I mean... Funny bit, and all. But first, people react badly under spotlight, and also Kimmel has the power of edit.
figmentPez
Staff member
I take both of those into account, but that there are people who can say "I haven't read a book in 12 years" still makes me sad.
GasBandit
Staff member
figmentPez
Staff member
I continue to be amazed at how far 3D printing has come:
Did @Dave write this sketch?
I couldn't understand most of that.
Not so much that the shopkeeper can't understand the accent, more that it has a lot of homophones in it. Basically it's a British version of Who's on First?
We have a winner! It's really obvious on the slow speed, but the whole rig jumps when triggered. Just how much potential crushing force is lost there?
I’d say little to no force is lost. If you smash a car into concrete at 60mph, or the concrete into the car, it’s just a matter of frame of reference, the force and damage is the same either way. The frame is moving up because the piston is heavy and they don’t have it secured, but it’s smashing against the frame, not the ground or gravity.
I'm not an engineer either, so I may (likely) be talking out my ass, but at first glance I'd think that because the frame isn't secured, it would potentially give more at the moment of impact and absorb some of the energy that would otherwise be transmitted to the target object.
(Yeah, I've been watching that YouTube video about the evolution of F1 crash barriers this week.)
Well, I'm not going to do the calculations, but it might be an interesting question for the wonks at https://physics.stackexchange.com/ - it would have to be well written and targeted to the expert audience lest you get your nose bit off, but they'd give a reasonable answer.
Physics says it really doesn't matter which is moving against what, the piston could hold perfectly still and you could smash the pallet up into it at 50MPH and it would generate the same amount of force as holding the pallet still and driving the piston down onto it. You will lose power to lateral movement, though, because the piston will bind up against the sides of the cylinder and lose force as friction/heat.
If anything, you're losing crushing force because the anvil is made of wood and therefore flexing under the impact.
--Patrick
If anything, you're losing crushing force because the anvil is made of wood and therefore flexing under the impact.
--Patrick
Knew: All 7
Seen: 6 (missing Rush Hour)
Own: 3 (There are more in the house but *I* only own 3)
The fun fact that *I* know about Twister is that some of the cast suffered retina damage during filming because of all the extra lighting used to overexpose the film to make it look stormier.
—Patrick
Seen: 6 (missing Rush Hour)
Own: 3 (There are more in the house but *I* only own 3)
The fun fact that *I* know about Twister is that some of the cast suffered retina damage during filming because of all the extra lighting used to overexpose the film to make it look stormier.
—Patrick
100% on all.
I think they shouldn't have picked JP though, since it has a sequel coming out VERY soon with a near-identical logo. Way too easy.
I thought the comments on Last Action Hero were hilarious though, in that they were accurate about it just via the poster: comic-ey, and weird. YUP! And also trash. I thought the Kindergarten Cop guesses were good though. And honestly, THAT movie could have been that cover, or very nearly.