Stuff of Fannish interest in Chicago, June 8-12?
Paul Ciszek
the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
that time?
--
Please reply to: | "When the press is free and every man
pciszek at panix dot com | able to read, all is safe."
Autoreply has been disabled | --Thomas Jefferson
Jay Denebeim
Paul Ciszek <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and
>the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
>might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
>that time?
Fermilab is way cool if you can get someone to show you around it.
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim Moderator rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: b5...@deepthot.org *
* moderator contact address: b5mod-...@deepthot.org *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.org *
Kip Williams
> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and
> the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
> might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
> that time?
The Art Institute has Seurat's "Grand Jatte" in it. Fannish or not, next
time I get out to Chicago, that'll even take precedence over Science &
Industry.
Kip
scientific, industrial & artistic
Daniel Silevitch
> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and
> the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
> might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
> that time?
If you go to the Science museum, be sure to see the BodyWorlds special
exhibit. It's absolutely amazing.
http://www.msichicago.org/bodyworlds/index.html
http://www.msichicago.org/bodyworlds/gallery.html
It's running through early September.
-dms
Del Cotter
Do you get "The Private Life of a Masterpiece" on TV over there? They
did the Grand Jatte a couple of weeks ago.
--
Del Cotter
Thanks to the recent increase in UBE, I will soon be ignoring email
sent to d...@branta.demon.co.uk. Please send your email to del2 instead.
Daniel Silevitch
> On Sat, 7 May 2005, in rec.arts.sf.fandom,
> Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> said:
>
>>Paul Ciszek wrote:
>>> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and
>>> the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
>>> might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
>>> that time?
>>
>>The Art Institute has Seurat's "Grand Jatte" in it. Fannish or not,
>>next time I get out to Chicago, that'll even take precedence over
>>Science & Industry.
>
> Do you get "The Private Life of a Masterpiece" on TV over there? They
> did the Grand Jatte a couple of weeks ago.
Not sure about the TV series, but a year or so ago, the Art Institute did
a special exhibit centered around Grand Jatte, assembling many of
Seurat's studies and drafts. The Making of a Masterpiece, I believe it
was called. Very interesting.
The Art Institute recently got (long term loan, I think) the collection
of the mostly-defunct Terra Museum, a smallish Chicago art museum focused
on contemporary American art. Some of that is already on display.
-dms
Kip Williams
> On Sat, 7 May 2005, in rec.arts.sf.fandom,
> Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> said:
>>
>> The Art Institute has Seurat's "Grand Jatte" in it. Fannish or not,
>> next time I get out to Chicago, that'll even take precedence over
>> Science & Industry.
>
> Do you get "The Private Life of a Masterpiece" on TV over there? They
> did the Grand Jatte a couple of weeks ago.
I'm not aware of it, but I don't generally get around to reading the TV
listings these days.
Kip
out of it
Jenn Ridley
>I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and
>the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
>might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
>that time?
There's a con (Duckon <http://www.duckon.org>) in Naperville (western
suburb) that weekend; but Chicago fandom is large, and contains
multitudes. Give the Chicago fen a chance to wake up, and they'll
probably know more.
I always make a stop at the Shedd Aquarium. The shark tank is
something else.
--
Jenn Ridley : jri...@chartermi.net
Del Cotter
>Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> said:
>>>The Art Institute has Seurat's "Grand Jatte" in it. Fannish or not,
>>>next time I get out to Chicago, that'll even take precedence over
>>>Science & Industry.
>>
>> Do you get "The Private Life of a Masterpiece" on TV over there? They
>> did the Grand Jatte a couple of weeks ago.
>
>Not sure about the TV series, but a year or so ago, the Art Institute did
>a special exhibit centered around Grand Jatte, assembling many of
>Seurat's studies and drafts. The Making of a Masterpiece, I believe it
>was called. Very interesting.
"Private Life" does a different painting every week. Each hour long
episode has roughly the same format, covering the social environment at
the time it was painted, the personality of the artist, the reaction to
its initial unveiling, changes in public attitude to it over the years,
and the modern bits of culture it inspires (e.g. in "Grand Jattes"'s
case, the three-dimensional topiary version somewhere in America, and of
course all the Seurat kitsch advertising the gallery and city of
Chicago).
When they did Rembrandt's "Night Watch" I was disappointed that they
didn't show Paul Kidby's version of it for Pratchett's novel of the same
name.
Cally Soukup
> Paul Ciszek wrote:
And it has the most Monets of any museum not in France. And a bunch of
other impressionists, as well.
Also, it has the very impressive Harding Collection of arms and armor.
The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
As for get-togethers, I don't know of any, but that doesn't mean much.
--
"I disapprove of what you have to say, but I will defend to the death
your right to say it." -- Beatrice Hall
Cally Soukup sou...@pobox.com
Kip Williams
> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
> think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
They squicked me good, years ago, with the Hall O' Fetuses. All sizes,
in a parade of glass jars with yellowish preservative. Talk about
material to haunt your dreams.
Years later, I was walking through a hall in the Field Museum. The wall
was covered with various large fish. Sailfish, sawfish... seemed to be
sea-dwelling sport fish, all of a varnished looking grey tone over a
battleship-grey wall. It started to get oppressive and I had to get out
of there. OD'ed on fish.
Kip
weak
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:d5hvnh$bup$1...@dent.deepthot.org:
> In article <d5hhdr$6e7$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> Paul Ciszek <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and the
>> Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that might
>> interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during that
>> time?
>
> Fermilab is way cool if you can get someone to show you around it.
Is Sara Tompson still the Library Director of Fermilab? She's a fan, or at
least was at one time associated with a bunch of crazies from DeKalb who
put out a fanzine called Hard Pore Korn.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:7o7fe.2607$sy6.1702@lakeread04:
> Cally Soukup wrote:
>> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
>> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
>> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
>> think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
>
> They squicked me good, years ago, with the Hall O' Fetuses. All sizes,
> in a parade of glass jars with yellowish preservative. Talk about
> material to haunt your dreams.
Some museum around here has an exhibit of flayed, preserved, posed corpses.
I have carefully refrained from learning where, so that I can avoid
thinking about it. Unfortunately, there are banners up and down certain
streets around here (including those approaching my preferred gas station)
showing a flayed and preserved corpse posed as a basketball player. Bleah.
I don't like to think about the inside parts of people being made visible.
All the more so as I'm facing surgery on my right hand sometime soon, to
correct a problem with a tendon that's been bothering me since 1976.
> Years later, I was walking through a hall in the Field Museum. The wall
> was covered with various large fish. Sailfish, sawfish... seemed to be
> sea-dwelling sport fish, all of a varnished looking grey tone over a
> battleship-grey wall. It started to get oppressive and I had to get out
> of there. OD'ed on fish.
--
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:mpgp71t08dvmrjdlc...@4ax.com:
> nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
>
>> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and the
>> Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that might
>> interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during that
>> time?
>
> There's a con (Duckon <http://www.duckon.org>) in Naperville (western
> suburb) that weekend; but Chicago fandom is large, and contains
> multitudes. Give the Chicago fen a chance to wake up, and they'll
> probably know more.
Is Candis King still involved in that? I have seen nothing about her for a
while; her financial advice Webpage has been static for years.
> I always make a stop at the Shedd Aquarium. The shark tank is
> something else.
--
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in
Oh, EYEWWWWWWW, that's the exhibit of flayed, preserved, posed corpses that
I'm trying so hard not to think about!
Cally Soukup
> Cally Soukup wrote:
> > The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
> > Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
> > bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
> > think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
> They squicked me good, years ago, with the Hall O' Fetuses. All sizes,
> in a parade of glass jars with yellowish preservative. Talk about
> material to haunt your dreams.
There's a particular stairwell at the Museum of Science and Industry
that has the Sliced Man. (I wouldn't be surprised if he's been brought
down to the preserved human exhibit for the duration.) A set of
vertical slices of a person, preserved between panes of glass or
plastic in some sort of preserving fluid. Hinged like a poster display
case. Fascinating to look at for a few minutes until the viscera catch
up with the brain and I Have To Leave Now.
Cally Soukup
> dene...@deepthot.org (Jay Denebeim) appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:d5hvnh$bup$1...@dent.deepthot.org:
> > In article <d5hhdr$6e7$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> > Paul Ciszek <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and the
> >> Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that might
> >> interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during that
> >> time?
> >
> > Fermilab is way cool if you can get someone to show you around it.
> Is Sara Tompson still the Library Director of Fermilab? She's a fan, or at
> least was at one time associated with a bunch of crazies from DeKalb who
> put out a fanzine called Hard Pore Korn.
And there's Bill Higgins, of this very newsgroup, who you might email
and ask. He's been known to give tours of Fermilab. (Of course, he'll
likely be at DucKon that weekend.)
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:d5j7uj$pmn$2...@wheel2.two14.net:
> There's a particular stairwell at the Museum of Science and Industry
> that has the Sliced Man.
EYEWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
Daniel Silevitch
>
> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
> think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
It's not that bad. When my parents were visiting a few months back, I
dragged my somewhat squemish mom to the exhibit, and despite her initial
reluctance, she found it very interesting and not at all icky.
Bunch of photos: http://www.msichicago.org/bodyworlds/gallery.html
-dms
Cally Soukup
> Cally Soukup <sou...@pobox.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:d5j7uj$pmn$2...@wheel2.two14.net:
> > There's a particular stairwell at the Museum of Science and Industry
> > that has the Sliced Man.
> EYEWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
It's ok; you can walk right by it without particularly noticing it.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in
EYEWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
David Dyer-Bennet
> Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> appears to have caused the following letters to
> be typed in news:7o7fe.2607$sy6.1702@lakeread04:
>
>> Cally Soukup wrote:
>>> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
>>> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
>>> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
>>> think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
>>
>> They squicked me good, years ago, with the Hall O' Fetuses. All sizes,
>> in a parade of glass jars with yellowish preservative. Talk about
>> material to haunt your dreams.
>
> Some museum around here has an exhibit of flayed, preserved, posed corpses.
> I have carefully refrained from learning where, so that I can avoid
> thinking about it.
Reasonable enough -- so long as you're sure there's no danger you'll
casually *walk into the place* not knowing.
> Unfortunately, there are banners up and down certain streets around
> here (including those approaching my preferred gas station) showing
> a flayed and preserved corpse posed as a basketball player. Bleah.
>
> I don't like to think about the inside parts of people being made visible.
> All the more so as I'm facing surgery on my right hand sometime soon, to
> correct a problem with a tendon that's been bothering me since 1976.
Reasonable enough to worry about such surgery. On the other hand, I
rather *like* inside parts being made visible -- via x-rays and other
relatively harmless imaging techniques.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd...@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Cally Soukup
> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> writes:
> > Some museum around here has an exhibit of flayed, preserved, posed corpses.
> > I have carefully refrained from learning where, so that I can avoid
> > thinking about it.
> Reasonable enough -- so long as you're sure there's no danger you'll
> casually *walk into the place* not knowing.
Not likely; it's a travelling exhibit, so it costs extra, over and
above museum admittance. Of course, there will still be posters and
banners, but not the Real Thing.
John Houghton
> Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in
> news:slrnd7qg22....@bardeen.local:
>
>
>>On Sat, 7 May 2005 14:27:57 +0000 (UTC), Cally Soukup <sou...@pobox.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
>>>Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
>>>bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
>>>think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
>>
>>It's not that bad. When my parents were visiting a few months back, I
>>dragged my somewhat squemish mom to the exhibit, and despite her initial
>>reluctance, she found it very interesting and not at all icky.
>>
>>Bunch of photos: http://www.msichicago.org/bodyworlds/gallery.html
>
>
> EYEWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
>
this (post mortem). Until now, my best hope of saving my posterior for
posterity was to have my articulated skeleton hang in the corner of a
classroom.
John
Who hasn't actually made this kind of arrangement, just the normal
organ donor thing.
Paul Ciszek
that you might not see elsewhere, low class as well as high class?
Obscure ethnic food joints? Kitsch?
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:mLidnfVVR_w...@comcast.com:
I'll skip the full-body donation, thank you; I'm fine with being seen with
my clothes off, but my skin is something else.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:m2vf5uk...@gw.dd-b.net:
> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> appears to have caused the following
>> letters to be typed in news:7o7fe.2607$sy6.1702@lakeread04:
>>
>>> Cally Soukup wrote:
>>>> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
>>>> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
>>>> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but
>>>> I think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
>>>
>>> They squicked me good, years ago, with the Hall O' Fetuses. All sizes,
>>> in a parade of glass jars with yellowish preservative. Talk about
>>> material to haunt your dreams.
>>
>> Some museum around here has an exhibit of flayed, preserved, posed
>> corpses. I have carefully refrained from learning where, so that I can
>> avoid thinking about it.
>
> Reasonable enough -- so long as you're sure there's no danger you'll
> casually *walk into the place* not knowing.
Before I go to a museum, I like to look at its circulars and whatever
displays are outside (and these days, Website as well), in order to pique
my experience of what I'll find inside. I'm sure the flayed corpse exhibit
is sufficiently publicized that I'm not likely to happen upon it by
mistake.
>> Unfortunately, there are banners up and down certain streets around
>> here (including those approaching my preferred gas station) showing
>> a flayed and preserved corpse posed as a basketball player. Bleah.
>>
>> I don't like to think about the inside parts of people being made
>> visible. All the more so as I'm facing surgery on my right hand
>> sometime soon, to correct a problem with a tendon that's been bothering
>> me since 1976.
>
> Reasonable enough to worry about such surgery. On the other hand, I
> rather *like* inside parts being made visible -- via x-rays and other
> relatively harmless imaging techniques.
That's very enjoyable. I like seeing x-rays of myself, particularly things
like my hands. I probably will get to do so again soon, as I will soon be
having minor surgery on my right hand to correct a tendon problem. (Yes,
the tendon itself won't show up on an x-ray, but the doctor might want to
be sure that the bones are OK.)
Kip Williams
> That's very enjoyable. I like seeing x-rays of myself, particularly things
> like my hands. I probably will get to do so again soon, as I will soon be
Once when we were visiting my grandmother in Riverside, IL, we went to a
store in or near Chicago to purchase me a new pair of shoes. The store
had some sort of elaborate X-ray machine which would, through the
miracle of Science, help provide shoes that fit better. Scientifically
better! I was sorely disappointed that the machine wasn't operating,
because I really, really wanted to see my foot bones.
Naturally, this was a few years before dental technicians started
wearing lead-lined vests as they took my X-rays from behind a sort of
fortified bunker. No doubt I dodged a magic bullet of sorts that day.
Kip
still has two left
Dan Kimmel
"Paul Ciszek" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:d5laij$45v$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> OK, expanding beyond just fannish interest, what is there in Chicago
> that you might not see elsewhere, low class as well as high class?
> Obscure ethnic food joints? Kitsch?
Lots of very impressive public art, including a Picasso sculpture.
On the low end I confess a weak spot for Ed Debevic's, an eatery where the
surly attitude from the waiters to the signs in the rest rooms is part of
the fun.
Daniel Silevitch
> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>> That's very enjoyable. I like seeing x-rays of myself, particularly things
>> like my hands. I probably will get to do so again soon, as I will soon be
>
> Once when we were visiting my grandmother in Riverside, IL, we went to a
> store in or near Chicago to purchase me a new pair of shoes. The store
> had some sort of elaborate X-ray machine which would, through the
> miracle of Science, help provide shoes that fit better. Scientifically
> better! I was sorely disappointed that the machine wasn't operating,
> because I really, really wanted to see my foot bones.
This notion has made a comeback in the clothing market. There's a company
making whole-body scanners (RF based, I believe) that will profile your
body's contours and then recommend the proper size and cut.
http://www.intellifit.com/site/index.html
Levi's was demoing the machine at some of their stores; I remember seeing
a story on the evening news a short while back when the demo passed
through Chicago.
-dms
Daniel Silevitch
>
> "Paul Ciszek" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:d5laij$45v$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>> OK, expanding beyond just fannish interest, what is there in Chicago
>> that you might not see elsewhere, low class as well as high class?
>> Obscure ethnic food joints? Kitsch?
>
> Lots of very impressive public art, including a Picasso sculpture.
By June, I believe that The Bean (aka "Cloud Gate") will be finished with
its final polishing and will be again visible. If so, definitely see it.
It's a steel sculpture in the new Millenium Park (next door to the Art
Institute) roughly the shape of a kidney bean. Mirror polished and big
enough to walk under, the reflections and such forth are way cool.
If you're a fan of architecture, I'd recommend the Chicago Architecture
Foundation tours, both walking and boat-based. The Early Skyscraper
walking tour was my favorite of the bunch.
-dms
James Nicoll
Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> appears to have caused the
>following letters to be typed in
>news:slrnd7qg22....@bardeen.local:
>
>> On Sat, 7 May 2005 14:27:57 +0000 (UTC), Cally Soukup <sou...@pobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
>>> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
>>> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
>>> think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
>>
>> It's not that bad. When my parents were visiting a few months back, I
>> dragged my somewhat squemish mom to the exhibit, and despite her initial
>> reluctance, she found it very interesting and not at all icky.
>>
>> Bunch of photos: http://www.msichicago.org/bodyworlds/gallery.html
>
>EYEWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
>
with another one?
--
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/
http://www.marryanamerican.ca
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
Daniel Silevitch
> In article <Xns9650662EC5...@207.217.125.201>,
> Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>>Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> appears to have caused the
>>following letters to be typed in
>>news:slrnd7qg22....@bardeen.local:
>>
>>> On Sat, 7 May 2005 14:27:57 +0000 (UTC), Cally Soukup <sou...@pobox.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The Museum of Science and Industry currently has (and will have while
>>>> Paul's here) a truly strange travelling exhibit of preserved human
>>>> bodies and dissected body parts. It's supposed to be fascinating, but I
>>>> think I'm too squeemish to go see it.
>>>
>>> It's not that bad. When my parents were visiting a few months back, I
>>> dragged my somewhat squemish mom to the exhibit, and despite her initial
>>> reluctance, she found it very interesting and not at all icky.
>>>
>>> Bunch of photos: http://www.msichicago.org/bodyworlds/gallery.html
>>
>>EYEWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
>>
> Wasn't the donor a man on death row, or am I confusing that exhibit
> with another one?
No, BodyWorlds is a whole bunch of donors (200, I think, plus one horse),
and the exhibit tells you nothing about who the people were except,
sometimes, how they died. If nothing else, the exhibit was one of the
best pieces of anti-smoking propaganda that I've ever seen. "Here's a
healthy lung; here's the lung of a smoker who died of lung cancer."
Repeat for half a dozen smoking-related illnesses.
-dms
Marilee J. Layman
>Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>> That's very enjoyable. I like seeing x-rays of myself, particularly things
>> like my hands. I probably will get to do so again soon, as I will soon be
>
>Once when we were visiting my grandmother in Riverside, IL, we went to a
>store in or near Chicago to purchase me a new pair of shoes. The store
>had some sort of elaborate X-ray machine which would, through the
>miracle of Science, help provide shoes that fit better. Scientifically
>better! I was sorely disappointed that the machine wasn't operating,
>because I really, really wanted to see my foot bones.
Fluoroscope. Kaiser has one at all the urgent care clinics and at
ortho. The cool thing is that it's not static. If you move your
foot, it moves on the picture, too. When I broke my fifth right
metatarsal, they used the fluoroscope instead of sending me to x-ray.
>Naturally, this was a few years before dental technicians started
>wearing lead-lined vests as they took my X-rays from behind a sort of
>fortified bunker. No doubt I dodged a magic bullet of sorts that day.
>
>Kip
>still has two left
--
Marilee J. Layman
Thomas Womack
To add extra confusion, I believe the MSI permanent collection
contains a homo sapiens in coronal (that is, parallel to the legs,
going from the toes to the ankle) slices preserved in some kind of
preservative fluid, and a quantity of different-stage fetuses. I think
there are also assorted preserved organs; when I was there in
September 2001, the display occupied one long wall plus about a third
of the floor behind it.
They're interesting to look at, but I felt, strongly and for reasons
not immediately explicable, that I ought not to photograph them.
Tom
Thomas Womack
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
> Wasn't the donor a man on death row, or am I confusing that exhibit
>with another one?
I think you may be confusing BodyWorks (lots of donors; bodies infused
with unperishable plastics and displayed around the country) with the
Visible Human Project (one donor from death row; body embedded in wax
and sliced very finely, with high-resolution photographs taken of each
slice, to provide a three-dimensional dataset).
Tom
James Nicoll
I am indeed.
The convict volunteered to have his body used in that manner,
right?
Thomas Womack
Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote:
>If you're a fan of architecture, I'd recommend the Chicago Architecture
>Foundation tours, both walking and boat-based. The Early Skyscraper
>walking tour was my favorite of the bunch.
My "my, this is a civilised place" instinct was most tickled by the
fact that the Chicago Architecture Foundation produce a really good
CD-ROM containing most of the material from their tours (lots of
Quicktime video and panoramas) if, as I did, you've messed up the
scheduling and miss the tour.
Tom
Kip Williams
> On Sun, 08 May 2005 12:41:58 -0400, Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>Once when we were visiting my grandmother in Riverside, IL, we went to a
>>store in or near Chicago to purchase me a new pair of shoes. The store
>>had some sort of elaborate X-ray machine which would, through the
>>miracle of Science, help provide shoes that fit better. Scientifically
>>better! I was sorely disappointed that the machine wasn't operating,
>>because I really, really wanted to see my foot bones.
>
> Fluoroscope. Kaiser has one at all the urgent care clinics and at
> ortho. The cool thing is that it's not static. If you move your
> foot, it moves on the picture, too. When I broke my fifth right
> metatarsal, they used the fluoroscope instead of sending me to x-ray.
Confused the two again. I'd ask the difference, but now that I have the
nouns in front of me, I expect Mister Google can do the rest.
Kip
he's my friend
Robert Sneddon
Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> writes
>This notion has made a comeback in the clothing market. There's a company
>making whole-body scanners (RF based, I believe) that will profile your
>body's contours and then recommend the proper size and cut.
There's a British research group working on developing an radar-based
breast scanner which can be used without worrying about cumulative
dosages or squashing the tissues flat to expose X-ray film. It uses
multiple low-powered antennas in a cup plus some hairy signal-processing
capability to analyse radio frequency returns from tissue
discontinuities like lumps. The experimental system they're working with
uses sixteen antennas but that isn't going to be enough for a real
production system. Even so it seems they're getting some good results;
they can already spot a 3mm pre-cancerous "lump" in a dummy test sample.
--
Email me via robert (at) nojay (dot) org (new email address)
This address no longer accepts HTML posts.
Robert Sneddon
Robert Sneddon
<jdni...@panix.com> writes
> The convict volunteered to have his body used in that manner,
>right?
He was killed by lethal injection so his organs couldn't be used in
transplant procedures. There were plans to do another with a finer slice
and also a Visible Woman too but I don't think that any suitable donors
have turned up yet.
Thomas Womack
Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <d5lplb$eb$1...@reader1.panix.com>, James Nicoll
><jdni...@panix.com> writes
>
>> The convict volunteered to have his body used in that manner,
>>right?
I don't know. The description on one of the NIH sites is "Two bodies
acquired through donations met bioethical standards of informed
consent", which seems close to being somewhat weaselly. I'm not sure
how to find out whether the bodies of the executed are routinely used
for medical research, nor whether I want to know.
> He was killed by lethal injection so his organs couldn't be used in
>transplant procedures. There were plans to do another with a finer slice
>and also a Visible Woman too but I don't think that any suitable donors
>have turned up yet.
There is a Visible Human Female, photographed at three voxels per
millimetre in all three axes (also MRI'd with 4mm voxels and CT'd at
1mm x 0.33 x 0.33, as was the Visible Male)
The Visible Male is
(http://www.masscomm.txstate.edu/graduate/guerrero/Joseph%20Paul%20Jernigan.htm)
Joseph Paul Jernigan, executed on August 5th 1993 for the violent
murder of Edward Hale, a 75-year-old man who returned to the house
that JPJ was burgling while JPJ was still there.
At least one site claims "Jernigan didn't know that in donating his
body to science, he was going to let his naked body flow on Internet",
but there is much loon-sign on that site.
The Visible Female is "a 59-year-old Maryland resident who died in
September 1993 of a heart blockage after several years of bad health",
and her name is not publically known.
Tom
Paul Dormer
wrote:
> Naturally, this was a few years before dental technicians started
> wearing lead-lined vests as they took my X-rays from behind a sort of
> fortified bunker. No doubt I dodged a magic bullet of sorts that day.
My dentist just scurries out of the room when he takes the X-ray, as I
discovered on Friday.
Arthur D. Hlavaty
When I was a kid, they repeatedly fluoroscoped my feet. I still had to
get a vasectomy later.
--
Arthur D.Hlavaty hla...@panix.com
Church of the SuperGenius in Wile E. we trust
http://www.livejournal.com/users/supergee/
E-zine available on request
Bill Higgins
> And there's Bill Higgins, of this very newsgroup, who you might email
> and ask. He's been known to give tours of Fermilab. (Of course, he'll
> likely be at DucKon that weekend.)
Yes, I expect to spend much of the weekend at Duckon. But I would enjoy
meeting Paul Ciszek. Hope we can work something out.
--
MN
\
\
___ O~~* /_) ' / / /_/ ' , , ' ,_ _ \|/
/ / - ~ -~~~~~~~~/_) / / / / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
/__// \ (_) (_) / | \
| | Bill Higgins Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
\ / Internet: hig...@fnal.gov
- - Minnesotans: Watch for our quality neutrino beams!
~ Coming soon to an iron mine near you!
James Angove
> Paul Ciszek wrote:
>
>> I will be in Chicago, June 8-12. I know about the Field Museum and
>> the Museum of Science and Industry; what else is there in Chicago that
>> might interest fen? Are there any open get-togethers occuring during
>> that time?
>
> The Art Institute has Seurat's "Grand Jatte" in it. Fannish or not, next
> time I get out to Chicago, that'll even take precedence over Science &
> Industry.
>
I'll have lived in Chicago three years when Paul shows up, and I've seen
Grand Jatte at least four times, and still haven't made it down to Science
& Industry. I hear Science & Industry is nice, but its a long way south
(and I don't drive), and nothing I've heard makes it out to be radically
different that OMSI or the Exploratorium. But the Art Institute is a not
to be missed kind of experience.
--
James Angove
James Angove
news:slrnd7sh30....@bardeen.uchicago.edu:
>
> If you're a fan of architecture, I'd recommend the Chicago Architecture
> Foundation tours, both walking and boat-based. The Early Skyscraper
> walking tour was my favorite of the bunch.
>
The Chicago Architecture Foundation also does an El tour that I like quite
a bit.
Daniel Silevitch
It's not hard to get to via public transportation from downtown. The two
easiest ways are the number 10 bus (express from the Loop to the museum)
and the Metra Electric line, going from the Randolph Street station
(Randolph & Michigan, near the Art Institute). Get off the train at 57th
street, and you're a block or so from the museum. Or take the Red
line to Garfield (aka 55th) and the no 55 bus directly to the museum.
Another option are the commuter buses, nos 6 and 15 (I think), both of
which stop at 57th, again about a block from the museum.
-dms
Daniel Silevitch
Ooooh. Didn't know about that one; I'll have to give that a shot some
time. Neato, thanks.
-dms
James Angove
>
> It's not hard to get to via public transportation from downtown. The two
> easiest ways are the number 10 bus (express from the Loop to the museum)
> and the Metra Electric line, going from the Randolph Street station
> (Randolph & Michigan, near the Art Institute). Get off the train at 57th
> street, and you're a block or so from the museum. Or take the Red
> line to Garfield (aka 55th) and the no 55 bus directly to the museum.
Its not so much that its far or long as such so much as my deep aversion to
going into the loop on a weekend, and the fact that I don't know the area
or anyone down there, so I can't combine the trip with anything else. This
means that every time I think of it, some combination of "But I really want
to eat at" and "I need to stop by" winds up derailing the process. Its not
that public transit takes more time; most things I want to do, I almost
certainly do as fast or faster without a car, but it really encourages very
well planned trips.
James Angove
>
>> The Chicago Architecture Foundation also does an El tour that I like
>> quite a bit.
>>
>> http://www.architecture.org/tour_view.aspx?TourID=94
>
> Ooooh. Didn't know about that one; I'll have to give that a shot some
> time. Neato, thanks.
>
I especially like it for visitors, since its not a walking tour so I don't
have to worry about various infirmities, and it runs all year, so I don't
have to worry about scheduling so much. Plus, its free[1] and frequent,
which makes it nice when you'retryingtogetalotininjustthetwodays!
[1] "And that's a very good price"[2]
[2] I would explain this, but I want to see if anyone else remembers that
bit of Portland advertising
Marilee J. Layman
<no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <slrnd7sgos....@bardeen.uchicago.edu>, Daniel
>Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> writes
>
>>This notion has made a comeback in the clothing market. There's a company
>>making whole-body scanners (RF based, I believe) that will profile your
>>body's contours and then recommend the proper size and cut.
>
> There's a British research group working on developing an radar-based
>breast scanner which can be used without worrying about cumulative
>dosages or squashing the tissues flat to expose X-ray film. It uses
>multiple low-powered antennas in a cup plus some hairy signal-processing
>capability to analyse radio frequency returns from tissue
>discontinuities like lumps. The experimental system they're working with
>uses sixteen antennas but that isn't going to be enough for a real
>production system. Even so it seems they're getting some good results;
>they can already spot a 3mm pre-cancerous "lump" in a dummy test sample.
Something similar from Charleston and a picture:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/02/AR2005050201293.html
--
Marilee J. Layman
Paul Ciszek
In article <Xns96518725515...@130.133.1.4>,
I have seen the MSI, and it is definately worth seeing. I have not yet
seen the Field museum, so my ration of non-art museum time will probably
be spent on that.
--
Please reply to: | "When the press is free and every man
pciszek at panix dot com | able to read, all is safe."
Autoreply has been disabled | --Thomas Jefferson
Kip Williams
> When I was a kid, they repeatedly fluoroscoped my feet. I still had to
> get a vasectomy later.
But you still only have two feet, so they didn't multiply. (Pretty clear
you didn't spend enough time sitting in front of color TVs in the 60s.)
Kip
Kip Williams
> I'll have lived in Chicago three years when Paul shows up, and I've seen
> Grand Jatte at least four times, and still haven't made it down to Science
> & Industry. I hear Science & Industry is nice, but its a long way south
> (and I don't drive), and nothing I've heard makes it out to be radically
> different that OMSI or the Exploratorium. But the Art Institute is a not
> to be missed kind of experience.
As a kid in the late 60s and early 70s, I had absolutely nothing else to
compare it to. Only when we got in our car and drove a thousand or so
miles to visit Grandma Mimi and Aunt Mary did I have a chance to get
there, and that wasn't guaranteed. There are places now that have some
nice science stuff, but it would take decades to get as many neat
exhibits sponsored by various industries and such as I used to see
there. The best science museum I know in Virginia would fit in one wing
of the place, the way they have it packed. And do any of them have
anything to compare with Colleen Moore's Fairy Castle, or the U-505, or
the 1900 street, or the animatronic stuff, or... (if that stuff's all
still there, of course)
Kip
mmmmm
Daniel Silevitch
> of the place, the way they have it packed. And do any of them have
> anything to compare with Colleen Moore's Fairy Castle,
Not familiar with it, so it may be gone
> or the U-505,
Just reopened after being moved into new (sheltered) exhibit space
> or the 1900 street,
Still there
> or the animatronic stuff,
May be gone.
The coal mine is also still around. There's a neat new exhibit (opened
last year, IIRC) which is a scaled-down version of a modern automated
production line. Lots of robots assembling a cheap toy, and if you pay a
couple of dollars you can get your name laser-etched into one of them and
keep it afterwards.
For anyone interested in model trains, they have the mother of all
layouts, illustrating the train lines from Chicago to Seattle. Most of
the landmark Chicago buildings are present; an HO-scale Sears tower is
really really big.
-dms
Joe Ellis
Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote:
A _true_ HO scale one would be even bigger... that one's compressed.
There was a two-issue spread on it in Model Railroder a while back.
--
"What it all comes to is that the whole structure of space flight as it
stands now is creaking, obsolecent, over-elaborate, decaying. The field is
static; no, worse than that, it's losing ground. By this time, our ships
ought to be sleeker and faster, and able to carry bigger payloads. We ought
to have done away with this dichotomy between ships that can land on a planet,
and ships that can fly from one planet to another." - Senator Bliss Wagoner
James Blish - _They Shall Have Stars_
Kip Williams
> On Mon, 09 May 2005 18:16:22 -0400, Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>of the place, the way they have it packed. And do any of them have
>>anything to compare with Colleen Moore's Fairy Castle,
>
> Not familiar with it, so it may be gone
Here it is: http://www.msichicago.org/exhibit/fairy_castle/history1.htm
>>or the U-505,
>
> Just reopened after being moved into new (sheltered) exhibit space
>
>>or the 1900 street,
>
> Still there
>
>>or the animatronic stuff,
>
> May be gone.
Alas. Goofy, but memorable.
> The coal mine is also still around. There's a neat new exhibit (opened
I thought of that, but since I never got to see it, I didn't mention it.
> last year, IIRC) which is a scaled-down version of a modern automated
> production line. Lots of robots assembling a cheap toy, and if you pay a
> couple of dollars you can get your name laser-etched into one of them and
> keep it afterwards.
Neato.
> For anyone interested in model trains, they have the mother of all
> layouts, illustrating the train lines from Chicago to Seattle. Most of
> the landmark Chicago buildings are present; an HO-scale Sears tower is
> really really big.
One of the neatest things they did, in my opinion, was one of the
simplest. They put a glass panel on part of the side of an escalator so
you could see the treads going back up.
Kip
used to dream of the place
Doug Wickstrom
<slrnd7vp0m....@bardeen.uchicago.edu>
Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> caused electrons to
dance and photons to travel coherently in saying:
>For anyone interested in model trains, they have the mother of all
>layouts, illustrating the train lines from Chicago to Seattle. Most of
>the landmark Chicago buildings are present; an HO-scale Sears tower is
>really really big.
And, BTW, it is a _new_ layout, in case you've seen the old one.
--
Doug Wickstrom <nims...@comcast.net>
"Quin tu istanc orationem hinc veterem atque antiquam amoves?"
--Plautus, "Miles Gloriosus"
Now filtering out all cross-posted messages and everything posted
through Google News.
Paul Dormer
wrote:
> *From:* Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net>
> *Date:* Mon, 09 May 2005 18:11:59 -0400
As my mother said to my aunt, "You wouldn't recognise our Paul. He's
grown another foot since you last saw him."
Kip Williams
> In article <PeRfe.2820$sy6.1080@lakeread04>, ki...@cox.net (Kip Williams)
> wrote:
>
>>*From:* Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net>
>>*Date:* Mon, 09 May 2005 18:11:59 -0400
>>
>>Arthur D. Hlavaty wrote:
>>
>>>When I was a kid, they repeatedly fluoroscoped my feet. I still had to
>>>get a vasectomy later.
>>
>>But you still only have two feet, so they didn't multiply. (Pretty
>>clear you didn't spend enough time sitting in front of color TVs in the
>>60s.)
>
> grown another foot since you last saw him."
Give 'em an inch...
Kip
Paul Dormer
wrote:
> *From:* Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net>
> *Date:* Tue, 10 May 2005 06:12:51 -0400
And they'll take an ell.
This must be just about the only place the measurement of an ell is still
used. Used to be 1.25 yards according to my dictionary.
Of course, nowadays we say "Give them 25.4mm and then take 1.143m."
Kip Williams
> In article <CO%fe.2846$sy6.487@lakeread04>, ki...@cox.net (Kip Williams)
> wrote:
>>*From:* Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net>
>>*Date:* Tue, 10 May 2005 06:12:51 -0400
>>Paul Dormer wrote:
>>>In article <PeRfe.2820$sy6.1080@lakeread04>, ki...@cox.net (Kip
>>>Williams) wrote:
>>>>*From:* Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net>
>>>>*Date:* Mon, 09 May 2005 18:11:59 -0400
>>>>Arthur D. Hlavaty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>When I was a kid, they repeatedly fluoroscoped my feet. I still had
>>
>>to
>>
>>>>>get a vasectomy later.
>>>>
>>>>But you still only have two feet, so they didn't multiply. (Pretty
>>>>clear you didn't spend enough time sitting in front of color TVs in
>>
>>the >>60s.)
>>
>>>As my mother said to my aunt, "You wouldn't recognise our Paul. He's
>>>grown another foot since you last saw him."
>>
>>Give 'em an inch...
>
Give 'em 'ell, 'arry! (I'll take the "A" train.)
Kip
not in Chicago
Marilee J. Layman
>The best science museum I know in Virginia would fit in one wing
>of the place, the way they have it packed.
Are you sure? The Udvar-Hazy center is pretty big!
--
Marilee J. Layman
Kip Williams
The key is "...I know of..." in there. What's the opposite of "I don't
know, I can imagine quite a lot"?
"I imagine I don't know quite a lot"?
Kip W
taking a "The" train
Keith F. Lynch
I sat in front of a black & white TV in the 1960s, and I've grown
another foot since then.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Keith F. Lynch
> James Angove <ja...@ospf.net> wrote:
>> I'll have lived in Chicago three years when Paul shows up, and I've
>> seen Grand Jatte at least four times, and still haven't made it
>> down to Science & Industry. I hear Science & Industry is nice, but
> It's not hard to get to via public transportation from downtown.
> The two easiest ways are the number 10 bus (express from the Loop
> to the museum) ...
Yes, that's how I got to that museum during my layover on the way
to ConJose. If someone who has spent a grand total of two weeks in
Chicago, 95% of which was at cons rather than exploring, can figure
out how to get to that museum...
If not for that side trip, my whole trip from Virginia to ConJose
and back would have been by rail.
Daniel Silevitch
> Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote:
[Chicago Museum of Science and Industry]
>> It's not hard to get to via public transportation from downtown.
>> The two easiest ways are the number 10 bus (express from the Loop
>> to the museum) ...
>
> Yes, that's how I got to that museum during my layover on the way
> to ConJose. If someone who has spent a grand total of two weeks in
> Chicago, 95% of which was at cons rather than exploring, can figure
> out how to get to that museum...
>
> If not for that side trip, my whole trip from Virginia to ConJose
> and back would have been by rail.
Ah, but if you'd taken the commuter rail, you could have avoided that one
blemish on an otherwise perfect record. To be fair, the Metra trains run
significantly less frequently than the buses, especially on the weekends
and outside of rush hour.
-dms
Keith F. Lynch
> James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>> The convict volunteered to have his body used in that manner, right?
Yes; or so I've read.
> He was killed by lethal injection so his organs couldn't be used in
> transplant procedures.
That doesn't follow. Lethal injection doesn't damage organs. It
causes the heart to stop beating and the lungs to stop breathing, and
the resulting ischemia is what kills the convict. Most organs can
survive several hours of ischemia.
It would be ironic if the preservation process causes this convict
to be one of the few people from the 20th century to live into the
distant future.
> There were plans to do another with a finer slice ... but I don't
> think that any suitable donors have turned up yet.
Well, I'm not volunteering.
Keith F. Lynch
> There's a company making whole-body scanners (RF based, I believe)
> that will profile your body's contours and then recommend the proper
> size and cut.
> http://www.intellifit.com/site/index.html
That website is completely broken. Maybe it works on some version of
some browser with some plugin, I don't know. But I can't get anything
useful out of it.
RF seems an odd choice, since you can't get resolution smaller than
about one wavelength. RF wavelengths vary from several centimeters
to several kilometers. "According to our machine, you wear size 30
trousers. Or perhaps 40, or 50, or 20."
Keith F. Lynch
> Until now, my best hope of saving my posterior for posterity was to
> have my articulated skeleton hang in the corner of a classroom.
Or, better yet, in a "haunted" funhouse.
Some years ago a funhouse mummy was discovered to be real.
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/gruesome/mccurdy.htm
David Dyer-Bennet
> Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote:
>> There's a company making whole-body scanners (RF based, I believe)
>> that will profile your body's contours and then recommend the proper
>> size and cut.
>
>> http://www.intellifit.com/site/index.html
>
> That website is completely broken. Maybe it works on some version of
> some browser with some plugin, I don't know. But I can't get anything
> useful out of it.
>
> RF seems an odd choice, since you can't get resolution smaller than
> about one wavelength. RF wavelengths vary from several centimeters
> to several kilometers. "According to our machine, you wear size 30
> trousers. Or perhaps 40, or 50, or 20."
I suspect they think it's important to scan you clothed rather than
naked, because of expected market resistance.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd...@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:d68cns$krb$1...@panix2.panix.com:
> John Houghton <jh1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Until now, my best hope of saving my posterior for posterity was to
>> have my articulated skeleton hang in the corner of a classroom.
>
> Or, better yet, in a "haunted" funhouse.
>
> Some years ago a funhouse mummy was discovered to be real.
> http://www.snopes.com/horrors/gruesome/mccurdy.htm
Life imitates art. Cf. the Fourth Evening in Hector Berlioz' _Evenings
with the Orchestra_ (I used the title of Jacques Barzun's translation), in
which a music-lover who used to hiss the music of Carl Maria von Weber off
the stage makes his posthumous debut onstage as a skeleton in a production
of _Der Freischütz_ by, as it happens, Carl Maria von Weber.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Doug Wickstrom
<d68733$t6k$1...@panix2.panix.com>
"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> caused electrons to dance
and photons to travel coherently in saying:
>Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Arthur D. Hlavaty wrote:
>>> When I was a kid, they repeatedly fluoroscoped my feet. I still
>>> had to get a vasectomy later.
>
>> But you still only have two feet, so they didn't multiply. (Pretty
>> clear you didn't spend enough time sitting in front of color TVs in
>> the 60s.)
>
>I sat in front of a black & white TV in the 1960s, and I've grown
>another foot since then.
Tough to find shoes, is it?
--
Doug Wickstrom <nims...@comcast.net>
If the gods had wanted Democrats to vote, they'd have provided candidates.
Doug Wickstrom
<d68caa$7i3$1...@panix2.panix.com>
"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> caused electrons to dance
and photons to travel coherently in saying:
>RF wavelengths vary from several centimeters
>to several kilometers.
Never heard of millimeter and sub-millimeter radar, huh?
I was working with a 9-millimeter-wavelength radar in the 1970s.
--
Doug Wickstrom <nims...@comcast.net>
"Believe me, you gotta get up early if you wanna get out of bed."
--Groucho Marx
David Bilek
>> There's a company making whole-body scanners (RF based, I believe)
>> that will profile your body's contours and then recommend the proper
>> size and cut.
>
>> http://www.intellifit.com/site/index.html
>
>That website is completely broken. Maybe it works on some version of
>some browser with some plugin, I don't know. But I can't get anything
>useful out of it.
If by "some" you mean "99%" then yes, it workso n some browsers.
-David
Kip Williams
> On 15 May 2005 15:14:43 -0400, in message
> <d68733$t6k$1...@panix2.panix.com>
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> caused electrons to dance
> and photons to travel coherently in saying:
>>Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>Arthur D. Hlavaty wrote:
>>>
>>>>When I was a kid, they repeatedly fluoroscoped my feet. I still
>>>>had to get a vasectomy later.
>>
>>>But you still only have two feet, so they didn't multiply. (Pretty
>>>clear you didn't spend enough time sitting in front of color TVs in
>>>the 60s.)
>>
>>I sat in front of a black & white TV in the 1960s, and I've grown
>>another foot since then.
>
> Tough to find shoes, is it?
The left and right ones are easy enough.
Kip W
shoe nuff
David Dyer-Bennet
It appears to be Macromedia Flash; it's looking for the Flash v6
plugin.
I had Flash working in Opera, and it works in Firefox without my
having had to do much of anything. I imagine it works in IE as well.
Interestingly, that set of browsers doesn't come up to 99% of page
hits on my own server yet (Mozilla 20.69%, IE 55.78%, Opera .20%), and
there's nothing else in double digits (Konqueror is 0.07%, Grub Client
is .84%, Googlebot is 4.12%). There are a *lot* of small clients out
there!
Morris M. Keesan
wrote:
You have polls showing that 99% of browsers have Shockwave Flash
enabled?
--
Morris M. Keesan -- kee...@alum.bu.edu
Keith F. Lynch
> Never heard of millimeter and sub-millimeter radar, huh?
The border between RF and microwave was originally one meter. It's
changed some since then, but if millimeter waves aren't microwaves,
then what are?
> I was working with a 9-millimeter-wavelength radar in the 1970s.
An error of nine millimeters in someone's radius implies an error of
57 millimeters -- over two inches -- in their circumference. This
may be acceptable, but it's hardly better than what's done today.
Keith F. Lynch
> I don't like to think about the inside parts of people being made
> visible. All the more so as I'm facing surgery on my right hand
> sometime soon, to correct a problem with a tendon that's been
> bothering me since 1976.
If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
Best of luck with the surgery. And with paying for it.
Matthew B. Tepper
> Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>> I don't like to think about the inside parts of people being made
>> visible. All the more so as I'm facing surgery on my right hand
>> sometime soon, to correct a problem with a tendon that's been
>> bothering me since 1976.
>
> If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
I'd want to be knocked out completely, but it'll be under local. When I
had foot surgery a couple of years ago, it was draped and I was doped
somewhat (but still kind of conscious).
> Best of luck with the surgery. And with paying for it.
The insurance company is supposed to do that, but I have my doubts.
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>> I don't like to think about the inside parts of people being made
>> visible. All the more so as I'm facing surgery on my right hand
>> sometime soon, to correct a problem with a tendon that's been
>> bothering me since 1976.
>
>If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
>
Yes, me too. I was able to watch two of my ankle surgeries, but for
everything else they insist on putting up the screen.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Keith F. Lynch
Insist? You're the client; what you say goes.
David Dyer-Bennet
> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
>
>> Yes, me too. I was able to watch two of my ankle surgeries, but
>> for everything else they insist on putting up the screen.
>
> Insist? You're the client; what you say goes.
You're right, I'm sure the screen is strictly voluntary. Of course,
if you don't elect to voluntarily have the screen, the doctors won't
operate. But this, of course, does not constitute any form of
coercion, oh goodness me no!
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:m2ekc55...@gw.dd-b.net:
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>
>> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>> If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
>>
>>> Yes, me too. I was able to watch two of my ankle surgeries, but
>>> for everything else they insist on putting up the screen.
>>
>> Insist? You're the client; what you say goes.
>
> You're right, I'm sure the screen is strictly voluntary. Of course,
> if you don't elect to voluntarily have the screen, the doctors won't
> operate. But this, of course, does not constitute any form of
> coercion, oh goodness me no!
My own sensitivities (buk-buk-buk b'GACKKKK!) require that I get the
screen. I make a point of looking away even when I have blood taken, or
receive an injection.
I am pleasantly surprised to learn that my HMO has approved the surgery.
I'm going to double-check to make sure that they've also agreed to pay for
the anesthesiologist; I've gotten screwed on just such a thing before this.
Kip Williams
> My own sensitivities (buk-buk-buk b'GACKKKK!) require that I get the
> screen. I make a point of looking away even when I have blood taken, or
> receive an injection.
>
> I am pleasantly surprised to learn that my HMO has approved the surgery.
> I'm going to double-check to make sure that they've also agreed to pay for
> the anesthesiologist; I've gotten screwed on just such a thing before this.
I have found that dental work is much more bearable when I can watch.
Sometimes they let me hold a mirror. One time they went away for a while
in the middle of root canal, and I managed a self-portrait with all the
appliances in and a sort of apprehensive expression that breaks me up
now when I look at it.
Kip W
a dentist's dream
Keith F. Lynch
> receive an injection.
At the Red Cross, they arrange things so that you *can't* see the
needle, unless you raise your head. And if you do, that bothers some
of the phlebotomists.
David Dyer-Bennet
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:m2ekc55...@gw.dd-b.net:
>
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>
>>> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>>> If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
>>>
>>>> Yes, me too. I was able to watch two of my ankle surgeries, but
>>>> for everything else they insist on putting up the screen.
>>>
>>> Insist? You're the client; what you say goes.
>>
>> You're right, I'm sure the screen is strictly voluntary. Of course,
>> if you don't elect to voluntarily have the screen, the doctors won't
>> operate. But this, of course, does not constitute any form of
>> coercion, oh goodness me no!
>
> My own sensitivities (buk-buk-buk b'GACKKKK!) require that I get the
> screen. I make a point of looking away even when I have blood taken, or
> receive an injection.
*I* favor it being *really* at the choice of the patient, and do not
think less of you for saying you'd want it.
> I am pleasantly surprised to learn that my HMO has approved the surgery.
> I'm going to double-check to make sure that they've also agreed to pay for
> the anesthesiologist; I've gotten screwed on just such a thing before this.
I believe the anesthesiologist is pretty important for something like
this, yes.
David Dyer-Bennet
> Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>> I make a point of looking away even when I have blood taken, or
>> receive an injection.
>
> At the Red Cross, they arrange things so that you *can't* see the
> needle, unless you raise your head. And if you do, that bothers some
> of the phlebotomists.
I've always watched. It bothers me more not to watch, I have
discovered. I haven't happened to run into one who seemed bothered,
but I believe I'm barely over 4 gallons i.e. nowhere near the high
end of experience with them. Maybe I do have to raise my head, but I
don't think so. My next donation will be the other local outfit not
the Red Cross, so even less reason to expect here to be the same as
there.
Matthew B. Tepper
> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> appears to have caused the following
>> letters to be typed in news:m2ekc55...@gw.dd-b.net:
>>
>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>>>> If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, me too. I was able to watch two of my ankle surgeries, but
>>>>> for everything else they insist on putting up the screen.
>>>>
>>>> Insist? You're the client; what you say goes.
>>>
>>> You're right, I'm sure the screen is strictly voluntary. Of course,
>>> if you don't elect to voluntarily have the screen, the doctors won't
>>> operate. But this, of course, does not constitute any form of
>>> coercion, oh goodness me no!
>>
>> My own sensitivities (buk-buk-buk b'GACKKKK!) require that I get the
>> screen. I make a point of looking away even when I have blood taken,
>> or receive an injection.
>
> *I* favor it being *really* at the choice of the patient, and do not
> think less of you for saying you'd want it.
I'm not surprised. I am, however, astonished at the contributors to this
thread who say they'd happily watch themselves get cut up. Yikes.
>> I am pleasantly surprised to learn that my HMO has approved the surgery.
>> I'm going to double-check to make sure that they've also agreed to pay
>> for the anesthesiologist; I've gotten screwed on just such a thing
>> before this.
>
> I believe the anesthesiologist is pretty important for something like
> this, yes.
Well, I wasn't screwed *out* of having an anesthesiologist (when I had my
foot surgery in 2002), but my insurance cleverly managed not to pay for it.
Kate Schaefer
news:l4yie.10640$jj.1639@lakeread06...
Oh, wow. Is that by any chance among the archived works online?
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> If I were facing such surgery, I'd want to watch.
>
>> Yes, me too. I was able to watch two of my ankle surgeries, but
>> for everything else they insist on putting up the screen.
>
>Insist? You're the client; what you say goes.
No, that's not how it works. They don't want most people to see
what's going on, and those two times I talked them into letting me
have my glasses and I could see in the slanted mirror above my leg.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Kip Williams
> "Kip Williams" <ki...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:l4yie.10640$jj.1639@lakeread06...
>>
>>Sometimes they let me hold a mirror. One time they went away for a while
>>in the middle of root canal, and I managed a self-portrait with all the
>>appliances in and a sort of apprehensive expression that breaks me up now
>>when I look at it.
>
> Oh, wow. Is that by any chance among the archived works online?
Well, not -yet-. I'd have to find it first. But as you know, I do my
best to fill your requests.
I did get a new picture posted on Sarah's page not too long ago. It's
from this month, I think. If you haven't visited in a while, go see the
photos she took.
Kip W
proud, and just a little bit umble
Kate Schaefer
> Kate Schaefer wrote:
>> "Kip Williams" <ki...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:l4yie.10640$jj.1639@lakeread06...
>>>
>>>I have found that dental work is much more bearable when I can watch.
>>>Sometimes they let me hold a mirror. One time they went away for a while
>>>in the middle of root canal, and I managed a self-portrait with all the
>>>appliances in and a sort of apprehensive expression that breaks me up now
>>>when I look at it.
>>
>> Oh, wow. Is that by any chance among the archived works online?
>
> Well, not -yet-. I'd have to find it first. But as you know, I do my best
> to fill your requests.
Your best is fine. Thanks.
> I did get a new picture posted on Sarah's page not too long ago. It's from
> this month, I think. If you haven't visited in a while, go see the photos
> she took.
Her pictures are pretty good, particularly the one of Cathy peering in at
the camera. The picture of Sarah leaping off the red stepstool is charming
and terrifying.
Kip Williams
>>I did get a new picture posted on Sarah's page not too long ago. It's from
>>this month, I think. If you haven't visited in a while, go see the photos
>>she took.
>
> Her pictures are pretty good, particularly the one of Cathy peering in at
> the camera. The picture of Sarah leaping off the red stepstool is charming
> and terrifying.
The one of Cathy is one of the best pictures of her that I've seen. I
think the expression she has shows her love for Sarah quite clearly.
I actually bought the red stool for her to jump off of. She was jumping
off a rickety old wooden stool (equally tall) before that, and I didn't
think that was good. When I took the picture, she was showing her friend
Madison how to leap off the stool. Her first play date! Then she took a
picture or two, and so did Madison.
I sent that picture to relatives and friends, identifying it as a Jack
Kirby pose to those who knew about Marvel Comics and such. One of them
replied that I should remove her from the setting and put her in front
of a Kirby background and make that our Christmas card. It could happen.
Kip "King" Williams
Keith F. Lynch
> they'd happily watch themselves get cut up. Yikes.
I'd rather not get cut up. But if it's going to happen, what's so
strange about wanting to watch?
> Well, I wasn't screwed *out* of having an anesthesiologist (when I
> had my foot surgery in 2002), but my insurance cleverly managed not
> to pay for it.
Was it a case of them being willing to pay for a local anesthetic,
but you opted for general?
Steve Coltrin
> Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> He was killed by lethal injection so his organs couldn't be used in
>> transplant procedures.
>
> That doesn't follow. Lethal injection doesn't damage organs.
Lethal injection involves a hypertonic KCl solution, which fucks up
every osmotic balance it comes across.
--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org Bill Hicks died for your sins
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
Steve Coltrin
[re the Amazing 3-D Man]
> It would be ironic if the preservation process causes this convict
> to be one of the few people from the 20th century to live into the
> distant future.
Not a chance; the resolution is several orders of magnitude coarser
than neural structures, and the actual meat was ground to slurry and
sprayed against the walls layer at a time.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:d6gsg6$8ck$1...@panix2.panix.com:
> Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>> I am, however, astonished at the contributors to this thread who say
>> they'd happily watch themselves get cut up. Yikes.
>
> I'd rather not get cut up. But if it's going to happen, what's so
> strange about wanting to watch?
Not strange for you. You do what you like. I want my insides to stay on
the inside, and if they should come out, I want somebody to work very, very
hard to put them back in (as necessary, of course).
>> Well, I wasn't screwed *out* of having an anesthesiologist (when I
>> had my foot surgery in 2002), but my insurance cleverly managed not
>> to pay for it.
>
> Was it a case of them being willing to pay for a local anesthetic,
> but you opted for general?
As I have sleep apnea, a general is contraindicated for such a minor
procedure. I had a local but was sedated, and somehow or other they didn't
want to pay for that.