Nukeyfox

At first, I (hastily) thought (4) was the redox reaction since H2SO4 is an oxidizing agent, however it turned out, according to the answer key, that (1) is the answer. I don't understand how and why only (1) is an oxidizing agent. For example, in (2) the oxidation number of the 2nd carbon increases and the 3rd carbon decreases. And also in (3) Should I ignore the carbon when considering redox reactions on organic compounds? Or is my method wrong in any way?

Hi, I'm going to complete my A-levels next year and I haven't decided on what major I want to take. I'm certain I want to major in biology or life science but I'm torn between choices. I do not have a passion for medicine however -- I have neither the interest nor the stomach for it. What interests me the most is researching, especially if the field is hands-on. I've narrowed it down to two -- Zoology and Bioengineering -- but I need help in deciding as I would be stuck with my choice for the rest of my life. I've listed down what I think of them and why I would like to study them. I could use more insight. Zoology: I'm an outdoor enthusiast. I have a passion for environmental protection and conservation I find evolutionary biology, geology and ethology very interesting. However, there is probably very few opportunities in my (very anthropocentric) country It seems to be a very time-consuming career and I wouldn't be able to practice other interests, such as CS or design. I also have a deep interest in physics and engineering, and I'm not sure if zoology is broad enough to include those. Bioengineering: I have an interest in computer science and electronics. (I excel in physics) This field allows me to research as well as apply it practically. There is more job opportunities (albeit medical job opportunities) than zoology. However, I would probably miss out in time spent outdoors. Most paths seem to lead into biomedical engineering, something I do not want to do. I do not get to hang around and learn about animals I may be too idealistic and naive. I'm also thinking of just studying Biology in general. Thanks for any input.

Studying the nervous system and I was wondering why are motor neurones, sensory neurones and relay neurones all different? In what way are multipolar neurones, as in motor neurones, more effective at sending signals to muscles than unipolar neurones, as in sensory neurones? And why the cell bodies of motor neurones larger than that of sensory neurones Why don't relay neurones have myelin sheaths? My questions can be summed up as: how are the neurones adapted for their function?

In churches (or at least the ones I attended), it's considered rude to be 'playing' with your phone while an exorcism is going on. Nowadays, I don't see much exorcisms happening and I probably won't be invited for one in the future. However, I'm pretty sure there is some video out there on Youtube that can give a view on what's happening. Hush, you might trigger a femminazi.

Oh, I never really thought about that. That'll be another possible option, which I'll think about. Apply lavishly or specifically?

As a deist, I tend to hold a sceptical view on some so-called supernatural activities. I believe that God or any other spiritual diety don't need to intervene with the world. And that most 'spiritual experiences' can be explained away. However, I have a problem with refuting demons, or more specifically, demonic possessions. --- Firstly, because I witnessed it firsthand. I have seen seemingly normal people suddenly go manic and hysterical. Their voices will change, possess great strength and hallucinate. Sometimes speak out words of prophesy (but I just think that's just hot reading) It will last for few days or weeks and it's usually followed by an exorcism. I know that other religions and culture (especially Eastern culture) practise exorcism, but I have only seen Protestant Christian ones. Each one was different -- some simply prayed for a couple of days, others straight out hit and pulled the hair of the possessed. --- Secondly, I haven't met any reasonable explanation for them yet. Here are some common ones: 1) "The person has a dormant mental illness, which suddenly manifested itself for a short time." I still keep contact with former 'possessions' and they seem completely normal. I would expect them to relapse or show signs as with most mental illnesses. Is it the case that the exorcism ritual is sufficient enough to cure them? 2) "The person is acting." I find it unlikely. The 'acting' is too extreme and too prominent. The person would be risking his or her reputation just for some attention. And as mentioned, there was some physical abuse with the exorcism and I'm pretty sure the actor wouldn't have liked that. 3) "The person believes that he or she is possessed, and is manifesting this belief." While I do think that people can be quite unpredictable, it's not enough for people to simply believe themselves into taking on a new persona. Despite this, I think this argument is probably the most convincing. --- I'm still open to the idea that I may be wrong, and that there might be some interference with the natural world or that one of my couterarguments are unsound. But what do you think? Is there a possible scientific or philosophical reason for demon manifestations? Are demons and spirits a reasonable and sound explanation for them? --- I'll give you more food for thought though: I have not seen an exorcism not succeed at the end. Sure it lasts for a few days, but at the very end, the person gets delivered. My mother, however, mentioned a person who was 'oppressed by demons'; she could even cite who it was (a church member). That person would manifest nearly every night and see apparition. Her view states that demons or spirits oppress the person to the point that they become hysterical. While this view doesn't rule out the existance of demons, it does extend the idea of demon manifestation. People don't get possessed per se, but rather are persecuted by the 'demon' until they lose it and go mad.

One of the necessary ideas of God is that he is an uncreated creator. If something created him, then he is not God; the thing that created him is God. And if something created that thing, then that thing is not God -- it's its creator. It relies on the fact that infinite regress is (thought) to be impossible. Since you cannot have an infinite line of creators, there must be an uncreated creator.

Hi, I'm a highschool student who is going to complete his IGCSE this year. I'm interested in studying wildlife and I aspire to be a park ranger or a naturalist. I enjoy ecology, conservation and the outdoors and I want to specialise in them. However, I am unsure on what to study for my tetiary education. The universities and colleges I have surveyed do not have a course on ecology or wildlife science (most of the time it's medical) At most that they have is general biology, environmental management/science, zoology and aquatic science. Is it the case that I have to go through one of these courses to study ecology and conservation? Or do I have to search for more universities that offer the course that I want? I'm not interested in aquatic science or zoology per se, I'd rather learn about the different biomes (mainly forests) and its inhabitants. If possible, an outline on the path would be helpful. I hope to study A-levels, but if I can find a university that I can be certain about, I might take foundations. I have even been told that ecology is not a specialised subject -- but I highly doubt that comment is true. I might have more questions in the future. Thanks.

As someone who is going to major biology in college, one thing has always bugged me: bugs. Specifically, arthropods. Don't get me wrong; I enjoy them and I think of them as a beautiful and impressive creatures, but I always squirm when handling and touching them. To those who study and handle them, does it get easier? And how do you practice holding them? Besides the obvious fact of their gross legs and freaky jaws, I also worry about accidentally crushing them. I know that they have a pretty hardy exoskeleton, but occasionally their legs or antennae (or any other segments) gets between my fingers and they just come off. I have also thought of starting a bug collection because it will teach me how to handle them better and hopefully ease my squeamishness. The only problems I would have however is getting the materials and the probably some critics saying that it's unethical to kill animals for 'no reason other than enjoyment.' What do you guys think? Have you overcome that bad feeling? And how do you manage your bug collection?

Just to clarify: Overall, I enjoy wit and making jokes, but apologies in advance is something appears too sardonic. Hi, I'm Nukeyfox. I'm a high school student in Malaysia. Now I am preparing for my IGCSE exams at the end of the year and I'm working hard to hopefully get straight As. Conservation and ecology are what I hope to study in my tertiary education. Eventually, I hope, I can be a ranger and a naturalist. Nature is my passion, and I enjoy the outdoors and going on hikes. Also my other hobbies include drawing, cardistry, philosophy and writing.