Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Grant Imahara Has Died

hollywoodreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 267 posts

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#151

Post by tyingq »

anakaine wrote: post #134
bjt2n3904 wrote: post #128

https://mobile.twitter.com/grantimahara/status/1243234010215... This was his workbench. In many ways, it doesn't look much different than mine. Grant was an electrical engineer, like me. Gone suddenly before 50 from an aneurysm. I can't help but wonder if it looks like that now, filled with unfinished projects. Projects that only he understood the complexity of, and few would have the hope of picking up where he fini…

I see a nodemcu, some sparkfun and adafruit gear. I see the node sitting on some plug in headers over a breakout board. That looks like things I like to play with. I'm not an electrical engineer, but am an earth scientist , engineer, programmer, and electronics hobbyist. This man was inspiring. What a loss to the world his passing is.

The paper print of a pinout, on the left, is for a Teensy 3.6 MCU. I imagine many here have played a bit with those.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#152

Post by phaus »

aroch wrote: post #149
phaus wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Embrace the Scientific Method, and you just might solve any problem that comes your way. Mythbusters was a great and inspiring show, but they weren't always great at following the scientific method IMO. It was always more about cool hacks than scientific validity. They decided people being injured by bullets being shot into the sky was a myth mostly because they couldn't locate the bullets they fired into the sky, i…

In fairness, if I remember correctly, the bullet myth was testing the narrow condition of "shot straight up into the air" such that the bullet would be returning at terminal velocity and no longer be on a ballistic trajectory. Whereas, most people struck by bullets fired into the air are probably being hit by bullets that are still on a predominantly horizontal trajectory.

Fair enough, but IMO if they are holding themselves to that narrow and frankly completely useless condition then 90% of the episode was wasted effort talking to people about things that, by the definition of their own condition were completely unrelated.

I wouldn't consider 46 degrees to be a predominantly vertical trajectory, but its closer to being that than it is horizontal. I'd bet money that people have been injured by bullets between 46 and 70 degree angles at least. I wouldn't rule out higher angles than that either.

It could end up having less energy sooner than I imagine, but I would have to see it simulated far more convincingly than they did on the show.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#153

Post by zxcvbn4038 »

This will hit my kid hard, since he learned to work the TV his two favorite shows were Mythbusters and Popular Mechanics for Kids. When they dropped the B team and when they stopped producing the shows were probably his biggest introduction to the general impermanence of the world.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#154

Post by aroch »

phaus wrote: post #152
aroch wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness, if I remember correctly, the bullet myth was testing the narrow condition of "shot straight up into the air" such that the bullet would be returning at terminal velocity and no longer be on a ballistic trajectory. Whereas, most people struck by bullets fired into the air are probably being hit by bullets that are still on a predominantly horizontal trajectory.

Fair enough, but IMO if they are holding themselves to that narrow and frankly completely useless condition then 90% of the episode was wasted effort talking to people about things that, by the definition of their own condition were completely unrelated. I wouldn't consider 46 degrees to be a predominantly vertical trajectory, but its closer to being that than it is horizontal. I'd bet money that people have been inj…

Fair, I should have said "still on a ballistic trajectory". Given that a bullet fired not straight up may travel miles, I'm just guessing here, but legal was probably not too keen on them testing the more likely scenario. And, of course, every wants the payoff of full scale.

I totally agree that simulations of the most likely events would have been nice. The show could have benefited from more strict adherence to the scientific method. Alas, that probably would have made the show less appealing for a large segment of the audience.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#155

Post by simias »

phaus wrote: post #141
Alupis wrote: post #56

Armed with science, engineering, and curiosity, the Mythbusters crew inspired a generation. Embrace the Scientific Method, and you just might solve any problem that comes your way. Still to this day, my friends and I consider the Mythbusters as the final word on so many "myths". Grant's clever use of robotics, sensors and code opened my eyes to a world of possibilities. I still remember the first time I read a temper…

>Embrace the Scientific Method, and you just might solve any problem that comes your way. Mythbusters was a great and inspiring show, but they weren't always great at following the scientific method IMO. It was always more about cool hacks than scientific validity. They decided people being injured by bullets being shot into the sky was a myth mostly because they couldn't locate the bullets they fired into the sky, i…

I haven't found this video but I got this one about the terminal velocity of a penny: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHxvMLoKRWg

Long story short, it's not enough to kill you or even really hurt you (Adam Savage even shot his own hand to prove that).

That being said a bullet's terminal velocity is probably much higher thanks to it's much more aerodynamic shape. I can't be bothered to see if the math adds up because Mythbusters uses feet per second and miles per hour and I just refuse to touch this nonsense.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#156

Post by rotterdamdev »

codecamper wrote: post #111
woutr_be wrote: post #14

Brain aneurysm is truly something terrible, I lost a friend to it a couple of years ago. (She was 22 at the time and in good health). She just woke up one day in the middle of the night with a headache and had to vomit. On the way to the hospital she fell into a coma and never woke up. Really scary.

So what can be done preventatively against a brain aneurysm? Seems like there is something called a Magnetic Resonance Angiography.

Taking your vitamins is the first step. People seem healthy until it turns out they had chronic low levels of vitamin D and K.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#157

Post by TheHypnotist »

ainiriand wrote: post #129
codecamper wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what can be done preventatively against a brain aneurysm? Seems like there is something called a Magnetic Resonance Angiography.

Having a controlled blood pressure really helps. Other than that... good luck I guess.

Also not being a smoker. But that's not really preventative I guess.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#158

Post by TheHypnotist »

TaupeRanger wrote: post #147
peignoir wrote: post #79

I wished there was a way to detect aneurysm without the need of an MRI... maybe one day with AI and some blood pressure sensor. My condolences to his family.

The problem, just as in cancer, is not detection. It's what to do once you find it. Many aneurysms/cancers that could be found will turn out to be harmless, and the risk of harming someone physically and/or psychologically from unnecessarily treating them is not negligible. There isn't much we can do for aneurysms unless they are obviously immediately threatening.

A doctor basically told my mother "The cure could be worse than the problem". So they just monitor.

Re: Grant Imahara Has Died

#160

Post by petercooper »

codecamper wrote: post #111
woutr_be wrote: post #14

Brain aneurysm is truly something terrible, I lost a friend to it a couple of years ago. (She was 22 at the time and in good health). She just woke up one day in the middle of the night with a headache and had to vomit. On the way to the hospital she fell into a coma and never woke up. Really scary.

So what can be done preventatively against a brain aneurysm? Seems like there is something called a Magnetic Resonance Angiography.

(I'm not really here to discuss the pros and cons, false positives and what not here as it's a complex topic, but..) I have a medical every three years that involves a full body MRI and ultrasounding which monitors for both brain and aortic aneurysms. There are people who have caught aneurysms in early stages through such monitoring, but there are enough downsides to such screening that it's not something that would usually be recommended for everyone. My next is next week and I'm going to try and tweet as much of the process as I can since enough people have asked about it in the past.
Post reply on HN