Recent Comments

1. about 4 hours ago on B.C.

   "Read years ago that a single strand of a spider’s web is stronger then steel?”

   That’s a safe statement, yes. Depends on how one looks at it. If one takes spider web and steel of the same diameter, they have about the same strength… but spiderweb is far lighter.

   If one is speaking of mass (the same weight as steel) then spider web would be considerably stronger. We’ve already achieved that using carbon fiber, which is about 5 times stronger than steel (depending on how it’s measured… again a size vs mass issue). I have seen an experiment in which carbon fiber was formed a specific way and then put into a torque machine. It proved 10 times more torque resistant than steel of equal size and formation… and the steel was much heavier.

   The problem they face with natural spider web is quantity and production.

   There has been some research into artificial spider silk over the past few years and they’ve made significant advances. They apparently are getting closer to reaching their goals but aren’t quite there yet. Lately they’ve invented an artificial “spider gland” that produces spider silk almost precisely. But the final results aren’t in the last time I checked. As with all things, they probably still have a lot of kinks to work out. There’s usually a lengthy gap between experimentation and actual production.

   Reports suggest that like carbon fiber they’ve already succeeded to a significant degree and are very close to producing a significantly strong artificial “web”. Now they need to figure out how to put it into application and production at a reasonable price.

   But you know how experimenters tend to strive for perfection. Until they can say, “Yup, this material is equally strong to the strongest web and we can produce it for next to nothing”, they’ll keep trying.

   That said, it seems that creation is always just one step ahead. Even in this tech/industrial age… the finest violin bows are still made out of horsetail hair. ;D

2. about 5 hours ago on B.C.

   “The only “facts” that you have a problem with are the ones you haven’t made the effort to validate.”

   Since this is a comics forum and not a college thesis, I saw no particular need to validate anything. Frankly, I didn’t notice any “validation” in your comments either. Arrogance yes, but that’s typical of your posts throughout these forums.

   Whether you agree or disagree with a comment is irrelevant; you can still exercise a reasonable level of decency when replying to other commenters.

3. about 19 hours ago on Speed Bump

   Just the thought gives me a case of the hives.

4. about 19 hours ago on Pearls Before Swine

   Mwahahaha I like your handle. Rather says it all. ;D

5. about 19 hours ago on Brewster Rockit

   This is what I have wondered about all of science.

   Look, some science is great and helpful. But one has to wonder when enough is enough.

   Recorded civilization goes back about 5,000 years or so, and in all that time humankind survived and so did the Earth. But science and tech comes in and within a little over 100 years we’re actually damaging the planet we live on.

   It’s not all due to increased population; that’s deception. It’s tech, pure and simple. So one has to wonder when messing with the fabric of the universe might become a questionable idea. Not all knowledge has to be understood, nor is beneficial. We don’t need to know how large the universe is or how many atoms it contains in order to grow a garden and put food on the table. We don’t even need computers to do that; we just need to give people land.

   I know I know, there are a whole slew of people out there ready to defend science. Some will point to increased life spans… but what quality of life? The bottom line is: Are those arguments worth risking the very planet we live on?

   “For then there will come Great Tribulation such as has never been seen, nor will ever be seen again… Indeed, if those times were not cut short, no flesh would be saved.”

6. about 19 hours ago on B.C.

   If we could mass-produce spider web and use it as a building material…hooo boy. We’ve come closer with carbon fiber, but not quite there. : )

7. about 19 hours ago on Pearls Before Swine

   “People will turn from bad to worse.” There are still good people left. There are lots more selfish, arrogant, rude and crude people out there. I remember a line from a poem, “When perchance a smile offends, certainly there is no hope.”

8. 1 day ago on Loose Parts

   Actually in his live show the woman was from New Jersey. I think she moves around a lot. ;D

9. 2 days ago on Non Sequitur

   Your comment about the “thick boys” learning auto mechanics and physics is a prime example of “valuable education”. Their managing to learn something they could actually use later in life to earn a significant living was far more valuable than the drivel taught in most school courses. Three years of U.S. history doesn’t mean much if a person can’t put food on the table.

   This is the prime argument of Technical School vs College. Technical Schools are designed to allow a person to spend 1 to 2 years in an immersive skills course that will allow them to go out and immediately make a living.

   This is compared to college, which requires a minimum of four years, the first two of which are spent basically re-learning what should have been taught in high school. Then the Masters years (5&6) and the PHD years (7&8+) they get down to learning. But even a lot of that is more politics and memorization than practical application… and once they get their degree they go into the real world and get a real education.

   I could go on about how some other countries see these problems and the advantage of their students getting their PHD by age 20 and thus a head-start on the job market.

   httpS://academicpositions.Com/career-advice/phd-in-europe-or-the-us

   I particular liked this quote:“European PhD programs are shorter than those in the US. For example, it takes three years to complete a PhD in France, Norway, the UK, and Germany. Across Europe, a three to four year PhD in common. In comparison, six years is the average time to degree in the US with many PhDs in the humanities taking seven or eight years to earn their degree.”

   This is admittedly a controversial subject, but does present the concept that the U.S. system might need some serious re-thinking and more focus on real life application rather than wrote course-work.

10. 2 days ago on Non Sequitur

    I agree with you that history is important… and sometimes dates are important. Other times, not so much. Knowing what a President did and why and the consequences of such actions is important. The date, probably not so much, especially on a grade-reliant test.

    But unless someone is planning on becoming a history or sociology major, the average person would likely benefit far more from practical knowledge than memorized trivia… which is what most classes I attended taught.

    In all the years I went to school (through the end of college), I can actually list the most useful classes… and oddly enough beyond basic math, reading and writing, they aren’t usually academic.

    Typing. Have used that every day of my life.

    Accounting. Knowing those concepts served me all my life, in both personal and professional aspects.

    Statistics. Taught me how to use them, and how to avoid being sucker-punched with them.

    Nutrition. People usually aren’t taught nearly enough about how to keep their bodies and minds alive and healthy.

    And of course classes specific to my major. I was a Psych major and I do believe that understanding a bit more about psychology than is taught in average curriculum could do people a lot of good. But the question is where to limit that to non-psyche majors. There are many, many other fields about which one could say the same thing.

    For me: jewelry making and print making taught me concepts of working with metal and acid that came in handy in later years. But I can’t say it was essential to my well-being or wage-earning.

    In the end, I have to say there are a LOT of things taught in school that we really don’t much need… that could be replaced with things we’ll use all our lives. But in my humbly opinion, it’s usually the way they’re taught that is non-productive.

    Teaching someone English Literature but not teaching them how to balance a checkbook would seem well… unbalanced. ;-)