h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Thanks Anhaga!

I've had one on my mantel for a year or so.

I should have posted this link for the dragon: http://www.grand-illusions.com/opticalillusions/three_dragons/


it comes in three colours.

the rubix cube is solved then undone by twisting the top then the left the reverse of what shown all he does is undo a preset amount of twists

the bottle is easy

glycerin has the same refractive index as the glass, light does not bend you don't see the edge

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKqqMeJzXpo&feature=player_embedded

anyone care to de-bunk this

Sure.

Humans are to heavy for the surface tension to support them or motion to over come the desire to sink.

The jesus lizard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45yabrnryXk
achieves it's water run, if I remember correctly by slapping down it's relatively large surface area feet creating a layer of air which gives it temporary buoyancy. while it propels it's self through the water, steering with it's tail. It is a function of being rather light weight and incredibly quick.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1116_041116_jesus_lizard.html

Neither of which is true of humans - water repellent materials or not, the forces they are able to generate by running would not be sufficient to keep them afloat they'd sink immediately on contact as you'd expect them to.

I'd wager on a submersed platform.

Hydrophobic materials can let you float on water.


Like this chap
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UWOKjfBmy4

but note he is one of the world's smallest lizards, so again weight is negated by the hydrophobic skin.

I'll help with the liquid mountaineering thing, too:


http://www.psfk.com/2010/06/liquid-mountaineering-video-unveiled-as-branded-hoax.html

i'll look in the morning, thanks

Ah-ha!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vblhBmHKW5s

Regarding the rubik's cube trick, what I'd like to know is:

once you have managed to get the correct colours on the lower right 2x2x2 cube (ie, those unaffected by the two moves): is the described procedure sufficient to solve the puzzle?

Nice trickshot by Steve Davis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhAU0XJhl0M

'is the described procedure sufficient to solve the puzzle?'


I'm going to say 'no' although I don't have a mathematical proof.

I think you can invoke the "it would be well-known" argument here

It has made me want to go get a Rubick's Cube ina fit of empirical zeal and put it to the test.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhxVx8fskMo

King Kong, Tom Waits, Ray Harryhausen and your five minute musical guide to the biggest love story of all time.

http://www.youtube.com/user/iammoog#p/a/u/0/0iRTB-FTMdk

steampunk rap. Better than the title makes it sound, and that from someone that doesn't particularly appreciate rap.

Not a youtube gem, but an animated gif. Remember the ballerina silhouette which appears to be turning sometimes clockwise sometimes anticlockwise?

Well here she comes again, with two elucidative friends:

http://omnilogie.fr/images/O/abbcdcf30c9bb9d6d2d6c0cda300def5.gif

To think about all of this
To think about the vast emptiness of space.
There's are billions and billions of stars
Billions and billions of specks

The beauty of a living thing
is not the atoms that go into it
but the way those atoms are put together.

The Cosmos is also within us.
We are made of star stuff
We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself...

Across the sea of space
the stars are other suns.....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGK84Poeynk


Just beautiful. The Symphony of Science.

Glorious Dawn is still the best of those.


The "glorious" Kate Silverton and Susanna Reid and others from BBC news do a Lady Gaga medley for Children in Need.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FGEU8bQ_hs

How to pack a small bag...


http://video.yahoo.com/network/100743807?v=8251861&l=100000248