Agent Smith

Ok!

There's another treatment for lactose intolerance: Lactase enzyme. This at least has the benefit of people being able to enjoy dairy products like ice cream. What would life be without ice cream? Last I checked the the genetic variation involved occurs in the enhancer region of the LCT gene (lactase gene), affecting a TF (transcription factor) binding site. The upshot - poor binding of TF proteins resulting in decreased expression of the LCT gene and lower levels of lactase enzyme in the small intestine.

To my knowledge, ATP synthesis is fully dependent on the H+ gradient across the inner mirochondrial membrane with [H+] in the inner membrane space > [H+] in the matrix. Oxygen is important only as the final electron acceptor at complex IV, the end product of this last step being H2O. It's theoretically possible to make ATP if you could somehow produce & maintain the H+ concentration difference across the inner mitochondrial membrane.

From the Wikipedia article, allosterism/allostery is when one party activates/inactivates another party (trying to keep it as general as possible). If x activates y, x is the allosteric activator. If x inhibits y, x is the allosteric inhibitor. Cooperativity on the other hand is usually a quid pro quo - a mutually beneficial interaction. However it can be of a type where only a select few gain from pooling resources.

I'll keep this short & sweet. Why are echoes only partial as opposed to whole? What I mean is if I shout "I love you", the echo is "love you" and not "I love you" which is what I actually said. The echo is truncated, the first word/two is dropped as it were.

Bravo! You're on the right track lady! What was the cause of death? Exposure to radioactivity? Radium glows and are used in watches to light up the hour markers. Then there's the possibility that seems rather far out viz. bioluminescence. Was the deceased a failed test subject in a secret government experiment?

😄 I won't. Imagine the scandal it'll cause in botany! I'm stupid but I don't think I'm thaaat stupid! What an information treasure chest! Danke! It seems mimicry is a two-way street. Vide

SAGAN'S BULLSHITOMETER! Darwin, another late great rputed scientist, would opine that bullshit must confers some kinda survival advantage. Many animals e.g. the Australian Chlamydosaurus bluff i.e. bullshit their way out of tight spots!

😄

Science is all about hypotheses construction. Hypotheses can never be proven true for the simple reason that more than one will square with observational data. In other words, science ain't about truth! That's how I would eff science.

I was just wondering about the sequence of evolution in re plants & animals. Which came first, plants/animals? Did both arise simultaneously and evolve along different lines? Did plants evolve into animals or did animals evolve into plants? I find these queries very thought-provoking to say the least. The standard response to questions about how such a complex organism such as the orchid mantis came to be is evolution. When more information is requested, the other stock answer is that the times involved are geological scale (hundreds of millions of years) and so, anything's possible! Orchid mantises?! Just routine, nothing to see here, move along, move along! However, I find this quite inadequate, I suffer (dukkha). Let's get some evolutionary biologists and mathematicians together and bring some precision to the time scales required for creatures like the Orchid mantis to evolve. Hundreds of millions of years is utterly and hopelessly unscientific any which way you slice this cake! What sayest thou, o scientist?! What sayest thou?

Very interesting points. Product defect

A simple question: Why doesn't Tourette Syndrome manifest in written form? The "illness" is restricted to speech. Points to discuss. 1. The written word and the spoken word vis-à-vis our brain's language center. 2. A possible "cure" if, for instance, we can fool the brain of a Tourette person into thinking s/he's writing instead of speaking.

That's what I don't understand. Why is this true? F [math]\propto[/math] m F [math]\propto[/math] a [math]\therefore[/math] F [math]\propto[/math] ma ???

To all the above posters: Merci beaucoup! The way I understand it is as follows. F [math]\propto[/math] a Ergo, F = k1a (k1 is the constant of proportionality) --- F [math]\propto[/math] a Ergo, F = k2a (k2 is the constant of proportionality) Note that k1 contains a (it remains constant) and k2 contains m (it's part of the constant of proportionality) So, F = k3ma (factoring out a constant from k1 and k2) Does this make any sense

This is from memory of high school physics. It concerns the mathematical relationship directly proportional to between force (F), mass (m) and acceleration (a). F = ma 1. F [math]\propto[/math] m 2. F [math]\propto[/math] a Therefore, says my physics textbook, 3. F [math]\propto[/math] ma Can someone please tell me how that's derived i.e. how do we infer 3 from 1 and 2? Muchas gracias in advance!

I recall reading about the history of medicine and one interesting topic is the concept of The Magic Bullet which is basically a drug that zeroes in on the putative cause of an illness (bug/cancer/etc.), avoiding all healthy tissue, and takes them out in a manner of speaking. Such an idea has been worked on with considerable progress made in the military: precision munitions, heat-seeking and guided missiles, tactical nuclear weapons, and so on. The objective is the same in both medicine and weaponry: a sniper rifle instead of a machine gun. However, more ground has been covered in arms than in drugs. Is there an opportunity for comparing/sharing notes between killing (the military) and saving (medicine)? The magic bullet!

Makes a whole lotta sense than God reviving Jesus by supernatural means. Maybe Zeus is God. Isn't his weapon of choice lightning. Could've been Thor too (mjilnor is basically a capacitor). What about Indra, the Hindu God of storms, wields a lightning bolt to make convincing arguments. I'm sure if we put our minds to it, we can narrow the possibilities down to one. Great post OP. 🤣🤣🤣. Good one!

How would we answer this question, seriously? Evolution, the gradual view, would mean that there were some intermediate chicken-like and egg-like stages in between. It could be that the first egg to produce chickens that lay eggs was laid by a non-chicken.

In paraconsistent logic, one feature is that yes and no are not contradictory i.e. the logical operand "not" (~) doesn't mean negation as understood in classical logic (categorical, sentential, and predicate). As pertains to the OP, no doesn't mean not yes. Suppose an issue pops up between persons X and Y, God's existence. A question is asked: Does God exist? X: Yes! [nothing to see here] Y: No! [since no doesn't mean not yes, God's existence hasn't been negated completely i.e. no is (partially) yes or, to be precise, may be (yes/no)]

Be the fly (that ends up as lunch)! If a carnivorous plant could think, the orchid mantis would be its role model! A fun fact I shall try my best to remember. A knot on my handkerchief! The rafflesia, if you'll allow me to coin a word, is being "animalized". I recall reading that it smells like decomposing flesh! 😁 Roger! Lovely thought! To All (if interested) All this reminds me of Immanuel Kant's phenomenon-noumenon (appearance-reality) distinction. Nietzsche's übermensch would've seen right through the orchid mantis' ruse (superman/Clark Kent has X-ray vision, remember?). It's said that God can read our minds; does God do this using superman-like X-ray vision or something of that sort?

Yep. I tell you, these orchid mantises blur the boundary between plants & animals. Carnivorous plants like the venus fly trap would consider the orchid mantis the pinnacle, the zenith, the big finish, the grand finale, the ultimate endpoint of their evolution. "If only I could move," said one venus fly trap to another!

No, huh? Why not?

Yes, they're mantises, predatory insects, but look at from the perspective of a potential victim (a fly for example). To a fly, these mantises are plants, that's why they fall into the trap. No, I'm not. First of all, I lack the skill. Secondly, look at my reply to @exchemist (vid supra). Interesting. Care to clarify? Sorry, couldn't parse that. Lovely! Thanks for the short & sweet biology refresher course. So plants and animals, togther, constitute a reaction (cellular respiration) and its obverse (photosynthesis). An amazing system life is and we're on the brink of destroying this beautiful equilibrium between plants & animals. Could you read my reply to exchemist. How do I use the "@" feature?