Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Friday, January 16, 2009
OMFG!!1!1! ITZ TEH WINDCHHILZ!1!!1!
I don't believe in the wind chill factor. Don't get me wrong. I do believe it exists. I'm merely stating its importance is over-stated. Its importance is in making pedestrian numbers sound SCARY!!!
Do you ever walk out the door when it's 40 degrees out, feel a 5 mph breeze and think "Man, it feels like it's 36 degrees today." NO! Because noone cares at that temperature. Even if the wind is whisking by at 60 mph, the windchill factor is still only 25 degrees. You'd be more concerned about how a tropical storm got to the Upper Midwest in the middle of January than how cold it feels like outside. It's even more meaningless when you get further down the scale. Can any of us really tell the difference between -10 degrees and -28?
But that's what gets the fonking headlines. A negative -10 degree temperature is bad. You wouldn't want to be standing around outside for too long when the mercury drops that low. But add a 10 mph wind and suddenly IT'S -28 WINDCHILL!!! THAT SOUNDS ALMOST THREE TIMES WORSE!!! CAN YOU FONKING BELIEVE WE LIVE SOMEWHERE IT "FEELS" LIKE -28 DEGREES OUT?!?!?
Take a step back for just a second. This is the methodology of how you determine wind chill. Wind chill is the heat transfer on a bare face walking into the wind at 3 mph. Sooo basically you can mitigate the effects of wind chill by not having exposed skin and/or not standing in the wind. Either this strikes you as common sense or you're a fool.
Here's what wind chill is expressing. Your body radiates heat. That heat stays close to your body as the energy required to diffuse with the air around you is quickly exhausted. The wind comes along to blow that heat away from your body. When it does, the air surrounding you is made colder. So instead of being 5 degrees mitigated by this layer of heat near your skin, it is 5 degrees next to your skin. (Ludo, how are my physics?)
So what you can do is trap this warm air near your skin. If the wind can't blow it away, then it will continue to shield you from the cold. You can either wear layers or a hat or a scarf or a less permeable jacket. Sounds like something Mom told you years ago, right?
Wind chill is, at best, a factor of inconvenience and discomfort. Wind chill won't make your car harder to start in the morning (your car doesn't naturally radiate heat) or cause frostbite (the cold itself has that locked down). It just means you may need to plan better about what you wear and how much exposure you get to the elements.
It's true. It is it's cold outside. It's January and we live in the middle of the continent north of the 40th parallel. So stay inside and while you're at it invite me over. I'll brave the cold because I'm well-prepared and don't believe in the windchill.
P.S. For those of you who care, here's the formula for calculating wind chill.
where Twc (wind chill) and Ta (actual temp) are measured in °F, and V (wind velocity) in mph.
Do you ever walk out the door when it's 40 degrees out, feel a 5 mph breeze and think "Man, it feels like it's 36 degrees today." NO! Because noone cares at that temperature. Even if the wind is whisking by at 60 mph, the windchill factor is still only 25 degrees. You'd be more concerned about how a tropical storm got to the Upper Midwest in the middle of January than how cold it feels like outside. It's even more meaningless when you get further down the scale. Can any of us really tell the difference between -10 degrees and -28?
But that's what gets the fonking headlines. A negative -10 degree temperature is bad. You wouldn't want to be standing around outside for too long when the mercury drops that low. But add a 10 mph wind and suddenly IT'S -28 WINDCHILL!!! THAT SOUNDS ALMOST THREE TIMES WORSE!!! CAN YOU FONKING BELIEVE WE LIVE SOMEWHERE IT "FEELS" LIKE -28 DEGREES OUT?!?!?
Take a step back for just a second. This is the methodology of how you determine wind chill. Wind chill is the heat transfer on a bare face walking into the wind at 3 mph. Sooo basically you can mitigate the effects of wind chill by not having exposed skin and/or not standing in the wind. Either this strikes you as common sense or you're a fool.
Here's what wind chill is expressing. Your body radiates heat. That heat stays close to your body as the energy required to diffuse with the air around you is quickly exhausted. The wind comes along to blow that heat away from your body. When it does, the air surrounding you is made colder. So instead of being 5 degrees mitigated by this layer of heat near your skin, it is 5 degrees next to your skin. (Ludo, how are my physics?)
So what you can do is trap this warm air near your skin. If the wind can't blow it away, then it will continue to shield you from the cold. You can either wear layers or a hat or a scarf or a less permeable jacket. Sounds like something Mom told you years ago, right?
Wind chill is, at best, a factor of inconvenience and discomfort. Wind chill won't make your car harder to start in the morning (your car doesn't naturally radiate heat) or cause frostbite (the cold itself has that locked down). It just means you may need to plan better about what you wear and how much exposure you get to the elements.
It's true. It is it's cold outside. It's January and we live in the middle of the continent north of the 40th parallel. So stay inside and while you're at it invite me over. I'll brave the cold because I'm well-prepared and don't believe in the windchill.
P.S. For those of you who care, here's the formula for calculating wind chill.
where Twc (wind chill) and Ta (actual temp) are measured in °F, and V (wind velocity) in mph.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Who Is On First?
Last night, after my book club meeting, I proceeded further south in Minneapolis to the new Chatterbox Pub at 45th and France. The Chatterbox is a now-chain-of-restaurants where you can have a drink, eat good bar food and play games. Board games are free though you can also play old-school videogames for a small fee. My friend Pete lives near this newest location and he was already there with our friend Peder.
One of the oddities of this location of The Chatterbox is the bathrooms are for one person at-a-time. (When you lock the door it flips an "in use" sign like on an airplane.) So in the men's room there is a toilet next to a urinal with no divider in between them. When one of my book club compatriots accidentally opened the unlocked door to find it occupied, the nearby and observing waitress regaled him with this story.
When the restaurant was just opening, a gentleman opened the door to find the bathroom occupied. He waited and let the occupants exit. That's right; occupants. But get you mind out of the gutter because this is what the gentleman in question told our waitress storyteller. When he opened the door what he saw was one occupant was making use of the toilet while the other was using the urinal. Not that odd in a usual bathroom except in this one, as I mentioned, there is no divider.
Here's the question I want an answer to which has, no doubt, been lost to the sands of time. Who was there first? I suppose it's possible (and in fact, most likely) they both entered the restroom at the same time since they also both left at the same time. But drive with me for a while.
If you are in said restroom using the toilet and someone else comes in to use the urinal, that's just rude. Obviously it's meant for just one person and your oversight of not locking the door should not put you at the peril of someone walking in on you and choosing to stay. Other than when we are sleeping, the most vulnerable a person is each day is when they are sitting down to use the toilet. Society has established rules governing this situation for just this reason. Ultimately though it's just harmless.
However it's more intriguing to me if the man using the toilet was the second occupant. Talk about a ballsy motherfonker. Short of it being an "emergency" that would be one of those moments where you just kind of have to take it. Yes, it's still rude. But c'mon. Could you imagine the conversation you would have?
(Man opens the door while you are peeing)
You: Occupied!
Man: (nothing)
(Man crosses the room, unbuckles his pants, pulls down his underwear and sits down on the toilet.)
You: (stunned silence)
I mean, men hate to even make eye contact while washing their hands. This man is flaunting etiquitte so basic it's to the point of being informal and understood. Either he doesn't know (which is unlikely) or he doesn't care (which makes him a total fonking bad-ass). Anyone who is audacious enough to walk into an occupied restroom, basically expose themselves to a complete stranger and then subject the same captive stranger to all of their foul odors is a man not to be fonked with and perhaps one whose movements should be tracked.
And since we can imagine him, it means it is possible for him to exist. And if this man were to exist, we'd all be in trouble. Because a man who can poop in a one-man bathroom next to another strange man who is peeing is a man who has the will to dominate us all.
It's only worth mentioning because everyone is thinking it. I hope we never see such a day. And may God have mercy on us if we do.
One of the oddities of this location of The Chatterbox is the bathrooms are for one person at-a-time. (When you lock the door it flips an "in use" sign like on an airplane.) So in the men's room there is a toilet next to a urinal with no divider in between them. When one of my book club compatriots accidentally opened the unlocked door to find it occupied, the nearby and observing waitress regaled him with this story.
When the restaurant was just opening, a gentleman opened the door to find the bathroom occupied. He waited and let the occupants exit. That's right; occupants. But get you mind out of the gutter because this is what the gentleman in question told our waitress storyteller. When he opened the door what he saw was one occupant was making use of the toilet while the other was using the urinal. Not that odd in a usual bathroom except in this one, as I mentioned, there is no divider.
Here's the question I want an answer to which has, no doubt, been lost to the sands of time. Who was there first? I suppose it's possible (and in fact, most likely) they both entered the restroom at the same time since they also both left at the same time. But drive with me for a while.
If you are in said restroom using the toilet and someone else comes in to use the urinal, that's just rude. Obviously it's meant for just one person and your oversight of not locking the door should not put you at the peril of someone walking in on you and choosing to stay. Other than when we are sleeping, the most vulnerable a person is each day is when they are sitting down to use the toilet. Society has established rules governing this situation for just this reason. Ultimately though it's just harmless.
However it's more intriguing to me if the man using the toilet was the second occupant. Talk about a ballsy motherfonker. Short of it being an "emergency" that would be one of those moments where you just kind of have to take it. Yes, it's still rude. But c'mon. Could you imagine the conversation you would have?
(Man opens the door while you are peeing)
You: Occupied!
Man: (nothing)
(Man crosses the room, unbuckles his pants, pulls down his underwear and sits down on the toilet.)
You: (stunned silence)
I mean, men hate to even make eye contact while washing their hands. This man is flaunting etiquitte so basic it's to the point of being informal and understood. Either he doesn't know (which is unlikely) or he doesn't care (which makes him a total fonking bad-ass). Anyone who is audacious enough to walk into an occupied restroom, basically expose themselves to a complete stranger and then subject the same captive stranger to all of their foul odors is a man not to be fonked with and perhaps one whose movements should be tracked.
And since we can imagine him, it means it is possible for him to exist. And if this man were to exist, we'd all be in trouble. Because a man who can poop in a one-man bathroom next to another strange man who is peeing is a man who has the will to dominate us all.
It's only worth mentioning because everyone is thinking it. I hope we never see such a day. And may God have mercy on us if we do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)