StringJunky

What constitutes you is the sum total of all the chemical reactions that your body performs. You are an emergent phenomenon, arising from those reactions. When those reactions stop, so do you. Emergence can be thought of as: That which is greater than the sum of its parts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

You are not going anywhere, so, can't take anything material. You've lived your life properly if your mind is full of worthwhile memories... and your body is totally run into the ground! I can never get my head around the American penchant for pursuing unrealistic youthful looks at 60+; who wants to die with a perfect body, only for it be incinerated or left to decompose?! Society needs to value experience/s and wisdom more. In a way, their behaviour proves that material things don't matter, and one should never expect others to feel the same way about material things that you did. Saving things for future generations is a pretty futile exercise in this fast-turnover world. Inheritance is all about monetary value and it sucks, irrespective of generation.

Stop watching and reading advertisments; get rid of your telly. 4 or 5 times an hour you are bombarded with envy-inducing adverts. I haven't had one for ten years and felt no materialism since. The only reason you want that flash car, phone, is to hear people say "Oh, that's nice!" and then when everyone you know has complimented you on that, you soon want something else to get that 'fix' of compliments again... ad nauseum. You are conditioned by marketing forces to have constant Acquisition Syndrome. It's what keeps the wheels of modern commerce turning. Buying things constantly because you like them, rather than need them, gives you a false sense of personal progression. Picture yourself near the end of your life, looking back, and think about the things you can and can't take with you; the things you can take with you are all that matters.

What are you seeing when you click on one. That link I posted is to a DuckDuckGo search engine search result. Click on a picture and you get a slightly bigger one on the same page. Click on THAT picture and it should give you the full size one.

I wasn't referring to you.

I would very much hope that student doctors don't just get there information anywhere; they would likely follow the same path I described earlier. If there is any threat to safety from inappropriate information the admin are ethically bound to avoid it. Don't forget, a fair few of the people on here are working scientists and pursue high standards of safe and ethical conduct and it's going to apply to areas that are not part of their expertise but they know wrong and foolhardy when they see it.

That's a stunning object. Found some more here. It looks almost volcanic in origin, like pumice.

AFAIK there aren't any medical doctors on here and even reputable online doctors elsewhere usually put out a disclaimer that their advice is not a proper substitue for a face-to-face with one. If you want general information to start looking for specific information then your national medical authoritys' website can be a good start. The American National Institutes of Heath (NIH) is pretty informative and great for medical research papers. The UKs NHS site can get you started as well. Going to reputable sources as starting points for information like those is much better than asking places like here. What I do, when I want to learn about something, is first find where the authorities on that subject hangout and then follow that trail that they point to. The thing about sites like those two is they know how and what to present to their general online visitors, in a way that is generally digestible and, above all, responsible. It's all about finding sound sources.

If SCOTUS decides for the whole country, it's about time. This sort of fundamental issue is well beyond the scope of a state entity to decide. On matters like this, there must be a consistent policy between states.

Yep. It won't be of any use practically, assuming it's correct, until about 80 years after the next one but it does add to the body of knowledge. It just shows how much work one has to put in just to get that bit data. It's a slow old job.

The article was about the pairing of earthquakes in that region ...nothing more.

Yes, but the author of the research I linked has particular interest in the geology and seismology of the the Himalayas, so he may be onto something.

Absolutely, but they've possibly found a statistically significant pattern in this one. As you know, science is statistics and probabilities, and this is no exception.

People are playing chinese whispers. A few days ago, I read research - the one people are probably misquoting - is that, after an earthquake in that region another occurs about 70 years later ie occurs as a pair 70 years apart. The researchers think it takes that long for the stress to be relieved on that particular fault after the initial one. The predictability of the first one is unknown.. They have found two other paired events like this in the last 8oo years or so. If I can I can find the article again I'll post it. Edit: Found it

In t'days before non-stick that's what my Grandma used to do to her trays ...pure black they were.

That's why you commonly get a snotty nose, because the body is trying to elevate the temperature in the repiratory system to to try and immobilise the pathogens. Going out in the colder air will make you even snottier and block your nose up as the body tries to keep the temperature up. It's funny how we have 'remedies' to work against our bodies defences iisn't it? When we get feverish we try to cool down when we should wrap up so the body doesn't have to work hard to keep warm.

Old love is like Evostik: a bugger to get off.

Time to move on...

Cheers. What do I look for on Google to find the mathematical parameters/relationships of colours - frequency and/or wavelength - and how they add or cancel to make another colour?

Are monitors/TVs RGB because our eyes are?

Then what is the yellow that red and green produce?. Is it because the blue component in green cancels the red component leaving yellow? Also, why are the three primary light colours in monitors and the cones in our eyes RGB and not RYB?

This physics lesson is a nice potted treatise on the history, physics and perception of colour. The author seems to think there is only six visible rainbow colours: "Indigo. The only time I ever hear it is when students recite the visible spectrum. Indigo is a color of relatively little importance. If indigo counts as a color then so should canary, and mauve, and puce, and brick, and teal, and so on. Where is their place in the spectrum?"

To pinch from Dawkins, always remember, Evolution is a blind watchmaker.

I would say science is a particular investigative process or style and if you adhere to that process you are a scientist. I think it's more a way of thinking than a job description.