Justin: The right thing to say, not the…
Kirsten: Right. Not what they actually…
Justin: This is what I really…
Kirsten: Not what they actually feel; right?
Justin: Yes. High self-monitors…
Kirsten: Fascinating.
Justin: Are very likable and successful people, however, it appears the highest self-most just aren’t that deep, their propensity to self-censor.
Kirsten: They’re not deep.
Justin: They will, it’s, I mean, I guess not necessarily what you’re getting from them at least isn’t deep.
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: The propensity to self-monitor prompts them to avoid interaction, threatening interactions that are more honest and to avoid self-disclosures. The results – partners of high self-most maybe completely in dark about the extent of their high self-most partners degree of commitment or regard for them. In other words, they will be fine. And of course by fine, we mean, flack, insecure, neurotic, and evasive.
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: Yes, I just made that.
Kirsten: [laughs] It’s great.
Justin: It’s not that the high self-most are intentionally deceptive or evil, it’s just that they appear to have an outlook in a way of achieving our goals, that makes them attracted to us but prevents themselves being particular happy or loyal in romantic relationships according to Dr. Roloff again.
Conversely, researches finding that the low self-most, people who are the least concerned with social appropriateness and they’re unlikely to mask their feelings or opinions to avoid confrontation or preserve their self-image are more committed to; are more satisfied with their relationships.
Low self-most communicate in a more genuine intimate way but they also may say blunt and hurtful things to their partners. Their disclosive [?] communication and loyalty can extract the price from their partners. So I think this it. I’m figuring it like…
Kirsten: So what need are like two self-most to be partners cause they always say the right thing to each other so they’re never really happy but they’re happy.
Justin: Yes.
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: Well, it’s like they say that it’s so like the distribution of self-monitoring is pretty in the middle.
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: There’s not a lot of high, you know.
Kirsten: Probably yes. There’s probably a bell curve distribution than normal distribution.
Justin: But I think I’ve been with a lot of high self-most and I’m a way low self-most.
Kirsten: Maybe there’s a particular, you know, personality type, you know, you get…
Justin: Maybe cause this is…
Kirsten: Based on your upbringing…
Justin: Cause it’s like a…
Kirsten: You’ve got conditioned…
Justin: I think I tend to flock definitely with the, for some reason with the highest self-most. I’m just too… because this is like, I’m totally like I’m not saying they make you look fat, I’m saying if you want to look skinny, don’t wear those jeans. Like I have this thing of accidentally saying the things.
Kirsten: Which is a wrong thing…
Justin: And I’m like I’m self-monitoring enough to know that I can’t say “yes, they make you look fat” you know, but I might be like well, if you want to look skinny, I could suggest you should wear something.
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: Cause I’m still going to try to say the thing that’s honest that I’m thinking.
Kirsten: Right.
Justin: And I try to get around being completely blunt about it.
Kirsten: Right.
Justin: But it’s hard cause I can’t.
Kirsten: That’s so hard.
Justin: I can’t. It’s a lack of – it’s brutal; I think it’s probably very brutal to date somebody who’s too honest with you.
Kirsten: Yes. It would be. Well, it’s either that or you live in a fairy tale.
Justin: Which we all should.
Kirsten: We all should.
Justin: We shall all pretend really, really hard.
Kirsten: And there’s a really neat …
Justin: Pretend. Pretend.
Kirsten: Really, really nice[sp] press release out from, I can’t remember who it’s from but…
Justin: APS
Kirsten: Not APS, it’s like the physics dep…
Justin: University in (Washington) [sp].
Kirsten: Yes. Chris Gorski is the author and he’s written on a really fun article relating to the science behind fairy tales. Yes. So Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair; what’s the truth behind that?
Justin: Is it actually possible to walk up a ladder with human hair?
Kirsten: It is possible. Yes. So let me tell you. According to this article, on average one strand of hair can support about three and one-half ounces, or about the weight of two candy bars.
Justin: What? Wow!
Kirsten: Each strand of dark hair is generally thicker, and therefore stronger than blond hair.
Justin: Yes.
Kirsten: Rapunzel is blond though so you know…
Justin: Says who?
Kirsten: Her hair is a little bit weaker.
Justin: Says who? Rapunzel?
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: That’s so [xx].
Kirsten: Blonds generally have about 140,000 hairs on their heads. So her hair should be able to support the weight of several princes not just one. So if a lot of…
Justin: At the same time?
Kirsten: If a lot of princes came and try to save her all at the same time, they could all, hypothetically, climb up her hair. However…
Justin: How long can it be?
Kirsten: However, if the prince just started climbing and Rapunzel didn’t do anything to, I guess, support the hair itself other than just using her scalp, the minute that the prince started climbing, it would probably rip all the hair from her head. The hair itself would not break but it would be pulled from her head.
Justin: Oh well, that’s the same, that’s not or wait she’ll be pulled out the window.
Kirsten: And exactly, that’s the other possibility. Her body might not be strong enough to be able to deal with the mass of the climbing prince or princes depending on the situation.
Justin: All right. [laughs]
Kirsten: Right. [laughs] Lets see. What is it says here? It says the whole idea is that you can use friction of the hair against itself in the knot and whatever is tied around will support the weight of the prince. So if Rapunzel is actually trapped in a tower…
Justin: [coughing] I get it.
Kirsten: She should wrap her hair around something and then let it down.
Justin: Yes. Like three times around the bedpost and drop it down, am I right?
Kirsten: Yes. Exactly. [laughs] How about another wonderful fairy tale of little mermaid? Little mermaid, you know, the prince is coming to save Ariel, the little mermaid. She’s trapped by the evil witch and the witch has taken her voice and silence stays…
Justin: [humming]
Kirsten: So she cannot sing, exactly. [laughs] Exactly. She’s silenced. Could this happen? Could the witch have made a spell that could actually silence the mermaid, Ariel? Oh that was a rhyme and I didn’t even mean too.
Well, scientists according to this article have figured out a way to bend sound waves around objects and prevent the escape of sounds created inside areas, particular areas. Duke University professor has announced it’s theoretically possible to create a sound shield.
Justin: What?
Kirsten: Yes. A sound shield. So it’s possible to create a material that bends sound waves around walls, pillars, or other areas where the sound waves emerge as if nothing had been in their way. The sound waves generated inside the enclosed area would never escape. If the witch had been clever, she could have built this material and there would have been no need for a curse. [singing]
Justin: Wow!
Kirsten: How about a flying carpet?
Justin: Yes. Yes. I’d like one of those.
Kirsten: Yes. The last fairy tale situation and…
Justin: And this was…
Kirsten: In which article is it? In Chris Gorski’s article talks about 1,001 Arabian Nights and the flying carpet. There’s an article published in Physical Review Letters suggesting that there are situations in which carpets could fly.
Similar to the way that tissue paper floats in air as it flutters. So if a carpet is subjected to just the right vibrations, vibrating in just the right frequency, it would create fluctuations in the air round the carpet that could potentially levitate it.
Yes. So there are probably other fairy tales that we could figure out that we can figure out whether or not the science behind them is possible.
Justin: Yes. I always heard that the flying carpet originated from thieves who had leave the tops of buildings or escape city walls sort of grabbing like using them like a mini parachute thing but then I was like I don’t think that the physics – It wouldn’t even back that up.
Kirsten: Yes. It had to be a very light carpet.
Justin: Yes.
Kirsten: But yes, I don’t know. That’s a really good question.
Justin: I don’t think they’ll back it up cause I think…
Kirsten: It’s a great. It’s a great story though.
Justin: I think I tried that one when I was like seven.
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: I grab a sheet and ended badly.
Kirsten: I just think it’s really neat to be able to take fairy tales, folk tales, things that are in the realm of fantasy and try and figure out.
Justin: Yes. Like space travel. Going to the moon.
Kirsten: How could they work? Right. Time travel maybe.
Justin: Time travel would work but you need a spaceship.
Kirsten: Yes. There’s an article out this week in several…
Justin: Intergalactic one.
Kirsten: Yes. In several publications where they’re talking about a paper that came out from Russian physicist like in October suggesting that time travel could happen like as soon as the large hadron collider comes online. They’re suggesting it will create little time warps that will bring time travelers from the future to us.
Justin: Well, that’s might…
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: Here’s the problem with time travel.
Kirsten: I don’t think it’s going to happen.
Justin: Here’s the problem with time travel. If you change your place and time, people always get confused about this, it’s such an…
Kirsten: Yes. You’ve brought [sp] Yes.
Justin: Sticky [sp] issue. But you don’t change your place in space. So if you go back in time, one day, you know, never mind that the planets evolve at whatever speed around not just on its axis but around the sun.
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: And that the sun is moving and it…
Kirsten: Right.
Justin: Our solar system is moving in the galaxy space and the galaxy expanded…
Kirsten: We’re not all staying static. Yes.
Justin: Yes.
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: 24-hours ago, we could be [xx] hundred and thousands of miles out in the space with no way of getting back again. Just in 24 measly hours. It could probably be more than hundreds. It’s probably like 850,000 millennium; it might be even a light-year, who knows. It could be for… it could be… it’s insane. Who knows how far away it would be?
Kirsten: [xx] dropped into the middle of a black hole.
Justin: Yes. Is it [xx] space and back in a different time? If you go to the future, the planets are not even here yet, you know. What are you going to do?
Kirsten: Well, I’m sure that would be taken into account by all those future time machines. They’ll fix it.
Justin: No. They need to have… well, they need to have…
Kirsten: Come on, science fixes everything.
Justin: They can’t fix it. They need spaceships.
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: That can go really fast and then they’ll be fine. That’s why aliens look like us from the future cause they are.
Kirsten: Bring me another story.
Justin: Hey, so we had Ian Ayres was it while back ago?
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: Talking about number crunching.
Kirsten: Right.
Justin: We have here prediction markets, you know, on the presidential campaign. These are people who sort of have created a stock market with all of the different candidates, you know. And looks like right now Senator Barack Obama will defeat the former first lady, Hillary Clinton for the democratic nomination and ultimately win the presidency if the current number crunching of the prediction market is to be believed.
Kirsten: So Obama would be ahead of Hillary but not just Hillary, McCain.
Justin: Yes. Cause there are couple of things, McCain has got a 95% chance on this, according to this, a 95% chance of winning.
Kirsten: Wait. Winning?
Justin: His party’s nomination.
Kirsten: Oh, yes.
Justin: Cause they’re still technically and a primary, right?
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: But Obama can win with his recent optics in his stock or has a 70% chance of winning the nomination and Clinton only about 27%. This is very interesting. This is from Intrade.
Kirsten: But then for the actual presidential election don’t you think he…
Justin: The actual presidential election, the Intrade traders gave Obama 46% of winning versus 33% for McCain and only 20% for Clinton.
Kirsten: Huh. Interesting.
Justin: Yes.
Kirsten: Very, very interesting. We’ll see. It’s interesting to think how they economics of stock trading could predict the future. We’ll see. That what’s being predicted; I don’t know. Are we helping the future come to pass by reporting this news and putting that eventuality into people minds?
Justin: Our people don’t think.
Kirsten: Oh, [xx]. [laughs]
Justin: They don’t forget this shit. They’ll be like oh, listen to This Week in Science earlier today. What was on that one?
Kirsten: Yes.
Justin: They said something about flocking around, there was Justin is…
Kirsten: Barnacles.
Justin: Annoying. Kirsten told me something that was really interesting. I wish I could remember what it was.
Kirsten: Yes. That’s right. [laughs]
Justin: [laughs]
Kirsten: That’s exactly it. As you’re all sitting there, sipping your daily coffee, there’s a machine that’s been created, published in the Associating of Chemical Sciences Analytical Chemistry a semi-monthly journal.
Researchers in Switzerland have created a machine that tastes coffee to analyze all the wonderful bounteous flavors that emanate from the fine dark brew. Yes. So the machine can sense over 1,000 substances that may contribute to the complex aroma of coffee. The new tasting machine assessed taste and aromatic qualities of espresso coffee nearly as accurately as a panel of trained human espresso tasters.
Justin: Wow!
Kirsten: It analyzed gasses release by the heated espresso sample and then transformed the chemical information into taste qualities like roasted, flowery, woody, toffee, and acidity.
So it’s another step on the road toward technological advances taking the place of the human taste bud.
Justin: Well, you know what’s amazing? I’d never thought about that until just this story right now. I know they had a robot that was like sniffing people before; right?
Kirsten: Yes. Taste like bacon.
Justin: And they were like…
Kirsten: [laughs]
Justin: The human reporter was like [Persuto] it’s like but…
Kirsten: That’s right.
Justin: But we can so easily…
Kirsten: Hmm… 50 pounds of ham.
Justin: And or maybe I’m taking this step too far, maybe I’m not right about this. Because at first I was going to say we can recreate like the sense of sight because with our video. I mean, we’ve, you know, electronics and all of these; right? Audio, very easy to record and playback and all of that…