Slashdot Mirror


Water Flows Uphill

An anonymous reader writes "The BBC are reporting James Dyson's new garden feature, a waterfall with water flowing uphill. Apparently, he wanted to recreate an Escher drawing."

365 comments

  1. It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's a water elevator, or something.

    1. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1, Funny

      If it's the opposite of a waterfall he could call it a water spring. Sadly, that name is taken.

    2. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by anonymous+cowfart · · Score: 0

      Or a waterrise. Or maybe a waterise.

      --

      So I'm a pervert. Welcome to the Internet.
    3. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you have not seen the device. Water flows uphill to the point where it cascades back down to ground level. This is repeated 4 times to form a square device.

      It is a waterfall, but the water flows UPhill TO the waterfall (actually to each of the 4)

    4. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      How about gardening.slashdot.org? That way all the people who want to decorate their cubies could get together with the *cough*cough* hydroponics types.

    5. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by cruppel · · Score: 1

      Possibly a waterrise?

    6. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by hatrisc · · Score: 2, Funny

      but, does water still fall? yes, so it's a waterFALL. errr... why don't we compromise and call it a water elefall.

      --
      I write code.
    7. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      In short, yes, the water does fall. On both sides, that is. I hate to say RTFA, but... :-)

    8. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blah.. Been there, done that.

      -Jesus

    9. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by pbrammer · · Score: 1

      Water does not flow uphill. It actually flows downhill. It's the bubbles the flow uphill that give the illusion that the water is going uphill. Read the story.

    10. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by cruppel · · Score: 1

      omg i was joking. Sorry...

    11. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by hatrisc · · Score: 1

      i read the article... in reply to the previous message... ah forget it.

      --
      I write code.
    12. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Or a waterrise. Or maybe a waterise.

      You missed the point. Fall, Spring...opposites, get it?

    13. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by anonymous+cowfart · · Score: 0

      NOOOO! And rise isn't the opposite of fall?

      --

      So I'm a pervert. Welcome to the Internet.
    14. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      NOOOO! And rise isn't the opposite of fall?

      Well, yeah, but only in a simple way. With Spring and Fall you have both the seasons, and the actions of springing and falling. It is the playful mixing of these meanings from which the humor springs.

    15. Re:It's not a waterfall then, is it? by cmkrcs1 · · Score: 1

      water elefall? thats a good name for it.

      --
      If Windows is running and there's no one there to use it, does it still crash?

      cmkrcs1 was here.
  2. Water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whats he plan to add next to this garden, a never ending looping stair case?

  3. Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Antiwater (two part antihydrogen and one part antioxygen) is repelled by the force of gravity.

    1. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If only antimatter was repelled by gravity. Antimatter is just normal matter with reverse charge and spin, so it obeys all normal physical laws. So-called "negative matter" would be repelled by gravity, but we don't know if it even exists or can be made.

    2. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by hdparm · · Score: 2, Funny
      Nothing new here - we've got plenty of those...

      ...In Soviet Russia.

    3. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by nomadic · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you drink anti-water, do you become thirsty?

    4. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by HiQ · · Score: 1

      In normal circumstances you can pass water, but with anti-water.... ** his mind boggles **

    5. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by JoeJob · · Score: 2, Funny

      Exactly. But whatever you do don't let it get wet.

    6. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, that rules out antiwater. The answer, then, is clear. It is antigravity, not antiwater, that makes water go up.

    7. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by SEE · · Score: 5, Informative

      The troubles here are two:

      1) We have no experimental evidence as to how antimatter reacts to gravity (beond a couple of small ones where the externally-caused experimental error bars render the results statistically meaningless)

      2) We don't know how gravity works. In GR, yes, antimatter has normal mass and reacts normally to gravity. But GR is not the last and final word on how gravity works, and several models otherwise fully consistent with known experimental data allow for anitmatter to be affected to a greater or lesser extent than normal matter by gravity, even to the point of sign reversal.

      Since we have no experimental evidence and several potentially correct theories that give different answers, the only conclusion is that we don't know. The general opinion is that animatter is affected by gravity as normal matter, but we don't know that it is.

    8. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Yakman · · Score: 4, Funny

      In normal circumstances you can pass water, but with anti-water.... ** his mind boggles **

      Come on, it's obvious.. ANTI-WATER PASSES YOU!

    9. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by edgrale · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dude, you've just described alcohol :D

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    10. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by thoughtstream · · Score: 5, Funny
      Close, but no cigar. The clue is in the article, where it's explained that a "thin later of water" is used.

      In other words, he's using anti-time! By covering the ramps with a thin coating of later (rather than the usual layers of earlier that surround most objects) the water actually flows backwards in time. This, of course, causes its normal downhill motion under gravity to occur retrotemporally, giving the fluid the appearance of syntemporal uphill motion.

      Contratemporal epitaxy, eh? I tell you, that Dyson's a genius!

    11. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Alsee · · Score: 5, Informative

      We don't have experimental proof yet, but we have overwhelming reason to believe antimatter fall down just like matter. You can work it out based on hysical constants and conservation of energy in a matter/antimatter annihilation. It is explained in this physics FAQ.

      If antimatter is repelled by gravity then you either have a violation of conservation of energy, or physics constants are not constant.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    12. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn dude. you just harshened my mellow :/

      what if.. like... my SHOES were made of antileather....

    13. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by rlanctot · · Score: 1, Funny

      If you drink antiwater, you die. So do a signifigant portion of the rest of us.

    14. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you drink anti-water, do you become thirsty?

      I don't know, but I know you become hungry if you have a bowl of Subtraction Stew!

      (SINCE SOUND IS NO LONGER APPRECIATED, I HEREBY ABOLISH IT. PLEASE RETURN ALL UNUSED AMOUNTS TO THE FORTRESS IMMEDIATELY.)

    15. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by CleverNickedName · · Score: 1, Funny

      http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=humour

      --


      Unfortunately, I am not Wil Wheaton
    16. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Fat+Casper · · Score: 0
      No, he uses "light water." It's He2O. Two parts Helium, one part Oxygen. Surface tension keeps the water in place in the pools. Water is bubbled up at the "waterfall" part, breaking the surface tension and allowing it to float upward. At the top is a vacuum, which sucks the water into the glass. There is some overflow, but surface tension keeps it on the glass, flowing downhill. It's really an impressive system.

      --
      I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
    17. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by The-Bus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or feed it after midnight?

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    18. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by misterpies · · Score: 5, Informative

      There can be no doubt, for solid physical reasons, that antiparticles behave identically to regular particles when it comes to gravity.

      First of all, the only relevant physical quantity to determine how something is affected by gravity is its mass (and equivalently, in relativity, energy). That's practically the definition of gravity -- the force one body exerts on another by virtue of its mass. In physicist speak, the gravitational field "couples" to mass/energy. Any force having an origin in some other physical quantity is by definition not gravity.

      Now we have plenty of experimental evidence -- eg from particle accelerators that antimatter has positive mass, just like regular matter. Indeed, antiparticles have IDENTICAL masses to their corresponding real particles. Therefore they must be affected in the same way as regular matter by gravity.

      Secondly, in both relativistic and quantum frameworks, gravity can only be understood if it is always attractive. In other words, mass can only be positive. In quantum terms, this comes out of the fact that gravity must be "spin 2" field. (There's a nice book by Feynman on his attempts to come up with a quantum theory of gravity that explains why it has to be spin 2).

      Thirdly, according to quantum field theory the vacuum is filled with "virtual" particles and antiparticles -- that's the zero-point energy of the vacuum. Now the whole point about the vacuum is that it's the lowest possible energy state. If anti particles had negative mass-energy, they'd be in a lower energy state than the vacuum, which means that they'd be stable compared to the vacuum and would not decay back into the vacuum.
      If that were true, the universe would long ago have filled up with antiparticles...

      --
      The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
    19. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by death+or+glory · · Score: 0

      looks like the reds have taken over mexico, or something

    20. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by darkov · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      If you drink anti-water, do you become thirsty?

      You stay thirsty, it will run out of your nose.

    21. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      If he's using anti-time in that square (cubical?) configuration, he's going to be hearing from that time cube guy's lawyers!

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    22. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by jhines0042 · · Score: 0

      This has to be the best post in my history of reading Slashdot. Bravo!

      This, of course, causes its normal downhill motion under gravity to occur retrotemporally, giving the fluid the appearance of syntemporal uphill motion.

      Brilliant!

      --
      42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
    23. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by cruppel · · Score: 1

      At first, when I read your post I exclaimed "Ah HA! We're on to something here!" Then I realized that there is an error in your theory.

      The water flows up the ramp and down the side of it into a collection pool, where it procedes up the next ramp. If Hoover-man was using anti-time, wouldn't the waterfall part of this contraption also travel from the collection pool to the top of the glass triangles?

      It makes you wonder... If the water finishes traveling down (but because of the anti-time coating, up) the glass, does it just traverse the time continuum and head down the other side of the glass into each pool? How much energy is lost in each conversion from time to anti-time, and anti-time to time, time after time? Also, in the collection pools, where the water is not as thin, is there a layer of Anti-Time too? What happens to the water molecules affected by the anti-time that touch the forward-time water?

      Perhaps we'll never know, or on the other hand we could get some explosives and detonate what do not understand.

    24. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      And he did it anonymously... I really don't want to add Anonymous Coward to my "Fans" list :-)

    25. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by aflat362 · · Score: 1

      don't be rediculous - where are you going to find an anticow?

      --

      Conserve Oil, Recycle, Boycott Walmart

    26. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      There is a slot at the top of the ramp from which the time-reversed water comes out, having been pumped from the pool at the bottom. Normal water is pumped to a slot to create the waterfall. The types of water do not mix in the pool because the pumps are started at different times such that the flow of the time-reversed water has already been determined before the normal water is added.

      It's really quite obvious.

    27. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by The_K4 · · Score: 0

      At an anti-farm of course. :)

    28. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by John+Zebedee · · Score: 3, Funny

      Speaking of antiwater, we need to be careful with that stuff!

      --
      The future is here. It's just not evenly distributed yet. -- William Gibson
    29. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by el_guapo · · Score: 1

      Uhhh, sorry - no. The US has around 100 antimatter manufacturing facilities literally online right now. Those would be "Fission Reactors". A natural part of the fission reaction is electron/positron production.

      --
      mas cerveza, por favor politically incorrect stu
    30. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet-Russia, the anti-water drinks you!

    31. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is customary to introduce the term before using the acronym. I assume you mean General Relativity, but that is not at all obvious to the average reader, even on /.

    32. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but only in Soviet Russia.

    33. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by operagost · · Score: 1

      Hydrogen is lighter than Helium, so the molecular weight of a hypothetical He2O would be greater than water.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    34. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Speare · · Score: 1

      This, of course, causes its normal downhill motion under gravity to occur retrotemporally, giving the fluid the appearance of syntemporal uphill motion.

      I think I wioll haven be sick, like the time I will have read Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's book at Milliway's.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    35. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no. In Soviet Russia, WATER passes you! Everywhere else, the anti-water passes you, as it should.

    36. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by EvanED · · Score: 1

      I think you just hit upon the next major world religion.

      Or not.

    37. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      If you drink anti-water, do you become thirsty?

      Not if you take a lot of anti-pisses

    38. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by phil-is-math · · Score: 1

      I'm not a physisist or any thing, but the statement "mass can only be possitive" seems extremely counter intuitive, and I don't believe it for a second. Doesn't everything have and opposite? ya know yang and wang and all? Doesn't that trouble you?

      --
      Word to me.
    39. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by KILNA · · Score: 1

      Care to postulate the effects of a hammer time coating on a ramp-based fountain system?

      --
      Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
    40. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by thoughtstream · · Score: 1
      The water flows up the ramp and down the side of it into a collection pool, where it procedes up the next ramp. If Hoover-man was using anti-time, wouldn't the waterfall part of this contraption also travel from the collection pool to the top of the glass triangles?
      But that's the genius of the system. Those ramps look to be about 1 metre long and angled at about 20 degrees. Ignoring friction (non-trivial I admit, since later tends to be a drag), that means the water experiences a retrochronic gravitational acceleration of around 3.35 m/s^2. This acceleration is (in our synchronic frame of reference) vectored laterally upwards along the ramp. So by the time the water flows to the top of the ramp, it's travelling at around 2.5 m/s. The resulting linear mutnemom is sufficient to launch it off the lip, out of contact with the later, and back into normal time. At which point it finds itself with no visible means of support (a condition referred to by kinematics boffins as canis latrans ad photomachinam spectat maeste) and simply falls into the next pool.
    41. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by cruppel · · Score: 1

      I'd be eager to agree with this theory but I am still not satisfied:

      How does the water traverse this continuum? What is the effect on the matter transitioning into earlier from later? Is if there is a change in time there must be a change in position. Perhaps someone should drop food coloring into the stream of later and observe the color's motion around the waterfall/waterrise/elefall.

      Or let's blow this thing up, like I said before.

    42. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by misterpies · · Score: 1

      What's intuitive? It all depends on your experience, education and intelligence. For most people, intuition is the same as common sense. But science only advances when somebody intuits that common sense is wrong.

      Think about the great scientific advances. The earth being round. The earth going around the sun. Heavy and light things falling at the same rate. Evolution. Plate techtonics. Wave-particle duality. Nothing going faster than light.

      None of these comply with common sense. But when you've understood the arguments behind them, all completely intuitive. And anyway, there are plenty of physical quantities that can only be positive. Absolute temperature. Probabilities. Entropy. Why not mass.

      Moreover, consider the basic attributes ("quantum numbers") of fundamental particles and how intuitive they are. OK, so they can have electric charge -- that's positive or negative, i.e. two types of electric charge. Spin -- well that can be "up" or "down", so yes, two types there. But you have to spin an electron 720 degrees to get it back to the orientation you started -- 360 turns it upside down. Is that intuitive? Then there's "colour" (the thing that interacts with the strong nuclear force). That comes in six different types.

      If we relied on common-sense intuition to understand science, we'd be stuck in the Middle Ages.

      --
      The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
    43. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For gods sake, just say GENERAL RELATIVITY!! If only idiots like you would stop coming up with stupid acronyms just to make it seem like you know what you're talking about.

    44. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by jmatson · · Score: 1

      Only in Soviet Russia...

    45. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At an anti-farm of course. :)

      But how do you get it between the panes of glass?

    46. Re:Simple... it's antiwater by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I think maybe you responded to the wrong post? You said I was wrong, and proceeded to "correct" things I didn't say. I didn't mention antimatter production and I didn't mention any sort of reactor.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  4. Interesting... by Stephonovich · · Score: 5, Informative
    Quite an elaborate optical illusion. The original drawing is also worth looking at.

    (-:Stephonovich:-)

    --
    "Who needs reincarnation when we've got parallel universes?" -Me
    1. Re:Interesting... by localghost · · Score: 0

      Escher makes my brain hurt. It's so obvious something is wrong, but it's impossible to focus on it. Argh, this makes me want to gouge out my eyes.

    2. Re:Interesting... by Stephonovich · · Score: 1
      That's the bloody point... It confuses you beyond compare. Like eternity. Whether or not you believe in heaven, hell, an after-life, whatever, close your eyes, and try imagining living forever. Your brain continually attempts to make you die in your fantasy.

      (-:Stephonovich:-)

      --
      "Who needs reincarnation when we've got parallel universes?" -Me
    3. Re:Interesting... by Servants · · Score: 1

      I've never understood this particular drawing of Escher's. To me it just looks like the top of the waterfall is... the top, and none of the water looks like it's flowing up in that direction. The support pillars make the top of the drawing look higher, and the stepped bricks don't have that much effect because I see the whole channel as tilted.

      Anyone have advice on how to "see" this illusion?

    4. Re:Interesting... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2, Interesting
      none of the water looks like it's flowing up in that direction.

      If it looked like it's flowing up then it wouldn't "work." You follow the water from the waterfall down, then as it flows horizontally for a while, and everything seems normal, except that you've somehow gotten back to the top. At that point you get the standard "WTF?" Escher moment.

    5. Re:Interesting... by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 5, Funny

      Escher makes my brain hurt. It's so obvious something is wrong, but it's impossible to focus on it. Argh, this makes me want to gouge out my eyes.

      Indeed. It reminds me of a few companies I've worked for.

    6. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of somebody I'm married to...

      (posted anonymously for obvious cowardly reasons)

    7. Re:Interesting... by robwills · · Score: 1

      Its easy!

      look at the corners of the chanell carying the water... you will interpret the pillars as giving you height. pay close attention to the pillars and you can figure it out.

    8. Re:Interesting... by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Just for fun, try imagining the bounds of the universe. In theory, the universe is constantly expanding at an ever-increasing rate. But the question to ask yourself is, expanding into what? What's beyond nothingness? What surrounded the dot of dense mass that precluded the Big Bang?

      Take 2 aspirins and call someone in the morning.

    9. Re:Interesting... by Afrosheen · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dude, you just helped me coin a new term:

      Escher-esque Management.

      Let's push it onto a few blogs and see if it doesn't end up in Wired next month.

    10. Re:Interesting... by mbst · · Score: 1
      Here's another optical illusion.
      Only this time, it's fascinating effect is torn apart with a little help from Maple.

      Maple Worksheet

    11. Re:Interesting... by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      A design flaw causes the universe to extend to the limits of the universe, thus leaving insufficient room for a nothingness beyond it.

      (Inspired by the Star Trek spaceship with the design flaw of being larger than the universe in which it exists)

    12. Re:Interesting... by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      I used to live just down the street from the place in this picture, only really it wasn't quite down the street, so much as around (and through) one of the adjacent corners. The view was nice, if not a little disturbing, but parking was hell.

      That landlord was a little warped, too, I tell you.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    13. Re:Interesting... by TFloore · · Score: 1

      The thing about Escher's waterfall drawing...

      I almost have to claim it is a fake Escher drawing. Really, look at it... there are three sets of stairs in that drawing, and they all go in reasonable logical directions and orientations.

      Obviously a fake. :)

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
    14. Re:Interesting... by WinDoze · · Score: 1

      Anyone have advice on how to "see" this illusion?

      Smoke two fatties and call me in the morning.

    15. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say that the part of the universe that is occupied by matter is expanding. Into empty space, which stretches on forever. Simple as that.

      Or in other words, the matter in the universe all started out at the location where the big bang happened. It's now flying outward in all directions from that location, occupying more and more of the infinite amount of empty space that the universe contains.

    16. Re:Interesting... by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Wow, a real live demoscene person on /.

      The wonders never cease.

      (btw I was megmyx of storm, my old crap is all over the place)

  5. Here's the image I think by friedegg · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Google doesn't index user sigs, so stop trying to "Google Bomb" with them.
    1. Re:Here's the image I think by great+throwdini · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, that's the one. The BBC piece actually links to another representation of the same. Their link is in the righthand sidebar adjacent to the article - not hard to miss.

  6. Nope by dh003i · · Score: 1

    Wrong image. He's thinking of the image where there are soldiers walking up a set of stairs which never gets higher, and cycles around, on top of a tower.

    1. Re:Nope by great+throwdini · · Score: 2, Informative
      Wrong image. He's thinking of the image where there are soldiers walking up a set of stairs.

      RTFAWC:

      "One of these is an optical illusion that shows water going uphill and round and round the four sides of a square perpetually," [Dyson] says.

      The WC is for 'With Care' - the BBC write-up mentions the marching soldiers in an aside. Dyson himself mentions no such work directly (as quoted).

  7. I want one on my desk :-) by newsdee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That would look really cool if it was a small widget-type zen thing, so I can have one on my desk to contemplate while trying to be inspired. :-)

    1. Re:I want one on my desk :-) by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Except the inspiration you feel from a zen waterfall comes from the water flowing down. Use this when you want to feel uninspired.

    2. Re:I want one on my desk :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it would probably make you want to go to the bathroom all the time. Running water does that. Uphill or down.

    3. Re:I want one on my desk :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it would dehydrate the air in your cubicle.

    4. Re:I want one on my desk :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use this when you want to feel uninspired.

      No... that's when I read Slashdot.

  8. Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by droopus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since the 70's, there has been a cave on Tom Sawyer Island in Disneyworld in which water appears to flow uphill.

    The Imagineers did it cleverly with a slanted room and no point of reference. Not as geeky, but a really cool effect nonetheless which amazed me back in the day.

    --
    "The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
    1. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by Merovign · · Score: 1

      I followed this link, and what do I find?

      Cheat codes and Easter Eggs for The Real World! That is Way Cool. Cuspy, even.

      I don't suppose you have any links to money and employment-related cheat codes, would you? :)

      Much peace and satisfaction to the one who pointed me at this Really Cool Thing. Thanks, droopus!

    2. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by anethema · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I always thought the most famous of these things was at the bay of Fundy. The level of the tide rises higher than the river level and causes REAL uphill rapids, and a semi illusionary uphill waterfall.

      I havent seen it myself, but I understand its quite a mind bender to see.

      There is also an optical illusion near there in..Moncton i think? You go to the base of the hill, put your car in neutral, and your car will roll up the hill. Its an optical illusion, you are actually rolling downhill, but you look and it looks uphill, no amount of thinking its downhill dispells that.

      Some very neet stuff, and example of an Eschery world in real life.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    3. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by lendude · · Score: 2, Informative
      There is/was? a similar hill optical illusion in a suburb called Forrestfield in Perth, Western Australia. Whack the car in neutral and up the noticeable hill you'd roll. Used to be called Magnetic Hill - the theory being there was some large lode stone doing the 'pulling' of the vehicle.

      Was a rather unsafe place to drive - the road went thru' thickish scrub and you'd come around the top or bottom corners of the hill and find some car creeping in the middle of the road, sometimes with open doors and no-one inside it - the occupants would be out on the side of the road watching it go 'uphill'.

      --
      "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
    4. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know where Moncton is, but there is a similar hill in Nashville, TN, USA. Same deal: park your car, put it in neutral and it rolls uphill. If anyone lives in the area and wants to check it out: go to the Warner Parks, head down Old Hickory Blvd. The second right before the model airplane field is your target. You can't miss it because it has a big closed gate blocking access to cars... which sucks. They did that about fifteen years ago. You'll have to bring a bike or a soccer ball or something.

    5. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

      I remember when i was a kid seeing a endless facet flowing from the sky. Basicly you looked at it and it looked like a giant facet floating in air with water flowing out of it. It was a neat illusion. But all it was, was a clear plastic pipe going up to the facet. A pump someplace pumped the water up it and then it can back down the edge so you couldn't see the pipe. It looked pretty neat. But i managed to figure it out and I was like 5 (no, there was no explanation with it, it was just there in the middle of the mall). So the idea that this thing amazes adults is just sad. I would very much hope anyone with a brain would figure it out fast.

    6. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      facet?

      what in God's holy name are you blathering about?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    7. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by Inda · · Score: 1

      In England we have a similar thing that happens in the Bristol Channel/Severn Bore.

      People even surf uphill along it.

      I found this picture. http://www.boreriders.com/Photos/s10.jpg

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    8. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by TequilaMonster · · Score: 1

      We have another one here in Waterford, Ireland. Called the Magic Road, it's about 20 miles from Waterford City, heading towards Dungarvan, and then hang a right about halfway there.

      Not only do you have the Magic Road, a little further on you have a spectacular Mahon Falls, a lovely waterfall, and then turn around and you can see all the way to the coast across the patchwork quilt of 40 shades of green ....

      </wax lyrical>

      It's truly a beautiful place. Come on over and visit!

      --
      Tequila - drink of the gods.
    9. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by death+or+glory · · Score: 0

      that guy is killin' it!

    10. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      I think he means FAUCET, like a WATER FAUCET. I've seen one before, it's got a clear plastic pipe running water up about 7 feet with a fake FAUCET on top, and water spurts out from the top and runs down the sides of the clear tube, giving the illusion of water coming out of thin air from a magical faucet floating in space. Maybe he's from BAHston and he says Faaacit.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    11. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by evenprime · · Score: 4, Informative
      There is also an optical illusion near there in..Moncton i think? You go to the base of the hill, put your car in neutral, and your car will roll up the hill. Its an optical illusion, you are actually rolling downhill, but you look and it looks uphill, no amount of thinking its downhill dispells that.

      There are many places like this:
      • Mystery Spot Road, off Branciforte Dr. Santa Cruz, CA, USA. A spot 50m in diameter in the redwoods of the Santa Cruz Mountains
      • Mystery Spot, Putney Road, Benzie County, Michigan, USA.
      • Gravity Hill, Northwest Baltimore County, USA. along a public road that ran through the Soldier's Delight environmental area.
      • Gravity Hill, Mooresville, Southwest Indianapolis, USA. Located off SR 42 on the South side of Mooresville.
      • Gravity Road, Ewing Road exit ramp off Route 208, Franklin Lakes, USA.
      • Mystery Hill, Blowing Rock, hwy 321, Carolina, USA.
      • Confusion Hill, Idelwild Park, Ligonier, Pennsylvania, USA.
      • Gravity Hill, off of State Route 96 just south of New Paris, Bedford County, Pennsylvania, USA.
      • Gravity Hill (near White's Hill) , just South of Rennick Road, on County Truck U, South of Shullsburg, in LaFayette County, Wisconsin, USA
      • Oregon Vortex, near Gold-Hill, Grants Pass, Oregon, USA.
      • Spook Hill, North Wales Drive, North Avenue, Lake Wales, Florida, USA.
      • Spook Hill, Gapland Road just outside Burkittsville, Gapland (Frederick County), Maryland, USA.
      • Magnetic Hill, Near Neepawa in Manitoba, Canada.
      • Magnetic Mountain, just off the Trans Canada highway, Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada.
      • Gravity Hill, on McKee Rd. just before Ledgeview Golf Course in Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada.
      • Electric Brae, on the A719, Near Croy Bay, South of Ayr, Ayeshire, Scotland.
      • Anti-Gravity Hill, Straws Lane Road, Wood-End, Near hanging rock, Victoria, Australia
      • Morgan Lewis Hill, St Andrew, Barbados.
      • Hill South of Rome, in Colli Albani, near Frascati, Italy.
      • Malveira da Serra, on N247 coast road West of Lisbon, Portugal
      • Mount Penteli, on a road to Mount Penteli, Athens, Greece
      • Mount Halla, on the 1.100 highway a few miles south of the airport, near Mount Halla, on the island of Cheju Do, South Korea
      There's another place named "spook hill" with this illusion in Florida
      --

      "Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
      I think that goes for OS's too
    12. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by haystor · · Score: 1

      If you go rafting through canyons enough, you'll eventually come across an area where the strata of the rock will make it look like its uphill. While this is eery, when the strata tilts the other way it can look like you're in for a 45 degree descent which is downright scary.

      --
      t
    13. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by slim · · Score: 1

      I'll add to the list of similar places: the House of Mystery in Hungry Horse, Montana. They give you marbles before you go in, and you can watch them roll uphill.

      The effect is caused by an unexplained vortex on the site. Science is unable to explain it, and you get to stand pretty much as near to the centre of the vortex as is safe.... :)

      picture1
      picture2

    14. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

      no, i just spelled it wrong. I would have said spicket , but i can't spell it either. and i don't think calling it a Tap would be very clear to people.

    15. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These types of things are only unexplainable by scientists because scientists are not allowed to explain them :)

    16. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by operagost · · Score: 1
      Spigot.

      You're welcome :)

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    17. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by ryanwright · · Score: 1

      You go to the base of the hill, put your car in neutral, and your car will roll up the hill. Its an optical illusion, you are actually rolling downhill, but you look and it looks uphill, no amount of thinking its downhill dispells that.

      There's also one in Grangeville, Idaho. Tiny little town in the middle of nowhere. The effect is perfect: The hill looks quite steep, and you roll up it slowly. Way cool.

      --
      -Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
    18. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another one: Cosmos Mystery Area in Black HIlls, South Dakota. Pretty darn cool place. (shitty website)

    19. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by fatalist23 · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Looks like a glitch in the Matrix, to me.

    20. Re:Uphill water flow at Disneyworld since 1971.. by mpthompson · · Score: 1

      I believe that you mean something like this.

      I remember seeing a much larger version of such a floating faucet at the Ripley's Believe It or Not! Museum in San Francisco during the 1970's. I'm not sure if it is still there or not.

  9. More MC Escher drawing by Michael's+a+Jerk! · · Score: 5, Informative

    are at the World of Escher. The man was a genius.

    --

    I'm not Seth.

    1. Re:More MC Escher drawing by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 1

      That he was indeed. Without a doubt, the works of Escher can be considered art by nearly everyone. It's good to see his works in times where anyone who can jam on a piano and/or playback is a mucisian and that throwing a bucket of paint on some cloth makes you an artist.

      And referring to your sig, what the hell is wrong with being a Seth? :o(

    2. Re:More MC Escher drawing by oever · · Score: 1
      Check out xscreensaver for some really cool Escher inspired screensavers based on his drawings
      --
      DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
  10. i have previously achieved this same illusion by Miguel+de+Icaza · · Score: 5, Interesting

    but using a different technique. I used a strobe on a small waterfall in a dark room- this works in the same way you can sometimes see car wheels spinning in the wrong dirrection.

    When i saw dysons outdoor version while touring the flower show I hoped he had somehow used lasers to implement the strobe technique outdoors in full daylight - that would be cool. But no he is just using pumped air - no surprise really considering hes a vacuum genius :^)

    --
    Before adopting WHATWG, read the moonlight.NET EULA [http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/moonlight.mspx]
    1. Re:i have previously achieved this same illusion by wass · · Score: 1

      That's the same technique that Wurlitzer-style jukeboxes have used since the 40's in their "animated bubble tubes" for that weird upwards bubble-moving effect. Here's a pic.

      --

      make world, not war

  11. Sigh... by lingqi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Before someone tries to market their own uphill water feature, they had better be warned. James Dyson - no stranger to court battles over patents - has presumably taken care of the necessary legal business.

    Now, why would he do that? I know it might be a rhetorical question, but honestly though - all he would do, I presume, is to limit this neat but useless (admit it - this is as useless as your lava-lamp and plasma-ball (no seminal jokes please)) thing out of mainstream for a long time - instead of giving him eternal fame, etc.

    Now - an interesting question to think about is what part of our pattern-recognizing brain is responsible for *falling* for such a visual illusion? Research like this can shed light on the workings of the mind, I think.

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

    1. Re:Sigh... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Forget about the usefulness of the invention for a moment (patents have never been concerned with the merits of the invention), this guy created something new and unique, and something which, to some, could be pretty valuable. After all, the exact things you list as examples (lava lamps and plasma balls) have made tons of cash (hell, I have a lava lamp on my desk). So why shouldn't Dyson be allowed exclusive rights to his invention and any monetary rewards it generates for a time? That's exactly what patents were created for! To allow the "little guy" to innovate, and benefit from those innovations.

    2. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the pictures in the article, it seems like the bubbles are created in horizontal lines which then appear as travelling waves.. so it is the appearance of moving waves/ripples which tricks the brain into thinking the water is moving uphill.

    3. Re:Sigh... by elbobo · · Score: 1

      all he would do, I presume, is to limit this neat but useless [snip] thing out of mainstream for a long time

      no offense, but i call bullshit. this idea gets overused far too much on slashdot.

      people patent their ideas to protect their possible income. whilst frivolous and trivial patents are undoubtably a bad thing, patenting something truely unique and new is a perfectly valid protective measure to take. and i'm sure most inventors would much rather license their patents out at reasonable rates than to hold them forever without gaining any income from them at all.

      although whether this is a valid patent or not, i'm not going to touch on. that's an argument that should be happening at the patent offices.

    4. Re:Sigh... by WG55 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now, why would he do that? I know it might be a rhetorical question, but honestly though - all he would do, I presume, is to limit this neat but useless (admit it - this is as useless as your lava-lamp and plasma-ball (no seminal jokes please)) thing out of mainstream for a long time - instead of giving him eternal fame, etc.

      James Dyson would be a fool if he were to patent this invention and then not license it out to anyone. Many inventors are quite liberal with their licensing policies, and want to make sure that their invention does enter the "mainstream".

    5. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, let's suppose I had not read this article and came up with a functionally identical illusion: My original idea, my work, my possible income. Compare to: his original idea, his work, his possible income, his patent. I would feel like my invention was taken away from me, not because someone else can use it, but because I couldn't use it myself! There are more than 6,000,000,000 people on this planet. To tell someone he can't do something because someone else thought of it first is preposterous. Patents only work because many of the great inventions of the past have not been patented. If every worthwhile invention had been patented, inventors would be nothing but rare occurrences amidst hordes of lawyers, shrivled minds pondering the next incremental "invention" which is demanded by the legal staff because every other path would most likely lead to spending much time and energy on an invention which has already been made somewhere. Think about the work that is done in standards commitees to ensure no patents are contaminating a future standard. That's dead work and it leads to great inventions going unused, and all that because there's no such thing as a patented standard.

    6. Re:Sigh... by KITT_KATT!* · · Score: 2, Informative

      ... And besides if he's keeping it a secret, by definition he _can't_ have filed a patent. Patents were originally created to encourage people to make the design of their inventions public. You can hold exclusive rights over your invention forever if you keep the design a secret. But if the secret leaks out, you're screwed. On the other hand, if you make the design public through the patent process, the government will enforce your exclusive rights for you for a set period of time.

    7. Re:Sigh... by xmda · · Score: 2
      Now - an interesting question to think about is what part of our pattern-recognizing brain is responsible for *falling* for such a visual illusion? Research like this can shed light on the workings of the mind, I think.

      Well, it's probably the same mechanism that allow us to be fooled by magic tricks. No biggy!

    8. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The BBC story was merely making a reference to Dyson's perpetual fight with Hoover. When he invented the cyclonic vacuum cleaner and tried to sell the idea, nobody wanted it. Now that everyone in Europe has a Dyson, Hoover suddenly jumped on the bagless bandwagon, and they've been fighting over whether it's a patent infringement for years. I don't think the article was trying to say for a fact that the anti-waterfall had been patented; it was, in keeping with the light tone, making a half-joking reference to the Dyson vs. Hoover situation.

  12. 360 deg view of the waterfall here... by mrklin · · Score: 4, Informative

    A video would be much better but there is the iPix version.

  13. And for his next trick... by AvantLegion · · Score: 2, Funny
    ... a toilet whose water rotates clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere!

    (don't bother replying with a debunk of the "Coriolis force" - I already know)

    1. Re:And for his next trick... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coriolis force! Sorry, can't help myself.

  14. Immediate dissapointment by Malicious · · Score: 4, Informative

    The first thing i would do having this invention in front of me, is to put a small floatation device (leaf, paper boat, etc...) at the bottom of the hill, to watch it float uphill.
    Sadly, I would be completely dissapointed.

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
    1. Re:Immediate dissapointment by D+iz+a+n+k+Meister · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, I would have dipped my finger into the "upward" flowing water to see which side the water ebs on. :-(

      --

      He painted a unicorn in outer space. I'm askin' ya, what's it breathin'?
    2. Re:Immediate dissapointment by MikeFM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They have uphill waterslides that just shoot the water uphill. Why couldn't you build an uphill waterfall that way.. which would allow your boat to flow uphill.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    3. Re:Immediate dissapointment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorta like this, I always envisioned an uphill waterslide that would bring you to a hub where you could go on all the traditional waterslides. Mmmmm..

    4. Re:Immediate dissapointment by trout_fish · · Score: 4, Informative

      But then it wouldn't have the gentle, relaxing qualities that you would want in your garden. The idea is that it looks to be flowing naturally uphill, not being forced up it.

    5. Re:Immediate dissapointment by xmda · · Score: 1

      Of course you would. Now that you read the article and know the "trick"... :)

    6. Re:Immediate dissapointment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, that was my first inclination.

    7. Re:Immediate dissapointment by jred · · Score: 1

      What's fun about a fake ice cube w/ a bug in it? Why not use a *real* ice cube with a bug in it? Then the ice could melt, the bug be freed, and...
      Encino Bug, the Movie!!!!

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
    8. Re:Immediate dissapointment by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      Hrm. Maybe not if you shot the water up with low force and had hidden jets under neath that'd give the water a new boost with each step. I'd have to try it but I think I could make it look realistic.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  15. Obligatory POV-Ray Reference! by PovRayMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Check this animation out from an old IRTC round.

    http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/anims/2000-07-15/h20fa ll.mpg

    (setting up a BT would nice for this so IRTC.ORG doesn't get bandwidth destroyed. I'd do it, but I should be really studying for final exams :-) )

    Notes
    http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/anims/2000-07-15/h20fa ll.txt
    Comments
    http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/anims/2000-07-15/comme nts/h20fall.comments

    From here

    http://www.irtc.org/anims/2000-07-15.html

    All credit for the animation goes to Joe Wise.

    1. Re:Obligatory POV-Ray Reference! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT UP

      this is a very cool video!

  16. Re:The house at Disneyland... by ahecht · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, that was the Haunted Shack at Knott's Berry Farm, just down the road from Disneyland. It was torn down about a couple of years ago to make way for a thrill ride, which was also quickly torn down because it was unsafe. It is now a picnic area.

    An identical copy of the Haunted Shack was built at the Calico Ghost Town where it was called the Mystery Shack, but it burned down in 2001 and is currently being rebuilt.

  17. urinals by scubacuda · · Score: 5, Funny
    Maybe he could make a urinal that does that.

    Perhaps some sort of spinoff of Marcel Duchamp's 1917 work of "art".

    Those crazy dadaists!

    1. Re:urinals by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oh, go piss up a rope.

    2. Re:urinals by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Maybe he could make a urinal that does that.

      Piss in reverse? Ooooouuuuuuch!

      Hey, new birth control idea: Put it all back in when you are done! (still ouch)

  18. This is really neat. by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 0

    I always was fascinated by Escher when I was a kid and I still love to just stare at his works for long periods.
    It's the only exercise my brain gets outside of /.

    I will be building one of these in my backyard..
    Totally cool..

    1. Re:This is really neat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's the only exercise my brain gets outside of /.

      My sympathies, really...

  19. The house at Disneyland... by antispamist · · Score: 1

    They tore down that house? That was one of the best memories...:( Damn you Knott's Berry Farm DAMN U.

    --
    --Thei Antispamist A useless endevor that will cer
  20. that's pretty damned cool... by Machine9 · · Score: 3
    Just to counter-balance the usual array of cynical and downright unfriendly Slashdot responses, I'm gonna say:

    That's pretty well done! of course it's a trick, but it's one I haven't seen before, AND it's a *good* trick!

  21. Obvious... by Echnin · · Score: 1

    I want to be floating upstreeeeeeeam.

    Yes, I know that's impossible with this mechanism, but it'd be cool.

    --
    Lalala
  22. This Bring Back Fond Memories... by istartedi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This brings back fond memories of an illusion I first saw when I was a kid. I saw it in Springfield Mall. It was put on by a plumbing contractor, or a hot tub installer, or somebody like that.

    It was a faucet, seemingly suspended in mid-air, with an endless supply of water coming from it.

    I marvelled at it for several minutes, pondering how it could be done, yet my child's mind, while knowing it wasn't real, was beyond fathoming any art or science that could accomplish this.

    Leaning closer to inspect it, my suspicions were aroused by the strange apparatus in the catch basin, but I still needed a full explanation from an adult:

    All you do is run a pipe up to the faucet. The pipe supports the faucet. The faucent contains a concavity that directs the water to flow in a hollow cylinder that hides the pipe and completes the illusion.

    You can buy table-top models of this, with yellow-dyed water flowing into a mug of beer.

    Kudos to this guy though, for taking the concept and wedding it to Escher in a novel way.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
      I recall seeing a gas company booth at a local fair, that had a flame burning from a horizontal ring suspended in a clear plexi box.

      The ring was suspended by 4 small clotheshanger-diameter sized wire bars that had the ends running through the walls of the box.

      The walls were freely accessible, and the top was open so you could see inside. No other tubes or wires were evident. As a kid, I suspected trickery.

      Now, after years of drinking and drugging, trying to escape the unfathomable mystery of the unsolvable corundrum haunting my every waking moment, I know what it was.

      THE DEBIL! IT'S THE DEBIL! YER THE DEBIL!

    2. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      It was a faucet, seemingly suspended in mid-air, with an endless supply of water coming from it.

      I've seen this

      Kudos to this guy though, for taking the concept and wedding it to Escher in a novel way

      Not so fast now

      The faucet had water coming down. Dyson's faucet has the water going up and laminar flow to boot if you need the challenge.

      Not that easy if the faucet is way higher than the diameter of the water cylinder. Must be a Dyson vacuum cleaner in the faucet!

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    3. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you misread... The kudos were to Dyson, not to whoever created the faucet.

    4. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by farnerup · · Score: 1
      It was a faucet, seemingly suspended in mid-air

      The best implementations have the faucet "hanging" from a string. This makes the fact that it hovers in midair look less suspicious.

    5. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by cruachan · · Score: 1

      No, the water going uphill is an optical illusion. Look at the bbc's explanation - the bubbles rising make it look like the water flow is up, but in fact they're rising through water going in the opposite direction.

      Not wishing to show-off, but I looked at the report on the bbc news - which included a few close ups - and immediatly thought that was an interesting use of the 'endless beer can' trick. It's clever, but I'm very suprised it's as highly thought of as it is.

      Now, water flowing the wrong way up the waterfalls - that would be a site worth seeing

    6. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, that's the first thing I thought of when I saw this article, and I'd still never figured it out in all the years since I'd seen it for the first time. The adults wouldn't explain it back then, they'd just tip a wink and say "magic". Thanks a lot buddy.

      This actually puts a dusty old corner of my mind at ease. A pipe! Inside the water flow! Whoda thunk it?

    7. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by ChiefCrazyTalk · · Score: 0

      Springfield mall? Did you visit the Leftorium while you were there?

      Sorry.

    8. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by EvanED · · Score: 1

      >>No, the water going uphill is an optical illusion. Look at the bbc's explanation - the bubbles rising make it look like the water flow is up, but in fact they're rising through water going in the opposite direction.

      But that's the point... the illusions are completely different. The endless beer can's illusion is just that: a never ending stream of beer/water/whatever. It flows normally, just there's way too much of it in the faucet. Dyson's illusion is that water flows uphill.

      Sure, they use related concepts--and not even all that related considering that the main component of Dyson's illusion seems to be the air bubbles--but to accomplish entirely different things.

    9. Re:This Bring Back Fond Memories... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone smarter than you! (that is to say, most people)

  23. Another cool idea... by dh003i · · Score: 1

    How about a statue of two hands molding eachother, demonstrating the wonderful concept that we all mold our own fate? You know, like Escher's picture of two hands drawing eachother?

    Or what about a room of relativity, where one person's stares going up are another person's stares going down?

    1. Re:Another cool idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this cool idea: you learn that it's "stairs" that you walk up or down and "stares" that you attract when you leave your home...

    2. Re:Another cool idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How bout a stature of goatse.cx in your backyard?

  24. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about not, mkay?

  25. Slashthink by miu · · Score: 2, Funny
    That's exactly what patents were created for! To allow the "little guy" to innovate, and benefit from those innovations.

    No!!! IP laws are evil! They are outdated and wrong! There is no purpose to them other than giving the man a tool to keep his jackboot on my neck!

    --

    [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
  26. Water Flowing Upward??? by NeoMoose · · Score: 1, Funny

    In other backwards news: Duke Nukem Forever will be released next month!!!

  27. BBC Slashdotted? by statusbar · · Score: 1

    Very impressive!

    --jeff++

    --
    ipv6 is my vpn
  28. Sure makes.. by [cx] · · Score: 0

    Canoeing up river easier, when can we incorporate this model into our new age WonderCanoe that will take us beyond the milky way??

  29. Cease and Desist by AvantLegion · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear Mr. Dyson, We, the FBI, have become aware of your projects. We understand that you have been reverse-engineering water, and this is in violation of the DMCA, PATRIOT, and PATRIOT II acts. You have been flagged for interrogation as a potential terrorist. Until you can be brought in, you are asked to cease all water reverse-engineering. Sincerely, Agent J. Mehoff

    1. Re:Cease and Desist by GC · · Score: 0

      Dear FBI,

      Eat my shorts! I live in the UK and you have no immediate jurisdiction here.

      Sincerely,

      J. Dyson

    2. Re:Cease and Desist by vidarlo · · Score: 1
      Perfectly true... In the same way that Eschers pics are perfectly logical...He's not reverse engineering the water:

      He's just reversing it

      If he's reverse engineering something, it's the gravity And if he happends to reverse engineer the gravity force, we would all be reading /. from the moon. Via some satelite, or by the matter of fact that the servers came there too. I don't know DMCA in detail, but certainly, reverse engineering the gravity force, would be a REAL threat against any country on earth, therefor this man must be jailed. And don't give him water to mess with...Nor anything else...

    3. Re:Cease and Desist by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      You have been flagged for interrogation as a potential terrorist. Until you can be brought in, you are asked to cease all water reverse-engineering.

      After all, somebody might use the technology to fly buildings into planes.

    4. Re:Cease and Desist by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      Dear Mr. Dyson,

      Since when has jurisdiction stopped us before?

      Sincerely,
      Agent J. Mehoff

  30. Probably just another hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iLoo with water flushing uphill? nah.....

  31. Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative


    If you RTFA

    Derek Phillips, the Dyson engineer who spent 12 months building the feature, told BBC News Online that his head was spinning when he was given his brief.
    "James came up to me and said he wanted this idea to make water go uphill. My initial reaction was to look for Paul Daniels' phone number. But I've had to become a bit of an illusionist myself."

    so i think the credit goes to Mr Phillips for actually pulling it off, Dyson loves taking credit for other peoples work

    1. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by citog · · Score: 1

      Just before you get too carried away having a go at Dyson .. you should note that Phillips *built* it. While he may have had to do most of the work, it was to fulfill Dyson's idea. It would probably be more fair to say; while Dyson invented it, Phillips created it.

    2. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      no no, Escher invented it then Dyson told Phillips to build it, Phillips had the job of overcoming the hurdles, so Dysons involvement seems to be only financial oh and taking the credit of course

    3. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by www.microsoft.com · · Score: 1

      so i think the credit goes to Mr Phillips for actually pulling it off, Dyson loves taking credit for other peoples work

      "I stand a discreet distance away and listen to some of their theories - there are some fantastic ideas there, some of them I actually wish I could make[and patent?]."
      There are a lot of people that patents other people's ideas.

    4. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by citog · · Score: 1

      Because Escher wasn't constrained by bringing his invention into physical being his design is different from Dyson's, surely? Escher's drawings don't give directions as to how they would be assembled in three-dimensional space - the whole point was that many *look* three-dimensional but can only ever exist two-dimensionally. Therefore there had to be an inventive aspect to Dyson's contribution.

    5. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If Phillips works for Dyson, then presumably Dyson ownz all of Phillips' work. At least, all the work that he officially does for Dyson's company. Standard IP contract by the sounds of it.

      Therefore it is Dyson's water feature, even if one of his employees did all the hard work. ;-)

    6. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, I don't know why you're grinding this axe, but it's very clear from "RingTFA" that Dyson *isn't* taking credit for the invention. Why not?

      BECAUSE THE FUCKING ENGINEER IS THE ONE BEING INTERVIEWED FOR THE FUCKING ARTICLE.

      If Dyson were taking credit, he'd be giving the interview.

    7. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by Usquebaugh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Rather like a certain Mr. Edison.

    8. Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did ! by JosefK · · Score: 1

      In this case, Dyson's contribution was looking at Escher's drawing, saying, "I want one of those," and telling Derek Phillips to figure out how to build it.

  32. Nice for your home garden by MikeyNg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That thing would look awesome in your garden. I'd buy one. (If I had the money, and if I had a garden to put it in.)


    I'd also want to put one of those non-linear water wheels. You have buckets on a wheel and they get filled up by a source of water. As they fill, they begin to rotate the wheel. However, the buckets have holes on the bottom. This causes the water in the buckets to flow out. What results is a wheel that moves in a decidedly non-linear fashion. That'd be a nice companion to the Escher waterfall. :)

    --
    Where the wind blows, the tumbleweed goes.
  33. Water Bongs by RightInTheNeck · · Score: 3, Funny

    The story leaves out that after the reporters were done taking pictures for the day, he put the big glass bowl centerpiece back in the middle and he showed them what it was really built for. Its rumored that everyone lost thier lighter.

    1. Re:Water Bongs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reverse Gravity Bong???

  34. Unfortunatly... by Zep1a · · Score: 1, Funny

    According to my supervisor, shit still does, in fact, flow down hill. Zep--

  35. And for his next trick... by arpy · · Score: 3, Funny

    And for his next trick, maybe he could do a mini "hell freezing over".

    Hey, then we'd all get laid! Quick, where's his phone number?

  36. Video by IanBevan · · Score: 1

    If any article needed a video link, this surely should have been it.

    1. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when i saw his sig i thought i saw "WinHeap [winheap.com] Make Visual C++ programs ers run faster - free download so i was like "no shit!? what are you doing throwing unix manuals at them?"

  37. Liquid that really flows uphill...kind of by valloq · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This reminded me of something I read in the paper years back, turns out back in 1996 some scientists were awarded the Nobel Prize for discovering a liquid that actually flows uphill, some sort of special property about temperatures approaching absolute zero that cause liquid to move in a coordinated manner and lack all inner friction. That's the extent of the stuff I can understand, check the article out for yourselves.

    1. Re:Liquid that really flows uphill...kind of by panurge · · Score: 4, Informative

      Liquid helium at close to absolute zero. It doesn't flow uphill, it displays enormous capillary effect which can pull it right out of a container.

      --
      Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    2. Re:Liquid that really flows uphill...kind of by panurge · · Score: 1

      I know, I shouldn't reply to my own posts...but I missed out a critical number. It should have been "Liquid helium 3", it's the isotope of mass 3 that does it. See this Finnish site for more than you ever wanted to know on the subject.

      --
      Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    3. Re:Liquid that really flows uphill...kind of by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      I know, I shouldn't reply to my own posts...but I missed out a critical number. It should have been "Liquid helium 3"...

      You can actually also get superfluid properties with garden variety helium-4. Below 2.2 K, liquid helium-4 undergoes a phase change to the (confusingly labelled) helium-II. Helium-II is currently believed to be a combination of superfluid and 'conventional' helium-4, so it can sneak out of containers, too. Here's a very brief blurb.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    4. Re:Liquid that really flows uphill...kind of by phliar · · Score: 2, Interesting
      ... turns out back in 1996 some scientists were awarded the Nobel Prize for discovering a liquid that actually flows uphill, some sort of special property about temperatures approaching absolute zero...
      Superfluidity of liquid helium (He4) below about 2K (that's 2 kelvin above absolute zero) has been known for a very long time -- since around 1952 or '53 I think. Helium had been liquefied in 1927, but superfluidity wasn't noticed till the 50s.It's a quantum phenomenon. These 1996 Nobel laureates showed it in He3.
      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    5. Re:Liquid that really flows uphill...kind of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember one of my college chemistry professors mentioning that Bucky balls (C60) have this unusual property of flowing right out of a container.

  38. Who modded this Insightful?! by Sapphon · · Score: 1

    Come on, you must have picked the wrong category there chum.

    Patent laws provide incentives for people to indulge in creative thought by rewarding their investments in any ideas they may come up with.

    How do patents do this? Fairly simple, really:
    1) You think up a new invention
    2) You market this invention (exclusively, thanks to patents)
    3) MONEY!!

    Seriously, do you think companies would spend a 10th on R&D of what they currently do, if they knew that if they came up with something everyone would be free to duplicate it? Where's the incentive to put in the hard yards there, without patents it would be a case of big firms sitting back, waiting for someone to come up with a good idea, then stealing it.

    Patent Laws encourage innovation by giving the inventors enough time to recoup in the investment they make in their ideas. I don't see how they let "the man" do anything.

    --
    Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
    1. Re:Who modded this Insightful?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you think companies would spend a 10th on R&D of what they currently do, if they knew that if they came up with something everyone would be free to duplicate it?

      Yes, they would. It becomes obvious when you think about the alternative: What would they do if everybody waited for someone else to invent something? Nothing to sell, no business. That's not even taking into consideration man's inherent drive to create, or the time-to-market head start for the company which made the invention.

    2. Re:Who modded this Insightful?! by ThaReetLad · · Score: 1

      What if the incentive is not merely money? What if people invent just for the joy of creating something new? Maybe I'm naive but I don't believe that money makes the world go round.

      --
      You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    3. Re:Who modded this Insightful?! by SwissCheese · · Score: 1

      Then you are free to not patent your inventions. Nobody is forcing you to do so. However, don't cry foul when somebody else comes along and makes money off of your ideas.

    4. Re:Who modded this Insightful?! by spun · · Score: 1

      Ah, dude, this is Slashdot, home of the Open Source programmer, a strange critter that creates for free.

      Of course, there is still incentive. Fame, having a cool program, the respect of one's peers, impressing that hot chick, or even, omigawd! just for fun.

      Money isn't the only incentive, or even the primary incentive for most people.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  39. Water running uphill by Ashtead · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I have seen sections of water-slides where the water flow actually goes uphill for shorter distances. Then there is the everyday action where water flows upwards inside a pipe. Except we're so used to this, so making a display of it doesn't prove interesting.

    Still, this does look really cool even though it is a trompe l'oeil.

    --
    SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
  40. Patented without disclosure? by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1
    "But I'm not telling exactly how I achieve the effect."

    "James Dyson - no stranger to court battles over patents - has presumably taken care of the necessary legal business."
    Imagine that! Apparently he's been granted a patent on this invention but he's "not telling" people how it works. Whatever happened to full disclosure before being granted a patent? You know, advancing the arts and all that? Or is he perhaps going for a different kind of IP protection, like Penrose and his idiotic toilet paper lawsuit?
    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:Patented without disclosure? by bazabba · · Score: 1
      "But I'm not telling exactly how I achieve the effect."
      I thought the article took care of this? The diagram and description didn't describe how he achieved the effect? This is a cool device though and I wouldn't mind trying to put one together myself.
    2. Re:Patented without disclosure? by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      The article did give an idea of how the effect is achieved. I guess the keyword is "exactly", where the article gives us only an overview. It's more a matter of principle than about the man's invention.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    3. Re:Patented without disclosure? by Loosewire · · Score: 1

      i thaugt he meant he wasnt telling visitors how it worked - the bbc article seems to explain everything?

      --
      Slashdot - The one stop shop for procrastination
  41. Evil Patents! by while(true) · · Score: 1, Funny
    "James Dyson - no stranger to court battles over patents - has presumably taken care of the necessary legal business."

    I guess they forgot to check for prior art... :)

  42. How To Accelerate Water Up by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

    Instead of bubbling air under the water to make an illusion, force air over the water, like wind over the ocean. The water will be forced to move like water rushing up a beach.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  43. licensing? by lingqi · · Score: 1

    hmm, just like his vacuum cleaner technology, right?

    I believe his bagless version is quite some bit more advanced than the most (all?) of the other ones out there.

    However, you are expected to pay some 400 dollars for a vacuum.

    Now, that's very cool technology that he is touting, but no way in a billion years that i will choke up that kind of money for a vacuum - the fact is, if his vacuum technology is licensed liberally (or, I might add, not patented altogether), manufacturing for it would be drop in price and everyone can get hold of nice vacuums. However, now we'd have to wait some 17 years before that happens.

    I don't think it's, in the end, for the Greater Good (tm). To be honest I have become quite convinced that even without patents, willingness to innovate would not be at all strifled, and patent laws, when abused, have a much higher tendency to do so. Yes if properly done patent is a wonderful thing, but so is communism - patent laws are too easy to abuse. But I digress - this is offtopic enough already

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

    1. Re:licensing? by afidel · · Score: 1

      I guess it depends on your needs and the specifics of the vacuum cleaner. Before HEPA filter vacuum's my folks bought a rainbow water vacuum, it filtered the water through a tank of water, catching some 99.99% of particles. It also cost over $1,000. This might seem like a lot, but compared to the agony of living with alergies it was nothing. Now of course you can get a HEPA filtered bag vacuum for under $100 and the bags are around $10 apiece.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:licensing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...it filtered the water through a tank of water...

      i am sorry, what?

      besides the point, Dyson vacuum is not good b/c the HEPA, but because it never lowers suction power regardless of how near-full it is.

    3. Re:licensing? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Instead of using a bag the rainbow vacuum forced the sucked air through a tank of water, all of the dust and sediment was trapped by the water and the air stream escaped. Very, very good for trapping dustmite feces and other things that were not caught by traditional bag vacuum's. Like I said though they have been supersceded by HEPA bags. btw the Rainbow vacuum also kept up 100% sucktion until the water was supersaturated, normally about 1500sq feet if vacuumed twice a week. My point was that if the need is there $400 is not that outrageous, I've spent several times that on a vacuum.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  44. Oh no! by DrewCapu · · Score: 1, Funny
    "But no he is just using pumped air - no surprise really considering hes a vacuum genius"
    He's gone from suck to blow!
  45. Didn't they do this with a gradient of teflon? by Darwiniac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember seeing this ridiculous pop science show that was trying to come up with any evidence to support various bible stories. In one of them the tried to support the splitting of the red sea by showing some researchers who got water to flow up a gradient of decreasingly hydrophobic material (teflon I think). I remember thinking, "Oh yeah, Moses was an expert in poly-flourinated chemistry!" Does this ring a bell for anyone? The teflon gradient that is, not the cooky show.

    1. Re:Didn't they do this with a gradient of teflon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like the suggestion that parting the Red Sea would be physically possible but failing to explain exactly how Mosses would have lined the Red Sea with Teflon in the first place. I guess thats just to obvious for them to bother explaining.

  46. Electric Brae, it's called. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's just north of Ayr, near a place called Dunure. Quite a bizarre thing, too. Website here

    1. Re:Electric Brae, it's called. by hswerdfe · · Score: 1

      There is one in New Brunswick (Canada).
      Its called the "Magnetic Hill" there.

      its amusing.
      nothing actually goes up hill its just that the horizon is slanted, so it seems like it.

      or at least thats what I am told

      --
      --meh--
    2. Re:Electric Brae, it's called. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did this get to +5 Informative? The original poster was refering to Magnetic Hill, in NB. Granted, there are a number of places that have this same property of illusion, but still, New Brunswick is not part of the UK!

      The moderators are on crack, I tell ya.

    3. Re:Electric Brae, it's called. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      There's a place called Monkton near Ayr, which is what I thought he was referring to.

    4. Re:Electric Brae, it's called. by anethema · · Score: 1

      thats the one im talking about...
      i think i read it was in Moncton or something (NB)

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
  47. Car rolling uphill (was Re: Uphill water flow...) by minderaser · · Score: 1

    There is also an optical illusion near there in..Moncton i think? You go to the base of the hill, put your car in neutral, and your car will roll up the hill. Its an optical illusion, you are actually rolling downhill, but you look and it looks uphill, no amount of thinking its downhill dispells that.

    You may (or not) be thinking of a place near Lewisberry, Pennsylvania - which is conveniently about 15 min. from my house :-) It is truly a mindfuck. I love taking people there and acting as if I don't know what's going on and freaking out when the car rolls backwards uphill (apparently), which only freaks them out even more!

    I've heard it was featured on that "Unsolved Mysteries" show, but I dunno.

  48. Almost as good as... by UnixRevolution · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Those Escher Lego Pictures from a while back.

    Escher's work is damn cool. :)

    --
    You like your new Mac more than you like me, don't you, Dave? Dave? I asked...She said Yes.
  49. dyson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    So when will he build us that sphere thingy?

  50. That's great and all... by tspilman · · Score: 1


    ... but this is infinitely more interesting to me.

    --
    Tom the Sigless
  51. Look it up, then. by alannon · · Score: 1

    You obviously don't understand how patents work, then. The whole point is to NOT disclose them before being granted the patent, at least to the public. Once the patent is granted, it's a matter of public record.

    Look it up if you want to know.

    1. Re:Look it up, then. by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      I assumed he had already recieved a patent. I guess not.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
  52. Re:The house at Disneyland... by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1

    There was also one called "Grandpa's house" at Silver Dollar City in Branson Mo. Don't know if it's still there.
    There were all sorts of visual gags in there, goofy floors, tilted stuff, you know..
    Great fun for the kids, pretty fun for the older folks too, but tough to walk through if you have a bum leg..

  53. Re:Not to be a grammer nazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not to be a spelling nazi, but shoudn't it be "grammar"?

  54. drink to make you more thirsty by wadiwood · · Score: 1

    Yes, coke, coffee or alcohol all dehydrate you (make you thirsty). In the case of alcohol, thats why drinking as much water as you can the night before helps in the morning after. And if you still hurt in the morning, drink more water (and coffee doesn't count, but apple juice does, water is still best).

    --

    -- it must be true, it's on the internet.
    1. Re:drink to make you more thirsty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the dehydrating effects of caffeine are not that significant. More liquid is retained than emitted by the caffeine-stimulated kidneys. If they were very significant, you'd see office workers in a dehydrated stupor at 10 AM and beaches covered with bodies. Oh, wait...

  55. Not Impressed by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1

    Schlitterbahn in New Braunfels, Texas has had uphill water rides for almost ten years. Sure, there's no nifty Escher tie-in, but it's a lot more fun than a British flower show.

    --
    But then again, I could be wrong.
    1. Re:Not Impressed by Loosewire · · Score: 1

      yeah but that is just high preassure water jets still neither of them actually make water flow up hill. and im sure the uk has some uphill water rides somewhere...

      --
      Slashdot - The one stop shop for procrastination
    2. Re:Not Impressed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes...yes....everything is better in TEXAS. We know. Shut up.

  56. Linux?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Post flowing uphill to the wrong topic

    Oh yeah. Any chance of getting Linux to run on one of those things?

  57. not entirely true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you engineer a product, people can reverse-engineer it. holding a secret isn't always THE way to go.

    BUT, i believe you can still file a patent even after that, if you prove that you invented it first. Bell won the telephone thing based on the "I invented 3 days before him though I came into the patent office 30 seconds after" clause.

    though, 3M did a good job with the secrets thing. post-it note glue formula was never revealed to the world, and by the time companies like avery reverse engineered it, they have already established market penetration and brand recognition that nobody can touch.

    Just some random babble

  58. Father Ted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that anywhere near Saint Kevin's Stump?

  59. Grammar nazi by GQuon · · Score: 3, Funny

    This, of course, causes its normal downhill motion under gravity to occur retrotemporally, giving the fluid the appearance of syntemporal uphill motion.

    I know we're supposed to concentrate on the content, and not the form of comments. But you pulled of the rare feat of making 3 simple grammatical errors in that sentence. I suggest you order the book "1001 Tense Formations", by Dr. Dan Streetmentioner, from your favourite Internet book store, and re-fresh your grammar. Next time Read It Before You Post.

    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    1. Re:Grammar nazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you made three obvious ones in your own post.

      Maybe you should "re-fresh" your social skills by going outside for a change, you'll find that nitpicking grammar isn't quite as impressive to people as you may think.

      In other words.. get a fucking life.

    2. Re:Grammar nazi by Rick.C · · Score: 2, Funny
      I suggest you order the book "1001 Tense Formations"

      Duh! Normal tenses don't apply when discussing fictional time manifestations.

      Additionally, grammar flames are expected to be grammatically perfect. Yours contained four punctuation errors, one hyphenation error and one misspelling ("off").

      Please try harder.

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    3. Re:Grammar nazi by RichardX · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, the Duh! is on you.
      The gramattical guide book to which the parent refers is from the hitch hiker's guide to the galaxy (think about it. How often do you find a grammer guide for time travel in your local bookshop?)

      --- quote ---
      One of the major problems encountered in time travel is not that
      of accidentally becoming your own father or mother. There is no
      problem involved in becoming your own father or mother that a
      broadminded and well-adjusted family can't cope with. There is
      also no problem about changing the course of history - the course
      of history does not change because it all fits together like a
      jigsaw. All the important changes have happened before the things
      they were supposed to change and it all sorts itself out in the
      end.

      The major problem is quite simply one of grammar, and the main
      work to consult in this matter is Dr Dan Streetmentioner's Time
      Traveller's Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations. It will tell you
      for instance how to describe something that was about to happen
      to you in the past before you avoided it by time-jumping forward
      two days in order to avoid it. The event will be described
      differently according to whether you are talking about it from
      the standpoint of your own natural time, from a time in the
      further future, or a time in the further past and is further
      complicated by the possibility of conducting conversations whilst
      you are actually travelling from one time to another with the
      intention of becoming your own father or mother.

      Most readers get as far as the Future Semi-Conditionally Modified
      Subinverted Plagal Past Subjunctive Intentional before giving up:
      and in fact in later editions of the book all the pages beyond
      this point have been left blank to save on printing costs.

      The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy skips lightly over this
      tangle of academic abstraction, pausing only to note that the
      term "Future Perfect" has been abandoned since it was discovered
      not to be.

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    4. Re:Grammar nazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should "re-fresh" your social skills by going outside for a change, you'll find that nitpicking grammar isn't quite as impressive to people as you may think.

      In other words.. get a fucking life.


      So there's great opportunities for outdoor sex (outside fucking life) where you live? Here it's raining, the temperature is 45F, and the wind is blowing. You might think that's great, but I don't take those chances with my "junior".

  60. Magnetic Hill and Reversing Falls. by Viking5150 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You are referring to the Reversing Falls in Saint John, NB.

    Also, you are referring to The Magnetic Hill in Moncton, NB.

    I've seen both. The Magnetic Hill is a cool illusion. The Reversing Falls isn't worth the drive. It looks cooler in pictures. It's really a reversing river more than anything.

    1. Re:Magnetic Hill and Reversing Falls. by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 1

      Some days, when the conditions are right, Moncton gets a nifty "tidal bore". What's that? When tide starts coming in, a couple of waves flow UP the Petticodiac river from the ocean all the way to Moncton. (By the time you see them, those waves have moved upstream about 80-100km.)

      The size of the bore varies on how big a tide it is, how dry the river is etc. It's neat to observe when you happen to drive by at the right time and catch a good one. It isn't reliable enough to sit at the stupid tourist viewing area and wonder what the fuss is about.

  61. Gravity is dying! by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 2, Funny

    It is official; BBC confirms: gravity is dying One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered gravity community when IDC confirmed that gravity market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all garden shows. Coming on the heels of a recent BBC survey which plainly states that gravity has lost more garden market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. gravity is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Dyson comprehensive water test.

    You don't need to be a Newton to predict gravity's future. The hand writing is on the wall: gravity faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all because gravity is dying. Things are looking very bad for gravity. Red ink flows like an uphill river of blood.

    1. Re:Gravity is dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evil moderators... this one was clever, its definitely not offtopic. Well at least that moderator was stupid enough to not use overrated/underrated. Now, someone can metamod his ass.

    2. Re:Gravity is dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rating: Offtopic.
      This rating is Unfair [x]

      Greetings from the metamoderation department

  62. Linux??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed. What if?

    Sounds like a great Open Sores business model.

    See: Stolen Concept. The world cannot go round with out the consent of the owner. It's their right as an owner. If the owner doesn't have any incentive to make the world go round, it won't. To conclude otherwise is to conclude that one is unconscious. To conclude that one is unconscious is scarcely epistemologically admissible.

    1. Re:Linux??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's their right as an owner.

      Says who? That's what I like about "Information wants to be free". It doesn't postulate any "rights". It's simply an observation concerning the nature of information, encapsulated in a personification which underlines that the intentions of the "owner" have little influence.

  63. Re:The house at Disneyland... by zeno_2 · · Score: 1

    That is probably one of the only things I can really remember from Knotts Berry Farm. They had a few illusions in that house.

    1 - First room they took a shorter and a taller person and put them kinda against the wall, they looked the same height.

    2 - Next one I believe was the water one. They had a pipe with the water source connected to a water pitcher of some sort, which was pouring onto a little trough, but the water went uphill instead of downhill.

    3 - Next room they had someone sit in a chair that was nailed against the wall and made them put their hands on thier lap. The goal was to be able to sit up but the person couldn't.

    That was a pretty cool deal they had there, its too bad it got torn down.

    About 50 miles or so from where I live there is a hill called gravity hill. When you put your car in neutral it appears the car rolls uphill, its pretty trippy =).

  64. V�durspump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this is a bit off topic, but there has been self-driven water pumps (swedish) around for a couple of hundred years.

  65. Disney World Called by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are sueing you for IP Violations for the waterfall flowing up like the one seen in Epcot.

  66. Magnetic Hill by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Moncton, NB, Canada (where I was born), there is a tourist attraction called Magnetic Hill. It is a really cool experience where you park your car on a hill, and it (seemengly) rolls *up* the hill. This was not designed by "imagineers" or anyone else, it is a natrually occuring illusion... something to do with the way the land grades there in relation to the center of earths gravity. Water also flows uphill there.. totally naturally. Its the only place I know of in the world where this happens.

    1. Re:Magnetic Hill by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 1

      See my post "Also Happens In Nature" about Electric Brae in Scotland. Sounds like a similar phenomenon.

      Bob

    2. Re:Magnetic Hill by SheldonYoung · · Score: 2, Informative

      See the following page for a list of more of the similar type of illusion:

      http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/ro ll -uphill.html

  67. Er.. bad links, sorry! by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    It seems Google provided me with two invalid links, and I didn't bother to check them before submit... I am sure everyone is aware of how to use Google though so I won't waste my time finding more links :P

  68. Similar thing in Mexico by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... close to Comala in the state of Colima there is a stretch fo road in which one sees like going uphill as well.
    Check it here.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  69. moron the buoyancIE of bovine nitrogenous.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    waste. it only floats for a while. what's notable is that afloat or completely submerged, it's still total bull, subject to gravity/decomposition, same as the rest of US.

    NYT GIVING DECEPTIVE PREFERENCE TO PAID2POST ?PR? SHILLS/STOCK MARKET FRAUDS BUY DELETEING OPPOSITION TO THE SOFTWAR GANGSTERS' PAYPER LIESENSE LIARS TOUTS & SHILLS

    read all about it.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8& oe =UTF-8&q=microsoft+%22bill+weisgerber%22&btnG=Goog le+Search

    http://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft+%22sanj ay +ahuja%22&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe =UTF-8

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8& oe =UTF-8&q=microsoft+attacks+linux+gnu&btnG=Google+S earch

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8& oe =UTF-8&q=microsoft+sabotages+java&btnG=Google+Sear ch

    lookout bullow. nothing but gnu skies, ...?/

    for more insight: trustworthycomputing.com(owed)

    frequent contact with yOUR creator is also highly recommended, in these times of whoreabull deceptive payper liesense stock markup FUDgePacking.

    consult with yOUR creator. vote with yOUR wallet. lookout bullow.

  70. Water has been flowing uphill for years . . . by CuriousGeorge113 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The laws of physics have been defiled for years over at Gravity Hill.

    Where have you been?

    --
    No man is an island, But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie them together, they make a pretty good raft.
  71. De visita en Londres? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 0

    Lo que es la vida. No te vas a acordar pero nos reunimos un par de veces cuando yo estaba haciendo mis pininos en la UNAM como aministrador de sistemas.

    Me da gusto ver la prominencia que has ganado gracias a tu trabajo.

    Saludos.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:De visita en Londres? by default+luser · · Score: 1

      Why yes,

      I DO like to put on women's cloting, and hang around in bars.

      But don't tell CmdTaco. He's obviously smitten with my feminine side.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

  72. Epcot by Therlin · · Score: 1

    There is a waterfall at Disney's Epcot where water flows up. They simply use water jets that shoot water up from underneath the lake all the way to the top of the waterfall. Simple but effective (and not as cool as this story's fountain)

  73. Re:Car rolling uphill (was Re: Uphill water flow.. by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

    No, the one he's referring to (the famous one) is near Moncton, New Brunswick, and is called Magnetic Hill.

  74. For his next trick.... by wowbagger · · Score: 3, Funny

    For his next trick....

    Making the bubbles in a Guiness flow up!

    1. Re:For his next trick.... by Jedi+Holocron · · Score: 1

      Blasphemy!

  75. Re:Car rolling uphill (was Re: Uphill water flow.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada:

    http://2hwy.com/nb/m/magnetic.htm

  76. Ah, so... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    You're saying that anti-matter fall down, go boom? :^)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  77. Free standing faucets by stephanruby · · Score: 1

    How does his invention differ from a free standing faucet? The concept is the same. Only the shape is different. May be his competitors will be able to make competing products based on slightly different shapes.

    1. Re:Free standing faucets by art123 · · Score: 1

      That is a completely different illusion.

      The liquid does not appear to move up into the faucet like the water of this waterfall does. It is simply pumped up a vertical tube and spills over the top of the tube thus hiding the tube from view.

    2. Re:Free standing faucets by EvanED · · Score: 1

      The illusions are completely different. The endless beer can's illusion is just that: a never ending stream of beer/water/whatever. It flows normally, just there's way too much of it in the faucet. Dyson's illusion is that water flows uphill.

      Sure, they use somewhat related concepts--and not even all that related considering that the main component of Dyson's illusion seems to be the air bubbles--but to accomplish entirely different things.

    3. Re:Free standing faucets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh, I didn't notice the air bubbles. Thanks.

  78. Prior Simpson's art by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    They already had one on the Simpson's for the southern hemisphere.

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  79. Also Found In Nature by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Those who have visited Ayrshire in Scotland will most likely have visited Electric Brae, which is just about the wierdest place I've ever been. Things roll uphill here, or at least appear to.

    Here's a link, and here's another.

    Bob

  80. no by banana+fiend · · Score: 1

    Instead, you mutually annihilate, creating a fairly large explosion, depending on how much anti-water you drink - or in this case self-immolate with :))

    Though, if you're really REALLY thirsty, the burning dying sensations are similar.

    --
    Johns: Well, how does it look now? Riddick: Looks clear.
  81. In Montana there is a river that is ... by danieleran · · Score: 3, Informative

    "a mile wide, an inch deep and runs uphill," as Lewis and Clark described it.

    It's the Powder River, runs into the Yellowstone to the Missouri. There are places it appears to run uphill because the wind blows the surface backward. It's generally pretty shallow, hence 'the inch deep' and, well, the name.

    There is no link I can point to on the web. Not even Google knows about it. Montana is very unwired.

    1. Re:In Montana there is a river that is ... by Khomar · · Score: 1
      Montana is very unwired.

      Not to shatter illusions too much, but believe it or not, Montana does have Internet access (afterall, I am posting right now, eh?). In fact, there is a growing Internet community with online technology companies right here in Bozeman including Right Now Technologies and my own company, Bridger Systems. With the influx of people into the western half of the state over the past ten years, we are getting more and more infrastructure. Though cable modems have not yet arrived in my town (I believe it exists in Missoula and Billings), we have DSL and wireless broadband access. Furthermore, there is a strong computer science department at Montana State University. Montana is not quite the isolated wilderness that people think it is.

      --

      I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!

    2. Re:In Montana there is a river that is ... by danieleran · · Score: 1

      I grew up in Montana (in the town at the end of Lonesome Dove: Miles City, as in, ahem, http://www.milescity.com ), so I'm not exactly speculating, hehe.

      Montana is so big (state #4) that the difference between hip college town Missoula and "where the Power River runs thru it" is greater than San Francisco and, say, Winnemuca Nevada.

      Not that you can't get a dialtone: When I graduated HS in 1991, I was using dialup lines to download and try out Mosaic (figured something was going to need to change for the Web to catch on; I was at a blazing 14.4kbps and it sucked). I was chatting online with a 1200 baud modem at $10/hour before that, using the Internet before AOL & compuserve had gateways installed (I used GEnie).

      So yeah, there is/has been Internet but I'd still say MT is not "real wired" out there in cowboy country.

      I moved to the City to get somewhere Wired and Important. Yet even in downtown SF, my Verizon phone can't stay connected for a 5 minute phonecall, so its all relative.

      Failing to find anything in Google about the Powder River left my jaw on the floor.

    3. Re:In Montana there is a river that is ... by Khomar · · Score: 1

      There is indeed much of Montana (especially eastern) that is pretty much unwired, but you would probably be surprised how much Missoula and Bozeman have changed in the last 10 years, Bozeman especially. It is no longer the small cowboy town it used to be... much to my chagrin. But compared to the big cities, yeah, I guess we have quite a ways to go. However, you do not have to go out-of-state anymore to be successful.

      I must admit that I find the lack of Powder River surprising as well.

      --

      I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!

  82. Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1
    You knew it was a joke, right? This being slashdot, I had almost expected people to either have read "the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy", or to search for "1001 Tense Formations" on the Internet. Next time I try to make a joke with an obscure reference to literature, I will provide the hyperlinks and fill it with emoticons. :-/ :-( :-)

    I acknowledge the misspelled "off".
    Could somebody please point out the punctuation errors and the hyphenation error? (I mean, there must be some teachers of English or high school valedictorians around here.)

    Second attempt:

    I know we're supposed to concentrate on the content, and not the form of comments. However you pulled off the rare feat of making 3 simple grammatical errors in that sentence. I suggest you order the book "1001 Tense Formations", by Dr. Dan Streetmentioner, from your favorite Internet bookstore and refresh your grammar. Next time "Read It Before You Post" as the slashdot FAQ states.
    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    1. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by johndiii · · Score: 1

      I think that these were the punctuation issues:

      - There should be a comma after "form" in the first sentence.

      - The comma after "1001 Tense Formations" should precede the quote, rather than following it. This is illogical, of course, but it is the rule. I frequently make this error on purpose. Another possibility was that the poster was asserting that book titles should be underlined, rather than double-quoted. That seems less likely.

      - In the original post, the hyphen in "re-fresh" was inappropriate.

      Those are my guesses, anyway. Not that it really matters. The original post was an excellent, subtle joke. Thanks.

      --
      Floating face-down in a river of regret...and thoughts of you...
    2. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the ideas.
      The original post was an excellent, subtle joke.
      Unfortunately, I didn't consider people who weren't "in" on the HGttG.
      I feel sorry for Rick.C (626083), who replied in good faith ? well sort of ? and was moderated down. I'll maybe moderate him up sometime to make amends.

      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    3. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by johndiii · · Score: 1

      The name "Streetmentioner" brought the memory right to the fore. Just the kind of thing that Adams would drop in there. Can't believe that you got a "troll" mod for the original post, though. Time to go and metamoderate.

      The mod on Rick C's post might have been a troll mod, since "Overrated" was used. They need to close that loophole.

      --
      Floating face-down in a river of regret...and thoughts of you...
    4. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      Don't worry about my karma. I don't.

      Yeah, I missed the HGttG reference even though I read it from cover to cover several years ago. My bad. Even so, my "Duh!" comment was supposed to be funny, not sarcastic.

      The grammar bit is reflexive, I'm afraid. I used to frequent a Usenet group where that sort of thing was common and pointing out Grammar Nazis' errors was a required response.

      To be helpful (and since you asked), your second attempt was much better. In order to make it perfect:

      Drop the comma after "content". Generally there should not be a comma before "and" because the comma means "and".

      Add a comma after "However". Without the comma, "however" means something different as in, "However you look at it, it's a mess!"

      The "3" should be spelled out. Usually non-hyphenated one- or two-digit numbers are spelled unless they are mixed with non-spelled numbers or if there is math involved. In that case all the numbers should be numeric for ease of understanding. "What is the sound of fifteen hands clapping?" and "What is the sound of 101 hands clapping?" are both correct, as is, "You ordered 10 of those at $1.50 each."

      The comma before "from" is correct, but a little awkward. Some day when you're a famous author your editor will probably rearrange it to:

      I suggest you order Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's book, "1001 Tense Formations" from your...

      Finally, putting the punctuation inside the quotes on a quoted word is technically correct I suppose, but as a programmer it really hurts my eyes. It's always correct for a quoted sentence or phrase, but for a single word it looks weird. Ditto if you're quoting something syntactically important and the punctuation would change the syntax. Follow your muse here, I guess. I do.

      Now I'd like to ask you to return the favor. Using Slashdot's allowed HTML, how do you force a line break without adding a blank line?
      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    5. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Using Slashdot's allowed HTML, how do you force a line break without adding a blank line?

      Um, wouldn't that just be "BR"?

    6. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1
      Comment Options is your friend:


      It might have something to do with my new signature:
      Real men First Post only in the FPHoE.

      Moderators might think I'm a troll because of it. It is really a whimsical, but obviously futile, attempt to stop people from posting first posts in story comments.
      I was inspired by the user-moderated story queue.
      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    7. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1

      Um, wouldn't that just be "BR"?

      Yes, it would. If he remembers to write "HTML Formatted" instead of "Plain Old Text" which inserts line breaks for you.
      That was a "BR".

      The "P" tag typically inserts blank lines above and below.

      Like in the previous paragraph.
      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    8. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      Duh!
      It works! (I'm obviously HTML-challenged.)

      Thanks!

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    9. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1
      Thank you for answering.

      My bad. Even so, my "Duh!" comment was supposed to be funny, not sarcastic.
      I wish I could say that I introduced language errors just to be funny. The truth is that I wanted to be quicker than the ten other people who got the same idea.


      Drop the comma after "content".
      You're right. If I had read it through properly I would have caught it. I now found at that lists should have a comma before the "and" at the end. I learned differently.


      Add a comma after "However".
      That was a stupid typo. When I exchanged the "but" for "however", the sentence became wrong. "But" was fine in the first place.



      Finally, putting the punctuation inside the quotes on a quoted word is technically correct I suppose, but as a programmer it really hurts my eyes.
      Puctuation? Do you mean capitalization?
      Or are you referring to the comma after "1001 Tense Formations"?/"1001 Tense Formations?"

      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    10. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by EvanED · · Score: 1

      >>Finally, putting the punctuation inside the quotes on a quoted word is technically correct I suppose, but as a programmer it really hurts my eyes.

      He means it should be "1001 Tense Formations," [...] instead of "1001 Tense Formations", [...]. This is dependent upon you country, though I supect from your use of double- rather than single-quotes that you're based in the US. In the US, punctuation goes inside the quotes, with the exception of the '?' which depends on if it was part of the quote origionally.

      (I think most other countries use single quotes more often, and punctuation such as '1001 Tense Formations', is sometimes not considered incorrect.)

    11. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1

      Yes, you're right.
      Quotation Marks.

      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    12. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      While it's true that nowadays, lists of three or more items can have a final comma if it improves readability (my high school grammar teacher would roll over in her grave if she heard that!), this sentence is not a list:

      "I know we're supposed to concentrate on the content, and not the form of comments."

      The "and" joins two clauses or phrases. If removing the comma makes that sentence seem awkward to you, try rephrasing it:

      "I know we're supposed to concentrate on the content and not on the form of comments."
      or
      "I know we're supposed to concentrate on the content of comments instead of their form."

      Do you mean capitalization?

      No, I meant commas and periods. I was referring to another poster's comment about putting the comma inside the quotes and how I often break that rule when it looks wrong or the result is confusing.

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    13. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by GQuon · · Score: 1

      this sentence is not a list:

      "I know we're supposed to concentrate on the content, and not the form of comments."


      I know. I did start my answer with "You're right."
      I just included the bit about lists because the "final comma" rule is news to me. Sorry for not making that more clear, like by using a "BR" and writing "And by the way".

      --
      Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    14. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by Majik+Sznak · · Score: 1

      I've looked into the quote-comma issue. It seems the rules have changed (likely to account for the lowest common denominator, which is the primary reason rules change.

      It is now OK to put the comma either inside or outside the quote.

      And a few years from now, the apostrophe will be just for show, and nukyulur will be in the dictionary...

      --
      Karma: Chameleon (Mostly affected by the 1980s)
    15. Re:Grammar Krikkit Robot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The comma-quote issue is purely a country based one where the US is different from the rest of the English speaking world. In most of the English-speaking world the comma is placed logically (if it's a part of the quote it goes inside the quote, otherwise it goes outside - same with full stops). In the US the rule is always inside the quotes. The justification given is something like: when moveable type was used you had to protect the comma from breaking and put it inside the quote block or even "it looks better that way" (or even occassionally, "that's the rule - deal!")

      Interestingly, the US rules (Chicago handbook of style I believe) actually suggest one exception: if you use a single word then the comma goes outside, i.e., when I say "rule", I mean "suggestion" is correct in the US according to the Chicago handbook. But most people in the US don't know that one.

  83. Similar to the Honda ad ... by Litterbox · · Score: 0

    I really find it hard to believe that the tires in this ad could roll uphill. Other than that one mistake the ad is really cool! http://home.attbi.com/~bernhard36/honda-ad.html

    1. Re:Similar to the Honda ad ... by smack_attack · · Score: 1

      If you placed heavy objects at the VERY TOP of the inside of the tire... when pushed they would be able to roll the tire uphill until the heavy object came to rest at the bottom or ran out of it's potential energy.

      It's a simple physics lesson of stored potential energy.

  84. Do as he says, NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's spot-on.

  85. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the illusion?

  86. Re:Magnetic Hill Photos by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
    Here

    and with the help of Google

    I've been looking for info on what/where this place was since I was a kid and saw it on Ripliey's Believe it or Not or somthing...

  87. wtf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why was this modded off topic? It was about as off topic as anything other post here.

    Stupid fucking moderators...

  88. Re:Magnetic Hill is everywhere! by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1

    Ooh...one more good link.

  89. "Uphill" stream alongside I-70 in Utah by CraigV · · Score: 1

    As one drives east on I-70 out of Salina, Utah, into the Fishlake Wilderness, there is a stream alongside the highway that convincingly appears to be flowing the wrong way. My wife had to use our GPS to be sure that we were still going uphill. It seems that the mountains alongside the canyon are highest above the road and river at the lower elevations and that difference steadily diminishes as one drives up the road.

    I had the opposite feeling driving down highway 191 from West Yellowstone, WY, to Bozeman, MT, alongside the Gallatin River.

  90. Aniwater? by Superfreaker · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Who cares how anit-water behaves with gravity?

    If an antimatter atom came into contact with its matter cousin it would instantly obliterate both of them. Given that it is H and O we're talking about, your anti-water would last for all of a nano-second. If that.

    1. Re:Aniwater? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Who cares how anit-water behaves with gravity?

      You may as well say who cares if E=MC^2. How anti-matter interacts with gravity has huge implications for our understanding of physics, and huge implications for technological developments in the future. E=MC^2 gave us nukes, nuclear power, nuclear medicine, it may bring us fusion power in a few years, and has contibuted greatly to our understanding of the universe.

      If anti-matter was repelled by gravity you can be sure it would have technological implications at some point in the future.

      The original poster was obviously making a joke when he suggested this waterfall might be made of antimatter. In my oppinion it was a funny joke. I just took the opportunity to deal with the science behind it.
      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  91. ...but only if you're standing next... by Interrobang · · Score: 1

    ...to Dyson's creation, and then perhaps only in...Oh, never mind. Bring me the head of Natalie Portman on a plate of hot grits!

  92. river flows uphill by Tahoe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Drive along 89 between North Lake Tahoe and Truckee and the river flows uphill...or at least appears that way.

  93. Magnetic Hill, NB by Interrobang · · Score: 1

    You may (or not) be thinking of a place near Lewisberry, Pennsylvania

    Nope. The parent poster's thinking of Magnetic Hill, NB, which is indeed near Moncton. I've been there, and it's really quite interesting. At the tender age of seven, I intuited that it was an optical illusion when I was there, but my parents explained it anyway.

  94. Trick... by dargaud · · Score: 1
    I'm slightly disapointed by this trick. It's just like the faucet hanging up in the air with water flowing out of it... The transparent plastic tube inside the flow actually carries the water up. Nothing new here.

    A more geeky, and more satisfying, way to do it could use magnetohydrodynamics. With an appropriate association of electric current and magnetic field running through the water, you can force it to flow in the direction you like, even uphill. I don't know what kind of angle you could get out of it, nor how much flow, but I'd think it'd work for the 'slow relaxing garden waterfall'.

    Anyone with a better memory of that physics field than me cares to comment ?

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
  95. This is actually worthy of a patent by asscroft · · Score: 1

    This is novel. This is non-obvious. This is unique. This was inspired by someone elses ideas and artwork, and if Escher had unlimited IP rights like they give now-a-days he'd be suing this out of existence (so much for innovation) - but since he lived back in the good ol days his ideas are our ideas, and this dude put it to practice. I can see giving Tyson a patent for this. So, now, when I bash a patent as being obvious, stupid, non-unique, and other such crap you can all remember that today, I, Asscroft, actually advocated a patent. So it isn't patents I'm against, it's patent abuse. Remember that the next time you think I'm some sort of communist freak! If some of you feel this isn't a good use of a patent, please inform me!

    --
    because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
  96. That isn't so impressive by NewsWatcher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I was in Italy, not far from Rome, there is an entire mountain where not just water, but everything appears to be rolling uphill.
    Couldn't find any links in Google on it, but I think the Italians called in La strada contrario (the contrary street).
    All over the road cars are pulled over, as drivers take off the handbrake and laugh as their car rolls uphill.
    People tried to explain to me how it works, but my Italian wasn't good enough.
    That didn't use any bubbles to create the illusion either!

    --
    If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
  97. Particle Man, Particle Man by WildFire42 · · Score: 1

    "When he's underwater does he get wet, or does the water get him in..."

    Ah forget it.

  98. I fucked it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck! Damn it! That what I get for posting at 0200 in the morning half asleep. Fuck.

    I meant to say "Water flows downhill. Sorry about that. I am glad this was modded down because I can make an ass out of myself in front of fewer people.

  99. any geek worth salt knows downhill it goes by emg178 · · Score: 1

    You can tell by the wave pattern that the water is flowing down the ramps. How *dumb* does he think his viewers are??

    Any phd in fluid mechanics can see that. Jeesh.

  100. Tidal Bore was better 30 years ago. by Viking5150 · · Score: 1

    Last time I was out in the Maritimes, I was told that a dam/causway was built to satisfy some rich landowners. This basically ruined the Tidal Bore because the water doesn't go as high anymore.

    See this link for details.

    1. Re:Tidal Bore was better 30 years ago. by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 2, Informative

      A lot of people have a lot to say about the causeway, they've have been fighting about it for 30 years.

      I think the "rich landowners" thing is pretty funny, Moncton isn't known for its wealth. The houses along that artifical lake are pretty middle class, we're not talking about millionaires. Also, while those guys oppose *removing* the causeway, they didn't have anything to do with *building* it in the first place.

      Also, as the linked article points out, the fishermen downstream oppose removing the causeway.

      Lastly, the "let's get rid of the causeway" people conveniently forget about the old garbage dump on the banks of the river just downstream from the causeway. (A lot of really smart environmental decisions were made in Moncton in the 60's, can you tell?) If they remove the causeway there will be a lot more erosion along that stretch of the river, unearthing God knows what. So any plan to remove the causeway had better budget for shoring up the banks of the old dump.

      Just to be balanced, the people who want the causeway to be removed have a website here.

  101. Alan Greenspan by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Alan Greenspan is interested in this technology for use on the budget deficit.

  102. I'd love to see that. by John+Penix · · Score: 1

    Even better would be if you could find a way to make the water rise up into space and just pool there. That would be an amazing illusion.

    I've seen the "floating spigot" illusion at trade shows, where water is piped up a transparent tube and then back down its outer surface, creating the illusion of a suspended spigot endlessly pumping water.

    This sounds much cooler though.

    --
    Someone named an OS for me.
  103. The Real Thing by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    In the park of Krynica town in Poland, there is the REAL thing where water actually flows uphill. But there's no magic in that. Simply, there's quite a steep slope down which the stream runs, gaining considerable speed, and then a short part of the concrete bed of the stream runs uphill, where the water loses speed gradually, but not before it reaches the top, and continues downhill again. The uphill part is just several meters long and not really steep.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  104. Three problems with my post by GQuon · · Score: 1
    Three problems with my post (well, excluding any grammatical issues, that is).
    • The reference is in "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe" wich is strictly speaking not "The Hitchiker's Guide To The Galaxy", but can be found with it in "The Ultimate Hitchiker's Guide".
    • The full title of Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's book is "Time Travelers' Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations", but I would expect the "Time Travelers' Handbook of" part to be set in a smaller font; so whatever.
    • The link to the sarch engine didn't work. I know I pasted it in correctly and I also seem to remember testing it in the preview. Oh, well. :-/
    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
  105. Its been done before by mangalpande · · Score: 1

    although on a really small scale. Manoj Chaudhury and George Whitesides (Harvard) published their results on making a water droplet move uphill on a gradient of surface energy. The water droplet moves (very slowly) from hydrophobic (lower part of inclined glass slide) to hydrophilic (higher part of inclined slide) region on the slide. Pretty cool. It was Published in Science a few years ago.

  106. Re:The house at Disneyland... by ShawnDoc · · Score: 1
    Try the Mystery Spot in Santa Cruz California.

    A lot of cool effects there. Though rather than use water they now seem to use a ball. But same effect.

  107. Could you do it with electricity? by Aku+Head · · Score: 1
    I remember building something called a "squirrel cage" motor in electrical lab. Alternating current in the stator would induce current in the rotor, which generated a magnetic field around the rotor that was then pushed by the field generated by the stator.

    We used a soda pop can for the rotor.

    I was thinking that if you could spin a pop can, maybe you could push water uphill.

    You might have to put salt in the water to increase its conductivity. It might shock the crap out of you if you stuck your hand in it, too.

  108. Re:De visita en Londres? BUT WHAT DOES THIS MEAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF does this mean. Seriously - i mean what language is this even? French, Spanish? Miguel is mexican non? Why are you posting non-english here when you don't usually?

  109. s�, visita en Londres by Miguel+de+Icaza · · Score: 1

    Hola otra vez. UNAM estaba fresco. Su gusto de la boca de pescados?

    amor, paz, esperanza, muelle

    Saludos

    miguel

    --
    Before adopting WHATWG, read the moonlight.NET EULA [http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/moonlight.mspx]
    1. Re:s�, visita en Londres by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MONO sucks, You are a cocksucker miguel d'

  110. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide(H2O) by www.microsoft.com · · Score: 0

    It's only a joke about Water :(

  111. dehydration through diruetic (sp) by wadiwood · · Score: 1

    Caffine dehydrates me because if I drink a cup of coffee I have to pee more and sooner than if I had drunk a cup of water.

    It is very significant. And it is devastating when combined with excessive exercise on a hot day. Blech.

    But I still like coffee.

    I think you'd see the adverse effect in the office if you let everyone come in and get their morning cuppa and then locked them out of the loo.

    --

    -- it must be true, it's on the internet.
  112. Argh! by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    I forgot that Miguel's handle in /. is a different one.

    You got me pal. brownie points to you.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.