BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jeg7po4 wrote

For small scale objects (where "small-scale" means like planets), gravity is enough to hold matter together and keep it the same size .The expansion of space is extremely minute and weak at distances as small as planets. It's distant outer empty space that is expanding, space that is empty on a size scale billions of times bigger than planets.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jeg74bl wrote

Ticketmaster is part of LiveNation. LiveNation has exclusive deals with almost all of the large venues (stadiums etc.) saying "all shows here must sell tickets via ticketmaster", and deals with many of the artists themselves saying "tickets to my shows anywhere will be sold via ticketmaster".

So any potential competitor trying to undercut them would have to sign new artists and not have them perform in any of the established big venues. They have a functional monopoly, it's literally impossible for a competitor to sell tickets to a concert at a given stadium or for a given artist for cheaper, because TicketMaster/LiveNation have contracts that make it illegal.

That's the problem, they can charge whatever they want because they have a monopoly where it's impossible for someone to undercut on the same product, because they're the only ones that are allowed to offer that product.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jefux3v wrote

When rain partially fills the bowls. It's not designed to meet the safety codes for public outdoor pools (depth, dimensions, signage, etc) so legally they have to put up the "no swimming" for lawsuit protection because it conceivably *could* get at least partially water filled.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jefe7jb wrote

Reply to comment by JoveX in Modern barbershop music? by KaptainKrule

Yeah I regret the tone of my comment, sorry. I really wasn't trying to be snibby/elitist but I struggled getting my point into words. I will try again

"Barbershop has not just morphed and become other styles of a Cappella music like Pentatonix, modern barbershop is still barbershop, and exists alongside those other styles. If you are thinking the only modern remnants of barbershop is other acapella like Pentatonix (who are amazing btw!), I'm not saying you're dumb ...I'm excited to say that means you must be missing out on barbership itself still existing as a genre in its own right with a lot of fantastic music and artistry to be enjoyed".


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jefbaw8 wrote

Because the countries that were making the maps when this convention was established are all in the north and put themselves "on top".

And you can't really blame them...it is useful to have maps always pointing the same way. So they had to put themselves either always at the bottom or always on top. Top is what I'd have done too.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jedsw65 wrote

To resolve the apparent contradiction, your question has a false assumption in it.

When you drink alcohol, it absolutely does damage and kill human cells too. That's why it increases your cancer risk. It's not like our cells aren't immune to it in some way that bacteria cells aren't.

It's just that bacteria only are one cell, so if alcohol kills that cell, that's it it's dead. But humans have tons of cell, so if doing a shot kills a few thousand cells in your mouth and throat, you can regrow them.

...But every time cells divide there's a chance something messes up and it becomes cancer.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jedsihh wrote

No it's not. Barbershop is by definition 4 part harmony, and has a certain vocabulary of chords (heavy on dominant 7ths, low on dissonant "jazzy" chords.

Ringmasters is modern barbershop.

Vocal Spectum is modern barbershop.

Westminster Chorus is modern barbershop.

Pentatonix, which isn't even 4 part harmony, is not barbershop. The modern Barbershop is...barbershop. It's still very much a thing. The Barbershop Harmony Society has thousands of active quartets and choruses, many of them young, vibrant, modern, and not wearing stripes and boater hats.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_je8nilj wrote


No they don't sound the same.

"Then" means "happening next". I'm going to work, and then to the gym, then driving home.

"Than" is for comparisons. You are taller than me. Mexico is hotter than Canada.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_je3yunj wrote

>Isnt the air you exhale CO2?

No. It has a little less oxygen and a little more CO2 than what you breathe in, but still much more than enough oxygen to be more useful than nothing.

  • Regular air (what you breathe in) is 21% oxygen and about 0.04% CO2.
  • What you breathe out is still 16% oxygen, and about 4% CO2.

So what you breathe out is still only 4% CO2! And it still contains about 3/4 of the oxygen you breathed in, too. Yes using fresh air would be better, but there's no good way to force in fresh air with no equipment. Delivering 16% oxygen with 4% CO2 by mouth is the best available easy option and better than nothing.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jd4293b wrote

You're right, and its shape IS distorted. The effect is just so tiny it's not noticeable. It helps to put some numbers on it:

  • Our galaxy is ~87,000 light years across. So to an observer, the light from far edge would be 87,000 years older
  • But it takes our galaxy 250,000,000 years to complete 1 rotation!! So you're right, there IS a distortion - the light from the back edge appears to be shifted by 0.0003 of a rotation.

The amount it has moved through the universe is just negligible compared to how fast light is compared to stuff.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jaber0p wrote

It's the apparent size something appears to be based on how much radar signal it bounces back.
So a stealth bomber with a radar cross section of 10 square feet bounces back as much radar signal as a non-stealth blunt object with a surface size of 10 square feet facing the radar station. So it appears as a tiny object on the radar, if it appears at all, despite actually being big.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_jabeprl wrote

You haven't answered what radar cross section is though. It's the apparent size something appears to be based on how much radar signal it does bounce back.

So a stealth bomber with a radar cross section of 10 square feet bounces back as much radar signal as a non-stealth blunt object with a surface size of 10 square feet facing the radar station. So it appears as a tiny object on the radar, if it appears at all, despite actually being big.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_ja22hqn wrote

> it’s isn’t broken apart?

It's not broken apart by you... but your intestines are full of billions of bacteria that can break it down just fine!

When your own body can't break down the lactose into a digestible form, that just means it passes through the stomach and becomes a huge pile of food for intestinal bacteria. The result is that:

  • the bacteria multiply to much higher population levels than they should have, and
  • all those bacteria eating all that food creates a bunch of waste products and gases

All the bacteria and their gassy excrement being generated inside your pipes is what causes the pain and bloating, not the glycocidic linkages!


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_j9xdpws wrote

It's this! For people with a lifetime listening to Western (meaning North American and European) music, your brain is just assuming "major = happy and minor = sad" because that's what you've mostly been exposed to.

But eg in Jewish music, minor keys are used all the time and don't imply anything negative. Hava Nagila is super minor and it's a wedding song that literally translates to "Let's Celebrate".

And even in Western music, that "rule" of major = happy is far from universal. Pumped Up Kicks is a dark song in a major key, SexyBack by Timberlake and Yeah by Usher are happy songs in a minor key. There's tons of cases like this, they're just not the majority. Most sad songs are minor so it's just an association we develop from past experience.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_j9xd8h3 wrote

Correct! For example the Jewish musical tradition is extensively minor, even the happiest of songs. Think of Hava Nagila. Musically, that's as minor as it gets - but it literally translates to "Let's Celebrate" and it's traditionally a party song sung by large groups at weddings.

Besides Jewish music, there is also a lot of other Balkan / Eastern European music that has this "reversed" rule and uses minor in ways that aren't meant to imply anything negative emotionally.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_j9xcviv wrote

It's mostly just conditioning. Major sounds happy and minor sounds sad to you, because that's the association you've heard again thousands of times over your whole lifetime listening to (I'm guessing) typical Western music.

But that association isn't universal at all! There are whole non-western musical traditions (eg Jewish, Balkan, Eastern European) where a ton of it is minor but not sad. Think of like Hava Nagila - that's 100% minor key and it's a party song sung at weddings that literally translates to "Let's Celebrate".

Heck, even in popular Western music there are plenty of examples of dark songs in a major key (Pumped up Kicks, Boy in the Bubble...) and happy songs in a minor key (Yeah - Usher; SexyBack - Timberlake; Just Dance - Lady Gaga...).

Basically, if you grew up listening to typical Western music, your brain assumes major = happy and minor = sad because based on your previous experience that's more likely true than the reverse. But there are many exceptions in Western music, and other non-Western types of music where it's not a good assumption to begin with.


BurnOutBrighter6 t1_j9wybae wrote

Because for like 99.9999% of evolutionary history, calories were scarce and unpredictable. You were WAY more likely to die of starvation (due to sickness, drought, winter, injury) than somehow finding so many calories that you got fat. So we all evolved the strategy: "when you do find a high-cal food source, eat as much as possible!!" And in those calorie-scarce times, (aka essentially all of human history!) that was a great strategy to have. It kept your ancestors alive.

Calories becoming cheap and abundant for everyday normal people happened in the last ~200 years, which is a split second on the evolution timescale. There just hasn't been anywhere near enough time to adapt to this yet. So we're all still running the "eat as many calories as you can find" program in our brains because that worked great for like a million years and has only needed the "but not too much" asterisk for a tiny amount of time since then.