The 2011 Japanese quake was a 9.0 on the Richter, but only reached IX on the Mercalli.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercalli_intensity_scale
Also if anyone knows of a better sub to ask this, I can try there too.
Thanks!
Hello
Does anyone have access to ESDU 85020 - "Characteristics of atmospheric turbulence near the ground. Part II: single point data for strong winds (neutral atmosphere)", I suppose it has the data for power law length scale but I have neither proof nor access to confirm; reason being:
I have been trying to find out how to calculate the power law of turbulent intensity and length scale as in aboshosha(2015) [https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2015.04.004].
But methods have usually not given three-dimensional length scales and experimental results have not provided a power law.
I find that to be strongly hampering the application of the turbulent inflow method CDRFG, a most important point in my undergraduate dissertation
This is a TIL for me. My wife and I have been ripping through multiple pods per day ever since someone gifted us a Nespresso for a wedding present over a year ago. Often Iโll have an afternoon or evening pick-me-up of Solelio under the logic that itโs only a 2/10. My brother enlightened me on this yesterday. No wonder I canโt sleep. Iโm an idiot.
Just in case anyone else is as clueless as us, now you know!
Additionally: How is rigidity of the Earth calculated? Curious from the earthquake thread earlier today, thanks!
It goes: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5(L), 5(U), 6(L), 6(U), 7
I know that everyone in Japan understands this but I can't stop getting that annoyance with it.
Maybe they should change 5(lower) to 5, 5(upper) to 6, 6(lower) to 7 and 6(upper) to 8.
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9... much nicer. And probably will cause less confusion after a brief transition period.
I think I have OCD so I'm sure this wouldn't annoy many people but it frustrates me.
We often refer to a 1-10 scale when we talk about intensity of our climaxes. I'm wondering, should we create a standardized scale? That way, we can communicate better the effectiveness of our treatments. Here is my proof-of-concept scale:
10 - Prostate Super-O
9 - Normal orgasm
8 - Near-normal orgasm
7 - Orgasm occurs, but may seem premature and without adequate build-up
6 - A moderately strong orgasm, again incomplete in some aspect
5 - A solid partial orgasm, deficit in some autonomic, cognitive or emotional aspects of orgasm
4 - Definite alteration of consciousness, but orgasm is weak and unsatisfying, leaves something to be desired
3 - A glimmer of a normal orgasm, slight alteration of consciousness
2 - Contractions are mildly pleasurable, but no alteration of consciousness
1 - Non-pleasurable but not painful
0 - Painful and non-pleasurable
What are your thoughts on this? Would you reword any of the levels? Or do you have a completely different scale in mind? Should 10 be the typical, normal orgasm, or should it be reserved for extraordinary orgasms that involve the prostate? Especially those of you who have had partial orgasms in the middle of the scale (3-7), how would you describe them?
https://preview.redd.it/wv62qq5tacm71.png?width=2560&format=png&auto=webp&s=6c743383ee2f1229ed7ef8a68890437aac9c3834
I got bored with the vanilla game a while ago and have since been trying to approach the game from a realistic angle. I play with seasons, and have gotten the hang of crop rotations, animals etc. The one thing Iโm unsure about is the settings for crop damage scale aswell as and especially the weeds intensity scale. Base game sets damage at 50 and weeds at 20 iirc. Just got wondering what the most realistic settings would be, maybe some seasoned (pardon the pun) veterans and maybe even ppl with rl farming experience could weigh in on this. Am playing on Little Norton currently so looking for settings realistic to UK conditions.
So a 1 mana thermo against teemo on turn 1 is a pathetic wispy pew
but a 10 mana epic one goes PEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW and has a nice thick bolt of laser energy
