Misconceptions/Ignorance

[Eamar]

naa the other guy, anti smoking people are douches

Why? Smoking is bad for everyones health assuming they are in proximity to the smoker.

Don't get me wrong here, I don't care what you do in your own privacy, but when it affects other people it becomes a problem

you can smoke a pack a day for years and not die, so i doubt a bit of second hand smoke is going to give your kid cancer

And if 'my kid' has lung problems? Asthma? Is it fair for you to blow smoke around him/her.

I have a minor chest infection right now, and the second to last thing I want right now is to be breathing in second hand smoke.

This. It's not all about cancer.

I have "moderate to severe" asthma,meaning that I have to take inhaled steroids twice a day. Have done all my life and it's never going to go away. My symptoms never bother me unless I either stop taking my medication or spend time in a smokey environment (ie around smokers). Same goes for anyone with a chest infection or even a bad cold. Also it smells awful. Many smokers don't realise how stubbornly the smell sticks to hair/clothing/upholstery until they quit.

Also, all this reminds me of another irritating misconception:

"You have asthma? Well you'd better not join in with sports or anything, here, sit on the sidelines. You're REALLY sure you want to participate? Ok, but only if we have your inhaler first."

My asthma is not like that. It's not triggered by exercise. I love exercise. I'm one of the most dedicated gym-goers I know. I was the best cross country runner at school. I went on all the hiking/mountaineering trips and had less trouble than most of the non-asthmatic kids. I was in the army cadets. And my inhaler isn't the type you can just take an extra dose of whenever you feel like it- it's an inhaled steroid, not the standard blue "puffer" you see in movies. If I took too much it could mess with my heartbeat. If I took it as often as some teachers seemed to want me to (ie whenever I got out of breath because I was exercising *rolls eyes*) I could have a seizure.

Yes, my asthma is worse than most people's, but only if I don't take my medication. I am not an invalid. I'm not disabled (seriously, some people have suggested that). I don't need special treatment, and I REALLY don't need to be wrapped in cotton wool.

 

[Guffe]

Groceries, since Í wokr in a store and people really don't know much about what they're eating, or how to make it, or what.... GAAAAHHH My work would be so much easier if poeple would just know what to get -.- But then again I wokr in service so it's sort of my job to help people out.
But usually it's alos my fault for something not being "where it's supposed to be" or if it's a bad potato harvest a week it's apparently my fault we don't have enough... adn I only work there... people stop being so damn ignorant and learn they way stuff works, I don't sow potato in the back room of the store!

Captcha: om nom nom -.- DAMN RIGHT!

 

[Guffe]

That ADHD is obviously a thing made up pharmaceutical corporations to sell placebos to ignorant parents. :|

It's hard enough dealing with my intense short term memory problems and the fact that I have to take what essential amounts to crank. Now people think it's hilarious to use it as a term for impatient, stupid people. I love the internet.

I have a friend who had ADHD when he was younger, some crazy doctor took it as his perosnal agenda to cure it, didn't but it made it A LOT better, so as his best friend I know what he had to deal with.
And yeah I also find it funny when as soon as a child is a bit "too active" a parent immediatelly diagnoses him with ADHD -.-

 

[Redingold]

Anything involving black holes. Sci-Fi have made them out as planet munching monsters that go around the universe eating stuff up. Also that they're some sort of rip in space-time.
If our sun was to turn into a black hole (It wouldn't, but follow me on this...) we would orbit in the same way we do now. We'd all die from the cold of space, but we'd still orbit it. It wouldn't suck in the solar system because IT HAS THE SAME MASS AS THE SUN. Gravity is caused by mass, and you can't create mass, so a black hole is only as heavy and powerful in terms of gravity as the star (Or core of the star...) it came from! And they aren't rips in space or whatever badly written TV shows have you believe. The event horizon, the black part you see (Or don't see, whatever way you look at it...) is just the radius at which the gravity is so strong light can't escape. It isn't a surface, but it definitely isn't some sort of inter-dimensional rift.
Also, that they 'eat up' time. No, time (Like energy and matter...) can't be destroyed or cast into some sort of void, it's just that according to the laws of general relativity the singularity at the center of the black hole has a gravity so strong that time essentially stops at that point. If you were somehow magically unaffected by gravity and you were somehow magically inside a singularity, if you somehow magically managed to GET OUT of the singularity, you'd be an infinite number of years into the future. Considering the universe itself is finite, you can understand the impossibility of exiting a singularity or even the radius at which light can't get out of a black hole.

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Wrong. A black hole with the same mass as the Sun would still be orbited by the planets in the exact same way. The force of gravity wouldn't suddenly magically increase just because the Sun became dense enough to be a black hole (which, incidentally, would require shrinking it down to a sphere 6km across). A black hole has no more gravity than any other object of equal mass.

 

[Gordon Freemonty]

Eyewitness accounts, especially during stress related events like being attacked or mugged, are actually really untrustworthy due to the witness being under stress and not analyzing even the basic details.

"Your Diabetic...?

My diabetic?

Are you really 'that guy'?

 

[Unsilenced]

That ADHD is obviously a thing made up pharmaceutical corporations to sell placebos to ignorant parents. :|

It's hard enough dealing with my intense short term memory problems and the fact that I have to take what essential amounts to crank. Now people think it's hilarious to use it as a term for impatient, stupid people. I love the internet.

I'd be more offended if "impatient, stupid person" weren't actually an understatement of my problems.

If, however, I hear one more joke ending in "Hey look! A squirrel!" I am going to have to break my foot off in someone's ass.


People also don't tend to realize what ADHD meds actually are unless they have a prescription or a drug habit. I guess the idea of giving a hyperactive person amphetamines isn't exactly intuitive. People assume that when I'm super-talkative and annoying, it's because I'm off-meds. Really it's because I'm on them. Off them is when I stand in front of my locker with shampoo on my toothbrush wondering just where exactly this all went wrong.

 

[Popadoo]

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

 

[PureChaos]

The fact that im british i immediatley like tea.

The fact that i do and i make a fine brew is neither here nor there

When i become the supreme ruler of the world, i will decide if someone should be put to death by their tea making skills.

one thing that really bugs me is that because I went to university and got a degree, some people seem to assume I know EVERYTHING

 

[ReservoirAngel]

OT: I have to deal with constant misconceptions around the fact that I'm gay. Mostly from ignorant morons, but occasionally people will harmlessly stereotype me. I don't mind that so much because often the stereotypes are kind of true in relation to my life, but I still find it kind of annoying at times. I don't love musicals because I'm gay! I love them because they're fantastic. fabulous

amirite?

Spoiler

Again, I merely jest.

I was purposely trying to avoid using that word... but yeah, musicals are fabulous.

OT: Because I dropped out of University people, mostly douchebags I get into arguments with, assume I must be a total failure that doesn't know anything. Yeah, I dropped out of a Film-based course because I didn't enjoy being there, I wasn't thrown out. So unless we're in a discussion about Film-based subjects, trying to use that kind of line on me really fails. And if we are in a Film-based discussion, odds are I still know more than a lot of people.

 

[Spectrre]

As a Type 1 Diabetic, I face all sorts of people who seem to think I am 'allergic to sugar' and wonder why I am not as big as a house. People seem to believe Type 1 diabetes is gained from the overindulgence of too much sugar, Where it is actually an auto-immune disease, a fluke basically. I was just curious what kinds of misconceptions the general public have about the escapist community's lives and how you deal with it. I'm also open to answer any questions you have about me and what daily life involves.

captcha: political PARTAYYYY

I think this one annoys me the most

"The belief that planes couldn't bring down the twin towers because jet feul doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel"

I think someone utterly missquoted that statement if you heard it that way. Though I have no idea how hot jet fuel burns or how hot it needs to get for a plane to evaporate, the way that statement was used by the 9/11 skeptics (that I read about anyway) is that the plane that crashed into the Pentagon had almost completely evaporate. Which is supposedly impossible because jet fuel doesn't burn that hot. That was their cue to bring in the "It was a bom of some description"-theory.


OT: The misconception I encounter most personally is the one where people like my mother and her parents think because I spend a lot of time on the computer that I must always be playing a (violent) game and I'm completely addicted to it. I study Webdesign.. Is it that impossible for me to be.. ionno, working for school, designing a site? Or even just fooling around in Photoshop due to boredom? Or watching a movie, talking to people? Nope, must be I'm gaming like an addict. /rage

 

[TiloXofXTanto]

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

Actually, I believe what bullet_sandwich meant was that if we were to replace the sun with a real naturally formed black hole (the gravitational force of which would be much, much higher than the sun's due to the increased mass gained from being formed from a larger star) then the increased force would overtake the current orbits and suck in the closest of the planets, and possibly some of the farther ones eventually.

...and really, even if that isn't what they meant, they did apologize preemptively for their inaccuracy.

 

[artanis_neravar]

As a Type 1 Diabetic, I face all sorts of people who seem to think I am 'allergic to sugar' and wonder why I am not as big as a house. People seem to believe Type 1 diabetes is gained from the overindulgence of too much sugar, Where it is actually an auto-immune disease, a fluke basically. I was just curious what kinds of misconceptions the general public have about the escapist community's lives and how you deal with it. I'm also open to answer any questions you have about me and what daily life involves.

captcha: political PARTAYYYY

I think this one annoys me the most

"The belief that planes couldn't bring down the twin towers because jet feul doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel"

I think someone utterly missquoted that statement if you heard it that way. Though I have no idea how hot jet fuel burns or how hot it needs to get for a plane to evaporate, the way that statement was used by the 9/11 skeptics (that I read about anyway) is that the plane that crashed into the Pentagon had almost completely evaporate. Which is supposedly impossible because jet fuel doesn't burn that hot. That was their cue to bring in the "It was a bom of some description"-theory.


OT: The misconception I encounter most personally is the one where people like my mother and her parents think because I spend a lot of time on the computer that I must always be playing a (violent) game and I'm completely addicted to it. I study Webdesign.. Is it that impossible for me to be.. ionno, working for school, designing a site? Or even just fooling around in Photoshop due to boredom? Or watching a movie, talking to people? Nope, must be I'm gaming like an addict. /rage

No it's the idea that jet fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel so the twin towers shouldn't have collapsed because the rest of the building would still have been sturdy

 

[Popadoo]

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

Actually, I believe what bullet_sandwich meant was that if we were to replace the sun with a real naturally formed black hole (the gravitational force of which would be much, much higher than the sun's due to the increased mass gained from being formed from a larger star) then the increased force would overtake the current orbits and suck in the closest of the planets, and possibly some of the farther ones eventually.

...and really, even if that isn't what they meant, they did apologize preemptively for their inaccuracy.

It has been cut out, but in my original statement I said that if our sun was to form a black hole (which obviously it can't, I was being hypothetical...) then we would orbit the same.

 

[TiloXofXTanto]

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

Actually, I believe what bullet_sandwich meant was that if we were to replace the sun with a real naturally formed black hole (the gravitational force of which would be much, much higher than the sun's due to the increased mass gained from being formed from a larger star) then the increased force would overtake the current orbits and suck in the closest of the planets, and possibly some of the farther ones eventually.

...and really, even if that isn't what they meant, they did apologize preemptively for their inaccuracy.

It has been cut out, but in my original statement I said that if our sun was to form a black hole (which obviously it can't, I was being hypothetical...) then we would orbit the same.

I understand that if we compacted the sun into a black hole (impossibly), the mass would be the same and therefore the orbits would be maintained. It stands to reason that a gravitational well would not increase in force just because a change in shape had occurred, assuming the shape change did not add or remove mass from the object creating the well.

This, I understand, however I did not say that the sun created the black hole (which is, as you have pointed out many times before, impossible), I suggested that a real and possible black hole replace the sun.

So, in essence, I suggested that we take the sun, replace it with Betelgeuse, and then turn that giant into a black hole.

In that situation, would the planets closest not be pulled in, considering the increased force created by a black hole that is actually physically possible and not the tiny impossible thing the sun would never create?

 

[RustlessPotato]

S

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

Actually, I believe what bullet_sandwich meant was that if we were to replace the sun with a real naturally formed black hole (the gravitational force of which would be much, much higher than the sun's due to the increased mass gained from being formed from a larger star) then the increased force would overtake the current orbits and suck in the closest of the planets, and possibly some of the farther ones eventually.

...and really, even if that isn't what they meant, they did apologize preemptively for their inaccuracy.

It has been cut out, but in my original statement I said that if our sun was to form a black hole (which obviously it can't, I was being hypothetical...) then we would orbit the same.

I understand that if we compacted the sun into a black hole (impossibly), the mass would be the same and therefore the orbits would be maintained. It stands to reason that a gravitational well would not increase in force just because a change in shape had occurred, assuming the shape change did not add or remove mass from the object creating the well.

This, I understand, however I did not say that the sun created the black hole (which is, as you have pointed out many times before, impossible), I suggested that a real and possible black hole replace the sun.

So, in essence, I suggested that we take the sun, replace it with Betelgeuse, and then turn that giant into a black hole.

In that situation, would the planets closest not be pulled in, considering the increased force created by a black hole that is actually physically possible and not the tiny impossible thing the sun would never create?

I have a question : seeing that the mass remains the same, you wouldn't need to make Betelgeuse into a black hole for the planets to be pulled in then, no ?

 

[TiloXofXTanto]

S

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

Actually, I believe what bullet_sandwich meant was that if we were to replace the sun with a real naturally formed black hole (the gravitational force of which would be much, much higher than the sun's due to the increased mass gained from being formed from a larger star) then the increased force would overtake the current orbits and suck in the closest of the planets, and possibly some of the farther ones eventually.

...and really, even if that isn't what they meant, they did apologize preemptively for their inaccuracy.

It has been cut out, but in my original statement I said that if our sun was to form a black hole (which obviously it can't, I was being hypothetical...) then we would orbit the same.

I understand that if we compacted the sun into a black hole (impossibly), the mass would be the same and therefore the orbits would be maintained. It stands to reason that a gravitational well would not increase in force just because a change in shape had occurred, assuming the shape change did not add or remove mass from the object creating the well.

This, I understand, however I did not say that the sun created the black hole (which is, as you have pointed out many times before, impossible), I suggested that a real and possible black hole replace the sun.

So, in essence, I suggested that we take the sun, replace it with Betelgeuse, and then turn that giant into a black hole.

In that situation, would the planets closest not be pulled in, considering the increased force created by a black hole that is actually physically possible and not the tiny impossible thing the sun would never create?

I have a question : seeing that the mass remains the same, you wouldn't need to make Betelgeuse into a black hole for the planets to be pulled in then, no ?

Yes, However, the whole argument was about black holes, and really I was simply suggesting that we take a real and completely plausible black hole (such as the one which will eventually, or has already, taken the place of the Betelgeuse formerly known as a red supergiant {hypergiant?}) and put it where the sun is now, and then prove a point which doesn't exist, because I forgot who I was defending and why.

 

[TiloXofXTanto]

Double post, ignore this

 

[Redingold]

As a Type 1 Diabetic, I face all sorts of people who seem to think I am 'allergic to sugar' and wonder why I am not as big as a house. People seem to believe Type 1 diabetes is gained from the overindulgence of too much sugar, Where it is actually an auto-immune disease, a fluke basically. I was just curious what kinds of misconceptions the general public have about the escapist community's lives and how you deal with it. I'm also open to answer any questions you have about me and what daily life involves.

captcha: political PARTAYYYY

I think this one annoys me the most

"The belief that planes couldn't bring down the twin towers because jet feul doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel"

I think someone utterly missquoted that statement if you heard it that way. Though I have no idea how hot jet fuel burns or how hot it needs to get for a plane to evaporate, the way that statement was used by the 9/11 skeptics (that I read about anyway) is that the plane that crashed into the Pentagon had almost completely evaporate. Which is supposedly impossible because jet fuel doesn't burn that hot. That was their cue to bring in the "It was a bom of some description"-theory.


OT: The misconception I encounter most personally is the one where people like my mother and her parents think because I spend a lot of time on the computer that I must always be playing a (violent) game and I'm completely addicted to it. I study Webdesign.. Is it that impossible for me to be.. ionno, working for school, designing a site? Or even just fooling around in Photoshop due to boredom? Or watching a movie, talking to people? Nope, must be I'm gaming like an addict. /rage

No it's the idea that jet fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel so the twin towers shouldn't have collapsed because the rest of the building would still have been sturdy

That's actually true, though misleading. Jet fuel does indeed not burn hot enough to melt steel. Steel melts at about 1400 degrees Celsius, and I think jet fuel burns at about 800. However, this is misleading because steel becomes soft when it heats up. Steel can lose half its tensile strength at a mere 600 degrees, so even though jet fuel fire wouldn't have melted the supports in the WTC, it would have weakened them enough to give way and collapse.

 

[Space Spoons]

I'm not big on fighting games, but by the looks of it, the Haduken spam is to pressure your opponent into either:
A) Defending
B) Make an aggressive advance which leaves them open to counter attack
Am I close?

More or less. What they're doing is an aspect of "zoning", a technique meant to keep your opponent from being able to reach you and counterattack, while simultaneously keeping yourself in ideal attack position. Ryu, like most projectile characters in Street Fighter IV, has excellent zoning tools- the Hadouken is the original keep-away device, after all, and his almost-unbeatable Shoryuken uppercut discourages trying to get around them with risky jumps.

Now, Daigo and Alex have both been playing Street Fighter professionally for something close to twenty years. They're easily the best Ryu players in Japan and America, respectively. They are masters of their craft.... So naturally, watching them attempt to zone each other out is going to be explosive.

What they're doing looks simplistic, but it's actually a constant battle for the high ground, and as the match demonstrates, one false move can very easily lead to disaster.

 

[bullet_sandw1ch]

partially incorrect (i think, sorry if im being an ass hat). a black hole is like a gravity well, i think that earth to mercury would be pulled in. also, the sun is too small to be a black hole, it would just become very cold, and die (a neutron star).

Nope, our sun would become a White Dwarf.
And if for whatever reason our sun did somehow become a Black Hole (which it can't...), we wouldn't be sucked in, not even Mercury would get sucked in, they'd orbit the same since the Black Hole has the same mass as the star it is formed from, sometimes even less mass since it is usually only the core that forms the Black Hole.
Everything that has mass has a gravity well. YOU have a gravity well, it's just so tiny it doesn't effect pretty much anything. The Black Hole has the same gravity well as the star it formed from.

i dont know why, but i love to be proven wrong. well, thank you, i guess you do learn something new every day!