Glider

This is true. The terms 'Reality' and 'Perception' are not interchangable, they refer to different things. One exists and doesn't require our understanding (or even our existence) to do so. The other is an interpretive representation that needs to have undergone transduction and cognitive reconstruction in order to exist. They are completely different things.

June. It's my birthday too. Plus, I prefer early summer because I'm prone to sub-clinical SAD, so I don't do winter. I never seemed to get the hang of it. Early Summer provides a huge feeling of relief for me and I feel relaxed and really good until the end of September (although Jan and Feb are the worst months for me).

It's an important activity

The brainstem, particularly the medulla, contains nuclei necessary for the maintenance of physical life. Brain-stem death means physical death. The body can no longer sustain life. Brain death is more tricky. The absence of cortical activity (brain death) is often termed persistant vegetative state. The body can sustain life, but the 'person' has gone. I suppose a way to look at it would be: Brain stem death = physical death. Brain death = death of the person (the body can persist).

Breathing is an autonomic function in that it is non-conscious and non-volitional. There is a small nucleus of 'leaky' cells in the brain stem (medulla) that are permiable to sodium. These cells allow sodium to leak in passively until threshold is reached at which point they fire. Being 'leaky' this results in a constant volley of action potentials from that nucleus. This signal results in the muscle groups associated with breathing to contract (e.g. intercostals among others). As these muscles contract, they cause the diaphragm to lower and the rib cage to expand, which increases the volume of the thoracic cavity. This increase in volume results in a drop in pressure and air is sucked into the lungs to compensate. After a certain period, inhibitory interneurons cut in and block the signal from the brainstem and the muscles relax, allowing the ribs and diaphragm to return to their original positions, reducing the volume of the thoracic cavity and forcing air out of the lungs. Due to the neurons responsible for respiration being permiable to sodium, the signal for inhalation is constant, so in effect, we are constantly signalling to breathe in. It is only the timed action of the inhibitory neurons interupting the constant signal that allows the muscles to relax and causes us to breathe out. Respitory rate is controlled by chemoreceptors in the carotid arteries. An increase in levels of CO2 causes blood pH to drop. When the chemoreceptors detect this (e.g. during exercise), they signal other nuclei in the brainstem which increases respitory rate and also recruits other muscles (e.g. deltoids and other groups around the shoulders) which when contracted, increase the overall thoracic volume, so breathing both speeds up and gets deeper.

From a Google search: "Tactical neutron bombs are primarily intended to kill soldiers who are protected by armor. Armored vehicles are very resistant to blast and heat produced by nuclear weapons, but steel armor can reduce neutron radiation only by a modest amount so the lethal range from neutrons greatly exceeds that of other weapon effects. The lethal range for tactical neutron bombs can exceed the lethal range for blast and heat even for unprotected troops. Armor can absorb neutrons and neutron energy, thus reducing the neutron radiation to which the tank crew is exposed, but this offset to some extent by the fact that armor can also react harmfully with neutrons. Alloy steels for example can develop induced radioactivity that remains dangerous for some time. When fast neutrons are slowed down, the energy lost can show up as x-rays. Some types of armor, like that of the M-1 tank, employ depleted uranium which can undergo fast fission, generating additional neutrons and becoming radioactive. Special neutron absorbing armor techniques have also been developed, such as armors containing boronated plastics and the use of vehicle fuel as a shield." reference: http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Outlaws/faq1 "Also called ENHANCED RADIATION WARHEAD, specialized type of small thermonuclear weapon that produces minimal blast and heat but which releases large amounts of lethal radiation. The neutron bomb delivers blast and heat effects that are confined to an area of only a few hundred yards in radius. But within a somewhat larger area it throws off a massive wave of neutron and gamma radiation, which can penetrate armour or several feet of earth. This radiation is extremely destructive to living tissue. Because of its short-range destructiveness and the absence of long-range effect, the neutron bomb would be highly effective against tank and infantry formations on the battlefield but would not endanger cities or other population centres only a few miles away. It can be carried in a Lance missile or delivered by an 8-inch (200-millimetre) howitzer, or possibly by attack aircraft. In strategic terms, the neutron bomb has a theoretical deterrent effect: discouraging an armoured ground assault by arousing the fear of neutron bomb counterattack. The bomb would disable enemy tank crews in minutes, and those exposed would die within days. U.S. production of the bomb was postponed in 1978 and resumed in 1981." reference: http://www.britannica.com/seo/n/neutron-bomb/

I can't really see how a crankcase vacuum helps at all. Whilst it may reduce load on the rings of descending pistons, ascending pistons have to overcome the vacuum to reach TDC. Thus, some of the power generated on the ignition stroke of one piston, will be wasted on evercoming the vacuum pulling on the other. In my engine, a build up of crankcase pressure would force oil out (a bad thing) and a vacuum would suck oil in through the feed, but fight against the scavange part of the system and things would get messy (so I have a timed breather system). In sealed crankcases any gain in the reduction of load against the downstroke would be lost in increased load in the upstroke. So, I don't get it.

The neutron bomb is a reality, it does exist. It has been described as the ultimate capitalist weapon, because it kills people but leaves property intact. For example, an airburst over a tank squadron gives out a massive burst of radiation that cooks the tank crews, but comparitively little by way of blast, so the tanks are left largely undamaged. Same with buildings and their occupants.

No, I don't really blame people for the stereotype. You're right though, the pop media do have a lot to answer for. That's the nature of stereotypes, unfortunately. It's not only psychologists either. Look at the crap nurses have to take (usually as the objects of misguided sexual fantasy). None taken (honestly). As I said, I understand where it comes from. It does frustrate me sometimes, but as I don't in any way resemble the stereotypical 'psychologist' I'm not personally offended by it.

I'm just guessing but: Flat coke doesn't have the same effect so it has to do with the fizzing. This leaves two possibilities. It could either be chemical; carbonic acid coming out of solution, or it could be mechanical; intense stimulation of receptors by the bubbles. If you look at a glass of coke (or lager or any fizzy drink), you'll notice that bubbles need a 'seed' on which to form, i.e. some impurity or imperfection in the surface of the glass and you'll see a constant stream of bubbles from those places. If you drop a pinch of salt into coke (i.e. introduce a whole bunch of 'seeds') you see the fizzing suddenly becomes quite violent as carbonic acid rapidly comes out of solution around each grain. If you pour coke into your mouth, the same thing happens. The 'seeds' in this case though will be nerve endings (taste buds and so-on) and it is around these that carbonic acid comes rapidly out of solution into carbon dioxide. Most receptors are sensitive to pH and many respond to levels of carbon dioxide. I would expect these to be intensly stimulated and to be firing high frequency volleys to the CNS. It might even be that the stimulation is of sufficient intensity to trigger some polymodal receptors (C and A-Delta fibres) that are associated with nociception.

Blike's right. I do have a different opinion. However, I'm not offended, because I understand where the stereotype comes from. Most people don't really have any idea of what a psychologist is, or does. Consequently, when people say 'Psychologist' they are in fact referring to the only image they have, which is usually of counsellors. One small branch of psychology from the pink and fluffy end of the continuum that even I can't take too seriously (though I should, really). Unfortunately, the stereotype image of psychologists (women of a certain age called 'Aurora' wearing gypsy skirts, or some hippy in brown cords "Just call me Nigel") blocks out the reality. The overwhelming majority of psychologists are scientists who specialise in research or clinical practice. The hippy view denies all the psychoneuroimmunologists, psychophysiologists, neuropsychologists, clinical psychologists, biological, developmental, health, forensic and experimental social psychologists (to name a few) that are the real core of the discipline. But then, this is the nature of stereotypes and why they are a significant factor in all kinds of prejudice. As with most forms of prejudice, the best way to overcome it is to learn something about the object of the prejudice. This will help eliminate the associated stereotypes. As for the degree being mail order, it is true that the basic BSc in psychology is not a vocational degree (Note: BSc = Bachelor of Science, not to be confused with BA; Bachelor of Arts). This does not make it easier to achieve. In any event, to become a psychologist, a BSc provides only the basic introduction to psychology and in itself is not enough. In order to be a psychologist, you must speciallize and take a post graduate degree (MSc or more often PhD). All clinical and most research psychologists are PhDs. This is not a requirement for counsellors. They have their own qualification(s).

'Life' in and of itself is a poor criterion on which to argue. Algae are alive, as are bacteria. Nobody has an issue with killing them. I think the debate needs to define its terms of reference. At what point does human life become human? For example. At conception, the zygote is a single cell. For all practical purposes, the only things differentiating it from algae are its chromosomes and its potential.

...which brings us nicely back to the first post (or the Last Post, depending on your perspective).

Perhaps. Maybe it's biased (or poor) reporting, but I get the impression that this is a case in which the people and their leaders are in fairly close concordance. I may be wrong.

I don't think either side really want peace. I think they want victory.

Yes, it did. In any event, in laymans terms, a cold pressor response is how your veins and capillaries respond to cold. We have a core temperature of 38 degrees celsius. Our core temperature is critical, and deviation of a few degrees either way from that value will kill us. Our bodies evolved certain mechanisms to help regulate our core temperature, one of which is the ability to divert blood to, and away from the surface of our bodies. When we get hot, the veins and capillaries close to the skin dilate and we become flushed. We sweat and evaporation cools the skin and the blood in the capillaries close to the skin loses heat, cooling us down. When we are cold the opposite happens. The veins and capillaries close to the skin constrict keeping warm blood deep inside and away from the cold body surfaces. This helps prevent us from losing heat. This vasodilation and constriction is called the vasopressor response. The cold pressor response is the vasopressor response to cold. As you can see, we also have a vasopressor response to heat (vasodilation). How does this relate to minty chewing gum? Well, along with heat, certain chemicals also induce localised vasopressor responses. The chemical in chilli peppers (capsaicin) for example, causes vasodilation. There are other chemicals which also cause vasodilation and minty chewing gum, and particularly something like Wrigley's Airwaves, which contains menthol, cause vasodilation.

The injury would have resulted in haematoma and local inflammatory response. If you hold you hand under cold water, it causes the veins to constrict and reduces the amount of interstitial bleeding and inflamation (which itself is due to the localized release of histamine and prostoglandins which cause the capillaries to dilate and become 'leaky' allowing white cells and so-on to reach the damaged tissue). If you hold your hand under hot water, it would cause vasodilation, increase bleeding and inflammation, so I don't know why you were told to alternate between hot and cold. The usual immediate treatment for such injuries is cold water as it reduces bleeding and inflammation. It's just damage limitation really, it won't stop the bruising, it'll just reduce it.

Hehehe....if Smirnoff made minicabs...

By the way, I just read the bit where you said "and presumably I just do this for each antibiotic?". Running multiple t-tests is a very tedious way of doing it. You'd be better of using a 2x3 2-Way ANOVA. Your two factors are Gram, with two levels: +ve or -ve, and Antibiotic, with three levels: Ampicillin, Tetracycline and Streptomycin (or four if you include your control, which would make it a 2x4 2-Way ANOVA).

It's not a paired t-test you need. The bacteria are either G+ or G-. You have split your sample into two independent groups using this variable, so you need to use an independent t-test. The paired t-test uses the pooled variance and is therefore more conservative, than the independent t-test as it assumes the two samples of data are from the same population (and thus that the inherent variance is less than it would be for two separate groups). Thus you have an increased probability of a type II error using a paired t-test on independent samples.

It will, but you have to over-cook the rice, and even then, once you have strained the 'ricey water' off, you may need to keep it over a low heat for a while until some of the excess water evaporates. What you are left with is starch. Lots of stuff grows in starch.

This is true . But they are told right at the beginning what is required, and at regular intervals after that. They are also given booklets which present all the relevant information regarding writing style, format & layout (of essays and research reports) and so-on in detail. The people I have found using SMS text shorthand are second years. There's no excuse for that and it ticks me off. You're absolutely right. I apologise. It's just that Easter is one of the worst times for marking as all course work gets handed in just before the break. It took two separate bags just to carry it all home, and it gets to me after 10 days or so.