canadianpoet

I have just recovered from a gastral illness after being on holiday where the diet consisted of very little vegetable products. This was neither pleasant nor expected on my part! I was wondering if people who come off the Atkins Diet suffer in the same way. I was away for 2 weeks, and ate mainly cheese, meat and bread. This is not too dissimilar to the Atkins Diet. If the gastral illness is a side effect to the Atkins Diet, is there something that can be taken to prevent it from happening?

Thank you for all you replies. I have learnt quite a bit. I'm very surprised that the brain is a parallel system! And the neuron speed was also a bit of a surprise. On a related topic, now that I've got interested in this. Is it possible to 'pick up' the nerve impulses from a finger say, as they travels up your arm. Going back to the computer analogy for a second; is it possible to intercept the signals in a computer, and view them on an oscilloscope. I'm aware that you can view brain waves, but is it possible to view the inputs to the brain, before they reach the spinal column? And obviously, if possible view them on an oscilloscope!

I'm aware of that! But how does the brain know where the signals have come from? What, within the signal, identifies it as a signal from a specific part of the body?

This is quite a specific question, and I'm not entirely sure how to word it, but I'll try to keep it simple and see if it makes sense! When you touch your finger, the nerves in it tell your brain that it is your finger that you are touching. When you touch your leg, your brain is told that it is your leg. My question is: How are the signals from the nerves transmitted to the brain in such a way so that the signals from your finger are different from the ones from your leg? Does anyone know if they are modulated in some way, with headers and data packets, like computers use? What is the bit-rate and propagation speed of these signals? Any information would be most welcome, and I am a nosey person!

I've never tested this, but when I was at school (frighteningly large number of years ago now) my chemistry teacher once told me that if you put 2 bowls of water outside in the winter; 1 with hot water one with cold water, the hot water will freeze quicker than the cold water! Is this actually true?! If so, can someone explain the mechanics behind it. Surely the colder water would freeze first as it's particles have less energy to start with, and so wouldn't take so long to become a solid. On the same theme: if I wash my dishes up with warm water, the water dries faster than if I use cold water. This makes sense, as the particles in the warm water are closer to the evaporation point. So what's the deal with the freezing of cold water - if it is in fact, correct!?

I don't think a pool or lake would attract the lightning anyway! Once lightning reaches the ground, the air close to the ground becomes ionised, and then 'streamers' flow upwards from all surrounding objects towards the oncoming bolt, and which ever makes a connection first is the overall lighting bolt! This had been scientifically tested, proven and even filmed! I don't think a (relatively) small body of water would send streamers up to the lightning. I'm not saying lakes don't get struck or that you are safe if you’re floating about in one during a storm. But I think the chances of one being struck as opposed to a nearby tree or hill top is very remote. And 300kV will not ionise the entire sky, there's no where near enough juice to do that! The air is only ionised when the bolt is very close to the ground, once the streamers go up. It's the ionisation that sets the streamers off! But obviously, 5614 was correct when they said that the air is ionised once the lightning has passed through it.

This is a slightly convoluted thread, but I think I understand the principle question. If you were swimming in a lake during a thunderstorm, are you safest if you stay in the water or got out and stood on the shore line? If I understand this correctly, then I think you are safest in the water. Lightning would always prefer striking ground than water, as water isn't the most conductive substance known to man. Having said that, you'd be even safer if you were under the surface. The lightning bolt wouldn't go under and through the water to the lake bed. It would act as skin effect. The charge would spread out across the surface of the lake. If you were submerged you wouldn't get zapped. However, if you were bobbing on the surface, there is a chance you would be struck, as you are (technically) the path of least resistance and the highest object. If you weren't struck you would still feel the strike, but it would be greatly lessened as it would be so spread out over the surface. I wouldn't want to risk it though! Id just run for my car, you're safest there!

The Sumerians had a very similar iconic emblem with two entwined snakes and a staff. Some say it signifies the double helix of DNA, but it bears a startling resemblance to our modern day Caduceus! The Sumerians are a civilisation older than the Greeks and whom originated in modern day Iraq. They are quite a few civilisations from Mesopotamia and Mesoamerica that use the snake as a depiction of healing or medicines in some form. It would be very interesting to find its true origin!

This is probably two different subjects, but I'm guessing that the mechanics are the same. Why do some spieces of birds (geese for example), always seem to fly in a triangle formation? How do they decide who leads the formation? Lastly, how do schools of fish (sardines etc), and flocks of small birds, decide their next direction and is there a lead fish, or bird, as such?

Going back to the original question!!! Yes it is possible to increase the time you hold your breath! It takes a lot of effort and training of your body, but you can do it. I once managed to hold my breath for almost 4 minutes using this method. What you have to do is slow your whole body down! Slow your heart rate, and your metabolism. The easiest way to do this is meditate! (stick with me) You have to get yourself super relaxed, almost to the point that you could drop off to sleep! The best way to do this is concentrate on a ticking clock. Don’t count the ticks just listen to them, eventually, and you wont notice this all being well, you won’t hear the ticks anymore. At this point you will feel super relaxed and everything will have slowed down, don’t check though, because that will bring you out of that state. Anyway, the more you do it, the easier you will find it and the easier it will be for you to recognise when you are in the right state. It's at this point you can take some really deep breaths and then hold it! It will take you many attempts and some time to increase your time, and it takes more effort than you might think to make small increases, but it's always a good party trick! Good luck. PS you can't go too far with it. Worse case: you starve your brain of oxygen, pass out, then it all kicks in again and you start breathing normally.

In the Book "The Mars Mystery" by Graham Hancock, Robert Bauval & John Grigsby, the authors present a theory along the following lines: Mars was once just like Earth; temperate lands and seas, with poles, an atmosphere, stronger gravitational and magnetic fields etc etc. There was a planet between Jupiter and Mars, which for an undetermined reason, was destroyed by a massive explosion. This exploded planet is now the asteroid belt, and killed off Mars. There is a lot of evidence to support their theory. 1) The asteroid belt is a vast ring of rock and debris in between Jupiter and Mars for which there is no logical reasons for it’s existence presented by NASA or any other main body; 2) There is a logical 'gap' in between Jupiter and Mars; 3) One side of Mars is very heavily scarred, far more so than the other; 4) Mars has a huge 'crack' for want of a better word, running around the planet. Could this have been caused by a massive shock wave through the planet? 5) Mars seems, or seemed, to have many characteristics of Earth. To name some. Does anyone have any sensible, constructive views or comments on their theory?

I have come across this man's work before. In my opinion he is an ignorant moron who has a very very limited understanding of the most basic principles of science!! My neighbour’s 5 year old knows more science than he does. He's just out to make money trying to make gullible people buy his book and start disbelieving all the hard working scientists and engineers who do real science!!! We should try and boycott him! It would be interesting if he did come on here and defend or back up all his outlandish theories!! See what he has to say for himself!

Aardvark, yes I agree that I said that religion is possibly just a man made thing to give human’s some form of comfort, and I believe that your soul goes to a better place when you die. But I wasn't contradicting myself. Firstly, I was trying to prove my point, that thinking that we all end up in a better place is far more comforting than just no longer existing or coming back and living again. Secondly, I don't regard myself as being particularly religious, and the 'better place' doesn’t have to be of Devine origin to exist. I'm more willing to accept that it is on a higher energy plane or something like that. I do believe in a higher being, but again that is just a comfort thing! I don't want to get into a debate about religion, not in this thread anyway, but I was attempting to prove my point about the need for someone/thing to have overall control over everything.

With all due respect Tesseract the Bible does have things on Creation. The first chapter of the Old Testament is Genesis. This details how God created the Earth in 7 days! Then it all goes on to describe Adam and Eve and their children and so on. Depending on how literally (or not) you take the texts in the Bible, some of it could be describing visitation by Aliens. But that is a very controversial subject and this thread could turn into a debate about that instead of the original topic.

I agree with Demosthenes on this one! I think mankind needs to create things in order to feel comforted and a sense of well being. Religion is one of these man made creations. The idea of a Supreme Being or God looking out for everyone on the planet and having some sort of overall control, is kind of comforting. The idea of a heavenly place or somewhere after death is much the same thing. People like to imagine a Heaven as a place where you end up when you die. Yes we decompose and insects and stuff eat our flesh, but quite frankly, why shouldn't our soul or inner self or chi or whatever you want to call it go somewhere else? Just because we can't find evidence for it or proof or come up with a plausible explanation, doesn't mean it can’t happen. 500 hundred years ago, man had no idea what created lightning, or the tides, or what was over the horizon. But lightning is just static, the tides always come back and forth because of the Moon, and what’s over the horizon? Not the edge of the Earth, but more Earth, you just keep going round and round! Man hasn't answered everything yet, and never will. My own personal view on Death is that life is a test to see what you like and dislike, and so you can learn stuff. Then in 'death', you get to live out everything you ever wanted to do, all your 'one day I'll do that's will be done and you get to be with your loved ones again and it's all far better than here. But that could just be because this planet is a scary, dangerous place and I want to cling to something that makes it all worth while, other then the love of my wonderful wife!