I bet you didnt know that

retalivity

gozunda wrote: »

The skin is our largest external organ, and also the largest organ in general.

That may not be true, depending on who you talk to

sbsquarepants

Alanna Thousands Valley wrote: »

Can't fathom playing either the regular shop lottos nor using quickpick selections. (I only use the hotpicks method).

.

Which is?

joeguevara wrote: »

That’s exactly what it means. If you don’t have 73 in your 99 tickets and 73 is the winning number then you still lose. You either have it or you don’t. You have a much higher chance of having the winning number. But that doesn’t mean that you only have 1% chance of losing. You lose because you don’t have the winning ticket. And only one ticket is pulled so you either have it or you don’t. 50/50.

You don't calculate the odds after the fact. After 73 is drawn you either have it or you don't. There is a winner whose "odds" (if that word made any sense in the scenario) of winning would be 1/1 - as they have already won. At that stage every one else's chances are zero - they have already lost.

But before the draw, the person with number 73 has a 1/100 chance of winning and the person with the other 99 numbers has a 99/100 chance of winning. If you were to repeat the process a trillion times Mr. 73 would win only 1% of the time - not half the time as your odds would suggest.

The percentages would hold true but only over very large amounts of draws, when dealing with small amounts of draws you could get huge statistical anomalies - like your hundred million to 1 combination of birthdays matching the lotto numbers.

Franz Von Peppercorn

joeguevara wrote: »

That’s exactly what it means. If you don’t have 73 in your 99 tickets and 73 is the winning number then you still lose. You either have it or you don’t. You have a much higher chance of having the winning number. But that doesn’t mean that you only have 1% chance of losing. You lose because you don’t have the winning ticket. And only one ticket is pulled so you either have it or you don’t. 50/50.

Ah, jaysus

Allinall

If you put 23 people in a room together, there will be a 50/50 ( or even money) chance that the walls will be painted magnolia.

Fourier

Conchir wrote: »

Under the right circumstances, moons may have small moons of their own. In the Solar System, moons such as Titan (Saturn), Callisto (Jupiter) and Earth’s own moon, are large enough and far enough from their planets to potentially host a small natural satellite. For it to happen, it would have to be less than six miles in diameter.

We're on track to discover moons going around planets of distant stars next year. A few candidates have been found, but the statistics of the observations just aren't quite good enough yet.

4068ac1elhodqr

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Which is?

Hotpicks is this: (may require 3rd party, or travel, but similar is also available in most regular bookies).

Essentially it's more bang per buck, Anyone aiming for the 139,838,160/1 (5+2stars) is simply dreaming, so why even bother.

1 in 1,960 odds for 3balls (1,500) is slightly more plausable, although still not (ever) in ones favour, unless you know which balls to pick.

Perhaps the only euromills' based opportunity to bag a guaranteed 1m (for 5balls) is using hotpicks. Although the odds are still 'double the prize' at 2,118,760/1. Basically you've a 'x66 better chance' at millionaire, than regular euromillions.

Some say the luckiest man alive is this shrek chap who won an overachiever competition (see partner), then won 1m not long after. Good on ya chap.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

I was in Pereira the other day. It's the biggest city in the Colombian coffee region and like many cities in the country (And several neighbouring countries) it has a statue of Simon Bolivar in the main square.

What's unusual about Pereira's statue is that he is bollock naked.

Ipso

Now that’s bare back!

Professor Moriarty

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

I was in Pereira the other day. It's the biggest city in the Colombian coffee region and like many cities in the country (And several neighbouring countries) it has a statue of Simon Bolivar in the main square.

What's unusual about Pereira's statue is that he is bollock naked.

I can't see a bollock. Unless he has a horse-shaped giant bollock. In which case, hats off.

Conchir

'The Motherland Calls' is a statue in Volgograd (formerly Stalingrad) commemorating the WWII Battle of Stalingrad. When it was built it stood as the tallest statue in the world, 85m from the top of the plinth to the top of the sword. For reference, the Statue of Liberty measured in the same way is just 46m, though overall it would stand 7m taller if pedestals were included.


Comparison without the pedestals.

Realt Dearg Sec

That's amazing. Reminds me of the Liberty Statue on Buda Hill overlooking Budapest.



It was built in 1947 to commemorate the Soviet liberation of the city from the Nazis. The original design had the woman holding up a newborn baby, but the Soviets changed it to a palm leaf.

It was originally dedicated to "the liberating Soviet heroes" from the "grateful Hungarian people". As a result, it was a target for vandalism during the 1956 revolution, and in 1989 the dedication was changed "To the memory of all who sacrificed their lives for the independence, freedom, and prosperity of Hungary"

There are two smaller statues either side of the woman, but there used to be more, which have since been moved to the Statue Park. If you go to Budapest, it is well worth a visit, it's a sad, bereft little place way, way outside the city, quite awkward to get to, where the city dumped nearly all the old Soviet/Communist statues. Rather than destroying them, as happened in most Eastern Bloc states, they were put in this spot where locals no longer had to look at them, and where they lost all of their grandeur and power to intimidate or create awe. It's a remarkable place.

EDIT Was going to put in pictures from the Statue Park but it's not letting me do it, probably because that first picture is ludicrously oversized already. Sorry about that!

RiderOnTheStorm

Exclamation Marc wrote:

The 33rd President of the United States, Harry S. Truman's middle name was.... "S".

Harry had no middle name, and was advised that if he had a middle initial he would appeal to more voters. So he picked S. The S doesnt stand for anything, its just a letter. So you dont see a dot after it when his name is written ...

Realt Dearg Sec

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

Harry had no middle name, and was advised that if he had a middle initial he would appeal to more voters. So he picked S. The S doesnt stand for anything, its just a letter. So you dont see a dot after it when his name is written ...

Like when Homer Simpson goes searching to find out what the J in Homer J Simpson stands for, and after a long and difficult journey, discovers that his full name is Homer Jay Simpson.

RiderOnTheStorm

Tic Tacs are almost completely made of sugar. The only part of the "pill" thats not sugar is the smooth shell. However, 1 pill is counted as a portion, and it's so small that the sugar content of the portion is less than the minimum 0.1g for regulatory purposes, and can be marketed as "sugar free".... Check the small print next time you see a pack.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

Harry had no middle name, and was advised that if he had a middle initial he would appeal to more voters. So he picked S. The S doesnt stand for anything, its just a letter. So you dont see a dot after it when his name is written ...

He did use a dot. Also, he said the letter was chosen as compromise between the two branches of his family and represented the names of both his grandfathers.

https://www.trumanlibrary.org/speriod.htm

facehugger99

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Which is?



You don't calculate the odds after the fact. After 73 is drawn you either have it or you don't. There is a winner whose "odds" (if that word made any sense in the scenario) of winning would be 1/1 - as they have already won. At that stage every one else's chances are zero - they have already lost.

But before the draw, the person with number 73 has a 1/100 chance of winning and the person with the other 99 numbers has a 99/100 chance of winning. If you were to repeat the process a trillion times Mr. 73 would win only 1% of the time - not half the time as your odds would suggest.

The percentages would hold true but only over very large amounts of draws, when dealing with small amounts of draws you could get huge statistical anomalies - like your hundred million to 1 combination of birthdays matching the lotto numbers.

I always like the 3 box example of probabilities.

There's a gameshow with 3 identical boxes.

One box contains 1 million quid and the other two are empty.

You choose one box. The presenter takes the other two. He opens one and shows you it's empty and offers that you can either keep the box you originally picked or swop it for the other one that he still holds.

Most people will think they have a 50:50 chance regardless of what they decide to do, however, that's not the case at all.

When you initially make your choice you have a 33.3% chance that you have picked the million box and a 66.6% chance that it's one of the other two.

Once you know which of the the boxes that the presenter holds is empty, the chance of the million being in the other box he has is 66.6%.

So basically you double your chances of winning by swopping boxes.

New Home

Chancer3001

facehugger99 wrote: »

I always like the 3 box example of probabilities.

There's a gameshow with 3 identical boxes.

One box contains 1 million quid and the other two are empty.

You choose one box. The presenter takes the other two. He opens one and shows you it's empty and offers that you can either keep the box you originally picked or swop it for the other one that he still holds.

Most people will think they have a 50:50 chance regardless of what they decide to do, however, that's not the case at all.

When you initially make your choice you have a 33.3% chance that you have picked the million box and a 66.6% chance that it's one of the other two.

Once you know which of the the boxes that the presenter holds is empty, the chance of the million being in the other box he has is 66.6%.

So basically you double your chances of winning by swopping boxes.

IMO you omitted a key component that he KNOWS which box the money is in.


Otherwise it wouldnt make any difference. His box and yor box would have equal chance. However, if he KNOWS where the money is then it increses the likelihood.


Extrapolate to a million boxes for it to be more clear

mzungu

The name for the space between your eyebrows is called the 'glabella'.

mzungu

mzungu wrote: »

The name for the space between your eyebrows is called the 'glabella'.

And palpebral is the term for the eyelid, and the epipalpebral space is the area between the eyelid and the eyebrow. The nostrils are also known as the nares.

My favorite face-part-word is philtrum, the groove from the base of the nose to the middle of the top lip. Mainly because it sounds like a musical instrument. When we develop in utero our faces are two halves that develop into one - when this fails to complete there can be issues like cleft lip and palate and the philtrum is where that joining up shows most. Philtrum is a Latin word meaning something like 'love spell', which is probably why the common term is cupids bow, since those Cupid arrows were dipped in a love potion.

Grayson

facehugger99 wrote: »

I always like the 3 box example of probabilities.

There's a gameshow with 3 identical boxes.

One box contains 1 million quid and the other two are empty.

You choose one box. The presenter takes the other two. He opens one and shows you it's empty and offers that you can either keep the box you originally picked or swop it for the other one that he still holds.

Most people will think they have a 50:50 chance regardless of what they decide to do, however, that's not the case at all.

When you initially make your choice you have a 33.3% chance that you have picked the million box and a 66.6% chance that it's one of the other two.

Once you know which of the the boxes that the presenter holds is empty, the chance of the million being in the other box he has is 66.6%.

So basically you double your chances of winning by swopping boxes.

I think I've posted about the monty hall probably before but here's a really interesting article about how it became so controversial.

https://priceonomics.com/the-time-everyone-corrected-the-worlds-smartest/

gozunda

(Early Halloween special)
The triangle of death ....

The danger triangle of the face consists of the area on the face from the corners of the mouth to between the eyebrows 

Due to the special nature of the blood supply to the human nose and the surrounding area, it is possible that squeezing pimples located there may lead to a brain infection ....

At the center of that triangle, under the surface of the skin, is the cavernous sinus, which houses essential nerves and blood vessels that carry blood back to the brain.

If the surface skin were to be infected, the infection could spread, seep into the blood vessels, and, worst case scenario, lead to cavernous sinus thrombosis (the formation of blood clots), stroke, or death....

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

The triangle of death] ....[lead to cavernous sinus thrombosis (the formation of blood clots), stroke, or death....

I was going to write a post about cavernous sinus thrombosis before, but after turning peoples stomachs with the Demodex mites, I thought better of it.

Any issues related to the 'triangle of death' are very unlikely and that you'd be very unfortunate to cause your own death by popping a zit, though it can and does happen.

You're far more likely to see fatal consequences from things like ignoring a tooth abscess or bad gum infection, but ignoring any pain or obvious infection is a bad idea.

realitykeeper

The red colour on a ship`s hull is usually the 5 meter mark.

Carry

New Home wrote: »

Thank you for guiding us to a planet where molten glass sideways puts lottery wins into perspective

mzungu wrote: »

The name for the space between your eyebrows is called the 'glabella'.

There is a space between your shoulder blades you can never reach on your own. Everyone who tried it will know that there will always be a spot that will be untouched by yourself.

In murder cases pathologists will know if the victim has been touched by someone else, well, it's complicated, but a murderer can never claim to have left his DNA between the shoulder blades of a victim by accident.

Ted_YNWA

Carry wrote: »

Thank you for guiding us to a planet where molten glass sideways puts lottery wins into perspective



There is a space between your shoulder blades you can never reach on your own. Everyone who tried it will know that there will always be a spot that will be untouched by yourself.

In murder cases pathologists will know if the victim has been touched by someone else, well, it's complicated, but a murderer can never claim to have left his DNA between the shoulder blades of a victim by accident.

And everyone who has read this, has just tried to touch this spot.

New Home

Carry wrote: »

There is a space between your shoulder blades you can never reach on your own. Everyone who tried it will know that there will always be a spot that will be untouched by yourself.

In murder cases pathologists will know if the victim has been touched by someone else, well, it's complicated, but a murderer can never claim to have left his DNA between the shoulder blades of a victim by accident.

I don't get this. If by touch you mean "touch with your fingertips so as to live a print", then I get you. Otherwise I don't agree, I can. But then again, I can put my bent arm around my head so as to touch my ear on the same side as the arm (e.g. I can wrap my right arm all around my head so that I can grab my right ear with my right hand passing under the chin), so I can tell you I can definitely touch all of my upper back (as proven by the soap traces when I shower), albeit with the back of my hand*. As for the murderer accidentally touching a victim's back, I'm still lost - would you mind explaining, please?

(*It's a bit like when you shake your own hands on your back, one arm passing from the shoulders and the other from your waist)

Carry

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

And everyone who has read this, has just tried to touch this spot.

I just envisaged the whole AH community twisting their arms at their backs to reach that spot

New Home

I'd say if you can do this you can easily reach that spot.

gozunda

Carry wrote: »

I just envisaged the whole AH community twisting their arms at their backs to reach that spot

And willing themselves not to squeeze it - just in case it might be linked to the aforementioned "triangle of death" ... :pac: