Thirst Snake lyrics

Tiamat released their latest album called "Amanethes" earlier this year (in April), but I still am not able to find lyrics to the bonus track, "Thirst Snake", on the internet.

If you want lyrics to any other song except "Thirst Snake", use Google or just go here.

Perhaps I did not search thoroughly enough, though I believe I did. Anyway, I tried to listen to the song and write down what I understand the words said are. After about six or seven consecutive auditions, I seem to have reached the end of my words-distinguishing abilities.

The lyrics for "Thirst Snake" are (as heard by me):

"Your hands are my cradle, your hair is the heavenly abode
My longing for touching your skin,
There's a heavy load.
I wanna bathe you, my love, in broad heavens of divine light
A precious angel you are of the bodies of celestial might
Your eyes lighting up the skies like the chariots of fire
Let me take you there, tonight,
Take you higher and higher...

Without you it's all denied
Your poison burns like fire
My eyes are closed
And all I see is you
Is you...

Until the daylight spreads its hope
And does once again revive
(And may) the clouds of the night
Let me stay in your path for a while.

Without you it's all denied
Your poison burns like fire
My eyes are closed
And all I see is you
Is you...

I want you, [x2]
I don't wanna let you go away.
{Repeat x 2}

Oh,
I want you, [x2]
I don't wanna let you go away

From me...
Never gonna let you go..."

I must say, the line in which he says "(And may) the clouds of the night" makes me mad, I think I've listened to it about 15 times now and I still can't make out what's between the parentheses (It's at 3:17 - give it a go for yourself). I keep hearing something like "Nemey" or "Eney" ...

If you notice any mistakes, or want to add something, feel free to do so either by email or by comment.

Chatting with God

I've found a digital way to talk to God.

Yes, there are a few drawbacks, as you'll find out from the txt file, but, all in all, it's a rewarding experience.

Talking to god.txt

You can also talk to "God", here!

The Monty Hall problem

Why? Because an unintuitive answer always gives birth to controversy, and controversy leads to the use of reason. Simply put, because our brains need the exercise.

So, we have this probability-related problem loosely based on a TV-show (Let's make a deal -
the problem's name comes from that of the host - the dude from image2) that sounds like this:

"A thoroughly honest game-show host has placed a car behind one of three doors. There is a goat behind each of the other doors. You have no prior knowledge that allows you to distinguish among the doors. "First you point toward a door," he says. "Then I'll open one of the other doors to reveal a goat. After I've shown you the goat, you make your final choice whether to stick with your initial choice of doors, or to switch to the remaining door. You win whatever is behind the door." You begin by pointing to door number 1. The host shows you that door number 3 has a goat." The question is: do your chances to win the car change if you switch?

In one word, yes.

Although apparently absurd, your chances to win the car the moment you are left with two rooms and the option to change by choosing either door are not 50%.

Let me explain: the two options you have as a strategy are 1. do not switch and 2. switch. Being two complementary choices (there is no other one available: you either switch to the other room or stick with your original one), the sum of the possibilities of them gaining you the car is 100%. You are obviously going to think that their respective chances are equal, 50% and 50%. "After all, you only have two choices."

Well, no, not really.

Let's try and see what our chances to win are if we choose to stick with our choice.

The car lies behind one and only one of three identical doors. If we want to stick with our choice, then in order to win the car we must correctly guess the right door from the start. That means we have 1/3, or 33%, chance to win the car. Thus there is a 66% chance of winning by switching.

Think of it this way: you've got three doors. The possibility of guessing the right one is 1/3, while the other two doors have 2/3, together. Since the host eliminates one of the other doors, the 2/3 chances are redistributed to the remaining one, because this basically means: "you either choose one door, and have a 33% chance of winning, or choose the other two, and have 66%"(because, of the two left, he tells you which one COULD have the car by eliminating the other).

There is another, more clear way of proving that, if you switch, you have a 66% chance of winning. The probability of an event is equal to the ratio between the number of cases in which the event does occur and the total number of events. There are three cases, as shown in the following image (again, Wikipedia ftw!) - click for bigger picture - :


There are 3 cases that prove that switching results in a 66% win, while sticking with the original choice only gets us the car on 33% of the time.

P.S. A simple way to test the result is experimentally, with three playing cards. Just take three playing cards, one of which is an ace, for example, shuffle them, and take a pick. If you correctly guess the ace, then sticking with your choice would win you the car, so there's one "point" for it. If you do not, then switching to the other card would win, thus one "point" for switching. You'll definitely notice the difference and if you calculate the chances, they should come close to 66%. The more tries, the more accurate the chances.

P.S.2. I've tried the experimental way. After thirty cases, I had 18 for switching and 12 for "sticking". That is a 60%-40% ratio. After sixty cases and two hours of school, the chances got 63,33%-36,66%. Perhaps if I would continue, they would get closer to 66%-33%. Anyway, this confirmed the theory.

- article used: The Monty Hall problem -

Wishy-washer

Having trouble with your monitor being dirty?

Windows looking bad because you haven't cleaned the screen in a long time? (yeah, right!)

Don't worry, the cleaner-dog is here! He'll clean your screen, on the inside, for free! Just go here and let him work his magic!

Guaranteed perfectly clean screen after only minutes of lick..I mean cleaning!

Enjoy the free cleaner-dog brought to you by M0ony in association with Linein.org!

"We are all phantoms."

"And you thought there was a lot of empty space in the solar system.
Well, there's even more nothing inside an atom.
A hydrogen atom is only about a ten millionth of a millimeter in diameter, but the proton in the middle is a hundred thousand times smaller, and the electron whizzing around the outside is a thousand times smaller than THAT. The rest of the atom is empty.
I tried to picture it, and I couldn't. So I put together this page - and I still can't picture it."

This is a site that shows you the contents of an atom in the form of a proton and an electron.
It is made especially to show the distance between the proton and the electron.

He takes the size of an electron as one pixel and builds the proton (and the distance between the two) at the correct ratio (1000x1000 pixels). The distance between the two components adds up to about eleven miles, "making this possibly the biggest page you've ever seen (I personally have seen one that was set up to be even bigger, though its exact size did not seem to represent anything specific).".

"I recommend trying to scroll from here to the right a screen at a time, just to see how long it takes the little thumb in the scrollbar to move visibly. True masochists can try to scroll through the whole eleven miles - but the scenery along the way is pretty bleak." - try it, it goes to show that very much space is, well, wasted.

"I used to think that things like rocks and buildings and my own skeleton were fairly solid. But they're made up of atoms, and atoms, as you can see here, contain so little actual material that they can barely be said to exist.

We are all phantoms."

Trash as art

As the saying goes: "One man's trash, another man's treasure"...

Never thought I would take that literally, though:


- source: Slightlywarped -

Law breaking liquid defies the rules

A team of physicists from France have discovered a simple organic substance, made out of two compounds, that turns solid when heated and back to liquid upon cooling. (figure 1)

Usually, a solid substance would melt, thus becoming liquid, when confronted with heat, or turn to gas, if it was in a liquid state. Some exceptions have been studied, especially when the heating process would cause something like polymerisation. But no case had ever been discovered of a reversible transition involving liquid turning to solid when heated.

The team of Grenoble-based scientists have attributed this peculiar transformation to the hydrogen bonds.

Read more about it in the original article here.

Wow, how about this for an original finding? Very interesting...

- source: PhysicsWorld -

She reads, we see

A very interesting experiment was conducted (quite a while ago), that recorded, digitalized and then printed out the eyes' movements while reading a paper.

Here are the pictures that I've managed to gather on the experiment:



- source: DoctorHugo -

Cola victim

A sad day for all Coca-cola fans...

A day of mourning for a lost friend in the battle with Pepsi:


Rest in peace, friend :-(...we will always remember what a good drink you were... why did it have to be you? Why now? ... :-(

Spiderkids

Imagine walking through your hallway and, all of a sudden, you see this in a corner:


WTF, ZOMG!

'Time to bring in the flamethrower, guys!'

- source: EatLiver.com -

Half-money and half-reality

Interesting...

- source: musely -

Origami Wars

Some very nice pieces of Star Wars origami work (click for bigger image):

- source: PhilipWest -

Exoskeleton!

Utah-based robotics company Sarcos has been acquired by "the giant defense contractor", Raytheon.

What is this any of our business? Because the reason why it's being taken over isn't the wonderful panorama it offers over Utah, but its six-years-worth of work: an exoskeleton meant to greatly increase the strength of the user. Here's a video that demonstrates the capabilities of a prototype of the exoskeleton:



Wow, imagine the possibilities! What would exo-football be like? :-X

Human Tetris

Some Japanese dudes bring you:

Human tetris

And another one:



Mwhuhahahahahaha, you just gotta love Japan.

(For more funny stuff, see all posts labeled "Funny")

Formal apology

Here's something the God of bureaucracy should be proud of: a form for apologizing to someone.

Pretty useful if you've done something you're not proud of recently (especially because Christmas is approaching and all of us should try and make amends for the mistakes we've done - if any :-)) ) , or simply if you want to make someone smile.

On your right, you've got a preview of what the uncompleted form looks like (click for bigger picture), waiting for you to personalize it, sign in your name and send it to someone to whom you've made something you consider to be unkind, selfish, or otherwise not cool :-).

Click HERE for the apology form!

I think I should send one to Santa and apologize for ever doubting the fact that he exists...

Legotastic!

If you've ever been interested in or otherwise involved with Lego, then this will perhaps come as an interesting fact: some people are using Lego in other ways than by childishly trying to assemble them into a recognizable form (ok, they do this too, but not just this :-) ).

Here's an example: someone that uses Lego to make robots. Have a look HERE! - the "SeriousLego" site

There's a robot that solves Rubik's Cube, a robotic dog that fetches a ball and much more. Pretty amazing!

We Meat again

If you've enjoyed the previous post, then here is a video adaptation I've found on Youtube for the story written by Terry Bisson:



Pretty nice adaptation...

"They're made out of meat"

Here's a very interesting story that was nominated for the Nebula awards in 1992, that I think is rather imaginative:

THEY'RE MADE OUT OF MEAT

by Terry Bisson

"They're made out of meat."

"Meat?"

"Meat. They're made out of meat."

"Meat?"

"There's no doubt about it. We picked up several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, and probed them all the way through. They're completely meat."

"That's impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars?"

"They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don't come from them. The signals come from machines."

"So who made the machines? That's who we want to contact."

"They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made the machines."

"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to believe in sentient meat."

"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they're made out of meat."

"Maybe they're like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage."

"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn't take long. Do you have any idea what's the life span of meat?"

"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside."

"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through."

"No brain?"

"Oh, there's a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of meat! That's what I've been trying to tell you."

"So ... what does the thinking?"

"You're not understanding, are you? You're refusing to deal with what I'm telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat."

"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!"

"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?"

"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat."

"Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they've been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years."

"Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?"

"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual."

"We're supposed to talk to meat."

"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello. Anyone out there. Anybody home.' That sort of thing."

"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?"
"Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat."

"I thought you just told me they used radio."

"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat."

"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?"

"Officially or unofficially?"

"Both."

"Officially, we are required to contact, welcome and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the Universe, without prejudice, fear or favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing."

"I was hoping you would say that."

"It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact with meat?"

"I agree one hundred percent. What's there to say? 'Hello, meat. How's it going?' But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?"

"Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can't live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact."

"So we just pretend there's no one home in the Universe."

"That's it."

"Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you probed? You're sure they won't remember?"

"They'll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and smoothed out their meat so that we're just a dream to them."

"A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat's dream."

"And we marked the entire sector unoccupied."

"Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others? Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?"

"Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence in a class nine star in G445 zone. Was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants to be friendly again."

"They always come around."

"And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the Universe would be if one were all alone ..."

the end


Makes you wonder, doesn't it? :-))

How many five-year-olds can you take on?

Here's a site that offers to tell you how many five-year-olds you could take on under certain fixed conditions.

After taking the quiz, half-dumbfounded and half-amused, I found out I could take on 23 five-year-olds.

23

Ok, so now am I supposed to be proud? Should I start fighting with my friends over who can take on more robotically-fearless five-year-olds on a deserted basketball court?
me - "Hey, I bet I can take on more five-year-olds than you!"
a dude - "wtf?"
me - "you know it's true. i am t3h five-year-olds' pwnz0rx!!11"
a dude - *gets frightened* "ok, I'm leaving now..."
me - *laughs maniacally* "mwhuhuhahahahaha!"
That would definitely go well...

Or am I supposed to go out and test their algorithm, finding a basketball field and a lot of fearless children that will fight me until they go unconscious?

The site is both realistic and practical at the same time...the strangeness of some things never ceases to amaze me (and amuse me at the same time)...