So that map has pretty good quantities of underground water in California yet California goes through droughts every year

So where is the deviation coming from here? Obviously if there was enough water they would be digging down deep enough to get it? Is it just cost prohibitive to dig down deep enough and clean it

Or does that map only show certain times of the year

It's osmosis. The alcohol is absorbed into your cells via a concentration gradient and dries them out.

Another part if the burn is that alcohol activates heat receptors that usually only activate above 107°(VR1). But as for the pain if you leave a drop of high proof alcohol under your tongue- thats a result of osmosis.

If the hypotenuse is not 1, then the x and y sides will not be sine and cosine, but rather a scaled version of them.
Remember that sine and cosine represent ratios, so if the hypotenuse is r, then (x,y)=(rsin(a), rcos(a)), where 'a' is the angle. By pythagorian theorem, x^(2) + y^(2) = r^(2), note that 'r' can be divided on both sides to make the right side 1.

Sine is y/r, and cosine is x/r.

If you multiply x, y, and r by the same value - which is what happens if you make the circle bigger - the values of sine and cosine don't change, and therefore neither does the sum of their squares.

One is the default for the functions. If you’re looking for the output to be a length, you need to scale them accordingly. For example, for a circle of radius 3, you’d write:

3 x (sin^2 + cos^2 ) = 3(x1)

The definition of the equation stays the same, but both sides get scaled evenly.

Hope that helps.

If you change one side of an equation you have to make exactly the same change to the other side for the equation to remain equal.

Because sin and cos are about ratios, not pure side lengths. For example, 2/1, 4/2, 6/3 are all equal to 2 even though we are dealing with different numbers.

Sin is the same as opposite/hypotenuse and cos is the same as adjacent/hypotenuse.

So the equation is basically:

(opposite/hypotenuse)^(2) + (adjacent/hypotenuse)^(2) = 1

Even if the sides are different, the constraints of a right angled triangle (which is what it is based on, not the unit circle) make all the other sides change such that it still equals 1. Rearranging the equation we get:

opposite^(2)/hypotenuse^(2) + adjacent^(2)/hypotenuse^(2) = 1

opposite^(2) + adjacent^(2) = hypotenuse^(2)

Which is simply the pythagorean theorem.

Isnt the 1 supposed to represent the hypotanuse? What if its not 1? Will the equation still work?

No, they're saying dowsing is a myth, meaning even a single claimed experience is incorrect, and it's in fact something else. Like prior experience in an area (aquifers are rather large, so knowledge works for quite a distance), or knowing common geological patterns.

Yup, any set of individual mass units can collectively flow. bucket of sand, people in the cities, cars in the streets. This is, afterall what is happening even with water.

Had a friend who suspected he might be diabetic, had an appointment several weeks out. Died before the appointment.

If you don’t put a multiplier ahead of the sin and cos terms, they always fall on a scale of -1 to 1. The equation you wrote is concerned only with the angles. None of those terms relate to radius.

It's a bunch of factors combined. The terrain is part of it, but the elevation the terrain sits at is also a huge factor. Other factors include latitude, and also neighboring terrain features like how far to the ocean, where the mountains are, the nature and type of prevailing wind patterns. You can possibly build up an artificial mountain, but not a mountain range, and you're not moving oceans around.

Likely the best you can do is pick a perfect spot for an island and build it. Or you can dig canals and mess around with water flow. You have places like the Salton Sea and the current condition of the Aral Sea which are results of man-made water infrastructure.

[deleted]

[deleted]

Short answer, no. Not economically viable. Theoretically possible? Maybe. The unimaginable costs associated with terraforming swaths of earth to the point it had a noticeable effect on regional weather patterns make this not an economically viable solution.

Good thing glasses are made of glass then, you'll need some 😏

Welp, that's what I get for thinking phone=voice, and looking at those channels (and even then ignoring that carriers have started using data channels to carry voice).

Those bands still don't intersect any of the Wifi bands. The BRS band comes close to Wifi 2.4GHz band, so a new cell jammer could block old an old wifi router if the jammer was either poorly designed, or designed to block wifi as well

Please read this entire message

Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3).

Anecdotes, while allowed elsewhere in the thread, may not exist at the top level.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using this form and we will review your submission.

Glass is not fluid enough to perceptively change shape in hundreds of years, if it's fluid at all. There may be some debate on if it would flow over the course of huge, cosmic scales of time, I'm not clear on that, but glass is a solid for all intents and purposes when it comes any earthly scale of time, even geological time.

Stained glass windows have glass panes with one side thicker than the other because of manufacturing defects, not because of fluid dynamics.

Please read this entire message

Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3).

Anecdotes, while allowed elsewhere in the thread, may not exist at the top level.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using this form and we will review your submission.

Look at that! TIL!

Others have pointed out the size of the project and its likely unintended effects, but just to round it out, I'll add that engineering is about accomplishing a given goal as efficiently as possible.

So, let's say you want to move a mountain in order to get more water to a city. Let's look at a few options:

• move the mountain
• move the city
• build an aqueduct
• find another way to get water, like desalination

Even the "hard" options in that list, like desalination or moving the city, are significantly easier than moving the mountain. Throw in the climate effects, and there you go.

It's not just that it's unfeasible, though it certainly is. It's also not needed.

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Rule #2 - Questions must seek objective explanations

• Information about a specific or narrow issue (personal problems, private experiences, legal questions, medical inquiries, how-to, relationship advice, etc.) are not allowed on ELI5 (Rule 2).

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

Nope. Old fallacy based on old window glass usually being thicker at the bottom. But the way it was made at the time, it was always likely to be thicker at one end than the other* - and if your glass is like that (and expensive!) you're obviously going to put the heavier end at the bottom. Not least, there's less risk of it overtoppling and breaking while you're installing it. There's Roman glass around from over 2000 years ago; it's just the same shape as when it was made.

*(Basically, early window glass was made by spinning a blob of molten glass into a disc with centrifugal force. Which means that it gets thinner towards the edges. Then you'd cut the sheet up into panes. If you've ever seen old doors or windows with a rough, circular pattern of thickness on them - that's the cheapest bit, from the middle. Google "crown glass".)