ewmon

Yet, some neurons may be more sensitive to pressure than others, and thus malfunction, so I can't dismiss you statements entirely. Consider cortical blindness due to carbon monoxide intoxication. The eyes might be able to follow moving objects, which can be an unconscious feedback loop along the visual pathway not involving the cortex. However, the patient cannot describe what they are seeing, partially or entirely. They might be able to describe an object by its color, motion, location, shape, etc, but not all together to form a complete picture. For example, a patient might be able to describe an object as yellow and moving from right to left, but cannot describe it further. They might be only able to describe the level of ambient light, and nothing else. So, rhetorically, why is the cortex more sensitive to anoxia compared to the retina, optic nerve and other parts of the visual pathway?

The quick method (by combining the equations above) is: f = w × (1 + h / p) where: f = force required throughout the push off (lbs) w = weight of person (lbs) h = height to reach (ft) p = distance to push through (ft)

An ally in what respects? How critical a trading partner (for example, how much of our trading, or in what critical products)? What is this much needed source of energy? Why is it central to our economy? I think nothing is ever wholly a liability or an asset. What is the conspiracy to which America and Israel are a part of?

There isn't any conversion. Use the ADC's 8 MSBs.

All this in the news lately about the Middle East has me wondering what Israel is to the United States. A liability or an asset, or some of both? I ask that you consider both categories before answering.

Yes, I see the ventricles as being affected last. Otherwise there's seems to be two sources of trouble: the enlarged ventricles causing schizophrenia and the loss of cortical cells (also causing schizophrenia). Based on the laws of hydraulics, wouldn't that pressure exist throughout the inside of the skull, in brain tissue and CSF alike (the ventricles are interconnected, right?). What happens when we sneeze? Isn't that A LOT of pressure? I am knowledgeable about the developmental biology of the human brain, which is how I began my posts. My knowledge of the operation of the cortex is limited mostly to the visual field. Even though there is some pre-processing done by other parts of the brain, the bulk of interpreting sensory information is performed by the cortex, along with perceiving abstract information, memory, decision-making, and action-taking.

This seems to be the correct sub-forum. To begin with, once the woman leaves the ground, she is "ballistic" — that is, in free fall. Let's ignore the aerodynamic drag because that's complicated and inexact. The opposite of rising to 60 feet would be if she fell from 60 feet, so let's work with that. Find your linear motion formulas. Displacement under constant acceleration is equation 1c in the link I gave you. The initial velocity is zero, so the equation is just s = ½at². You know gravity is 32.174 feet/second², so plug that in for a. You're dropping 60 feet, so plug that in for s. Do the multiplication on the right side, then divide both sides by your result, leaving you only t² on the right side and a number on the left. Take the square root of both sides, leaving t on the right and a number (almost 2) on the left. That's how long it takes to fall 60 feet or jump up to 60 feet. Next find the velocity equation for constant acceleration (it's 1b in the link I gave you). Plug in your values for a and t and zero for your initial velocity (when falling 60 feet). Do the math (multiple and add) to get you velocity when you have fallen 60 feet. It should be about 62 feet/second. This is the same velocity (upwards) with which you must have to reach 60 feet. Now you need to know how strong she must be to accelerate herself to that velocity before leaving the ground. At best, she only has twice the length of her femur to do this in. From where her hip is one femur length below her knee to where her hip is one femur length above her knee. This is an extreme distance, but let's use it. Let's say her femur is 1¼ feet, making two femur lengths 2½ feet. Let's find the equation for velocity based on acceleration and distance traveled (it's equation 1d in the link). The initial velocity (v0) will be zero, of course. This leaves us with v = (2as)½, more popularly known as v=√(2as). Square both sides to get rid of the square root, leaving the 2as on the right and giving you v² on the left. Plug in 2½ for s and the velocity you need for v. Do the math to get a single number on the left side and a single number times the acceleration on the right. Solve for a. That's the acceleration you need throughout your pushing to get up to speed. (About 750 to 800 ft/sec²) Divide that acceleration by the acceleration for gravity (32.174 ft/sec²), and this will get you the number of g's for that acceleration. The number of g's of this acceleration should be about 24. The force of 1 g on this woman is 110 pounds (which you have us as her "weight"). So multiply 110 pounds by this number of g's, and that's how much force she needs to push through her 2½ foot jump to get up to speed to reach 60 feet. It should be between 2600 and 2700 pounds. Add her regular 110 pounds onto that (because if you're only pushing with 110 pounds, you're just standing there), giving you 2700 to 2800 pounds. What! You mean Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is totally ridiculous? Yup. So, you'd need the weight of a car on one side of a seesaw and you on the other side to get you up to speed in 2½ feet to get you 60 feet up. (I did this quickly, so I hope it's right)

The Big Bang Theory currently lacks critical facts, making it highly untenable. (What existed before the Big Bang? What triggered the Big Bang? Does the universe expand infinitely, stabilize or collapse? etc) It claims to know, for example, the details of the first 10–43 seconds, but doesn't know what triggered it. They now say that the universe will expand forever, but also that black holes will continue to suck in the universe around them, so the end game is an infinitely expanding "universe" full of black holes? The Big Bang Theory is the too-small tablecloth that can't cover the whole table adequately. The Big Bounce Theory doesn't have those critical facts that would limit its acceptance. The existence of the universe is cyclic, perhaps between "bangs" and "black holes", perhaps in its entirety (ie, all as one) or partially/locally here and there, etc. Maybe the red shift we see is a local black hole explosion that we are part of, and there's plenty of the rest of the universe beyond the "edge" of what we can see accelerating away from us. We see the universe around us expanding; we see black holes forming and collapsing. The universe is eternal, having done this throughout history and will continue to do so forever into the future. No big mysteries, no big missing puzzle parts.

Yeah, redundancy or backup or spare. If women had only one breast, then: newborn baby + nonproducing/underproducing breast = dead baby Symmetry allows for convenient redundancy. It's well known that can get around quite well, but imagine the predicament that dashing would be in if he lost one of his legs.

Henri Nestlé proved evaporation without air 150 years ago. Evaporation without air produces freeze-dried foods (fruits, instant coffee, etc), medicinal products (vaccines, plasma, etc), and other consumables. Thomas Newcomen proved condensation without air 300 years ago. In fact, steam heat only works due to condensation without air (ask an HVAC mechanic what happens if air enters the steam system). Desiccant packs draw out trace amounts of water vapor, but not the amounts that concern us here. Besides, I would not trust a desiccant pack with any child, and I think cafeteria monitors would also have concerns if they see it.

So, it seems you're saying: some cause ↓ enlarged ventricles ↓ detached relativity around ventricles ↓ communication loss around ventricles ↓ schizophrenia Even though there also is a known loss of cortical cells in schizophrenia patients. Whereas, my idea is that: loss of cortical cells ↓ schizophrenia ←→ slack volume inside skull ↓ compensation mechanism ↓ enlarged ventricles

Probably paper towels would work best. Those desiccant packets are too dangerous around children.

Notwithstanding the stated method of evaporative distillation, perhaps freeze distillation (fractional freezing) could work as well, at least to a reasonably high concentration where a vacuum pump could more easily draw off the remaining solvent.

Possible cause and effect. If this is the link between the two phenomena (enlarged ventricles and schizophrenia/bipolar) I would add that enlarged ventricles probably don't cause cortical cells to be created that lead to these mental illnesses, and that the creation of cortical cells that lead to these mental illnesses probably don't cause enlarged ventricles, but that some other situation causes both enlarged ventricles and cortical cells that lead to these mental illnesses. Elsewhere, I found in Wikipedia that the CSF in the ventricles helps to chemically stabilize the brain. Perhaps enlarged ventricles over-stabilize the brain, resulting in these mental illnesses. However, the schizophrenia website states that "Individuals with schizophrenia ... have a reduced volume of gray matter in the brain ... of up to 25% ... . Patients with the worst brain tissue loss also had the worst symptoms ..." Wikipedia also stated that the CSF provides buoyancy and physical protection. A smaller brain would suffer if it bounced/flexed around in CSF with every movement and turn of the head, but not if the ventricles enlarged to expand the brain to fit more snugly against the skull. This last scenario makes a lot of sense to me. The lack of gray cells causes the schizophrenia/bipolar, and it also causes a smaller brain for which the ventricles enlarge to compensate and create a snug fit to prevent movement and flexion, which would damage the brain.

What amount of current are you measuring?

You asked for any connection between some mental illnesses and the ventricles of the brain, and this is the only connection I know. The word "cortex" refers to the outer layer of neurons in the brain (also called "gray cells" due to their color). This word comes from the Latin cortex, meaning the bark of a tree, which is why we use it in English to refer to the outermost layer of the brain. The neurons in the cortex perform those functions that distinguish us as individuals — our mental and physical abilities, our personalities, our mental health, our memories, etc. Thus, mental illness is involved with the cortex. The white cells under the cortex basically act as interconnections between various parts of the cortex and between the cortex and the sensory organs and the muscles. One would assume that, as the fetal brain develops, that the gray cells are simply created at the surface of the brain. After all, other body parts are created at their permanent locations. For example, the big toe is created at the end of the foot, not, for example, at mid-thigh, and then it "migrates" down to the end of the foot. However, the gray cells are not created so simply. Instead, the gray cells that will form the cortex of the brain are created deep within the brain near the ventricles. Six populations of gray cells are created, one at a time, with each population numbering about one billion cells. Each population of gray cells migrates, during its own migration period of time, outward through the existing brain (that is, the white cells) until they reach the surface of brain. The surface of the brain emits a chemical "scent" that the gray cells follow, and the gray cells move using pseudopods, just like amoebas do. Each population of gray cells migrates outward through the white cells and then through any populations of gray cells that have already installed themselves on the surface of the brain. After a fixed period of time, the brain turns off the chemical scent, and the migration for that particular population ends. Thus, all told, the cortex (which is intimately involved with mental health/illness) is created near the ventricles, moves outward, and installs itself on the surface of the brain. All this occurs in normal human fetuses within the womb. I don't know of any affect that enlarged ventricles may have on the creation of the populations of cortical neurons.

The cortex contains several billions neurons (gray cells) that "contain" our personalities and abilities to deal with abstract information, which seems involved with thought disorders such as schizophrenia and bi-polar. During fetal growth, these neurons are not created "on site" at the surface of the newly-created white brain cells, but instead, deep within the brain near the ventricles, over time, in various populations, that then migrate in waves outward through the existing brain to the surface and install themselves there. This is the closest I can come to linking mental problems with the ventricles.

I sympathize with you. I had a cousin with Down syndrome. My friends have an autistic son, and one day at about age 10, an epiphany occurred, and he went from always needing diapers to never (ever) needing them again. They said it was as though a switch was flipped. I wonder if he's responding to the tactile sensation of the fried crusts of the nuggets and fries more than the actual foods themselves? Have you tried batter-fried vegetables?

I was thinking that the high heat of frying would drive out most of the moisture in potatoes (¾ of a potato is water). Food tips? I found regular sandwiches were a disaster with my kids, so I made them pita pockets, which can withstand the treatment kids give them. Especially strong when used with a "binder" (aka peanut butter, tuna or chicken salad, etc), ), but pockets also do well in controlling regular loose sandwich fillers (lettuce, cheese, meat, pickles, tomatoes, etc), etc. Between mayo, ketchup and mustard, I choose mustard because it doesn't tend to spoil and has few, if any, calories. Hot meals? I can't see a hot meal remaining hot without the moisture. I recommend those double-walled, evacuated liners. And I wonder how well a hot water packet in the container would work to keep any food (even dry foods) hot for a few hours. Soup at a bustling cafeteria lunch table is probably out of the question, but maybe stews, small baked potatoes, winter squash, pizza slices, calzones, etc. (Now I'm getting hungry) Overall suggestion: Whatever you do, try experimenting and validating: Make these lunches on weekends, and see for yourself how "hot", soggy, "untasty", disgusting, etc they really are by lunchtime (you actually eat them). Heat/cook/pack them in the morning, and set them on the counter. Then try them at lunch. Even do robustness testing. Turn the container upside down, drop it on the floor, and then set it on the counter. (Hey, you're talking to scientists here)

I would guess it was the fries that got soggy, perhaps along with the breading on the nuggets. The moisture would have come from the chicken. You could put the "victim" fries (or the "culprit" nuggets) in a sealable sandwich bag, but it seems that the nuggets' breading will suffer either way. You can try putting a paper towel in with the source of the water (here it's the nuggets) to absorb the water. Try wrapping the nuggets with a couple of paper towels, and then put that packet into a sealable bag. Let us know how this works.

I don't think a vacuum within the container itself would make much difference. (Read on.) What became soggy? The plastic/metal container? By "soggy", I think you mean lined with moisture, instead of saturated with moisture (as soggy paper or cardboard would be). On the other hand, if the lunchbox had enough openings to let the water vapor out, there'd be a minimum amount of condensation inside. I'd be more concerned that a hot lunch would lose its heat before it was eaten, and microbes in the food would grow and cause food poisoning (hopefully only a mild case). Meal containers with evacuated liners are probably your sons' safest and most enjoyable way to enjoy a hot lunch from home. I think the original brand of these types of containers are called Thermos, but there are many other brands on the market, some probably made with plastic or metal liners instead of fragile glass. You mentioned wanting to "keep the food dry and warm", but the moisture is coming from the food. For example, you'd be amazed at the amount of water in three slices of French toast. When that moisture has time to escape, the apparently dry French toast actually become drier.

Essentially, are you asking if gaseous water will move through a vacuum (disperse throughout an evacuated container) from a mass hot enough to vaporize the water it contains? Let's exaggerate the situation: If this mass was the end of a steam pipe (with steam coming out), what do you think the steam would do inside the evacuated container?

Water saturated with CO2 reduces the pH to ~5.8, but as Fuzzwood said, Coca-cola has phosphoric acid, which apparently brings the pH down to about the ~3 that I remember stated for cola-type sodas. I think you'd need to be using dissimilar electrodes to make a battery, but it's standard that a meter's electrodes are identical metals, not dissimilar. Then there's placement/connections. If one electrode was in the cola and the other was clamped onto the Menthos, there might be some sort of electron flow generated between the two, but Menthos electrode is destroyed quickly. When I heard about an electric current found in a cola-Menthos solution, I wondered how such a current could be measured if not by purposely making some sort of battery, and it still puzzles me.

I'm thinking we'd see game theory in the evolution of microbes and survival strategies, and quorum sensing came to mind when I read this thread. Sure enough, when I googled "quorum sensing" "game theory", I found a variety of information.

π is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter, and yet, it is the irrational ratio.