Channel assignments invocations have ceased working, at least on this video:

http://videosift.com/video/Obama-s-Hynotism-Techniques-Revealed

Don't know if it has anything to do with the tag war that's taking place there.

It ain't just me. It seems to have started 3 days ago...

http://videosift.com/video/Guys-I-think-something-is-wrong-with-the-faucet?loadcomm=1#comment-1229997

http://videosift.com/video/12-yrd-Girl-Discovers-Almost-All-U-S-Presidents-Related?loadcomm=1#comment-1229824

http://videosift.com/video/Log-Drivers-Waltz-2?loadcomm=1#comment-1229384

Well there's no line breaks in the code as copied from youtube. I pasted it into notepad to confirm and tried submitting it a third time and it got split up again.



...and yet it works fine here. I am still using the same clipboard contents I used in my third *backup attempt.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
That just can't be. Embed codes in comments aren't manipulated by siftbot or anything. Can you paste for me the embed code you're trying to use?

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
VS is inserting those line breaks.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
The embed code can't be split across multiple lines. Remove all the line breaks and it'll work.

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
I think *backup might be broken. I tried 2 different embeds here and got no reaction from siftbot either time.

VS is inserting those line breaks.

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
The embed code can't be split across multiple lines. Remove all the line breaks and it'll work.

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
I think *backup might be broken. I tried 2 different embeds here and got no reaction from siftbot either time.

I think *backup might be broken. I tried 2 different embeds here and got no reaction from siftbot either time.

http://videosift.com/member/faceman

Evil clone?

My interpretation of 1sttube is that it's for clips from television, so I would not include this. Just my interpretation, though.

I assume 80s was there for the SNES itself, but that launched in the 90s.

In reply to this comment by Truckchase:
Hey OC; this vid isn't an actual video game but a remake of the real TV theme song in a SNES style. I figured this would still qualify for 1sttube because of that fact. Do you figure that it doesn't since it didn't actually air on TV? I could see that too... just trying to get clarification. Thx!

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
*nochannel *videogames *british *geek

"If you think you understand Quantum Mechanics, you don't understand Quantum Mechanics."

@Estuffing17

Actually, because visible green light is at a higher energy level than red light, if an objects energy gap is high enough to let green light through, then red light will also pass through because it has even lower energy levels, not the other way around.

That's exactly what I said in my example.

As far as a translucent green material is concerned, when we perceive an object to have color, it is because that objects atoms are arranged in such a way that it reflects that wavelength of light (green in this case) back to our eye, while either absorbing, refracting or letting pass through photons of other wavelengths. Just because a piece of glass is green does not mean it will not allow other higher and lower energy photons to pass through it.

Green glass, as I understand it, is green because it's filtering out other colors. It's a simplified example, yes. Obviously you can have a little yellow or blue or whatever mixed in and it still looks "green".

But the energy gap explanation seems to mean that "green" glass would be letting all red, orange, and yellow light through since they are lower energy levels. It's one thing to say a little bit of another color is coming through and it's imperceptible. If all the "weaker" colors are coming through along with the green, it doesn't seem to me like it would look very green.

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:

>> ^xxovercastxx:
This leaves me with another question, unfortunately.
Let's stick with his example of green being high energy and red being low.
The photon only gets through the material if it's not strong enough to excite an electron. This makes sense for a translucent red material. The material's energy gap could be large enough to allow red light through but block all other.
This does not make sense for translucent green material. If the material's energy gap were large enough to allow green light through, it would also allow red light through, resulting in a translucent yellow material. This would seem to allow only red, orange, and then increasingly grey/colorless shades of yellow.
So what's missing from this explanation?

As I understand it(and I'm not sure I understood the question): Red is on a very low enegy level, so if the "energy gap" is large enough to let red pass, green will also pass, which means the light will be moving towards the white end of the spectrum. This means that if you want to make a translucent green material you need materials that absorbs or displace red (such as green plants)


You're addressing the correct question, yes. Does this mean that a translucent green material is a mix of materials with 2 different energy gaps?

This leaves me with another question, unfortunately.

Let's stick with his example of green being high energy and red being low.

The photon only gets through the material if it's not strong enough to excite an electron. This makes sense for a translucent red material. The material's energy gap could be large enough to allow red light through but block all other.

This does not make sense for translucent green material. If the material's energy gap were large enough to allow green light through, it would also allow red light through, resulting in a translucent yellow material. This would seem to allow only red, orange, and then increasingly grey/colorless shades of yellow.

So what's missing from this explanation?

>> ^PHJF:

Or you could just play Coldplay.


That's one for @FlowersInHisHair

˙ʇuıod ɹǝʍod ɐ ɥʇɹoʍ sı ʇxǝʇ uʍop-ǝpısdn uı uǝʇʇıɹʍ buıɥʇʎuɐ ʎןʇuǝɹɐddɐ

You ought to be proudly displaying that Irish flag on your profile.

No! Must have shiny!

In reply to this comment by campionidelmondo:
Sorry, the other features took up so much time I totally forgot about that. The icons look awesome the way they are though

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
No icons with improved shininess?