...based upon how my elementary school teachers used to grade assignments, great is just above excellent, so they'll diminish to excellent lakes first, then good lakes, then typical lakes...
I am not expert, but seems plausable. Shock comes from high voltage electric charge jumping from metal to skin. If you press it, you are part of the electric charge. If you are far away, charge cannot jump. Problem is only when you are couple of centimeters close to it. AFAIK, this is not current, but electric discharge, I think it cannot kill you (it is just very unpleasant), but maybe someone else knows better?
Thing that confuses me is that when you let go, you should have the same charge as the generator. No charge difference, no arc. Unless I'm wrong about something, which I probably am (hence my confusion).
Enough for a change in potential to cause arcing, as we can see. I'm sure you could find relevant experimental studies, or even conduct them on yourself with a proper transformer and voltmeter.
Yeah, if you move your hand around on those things you'll get a static shock, it's going to hurt, but it won't kill you. If you watch those demonstrations they have a pole they ground the generator out with.
It wouldn't delay your death. But it would make it more pleasant. You would most likely pass out from low blood pressure pretty quickly and then you wouldn't have to worry about starving any more.
You can never, ever get a net gain from self cannibalism of any kind. Digesting takes energy, and you're also having to heal/replace whatever it is you're eating.
Besides, the amount of blood that will come from a pulled tooth isn't enough to do anything useful. You wouldn't even gain minutes from it if the source was external.
Something to consider is that your body relies on blood glucose as its primary energy source. During starvation, glucose levels are severely depleted. This triggers your body to start using stored fatty acids. All remaining glucose is reserved for the brain to use.
By removing blood from your body and moving it to your stomach, you're essentially moving that precious energy to an organ that can't as readily make it available to the tissues that need it.
Thanks to the thermic effect, it also takes energy to digest and metabolize food. You'd be expending extra energy to digest the blood that was already in your body, where it was perfectly content carrying usable energy where it was needed.
I thought you can't digest more than a little bit of blood because of the amount of iron in it. And you're likely to start vomiting.
And if you lose too much blood, it'll kill you much more quickly anyways.
And of course if you lose blood and have to replenish it... That takes a good amount of extra energy to produce all the blood cells etc. And digestion also costs energy.
I've read a story of a 3 year old that had to have his tonsils removed. The poor child didn't understand that it's not good to swallow so much blood, didn't know enough to tell his parents what was up, and he unfortunately passed away, with a belly full of blood ☹️
Absolutely not true. Wherever you read it is full of malarkey. I would go so far as to say it is impossible, since your be vomiting unless you were still drugged. It would take sedatives to keep you under long enough to swallow that much, and you can still vomit while sedated.
You also don't die from a full belly by itself.
Then, there's the fact that the stomach takes up some degree of water during digestion, and is breaking down any solids that it can break down along the way. You'd have to literally chug the blood to get enough in at once to distend the stomach, and no tonsillectomy produces that much blood.
Almost every single modern procedure uses some kind of cautery to stop bleeding, and the few that don't still take steps to do so.
Anyone, especially a small child, bleeding enough to die from swallowing it, would never be sent home. That's a sign of a major problem apart from the surgery.
And that's ignoring how much blood loss that would be. Even if swallowed, the amount needed to cause death wouldn't fill the stomach in a small child. Even in a bigger child, the stomach is bigger too, so you run into issues with realism there.
Tonsilectomies are done all around the world, and have been for ages. While complications can happen, this simply isn't one of them.
I can't quite find the much older story of the 3 year old toddler though, but it was essentially the same thing, and took about a week of health decline before he passed. Nobody knew the toddler was swallowing the blood until the autopsy ☹️
The poor child didn't understand that it's not good to swallow so much blood
It sounds like the swallowing wasn't the problem, the bleeding was. The swallowing just masked the true symptom, the bleeding, from being observed by others.
If you have calories in your blood, you should leave them in there to get used instead of taking them out and back in. You wouldn’t be adding usable energy, you already had it.
You have energy stored in fat and muscle, but your body already is going to try and consume those without all that added stress of eating yourself from the outside.
Takes nutrients to both digest things and make more blood and you won't be able to use all of it the second time around so no you'd be netting negative calories.
I only have surface level knowledge of String Theory, but my understanding is that strings vibrate in simple harmonic motion and that different frequencies correspond to different particles. Since idealized springs are simple harmonic oscillators, you could perhaps say that, in some sense, the strings in String Theory are springs.
But maybe that's what inspired your question. If you're asking why they can't be springs in a more literal, geometric sense, then I would speculate that it's related to the world sheet that a spring would trace out as it propagates through spacetime. A world line describes a trajectory of a point particle not just through space, but through time as well - thereby describing the history of the particle's motion. In quantum field theory, these world lines are used in Feynman diagrams to describe interactions between particles. However, these diagrams always have sharp interaction vertices. In other words, the interaction occurs at a specific point in spacetime, which is problematic in terms of relativity (different observers should not need to agree on when a spacetime event occurred). For reasons I don't understand, this can give rise to infinities (ultraviolet divergences) when doing certain calculations. These have to removed through renormalization, but apparently this doesn't work when trying to develop a quantum theory of gravity.
In the case of a one-dimensional object like a string, instead of tracing out a world line, it traces out a two-dimensional surface called a world sheet. A consequence of this is that the sharp vertices of Feynman diagrams disappear: while an interaction did occur globally, it did not occur at a specific point in spacetime (different observers will see the event occur at different times, so no relativity issues). This eliminates the ultraviolet divergences and the need for renormalization (again, apparently), allowing for a full quantum theory of gravity. If you were to change the geometry of the strings to something more spring-like, my guess is you would no longer get this nice behavior.
Ask Science
Newest