Things you should know by now, but only just discovered

Kerbal Space Program-initiated rabbit hole I’ve been falling down the last while....

What I knew before: full moon = opposite side of Earth from sun, new moon = same side as sun. Eclipses = when all three bodies are aligned.

So why don’t we see eclipses every month?

What I’ve learned part 1: reason those full and new moons so rarely become solar or lunar eclipses = Moon orbit is offset 5 degrees which explains why those three objects are so infrequently directly in line with each other, and that orbit has 18-year procession which explains why the dates and visible locations vary so much when eclipse dates are consulted.

What I’ve learned part 2: those 5 degrees = not offset from Earth’s equator but instead 5 degrees from the ecliptic, the plane on which Earth and the other planets sit. This explains why the moon, exactly opposite of how the sun is visible, is higher in the sky in winter and stays closer to the horizon in summer.

Here’s a great video on #1

Random link for #2
http://sky-lights.org/2019/12/02/qa-...

Stele wrote:

WTF.

Going to have to pay attention to when I sneeze just to see.

My wife sneezes every time she does yoga and is in the basic pose of Sun Salutation A. Only the first time though, so the rest nine repetitions are sans sneezing.

Keithustus wrote:

Moon stuff

Thank you! Every time I think about it, it is not a good time to look it up and now I finally have some form of a basic understanding.

Cool is not the agreed upon best colour temperature. Warm is the first choice. Neutral is the second. Cool is disqualified! Damn.

Our default TV presets mostly range between C20 to C30 apart from Cinema, and ISF, which were Warm 2. It irritates me that this alternates between a W50 to C50 adjustable slider, to a choice of Cool 3, Cool 2, Cool 1, Neutral, Warm 1, Warm 2, Warm 3, for select presets. (We have an LG TV.)

I spent a few hours looking up as much as I could find on colour temperature. Curiosity demanded! Only to fall into a display settings rabbit hole. Super Resolution! Dynamic Contrast! Gamma! Colour Gamut!

I have since tinkered most settings to the warmer side. It does look more colour accurate, and it is easier on the eye.

Do we have such a thread? I'm still interested!

There's a help me buy a TV thread.

Recently learned there are four sequels to a favorite film of mine, Starship Troopers, you know, that thoughtful sci-fi bugfest by Paul Verhoeven (Robocop, Total Recall (1990), Basic Instinct....) that only follows the Heinlein novel a bit? I had only seen the first sequel before this week, now fixed. So I figured I’d provide brief thoughts on each. As an overall warning however, whereas the original had questionable acting at times to introduce an homage level of camp, all of the sequels have a lot of legitimately terrible dialogue, characterization, and performance. The effects also don’t hold up. Your enjoyment may vary. Most sadly, there is no Clancy Brown in any of them.

IMAGE(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5e/66/16/5e66163a26570ccf03039a59416efb77.jpg)
Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation (2004)
No, don’t do it. It hardly fits into the world at all. Skip.

IMAGE(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/76/Starship_Troopers_3_Marauder.jpg/220px-Starship_Troopers_3_Marauder.jpg)
Starship Troopers 3: Marauder (2008)
The last live action film. Could be a worthwhile watch if they had edited out some atrocious acting and effects. Decent ending that moves the film series much closer to the book.

IMAGE(https://target.scene7.com/is/image/Target/GUEST_a15cdb47-786c-4ebb-b5d3-7e51e7cecf36?wid=488&hei=488&fmt=pjpeg)
Starship Troopers: Invasion (2012)
The first animated film, and yes they still really leveraged the nudity/shower stuff that had been impressively egalitarian in the original, but is just weird here. Storywise, just watch the second half, as they advance the world nicely. Includes “Johnny Rico” protagonist but not Casper van Dien, which is jarring.

IMAGE(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/910BKOJ3L0L._SL1500_.jpg)
Starship Troopers: Traitor of Mars (2017)
Probably the most watchable of the sequels from a production standpoint, but the story is pretty cliched. It’s also the only sequel set directly after its predecessor. Advances the main characters well enough but not the overall world, ending from a practical perspective a reset button on all the sequels, but with the main characters ranked up.

....
And yet I still like the world enough to be satisfied to have watched these newer three even with all the cringeworthy scenes. And now I just heard of a TV series called Roughnecks. Terrible terrible or terrible good? It’s on my queue.

My fave cover is #2 because it looks like they had to Photoshop the helmets onto promo shots of the actors.

Yeah I remember one direct to video (DVD?) sequel. Had no idea they kept pumping out more junk.

Keithustus wrote:

And now I just heard of a TV series called Roughnecks. Terrible terrible or terrible good? It’s on my queue.

I'd say it's actually pretty good. You do have to get past the character models being character models rather than anything based on actual faces, and the default weapons sounding odd.

A botched production setup involving multiple production houses, syndicated scheduling demands, and different modeling formats meant that the final 3 episodes, which would have together served as the series climax and finale, never got made. Clancy Brown does reappear as Sgt. Zim, though, and he and the surviving cast get some memorably good lines in what ends up being the series closer.

Starship Troopers is an interesting film because, as a kid, I thought it was just a mindless action movie full of pretty people. As an adult, I see the satiate Paul Verhoeven was going for which makes for a much more interesting watch. The sequels (all of which I've seen thank you Blockbuster employee perks) are completely tone deaf, low budget cash grabs. The second movie's guns didn't even have muzzle flash, just light bulbs that they cut around. The only worse case of sequel-itis I've seen were the straight to DVD Jarhead movies.

Grenn wrote:

the straight to DVD Jarhead movies.

Hol’ up a minute.....!
Big fan of the book so.....uh....thanks...I guess.

Edit: it’s a whole sad industry!

Between endless Land Before Time entries (the franchise made it to XIII: The Wisdom of Friends),

That stuff probably worked better when there were rental stores to browse. Kids see another dinosaur movie and have to watch it.

Sure, but even for adults and even now on streaming services, just as I just watched all the crap Starship Troopers sequels. Scorpion King sequels, Death Race sequels, Ace Ventura films without Jim Carrey....probably every film lover is susceptible to the right films being sequeled to death. I actually enjoyed that article pretty well. It talks about the perpetual social media presence that spurs interest, and that some of these crap sequels actually do well theatrically outside the U.S.

It's like Sonic the Hedgehog. The sequels have been garbage for decades, but they still turn a profit!

Keithustus wrote:

Starship Troopers: Traitor of Mars (2017)
Probably the most watchable of the sequels from a production standpoint, but the story is pretty cliched. It’s also the only sequel set directly after its predecessor. Advances the main characters well enough but not the overall world, ending from a practical perspective a reset button on all the sequels, but with the main characters ranked up.

Wait, Dina Meyer's character died in the first movie.

It’s sci-fi.....plenty of ways to reintroduce a dead character / actress.

Method for this film:

Spoiler:

She is a psychic projection.

It's so weird that they used the Alliance helmets from Firefly in all those Starship Troopers movies.

maverickz wrote:

It's so weird that they used the Alliance helmets from Firefly in all those Starship Troopers movies.

It’s kinda like how Buffy the Vampire Slayer kept beating up demons that looked suspiciously like Babylon 5’s Narns.

Danjo Olivaw wrote:

My fave cover is #2 because it looks like they had to Photoshop the helmets onto promo shots of the actors.

They really did a terrible job. I guess that keeps the budget cheap though.

Via Alexa this morning:

A group of crows is called a "murder" which I knew. But what I didn't know is that a group of owls is called a "parliament" and a group of flamingos is called a "flamboyance."

PaladinTom wrote:

Via Alexa this morning:

A group of crows is called a "murder" which I knew. But what I didn't know is that a group of owls is called a "parliament" and a group of flamingos is called a "flamboyance."

Every type of bird has it's own collective noun. Some have several.

Some of them are great:
A screech of gulls.
A charm of hummingbirds.
A mischief of magpies.
A huddle of penguins.

Jonman wrote:
PaladinTom wrote:

Via Alexa this morning:

A group of crows is called a "murder" which I knew. But what I didn't know is that a group of owls is called a "parliament" and a group of flamingos is called a "flamboyance."

Every type of bird has it's own collective noun. Some have several.

Some of them are great:
A screech of gulls.
A charm of hummingbirds.
A mischief of magpies.
A huddle of penguins.

A murder of crows is my absolute favorite.

syzygy is not a typo, and it means "a conjunction or opposition, especially of the moon with the sun."

Chairman_Mao wrote:

syzygy is not a typo, and it means "a conjunction or opposition, especially of the moon with the sun."

It's also a real winner in Scrabble, but be prepared to defend it.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

syzygy is not a typo, and it means "a conjunction or opposition, especially of the moon with the sun."

It's also a real winner in Scrabble, but be prepared to defend it.

A quick search on Merriam Webster's website should convince most people.

I knew I had seen that word before: It's also the title of an episode of The X-Files.

bobbywatson wrote:

I knew I had seen that word before: It's also the title of an episode of The X-Files.

That's exactly what I was going to say. If I remember correctly, it is the episode in which some celestial alignment (perhaps the moon and the sun?) gives temporary powers to a couple of teenagers. Or something along those lines.

Yeah, my understanding from context was that it's whenever two or more celestial bodies are in alignment with the body they mutually orbit around. The "opposition" part, and "especially of the moon with the sun" (which throws out my "mutual orbit" understanding) parts are new to me, but are certainly in the New Oxford American Dictionary (which has that exact definition). I suppose "opposition" means there is a mutual orbit and they're on opposite sides of their shared gravity well.

IIRC, that was part of 2001 - the moon monolith sent out a signal when the Earth & Sun were in syzygy.

I always assumed that 'dropping the beat' meant that part of the song where the beat disappears for a while, after which the song builds back up to its climax. Apparently it means the exact opposite

dejanzie wrote:

I always assumed that 'dropping the beat' meant that part of the song where the beat disappears for a while, after which the song builds back up to its climax. Apparently it means the exact opposite :lol:

In electronic dance music (EDM) there is often a subtle intro, during which, the drugged out party people dance in a more subdued manner, allowing their anticipation to slowly build up and up and up until... THE BEAT DROP!! AKA the drop.

In other forms of pop music a dropped beat can be a way to describe an odd time signature. In 4/4 time, the feel is like counting to four over and over. It’s the most common time signature. 7/4 is like a measure of 4/4 followed by a measure 3/4. So in 7/4 it’s like counting to 4 then counting to 3 over and over. The feel is like 4/4 with a missing beat every other measure.

In some traditional American folk music, there are dropped bets that happen less frequently. Like maybe the last measure of every verse section is a measure of 3/4, giving it a feel of a missing beat. But rather than saying, “the last measure of every verse is 3/4 rather than 4/4.” You could just say, “At the very end of the verse there’s a dropped beat.”

In contrast there's the rare and elusive reverse beat drop, which master magicians can use to make an audience clap properly: