Velocity_Boy

Great question! As far as Infanticide by the Males of the species, Delta pretty much nailed it. An online Wiki article (with citations) that I found had this to say on that issue.......... "Infanticide caused by sexual conflict has the general theme of the killer (often male) becoming the new sexual partner of the victim's parent, which would otherwise be unavailable. This represents a gain in fitness by the killer, and a loss in fitness by the parents of the offspring killed. This is a type of evolutionary struggle between the two sexes, in which the victim sex may have counter-adaptations that reduce the success of this practice. It may also occur for other reasons, such as the struggle for food between females. In this case individuals may even kill closely related offspring. Filial infanticide occurs when a parent kills its own offspring. This sometimes involves consumption of the young themselves, which is termed filial cannibalism. The behavior is widespread in fishes, and is seen in terrestrial animals as well. Human infanticide has been recorded in almost every culture. A unique aspect of human infanticide is sex-selective infanticide." However, I think what you were really interested in--and to me is also the more interesting question--regards what is called "Filial Infanticide" where, not a rival Male, but the very Mother of the offspring will commit the act. And sometimes, in a case known as "Filial Cannabilism." go so far as to consume their young. This latter act is done not uncommonly, and almost exclusively, among species of Fish. The same online article had THIS to say about filial infanticide.............. "This form of infanticide represents a struggle between the sexes, where one sex exploits the other, much to the latter's disadvantage. It is usually the male who benefits from this behavior, though in cases where males play similar roles to females in parental care the victim and perpetrator may be reversed (see Bateman's principle for discussion of this asymmetry)." Which, I took to mean that in cases of Filial infanticide the mother is doing it pretty much to please and acquiesce to the preferences of the male. So he can father more offspring, which is ANY living creature's #1 priority. Lastly, this topic begs us to wonder about human acts of Infanticide. From what I know and have researched, it has been known in most cultures, and by far the most common reason for it is due to "sexual preferences for offspring." Meaning of course that the parents were not happy with the sex of the infant, so decided to cut their "losses" and diffuse resource consumption to the unwanted baby and try again. The second leading cause of human infanticide is for the same reason as we saw above with zoological filial infanticide, in that it is done to acquiesce the male's wishes.

You're asking us how you scarred up your fingers? Uh, I think you would have a much better chance than us figuring that out. Just think back to the sorts of physical activities you've done in the past that involved extensive hand usage. Did you play with fire or chemicals as a kid? LOL. Grow up on a farm, maybe? Rock climbing, perhaps. But hey, I got that beat. I tore the entire top two layers of skin off my left hand...On the palm side, and including all four fingers, in a motorcycle racing accident about six years ago. Layed down a Suzuki GSXR Hayabusa doing 70 on a slick curve on a Texas blacktop. I have no fingerprints on that hand, except a partial thumb print. And, yeah, it stung a might. Serious road rash, amigo. So if I ever decide to do crime i only need wear one glove! Yeah...show us a pic. I can tell from the scar tissue the nature of the causal incident. I think.

Although I disagree with much of what you claim, especially and most ardently on your anti Evolution claims....I'm a Biologist...I thought I'd drop a quick line and advise you not to let those negative rep points bother you. When I first came to these forms, I figured that this being a science site, it would be fairly free of capricious and groundless pettiness. Like downvoting only because they disagree with your post, or even don't like the way you efficiently shot down their argument. I figured, naively, that dowvotes were reserved for troll posts, and for those who broke forum debate protocol. This is of course not the case. I've received downvotes for perfectly objective and sourced posts that just happened to disagree with the thread authors opinion! Like once when I simply offered my own personal opinion on why time travel is impossible. LOL. Or when I posted that it was possible we humans might not have complete and total knowledge of every possible element in the entire Universe! So, yeah, lots of egos here. Lots of pedantry, and a slew of juvenile politics. Not much better than you'll find over on, say, Yahoo Answers. So don't sweat it. Those downvotes mean nothing. Churchill once said that it's a great thing to have upset folks and made enemies during your life, as it means that you've stood for something. I still disagree with your Creationism, though! LOL Cheers. Hey Doc. Yeah, I voiced the same opinion in a previous post. About my incredulity if a college Engineering professor giving a student an unbidden rant supporting Creationism. I even went so far as to ask Raider if he was attending a Bible College. I don't think he ever answered me. But yeah, I will not go do far as to question the accuracy of the young man's account here, but man, I have a whole lotta trouble believing the actions of the teacher. I was also maligned for claiming that faculty is usually cautioned not to offer unbidden opinions on controversial issues that can generate hostility among students who disagree. So...Thanks.

Interesting, to be sure. But I wonder, after doing a cursory reading of your abstract on your ISU hypothesis, if it does not indeed posses a few similarities to Wheeler's Quantum Foam model? It strikes me that there are, especially regarding the ridges- in- the -STC ideas. So....yeah...If you'd glance at this article and tell us if I'm even in the ballpark here, by saying that, I'd be very interested in hearing your opinion. Thanks https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_foam

LoL.....You're much humor, Daniel san! Awesome. Since your memory is now keen again, maybe you can help? I bought some instant powdered water, but I forget what to add to it? Thanks in advance!

http://www.livestrong.com/article/443672-supplements-to-lower-heart-rate/

The best class I know of of prescribed meds that are hr inhibitors are the beta blockers. They're prescribed a lot to folks for performance anxiety, as a far lesser dangerous or potentially addicting drug like your benzos. I know you asked about otc drugs, however, and not Rx. So....I might suggest Valerian root? It has been known to offer a nice calming effect for many people. I sometimes take it before racing, and it's proven moderately useful. Lastly....You Do realize Benadryl isn't a sedative, right? Diphenhydramine (C17 H21 NO) is just a chemical compound that acts as an antihistamine. But yeah it might cause done drowsiness in some folks.its is decidedly not a CNS depressant, however. It Jack's me up! As for all those antihistamines for some strange reason. It's almost like amphetamines for me. Weird. I'll have to research that one of these days. http://www.livestrong.com/article/443672-supplements-to-lower-heart-rate/

A list of basic smells is no more useless as is a periodic table of the elements. Sure, there are many smells and most are in fact combinations of two it more basic smells. You know, just like matter is often a combo of elements? LOL there really is little difference. Smell and your olfactory system are incredibly important. Smell has significant impact on your personal well being and mental health. It's used in therapy. It's been used to treat PTSD. It can indeed cause flashback episodes in people suffering from PTSD. It determines how much you enjoy your food. No smell equals no taste, amigo. What is smell? Did you know the only thing that determines odors and the difference in how we perceive them is shape? Yes...The shape of the gaseous molecules emitted from the source. LOL...That's all odor is. The particular shape of molecules when they're detected by your olfactory system. I find this very cool. Hope this helps.

I learned that the science of Acoustics does not deal exclusively with sound. Seems it deals with the far more broad subject of the propagation and behavior and characteristics of ALL types of physical waves. So, like the vibrational waves on a steel girder in a suspension bridge that were caused by traffic would be an acoustical engineering problem. Or..If you wanted to see how hard you needed to tap your dining room table with a hammer to get that salt shaker balanced on the edge to fall off....That too is a problem for Acoustics. I learned this from my friend and former classmate in undergrad school who is now in the process of getting his MS in Acoustical Engineering.

Really? How so? I'm interested in why you think it a lie? Especially since, you know, it's been proven and documented many times. I'll wait for your explanation. Meanwhile​, here's my first volley...... http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae433.cfm

Fragrant (e.g. florals and perfumes) Fruity (all non-citrus fruits) Citrus (e.g. lemon, lime, orange) Woody and resinous (e.g. pine or fresh cut grass) Chemical (e.g. ammonia, bleach) Sweet (e.g. chocolate, vanilla, caramel) Minty and peppermint (e.g. eucalyptus and camphor) Toasted and nutty (e.g popcorn, peanut butter, almonds) Pungent (e.g. blue cheese, cigar smoke) Decayed (e.g. rotting meat, sour milk)

If your claimed precognition was really that accurate, that perfect, it's a shame you didn't contact the Randi Foundation and take them up on their $1 Million reward! You'd be rich now.

Remember that computers don't favor numbers. Nor does the software programs. Or the CPU. All computers do to solve problems or find that restaurant you Googled or tell you what 5,797 times 9727 equals is manipulate electrons. Electrons sifted and directed and channelled through logic gates. That's it! So our brain manipulate and channels neurotransmitters. Brain chemicals. It uses our sensory perceptions as input and our experiences and memory to discern the meaning of that input. There is no reason it should favor numbers. Which are just invented symbols, anyway. I'll tell you what the human mind favors more than anything else. It obsesses on. Patterns. And causes. That is the brain's favorite thing to seek and discern. Hope this helps.

A thought that ties in with my idea on all this from my first post.........It is a known fact that more primitive societies don't have anywhere near the suicide rate us first world countries do. Given this.....It stands to reason that people's with less evolved and complex minds and living in simpler conditions such as Cro Magnon, or any ancestral bipedal humanoid primates, would also not trend to commit suicide as often as do we modern homo sapien sapiens.

Mmm...I think maybe you're forgetting that the Earth is a sphere? So, given the shape of our planet it would be impossible to point all it's vehicles toward the sun. And also when all these vehicles accelerated the cumulative force exerted upon the Earth's surface by the rotation of the tires would not be anything remotely close to being a coherent single force working on one directional vector. So diverse in fact would be the forces of all those cars and trucks, pointing in all those differing directions on the sphere, that they would all but cancel each other out. Thus, having not even a miniscule total effect on the Earth's orbital path. Again, the sphere is the problem. So, even a tiny planet like Mercury could be covered with three times the number of vehicles per square mile as is earth, and their unison propulsive forces still wouldn't budge the planet. But of course you're just having us on, aren't you, mate? Hope so! LOL

LOL....The Queen of Link Posting! linkogenic teen warhead? Isn't a smooth function just a function that has continual derivatives? That will extend to up to whatever the specific domain order is?

You're claiming that faculty is never cautioned about offering unbidden personal opinions on controversial topic like God v Creation? And you've never heard of a professor getting called on the carpet after a student files a formal complaint regarding something he said?

I've known the stable elements since the 9th grade. So....How about we get somebody to find a test we can both do online and submit our answers? I bet I outscore you. As far as that racket grip nonsense, we will see who has the best grip on chemistry. Though, I am quite sure you won't take me up on the offer. Can't wait to hear your reason. Have a great weekend!

Funny....Since I was in a medical, human microbiology frame of mind when I first read your post...Since I had just answered a question in that area, I thought at first you were speaking of human cells! LOL. Now I know you're talking about batteries. So.....Well, not quite sure I know what ya mean by bridge...But I think that in order to sustain the cell reaction, the charge that's being carried by the electrons through the external circuit needs be accompanied by in trsnsport between the two cells. So there's got to be a path for ions to move directly from one cell to the other. It's just ionic transport and its not just the electro-active Zinc and Copper--- Cu2+ and Zn2+---, but also the nitrate.

What do you mean by Cave man? That is not an accepted anthropological term. Are you speaking of the homo genus? Habilus? Erectus? Early sapiens? Neanderthals? Or are we going back some 4 Mya to a. Afarensis? There have been over twenty subspecies of genus homo. However, there would be every reason to think that suicide rates would escalate as the human brain, and in turn, it's software we call the mind, evolved. This, since its attendant emotions evolved with it. That is, the sheer number and complexity of these emotions, or affects. States of mind. Included here is of course fear and anxiety and hopelessness and depression. Al those being not uncommon precursors to suicide attempts or ideations.

The cell membrane is depolarized.....So it becomes closer to a 0 V potential difference of charge...both inside and outside the cell?

Yeah, I read it, thanks. Uh, last I checked questioned and refuted we're not synonymous. Ahem.

Fractional electrons are not needed in order for a new element to be created. It discovered. As far as knowing how atoms work. They said that back with the plum pudding and then the Rutherford models. Quantum mechanics has added more uncertainty to the nuances of sub atomic particle machinations. Who's to say that the probability fields put forth in QM follow the same rules elsewhere in the universe? Or during a supernovae explosion and attendant GRB? You? As Richard Feynman said, there is still plenty of room at the bottom. This means we may not know how atoms Always work, or if we have fathomed all possible combinations of them.

Thanks for telling me what I don't understand. Your pedantry and hubris are impressive. Rather, I'll put myself up against you in chemistry any day of the week, amigo. And it's not my field of emphasis. You made my point although you don't understand that ....Lol...With your basketball analogy. Yes...There Could Be! Just as I said there Could Be elements in the universe we are yet unaware of. If we can create here on earth some 25 or so, last I checked we are at 117? Then why could not other more advanced civilizations create more? And even with natural elements. Who is to say we know them all? What is Dark Energy composed of? You sir have not a clue. Could be another element. True when you said the basketball would go against all we know. So what? Scientific progress and discovery happens because of instances and observations yield facts that contradicted previous thought. To think that we in the backwater s of one out of hundreds of billions of galaxies have cornered the element market is absurd. It is the sort of closed minded hubris that better suits religious fundamentalists than it does men of science. http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160115-how-many-more-chemical-elements-are-there-for-us-to-find