Happy New Year!
Posted by Nathan on 1 January 2001, 01:00 GMT
We here at ticalc.org would like to welcome you into anno Domini 2001, the twenty-first century, and the third millennium! For your reading pleasure, I would link to last year's news article, which deals with the millennium. We had a lot of reasonable and irrational people give feedback on both points of view. Let the memories flow! And, as usual, the January 2001 newsletter has been posted to the Newsletter archives. Okay...these statistics aren't exact, but I thought I'd annoy Magnus and post them anyhow. Maybe someone will update these. :) Magnus says: I was just poking around a bit at statistics. Yearly stats so far (note, figures are not exact :-) I typed them off the web..): 1997: 12,058,640 hits (not a full year, though) 1998: 29,015,076 hits (up 141%, but extrapolating 1997 to 12 months gives 60.4%) 1999: 48,342,747 hits (up 66.6%) 2000: 84,767,923 hits (up 75.3%) So basically, we have grown more this year than ever before when it comes to hits! A great work by everybody! We've taken 48.6% of our all time hits this year. Also, I'm noticing that we are approaching a new record - we now have 14,515 files in our archives, closing fast on 15,000. We also have a total of 17,924 screenshots for these files. This only amounts to about 57% of our files, though, but it's a huge step up from last year. Taking a look at our news system, we have: 1997: 21 posted articles (ok, so the system wasn't there back then) 1998: 193 posted articles 1999: 242 posted articles 2000: 219 posted articles So we have a slight decline there, probably due to the fact that we no longer have Nick doing an obscene amount of news articles :-) We're still averaging more than one article every two days. (Standalone articles, like surveys, not included) As for comments to these articles: 1998: 4,758 comments 1999: 14,975 comments 2000: 19,333 comments So it seems our users are writing more :-) Umm. That ends todays statistics. Well, that's all for this time around. Please remember that those statistics are raw and meaningless, and are for your entertainment pleasure, only.
|
|
|
The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.
|
|
Re: Happy New Year!
|
Fil
(Web Page)
|
A Scientific Inquiry into Santa Claus
1) No known species of reindeer can fly. BUT there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not COMPLETELY rule out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.
2) There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world. BUT since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, & Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million according to Population Reference Bureau. At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.
3) Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with. This is due to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits/second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has .001 second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house. Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles/household, a total trip of 75.5 million miles; not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding & etc. So Santa's sleigh must be moving at 650 miles/second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles/second. A conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles/hour.
4) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 lb.), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight. On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 lb. Even granting that "flying reindeer" (see #1) could pull 10 TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the job with 8, or even 9 reindeer. We need 214,200. This increases the payload - not counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. This is four times the weight of the ocean-liner Queen Elizabeth.
5) 353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles/second creates enormous air resistance. This will heat up the reindeer up in the same fashion as a spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within .00426 of a second. Meanwhile, Santa will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250-lb Santa (seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 lb. of force.
If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's dead now.
-Fil's $0.02
|
|
1 January 2001, 03:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Space & Time
|
calcgenius
|
Tell me this all you eggheads you.What is a photon made of?Whoopii-packet of light!It must be made of something and if I am correctlight is not the smallest particles in existence.Anyone heard of quarks and gluons?Also, since no one has been able to slow light down enough to get a good peep at it,how do you know anything else can go faster than the speed of light?Physicists literally know jack about the properties of light and therefore cannot conclude that speeds greater than c are impossible.For example, whoever is familiar with the stream(?) line theory, which I can prove to be correct(email me), lines are never ending and go on infinitely.Yet, mathematically, graphs of lines with asymptotes(remember ye old favorite x><1,et cetera) have breaks in the line.This is physically impossible,thus mathematics cannot be a realistic foundation for (quantum)physics.Yes, I am disagreeing with Einstein's theories.After all, they are only theories. In conclusion,(geez, this is sounding like a term paper for English) if I am correct, his theories or not a sound basis for qauntum physics.
And to think this is a calculator web site!!
|
|
7 January 2001, 01:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Happy New Year!
|
Michael Vincent
(Web Page)
|
Having no life, I once did something similar. I only had a 1994 almanac for the figures though, as I wrote this in 1996 (there's probably some flaws I could correct now):
Based on 1994 figures, there are 1,833,022,000 people in the world who receive presents from Santa Claus. Santa has 24 hours of darkness to deliver his presents. There is an average of 2.62 people per household. Therefore, Santa must visit 699,626,718 homes. He can only visit each home for one-thousandth of a second, leaving a total of 4.5659245 hours for travel. Assuming that all of the homes are distributed evenly around the Earth's landmass, Santa must travel .2889987064 miles between each house. This requires Santa to maintain an average speed of 12,300.30926 miles per second. Nearly instant acceleration to this speed is also required. Santa will be subjected to gravitational forces 5,620,078.997 times greater than gravity, therefore instantly crushing him and causing the sleigh to disintegrate. Air resistance is a major problem. Friction between the sleigh and the air will cause it to vaporize, releasing 2,120,582,271,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy. The blast would decimate a portion of a continent. In addition, the weight of the sleigh and reindeer would be 14,664,176,400 pounds; impossible to support on any rooftop. Based on this evidence, we can conclude that Santa Claus does not exist.
|
|
1 January 2003, 01:49 GMT
|
|
1 2 3 4
You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.
|