Dumb Questions Thread

[DG_Silva]

I seem to recall something in the UK about equalising the age of consent for homosexual couples to that of heterosexuals couples, but campaign was close to resulting in the age of consent of heterosexuals couples raising to 18, rather than homosexual couples reducing to 16. However, a quick look does this didn't happen and both ages of consent are 16.

 

[Liquid]

Over time the ages of consent in the UK have met but from different directions; the heterosexual one went up from 12 to 13 in 1875 then to 16 in 1886, whereas the homosexual one came down from 21 to 18 in 1994 and then to 16 in 2001.

 

[RacingGrandpa]

Where I live the age of consent is 15.
I think that's appropriate actually. Because that's about the age where young people start experimenting and they need to be able to do so.
I on the other hand would find it socially unacceptable to have sex with anyone under the age of at least 40. So why should my social acceptance of age of consent be mixed with the legal age of consent.
And frankly, if the legal age of consent was 18 I would still think it was close to perverted if a guy my age went to bed with a 20 year old

 

[Liquid]

During a pub discussion, some friends and I were discussing whether Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk was more pathetic and annoying. It got me thinking about the inverted side of the discussion:

Who is the richest nice person?

Or in some way at least, the richest person with the fewest negatives?

 

[TexRex]

Warren Buffett? What's he worth these days?

 

[Liquid]

Warren Buffett? What's he worth these days?

That was the first answer that came to mind but I don't know much about his ventures to make an informed assessment.

 

[Barra333]

Bill Gates. Apparently plans on giving away enough money to remove himself from rich lists. Whether or not you like Microsoft, he seems to have his heart in the right place.

 

[Populuxe]

Here’s a question that’s been on my mind for years. (You have to remember I have worked as a dispatcher for a courier company for decades, so these are the sort of questions that occur to me.) I live just a few miles from I-5 (Interstate 5 for our friends from Not-the-US. It’s a 1400 mile/2200 km limited-access superhighway that stretches between the US-Canadian and US-Mexican border along the west coast.) I’ve been wondering, what with all the exit-only lanes, collector-distributor lanes, merge lanes, intersections with other interstates, US, and state highways, etc., is it possible to get in one lane at one border, stay in that lane, and make it to the other border without being forced to exit?

 

[Liquid]

Can you move to the inner-most lane when you enter and just stay there?

 

[Populuxe]

Can you move to the inner-most lane when you enter and just stay there?

Perhaps, but if you are heading south on I-5 in Lynnwood, the inner two lanes are split off to become I-405 southbound. One of these days I’m going to go to Blaine on the border, turn around, pick a lane and see what happens.

 

[Blitz24]

Here’s a question that’s been on my mind for years. (You have to remember I have worked as a dispatcher for a courier company for decades, so these are the sort of questions that occur to me.) I live just a few miles from I-5 (Interstate 5 for our friends from Not-the-US. It’s a 1400 mile/2200 km limited-access superhighway that stretches between the US-Canadian and US-Mexican border along the west coast.) I’ve been wondering, what with all the exit-only lanes, collector-distributor lanes, merge lanes, intersections with other interstates, US, and state highways, etc., is it possible to get in one lane at one border, stay in that lane, and make it to the other border without being forced to exit?

Hypothetically you should be able to, but my guess is no. Interstate highways ending in x5 are supposed to be the major highways going from the north to the south, but there aren't many that even reach both borders.

I-5: Goes from Canada to Mexico.
I-15: Goes from Canada to merging with I-5 in San Diego, California.
I-25: Goes from Buffalo, Wyoming to Las Cruces, New Mexico.
I-35: Goes from Duluth, Minnesota to Mexico.
I-45: Dallas, Texas to Galveston, Texas.
I-55: Chicago, Illinois to just north of Laplace, Louisiana.
I-65: Chicago, Illinois to Mobile, Alabama.
I-75: Canada to just west of Miami Lakes, Florida.
I-85: Petersburg, Virginia to Montgomery, Alabama.
I-95: Canada to Miami, Florida.

I-5 is the only one that reaches both borders. You'd need to stay in the middle lane as there are a decent amount of left lane exits. I double-checked the Lynnwood interchange and it doesn't look like the inner 2 lanes exit to become 405 (unless they've changed the interchange recently). Interstate 5 is a possibility then, provided there isn't a situation where the 2 left lanes (and the extra lane doesn't begin from the left) exit.

 

[Barra333]

The chances of going from one end of an interstate to the other without having to change lanes (due lane ending/exiting) are pretty much zero around major interchanges and cities.

 

[Populuxe]

Just in Seattle alone, if you’re traveling southbound on I-5, the left lane splits off to become State Route 520 eastbound across Lake Washington (one of our famous floating bridges.) A few miles further south in Tukwila, the left lane exits to become the south end of I-405 northbound while the two right lanes split off to merge with SR518 leading to SeaTac airport. Not to mention all the lanes on the right in downtown Seattle that split off to Mercer Street, James Street, and the I-90 junction. And then there are all the lanes that merge into I-5 and become a part of it. With all the lanes that are being added and subtracted, it’s hard to say if there is a single core lane that makes it the entire 1400 miles.

 

[TB]

The chances of going from one end of an interstate to the other without having to change lanes (due lane ending/exiting) are pretty much zero around major interchanges and cities.

This.

Interstates splitting off of each other on the left hand side and on/off ramps coming and going on the right hand side make it pretty much impossible over that kind of distance.

 

[Blitz24]

This.

Interstates splitting off of each other on the left hand side and on/off ramps coming and going on the right hand side make it pretty much impossible over that kind of distance.

Agreed. As I mentioned, because of odd left hand exits it would have to be the center lane.

 

[-Fred-]

1400 miles assuming a speed of 70mph is a 20h drive. Now, I'm pretty good with bladder control, but I'm definitely not 20h good. I can't think of a road going vehicle that can do 1400 miles on a gas tank/battery either, so you'd need to stop for fuel/recharge too. You'd definitely need to exit the interstate at least once if we're taking this from an achieveable perspective, which I would consider to be a lane change.

 

[Pupik]

Here’s a question that’s been on my mind for years. (You have to remember I have worked as a dispatcher for a courier company for decades, so these are the sort of questions that occur to me.) I live just a few miles from I-5 (Interstate 5 for our friends from Not-the-US. It’s a 1400 mile/2200 km limited-access superhighway that stretches between the US-Canadian and US-Mexican border along the west coast.) I’ve been wondering, what with all the exit-only lanes, collector-distributor lanes, merge lanes, intersections with other interstates, US, and state highways, etc., is it possible to get in one lane at one border, stay in that lane, and make it to the other border without being forced to exit?

Well, there's the "agricultural inspection" pull-off within the first few miles of southbound Interstate 5 in California, whereby everyone has to exit, so I suppose not.

It also depends on how many lane drops (MERGE RIGHT) exist because places like the Seattle area and Los Angeles have HOV lane restrictions. There's that odd section in LA where I-10 and I-5 overlap near Hollywood and I swear you have to keep shifting lanes to stay thru on one or another.

 

[Populuxe]

1400 miles assuming a speed of 70mph is a 20h drive. Now, I'm pretty good with bladder control, but I'm definitely not 20h good. I can't think of a road going vehicle that can do 1400 miles on a gas tank/battery either, so you'd need to stop for fuel/recharge too. You'd definitely need to exit the interstate at least once if we're taking this from an achieveable perspective, which I would consider to be a lane change.

Well, no, neither I nor my car have the capacity to make the drive in one go. If I were to attempt this, I would exit for food, fuel, sleep, whatever, then rejoin from the previous exit and get back into the lane I was in to continue the journey. The test isn’t “can I do this in one go”, rather “is there one lane?”

Or do it like a relay. Have ten drivers. Once you exit customs in Blaine, I-5 southbound is just two lanes. So we have two drivers start there, one in each lane. Each driver has 280 miles to cover. That’s doable on one tank/charge/bladder. We pass the baton every 280 miles and keep going until someone reaches the Mexican border or is forced to exit.

Edit: I keep talking about this from a north to south direction just because I live in Washington so that would be easiest for me, but there’s no reason it can’t be tested south to north. Although, really, that’s a separate challenge since lanes do not mirror each other exactly. Especially on I-5, there are a lot of T-intersections going east, so I’m sure northbound would be much different from southbound.

 

[Blitz24]

Well, no, neither I nor my car have the capacity to make the drive in one go. If I were to attempt this, I would exit for food, fuel, sleep, whatever, then rejoin from the previous exit and get back into the lane I was in to continue the journey. The test isn’t “can I do this in one go”, rather “is there one lane?”

Or do it like a relay. Have ten drivers. Once you exit customs in Blaine, I-5 southbound is just two lanes. So we have two drivers start there, one in each lane. Each driver has 280 miles to cover. That’s doable on one tank/charge/bladder. We pass the baton every 280 miles and keep going until someone reaches the Mexican border or is forced to exit.

Edit: I keep talking about this from a north to south direction just because I live in Washington so that would be easiest for me, but there’s no reason it can’t be tested south to north. Although, really, that’s a separate challenge since lanes do not mirror each other exactly. Especially on I-5, there are a lot of T-intersections going east, so I’m sure northbound would be much different from southbound.

Northbound has a lot more lanes from Mexico than Southbound does from Canada.

 

[Danoff]

is it possible to get in one lane at one border, stay in that lane, and make it to the other border without being forced to exit?

No, because you will get stuck behind a maddeningly slow truck at some point.

Dumb answer number 2: No, because you'll get sleepy.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

My guess would be that at some point you would branch off either to the left or right from the route that goes to the border.

 

[Liquid]

How are electrical kiloWatt power figures equated with or converted into mechanical horsepower power figures?

This comes after reading about the upcoming F1 engine regs and how much horsepower the electrical motors are "worth".

 

[DG_Silva]

kW to BHP

Engine power is calculated as either BHP, PS or kW each are explained.

www.allcarleasing.co.uk

 

[Famine]

How are electrical kiloWatt power figures equated with or converted into mechanical horsepower power figures?

This comes after reading about the upcoming F1 engine regs and how much horsepower the electrical motors are "worth".

They're actually slightly different, but ultimately both are (amount of work) per (time) - and "work" in that context is (force x distance).

One horsepower (the real one, not the awful "metric" abomination) is the amount of power required to lift a mass of 550lb vertically against gravity (force; mass accelerated down by gravity is the definition of weight) through a one-foot distance (distance) in one second. Or a mass of 1lb vertically 550ft in one second. Or a mass of 1lb vertically 1ft in 1/550th of a second. Or anything else which multiplies and divides out to 550lbft/s.

You may therefore think of 1hp as 550lbfft/s - where the little "f" means "equivalent force" as it's equivalent to the force required to lift that mass against gravity. Since people often conflate mass with weight, because we tend to deal only with masses accelerated by gravity at roughly sea level, the little "f" can be ignored if you like.

One Watt is the amount of power required to lift a weight of 1N (a mass of 102g accelerated by gravity*) through 1m in 1s, or 1Nm/s.

Converting one to t'other is relatively simple. The Watt is lifting less stuff (1/4.45th) but further (3.28 times further) in the same time. There's more decimal places in there, but if you divide ft/m by N/lb you'll get 746W (well, 745.highnumbers) for 1hp.

Thus 1hp is 746W ish. 1kW is therefore 1/0.746hp, or 1.34hp.

If you have a 500kW motor and you want to work out the hp, divide by 0.746 (670hp). A megawatt of electrical power - 1000kW - is 1,341hp.


"Metric" horsepower is nothing of the sort; it takes the "feels right"ness of imperial and converts it into metric units without any of the cold logic of metric where one something is always one something else divided by or multiplied by one of a third thing.

It takes 550lbft/s and converts lb into kg and ft into m, giving some stupid number which is then simply rounded up... to the nearest five. One "metric" horsepower is 75kgm/s, just because it is. And then it's given units in other languages that just mean "horse power", which basically confuses everything.

To save repeating the math above, because "metric" horsepower doesn't deserve to live, because 1PS/Ch/cv/literally whatever is a smaller unit, there's only 735W in one of them.


*There's approximately 9.81N/kg, as gravitational acceleration is... that.

 

[daan]

One horsepower (the real one, ...)

An actual horse?

 

[Famine]

An actual horse?

James Watt's idea of one

A horse can actually have as much as 15 horsepower. Which is neatly confusing.

 

[Pupik]

James Watt's idea of one

A horse can actually have as much as 15 horsepower. Which is neatly confusing.

Maybe they started out with a pony or foal in the initial testing. Something that wasn't many hands high. I was wondering yesterday why they went with a figure of 550 pounds...was it an average plow size or carriage weight? Or just whatever royalty had lying around?

(Metric or imperial hands? The US hand underwent deflation a few years back...)

 

[PeterJB]

James Watt's idea of one

A horse can actually have as much as 15 horsepower. Which is neatly confusing.

I wondering how this works when it comes to torque, because the Benz Patent-Motorwagen had approximately 1 hp, but I really cannot picture it pulling a 550lb weight one ft in a second.

 

[Liquid]

I wondering how this works when it comes to torque, because the Benz Patent-Motorwagen had approximately 1 hp, but I really cannot picture it pulling a 550lb weight one ft in a second.

I'm just guessing but maybe factoring in the weight of the car means a deduction has to be made, a bit like mechanical horsepower at a flywheel being higher than the horsepower 'the car' produces because of the energy and power required to move the car.

The Motorwagen's engine has 1hp.
The Motorwagen itself does not.

And when I say I am guessing, I mean guessing.

 

[Famine]

I wondering how this works when it comes to torque, because the Benz Patent-Motorwagen had approximately 1 hp, but I really cannot picture it pulling a 550lb weight one ft in a second.

Horsepower is simply the rate of conversion of torque; torque is measured in lbft*, and power in lbft/s*.

550lb isn't that much - it's about two and a half of me - and 1ft/s isn't even 1mph. But then the foot and the second in question aren't how far the car goes but how far the crankshaft goes and how fast it spins.

If you have a crankshaft where the journals** are a foot apart, they travel 6.3ft for every revolution. If it spins at 600pm, that's 63ft/s. Can it do that with a 9lb weight sat on the end? That's a little over 550lbft/s - or one horsepower.

The fact that it's the engine "speed" (in rpm) also covers why the power and torque curves of every engine - if measured in appropriately equivalent units* - cross over at 5252rpm.


*Which is why engine power in hp should always be paired with torque in lbft, engine power in kW should always be paired with torque in Nm (1W = 1Nm/s), and if you must use abomination units they should be paired with torque in kgm (1PS = 75kgm/s).

But of course car manufacturers pair PS with Nm, because they give the biggest number.

**Actually I have no idea what point on the crankshaft is the point you measure from; the journals make sense, because they're the outer edges and they're what the force of the combustion/piston/con rod acts upon.