h a l f b a k e r yGo ahead. Stick a fork in it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Rats like being in the walls of houses and they radiate heat. Rats
appear to ‘flow’ much like fluids. They would flow round and round
in a minimalist wire frame corridor-like cage. For extra heat make
them go faster by putting a weasel in the conduit. Or maybe just a
white hot metal ball from
the neighbours heating system..yes that
should keep them on their toes
Your bed is also a wire frame mesh like the foil of an electric razor,
and it’s jam-packed with rats connected to the main supply. They
warm it but also nibble your legs clean of hairs overnight. Don’t turn
over on your front though.
Feed with scraps. The little poops falls in a tray underneath.
Moderately noisy. Somewhere between chains and lapping mercury.
HP lovecraft
https://en.wikipedi...e_Rats_in_the_Walls
[not_morrison_rm, Jan 30 2018]
[link]
|
| |
We presume that you are aware of the fact that rats and mice urinate continuously ... ? |
|
| |
well I never said it was a nice house.. anyhow how nice do
grinding metal balls smell..? |
|
| |
Anyway, I’m rethinking this a piped rat suit, their fur would
be good insulation and it would be acceptable to the anti-
fur people ‘cos still alive |
|
| |
Put the rat suit up. I'll bun it. |
|
| |
Long as it doesn't hurt the little bastards. |
|
| |
Can I recommend moles instead? They have a natural affinity with long, twisting passages. They're also a lot more solidly built than a rat - a mole is basically a cylindrical brick covered in fur - which means they'll have a higher heat capacity. |
|
| |
A quick calculation suggests that a cylindrical pipe can be filled to about 85% volume with moles (79% if you allow for lung volume), but only 76% (or 70% allowing for lung volume) with rats. |
|
| |
Besides thermal mass, you also have to worry about heat transfer. In that respect, moles and rats are very roughly the same. If you want rapid heating (as opposed to gradual warming), you might want to consider naked mole rats. Not only are they naked (facilitating heat transfer), but they combine the words "mole" and "rat", which ought to keep everyone happy. |
|
| |
thankyou kindly [doc ]- but my audacity is all spent |
|
| |
[MB] moles are lovely, but what are their flow
characteristics.. . eg laminar flow etc. . ? I’ve never seen
them swarm, which is not to say they don’t. As for naked
mole rats - I think there’s a good reason they stay out of
sight.. |
|
| |
// I’ve never seen them swarm, // |
|
| |
Oh, but they do. Underground. Specifically, under [MB]'s croquet lawn. |
|
| |
// I’ve never seen them swarm,// They would definitely
swarm if crammed end-to-end in a suitable duct. As [8th]
alluded to, I have many moles available for
experimentation. |
|
| |
For heating larger spaces, may I suggest Shitzus? |
|
| |
That depends on the species, gender, and age of the mole. |
|
| |
However, should you wish to investigate, [MB] has a special
apparatus which causes an average mole to occupy 22.4 litres at
STP, in the form of a vapour of course. |
|
| |
Since the device is subject to a patent application, and a number
of lawsuits from animal welfare organizations, all we can tell you
is that both microwaves, compressed air, and a vacuum chamber
are involved. |
|
| |
The idea is to provide subtle warmth, not induce immediate
heatstroke. |
|
| |
Aren't insects, for their size, the strongest ? They'd probably produce the most heat per unit of mass. |
|
| |
M'Lud Buchanan or [bs] will know, but IWRC insects are poikilothermic, so no. The only heat they generate is opportunistic, as a secondary effect of muscle activity. |
|
| |
They probably don't indulge in mitochondrial thermogenesis either. |
|
| |
[8th], we're old friends - there's no need for "m'lud". A
simple "your lordship" will be fine in private. |
|
| |
As to poikilothermism - most human body heat is also
produced by muscle (I think). It's just that we adjust our
rate of heat loss (and shiver, if necessary) to control our
temperature. |
|
| |
Insects might be quite good at this. |
|
| |
You're deducing that from secondary sources - you're from newham, and the nearest you've ever been to seeing the sun is a particular form of low-grade lavatory paper retailed by newsagents. |
|
| |
Newham is renowned as The Place Where The Sun Doth Not Shine ... |
|
| |
Umm, equip one of the rats with one of them Viking sun-stones? |
|
| |
//M'Lud Buchanan or [bs] will know, but IWRC insects are
poikilothermic, so no.// |
|
| |
As far as I can tell, the whole poikiothermism thing is one
of those ESTABLISHED FACTS. Which is science speak for
"we haven't checked carefully, recently or at all in most
cases". To me that's nature waving a great big neon sign
reading "you did a few reasonable experiments in the
50's, generalized a bit, hand-waved wrote the textbook,
got funded for something else and died leaving behind an
absurdly simplified model". Nature has brevity issues. |
|
| |
That everything with mitochondria expresses multiple
uncoupling proteins, plants, fish insects, the lot, suggests
there are several roles for uncoupling and that
thermogenesis is a common trick.* Expect discoveries of
various poikiotherms showing local heating around this or
that tissue when they actually check. Insects scuttling
around at 4c is deeply suspicious, as are most fish. |
|
| |
//As to poikilothermism - most human body heat is also
produced by muscle (I think). It's just that we adjust our
rate of heat loss (and shiver, if necessary) to control our
temperature.// |
|
| |
Muscles are adapted NOT to make heat. They have a 20-
30 fold range from rest to max work rate, if they got it
wrong they'd cook, they have very tightly controlled ion
leak rates, which is why you have to cheat them into
thinking they're doing real work by shivering. The brain is
a big generator, but can't be considered alone, it's in a
couple of nested metabolic cycles: ((neurons<>glia)
<>liver). The boss of resting heat generation is the liver.
Even in exercise, all the anaerobic glucose metabolism in
muscle has to be dealt with oxidatively (i.e. with heat) in
the liver (and kidneys, a bit). |
|
| |
*The tricks will probably turn out to be 1. low level
proton uncoupling for futile cycling and heat generation
2. low level proton uncoupling to change the pH to
membrane potential gradient for the purposes of
solubilizing matrix calcium phosphate and accelerating
the Kreb's cycle. 3. Linked proton/K+ uncoupling with a
substrate burning brake system to mothball mitochondria
in energy surplus periods 4. Everything uncoupling for
death. |
|
| |
We wish to express our sincere appreciation for your detailed, erudite and comprehensive - yet oddly uninformative - answer. |
|
| |
Out of interest, how many years* of lavish research funding would you need to whittle it down to a choice of "Yes" or "No" ? After all, there might be a Nobel Prize lurking in there somewhere. |
|
| |
// Insects scuttling around at 4c is deeply suspicious, as are most fish. // |
|
| |
Fish scuttling round are suspicious at any temperature. |
|
| |
Your poikiotherm [sic] has dropped a lambda, and a stray
apostrophe has got lodged in poor Krebs. |
|
| |
//detailed, erudite and comprehensive - yet oddly
uninformative - answer.// |
|
| |
I see that I'm approaching the academic ideal. If we're
quick, we can get another round of G&T in while they finish
filling that table with wine. I've got some seriously
comprehensive arguments as to why we now know an awful
lot less than we thought about membranes. Should take us
through to dinner where I thought we could undermine a
couple of people's whole PhD projects. |
|
| |
//Muscles are adapted NOT to make heat...[t]he boss of resting heat generation is the liver. // Ah, but perhaps you're unaware of my most recent groundbreaking discovery: the liver is actually an enormous non-contractile muscle. |
|
| |