Things that make no sense to you

  • Thread starter Thread starter some bloke
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    News
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
364 replies · 31K views
jrmichler said:
From today's credit card statement:
Decades ago, I got something like that with a zero balance instead of a credit. I won't say from whom. We'll just call it the Carvard Hoop. Then the second notice. Then the final notice.

So I sent them a check for zero dollars and zero cents.

Shortly thereafter, I got a phone call from BayBank instructing me to stop screwing with them and never do that again. (Unlike the urban legends where the bank computer explodes. The only think at risk of exploding was the banker's head)
 
Last edited:
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jrmichler
Physics news on Phys.org
Vanadium 50 said:
Decades ago, I got something like that with a zero balance instead of a credit. I won't say from whom. We'll just call it the Carvard Hoop. Then the second noticed. Then the final notice.

So I sent them a check for zero dollars and zero cents.

Shortly thereafter, I got a phone call from BayBank instructing me to stop screwing with them and never do that again. (Unlike the urban legends where the bank computer explodes. The only think at risk of exploding was the banker's head)
Back when I was 18/19 years old and struggling, I learned from a friend's mother [who worked at a bank] that you can put a little tear through the account number on the check to delay processing. The scanner couldn't read it so it got rejected and had to be processed by hand. This added up to three days for processing. This little trick allowed me to float and cash checks at the local store without bouncing a check.
 
The moon is just the right size, and at just the right distance from the Earth to completely block the sun during a total eclipse.

The physical constants have just the right values so that matter and the universe as we know it, can exist. The best explanation I've heard for this depends on the notion of an infinite number of universes; with universes constantly bubbling up from the quantum foam. Given an infinite number of universes, we are guaranteed to get some universes where the physical constants are just right, like ours. I recall that the Heim Physics crowd once thought that Heim managed to predict the values of the physical constants. But that did not prove to be true and to my knowledge this is still a big mystery: Why do the constants have just the right values so that we can exist?
 
Ivan Seeking said:
The moon is just the right size, and at just the right distance from the Earth to completely block the sun during a total eclipse.
Or so the flat-earther's say. The truth is that the distance varies and that the moon is sometimes too big, sometimes too small and sometimes adequately close.

In my book, this doesn't rise to the level of a coincidence that needs further explanation.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Monsterboy, collinsmark and Bystander
jbriggs444 said:
Or so the flat-earther's say. The truth is that the distance varies and that the moon is sometimes too big, sometimes too small and sometimes adequately close.

In my book, this doesn't rise to the level of a coincidence that needs further explanation.
I've never seen an example of that. Do you have a photo where the moon was too small or to big? All the photos I've seen seemed to be almost a perfect fit.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
I've never seen an example of that. Do you have a photo where the moon was too small or to big?
Search for 'annular eclipse'.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking
Ivan Seeking said:
I've never seen an example of that. Do you have a photo where the moon was too small or to big?
No, I do not have a picture. But we should be able to find evidence by Googling for "annular solar eclipse".

Yep. Try it.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking
Ivan Seeking said:
too small
..., or, "Diamond Ring."
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking
1631980908405.png
Still close but not a perfect fit.

BTW, what does this have to do with flat earthers?
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hamiltonian and PeroK
Ivan Seeking said:
BTW, what does this have to do with flat earthers?
The flat Earthers will say that it is an impossible coincidence, therefore the heliocentric model is nonsense. [Though they will tend to say it in a much less coherent and much more boisterous fashion].
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking
jbriggs444 said:
The flat Earthers will say that it is an impossible coincidence, therefore the heliocentric model is nonsense.
Well I don't see how one thing has anything to do with the other but given the source, who cares. LOL!
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444
Ivan Seeking said:
The moon is just the right size, and at just the right distance from the Earth to completely block the sun during a total eclipse.

The physical constants have just the right values so that matter and the universe as we know it, can exist. The best explanation I've heard for this depends on the notion of an infinite number of universes; with universes constantly bubbling up from the quantum foam. Given an infinite number of universes, we are guaranteed to get some universes where the physical constants are just right, like ours. I recall that the Heim Physics crowd once thought that Heim managed to predict the values of the physical constants. But that did not prove to be true and to my knowledge this is still a big mystery: Why do the constants have just the right values so that we can exist?
The second "coincidence" stands. Maybe a true Theory of Everything would predict these values?

Are they random or could they eventually be calculated?
 
And of course, the mystery of the Jeremy Bearimy.

 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hamiltonian
Ivan Seeking said:
Well I don't see how one thing has anything to do with the other ...
You're not going to try to bring logic to the Flat Earth Society, now are you?
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking and BillTre
jbriggs444 said:
Or so the flat-earther's say.
jbriggs444 said:
The flat Earthers will say that it is an impossible coincidence, therefore the heliocentric model is nonsense.
So no sources? You bring up a forbidden subject on PF, that you don't even believe in, as an answer to a question that clearly doesn't require such comment.
Ivan Seeking said:
Well I don't see how one thing has anything to do with the other but given the source, who cares. LOL!
phinds said:
You're not going to try to bring logic to the Flat Earth Society, now are you?
And now the proof that Flat Earthers said it is that it doesn't make sense, therefore everyone agrees that they've said it! :doh:

That is the weirdest discussion I've witnessed on PF until now: A discussion about Flat Earthers using the type of argumentation that is reproached about them! :confused::rolleyes:o0)
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bystander
jack action said:
So no sources? You bring up a forbidden subject on PF, that you don't even believe in, as an answer to a question that clearly doesn't require such comment.And now the proof that Flat Earthers said it is that it doesn't make sense, therefore everyone agrees that they've said it! :doh:

That is the weirdest discussion I've witnessed on PF until now: A discussion about Flat Earthers using the type of argumentation that is reproached about them! :confused::rolleyes:o0)
That was more an afterthought. The point is that my original impression regarding the size and distance of the moon was in error.

I really don't care what flat earthers say. That is moot by definition.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
The point is that my original impression regarding the size and distance of the moon was in error.
I know, that is why I'm so baffled as to how the discussion steered in that weird direction.
 
jack action said:
I know, that is why I'm so baffled as to how the discussion steered in that weird direction.
I could write pages and pages about your objection. Trust me! Objectivity is subjective. LOL!
 
I have seen people argue for years debunking UFO reports that clearly they have never read. :doh:
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jack action
Can't read them in the original Martian?
 
Reply
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, strangerep and BillTre
jack action said:
I know, that is why I'm so baffled as to how the discussion steered in that weird direction.
Umm,... you did read the title of this thread, right?
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Monsterboy and jack action
russ_watters said:
Seriously? Did you not know that printed menus were done away with due to COVID? Even still, I can't fathom why the prospect of looking at a menu on your phone would cause you to leave a nice restaurant!?
If the issue was that printed menus were done away with due to COVID, why did the they lie and say the printer was out of paper. Why didn't they just explain the menus were gone due to COVID. It sounds to me the they did not want to "bother" with the customer. Sound's like they need an attitude adjustment to stay in business.
There are probably many restaurants which would prefer customers to leave their phones at home and enjoy the meal. Customers sitting nearby probably don't need to hear private matters discussed on the phone.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Can't read them in the original Martian?
Sorry, just reports like this declassified report from the National Security Agency; you know, that went to the White House and Joint Chiefs of Staff.
https://www.nsa.gov/Portals/70/docu...ified-documents/ufo/routing_slip_ufo_iran.pdf

Or like this from the then deputy commander of a nuclear weapons base
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading Room/UFOsandUAPs/dep_ba1.pdf?ver=2017-05-22-113454-777

I actually spent an hour on the phone with Col Halt, who wrote the second report.

On a more personal note, an uncle was once the commander of Camp Pendleton. Before that he spent a fair number of years in Vietnam during the war. From time to time he was able to monitor encounters between the USAF and UFOs over Vietnam. That was quite a shock when it came out.
 
Last edited:
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Monsterboy
I don't understand why a jellyfish Is called a jellyfish if it's not a fish! The same thing goes for a starfish...
 
BravesGirl1010 said:
I don't understand why a jellyfish Is called a jellyfish if it's not a fish! The same thing goes for a starfish...
But a seahorse is a fish.
 
BravesGirl1010 said:
I don't understand why a jellyfish Is called a jellyfish if it's not a fish! The same thing goes for a starfish...
It identifies as a fish.
 
Reply
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: epenguin, Hamiltonian, strangerep and 2 others
The lay fish designation is an older term than the fish as defined by biology.
Its seems to just refer to some animal living in the water. This meaning has been around for a long time.

Shellfish is another good example: molluscs and crustaceans (and maybe some other things).
Neither are anything like a fish (to biology), and they aren't even closely related to each other.
 
Reply
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Seeking and phinds
BillTre said:
Its seems to just refer to some animal living in the water.
What about silverfish? They live on land.
 
Reply
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: BillTre, Ivan Seeking and Bystander