• breadsmasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    345
    ·
    1 year ago

    The country claiming to have the most “freedom” of any country has the highest incarceration rate of any country.

  • Huffkin@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    192
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oxford University is older than the Aztec empire.

    Oxford University founded in 1326, Aztec empire ~1428-1521

  • swnt@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    145
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Oh, I have two good ones:

    1. Nuclear power causes less deaths (per energy unit produced) than wind (source)

    2. You get less radiation when living near a nuclear power plant, than if that nuclear plant hadn’t been there.

    To explain the second: A major misconception is, that nuclear power plants are dangerous due to their radiation. No they aren’t. The effect of radiation from the rocks in the ground and the surroundings is on average 50x more than what you get from the nuclear power plant and it’s fuel cells. (source). Our body is very well capable of dealing with the constant background radiation all the time (e.g. DNA repairs). Near a power plant, the massive amounts of isolation and concrete will inhibit any background radiation coming from rocks from that direction to you. This means, that you’ll actually get slightly less radiation, because the nuclear plant is there.

    Regarding the dangers of nuclear disasters. To this day, it’s been very hard to find out, if at all any people have even died to Fukushima radiation (ans not other sources such as tsunami/earthquake/etc.) Nuclear radiation causes much more problems by being an emotionally triggering viral meme spreading between people and hindering it’s productive use and by distracting from the ironic fact, that the coal burned in coal power plants spew much more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear power plants themselves. (source)

  • ch00f@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    127
    ·
    1 year ago

    The closest planet to Earth is Mercury.

    On average that is. Mercury is actually the closest planet to every other planet in average. Because when it’s on the other side of the Sun, it’s still pretty close.

    • domage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow, you’re absolutely correct!

      The average distance from Earth to Mercury is about 1.04 astronomical units (au), which is the average distance between Earth and the Sun.

      In comparison, the average distance between Earth and Venus is approximately 1.14 au, while the average distance between Earth and Mars is around 1.7 au.

      You can check that in Wolfram Alpha.

      • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        How can that be? I mean if that is true than at some point Earth Venus and Mercury will align in such a way that Mercury occupies the 2nd position not the 1st right?

        • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          1 year ago

          @ChatGPT@lemmings.world Hello there! What is the closest planet to Earth, Venus or Mercury, and why? Provide detailed, analytical, step-by-step output. Thank you

          • ChatGPT@lemmings.worldB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hello!

            The answer to your question may actually surprise you. The closest planet to Earth is not always the same because all of the planets in our solar system are constantly in motion, orbiting the sun at different speeds and distances.

            However, average distance over time is a key aspect to address here. Based on such a perspective, Mercury, not Venus, is the planet that spends more time being the closest to Earth.

            1. Orbital Paths: Understanding the orbit paths is the first step. The way planets orbit the sun is basically elliptical and not perfectly circular. For the Earth, Venus and Mercury, they all have different elliptical paths which cause their distances to each other and the Sun to constantly vary.

            2. Distance and Speed: Second step, each planet orbits the sun at a different distance and speed. Venus’s average distance from the sun is about 67 million miles (108 million kilometers), while Mercury’s average distance is roughly 36 million miles (58 million kilometers). Therefore, Mercury is closer to the Sun.

            3. Mathematical Simulations: This is the third and most crucial step. In 2019, a mathematical simulation was run by physicist Tom Stockman, showing that when the principle of comparing average distances over time is applied, it turned out that Mercury spends the most time as the closest planet to Earth.

            4. The Reason: So, why is Mercury closer on an average even though Venus gets closer to Earth than Mercury at their closest approach? The main reason is the orbital speed. Mercury orbits the sun more quickly than Venus or Earth, therefore, it crosses our field of view more often and is more frequently the closest planet to us.

            In fact, Mercury is not just the planet that spends the most time closest to Earth, but it spends the most time closest to all the other planets in the solar system due to its location and speedy orbit.

            So, while Venus is the second planet from the sun and appears closer to Earth based on that logic, Mercury actually spends more time as our nearest neighbor due to its speed and unique orbit.

            I hope this has provided you with a comprehensive understanding.

            • kodemystic@mastodon.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              @ChatGPT
              So if on average the closest planet to the Earth is Mercury, based on Average. That would mean that the closest planet to Neptune on average, is Mercury too, not Uranus. Is this correct?
              Provide detailed, analytical, step-by-step output.

              • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                @ChatGPT@lemmings.world

                So if on average the closest planet to the Earth is Mercury, based on Average. That would mean that the closest planet to Neptune on average, is Mercury too, not Uranus. Is this correct? Provide detailed, analytical, step-by-step output.

                • ChatGPT@lemmings.worldB
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, you are correct according to a technical analysis by Greg Laughlin, an astronomer at Yale University.

                  The analysis considers the relative motion of planets in their orbits instead of just the simple measure of the average distance between planets.

                  Here is a step-by-step breakdown of this concept:

                  1. Most of the time we think of two planets’ proximity as them sharing the same longitude in the sky, or them being at a point in their orbits where they align.

                  2. Yet, if you’ve got three bodies and by definition two of them have to be closest to each other, then it’s the one that’s left out in the way we think of planet distances.

                  3. This average-distance calculation involves working out every single possible configuration of, say, Earth, Mercury and Venus — every possible location they could be in their orbits — and then calculating which two are closest.

                  4. Based on Laughlin’s model, Mercury sits on average 1.04 astronomical units (AU) away from Earth — closer than Venus, our nearest neighbor, which sits an average of 1.14 AU away. (1 AU is the average Earth-Sun distance — about 149 million km.)

                  5. Extending that complex model to the outer planets, the closest planet to Neptune on average, turns out to be Mercury too, not Uranus!

                  6. Because Mercury is the planet that orbits the closest to the Sun, it is often closer to other planets despite the large overall distance. Mercury’s faster orbit brings it regularly back close to other planets, including Neptune.

                  So, counter to simple intuitions about the structure of our Solar System, by considering the whole of planetary orbits and using this complex method of calculation, the nearest planet to any chosen planet often turns out to be Mercury.

        • domage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It depends on what do you mean by “2nd position”. I mean, imagine the Venus on the opposite side of the orbit, and Mercury on the same side of the orbit as Earth. In that case, the distance from Earth to Mercury would be only 0.6 au, while distance from Earth to Venus would be 1.7 au.

          • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I did intense brain work and I got it now. This is a very interesting way of making people think about averages, space, geometry, etc. Noticed some steam coming out of my ears. Think I’m done for the day! X’D

        • sparr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure, but they also align with some of the planets on opposite sides of the sun, and the difference there outweighs the difference when they are lined up on the same side.

      • Googleproof@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re still right, though - talking about closest planet on average isn’t very useful, because it’s always going to be the closest planet to the sun. Asking “what planet can get closest to some [Planet]” is more interesting and enlightening.

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍@social.fossware.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    124
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are people still alive who remember a world before “splinter-free” toilet paper.

    The manufacturing of this product had a long period of refinement, considering that as late as the 1930s, a selling point of the Northern Tissue company was that their toilet paper was “splinter free”.

    -Wikipedia

  • LordOfLocksley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    117
    ·
    1 year ago

    A day on Venus is longer than a year on Venus.

    If you start to think about how these lengths of time are defined it becomes clearer.

    1 day = time to rotate on it’s axis once 1 year = time to complete a full rotation around the sun

    For Earth, it takes us ~24hrs to rotate on our axis and 365.25 days to orbit the sun.

    However, because Venus’ axial rotation is so slow (and another interesting fact, it rotates in the opposite direction to other planets) it actually completes a full orbit of the sun before 1 axial rotation.

    Hence, a year is shorter than a day

    For those interested:

    1 Venus day = 243 earth days 1 Venus year = 225 earth days

    • Kelsenellenelvial@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Colloquially, most people use “day” to mean how long it takes the sun to get to the same place in the sky. Solar day vs sidereal day, the difference is only about 4 minutes on Earth, but can be much greater elsewhere. Venus’ solar day is about 117 Earth days, so you would see a couple sunrises/sunsets each Venusian year.

    • MartinXYZ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow! That’s another thing I learned from QI recently. Great fact though, and nice to see it mentioned here 🙂

  • SpooneyOdin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    114
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cleopatra was born closer to the invention of cellphones than the building of the pyramids

    • aequitas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      We live closer in time to the T-Rex than the T-Rex to the stegosaurus. Which makes the land before time a fictional story not based on true events.

      Also the T in T-shirt stands for tyrannosaurus because it has short arms, just like the T-Rex.

      • booklovero@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Where did you get that the T stands for Tyrannosaurus? 😂

        It looks like a T, that’s why it’s called T shirt, imo, no source either.

    • darcy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      this is actually a misconception! the gravity of the planets combined would cause them all to crash into each other!

      • Donebrach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is a simple statement that the space between the earth and the moon can allow for the diameters of each planet to fit in between. Obviously it is not saying that such an arrangement would be stable for said astronomical bodies. Not at all “a misconception.”

        • snctfd@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          further proof that /j is always necessary, no matter how obvious the joke

          • rmuk@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “There’s nothing more we can do. I’m calling it. He’s gone. Time of death, 03:39. Cause of death: planet exploding.”

      • sparr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Now you have me wondering if there’s any combination of paths that would have them all pass through that alignment and continue on their way after slingshotting around each other. And, if not, how many bodies could do that.

        • rmuk@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I just did a simulation with representative bodies that included spheroid objects of varying densities to approximate the makeup of the major solar bodies and all the fruit bounced everywhere and the lady behind the counter is really upset now.

  • Julian@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Your car keys have better range if you press them to your head, since your skull will act as an antenna. It sounds like some made up pseudoscience that would never work in practice or have a negligible effect, but it actually works.

    Edit: idk if it’s actually because your skull acts as an antenna, although that’s what I’ve heard. I looked it up and it seems like it’s your head acting as a reasonance chamber. Since your body is conductive, your head can bounce and amplify the radio signal.

  • 1019throw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    1 year ago

    The northern most part of Brazil is closer to Canada than it is to the southern most part of Brazil.