We all know the wiliness of squirrels and how they use bird feeders as their dinner table and food. But a metal feeder, rectangular, built to look similar to a house with a removable roof, that has an overhang, seemed squirrel-proof. It had a ledge along the front of the feeder holes, which would make the rear part come up, when any weight was put on it, and cover the feeder holes. - It did not take long and the squirrels figured out that the bird feeder was just in arms' length hanging on a flower pot hook, which extended out from the deck railing about 1 plus foot. To reach the feeder holes, the squirrel had learned, not to put any weight onto the ledge of the feeder front, but to curl its tail over the railing of the deck, and stretch itself out to full length, and thus was able to simple reach the openings with its feet and take out the seeds, then sit back onto the railing and happily nibble on them.
So, I tried to lower the feeder, hoping it would not be able to reach out and down far enough from the railing. But within a few tries, it decided to use the upright struts of the railing, curl its tail around them and thereby reach the lower-hanging feeder again. It had turned sideways, being on an additional flower hook, which I had hung onto the metal extended solid hook. But the squirrel learned to simply takes its paws and swing the bird feeder toward it to reach the feeder holes.
Finally I thought of turning the feeder around, put it back onto the original hook, but with its solid back facing the railing and deck. This deprived me of being able to see the birds feed, and deprived the squirrel of the bird food altogether.
And even though there is a pine tree in front of the feeder, about two arm-lengths away, it will not help the squirrel, because it would have to jump onto the ledge, and the feeder holes because of the weight, would be closed.
Of course, it took the birds a few minutes to learn that the food was still there, but they too could no longer hop from the railing onto the feeder ledge ( it will not close with the light weight of the birds). But now they simply fly to the food from the opposite sides bushes and trees, and take their food to those perches, actually keeping my deck cleaner.
This is the second time the squirrels were outsmarted. The other one was done simply (with the knowledge and help of a neighbor) by putting up a plastic 2 1/2 " tube as a post, with a cross arm on which hooks were fastened to hang regular feeders, not squirrel proof ones. After all, the squirrels cannot climb the slick plastic tube/pole, it is slick and too wide to wrap its legs around it, and it stand far enough away from any trees or structure that the squirrel could use as a launch platform.
Of course, we do have food for the poor, deprived squirrels. We bought a squirrel feeder for the corn. So they don't have to go without totally.
One thing I know, I wish I were as flexible as a squirrel.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Surprise
The things you learn in small town, 6- page newspapers. I never gave the birth of the number 0 any thoughts. Now I learned, it was born in India, invented actually by a mathematician as early as the 5th century. They used it in calculations, astronomy and astrology. Zero was spread by Arabians to Europe and from there on it spread all over.
Before this, Europeans used roman numerals, which were difficult to calculate on as they were in form of symbols, lengthy and had limits.
From this information I decided I wanted to see a little more about the earlier systems, especially the roman numerals, which to my knowledge would not go beyond a symbol for 1000 - the 'M". Of course, they may not have had millionaires, billionaires, etc. so may not have needed them - lol. But my check on the vast internet showed some more interesting facts. For example the number 1732 would be denoted MDCCXXXII in Roman numerals. But the Romans numerals are not purely additive number systems. So instead of using 4 symbols for IIII, 40 - XXXX, etc. such numbers are instead denoted by preceding symbols for 5, 50, etc. and placing a symbols in front to denote a deduction. 4=IV, 40=XL.
This practice of placing smaller symbols before larger ones for subtraction was hardly ever followed by the Romans and came into popularity in Europe after the invention of the printing press.
But, the Romans did deal in huge numbers after all, so they must have had millionaires, etc. - by placing a partial frame around numbers, like a picture frame, with bottom side open. This would make a I into 100,000, a II into 200,000, a X into 1,000,000 (ten hundred thousands), a C into a 10,000,000, etc.
But for the number one thousand, the Romans would not use the M, but instead wrote (I), for two thousand (I)(I), etc. And occasionally the wrote IM, IIM, etc.. Then in the middle ages the use of M became quite common. And the Romans sometimes used multiple parentheses to denote nested multiplications by 10 such as (I) for 1,000; ((I)) for 10,000, (((I))) for 100,000 etc.. They also had some other ways of symbol usages, all of which makes us think it was terribly cumbersome. No wonder someone finally came up with the Arabic number system, avoiding the use of a full page just for a multiplication. All this and more on numbers on the Internet. A worthwhile and interesting use of the net. And it makes one realize how advanced though the ancient world was.And how important our zero is, even if we don't like it, when it refers to our bank account balances.
Before this, Europeans used roman numerals, which were difficult to calculate on as they were in form of symbols, lengthy and had limits.
From this information I decided I wanted to see a little more about the earlier systems, especially the roman numerals, which to my knowledge would not go beyond a symbol for 1000 - the 'M". Of course, they may not have had millionaires, billionaires, etc. so may not have needed them - lol. But my check on the vast internet showed some more interesting facts. For example the number 1732 would be denoted MDCCXXXII in Roman numerals. But the Romans numerals are not purely additive number systems. So instead of using 4 symbols for IIII, 40 - XXXX, etc. such numbers are instead denoted by preceding symbols for 5, 50, etc. and placing a symbols in front to denote a deduction. 4=IV, 40=XL.
This practice of placing smaller symbols before larger ones for subtraction was hardly ever followed by the Romans and came into popularity in Europe after the invention of the printing press.
But, the Romans did deal in huge numbers after all, so they must have had millionaires, etc. - by placing a partial frame around numbers, like a picture frame, with bottom side open. This would make a I into 100,000, a II into 200,000, a X into 1,000,000 (ten hundred thousands), a C into a 10,000,000, etc.
But for the number one thousand, the Romans would not use the M, but instead wrote (I), for two thousand (I)(I), etc. And occasionally the wrote IM, IIM, etc.. Then in the middle ages the use of M became quite common. And the Romans sometimes used multiple parentheses to denote nested multiplications by 10 such as (I) for 1,000; ((I)) for 10,000, (((I))) for 100,000 etc.. They also had some other ways of symbol usages, all of which makes us think it was terribly cumbersome. No wonder someone finally came up with the Arabic number system, avoiding the use of a full page just for a multiplication. All this and more on numbers on the Internet. A worthwhile and interesting use of the net. And it makes one realize how advanced though the ancient world was.And how important our zero is, even if we don't like it, when it refers to our bank account balances.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Good News
Was surprised to hear in news that one of the models of the famous underwear company elected to quit her contract. She realized that that was not the way to live. As she began to understand the Lord and read the bible, she felt guilty about her life style. - Great. - Same goes for many of the sports figures who are not ashamed to admit their love for the Lord and living their life accordingly.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Interstate
It is so typical - NC needs to improve I-95 and it will cost billions of dollars. When citizens in NC were questioned about pay for using interstate, overwhelming number in that survey said no. Where do they think the money comes from? The major part for Interstates has been given by the federal government, the same government they fault for being in debt.
The cost, at this time, for traveling on all of NC's I-95 after improvements would be approx. $20.00. But how many NC residents travel on it regularly all the length? Not that many. The majority of travelers are from other states, north-south route. And they are used to paying, after all VA and NJ, as well as other northeastern states have had tolls for decades. The State of NC certainly cannot afford to pay the entire cost. Neither can the federal government.
But this is the typical thoughtlessness, lack of understanding, and selfishness that is rampant in this country.
The cost, at this time, for traveling on all of NC's I-95 after improvements would be approx. $20.00. But how many NC residents travel on it regularly all the length? Not that many. The majority of travelers are from other states, north-south route. And they are used to paying, after all VA and NJ, as well as other northeastern states have had tolls for decades. The State of NC certainly cannot afford to pay the entire cost. Neither can the federal government.
But this is the typical thoughtlessness, lack of understanding, and selfishness that is rampant in this country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)