A few short days ago, I published a post titled “Why”. I posed some questions that I’d often pondered, but had never really found answers to.
Within hours of publishing, I was already feeling uneasy. I pride myself on being curious, inquisitive, and tenacious in understanding the “why” behind as many things as possible. There just wasn’t any reason for those questions to remain unanswered.
Why is there a ‘D’ in Fridge, but not in Refrigerator?
To make the spelling elicit the correct pronunciation.
As with many words that emerge as a result of new technology, the word “Fridge” first existed in oral form before it was widely written as text. While the root word “Refrigerator” follows traditional English and Latin roots, the spelling of “Fridge” was adjusted to reflect how it should be pronounced (i.e. to rhyme with “Ridge”, rather than sharing the same vowel sound as “eye” or “fry”).
How big can a cupcake get before it becomes a cake?
Looking at some of the attempts to make the “World’s Biggest Cupcake”, it seems as though size is not the relevant factor. Shape, aesthetics and the presence of a cup-like structure in which it is baked, are far more decisive in the distinction between “cake” and “cupcake”.
Why on earth does the toaster dial go up that high? Who exactly is eating a black stump of carbon for breakfast?
Turns out I’ve been under-utilising my toaster.
Crumpets, bagels, English muffins, and a plethora of frozen goods (such as waffles, meat and veggie paties, or hashbrowns) have been known to need multiple rounds in the toaster on the highest setting.
Breakfast will never be the same again.
How is it that mankind can send a man to the moon, but can’t make a dustpan that doesn’t leave a line of dirt behind every time you use it?
It seems as though the thickness of most regular dustpan edges provide an insurmountable barrier for that last bit of dust. There are some more expensive brands that attempt to negate this with a combination of high quality brush bristles and a very fine rubber edge on the dustpan, with mixed results. If anyone knows of, or owns the perfect dustpan, please let me know.
If the universe has been constantly expanding since the Big Bang, what is it expanding in to? Why isn’t that stuff considered a part of the universe?
This is a bit of a trick question, with some very complicated answers. For the sake of simplicity, I’ll mention only two.
A) The universe isn’t expanding “in to” anything, it’s just getting bigger. If there was anything to expand in to, that thing WOULD be a part of the universe. This leads to…
B) The OBSERVABLE universe is expanding.
What we refer to as the “universe” came into existence with the Big Bang. Since we can only see things when its emitted or reflected light reaches us, we can never see farther than the distance that light has traveled in the time since the Big Bang. This means that we may never interact with anything outside of that point, and we can only theorise about anything that lies beyond.
My favourite theory is that our observable universe simply sprang into being within THE infinite universe of everything that exists. This would mean that no matter how far our universe expanded, it would never compare to the infinity that is beyond it.
Why did God bother creating people that would be bad enough to go to hell?
Having grown up deeply entrenched in the local Muslim community, I think I’m answering this from personal experience.
He just did.
You can’t ask “why” when it comes to God. That he is infinite, eternal, all knowing and omnipotent, the entire concept of God is simply beyond our ability to comprehend. It all comes down to what you believe. He either created such people or He didn’t, just as one either believes that He exists or that He doesn’t.
Of course, there are those who say we simply don’t know, that any explanation about heavenly justice is just an attempt to rationalise something that we can never understand. They pose that heaven and hell are concepts that we believe in so strongly because it makes us feel better, and gives us the notion that people will always get what they deserve.
In reality, we can never truly know until it is far too late for us.
At what age is it no longer acceptable to be naked in public?
The answer is entirely dependent on societal/cultural norms and expectations. It differs between countries, localities within that country, generations, sexes and even within families.
If a child is growing up in a nudist colony, I’d say there’s no real limit to when it’s acceptable to be naked. However, here on the south-east coast of Australia, that number can range anywhere from 0 to 7 depending the parent. Temperature and proximity to the beach also seem to have strong a positive correlation to the amount of naked kids you see in public.
Why are they called “Veterinarians”, and not “Dogtors”?
Because they’re heathens that don’t appreciate a good pun.
We are in possession of a pocket sized device that is capable of accessing every single piece of information that mankind has ever known. One should never feel plagued by unanswered questions.
If you don’t have the answers, you simply aren’t searching hard enough.