Questions you've always wanted answered

Discuss anything interesting but not remotely Countdown-related here.

Moderator: Jon O'Neill

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3233
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ian Volante » Fri Jan 15, 2010 8:58 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:
Ian Volante wrote:Then again, in pool you're allowed jump shots, so can technically be said to never be unable to legally play a shot.
Only 9-ball, never 8-ball. Jumping balls is a foul in 8-ball.
Ooh, that'll be my learning for the day.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9371
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Charlie Reams » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:41 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:where you leave the table to the other player in such a way as it's absolutely physically entirely impossible to play a legal shot
I'm struggling to think of any way in which it could be physically impossible to play a legal shot.

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:59 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:where you leave the table to the other player in such a way as it's absolutely physically entirely impossible to play a legal shot
I'm struggling to think of any way in which it could be physically impossible to play a legal shot.
This actually happened to my hb on Monday: the cue ball ended up jammed into the jaws of a pocket, so that he couldn't move it without the opponent's ball dropping into the pocket. He tells me everyone crowded round the table to admire such an unusual situation though. There's one. Another, far more common, is to have the cue ball completely obscured, say in the jaws, by balls it's not legal to hit: e.g. 2 colours when someone coming to the table would be a on a red, or even 2 reds when they're on a colour, or against a cushion mickey-mouse stylie etc. This often happens by dint of a snooker that's ended up snugger than intended, but either way, in snooker it's a free ball, in 8-ball it's a re-rack.
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9371
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Charlie Reams » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:18 am

Lesley Hines wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:where you leave the table to the other player in such a way as it's absolutely physically entirely impossible to play a legal shot
I'm struggling to think of any way in which it could be physically impossible to play a legal shot.
This actually happened to my hb on Monday: the cue ball ended up jammed into the jaws of a pocket, so that he couldn't move it without the opponent's ball dropping into the pocket. He tells me everyone crowded round the table to admire such an unusual situation though. There's one. Another, far more common, is to have the cue ball completely obscured, say in the jaws, by balls it's not legal to hit: e.g. 2 colours when someone coming to the table would be a on a red, or even 2 reds when they're on a colour, or against a cushion mickey-mouse stylie etc. This often happens by dint of a snooker that's ended up snugger than intended, but either way, in snooker it's a free ball, in 8-ball it's a re-rack.
I'm not sure I understand the first situation. The second one sounds like you could hit another ball by jumping the white over another ball. Is that legal in pool?

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:31 am

Charlie Reams wrote:I'm not sure I understand the first situation. The second one sounds like you could hit another ball by jumping the white over another ball. Is that legal in pool?
Not 8-ball, no :( It wouldn't work if they were nearly touching, either. You need space to jump balls.
The first one was sort of \OO/, like that. It was most strange, anyway. The balls were touching so it wasn't possible to move the white without the other ball dropping in.
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Brian Moore
Devotee
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Exeter

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Brian Moore » Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:09 am

Are we less sensitive to the smell of our own shit & farts than other people's? If yes, how can this be, given that the smell depends on what we've eaten?

And how come dogs can sniff shit so closely when we're told that their sense of smell if 500 times more sensitive than humans'?

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Mon Feb 15, 2010 7:58 pm

Brian Moore wrote:Are we less sensitive to the smell of our own shit & farts than other people's? If yes, how can this be, given that the smell depends on what we've eaten?

And how come dogs can sniff shit so closely when we're told that their sense of smell if 500 times more sensitive than humans'?
I don't know a definitive answer (and can't be arsed to google it) but it's very definitely subjective. With your own child, their nappies aren't spectacularly offensive to the mother (haha - usually :P )but they are to everyone else. I've been there with other people's children who have been eye-watering, but their mother (nice people, not SS candidates) barely notices it. Also it seems my hb couldn't change a nappy without retching (although I suspected that was an avoidance tactic...) and on my child it never bothered me, but other kids did.

Smell's only your brain's interpretation of chemical signatures, after all. I'm quite interested now, I might do some research after all :)
Lowering the averages since 2009

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7757
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:55 pm

It might just be the fact that you know it's your own child's. I think on QI (yeah, I know, not that reliable) it said that people were told to smell the same thing and some were told it was vomit and some parmesan cheese and that made a difference to whether they liked the smell.

Also, about your own smell - I suppose if you're used to a smell you might not notice it, but personally I think I notice my own smells as well as anyone else notices my smells (Charlie will now link to some sort of self-smell fallacy).

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:57 pm

Brian Moore wrote:Are we less sensitive to the smell of our own shit & farts than other people's?
I think "appropriateness" could be a factor. While you're sitting on the loo you will not really be aware of the smell, but in a restaurant the same smell would stand out. Whether it's your own or somebody else's also factors into that: you might be disgusted by the smell of shit in a restaurant, but if it is your own shit you would also be mortified with embarrassment.

Also, your own smell is not noticeable while you're actually on the loo, but if you walk out and then go straight back in (e.g. to pick up your reading glasses :oops: ) then it hits you. I can't see any explanation for that.

Avoiding other people's smells makes good sense from a survival point of view - avoid catching a possible disease (or being asked to change a nappy :P ). Your own smells are entirely irrelevant there.

User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4132
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Jon O'Neill » Mon Feb 15, 2010 11:00 pm

You're all sick. My poos don't smell.

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Mon Feb 15, 2010 11:33 pm

Jon O'Neill wrote:You're all sick. My poos don't smell.
I think that proves you're Jesus.

... although actually, if you notice people being sick it's a sign that they do.

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Fanatic
Posts: 2815
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Marc Meakin » Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:39 am

Jon O'Neill wrote:You're all sick. My poos don't smell.
They havn't got a nose, boom boom.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:53 pm

*bump*

How come you need wet (or at least damp) hands to open things like plastic bags? Usually water decreases friction and makes stuff slippier, but it's almost impossible to open plastic bags with dry hands, but they conveniently stick to wet fingers. Why?? It should surely be the other way round, with the ridges of your fingerprints adding the necessary friction to enable the two surfaces to slide over each other.

Don't get it.
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:03 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:*bump*

How come you need wet (or at least damp) hands to open things like plastic bags? Usually water decreases friction and makes stuff slippier, but it's almost impossible to open plastic bags with dry hands, but they conveniently stick to wet fingers. Why?? It should surely be the other way round, with the ridges of your fingerprints adding the necessary friction to enable the two surfaces to slide over each other.

Don't get it.
I'm guessing, but perhaps to get rid of the static?

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7757
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:09 pm

Rosemary Roberts wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:*bump*

How come you need wet (or at least damp) hands to open things like plastic bags? Usually water decreases friction and makes stuff slippier, but it's almost impossible to open plastic bags with dry hands, but they conveniently stick to wet fingers. Why?? It should surely be the other way round, with the ridges of your fingerprints adding the necessary friction to enable the two surfaces to slide over each other.

Don't get it.
I'm guessing, but perhaps to get rid of the static?
Some things are grippier when slightly wet, like the Earth slope I have to get up if I don't want to walk the long way round. And pages/your finger.

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:10 am

Rosemary Roberts wrote:I'm guessing, but perhaps to get rid of the static?
Possibly, but you'd hope repellant forces would help, not hinder, and it's not like plastic's polarised to start with. Certainly not if it's PE, it's a straight hydrocarbon chain.
Gavin Chipper wrote:pages/your finger
Can't be - paper's really absorptive. Just look at the effect of dropping a book in the bath ( :oops: ) With paper it would increase the friction as the surface texture of the paper is increased. Same with mud, up to a point. The detritus and other organic matter would help absorb water and make it stickier until it got really sloopy, and that's when you (I) fall over.

They don't happen with plastic though. The surface texture's smooth to start with.
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Adam Gillard » Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:16 am

Clive Brooker wrote:To my surprise, worldsnooker.com seems to answer my original question explicitly :oops:

"14. Foul and a Miss
The striker shall, to the best of his ability, endeavour to hit the ball on. If the referee considers the Rule infringed, he shall call FOUL AND A MISS unless only the Black remains on the table, or a situation exists where it is impossible to hit the ball on. In the latter case it must be assumed the striker is attempting to hit the ball on provided that he plays, directly or indirectly, in the direction of the ball on with sufficient strength, in the referee’s opinion, to have reached the ball on but (for) the obstructing ball or balls."

I've inserted "for" in the final sentence.
So the solution for Player B who is in this impossible snooker is to hit the white really hard in the direction of the ball on despite the snookering balls in the way. E.g. mickey-moused against the bottom cushion by pink and black; blue on top cushion. Hit white in direction of blue hard enough so that it could reach it were in not for the pink and black in the way.

Alternative solution to get out of any tricky snooker: Do the Ronnie O'Sullivan "Oops, I knocked a ball with my hand. Clumsy me." As far as I know this loophole still hasn't been plugged despite the controversy in that O'Sullivan-Higgins match - the ref didn't call a miss because Ronnie didn't hit the white at all (although if he thought it was a deliberate ploy he could surely have used his discretion: "The striker shall, to the best of his ability, endeavour to hit the ball on. If the referee considers the Rule infringed, he shall call FOUL AND A MISS"). So if the ref (Jan Verhaas I think) thought there was some skullduggery involved he could have called a miss.
Mike Brown: "Round 12: T N R S A E I G U

C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)

Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3233
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ian Volante » Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:54 am

Lesley Hines wrote:They don't happen with plastic though. The surface texture's smooth to start with.
It's possible that because water is a polar molecule, it attracts parts of the molecule chains that make up the bag, and this, combined with the grippiness of one's fingers when damp, could increase the friction.

The same polar properties could in theory overcome the static that holds the bag closed simply by disrupting their distribution.

Pure speculation. You should try Last Word in New Scientist?
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Tue Aug 10, 2010 10:06 am

Lesley Hines wrote:
Rosemary Roberts wrote:I'm guessing, but perhaps to get rid of the static?
Possibly, but you'd hope repellant forces would help, not hinder, and it's not like plastic's polarised to start with. Certainly not if it's PE, it's a straight hydrocarbon chain.
As soon as you try to separate the layers you generate static that makes them cling even harder together - think how clingfilm prefers to cling to itself. But I've never tried wet hands - I usually have the problem in shops where you weigh your own vegetables. The little polythene (they're called that but I don't know what they really are) bags are the devil to get open. My solution is to 'snap' the top of the bag by pulling both ends sharply outwards (I hope that's intelligible) which slightly stretches both layers but differently so that they no longer match.

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3233
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ian Volante » Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:25 pm

Rosemary Roberts wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:
Rosemary Roberts wrote:I'm guessing, but perhaps to get rid of the static?
Possibly, but you'd hope repellant forces would help, not hinder, and it's not like plastic's polarised to start with. Certainly not if it's PE, it's a straight hydrocarbon chain.
As soon as you try to separate the layers you generate static that makes them cling even harder together - think how clingfilm prefers to cling to itself. But I've never tried wet hands - I usually have the problem in shops where you weigh your own vegetables. The little polythene (they're called that but I don't know what they really are) bags are the devil to get open. My solution is to 'snap' the top of the bag by pulling both ends sharply outwards (I hope that's intelligible) which slightly stretches both layers but differently so that they no longer match.
Even better, I just don't use those bags, I'd only bin them when I got home anyway.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:16 pm

Ian Volante wrote:
Rosemary Roberts wrote:
Rosemary Roberts wrote:I'm guessing, but perhaps to get rid of the static?
...
As soon as you try to separate the layers you generate static that makes them cling even harder together - think how clingfilm prefers to cling to itself. But I've never tried wet hands - I usually have the problem in shops where you weigh your own vegetables. The little polythene (they're called that but I don't know what they really are) bags are the devil to get open. My solution is to 'snap' the top of the bag by pulling both ends sharply outwards (I hope that's intelligible) which slightly stretches both layers but differently so that they no longer match.
Even better, I just don't use those bags, I'd only bin them when I got home anyway.
I don't use them except when I have to, but the checkout staff can get quite shirty if expected to weigh and bill each individual mushroom. And when I get home the bags get reused and eventually recycled.

David Williams
Devotee
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by David Williams » Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:22 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:*bump*

How come you need wet (or at least damp) hands to open things like plastic bags? Usually water decreases friction and makes stuff slippier, but it's almost impossible to open plastic bags with dry hands, but they conveniently stick to wet fingers. Why?? It should surely be the other way round, with the ridges of your fingerprints adding the necessary friction to enable the two surfaces to slide over each other.

Don't get it.
Good question.

Could air pressure play a big part? The two sides of the bag get a certain amount of static which brings them together, and they are so smooth and flexible that when they have come together there is no air between them. When I were a lad, atmospheric pressure was 14 pounds per square inch, which you can only overcome by getting some air to infiltrate from the edges - but you can't locate an edge. However introducing some water between your finger and the bag will drive out the air between them, meaning there is no pressure difference between your finger and the bag, and give you a sporting chance.

User avatar
Brian Moore
Devotee
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Exeter

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Brian Moore » Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:05 pm

Ian Volante wrote:the grippiness of one's fingers when damp, could increase the friction.
Yes. A little home experiment:

Completely dry your forefinger and thumb: they slide quite smoothly over each other. Now lick them - still quite slidy. But as they dry they become quite tacky. It suggests to me that skin has an optimum moistness (non-greasy) for gripping, and that that's all that's going on with the plastic bags. Forget air pressure, molecules and charge, I reckon. It's simple, innit?

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:30 pm

I don't live in a world yet where I can completely get away from plastic bags, much as I'd like to :( I do strongly agree their use should be minimised tho ;)

Ooo I've just found this interesting article.

I've been researching it gently for a coupla days and thought this was really interesting. They're saying that, contrary to previously-held beliefs about the purpose of fingerprints, they actually reduce the gripping area in a fingertip by 33%. Therefore filling the ridges will increase gripping area, rather than reducing texture, or whatever. Still doesn't completely answer it.

I don't think it's any sort of definitive answer, but they're all interesting ideas and almost certainly all contributing factors. I might write in to New Scientist to see if there's any learned physicist out there who specialises in carrier bag mechanics. Like you do :lol:
Lowering the averages since 2009

David Williams
Devotee
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by David Williams » Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:29 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:I don't live in a world yet where I can completely get away from plastic bags, much as I'd like to
The Progressive Bag Affiliates (PBA), which represents many of the leading manufacturers of plastic bags, said that about 65 per cent of Americans re-used their bags for rubbish disposal, lunch bags and clearing up after pets.
Plastic bags require 70 per cent less energy to manufacture than paper bags and produce half the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the process, according to the PBA. For every seven vehicles needed to deliver paper bags only one is needed for the same number of plastic bags, helping to save energy and reduce emissions.

From The Times yesterday. May not be a totally impartial body, but these things are never straightforward.

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3233
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ian Volante » Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:46 am

David Williams wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:I don't live in a world yet where I can completely get away from plastic bags, much as I'd like to
The Progressive Bag Affiliates (PBA), which represents many of the leading manufacturers of plastic bags, said that about 65 per cent of Americans re-used their bags for rubbish disposal, lunch bags and clearing up after pets.
Plastic bags require 70 per cent less energy to manufacture than paper bags and produce half the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the process, according to the PBA. For every seven vehicles needed to deliver paper bags only one is needed for the same number of plastic bags, helping to save energy and reduce emissions.

From The Times yesterday. May not be a totally impartial body, but these things are never straightforward.
It seems better to me to avoid using any bag where possible. I certainly don't replace plastic ones with paper ones.

One vaguely amusing theory I came across recently is that plastic bags going to landfill actually help with sequestering carbon, and are therefore good for the environment. I'm not convinced until i see the maths however...
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
Marc Meakin
Fanatic
Posts: 2815
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Marc Meakin » Wed Aug 11, 2010 11:18 pm

Here's a question.
Dmitry Goretsky, Why?
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT

User avatar
James Robinson
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 9020
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by James Robinson » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:33 am

Marc Meakin wrote:Here's a question.
Dmitry Goretsky, Why?
Ermmm............................... :? :?: :? :?: :? :?:
WE ARE PREMIER LEAGUE!!!
UP THE MIGHTY TERRIERS!!! ;) :) :D :mrgreen: 8-)

User avatar
Brian Moore
Devotee
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Exeter

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Brian Moore » Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:21 pm

Well, a question I'd like answered, but as it's only four days old, the 'always' is a bit of an exaggeration....

How can my radio-controlled bed-side alarm clock reset set each night (for the past four nights) to exactly four hours behind? I've got two other radio-controlled wall clocks, and they've stuck on the right time. Each morning I press the reset button, and it finds the right time again.

I guess the second and minute hands are right to the millisecond, as advertised, but the four-hour discrepancy in the hour hand is a bit of a drawback...

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Tue Aug 31, 2010 7:38 pm

This is a new question (to me) but I hoped some of you might be able to shed some light, or think more laterally than I'm doing on it.

Some weirdo keeps taking out home insurance policies for my house. It's currently insured for £1.75 million with three different companies (for £1m, £500k and £250k), not including what it's actually insured for. I've obviously told the companies concerned.

What I don't understand is how the fraudster can profit from it? You need a police report for burglary / fire / whatever someone might claim on their insurance for, and that wouldn't be accessible to Mr Dodgy McFraud. So what's in it for him? What's the scam that I'm missing? Why would someone pay for a policy (with huge glaring errors in it; the companies thought I was being sarky at first when I pointed out we actually have 10 bedrooms) on a house they don't own? And should I be worried about the withheld-number phone calls in the middle of the night asking if we're at home?

Answers from insurers / actuaries / Edward de Bono types / defense lawyers / career criminals please :lol:
Lowering the averages since 2009

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7757
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Gavin Chipper » Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:28 pm

Why do snooker players flap their fingers?

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9371
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Charlie Reams » Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:34 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:This is a new question (to me) but I hoped some of you might be able to shed some light, or think more laterally than I'm doing on it.

Some weirdo keeps taking out home insurance policies for my house. It's currently insured for £1.75 million with three different companies (for £1m, £500k and £250k), not including what it's actually insured for. I've obviously told the companies concerned.

What I don't understand is how the fraudster can profit from it? You need a police report for burglary / fire / whatever someone might claim on their insurance for, and that wouldn't be accessible to Mr Dodgy McFraud. So what's in it for him? What's the scam that I'm missing? Why would someone pay for a policy (with huge glaring errors in it; the companies thought I was being sarky at first when I pointed out we actually have 10 bedrooms) on a house they don't own? And should I be worried about the withheld-number phone calls in the middle of the night asking if we're at home?

Answers from insurers / actuaries / Edward de Bono types / defense lawyers / career criminals please :lol:
Maybe an identify fraud scheme? An insurance document for a house might suffice for some purpose, like a utility bill does.

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:53 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:Maybe an identify fraud scheme? An insurance document for a house might suffice for some purpose, like a utility bill does.
I thought the same myself, but all the dozy wazzock's documentation necessary for that comes in through our locked postbox, so the perp doesn't get his mitts on it. Once you can understand, but by the third time he'd've worked out he can't get the paperwork he needs. You'll know if he has though: my apterous rating will shoot up.

:idea: I should steal his identity, torch the place, and walk off with a little under £2m. 8-) :lol:
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9371
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Charlie Reams » Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:20 am

Lesley Hines wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:Maybe an identify fraud scheme? An insurance document for a house might suffice for some purpose, like a utility bill does.
I thought the same myself, but all the dozy wazzock's documentation necessary for that comes in through our locked postbox, so the perp doesn't get his mitts on it. Once you can understand, but by the third time he'd've worked out he can't get the paperwork he needs. You'll know if he has though: my apterous rating will shoot up.

:idea: I should steal his identity, torch the place, and walk off with a little under £2m. 8-) :lol:
Very strange. Maybe he's trying to be friendly but just isn't very good at interacting with people. The payments haven't come from Belgium by any chance, have they?

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Wed Sep 01, 2010 2:50 am

Lesley Hines wrote:This is a new question (to me) but I hoped some of you might be able to shed some light, or think more laterally than I'm doing on it.

Some weirdo keeps taking out home insurance policies for my house. It's currently insured for £1.75 million with three different companies (for £1m, £500k and £250k), not including what it's actually insured for. I've obviously told the companies concerned.

What I don't understand is how the fraudster can profit from it? You need a police report for burglary / fire / whatever someone might claim on their insurance for, and that wouldn't be accessible to Mr Dodgy McFraud. So what's in it for him? What's the scam that I'm missing? Why would someone pay for a policy (with huge glaring errors in it; the companies thought I was being sarky at first when I pointed out we actually have 10 bedrooms) on a house they don't own? And should I be worried about the withheld-number phone calls in the middle of the night asking if we're at home?

Answers from insurers / actuaries / Edward de Bono types / defense lawyers / career criminals please :lol:
I'm sorry you're being troubled, Lesley, but it's a fascinating question!

Is it possible that your dozy wazzock is himself the victim of a fraud. He may genuinely believe that he has bought your house (perhaps to go with the Eiffel Tower and Brooklyn Bridge he already owns). Is he actually putting down money on these policies or just setting them up and leaving it at that?

Or it's a simple mistake and he is really trying to insure the castle next door.

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:03 am

Lesley Hines wrote:What's the scam that I'm missing?
After charming one of the company's Fraud Departments it turns out it's a cashback scam. They're internet policies that were offering cashback as part of the deal. Man, what a desperate state of affairs :( To go through all that for 75 (or whatever) lousy quid.

You're all rubbish as career criminals go, though :lol:

Oh, and the snooker finger - twitch thing? It's just nervous. JV commented once. Interestingly Asian players (that have had different coaches) don't do it, and they also have a shorter withdraw.
Lowering the averages since 2009

User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ben Hunter » Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:16 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:Man, what a desperate state of affairs :( To go through all that for 75 (or whatever) lousy quid.
He's probably doing it to loads of properties.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7218
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Matt Morrison » Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:32 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:Asian players [...] also have a shorter withdraw.
Racist but true.

User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Michael Wallace » Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:37 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:Asian players [...] also have a shorter withdraw.
Racist but true.
I have to point out that I was seriously going to make this joke, but then I considered it beneath even me.

User avatar
Lesley Hines
Kiloposter
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Worcester

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Lesley Hines » Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:14 pm

Lesley Hines wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:What's the scam that I'm missing?
After charming one of the company's Fraud Departments it turns out it's a cashback scam.
The plot thickens. After the arrival of two more (ffs) I rang the respective companies, the first of which said they don't do cashback deals. Back to square one then. On the plus side my house is currently worth £3.05m. Who says there's a recession on? That's the fastest scale of growth I've heard since Man United found the pricing gun in the club shop.
Lowering the averages since 2009

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ryan Taylor » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:32 am

Charlie, can you please explain the Google logo for today? It won't let me click on it. Thanks.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7218
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Matt Morrison » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:46 am

Ryan Taylor wrote:Charlie, can you please explain the Google logo for today? It won't let me click on it. Thanks.
I only checked it out after seeing Jack's status update on Facebook. It really pisses me off that when you use iGoogle (which is such a sweet homepage tool that you really ought to be) you don't get the joy of the ever-changing Google logo like you do on the shitty blank white regular Google page. Seems an unfair oversight, but I guess it would be much harder to use logos like this on the iGoogle set up.

I did happen to see it yesterday or the day before, just as a lucky consequence of iGoogle signing me out for some reason, and it was another Flash-animated one that was also fucking cool. Are they doing a week of special animated logos or something? I dunno, too lazy to Google it.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7218
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Matt Morrison » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:46 am

If you're white and you only sleep with black people, does that make you extremely racist or extremely unracist?

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ryan Taylor » Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:53 am

Matt Morrison wrote:If you're white and you only sleep with black people, does that make you extremely racist or extremely unracist?
It makes you Cheryl Cole.

User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Michael Wallace » Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:56 pm

Ryan Taylor wrote:Charlie, can you please explain the Google logo for today? It won't let me click on it. Thanks.
The Grauniad have an article about it, complete with an informative video.

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ryan Taylor » Tue May 24, 2011 11:03 am

I want to know why in a packet of Jaffa Cakes 11 of them face one way whilst one of the ends faces in the opposite direction.

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3233
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ian Volante » Tue May 24, 2011 11:45 am

Ryan Taylor wrote:I want to know why in a packet of Jaffa Cakes 11 of them face one way whilst one of the ends faces in the opposite direction.
That never used to be the case (speaking as a former committee member of the Hugabugga Jaffacake Appreciation Society international).
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ryan Taylor » Tue May 24, 2011 11:51 am

Ian Volante wrote:
Ryan Taylor wrote:I want to know why in a packet of Jaffa Cakes 11 of them face one way whilst one of the ends faces in the opposite direction.
That never used to be the case (speaking as a former committee member of the Hugabugga Jaffacake Appreciation Society international).
Ha, cool. I'm pretty sure it is the case now because at least every pack of 12 that I have bought within the last year are packaged like this. It must be a conscious decision to make the 12th or 1st one to be packaged the opposite direction but I just dunno why. If anything it makes no sense because with there being a chocolate-chocolate face this could result in melting together and messing up 2 of the Jaffa Cakes. I'm not sure what it's like for them mini packs of Jaffa Cakes that have "6" in (which seemed to regularly have 7 (and I once got 8)).

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9371
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Charlie Reams » Tue May 24, 2011 11:57 am

Ryan Taylor wrote:chocolate face
:o

User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Michael Wallace » Tue May 24, 2011 12:01 pm

Could it be to stop the chocolate melting and sticking to the film wrapper? I can imagine people would find that much more distressing than a chocolate face disaster.

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7218
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Matt Morrison » Tue May 24, 2011 12:03 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Ryan Taylor wrote:chocolate face
:o
Image

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Tue May 24, 2011 12:09 pm

Ryan Taylor wrote:I want to know why in a packet of Jaffa Cakes 11 of them face one way whilst one of the ends faces in the opposite direction.
I would think it is to cushion the chocolate on the last one that would otherwise be cracked by the pressure that closes the packet.

Maybe we need a research project here - does it also apply to chocolate Hobnobs?

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ryan Taylor » Tue May 24, 2011 12:20 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Ryan Taylor wrote:chocolate face
:o
A-lol. Now fix Likes.

User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4132
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Jon O'Neill » Mon May 30, 2011 11:47 pm

How much money does leaving a phone charger plugged in and switched on with no phone attached cost?
How about with a phone attached?
How about a TV on standby?
How about a light bulb?
How about a strip light like in my kitchen?
How about a TV switched on?
How about a vacuum cleaner?

Order the above by how much it costs to run each for an hour.

Thanks.

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9371
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Charlie Reams » Mon May 30, 2011 11:54 pm

Jon O'Neill wrote:How much money does leaving a phone charger plugged in and switched on with no phone attached cost?
How about with a phone attached?
How about a TV on standby?
How about a light bulb?
How about a strip light like in my kitchen?
How about a TV switched on?
How about a vacuum cleaner?

Order the above by how much it costs to run each for an hour.

Thanks.
You could Google all of these in about 5 seconds.

Liam Tiernan
Devotee
Posts: 799
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:12 pm
Location: Kildare, Rep. of Ireland

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Liam Tiernan » Tue May 31, 2011 12:23 am

Lesley Hines wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:
Lesley Hines wrote:What's the scam that I'm missing?
After charming one of the company's Fraud Departments it turns out it's a cashback scam.
The plot thickens. After the arrival of two more (ffs) I rang the respective companies, the first of which said they don't do cashback deals. Back to square one then. On the plus side my house is currently worth £3.05m. Who says there's a recession on? That's the fastest scale of growth I've heard since Man United found the pricing gun in the club shop.
Did you ever get this sorted out, Lesley?

User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4132
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Jon O'Neill » Tue May 31, 2011 4:42 am

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jon O'Neill wrote:How much money does leaving a phone charger plugged in and switched on with no phone attached cost?
How about with a phone attached?
How about a TV on standby?
How about a light bulb?
How about a strip light like in my kitchen?
How about a TV switched on?
How about a vacuum cleaner?

Order the above by how much it costs to run each for an hour.

Thanks.
You could Google all of these in about 5 seconds.
Ok, first one. Search terms "money phone charger switched on". Result 1 is environmental dicks, who I don't listen to in any case. Result 2, a forum - nobody knew. Result 3, see result 1. Result 4, see result 3.

This has taken me about 3 minutes.

Anyone know this sort of thing for sure?

David Williams
Devotee
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by David Williams » Tue May 31, 2011 8:38 am

Rule of thumb is how much heat it generates. Hot (light bulb) costs a lot. Warm (some chargers) still worth switching off. Doesn't work so well for big things like TVs because it 's hard to tell. But even 1p an hour is costing you £85 a year.

Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Ryan Taylor » Tue May 31, 2011 12:18 pm

Jon O'Neill wrote:How much money does leaving a phone charger plugged in and switched on with no phone attached cost?
Does it cost? If so, does the same apply to say an iPod charger I have plugged inall the time and shaver charger etc. even though nothing is attached using the electric?

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3170
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Questions you've always wanted answered

Post by Phil Reynolds » Tue May 31, 2011 12:27 pm

On a related point, if I have room lights operated by dimmer switches and I turn down the dimmers so the light level in the room is reduced, am I using less electricity or does the consumption in fact remain exactly the same with a higher proportion of the power being dissipated as heat?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests