What frame material is safest to crash on?
Comments
-
They are, if you're in the 90% group...0
-
Send them to me and I'll checkFirst.Aspect said:Can we be clear on whether or not hobnobs are safe to eat?
0 -
A Hobnob can ruin a good cup of tea if left in past breaking point. It's not until it happens and then it's too late!
Hopefully this will help others.
0 -
Chocolate hobnobs are a composite construction.focuszing723 said:A Hobnob can ruin a good cup of tea if left in past breaking point. It's not until it happens and then it's too late!
Hopefully this will help others.
This improves structural integrity, although they do break if they get too hot.0 -
It’s a pity they didn’t dip a biscuit shaped piece of carbon fibre in tea. I wonder if It would have lasted 40 seconds.0
-
Only if totally coated in chocolate as that would offer an extra 10 seconds beyond the normal wet dissolve time for CF at 30 seconds.0
-
I could almost agree with you but for your use of "very" which takes away your statistical argument. Pedantic yes but when dealing with sweeping statements you have to be.neeb said:
"High percentage" is relative - if 10% of people who ate hobnobs dropped dead on the spot that would be a high percentage. If only 70% of parachutes opened when the cord was pulled that would be a low percentage.navrig2 said:
Are the not the same?neeb said:
Maybe not the majority, but a very high percentage.
Majority is absolute - greater than 50%.
Well, that's my take on it at least and I'm sticking to it..
0 -
Again, it's relative - "high percentage" is relative to whatever I'm assuming your/our expectations of that percentage might be, and "very high" in this case was probably tweaked for your apparent expectation that it was "a percentage of one percent" (i.e. a very low percentage, although we may have been talking about different groups). Both "high" and "very" are necessarily "sweeping" in this context - which is appropriate, as any quantification would require a precise definition of the group being referred to.navrig2 said:
I could almost agree with you but for your use of "very" which takes away your statistical argument. Pedantic yes but when dealing with sweeping statements you have to be.
Actually, I think arguing about the structural properties of biscuit would be more useful.
Pretty sure that Clive Sinclair breifly marketed a helicopter made of biscuit sometime around 1982.0