Now Playing Tracks

natsulasommer:

prettyinpwn:

natsulasommer:

hikikotaku:

hikikotaku:

hikikotaku:

factsbrain:

Like all living things, humans are bio­luminescent (meaning we glow) – We glow brightest during the afternoon. weirdinteresting & funny facts

what

i’ve been staring at this for like 5 minutes. so.. what. i don’t think people glow. but this is telling me that we actually emit visible light.. especially in the afternoon?? am i reading this right or what

"all living things" plants. when do the plants glow

science side of tumblr pls

I’m not from the science side of tumblr, but here’s the answer anyways:

 Basically, all living things are bioluminescent because every living thing has chemical reactions occurring in their cells. The energy created from these chemical reactions physically manifests as light, thus… all living things naturally glow.

 However, this glow cannot be seen by the human eye. In fact, the only way they’ve ever captured this light is through special cameras. Using these ultra special cameras, they’ve imaged subjects’ bodies over 24 hour periods. It has been found out that humans emit the most of this glow during the afternoon (about 4 PM), it is the weakest in the morning (about 10 AM), and the brightest light is emitted from the cheeks, neck, and forehead.

The light is about a thousand times weaker than what humans can perceive.

 Basically, it’s a side effect of metabolic reactions. It’s been suspected that humans are bioluminescent for years, but they weren’t able to confirm it until recently thanks to technology and a man named Masaki Kobayashi from the Tohoku Institute of Technology.

 Sources:

http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2009/07/20/photographing-the-glow-of-the-human-body/

http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2009/jul/17/human-bioluminescence

http://www.livescience.com/7799-strange-humans-glow-visible-light.html

10/10 explaination

10/10 source

10/10 time to answer

overal 10/10

you are now offiicially from the science side of tumblr.

and thank you

asktoseemygavin:

littleoctopiloveyou:

trust-me-im-adoctor:

redventure:

juicyjacqulyn:

entropiaorganizada:

hookteeth:

hethatcures:

This legitimately upsets me.

… Y’see, now, y’see, I’m looking at this, thinking, squares fit together better than circles, so, say, if you wanted a box of donuts, a full box, you could probably fit more square donuts in than circle donuts if the circumference of the circle touched the each of the corners of the square donut.

So you might end up with more donuts.

But then I also think… Does the square or round donut have a greater donut volume? Is the number of donuts better than the entire donut mass as a whole?

Hrm.

HRM.

A round donut with radius R1 occupies the same space as a square donut with side 2R1. If the center circle of a round donut has a radius R2 and the hole of a square donut has a side 2R2, then the area of a round donut is πR12 - πr22. The area of a square donut would be then 4R12 - 4R22. This doesn’t say much, but in general and  throwing numbers, a full box of square donuts has more donut per donut than a full box of round donuts.

The interesting thing is knowing exactly how much more donut per donut we have. Assuming first a small center hole (
R2 = R1/4) and replacing in the proper expressions, we have a 27,6% more donut in the square one (Round: 15πR12/16 ≃ 2,94R12, square: 15R12/4 = 3,75R12). Now, assuming a large center hole (R2 = 3R1/4) we have a 27,7% more donut in the square one (Round: 7πR12/16 ≃ 1,37R12, square: 7R12/4 = 1,75R12). This tells us that, approximately, we’ll have a 27% bigger donut if it’s square than if it’s round.


tl;dr: Square donuts have a 27% more donut per donut in the same space as a round one.

god i love this site

can’t argue with science. Heretofore, I want my donuts square.

more donut per donut

It’s back

I am not sure whether to laugh, cry, or start a petition for square donut.

(Source: nimstrz)

We make Tumblr themes