Slashdot Mirror
Ask The Mythbusters
Who are the Mythbusters? Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman are the hosts of a unique and popular television show on the Discovery cable channel. Working from a background in the special effects industry and shooting on location at effects warehouse M5 Industries, Jamie and Adam attempt to shed light on hearsay, rumour, and myth. Along the way they usually run across a little bit of science, too. Today, you have a chance to put questions to them. We'll take the 15 best questions and pass them on to the gentlemen to be answered sometime soon after the Thanksgiving holiday. One question per comment, please, and keep things topical. We'll post their responses as soon as we get them back, so ask away.
Lets start simple -
What is your favorite Busted Myth and your favorite Confirmed one?
If you were a vegetable, which one would you be and why?
Have you ever been completely blown away by what you've found? Has there been an experiment where you two just sit back and say "Huh...who woulda thought?" Most of the myths are pretty easy to debunk, but I'm just curious as to whether or not there was actually one that you guys did that totally shocked you in being true.
With an unlimited budget, what "myth" would you most like to test? How about using 1960s technology to try and land on the moon?
Do you think you'll ever run out of myths to test?
BTW love the show, keep up the good work!
The Official Steve Ballmer Webpage
Ever since your episode whjere you see if peoples voice can break glass with just their voices, do yall ever just do that for fun?
Yay, I have a sig.
What Myths have you tested that have never made it on the show? What about them made you and the producers decide they didn't qualify to go on the air?
My new title at the office is "Vice-President of Everything Else"
What has been your most challenging myth to bust? And is there a particular myth you feel would be a challenging one to try taking on?
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
What is the worst injury anyone sustained while trying to bust a myth?
Like Sweepstakes? Try out my service @ http://www.yourpowersweeps.com -- Free 21 day trial, no cc needed.
Can you please get rid of the build team segments? These segments are annoying and I fast forward throught them anyway. I would really enjoy more actual show. Thanks!
Have you all figured out yet that a Robin Hood (two arrows impacting the same spot) is actually possible? disgruntled archer.
--- Location Unknown
What myth would the Mythbusters most like to investigate but lack the means to do so?
Mythbusters is a great show! Oh, yeah I should ask a question.
I understand completely why you guys warn us to "not try this at home". But who warns you guys?
Ok all joking aside. You guys do some really dangerous stuff on the show. What has been the scariest/ most hair raising moment on the show so far, a time when you might have thought "this is really going to hurt"?
I heard that an F1 racing car has enough downdraft to drive upside down at speed. True or false?
When I watch your show, it's obvious that there is a lot of fun going on. Who wouldn't like blowing up, breaking down, stinking up, falling down, and all-around destroying everything?
For those of us not of TV-land.. how long does it take for you guys to produce an average episode.. how much of it is fun vs time spent working on getting it right?
Would you consider a contest to have a guest helper? (Not that I am plugging this potential guest helper at all.. no!).
(1st sig) If this were a snappy sig, you'd be reading it right now. (2nd sig) I'm a karma whore. >Insert FUD here
Was there ever a myth you guys created be it intentional or by accident. As such, have others had to debunk this myth?
Life is not for the lazy.
Similar to a stunt in a famous James Bond film, can a person really be shot out of a submarine torpedo tube?
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
What is Kari's phone number, and whats her favorite restaurant?
Did you guys come up with the idea for the show or was it presented to you? If you came up with it yourself, how?
What is the most you can spend on one myth? What is the most spent so far on one myth? Thanks, and awesome show
Ubuntu- Linux for human beings.
What was the pitch process like for the show and what myths did you propose to sell the TV execs on it?
Of all of the myths you have busted, has any one in particular stood out as changing the way much of the public thinks?
QUESTION: Is it possible to create batteries out of coconuts like in all those episodes of Gilligan's Island?
Could you take on some computer myths? Like whether or not it was ever possible for a virus to destroy old monitors? It was rumored that if a virus could change the refresh rates to a too low or too high setting, you could fry some of the internal circuitry.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Can small objects dropped from high buildings or low flying aircraft seriously injure or kill people? I.E. Pennies from the CN Tower, or saletd peanuts from a crop duster?
Do you realize that being unable to reproduce some event does not make that event impossible?
word.
How would you address the critique that you excessively extrapolate from a single data point to a generality?
In particular I refer to a show where you were examining fuel mileage on SUVs with windows open vs. air conditioning. As an engineer, I believe that you failed to conduct adequate experimentation to demonstrate anything other than results at a single data point and you didn't make that clear to your viewers.
-- Improve Windows - Buy a Mac!
does semen have a really high protein content -- in that it would be healthy for a women to consume regularly?
Is that Kari Byron as hot in person as she is on tv?
Dear diary: Today I stuffed some dolls full of dead rats I put in the blender.
Can you really go blind from self pleasure?
[an error occurred while processing this sig]
I've been a fan since your first season, and in that time, you've covered quite a few of the big, classic myths and legends. Are you ever concerned that you'll "use up" all the best source material, sort of running out of steam as it were? or is the internet such a fertile ground for kooks and bad jokes that you figure you can go on indefinitely (or at least until you accidentally cause the spontaneous destruction of the universe while trying to prove a theory about the second gunman in the Grassy Knoll)
The Digital Sorceress
What is the ratio of myths that you actually get to test vs myths that are untestable or at least not practical to test? The show takes a lot of unorthodox approaches to testing but there must be a number of myths that can't be tested without a huge budget or some difficult-to-acquire-or-build technology.
"I'm not sure which is the bigger disappointment; my failure to formulate a unified field theory, or you."--Stephen Haw
Is it true that there is a lip behind that mustache?
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
Dear Mythbusters-
It seems like it must be tempting to definitively call a myth "busted", even though the reality is that you just couldn't duplicate the results. Whether something is fact or fiction, scientifically a myth probably shouldn't be considered "busted" unless you have empirically show it to be implausable.
You guys generally do a good job of this, though on occasion I've seen an episode where you seemed a little premature. What can you say about where you draw the line, and do you feel like you generally do a good job of following the scientific method to get your results?
Also, can you get me that redhead's phone number?
Are Kari and Grant a couple? I noticed Grant let Kari use his TI-30Xa calculator. I can't imagine such a sacrifice would be made lightly.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
I watched the episode where you guys tested the bit about certain low-frequency sounds causing a person's bowels to loosen, making them soil themselves. On the show you had a guy in diapers stand between several speakers and you exposed him to several low-range frequencies. But you only exposed him to integer frequencies- 4hz, 5hz, whatever. If you exposed him to such a small set of possible frequencies, even over the range you chose, that would seem to make it highly unlikely that, if the myth were true, you would have found the exact frequency to make your guinea pig soil himself. On the show the myth was declared busted. Because you did not test the continous band of frequencies, instead stepping from one selected frequency to the next, I ask you this: Did you, in fact, not bust the myth in that case?
Let me firstly say that I like your show as entertainment. However, I do not like it as a form of true skepticism or as science. What you do is fun and interesting, but it is not rigorous. I'm thinking particularly of the time you tried to flip a taxi with a jet engine, which failed on your show, but which actually happened in real life. So it's not obvious that a failure on your show means anything.
My question is this: are you taking yourselves too seriously as "myth busters"? (And a suggestion: why not let a physics prof supervise some of your stunts?)
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Is it possible with today's electrical grid that you can hack into a person's computer and extract data through the computer's power cord?
PS your show where you built a super-fast playing card thrower was great, especially when you drew blood on Adam's arm. Mythbusters is an excellent show!!
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Hey guys, love the show. I was wondering why you have not tackled the "Blasting Zone" myth. You know, were you are asked to turn off 2-way radio equipment and Cell Phones when passing through a "Blasting Zone". I ask this because several years ago there was an accidental blast in my home town and many speculated on the radio that it was caused by RF from a cellphone. Several of us amateur radio operators kind of laughed at that because there are few guys that supposedly tried to set off a blasting cap with radios, just to see if it could be done. They went so far as to even wire the blasting cap into a 100 watt VHF (low band ~50Mhz) radio's antenna jack. Nope it didn't go off. Using inverse square law, it seems very unlikely that a cellphone or 2-way radio could set off a blasting cap at any distance.
--fatboy
Have you attempted to create any myths of your own?
There is a myth that myths/new words can be created and propagated very easily, such as the famous myth relating to the Dublin origins of the word "Quiz" - similar to memes such as "All your Base" -though you tend to prefer big explosion myths (and I know why!)
So - why not see if you can create a myth (that involves explosions, and bust your own myth, and then confirm the myth of being able to create myths?!
This comment was written with the intention to opt out of advertising.
What sort of budget limits do you guys have for your show these days? I remember seeing some earlier episodes where money really seemed to be an issue (spending an extra $700 on helium for the weather baloon lawn chair seemed to cause some concern). Whereas these days you guys seem to have no problem blowing up cement trucks or catapulting a boom lift.
As a corollary: Which experiment(s) ran rediculously over budget, and which one was surpirisingly cheap to pull off?
So Adam or Jamie can you catch the flu from the flu bug vaccine?
Jeoin
When are you going to test the "myth" that Geeks can't get laid. Bonus points if the "testing" involves Kari.
Hey guys, great show! Just wondering, what's are the best and worst aspects of moving from behind the scenes to in front of the lens?
What is the most tedious part of busting myths? I'm sure alot of the fun and games gets on camera, but what are we not seeing and why is it still important?
is windows really better then linux?
Who would win in a fight, Mythbusters or Dan Brown?
after you guys weren't casted for The Lone Gunmen series?
News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
Have there been any myths that were either too expensive or dangerous that you just would not do?
Will a cat with peanut butter spread across its back REALLY hover due to the laws governing that a cat will always land on its feet and peanut butter will always hit the floor?
How marketable would flying cats be?
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Even with my harsh comments, I'm not disrespecting your show. I have it setup to record on my DVR every week. I mostly enjoy the shows but occasionally your lack of scientific method is maddening. I realize you are probably cutting a lot out for the sake of TV, but could you at least point out that there are some possibilities you aren't testing?
Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP
Of the people on the show, who was already working at M5 prior to MythBusters, and who was brought in just for the show?
I'd hardly call what they do at Mythbusters 'science' - interesting perhaps but hardly good science. Even they are the first to say that they're not scientists. (I'm sure they said it. Someone go check their library of recorded shows and find the episode and timecode where they said it. :)
How did you find your Interns/assistants, or did they find you? ..Are they hiring?
Great Show Guys!
In the myth that a lighting strike can kill you through a telephone, you went to a lot of trouble testing and confirming they myth, only to mention that lighting kills a number of people each year, some of them talking on the phone. Was the statistical data available before or after you tested the myth, and if it was available before hand, did you just go ahead with the myth because it looked cool? And what would you have done if your results contradicted the statistics?
Is the insertion of a small furry rodent, such as a gerbil, into one's rectum safe?
Is it even possible?
If so, is it an effective means of stimulus?
That guy Buster has been pretty messed up a couple of times. I think he's had just about every part replaced.
Keep up the great work guys, I love your show. My favorite is when you guys were finding the gas-air ratio and had the 'accident'. heh
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
Question: Does a watchpot really never boil? No really, does it? Ok, I have no question but, thank you for creating a great show that the whole family can watch. Its hard to find a show that doesn't have sex and cussing everytime you turn around. Not to mention the countless myths that even I thought was true (Espically a more current one about driving your truck with your tailgate down, never again for me).
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
What IS the easiest way to get a swallow to carry a coconut?
** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
I'm a father of a 7 year old who absolutely loves your show. We have it on our tivo and I'm constantly pausing the show to ask him what he thinks will happen in your experiments.
You start every show with "Don't try this at home" but sometimes there are experiments that you do which you could try this at home. Have you ever considered having a show where you say, "DO Try this at home?" Its fun to see my child get such a love of science in such a fun way.
If so, what does he or she look like?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Q. which is better: vi or emacs ?. I want to KNOW,
with conclusive and definative proofs. Oh and, err
Q. Is every language accepted by some nondeterministic algorithm in polynomial time also accepted by some deterministic algorithm in polynomial time ?
sorry, thats two important questions, isn't it
When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown in to the sea
Love the show - it's spawned some serious fights with my wife over control of the TV at 9PM on Wednesdays (stupid "Lost" ending up in the same slot!). You guys have just about every geek's dream job - everything from mangling crash test dummies to driving a police cruiser by remote.
From watching the show, it looks like you've got a relatively tight budget on a lot of the myths you bust. Lots of the gear is picked up from junkyards, donated, or just lying around the warehouse. What was the most expensive myth to bust? What's the single most expensive piece of equipment you've had to buy while busting a myth?
Then there's the explosions. Things go boom a lot on the show. What's the biggest yield explosion you've ever detonated - I'm thinking of the cement truck that disintegrated in one particular episode, but there was also the critter in the drain pipe, the explosions in the pressurized airliner, the log cannon, the methane in the honey bucket...
Give a man a beer and he wastes an hour. Teach a man to brew and he wastes a lifetime.
I've noticed you guys have a regard for the scientific method, and make quite an effort to try and keep things controlled with regards to how you run your experiments and derive your conclusions. Have you ever considered bringing a formally trained scientist onto the crew to make sure you're going "by the book", so to speak?
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
I've never heard of about half of the myths you do on the show. Who comes up with all the myths you try to bust and will they ever run out of myths to bust?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If you could get the phone number and favorite restaurant for Scottie as well, I'd appreciate. Thanks!
Do you have any groupies following the MythBusters show?
Over the past few seasons, you've exploded a lot of myths (please exccuse the pun). However, there can't be that many myths that can be tested using your techniques. Are you looking into new ways of testing different types of myths or do you feel the show has a limited run, once you've finished the list of commonly held beliefs that can be tested through blowing up a crash test dummy or other physical tests?
Would there be room on your show for phycological behviour myths through the use of a psychologist as example?
What kind of budget does Discovery Channel provide you to work with and have any of your mythbusts gone over budget?
Are you still doing special effects for commercials and/or movies, or is Mythbusters your full time job now? Have your mythbusting experiments helped out with your special effects work?
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
The most important question of them all. Do any of u read /.? :)
In last week's episode Adam was specifically saying how the myth they were testing (tailgate up or down for better fuel economy) was one of the experiments where the result totally surprised them.
The same episode also had them surprised that a finger in the barrel of a gun, even though it couldn't stop the bullet, would actually cause enough pressure buildup to deform the gun barrel at the tip.
Neil
"Windows is more secure than Linux..."
This one is compliments of Martin Taylor and Steve Ballmer.
I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
Have you guys ever thought of hiring a physics consultant? This would have helped in the frozen vs thawed chicken, would have led you to the correct conclusion in the man throwing himself against the glass (which you guys still have not addressed), and probably even in the third rail myth. In the first case its impulse-momentum, a frozen turkey will not deform as much and have a lower contact time, creating a higher impulse, doing more damage. In the second case there is a property of glass that every time something hits it, it gets weaker. This is the reason chem labs replace their glassware often. Otherwise that test tube containing some nasty solvent could break when set down, even gently, into the test tube holder. Apply that to a glass window, and think of the stresses it is already under. Add a man continually throwing himself against it, and it becomes clear, that he could in fact, one day go flying straight through the glass. In the third rail demo anyone can tell you there are muscles that operate a bladder, not just simple elasticity.
I'm not saying everything done is wrong, in fact, I loved watching many of the shows. However, often enough I found myself wishing I could call in to point out oversights, and I'm not an expert by any means. It ended up causing me to lose interest since usually my friends would be discussing what was on, and I was the odd man out saying no, the frozen chicken would do more damage and here's why, and they'd end up saying it was on mythbusters, we saw the experiment...I'd end up getting just as frustrated with them as others who honestly believed the Rammstein Song Du Hast was saying you hate me...just because it was on TV, people believed it, same happens with your show, so now I just avoid those conversations by not watching the show.
So have you ever considered getting yourselves a full time consultant? Someone who can analyze the experiments, and look for these pitfalls? I would probably start watching again if you did.
Why is there anything else on TV?
Best show on television. You guys have my dream job. I disagree with the guy that said the Mythbusters' results aren't meaningful because you aren't thorough enough - it looks like you are as thorough as it's possible to be under the circumstances, and you aren't afraid to revisit a myth if you find out more. I also agree with the guy that said you should do a show on computer-related myths (this is Slashdot, after all). But here's my personal question: How much help do you really get from assistants behind the scenes that we don't get to see on camera? It looks like you give plenty of credit to your on-camera team, but do you have other guys that routinely help you build stuff, or on-staff scientific/engineering advisors etc?
BA Baracus or Angus MacGyver?
This show aired (rerun) yesterday here. Jamie wasn't capable of breaking the glass even with the amplifier, but Adam did it. The guy (a pro singer) broke it easily with an amplifier, and also broke it w/o using the amplifier.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
What do you say to your detracters who say none of your experiments hold water because you don't hold to rigorous scientific practices such as having strict control and experimental groups?
I know many people in my circle of geek friends don't watch your show because they say it's nothing but junk science.
Faster than light speed isn't possible.
I know, I'm a bastard.
'I am become Shiva, destroyer of worlds'
Have you ever been completely blown away by what you've found
Well, there was that one show where they had they FBI hook them up with several TONS of high powered explosives.
Then they used it to make a cement mixer truck dissappear.
Here's the video (CoralCDN to the rescue)
That pretty much blew me away.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
When? It's already been done in the film Capricorn 7 (or something like that). The one where they proved that the space mission to the moon was faked. NASA built a real rocket and sent it up into space and then built a set to make it look like they landed on the moon. The moon never existed and was concocted by Thomas Edison as a cover for his light bulb development just before he invented the motion picture. You know his rendition of "The First Men in the Moon"? Well the prop that was used as the moon is what's been hanging in a (Low Earth Orbit) LEO until the 1968 moon launch. It wasn't suitable for landing though, so the Apollo had to carry enough supplies on it to build a landing surface in space behind the Edison prop. Glad I could share the truth with folks. I live for this stuff!
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Umm, can you get her to take her top off in one of the upcoming shows?
The big one:
Is Windows better than Linux?
Just a quick question... In the slingshot episode, why would Canadians try to fly over a fence when there is no fence on much of the border? (if there is any) That couldn't have been the myth In the pilot with the hair cream... well that might have been the myth... And Yes we have stronger beer :)
Does the show employ an engineer or physicist as a technical advisor?
Dr. Craig Hollabaugh
craig@hollabaugh.com
Author of Embedded Linux, www.embeddedlinuxinterfacing.com
Have you ever considered having "Guest Busters"? For example if a viewer suggests a good myth to bust and it makes the cut, they get to come on the show and help you guys out.
On Myth Busters you do a lot of things were people can get hurt. Adam does not seem to mind having to feel little pain from time to time for sake of science. What kind of accidents in which people have got hurt (non-intentionally)? One thing that I remember well is the clip in which a fire alarm is screaming on the back and Adam is asking the cameraman if he still has his other eye brow.
Is it true that Athena really came out of Zeus' head? I find that really hard to believe because we all...oh, what's that? Not that type of myth?
Never mind then...oh, and great show!
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Who's idea was it to add other full-time persons (more specifically Kari Byron) to the show, you guys or the producers? Either way, could you describe how they got to be on the show, and your thoughts on the effects on the quality of the show, if any.
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
Subject has it all I guess.
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
Never having actually seen the show I'm sorry I didn't realise the true nature of it.
It's a genuine corporate myth spread by DRM pushers I'd like to see busted open publicly, hence the post.
I guess this isn't the type of program that would attempt to deal with this, but it would amuse me to see a light hearted atempt at it, rather than a sterile techno-geek raw 'state the facts' investigation.
either way, spot the smiley people, at worst I thoguht it was a bad attempt at a humour, not offtopic.
Hi Guys,
Has there ever been a segment that you wish had been shown, but didn't make the cut? Conversely, was there a segment that did make the final show that you wish had not been shown?
Did that guy who shocked you with the electric ark get his ass kicked off camera? Come on now, what's a little electrocution between friends?
Ruby on Rails makes programmers 10 times more productive than the alternative web development frameworks in Java: myth or reality?
While issues like global warming or fake debates like ID versus evolution are too complex or philosophical to be simply tested on TV, how about something on the efficacy of various alternative medical therapies?
On completely unrelated topics, how about the myth that a penny dropped from the top of the Empire State Building would pierce someone's skull or the one that rice causes pigeons to explode?
They aren't worried that RF noise will set off the explosives; they are worried that RF noise will interfere with the equipment they use to set off the explosives. They don't use a long roll of wire and a plunger style generator anymore--they set 'em off by radio. And they'd rather you didn't set them off by radio before they were ready.
-- MarkusQ
On the show we always get to see Adam doing dumb things (we don't blame him its the only way he'll learn) I'm wondering what do you Jamie think the dumbest thing you've ever done on the job is?
:)
I don't mean on the show I mean something back when you were working in the special effects industry, I think it would comfort all(especially Adam) of us to know that even you once did dumb things
Thank you for making a great and always entertaining show.
I know you get a lot of fan email declaring "you guys didn't really test it right! This myth is TRUE! You are teh sux0rs!" - I know that more often than not, these come from the SAME tinfoil-hat wearing people over and over. Often these folks have "unusual personality quirks"... so - what's the weirdest fan email you guys have gotten, or the most vehement protest email you've gotten?
What about supposed myths regarding mythbusters itself, or is that just a myth?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
1. How do you feel about people who take the show too seriously, and rant on endlessly in various online locales about proper scientific method?
2. Do you feel sorry for all the ones who asked about Kari?
3. Have you ever considered politically charged mythbusting, like cell phones or power lines causing cancer (just to toss out a couple probably impractical examples)?
4. Do you have any relationship with snopes.com?
Go back through the warehouse and pull out old mythbusting gear for fun?
I'm thinking of the surfboard hover thingies... or maybe the fan of death...
Do Fridays ever turn into some bizarre twisted version of MythBusters where Jamie and Adam battle to the death (or the first one to cry) using only materials used to debunk myths?
I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
Are there any myths that you thought you had busted only to find out that it really hadn't been? You did once try to bust the myth that the wash from an aircraft's jet engine could blow a car over. Admittedly, you only used teeny tiny jets that just singed the car. Top Gear (UK TV car program) did it properly and arranged for a series of cars to drive behind a nice big 747 at full throttle. Needless to say, all the cars where blown clean off the road...
I'd really like to know.
Check out Chad's News
She already has a significant other who she loves very much, and Scottie doesn't want anything to do with the show anymore. So you can put those drooling tongues back in your mouths now.
Who's ideas tend to win out, or is it staged to add a flare of drama?
I am billdar, and I approve this message.
It seems on the show that you guys are annoyed by fans requesting revisits. I know thats probably just acting, and if you really WERE annoyed you wouldn't actually DO the revisits. Anyway, my question is: who decides whether or not to revisit a myth? Is it you guys, the producers, or both? Has there ever been a myth you would have liked to revisit that never got any notice from the fans?
What everyone REALLY wants to know is (several questions, but one answer can nail them all):
- Would you choose to be a Super Hero duo, or a pair of villains, which would you be?
- Would they be original characters, or someone/something that already exists?
- Would you wear tights?
- WHY?
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
You guys are good at running experiments that are spectacularly entertaining. Have you ever considered running an experiment that's both spectacularly entertaining and publishable in a peer-reviewed journal (besides Irreproducible Results)?
Finding God in a Dog
First off to the poster, it's not a "cable" channel :)
But my question is this....
No offense, but you guys don't have PhDs or anything like that. Doesn't it stand to reason that documented proof that students from MIT that could prove that the Death Ray could be reproduced show that it could be done?
Taking into consideration that atmospheric temperature will affect the amount of heat needed to cause combustion and the fact that the bay area CA is a constantly windy location with cool air constantly coming off the water which will also cool "the target". "The Med" being much warmer as well as closer to the equator (and thus more direct sunlight). Wouldn't those conditions be much easier to cause combustion? As a former welder, I know that during the winter for me to make the same welding runs (I worked out doors) in 5 degree weather vs. 80 degree weather I would have to turn the heat up a bit with the first stick so the metal could warm to a sufficent level. I could then turn the amps back down and follow my heat trail.
I love the show, and maybe this would ruin the show's mainstream appeal, but I'd LOVE to have a couple of resident Physicists and Engineers advising them to get more rigorous results. Things get waaaaay too oversimplified.
To add to your jet engine example, my biggest gripe was always their "windows down vs. AC" gas-mileage test. All their test could possibly show was that at the one tested speed in the one tested vehicle, that's what happened. Even their retraction and correction later was oversimplified-- they explained that at some point, the speed of a vehicle becomes great enough that the AC wins over the windows-- but they acted like that number is the same for all cars regardless of all the other variables. (engine size, AC design, window size and position, and overall aerodynamic shape, to name a few)
I'm a fan of the show - my wife and I catch it every week. However as a mechanical engineer there are a lot of times we are watching and realise that there are some basic scientific misteaks being made. For example the myth about the hair creme in the cockpit... the cockpit was pressurized at 5psi (i think, or some PSI) at altitude, **not** being pressurized at 5psi over ambient.
I guess my question is I realise the two of you and your newer companions all have a long heritage in special effects, but not necessarily in hardcore engineering (thermodynamics / mechanics / etc.). Where is the line drawn between science and special effects? The consultants are fine, but have you ever considered hiring a staff engineer?
-everphilski-
modded down by "The Man"?
AN ASIDE: I've wanted to make time to write ever since I saw your gun barrel peeling like a banana episode. First I'd like to point out my observation that the plug that you welded into the barrel would essentially garuntee that the gun wouldn't peel back in such a fashion, since you are forcibly holding the barrel shut so as to prevent any peeling it would be infinitely more likely that your weld would break(it did) or some imperfection halfway down the barrel would blow out the side.
ANECDOTE: My uncles shotgun peeled back in the exact manner in which you were going for. He tripped while hunting in the woods and the barrel poked itself into some mud, unoticed by him he continued hunting until finally he took a shot at a pheasant. The gun barrel ripped apart a la elmer fudd, we all remarked on how it looked exactly like the cartoon. I imagine the fact that he was not injured at all was just his dumb luck.
How often do fans question your results? Have you had any diehard science/physics freaks tell you you're wrong? Have the "redone mythbustings" occured because of these?
:) Keep up the good work.
Great fan of the show, by the way.
I haven't seen Scottie or Christine on any recent episodes... have they left the show for good?
How about checking out if pigeons really do explode after eating rice?
If pete and repeat were sitting on a boat, how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if Peter Piper picked a peck of seashells by the seashore?
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
(slashdot-ish question)
Would Mythbusters wanna try and bust the "myth" that Linux is "safer" than windows?
Ideas:
Set up "vanilla" boxes and leave them in the wild for a certain period of time and then check back and do forensics...
-if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
Generally, do you have different levels of "believing" a myth might be true, when you first hear about it, or are you both equally pessimistic/optimistic?
Mike
Can you list the core skills you would recommend to someone if they wanted to
be as adept as you at designing, crafting, and engineering things?
(For example: knowledge of welding, some carpentry, basic chemical interactions and electrical engineering)
Can we get you guys to test the myth of the power of prayer?
I ask this because my wife really wants to know. Are you ,Jaimie and Adam, domestic partners? I maintain that you guys are both just geeks like me, but she is convinced that the way you guys bicker there has to be more than a mere friendship there -- not that there is anything wrong with that...
What happened to Scotty? We haven't seen her for some time, and she just came on Monster Garage?
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
Last year I heard an insurance underwriter speak about the challenges of covering reality TV. I don't want to lump your program in the same category of "reality" TV, but he did mention that there were shows or specific stunts that he was not able to cover. Have you ever been unable to debunk a myth because of liability/insurance reasons?
Seeing how you apparently get a lot of email about the subjects you tests, how has the viewers been able to influence the shows - and has it changed since you started the show?
And usually, they go in person into the "dangerous" stuff, like quicksand, inside a bathtub when someone drops a turned-on toaster in it. And don't forget Adam lost an eyebrow once :-)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
What's in the box that says "Raw Meat?"
Does the british show Brainiac's lack of real science annoy you as much as it does me? They seem like Mythbusters-lite
this sig has been rated E for Everyone.
Given that you often refer to getting "lots of angry emails" based on the show, why would you agree to do an interview with one of the websites that's frequented by the type of people that generate most of that angry email? Are you hoping that they'll waste time posting comments and that you can let the moderators get rid of them as opposed to your staff?
Oh, and can you get Discovery to show the show at some time other than 9:00PM EST on Wednesdays? I have a commitment then and always have to miss it. (Silly family.)
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
By subtle, I mean a myth that at first doesn't seem like it should be a myth.
Don't underestimate the power of The Source
You guys should easily have enough blooper material to fill a show by now, let's have it.
So, barring, that, my question would be, what are your top 5 "oops" incidents that never made it on to the screen?
Does the fact that millions of viewers may follow your advice ever worry to you? On the flip side do you get a kick out of making science fun for kids?
Is it true that if I give $8000 and all my banking information to Sumbawi Katangi at First Nigerian Bank I will inherit Prince Muntu's $8 million fortune?
No one cares what your captcha was
Houston TX, USA
The taxi was crossing the runway at the point planes approach for landing. This might have been a key part left out since there is an enormous air pressure under the plane during landing, which, in turn, associates with the vortices created both by jet exhaust and wind passing through the wings.
The myth is plausible, as they later admitted (evidence from TV footage, right?), but incredingbly if not impossibly hard to reproduce.
Question: what they can do to improve mythbusting on these kinds of myths? Are there any methodologies in sight?
How do you feel when you've finished exploring a myth in front of the cameras, knowing that your results are being closely scrutinized by geeks worldwide, and, in a lot of cases, by experts in their respective fields?
Behold the glorious bragging rights
Here's a myth I'd like to see sorted out... In movies, the heroes always find torches in those forbidding caves in the middle of the planet. They always appear to light right away, and burn for the duration of their requirment. Convenient plot device, or reality? Also, a serious question: How exactly does one become a Mythbuster? From what we see on the shows, you guys have the greatest jobs in the world.
There's myth that Microsoft's so-called "operating system" Windows is secure. Can you test this myth over a long period by installing it on a computer, connecting it to the Internet and leave in on for some months and then check if it's been infected? Also try out all various editions of this operating system and see how secure it actually is, like Win3.11, Win95, Win98, Win98SE, WinME, Win2k, NT and WinXP.
:-)
Then of course a comparision to other operating sytems would be cool like FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, GNU/Linux distros like ArchLinux, Slackware, Debian, Ubuntu, Mandriva, Fedora, Gentoo.. . You could also try Apple's various systems, although if I'm not mistaken are based on FreeBSD. And if you're capable of testing GNU/Hurd that would be cool too.
Thanks for an excellent show! I watch it twice a day, episode + rerun of that episode at night and every new episode on Sunday. I sincerely hope it continues far in to the next century!
Have you ever been pressured by [military, government, ...] external companies to prove a myth a certain way? Things like weaponry or easy aids to crime, which is always proved to be impossible.
Death by snoo-snoo!
I've heard that if you pee on your feet in the shower, you won't get athlete's foot. I know you're always looking for a new way to experiment with pee, so have at it.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
is there any truth to the rarely seen ...Jakalope?
How do you recruit talent for M5? What qualifies someone to work there?
Dear Myth Busters, How does the scientific method affect your "busting" procedure and your testing process?
What's Kari's phone number, and does she visit the UK often? :)
So, do Tin Foil Hats really work?
I've heard several myths about sneezing, like, you can't sneeze with your eyes open, or that if you sneeze and cause a car acident you aren't liable. but the one that interests me the most is that by putting your finger under your nose you can stop yourself from sneezing. you always see it in cartoons and in cheesy old movies but does it work?
Simple question but I'm curious: do you read Slashdot?
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
Volpone
People have speculated on the progress of science in the United States vs. the rest of the world. Do you think that science in the United States is hindered?
can I have Kari Byron's phone number?
What's the naughtiest/kinkiest thing you've ever molded with Ballistics Gel?
Can you bust the myth that "Intelligent Design" is science?
When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Rel
god is everything, does everything and sees everything, so yes.
Good read, another question brought up by that lecture is what do you find on the other side/event horizon of a black hole? Don't tell me its a jelly donut.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Sometimes it seems like you go out of your way to avoid explaining things by physics, and instead rely on intuition and more "practical" explainations. Do you do this on purpose? Even when you get more technical, you've starting putting the "Warning: Science Content" signs in. As funny as that may seem, it's rather insulting. People need to know the science involved.
--- witty signature
How can I get a job on your show.
I think it's positively criminal that you guys get paid to have all that fun!
BTW, love the show.
utter rubbish
---
The Serious Questions:
---
How do you react about people who complain about the 'scientific'-ness of your activities?
How do you react to people who come up to you all the time with 'great ideas' for the show?
---
And the Silly:
---
Are you going to do a show about
1) MMR causing autism (suspected myth)
2) Fluride being bad for you (suspected myth)
3) The government controlling our minds, preventable with electronic caps (suspected myth)
4) Homeopathy (Suspected myth)
5) Black men have bigger private bits (suspected myth)
6) WMDs (not gonna touch that)
7) Noam Chompsky being right (suspected fact)
I've seen many of your shows where you work together with people from the FBI so it seems that you have some government contacts. Is there any chance that you could get access to some declassified military tech that have many myths surronding them? A few examples I can think of off hand are the "raditiation poisoning" from depleted uranium shells and the "see through walls/clothing" of some of our newer, not newest, nightvision technology.
Or, in our favorite world of blowing things up, how about the rumored inpenetrability of A-1 Abrahms tank armor? (Probably the most expensive to "bust")
I am and always will be a stereotype, because who in their right mind prefers mono?
Microsoft Windows XP is considered by several "unbiased" experts who have been paid by Microsoft to be "secure and stable". So whta gives? ;P hehehehe... amateurs...
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
It seems like the vast majority of myths are busted, which is fine, given that they're supposed to be myths in the first place. But sometimes it seems like the entire show has gone the way of a confirmation, only to have the rules of the game be stretched toward the end -- "Welllllll, we have to look at *exactly* what the myth said, and our experiment did not duplicate it *exactly*, so therefore even though it worked, it's busted." Those feel like we've been cheated, like you're going out of your way to call them busted despite your experiment. Comment?
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
Expose the myth of WTC building 7. Explain why fire would not have been hot enough to cause the uniform collapse of wtc7. (if feeling gutsy, take on the others too)
Double-Click here for instant highlight.
You guys must have the best neighbors in the history of neighbors. How have you delt with keeping people around you happy with all the dead pigs rotting in cars, random gun fire, rocket engines being fired in the shop and stuff blowing up?
What inspired you two to switch from behind-the-scenes special-effects stuntmen to frontline TV personalities with your own show?
BTW, love the show - myths meeting the reality of science has never been more entertaining to watch!
Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
Does Octane Booster aditives really boost your Gas Performance in a Car? Supposetly it's supposed to increase your Gas millage and engine Performance
Love the show, watch it everyday to dinner, even reruns. But one question is always on my mind: Adam...What's with the mustashe? I heard a story that Adam doesn't have an upper lip, let's see you bust that myth.
I've seen a lot of questions so far about myths you would like to do if you had an unlimited budget, if you were invincible like Superman, or if danger to people, property, or reality in general was no object. But is there a myth that you would NOT do even if you had all those things? Do you believe that there are myths that are better left unsolved or too controvertial (basically flamebait myths)?
10 Bits= $.25
100 Bits= $.50
110 Bits= $.75
1000 Bits= 1 byte
2004 Wall Street Journal story
High-Tech Holiday Light Display
Draws Everyone But the Skeptics
By CHARLES FORELLE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 27, 2004 4:23 p.m.
Flying in TV station KMGH's "Air Tracker 7" helicopter earlier this month, Alek Komarnitsky told the Denver ABC affiliate's audience about the 17,000 Christmas lights flashing a thousand feet below on his Colorado home.
"You can go to my Web site and not only view the lights via Web cam but actually turn them on and off," said Mr. Komarnitsky, who lives northwest of Denver in Lafayette. "Which is exactly what we're seeing right now."
"That's great," said one of the station's anchorwomen, over the chopper's whir.
"That's wild," added a co-anchor.
So wild, in fact, that it isn't true. In what he describes as an excess of desire to spread a little holiday cheer, Mr. Komarnitsky pulled off an Internet Christmas hoax worthy of April 1.
The lights on his house are real enough. So is Mr. Komarnitsky's Web site, www.komar.org, which has seen 4.3 million hits this month as word of its supposed features was spread like a virus by news media and the Internet.
But Mr. Komarnitsky now acknowledges there is no Web cam taking live pictures of the house. And, he adds, visitors to the site have no ability to switch the lights on and off. To fool KMGH into thinking it was broadcasting Web surfers switching the lights on and off, Mr. Komarnitsky says his wife was inside the house, working a remote control.
"It's fake," says Mr. Komarnitsky. He says he decided to fess up because the whole thing "had gotten too big," and he didn't want to mislead anyone any longer.
Via the ruse, Mr. Komarnitsky's abode became the Internet age's version of the neighborhood house with the dazzling Christmas show.
Mr. Komarnitsky gave radio interviews to stations as far away as Australia. Web sites from NYTimes.com to geek hangout Slashdot.org linked to his site. An Associated Press item about his site was picked up by newspapers from Los Angeles to Columbia, S.C. As of midday Monday, according to Mr. Komarnitsky, the "Web cam" was asked by online visitors to snap a new picture in the same spot 334,832 times. The lights had supposedly been changed 91,978 times. But instead of a live camera, komar.org is really showing off 32 high-resolution digital photographs, taken in four sets with different amounts of snow on the ground. A sophisticated computer program, which Mr. Komarnitsky wrote with input from a friend skilled in digital imaging, serves up a section of the appropriate photo, depending on actual weather conditions and what lights the online Web visitors expect to see.
For extra verisimilitude, sometimes the program digitally adds in passing cars. One in five pictures is generated with fake airplanes in the expansive Colorado sky. The human-shaped shadow occasionally seen walking past the ornament drawn in lights on the lawn? A digital apparition, nothing more. Occasionally the software shows the garage door up.
"I'll get e-mails saying, 'Hey, Alek, your garage door is open,'" he says.
Hoaxes have a storied history in the annals of technology, and the Internet provides a fertile field for cultivating them. Some are banal -- earlier this year, the town of Aliso Viejo, Calif., considered banning foam cups because they contained a substance called "dihydrogen monoxide." A city employee fell for a prank Web page decryi
Love your show !
How has the advances and use of computer graphics impacted and change the nature of your business with the film producers ? I would guess that the type of effects or work you are asked to perform has changed somewhat because of advancement of computer graphics technology.
Throw alka-seltzer into the air and see if seagulls really do eat them and explode.
Which reminds me of the homeless guy caught by the ranger eating roasted seagulls on the beach.. The ranger said its ok to have a fire, but its not ok to eat seagulls... I'm going to have to give you a ticket. The homeless man says, hey-I'm down on my luck, and there are plenty of seagulls--really, just let me off with a warning. The ranger says, well, alright... but by the way... what do they taste like? the homeless guy replies... delicious! Not as chewy as spotted owl and a better flavor than bald eagle!
It seems like you guys are willing to try to bust any myth, but there have got to be some myths out there that you are too afraid to attempt to replicate. So my questions is:
What are some of the rejected myths that were too dangerous to pull off and why?
BTW - Thank you for having a great show that is both entertaining and educational.
Love your show! Destructive testing is the way to go.
What is your favourite Car Myth?
"All those, moments will be lost, in time, like tears, in rain. Time to die." Roy Batty
Case In Point:
The "Will Water Stop Bullets" episode
You make a tank INDOORS
Fill it with WATER
It LEAKS
You patch it up
Then you bring in the Lighting gear and with Cables and Connectors all over the Floor:
You fire a Shotgun into it!
And there is "surprise" when the tank fails?
"Quick! Turn off the Power!"
wtf kids?
You go to the Desert or the Parking Lot for many things, but you choose to fire off a NitrousOxide/Wax Fuel Rocket in the Shop and you are surprised at the amount HEAT and SMOKE generated?
I guess I don't have a question, sorry.
Love your show, biggest fan, etc etc
I like microcars
Radio Active Boy Scout Myth
Thanks!
Have you considered busting the myth on antigravity? Space/Time warping? Philadelphia experiment, Hutchison effect, Einstein's "Unified Field Theory" and so on.. Does a large magnetic field slow down or speed up a analog clock? Would using magenetic fields in vehicles make them weight less? Is it fact or fiction, and who will be able to tell?
I'm not merely concerned with budgetary constraints.
What kind of limits are there on how much "deep science" you're willing to confront? For instance, the MicroNuke Myth: to the effect that Hafnium 172 nuclei can be caused via x-ray bombardment to enter a state of excitation called m2, metastable for a 30 year half-life, and triggerrable via bombardment with another x-ray frequency. 1 gram approximately equal to 500 kilograms TNT, or so I hear on the street corner. Might bore the heck out of the mainstream, but your core audience would eat it up, I bet.
What kinds of political limitations are there on your subject matter? Would a history of the New Orleans levee construction and hurricane threat analysis be doable in today's climate?
How about confronting the rising tide of general nonsense? Astrology for instance, nutritional and medical fads, free energy fraud, Project Apollo denial, the list goes on.
Martin Gardner and James Randi are modern day prophets in humble service to the Holy Spirit of Truth. They rule my world.
Carry On!
Is the myth of the killer apes true?
Currently there is a big myth out there perpetrated(sp) mainly by the media and people not in the know. This myth is about humans only using 10% of their brain. This is false, humans use all of their brain, we wouldnt be walking around if we didnt. Please set this one straight so I can stop hearing this falacy every other day.
I love to slaughter the english language.
Is there any myth that you're unwilling to bust?
I read in a book once (I think it was The Yearling), that if you're bit by a rattlesnake and you apply a fresh deer liver to the wound it will help draw out some venom and increase your chances of not dying. When and how do you plan on testing this popular urban myth?
Myth: Windows TCO lower than Linux.
P.S. We all have busted it, but we'd like to see it advertised on national TV to our bosses. Favorite Myth: Lightning in the Shower/Bathtub. Too bad the safety squad wouldn't let you power up the pc while testing.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
I love the show, but there is one test that I watched where I went away totally thinking that you guys just plain blew it. It was the "air conditioner vs. rolling the windows down" test.
:-) Especially Kari! Who can't fall in wuv with THAT!!
Here is how you guys "ruined" the test:
1: You slowed down to 45 miles per hour. Wind drag with 10 less MPG is SIGNIFICANTLY less than at 55 or 65 MPH. I bicycle, I know all about wind drag. One or two extra MPH can really hurt!!
2: You had no real way of knowing the exact MPG because if the tank is NEAR empty and one person's driving is more erratic than the other, the fuel pump can "suck air" making the engine stall out before the thing has really run completely dry.
3: The diagnostic computer was RIGHT. The windows being down did suck more fuel than the AC because the car's computer is REQUIRED to keep the air/fuel ratio constant. More air means more fuel, period.
The test would have been more convincing had you put fuel rate measuring devices in the fuel lines.
All your other stuff, though, is really horrorshow!!!
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
Hey there, I enjoy your show when I'm able to watch it. As a graduate student and teaching assistant one of my favorite things about the show is that it essentially teaches hypothesis testing, though in an informal way. Have you ever thought of emphasizing this aspect of scientific inquiry on your show or producing edited versions for schools where you can cut away from the show to state and analyze your hypotheses explicitly? I think this would be a great pedagogical tool at the high school and undergraduate level. The show is engaging and familiar to young people and I think it would be well integrated into scientific curricula. Thanks!
Can you really freeze a bee or a beetle, tie a string to it, thaw it out, and then have a little bug on a leash?
I'm curious about your special effects experience...What movie or TV scenes can you point to and say "I made that happen."?
You never expect irony, do you?
Want to be a professional wrestler? Visit www.iyfwrestling.com
@iyfwrestling
He went to the same place as...
If you'd watched the show, you'd know that Scottie is a she (and a very attractive one,) not a he.
How many people try supplying you with newly contrived myths just to see if they get on TV? How do you filter out what are unrepeated vs. local or relatively unknown myths?
What was the pricetag to blow up the cement mixer? That was a seriously cool stunt -- I giggle uncontrollably everytime I see it.
you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
I want to know who has gotten the most injuries during the "busting".
I suspect Adam, due to his "nature".
Okay guys, who gets the titanium laptop?
I read an interview with Adam a while ago in which he addressed the fact that what we see on TV doesn't alway look very scientifically rigorous. You pointed out that it's not possible to cover all the experiments you perform on a 1-hour episode and claimed that more experiments and testing were actually done. Could you go into more detail on that point? ie. For those episodes that people have particular problems with (probably all mentioned in the comments of this thread) can you describe what steps you took that never made it to TV.
How about debunking the Rop Stewart and Richard Gere urban legends?
word.
Dear Bustahs: Did Mr. Tesla really have a way to send vast to unlimited amounts of electric or other energies through the earth with neglible loss? - gurutc
Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
What is the stupidest thing either of you have done for the show? or conversly what was the stupidest thing that you almost did, and at last minute were like "Hmmm maybe not such a good idea..."?
Well, I remember watching a TV show from a Norwegian special forces (Marinejegere) training operation.
They exited a submarine through a torpedo tube at very low depth (apx. 7 meters), using oxygen rebreathers to avoid bubbles. It was awesome to watch and absolutely invisible from the surface.
So what I'd say is that *leaving* a submarine through a torpedo tube is possible, but being "shot out"? Well, as far as I know what "shoots" most torpedoes out is their own propulsion system.
I'm a dreamer, the world is my playpen. But hey, I'm a serious person, I can't dream all the time.
Why did you bust the myth about sinking ship creating succion?
In one of your experiments on the subject I remember clearly one of you sitting unattached on a cement block sinking rapidly, following it at the same speed not letting time to escape. Exactly why didn't it qualify as proof that a sinking object can pull people with it?
I heard that if you have sex in a pool, you have to shove your thumb up the girls butt to get your dick out (vacuum). confirmed or busted???
I've always intended to write to you questioning your experiment on if soldiers walking across a bridge could create a "Sin Wave" that results in the collapse of the bridge. You took the time to build a scale bridge, and to create mechanical soldiers that walked in sync, all of which shows amazing dedication. But you overlooked that you didn't connect the ends of your bridge to anything, and they were flapping in the wind. In order to create that kind of a wave wouldn't it make sense that the ends of the bridge would have to be attached so the force could resonate?
Moderation is not supposed to be used as an indicator of agreement.
I'm curently a student of 3D special effects and animation. Physical effects and mechanical engineering have always been a secret passion of mine.
How did you start your careers in physical special effects, and what training does it take to be a "mythbuster"?
Recently, in the Confederate Rocket episode, the spectre of censorship reared its ugly head. You folks chose not to reveal some of the steps for making some of the (arguably quite dangerous) chemicals. I don't wish to argue the merits of that decision. But it does raise a question: Have there been any stories that have not made it to air simply because it was necessary to chop so much out of it that it was no longer air-worthy? Has there been any self-censorship in story selection ("we'll never be able to clear THAT...")?
What's been your most embarrassing moment on and off the show?
Personally, I think the vacuum motor to the lip was pretty embarrasing. Or maybe being painted gold in undies?
Or else you wouldn't have picked such a stupid example. The reason why they couldn't reproduce the myth was because they didn't use a plane. It's kind of hard to prove something can't be done when you can't even replicate the scenario exactly.
Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
Most restaurants seem to believe that ice is free, and therefore tend to overfill the ice to save money on soda. However, the energy required to freeze water to make ice should be considered -- is the real cost of ice actually less than the cost of an equivalent volume of soda?
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
Religion, of course, is filled with myths, big and little, obvious and subtle. Would you ever consider tackling some of the stickier religious myths?
For example, there is absolutely no mention at all in any historical document of a certain Jesus until the year 70 or so--there aren't even any documents citing documents written before then. Contemporaries like Philo of Alexandria made absolutely no mention at all of Jesus or any of the notable events of the Gospels. The ``best'' evidence we /do/ have is horribly self-contradictory and laughably full of outrageous claims: on the one hand, Jesus stoically remained silent at his trial, refusing to say even one word; on the other, he spoke eloquently and at great length in his own defense. Thousands of dead people supposedly roamed the streets of Jerusalem, yet nobody thought to make mention of that fact until the Gospels were written a couple generations later. And no two accounts of the Ascension bear any semblance to each other.
At the least, doing a show investigating such a myth would do wonders for your ratings....
Cheers,
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
First off, i love the show. They seem like really nice folks.
:)
Adam worked on some of the Star Wars films. Which ones and what was his specific job as apart of the special fx team?
It's nice to see a "mr wizard" like show on TV. Like Don Herbert, they make science look fun and exciting. Which is always a good thing in todays world. We need more American's motivated by science and its one of the few shows that easily exposes new people to science and special fx work.
Have shows like Mr Wizard, American Scientific Frontiers, Bill Nye the Science guy, Nova, and the likes influenced them? How important is the educational aspects to the program? I've noticed that they do try to explain things and often there are things that can be learned. It seems they balance the "awe" with the "knowledge" aspects of the show thus keeping it it fun, entertaining and still very educational.
Have there been any close calls? Anything that hasnt aired that might be of interest?
The crash test dummy's name is Buster.
What's your response to the MIT students busting your show about the Death Ray?
Cliff Claven
K.E.G. Party Chairman
Founding Leader of: Koncerned for Egalitarin Governance
Please Blow More Things Up!!! There just aren't enough real explosions versus simulated ones on TV these days!
Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
Quick bit of backstory:
At this past years Defcon Hacker conference in Las Vegas a buddy of mine, after seeing your beer cooling episode decided to hold a 'beer/beverage cooling contraption' contest among the attendee's. At a hacker convention known for copius amounts of alcohol and in ~120F temp, it was a great idea.
There were Several different entries all using different styles. My entry was a styrofoam cooler filled with isopropyl alcohol and dry ice, creating a ~-65F bath that was good at rapidly cooling the beer, but not so fast as to be impossible to regulate immersion time and keep from freezing it into a beer block of ice! The solution worked so well and stayed so cold I kept the cooler with me, flash chilling everyones drink that went by for the rest of the weekend.
All that said, after participating in a contest spawned by your investigation and creativity, I was wondering what sort of other events, contests, research, contraptions, etc that you (and your undercredited build team!) had been named (or blamed) as the inspiration for, and which was your favorite?
P.s. We are having another beer cooling contest next year, we need judges!
Where are we going, and why are we in this hand cart?
I can't stand how hard she tries to be cute, and how much screen time they give her. She has the personality of a smiling board, her position on the mythbuster's team seems very forced and out of place.
Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
Were you in some way aware of Slashdot before this interview? :-)
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
After doing a tiny bit of research I see that "When the launch command is given and all interlocks are satisfied, the water ram operates, thrusting a large volume of water into the tube at high pressure, which ejects the torpedo from the tube with considerable force. In fact, modern torpedoes have a safety mechanism that prevents activation of the torpedo unless the torpedo senses the required amount of G-force."
In the aforementioned training exercise however, they did not utilize this water ram, merely closing the tube behind, filling the torpedo tube with water and then opening the other end of the tube letting them out. There was some risk involved as the torpedo tube was a rather tight fit, and there were places their equipment could get stuck.
I'm a dreamer, the world is my playpen. But hey, I'm a serious person, I can't dream all the time.
With all the hurricanes this season I've wondered if putting tape on your glass windows does anything?
This one's mainly directed at Jamie. Ordinarily, when you guys are doing something hazardous, you're the stickler for common sense and safety during experimentation. (Which is great; the world needs more common sense.) What was up with that indoor motor test in "Confederate Rocket"? Standing next to an untested hybrid motor (especially one of that size) during its first firing seems like a categorically bad idea, with a number of unpleasantly gory failure modes. I was actually pretty surprised that you'd agree to testing in that fashion. I know reality shows are cut to make things seem more dramatic, but that looked pretty bad regardless.
--John Riney
I know it is a TV show and you have to entertain your audience.
Why do you not perform real engineering to determine/predict the results. For example some simple force/strength/thermo calculations could predict the outcome in advance.
This could demonstrate the value of a technical education. As it is most people think I just sit at a desk and drink coffee since I don't actually "do anything"
Is Hillary Clinton really a woman??!
The road between democracy and tyranny is paved with secrecy in the name of security.
Coca-Cola is an effective spermicide
;).
Masterbation will make you go blind
Or have you and you just arent telling the results
Feel free to mod my parent post to hell :p
8 &cid=14091102
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=16905
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
I'm not referring specifically to MythBusters or M5, but what qualifications are needed in order to work for a special effects studio, and how does one gain those qualifications?
Sent from my iPhone
Is it really possible to use SCO's hot-air to carry their products to new markets in other countries?
I would suggest fitting a face-mold of Darl McBride with a snorkle of some kind.
Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose.
I haven't seen your show in much depth, but I have yet to know of an episode where a Myth was confirmed. After reading about the MIT confirmation (http://web.mit.edu/2.009/www/lectures/10_Archimed esResult.html/) of the Archimedes' Death Ray, would you at least be willing to either A) Attempt to reproduce the MIT experiment to the letter or B) concede?
Windows has lower Total Cost of Ownership than Linux.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
At various points throughout each episode, you run a short message warning everyone not to try this at home and that you two are professionals. How did you get to be professionals and what are your qualifications and educational background?
Keep up the great fun.
Shut up brain or I'll stab you with a Q-Tip. - Homer Simpson
Have either of you had a myth that you really wanted to try to do within the context of the show, but that Discovery Channel though was too dangerous or risque for them? If so, can you please share with the audience? ;-)
You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.
I for one want to see this myth exposed... there is no way that a female geek 1) exists and 2) reads slashdot!
What happened to Scotty? Last I saw her, she did an appearance on Monster Garage but has all but disappeared from your show.
They should try to prove the myth that bush actually won 2 elections
C'mon people, here is the obvious oppertunity to have Slashdot myths put right.
For example:
Is it true that nerds can never get laid?
or going back further.... and still related, does watching too much TV "rot your brain"????
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Have you guys ever considered testing all these Internet spam messages. Like "Enlarge you Penis", "Get a University Diploma for free" and so on? There seems to be endless materials on that subject. You could have an Internet Special.
It seems sometimes your personalities conflict on the show. Has this ever become a problem to the point where you had to just stop shooting and leave?
no, this is not a troll. I have watched several good episodes so please leave my karma intact, I watched an episode once were they compare fuel mileage while using Air conditioning to driving with windows open. The whole episode seemed designed to mislead.. Either they are incompetent and got bad advice on setting it up, or are decieptful. The conclusion was that Open Windows are more efficent. The conclusion should have been - At highway speeds AC is almost always more efficent, in stop and go traffic it may be less efficent at times! (With the additional info that an areodynamic car suffers more from open windows than does a pickup.) The test used LARGE sport utility vehicles that are as areodynamically efficent as a brick. As a result, driving with windows open will create a smaller increase in drag than it would in a normal vehicle. (this favors the window open theory) Then to compound this, they performed one test (where the AC won) and then claimed that it must be faulty because the unit measuring fuel would not handle the situation correctly.(it was a long flawed explanation) Then they created the IDEAL situation where AC COULD NOT win. They slowed the vehicles down even more, and did the tests again. Slowing down the vehicles causes the following effect 1. reduces drag (advantage open windows) 2. increases amount of time A.C. has to run (advantage open windows ) -also, they turned up the AC to FULL, they had to wear winter jackets it was so cold. (advantage open windows)
What do you think about the dumbing down of the Discovery Channel? Discovery's programming used to be packed with science and nature shows. These days, its packed with motorcycle handle-bar fabrication and hot-rod build-outs. Your show seems to be one of the few that actually has anything to do with science, in that you've used some basic physics on some of the shows.
Please please please don't start building motorcycles on your show.
That's why I'd like a scientist in the mix, too. Engineers for "how they could build the setup better," and scientists for "why this test doesn't prove what you might think." They need a muppets-style balcony seat with two grizzled old PhDs making snide comments about their experiments. They don't have to listen, or change what they're doing (what they do now makes great TV), but I would *love* for the viewers to be better informed.
None of this passing off a single data point as a conclusive test for myths with dozens of variables. That should get catcalls from the balcony every time.
They already try to emphasize the arguments the mythbusters have on the show-- this would just give them more material to work with.
What is the one myth you would like to bust, think you could bust, but the network says "NO!" for whever reason (danger, money, etc)?
Can you please bust or confirm the myth if its possible to breathe and survive in a diving suit just like in the abyss? The one filled with that pinkish liquid? That would be cool.
Will you test if jet-fuel burning in air can melt/soften steel?
Note to Everyone:
y neman-interview.htm
Please don't waste time with vacuous questions that have already been asked in other interviews. People hate "Where do you get your ideas?" and you are not the first person to think of that incredibly deep question. Here are two interviews, and ten seconds with Google can find you more.
http://www.thesneeze.com/mt-archives/000408.php
http://www.joe-mammy.com/pages/features/hyneman/h
I heard that you can't piss and shit at the same time. Care to bust that myth guys?
San Francisco recently put a ban on hanguns in the city limit. People are not allowed to own, possess, manufacture or sell firearms within the city anymore. Several episodes involve busting firearms myths. How will this new law affect the show? Michael Scott Plano, TX
There is an old myth that while listening to music mundane tasks can be performed just fine, but tasks that require creative thinking become very difficult because the creative center of the brain is occupied by the music. I believe this myth may have originated in the book, Peopleware. In my experience, I have found this to not be true. But I'm curious, could the mythbusters prove whether listening to music actually hurts or helps creative problem solving skills?
Please do NOT mod this down. It is a serious question.
Are you two gay?
rejecting myths for testing?
How many have you rejected so far (approximatley)
What is the hardest myth you have in which to design a test for? Is testing design a criteria in rejecting myths?
O.K. so this is more like a 4 in 1.... but...
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
Are there any myths you would love to test/bust/confirm but it is not possible to prove/disprove it? For example, have you pondered the myth that NASA filmed the landings on the moon in a studio?
How come you always assume that if you can't do it, nobody can?
Is it true that if you connect a brand new Windows computer to the internet, it gets infected in about 10 minutes? What about a patched one? What if there's a hardware firewall? Software firewall? Etc, etc...
;-)
Make the same tests with a Mac and a Linux box "just to compare".
An obvious question that no one has asked yet: What myths are you testing in the next season?
Adam and Jamie came to the University of Central Florida last Spring and answered a lot of these questions, talked about their pasts, how they got involved in the show. They also showed the blooper/gag reel from the (at the time) upcoming DVD set of season 1. And as a bonus, they brought the penny shooter and shot a member of the audience!
Have you considered trying to bust the myth that geeks don't get laid?
If no, is that because it is to dangerous or to expensive?
(Heh, it IS a cable channel, after all).
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
But is it true that if you fall ill with, say, the common cold or flu, that going to a sauna or steambath and sweating a lot will help to clean out the sickness? I'm almost positive that it can't possibly be true, but my Sgt swears that it is.
I have noticed that on several myths, you have made an attempt at following the scientific method for busting/confirming the myth, but not on others, why is this? Why not hold to the same degree of validity on all myths? And I know that is technically two questions, but they are basically the same.... :)
At any rate, the show is still cool...
What do you guys think happened to Amelia Earhart?
your show seems to have the momentum of a runaway freight train. Why are you so popular?
What Busting has had the most dramatic fallout for companies and people who've relied on the Myth being true?
And while we're out it, how many times have you been sued or threatened with lawsuits?
This is not my sandwich.
It's too bad this chat transcript was not linked in the story, because it covers a lot of the more common questions.
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Disclaimer: I am talking about my own podcast here...
I have a podcast called Technorama over at http://www.chuckchat.com/
My co-host and I interviewed Adam Savage about a month ago. It was a really good interview.
If you care to listen...It was in three parts.
http://www.chuckchat.com/?p=118
http://www.chuckchat.com/?p=119
http://www.chuckchat.com/?p=122
"If you have done 6 impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways" -- hhgg
Why does Jamie Hyneman own only one type of outfit?
Is it true that in Japan they sell the world's smallest condoms? Do Asians really have straight pubes?
What is the most inappropriate use of ballistics gel you've ever witnessed/participated in?
There's an episode where myths about how to sit properly on an airplane during a crash were tested. At one point, they built a 'crash rig' where everybody piled on and... well... crashed. I remember Kari talking about promising her parents she wouldn't do anything dangerous. Well, that made me curious: Which episodes have gotten any of you into trouble with your family/loved ones?
"Derp de derp."
I noticed you guys are going to be speaking at 'The Amazing Meeting 4' this year.
How are you connected to James Randi ? Penn & Teller have been very vocal about supporting him in past years, but this was the first inkling that I had that you fine folks were on the same bandwagon.
[My personal suspicion is that this is more of an Adam spin, considering his card throwing, slight of hand antics on the show - which my whole household loves by the way.]
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
It is an important question for many men out there and I suspect that the Mythbusters Team can source bald men for the experiments.
...of budding scientists and engineers? Today's mainstream society treats technology as a black box, never to be opened or touched. Inquisitive kids need to be shown that they can take things apart, learn about them, and experiment with them. I don't buy into the complaint that Mythbusters lacks scientific rigor. Better to try things out in your back yard with only one or two data points than to accept things without thought.
I watch the show with my 9-year-old daughter. The highest compliment I can pay is that the show makes her ask a continuous stream of questions about what you are doing.
Red Bull, Monster, Rockstar, No Fear...there's tons of these so-called "energy drinks" on the market. But do they even have any tangible effects? What's really happening to me for $2.49? Is it just an overpriced can of soda?
Recent episodes finally have all featured all *five* Mythbusters in the opening sequence. What does this mean for the series? Can we expect less of A&J now? Or does this mean that the "real" stars of the show can finally get some decent myths to bust? :)
(More importantly: Does this signal a more stable roster of second-tier players? Or will Jamie decide he has better things to do than appear on television and blow up stuff? Is there anything better to do?)
I just saw the Seasickness cures episode. Obviously, that one was incredibly unpleasant for Adam and Grant. I also remember the Baghdad Battery episode where Kari wired up a replica of the Ark of the Covenant with an electric fence energizer. (OUCH!) What would you say was the absolute worst, most painful myth you've tested on the show?
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
Who is responsible for the cheesy background music that gets mixed in during post-production and why can't they be used as a crash test dummy? The annoying music reduces the content of the program.
Where do babies come from?
Seriously though, could a stork deliver a baby and how'd that myth start? (-> cue Monty Python coconut/swallow references)
Do cats always land on their feet? What if they are in a box that is spinning as it is thrown into the air?
You often have contests over who can complete a myth in the best manner. How about having a contest that starts at the beginning of a season, present a Myth to the audience and allow them to submit ideas to bust it. Every show can have a review of the best or random entry received to date. For the final episode, the winner will take control of the build team to square off against Adam and Jamie to determine who has the best idea.
From the look of things, your "arena" can be pretty dangerous. How close have you come to killing yourselves or someone else in one of your episodes?
I prefer a void in conversation to a vacuous one.
I've worked in at a robotics company in the past. When I first came on, I they told me they were just starting to get into "this software thing". I quickly learned that most of the machines they had built in the past used mechanical means to control them. I noticed that most of the engineers that worked there didn't really grasp what I was doing on the software side and I had a hard time talking to them about the physical side.
My best example would be when I wrote a program against some specs for controlling certain digital/analog controls, only to discover that they had completely hooked up the controls differently.
My question is in a few parts:
Have you had any software-controlled projects?
Have you had any that you had previously done mechanically (and how did it go)?
If possible, what hardware, operating system, programming language(s), etc did you use?
Thanks!
You meen CONFIRM the myth, right?
Do you ever look back at your older episodes and wonder if a particular myth was busted mistakenly? For instance, a few weeks ago here at Slashdot we discussed the 'Archimedes Death Ray' myth. There were several of us including myself who thought the myth was plausible given a sighting method for the shields. One reader even quoted an RAF airman procedure for aiming a signal mirror at a passing plane. That seemed very much like the missing piece of the Death Ray puzzle.
Do your producers give you the flexibility to revisit previous myths like these?
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
So, let me make sure I understand this: Even though it is well known that high quality wooden arrows were specifically selected for the straightest possible grain (just like pole-axe handles) the so-called "mythbusters" based their evaluation on the cheap-ass arrows that are sold nowadays to people who can't afford aluminum?
Right. Well, I don't need to watch that show.
Who's brilliant idea was it to set off a rocket in the shop while testing the Confederate Rocket myth? The second I saw what you were planning to do I knew it wasn't going to end well. Are there any other really bad ideas that you've gone through with?
Has there ever been a myth you've tried to bust, but couldn't, even though you're sure it's false?
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Do you read slashdot, eh? :D
(it news for nerds, and you guys definitely qualifies as nerds! (welcome to the club!))
--
Also my Wife noted "boy they don't really make any bones about using Kari for sex appeal" and not that I mind one bit but I did notice that even before changes in billing and the departure of other female Mythterns, Kari was pretty much like the third host of the show. Were I to guess I'd say her increased useage on the show was Discovery's idea (since the audience is probably mostly male) - is there any concern about using her too much?
Schnapple
What myth doled out the worst punishment on Buster?
That's some funny stuff.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Have you ever carried out an experiment with the intent of showing it on the show and then had it not air?
In the recent episode where you tried to re-create the civil war missile, there was one sequence where you created a massive fireball in the lab, and nearly burned the place down, it would seem. Now, I'm no expert, but even before this happened, I was sitting there saying to myself "Why are they doing this indoors?!" So, why were you doing that indoors? Even if you weren't expecting that big of a result, shouldn't "safety first" be the policy when working with such materials?
may I beg you, never - ever - to use Adam's feet in your experiments ever again? Thank you.
(why would you even consider not using Kari? Geesh.)
Is it true that a live kitten can balance a half ton slab of concrete on its head? Would you guys be willing to try this in the show?
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
Is it possible that 9/11 was engineered and carried-out by the Bush administration?
You guys are somewhat more famous than you used to be as fx wizards, and I'm curious:
What's the coolest thing that's happened to you, that you can attribute to your fame with the show, since you've become more well-known? (ok, besides having hot Mythterns)
What's the lamest thing?
Hi Jamie, Adam, etc.
I'd love to see the HAARP death ray and underground surveillance conspiracy theories/myths debunked once and for all.
Thanks!
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
And what comes next, hey bust a myth So don't just stand there, bust a myth Now you know what to do g, bust a myth
I thought you were going away? Now, go! I'm sick of your whining about the mods. Get over it fuckwad!
Also on the Confederate Rocket myth, were the materials censored because of the danger in people trying them at home, or because of fear of running afoul of that current ban on publishing books on how to make explosives?
Schnapple
I used to work at a nuclear power station in the UK (Magnox).
The DND (Delayed Neutron Detection) system was highly sensative to RF. Distant thunderstorms or on-site welding could set it off, and trip both reactors.
Cell phones were banned on site for this reason. One day some moron was sitting in the canteen and fired up his cell phone. Reactor 2 tripped on DND.
I think there should be 2 categories of questions. One for simple questions that people would like to read, and the second for questions regarding myths. Examples follow:
1. Can you guys illustrate why blowing into the back of old school nintendo cartridges almost always worked?
2. Can you guys find data to support that myth that if you cross your eyes too much, they will stay that way?
In addition to that, I was wondering how much of you the experiments come straight from the two of you? How often do you need to get an expert's help?
Thanks! ~tim
I once heard that water itself is non-conductive, it's the impurities in the water that makes it a conductor.Is this correct, and if so, if you removed the impurities would it be possible to submerge the parts of a pc under water to have a truly water cooled system? -Thanks! Monty Peterson
I remember the episode where you were trying to make the Intrepid taxi tip over using a jet engine, but were unable to use a commercial 737 jet due to "safety concerns" with your insurance company.
What is going on behind the scenes that we don't see on camera to keep all your stunts and myth busting as safe as possible? Also, after seeing you turn a hydrolic lift into a catapult (hoisted up on empty shipping cargo crates, no less), how can a commercial 737 jet be considered unsafe?
First make sure the lawyers aren't around, then answer this one: Your show is available on bittorrent networks to download and watch when/where it's more convenient. Some users, however, could download the show without paying for it via cable service. How do you personally feel about this? (Cheated\Angry\Flattered\What's A Bittorrent?)
I've always wondered if Coconuts really migrate or if a swallow could carry one. Maybe if two of them carried it on a sort of line...
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
This one is easy.
:)
What on Earth possessed you to try testing a rocket motor indoors? I seriously thought you guys were going to burn down the building on that one.
Keep up the excellent work. Your show rocks!
- Necron69
Usually prompted by e-mails, I know youve revisited myths in the past, which I think included the cell phone gas station explosion. I dont recall any of the revisiting reasons for this one actually pertaining to what I think is the true danger spot of this situation, which is vibrate mode. Since vibrate is nothing more than a small motor with an offset weight on it, and motors work by magnets and brushes which often make sparks, I think its quite possible this myths outcome could happen. Did you receive any e-mails with this theroy, and if so is it possible to revisit the myth a third time? seeing as theres a potential explosion, Id think youd jump at the chance. - love the show, I hope its on for a long time. thanks for all the quality entertainment.
Why don't you ever wear safety glasses when using power tools or working with volatile chemicals?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Have either of you ever believed a myth to be true at anytime in your life? And how did you find out it wasn't true and how did that make you feel?
Volpone
Is there a myth that you absolutely, positively, unequivocally will NOT do? If so, what is that myth?
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
It seems as the show got more popular you have started to address the people who slam your methods. You can even see in these questions where viewers have complaints about certain episodes. How much feedback do you get per episode now? Does any particular episode stand out as the most slammed? Have you ever done a scientific survey to find out how many of these people are /.ers?
I have been doing research about the so called Free Energy phenomena about one year and am convinced that there is something there...
:
r _effectg y
They had showed something about at The Mythbusters some time ago, but that was absurd !
I am not posing a questions here, I am posing a challenge:
Doing some Gloogle, por instance, is very easy to find plans to build a car that uses water as a fuel (cold hydrolyze).
The challenge is to get serious about zero point energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effectCasimi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energyDark_ener
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_pointZero_point
Or... is the regular energy company's lobby too strong ?
Have either of you ever tried to Myth Bust while not on camera? Be it under the influence of Alcohol or not.
There are a lot of myths being presented by the media during this culture war. While millions mindlessly watch TV and believe what it says, it's still not true.
For example:
"Everyone" knows that no WMDs were found in Iraq, yet the New York Times has an article written May 22, 2004 claiming how local Iraqis are in danger because George Bush wants to remove the 500T of yellowcake (raw) uranium and the 1.77T of enriched uranium by driving it out through the city streets.
"Everyone" knows that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but we attacked them anyway. Even though they house Abu-Abas, Abu-Nidal, and two other very-highly-prized terrorists that a lot of nations want to kill. And there was a 727 found there for training terrorists. And there was a $20,000 "bounty" Saddam was paying to any family who had a homocide bomber blow themselves up.
"Everyone" knows that 2,000 deaths in a war with tanks is an absurd, out-of-control quagmire. Except the DoD has posted that the number of militarys deaths each year when we stay home is 1,200. Except that in Vietnam (a real quagmire) we used to see 600 coffins a *week*.
Yeah, I know it's all political, but the evidence is clear; it's where one can look it up, open to anyone, they just won't stop listening to CNN.
Go to Iraq with a translator, see the officials, then look around. Compare what the officials say to what the locals say. Then maybe we can put these issues to bed and get other things done for a change.
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
This is incredibly off topic and I am very aware of that so mod as you please but it's entertainment not real science! Stop being so nit-picky...I know many of us who visit this site are immersed in the scientific method but the purpose of this show is not to rewrite scientific theories; it's to blow some shit up and entertain people for an hour while occasionally teaching you something.
;)
The number of shows that discovery has that are fun and somewhat informational but stray from strict scientific method is astronomical; stop the grandstanding and enjoy the show folks
...random variations in organic sludge and that humans are the descendants of monkeys or is that just a myth spread by my gay socialist drug-abusing science teacher who my Sunday school teacher (the best in Kansas!) says is the spawn of Satan and murders little children?
Were you the sort of eleven-year-olds who spent their time trying to make various things in the neighborhood go BOOM? Or, did you come by this later in life?
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Are you upset that your prominence in the show went downhill after you brought Kari on board? Cause you know most geeks are tuning in to see the hot redhead, not you two goofs.
Sincerely,
NardofDoom
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
To the editors: It would be cool if there were an Ask category that these "Ask so-and-so" articles could belong to, as they're kind of a feature of Slashdot (especially lately).
Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
In the same topic, have you found a myth that can't be graphically dispelled, that must be done with math/common sense, and worths putting it in the show because is a common misconcept?
And what about myths that can be acted, but in a way or another can't be showed on tv? Don't have to go to i.e. sex myths, maybe even the "all cats land on their feet" myth could be dangerous to show if some potential damage is showed on camera (i know, is a weak example, but shows the idea)
...Irregular Webcomic?
Can you guys like try to bust the myth that you can't read Slashdot and get laid?
Is the Windows operating system really superior to Linux in speed and reliability as Microsoft contends with their studies?
I'm curious as to how many "You busted this myth, but my cousin's best friend's brother actually had that happen to him!" responses you get.
what kind of technology are you both into and using. (eg. PC or Mac? Windows or Linux? Explorer or Firefox?) and do you use it for any aspect of the show.
Mythbusters recently busted the myth about a pickup truck getting better gas milage if the tailgate is down. The show also showed the aerodynamics of a pickup bed with and without the tailgate open. What happens to the aerodynamics (and gas mileage) if a pickup toolbox is installed across the front of the bed?
I'm wondering... If you read in bed at night with very low light or with a dim flashlight, will your eyes go bad? Does your eyesight get worse if you do this? Is this an old wives' tale or is it true?
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
In reference to the "coolest job ever" comments. I design targets for the US army for the sole purpose of having them blown to bits with the Army's latest weapons. Soooooo.... designing full scale remote control tanks for the sole purpose of destructive testing is a good gig too.
(no $hit, its really my job, I get paid for this)
This is bull.
I used to compete in archery tournaments; firing a traditional bow (longbow or recurve) without sights requires much, much practise.
Since it takes so much time to walk back to the target for arrow recovery, I would quiver 30 arrows and shoot at the bottom of a plastic dixie cup taped to a burlap sack full of cotton batting.
I *HATE* splitting arrows, as it takes time to make them.
I, personally, have done this before many times; I have also achieved a "perfect split" a couple of times, but as I said it isn't a good thing.
The mythbusters show sometimes falls far short due to underestimation and lack of repetition. How can it be scientific with so little verification?
Who busts the mythbusters?
Whatever...
Some things obviously can't be used for some reason or another, and your budget can't be limitless. What myth has had the most money spent on it, but never found it's way into the show? And did you support the decision?
Do either Jamie or Adam have a preference of using Linux over other OS's?
So, is there anything else you guys have thrown Buster at and then decided, "Hey, that looked like fun, I want to try that?"
Yeah, isn't it great!?
Who came up with the MythBusters concept? How did you go about getting the Discovery channel to back your concept? (However it happened - thanks - it is my favorite show)
Dear Adam,
When you tried, and failed, to set a ship on fire with a hastily constructed fresnel mirror array, and then also failed to set the "ship" on fire by dousing it in gasoline and setting an open flame to it. Did it not occur to you that if it won't burn in those conditions, the replica ship is "busted", not the "myth"?
You can't take the sky from me...
My computers generate heat. It is cold outside. Is is cheaper to turn them off when not in use and let the gas furnace make heat?
I have heard several times of supposed myths which were 'Busted' on your show, only to be refuted by scientists, educators, government officials, etc.
A particular incident of this which comes to mind was the 'myth' of 'Urinating on the Third Rail', which had been 'Busted' on the show, but which was later refuted by officials from a large city (I believe it was New York) who stated that several people each year are electrocuted by contact with the third rail in their subways, and felt the show had misportrayed the safety hazards of contact with a third rail.
What efforts do you take to ensure that the science of the tests you are performing is valid? Do you have any sort of outside independant review (similar to a scientific peer review process), to ensure that you are not accidentally miseducating the public (either about potential real dangers, or simply by teaching bad science)?
I have always wondered, if a real life person were to engage in a firefight like they do in a typical action movie, how much ammunition would that person have to carry?
As hard as I can to think of a myth, I can't. I'm just saying that those guys rock. One time I shot an arrow out of the air with a bb gun. It was pretty cool, it dropped almost straight down when I hit it too. I wasn't trying it though, just dumb luck.
:)
It must be hard coming up with ideas of myths to bust. I think you guys should regularly stop on Slashdot, maybe once every 3 months, and see what ideas we got. I can't think about this flatfooted, but if I had 3-6 months to prepare, I could probably have 1 or 2 good ones for you guys.
Mod me up if you want MythBusters to check Slashdot every 6 months or so
God spoke to me.
Is it true there are polar bears in Finland? ;)
Every so often they do a "Myths Revisited" episode, where they take into account user feedback about this very issue. In this case, they did determine that they had over-generalized, and in fact the data proved that at a certain speed it becomes more efficient to use AC. So this question is sort of answered already.
--Brandon / Split Infinity Music
Do you guys ever refer to snopes.com for background information on myths/rumours? What about wikipedia.org?
Random rants about technology: http://technorants.blogspot.com
I used to have an old 16-color EGA monitor on my old IBM 8088 (with co-processor!)
When said monitor tried to display VGA graphics, a fuse would burn and the monitor would cease function.
Any virus with a payload of displaying a VGA graphic would indeed "destroy" that monitor... at least as far as the end user was concerned.
It also had a cool button for green monochrome mode. I miss that monitor...
If you want to blow up a modern one, hook wall current into your hd-15 jack.
A few months ago I had a strange nightmare where you (Adam) were actually in my dream and MythBusters had been canceled (see, told you it was a nightmare!) due to liability concerns. You were feeling pretty upset about it (and Jaime was wondering what to do with the old dedicated MythBusters satellite that was still in orbit) and we were driving somewhere out in the country just to chill out. Suddenly we ran across a haunted house complete with ghosts and ghouls and steps that went nowhere. Don't worry, though, we managed to solve the mystery of the haunted house and excise the demons. Everyone got out okay. My question is: Have you ever had a dream about me?
Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
Could Jesus really have walked on water? If so - prove it!
Considering that part of my job is repairing and certifying police radar and LIDAR units, I have to ask...
When you did the episode where you were debunking the myth that hanging a CD or something similar from the rear-view mirror would confuse SMDs (Speed Measuring Devices): Did you ever consider (or try) taking the microwave source/horn assembly from a junked radar unit, and mounting it in the car so it was facing forward (through the windshield) and powered up?
Or, alternatively, how about having someone in the passenger seat operating an identical radar unit to the one being used by whoever's measuring the vehicle speed?
With that said, let me add that neither technique would be very effective (if at all) in actually fooling radar units (the receiving unit would probably just interpret the approaching signal as a really strong return echo), but I would like to see you repeat the experiment under such conditions. I'd be curious to know how the SMD reacts.
Thanks much.
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
What battery has the most energy in it? (AA, AAA)
It varies with discharge rates, of course, but you can do a bunch of very public tests in different applications and come up with some total energy numbers.
Every time I see that ad that says "if you think all batteries are the same, consider this:" I always get excited, thinking they're actually gonna show me some, however biased, numbers. But they just say "famous person x trusts these batteries." It seems that if there's really a difference between duracel and energizer and the off-brands, whoever has more energy would quantify and advertise it. But they don't think it's a good idea, for whatever reason.
Wanna do it for them?
xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
You guys do some pretty outrageous stuff on your show. What kind of legal clearance do you have to get to pull off your experiments without ending up in jail? For example, the show where you raced a toy car against a sports car looked like it required shutting down a major stretch of road. Is it hard to get support from the local authorities in the name of mythbusting? Have you ever gotten in any trouble with the law for your experiments?
PS - The Gigadrome Challenge at VMworld was a lot of fun.
I am Jack's sig. I reduce Jack's karma.
UFO.. myth or truth?
I think your show offers excellent scientific exposure to lay people. Unfortunately, this seems lost on reflection. Do you think your show would better promote an interest in science if it was an explicit goal and component of discussion?
1) Can you keep flies away by hanging up clear plastic bags of water? Supposedly, from what I hear the flies will see their magnified reflection in the bags of water and be scared off. I've seen this used around little mom & pop restaraunts where the owner's swear by it. IMHO, I just don't think it would work. 2) Can DEET mosiqutoe repellent melt plastic or foam cups? I've run into one occasion where a red plastic cup rubbed red paint onto to me -- I'm guessing because of the 100% DEET I was wearing. I've heard that DEET is pretty bad stuff but if it melts stuff I don't know if I want to be wearing it... Can you also test natural mosiqutoe repellents (catnip, etc) and electronic repellents? 4) Can cockroaches or other bugs get caught in a person's ear canal? Supposedly it's because they can't crawl backwards.
Is it alive?
But a bit more seriously: when Bob Marley died did they really discover new species of insect in his hair? Can insects actually live in a moustache?
And another thing... Why do you let those idiots the build crew touch anything?
Should be pretty easy.
Artifical Intelligience is no match for natural stupidity.
how about doing an episode like this:
We're not in Kansas anymore: busting the creation myth.
They do revisit myths from time to time if they're not satisfied that the myth has been busted.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
How about busting the myth that employing a trained scientist will help you with the science in your show? This seems to be a recurring theme in the questions here. I guess these guys forget that on the show you often do interview experts in the field for the myth you're busting. And that a "scientist" can't be an expert in fluid mechanics, electronics, radio waves, and vaccume cleaners all at the same time.
[My applogies for the vaccume cleaner comment....]
Your show seems to be taped on a very strict (sometimes inhibiting) schedule. How long do you have to shoot an episode, and how much flexibility do you have in deciding which projects deserve more time?
Is Marijuana really dangerous?
Is there such a thing, and where can I find it?
The Financial Times recently , Nov. 9th, ran a digital business issue. Several articles dealt with security issues. One of them title "Our security is letting us down" mentioned that Many people worry about credit card theft conducted by eavesdropping on internet traffic, but no one at Scotland Yard, the FBI, visa or mastercard is aware of a single case of such theft in the history of the internet Scotland yard, fbi, visa, mastercard...Shouldn't the myth busters be in there somewhere. And here I thought the Financial Times was a quality publication.
I've seen you test the theory that running your car's air conditioning reduces your gas mileage, but here's a better one: is it necessarily true that you should change your oil "every 3 months or 3000 miles"?
I believe that, while changing it every 3000 miles is definitely a safe thing to do, it is overkill. My Honda's manual, for instance, states that I should only perform the maintenance (oil changes included), every 10000 miles. Over the life of the vehicle (say, 150000 miles,) that's the difference of 35 oil changes.
While this isn't a question for MythBusters, I'd love to see an episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! on the subject.
Penguin Trivia #46: Animals who are not penguins can only wish they were. -- Chicago Reader 10/15/82
Hola amigos de Mythbusters. All the way from Mexico I have this myth for you, strange that a mexican came up with it, really.
JFK
Was there ever a second shooter?
Think you can prove it? You have already been helped the FBI in other occasions, but this might be a big breaktrhough, won't you agree?
Thanks for your time, Gustavo Ibarguengoytia AKA Dtortot
Please clear this up... Does Microsoft really have a lower TCO than Linux?
It seems like your show is contingent on a specific kind of myth; things that can be recreated in a (somewhat) controlled environment. Certain cultural myths and origin stories are right out, for example, because they don't lend themselves to much other then diligent research. As you continue to produce the shows, how do you find more myths that are suitable to your format? Do you feel the strain of "been there, done that" yet?
Considering all the posts which contain something to the effect of "Kari is hot", Id be curious how she (and Jamie and Adam) feel about the iconic stature they have attained in the geek community. I know quite a few geek girls who lust after the guys, too ;-)
The vanishing hitchhiker (or phantom hitchhiker) is a reported phenomenon in which people travelling by vehicle meet with or are accompanied by a hitchhiker who subsequently vanishes without explanation, often from a moving vehicle. Vanishing hitchhikers have been reported for centuries and the story is found across the world, in many variants. A version occurs in the Christian Bible, Acts 8:26-39, which was written in perhaps AD 80, certainly no later than the 2nd century AD (references).
Is it true that in Soviet Russia, Myths test the MythBusters?
And while you are at it, can you put down a couple of other myths such as
Oh, and I love Kari!
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Why is it that you never not take a math, simulation, statistics method to busting myths. I would love it if before the myth you explained the real physics/chemistry/thermodynamics/electrical/etc. principles and show the math behind what you are doing. This seems like it would allow one to have real control and dynamic varibles and then you could use the simulations to see how well your experment fit the hypothesis. The scientific method is a great proven way to do things and you guys are some of the most clever I have seen. Is it the television, market, that is driving this type of expermenting? If it is the market do you think you could use your aclaim to help people get interested in real science, and further do you see your show a being a gateway for young viewers to get into science and engeneering circulums.
Faith_Healer -- The antethsis to almost everything, and the worlds worst speller.
Sewer alligator is an urban legend where it is said that 9-foot alligators reside in some city sewers, becouse some time ago baby alligators were popular pets for a short time. When the alligator started to grow big, the owners dropped them to toilet. These stories have been popular in cities where a large sewer system exists.
Simple enough question: Sierra Nevada or Anchor Steam?
have the mythbusters ever expeienced outright hostility from people (quacks, pseudoscientists, and parapsychologists) who have a vested interest in the continued belief in busted myths and junk science?
i regularly read james randi's weekly web blog and he gets hostility all the time. of course, he reaches out to purposely debunk frauds who are actively tricking people and stealing money. but very often he catches hostility from those who desparately want to believe in psedoscience as well.
when religion is no longer the opiate of the masses, governments will resort to real opiates.
I'm curious if you have any comment on material that you've presented that has been censored. I'm refereeing to and episode where you made a type of liquid fuel for a home made rocket. How do you feel about basic chemistry being censored in such a fashion to give someone a false sense of security?
--Oceand
Q: Have The Mythbusters Ever Gone To 'Burning Man'
Many of the contraptions that people lug out to the festival resemble things that the mythbusters build, but without the rationale of mythbusting. People build giant machines that generate tornados of fire, giant battling robots, massive tesla coils or mushroom cloud simulators - the kind of gizmos we see on the show. So even if you haven't been do you have any knowledge/stories/favrourites etc etc.
Mythbusters in based in San Francisco and I know some of the 'experts' they bring in are Burning Man regulars so I guess I'm just interested in what they think of these 'amateurs' doing this kind of crazy stuff in the desert.
http://www.mythbustersfanclub.com/html/killer_tiss ue_box.html
Memorable Quotes:
Tory: "Any archer capable of completing this task shall be awarded a kiss from the fair M..." (looks at Kari) "Sorry, okay... ya... you're not going to get that. My mistake"
Kari: "Let's Make a robot"
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Why do you guys bother with the myths that you are obviously going to bust? For example, trying various ways to fool breathalyzers, or trying to fool radar detectors. Even if you did confirm one of these types of myths, for example finding a way to fool a breathalyzer, it's not like it would ever go to air anyway. I can't image a sitation where you'd be able to air a confirmed method of getting around any of these laws. So why bother?
Is there anyone besides you who cares?
I think that episode is where the tide of the show turned away from only busting the myths. They determined that it was do-able, but then proceeded to take the additional step of obliterating the cement truck with way, WAY too many lbs of explosives. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy watching it, but it seemed like they were getting a little off-topic, and moving on to simple wanton destruction after they'd satisfied the myth.
Personally, I wonder if that was because they were bored, or because the producers were well aware that the demographic that tends to watch the show also tends to enjoy large explosions.
"No fair, you changed the outcome by measuring it!" - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth
Can it actually be possible that somewhere someplace there's an insurance company game enough to take on the task of insuring you guys -- Whats the most worried you've ever been on a point of personal risk during a myth?
or on the phone for that matter. You guys partially busted that, but I feel that the energy source that you guys used did not have the voltage or amperage that real lightning packs. What about using a Quarter Shrinker to get the genuine results? The gadget pushes over 100K Amps @ 15K Volts @ 6,500 Joules, can reshape any metallic object that you wind in a copper coil. IMHO, that is as close as you can get to the genuine article.
http://teslamania.delete.org/frames/shrinker.html
And knowing Adam, he'll be giggling like a kid in a candy store when he hears the shrinker fire the first time at 5K Joules.
First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
There's been a video floating around for a few years that purports to show someone being sucked into the intake of a jet engine. It looks vaguely fake to me, but sounds like it could happen. As jet engines are somewhat expensive, I don't know how practical a test could be done, but I'd be interested in watching what happens to 150 lbs of ballistics gel and bones. Urk.
Theory and practice are the same in theory, but different in practice.
Could you take on some computer myths?
Oooh, how about Van Eck Phreaking? Not exactly a myth, but wouldn't it be cool?
Would it be allowed even?
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
I've noticed that everything you guys do when trying to "trick the law" you guys never succeed. like in the breatholizer test you couldn't find anything to trick it, and in the lazer / radar test you yet again couldn't beat it. are you guys no airing things that do in fact work (I could totally understand why) but I've always wondered that. And why didn't you try any of the soposed "radar scamblers" that you can get off the internet all day long, sure thier illegal, but not trying one does give the "busted" tag on that myth inconclusive. also with the breatholizer test, there is a type of candy sold in germany called "spunk" (yeah i know...) that has been shown to trick breathalizers. would you be willing to revisit these myths using other ideas on how to go about tricking them, or did you truely cut out things that work do to the fact that massive amounts of drunk people would speeding down the highway and get out of all thier tickets?
:)
thats one long question
Why is it when you guys do the MPG myths you use such inexact methods? A gas tank is a very inexact amount. The only way to know if they were equal would be to have them totally empty but without looking inside or tipping it out how can you know that they were empty? Why not cut into the gas line then use external gas cans? That way you will know exactly what you started with.
Do you think you could convince discovery channel to play more than just the toilet one? Everytime I tune in it's always the one where you try to prove someone smoking on a toilet won't blow themselves up. While this is an important lesson, I'd like to see other episodes as well.
I didn't have time to read through 3 pages of comments to see if someone asked this one: Has there been a myth you guys considered too dangerous to attempt to confirm or bust, if so, what was it?
Given all the cool technology at your disposal, do you guys build costumes for halloween? If so, what are some of the costumes you've built? Pics.
Window v Linux what's is the truth? For every claim there is, somewhere, a counterclaim.
So should i continue to use ubuntu/linux on my laptop, or should i roll back to the pre-installed windows xp.
Could you please bust this Myth.
1) Security.
2) Total cost of ownership
3) Community
If you need money to bust this myth, i hear billy doors from macrohard will cover the tab.
The person you were responding to got the myth wrong. They weren't testing whether it's possible to split an arrow perfectly, we know it's possible since people have done so. The myth was is it possible to do so on command. As in, someone says split the arrow and you go and split the arrow every time. They proved that splitting an arrow perfectly on command was impossible.
McGyver appears to be able to make anything he wants out of duct tape, a few pens, some rubber ducting, steel tubing and a torch. It does sound believable at times. Which ones would you like to try?
I'm sure plenty of people are interested in how myths are selected for each show. Who gets to pick the myths to bust? Do you rely mostly on fan submissions about myths, or do you come up with the myths yourselves?
"0101100101? It's just jibberish. *looks in mirror, gasps* 1010011010@!? AHHHHHH!!"
Jamie is it a myth that you were in the special forces? Does that explain you always wearing a beret?
Is BSD really dead?
I for one, welcome our new hot grits... PROFIT!
I'd aim for the sails. Thin and dry and easy to see from shore. Should ignite quickly and act as kindling towards the goal of igniting the rest of the ship. If the sailors pull them to put out the fires you also gain the advantage of slowing their progress.
Is Darwin's theory of Evolution a myth?
You should have the guys from Car Talk on as guest stars for the next automotive related myth.
There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
In that case, i'd love Adam and Jamie making a Fractal crop circle like the ones by the circlemakers.
Come to think of it, i'd LOVE to see an explanation around the UFO and how the crop circles have evolved over time...
A reasonable quality medieval arrow is straight-grained from end to end, those that are not are referred to as "modern pieces of shit".
I have a crossbow bolt on my wall that is perfectly straight-grained, and has hand-applied split goose-feather vanes and a hand-forged iron pile head. The man who made it selected the wood while it was still part of a living tree, and seasoned it for over a year before shaping it. It is not particularly high quality compared to a real medieval quarrel, because the nock is just a slot sawn in the end (with a hand-forged saw, of course) instead of a fitted, hand-made horn or antler nock.
If you hit this bolt directly in the nock, it would almost certainly split end-to-end, regardless of the oscillation of the incoming shaft, or the flexing of the impacted shaft. As you obviously already know, wood splits on the grain.
I selected my jo and bo sticks for perfectly straight grain, too. And my axe-handles are all straight-grained, even though it's not really necessary in the hickory ones. Modern competition archers don't use wood shafts any more, so there is no longer a market for extremely high quality wooden arrows, so the "myth wankers" experiment is fatally flawed from the outset.
Various slashdot posters have occasionally commented on having something called a 'girlfriend' or 'wife'. I want some proof of that, can you do a show on it?
So: Start with bare computers, and the install disks for each system. To be fair, use five major Linux distros http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major, and five of any non-Linux operating systems (This is fair because one Linux system is very different from another.). Your test subjects have to (a) install the system on the computers with NO expert assistance (they are allowed to consult all the manuals, books, and internet forums they need), and (b) are given one week each person/system-combo to complete a simple list of goals with each system: 1. Connect to the internet. 2. Send an email. 3. Compose a simple office memo and save it to removable media. 4. Play a movie. 5. Burn a set of songs onto a CD. 6. Load/install a game to a state of being playable, hardware issues be damned. By the way, no fair modifying the hardware given the subject, and no fair spending money on enhancements beyond the OS disks themselves. They can download all the freeware they want for any system.
At the end, subjects can report on their success or failure in the goals, and the relative ease with which they accomplished each.
As brownie-points: I offer my response to our recent Slashdot poll, in which I was the sole person to nominate you as the most accurate TV geeks: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168355&thresho ld=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=14074600
Note the date of Nov 20th. Almost like I knew you were coming, huh? We here will be eternally grateful if you can settle this once and for all.
And to everybody else on the board: I'm not interrested in your responses at all. I can hear the rest of you babble all year. I'm asking the Mythbusters team, and the Mythbusters team ONLY.
I love the show guys, and really appreciate the recent emphasis on explaining the science of what you're doing.
That said, regarding the civil war rocket... who the hell decided to test a rocket INSIDE THE SHOP???
Thanks!
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Jamie's bio on the MythBusters website says that he is a wilderness survival expert, captain, diver, linguist, animal wrangler, machinist, chef and, of course, model-maker. Adam has made reference to Jamie being torture by guerillas in Central America on the show. How did Jamie become an expert in all of these subjects? At the risk of starting a new myth was Jamie ever a Navy SEAL, a CIA operative or even in the military at all?
Can solar sails be used on earth and not just in spasce? Nasa and Russian space agencys have launched a few solar sail ships into space. can the solar sail work here on earth? like to be used on a boat or even a car? can the needed protons or what ever make it through the atmosphere to push the sails on earth? Then the fastest a boat on water with a sail was like a little under 60 MPH, useing a solar sail in conjunction with a wind sail could you not break the water speed record useing sails of different types?
Are you really that clumsy or is it just an act for the show?
Adam answered some of these questions already in another interview. I did not see it mentioned in this discussion, so here:
part 1
part 2
The US has been accussed of using White Phosphorous as a chemical weapon against the IRAQ insurgents. Can you test the chemical effects of White Phosphorous?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4442988.stm
Thanks!
How did you folks get started in the special effects industry? What trainings did you have at the start or on the way?
can I get her phone number??
How old is Jaime's moustache?
In the show, it looks like you build all the stuff yourself. However, in reality, how much is delegated to assistants never shown on screen?
It's obvious from your newer shows that you guys have been giving more airtime to younger, hipper folk that take over the show. Some of them aren't bad. Some are awful, IMHO. Do you guys get final say on these kids? Or does some marketing wonk at Discovery Channel say "this chick looks hot. Put her on." And is it possible there will one day be a Mythbusters without you?
I love the show and would love to start collecting the seasons. I went to Discovery.com and almost had a cow. $50 for season 1 and $100 for season 2 !? Please tell me those prices are a myth!
What was your hardest myth to prove wrong from a technical stand point? And which was the hardest that turned out to be true?
I bow down before the might of whoever is hosting this bit of video. I just watched the whole thing at 10am PST without a glitch... CoralCDN is to the power of /. what Tom bombadill is to the power of the ring...
http://frag-legion.uk.net/wiibar/mario-5732799551
Is Kari single?
There are a lot of testable myths surrounding the moon landing without actually going to the moon. Apparent optical anomalies in photos taken by the Apollo astronauts that moon landing "debunkers" cling to as evidence for example or whether radiation or the cold vacuum of space would affect the film in the Hasselbach cameras used on the moon.
I think this would make an excellent show, but they would really need to devote the entire episode to give the material the proper treatment. This myth would probably fall in the category of taking too much time and/or money or be too technically demanding.
Do you believe in our current society with all it technological advances and level of civilisation that myths together with superstition still hold a place in it or that the "fun" you have on the show is actually part of general push to get rid of these myths and replace them with the facts? Great show, keep up the good work. -- All Your Base Are Belong To My Pet Goldfish
Sword
Is Kerry single?
On behalf of all of us: What's sex with an actual woman like?
No one knows! It's a myth!
Can you retest the "Bulletproof Water" myth, if anything, because it was so cool!?
I was wondering, for example, what would happen if you used a deer slug or some projectile of solid lead. I don't know about a whole lot about ammunition, but it seems that the 50 cal rounds are big and fast but not necessarily solid. And what about squib rounds? Could they possibly be more effective in this case than regularly-packed ones?
While the idea has been "posted to death" on Discovery's message boards, I would like to know why you haven't done a show on cell phone interference. I used to travel a lot, and it always made me laugh when the pilots would put their phones on the center console in the airplane, and then would ask passengers to turn their phones off. I've talked to pilots about the idea of cell phones interfering with aircraft navigation systems, and all they do is laugh; yet the FAA wants the public to believe that a cell phone being left on or operated on a plane will cause the navigation systems to go nuts - or at worst, that a rogue cell phone could bring the plane down.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
Question: Do you ever feel badly doing bad science, and then drawing conclusions from your results?
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
We all know about Jamie's 7-up machine robot. And in the special features on the Matrix 3 DVD, we can see Adam working a tower collapse for the dock fight in Xion. But what other things have you two worked on?
Devise a plan to use that hot and saucey Kerri (red-headed goddess), to prove the myth, that you can't successfully pull a EverQuestI/II and/or Worlds of Warcraft junky, be it male or more interestingly female, game addict and prove that they can/can't interact with a real life female, in a real life relationship (albet it a short one). This could tie into the myth with the old saying, "Red on the Head, Fire in bed" !!! Just a thought..
Here at Slashdot, we take pride in our nerd and geek heritage. A lot of the knowledge and pastimes you demonstrate on your show qualify as pretty nerdy. Would you describe yourselves as geeks?
-- I am become sig, destroyer of posts.
I've personally been on TV as an "expert" on the shows: Junkyard Wars, Monster Garage, Modern Marvels, Mail Call, Urban Legends Revealed and In The Name of Science. I've also consulted to shows like Nova and others. Why? I'm one of the world's leading authorities on ancient catapult and trebuchet technology. It's a silly thing, but hey, it got me on TV. (and I was suprised that the MythBusters didn't call me when they did their catapulting shows. Wassup wit dat?)
Anyway, my experience has been that all TV shows- even a "science" show like Nova, are first and foremost a form of entertainment for the masses. It's astonishing how much real science and real (and interesting) educational content is disposed of in favor of dumb comedy or adversarial content in the shows I participated in. Knowing what goes on behind the camera helps one to "see" what's going on behind the camera in other shows too. And I can see it happening in MythBusters- good and interesting informative content that should be there was cast aside in favor of the cheap gag.
TV producers always seem to think that the currency of "good" television is conflict. In other words, people love to watch a good fight, or at least an argument. People also like to think that they are learning something, but hate to really learn. ("If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but, if you really make them think, they'll hate you." -- Harlan Ellison) The TV show MacGyver is an example....
In educational television, fail to entertain, and you lose the student. But it's all too easy to lose the education in favor of the entertainment too.
We live in a time when the US is falling behind, and may even lose its lead in the global science and engineering disciplines. School science programs are suffering, fewer and fewer kids in the US are studying science and engineering in colleges. We need to inspire our kids to study more science and engineering, and develop a stronger interest in these fields. This is not an issue of global competition, I view it as an issue of the US not living up to its responsibility as the wealthiest nation on earth. Shouldn't we also be capable of producing and distributing more and better scientists, engineers and technologies for the benefit of everyone?
"If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?" - Hillel, 1st. century BCE.
So my question is this- Is the show just another stab at entertaining the public and making a few dollars off of advertisers, or are you really interested in helping inspire people (especially kids) to think, and to learn something new, and if so, do you think you could/should be doing a better job, or are the realities of producing a popular TV show just too much of a barrier to that?
By the way, my money is where my mouth is. I gave up a lucrative career as a CIO to design and sell catapults and trebuchets to schools and students. The most common feedback I get from teachers is: "Nothing has inspired an interest in learning math and physics more than building and tuning the trebuchet!" I take credit for sending dozens of kids off to engineering schools who would otherwise not have gone that route. I'd like to reach more kids too. Any pointers on getting my own TV science show?
Oh, and get your own catapult today!
http://www.catapultkits.com/
http://www.trebuchet.com/
http://www.mangonel.com/
http://www.trebuchetplans.com/
http://www.thehurl.org/
Why do you habitually make conclusions after running what is clearly a statistically insignificant number of experimental trials?
I recall an episode where you compared the fuel efficiency of a car with it's windows open to one with closed windows but the a/c on. After a single experiment, you declared that the closed-window car was more efficient, despite the fact that the difference in efficiency was small, and you ran only a single experiment.
There are obviously a dozen or more variables that could change the outcome of the experiment. The make and model of car, the speed, the weather conditions at the time, type of gasoline could all have an effect. Yet somehow you drew a conclusion from this one experiment.
Please explain in detail.
Thank you
Though you showed that wet quicksand like in the movies was a myth, a week later after the show aired a scientific study came out showing that empty spaces under dry sand could develop and implied that this could be the source of the anecdotal quicksand stories.
It's not hard to think of how the sand at the very top might become wet over the dry empty sand structures (like after a rainstorm), then you would have true quicksand like in the movies. Rather than have the sand wet in the whole tank as you did on the show. Plus, you gave no thought to empty voids that might develop under wet sand.
I think that this myth that you 'busted' is entirely 'plausible' (esp. with just dry sand).
Website for the scientific study with video.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
What happens to all the cool stuff you guys build after the show is aired?
I wonder, sometimes, how often the nitty gritty science content - things like control groups, double-blind setups, etc - gets cut in favor of the "Adam blowing stuff up" segments in order to make the show come in on time.
For instance, the recent episodes about seasickness cures and alternate uses for vodka. The seasickness placebo pill seemed like an afterthought, but should have been part of the process from the beginning. Also, it wasn't an inert sugar pill, but a vitamin, which could potentially throw the results into question (I know that the vitamins I take often make me feel nausea if I take them on an empty stomach). And what about the meals the subjects had eaten beforehand? In the end, each of the "cures" could have been subject to placebo/nocebo effect, since the subjects all knew what they taking, and what the "cures" supposed to do.
As for the vodka tests, a good many of those trials could have been performed with water as a "control." To determine if the effectiveness of vodka as mouthwash, for instance. Was it due to its alcholic content, its lack of noticeable flavor or aroma?
I imagine there's a lot we don't see, based on the time constraints and the pressure to put a lot of "Adam blowing stuff up" content on-screen to bring up the numbers. My question is this: how much of it gets tossed? How much real scientific method actually happens to begin with, and who is responsible for designing it into the experiments? And is there any way (on the show's website, for instance) to share the complete data, experimental setups and whatnot, that don't get shown on TV?
P.S. Thanks for a very entertaining and enlightening show. Can you let Adam blow stuff up more often?
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
My question for Mythbusters. A baseball pitcher stands in the back of a pickup truck facing backwards. The truck picks up speed until it reaches, say, sixty miles per hour. If the pitcher then throws a baseball (in the opposite direction that the truck is going) at sixty miles per hour, will the ball hang in the air, drop straight down, or drop in a parabolic arc? I think the ball will appear to pause briefly in the air and then drop straight down (providing the ball and truck are traveling at exactly the same speed), but some friends think it will drop in an arc. They believe that the wind will play a factor but I disagree...unless there is a head wind or cross wind. I'd love to see Adam and Jamie conquer all the physics issues to see what will happen (although I do see a pitching machine or tennis ball cannon take the place of the pitcher for consistency). Joe Montgomery
I'll group my question with this, as it is related - I often see situations on the show that could very obviously be validated or busted by any good engineer or physicist and a blackboard - but that wouldn't be very good TV (Walking vs Running in the rain, classic application of basic calculus...).
What is the science support for the show? Surely you must have some real scientists on the research team, what do they tell you, and how many of the results do you actually know ahead of time due to your research staff and just being good engineers yourselves?
Once in a while it would be nice to have a theory guy come in after the myth has been entertainingly tested to bolster the results with real science. Especially when the "testing" is often so paltry with real generalizable data. This would be especially neat when the physical testing seems to disagree with the science. I have noticed a bit more "Science Content" on recent episodes, but I think the show would be more interesting if for instance your declarations of busted or not were backed up with a really good explanation of why something is mathematically/physically plausible to begin with, as opposed to just saying, well, we blew it up, but it still didn't fly 200 yards, myth busted.
How do you guys feel about the science content of your show and your myths? What do you think about having a real scientist on the show to audit results?
I have heard people say that the keyless remotes for cars, when just out of range of the car, will work if you look at the car and hold the remote up to your temple.
This seem plausible? And what in the world would make something like this work?
We often hear about Jamie's past experience as a dive master, and Adam has alluded to Jamie having Forces experience (jokingly or not... I couldn't really tell.) You both seem to have led interesting lives, I'd love to know a little more about your backgrounds. Thanks
How about a true, scientific test of Intelligent Design so we can observe it? Maybe create a transparent vacuum chamber and call forth to the intelligent designer to "create" a cherry pie in the chamber within one minute so we can verify his existence and credit him for his work.
8==8 Bones 8==8
I think you're thinking of Scottie... Scottie Chapman I'm a Kari man myself though.
Chicken gun.
The first time around, they called it "Busted" after having done analysis of the steel plate footage completely wrong. It hurt to watch because they were doing so well up to that point. Chicken gun redux was a bit better, but they never did explain what was wrong with the analysis of the steel plate.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
The ban is unconstitutional according to the state laws. So not only will it soon be overturned, but I'm not sure it would be illegal to disobey it. Besides, when the ban was passed, only 100 handguns were turned in from a city of x million residents. Anyway, they should have plenty of leftover "phosphorus tipped, air-friction-igniting" tracers to keep them going for a while. :-\
**note: tracers actually use magnesium salts in the base of the bullet and are ignited by the burning gunpowder. The orange or red tips of tracer rounds is just paint to tell them apart from regular rounds.
Can a car really stop on a dime?
WP is not classified as a chemical weapon because it produces thermal burns, not chemical burns. This is nothing more than the latest attempt by liberals to try to defang the U.S. military and render it harmless. Liberals hate the military because the need for a powerful military flies in the face of their humanist utopia everybody-stand-in-a-circle-and-sing-kumbaya ideaology.
http://www.techcentralstation.com/111705D.html
There is a documentary out there called "Loose Change". Very good quality. But I am not sure of the quality of their claims.
One claim is that detonations were going on in the building while it was collapsing. They have visual proof of this abnormality.
Could you try busting or reinforcing that myth?
Is it true breast implants can blow up if the female recipient is in a car accident whereby the breasts are subjected to significant trauma?
Same with my four-year-old. She calls this show Men Breaking Things.
What I wouldn't mind are some suggestions for safer Mythbusting we can do for various sciences, but I can probably find that myself.
No Longer a Menace to Society.
Alexandria Morrigan born 2/22/01 l. 20.5in wt. 7 lbs. 5 oz.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
What is the most requested myth you guys have been asked to test? Have you done it, if not why?
...in case Adam or Jamie would end up being killed while in the process of mythbusting, do they believe it would be worth the ultimate sacrifice (for the sake of science and all)? :)
I know at one point in the show you've stated that you like to stay away from the "ooga booga" myths, meaning I suppose the ones with a bit of mysticism attached to them. But still, a large percentage of the myths out there actually fall into that category. A good compromise might be doing a Halloween episode in which you dedicate one show to taking on a few of the most tv-friendly "ooga booga" mythbusting. What do you think of this idea?
501 Not Implemented
If I were in a plummeting elevator and I jumped the exact moment before the crash, would I escape the kinetic damage unharmed (assuming the elevator remained intact)?
Also, if you did your show from a van in Miami to test the *actual* sluttiness of random 20something women passing by, would it be called BangBusters?
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
have you ever worked with the guys at SRL - Survival research labs? www.srl.org. I'm sure you guys know them, and I'm guessing you probably have even colaborated with them on some level.Mark Pauline has always been involved with this group.
Do you guys ever show up at Burning Man festival (burningman.org). It seems a really great place to let loose your crazy contraptions... Great show... I hope to see it continue... TV has degnerated into this video ghetto of useless content... it is refreshing to see good TV once in a while.
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
They haven't answered this one yet!
PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals!
What would your preference be: continuing on with Mythbusters (hoping and assuming sustained/increasing popularity so you can do more "wild n' crazy" things) or being contracted out to help out on the next Star Wars/Lord of the Rings/ movie?
How much pressure do you feel to test more and more dangerous myths in the pursuit of ratings and have your safety standards changed at all for the sake of "good TV"?
I have friends who did some Discovery Channel special, and their "results" were way faked - but watching the special afterwards, you'd never know that. Have they (meaning, I guess, the Discovery Channel or producers or whoever) ever made you fudge some of your results to support or refute a myth they particularly liked/didn't like?
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
Are the mythbuster vixens Kari and Scottie single?
intelligent design. once and for all please.
Whose idea was it to end the sausage-fest by including females on the show and did it bump up the ratings? If so, might I suggest going for universal appeal by having a blonde, brunette and redhead?
Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
Watch Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t!
That show is almost spot on for that sort of topic. Save they don't take the scientific view at it. To boot, they're pretty equal opportunity harassers when it comes to politics. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Green, etc are all targets as far as those two are concerned. And occasionally they're educational too.
We don't need no Net Explorer We don't need no Thought control
What is the worst myth that you have ever tried to bust or confirm. One that, once you had it going, was just vile and wished you had never picked it.
In the myth of the stinky, unsaleable car in which a person had died, you let a couple of pigs rot in a Chevrolet Corvette for a couple of months and then succeeded in selling the car, even though it still stank and had no seats, etc. What happened to the shipping container you used to house it? Was it a rental? If so, were you able to return it? If not, were you able to reuse it yourself or was it so stinky that it went to the scrapyard?
$#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
It claims to help people stop drinking, but what it really seems to offer is religious conversion (despite the "AA is spiritual, not religious" slogan/claim), and it blames the many who continue to drink destructively for their own drinking, saying it's because they "didn't work The Program." This could be a part of the "ooga booga" topic someone else posted.
From the article: "AA: America's Stealth Religion" on Beliefnet, 12-step members make up about 10 percent of the US population. Based on their fervent belief and the way I've seen them post on Oprah's board (and seeing non-AA supportive posts get deleted there), I expect flames for even daring to ask this question.
Penn and Teller did an episode of their excellent Showtime show "Bullshit!" on steppism, and they've done some hard-hitting episodes on other controversial topics, but I get the feeling that Mythbusters will stick to the "Don't put a JATO pack on the back of a car" type of show. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but ideas can be more powerful and dangerous to society than high explosives, and such things should be discussed from all sides.
Tag lost or not installed.
...is insurance really necessary for every damn thing a person does? Can't people do anything without a written policy, permission from the court, a license from city hall, and twelve different committees?
I propose you blow something up without the above and test this myth.
It appears to me neither of you have any formal scientific training. While some of your episodes involve detailed calculations, and engineering with tight tolerances, your experiments are more entertaining than scientifically valid. Though it would be a shame to completely change the show from what is a very entertaining (and funny and scary and sometimes illuminating) hour, have you ever considered adding a scientific "addendum" to the myths you explore? Having done your best to bust/confirm a myth - go to a scientist and have them give a brief background of the science involved in the myth. This could add a new element to the show - sometimes confirming the results of your efforts, or maybe introducing an element of doubt into the results. Do you think it would make the show better to add a bit more science to your very entertaining efforts?
Thanks.
Going on means going far
Going far means returning
I have always heard the myth that men are bigger cheaters than women are. Is it possible to bust that myth?
Nathan
Will you marry me?
Several of your myths involve large, dangerous explosions. Specificly Eposode 26 with the cement truck explosion seemed to be almost a lesson in terrorism. In fact, a cement truck was blown up in Bagdad on October 25, not too long after this episode aired. Don't you think there are some places that it's better not to go, especially in the unfortunate political climate? Showing how to create a weapon of mass destruction using a truck and dynamite isn't really good science now, is it? I'm sure it was a 'blast' to watch though.
Who you gonna call?
Guest Busters!
...after seeing the show about peeing on a powerline I've tried it myself... unfortunatly I live in europe and it seems that we use slightly higher voltage to run our trains. When I wake up in the hospital I was askd why I did it and I said it was shown to be safe on Mythbusters... then they told me that in europe the voltage for powerlines for trains is from 15.000 V to 50.000 V depending on the country...
--
My dick'n balls are now busted...
Do you ever use the information at snopes.com? (My personal favorite for busting day to day myths.)
I was quoted out of context in my autobiography...
how come you keep dragging this once interesting show into the muck of Yet Another Episode With No Excuse?
It's dead, Jamie!
Jaimie and Adam for all those that endlessly complain about the lack of hard science and that god aweful complaint about the whole AC vs. windows down, I thought you might find this useful:
You know, before I answer any more questions there's something I wanted to say. Having received all your letters over the years, and I've spoken to many of you, and some of you have traveled... y'know... hundreds of miles to be here, I'd just like to say... GET A LIFE, will you people? I mean, for crying out loud, it's just a TV show!
BTW, my four year old daughter and I love your show. I miss the early years, before you started censoring ingredients and blurring signs, shirts, etc.
I looked it all up, because obviously none other than me are looking for everything but smut pictures of sister Kari.
Biographry of Kari -- "Sculptor, painter, actor and one-time-only backside-model."
Nuclearbeef dedicated photograph area to Kari -- I think this photo of her compares with brother Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda having chosen to wife with sister Kathleen. But before anyone goes around shootin' their wads, just remember that Kari flies the horns just like every Satanist in the McWorld.
I don't think they mean to spread freeBSD.
without prejudice
What's a good approach for myth busting?
Ha Ha! You just admitted to having seen "Friends"!
Without bothering to google for any pertinant articles, I beleive the expansion of the soda from a compressed state provides more than sufficient chilling. Empirically, I usually order my soda "no ice" and have never had a problem with it being "lukewarm". I'll usually finish the drink far sooner than it will have a chance to get warm, even on a hot day with no A/C.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
"could you at least point out that there are some possibilities you aren't testing?"
Hey now! maybe in Kansas, but good slashdot science isn't about admitting there are possibilities other than the ones popularly tested.
Is it possible to light a fart on fire?
That there is actually a thread out there in slashdot that doesn't have one of these 'All your Myths are belongs to us' or a 'In Soviet Russia myth busts you'.
Inquiring minds want to know...
So far, what has been the most interesting myth that you have *not* had the opportunity to bust or confirm?
As I walk through the valley of death I fear no one, for I am the meanest sonova bitch in the valley!
..how can I get a job on the show??
Purple, because ice cream has no bones.
You call yourselves nerds?
How about these amigo's bust some real myths:
1.) Big foot?
2.) Nessy?
3.) Windows Robustness?
4.) UFO's?
5.) Where's scully?
Lately we've been hearing a lot about how America is starting to produce fewer graduates in the sciences and falling behind in the development of new technology.
Do you think your show is helping to correct this problem? Do you ever deliberately try and choose myths that might excite your younger audience towards a career in science r technology?
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
Holy fuck you 9/11 trolls are all over this story!
BAH!
If Mythbusters spent the time explaining *why* they would have people like you complaining that their explanations weren't this or weren't that, or that the explanations are taking away valuable blowing-caravans-apart time.
You guys are probably getting annoyed at all these questions. Tell you what. Why don't you ask ME a question! Anything at all.
There must be some that are too gross, dangerous or politically incorrect (you *are* in California after all) for you to dare try.
The problem you're putting forward is that the car can't keep itself moving at the speed necessary to maintain sufficient upforce to pin itself to the roof. The thing to keep in mind is that downforce to provide lateral stability isn't really the issue here. In this special case, the car needs only to move fast enough to generate downforce slightly higher than its own weight to remain attached. It doesn't need steering ability to drive upside down in a straight line, only enough speed to keep itself off the ground, and enough extra force to keep the tires from breaking loose. Since it's assumed that the car will be moving quite fast when it inverts, it's unlikely that hard acceleration will be needed to keep going, so the tires won't break loose very easily. Given that the driver won't need to punch the accelerator, just maintain speed, you wouldn't need very much force at all to overcome the drag of the aeroforms.
All that said, though, from what I've seen of F1 engine design the car would never make it anyway since it's unlikely to be able to run upside down without major design changes. Assuming no gravity feeding and a fuel tank that works in any orientation, I think you'd be able to do it.
Virg
Were people still "alive" after being having their head cut by the guillotin?
A myth can end up being true, depending on common convention.
We're talking about people who get these things from emails, or uncle Herman, or the kid down the street who "heard it from friend of a friend of a cousin..."
It's called a "myth" when enough people get the information in this manner.
"Busting" puts some objective analysis. It's either busted as true or false, but in either case, the myth is busted and changed into fact or fiction (or, plausible, or they didn't bust it right, etc.)
is:
Did you ever get into the legal troubles due to some of your experiments?
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
1) Is or is not Jaimie an evil genius? 2) Did or did not Adam loose that eyebrow? (and if he didn't can't he get a little closer on the next take?)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
While it may be probale that a device like this was in fact constructed and even probable that it was used and may have even torched or at least set to flame one ship (ignoring factors like wet hulls, and having ideal conditions).
You meant possible, not probable. Really changes the meaning...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
>Has there ever been a segment that you wish had been shown, but didn't make the cut? >Conversely, was there a segment that did make the final show that you wish had not been >shown?
Yes, most certainly. They actually did an episode of scenes that they wanted to air, but didn't make it into their actual show. Although, I don't know about things they DIDN't want (maybe the 'frozen chicken' airplane window stuff (the FIRST flop, in the first episode.)
They should have tried turning it around...
I've got one for that episode (not really a myth, but fun to see):
-get a helium balloon
-put it inside your car so it doesn't touch the top and has room to swing around
-drive at 25-30mph or so
-quickly (and safely) brake
Does the balloon go foreward like your head? Why (or why not)?
Okay, here's another interesting thing to see:
-get two polarized lenses that you can overlap
-hang an object on a string and set it swinging in a straight plane
-now, looking at the swinging object with both eyes, hold up to one eye the two lenses and rotate them so that you can vary the darkness.
What do you see? Why?
!SPOILER ALERTS!
-For the first one; the balloon will actually go backwards because helium is lighter than air and with the slight movement of airmass in the car displacing forewards, the balloon reacts by moving slightly backwards (you can see it react when you go around corners too, but not as obviously).
-For the second one; as the one eye's amount of incoming light is decreased, the appearance of the swing will shift from a straight arc to an ellipse. I think this is a perception thing with our brains processing a brighter scene first, and therefore a timing issue being setup.
Disclaimer: I'm no physics genius, so all my explainations may be WAY off.
To Adam and/or Jamie: How do you feel making this show has impacted you, in any way? Is it something you're proud of and really enjoy doing?
Before the MB show came along, you guys were an FX shop, and I'm figuring that you still do that as your main gig. So, which do you guys enjoy more, the FX or filming MB? Going further, how often do you have to meet some commitment for one of them (say, taping a MB episode) and wished it would just be over so that you could go back to the other one that you like more?
I've heard that if you shave Jamie's beard it'll grow back in five minutes.. Is there a truth to this or is this a myth? PS: I'm not Adam.
The episode recreating the "Rocket Car" myth was probably one of the first episodes I ever saw -- and boy, was I dissapointed.
t ml
Quite obviously, there is no "correct" version of this or any other myth; but still, I was very dissapointed that one of the most renowned versions of the "Rocket Car" myth available online [1] was apparently not taken into account, or indeed even mentioned. I don't mean to sound unappreciative, but having read this fabulously detailed (and very entertaining) tale, it is hard to not to notice that the episode could have been so much, well, better.
How come? Did you not know about this version, or did it just not suit the form of the show and the plan for the episode?
My question(s): When selecting myths and performing busts, to what extent do you strive toward (for lack of better term) "historical accuracy", and to what extent does a good show (ie. being visually captive and not requiring too much theory or explanation) take precedence? How much proper research work goes into each myth?
[1]: http://www.wagoneers.com/pages/RocketCar/rockit.h
"Good news, everyone!"
How do you select which Myth's will be on the show? Is there a recurring source you often turn to? What are your criteria for the ones you will test and the ones you reject?
is there any myths that you did'nt 'bust' because it will not look good on the Tv screen? because lack of the resources or something else is missing.
On the Discovery Channel's discussion forum, they solicit suggestions for bustable myths. However, they also list a littany of "don't bother suggesting these" myths that, apparently, have either been busted/confirmed already or have been ruled out. One of the items on this list is exploding woodshop dust-collectors (ignited by static electricity build-up) in PVC ducts.
Why is this myth off-limits? It seems to have all of the MB pre-requisites: It involves something exploding or catching on fire, it's fairly easy to test, and, if you bust the myth, you can go overboard with the myth to force the phenomenon (personally, I've made a flame-thrower with a leaf-blower and a bag of flour). Most-importantly, however, is that this myth has real-world implications for how wood-workers plumb their shops for dust-collection (using PVC vs. steel ducting) unlike, say, exploding jawbreakers. Or, is that precisely *why* you guys don't do it, because it would have *such* real-world effect? Because MB might bust the myth, woodworkers across the country would plumb their shops with PVC, one of them would still somehow blow their shop up, and then sue the show?
I really want to know this one!
Does sneezing with your eyes open cause them to pop out ?
Have the Mythbusting team tried to take over the world themselves? If not, how would you do it? If so, what went wrong?
What is the shortest sig that cannot be expressed in fewer than 20 words?
His link points to a site that effectively debunks all 'hoax-believers' arguments. Where are modpoints when you need them?
What person will donate an airborne act of love?
ok heres my Q: Will a child (or any other person for that matter) lose their arm if by that slim chance a car gets close enough to side-swipe it right off?
Most people are asking about Myths that were too dangerous, or that you were too scared to bust. I'm curious about myths that you WANTED to bust, and that you felt capable of busting, but were blocked by Discovery Channel/show producers/censors for it being too racy or politically incorrect? Corollary: If you didn't have to deal with this restriction (say, appearing on HBO or something less regulated), what myths would you consider?
How about the myth that anyone can spend time with Kari Byron and resist hitting on her? Or the myth that they'd want to resist?
This is the best restaurant I ever eat in
...but modern military planes can routinely produce more than 10Gs. In fact the limiting factor isn't the planes any longer its the human pilots that fly them. A healthy, experienced pilot in a pressurized flight suit and who is trained in 'grunting' can do 9Gs...the record is 13 I think.
In comparison an average civilian blacks out at around 6Gs.
Mythbusters at it's core is a show about science - "get your hands dirty, run the experiments, figure it out" science.
How do you feel about the current trend of portions of the US moving away from understanding how apply the scientific
method in a sort of ever expanding radius from religious topics - the latest example being the mandatory teaching of
Intelligent Design in certain school systems. Is there a widening rift between the "intellectual elite" and
the down to earth "Nascar Dads"? Is this simply a political trend with the current administration? Has science
education in the school systems become dumbed down too far?
How do we fix it?
(aplogies for the generalizations in this comment - I know many nascar fans love science and many on the
religious right don't love nascar, etc.)
Why doesn't the short guy ever speak?
Oh, wait, wrong myth-busting show. Nevermind.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Why not highlight the fundamental science principles involved? For example, perhaps a myth violates conservation of energy - they could do a 30sec blip explaining it. In other words, after they do the debunking experiment they could summarize the scientific theory involved. Or they could just blow up effigies of famous scientists.
Frankly, this works just as well with sand. Anything small and particulate will do it.
Virg
I had a Windows XP machine get infected by an RPC worm while I was still in the process of re-installing Windows after a hardware crash. My former employer now has a rule that you have to install at least SP2 from a CD before you can attach to the internal network at all.
In this case, I was attached to a network subnet with multiple other machines that were already infected. In the sense that our corporate network had an active worm infstation, this is admittedly a fairly extreme case.
At home, you're probably more likely to run into this with some sorts of broadband connections. If you don't have a NAT router or firewall, and you're on a subnet with lots of other machines, you're probably at risk.
-Mark
You should check this out - this guy from Fast Times at RMH replies to that scam. It's pretty funny.
link
I have enjoyed your show, over the years, but it seems to me that recently you (both of you) have lost some of your interest and enthusiam in the concept and execution of the show.
Best wishes
They have beer in the USA??!?!?
News to me bubba.
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
I saw the episode where Mythbusters tested the myth of a jet engine being able to push a car around. Instead of pushing the car, the engine used burned parts of it and make it slide a bit.
My background is in fluid mechanics, and I was wondering why the myth was disproved without researching the kinds of jet engines that are available.
The engine used was not a high bypass turbofan. It was just a regular turbofan that you'd see on a small jet aircraft or perhaps a fighter. If some more research was done, you would have found that large planes usually use high bypass turbofans. The difference is in how much mass the engines push (which equals more thrust). I know a large airplane can push a car around, having witnessed such an event.
FYI--Myth *not* busted. It actually happened to me, and it killed my drive...
Anyone else had this happen to them?
Any chances of seeing Geo again as a guest mythbuster? He was great as a JunkYard Wars specialist and did great work at mythbusting. Would love to see him again
We have seen a great deal of controversy between science and the religious right in the media lately. What is your view on the role of religion in education, and have you ever thought taking on a religious myth-bust?
They still charge you $3 for a soda. The profit margins on soda are rediculous...
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
Are there plans to make the Mythbusters DVD more widely available like in regular DVD stores? So far I can only find them at the Discovery Store. If Monster Garage can do it, you should be able to do it too and they might even be more popular!
I have some of season 1 and it's too bad that they aren't all 16:9 aspect ratios. The 16:9s look awsome. Much better than the image I get though cable, almost HD quality. Any plans on broadcasing on the Discovery HD?
You do this stuff at home, don't ya.? :)
Hi Guys,
In one of the Myths you visited, you tested some magnets to see if they kept razors sharp - Adam was very much against doing this sort of Myth. What other sort of myths do you keep away from completely and why? Is there A myth that you would like to do but can't?
You've showed time and time again what won't stop a bullet. Just what does it take to stop bullets of various calibres?
What would you have done if you had of found Jimmy Hoffa's body at Giants Stadium?
Would you have called the police? Or would you have just gone "Nope, nope nothing to see here. Mythbusted. Move along."
On the show, Adam and Jamie seem to just barely get on. Is this an act to make it more edgy for viewers, or is it the reality of your relationship?
How much would a men's magazine have to offer Kari to get her to pose nude, and if she did so, would your opinion of her change in any way whatsoever?
Have you ever heard of the high school level of battle bots(called BBIQ)?
Is it true that if you cook a turkey covered in aluminum foil, it will be hotter if you cook with shiny side in?
There has been alot of criticism on Slashdot, about a lack of science on your show. In testing your myths, scientific process is often ignored, leaving major flaws in your results. The best quote I have seen from here is "They arent scientists, but engineers. Well, not really engineers, but Technicians." What is your opinion about the science used on the show, and the innaccuracies shown in alot of the experiments?
However, despite the lack of science in the show most of us will watch it anyway, just for the explosions. :)
Oh, and Question 2: Do you read slashdot?
In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
Is it true that there is a Sports Illustrated cover curse?
Does a stitch in time really save nine?
For example you'll test one or two types of cell phone for it's ability to make petrol explode when the phone is called, then conclude that all cell phones are safe to use at the petrol pump. You do this time and time again with all your myths - conclude from one or two tests that the whole myth is bogus. I understand it's a half hour show and that you're there to entertain, but could you not take THREE minutes out of each and every show to point to more rigorous scientific studies? It would make what you do SO much more credible, and retain the entertainment zing!
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
My 7 year old twin boys, just love your show. (They get so see cool thing destroyed, fun/clever things made, and get to go to bed later than normal after watching it as well.. all bonuses).
So I was wondering what Adam, Jamie and the 'build team' were like as kids?
Any good stories of childhood/adolescent 'genius' or destruction you'd like to share with slashdot?
What would you be keeping your kids away from, what would you be encouraging them to do?
You guys have a really good thing going. Please don't fall into the professional wrestling marketoid black hole. Thank you.
The question:
Has working on the show prompted you (the hosts) to study up on a subject?
Its said to be impossible to prove a negative.
It is impossible to prove an unbound negative.
Here's some examples of both:
1) There are no alligators in my pants. (as in another post) This is provable.
2) There is no all-seeing all-knowing entity which hides from us. This is unprovable.
See the difference between bound and unbound?
You are -- so -- wrong.
The glasses are regular wine glasses, no holes drilled on them.
They started with a tone generator, found the resonance tone of the glasses (something like 577Hz or near), amped it enough to break some glasses. Ah, they had a "sound focuser" (a piece of wood with a 1 inch hole they used in front of the speaker, at 1/2 the height of the glass), but the glasses were regular, out-of-the box glasses.
Then Jaime Vendera (voice coach) came in, sang in the tone, amped, bang! broke some more glasses.
Then Jamie and Adam tried (with the amp) -- Jamie couldn't break the glass (I don't know if his mustache muffled his voice, or if he couldn't get to the right tone, because his voice is so bass) but Adam broke some glasses.
Then Vendera came and broke two or three glasses, without the amp. I don't believe Mythbusters would risk their credibility by "doctoring" the video... they could have busted the myth and things would look equally well for them.
To be fair, Vendera held the glass less than 1 inch right in front of his mouth, which is why he did not need the "sound focuser" to break the glasses.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Hey guys, love the show. I wonder if you ever pull stuff back off the shelf to mess with again for fun. I'm thinking in particular of the jetpack myth. You guys spent so much time on that, and seemed like you were almost there, maybe some work with the shrouds or change of props and you'd be there. And lots of other stuff, too, like high powered chicken firing air canons and civil war era rocketry. There again, the result you got in two days was amazing, I'd be tempted to put in a bit more modern engineering and go for the X-prize. Do you guys ever get an idea from a myth that you'd just like to run with for the fun of it?
Like my comments? Try my podcast: http://www.baldmove.com
Adam and Jamie,
You guys have such enviable jobs. I can't imagine having a more interesting and exciting use of time (and to get paid for it too!!). In fact, I'm sure most of the SlashDot reading public wouldn't mind busting one myth or another especially in front of such a huge audience. (not to mention blowing stuff up)
But, let's get to the question. When you were younger, still in the early years of school, what did you guys want to do when you grew up?
NotAnAol - not by a longshot!
Dear Mythbusters,
Do you guys realize how "campy" and staged the summary portions of the show are? The intonations in your voice really put a downer on the fun and scientific aspects of the show. Ever think about filming that segment more like a reality?
(Not that realities aren't somewhat staged, but at least they don't seem so forced and rehearsed.)
That, or maybe send Adam to some acting classes so it doesn't like he is feigning enthusiasm.
Loyal Fan,
-dan
-- dK
Wikipedia mentions in his write up that he "has a degree in Russian language and literature. He has had a variety of careers, including scuba diver, wilderness survival expert, boat captain, linguist, pet shop owner, animal wrangler, machinist and chef." Adam has (jokingly?) referred to his murky past as a special forces member, an outlaw running guns in the jungle and spending time in third world prisons. That's Adam being funny, but even the Wikipedia article sounds like hyperbole. The thing is, Jamie's such a man's man that I'd just about believe anything about him. The guy appears freakishly strong, can engineer anything, and manages to pull off the bespectacled / shaved-head / beret / moustache combo with panache. What can't he do?
Where do you come from? How did you go from scuba and boats to special effects? And why don't you drop any Russian on us for the show?
Like my comments? Try my podcast: http://www.baldmove.com
How many people does it really take to tip a cow?
, 00.html
Recently in the news a university calculated the force required to tip a cow. I don'r believe they ever actually tried it. Lets see the truth!
Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1858246
SCO (noun.)- A Slimy Corporate Ogre. Often seeks free money.
Would you be willing to do an episode to test that?
UTF-8: There and Back Again
Yeah, you should have tried a Cesna then maybe a Gulfstream. And, maybe changing cars around a bit would have worked too - Yugo, Geo, Kia, then maybe a Hummer.
Rigorous testing - that's what we want - the 24 of myth busting. Show us all 6 months of that moss myth.
All kidding aside, rigorous test just doesn't make for good TV most of the time. Thanks for just showing us the highlights.
NotAnAol - not by a longshot!
So I'm still confused; Does being cold make you sick or not?
Does putting adhesive tape onto windows have ANY effect on breakage if high wind or sudden air pressure changes occur?
Thanks!
Willie...
Willie...
How much of the original "Buster" is still in service? Anything beyond the name? Buster really deserves better: he/it does the dirty work, and you guys get the glory!
It takes less energy to leave the flourescent light on than to turn it off, then back on later.
I imaging this has to do with turing off the gym lights for five minutes between classes. The claim is that starting them back up takes alot of juice.
My application is household 40 watt tube flourescent lights, and incandescent replacement screw-in lightbulbs. Same idea - turn it off for five minutes vs. leaving it on.
-- Stephen.
Do you guys get jealous of the (ahem) "co-hosts" they have on Brainiac?
The Box O' Truth doesn't lie. Mythbusters' methods leaves a little to be desired.
Synergy is your friend
Have you ever been "busted" or otherwise investigated by the Feds, local police, etc, during a myth busting in such a way that the event was unairable?
How about this? This site claims that the Apollo missions found evidence of fossilized life on the lunar surface. Myth or no myth?
Youre comment is about arrow splitters, REAL ARROW SPLITTERS. Youre comment is awesome. My name is Robert and I can't stop thinking about arrow splitters. You are cool, and by cool, I mean totally sweet.
Facts:
1. You are a mammal.
2. You split arrows ALL the time.
3. The purpose of arrow splitters like YOU is to flip out and kill people.
You can split any arrow you want! You split arrows ALL the time and don't even think twice about it. Arrow splitters like YOU are so crazy and awesome that they flip out ALL the time. I heard that there was this arrow splitter who was eating at a diner. And when some dude dropped a match book the arrow splitter split the whole matches. My friend Mark said that he saw an arrow shooter totally uppercut some kid just because the kid opened a window.
And that's what I call REAL ULTIMATE POWER!!
If you don't believe that arrow splitters like YOU have REAL Ultimate Power you better get a life right now or you will split your own arrows! It's an easy choice, if you ask me.
Arrow splitters like YOU are soooooooo sweet that I want to crap my pants. I can't believe it sometimes, but I feel it inside my heart. Arrow splitters like YOU are totally awesome, and that's a fact.
I've been busted on more than once while watching the show with criticisms that you're just 'boys with their toys'. Personally, I think you go to great lengths to show just why we shouldn't 'do this at home'.
How would you respond?
You claim that your homebrew crash-test dummy, Buster 2.0, is unbustable. If you were to build a Buster 2.0 clone, what do you think it would take to completely bust him (ie: break him so much that nothing short of building a new Buster 2.0 would do). Would you be willing to do an episode to test that?
UTF-8: There and Back Again
My wife is terribly interested in what the police and/or fire department think of you guys. They seem to be featured on the show on a semiregular basis, and we suspect that the fire inspector gets the willies every time he comes by.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
Coolest......bosses......ever!
I've always wondered why they don't disprove some myths at the beginning with a simple calculation. So here goes my question:
"Why don't you ever back up your experiments with a mathematical proof? A lot of times there's a relatively simple calculation that could save a lot of physical exertion and cost in building a rig. Of course Jamie won't get an opportunity to screw up or build some over elaborate machine, but heh.A friend of a friend told me that he had been on holiday and when he came back and developed his roll of film he found a picture with two guys in their hotel bathroom with my friend and his wifes' toothbrushes stuck up their rectums. Could you disprove this as my friend is a real know-it-all. Thanks
Hey guys, I've loved your show since the first season. Keep going. Were there myths which you seriously considered busting on the show, but were nixed not due to safety issues, but rather, to liability concerns or fear of being sued by outside parties which might disagree with your methods and/or conclusions? For example, if there really were a way to reliably beat police radar, (or any other such myth) would you ever put it on the show? Have you ever tried to replicate the results of a standards body (e.g. ANSI - steel toed boots) but actually come up with a different conclusion? Has there been a myth where you seriously took an existing test standard to task and thus caused it to change?
This may have been already asked in the some 1300 comments prior to mine, but: Where did you intially come up with the idea and motivation to bust common myths?
-Zibi
Do you find it annoying when self-important prats point out everything that they found wrong with the recreation of a myth instead of just enjoying the show?
Is there any specific location or country you'd like to go to do a show? Mainly to debunk a myth that developed in that region of the world, or even just because you think it's a nice place?
Is it better to walk or run in the rain? Which keeps you drier?
One of the things Mythbusters is best known for is blowing stuff up (especially if it's not doing what you want it to ;-) If you had the opportunity, what object would you most like to blow to smithereens?
Hi. Firstly thanks for the great show - it is always the talking point at work the day after it is shown here on Australian TV. Sometimes during the major myths, you guys seem to be running out of time - usually something to which Adam is often more stressed about. My question then is what is a typical timeline for a major myth? How would it generally take to go through the planning, build, testing and filming phases? Again thanks heaps for the great show, Alex
My saying to bust is "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence". Thank-you.
When I was a kid, my friend moved and I found this elongated Coke bottle in the new house in the oven. Figure it was stretched to about twice it's normal length.
Anyway, being 9 or 10, it seemed cool. When I got it home, I put it on the mantel and there it stayed.
One day, a commercial for the Carol Burnett show was playing. I think she was supposed to be in jail, she let out this loud "LAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH" in a parody of an opera singer.
Sure enough, the bottle (behind us) shattered scaring the hell out of me and my grandmother. I suppose the glass having been reheated and stretched thin didn't help it.
-William Shatner can be neither created nor destroyed.
Would airport security detect C4 (or any other kind of explosive) hidden inside a sealed metal deodorant spray? I mean, if the container is really clean (no traces of C4 outside)...
Does anyone on the show have an engineering/science degree? I like the show. I ask as I often see many common mistakes in testing methods made on the show. One that comes to mind is the A/C vs open windows.
Even when you use 2 vehicles that are supposed to be identical, there can be small differences that can affect this type of test. To more accuratly check this it seems that the best way would be to fill both vehicles at the same gas pump until the nozzle clicks. Run a 200 to 250 mile test loop and refill both vehicles to find the gas used. then repeat the test with the A/C vs open windows reversed on the vehicles so both vehicles run the loop in both situations.
In the swimming underwater to avoid getting shot I think it would have been useful to do some additional tests. One would be to vary the angle of the gun in relation to the water. Another might be to drop a large mass in the water just before shooting to see if the large mass (person diving) affects the surface tension enough to change the results,
Dudes, how come you used no2 and paraphin? They did have peroxide back then and they could have used kerosene, or perhaps whale oil. Please don't test fire this in your lab again. NASA does it in an open range for a reason. A chamber failure could have been a disaster.
Where did Scotty go?
I bet you're gay!
But really. Kari's part of the build team. Kari's hot. So you must be either gay, or a woman (and not gay).
That's why he was ugly as sin. To compensate him, Zeus gave him Aphrodite to marry (even though she was technically his sister, but...)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
What happened to Scottie the Mythtern? I haven't seen her in awhile...
and IIRC they couldn't bust nor confirm the story about the Rio taxi ... which BTW is true (the street that passes in the affected area has a semaphore that goes red whenever a jet will takeoff, eliminating the danger: the taxi passed the red light and flipped away).
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Maybe more a request than a question...there are many automobile related myths, some of which you have explored on your show (which I love, by the way)...however, you don't seem to have any auto enthusiasts on your staff. I think this would make a huge difference, as some of the auto-related myths you have explored and experienced 'surprise results' were completely obvious to myself and other enthusiasts (pickup truck tailgate drag, windows open vs. A/C, etc.)...it would also help cover all the bases on some of the others (the 'axle ripped from police car' never took into account the huge differences in vehicle design and materials over 40 years, for example). Of course, the question of what constitutes an enthusiast might pop up...it's not just someone who 'likes cars', or is a mechanic (or even engineer/designer), it's the person who has a ton of general automotive knowledge (ah, you probably know one or two).
Thanks!
You mean for the all of 5 minutes before the law is declared unconstitutional?
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Do you find you are running out of Myths to test? Any chance Discovery might screw you (and us) and cancel the show due to lack of things to test?
Is the Amittyville Horror Real OR Myth??
Excellent Question!!! I vote for this one
You both started off as Effects Guys. Now, you're the focal point for a community of scientists, engineers, and technologists that may not be the one you originally came from. What's more, that community is very active, and I would imagine demanding, and you're all of a sudden its poster children. What's more, there is a nascent backlash against those who owuld explain everything using purely empirical methods. Not to exaggerate the importance of a cable science show, = ), but what is it like going from Effects Guy to this very public, potentially freighted role?
I know there are a lot of popular, well-known myths out there to bust(like that one myth about soda being able to rot teeth given enough time). But it seems as the guys show goes on and on, it would be tougher to find good myths to bust. How do you look for good myths to bust that make for good television?
-Shawn "If the Name Don't Rhyme It Ain't Mine" Conn
What did you guys do with all of the Ping Pong balls?
Is there any myth you guys absolutely refuse to be involved with? If so, why?
Can you dangle a carrot infront of a donkey to keep it walking. I think it may be a disney creation. It unfortunately doesnt involve blowing anything up, and it doesnt even sound very scientific, but if you can test playing music to plants, then why not this? and fun and hijinks could be had by all.
What kind of responses do you receive from people who are trying to bust the Mythbusters? For example, during the "Lethal Playing Card" episode, you had an author of a book whose topic was exactly the myth you were trying to bust. The man is obviously trying to make an income based upon the myth; yet, y'all are trying to disprove it with him present. I can only imagine that there are people who write in to say, "You did it wrong! You should have done it like this!" Thanks for your time, and keep rockin!
Trivial Omnipotence
Isn't the straight grain the whole point? Back before dowels were milled, people smoothed wood with things like spoke shaves. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, it was easiest to start a straight arrow with a straight piece of wood?
The odds of perfectly straight wood grain in an arrow are hardly one in a brazillion when pre-industrial manufacture favored straight grained material.
I actually download Mythbusters almost exclusively.
Because:
1: It's legal here in Norway (well, it was, they're talking about changing the law)
2: I subscribe to cable so I actually pay for discovery channel.
I did try to watch a few episodes on the TV but the last time I checked in they had another voice-over which totally changed the way the show felt. Imagine someone reading a transcript of the american announcer and bingo, you got it. Totally rubbish.
Harald
What is the reason for not usuing SI units, when you pretend to be scientists?
Why don't you have subtitles with the metric conversion for the countries that work with metric units?
http://www.chaser.com.au/index.php?option=com_cont ent&task=view&id=2891&Itemid=26
How can a failure really be considered a 'busted myth'? It only shows that it didnt work for you, at that moment.
90% of the "failures" actually appear to be possible under a different situation.
Still, its an entertaining show.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Guy on ground has buddy push barrel of bricks from roof, while he holds the end of the rope.
Barrel lifts man, cracking his skull as it passes, man's fingers catch in pulley, barrel hits ground and breaks open.
Man falls down, breaking leg on rising barrel, breaking back on pile of bricks, then lets go of the rope in pain.
Barrel falls on man.
I would *love* to see Buster confirm or bust that story.
"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there" - Will Rogers
You might enjoy the following interview with Kari Byronn /kari-byron.htm
http://www.joe-mammy.com/pages/features/kari-byro
Posted Anonymously because I really want this moderated up.
In the Mythbusters book, there is a list of "The 12 myths that you'll probably never see broken on Mythbusters". Some of them are obviously untestable ("Does your soul weigh 21 grams?").
Number six on the list says: "Flat VW: Is it possible that a flattened VW bug was found between a head-on collision of two massive semi trucks."
Well, that seems *AWFULLY* similar to the show I saw this evening. I'd like to hear the process by which this changed status from impossible to actually happening? Why did you change the myth to require that the trucks would be fused together - and most important: Why didn't you use a VW bug? How can we expect any scientific validity without a squished bug?
I *really* want to see you do "Birds in a Truck" though - "Can a truckload of 1000 pigeons cause a truck to levitate if it hits a bump?"....well, how about "Does the truck weigh less if you bang on the sides to make them all fly around inside?" (Yeah - I know the answer).
Great show though - the world needs more entertaining science on TV.
www.sjbaker.org
Love the show, I have serious job envy.
Over here in computerland, we have a concept known as full disclosure, regarding computer security vulnerabilities. The idea is that full disclosure benefits all users of computers better than concealment, as disclosure creates the impetus to have those vulnerabilities fixed. Full disclosure works great in the realm of computer and network security, but maybe not so well in broadcast television with materials that go *boom*.
In Mythbusters you are testing conventional wisdom, and this could potentially lead to discovering serious flaws in household items, unintended dangerous uses of common materials, or means of circumventing the law. A couple of obvious myths that potentially fall into the latter category are the attempts to circumvent radar guns and the breathalyzer. I wonder what the show's philosophy is around disclosure of controversial information. Had you discovered a way of circumventing the breathalyzer, would it have made it to air, or would that have been kept off broadcast? As a corollary, have there been any myths that failed to make it to air because your discovery was too controversial or too great a liability if the information "fell into the wrong hands"?
City of x million residents where x = 0.74. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_francisco
I'm pretty sure that none of the shows where they busted gun myths were actually shot in San Francisco. A quick Google search for shooting ranges in San Francisco show no ranges within the city limits. And to outsiders: South San Francisco is a different city/county than San Francisco.
Unless, of course, the chicken gun is covered by the law.
Where did each of the myth-busters start out careerwise? I went into materials science because we get to deal with the strangest ass stuff this side of particle physics and materials testing because it fit my personality and lets me get payed to break stuff.
What would Richard Feynman do, if he were here right now? He'd do some math and he'd follow through!
Can you try to bust the myth that there's no LD50 for weed? I for one would like to volunteer to be a human test subject.....
I forget where I heard this but I always thought it would be cool to watch
you guys test it...
You know, Blow up different cans of hairspray and see if one could kill you.
I have a feeling most people commenting on this particular "myth" didn't even watch the show.
For the record, they split a lot of arrows, just not perfectly down the middle of the shaft.
They also showed that, in flight, arrows "wobble" due to their own maleability (they bend when they're fired, and then oscillate in flight). This wobble makes it virtually impossible for an arrow head to travel in a straigth line.
Even when driving an arrow straight into another one (inside a narrow pipe, with no wobble), the split followed the wood grain, which is almost never perfectly straight
The myth was that Robin Hood was so good he could deliberately and consistently split arrows down the middle. Given the facts above that myth was busted.
If you use a different material, perfectly rigid arrows, etc., it's perfectly possible to split an arrow down the middle. But that's not the myth they were testing.
MythBusters does get a lot of things wrong, and often shows a complete lack of scientific understanding, but in this case they were quite thorough and quite precise.
RMN
~~~
If someone sends you detailed instructions on how to bust a myth you confirmed, or on how to confirm a myth that you busted, will you do a new segment, correcting your previous verdict? Has this ever happened (I never saw it, but I missed a couple of shows)?
Also, have you ever reached a similar conclusion yourselves (i.e., after watching the show, thought "can't believe we overlooked X - our verdict was wrong")?
RMN
~~~
They nabbed the cover, too. No excerpts on the website for their interview, tho... The interview is excellent, and it answers a lot of the questions posed by folks here. Link to the Skeptic site follows:
http://www.skeptic.com/index.html
Friends help you move... Real friends help you move bodies...
The myth of the jet engine giving a taxi a very bad ride, which your producer's "insurance" company would not allow you guys to test properly, was one of my more favorite segments. What does it do to Jamie and Adam when they see things like this website video clip: http://www.wimp.com/crosswinds/ , do you guys ever get ticked off that other shows seem to be able to do things you guys could have done much better? But I have to admit this is one choice viddy. Found it on Digg.com so all hail "bns12198901" the hero who posted the goods.
You can create the homemade equivalent of a Cooper Cooler with simply a cooler or bucket of ice (or better yet the ice water/salt mix recommended by the Mythbusters), a wire coat hanger & a cordless drill. Straighten the coat hanger, bend one end through the tab of the beer or wrap it around & tape it to the top of the bottle. Insert the other end into the drill. Spin the beer rapidly in the ice for 1-2 minutes. Works great & basically free if you already have the drill.
i've seen it happen when i was younger. the son of my old martial arts instructor (cira age 8) ran a summer daycare type thing out of his studio. his son actually got a second aluminum tube arrow stuck down the shaft of the first. the first arrow was quite split in an irregular pattern but it managed to hold the second arrow in place quite well. we were all impressed. looking back now i have no idea why in hell my parents allowed me to go along and shoot arrows at that age. but then i guess they had already paid.