[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
Subject   (new thread)
File  []
>> No. 3543 Anonymous
31st March 2014
Monday 9:55 pm
3543 spacer
0.999... = 1 - 1 / infinity = 1 - 0 = 1

I think that's the most rigorous proof there is.
1 post omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3545 Anonymous
31st March 2014
Monday 11:09 pm
3545 spacer
u wot m8?
>> No. 3547 Anonymous
31st March 2014
Monday 11:15 pm
3547 spacer

You could at least try going back a page or two. Cunt.
>> No. 3548 Anonymous
31st March 2014
Monday 11:32 pm
3548 spacer
But then he'd have had to bump a two-year old thread and, like the IPL, that's just not cricket.
>> No. 3611 Anonymous
13th May 2014
Tuesday 2:16 pm
3611 spacer
>They will probably kill me if I don't say 'April Fools'.
>> No. 3613 Anonymous
13th May 2014
Tuesday 4:08 pm
3613 spacer

I love troll maths.

>> No. 3603 Anonymous
5th May 2014
Monday 9:58 pm
3603 spacer
I don't know how many people have both the expertise and interest (I know I lack the former) to discuss this, but I found this proposed explanation for the internationally observed reduction in violent crime intriguing. The theory goes that the elimination of lead in petrol and household products closely corresponds to reduced crime everywhere you look.


If there's a refutation accessible to the layman that would be interesting too.
2 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3606 Anonymous
9th May 2014
Friday 7:02 pm
3606 spacer

This maybe relevant. It may not be. I found it amusing anyway.

>> No. 3607 Anonymous
9th May 2014
Friday 7:47 pm
3607 spacer

The lead argument is based on the straightforward correlation between IQ and criminality - people with lower IQs are more likely to commit crime, lead toxicity lowers IQ, therefore lead toxicity may cause crime. It's a fairly loose chain of causation, but perfectly plausible on face value.
>> No. 3608 Anonymous
10th May 2014
Saturday 4:11 am
3608 spacer

>people with lower IQs are more likely to commit crime, lead toxicity lowers IQ, therefore lead toxicity may cause crime.

IQ is not a proper measure of how intelligent you can potentially be but rather a measure of how educated you are, which means that people with lower IQ tend to be from impoverished backgrounds. The same 95 IQ chav could have been a 120 if he had been born into a richer family. So the argument now goes:

>People from poor and anti-educational backgrounds tend to have a lower IQ, people with lower IQs are more likely to commit crime, lead toxicity lowers IQ, therefore lead toxicity may cause crime.

Which doesn't really make too much sense. In fact I'd argue that lead is irrelevant to crime, and it's a matter of a good solid education for all.
>> No. 3609 Anonymous
10th May 2014
Saturday 7:02 am
3609 spacer

>IQ is not a proper measure of how intelligent you can potentially be but rather a measure of how educated you are

This is arguably untrue. Correctly managed IQ tests compose two papers (really big puzzle books, essentially), one of which is variety of logical and numerical problems, the other of shape and pattern-based problems (to measure basic cognition and offset such bias). As long as the subject is capable of reading and completing these, education should not be a limit on achieving a respectable score.

>People from poor and anti-educational backgrounds tend to have a lower IQ, people with lower IQs are more likely to commit crime, lead toxicity lowers IQ, therefore lead toxicity may cause crime.

>Which doesn't really make too much sense. In fact I'd argue that lead is irrelevant to crime, and it's a matter of a good solid education for all.

Wealth is linked to diet and nutrition, which in turn is linked to intelligence.

It is also arguable that people who would score low in both logical and cognitive tests are treated differently by society, have fewer opportunities (or are oblivious to those that exist), and perceive the world accordingly. They are also more likely to be caught having committed an offence. If exposure to lead reduces intelligence by a significant degree then a correlation may exist.
>> No. 3610 Anonymous
10th May 2014
Saturday 2:48 pm
3610 spacer

>IQ is not a proper measure of how intelligent you can potentially be but rather a measure of how educated you are

That's not true in the least, and I'd suggest you go and find out what an IQ test actually is because you appear to be severely misinformed. As >>3609 describes, a correctly composed IQ test assesses abstract reasoning and requires no prior knowledge.

While it is true that environmental influences can affect IQ, the effect is relatively weak, as demonstrated in numerous twins studies over the years. Education is far less significant than adequate nutrition and good parental interaction. Events like toxic exposure and head injury can drastically reduce IQ. The predominant influence on IQ is heredity.

Your second statement is clearly a nonsense, predisposed upon the fallacious idea that IQ is purely a measure of educational attainment.

>> No. 3527 Anonymous
19th February 2014
Wednesday 11:21 am
3527 How Wolves Change Rivers
This was quite amazing, I'd recommend you take 4 and a half minutes to watch it.

13 posts and 2 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3597 Anonymous
3rd May 2014
Saturday 10:21 pm
3597 spacer

With the Ian Watkin's debuncle, I do find Purps's black SAS rectangle quite apt.

Farmers are top lads. Try talk to some of em. As a Yorkshirelad I've had great times with gamekeepers, shepherds, dry stone wallers and cows.

I'm a vegetarian and they all threaten to shoot me cos I can't run faster than a scared ewe chased by a Welshman.

Farmers are great.
>> No. 3598 Anonymous
3rd May 2014
Saturday 10:27 pm
3598 spacer

Shut up you incoherent bumpkin and find me some quails eggs.
>> No. 3599 Anonymous
3rd May 2014
Saturday 10:32 pm
3599 spacer

AKA celeb diet in HEAT
>> No. 3600 Anonymous
3rd May 2014
Saturday 10:50 pm
3600 spacer

Wrong thread?
>> No. 3601 Anonymous
4th May 2014
Sunday 12:00 am
3601 spacer
I'd back it if only to give farmers subsidies.

I agree.

>> No. 3555 Anonymous
12th April 2014
Saturday 1:35 pm
3555 spacer
Can someone explain to me what this means?

19 posts and 5 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3577 Anonymous
13th April 2014
Sunday 2:22 am
3577 spacer
Somehow I don't want to believe you but ok.
>> No. 3578 Anonymous
13th April 2014
Sunday 2:22 am
3578 spacer
I have seen this same graph/pic/image all over 4chan. They seem to be celebrating it based on whatever they picked from the study (superiority or some shit). I haven't read it and I don't know what it is.
>> No. 3579 Anonymous
13th April 2014
Sunday 2:38 am
3579 spacer
Well, I've tried to understand, with difficulty, what the study says. The X/A ratio is to do with X chromosomes and autosomes (non-sex chromosomes). "Because two-thirds of X chromosomes are found in females whereas autosomes are split equally between the two sexes, a ratio between their effective population sizes (X/A ratio) of 0.75 is expected under random mating." So the higher the ratio, the more Xs, and the more reproducing females there are in the population. The graph is captioned "The low X/A ratio for the European has been suggested to be due to demographic effects connected to migrating out of Africa", which presumably means something caused there to be less females, or less reproducing females, in the population. So that's all it means. Ancestral genetics show less women had babies in Europe than Africa. Or something.
>> No. 3580 Anonymous
13th April 2014
Sunday 3:13 am
3580 spacer
So racists everywhere claiming that this is proof that Africans are closer to Bonobo than Europeans is bollocks?
>> No. 3581 Anonymous
13th April 2014
Sunday 12:39 pm
3581 spacer
It means bonobos need to be added to the list of animals which should be given "human" rights alongside elephants, dolphins, some of the other primates and probably a fair few species of mollusc.

>> No. 3549 Anonymous
6th April 2014
Sunday 3:28 am
3549 Cocaine HCl to Crack conversion - the science behind it
Can anyone tell me (sci fags) what happens to cocaine HCl into crack? I mean, what is the chemical difference?
Expand all images.
>> No. 3550 Anonymous
6th April 2014
Sunday 3:43 am
3550 spacer

No, lad.
>> No. 3551 Anonymous
6th April 2014
Sunday 3:55 am
3551 spacer

WTF are you on about? I know how to make it, i want to know what actually happens during the process and how "crack" differs chemically to cocaine.
>> No. 3552 Anonymous
6th April 2014
Sunday 5:07 am
3552 spacer
Crack is the freebase form of cocaine, as opposed to the hydrochloride salt. Reacting cocaine hydrochloride with a weak base (usually sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3)) removes the hydrogen and chlorine ions, giving the freebase cocaine alkaloid, water, carbon dioxide and a salt (sodium chloride in the case of a reaction with sodium bicarbonate).

The freebase form has a much lower melting point, allowing crack to be smoked - cocaine HCl would just burn. The effects are essentially the same, but smoked crack enters the bloodstream much more quickly than snorted cocaine (due to the much greater surface area of the lungs vs the mucous membranes) giving a more intense and immediate hit. Crack cocaine isn't water soluble, so can't be effectively snorted.

Heroin offers an interesting parallel. The overwhelming majority of heroin sold in Europe is in the freebase form, which can be readily smoked but needs to be buffered with an acid (usually citric or Vit C) in order to be dissolved and injected. In the US, the market is split - on the east coast, most heroin is sold as a salt, whereas on the west coast it is usually sold as a freebase.

Also, that minge haunts my dreams, like a stubbly Eye of Sauron.
>> No. 3553 Anonymous
6th April 2014
Sunday 6:23 am
3553 spacer
This is correct.

t. Chemist

>> No. 3506 Anonymous
14th February 2014
Friday 9:59 am
3506 spacer
Where on the Rio scale would the Wow signal feature?
Expand all images.
>> No. 3507 Anonymous
14th February 2014
Friday 6:34 pm
3507 spacer
I'm not sure. Was kind of worried about this though:

>In 2012, on the 35th anniversary of the Wow! signal, Arecibo Observatory beamed a response from humanity, containing 10,000 Twitter messages, in the direction from which the signal originated.

What a better way to show our own intelligence than random messages taken from twatter.

>> No. 3493 Anonymous
19th December 2013
Thursday 8:40 pm
3493 I have a tenuous theory.
So, laughter.
Sex and orgasms are pleasurable because they're important for procreation (and perhaps pair-bonding). Food is pleasurable too, in a not dissimilar way. In fact most things that our bodies need to function and recreate optimally are pleasurable (ignoring things like salts and sugars which we enjoy too much, due to their scarcity of availability for aeons but over-abundance now).
Animals enjoy those things too. But most animals don't laugh. The only animals which display a sense of humour (as far as I know) are some varieties of non-human primates, dogs, elephants and possibly dolphins. These are all pretty smart animals with the capability to develop complex social structures.
The tl;dr of it all is do you think laughter [could be said to be] the social/group bonding equivalent of an orgasm? It's a natural rush we (usually) get from communicating with each other. There's no other obvious explanation for it that I'm aware of.
4 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3498 Anonymous
20th December 2013
Friday 2:59 am
3498 spacer

As >>3496 says, that study is related to the very 'theory' you're proposing. In fact, all of the other examples of reinforcing behaviours you cite in your first post are either wholly or very strongly effected by the dopamine reward pathway. Pretty much everything that encourages us to do anything is; be that eating food, having sex or taking drugs.


There are evolutionary goals that can be achieved through the sharing of societal mores and interaction that happens at a comedy show. Generally, anything that reinforces "getting on with people" ties into the whole altruism gig.
>> No. 3499 Anonymous
20th December 2013
Friday 2:18 pm
3499 spacer
>Ah, I used to ponder this sort of thing as a teenlad too.
What a coincidence! I used to be an unnecessarily condescending dickhead when I was a teenlad.
>> No. 3500 Anonymous
20th December 2013
Friday 5:35 pm
3500 spacer
Apparently not much has changed.
>> No. 3501 Anonymous
20th December 2013
Friday 5:41 pm
3501 spacer

Now I only do it necessarily.
>> No. 3502 Anonymous
23rd December 2013
Monday 1:46 am
3502 spacer
Why was it necessary? I was being sincere. I genuinely did ponder it as a teenlad. Ho hum.

>> No. 3441 Anonymous
15th November 2013
Friday 8:29 pm
3441 spacer
Am I right in thinking that all living beings are light's energy in a different form?

Plants grow via photosynthesis, buy converting the energy from light into fuel. And animals then eat plants, converting the energy from plants into fuel etc.

Is anything added to the conversion? Or are all living beings light's energy?
11 posts and 1 image omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3453 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 1:08 pm
3453 spacer

If you had said intensive porpoises... but alas, you're up shit creek without a dorsel fin.
>> No. 3455 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 1:21 pm
3455 spacer
[cetacean needed]
>> No. 3456 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 2:40 pm
3456 spacer
Well that's all a bit philosophical and semantic really. Personally I would say that yes, it's surely pretty clear that life isn't separate from the universe. How could it be? It exists and is spawned within it.
I'd also agree that it's fair to say it's an extension of it, but when you get into words like "expression" it starts to muddy the waters a bit and maybe implies some sort of underlying consciousness or will. Maybe you didn't mean that at all though which is why I mentioned the semantic aspect of it.

I do think it's quite a nice way to look at things though, that we are the universes sense organs, a way for it to perceive itself etc etc. That is all pretty well trodden metaphysical ground though, even Bill Hicks had a bloody bit about it.

Anyway, I'm sure there are probably some more rationally minded materialist scientifically inclined headbods who would take issue with that line of thinking.
For myself I think it's a nice way to look at things but it's easy to fall into lazy new age thinking that way and I'm inclined to always keep a sceptical eye on my own thought processes. I think when you get into these sorts of areas then they're not really scientific questions anyway.

Would like to hear other people's perspectives though. Sorry for the ramble, I've had a glass of red and a valium.
>> No. 3487 Anonymous
17th November 2013
Sunday 11:06 am
3487 spacer
Oh that's good. That's very good.
>> No. 3488 Anonymous
17th November 2013
Sunday 1:34 pm
3488 spacer

I fought god made us hoomans and all the animals and stuff. The muzlims have a name for god.. What is it again?.. Oh yeah - Allan.

>> No. 3457 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 3:45 pm
3457 spacer
Recently an American politician has enraged people after claiming that a woman couldn't get pregnant from a real rape because her reproductive system would shut down if the rape was "legitimate", in his own words.

This idea isn't actually as dumb as it sounds. Why do women conceive from rape? If rape is that damaging to a woman's reproductive success by taking away her choice, why haven't they evolved some way to prevent conception from happening from rape?
21 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3481 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 5:55 pm
3481 spacer
That's enough now mate.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 3482 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 5:58 pm
3482 spacer

>> No. 3483 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 6:00 pm
3483 spacer

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 3485 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 6:09 pm
3485 spacer
I'm going to write to my MP about this.
>> No. 3486 Anonymous
16th November 2013
Saturday 6:12 pm
3486 spacer
misterpink won't care either.

>> No. 3378 Anonymous
9th October 2013
Wednesday 12:16 am
3378 Space Exploration
Apologies for what may seem like an extraordinarily trite subject to such boffins, but I am looking for some enlightened discussion.

The thought occurred to me a while ago that if (and I am aware that in terms of realism, it's a very slim prospect) humanity ever does reach out and colonise the stars, what will the implication be on the development, progression, and continued survival of the human race? And what are our most likely means of achieving it?

To begin with, as I followed this train of thought, I was somewhat fascinated by how primitive our early space-faring voyages will appear to this hypothetical future Alpha Centauri society. It seems inevitable that things will parallel the early colonisation and exploration of the new world by medieval humans. Early colonists will most likely be entirely cut-off from the established human race, the vast gulf of space making even basic communication difficult, meaning the society of our new worlds will be something almost alien in itself.

My line of reasoning here is that once humanity has mastered interplanetary travel within our home system, and maybe put a foothold on Mars or some distant moon of Jupiter, our attention will turn pretty swiftly to inter-stellar travel. We have always been a species to make daring, bold leaps into the unknown, and merely colonising this solar system is not enough to ensure our survival. Once we can travel between stars we will be almost inextinguishable, though we may mutate and evolve over the centuries we will always survive provided our fate is not tied to one solitary rock. But what I really want to discuss is the myriad of possibilities the future holds in such a scenario. Hypothetically, if we managed it, how would it work out? What do you think will become of us?

Will we wage vast interplanetary civil wars over resources and territory, the new Martian global elite leaving the paupers of Terra to starve and fight amongst themselves for what little fossil fuel remains? Will the great exodus fleet of varying corporate, government and military alliances survive it's expedition across space with some kind of cryogenic travel, or will the eventual survivors who set foot on New Earth be unrecognisable? A tribe of religious zealots worshipping the technology and ideology of a bygone age, having been confined for dozens of generations aboard their mothership, the nations of our new home forming eventually from these fractured remnants of ancient Earth society? Would they even still have mastery of the technology they used to travel there?

Please, discuss. I'll let you in on the secret that I'm thinking of starting to write a hard sci-fi novel and I'd like some input from people who actually know science, rather than just my mild acid-trip imaginings.
48 posts and 2 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3428 Anonymous
22nd October 2013
Tuesday 1:00 am
3428 spacer
This, This is how the zombies will happen. They'll invent teleport machines and send people through them, but it will rip their souls out. Society won't notice much for a while, only a strange increase in the Hollyoaks viewing figures, but one day it will reach critical mass and they'll not want to be arsed to go to the shops and just start eating each other's brains.
>> No. 3437 Anonymous
29th October 2013
Tuesday 9:27 am
3437 spacer

>Evidently not mate, you're not the you you thought you were.

I'm not sure what you mean. I won't suddenly find myself immortal in the Matrix when that's what I'd want the service to perform is what I'm saying. It will clone my mind and store it on a hard drive, that's all.
>> No. 3438 Anonymous
29th October 2013
Tuesday 10:43 am
3438 spacer

There's a guy in China Mieville's Kraken who has a teleport ability and overuses it, the end result being that "he" is driven mad by loads of ghosts of himself who haunt him because "he" is the one who kept killing himself whenever he ported.
>> No. 3439 Anonymous
29th October 2013
Tuesday 6:32 pm
3439 spacer
The views of an uneducated lower-classian like myself would go thus - The only groups able to fund such exploration will no doubt be corporations and, because of this, the first expeditions will have such emblems as 'the golden arches' painted onto the colony ship hulls.
After securing their new worlds and the bountiful resources found upon them, the now 'mega-corporations' will turn on one another in the name of profits. War will erupt over our system, causing discomfort to many as they're woken by sun bright explosions fizzling in the night sky. Fragmented ship wrecks will drift into our atmosphere and spark like fireworks; Everyone below wondering how such beauty could come from this.
>> No. 3440 Anonymous
13th November 2013
Wednesday 12:43 am
3440 spacer

Kim Stanley Robinson, 'Red Mars' and the sequels. It's criminal no one has mentioned these yet.

Reads like a future history of the colonisation of mars from the point of view of the first 100 sent there. Really well written, fantastic characterization.

>> No. 3434 Anonymous
25th October 2013
Friday 2:25 pm
3434 Dynamometer
A very general question; open to all discussion, is about to be asked.

Is there a way to create a (chassis / engine / etc.) dynamometer that measures the power of a vehicle in nodes instead of a one off reading.

When I say nodes I mean, by applying a known load to a fixed speed and returning it to the previous... e.g.

10 hz -> 0 hz say takes a load of 10N
20hz -> 10 hz say takes another 15N

and from this you map the engine power by knowing the amount of energy required to decrease the speed to the previous node.

Any help would be greatfull.
Expand all images.
>> No. 3435 Anonymous
25th October 2013
Friday 4:01 pm
3435 spacer

Dynos don't give a one-off reading, they give a full torque and power map across the whole rev band.


>> No. 3429 Anonymous
24th October 2013
Thursday 12:10 am
3429 spacer
I have a very nice mechanical pencil, however the lead has jammed and I'd like to get it out. The mechanism is enclosed in a stainless steel case that I can't open without breaking the pencil.

I have tried a couple of ways to get it out, using metal wire to dislodge the lead and heating the pen to expand the metal, but it's not worked.

I've come to /lab/ to ask: Is there anything that would break down the graphite inside this pencil without damaging the case or the mechanism? Is there anything else I can use to salvage the pen?
Expand all images.
>> No. 3430 Anonymous
24th October 2013
Thursday 9:20 am
3430 spacer
Take it to a jeweller or specialist pen shop - they do still exist in large cities. Ask them to take out apart and see if it can be fixed. Don't attempt it yourself; you'll probably damage it permanently like a fat-handed twat.
>> No. 3431 Anonymous
24th October 2013
Thursday 11:49 am
3431 spacer
I'm surprised a few sharp taps wouldn't be enough to dislodge or at least break the blockage. I would take the advice of >>3430 before you start pouring perchloric acid all over the shop.
>> No. 3432 Anonymous
24th October 2013
Thursday 7:32 pm
3432 spacer
Oh and for future reference threads like these best go in /uhu/.
>> No. 3433 Anonymous
24th October 2013
Thursday 7:38 pm
3433 spacer

Duly noted.

>> No. 3370 Anonymous
8th October 2013
Tuesday 7:53 pm
3370 spacer
I take a lot of public transport and I sometimes try to imagine what might make pedestrian routes nicer/safer.

I've noticed a lot of places with poorly designated pedestrian routes, particularly alongside A roads and the like, those awkward areas where countryside has been sliced by traffic. My most recent idea was, rather than railings, what if these routes had a simple separator made from biodegradable plastic? I'm trying to imagine materials which might absorb CO2 emissions from vehicles as they drive by, also. Carbon dioxide scrubbers? Perhaps they could be intergrated?

Also, if the aesthetic doesn't appeal, perhaps they could be trellis-like, with plants grown throughout.

I just thought a simple dividing border like this could be useful as an indicator, ecologically sound, and hopefully quite cheap. Someone please feel free to tell me my idea is stupid.
1 post omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 3373 Anonymous
8th October 2013
Tuesday 8:13 pm
3373 spacer
The "railings" in the middle of a dual-carriageway are specially designed safety barriers that do a very complex job. They are there to prevent vehicles from crossing over into the other carriageway (to prevent head-on crashes). They need to be flexible enough to cushion the impact, but not so flexible that they catapult cars out into the inside lane. They also have to deal with a huge range of vehicle weights, from a 700kg smart car to a 44 tonne lorry. The design of these barriers is a constant work in progress and they are a crucial safety technology.


The better solution for pedestrians is segregation - providing alternative paths that are protected from traffic and noise. Walking alongside a busy arterial road is never going to be pleasant, but it's usually quite easy to design pedestrian routes that are separated from that traffic. Where you have pedestrians interfacing with dual carriageways you have a fairly costly engineering challenge to provide crossings (bridges and underpasses don't come cheap) so you generally want to keep pedestrians away from such routes.
>> No. 3374 Anonymous
8th October 2013
Tuesday 8:22 pm
3374 spacer


I didn't mean so much the barriers in the center, but rather guard rails like the ones pictured (which are usually only placed along specific stretches of road).
>> No. 3375 Anonymous
8th October 2013
Tuesday 8:52 pm
3375 spacer


Those barriers exist mainly to route pedestrians towards safe crossing points. Their design is less complex than a median barrier, but they're still built to provide the greatest possible energy absorption in the event of a vehicle impact, protecting both motorists and pedestrians. The design of these barriers is prescribed in British Standard 3049 - much more thought has gone into their design than you might imagine.

The use of pedestrian barriers at all is a hotly disputed topic amongst planners and traffic engineers. In many circumstances, the use of barriers reduces the visibility of pedestrians to motorists, which can dramatically increase the risk of accidents. Guardrails can be almost completely opaque at some angles, which poses an especially serious risk to children. Any design that worsens the visibility problem is a complete non-starter, as most new guardrail designs are specifically optimised to improve visibility.

There might be a case for transparent polycarbonate barriers, but these would have several downsides - less energy absorption in the event of a crash, higher cost, lower durability and greater vulnerability to vandalism.
>> No. 3376 Anonymous
8th October 2013
Tuesday 9:40 pm
3376 spacer


Thanks for this. I'm not a motorist nor an engineer, so perhaps I shouldn't venture like this, but I do think that perhaps there's an argument to be made for visibility over the aptitude of the materials, particularly in places where there's no barrier at all.

It occurs to me now that my 'trellis' idea would be bollocks, unless the plants were very low to the ground.

I also wanted to mention that I recognise the practical solution you offered in your last post, but I encountered one of those areas where segregation isn't possible today. It doesn't sound like much, but alongside certain roads even the smallest indication that pedestrians have an area where they are meant to be makes the entire experience much less alien. I remember having to cross a dual carriageway, and even a hint of tarmacked path showing the accepted route was a great comfort.

About damage and vandalism, I'd hope that the materials would be cheap enough so that the individual panel could be replaced in the event that one gets destroyed by vehicle or drawn on. I also had this idea that the barrier would be high and arched with kind of curved roofing lip at the top, but this would probably be too costly and may attract enough glare to distract drivers.
>> No. 3377 Anonymous
8th October 2013
Tuesday 10:14 pm
3377 spacer
That's really interesting, thanks.

(Polite sage for adding no value to the conversation.)

>> No. 3368 Anonymous
22nd September 2013
Sunday 5:27 pm
3368 spacer
In the unlikely event that anyone here missed it:


My personal favourites are the winners in Probability and Public Health.

Delete Post []
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]