blike

ROFL

Understandable, but what about us poor folk who got a new computer and don't feel like ripping 100 cds again :/

The one thing that annoys the heck out of me with my iPod is the fact that you can't pull songs from the iPod back to your hard drive. I just realized this. Now I've got to go hunt down some free software to do it for me. Any suggestions?

The whisker one sounds like a lot of fun. I also think "Molecular Modeling of the Sodium/Potassium Pump" would be fascinating.

The study doesn't indicate that they were inaccurate or guessing. They had higher success than random chance. The point of the study was that a computer could outperform highly experienced psychiatrists by analyzing a simple set of parameters.

Well, there's several long bridges that span the bay. You probably took one of them if you were coming from east of clearwater (orlando). The biggest bridge (in terms of sheer height) is the sunshine skyway. It's the only suspension bridge around here. That might be the one you're referring to if you were coming from orlando. But I live across the howard-franklin bridge, which is a long bridge that spans from Tampa to Clearwater.

He's on vacation for a bit.

Ah! Clearwater is just across the bridge from me. But yes, americans are superficial. I never realized that, but I hear a lot of foreigners make the same observation. Were we as fat as you expected?

I think it ultimately boils down to the fact that we tend to remember successful "gut feelinsg", i.e. gut feelings which were acted upon and resulted in a positive outcome. For example, you don't remember all the gut feelings you had about poker that went wrong. The ones that stick out are the gut feelings that worked in your favor. The other day I was reading about the same phenomenon in the medical profession. Phyiscians often have gut feelings about patients. The ones that were acted upon and resulted in a favorable outcome are typically remembered, but the ones that ended up being wrong are usually quickly forgotten. Thus, the "gut feeling" feels like more than it actually is. I read of a study in Switzerland (I believe) where a world-renowned cardiologist was asked to view several hundred ECGs and identify which ones he thought indicated the patient was experiencing a heart attack. He was matched up against a computer which had studied several thousand ECGs as well. The computer had no intuition, only raw processing of information based on a few variables on the ECG. The computer beat the physician, identifying something like 15% more accurately. Another study I read about involved psychiatrists evaluating prisoners for release. They were matched up with a computer which evaluated a few simple parameters, plugged them into a formula, and then predicted the likelihood of the prisoners committing another crime. The computer predicted more accurately than psychiatrists, yet it had no intuition and was based on a select few parameters. Just food for thought.

I just read a TIME magazine article which included specific details of intelligence gathering methods used on a detainee at guantanamo bay. It was very interesting. The methods the US interrogators used would probably be considered "light" torture by most people. Although I'm an advocate of aggressive interrogation, I cannot support torture. Naturally, I found myself questioning whether or not some of the methods they used were "over the line" for me. The detainee is supposedly the "20th hijacker". One thing particularly interesting was how concerned the interrogators were with his physical health. The article notes that he was seen by doctors up to three times a day. Here's the portion of the article I'm referring to.

It was a great white shark.

nice!

You could always create measure "twin" particles with a known life-span. Measure the life-span of one moving at .9999c and the lifespan of a stationary one. I'm sure this has been done.

If you've got an idea for a good science debate, let's hear it. I'd like to do another almost-mythical "featured debate".

On my personal statement I included motivations. Don't sound hokey ("I want to help people"), because they'll make you look like a fool during interviews if you do. I think the most important and unique part of your application is your experiences, and the PS is a great place to expand upon them. Tell them what experiences you've had and what they taught you about medicine, yourself, and your motivations. I'm a US medical student (well, I will be in August), but we also have to submit personal statements.

I closed this thread because Deviation got what he was asking for from swansont. And yes, curvature should make light take longer. You can demonstrate this with a ruler in your living room. Pick two points. Measure the distance between them in a straight line. Then, create a large curve between the two points with a piece of string. Measure the length of the string and you'll see the distance is greater. Thus something that is travelling at a constant speed will take longer to pass through a curve then it would in a straight line.

One of the more stupid things I've done, but probably not the stupidest. After getting in serious trouble for something at school, I thought it would be funny to record the conversation between me and the high school dean for my buddies on a little voice recorder. A few hours later, by some stroke of bad luck, the recorder was taken away from my friend at lunch and ended up in the dean's office. By a further stroke of bad luck, the dean decided to play the tape, and it happened to be the small portion of the tape that had OUR conversation. Nearly got expelled for that one.

I like the new icons.

We had an SFN wiki, until it mysteriously killed itself. Nonetheless, projects like that need a large effort to be successful. I would like to create a wiki dedicated to science, but I dont' think we have the resources to successfully get one off the ground. Further, one probably already exists.

In honor of the NGC poll. I was suprised we hadn't done this blatantly obvious poll yet.

A recent poll released by National Geographic indicates that 60% of Americans believe that life exists on other planets. Some other interesting results: More men believe that life exists on other planets than women (69% men / 51% women) Women are more likely to feel 'nervous and afraid' if we learn that life exists elsewhere (27% women /13% men) Regular church goers are less likely to believe that life exists elsewhere (46% church / 70% nonchurch) Republicans and Democrats are just as likely to believe in life on other planets 70% of Americans believe that these life forms would be similar to humans, and 80% believe they would be more technologically advanced. 90% of those who believe life exists elsewhere feel that we should respond if we were to receive communication. You can find all of the results on the National Geographic site

They're all working fine for me. Try refreshing?

True, but fire could be said to do the same. It's hard to find a perfect definition, but the one Ophiolite is really good.

Moved this to general sciences.

Oh my bad. One of my favorites was tagging proteins (actin, tubulin, and a mitochondrial protein) with enhanced yellow flourescent protein by inserting the gene for the respective protein into a vector with EYFP. The plasmid was then transfected and the cells obserrved under flourescent microscope. It was fascinating to see all the theory come together in a nice visual demonstration.