Oustanding!

YouTube in Spanish!

Have trouble finding content to practice your listening comprehension in Spanish in an fun & engaging way? Below is a list of some YouTube channels across a variety of genres/topics to exercise your Spanish skills and maybe even gain a new favourite YouTuber!

Comedy AndoWebi  Daiana Hernández  HolaSoyGerman PlaticaPolinesia WOKITOKI 

Gaming DSimphony Fernanfloo JuegaGerman luzugames MellowGames  Sarinha

Food Las Recetas de Laura Müller Las Recetas de MJ Marisolpink 

Fitness Fausto Murillo

DIY/Fashion & Style/Makeup/Lifestyle Coolbrush Craftingeek* dailycurlz (natural hair) Isabel Sanz   Jackie Hernandez joryck La Fashionista Realista (natural hair) Lizy P Maria Cadepe Mariale Musas reishe RosyMcMichael SandraCiresArt vikguirao Yuya 

Things about their life/general shenanigans BagreTV DebRyanShow ExtraPolinesios HappySunnyFlowers JackieD Story LosPolinesios LuzuyLana LuzuVlogs MeloMore Miranda Ibañez MonserratHermosillo PabloVlogs PaisaVlogs YellowMellowMG yuyacst 

Educational ExpCaseros ExpCaserosKids 

Foreigners Dustin Luke  elrubuisOMG Lanita 

?????? Desahogada 

The cool thing about YouTube is that once you start watching certain kinds of videos, it’ll start recommending similar content, so after a while things will just show up in your homepage that you might be interested in and end up liking! YouTubers often collaborate so that is another great way to find more content. The other great thing is a lot of YouTubers will put the links to similar content in the ‘related channels’ bar to the right of the ‘featured’ page of their channel. You can look there if you’re ever stuck for content and want to get into something similar. Another thing you can do is look for a radio station or a TV channel that you enjoy and subscribe to them on YouTube. Try to do it for channels/stations in a variety of countries to get different cultural insights as well as the opportunity to expose yourself to different accents.

Additionally, if you’re interested in finding content on YouTube in a target language just go to youtube.com/videos and at the very bottom of the page simply change the country to one where the language you want to practice is spoken and you’ll see all the videos that are popular in the country at the moment!

YouTube in French (x)

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613576/gene-therapy-may-have-its-first-blockbuster/

Daft Punk Releases Retro 1970s Themed Magazine Ads To Promote Their New Line of Merchandise

Nikola Tesla On X-Rays, Electrons, Radiation and Cosmic Rays

History tells us that J. J. Thomson discovered the electron, Marie Curie radiation, Albert Einstein the photoelectric effect, and Victory Hess the cosmic ray, but below is proof Nikola Tesla was the first to discover the electron (a year before Thomson), radioactivity (2 years before Curie), the photoelectric effect (9 years before Einstein) and Cosmic Rays (16 years before Hess). All went on to win Nobel Prizes.

“TESLA’S LATEST ROENTGEN RAY INVESTIGATIONS.” The Electrical Review, April 22nd, 1896.

“Further investigations concerning the behavior of the various metals in regard to reflection of these radiations have given additional support to the opinion which I have before expressed; namely, that Volta’s electric contact series in air is identical with that which is obtained when arranging the metals according to their powers of reflection, the most electro-positive metal being the best reflector. Confining myself to the metals easily experimented upon, this series is magnesium, lead, tin, iron, copper, silver, gold and platinum. The lastnamed metal should be found to be the poorest, and sodium one of the best, reflectors. This relation is rendered still more interesting and suggestive when we consider that this series is approximately the same which is obtained when arranging the metals according to their energies of combination with oxygen, as calculated from their chemical equivalents.

"Should the above relation be confirmed by other physicists, we shall be justified to draw the following conclusions: First, the highly exhausted bulb emits material streams which, impinging on a metallic surface, are reflected; second, these streams are formed of matter in some primary or elementary condition; third, these material streams are probably the same agent which is the cause of the electro-motive tension between metals in close proximity or actual contact, and they may possibly, to some extent, determine the energy of combination of the metals with oxygen; fourth, every metal or conductor is more or less a source of such streams; fifth, these streams or radiations must be produced by some radiations which exist in the medium; and sixth, streams resembling the cathodic must be emitted by the sun and probably also by other sources of radiant energy, such as an arc light or Bunsen burner.

"The first of these conclusions, assuming the above-cited fact to be correct, is evident and uncontrovertible. No theory of vibration of any kind would account for this singular relation between the powers of reflection and electric properties of the metals. Streams of projected matter coming in actual contact with the reflecting metal surface afford the only plausible explanation.

"The second conclusion is likewise obvious, since no difference whatever is observed by employing various qualities of glass for the bulb, electrodes of different metals and any kind of residual gases. Evidently, whatever the matter constituting the streams may be, it must undergo a change in the process of expulsion, or, generally speaking, projection — since the views in this regard still differ — in such a way as to lose entirely the characteristics which it possessed when forming the electrode, or wall of the bulb, or the gaseous contents of the latter.

"The existence of the above relation between the reflecting and contact series forces us likewise to the third conclusion, because a mere coincidence of that kind is, to say the least, extremely improbable. Besides, the fact may be cited that there is always a difference of potential set up between two metal plates at some distance and in the path of the rays issuing from an exhausted bulb.

"Now, since there exists an electric pressure of difference of potential between two metals in close proximity or contact, we must, when considering all the foregoing, come to the fourth conclusion, namely, that the metals emit similar streams, and I therefore anticipate that, if a sensitive film be placed between two plates, say, of magnesium and copper, a true Roentgen shadow picture would be obtained after a very long exposure in the dark. Or, in general, such picture could be secured whenever the plate is placed near a metallic or conducting body, leaving for the present the insulators out of consideration. Sodium, one of the first of the electric contact series, but not yet experimented upon, should give out more of such streams than even magnesium.

"Obviously, such streams could not be forever emitted, unless there is a continuous supply of radiation from the medium in some other form; or possibly the streams which the bodies themselves emit are merely reflected streams coming from other sources. But since all investigation has strengthened the opinion advanced by Roentgen that for the production of these radiations some impact is required, the former of the two possibilities is the more probable one, and we must assume that the radiations existing in the medium and giving rise to those here considered partake something of the nature of cathodic streams.

"But if such streams exist all around us in the ambient medium, the question arises, whence do they come? The only answer is: From the sun. I infer, therefore, that the sun and other sources of radiant energy must, in a less degree, emit radiations or streams of matter similar to those thrown off by an electrode in a highly exhausted inclosure. This seems to be, at this moment, still a point of controversy. According to my present convictions a Roentgen shadow picture should, with very long exposures, be obtained from all sources of radiant energy, provided the radiations are permitted first to impinge upon a metal or other body.”

“The preceding considerations tend to show that the lumps of matter composing a cathodic stream in the bulb are broken up into incomparably smaller particles by impact against the wall of the latter, and, owing to this, are enabled to pass into the air. All evidence which I have so far obtained points rather to this than to the throwing off of particles of the wall itself under the violent impact of the cathodic stream. According to my convictions, then, the difference between Lenard and Roentgen rays, if there be any, lies solely in this, that the particles composing the latter are incomparably smaller and possess a higher velocity. To these two qualifications I chiefly attribute the non-deflectibility by a magnet which I believe will be disproved in the end. Both kinds of rays, however, affect the sensitive plate and fluorescent screen, only the rays discovered by Roentgen are much more effective. We know now that these rays are produced under certain exceptional conditions in a bulb, the vacuum being extremely high, and that the range of greatest activity is rather small.

"I have endeavored to find whether the reflected rays possess certain distinctive features, and I have taken pictures of various objects with this purpose in view, but no marked difference was noted in any case. I therefore conclude that the matter composing the Roentgen rays does not suffer further degradation by impact against bodies. One of the most important tasks for the experimenter remains still to determine what becomes of the energy of these rays. In a number of experiments with rays reflected from and transmitted through a conducting of insulating plate, I found that only a small part of the rays could be accounted for. For instance, through a zinc plate, one-sixteenth of an inch thick, under an incident angle of 45 degrees, about two and one-half per cent were reflected and about three per cent transmitted through the plate, hence over 94 per cent of the total radiation remain to be accounted for. All the tests which I have been able to make have confirmed Roentgen’s statement that these rays are incapable of raising the temperature of a body. To trace this lost energy and account for it in a plausible way will be equivalent to making a new discovery.

"Since it is now demonstrated that all bodies reflect more or less, the diffusion through the air is easily accounted for. Observing the tendency to scatter through the air, I have been led to increase the efficiency of reflectors by providing not one, but separated successive layers for reflection, by making the reflector of thin sheets of metal, mica or other substances. The efficiency of mica as a reflector I attribute chiefly to the fact that it is composed of many superimposed layers which reflect individually. These many successive reflections are, in my opinion, also the cause of the scattering through the air.

"In my communication to you of April 1, I have for the first time stated that these rays are composed of matter in a “primary” or elementary condition or state. I have chosen this mode of expression in order to avoid the use of the word “ether,” which is usually understood in the sense of the Maxwellian interpretation, which would not be in accord with my present convictions in regard to the nature of the radiations.”

—Nikola Tesla

Throwback Thursday: Answers to Apollo Moon Landing Questions

The first six missions to the Moon helped us answer questions about our nearest celestial neighbor, but a curious public wanted to know more about how we did it. With the help of the NASA History Office, we’ve identified some of the most frequently asked questions surrounding the first time humans walked on the surface of another world. Read on and click here to check out our post from last week and the week before. 

Why do some shadows on the Moon appear to go in different directions?

For Apollo astronauts, the Sun wasn’t the sole source of light. The high reflectivity of the lunar surface or “albedo” means that the Moon’s many craters, hills and rocks bounce sunlight to wash out the stars multiple shadows on objects. The highly uneven terrain means that shadows can have slightly different lengths, as well. For example, two astronauts standing several feet away from each other can have different shadow lengths because one may be on a slope.

While the Lunar Module itself was also reflective, Apollo astronauts had yet another bright source of light: Earth! To a moonwalker, a half-full Earth would be about 20 times brighter than a full Moon as seen from our home planet. This also explains why stars are not visible in pictures. Think about it: if you wanted to photograph all the stars that can be seen from Earth, would you want to do it during a full Moon? 

Why are there no blast craters under the Lunar Modules? 

The Moon has endured billions of years of bombardment from micrometeorites and large meteorites, compacting the dust into extremely dense rock. A thin layer of fine and powdery moondust covers the ground, but the dense rock beneath this layer makes it hard to penetrate the surface. That, paired with an engine thrusting in a vacuum means that the exhaust would expand rapidly outward instead of straight down like it would on Earth. The large engine nozzle. Still, many pictures clearly show dust markings radiating from the landing site. 

Can Humans Really Survive Passing Through the Van Allen Radiation Belts?

The short answer is yes, but with protection. The Van Allen radiation belts, named after their discoverer James van Allen, are regions high above Earth’s surface that trap highly charged particles that radiate off the Sun. This energetic region contains harmful radiation that would be lethal to anybody who encountered them unprotected. Thankfully, the 12 astronauts that passed through the belts did so relatively quickly in the comfort of their shielded spacecraft that had been tested to withstand high doses of radiation. Although all six crews had to pass through the Van Allen belts, the dosimeters indicated that they received a dosage no higher than that of a chest X-ray or a single CAT scan. 

Why are we going back to the Moon?

Exploring the Moon is only the first part in our mission to expand humanity’s presence on Mars and beyond. The Moon is the ideal stepping stone for testing technology that will enable us to expand humanity’s presence on Mars and beyond. Click here to learn more about the Artemis program that will take humans to the lunar surface within five years – this time, to stay. Make sure to follow us on Tumblr for your regular dose of space: http://nasa.tumblr.com.

100 most used Spanish adjectives + examples

100 Spanish adjectives for you to learn! These are indeed very very used, so this list can help lots. I also added some example sentences/expressions:)

List via Practica Español, not mine.

Note: these adjectives have more translations than what this post shows, but these translations here are the ones referring to the most used meaning.

Aburrido/a. Boring, bored

Las mates son aburridas. Maths are boring. Estoy aburrida. I’m bored. 

Ácido/a. (Taste) Acid, acidic, sour 

Este limón está ácido. This lemon tastes acidic. 

Alegre. Happy, cheerful

Elena es una chica muy alegre. Elena is a very cheerful girl.

Alto/a. Tall

Soy el más alto de la clase. I’m the tallest of the class.

Amargo/a. (Taste) Bitter

Este yogur está amargo. This yogurt tastes bitter.

Ancho/a. Wide, broad

La carretera es muy ancha. The road is very wide.

Atrevido/a. Daring

Ese es un comentario muy atrevido. That is a very daring comment. 

Azul. Blue

Homer lleva pantalones azules. Homer wears blue pants

Bajo/a. Short

Soy demasiado baja para montar a caballo. I’m too short to ride a horse. 

Blanco/a. White

La nube es blanca. The cloud is white. 

Blando/a. Soft

¡Qué almohada más blanda! What a soft pillow!

The rest are below:)

Czytaj dalej

Por vs Para

hi, how do you use disculpa, perdón and lo siento correctly? regional or contextual differences would be appreciated !

With disculpa it depends on if you mean it as a verb or a noun.

disculpar is “to forgive”, and disculparse is “to apologize, to ask for forgiveness”, so you do see disculpa used as a conjugation there.

With disculpa, this is a tú command so what you’re literally saying is “forgive (me)”:

Disculpa. / Discúlpame. = Sorry. / Forgive me. [informal tú]

Disculpe. / Discúlpeme. = Sorry. / Forgive me. [formal usted]

Disculpen. / Discúlpenme. = Sorry. / Forgive me. [plural]

So if I were apologizing to one person, I would either use disculpa or disculpe depending on how formal I was being.

If I were apologizing to a group of people, I would say disculpen 

The addition of the me is optional, and could changed out for something else like discúlpanos “forgive us” or discúlpala “forgive her” etc

la disculpa is “an apology” so something like me debes una disculpa “you owe me an apology”

You can also see a synonym of disculpar as pedir disculpas “to ask for forgiveness” literally kind of like “to beg pardon”

perdón is used an interjection meaning “pardon”, and el perdón is “a pardon” or “forgiveness”

There is a verb that you could use but don’t have to which is perdonar “to pardon/forgive”.

So as an interjection you could say ¡Perdón! “Sorry! / Pardon me!”, or a more literal “pardon me” is perdóname / perdóneme / perdónenme

With lo siento this is just kind of “I’m sorry”. It literally means “I feel it” which is probably like “I feel (regret)” or something along those lines. It’s literally “I’m sorry for it” that way.

But the thing about lo siento is that it exists on its own. You say this and don’t say for what. The lo takes the place of “it” so it’s “I’m sorry (for it)”

If you want to apologize for something specific, you use sentir “to feel” or in this case “to regret”, but don’t use the lo:

Lo siento. = I’m sorry.Siento haber llegado tarde. = Sorry for being late. / Sorry I got here late.

Lo siento. = I’m sorry.Siento mucho tu pérdida. = I’m so sorry for your loss.[can be su if its formal or plural]

Lo siento. = I’m sorry.Siento tener que informarle. = I’m sorry to have to inform you.[the le here is for an usted or for él/ella, you could use siento tener que informarte for informal, les for plural, and so on]

Lo siento. = I’m sorry.Siento decirte eso. = I’m sorry for telling you that. / I’m sorry for saying that to you.

Lo siento. = I’m sorry.Siento gritar. / Siento haber gritado. = Sorry for yelling. / Sorry I yelled. / Sorry for having yelled.

The lo takes the place of whatever thing it is you’re apologizing for.

Also on this list I include con permiso which is something like “sorry” or “excuse me”. You use con permiso in any case where you’re doing something unintentionally rude or something that could be considered rude.

This is like when you bump into someone when you’re walking, or you squeeze by someone because they’re in the way, or you accidentally step on someone’s foot. This is also what a server or waiter would say when they have to interrupt your conversation to bring you food.

So using con permiso is like “I needed to do something but I understand that my actions could be interpreted as me being rude” or “this is probably bad manners, I apologize”

I’ve also seen some people say this when people enter a room or someone’s office where someone might be busy but you need to talk to them

Or said sarcastically it reads as “you were taking up too much room so I had to squeeze by you awkwardly, so excuse you, Your Majesty”

It’s also something like “by your leave” or “with your permission”, so if you see con su permiso it means “with your consent/permission” or “if you’ll allow me”