Joe answers five questions that he wondered aloud to himself throughout the month.
1. What was Muggsy Bogues' deal, i.e. was he legitimately short, or just shorter than other NBA players?
I wasn't really "into" sports in the '90s, and really the only reason I was aware of Muggsy Bogues' existence was because of Space Jam. And that's a cartoon, so, like, who knew whether they were exaggerating Bogues' height or what.
But no, he really was that short. At five-foot-three, he was and is the shortest NBA player in history. I myself am thirteen inches taller than him! And, funny enough, the dude who was then the tallest person in NBA history, Manute Bol (7'7), was on the Bullets with him. Here's a good picture.
What's crazy is that, despite the insane height difference between Muggsy Bogues and literally everyone he played basketball with, the dude by all accounts was an all-star athlete. He's still in the Top 20 for highest assists-per-game average all-time. In '93-'94, he was averaging a double-double per game. Dude could jump 44 inches into the air, and even at that height, could almost dunk the ball.
I don't think we'll ever see someone Bogues' height in the NBA ever again. But you never know. I love learning about weird shit like this re: sports. The daily grind of being a sports fan is too much for me, and I usually dip out more often than not. But reading about some 5'3 dude in the '90s who was still making the occasional block and scoring 11 points per game, still, despite (as he put it in the title of his autobiography) living "in the land of giants"? That pulls me back in and gets me excited.
2. Why did Brisk ice tea always make my mouth feel dry??
I wasn't really "into" sports in the '90s, and really the only reason I was aware of Muggsy Bogues' existence was because of Space Jam. And that's a cartoon, so, like, who knew whether they were exaggerating Bogues' height or what.
But no, he really was that short. At five-foot-three, he was and is the shortest NBA player in history. I myself am thirteen inches taller than him! And, funny enough, the dude who was then the tallest person in NBA history, Manute Bol (7'7), was on the Bullets with him. Here's a good picture.
What's crazy is that, despite the insane height difference between Muggsy Bogues and literally everyone he played basketball with, the dude by all accounts was an all-star athlete. He's still in the Top 20 for highest assists-per-game average all-time. In '93-'94, he was averaging a double-double per game. Dude could jump 44 inches into the air, and even at that height, could almost dunk the ball.
I don't think we'll ever see someone Bogues' height in the NBA ever again. But you never know. I love learning about weird shit like this re: sports. The daily grind of being a sports fan is too much for me, and I usually dip out more often than not. But reading about some 5'3 dude in the '90s who was still making the occasional block and scoring 11 points per game, still, despite (as he put it in the title of his autobiography) living "in the land of giants"? That pulls me back in and gets me excited.
2. Why did Brisk ice tea always make my mouth feel dry??
This was something I haven't thought about in maybe 20 years, even though it was for some reason important to me when I was a kid. Do they still sell Brisk iced tea? Probably. If they do, though, it's way less prevalent than it was in the '90s (or I'm spending significantly less time in the sugared drinks aisle at the supermarket). This was something I always said about Brisk: I disliked it because it made my mouth have this really weird, dry aftertaste. I forget if this was something that only I felt or if it was a common occurrence. It's been decades since I've had Brisk iced tea to drink at all, so who knows.
Thinking about it now, though, and I can still taste whatever that was. Well, what was it? Some explanations say that there are tannins in strong teas that can up the astringency levels in your mouth, so maybe Brisk had tannins? Could also be artificial sweeteners or citric acid causing the dryness. But it's probably just something to do with what type of tea leaves are used, how many tannins are in there, and that particular combo in Brisk specifically that got my goat. I don't plan on testing the theory any time soon.
Thinking about it now, though, and I can still taste whatever that was. Well, what was it? Some explanations say that there are tannins in strong teas that can up the astringency levels in your mouth, so maybe Brisk had tannins? Could also be artificial sweeteners or citric acid causing the dryness. But it's probably just something to do with what type of tea leaves are used, how many tannins are in there, and that particular combo in Brisk specifically that got my goat. I don't plan on testing the theory any time soon.
3. Can you build a car from scratch???
I have no interest in cars or building a car or honestly even driving a car at this point. I would describe my relationship with cars as antagonistic at best. And yet still I spend a decent amount of time in cars, and so of course my mind is going to wander a bit from time to time. Say I had unlimited money, unlimited time, and unlimited resources, both equipment-wise and knowledge-wise (from books or from other people), could I legitimate start with scrap metal and build my own car that could legally and safely drive on a public road?
Even in this hypothetical, in which all of a sudden I know where the pieces go and where to buy those pieces and have the money to buy those pieces and so on, I think the big trip-up is going to be rules and law. Like, I'm assuming that there is a regulatory body somewhere that has to say "Yes, this car is fit for the road." Some guy on Quora said that he built a car, and that an engineer had to test it for two days on a stress track, whatever the fuck that means.
Reddit says the laws vary by state, so I googled PA states laws regarding car kits (to get me pointed in the right direction). Sure enough, here is a handy cheat sheet from our "GOOD FRIENDS" at PennDOT. It really is as simple as getting it tested, and keeping your documentation in order. I wonder how many cars fail inspection, and what it would take to fail. Just one screw loose? Or would the car have to burst into flames for it to fail? Probably the former, but just in case... I'm taking the bus.
Even in this hypothetical, in which all of a sudden I know where the pieces go and where to buy those pieces and have the money to buy those pieces and so on, I think the big trip-up is going to be rules and law. Like, I'm assuming that there is a regulatory body somewhere that has to say "Yes, this car is fit for the road." Some guy on Quora said that he built a car, and that an engineer had to test it for two days on a stress track, whatever the fuck that means.
Reddit says the laws vary by state, so I googled PA states laws regarding car kits (to get me pointed in the right direction). Sure enough, here is a handy cheat sheet from our "GOOD FRIENDS" at PennDOT. It really is as simple as getting it tested, and keeping your documentation in order. I wonder how many cars fail inspection, and what it would take to fail. Just one screw loose? Or would the car have to burst into flames for it to fail? Probably the former, but just in case... I'm taking the bus.
4. What is the math behind bowling a 300, like where does that number come from????
Everyone once in a while, I ask a question in this semi-regular column that probably seems laughably simple to everyone else, and really is only asked here because of one simple misunderstanding. Once I clear the misunderstanding, I regret the question. So be it!
I wasn't a regular bowler at any stage of my life. I've probably gone to the bowling alley three times in the past twelve years. But in grade school, it seemed to be a birthday party idea that popped up among my friend group more often than not. I would say that I've probably been bowling 40 times in my life. I broke a triple-digit score exactly one of those times (that's 40 trips times an average of 2.5 games per trip, so one out of one hundred games).
In other words, I have no aspirations toward bowling greatness, and a zero-percent chance of every bowling a 300. But I have been in bowling alleys enough times to at least be aware of the existence of the 300 game. And, I know that strikes and spares are 10 points plus additional points in the next shot(s). So what was the misconception?
At some point, I was told that if you get a strike, the next frame counts toward that strike's total (and a spare meant that the first half of the next frame counted toward that total). Which is not technically wrong in many cases, especially for someone like me. If I roll a strike in the first frame, and then a 6 and a 2 in the second frame, then we add the 6 and the 2 to the 10 and that strike in the first frame ends up being worth 18 points.
But what I was missing for all these years up until right this fucking second is that it's not just the two shots in the next frame that are added to the strike, it's the next two shots total. Which means that if you get a strike in the first frame, and then a strike in the second frame, then the second shot added to that first strike is going to be the first (or only) shot in the third frame. So then that means that the first strike could be worth as much as 30 points. I never knew the difference because the chances of me getting three strikes in a row were basically nil.
And then of course there's the whole issue with the final frame, but that was never my question. Yes, I know that if you hit a strike in the tenth frame, then you get two extra shots, which could be strikes as well. I guess the only thing to remember here is that those two bonus strikes don't necessarily act like regular strikes. They aren't 10+x points. They are just extra points added to that original strike in the tenth frame. And that original strike will be worth 30 points like all the others if you get three strikes total in the tenth frame.
The question that will never be answered is: did someone give me bad information at some point in my youth, or was I just at an age where I would misunderstand something like that, and the misunderstanding stuck until I was deep into adulthood?
In other words, I have no aspirations toward bowling greatness, and a zero-percent chance of every bowling a 300. But I have been in bowling alleys enough times to at least be aware of the existence of the 300 game. And, I know that strikes and spares are 10 points plus additional points in the next shot(s). So what was the misconception?
At some point, I was told that if you get a strike, the next frame counts toward that strike's total (and a spare meant that the first half of the next frame counted toward that total). Which is not technically wrong in many cases, especially for someone like me. If I roll a strike in the first frame, and then a 6 and a 2 in the second frame, then we add the 6 and the 2 to the 10 and that strike in the first frame ends up being worth 18 points.
But what I was missing for all these years up until right this fucking second is that it's not just the two shots in the next frame that are added to the strike, it's the next two shots total. Which means that if you get a strike in the first frame, and then a strike in the second frame, then the second shot added to that first strike is going to be the first (or only) shot in the third frame. So then that means that the first strike could be worth as much as 30 points. I never knew the difference because the chances of me getting three strikes in a row were basically nil.
And then of course there's the whole issue with the final frame, but that was never my question. Yes, I know that if you hit a strike in the tenth frame, then you get two extra shots, which could be strikes as well. I guess the only thing to remember here is that those two bonus strikes don't necessarily act like regular strikes. They aren't 10+x points. They are just extra points added to that original strike in the tenth frame. And that original strike will be worth 30 points like all the others if you get three strikes total in the tenth frame.
The question that will never be answered is: did someone give me bad information at some point in my youth, or was I just at an age where I would misunderstand something like that, and the misunderstanding stuck until I was deep into adulthood?
5. How do you get the two different numbers for blood pressure, and what do those numbers mean?????
This has become a topic of discussion in my household recently, mainly because my life partner's blood pressure is up for mysterious reasons, and no amount of low-salt dieting makes it budge, and her response to these types of stressors is to buy equipment from Amazon, and so we now have a blood pressure monitor in the house that beeps and speaks in robotic ESL tones. I don't have any issues with blood pressure myself, but I find myself wondering how it works, and how it's measured. (Pam is a great medical professional, so great that I really don't understand anything she says when she tries to explain shit like this, so here I am.)
First, very briefly—what is blood pressure? It's the pressure that the blood puts on the arteries when its pumping through the body. The danger of high blood pressure is that it could damage those arteries, which means that the blood is pumping through at a slower rate, which means that the heart is getting less oxygen at a slower pace, which eventually causes heart disease. You don't want that.
To answer the actual question, there are two numbers in a blood pressure measurement. The top one is your systolic blood pressure, and the bottom one is your diastolic blood pressure. I've been told those terms before, but what I struggle with is what they mean. Because all I get when I try to search for this kind of stuff is what the "normal" levels of each are. I'm interested in the why, though. Why is 120/80 normal? What the fuck are "120" and "80" even referring to?
To answer the actual question, there are two numbers in a blood pressure measurement. The top one is your systolic blood pressure, and the bottom one is your diastolic blood pressure. I've been told those terms before, but what I struggle with is what they mean. Because all I get when I try to search for this kind of stuff is what the "normal" levels of each are. I'm interested in the why, though. Why is 120/80 normal? What the fuck are "120" and "80" even referring to?
It's taking me a weirdly long time to find out the information here. Okay, there is plenty of info about systolic being the pressure when the heart contracts (and pumps blood through the arteries), and diastolic being the pressure when the heart relaxes (and pulls blood through from the veins). But why 120? Where does that number come from when we are measuring the "pressure" in the artery when the heart contracts? That's what I'm having trouble with.
The number is mmHg. What's that? "Millimeters of mercury." It says here that, before fancy blood pressure monitors were invented, there would literally be a tube of mercury, and it would rise a certain number of mm depending on how high the pressure was in the blood. And even though they don't use mercury anymore because it's dangerous, the unit of measurement is still used, basically because those are the numbers that people have always used. There are easier units, such as Pascals, but people would get too confused if they here that their systolic blood pressure is 15998.7 Pascals. Here's a video of a mercury cylinder used to measure pressure.
Any further into the depths of the hows and whys of measurement and I start to get confused, but I think I'm satisfied here. You don't want high blood pressure because it damages arteries. You measure blood pressure to check to make sure your arteries aren't at risk. The unit of measurement is millimeters of mercury. It's called that because they used to literally see how far mercury would be pushed up a cylinder to measure that pressure.
There are plenty of other questions I could go into at this juncture, but where do you think you are? This isn't a medical blog. This is a blog about listening to music and farting emo nostalgia.
The number is mmHg. What's that? "Millimeters of mercury." It says here that, before fancy blood pressure monitors were invented, there would literally be a tube of mercury, and it would rise a certain number of mm depending on how high the pressure was in the blood. And even though they don't use mercury anymore because it's dangerous, the unit of measurement is still used, basically because those are the numbers that people have always used. There are easier units, such as Pascals, but people would get too confused if they here that their systolic blood pressure is 15998.7 Pascals. Here's a video of a mercury cylinder used to measure pressure.
Any further into the depths of the hows and whys of measurement and I start to get confused, but I think I'm satisfied here. You don't want high blood pressure because it damages arteries. You measure blood pressure to check to make sure your arteries aren't at risk. The unit of measurement is millimeters of mercury. It's called that because they used to literally see how far mercury would be pushed up a cylinder to measure that pressure.
There are plenty of other questions I could go into at this juncture, but where do you think you are? This isn't a medical blog. This is a blog about listening to music and farting emo nostalgia.
No comments:
Post a Comment