Install Theme

Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.

mingau.matador

There's no such thing as revenge. Three times in a row!
May 24 '13

angerpainfearagression:

Advice from Community (based on this post)

2,657 notes (via nudityandnerdery & angerpainfearagression)

May 24 '13

2,100 notes (via icanread)

May 24 '13

If there was a show that was just Stephen Fry and Craig Ferguson gabbing I’d watch all the episodes.

(Source: seanoftheundead)

78 notes (via nudityandnerdery & seanoftheundead)

May 24 '13

1,681 notes (via anapads & nevver)

May 24 '13

science:

Soap Bubbles, Honeycombs, Snowflakes, Oranges on top of Each Other, and Programming Language Compilers

The Beijing National Aquatics Center, aka the “Water Cube”, constructed for the 2008 Summer Olympics, is based on the Weaire–Phelan structure. The what now?

In 1887, Lord Kelvin, notable for his achievements in thermodynamics, asked himself the following question: what is the most efficient bubble foam? To be precise, what is the structure of bubbles of equal volume with the least surface area? Kelvin proposed a slightly curved variant of the bitruncated cubic honeycomb, inspired by the honeycombs of bees. This structure, Kelvin thought, must be the most efficient way to construct a foam, like the one you’d observe when blowing soap bubbles.

An aside about bees. Two hypotheses about the hexagonal nature of bee cells have been proposed. One says that its efficiency at filling space while minimizing surface area (i.e., resource use) is why this design evolved. Another says that, far from geometric perfection, it is simply the way cells get deformed when bees try to squeeze their cells into each other—and observes that individual cells constructed outside the grid are irregular and not at all space-efficient.

For a hundred years, mathematicians considered Kelvin’s solution to be optimal. It seemed obvious, but no one could produce a formal proof of its efficiency. Then, in 1993, physicist Denis Weaire and his student Robert Phelan made a computer simulation and discovered a different structure, now bearing their names, which was slightly more efficient. This structure is non-obvious in that it employs two different kinds of cells, which nevertheless fulfill the formal criteria by having equal volume.

Something to think about when considering the similar ball stacking problem, which is even more obvious on first look. In 1611, the astronomer Johannes Kepler conjectured that the face-centered cubic packing—also known as the way to stack balls that results naturally from putting one ball on top of the other, in the way seen at any supermarket stack of oranges—is the most efficient packing. Slightly less than 26% of space is left unfilled by this arrangement. There are other known ball stackings with the same efficiency, but none that are more efficient. There’s a funny story about Kepler’s essay, On the Six-Cornered Snowflake: Kepler didn’t have money to buy his friend a Christmas present, because his employer hadn’t paid him for some time. Instead, Kepler wrote his friend a meditation on nothing, since he had nothing to give, in which he considers the closest things to nothing that were then known, such as snowflakes.

In 1998, mathematician Thomas Hales produced a proof of Kepler’s conjecture. This proof is widely accepted by mathematicians, but since it is a computer-assisted proof by exhaustion, meaning it runs through all the possibilities and checks to see if any is better than Kepler’s, it’s very hard to follow and to verify. This is why mathematicians remain skeptical to computer-aided proofs and prefer ones that aren’t. Another famous theorem, the four-colorem theorem, which states that any map can be colored with no more than four different colors such that no adjacent regions share the same color, was also proven by a computer-assisted proof by exhaustion.

But mathematicians aren’t Luddites. They don’t distrust computers by reflex. In fact, there is a theoretical result that is grounds for optimism about the future of mathematical proofs. Known as the Curry-Howard isomorphism, it establishes a correspondence between computer programs and formal proofs. The Coq proof assistant has a programming language designed with this isomorphism in mind. One of its applications is programming language semantics. Semantics is the field that studies meaning, and programming language semantics is about how compilers and interpreters—the programs that translate code written in a higher-level programming language into machine code—actually translate. Does the compiler translate the code as intended, or could there be bugs that make it mistranslate? Coq can help verifying that a compiler translates the code exactly as intended.

128 notes (via science)

May 24 '13
  • Season one of supernatural: We have to carefully inspect this substance to see if it is infact sulfur then we must find the proper exorcism to destroy this demon.
  • Season eight of supernatural: dude that's fucking sulfur you dumb shit look at it. Now this exorcism works for all demons you ass hat but lets just stab it anyways.

6,683 notes (via awesomephilia & destiel-and-bandoms)

May 23 '13
I’d like to take a trip down speculation lane. Let’s pretend for a moment that these accusations against our soldiers are all correct. Let’s entertain the notion that these women, and many of their compatriots, suffered extreme abuse at the hands of male soldiers. Does this not form the most compelling argument of all that we must not deploy women alongside men? If we cannot trust men not to rape, assault and abuse women, why do we even place women in the position of vulnerability to these crimes? If we cannot trust women to undertake reasonable efforts to prevent sexual abuse or harassment, why do we place them in environments which present this risk?

More from that fucking guy that said tattoos make you a whore.
By this logic, if you lock all of your doors and have all of your windows rolled up on your car, it’s your fault that you drove it to the store and it got stolen.
Can’t teach people not to steal cars! NO NO NO!  (via shoebie-love)

“If we cannot trust men not to rape, assault and abuse women, why do we even place women in the position of vulnerability to these crimes?” Because there’s no other option for women to be other than anywhere in existence right now?

Seriously, that guy is a fucking idiot. “Reasonable efforts” to avoid rape and harassment? Like what, never let themselves be seen by men? This line of think assumes that, by existing, women are somehow complicit in the behavior of men who rape or harass them- which means that these men can convince themselves that their sexual abuse and catcalls and insults aren’t their fault. Because they don’t think they should have to do something revolutionary, like treat women as people with feelings and rights and a purpose other than some guy’s sexual approval.

Fuck. That. Shit. 

(via nudityandnerdery)

47 notes (via nudityandnerdery & shoebie-love)

May 23 '13

sourcedumal:

discoverynews:

teamepiphany:

Virtual supermarkets are popping up in subway stations in South Korea, where commuters can virtually shop for items while waiting for the train to come. Customers simply scan an item’s QR code using the free “Homeplus” app and can have it delivered to their doorstep before they even get home. Ranked as the 2nd most hard-working country in the world to Japan, South Korea is rewarding its workers with this timesaving gem.

Wow! I kinda love this idea.

We have that here in Chicago. I forget which red line stop its on (I believe it’s Monroe or one of the Loop stops)

43,578 notes (via nudityandnerdery & teamepiphany)

May 23 '13
heyfunniest:

my life is complete

heyfunniest:

my life is complete

(Source: cineraria)

53,086 notes (via nudityandnerdery & cineraria)

May 23 '13

1,799 notes (via icanread)