Category: Smcquaid

The Question

Ben asks:

Shaun, simple question for you today:

If I was to drive the Mass Pike from the beginning (NY border) to the end (Logan Airport) exclusively in the right lane, would i travel a longer or shorter distance than someone traveling in the left lane? (we can ignore the pesky middle lane since it only exists on like half the pike)

The Answer

Taking a quick look at the road map, the casual observer will see that the Mass Pike curves in a gentle “U” shape, starting at the MA border, dipping down to drift through Springfield, staying low through Sturbridge, then slowly drifting back up for it’s eventual end in Boston. Given that this is the case, it’s clear that the left lane is shorter (just like how the inside track in a circular race course is shorter).

BUT WAIT! Have you taken into account the CURVATURE OF THE EARTH?

Well, of course! Would you expect anything less from me?

A “Great Circle Route” shortens the distance you travel on the globe by taking into account the curvature of the Earth. However, because we are in the Northern Hemisphere, any Great Circle Route would curve DOWN, like a frown, not UP, like the Mass Pike. So, even with the curvature taken into account, the left lane is STILL shorter.

Here are some posts from other would-be answerers or commenters on the question.

Mike D says
whoa! I’ve been wondering this same thing for years!

Now you can rest easy, Mike D….

Kurt says
Don’t forget the Right lane at around exit 9 becomes the middle due to the addition of the NYC traffic. So the right lane would become that pesky middle lane. And if you try to go the other way, the right lane would dissappear as it is the exit lane for Exit 9 (Rt84) Don’t forget to keep that in mind while calculating that all knowing Shaun.

No worries. I take all factors into account. Even the gravitational constant. And the X-files (especially the episodes with cameos from current West Wing stars). Please note that we are only concerned with the “left-to-right” journey in this answer…

Patrick says
You’d be driving a longer distance in the right hand lane.

Our conclusions agree, Patrick. As a side note, Interstate 90 would continue beyond the MA border, across the country, and directly into Seattle. Connected by the same road! Ever drive on I-90?

The Question

Becky asks:

Follow-up question.

Given:
-Life on Earth is Carbon based.
-The second most common element in the earth’s crust is Silicon (28% by weight, Oxygen is first).
-Silicon Dioxide is the most common compound (42% by weight).
-Carbon and Silicon both have room for 4 electrons on their outer orbitals, so their affinity for electrons should be equal.

Question:
Why is life on Earth Carbon based instead of Silicon based?

(figures taken from http://education.jlab.org/glossary/abund_ele.html)

The Answer

Another question from the elegant, intelligent Becky. I relish the challenge.

The answer lies in the fact that carbon knows how to party and get along with others of its kind. Silicon is a poor partier and an angry drunk, so it gets left out of the life-shindig. Carbon is very comfortable hanging out in multiple configurations with other carbon molecules (chains, links, etc) – silicon, when put in the same configuration, tends to either fall apart or EXPLODE. While an exploding life form might be interesting, it’s likely to be short-lived.

Carbon likes to hang out in molecules of tens of thousands of atoms. Silicon, being kind of lame and boring, only hangs out at most with 6 other atoms of the same kind, and that’s only in the lab – being such big dorks and all, parties are beyond silicon’s ken.

Finally, carbon has chirility, or handedness. Most organic molecules form in left or right “handed” configurations – and silicon is a big ambidextrous loser. The chirility is what allows carbon molecules to form chains, which are required in organic compounds.

I hope this answers your question, Becky. Carbon likes to get out and party, and silicon stays at home and smells like rotten eggs.

The Question

Becky asks:

Shaun,

Being raised Roman Catholic, and attending a rather strict version of Sunday School, I had a lot of exposure to Christianity growing up. I’m also of a scientific, logical mind-set.

Keeping in mind we can never know anything for certain, there is overwhelming evidence of evolution that a biologist cannot deny. From my experience, the majority of things in science reject any form of intelligent design. Still, all the matter in the universe came from somewhere. Even the big bang couldn’t have started on it’s own.

So, my question is, is it hypocritical to believe that God created everything and also believe that humans evolved from apes?

The Answer

Becky, I believe this is the first time I’ve had a question in this realm. More often the questions are cut and dried, black and white, with answers ranging from the subtle to the gross, but this…this is belief, this is philosophy. And yet there is a teensy bit of research we can do here.

The Roman Catholic faith does not hold with a literal interpretation of the Bible in all cases. In addition, Catholic faith calls for the use of a combination of supernatural revelation in the Bible and natural revelation via the human mind. In the situation we are considering, this means that, as a Catholic, you are entirely within your belief structure when you consider the Creation story to be allegorical to a certain degree, and far from hypocritical when you consider the truth of science in this area and harmonize it with a Creator who got the ball rolling and created the rules under which the universe operates (such as evolution).

No hypocrisy here, Becky. Rest easy.

As a side note, let me just say that I am neither a theologian nor an expert – and that, if anyone finds the content of this answer to be contrary to their belief structure, be assured that I am neither attempting to convince anyone of anything nor advocating anything. To each their own.

The Question

Dear Shaun,

I have some burning questions about Halloween. I know the usual 2nd grade equivalent of All Hallow’s Eve, but I want to know more about where it originated and for what purpose. In addition, I’m particularly interested in how the transition from scary costumes (ghosts, bats) to less scary (Smurfette – what I am this year) and plain stupid (post-its, fish) came about. Further, what is the most popular candy given out on halloween? And moreso, what is the ettiquette for people living in apartments or top floors of houses? How are they supposed (are they?) logistically give out candy??

Yours,
Theresa.

The Answer

Wow, Theresa, you have somehow managed to sneak at least 3 questions into one. Bravo!

Scary costumes were the norm for Halloween until around the 70’s. Somehow, the 70’s were scary enough, and people decided that it might be a good idea to go goofy. Hence, He-Man made his appearance at Halloween. This was not a good move, since He-Man wasn’t much less frightening than the Grim Reaper himself, but it was a start.

The most popular candy in the past has always been that friendly, reliable Snickers. HOWEVER! Your question comes at an opportune time, since Snickers has been body-slammed from the top quite recently, not once, but TWICE! In 2004, Snickers was relegated to #2, as Candy Corn took the top slot. And THEN, to add insult to injury, in 2005 the Lemon Head took #1! Amazing!

One way that some high-rise apartment buildings handle Halloween is that they create a “list” of some kind where “residents” can sign “up” to “receive” Halloween “trick-or”-treaters.

Okay, done with the quotation marks. Sorry.

The “list” mechanism (My finger slipped! Honest!) is generally enough to get hordes of children into an apartment building, completely disregarding the list and banging on every door in the place, demanding sweets.

Generally, etiquette calls for residents of high-rise buildings to have candy available in a volume proportional to the resident’s floor. For example, a resident on floor 7 needs less candy than someone on the first floor. Keep in mind that the top floor is a kid magnet, so the same rules apply for the top floor as the bottom floor.

I hope this clears up some of the confusion you’ve been experiencing. It appears that you asked this question around Halloween of 2005. Hmm….have I been this lax with question answering?