All that Colour

Q: Dear I-Know-You'll-Always-Be-Smarter-Than-Me-100-Hour-Board,

I've read that trees use energy to change the pigment of their leaves in the fall. So, why bother? If this is truly a Darwinian world what possible evolution breakthrough could possible make trees benefit from this? And was there a time when the trees didn't change the pigment of their leaves?

Regards,

A 100-Hr-Board-Wannabe-Critchlow

PS. Why don't you ever comment on Critchlow's Counter?

A: Dear 'Kritchlow'

What the heck is a critchlow anyway? I mean I do think it is hugely more scary than any monster in myth - this 'small, aged, hairy man'. And he tells stories at a counter? Don't you sell anything? Counters are for counting things or selling goods. A hearth, table, den I can understand, but unless your selling me BS, I don't get the counter thing.

As to fall colors. Your first statement is true and false. Some leaves require energy to change color, others don't. Here's the 50,000ft overview first.

• Chlorophyll is used to turn photons into energy used in the CAM cycle of plants to undertake carbon fixation - turning CO2 and water into sugar.


• Chlorophyll is green and makes leaves green.


• Chlorophyll is constantly destroyed by the sunlight and must be replaced.


• The tree slowly shuts down chlorophyll production (clogs the arteries with cork) to slow down energy production as the winter months come. This is a function of weather, drought, age, time cycle from the first leaves, etc. Basically that the energy required to keep the leave healthy and move food around is not justified by the decreased food production in low light months.


• Food is moved from the leaves into the tree slowly in the transition. This takes energy (remember this). You need to keep part of the factory functioning as you tear it down.


• Remaining energy is in the leaves as they fall and used as fertilizer as it rots.


• When chlorophyll dies carotenoids in the leave (that have always been there) emerge from the 'masking' green color - these are yellow, brown and orange (they color carrots, corn, etc.) THIS color change requires NO energy b/c it is a side affect of chlorophyll balance changing.


• BUT...here's where your question comes in...some trees PRODUCE anthcyanins (reds, purples) as the summer winds down and fall comes. This does take energy. And in cooler night temps it happens more (more vibrant colors in bright days - cool nights).
  

So why? Doesn't make sense that trees would still use more energy to create a colour change as the leaves. There are two theories to date (many have come and gone over time).

• Photoprotection: The new colors absorb light and dissipate it as heat. This protects the leaf from damaging rays as the leaf slowly dies. This goes well into the preserve energy production as the leaf shuts down.


• Coevolution: Red leaves may serve as a signal to aphids that they shouldn't eat here. Or that 'specialized' ones should. This is a coevolved function. Although isn't as wide spread to be the whole truth. Some birds and animals are attracted to the leaves perhaps helping with seed distribution.

The truth is probably a combination of the two, that has evolved over time. Sort of like the evolutionary reason young, poorer portions of the population rely on bling (I swear this is a valid evolutionary study...we can talk about that sometime).

So for now - enjoy the leaves changing. I did last week on a drive to Pittsburgh. Oh wow - incredible.

Happy Fall,

100 Hour Board

PS - As to the question of posting on Critchlow's blog...I offer the following reasons:

• Perfection needs no comment


• If art demands critique than is it really art?


• Lack of interesting topics - I mean fart jokes? Really?


• Still confused on why I should talk to a little, hairy old man with the inability to eat ruffage


• I don't need to add any pithy, sarcastic remarks to make you look bad


• I'll wait until you stop making fun of the 100 Hour Board with a link titled "Stupid ?s Dumber Answers"
  

Continue Reading...

Holy World Wide Web Batman

Q: Dear 100 Hour Board:
wow... quick response this time! Here is another one:assuming that one has limitless financial assets and no need to attend to any responsibilities (family, jobs, meal preparation) is there any feasible or possible way for someone to finish the internet up to this point in time before dying?
Regards,
Triple B - aka "Too Much Time on My Hands"

A: Oh my, my, my Triple B,

This is a question you will not like the answer to. Let's start by laying some ground rules too.
First, the world wide web is an architectural program that has no single owner. It is considered a complex engineered system with its own idiosyncrasies and phenomena. Also, there are two portions of the WWW; the surface web and the deep web. The surface web includes only the websites and materials you can readily 'find' by searching. These are sites that are hyperlinked and accessible to webcrawlers used by search engine companies. The vast majority of the web is in the deep web - sites unlinked or protected to access from the casual user. This is a huge world you couldn't even access typically, but let's assume from your 'limitless finances' that you can.
Because no one owns the internet, no one knows precisely how many websites exist. Even in creating this post I create a site. And given programs like Amazon use there are infinite arrangements of websites based on viewing content (I don't think these technically count). The last time this was studied was 2005, when they believed there was 19.2 billion web documents on the surface www. In 2001 they estimated 550 billion documents total. This was included into 108,810,358 webpages
- but I don't think this nearly captures it all. With rough estimates and projections I can put this is the ballpark of about 29.7 billion single web pages now. Roughly. Let's call it 30,000,000,001 with this entry.
If you looked at the webpage an average of 2 seconds per page (a way too quick look given content and that load times will probably be at least double that - but let's assume money buys you instant access) you would need 60 Billion seconds - that's 1 Billion minutes or 16.7 million hours or 694444 days or 1902.6 years. Wow! A little beyond your lifetime or financial abilities.
Now if you want the whole web you are looking at about 1.85 trillion pages - taking about 117250 years. A lot of millenia. So forget about it.
Now it's estimated roughly that pornography is about .5% of the internet - so let's say 149 million sites. That would take 4.8 years to look at at 2 seconds a page. That is doable. A not so noteworthy goal to achieve. What's 4.8 years for an eternity of hell?
Then...if you ask about looking at content - do videos count? I mean must you watch the entire video posted to get credit. Than forget even going through You Tube.
So all in all...no dice, it wouldn't work to get through the internet. But maybe in hell you'll spend it rewriting HTML code for the whole www. (By the way the pic is .0004% of the web content)
I do offer some fun corners of the web:

• Archival of first webpage


• Weird Conversions - how many babies do you weigh?


• Find your Celeb Look alike


• Top 15 Manipulated photos

Just to name a few.

Regards,

Mired in the Web

Continue Reading...

When Hell Freezes Over

Q: Dear Master 100 Hour Board:

If you were a masochist in life, wouldn't it be a reward to be sent to hell and punishment to be sent to heaven?

Signed,
Please hurt me

A: Dear Sadist of the Self

A sadist and a masochist meet at a bar. After several drinks the masochist suggests that the take off, go to his house and 'have fun'. The sadist replies, "no."

Three guys found themselves in Hell: we will call them Carl, Bob, and Brett, they were a little confused at their present situation, and they were startled to see a door in the wall open, and behind the door was perhaps the ugliest woman they had ever seen. She was 3'4", dirty, and you could smell her even over the Brimstone. The voice of the Devil was heard, "Brett, you have sinned! You are condemned to spend the rest of eternity in bed with this woman!" And Brett was whisked through the door by a group of lesser demons to his torment.
This understandably shook up the other two, and so they both jumped when a second door opened, and they saw an even more disgusting example of womanhood gone wrong. She was over 7' tall, monstrous, covered in thick black hair,and flies circled her. The voice of the Devil was heard, "Carl, you have sinned! You are condemned to spend the rest of eternity in bed with this woman!" And Carl, like Brett, was whisked off.
Bob, now alone, felt understandably anxious, and feared the worst when the third door opened. And as the door inched open, he strained to see the figure of ... Cindy Crawford. Delighted, Bob jumped up, taking in the sight of this beautiful woman, dressed in a skimpy bikini.
Then he heard the voice of the Devil saying:"Cindy, you have sinned."

I hope you see the wisdom in there somewhere.

Regards,
I'll visit you from heaven

PS
Picture it: rural area, Sunday morning, church is packed and the devil decides to pay a visit.The doors burst open, and a rolling black cloud rolls in with the devil in its midst. People jump out of the pews and run outdoors, screaming - all except for two. One is the Pastor, the other is an elderly farmer.
Satan is a bit perplexed. He points to the Pastor and says, "You! I can understand why you didn't run away, you are in your Lord's house, you preach against me everyday and you aren't afraid of me. But YOU (points to the farmer), why didn't you run out scared like everyone else?"The farmer crosses one leg over the other and drawls, "Why, I'm surprised you don't recognize me...I've been married to your sister for 36 years!"

Continue Reading...

Q: Dear 100 Hour Board,
They say there is more than one way to skin a cat, but how many ways are there to do said skinning? Furthermore, for what practical reasons would one be required to skin a cat?
Regards,
Hannibal Lector

A: Dear Favabean and Liver Connoisseur,

I'm worried about you and your predilections for cruelty to small animals. I'm afraid that one day I'll wake up in some scary house of torture puzzles to try and escape from, only to find out that it was all one of your twisted games...ok enough Saw reruns.
"To skin a cat" is not a new idiom in the English language. Some claim that it comes from a Southern phrase referring to catfish - or cat for short - and hence is used in preparing lunch. But that just seems to be a local use of the phrase, history points to earlier use. It was recorded in John Ray's 1678 book of English proverbs (proverb? really? there's a difference between 'early to rise early to bed...' and skinning a cat). It has shown up in several books, including Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court by Mark Twain, "she was wise, subtle, and knew more than one way to skin a cat”, that is, more than one way to get what she wanted. Apparently they needed fresh skinned cats back in 1889, or maybe that's medieval times, or who knows!

I've found multiple references to skinning a cat - including actual skinning a cat, step-by-step photo instructions. (As part of a standard dissection procedure, mind you!) But that's just gross - or too medical. I'd offer you one stanza from a poem of three ways on "How to skin a cat" by Sarah Willians but she's a little deranged. So...although I can't find a finite number, I bet there are infinite, hence the saying, I am assured there are at least 101 according to one list. My favorites:

• Hold it by its tail. Shake vigorously
• Wrap duct tape around it. Pull off quickly
• Chemotherapy
• Paint it white and take it to a sheep shearing contest

Although admittedly some of these suggestions are less about skinning and either just about shaving it or sadistic (use it as a lance or shield in a joust). And some of the actual entries are more about uses of a skinned cat, "shave a message in the fur and send it to an enemy." Apparently the use of a messaged cat is so frequent this must be a major reason to skin one.

As to actual uses, I'm sure there are a good deal them. In fact I'm certain that several countries serve cat much in the same way catfish is in the South. This is the primary reason - though rest assured that cat meat is hard to get in the US and illegal. But do watch out for Chinese restaurants that offer to 'walk the cat.' Or rather 'wok the cat.' But I offer some original uses.

• To pass a regular cat off as Mr. Bigglesworth
• To participate in the Body Worlds traveling exhibit
• Nothing like a cat-skin stole to keep you warm

I don't want to get too creative in case you are inspired to make my kitties go missing.

Now, skinning the cat is also a jungle-gym move, involving hanging by your hands, raising your legs and feet up through your arms and flipping over. Although there is only one way to do this, so I don't think this is your intended idiomatic meaning.

Regards,

Protector of Felines

Continue Reading...

Let Us Think...

Q: Dear 100 Hour Board:
I usually stay away from things like this. I might read for entertainment purpose. But really, can one person know ALL! After days of struggling with this quandary, I am swinging the question your way. Let us test your knowledge, or at least if you Wonder 8 Ball is working. So here it goes: Oh Great 100 Hour Board, will the sister of one be able to attach the glitter to her appendage? Please try to come up with your answer within those 100 hours, time is an essence. Challenge yourself, try 99 hours.

A: Dear Interested in Short Cuts:

Ask Again Later.

Regards, Magic 8-Ball

Continue Reading...

Time After Time

Q: Dear 100-hour board,
Is the concept which we know as "time" a fundamentally man-made concept, divine creation, or natural law? Hope you aren't 'late' to provide an answer, seeing as how this mysterious concept called time governs the all-powerful board it's self!
BBB

A: Dear Clock Confused:

The 100 Hour Board finally feels challenged by such a wide and deep topic as brought up in your question, and hopes there is sufficient…um…well time to address this issue. I will try to keep the conversation above the deep philosophical, religious and scientific trenches one can stumble into when wading this ocean of inquiry. But I can only try.

Time is Relative (Philosophy)
Interestingly to note, time is viewed to be one of two general concepts, championed by Newton and Leibniz. I say interestingly because these two physicist/scientist/philosophers were constantly at odds in their work – for example arguing on fundamental approaches to calculus (both were right – we use derivatives AND integrals – one stemming from each). Newton, and all realists, believe time is a fundamental, integral part of the universe. And all events occur in a sequence separated by this dimension of time. Leibniz however held that time was purely a human creation, to help the comprehension of interrelated events.
Many a philosopher have argued this, some holding time is unreal, others that it is fundamental to existence. And it isn’t a new argument – with records back to 5BC and also some from St. Augustine.

Tesseracts (Science)
Philosophy and science meld into one gray area, especially in older science, but modern physics holds that time is a fundamental unit of the universe. It has a direction (although Steven Hawking suggests that perhaps we are traveling backward in time and don’t realize it) generally forward. (“Lisa – in this household we obey the Laws of Entropy” Homer Simpson) Time is relative in motion and in relation to events, but was fixed in relation to the speed of light (300K km/second) by Einstein. This constant helps fix time (with space) as real. (Though we can now technically stop and freeze light – but that’s a different entry). And Einstein was a proponent of spacetime – that space (distance) and time are tied in one ‘substance’ like mass. So it bends, forms and has character.
This is all well and good – but remember that science is always a model of ‘reality’, a representation that fits mathematically. What is real is left to metaphysics (see above).

And the Sun Stood Still (Religion)
Most all main religions describe time as real and a part of God. (Thomas Acquinas uses this when he proves God’s existence by discussing God’s existing before us – Ontological proofs) Some believe it is cyclical, others linear. Though for Judeo-Christians there is relative time – think of God’s day and man’s. In the LDS Church, time is a fundamental part of God and life. God’s time is ‘slower’ relatively, Abraham shows that ‘one day’ for the Lord is a 1000 years. Events occur in succession (creation, 2nd Coming, etc.) although the Atonement is infinite. All things have a law that determines ‘times and seasons.’ Some stumble on statements like “all time being before the Lord,” but this is more a statement of omniscience than the non-existence of time.

So what is the truth? Depends on what is real. The 100 Hour Board firmly believes it is real and fundamental. And we’ve already taken up too much of yours.

Regards,
Father Time

Continue Reading...

Fundemental Numbers

Q: Dear 100? Hour Board,
How many licks does it take to reach the center of a tootsie pop? It may be an aged old question, but I mean the owl in the dumb commercial toys with you by biting it by the third time. Does is vary on saliva excretion or what? Perhaps the Rolling Stones offered the true answer with "40 Licks," but honestly how many?
And on that note, how many hours does it take to get to the center of a 100-hour Board Question?
Regards,
80? 90? Whatever it Takes
A: Dear Lick Confused:
This is an age old question - or at least dates back to 1970 when the first Tootsie Roll Pop commercial aired discussing the question, "How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of Tootsie Roll pop?" Now I have never scientifically tried this out, owing to the fact that once I get to the thin barrier of remaining sucker around the tootsie roll I stop and discard the pop. I hate Tootsie Rolls, I'd rather drink Caro syrup (you know who you are!!) than eat it. So I never get to the center. It's like an asymptote in math - it never quite meets the answer and continues on to infinity.
Now there have been multiple responses and some scientific studies into this problem - the Sweets Company of America state they have received over 50,000 responses to the question ranging all over the place (from 100 to over 5000). They also site 3 studies:
Engineering students at Purdue built a tongue-licking machine that tested pops. Their number? 364. 20 Humans tried it also and averaged 252 licks.
A U Mich engineering student recorded his licking machine took 411
Swathmore students tried a human trial that averaged 144 licks
Interestingly, an elementary school study said it takes an average 9 minutes to get there.
It all comes down to some fundamental questions - like: what is defined by a lick? Are they the same every time? Do you rotate the pop? Do you count licking in the same place to the center? What other hobby could you pick up besides trying this out? Are you Gene Simmons and have an abnormally large tongue?
If you'd like to view the video please see below:(I couldn't get the video uploaded for some reason - please rely on the link) Commercial
Regards,
Sweet Tooth 100 Hour Board

Continue Reading...