If nothing else you can be damn fucking sure they won't even attempt to fulfil wishes that constitute straight up crimes (such as exposing yourself to a minor).
As for everything else, they probably don't have any super specific rules beyond that, what tthey likely have some kind of genericly vague, vibes based, catch all term that "wishes have to be in good faith and good taste"
As long as the river crossing doesn't take (significantly) longer than around 5-10 minutes, there's probably enough air volume in that bag for CO2 levels (which are actually the more accute problem in an airtight space, not oxygen) to remain acceptably low
That bag probably has enough air volume to last someone around 5 minutes (give or take, probably give since that's based on adult respiratory rates, and that's a kid) before noticeable symptoms of hypercapnia (too much CO2, which will become a problem before oxygen deprivation does) start setting in.
Depending on how wide the river is, that's not actually too much of an issue.
If there was an air outlet, the water pressure would force the air out of the bag. It's clearly inflated at pressure in the image, proving it must be (mostly) airtight.
Even if he weren't lying, it would still be negligent homicide. If you point a gun at someone, you are responsible if they get injured or killed. Doesn't matter if you pulled the trigger, mishandled the gun or a magic fairy pixie materialised and pulled the trigger for you.
The mere fact that you pointed a loaded gun at another person already makes you responsible per se in my book.
As much of a fan as I am of gun control, expecting gun owners to have a safe that is literally, physically impossible to break into is wildly unreasonable
Imo, if it was your gun, unless it was literally stolen from a locked gun safe, anyone who dies by it is automatically your fault.
Doesn't really matter what the circumstances were. If anyone is even in a position to be injured or killed by your weapon, it usually means you acted negligently in either handling or storing the weapon.
The glass of wine is likely due to a selection bias in Tea Total people. Most people who are completely sober, are so either because they are recovering alcoholics, or have other health issues.
Most people who are healthy and have no prior alcoholism issues drink at least occasionaly, which introduces a selection bias favouring people with health issues as strict non drinkers, which causes not drinking at all to be correlated with worse health than drinking occasionally.
In this case it isn't about improving heat transfer through the bottom of the pan, it's about improving heat transfer across the bottom of the pan.
The heat will travel through the pan more slowly because of the added material, but due to coppers extremely high heat conductivity, the copper base will heat very evenly, even if the heat source is unevenly applied, and therefore evenly transfer that heat through the steel layer.
Yes it would. Adding material generally makes thermal conductivity worse. There is no material with negative thermal resistance, so adding more will always increase thermal resistance by at least a bit.
The only exception is 3D geometries, where an increase in surface area due to the extra material can outweigh the effect of the added material, and lead to a net increase in thermal transfer.
This can lead to a paradoxical effect, where ADDING insulation around a pipe leads to HIGHER transfer than with less insulation material, because the added material increases the exterior diameter, and therefore surface area.
(Heatsinks are also a good example. It is more material than just the component by itself, but increases surface area by such a massive amount that it more than outweighs the added material)
If nothing else you can be damn fucking sure they won't even attempt to fulfil wishes that constitute straight up crimes (such as exposing yourself to a minor).
As for everything else, they probably don't have any super specific rules beyond that, what tthey likely have some kind of genericly vague, vibes based, catch all term that "wishes have to be in good faith and good taste"
As long as the river crossing doesn't take (significantly) longer than around 5-10 minutes, there's probably enough air volume in that bag for CO2 levels (which are actually the more accute problem in an airtight space, not oxygen) to remain acceptably low
That bag probably has enough air volume to last someone around 5 minutes (give or take, probably give since that's based on adult respiratory rates, and that's a kid) before noticeable symptoms of hypercapnia (too much CO2, which will become a problem before oxygen deprivation does) start setting in.
Depending on how wide the river is, that's not actually too much of an issue.
If there was an air outlet, the water pressure would force the air out of the bag. It's clearly inflated at pressure in the image, proving it must be (mostly) airtight.
Nothing, Merz is just a massive piece of shit and seemingly fully immune to any level of shame.
Even if he weren't lying, it would still be negligent homicide. If you point a gun at someone, you are responsible if they get injured or killed. Doesn't matter if you pulled the trigger, mishandled the gun or a magic fairy pixie materialised and pulled the trigger for you.
The mere fact that you pointed a loaded gun at another person already makes you responsible per se in my book.
As much of a fan as I am of gun control, expecting gun owners to have a safe that is literally, physically impossible to break into is wildly unreasonable
Imo, if it was your gun, unless it was literally stolen from a locked gun safe, anyone who dies by it is automatically your fault.
Doesn't really matter what the circumstances were. If anyone is even in a position to be injured or killed by your weapon, it usually means you acted negligently in either handling or storing the weapon.
The glass of wine is likely due to a selection bias in Tea Total people. Most people who are completely sober, are so either because they are recovering alcoholics, or have other health issues.
Most people who are healthy and have no prior alcoholism issues drink at least occasionaly, which introduces a selection bias favouring people with health issues as strict non drinkers, which causes not drinking at all to be correlated with worse health than drinking occasionally.
In this case it isn't about improving heat transfer through the bottom of the pan, it's about improving heat transfer across the bottom of the pan.
The heat will travel through the pan more slowly because of the added material, but due to coppers extremely high heat conductivity, the copper base will heat very evenly, even if the heat source is unevenly applied, and therefore evenly transfer that heat through the steel layer.
Yes it would. Adding material generally makes thermal conductivity worse. There is no material with negative thermal resistance, so adding more will always increase thermal resistance by at least a bit.
The only exception is 3D geometries, where an increase in surface area due to the extra material can outweigh the effect of the added material, and lead to a net increase in thermal transfer.
This can lead to a paradoxical effect, where ADDING insulation around a pipe leads to HIGHER transfer than with less insulation material, because the added material increases the exterior diameter, and therefore surface area.
(Heatsinks are also a good example. It is more material than just the component by itself, but increases surface area by such a massive amount that it more than outweighs the added material)