CLOSE
Original image

Is It True What They Say About Guys With Big Feet?

Original image

We’ve all heard it before: The claim that the size of a man’s feet can tell you something about the size of his reproductive organ. Sometimes it’s as vague as "big in the shoes = big in the pants," and sometimes it's as precise as a complex algorithm that can supposedly deduce the subject’s masculine length, in inches, from his shoe size.

For a while, all that the people who claimed these sorts of things and their detractors had to go on was anecdotal evidence. All the “proof” either side had boiled down to, “yeah, well, I used to date a guy who [confirmed/disproved] what you say."

Thankfully, we have urologists, those brave men and women who boldly explore the nether regions of science most of us would never dare tread. In a handful of studies, they’ve searched for empirical evidence of the supposed foot-penis size connection and came up, ahem, a little short.

Let's Go to the Measuring Tape...

In 1993, two Canadian doctors measured the height, foot size and slightly stretched penile length of 63 men. The length of the penis was linked to both height and foot size, but the correlation was pretty weak. The researchers, who won the 1998 Ig Nobel Prize for Statistics for the study, warned that there was no “practical utility” in trying to predict penis size from either of those other measurements.
*
In 1999, Korean researchers measured the length and circumference of 655 Korean men’s flaccid penises, as well as the size of their feet, length of their toes and fingers, the sizes of their ears, mouth and even the amount of hair on their heads. They found a weak correlation between the length of the penis and the circumference of the penis (three cheers for being proportional!), but not with any of the other measurements. The circumference was also slightly correlated with height, weight, and the length of the third and first toes (in order of strength), but not enough that the scientists could conclude anything beyond “the size or characteristics of body extremities is not enough to predict the penile size.”
*
A year later, Richard Edwards found in the sixth edition of his online "Definitve Penis Size Survey" that there was no correlation between penis size and shoe size, but a strong one between penis size and height. There wasn't a vast difference in those sizes as men got taller, though. (Of course, we also have to keep in mind that all measurements were self-reported by the survey takers, which could color the results.)
*
In 2002, a study from the University College Hospitals in London measured penises and feet of 104 men and found no correlation whatsoever. While their results may be the most discouraging to guys who like to talk up their size 16 shoes at the bar, they did have one of the best introductions of all the studies I’ve read in my science writing days: “The penis appears in virtually every aspect of life.”

[Image credit: Flickr user FallenPegasus]

Original image
iStock
arrow
science
Why a Howling Wind Sounds So Spooky, According to Science
Original image
iStock

Halloween is swiftly approaching, meaning you'll likely soon hear creepy soundtracks—replete with screams, clanking chains, and howling winds—blaring from haunted houses and home displays. While the sound of human suffering is frightful for obvious reasons, what is it, exactly, about a brisk fall gust that sends shivers up our spines? In horror movie scenes and ghost stories, these spooky gales are always presented as blowing through dead trees. Do bare branches actually make the natural wailing noises louder, or is this detail added simply for atmospheric purposes?

As the SciShow's Hank Green explains in the video below, wind howls because it curves around obstacles like trees or buildings. When fast-moving air goes around, say, a tree, it splits up as it whips past, before coming back together on the other side. Due to factors such as natural randomness, air speed, and the tree's surface, one side's wind is going to be slightly stronger when the two currents rejoin, pushing the other side's gust out of the way. The two continue to interact back-and-forth in what could be likened to an invisible wrestling match, as high-pressure airwaves and whirlpools mix together and vibrate the air. If the wind is fast enough, this phenomenon will produce the eerie noise we've all come to recognize in horror films.

Leafy trees "will absorb some of the vibrations in the air and dull the sound, but without leaves—like if it's the middle of the winter or the entire forest is dead—the howling will travel a lot farther," Green explains. That's why a dead forest on a windy night sounds so much like the undead.

Learn more by watching SciShow's video below.

Original image
AFP/Stringer/Getty Images
arrow
Space
SpaceX's Landing Blooper Reel Shows That Even Rocket Scientists Make Mistakes
Original image
SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket launches.
AFP/Stringer/Getty Images

On March 30, 2017, SpaceX did something no space program had done before: They relaunched an orbital class rocket from Earth that had successfully achieved lift-off just a year earlier. It wasn't the first time Elon Musk's company broke new ground: In December 2015, it nailed the landing on a reusable rocket—the first time that had been done—and five months later landed a rocket on a droneship in the middle of the ocean, which was also unprecedented. These feats marked significant moments in the history of space travel, but they were just a few of the steps in the long, messy journey to achieve them. In SpaceX's new blooper reel, spotted by Ars Technica, you can see just some of the many failures the company has had along the way.

The video demonstrates that failure is an important part of the scientific process. Of course when the science you're working in deals with launching and landing rockets, failure can be a lot more dramatic than it is in a lab. SpaceX has filmed their rockets blowing up in the air, disintegrating in the ocean, and smashing against landing pads, often because of something small like a radar glitch or lack of propellant.

While explosions—or "rapid unscheduled disassemblies," as the video calls them—are never ideal, some are preferable to others. The Falcon 9 explosion that shook buildings for miles last year, for instance, ended up destroying the $200 million Facebook satellite onboard. But even costly hiccups such as that one are important to future successes. As Musk once said, "If things are not failing, you are not innovating enough."

You can watch the fiery compilation below.

[h/t Ars Technica]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios