Revision as of 08:35, 30 September 2015

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

• WP:RD/S

Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

September 26

Are people with Asperger or autism more prone to stalking?

Is there any correlation between autism spectrum disorder (ASD), including Asperger's, and stalking? Intuitively, it makes sense to believe that the possibility exists, but was it scientifically researched? --Scicurious (talk) 00:22, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Individuals with Asperger's are known to have great difficulty in pursuing romantic relationships, which is attested by many sources. I have only seen one paper that actually attempts to answer whether Asperger's sufferers are more likely to engage in stalking-like behavior. The authors believe the data answers in the affirmative, but they used a very small study population . Perhaps someone has compiled crime statistics, but I have not found any. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Speaking from personal experience, a degree of social ineptitude (even if not spectrum-related) can result in behaviour which to observers may resemble stalking. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 14:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Musician's fine motor control vs. weight training

In theory, is there any reason for thinking that lifting very heavy weights could have a detrimental effect on fine motor control for musicians? I am thinking specifically of the very small movements involved in classical or fingerstyle guitar (which apparently should be completely free of tension, at least if you don't want RSI), but would also apply to piano. The question is more concerned with instruments that use fingers, less with those that use large movement from the elbow or shoulder ie. violin bowing hand or strumming guitar. 129.96.84.184 (talk) 01:27, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Found two specific examples, but both violin players.

"Vengerov stopped playing in 2007, citing both professional malaise and a weightlifting injury to his right shoulder that had plagued him since 2005" Source. Read somewhere that he was "pretty big into weight lifting". Didn't seem to hurt his technique before the injury.

Elizabeth Wallfisch says she overcame chronic RSI by working in the gym and lifting weights. (with the help of a physiotherapist) source

A piano forum where the question was asked, maybe some useful responses: link

Didn't find any studies; the question has been asked on other sites, mostly about "classical" instruments (piano and violin), about guitar not so much. On some fora the same question comes up every few months; if good sources/studies existed, you'd expect them to be mentioned in one of those topics. Read that some teachers recommend it, others advice against. And there was a rock guitarist who (supposedly) said he had to cut back on bodybuilding because it made him slower, but that's hardly the same as weight training. Can't tell you more I'm afraid... Ssscienccce (talk) 22:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the effort to gather those links. Yes, an injury would definitely be detrimental to musical ability. Part of the reason I hedged my question with 'in theory' is that there does seem to be a lack of evidence (outside the anecdotal). Of course, absence of evidence isn't necessarily evidence of absence. I have a strong intuition that the great weight I place on my fingers when I do pullups might not be great for the delicate movement of fingerstyle, but my intuition might just be baseless... The piano forum's take-away of 'it's fine, just don't overdo it' is probably not far off the mark. - The OP 121.45.141.164 (talk) 07:49, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, clearly didn't address the "in theory" part. I could speculate, but would probably come up with things you've thought of already, like adverse effects of more muscle mass, less feeling in your fingers, damage to tendons, loss of fine motor control... but perhaps the opposite is true, I simply don't know. Ssscienccce (talk) 01:37, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Superconductor question

what is superconducter? discribe it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahjad ansari (talk • contribs) 03:28, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

"A superconductor is a material that can conduct electricity or transport electrons from one atom to another with no resistance." You could also read our article on superconductivity for a better understanding. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 03:50, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

popullation

Q.which country has very high popullation density----Shahjad ansari (talk) 03:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Macau or Monaco is the highest, depending on how you think of "sovereignty" or "country", see List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density. SemanticMantis (talk) 03:42, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

And depending on how you define resident. I am pretty sure many people count as Monacos population, but live elsewhere.--Scicurious (talk) 18:28, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Can small plastic test tubes survive freezing with water in it?

I'm trying to buy a pack of small test tubes, fill them with water, and then freeze them. They come in two versions, polystyrene and polypropylene. Can either version survive the ice expansion? If they both can, which plastic will last longer under these conditions (repeated thawing and freezing of the water inside)?

I know that glass test tubes will crack, but I've never tried with plastic test tubes before, nor have I ever played around with test tubes this tiny. 731Butai (talk) 08:29, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Those look like a strange choice of test tube for storing something at freezing temperatures. Anyway, either type of plastic would survive freezing. The expanding water would only burst the tube if you sealed it completely, and in the case of these tubes I suspect doing that would simply cause the top to pop off. My own experience with polypropylene test tubes is that they can survive effectively infinite freeze-thaw cycles. Not sure I ever worked with a polystyrene test tube, but polystyrene equipment is generally easier to destroy by accident, in my experience. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:16, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

See Richerman (talk) 09:51, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I've used plastic centrifuge tubes (similar to test tubes) that I have flash frozen water or water solution samples using liquid nitrogen on a regular basis in preparation for lyophilization. At first I was very concerned about breaking the tubes, but this has yet to happen. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

As per the articles, polystyrene is "brittle" while polypropylene is "rugged". My guess is both will hold up to a simple freeze, but if you're planning on dropping your sample and running a cart over it you'd be better off with polypropylene. Also, polystyrene (like styrofoam) is very susceptible to dissolve in something like xylenes, while polypropylene resists a variety of such exposures, and likewise polypropylene may even survive an autoclave while polystyrene wouldn't. The only real advantage I can think of at the moment for polystyrene is that it is nice and clear and you can carefully watch what's going on if you're, say, sucking a layer out of a tube without pulling up material from the phase interface, while polystyrene tends to be cloudy though certainly not opaque. Wnt (talk) 09:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Question 1: Ton Of Gay Aspies?

From my own observation, adolescent and adult males with Asperger syndrome are at least twice as likely as their "typical" counterparts to be gay. Any research to affirm this? Theskinnytypist (talk) 09:30, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't see that anyone has looked in the case of Asperger's. People have looked in the case of autism in general (such as here), but never with a large number of patients. There are more studies than that that are even smaller and come to different conclusions, so the answer is "unknown". Someguy1221 (talk) 10:06, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Never went through my mind any association between Asperger's and being gay. Quite in contrary, it's more like gay men always are in the mood "to express themselves."--Scicurious (talk) 18:23, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Question 2: Getting To The Bottom Of Health Effects

My other question is about health (hopefully I've come to the right place) - specifically obesity. For the entire 21st century, the media have invariably done two things in regards to it:

1. Focused on its effects on society
2. Used language that implies that it's a horrible thing

I've flirted with the bear and chub scene for a couple years now, and my desires prevent me from agreeing with the latter. Prompted by a conflict between public health announcements and the associated movement, these (unable to find good describing word) have been burning in my head for several weeks:

• The mere presence of fat on one's body doesn't make someone unhealthy, but rather the lifestyle choices that often go with it. True or False?
• I've heard not just these guys, but even some covet members of the health industry, say that an overweight person who exercises regularly would be somewhat healthier than a fit person who gets no exercise.
• Eating a balanced diet is better than eating one high in fat. True or False?
• I am especially skeptical of reports of life expectancy winding down like an old clock, as many overweight or obese people live about as long as people of "normal weight."

What is the real story?? Theskinnytypist (talk) 09:53, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Obesity is one of the leading preventable causes of death worldwide. That article is quite detailed and well referenced. Have you read it?--Shantavira| 10:23, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

There's nothing covet about your second bullet point. These's some evidence that complete inactivity is worse than being overweight or even being obese and this is often discussed outside journal articles particularly when a study or whatever has just been released. However I think it's fairly unlikely that anyone who does absolutely no exercise, even a teen or young adult, will be consider "fit" under most normal definitions of the term fit, even if they have a weight in the healthy range (and the fit isn't normally a synonym for that).

Note also a lot of the strong evidence tends to be looking at exactly that, people who get almost no exercise. (E.g. In the first study, a brisk walk of 20 minutes every day would be enough to put people outside of the worse category.) If instead of a nearly completely sedentary lifestyle, you're comparing, for example, an obese person who does a 40 minutes brisk walk every day vs a person in the healthy weight range who does a 20 minutes brisk walk every day, you'll need to look more carefully at the evidence. I suspect it's probably not that strong either way.

There's also debate over whether a weight in the healthy range or increasing activity should get more emphasis , however I think most researchers in the field would agree that ideally both should get some emphasis.

I won't say much more about your other points since I'm lazy to dig up sources and I think it's the sort of thing that really needs them, but bear in mind the evidence for most dietary and lifestyle factors is generally based on longitudinal study and similar. The results of such studies have to be treated with care compared to the gold standard, i.e. double blind testing, as it's very difficult to properly account for all the possible interacting confounding factors. Hence it's particularly important you concentrate on good multistudy reviews (like Cochrane Collaboration reviews rather than single studies. Also there's recognition that weight/BMI is at best a weak datapoint. At the very least, you have to consider stuff like race (ancestry), sex and age, but ideally you want to look at body fat percentage, where it's distributed etc. Unfortunately these are more difficult to obtain or sometimes, understand.

Nil Einne (talk) 12:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

There is good evidence when it comes to extreme obesity, see the NIH study.

I should point out that some of the sources used in the mortality section of the Obesity article are outdated, and in particular the one claiming up to 365,000 deaths per year due to obesity in the US has been challenged in later publications. Ssscienccce (talk) 13:42, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

"The mere presence of fat on one's body doesn't make someone unhealthy, but rather the lifestyle choices that often go with it. True or False?"

Of course, everyone has fat on their body, unless they have a metabolic disease. (Having no fat makes you look like a skeleton with skin, so you don't want that.) But, I suspect you meant to ask about excess fat, which does make you unhealthy. Specifically, it seems to lead to adult-onset diabetes. Lifestyle choices are also important. StuRat (talk) 16:20, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

"Eating a balanced diet is better than eating one high in fat. True or False?"

Balanced as far as calorie sources, in protein, carbs, fat (and maybe alcohol) you mean ? Well, protein is absolutely required, something on the order of 55 grams per day. Healthy fats are also important (avoid trans fats). As for carbs, you really don't need carbs, but inevitably get them when you eat other healthy things, like fruit and veggies. Grains (especially white flour and white rice) tend to have lots of carbs and a high glycemic index with not as many vitamins and minerals as fruits and veggies, so limit those. Alcohol isn't required, but getting a small portion of your calories from alcohol is probably OK. StuRat (talk) 16:20, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

You really don't need carbs. That's a rather controversial viewpoint. Not everyone is convinced that long-term ketosis is a good or even neutral thing for the body. --Trovatore (talk) 20:22, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I meant you don't need to go out of your way to add carbs to your diet, as you will get all you need as a result of eating fruits and veggies. So, you don't need to add grains, potatoes and sugar to your diet in an attempt to get enough carbs. StuRat (talk) 21:45, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

What if their job requires significant physical effort and strength? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:43, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like you refer to carb loading. That's used by athletes to provide energy for endurance events, because they can't stop to eat during an event. However, if your job requires lots of energy and endurance, you are likely allowed to eat during the work day, to replenish your energy (even a 5 minute break can allow you to eat a piece of fruit). Thus, there's no need to carb load. StuRat (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Exploring Europa's Ocean

I was just reading this article, NASA Shows Off The Drone That Will Explore Europa and I'm wondering isn't it dangerous to Europa's ecosystem and any life there for us to disturb it? The drone could contain an Earth virus or bacteria. Is it possible to sterilize a probe to guarantee that there's absolutely nothing living on or in it? Also, when happens to the probe? I would assume that it will eventually run out of power, fall to the bottom of the ocean and decompose. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

See Interplanetary_contamination#Vulnerability_of_the_Solar_System_to_contamination and Planetary_protection for information about the procedures used to sterilize spacecraft that may enter another planet or moon. LongHairedFop (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE. USE THEM TOGETHER. USE THEM IN PEACE. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 18:29, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Armadillo Relations

Hi! I was wondering if you can answer a question for me. A friend told me about an animal in the same family as an armadillo but it is supposed to be much bigger. I hope you can answer this for me.Thanks!Claire Anemone (talk) 19:32, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Try Giant armadillo. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 19:39, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

THANKS!Claire Anemone (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

A giant armadillo is an armadillo. There's also the fairy armadillo, check this out. But what you really want is a Glyptodont. μηδείς (talk) 23:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

supermoon

Please can you tell me all the dates of supermoon eclipse events in western europe since 1990 to present day? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.81.42.132 (talk) 21:21, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

See Supermoon and Lunar eclipse. The only total lunar eclipse that occurred at perigee in your timeframe was the September 1997 lunar eclipse. As you may know, there's another one due on Monday, the September 2015 lunar eclipse. Tevildo (talk) 22:36, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

According to space.com, the last supermoon eclipse was in 1982, next one won't be until 2033. They are usually 18 years apart. Ssscienccce (talk) 00:10, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, the 1997 eclipse was three hours away from the actual perigee - the December 1982 lunar eclipse was 10 hours away, and not visible from Europe. (The 1997 eclipse was only visible from Spain, France and Italy, but I assume that comes within the OP's definition of "Western Europe"). Presumably the space.com definition includes an implicit "visible from the USA". Monday's eclipse will be 57 minutes away, and visible from all of Europe. "Supermoon" is more of an astrological than an astronomical term, after all. Tevildo (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

That would make sense, yes. For the OP: here is a list of full moons near perigee for the 21st century. A letter after the date indicates that an eclipse occured, (a "t" stands for total eclipse). The last column gives the difference in days between nearest perigee (moment that the moon is closest) and the moment of full moon. Time is in UCT. The moment of full moon will be the moment of eclipse, based on the time you could work out if it was visible in Western Europe. One could argue that January 2001 lunar eclipse was also a supermoon eclipse (12,5 hours from epigee). The wiki page doesn't mention Europe, but given the image of the orientation of the earth during greatest eclipse, I would assume that Europe had a better view than Western Australia. Ssscienccce (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

September 27

Visibility of nearby nebulae

Recent spectacular photos of the Veil Nebula (news story) bring up a nagging question. If a nebula is six times the size of the full Moon and we don't see it from Earth with the naked eye, I think that this means you wouldn't see it with the naked eye if you were standing on a planet right at the rim of it, or inside it. This is because the light received from astronomical objects according to the square of distance, but the portion of the sky they occupy decreases by the same amount. So my assumption is that you would see the very center of the Crab Nebula as being "as bright as starlight" from some nearby planet, because it is seen with the naked eye here as one star in Orion's sword (note though that stars themselves are much brighter than they look because they occupy a smaller area we can see, so I'm not quite sure what that really means). But we wouldn't see the outer part, and we wouldn't see the Veil Nebula at all because according to the article the whole thing (I think) is apparent magnitude 7. Anyway...

• What nebulae are bright enough that from nearby you would see some or all of them as naked-eye objects?

• There are apparently some number of nebulae taking up fairly large portions of the sky. When distant galaxies are examined within those regions, is the nebula background basically being subtracted from the pictures to make them look like they are set against the "blackness of space"?

• Is there some faint level of background that can be seen in larger portions of the sky, so that there is a certain faint "nebula" like quality ino ]]the space around us? Wnt (talk) 02:18, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I'll just point out that the Crab Nebula is actually in the constellation Taurus. You're thinking of the Sword of Orion. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Falling block and Newton's 3rd law

First year university student here. Say a wooden block is dropped to the ground from the top of a cliff to the (horizontal) ground below. The block's velocity increases at a constant rate (in the negative direction), and the acceleration is -9.8 m/s^2.

An acceleration-time graph would have the acceleration negative for the time the block is falling, then very quickly spikes up in a fraction of a second to a very high velocity. This is because the velocity goes from a non-zero quantity to zero very quickly (assuming the block does not bounce back upward), meaning the total area of the acceleration-time graph must be zero, so there must be a high acceleration in the positive direction, which must come from a force exerted by the ground upward.

What my problem is, is Newton's Third Law: "When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body." The only forces acting on the block when it is falling are gravity (ignoring air resistance), which is F=mg. But if that's the case, then according to the law, the ground would exert the same force upwards of mg. My question is, why is the acceleration on the block from the ground so high? Is this a violation of Newton's law? Thank you!! 70.54.112.243 (talk) 03:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

(The end of your first paragraph appears to be missing.) The ground does exert a great deal of force on the block, which might very well shatter it. Of course, in the real world you don't have the perfectly inelastic collision you describe. So, the ground right under the block deforms, the block deforms, and possibly both shatter or leave an indentation in the other. StuRat (talk) 03:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about the first paragraph! I moved it to the second paragraph and forgot to erase it. And thank you for your reply. 70.54.112.243 (talk) 03:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

The force that stops the block at the bottom is not gravity but a contact force that's ultimately due to some complicated combination of electromagnetism and the Pauli exclusion principle. It's easily able to counter the acceleration of gravity because gravity is extremely weak compared to other forces of nature.

Newton's 3rd law does imply that an upward gravitational force of mg acts on the earth while the object is falling, but the resulting acceleration is too small to notice since the earth's mass is so large. It also implies that the large upward contact force on the block that stops it is matched by a large downward contact force on the earth. The net acceleration of the earth is again too small to measure, but the force will generate transient waves in the ground that could be detected by a seismograph. -- BenRG (talk) 04:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

When the block hits the floor, Newton's second law also applies: the net force on an object is equal to the rate of change. The downward force from gravity is still m*g, but the force upwards from the ground will be much larger because it has to "decelerate" the block. If the deceleration (acceleration in upward direction) is 100*g, then the net force on the block is F_n=m*100*g; therefore the force from the ground must be F_ground=101*m*g (since F_n = F_ground - F_gravity or 100*m*g = F_ground - m*g). If the force from the ground was only m*g, the net force would be zero, meaning the block would keep the same velocity, which clearly isn't possible.

Only when the block has come to rest on the floor (velocity is zero) the net force becomes 0, so at that moment the force from the ground equals F_ground=m*g. Ssscienccce (talk) 16:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

And the third law applies the whole time: during deceleration, the ground exerts a force of 101*g on the block, but the block also exerts a force of 101*p on the ground. It may not be obvious that the ground experiences such a force, but replace the ground with the roof of a car for example: the weight (=force) of a brick won't damage it, but a brick dropped from a cliff will, because the force the brick exerts on the roof is equal (in magnitude) to the force the roof exerts on the brick. Ssscienccce (talk) 18:34, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Sulfur in the Bible

The Old Testament

• Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
• Deuteronomy 29:23 And that the whole land thereof is brimstone, and salt, and burning, that it is not sown, nor beareth, nor any grass groweth therein, like the overthrow of Sodom, and Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim, which the LORD overthrew in his anger, and in his wrath:
• Job 18:15 It shall dwell in his tabernacle, because it is none of his: brimstone shall be scattered upon his habitation.
• Psalms 11:6 Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup.
• Isaiah 30:33 For Tophet is ordained of old; yea, for the king it is prepared; he hath made it deep and large: the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the LORD, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it.
• Isaiah 34:9 And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch.
• Ezekiel 38:22 And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone.

The New Testament

• Luke 17:29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
• Revelation 9:17 And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone: and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone.
• Revelation 9:18 By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.
• Revelation 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
• Revelation 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
• Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
• Revelation 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

When the Bible talks about sulfur (brimstone), it's bad, it really really really is BAD! Nothing can be worse than sulfur.

However, I don't think the Middle East was a land that produced large quantities of sulfur. Today, many oil producing countries (e.g., Saudi Arabia and U.A.E.) sell sulfur for industrial use as byproducts. I don't think there were oil fields that produced tons after tons of sulfur during Biblical Ages.

Where did they learned about sulfur? -- Toytoy (talk) 06:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

See History of Sulphur. Nowadays, sulphur is mostly a by-product of oil production, but historically it was found as a raw element in places where there are or were volcanoes (and there are a fair few extinct volcanoes in the Middle East) - being associated with volcanoes helps sulphur's hellish image. They may also have found some of it as a by-product of smelting metal ore (many copper ores, for example, contain sulphur). Sulphur was valued for medicine and pest control in ancient times, and that's partly because it produces such horrible noxious fumes when you burn it. Smurrayinchester 07:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

All the Miracles of the Bible by Herbert Lockyer (p. 40) says that at Mount Usdom (?), allegedly the Biblical Sodom, there is a "stratum of marl mixed with free sulphur". Alansplodge (talk) 08:10, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Didn't Jesus say "Sulfur the children to come unto me"? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 18:19, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Salt domes sometimes contain elemental sulfur: The caprock above the salt domes is sometimes the site of deposits of native sulfur. Salt domes are often associated with oil reserves.

Some historians claim that Persians used sulfur as a "chemical weapon" against the Romans, in Eastern Syria, in the 3rd Century AD.

this 19th century book writes about "The great sulphur mines of Khameer, in the Persian Gulf; are rented by the Imaum of Muscat, who works them, and trades with the produce." Ssscienccce (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Do banana actually causes to constipation?

I searched on the internet and I saw two opinions about that. What is the true? Are there scientific studies about this issue? 37.73.192.222 (talk) 11:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

When I first saw this question I thought it would be easy to answer, as green or greenish bananas (as every body knows from their Grandmothers) helps with diarrhoea because of the higher starch content. Whilst on the otherhand, ripe, slightly brown bananas, have a lower starch and higher sugar content and reduce constipation and both contain the all important fibre. However, the scholarly articles all seem to concentrate, either on constipation or diarrhoea and with the additions of rice bran or some-other other stuff. Of course, this handed down wisdom could all have been a cunning ploy by our Grandmothers to induces some type of placebo effect upon us so the we didn't have to get taken down to a doctor for an expensive consultation and prescription. Leave that up to you deside (and if I say the Sun is going to rise again tomorrow do I need to come up with a scientific study to prove an everyday common-sense observation)--Aspro (talk) 12:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4291444/ : Unripe bananas contain 100-250 mg tannins/100 g and have high amylase-resistant starch content. Thus, they can cause or aggravate pre-existing constipation. This property has been used in the BRAT (banana, rice, apple sauce, and toast) diet for diarrhea. As bananas ripen, the quantities of tannins and amylase-resistant starch decrease, while soluble sugars accumulate. Ripe bananas contain 3 g fiber/120 g, mostly in the form of soluble fiber.

So unripe bananas contain more constipation-causing tannins and starch than ripe bananas. Ssscienccce (talk) 12:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Have come across this: Bananas And Constipation: The Real Story. It may be not scientific and peer reviewed but I think my Grandmother would agree with every word, as would anybody that took her advice and found it works in practice.--Aspro (talk) 13:56, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that bananas might not have been so much to cure diarrhea as to restore the potassium balance which can be messed up as a result of diarrhea. StuRat (talk) 13:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Good point Stu. For someone who has galloping diarrhoea or persistent vomiting, they can lose potassium which messes up their potassium/magnesium balance which can have a big effect on their metabolic water balance and aggravate their malady even further (i.e., go on to cause constipation). In parts of the world where they don't have modern rehydration fluids, bananas are often recommended as the source of the required potassium. --Aspro (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Blood borne illnesses

Are blood borne illness transmissions common from gyms or contact sports? Why or why not? 2A02:C7D:B91D:2200:4964:3DE1:240A:360A (talk) 11:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

It's unlikely that this would be common - because it's unlikely that the blood from one competitor to get past the skin of another. Surgeons (for example) are able to operate on HIV positive individuals without too many risks - unless they get 'stuck' by a used needle or scalpel, then it's suddenly a cause for massive concern because the patient's blood may now have come into direct contact with the surgeon's blood. Everything depends on the individual disease we're talking about - but in general, it requires that the bodily fluids from the infected person to get inside the body of the uninfected person. says that percutaneous transmission is worse - that's when something with infected blood is stuck physically inside your body (eg with a needle or a knife) - second most likely is when the blood gets onto a mucous membrane (inside your nose, mouth, eyes, etc) - third most likely is if it gets onto a cut or scrape in your skin - and far, far least likely is if it winds up on undamaged skin. That's not to say that precautions shouldn't be taken - blood needs to be promptly cleaned from contaminated surfaces and disinfectant applied - wounds need to be covered promptly. SteveBaker (talk) 14:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Here is a scholarly article that

SemanticMantis (talk) 18:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Other sources: about hepatitis B infection risk, advising vaccination , a report that mentions HBV infection among five members of a sumo wrestling club, guidelines for prevention of infection during student activities, Indiana department of health... All say that such transmission is extremely rare, only hepatitis B seems to pose a small risk, particularly during the acute infection phase. Ssscienccce (talk) 19:24, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that many (most?) team sports have a Blood rule, which generally require a player who is bleeding, or has blood on their clothes to leave the field and seek treatment and replace any clothes before coming. Compliance with these rules may however be spotty. To try and encourage compliance (and for other reasons), some contact sports with high rates of such injuries specifically allow blood replacements generally without affecting normal tactical replacement allowances. Nil Einne (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Tonight's lunar eclipse

Is this animation to scale? I'm asking to know how far I can zoom in on the moon and capture the entire eclipse and blood moon stage without having to pan. --2003:48:2E4C:B186:F881:D2C6:8E35:E907 (talk) 23:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

You'll probably have to pan. For perspective: the moon angular size is about half a degree; it moves across the sky at about fifteen degrees per hour; the eclipse lasts for about four hours from first entry into the penumbra until last exit from the penumbra. (Here's the article from this week's Sky and Telescope: Ready for Sunday Night’s Total Lunar Eclipse?).

So: you can expect the moon to travel around sixty degrees: you can fit your camera with around a 30mm focal length lens (in 35mm equivalent units) to capture the entire event without panning. ...But, with that lens, the moon is going to be a small dot. For example, if you shoot with an iPhone 6S, you could carefully aim and timelapse the entire event, without a pan, but the moon would only be about 30 pixels in diameter during each still image.

I usually shoot Moon through a 300mm lens (450mm in 35mm-equivalent units); or through my telescope at 1000mm (1500mm in 35mm-equivalent). That lets me frame the whole moon... but the Earth rotates so fast, I can actually see the moon drift across my view in real-time. If you don't have a tracking scope, you can re-align by hand every few minutes, depending on how fast you plan to shoot timelapse intervals.

Nimur (talk) 23:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Focal length figures will probably be way off as I'm using a 1/3" CCD cam here. But at least it's 16:9. But thanks for your link, I'm checking it out. --2003:48:2E4C:B186:F881:D2C6:8E35:E907 (talk) 23:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Indeed: if you are unfamiliar with your camera's conversion ("crop factor"), read 35 mm equivalent focal length to learn how to convert into "standardized" equivalent focal lengths. You can also experiment with fixed targets, or if you're really enthusiastic, you can independently measure angular field of view by marking the camera's position, and the edges of the camera's field of view, on a paper target, and then pull out a protractor. Nimur (talk) 23:43, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Hmph, the link doesn't say much of scale either, although it has a similar image with about an equal distance the moon will pass within the time. But going by the assumption that the animation here is to scale, I've set my 1/3" CCD cam to c. 38mm, if that tells anybody anything. It's also weird to see how 1/3" CCDs have fallen so much out of use within the last decade that not even Crop factor#Common crop factors still carries it. Using a JVC GY-HD110E from 2005 here. --2003:48:2E4C:B186:F881:D2C6:8E35:E907 (talk) 23:48, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the animation: the animation tracks with the center of the penumbra; this is, basically, an animation of the view from a tracking telescope (i.e. as it is "panning" on an equatorial mount). The scale is not the issue; the apparent motion of the moon across the sky will be many many times larger than the width of this animation.

Regarding CCDs: Unless you have a chiller - like this little toy - your CCD probably performs worse than an equivalent modern CMOS imaging sensor. More to the point, you can't find an "equivalent" modern CMOS sensor; modern CMOS will deliver a lot more megapixels, allowing you to use more sophisticated digital noise reduction and to make the call whether to trade noise against spatial resolution in post-production. The jury is still out on whether this actually yields better signal-to-noise in the unique conditions of deep sky astrophotography (which is why Orion can still sell chilled CCDs at $500!) ... but for Moon shots, it's a no-brainer: there is so much light, the modern CMOS sensor (plus a smart algorithm) will win on almost every image metric.

I race my 12 MP Nikon DX against my newer 24 MP Nikon DX, and sometimes for fun, I sometimes even race them against my phone cameras... so far, the Nikon D90 appears to be the winner. The reality is, I am usually able to destroy a good photograph by way of poor control, and poor composition, to a degree far worse than image noise could possibly contribute.

The short of it: your camera will work fine for shooting tonight's lunar eclipse; I would bite the bullet, plan to pan (which will be easier if you have some astronomy gear, but you can do it by hand on a regular camera tilt/pan tripod, too). Zoom in as much as possible to frame the entire moon; and if you're really in to it, you can use software in post-production to "stabilize" the moon across multiple shots.

Nimur (talk) 00:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

It's pretty funny how you're trying to sell HD to somebody who's pretty content with an SD camera, one which due to its cine-mode will make even better images in regards to contrast and color values than the shitty RED used for Mel Gibson's visually abysmal Apocalypto which looked in colors and contrast like it had been shot on a 1CCD VHS-C cam from the early 80s. --2003:48:2E4C:B186:F881:D2C6:8E35:E907 (talk) 00:09, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

For the record: I'm not trying to sell you anything! In fact, the only commercial link I posted was to a 752x582 monochrome camera - not to its six megapixel younger brother! Your camera is fine for the task. You always have the option to buy as much extra gear as you desire; and obviously, not every expensive product will actually improve your imagery; but some products can help. The cameras that shoot well in astrophotography overlap, but are not identical, to the cameras that are useful for other types of photography or video. If I were in your place, I'd spend money on an astronomical tripod mount before spending money on a different camera. Or, ... don't! Nobody said you needed to spend money in order to appreciate a lunar eclipse. Nimur (talk) 00:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, a moving tripod would come in handy, but it's not like I could buy one at 2:18am on a night from Sunday to Monday. --2003:48:2E4C:B186:F881:D2C6:8E35:E907 (talk) 00:19, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Quote: “but it's not like I could buy one at 2:18am on a night from Sunday to Monday.” Eclipses are predictable - years ahead. Just plan ahead. Then you can have all your equipment and a pizza delivery, bottle of Budweiser etc., all present at the right time of the the eclipse or even occultation. It is what other people do like User:Nimur. P.S. Regarding Budweiser, I think that just listening to Claude Debussy's Clair de Lune is the only intoxicate one needs with the stellar heavens as a backdrop to the stage of this amazing universe. Just a personal opinion--Aspro (talk) 15:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Here is Shoot the Supermoon Eclipse Like A Pro, an interview with Bill Ingalls, senior staff photographer at NASA Headquarters, which was featured on NASA's front page today. Along the same lines, if you've been watching NASA TV today, you've been hearing "supermoon" and "blood moon." I'd like to take this opportunity to reiterate some remarks made by Mitzi Adams, a NASA solar physicist at MSFC: these words (particularly "blood moon") are not proper scientific names! First, a "super moon" is a loose way to describe a full moon that occurs near perigee. Regarding the color of the eclipse: all lunar eclipses appear reddish, because of Rayleigh scattering by Earth's atmosphere (affected by particulate matter, smoke, volcanic eruptions, and so on). "Blood moon" is a silly, unscientific term; nothing about this particular eclipse will make it more or less reddish than usual; frankly, I think it's embarrassing that anyone would use that term (including NASA's social media teams). I'm very happy that a real NASA scientist has put them straight. Nonetheless, expect to hear those terms bandied about anyway, as they've already been republished by the popular press and "social media" galore. Nimur (talk) 01:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Think that the term "blood moon" came about during the years immediately after the Krakatoa eruption and has stayed in the common vernacular. These days the lunar eclipses appear (to my eyes) as orange red or red orange or red or however one wants to describe it.. A long way from the deep blood-red though. It is on record too that the Krakatoa eruption created many amazing sun rises and sunsets. So today, I think that "blood moon" is an anachronism of a time gone by when the lunar eclipses appeared blood-red. Which they would have done, because the longer the wavelength the less they gets scattered by volcanic dust. The reduced transmission through the atmosphere (at these times) of the shorter wavelengths would have left it looking very dark blood red... err..me thinks... So Blood-Moon is no longer an applicable description, which I think is what Nimur is alluding to and saying.--Aspro (talk) 16:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea how the color has changed over time. Danjon scale is relevant. I don't know if manmade smog and lighting has changed the color of lunar eclipses; would be curious to hear about it. Wnt (talk) 18:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

September 28

Erysiphe and humans

Are there known cases of lung infections caused by the fungal genus Erysiphe? (I know there are things like aspergillosis, but I am specifically curious about Erysiphe. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

No results in British Medical Journal or PubMed Health, PMC results seem to be botanical, not medical. Hooch related perhaps? Ssscienccce (talk) 04:35, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

My parents are doing the fall gardening, and one of the oak trees they had cut down when they reinstalled the fence developed a really heavy Erysiphe infection on the shoots that were coming up from the stump. I visit on the weekends, so I used his lawn antifungal to spray it down (the active ingredient is used as a broad-spectrum garden anti-fungal) and advised them not to cut the infected shoots down until the fungus dies down, since it sends of clouds of spores if you touch it. I did manage to find an article that said the spores cause allergic reactions, but most of the hits were coming up about aspergillosis, which is much more dangerous, apparently. Thanks for checking the medical journals. Oh, BTW, the hooch is more of a bucket list thing than an immediate project. I have to get the wine yeast yet, and I am not sure how many rotten peaches I will be coming across now that summer is over. μηδείς (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Must have missed that article, when I looked for Erysiphe and allergy (instead of lung infection) I did get results, but it wasn't the causative agent in the ones I checked. For example: a Japanese study in schoolchildren mentioned it as one of sixty species found in the environment, but it wasn't considered an allergen (concentration didn't correlate with symptoms severity).

I've had another go, only result in PMC that identified Erysiphe as an allergen (sort of) was a study from 1941.

Aspergillus is indeed the main one, also some studies about Penicillium and Cladosporium. Ssscienccce (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the Placebo Effect and Nocebo Effect

I was doing some research and thought up a few questions...

What happens when someone does this?

"This sandwich is totally a placebo/nocebo! Wait, did I just make it a placebo/nocebo?"

Do placebos/nocebos work if (1) the thing isn't a medicine, (2) the person has no medical condition, (3) it the person has taken it before and knows it won't heal/kill them?

Do either placebos/nocebos (Have you guessed that I'm prettty tired of typing that out? I'll henceforth refer to them as Ps and Ns respectively.) affect things outside the person's body? Like:

"I bet I can levitate this apple by thinking it's I'm levitating it!"

Can Ps/Ns make you forget things on purpose (if you think you're gonna forget it)?

Regarding Nocebo effect#Ambiguity of anthropological usage and the variants...what if you're reading about them and think "This'll take effect if I, say, buy a certain book..." (This maybe the most outlandish question so far, but I bet you can guess where I got the idea.) Actually this may be the same as question 1, but whatever. Actually, there may be a difference (one is a placebo and another is a curse).

I may explain more about this if you don't know what I'm talking about or whatever.

I tried to paste this from the edit page, but on iPad I can't seem to get the range right (pasting from the page itself removes the links). Is there a solution? (Damn it, I may have to make another query)... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hop on Bananas (talk • contribs)

Placebo/nocebo have mainly effect on self-reported subjective symptoms, although a meta-analysis showed placebo effects on sleep efficiency or duration measured by polysomnography. Confusingly, one study also found effects in persons who were told that it was a placebo (read it a while ago, but can't find it now). That P/N can have psychological effects seems undisputed, even in healthy people: see for example the effect of non-alcoholic drinks when people think there's alcohol in them. If you fear you've eaten contaminated food, you may develop subjective symptoms like nausia. Affecting things outside the person's body seems highly unlikely, would be contrary to the laws of physics. Ssscienccce (talk) 13:25, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

As Ssscienccce's link shows, you don't have a medical condition to experience a placebo effect. When you ask if you can levitate an apple, well, that's not going to happen. The mechanism of the P/N effect isn't fully understood but it's my understanding that it's connected to well-known facts like conditioned response and how the brain interprets the world using past experiences (completely natural and observable processes in other words). In contrast, you levitating an apple just isn't physically possible as far as we know today. It would require some supernatural ability or some entirely new understanding of physics. The P/N effect can do much but not that.

I don't have an answer to your question about the placebo sandwich. Please accept an on-topic xkcd web comic instead. Sjö (talk) 17:25, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Using disposable diapers as paper towels

1. Can disposable diapers be used to clean up after water/drink spills? Seeing as how absorbent diapers are, they can do a much better job than paper towels. And yet I haven't seen any "life hacks" featuring this. Am I missing some obvious reason as to why it wouldn't work?

2. Can used disposable diapers be air-dried to remove the absorbed water? Disposable diapers can't be reused after performing its "normal" duty, but what about if it just soaked up some spilled water or tea? Can the Sodium polyacrylate inside be air-dried if it's left in a dry place for a few weeks?

I'm trying to be environmentally friendly by using less paper products. Thanks in advanced. 731Butai (talk) 05:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

this search shows that polyacrylate used to absorb fluids (many of these cite the "fake snow" application of polyacrylate) as fully reusable. Indeed, there are products on the market, right now, that basically use fabric-enclosed polyacrylate (or, diapers), such as the Swiffer WetJet Mop, which uses reusable (and disposable, for when they get too soiled) polyacrylate-filled pads. --Jayron32 05:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

This paper shows that they can be dried and recover their original mass if the pH was between 3 and 12, but it is quite slow, up to 200 hours, at room temperature, and the rate was almost unchanged when heating to 40°C. Drying under vacuum shortened the time to 2 hours (confusingly, they add "at a pressure of 1 atm" ??) Ssscienccce (talk) 12:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that's really helpful. The Swiffer WetJet refills are exactly what I need. Can I just get a reference that says they indeed do contain polyacrylate? I don't want to go out and buy the wrong thing; this is the exact model that I'm planning to buy . 731Butai (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

FYI any decent garden center can sell you various amounts of sodium polyacrylate as "water crystals", used to amend potting soil. I have used them to absorb spills. They are very absorbent, but also pretty slow. my WP:OR is that it can take 15-20 minutes to reach capacity, though that might decrease dramatically if granule size is reduced. It does also take a very long time to completely dry out. Anyway, if you want to experiment, you can get the raw material like so rather than messing around with actual (expensive) diapers that also have very little sodium polyacrylate per diaper. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:09, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

If you want to be environmentally friendly, use paper and put it in the compost bin, or use a microfibre cloth and wash it out regularly. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

1) It's more comparable to using a sponge or mop, since they are reusable, while paper towels aren't designed to be. Are diapers better than sponges and mops in any way ? StuRat (talk) 19:38, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Sawdust would be a better choice. It's fairly absorbent - and it's a wood product with very little processing or chemical by-products that would otherwise to go waste - so it's likely to be (at worst) carbon-neutral and if it ends up in landfill rather than being incinerated, it might even be carbon-negative. SteveBaker (talk) 21:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Being currently much more familiar with diapers (and their contents) than I'd have ever liked to be, I can tell you there are definitely more than ONE class of diaper. They fall into two main groups, there are the cheap variety, they cost around $0.15 each and they do not contain any fancy absorbent chemicals, they're basically just some padding, sort of like packed cotton wool. Then there is the "premium" variety which cost more like $0.50 each, they have those water absorbing crystals in them. Vespine (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I don´t understand this picture..

this here. It says "limestone after a rail suicide" but there is no explained in any article, why they use limestone after a rail suicide.. can you explain why? --185.51.85.16 (talk) 15:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I believe it is Lime (material) which was placed over blood to soak up and cover the liquid and to prevent odor from its decomposition from developing. Deli nk (talk) 15:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

'Lime.' I think you will find, is just reporters short-hand, for not getting too technical – otherwise it would distract from the the story. I'll put money on it however, that what s/he was referring to is Calcium hypochlorite. Cheap and effective for these types of incidents. Be it on rail, road, or any other situation. --Aspro (talk) 17:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Kalk can be lime, but it is also the word for chalk. Looie496 (talk) 21:13, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

When cleaning up such an incident, would you expect plain chalk, lime or a commonly used steridant like calcium hypochlorite to be employed? --Aspro (talk) 23:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

It is however not a German synonym for Kalk (on de.wikipedia). Calcium hydroxide is used for disinfecting roads (slide 19) in cases of bird flue. Calcium hypochlorite would smell for a long time. And we don't know all the facts, maybe they sprayed a strong disinfectant first. Ssscienccce (talk) 15:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Were Giovanni Schiaparelli and Percival Lowell right?

Giovanni Schiaparelli and Percival Lowell are the guys infamous for seeing a network of canals on Mars, which they took to be changing color with the seasons as the supply of water from the polar ice caps waxed and waned. With the announcement that there really is water on Mars, causing "recurring slope lineae" that are dramatically apparent on the surface, it seems like time to ask: were they right? I mean, apart from the involvement of sentient aliens, though that hasn't technically been disproven...

Specifically, was it possible for someone, eyeballing the whole planet, to see the kind of color changes caused by these dramatic dark patterns that appear seasonally on Mars?

Did these observations match the reliably observed pattern of slope lineae, at least on the continental scale?

Is there some system of (presumably natural) "depressions in the soil that are not very deep, extended in a straight direction for thousands of miles, over a width of 100, 200 kilometers and maybe more" that permit the existing brine to redistribute itself over time on the Martian landscape without having to sublimate and be precipitated?

I feel like Science never truly discards a theory - sooner or later something impossible like spontaneous generation or acquired inheritance is sure to turn up again, with some fancy name like abiogenesis or epigenetics to make it marketable, and next time ... it might be right. Wnt (talk) 16:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

We have an article on Martian canals. Here's some different pictures of the recent findings . There, the streaks are described as being about 100m long. WP:OR I think Lowell et al. were seeing some other feature(s). SemanticMantis (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

"Settled science" has far too often neither been "settled" nor "science." Long time adage, dating back well before current controversies. Our "spherical" universe may be literally "as flat as a pancake". Black holes - leak. The "Big Bang" may have been one of many. The only absolute certainty is uncertainty. By the way, DNA supports limited "acquired inheritance" but mainly on a very long-term scale. Ink spots on frogs do not get inherited. Collect (talk) 17:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

(Wnt is referencing epigenetic effects like mice inheriting behavioral responses that parents learned , which happens on a pretty short time scale. Lots of current research being done on effects that can be described as Lamarckism#Epigenetic_Lamarckism or Transgenerational_epigenetic_inheritance. But that's not really what this question is about :) SemanticMantis (talk) 17:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Looking into this a bit further, I found some interesting data around page 154 of . Apparently Mars generally became darker in high latitudes in spring, and browner in lower latitudes in summer. A hotbed of the observed activity was Solis Lacus, which nowadays is known for dust storms. A noncongruence is that our article on Mars says the dust storms are tied to perihelion, whereas the old observations made the color changes sound seasonal. Our article Seasonal flows on warm Martian slopes says that the flows are at 25 to 40 degrees latitude, and admittedly, they do seem hard to picture seeing from orbit. So I'd very tentatively say the old astronomers were seeing changes from dust storms and any effects from the RSLs should be too faint to see - though I don't know how much they affect dust storms. I still welcome any clue about Martian hydrology :) Wnt (talk) 18:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

You know, I thought Lowell et al. might have been seeing storms or traces of aeolian processes too, but the article I linked above says "improved astronomical observations revealed the "canals" to be an optical illusion", though that claim doesn't cite any refs. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

There's the phrase "even a blind dog pisses on a tree once in a while", meaning that being right for the wrong reasons doesn't really count. Lowell's conclusions about finding water flowing on Mars is only correct because we later found water flowing on Mars, but it was not his observations or his methodology which produced the discovery, rather he was completely mistaken, and made unrepeatable observations which were later summarily disproven, not because the conclusions were wrong, but because what he saw wasn't really there. For an analogy, we don't usually count Democritus, Leucippus, and the atomists as important scientists for their role in developing modern atomic theory, because of course, they didn't. They accidentally tripped over the right answer among hundreds of other Greek philosophers in a sort of infinite monkey theorem of ideas: some of them are bound to be right even if the people proposing the ideas have no real sound scientific reasoning behind them. It's the same thing here: merely because a later scientific study found evidence of water on Mars doesn't vindicate the incorrect conclusions of the earlier, incorrect study. --Jayron32 19:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that there was a translation error. From our article: 'The Italian word canale (plural canali) can mean "canals" (including artificial canals or ducts) or "channels" or "gullies".' Unfortunately, it was translated into English as "canals" only, which implies they were artificial, when this was not true in the original Italian. StuRat (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Let's be really clear here. This is the drawing that Lowell made:

Is this in any way, remotely like what is currently being claimed?

Clearly he's claiming long, straight channels traversing the entire northern hemisphere of Mars. In his writings, he's also claiming water flowing through them and that only an advanced civilization could have done that.

OK, how about Schiaparelli's map?

Well, that's not so clear. He is quoted as saying "Rather than true channels in a form familiar to us, we must imagine depressions in the soil that are not very deep, extended in a straight direction for thousands of miles, over a width of 100, 200 kilometers and maybe more. I have already pointed out that, in the absence of rain on Mars, these channels are probably the main mechanism by which the water (and with it organic life) can spread on the dry surface of the planet." - well...the channels that we actually see are far from straight - they are sinuous - and for that reason, they look like they once carried water. Schiaparelli thinks they are straight - which (if it were true) would certainly not point towards natural water channels. So I'd say he was closer than Lowell - but it's very clear that in neither case did their observations or their conclusions amount to anything but a distraction (plus a good source of pulp sci-fi authors' inspiration!).

We should also mention Charles E. Burton who also made maps of mars with long, straight features. (See ).

What we actually have found (maybe) is the smallest, probably periodic, miniscule flow over some relatively short distance that is most definitely not straight.

All three made poor observations and from that produced conclusions that even with what we learned today are entirely incorrect because they are claiming straight channels running for thousands of miles. SteveBaker (talk) 21:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

"All three made poor observations." No, Steve, all three made observations that were at the cutting edge of astronomy at the time, and they don't deserve disrespect for it.

Many other observers thought that they saw what Schiaparelli et al mapped. Doubtless this was in part unconscious suggestibility, but experiments by Patrick Moore and others using simulated targets have established that at the limits of the eyes' discrimination, the brain links up random unconnected markings to produce an illusion of continuity, and different observers produce similar "linear features" using the same target.

Some of the modern incomprehension of these early observer's "errors" stems from a lack of familiarity with actual optical observation as opposed to photographs. Photos average out the variable "seeing" typically over seconds or minutes (depending on the exposure details): however a live observer is able to see momentary improvements in clarity lasting a second or less, and may be able to use these glimpses to draw better detail than can be photographed at that time. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195) 185.74.232.130 (talk) 13:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree that their observations were at the cutting edge of astronomy at the time - they did the very best they could, given the degree of understanding and technology of the time. But they are still very poor observations by modern standards. SteveBaker (talk) 19:29, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

The appearance of the canals is an issue that got to me some time ago:

Note that Schiaparelli is generally credited with the origin of the naming of many Martian features. Of course neither he nor any of the other early astronomers were making a be-all and end-all map; all were approximating what they saw as best they could manage, though some hallucinated a bit more detail than others.

Admittedly, on thinking about it, it's hard for me to come up with a way that the tiny amount of flowing water present affects the overall appearance of Mars; but I still wonder how extensively it flows - whether the brine in one region can move to or affect another in any way. I suppose though by comparison by Earthly aquifers that the speed of flow should not be great; not enough for a yearly cycle, but I don't really know. Wnt (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Even a tiny amount of water can have measurable effects given the timescales involved. It's not the amount flowing in an instant, its the cumulative effect of all of those instants. Billions of years is a REALLY long time. --Jayron32 13:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

New species?

I'm not sure but, I think I may have found a new species. I would like to know where I would find a scientist to confirm it.Megaraptor12345 (talk) 18:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I would contact the Zoology or Botany department of your nearest university. --Jayron32 18:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Take pictures. If you aren't sure you can find it again, preserve a specimen (or several if you can). And yes, contact the nearest expert in the relevant field (usually in a university). If the expert is nice, they might name it after you. This article might help give you an idea of what generally goes into finding, identifying, and naming new species.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 18:37, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

It really depends on what the thing is. I don't think even most most large state universities in the USA have a local bryophyte taxonomist. The situation gets worse for smaller institutions and other places around the world, and also for less popular clades. There has been a lot of concern that taxonomists are a bit of a dying breed, e.g.. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

There may not be someone there who can help them directly, but there's a better chance of there being someone there who knows someone who can help them than there is here at Misplaced Pages. Contacting the closest university with a botany/mycology/zoology/etc. department will put them on the path to solving their problem. Faster, certainly, than posting questions to obscure webpages on the hopes that such an expert should randomly show up. --Jayron32 18:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey, don't sell us short. I could recommend an expert in e.g. bee or louse taxonomy and even facilitate communication far faster than OP could contact any university and get a response. I don't know if you've ever called the receptionist at a zoology dept. but I'm pretty sure dealing with this kind of a request is very low on their priority list. If the thing happens to be even vaguely related to agriculture (e.g. as a weed or pest) then an extension service would probably be a better bet, as dealing with the public is at least officially part of their mission. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's a spider. And yeah. Claims of new species can become bothersome for taxonomists since in most cases it's simply an already described species that the discoverer is unfamiliar with. I remember the Boston accent guy and his "sea monstah". XD That said. Maybe he could first try and get it identified online, and only try and contact and expert when no one else can identify it. There are plenty of such sites online. North America for example, has the BugGuide which have pretty accurate ID requests. He needs pictures though (and don't worry, no one can "steal" the discovery from you by pictures, they still need the type specimens to publish it validly).-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 22:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Well, what type of thing is it? Someone who can help describe a new fungus species generally won't be very helpful in describing a new ant species, and you'd need another type of expert yet for a moss species. If you can at least narrow down the clade a bit, we might be able to help you find an expert that could help, who may read unsolicited scientific queries from strangers. You can do as Jayron suggests, but if you do happen to have a new species of something, it is unlikely that the local Uni will have an expert with sufficient skill and experience to conclusively determine that it is novel.

For the general issue of how "new species" are "discovered", see Species_description. Typically, description of a new species is accomplished by publishing the information in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. You need a Type_(biology) deposited in some museum or collection, often a holotype, maybe other types as well. If it's an animal, you need to follow the International_Code_of_Zoological_Nomenclature, it it's not an animal, you need to follow International_Code_of_Nomenclature_for_algae,_fungi,_and_plants. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Probably irrelevant, but I noticed that Megaraptor12345 has done considerable editing on spider articles, which might suggest the topic of interest. Dragons flight (talk) 21:59, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

If it's got nine legs, he will have defiantly discovered a new species but to show it to an arachnologist, will just allow the arachnologist to claim the discovery as his own, as he will be be first to formally describe it.--Aspro (talk) 00:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

That is almost certainly what will happen, and they won't be shy about it either. The person who found the specimen will be acknowledged in the paper and possibly called the discoverer in media sources if it makes the news, but confirming that a find is a new species is actually a tremendous amount of work. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:54, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

The point I was making is that there is no reason to stop Megaraptor himself, from doing the leg-work and research needed to discount any previous discovery. Then perhaps, he could offer up a name (such as novem crus aranea megaraptori -which would be most fitting).--Aspro (talk) 10:49, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

You do actually need pretty in-depth knowledge of arachnology to describe a new spider species. Morphological analysis to establish diagnostic characteristics for example, requires that you actually know what you are describing and what to describe. That can range from as simple as the number of eyes to as difficult as the shape and size of the palpal bulb. Genetic analysis is also common in describing new species nowadays. Not to mention having to discuss possible relationships with existing groups. The name itself is subject to ICZN rules which can be dizzyingly complicated. The name you came up with is already invalid. :P And to get published (at least in a respectable journal), you'd need to pass peer review from other experts in the same field, etc., etc. For an idea of how complicated it is, here's the full "How-To" recommended by ICZN for describing new species, a ~500 page book: Describing New Species (Judith E. Winston, 1999). And that one is just more or less the "general" guide. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 13:29, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

In a perfect world a systematist would help if one can find one willing to spend the time, and your (brilliant) ref explains - there are very few of them. It then goes onto say:

“In summary, most biologists who find a new species, whether living or fossil, must describe it themselves. This book aims to explain the procedure by which scientists who find a new species in the course of their research can perform the necessary background studies and write a publishable description of that species. 

I anticipate grumbling from a few of my colleagues who seem to feel that systematics should remain an esoteric pursuit. They are convinced that if "amateurs" acquire the information they need to publish taxonomic papers, the result will be a horrendous proliferation of poorly delimited species and a great increase in confusion in the literature.” 

Charles Darwiwin was not qualified either for what he is remembered for. A complete amateur. That leads me to wonder... If one was to stuff and place a WP Editor in museum glass case, what would be a good description? Homo itchy digiti perhaps? :¬ ) --Aspro (talk) 15:31, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Very few specialists indeed. Usually just a handful of scientists worldwide focus on any particular taxonomic group sufficiently as to be considered a specialist. You notice that quickly when editing articles on organisms here. The same names pop out again and again when it comes to certain groups. In my country for instance, when it comes to spiders, pretty much the only arachnologists of note here are the Barrion family of the University of the Philippines. Dr. Adelina Barrion recently passed away, but her husband and daughter are still active in spider taxonomy. And specialists do already help out the more "generalist" biologists from time to time. From co-authoring to mentoring them. I don't know if they're willing to help out a complete layperson though. That's what university degrees are for. :P But most of them are actually kind enough to actually name new species after the wishes of the discoverer. And I dunno. Homo sapiens citationneededus perhaps. :3 They'll eventually escape anyway to refresh their Watchlist one more time.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 22:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

• You might look at Haemopis ottorum, a new species of giant leech found on the Ott family farm in South Jersey. It was described by a biologist from Rutgers, Camden, and displayed att their museum for some time. The species name means "of the Otts". μηδείς (talk) 02:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it would be as easy for someone to "steal" the discovery as is being made out. For example, if the OP submits a type specimen somewhere, and says where and how he got it, then that's his description - someone else reporting the same thing would be hearsay. Some kind of material transfer agreement demanding publication credit from the expert can probably be copied off the Internet, but even if made up on the spot by an amateur it would still be unlikely anyone would want to try to renege on it. And there's really little reason for an expert to deny an interested and helpful amateur a spot in the limelight, when it's such a nice PR gesture for any department to be working with the community.

That said, I'll eat my hat if it's a new species... the biggest barrier here will probably just be skepticism that someone not formally trained really has anything of interest. And yet, it does happen. Wnt (talk) 19:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

How many cavities does the brain have?

37.73.205.29 (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

One, subdivided into four parts. Fgf10 (talk) 22:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Unless they have spongiform encephalitis, in which case they have many more. StuRat (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. 37.73.205.29 (talk) 23:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

What happens to atmospheric particles lost to space?

When particles from Earth's atmosphere are lost to space, where do they go? Are many still in the close vicinity of Earth? Are many significantly affected by the solar wind or the gravity of other solar system bodies?--88.81.124.1 (talk) 22:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Earth leaves a dirty ring. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/12nov_dusttail/ Hcobb (talk) 22:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Very, very small particles, such as gas molecules, will eventually be ejected from the solar system due to the solar wind if they don't get stuck to something else first. Interestingly, there is also a class of dust (larger than gas but smaller than a pea) that is slowly moved towards the sun due to Poynting drag. Dragons flight (talk) 08:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Twins can have different fathers?

37.73.205.29 (talk) 23:41, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes. It's called heteropaternal superfecundation. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 23:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Fraternal twins, yes. Identical twins, no. StuRat (talk) 23:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

What if the two fathers are identical twins? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 08:04, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Your question isn't in small type, so I assume it's sincere. Having only a random half of the mother's chromosomes, each of the two eggs would have different genetic material. Even in the highly unlikely event they had the exact same chromosome profile, they eggs would still not be identical due to chromosomal crossover, which would also affect the fathers' "contribution" as well.--William Thweatt 08:37, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Also see meiosis. It basically gauarantees some genetic difference between the gametes produced by a single individual, let alone the gametes produced by two individuals (even if they share identical genetic code). --OuroborosCobra (talk) 11:53, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Furthermore, identical twins do not have identical genomes. Close, but no cigar. - Nunh-huh 12:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It's worth remembering as our article says, that fraternal twin with the same father (and mother) are basically a full-sibling, except that they share an environment in the womb and are nearly the exact same age. Fraternal twins with different fathers (but with the same mother) would likewise be the equivalent to half-siblings. (Look at the Twin#Unusual twinnings section of our article.) The exception would be the case where the fathers are identical twins themselves, in which case there genetic complement is close enough to being the same that they're likely to be considered to have the genetic complement of full siblings. (Our article doesn't say this about fraternal twins, but it does talk about the case of identical twins with either the same partner, or with identical twin partners.) So fraternal twins arising from heteropaternal superfecundation with identical fathers would basically be the genetic equivalent of most fraternal twins. Identical twins are monozygotic, they result from a single fertilisation event. You can get some cases with monozygotic twins where they may not be considered identical, but your chance of getting something close to identical twins with dizygotic twins is basically zero even with the same father. Nil Einne (talk) 16:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Similar appearance and mannerisms too

I often see people who have an apparent genetic similarity to someone else. Sometimes they have similar mannerisms too. How can that be? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, let's just start by looking at eye color. There are some 7 billion people on Earth. Are there 7 billion eye colors ? No. Your chances of having the same eye color as somebody else are actually pretty good. Now repeat this for all other traits and mannerisms, and, out of 7 billion, you will see a lot of similar looking people. StuRat (talk) 00:04, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I've noticed the same thing to but I wonder if I am just noticing the mannerisms I expect to see. --Aspro (talk) 00:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

That would be confirmation bias. StuRat (talk) 00:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

• There has been evidence since the work of Luca Cavalli-Sforza that the largest component of genetic difference is at the single-language nation state level. It would seem that Frenchmen, therefore, might be linguistically and culturally more similar to each other by definition, with genetics apparently following suit. I am not sure why it would not be expected that genetically related individuals might not share cultural traits as a matter of simple correlation. μηδείς (talk) 00:52, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Mirroring.
Sleigh (talk) 08:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think we are getting on to dangerous ground here. It very tempting to think that mannerisms are the result of nature rather than nurture. An apple doesn’t fall far from the tree is true but mannerisms appear to me as a subconscious learnt thing. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has brought up adopted children. They can sometimes show remarkable similarity to their biological parents (who they may have never met) but as StuRat pointed out. This may simply be down to confirmation bias. I notice this in myself, because I used to work in R&D and it was something to be always alert for – and yet faux connections still form in my brain.--Aspro (talk) 11:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I have trouble believing this is confirmation bias. It is often so stark and striking. I also see these similarities in two individuals who are clearly from opposite ends of the globe. It is pretty spooky. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I am not saying that it should all be considered as conformation bias. There is -I agree- an overlap between Nature & Nurture. I also find physiognomy a bit spooky too. I am saying that until a few PhD's publish a few papers on this, I remain wary. Re: Eugenics and similar twaddle.--Aspro (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

This is similar to the birthday problem.—Wavelength (talk) 20:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

September 29

Spider ID

Could someone help to identify this spider? Taken on a ceiling in living room in Warsaw, Poland. Even just genus or family would be appreciated, the spider's length is about 3,5 cm. Brandmeister 08:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It's an orb-web spider and possibly a male from the small abdomen, but there are many possibilities. Mikenorton (talk) 09:37, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah. Too many possibilities. It's way too blurry to identify reliably unfortunately. If there's a web nearby and it's the classic spiral in a disc, then it's an orb-weaver. If the web is "cobwebby", then it's not. If there's no web, it's probably a male, scurrying to find a female before winter (pedipalps don't seem to be evident in the photo, but it's thin enough to be a typical male of most spider species).

Judging from the leg stance, though, I'd also say it's an orb weaver. Or at least any of the web-building spiders. If it's an orb-weaver, my guess would be a missing sector spider (Zygiella x-notata) or a male gray cross spider (Larinioides sericatus note that our article of the latter species is outdated and under the wrong name). Both commonly build their webs in human structures and has ranges that include Poland. They have striped legs and are around the size you described (I'm assuming 3.5 cm describes the legspan, rather than the length of the body).

If it's not an orb-weaver, then it could be any of the other common web-building synanthropic spiders of Theridiidae or Nesticidae (cobweb spiders and scaffold web spiders, respectively), e.g. the triangulate cobweb spider (Steatoda triangulosa), though spiders from both families are typically smaller than the length you described. Note that all of these are just guesses and does not take into account spiders that don't actually live in houses. It may have just gotten in from somewhere else.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 11:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Extraterrestrial life

With the recent discovery of water in Mars, a lot of media raises the discussion of the possibility of the existence of extraterrestrial life there. There are many reports around that describe the things that may be need for that, such as liquid water. There's of course the reminder that, if there is life in Mars, it may only be as unicellular organisms, and not as "little green men". But that raised a question, that goes one step beyond Mars: which would be the requirements (even if only speculated at this point) for the presence of multicellular organisms on a planet, and not just unicellular ones? Cambalachero (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I'd think it comes down to a question of quantity and time. That is, the more (single-celled) organisms you have on a planet, for a longer period of time, the more likely multi-celled organisms are to evolve. Temperature may also play a role, as a planet that's always warm will have faster chemical reactions and subsequently faster reproduction rates of single-celled organisms and thus faster evolution. So, multi-cellular organisms might evolve on Mars, but take much longer because of conditions there. StuRat (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It goes beyond that. We don't know that the concept of a "cell" would necessarily apply to all life - and whether the terms "multicellular" or "single-celled" would even have meaning for extraterrestrial life is impossible to know until we get some under the microscope to see. SteveBaker (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

It's life, Jim, but not as we know it, not as we know it, not as we know it, it's life, Jim, but not as we know it, not as we know it, Jim --Trovatore (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

"Not as we know it, Captain." WHAAOE. Tevildo (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

More twin questions

Seeing the question on twins above reminded me of a question I have. My best friend is a twin. Or at least she thought she was until earlier this year when her mother died, and the family secret came out. It seems that her father got her mother and her mother's sister pregnant at the same time and the two babies were born a day or so apart. Both babies were raised by her father and her biological mother's sister as twins. (Confused yet?) My question is, what is the heredity of these two babies? How much shared genetics do they have? It seems too glib to say "100%" as the mothers are different women, albeit sisters. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:27, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

To simplify "same father and two sisters for mothers", right ? Full siblings (including twins as long as they aren't identical twins) are 50% related on average, cousins are 25% related on average. So, I'd think 37.5% related, not counting mutations and other minor effects.

BTW, wouldn't their birth certificates have different mothers and birth dates listed ? StuRat (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Beware, you lucked into the right answer for the wrong reasons! Normal first cousins don't have 25% coefficient of relationship, it takes a double first cousin to get that close. You get a double first cousin when siblings pair up with siblings. Double first cousins are related as closely as half siblings or uncles/nephews, all at 25%. Normal first cousins (whose four parents are all unrelated) have coefficient of relationship of only 12.5%. All this info is given quite clearly in the table at Coefficient_of_relationship#Human_relationships. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

"Normal first cousins (whose four parents are all unrelated)". How can they be cousins if none of their parents are related ? StuRat (talk) 19:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, that was nonsensical, I've struck it out now. I was just trying to distinguish "normal" first cousins from the other cases where there are paths of relation in addition to the common way where two people each have one parent who are siblings with each other. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

They are 3/4 siblings, and also first cousins, sometimes called sibling cousins. They can call themselves "horizontal 3/4 siblings" to distinguish from the case where the consanguinity of the non-shared parents comes from a parental relation rather than a sibling relation. Your friend and her 3/4 sister do indeed have a Coefficient_of_relationship that is 37.5%. Terminology and other info at Sibling#3.2F4_sibling. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:39, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Synthesizing acetone from urine

Let's say you're out in the woods and for some reason you need acetone. Is it possible to synthesize it from your urine if you stop eating for over 24 hours and are in a state of ketosis? 18:16, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

If you're willing to settle for trace quantities of acetone mixed in with your breath, I suppose; but it's not a serious way to make it in meaningful amounts. A woods-expedient method would probably start with Acetone–butanol–ethanol fermentation, but I still think it will look like more lab than woods by the time you have it running properly. Wnt (talk) 18:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Maybe worth mentioning that some uses of acetone are also uses of urine, e.g. both can be used as a light solvent and cleaner. Urine#Uses has some other cases, tanning might be a useful one for surviving in the wild. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

If the OP is a normal male, the only reason he would be going into the woods is to introduce his girlfriend the wood fairies. So if he suddenly needs (?) some acetone, all he needs to do is rifle through her hand-bag for her nail polish remover! On the other hand, if the OP is a female Goth, all she need to do is rifle through her boyfeind's hand-bag for his nail polish remover.--Aspro (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Discussing MyD88

Hello, I'm a third-party editor of research papers and an author has written "We performed immunohistochemical staining with a MyD88 antibody ..." and I don't know how MyD88 is expressed out loud, so I don't know whether to correct the indefinite article to 'an MyD88 antibody' or keep it as is. I've been reading it as "My-dee-eighty-eight" but maybe it's "em-why-dee-eighty-eight" in which case I will correct the article. Any help is appreciated. Wolfgangerl (talk) 20:56, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

We have an article at MYD88, suggesting that maybe the 'y' should be capitalized. The string name comes from the term myeloid, suggesting that your first reading is probably how some people pronounce it. But some people may also pronounce it according to your second reading. Here's a video of a guy presenting a research conference talk involving MYD88 - at a skim I can't find him pronouncing it, but if you watch the whole 12 minutes he probably says it at some point (youtube is often a great resource for finding how expert scientists pronounce weird names!). You can ask your authors how they pronounce it or punt to the journal office, but I think the sentence as written is fine. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:30, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Experts may expand the abbreviation to "Myeloid differentiation primary response gene 88". Google Books have both "a" and "an", so writers disagree. Lower case "y" is more common than Misplaced Pages's upper case. Dbfirs 21:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Have to disagree with the choice of letter case: Myd88 . Think that maybe, we on WP have it wrong this time. MyD88 makes more sense. Should the article name be corrected?--Aspro (talk) 21:45, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think it should be corrected. Does that mean moving it over the redirect? I've left a question on the talk page. Dbfirs 22:22, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

See Gene nomenclature which AFAIK is correct and also deals with "expansion" issues somewhat. If you have some idea where this particular paper is going to be submitted, you may want to check, what, if any, nomenclature rules they have.

As our article says, standard nomenclature is for human gene symbols to be entirely uppercase, whether it's sonic hedgehog or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4. Others have different conventions, mice genes have the first letter upper case for example. I'm not aware of any convention which follows the full name. That would be confusing for various reasons, including the fact as our article mentions the symbols are intended to be independent.

Protein symbols (our article appears to be about the protein rather then the gene, as does the OP) have sometimes differing rules, more commonly they're entirely in uppercase, but also not always again dependent on species. they also don't generally use italics. But again, I'm not aware of many cases where the follow the name for capitalisation however.

As for wikipedia articles, I'm not sure whether we follow the human symbol name or what. I'm sure this must be covered in some MOS, or if not a previous discussion. It may be all upper case is generally used, because quite a few including humans use all upper case for the protein names.

The earlier source does use MyD88 as do a number of others and some of the source titles in our articles (which I assume are correct).

It may be that at the time the protein was first described the conventions were not well established. Or it was described and researched by people who don't or didn't. Or in journals which don't or didn't follow such capitalisation conventions. I believe the protein name capitalisation conventions are perhaps somewhat less followed, possibly because they mostly arose after people began to consider how to deal with gene symbol conventions.

Notably this protein seems to be of interest to those involved in public health research, who I believe may be less likely to follow such conventions (our article mentions how they don't generally follow italic conventions) than most other molecular biologists. Particularly Drosophila researchers, who probably need them to avoid confusion over capitilisation given their tendency to come up with weird names.

It's possible a common name argument could be made for MyD88, but I would suggest checking the MOS or other conventions first.

Nil Einne (talk) 23:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Good points; even our MYD88 article is inconsistent in typographical style, writing 'Myd88tm1a' for the corresponding mouse model when naming the corresponding International_Knockout_Mouse_Consortium lines. It seems to me that the OP has no uncontested right or wrong choices. This is presumably why s/he earns a paycheck for this type of work :) SemanticMantis (talk) 00:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

If this is professional work, I'd say there's no substitute for talking to someone who works in the field: perhaps one of the authors whose work is referenced in the paper you're editing. Alternatively, you could assume that the author of the paper you're editing knows how she pronounces the abbreviation and used the correct form of the article. --174.88.134.156 (talk) 22:58, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Does penicillin have sulfa

I need to know form a doctor as my doctor said it does not have sulfa but wikipedia says it has sulfur witch is sulfa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rigsofrods (talk • contribs) 23:51, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

You should discuss your concerns with your physician. Penicillin contains sulfur, but it is not a Sulfa drug. A Sulfa drug contains a sulfonamide group. Not all drugs that contain sulfur are Sulfa drugs. Misplaced Pages does not call penicillin a Sulfa drug, because it isn't a Sulfa drug. - Nunh-huh 00:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

September 30

What compound is it?

When reading Chemistry of the Elements (second edition) by N. N. Greenwood & A.Earnshaw, I saw a strange conpound in a chemical equation in page 692 - ${\displaystyle (SbF_{3})_{3}SbF_{5}}$. What structure does it have? I went through the section of antimony's halides but found nothing about it. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 03:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

There is apparently a crystal structure for this, but I can't download it myself . Someguy1221 (talk) 04:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Record number of daily seizures

There's currently a campaign in Ohio to permit the use of marijuana in certain cases, and some of the proponents have been running atelevision advertisement featuring a mother who says that medical marijuana improved her daughter's epilepsy. According to the advertisement, the girl "was having over 1,000 seizures in a day" before they started using marijuana. I've tried and failed to find any even-close-to-reliable sources that attempt to guess the record highest number of seizures in a 24-hour period; the highest numbers I'm seeing are from news results, e.g. this one stating that a boy had approximately 100 per day. Does anyone know where I could find a reliable source that might attempt to identify the highest recorded number of seizures in a 24-hour period? Nyttend (talk) 03:26, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

PS, please note that no discussion of medical marijuana is intended or desired; I'm solely looking for information about epilepsy symptoms, not methods of relieving it. Nyttend (talk) 04:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Can't really help with that, but can add some thoughts to consider. Remember not all "seizures" are the same. Nor are they the same duration. Which is worse, 3 seizures that last a total of 2 minutes, or 1 seizure that lasts 3 minutes? Note also that Addyson Benton, the child featured in the commercial, isn't having grand mal seizures or tonic/clonic seizures. She has myoclonic epilepsy, which consist of muscle jerking without loss of consciousness. In terms of numbers, I suspect simple absence seizures (which manifest outwardly only as staring) can occur very frequently during the day without even being noticed.- Nunh-huh 06:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

This Watch

Can someone please tell me about this watch.These don't seem to be "hot digits", or are they? If not,what is the actual system. How it works? 27.255.203.64 (talk) 03:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

That to me looks like a static prototype. i.e. those digits are molded and painted onto the band, it's not a "functional" watch. I'd need to see a video of the digits changing to convince me otherwise. I'm not an expert but I am somewhat familiar with LEDs and various displays, I've built LED cubes and clocks from VFDs and Nixie tubes amongst other things. Vespine (talk) 05:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok, i take that back, it's just a terrible photo which has probably been "retouched". I did a reverse image search to find a supplier and given the price AND the fact you have to press a button to display the time (as opposed to "on all the time") these are almost certainly just regular hot digits. The reason it looks fake is probably the digits don't photograph well so they've been "shopped" in.Vespine (talk) 05:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Meaning of elemental mass

In an old German physics paper, the author used the term "Elementarmasse" (literally "elemental mass").

This term does not appear in any of the physics textbooks (English) I have.

The whole sentence translates as something like:

Here, K is the gas constant of an electron, T is the absolute temperature, ε is the elementary charge of an electron in electrostatic units, and μ its elemental mass and the i in electrostatic units, measured current per unit area.

What exactly is "elemental mass"? What is its standard value? 124.178.135.7 (talk) 03:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

It would really help if you gave us more context, including the equation. Literal translation of German physics is a notorious problem, as I have previously remarked!

Going from the limited context we have, this is probably referring to the "elementary mass" - not "elemental." in English, we would typically say "rest mass." Contrast this to the reduced mass, the relativistic mass, or any of the various other masses we might care about. In this case, it would be the m_e constant, 9.1×10 kg, or, about 1/1800th of an atomic mass unit.

Nimur (talk) 04:50, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Nimur. The subject involves assuming the electrons have near zero speed, so there is no reason why the author had to indicate it was not under any sort of relativistic effect. I had thought that it should simply be the mass of an electron. But why not just simply say so? Other aspects of this paper had tricked me, so I thought I had better not assume too much. Unfortunately the formula makes no sense dimensionally, so I am looking for an error. 120.145.150.244 (talk) 08:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

• Pages automatically checked for accidental language links
• Misplaced Pages resources for researchers
• Misplaced Pages help forums
• Misplaced Pages reference desk