CULTURAL QA 01-2024-01 All the BELOW QA are from Quora digest to me on 01-01-2024.
Quora answers need not be 100% correct answers .Compiled and posted byR. Gopala krishnan, on 01-01-2024 Q1 What are some interesting facts aboutphysics? A1 Deepaktopzone, Dec 4 #1 The myth of an apple falling on Newton iswrong. We’ve allheard the story of an apple falling on Isaac Newton's head, but few know it wasa myth. In reality, Newtondrew inspiration from apples, not because one hit his head, but because theyfell straight down and not sideways. This observation helped him developthe theory of universal gravity. #2The higher you are (building-wise), the fastertime will go. Time is ahard concept to understand when you look at it through the lens of physics. A couple of seconds while standingon the ground will go slower than for someone who sits on a high building, likethe Empire State building. It is best explained by Einstein and his famous theory of relativity. #3 The screens of smartphones work thanks to theelectric charges leaving our fingers. Touch phoneswork thanks to the physics behind the human body itself. When we touch the screens with ourfingers, we let out a small number of electric charges that register with themechanics and allow us to interact. For this reason, things likerubber, fingernails, and others don’t register #4 It’snearly impossible to sink in the Dead Sea. The Dead Seais popular for the number of tourists that visit it, but also for having alarge amount of salt in it. Saltis not only good for food, but also a good way of making the water much denser.There is so much of it in that sea that people who swim there havelittle to no chance of drowning. Of course, it is still important tokeep things safe. #5 Wind casts an invisible shadow. Shadows arenot always cast by objects, and winds can do it too. The only problem? We can’t see them with the naked eye. Wind, a movement of a gasthat varies from a small gust to full-on thunderstorms, can cast a small shadow only visible with the help ofmachines and physics. #6 Lightgets much slower in water. Water is notonly a refresher at the end of the day, but also a great stopper for thewavelengths of light. Light travels through air at a very high speed, and thatis thanks to its small density. Water, however, is thicker. Since everymolecule has surface tension, light gets distorted due to the amount of energy needed to passthrough. My note-Refraction studied and performed experiment about refractive index of materials in Physics class #7 Galileo Galilei proved his theory of free fallwith the help of the leaning tower of Pisa. WhileGalileo Galilei might have created the theory of free fall, he had to prove itby experimenting. He did itby throwing two cannonballs of the same material, but different masses,from the leaning tower of Pisa. His theory would be further supported bymissions to the moon. #8 The universe is growing every second. The universeis already a vast space full of planets, stars, and other celestial bodies. But it is still notbig enough. The universe is growing at a high rate every second, expanding inevery direction, getting colder and faster at the same time. Thisexpansion has been going on for billions of years. #9 Watercan boil and freeze at the same time. At the sametemperature, water can either boil or freeze. A triple pointis a point where the temperature, pressure, and pressure value all coincide.The fact that all three states—liquid, ice, and water vapor—are present at thistime allows water to boil and freeze at the same temperature. Q2 Is it strange that I don't think ofJanuary 1st as the start of my new year? A2 Gopalkrishna Vishwanath, I am not thepartying type 4h No. It is not strange. ManyIndians do not feel that January 1st should be celebrated as the New Yearfestival at least in India. A commentwas posted in Hindi by Sobhachand Dugar in one of my answers yesterday. This acondensed translation of what was mentioned in that comment. Why do we observe Jan 1st as the beginning ofthe new year? We Indians should think this over. The seasondid not change. In school orcollege, the class did not change and neither did the term. The harvestdid not change and neither did the crop. Neither didthe colors of the trees and plants change. Neither didthe direction of the sun and stars change. Let usconsider a comparison of the New year per the Gregorian Calendar and thetraditional Indian New year day. Nature: There is nodifference between December and January in the Gregorian Calendar while in theIndian new year, flowers bloom, new leaves appear on trees. There is greeneryall around. Clothes: We wear thesame warm clothing in December and January But when theIndian new year begins, there is a change in clothing due to change in weather. New terms in school. There isnothing new in the Gregorian Calendar, while in the Indian new year theacademic session closes and results of exams are declared. New Financial year: Our accountbooks don’t close in December-January Newaccounting is opened during the Indian new year. Farmers: There is nodifference between December and January for farmers in the Gregorian Calendar. But onIndian New year season the crop is harvested and there is a celebration on thisoccasion. For thesereasons we need not celebrate January 1 as a New year festival in India. My note-Generally January is told as the English new year. We follow English 99% incomputer, office files, and common language medium in India. All regional calendars and diaries also printed fromJanuary. So we may consider English New year with equal importance to regionalnew year avoiding Meaning less things like lighting lamp atmidnight in pooja roometc. Q3 If an elephant’s brain is bigger thanours, why are they not smarter? A3 Gary Meaney, author of Zoology'sGreatest Mystery (2022)Nov 2 This is agood question, because theanswer teaches us a lot about the nature of intelligence itself The averagehuman brain weighs about a kilogram and a half, which is remarkably smallreally. The sum of all consciousness ishoused within that little scoop of nervous tissue. On the otherhand, within the cranium of an African bush elephant sits a brain well overtwice the size of ours. It’s clearthat there’s more tointelligence than just brain size. The baleen whales of the oceans have brainsweighing 7 kilograms, well over quadruple the mass of ours. However,their behaviour is much less complex and sophisticated than that of humans, or indeed of elephants.Baleen whales aren’t stupid - their songs are a rich and advanced form ofcommunication, and they’ve been known to display altruism - but theirintelligence definitely isn’t proportional to their massive brain size. This is ofcourse because their brains are tiny relative to their bodies.A blue whale’s brain makes up as little as 0.005% of its total body mass! Ourbrains, by comparison, are about 2.5% of our bodyweight. So is brain-to-bodymass ratio the true decider of intellect? It’s certainly a better metric tocompare between animals, but still one which is deeply flawed. It turns outthat, all else being equal, brain mass does not scale linearlywith body mass. Afterall, there is a minimum number of neurons an animal needs to function, aconcept known as the “grey floor”. Smaller animals tend to have much higher brain-to-body mass ratios,without necessarily seeming any more intelligent. A humble shrew, for example,has a brain which constitutes one tenth of the size of its body! If the metricwere reliable, the shrew would be taming us! While we’reon the topic, I should mention that the species with the lowest brain-to-bodymass ratio of all vertebrates on this Earth is the magnificently namedbony-eared assfish. Brainsconsume huge amounts of precious energy, so in the incredibly barrenenvironment of the deep sea, the bony-eared assfish has done away with most ofits grey matter. For a fishwith such an unflattering name, it is hauntingly beautiful! Anyway, it’s clear that raw brain-to-body mass ratio is far from a perfectmeasure of intelligence; it is too harsh on big animals, and too kind tosmall animals. Scientists have studied the relative brain sizes of mammals, andcome up with a formula that adjusts for this problem. Applying this formula gives anew, more refined metric: encephalisation quotient, or EQ for short. In otherwords, EQ is the ratio of actual brain size to predicted brain size. When we compare different animals’ EQ values, the results line up a lotmore with what we would expect, intelligence-wise. Humans have thehighest score of any animal, at about 7.6. The tucuxi, avery interesting type of freshwater dolphin from the rivers of South America,takes second place. It measures only1.5 metres in length, and has a bright pink underbelly! anta rayshave one of the highest EQs among fish, octopuses triumph among invertebrates,and corvids outperform their feathered friends. These results are all exactlywhat we would predict based on behavioural signs of intelligence. So, is encephalisation quotient really the answer? Probably not. Once again, thismethod seems to fall short of being perfect. On average,birds have much lower EQs than mammals, but there is ample evidence to suggestthat birds are incredibly smart. In fact,all the dinosaurs, not just birds, have surprisingly low encephalisationvalues. If estimated EQ is to be believed, Tyrannosaurus rex was lessintelligent than a slug. Believe it or not, the sauropod dinosaurs have thelowest score of any animal in history ever measured, at as low as 0.01! There areseveral likely reasons for this. The formula for encephalisation quotient was based only on data frommammalian species, so in general it probably shouldn’t be used to comparemammals to non-mammals. Bird/dinosaur cells are much smaller thanmammalian cells. For its size, a typical avian brain has twice as many neuronsas a standard mammal brain! Raw brainsize, brain-to-body mass ratio, EQ… all these metrics share a fundamentalproblem: they’re all based on overall brain mass in some way, and there’s a lotof stuff inside brains that has nothing to do with intelligence. For example, alarge portion of whales’ and dolphins’ brain mass is just insulating blubber!There are all kinds of factors like this that really muddy the waters. Perhapsit’s better to just focus on the part of the brain that actually does thethinking. The cerebral cortex is thought to be the seat ofintelligence in mammals. This grooved andconvoluted outer layer of tissue is responsible for processing our senses,finely controlling our movement, abstract thought, and much more. Non-mammalanimals don’t have a cerebral cortex per se, but they always have an equivalentbrain region - for example, birds have their dorsoventricular ridge, or DVR. So far, thesingle best predictor of intelligence we have found is the number of corticalneurons; that is, the total number of nerve cells within the cerebral cortex(or equivalent area). Humans have at least 16 billion, which is exceptional!Elephants, despite having a brain twice as large, have about a third as manycortical neurons. However, the real world champion is the orca, believe it ornot, with an absolutely astonishing 43 billion cortical neurons! In fact, bythis measure, humans sit at humble fifth place.There are four species of dolphins with more cortical neurons, the most of allbelonging to the orca. Some might be quick to discredit this method as soon asthey hear that it doesn’t put humans on top, and I would encourage those peopleto keep an open mind. If we’re so, so sure that orcas are less smart than us,perhaps we’re looking at intelligence in the wrong way. But that’s amore philosophical discussion for another answer. Anyway, for centuries, humanshave been trying to put a number on intelligence, to find some way to quantifyit. None of the metrics we’ve come upwith are perfect, but for now, the best we have is the number of corticalneurons. It doubtless has its discrepancies, but overall it seems to be anextremely useful way of comparing animal acumen. So, goingback to your question, if an elephant’s brain is bigger thanours, why isn’t it smarter? Because the size of a brain, as we’ve seen, haslittle to do with intelligence. Apologies if this answer waslong-winded, though I think we visited some interesting places on our journeythrough animal minds! Thank you everyone for reading, I hope you enjoyed, andhave a great day. Q4 Why was the old calendar changed? A4 Steve Baker, Senior Software Engineer(2013–present)Sun The problem isthat the Earth orbits the Sun in 365.2422 days (an “astronomical year”). The oldercalendars used 365 days per year - with a leap day every four years. So that’s:365 + 1/4 = 365.25 days But that365.25 is a little too long - it should be 365.2422. Without some kind of a fix - the calendar wasslowly slipping away from reality.The solstices and equinoxes were drifting slowly - but measurably. Although the error wouldn’t bother most people - itbothered the Catholic Church A LOT - because they’d gone to a LOT of trouble toformally establish the date of Easter. Easter is defined as: The first Sunday after thefull Moon that occurs on or after the spring equinox. If the full Moon falls ona Sunday then Easter is the next Sunday. But if you have the date of the equinox wrong - byeven just one day - then you could have Easter an entire week away from when itshould be…and that would evidently displease God and “Very Bad Things” wouldhappen. So it wasdecided to skip the leap day every 100 years.So - for example - the year 1900 -despite being a multiple of 4 years was NOT a leap year. That gave ayear to be 365 + 1/4 - 1/100 = 365.24 days - which is pretty close. But the nextrule is that a century year that’s an exact multiple of 400 years IS a leapyear - which is why the year 2000 was a leap year - despite being a multiple of100 years. So now wehave: 356 + 1/4 -1/100 + 1/400 = 365.2425 So we’re stillnot 100% perfect - but the error of a single day every few thousand years isactually OKbecause the length of our orbit does change atiny bit each year depending on the location of Jupiter - so going for moreaccuracy than that is over-kill. Q5 What is the craziest domesticatedanimal to ever exist? A5 Gary Meaney, author of Zoology'sGreatest Mystery (2022)4y In my opinion, that honour goes to the domesticpigeon. In the 10,000 years since theirdomestication, the birds have been selectively bred into countless bizarreforms, collectively known as “fancy pigeons”. Ever wondered if there was a pigeon with theerectile fan-shaped tail of a turkey? Probably not, but check. What about apigeon with a huge puffy crop? Check. Pigeons withcurly feathers on their wings? Check. Pigeons withhuge feathers on their feet and powdery down? Check. Pigeons withfleshy, flower-like wattles all over their faces? Check. Pigeons withthat, plus scrawny giraffe necks? Check. Flightlesspigeons that look and act like chickens? Check. Pigeons withenormous ruffs like parka hoods? Check. Pigeons withvirtually non-existent beaks? Check. Bug-eyedpigeons? You guessed it, check. In a way, it saddens me that we’ve practically engineeredthese natural creatures to suit our strange desires. At least they’re notunhealthy, though - unlike so many poor dogs,especially purebreds. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/1730095884.3333233.1704118911639%40mail.yahoo.com.
