For Anastasia: How About My Love Life?

Anastasia asked: Can you pleas give me a reading about the prospect of my love life? Thx.

I can and just in time for the new year.

Past - Coins X - This is a card the talks about establishing financial security, the kind of thing you might have with retirement. Given that your question had to do with your love life, I'd interpret this card as an indication that your first priority in the past has been career, rather than love. It also argues that you have reached a certain level of success.

Present - Ace of Cups (reversed) - This card in the reversed position is often associated with poverty, which, despite the last card, might not be impossible in the economy. However, it doesn't have to be financial, but also the sense of longing, of dreams and wishes unfulfilled, of a life that's devoid of something necessary. I'd say this card says you're feeling that, along with struggling to start any meaningful relationship.

Future - Coins IV (reversed) - In the reversed position, this card is not hopeful for future relationships (your question). It's a card that speaks of suspicion and greed, the potential for being swindled and dissatisfied. To me, it argues that you move forward on a fine line, one where you either become so desperate for companionship you let a potential lover use and cheat you and/or you become so suspicious someone is planning to use you that you push them away. And, yes, it could be both, particularly if you are badly burned.

You're in a challenging position, driven by loneliness and dissatisfaction to find love and yet having a lifetime accomplishment at risk if someone betrays your trust. I can't tell you who to trust. I can tell you that, if anyone's love comes with a price tag, you are better off lonely (or, more appropriately, waiting). I can also say that, if you are open with your heart (if not your wallet), there are people out there worth trusting with it. If you find one, when you find one, your trust will be the key to having a healthy relationship. Likely, it will be tricky.

Good luck.

Read more...

For RavenLeeDraconis: Gun talk

RavenLeeDraconis asked: What do you think the most influential firearm of all time is and why? What do you think are the most important qualities in a firearm? The reason I ask this is that I know you don't really care about firearms, but I know you take your questions very seriously. If I ask this here, you'll give it the research and credence to really give my question serious thought. I know you're excellent at research and I think, if you answered this, I'd learn something I hadn't thought of before.

Leave it to my husband to leave me a humdinger. He's not wrong about guns, or, in this case firearms, which is sort of a subset of guns, those that can be carried about by a single person.. They're noisy and destructive. They serve no purpose but to kill other living things. That isn't to say that such things aren't necessary, but it's hard for me to love a unitasker in spite of (or because of) it's success at performing its task: killing.

I struggled with the answer to your question quite a bit. My first thought was that the most important and influential item regarding firearms was really a change in ammunition, but that didn't fit your question. Turns out, after more research, that my second choice, the Colt revolver, had a profound influence on ammunition as well.

Why a revolver? There were pistols before that and, of course, rifles and muskets before that. Even more primitive eastern and western weapons before that, but, in my opinion, the revolver did something very important that changed firearms forever - it enabled shooting several shots without reloading. That may sound minor, but, even during that same time frame, most guns were still muzzle loaders though breech loaders with paper cartridges taking over for the old powder and ball method, reloading and the vulnerability while doing so, were huge issues. There were other multi-shot weapons previously, but most involved multiple barrels and were cumbersome and largely impractical. There was already a flintlock revolver patented, but the interchangeable parts and machining processes Colt would introduce would make guns easier to obtain and more reliable than before.

Colts revolvers (and the many repeating handguns that followed) would allow "anyone" to have a gun, a reliable gun, without requiring a great deal of know-how, would allow a single person to carry about, in a convenient package, enough firepower to kill several people without ever being made vulnerable by reloading (a real issue with most muzzle loaders and even breech loaders at the time). The Colt's popularity did much to solidify the metal cartridge as the standard for ammunition.

Since then, of course, we've had many many weapons that shoot more and shoot them faster, with bigger and nastier bullets. But, in my opinion, Colt set the new bar where we weren't going to ever be satisfied with single shot weapons again, not when we could have many. It set the tone and standard (along with standard practices) that have carried forward into today. Revolvers are far less commonly used than they used to be, but they're still out there. And in use. That says a great deal about their staying power.

I can't give you a single attribute for a firearm. In general, key factors are (a) accuracy, (b) range, (c) firing speed, (d) magazine size/reloadability and, not least, (e) stopping power. That last, stopping power has to do with muzzle velocity (firearm and cartridge related), bullet size as well as bullet design. The ammunition can be as important as the gun in stopping power (if not more so), but there can be many other considerations for a firearm. For soldiers, weight, maintainability, reliability, and the ability to withstand different and harsh environments may be as important as the rest. Cops want guns that are accurate and won't leave them stranded while they reload, while a criminal might prefer a gun that shoots. A lot. Accuracy not withstanding.

Firearms can be very specialized and have been from the beginning. Ammunition has become so, too. Does this answer your question?

Read more...

Video Break

Something I never do is put in videos. One reason is that I rarely watch other people's other people's videos. Well, I'm having to take a hypocrisy break and embed some videos. Why? Because these are so cool.

You may or or may not know but I have a real fondness for vocal music, particularly well harmonized music. Well, my mother-in-law pointed me to this group called Straight no Chaser, a men's A Capella ground from Indiana University. Wow!

I'm starting with one they apparently sang in a random Hardy's, but there's some lovely staged stuff, too. Then, I'll be going to figure out how I can buy some of this. Incredible. Kudo's, gentlemen. Lovely!


Stand By Me


Carol of the Bells (and I never thought I'd admire an all-male rendition - I love the soprano part)


The Lion Sleeps Tonight


And this is my favorite version EVER of 12 Days of Christmas

Read more...

For Katrina: Tell Me About El Nino and La Nina

Katrina asked: Explain the difference between El Nino and El Nina and how are they different within each region of the USA?

Pretend I have ~ on top of the n's throughout, would you? El Nino and La Nina represent two aspects of the same phenomena, an oscillation in the Pacific Ocean characterized by pressure differences between Darwin, Australia and Tahiti and surface water cooling or heating in the Central and Eastern Pacific. It affects both the atmosphere and the ocean, and, to date, no one has entirely pinned down why it happens.

The aren't really two different things, but the same thing. It's called El Nino when the temperature goes up, the warm phase of the oscillation. It's called La Nina when the temperature drops, the cool phase of the oscillation. Although it is a periodic oscillation, it does not have a regular period and tends to manifest every two to seven years.

So what? Well, these heating and cooling patterns can have a profound effect on tropical storms, rainfall, and drought all around the rim of the Pacific. However, the effects are seen all over the world as a corresponding effect on Atlantic often occurs 12-18 months after the Pacific anomaly. The normal trade winds slow or flow backwards and other currents and weather patterns are disrupted.

In general and most directly, El Nino makes the Southern portion of the East Pacific wetter and warmer and the Northern and Western Pacific colder and dryer, as well as sending tropical storms in different directions, but there can be effects on Europe as well, and the number of Atlantic tropical storms is reduced because of wind shear. Fishing, as currents are disrupted and water temperatures (and nutrients) are anomalous, can be severely impacted.

For La Nina, the effects are kind of opposite. Where El Nino makes it dryer, La Nina makes it wetter and vice versa. I've included some graphical representations of the effects for the interested.

Read more...

For Patricia Rockwell: Have I Been Visited By Martians?

Patricia Rockwell said: Flit suggested that you might have an answer about the Martians that landed on the frozen lake behind my house yesterday. There were three perfect circles in the snow, set as if at corners of an imaginary equilateral triangle. That would be flying saucers, right?

I don't like to give definitive answers when the possibilities are so diverse (and the data so sparse). I actually thought you received some fine answers when you posted your question, including, particularly, the pipes delivering air to keep fish alive.

Here's the thing, the tidy rings sound man-made. Not sure what the mechanism is though some unknown heating or water agitation seems logical.

So, why, with all the possibilities am I not saying Martians? First of all, I don't have any reason to believe there are Martians. Mars has an atmosphere less than 1/100 as dense as our own as well as being way colder. It's much like a world atop Mount Everest except perhaps a bit colder and with less atmosphere. Life *might* exist there, but I wouldn't bet on it, even though there are signs of water on Mars. There is absolutely no sign of the kind of technology that would make a civilization that could support space travel from the planet possible (let alone likely).

Now, if not Martians, could it be some other alien craft? Technically possible (though our radar system mean they must have some pretty sneaky craft). The thing is, though, why would they land on a lake? Surely, if they have such sophisticated technology as to evade our radar, they can pick a landing surface intelligently. A frozen lake sounds like a bad bet.

In my opinion.

Read more...

For Jeff King: The Limits of Time and Space

Jeff King asked: If space has no ending, how is it believed that our universe is the only one in existence?

Who says there is? I don't and don't believe there is (depending on how one defines "universe") only one or that the term "ending" or "limits" means anything with regards to it. The universe is effectively the extent of existence that we see and believe exists. We don't know what, if any, boundaries there are to it.


There are several ways of tackling this question, which would actually demand multiple posts, not the least of which is the extent and meaning of "infinity." If you want that, ask about infinity and I'll go through it in its own post. There's also the whole concept of multiverses and that also deserves it's own post.

Today, I'm going to talk about what we know, what we surmise about the "universe." Merriam-Webster's first definition of "universe" is: the whole body of things and phenomena observed or postulated. That's an important distinction. The universe is everything we can detect/see/etc. and everything we can surmise exists.

What does that mean? Well, first, it means that what we think of as the universe is based on the parts of the universe we can see or detect and then, added to that, what we surmise exists. That means that we are (a) limited in our view of the universe by our observational abilities, limits that may not exist in the actual reality (which we can't see all of) and (b) what we surmise to be beyond the bounds of our detecting ability is based on the part we can see, which, again, may not exist in the actual reality. The universe as we "perceive" it, in other words, may not have much or anything to do with the actual "universe."

Confused? Let me try an analogy. Let's say, someone is a clown fish in an anemone in a coral reef. For such a creature, the "universe" is limited to the small area of the coral reef around him. Even if his reef sits on the edge of the Pacific and looks out over the huge expanse of the ocean, he has no way of imagining the huge and diverse spots with dark arctic depths beneath the ice to the north and south or lava heated vents in the darkest corners of the ocean's depths, the huge monstrous creatures that swim in other areas of the ocean. Nor does he have a frame of reference for rivers and lakes and other freshwater ecologies. His idea of the world/universe is limited by the extent he can see and understand. Even if his anemone is in a big aquarium and people wander by, he is still limited.

He has no real way of understanding that the world outside his little world has air, even if he sees us breathing air and walking about. His world is water so that's his presumption about the rest of the universe. His world is warm and salty and filled with light. It also looks like something without limits as, indeed, the ocean would be for a wee fish.

We have huge telescopes and detectors and know a great deal about things thousands, even millions of light-years away. It's infinity as far as we are concerned. But, we have no way of knowing if there are rivers and lakes and vents and trenches and islands and whatever beyond the extent of our detection ability.

What I'm saying is, we don't know the extents of reality or the nature of its extents. Does it have boundaries? We haven't found them so far. Is there only one universe? Well, universe is as much a part of our minds as it is reality and, far across the expanses of space, there might be other intelligent dreamers imagining a universe as different from ours as the top of Mount Everest is from the coral reef (if not more). Reality likely includes both of these pockets of universe and who knows what else besides.

Did that help?

Read more...

For Krys: What About Bryan's Career?

Krys asked: hi stephanie... i hav a question regarding bryan's career life, is he heading the correct path? or is he goin thru struggles?

Something that would help. If you're asking a question for someone else, let me know your relationship. If I'm confused, it doesn't seem like my cards would be much help. Still, I'll see what I get.

Past - Coins V (reversed) - From this card, I would say that Bryan has had some stressful times in the past, where prospects looked bleak and worry over money was overwhelming.

Present - Cups I - Although this card is often associated with emotions, it still fits here as abundance and fulfillment, especially after a time of anxiety and need. Hopefully, this is a card of finding the right path after stumbling, but let's see what the next card says.

Future - Swords I- There are some aspects of this card that can denote dark shadows, but, overall, this is a card of triumph and success, usually through one's own abilities (especially smarts). From this card, I'd deduce that he was indeed on a path that can lead to success particularly suited to him.

Here's hoping that the cards I've pulled are pertinent to whomever Bryan is.

Read more...