Solar System Distances

Here’s a useful Solar System resource for you:

Average distances of the planets from the sun; Total distance traveled in one complete orbit by each of the planets; Total time for one complete orbit of the sun (one planetary year).

OBJECTDistance from Sun (average) in kmDistance traveled in one complete orbit of the Sun in kmAmount of time for one complete orbit of the Sun
Sun0
Mercury59,221,114359,993,5633 Earth months.
Venus108,142,903679,916,3187 Earth months.
Earth149,662,053939,813,3251 Earth year
(365.25 days)
Mars227,872,5461,429,031,22023 Earth months. Almost 2 Earth years.
Jupiter778,242,6784,887,351,143142 Earth months. Almost 12 Earth years.
Saturn1,426,617,3168,957,032,507354 Earth months. 29½ Earth years.
Uranus2,870,453,81418,025,909,2371009 Earth months. Over 84 Earth years.
Neptune4,498,229,80428,262,471,8381979 Earth months Almost 165 Earth years.

Working on a school project, we needed these figures. Plenty of copies of this information are available, but all of it was on US sites and all of it was in miles. Want it in kilometres? Well, either you have to do it yourself (like I did) or (now) you can use the table above.

Happy to help.

Stikeez & The Sea

OK. Difficult one here. Difficult because I’m a big fan of the local Aquarium and virtually everything that they stand for, but I find myself disagreeing with them on this issue. A bit, anyway.

Firstly, let me tell you that I’m a member of the Aquarium, as are my kids. We have been for several (or more) years. We go there often, we love their behind the scenes tours, we were excited about their revamp, we take them turtles (well, a turtle) and we’re very supportive of their work.

Yesterday, the Aquarium published a blog post on their views about the new Stikeez promotion at local retailing behemoth PicknPay. For those unaware of what a Stikeez is, it’s a small plastic toy with a sucker on the bottom, one of which you are given with every R150 you spend at the supermarket. This is the second Stikeez promotion that PicknPay have launched. The first one was… well… a spectacular success.

But the Aquarium are unhappy about this new promotion, simply because it flies in the face of their understandable and commendable stance on plastics – namely that there’s too much in the ocean already. Their view has been brought even more sharply into focus by the fact that this lot of toys have an “under the sea” theme.

So, let me set my stall out here. Yes, I agree that there is too much plastic in the ocean, and yes, I agree that this is a bad thing. My family are doing their bit to help out here. We recycle all our plastic, we use refills rather than new bottles for washing up liquid, deodorant, shower gel, window cleaner and fabric conditioner, and we all routinely reject plastic straws at restaurants, much to the bemusement of waiting staff across the Western Cape.

But – and here’s the crux of my argument on this one – those things I listed above are single-use plastics. And I don’t agree that Stikeez fall into this category – our kids still have theirs from last year.
Looking at the Aquarium post, I’m not sure they are 100% on it either:

The issue is the fact that more unnecessary (and essentially single-use) plastic waste is being introduced into the environment via a major national retailer…

You could argue that additional introduction of any plastic is bad, and you’d probably be heading along the right lines. But you can’t just stop using plastic. It’s simply not possible – it’s an essential material in our lives whether we like it or not. And if we’re going to say no to Stikeez on the grounds that they are “essentially single-use”, why are we content to say yes to sweet wrappers, cling-wrapped produce, bread tags and the like?
And if you want to take the argument further and say that it doesn’t matter whether they are single-use or not, then presumably Crocs, Bic ball-point pens and toothbrushes are next on your hit list?
(Seriouslythough: if you actually have a hitlist and Crocs are next on it, well done.)

It’s that sort of inconsistency and s-t-r-e-t-c-h that doesn’t sit easily with me. The previous Stikeez campaign was attacked simply because people wanted to be seen attacking it. It became silly: people complained about the wrappers on the floor, and yes, littering is bad, but that’s not a Stikeez issue, that’s a teaching your kids general respect and responsibility issue.

And then remember all that drama over another supermarket promotion a few months back? The one that was blamed for starvation, unemployment, drought and inflation – before this pièce de résistance:

Maybe, a child might actually mistake it for food and try eat it and accidentally choke and die?
Shame on you.

I’m not saying that the Aquarium are going down Hyperbole Street, although I don’t doubt that some people will take things that way. But that’s not an Aquarium issue, that’s a people are just complete cockwombles issue.
There are already one or two on the Aquarium FB page:

fullscreen-capture-2016-10-27-100315-am-bmpI’ll share your post, and I’ll consider boycotting the store (of course you will) but your spoor continues to disgust me.

fullscreen-capture-2016-10-27-100504-am-bmpOf course you do, you Rainbow Warrior. You only buy half your groceries there and then you get into your fossil fuel powered, greenhouse gas belching car and drive somewhere else to buy the rest. Well done on taking a stand, making a difference and showing PicknPay who’s boss.

So will PicknPay pull Stikeez II? I very much doubt it, although it wouldn’t surprise me if this was to be last Stikeez campaign they run. In that way, maybe the Aquarium wins this one.
Well done. Next stop, Lego? (he said, facetiously).

Look, I understand the Aquarium point of view and I understand why they feel they have to pass comment on this. Do we need more ‘unnecessary’ plastic? No, we don’t. And is this a good opportunity to educate people and perhaps lever their behaviour? Yes, it is.
But are Stikeez really to blame for the world’s (and the oceans’) woes? No.
No, they’re not. They’re just toys and because of that, I’m not even sure that they are symptomatic of those problems.

There are far bigger genuine single-use plastic fish to fry (pun intended) and it would be a bit of an own goal if we got distracted by apparently low-hanging fruit like this.

TCR

This won’t be for everyone (warning: occasional naughty language), but if you find that it’s for you, then well done: you have great taste in music and social commentary. I say that, because obviously, I have great taste in music and social commentary and I just cannot get enough of this track (pun intended) from Nottingham-based band Sleaford Mods.

‘TCR’ stands for “Total Control Racing” and is named after a Scalextric-style toy racing car game popular in the 1980s. Talking about the song, vocalist Jason Williamson said: “The idea behind the ‘TCR’ video was to show and use the actual 1980s toy racing kit in its original environment, which would have most probably been the living room floor for most kids at that time.”

And yes, that’s exactly where my brother and I used to play it, although our carpet was a nasty brown, not a nasty patterned affair.

Also, we had a lorry version with a white articulated truck and a shiny golden oil tanker. But the memories are still there. And the meaning behind the lyrics ring true as well. Sadly.

I thought it married perfectly to the idea of life’s (at times) rotating dross. The narration/vocal over the song is just that, an account of a bloke reacting to what he feels is a routine-laden existence by ‘escaping’ for the night to the pub, only to realise this is also a limited experience, and in turn all options kind of merge into a circular experience of never ending repetition that he tries to navigate.

Having finally given up on 5fm (sorry, Rob), I’m enjoying all the airplay that this is getting on BBC 6 Music, which is being streamed into the lab from the UK on a daily basis now.

My list of other good music to catch up on is growing by the day as well. I’ve missed out on a lot thanks to Hlaudi’s stupid policies.

But that’s another post for another day.

On this week’s show…

[Puts on Jeremy Clarkson Top Gear voice]

A boat gets rescued
Batman consults his smartphone
A spider eats a mouse
A church is turned into a swimming pool
An amazing 3D printed sundial
An academic says not to worry about burning cars

…And Richard Hammond visits a brewery in Norfolk.

[comprehensively fails to punch an Irish producer]

Beards in the lab

Fashion is cyclical. Beards are back in, after 35+ clean-shaven years.

I don’t wear one myself, but I am aware of some individuals that do. And some of them work in laboratories. Eww.

Why eww? Because you’ll surely remember the 1967 research of Barbeito et al. entitled:

Microbiological Laboratory Hazard of Bearded Men

No?

Allow me to reacquaint you with their work:

An investigation was conducted to evaluate the hypothesis that a bearded man subjects his family and friends to risk of infection if his beard is contaminated by infectious microorganisms while he is working in a microbiological laboratory.

It’s a serious thing, and it’s why we wear lab coats and gloves (and sometimes more PPE) when we’re working in the lab. It’s why we wash our hands thoroughly each time we leave the room. And it’s not just to protect ourselves from contaminated and/or infection. No-one wants to wander out of the lab and give spread germs, disease and infection to everyone they meet. (Although this does depend on who they meet, I guess.)

So we’re all covered and washed, but… but what about the guy over there with his beard? Well, Barbeito et al.’s  methods to investigate whether bearded men could carry germs out of the lab were pretty cool:

They sprayed some non-pathogenic (non-disease causing) bacteria into real beards on real men and sampled the beard at 30 minutes and 6 hours)

The 30-min interval was selected to represent two work situations: (i) the time necessary for a man to complete a laboratory operation in a zealous attempt to avoid loss of an experimental series despite a known accidental contamination of his beard before he rejoined his associates with an unwashed beard, and (ii) the time required for an immediate shower and change of clothing, after an accident that contaminated the beard and the before association with fellow employees or family.
The 6-hr interval was selected to represent the time between an unrecognized contamination of the beard and family contact with the unwashed beard.

“Sorry dear, I’ve brought some work home this evening.”

Then they sprayed Botox and rubbed infected chickens against a beard on a mannequin. Seriously.

fullscreen-capture-2016-10-21-104950-am-bmpYeah, that image will stick with me as well. Apologies for that.

Clean-shaven men (and presumably, clean-shaven mannequins) were used as controls, just to see that any significant results were genuinely beard-related.

And…?

Yes. Beards are dirty and dangerous and yucky and are (now) full of Serratia marcescens and Bacillus subtilis var. niger and Newcastle disease virus and Clostridium botulinum toxin, type A:

The experiments showed that beards retained microorganisms and toxin despite washing with soap and water. Although washing reduced the amount of virus or toxin, a sufficient amount remained to produce disease upon contact with a suitable host.

Do you have a beard? Do you work or live with someone who has a beard?

This experiment suggests that even if they don’t work in a lab, and even if they do wash their beard, it’s still horribly full of nasty bacteria and cornflakes* and stuff. You will might get an infection.

Consider yourself warned. And go get a shave.

 

* possibly, anyway.