Gian

Phobias are irrational. There are no dangerous species of arachnid in the UK so arachnophobia is irrational. Two gay men doing what they want with each other in their own home cannot possibly harm anyone else, thus homophobia is irrational.

What they did was something like this. They put the kittens on a walkway (catwalk!) which had 2 thick black lines painted along its length. Then there was a gap several feet deep with the lines running down it, so the kittens could clearly see the lines appearing to go downwards. But the gap was covered in transparent Perspex, so the kittens could have walked across it. But they all shied away from the gap, so evidently they had an inborn sense that heights are dangerous because they could fall

Thanks! that is useful info🙂

I would still like to be able to gaze at Saturn's Rings, and Jupiter directly Such as?🙂

Well because homophobia seems to be an ethical issue, although perhaps I should have put it in one of the Science sections. I read of an experiment once where newborn kittens were found to have a fear of heights, implying It's something they're born with. I just wondered if it's true of homophobia

I don't recall Jesus saying anything whatsoever about homosexuality. But to get back to why I started this topic, are phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia, claustrophobia etc) nature or nurture? Well yes, but my question is not about whether it is morally right or wrong to be homophobic, but whether phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia etc) are inborn or not. I always used to think phobias were socially constructed, but now I'm reading stuff which says they may be inbuilt

Just getting started with astronomy, so I guess I just wanna be able to see the stars and planets as clearly as possible

Can anyone recommend a telescope for astronomy for under about £200/ $US250? Is there one, or do I need to go higher? Thanks GIAN x

Well I used to read that phobias (eg arachnophobia claustrophobia etc) were socially constructed. But now I'm reading stuff that phobias may be inborn So is homophobia (along with arachnophobia etc) inborn or isn't it?

Is it theoretically possible to take a fertilised child early in the pregnancy and transfer it to the womb of another mother? If not now, will it be possible in the future? Thanks GIAN

I suppose the sort of homophobia I mean is repulsion rather than hatred. I heard of an experiment once with newborn kittens who were found to have an immediate fear of heights. This is not irrational of course, but would seem to be inborn. With phobias, which are defined as irrational, eg arachnophobia (I think I'm right there are no dangerous spiders in Western Europe) these are thought to be socially constructed. I have my own irrational repulsions, and children of course love saying "Eeeugh!"

Science used to say that phobias were socially constructed, but I seem to remember experiments with newborn kittens showing that they had an immediate fear of heights and could "read" 3D space, before they'd had time to be taught anything. However I suppose a fear of heights is a genuine defence mechanism, wheras a phobia is supposed to be an irrational fear. The idea of 2 gay men "doing it" can't possibly hurt you, but it can still elicit the yuk response. But perhaps there's some evolutionary advantage to not being gay lke "my genes will reproduce better if I do it with the oppo sex rather than same sex"

Is it possible that homophobia - fear of homosexuality - is something that is inborn? If so via natural selection? Among our remote ancestors, did homophobes survive better?

Well, I mean suppose families are emigrating to start a new life on an Earthlike planet in another star system. Or tourists want to visit the moons of Saturn, but don't want to be sitting in the spaceship for months until they get there?

I don't mean "suspended animation" but would it be possible to put someone in an induced coma for several months or years while travelling to other parts of the solar system? If so would the following mechanisms be necessary? I guess a machine would have to keep moving the person's limbs into different positions to prevent clotting and emboli. And electrodes to keep stimulating the person's muscles to prevent wastage. I guess the waking crew would have to keep waking the sleepers regular to make sure everything's ok Sound any good?

If I went for an afternoon stroll on Titan, will I be able to see Saturn through the clouds and do the clouds ever clear sufficiently to give sunny days?

If you have time, can people give me their response to this video on artificial gravity please? The coriolis effect is discussed from 13.31 I've no science beyond GCSE so I can't evaluate all the technicalities. GIAN xxx

As a means of creating artificial gravity sci-fi authors and movies have often suggested using a centrifugal force in a rotating space station or spacecraft, as in 2001 A Space Odyssey However the idea apparrently fails to take note of the "Coriolis effect" which would cause immediate nausea and loss of balance, like motion sickness, unless the rotating radius were very large eg 1 mile+ Yet even Lord Nelson was seasick for several days after putting to sea, but would then gain his sea legs and be unaffected. Is it possible that the bodies of individuals like the crew of 2001's spacecraft Discovery One may adapt after a few days and get their "space legs" leaving them unaffected by the Coriolis effect? Thanks GIAN🙂

The common ancestor is the Big Bang, the creation of the universe. The creation of the matter (or energy or whatever) was initiated which eventually made up the Milky Way, the Earth, then us, and also the astrological stars and planets in which astrologers examine for patterns.

Why can't anyone here get me?? I don't mean that distant matter is influencing events on Earth. I mean that distant matter has an origin in common with events here. Therefore it may be possible there's an observable correlation between the two, even though they are now of no influence on each other at all

We were told in GCSE Physics that every particle of matter in the universe exerts a gravitational pull on all other particles of matter That's not what I mean lol I don't mean that the stars are affecting us at this point in time, of course they're not, or not in any discernible significant way. What I mean is that all objects - matter and energy - have a single common ancestor; Creation, the Big Bang. In dendrochronology we can see the weather year by year affecting tree rings. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the behaviour of some objects is discernible as "mirages" in the behaviour of other objects within our universe, as they all had the same single starting point. If so this is not remotely supernatural, and is so inexact it probably isn't very useful.

Gravity affects atoms the same way it affects all other matter. Every atom creates its own gravitational field which attracts all other matter in the universe. Steve Gagnon, Science Education Specialist Im still reading and pondering your reply but here's Point 1: So is it true that the particles that make up this planet, you and me attract the particles which make up objects on the other side of our universe? Gravity affects atoms the same way it affects all other matter. Every atom creates its own gravitational field which attracts all other matter in the universe. Steve Gagnon, Science Education Specialist

Richard Dawkins is especially scathing of astrology, along with most scientists. But I wonder what scientists here think of this idea from the Hitch-Hikers Guide To The Galaxy about the Total Perspective Vortex; "The idea is that, if every atom of the universe is affected by every other atom of the universe, it is in theory possible to extrapolate the whole of creation—every Galaxy, every sun, every planet, their orbits, their composition, and their economic and social history from, say, one small piece of fairy cake." So if every atom of matter attracts every other particle of matter in the universe, it follows that there's a relationship between the attributes and behaviour of celestial bodies (the fairy cake) and the matter here on Earth. And as the planets' existence and our lives have been "going to happen" since the Big Bang, viz all events in the universe have a single common ancestor, is it possible that astrologers have identified readable patterns of behaviour in the heavens which relate via the Big Bang with events on Earth? Eg put very simply, after a lecture hall has emptied, a scientist could I assume measure temperature and other attributes and estimate the number of students who had been present. Thus there's a relationship between the temperature of the lecture theatre, and the behaviour of students. Can astrology be the observation of similar patterns? Thanks GIAN x

Thanks. I don't really understand it all but I agree with you x

There's absolutely nothing wrong with manual skills, it's what this country was built on including science. Ive done site labouring and you can't get bricklayers and plasterers. Alot of my schoolmates could sit in front of a screen pressing buttons all day, but were scared shitless of honest grime.