If Billary could enact all of (t)he(i)r campaign proposals, we'd be SOL.
Sorry if I'm asking the obvious, JT, but explain to me how this would hypothetically fly, exactly?
-10-key princess
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Oh crap.
Despite being candidly open about being a Republican, I'm certainly the farthest thing from being a fan of this guy. But upon being heckled this afternoon by some members of Code Pink - the liberal Berkeley left-wing anti-war group - he actually had a pretty good response:"The beauty of America is that a person can come and even make a disruption, and you know what, that person is not going to be taken out and shot."
I'm sure it was totally scripted, certainly even a little obvious . . . but nevertheless, a good line. And I was really convinced until now that nothing genius could ever come out of this guy's mouth.
-10-key princess
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Salon Receptionists
Today I decided to check out the adjoining Aveda salon at my gym. I was interested in getting an appointment for a haircut/style/color (and the benefit of doing this at the gym is that I get 2 hours of child care!) After consulting briefly with the stylist, I decided to book an appointment for tomorrow. I whipped out my gym membership card; upon handing it to the receptionist, I guess I must have flashed her some horrifying jagged cuticle or unkempt nailbed (gang signs inside a spa). She gasped in horror, dropped the card, grasped my hands in hers and said, "Oh, hon (the condescending "hon," not the sugary sweet diner-style "hon"), you have to get a manicure along with that haircut tomorrow."
I wasn't sure whether or not to feel insulted or sold to, but I politely smiled and said, "No, thank you. I have a 2-year old, which generally means that I've given up regular shaving, plucking, waxing, and on odd days, flossing. And once in a while, I can even go for three days without showering. So really, a manicure is the lowest on my priority list these days."
She just stood there, jaw on the floor. It was probably one of my best comebacks ever.
I wasn't sure whether or not to feel insulted or sold to, but I politely smiled and said, "No, thank you. I have a 2-year old, which generally means that I've given up regular shaving, plucking, waxing, and on odd days, flossing. And once in a while, I can even go for three days without showering. So really, a manicure is the lowest on my priority list these days."
She just stood there, jaw on the floor. It was probably one of my best comebacks ever.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Lessons from Sex and the City
I don't know if I'm getting older, if everyone else just seems so much younger, or if I'm just *SO* much more mature than I was 2 1/2 years ago (doubt it), but I've only been "re-single" for 4 months and I'm already dreading the dating scene.The single life has been good to me. I go where I want, when I want. I don't answer to anyone. I flirt with cute traveling businessmen and guys at the gym without feeling guilty. I spend my money a little more impulsively than I did before and travel as much as I want. I'm investing time in relationships with my family and girlfriends. I even have a flowery duvet on my bed since the departure of two-and-a-half-year-relationship ex.
But I know eventually I'll have to get back out there. But I really, really don't want to. I don't know how the game is played anymore. I have no idea what to expect. The thought makes me tired and weary. I think Charlotte on S&tC said it best:
Charlotte: Women just want to be rescued. I'm sorry but it's true. I've been dating since I was fifteen. I'm exhausted. Where is he?
Miranda: Who? The white knight?
Samantha: That only happens in fairy tales.
Charlotte: My hair hurts.
Maybe I should consider becoming a social smoker. Then I won't have to wait to be rescued by my knight in shining armor.
-10-key princess
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Wake up, people!
Introducing the world's most effective wake-up call - the SnūzNLūz Wifi Donation Alarm Clock.
The way it works is simple. You connect the alarm clock directly into your bank account via the internet. Every time you hit the snooze button, money is withdrawn from your account and donated. To organizations you loathe. Suddenly, snoozing becomes a little more costly than just causing you to skip your daily exfoliation before heading to work. Oversleep 10 minutes? Forty bucks to Al Qaeda. Snooze till one? Cha ching - $300 to the GOP.
I should buy this for my best friend, who's a notorious oversleeper. And I could set it up to donate to the JT Livelihood Foundation. Hey, don't judge - I too have rent to pay.
-JT
The way it works is simple. You connect the alarm clock directly into your bank account via the internet. Every time you hit the snooze button, money is withdrawn from your account and donated. To organizations you loathe. Suddenly, snoozing becomes a little more costly than just causing you to skip your daily exfoliation before heading to work. Oversleep 10 minutes? Forty bucks to Al Qaeda. Snooze till one? Cha ching - $300 to the GOP.
I should buy this for my best friend, who's a notorious oversleeper. And I could set it up to donate to the JT Livelihood Foundation. Hey, don't judge - I too have rent to pay.
-JT
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Snowball Earth
It's Science Saturday again!
This is actually a very controversial topic in geology circles. (In fact, I know a lovely lady off the coast of Tasmania right now digging for these carbonate structures at the bottom of the ocean floor.) This article relates to a controversial theory called the Snowball Earth theory for global climate from millions of years ago. (Sorry, I'm not talking about controversial modern day global warming today...) This theory assumes that the earth's climate is always in a delicate equilibrium. (This is a reasonable claim seeing that entire polar ice caps can melt in the period of a hundred years when the average global temperature only changes by less than 2 degrees farenheit).
Assuming you don't embrace the history of the friendly (but moronic) folks at Conservapedia, a lot of scientific research has been done to estimate the earth's climate dating back many many millions of years. Earth's temperatures are found through isotope studies of calcium carbonates (fossils).
Now, a brief chemistry class:
All materials on earth are molecules made up of atoms, including you and me and fossils. Crudely speaking, atoms in a molecules behave like balls strung together on networks of springs. These atoms (balls) stay attached in their networks of springs (chemical bonds) to form big nets of balls and springs (molecules).
Quantum mechanics tells us that these balls are always bouncing and vibrating slightly in their springs; they are never completely at rest (as opposed to classical mechanics, the physical laws that govern the world we live in, which says all objects will eventually stop moving once it comes to rest). When temperatures increase, the heat of the environment turns into energy, and that extra energy makes the balls bounce and vibrate more vigorously (just like heating a pot of water eventually makes water boil). However, these balls always stay attached to their springs until something hits the balls with so much force that a spring breaks (like cracking something when it gets smacked), or until the balls absorb so much energy that the vibrations alone break a spring (like when something melts). Lets ignore the smacking aspect and only think about temperatures.
When temperatures are hot, the energy from heat causes balls to bounce in their springs because energy makes balls bounce. When temperatures are cold, the balls only bounce in their springs minimally, because a lack of energy means balls can't bounce. HEAVY balls (even if they are the same size) bounce less than LIGHT balls, because more energy is needed to make heavy balls bounce compared to light balls. Thus, clusters of heavy balls bounce very little compared to clusters of light balls. It turns out that heavy balls are quite rare, but they appear in molecules at very predictable rates. For instance, if I had 100 of a particular kind of light balls, nature tells me that I can safely guess that 1 or 2 of those 100 are heavy, but not any more or any less. Furthermore, these heavy balls have special characteristics that allow us to seem them easily. These heavy balls are called isotopes.
Knowing this, hot babes like my friend can figure out how cold or how warm regions of the earth were as far as millions of years ago. They simply collect old fossils from different parts of the world and then figure out how old the fossils are through radioactive dating methods. By analyzing the atoms in the fossils (the balls in the networks of springs), they look for all the heavy atoms (isotopes) in the fossil. Once found, they look at where the heavy atoms are with respect to each other. If a lot of isotopes are found very close to each other, it means nature at that time must have been cold. This is because having heavy atoms together means nature at that time wanted minimally bouncing balls, and that happens when there wasn't much heat making balls bounce. If the isotopes are all far away from each other, then the temperature must have been warm, because nature at the time could afford to spread out the heavy balls making all the molecules overall more bouncy. Therefore, we can estimate temperatures of the planet.
How cool is that?
This is actually a very controversial topic in geology circles. (In fact, I know a lovely lady off the coast of Tasmania right now digging for these carbonate structures at the bottom of the ocean floor.) This article relates to a controversial theory called the Snowball Earth theory for global climate from millions of years ago. (Sorry, I'm not talking about controversial modern day global warming today...) This theory assumes that the earth's climate is always in a delicate equilibrium. (This is a reasonable claim seeing that entire polar ice caps can melt in the period of a hundred years when the average global temperature only changes by less than 2 degrees farenheit).
Assuming you don't embrace the history of the friendly (but moronic) folks at Conservapedia, a lot of scientific research has been done to estimate the earth's climate dating back many many millions of years. Earth's temperatures are found through isotope studies of calcium carbonates (fossils).
Now, a brief chemistry class:
All materials on earth are molecules made up of atoms, including you and me and fossils. Crudely speaking, atoms in a molecules behave like balls strung together on networks of springs. These atoms (balls) stay attached in their networks of springs (chemical bonds) to form big nets of balls and springs (molecules).
Quantum mechanics tells us that these balls are always bouncing and vibrating slightly in their springs; they are never completely at rest (as opposed to classical mechanics, the physical laws that govern the world we live in, which says all objects will eventually stop moving once it comes to rest). When temperatures increase, the heat of the environment turns into energy, and that extra energy makes the balls bounce and vibrate more vigorously (just like heating a pot of water eventually makes water boil). However, these balls always stay attached to their springs until something hits the balls with so much force that a spring breaks (like cracking something when it gets smacked), or until the balls absorb so much energy that the vibrations alone break a spring (like when something melts). Lets ignore the smacking aspect and only think about temperatures.
When temperatures are hot, the energy from heat causes balls to bounce in their springs because energy makes balls bounce. When temperatures are cold, the balls only bounce in their springs minimally, because a lack of energy means balls can't bounce. HEAVY balls (even if they are the same size) bounce less than LIGHT balls, because more energy is needed to make heavy balls bounce compared to light balls. Thus, clusters of heavy balls bounce very little compared to clusters of light balls. It turns out that heavy balls are quite rare, but they appear in molecules at very predictable rates. For instance, if I had 100 of a particular kind of light balls, nature tells me that I can safely guess that 1 or 2 of those 100 are heavy, but not any more or any less. Furthermore, these heavy balls have special characteristics that allow us to seem them easily. These heavy balls are called isotopes.
Knowing this, hot babes like my friend can figure out how cold or how warm regions of the earth were as far as millions of years ago. They simply collect old fossils from different parts of the world and then figure out how old the fossils are through radioactive dating methods. By analyzing the atoms in the fossils (the balls in the networks of springs), they look for all the heavy atoms (isotopes) in the fossil. Once found, they look at where the heavy atoms are with respect to each other. If a lot of isotopes are found very close to each other, it means nature at that time must have been cold. This is because having heavy atoms together means nature at that time wanted minimally bouncing balls, and that happens when there wasn't much heat making balls bounce. If the isotopes are all far away from each other, then the temperature must have been warm, because nature at the time could afford to spread out the heavy balls making all the molecules overall more bouncy. Therefore, we can estimate temperatures of the planet.
How cool is that?
Friday, January 25, 2008
Who thinks this is part of a heist?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
