Previously:
http://4-ch.net/dqn/kareha.pl/1350571235/
"Wretch," I cried, "thy God hath lent thee\by these angels he hath sent thee
Respite\respite and nepenthe, from thy memories of Lenore;
Quaff, oh quaff this kind nepenthe and forget this lost Lenore!"
Quoth the Raven "Nevermore.""Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil!\prophet still, if bird or devil!\
Whether Tempter sent, or whether tempest tossed thee here ashore,
Desolate yet all undaunted, on this desert land enchanted\
On this home by Horror haunted\tell me truly, I implore\
Is there\is there balm in Gilead?\tell me\tell me, I implore!"
Quoth the Raven "Nevermore.""Prophet!" said I, "thing of evil!\prophet still, if bird or devil!
By that Heaven that bends above us\by that God we both adore\
Tell this soul with sorrow laden if, within the distant Aidenn,
It shall clasp a sainted maiden whom the angels name Lenore\
Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore."
Quoth the Raven "Nevermore.""Be that word our sign of parting, bird or fiend!" I shrieked, upstarting\
"Get thee back into the tempest and the Night's Plutonian shore!
Leave no black plume as a token of that lie thy soul hath spoken!
Leave my loneliness unbroken!\quit the bust above my door!
Take thy beak from out my heart, and take thy form from off my door!"
Quoth the Raven "Nevermore."And the Raven, never flitting, still is sitting, still is sitting
On the pallid bust of Pallas just above my chamber door;
And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming,
And the lamp-light o'er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;
And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be lifted\nevermore!Calm down people, at this rate we will go to >>800 way too soon.
My butt smell good today.
I refuse to calm down.
I like bit butts and I cannot lie.
>>204 Let's not get complacent, though. We still need ~59 posts/day, and last time's 20 posts/day proved quite challenging.
goof butts
Do you KNOW what happens when you lose your LAST RUBY?
JEWS
Threw up till nothing would come out anymore. Feels good, man.
Quoth the budgie...
Chilling.
>>209
That means each of us has to post 12 times a day, I don't think it can be done.
Nomen urbanitatis (Sinice , pinyin: zì 'nomen styli', 'appellativum') est nomen ei tributum qui adultus fit, praeter nomen proprium. Sic enim agitur in terris affinibus in Asia Orientali: Sinis, Iaponia, Corea, Vietnamia.
Saulus Niinistö (Finnice: Sauli Väinämö Niinistö, natus 24 Augusti, 1948, Salae) est praeses Finniae. Officium eius incepit 1 Martii anno 2012, cum duodecimus praeses Finnicus factus esset. Ab anno 1987 usque ad annum 2003 et iterum ab anno 2007 usque ad annum 2011 delegatus parlametaris, annis 1994-2001 praeses partium suarum Kokoomus, annis 1996-2003 autem minister aerarii publici erat. Coniunx Sauli Niinistö est poetria Ioanna Haukio.
vc: lawghment
vc for >>219: lowghment
R(L[M)m
Niinistö iuris prudentiae in Universitate Turkuensi studebat et postquam actor causarum factus est anno 1977, officinam legistae habebat in patria Sala per fere decennium. Cursus politicus suus initium cepit, cum delegatus municipialis in Sala electus est anno 1976. In administratione municipali manebat usque ad 1992, tres annos etiam munere praesidis curiae civicae functus.
Niinistö parlamentum reliquit, cum praeses vicarius ab anno 2003 esset argentariae European Investment Bank. In comitiis praesidentalibus Finniae anni 2006 candidatus factionis Kokoomus fuit, sed in comitiis bipertitis tandem cladem accepit Dariae Halonen centesimis 48,2 contra 51,8; haec autem usque sex annos praesides manuit. Proximo anno delegatum parlamentarem iterum petivit et 60 563 votis, quae quantitas maxima est omnium temporum in comitiis parlamentariis, iterum est electus. 5 Februarii anno 2012 in comitiis praesidentialibus tandem votiis 62,6 centesimarum Petro Haavisto candidato secundo Niinistö factus est praeses Finniae.
Bayt Jiz (Arabic: بيت جيز) was a Palestinian Arab village situated on undulating land in the western foothills of the Jerusalem heights, 15 kilometers (9.3 mi) southwest of Ramla. In 1945, it had a population of 550. It was captured by Israeli forces in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War and its inhabitants fled the village.[5]
Nearby Khirbet Bayt Jiz has been claimed as the site of the Biblical Gizo and has been linked to the Crusader settlement of Gith, although the latter association was dubbed as doubtful by some historians.[6]
Since 1136, the village belonged to the canons of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.[7] By 1171, Gith was one of five villages within the Lydda diocese, in which the canons were permitted by the village bishop to have or build a church and control half the village's tithes.[8]
Bayt Jiz is not recorded in early Arabic sources.[6] According to local legend, the maqam ("sacred Muslim tomb") was built in 1334 to house the sarcophagus of Shaykh Zayd, a local sage. A stone with Arabic inscriptions was found near the maqam, attributing the building of the structure to a Mamluk commander named Sayf ad-Din Aqul. It is the only evidence of early Islamic activity in the village thus far.[9]
In 1883, the Palestine Exploration Fund's Survey of Western Palestine described the place, called Khurbet Beit Jiz, as having "traces of ruins and a sacred Mukam. To the south are caves. There are foundations and cisterns among the ruins. On the south-west, in Wady el Kharjeh, are a number of pits containing a perennial supply of good water."[10]
The modern village of Bayt Jiz was founded in the early 20th century.[6]
In the 1922 census of Palestine, conducted by the British Mandate authorities, Bait Jiz had a population of 203, all Muslims,[11] increasing in the 1931 census to 371, still all Muslims, in a total of 67 houses.[12]
It had a rectangular plan, narrow streets, and houses constructed of adobe and stone. The village center included a mosque, some shops, and a school built in 1947, shared with nearby Bayt Susin. Bayt Jiz's economy was based on agriculture, with the main crops being grains, figs, vegetables, almonds, and olives. A part of the surrounding land was grassland, enabling the villagers to raise sheep and goats.[5]
In 1945 the population was 550, all Arabs, while the total land area was 8,357 dunams, according to an official land and population survey.[2] Of this, a total of 6,529 dunums of village land was used for cereals, 36 dunums were irrigated or used for orchards,[13] while 29 dunams were classified as built-up public areas.[14]
On 11 January 1948, Kfar Uriah was attacked by Arabs who came through neighboring Beit Jiz and Khirbet Beit Far.[15]
According to Israeli historian Benny Morris, the residents of Bayt Jiz fled their village following an Israeli military assault against it on April 20, 1948. Nevertheless, Palestinian historian Aref al-Aref points out that the village had not been evacuated for the first assault of the Battle of Latrun that took place on May 22. He points out that the Israeli attack partly failed because the Israeli forces had received mistaken reports that the village had been evacuated. Consequently, they were surprised to encounter fierce resistance from the local militia as well as from Jordanian regulars in the Latrun sector who sent troops to the village.[16][17]
Bayt Jiz was occupied by the 7th Armored Brigade of the Haganah in the interval between the first and second assaults on Latrun in late May 1948.[18] A New York Times correspondent reported that the unsuccessful Israeli assault on Latrun spread to Bayt Jiz on May 25. He noted the battle around the village was the "biggest, single clash of the war to date". An Israeli army official announced the capture of Bayt Jiz on May 27,[19] but al-Aref puts it at May 30.[16]
A few days after, the Burma Road that crossed the village of Bayt Jiz was built by Israeli to counter the Latrun sector and to supply Jerusalem.[18]
Three Jewish settlements were built on village lands, including Har'el in 1948, Tzelafon in 1950, and Gizo in 1986. Palestinian historian Walid Khalidi described the remains of Bayt Jiz in 1992:
"The school is the only remaining landmark and is used as a recreation facility, although a fire observation tower has been added to it. A number of houses remain. Some are used for storage, others are deserted. One of the storage houses is a large, stone structure, with a flat roof and a three paneled, lancet-arched side window. Three of the deserted houses are two-story structures"Petersen, inspecting the place in 1996, found that the most distinctive extant building was the Maqam of Shayk Zaid.[20] It was a tall, square building, covered with a domical vault. On the north wall there is a low doorway on the eastern side. Directly opposite the entrance (on the southern wall), is a shallow (0.35 m deep) mihrab. There is a small window (0.4m wide) in the middle of the east wall, while the west wall has collapsed.[21][22]
The inhabitants of Bayt Jiz were entirely Muslim,[5] and in a 1922 survey, they amounted to 203.[11] In the 1931 British Mandate census there were 370 inhabitants[12] and by 1945, Sami Hadawi recorded a population of 550.[2] The projected population in 1948 was 638. According to Salman Abu Sitta, Palestinian refugees from Bayt Jiz and their descendants numbered 3,918 in 1998.[23]
Ant–fungus mutualism is a symbiosis seen in certain ant and fungal species, in which ants actively cultivate fungus much like humans farm crops as a food source. In some species, the ants and fungi are dependent on each other for survival. The leafcutter ant is a well-known example of this symbiosis.[1] A mutualism with fungi is also noted in some species of termites in Africa.[2]
Fungus-growing ants actively propagate, nurture and defend the basidiomycete cultivar.[3] In return, the fungus provides nutrients for the ants, which may accumulate in specialized hyphal-tips known as "gongylidia". In some advanced genera the queen ant may take a pellet of the fungus with her when she leaves to start a new colony.[4]
There are five main types of agriculture that fungus growing ants practice:[5] lower, coral fungi, yeast, generalized higher, and leafcutter agricultural systems. Lower agriculture is the most primitive system and is currently practiced by 80 species in 10 genera.[6][7] Coral-fungus agriculture is practiced by 34 species by a single derived clade within the genus Apterostigma.[7] The coral fungus farmers underwent a switch of cultivars between 10 and 20 million years ago to a nonleucocoprineacoeous fungus, which makes its choice of cultivar different from all other attines.[8][9] Yeast agriculture is practiced by 18 species of Cyphomyrmex rimosus. The C. rimosus group is hypothesized to have evolved growing fungus in a yeast form between 5 and 25 million years ago.[9] Generalized higher agriculture is practiced by 63 species in two genera and refers to the condition of highly domesticated fungus.[7] The fungi used in higher agriculture cannot survive without its agriculturalists to tend it and has phenotypic changes that allow for increased ease of ant harvesting.[9] Leafcutter agriculture, which is a more highly derived form of higher agriculture, is practiced by 40 species in two genera and has the most recent evolution, originating between 8 and 12 million years ago.[9] Leaf cutters use living biomass as the substrate to feed their fungi, whereas in all other types of agriculture, the fungus requires dead biomass.[9]
The ants of the Attini tribe (subfamily Myrmicinae) are obligatory fungicultivists. The Attini form twelve genera with over 200 species, which for the most part cultivate Leucocoprineae fungi of the tribe Lepiotaceae (Weber 1972; Chapela et al. 1994; Mueller et al. 2001)[2][3][10] These ants are typically subdivided into the glowerh and ghigherh Attines. One of the more distinguishing factors between these two subgroups is their respective cultivars and cultivar substrates. Lower Attines have less specialized cultivars that more closely resemble Leucocoprineae found in the wild and use gancestral substratesh composed of plant, wood, arthropod, and flower detritus. The higher Attines, on the other hand, use freshly cut grass and flowers as their fungi substrate (hence the common name gleafcutter antsh) and cultivate highly derived fungi (Schultzet al. 1995).[11] The cultivars of higher Attines often have growths called gongylidia\nutrient-rich structures designed for easy harvesting, ingesting, and feeding to larvae, while simultaneously serving as propagules for the fungi (Mueller et al. 2001, Mueller et al. 2005).[2][12]
There are additional symbiotic relationships that affect fungal agriculture. The fungus Escovopsis is a parasite in ant colonies, and the bacterium Pseudonocardia has a mutualistic relationship with ants. Pseudonocardia resides on the ants' integuments and assists in defending the ants from Escovopsis through the production of secondary metabolites.[13] In fact, some species of ants have evolved exocrine glands that apparently nourish the antibiotic-producing bacteria inside them.[14] A black yeast interferes with this mutualism. The yeast has a negative effect on the bacteria that normally produce antibiotics to kill the parasitic fungus and so may affect the ants' health by allowing the parasite to spread.[15]
Partner fidelity can be witnessed through vertical gene transmission of fungi when a new colony is begun.[16] First, the queen must mate with several males to inseminate her many eggs before she flies off to a different location to begin a new colony. As she leaves, she takes with her a cluster of mycelium (the vegetative portion of the fungus) and actually begins a new fungal garden at her resting point using this mycelium. This grows to become the new fungal farm complete with the genes of the original cultivar preserved for another generation of ants. The relationship between Attine ants and the Lepiotaceae fungus is so specialized that in many cases the Lepiotaceae is not even found outside of ant colony nests. It is clear that evolutionary pressure has been exerted on these ants to develop such an organized system in which to feed the fungus and continue its reproduction.
Studies done (with the concept of the Prisoner's Dilemma in mind) to test what further drives partner fidelity among species have shown that external factors are an even greater driving force. The effects of cheating ants (ants who did not bring plant biomass for fungal food) had a much smaller effect on the fitness of the relationship than when the fungi cheated by not providing gonglydia. Both effects were exacerbated in the presence of infection by escovopsis, resulting in close to a 50% loss in fungal biomass.[17] It is clear that the risk of infection from parasites is a driving external factor in keeping these two species loyal to one and other. Though external factors play a large role in maintaining fidelity between the mutualists, genetic evidence of vertical transmission of partner fidelity has been found among asexual, fungus cultivating ant species.[18] Factors such as vertical transmission do not play as strong a role as environmental factors in maintaining fidelity, as cultivar switching among ant species is not a highly uncommon practice.[16]
Given the exclusive New World distribution of the over 200 fungus-growing ant species,[12] this mutualism is thought to have originated in the basin of the Amazon rainforest some 50 – 66 million years ago. The species Cyatta abscondita is considered the most recent ancestor of all fungus-farming ants.[19]
Though the ants are monophyletic, their symbionts are not. They fall roughly into three major groups, only G1 having evolved gongylidia. Some G2 species grow long hyphae that form a protective cover over the nest. Those in G3 are paraphyletic, the most heteregenous, and form the most loose relationships with their cultivators.[3] Studies now show that the fungi themselves may not be completely dependent on the ants. The fungi were earlier thought to be propagated by ants purely through clonal (vegetative) means. However considerable genetic variation in the fungi suggests that this may not be the case.[20] It is hypothesized that fungi have evolved to make themselves more attractive to ant species through the development of enzymes that allow the ants to access nutrition in the fungal mass.[21]
While the vertical transmission of fungal cultivars[22] and strong host-symbiont specificity[20] might suggest a tight coevolutionary relationship, recent phylogenetic analyses suggest this is not the case. Multiple domestications of the same fungus, fungal escape from domestication, or cultivar switching could lead to the observed diffuse coevolutionary pattern.[23]
Well damn, this thread only needed one more post to page-width breaking quote off the front page, but that's the end of the article. I guess we are stuck with it.
This one's for Wik!
move your ass to shit on this gay cock
+800
I finished a bottle of shampoo
pingas
Work it!
l`bbgh`sn
Let me tell you about fluid dynamics, DQN.
Fluid dynamics is the dynamics of fluids. Fluids are things that flow, and dynamics is how things move around.
The first one is laminar flow, laminar meaning in layers.
The second one is turbulence. Turbulence is terrifying and doesn't make sense and will eat your brain.
More on that later.
A good demonstration of the difference is the way smoke rises from a lit cigarette.
Go watch a video of that now. Or, if you're feeling very daring, light one yourself.
You should observe that the smoke just above the end of the cigarette rises in straight or slightly curved lines, and doesn't move about suddenly or do anything particularly weird or unexpected.
That bit's laminar flow.
Above that, the smoke spreads out and begins turning in vortices. Vortices are parts of fluids which spin around.
The important thing to note is that it still doesn't do anything particularly weird or unexpected, but it's a lot harder to guess where it's going to flow.
(Actually, thanks to chaos theory, it can be literally impossible to guess where it's going to flow, but let's not worry about that just now)
Turbulent flow still conforms to all the same equations as laminar flow; it's just a different type of motion.
The fact it spins - and the way it spins - is very important.
Laminar flow can still have vortices, but turbulent flow has vortices containing other, smaller vortices, and vortex shedding, and fractals of vortices, and other such bizarre and terrifying things.
One of the really, deeply horrifying things about turbulence involves energy dissipation.
In theory, laminar flow always conserves energy. Gravitational potential energy can be converted to kinetic and suchlike, but that's about it.
Laminar flow can lose energy if you account for viscosity, which is basically how much the fluid resists being stretched.
penises
The amount of energy lost (or dissipated) is proportional to the viscosity, which is pretty obvious if you think about it.
If you take a laminar flow, with viscosity, and then slowly reduce the viscosity until it's zero, the energy dissipation also goes to zero.
If you do the same thing with turbulent flow, the energy dissipation doesn't go to zero.
So where is the energy going?
The physical interpretation is that the ever smaller vortices distribute the kinetic energy in all directions until you get to the molecular scale, where it's just heat.
But the above shows that even if real fluids weren't made of particles, turbulent flow would just keep shifting the energy about, on ever smaller scales, forever.
Sometimes I wonder if the molecular scale really is the hard limit for fluid dynamics, or if perhaps the molecules themselves are just little lumps bobbing about on the surface of some infinite scale, infinitely detailed ethereal fluid, and if the vortices keep spinning, smaller and smaller, faster and faster, even when they aren't really pushing matter around any more.
The thought genuinely frightens me, in a way that I can't put into words.