• Zombiepirate@lemmy.worldMEnglish
      27·
      6 months ago

      Thanks for contributing both to this community and to the academic study of art.

      Beautiful selection to highlight on your post.

      • steeznson@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
        14·
        6 months ago

        Thanks! It was fun to write at the time. I was doing a double major of History of Art and Philosophy but the HoA was definitely inflating my grade average!

      • steeznson@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
        18·
        6 months ago

        Cano did a good job of convincing the church he was being sincere! Probably would have been excommunicated or executed if they suspected him of herasy.

        Edit: he personally described his work as being “edifying” lol

    • steeznson@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      24·
      6 months ago

      They were definitely geeking out on something! I had this piece of visionary poetry in my dissertation:

      I entered - where - I did not know,

      Yet when I found that I was there,

      Though where I was I did not know,

      Profound and subtle things I learned;

      Nor can I say what I discerned,

      For I remained uncomprehending,

      All knowledge transcending.

      • John of the Cross, Verses Written on an Ecstasy.

      NB “ecstasy” as we know it did not exist in the 16th Century 😂

    • DreynsEnglish
      5·
      6 months ago

      Hey my man gotta explain the white stains on his shirt to the church !

      • DABDA@lemm.eeEnglish
        2·
        6 months ago

        I can’t remember if I stumbled across it at a video store or caught it on cable or something, but even though I was a KitH fan I had no idea they were making a movie. Absolutely love it though and even with familiar elements and some returning characters it didn’t feel like just a rehash of the show. I was bummed to learn (from the 2022 “Comedy Punks” documentary) that they were totally miserable making it and there was bad blood between Dave and everyone else.

  • Magnetar@feddit.deEnglish
    14·
    6 months ago

    I kind of want to fit a parabola to that stream of milk to check if the physics is correct.

  • petersr@lemmy.worldEnglish
    7·
    6 months ago

    What velocity does the milk exit the nipple with to be able to have that trajectory?

    • petersr@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      6 months ago

      From ChatGPT:

      Me: Water exits a nozzle at coordinate (0, 1.7m) and hits the ground at (2m, 0). Assume the water exits the nozzle at 90 degree (i.e. straight to the right). How can we determine the speed of the water?

      (here I made some rough assumptions based on the image, and assumed that her feet were at (0, 0)

      Answer: The speed of the water exiting the nozzle can be determined using the principles of projectile motion.

      1. Determine the time of flight:

        The water is projected horizontally from a height of 1.7 meters and hits the ground at 2 meters horizontally. The vertical motion is governed by the equation: [ y = y_0 + v_{y0} t - \frac{1}{2} g t^2 ] Here, ( y_0 = 1.7 ) meters, ( v_{y0} = 0 ) m/s (since there is no initial vertical velocity), and ( g = 9.8 ) m/s² (acceleration due to gravity).

        The water hits the ground when ( y = 0 ): [ 0 = 1.7 - \frac{1}{2} \times 9.8 \times t^2 ] Solving for ( t ): [ 1.7 = 4.9 t^2 ] [ t^2 = \frac{1.7}{4.9} ] [ t = \sqrt{\frac{1.7}{4.9}} \approx 0.59 \text{ seconds} ]

      2. Determine the horizontal velocity:

        The horizontal distance covered is 2 meters. Since horizontal velocity ( v_x ) is constant (there is no horizontal acceleration), the distance can be given by: [ x = v_x t ] Here, ( x = 2 ) meters and ( t \approx 0.59 ) seconds: [ v_x = \frac{2}{0.59} \approx 3.39 \text{ m/s} ]

      Therefore, the speed of the water exiting the nozzle is approximately 3.39 m/s.