A More Civilized Q&A - October 2021

OMG the discussion of gravity, trees, biology & crabs has cemented my love of this podcast let alone the deep introspection into a more civilized age! ❤️😂🤔💯🌲🦀☺️

Lexi Orchard (aka needmoreloot)

For real, there is like practically no one this deep into Star Wars who keeps both of those sides of interpretation in their assessments all the way through, it's beautiful

Rad Rodge

In the case of Dolly the sheep, it was found that Dolly's telomeres from birth were already shortened, possibly a result from being cloned from an already-adult cell. I'm not sure how much of that is actual current scientific knowledge, Dolly was from a while ago now.

Big object pulled more, but also harder to move. Turns out these cancel out, but it doesn't necessarily have to be this way! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

Gravitational Force can be described by the following equation: F = [G/(r^2)]*M*m where F is the force, G is a constant, r is the distance between the two objects, M is the mass of Earth, and m is the mass of an object near Earth. Force on an object can always be described as the mass multiplied by the acceleration of that object (F = ma). So setting the force on an object near earth equal to the gravitational formulation: F = ma = [G/(r^2)]*M*m dividing all equalities by m, we get the folllowing: F/m = a = [G/(r^2)]*M Therefore, the acceleration (falling rate) of an object near Earth is only dependent on the mass of earth, the distance to the Earth's center of mass, and G (universal constant). So all objects fall at the same rate, regardless of their mass.

Also I love y'all's balance of your own readings and the stated intentions from the production side. Keep up the great work. All my homies hate Yoda.

V Dryman

The thing to remember about the gravity discussion is that gravity is a rate of acceleration, not speed. Even in a vacuum, objects with more mass take more energy to accelerate. Heavy (larger mass) objects do have more gravity pull, but they also take more energy to accelerate compared to smaller ones, and as Austin said, this increased force of gravity is exactly cancelled by much more energy is required to move a bigger thing, as Austin said.

V Dryman

I especially love that there's no such think phylogenetically as a tree since we represent phylogenetics as...trees

Lexi C

On the cloning discussion - why can't we just clone a clone? Grab some DNA from Boba since he's young and has had less time for his telomeres to shorten! Why does it have to be jangos original DNA? Sure cloning a clone may introduce mutations but then why aren't they finding the best clone troopers and cloning them to make super troopers?? Also I'm an immunology PhD student and love y'all's grasp of science

Lexi C

Telomeres sound rad. Literal life hack. Carcinization on the other hand is way overrated. People think it's like, dogs growing a carapace and claws. But it's just crustaceans which already look very crab-like to us, just becoming flatter and getting a more crab-like arrangement of limbs. Less cool than people act.

MythicalMothman

I like to think Onionsan being one of the many potentially important/potentially red herring things in Deltarune's episodic release is in reference to this

Kzinssie

talking about the difference between creator and fan perspectives is reminding me of when Toby Fox livetweeted an Undertale anniversary playthrough and said something like (paraphrased) "who the fuck is Onionsan. why did i make this character"

Kzinssie

The difference between Canon and EU for Rex's helmet markings and their importance to clone culture really highlights the problem that this show seems to face commonly with what it decides to show explicitly. https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Jaig_Eyes. If I didn't have prior EU knowledge when I was first watching this show, there are so many things that I'd have missed out on. (What the Hell is an ARC Trooper, unless you've read the Dark Horse Comics or watched the 2003 series)

Jason

I loved that tree article! It's mentioned in the article, but there is also No Such Thing as a Fish! We share a more recent common ancestor with goldfish, than a goldfish does to a shark. That also means that dolphins are more closely related to tuna than tuna are to sharks!! Phylogenetics is wild http://www.cdas.org.au/node/49

New podcast idea: the gang teaches Natalie high school physics.