Science Squabbling

At a high enough velocity they will likely pass through everything.

Nope. Both Sir Isaac Newton and xkcd et.seq. have commented on this, as well as all sorts of people interested in terminal ballistics. The sectional density of crayfish is quite low, so getting them through more than about an inch of RHA isn't going to happen however fast* they're going when they hit it..

*for practical values of "fast". If you stick your crustacean in a light gas gun, you can probably get it up to about 5000m/s, but it would technically be bisque when it emerged from the barrel, but it will still have roughly the same effect as whole crayfish.

but it would technically be bisque when it emerged from the barrel

I'd much rather spend my life studying bisque...mmm

but it would technically be bisque when it emerged from the barrel.
I demand an experiment.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806

Interesting indeed. Thanks hippy.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806

Old news^
(8 minutes old)

Neuroplasticity, rewire your brain to see better?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/med-tech/this-app-trains-you-to-see-farther-16506910

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26462348

I've organised a fortnight of curator-led tours at the Science Museum, starting tomorrow. Tours are free and last an hour, details here: www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/scienceofgiving
The curators don't normally hold tours for the general public and are a really clever and interesting bunch.

Why didn't you do this while I lived in London!?! Sounds great.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-04/16/flat-antennae-metamaterial

Re: not understanding how bicycles work. (http://www.lfgss.com/thread111513.html)
We can add Curling to the list of sports people think they understand the physics of but actually don't:
COLD HARD SCIENCE. The Controversial Physics of Curling - Smarter Every Day 111 - YouTube

I love it when physicists study slightly mundane things and discover something fun.

There was one a while ago about why spaghetti breaks into three or more pieces if you bend it from the ends until it snaps: doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.095505

A whole series about Guinness (from Limerick, of course)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.2263, http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.5233, http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0508, etc...

Some about string tangling (I pity the grad student) but they won an IgNobel for that

Another about the shape of ponytails (can't be bothered finding the link)

I <3 science etc.

http://www.wired.com/2014/04/lost-lunar-photos-recovered-by-great-feats-of-hackerdom-developed-at-a-mcdonalds/

That's very cool.

Love a bit of garage hackery I do.

That's wonderful, the first images of the earth from the moon and we've only just seen them... Amazing...

I'd pay a fair bit of moolah to own a big ass print of that.

Phone locks people out whilst driving

Cyclists, Phones, driving blah blah blah.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-04/23/jpl-jack-parsons/viewall

http://www.salon.com/2014/04/26/the_worlds_newest_mineral_is_unlike_anything_weve_ever_seen_before_partner/

Sexism in science - Where are all the vaginas?

By analysing 364 studies published in the last 25 years, Malin Ah-King, Andrew Barron and Marie Herberstein found that 49 percent only looked at male genitals, 8 percent only looked at female genitals, and 44 percent looked at both. There’s some variation: people who study spiders, snails and slugs are more likely to pay attention to female genitals. But in general, female sex organs—vaginas, bursas, cloacas, spermathecae and more—get a short shrift.

Given it's only recently that people discovered that women don't pee out of their vagina, or that their hymen doesn't need breaking in order to lose their virginity, I'm not surprised.

Last week wasn't it? Vaginas hey? How do they work?