The All New All New Groundspeak UK Pub Quiz

[+Pharisee]

Got a feeling it was somewhere up on the north east coast... Whitby?

but no idea who the historical figure was...

Edited September 20, 2011 by Pharisee

[+Betelgeuse]

Dracula was based on Vlad the Impaler but the character was in part inspired by Henry Irving

 

He stayed at Whitby.

[Pajaholic]

Dracula was based on Vlad the Impaler but the character was in part inspired by Henry Irving

 

He stayed at Whitby.

DING!

 

A lot of what went on in Whitby made it to the book.

 

WRT the basis of the Dracula character, although I didn't know that Henry Irving inspired it AIUI Vlad the Impaler was nonetheless the basis and even had the same name as the character. Vlad the Impaler's father was inducted into the order of the dragon for his efforts against the Turks. "Dracul" is Romanian for "the dragon" and so Vlad's father (also Vlad) became known as "Vlad Dracul" (Vlad the dragon). In Romanian, the ending "ulea" means "son of" and so Vlad the Impaler was known as "Dracula" (son of the dragon). Thus when Bram Stoker needed a basis for his fictional Dracula, there was already a real-life one with an appropriate name and reputation!

 

Over to Betelgeuse ...

[+Betelgeuse]

Which hoofed mammal found in the rain forests of Central Africa is the only other member of the giraffe family?

[+MTH]

Okapi

[+Betelgeuse]

Blimey - you're on a roll

 

Ding!

Edited September 21, 2011 by Betelgeuse

[+MTH]

Keep asking things I know and I'll keep answering them

 

I'll stick to wildlife for the next question. What unusual characteristic is shared by Eland and Reindeer?

 

Mark

 

P.S Now going offline until tomorrow. Hopefully this will take a bit longer to answer than my last question

Edited September 21, 2011 by MTH

[+Fianccetto]

Furry antlers?

[+The Patrician]

Something to do with their hooves, I know reindeer have extra large ones, more toes? for grip on snow. Are eland similar?

 

Edit - obviously not for grip on snow but for sand in the eland's case.

Edited September 21, 2011 by The Patrician

[+drdick&vick]

I would hazard a guesse and say that its the fact that both sexes have antlers.

[+MTH]

All wrong so far.

 

Eland are Antelope and have horns, not antlers

 

"Furry" antlers, or velvet, is common for all deer when the antlers grow. If you feel them they're warm at this stage as they contain the blood vessels. Once the antlers are grown the velvet dies and the deer will rub it off.

 

Both Reindeer sexes have antlers, but only the females have theirs throughout the winter. Rudolph must be female!

 

It's nothing to do with the hooves either, but it is something that happens when they walk.

 

Mark

[Pajaholic]

I thought that few other animals than giraffe and camels walked with both left legs then both right legs. However, I'm guessing that eland and reindeer also have this gait [edited to add: whereas most other quadrupeds use their legs diagonally - i.e. left fore with right rear then right fore with left rear]?

Edited September 22, 2011 by Pajaholic

[+MTH]

It's not the gait either. I almost asked the Giraffe/Camel question though.

 

I think this is unique to the Eland and Reindeer; I've certainly not heard it from any other species.

 

Mark

[Pajaholic]

It's not the gait either. I almost asked the Giraffe/Camel question though.

 

I think this is unique to the Eland and Reindeer; I've certainly not heard it from any other species.

 

Mark

IIRC, caribou 'click' when they walk as the tendons in their ankles snap into place with each stride. Since caribou are closely related to reindeer (close enough for some to consider them to be essentially the same species), I wonder whether "heard it" is a clue and that this is what you're looking for? (although I don't know whether eland have this trait)

[+MTH]

DING.

 

Reinder click, presumably so the herd can keep together in deep snow and blizzards.

 

Eland also have a very audible click when walking, although it's tendons in their knees. It's thought to indicate body size, and therefore the fighting ability of males.

 

Over to Pajaholic

[Pajaholic]

Thanks. I've learned something new there!

 

Sticking with the theme of unusual wildlife characteristics: The Aye-Aye has an unusual adaptation for hunting its prey. What is this adaptation?

[+MartyBartfast]

Thanks. I've learned something new there!

 

Sticking with the theme of unusual wildlife characteristics: The Aye-Aye has an unusual adaptation for hunting its prey. What is this adaptation?

 

I think that's the one with one enormously long finger for picking its nose out grubs

[Pajaholic]

I think that's the one with one enormously long finger for picking its nose out grubs

DING!

 

It also uses that finger for finding its prey. It taps the trunks of trees with that finger and listens with its very large and sensitive ears for the right type of noise, then it chews away the bark and wood over the grub's home, and finally picks out the grub with that finger.

 

Over to MartyBartfast.

[+MartyBartfast]

Leaving natural history behind and enterring another realm altogether:

 

What was the name of the individual who was tasked to push a boulder up a hill, but it would roll down before reaching the top, thus he was condemed for ever to push the boulder up the hill.

 

Ding for the name, and a Dong for the correct speeeling !!!!

[+keehotee]

Leaving natural history behind and enterring another realm altogether:

 

What was the name of the individual who was tasked to push a boulder up a hill, but it would roll down before reaching the top, thus he was condemed for ever to push the boulder up the hill.

 

Ding for the name, and a Dong for the correct speeeling !!!!

 

Sisyphus!

[+MartyBartfast]

Leaving natural history behind and enterring another realm altogether:

 

What was the name of the individual who was tasked to push a boulder up a hill, but it would roll down before reaching the top, thus he was condemed for ever to push the boulder up the hill.

 

Ding for the name, and a Dong for the correct speeeling !!!!

 

Sisyphus!

 

 

DING DONG

[+keehotee]

A five tonne, 20-year-old satellite has fallen out of orbit and is expected to crash somewhere on Earth on or around 24 September, according to Nasa.

 

But.....what's the height of the lowest sustainable Earth orbit - and what velocity would a satellite need to stay there?

[Pajaholic]

I don't think this is a pub question as it'd take more than a minute or so to calculate. Nonetheless (and making lots of simplifications):

 

Limit of Earth's atmosphere is normally reckoned to be circa 200 km, which is the minimum altitude a spacecraft would need to be to avoid speed loss due to friction with the atmosphere. The diameter of Earth about is about 12,750 km. So a satellite in circular orbit would need to travel at a speed at which the centripetal force of gravity is equal to the centrifugal force due to angular acceleration. That is:

 

mg = mrw

²

;or

g = rw

²

Therefore w = sqrt(g/r)

Now the radius is 6375+200 km = 6575000 m, so w (the angular velocity) = sqrt(9.81 ms^-2 / 6575000 m) ~ 0.00122 radians per second.

 

Thus the speed is rw = 6575000 x 0.00122 = 8,030 ms^-1

 

Summarising: Minimum orbital height is approximately 200 km, with orbital speed approximately 8,030 ms^-1 which is equivalent to a velocity of approximately 0.00122 radians per second!

 

(Phew!)

[+keehotee]

I don't think this is a pub question as it'd take more than a minute or so to calculate. Nonetheless (and making lots of simplifications):

 

Limit of Earth's atmosphere is normally reckoned to be circa 200 km, which is the minimum altitude a spacecraft would need to be to avoid speed loss due to friction with the atmosphere. The diameter of Earth about is about 12,750 km. So a satellite in circular orbit would need to travel at a speed at which the centripetal force of gravity is equal to the centrifugal force due to angular acceleration. That is:

 

mg = mrw

²

;or

g = rw

²

Therefore w = sqrt(g/r)

Now the radius is 6375+200 km = 6575000 m, so w (the angular velocity) = sqrt(9.81 ms^-2 / 6575000 m) ~ 0.00122 radians per second.

 

Thus the speed is rw = 6575000 x 0.00122 = 8,030 ms^-1

 

Summarising: Minimum orbital height is approximately 200 km, with orbital speed approximately 8,030 ms^-1 which is equivalent to a velocity of approximately 0.00122 radians per second!

 

(Phew!)

 

Not the answer I've got, unfortunately. But impressive workings out nonetheless.....

[+Simply Paul]

Trick question as it depends entirely on the drag co-efficient of the body and its mass. Even 150 miles up there's enough drag to bring big things down 'eventually'. The usual figure given is 100 miles/160km or 200km but 200 miles/320Km is probably more realistic, unless the object was able to 'power' itself against drag long-term, perhaps by sunlight-driven ion propulsion.

 

As for speed, it's about 7km per second or 4.5 miles per second, relative to the Earth's surface. That gets more complicated if the object is in a polar orbit, but you wanted a general figure so...

 

Edit - I didn't see this had moved onto another page. Lucky the correct (tbc!) answer hasn't yet been given

Edited September 22, 2011 by Simply Paul

[Pajaholic]

Hmmm ... I've just googled and the method of most people's calculation seems to be similar to mine. However, the answer depends a lot on just where you take the minimum altitude for negligible atmospheric drag. Wikipedia suggests this is much higher than the figure I gave and claims this to be the minimum altitude for a stable orbit. However, a quick check shows that Sputnik was placed into an elliptical orbit at an altitude of 215km with an orbital velocity of ~ 18,000 mph (8,046 m^-1), the excess velocity giving rise to the ellipse. That fact that the Russians actually put a satellite into a lower orbit than Wikipedia suggests to be the minimum very strongly suggests they're wrong!

 

Edited to add:

 

... unless the object was able to 'power' itself against drag long-term, perhaps by sunlight-driven ion propulsion.

... In which case the orbital height an velocity are a lot less than you might suspect because Pathfinder can stay up indefinitely at a very low speed as most of its 'anti-gravitational' force is aerodynamic lift rather than centrifugal! (Although few would consider Pathfinder to be a satellite)

Edited September 22, 2011 by Pajaholic

[+Simply Paul]

..That fact that the Russians actually put a satellite into a lower orbit than Wikipedia suggests to be the minimum very strongly suggests they're wrong!

It was light though, so came down after just three months. A far from sustainable Earth orbit!

[+Betelgeuse]

Stable LEO (Low Earth Orbit) is generally accepted to be around 350km altitude. Anything below 200km is going to decay relatively quickly due to atmospheric drag. Orbital velocity for satellites in LEO is approximately 7,800m/s although that's going to vary with altitude as it's the angular velocity that matters (as Pajaholic pointed out). Truly stable satellites are placed in geostationary orbit at an altitude of 35,780km and an orbital velocity of a shade over 3km/s. Even in geostationary orbit corrections still have to be made for the effects of precession though.

[+thehalibutkid]

I hate to be a killjoy but this is a pub quiz not a physics class.

[+keehotee]

As there seem to be so many differences of scientific opinion (boundary of "space" varying from 100 to 200km, definition of "sustainable, etc) in the interests of keeping things moving, I'm going to give the ding to...................... (drum roll)

 

Simply Paul!

[+Simply Paul]

Simply Paul!

I don't think I deserve it, but in the interests of keeping things moving, who had a minor hit with "The Future's So Bright I've Gotta Wear Shades" in 1986?

[+eusty]

Timbuk Three...but please don't listen to it...it's 'singing' in my head now!!

[+Simply Paul]

The correct spelling is Timbuk3, but you're clearly good enough for a DING! Over to you

[+eusty]

Back to music.

 

The band The Specials used to have AKA the end of their name (The Specials AKA) on their early releases...what does AKA mean?

 

[+keehotee]

Back to music.

 

The band The Specials used to have AKA the end of their name (The Specials AKA) on their early releases...what does AKA mean?

 

Also known as.

 

And it was The Special AKA, not The Specials AKA

Edited September 25, 2011 by keehotee

[+irisisleuk]

Also Known as the Automatics

[+NattyBooshka]

The Special Also Known As The Coventry Automatics

[+drdick&vick]

duplication of Keehotees's answer, whoops.

Edited September 25, 2011 by DrDick&Vick

[+eusty]

@ irisisleuk

 

Ding! over to you

 

@ keehotee

 

You get the Pedantic Award I was only a young lad at the time...I should have googled it first though

 

 

[+keehotee]

@ irisisleuk

 

Ding! over to you

 

@ keehotee

 

You get the Pedantic Award I was only a young lad at the time...I should have googled it first though

 

M'eh

Edited September 26, 2011 by keehotee

[+eusty]

This needs a bump as it's nearly dropped off the first page!

[+MTH]

This thread looks like it might die (some might say about time).

 

Since irisisleuk doesn't look likely to come up with a new question can I suggest the Eusty nominates someone else for the next question...

 

Mark

[+eusty]

can I suggest the Eusty nominates someone else for the next question...

I nominate you!!

 

Go for it...

 

[+MTH]

I wasn't expecting that!

 

Something topical...

 

Dan Crowley, John Eales, Tim Horan, Phil Kearns, Jason Little. Who's next on the only other member of this exclusive list?

 

Mark

 

[Edited to clarify the question]

Edited October 4, 2011 by MTH

[+The Duckers]

Well, I know they are Australian rugby union players, so I will guess at Captains and go for George Gregan being next.

[+MTH]

Not captains.

 

And, although these are all Australian, the one you're after isn't...

 

Mark

Edited October 4, 2011 by MTH

[+MazdaRoy]

The last hint swung it for me, (I hope) they have all won the Rugby World Cup twice and the only other player to do so is a South Africian Os du Randt.

[+MTH]

DING!

 

The Australians won in 1991 and 1999. Os Du Randt won with SA in 1995 and 2007.

 

Hopefully there will be a few Englishmen joining them this time

 

Seriously though, the "northern" half of the draw is very open and any of the four teams could make the final. England will have to improve considerably if they're to beat France and either Wales or Ireland.

 

The favourites have to come from the "southern" half. Dan Carter's injury has no doubt weakened NZ, but they should still have more than enough firepower to win (unless they choke again ). Australia or SA could still spoil the party, and we've seen both are far from invincible.

 

Mark

[+MazdaRoy]

Keeping it topical (sorry for non rugby fans)

 

Who was the first Rugby Union player to win 60 international caps?

[+eusty]

(sorry for non rugby fans)

that would be me then!