Just 3 miles.

 

Our collaborators in China are back to work now and sending us things, which I have been wiping down with 200 proof ethanol, just to be sure.

Question for you, that I've been asking myself pretty much all my life. In Canada, the labeling on liquor or on pharmaceutical stuff never uses the "proof" appelation. It's always just %, and we don't even add APV or whatever, because the % implicitely means the amount of whatever substance we're talking about per volume (acetic acid for vinegar, isopropanol for rubbing alcohol, ethanol for booze, and so on).

My question is: why "proof"? Proof is twice the % per volume, isn't it? What is the history behind using that unit of measure?

I guess I could Google it, but I'm asking you 

 

When my trip to Orlando got screwed up because of the hurricane, I got my money back. ALL of it. My main point was that getting a credit for use within a year was of no use to me because I was going on vacation NOW, and needed my money to do it.

 

I did not have travel insurance and refused to let them use it as an excuse. The cancellation was completely out of my control and I held firm. Universal Studios was technically still open but the freeways were a parking lot with people leaving en masse. It was teetering on the edge of mass hysteria and there was no way in hell I was flying into that.

 

Not sure how it will work for you but I would start with the airline and then the hotel, which is what I did. I spoke to over a dozen people but in the end, they gave it up. And then the very next day the hurricane turned east and headed north and never did hit Orlando, so I could've gone! 

I don't have insurance because I booked using a credit card that has built-in travel insurance. But that's against things like illness... I am not ill. Not sure if this would qualify, and I hope to not have to find out. Given my frame of mind right now, I can't help but expect the worst.

 

Usually when chemicals have those sorts of weirdness to it, it's based on something historical. Which I'm assuming is the case here. Typically, we would use molarity or normality for aqueous solutions.

 

In my world, we usually use 200 proof because it is not for drinking so we (as a lab) don't have to pay the taxes on it.

Here you go:

The term proof dates back to 16th century England, when spirits were taxed at different rates depending on their alcohol content. Spirits were tested by soaking a pellet of gunpowder in them. If the gunpowder could still burn, the spirits were rated above proof and taxed at a higher rate. As gunpowder would not burn if soaked in rum that contained less than 57.15% ABV, rum that contained this percentage of alcohol was defined as having 100 degrees proof.

So actually originally in the UK, proof was ~1.8x % alcohol. Later the US made it exactly 2x. 

 I’ve never seen “proof” used outside a liquor store. I guess not used much outside the US anymore; the article indicates Canada used the old UK standard till 1972.

 

Here you go:

The term proof dates back to 16th century England, when spirits were taxed at different rates depending on their alcohol content. Spirits were tested by soaking a pellet of gunpowder in them. If the gunpowder could still burn, the spirits were rated above proof and taxed at a higher rate. As gunpowder would not burn if soaked in rum that contained less than 57.15% ABV, rum that contained this percentage of alcohol was defined as having 100 degrees proof.

So actually originally in the UK, proof was ~1.8x % alcohol. Later the US made it exactly 2x. 

 I’ve never seen “proof” used outside a liquor store. I guess not used much outside the US anymore; the article indicates Canada used the old UK standard till 1972.

My bottle says specifically DO NOT DRINK but then is also measured as 1 pint   Probably the only lab thing I use that is not measured in metric.

 

I don't have insurance because I booked using a credit card that has built-in travel insurance. But that's against things like illness... I am not ill. Not sure if this would qualify, and I hope to not have to find out. Given my frame of mind right now, I can't help but expect the worst.

I won't press it at this point but if it comes to that accept nothing less than a full refund...except maybe $75 or whatever it was, I can't remember exactly. But it was a drop in the bucket comparatively speaking.

 

People I talked to who were planning to run Tokyo had pretty good success getting their hotels cancelled with no penalty. Airfares were a mixed bag, in most cases you could change or get a credit, but with a fee. A few folks I think were able to talk their way out of it. If it does come to this and you’re unsuccessful, I would look at the fine print on your credit card insurance and see what they allow. How do they know whether you’re sick, do you have to provide a doctor’s note? 

I think you actually do

 

 

So... international runners are allowed to enter the country, they're just not allowed to participate in the event. I fail to see how this helps prevent the spread of anything. Too bad I never got that dual citizenship.

I wonder if they hope international runners will cancel their trips entirely? Then you hff ave less people traveling?

 

I wonder if they hope international runners will cancel their trips entirely? Then you hff ave less people traveling?

Well I think the main thing is the race can only control who participates in the race, and only the government decides who can get into the country.