The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Profile of briligg
  3. Show Posts
  4. Topics
  • Profile Info
    • Summary
    • Show Stats
    • Show Posts
      • Messages
      • Topics
      • Attachments
      • Thanked Posts
      • Posts Thanked By User
    • Show User Topics
      • User Created
      • User Participated In

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

  • Messages
  • Topics
  • Attachments
  • Thanked Posts
  • Posts Thanked By User

Topics - briligg

Pages: [1]
1
Technology / Could private space flight have taken off earlier? Why now?
« on: 21/10/2013 21:23:34 »
I watched Niel Degrasse Tyson the other day say private space flight should have happened a long time ago. He's an expert, but i still kind of wonder if that is unfair.
Space X, the Skylon project, XCOR, Virgin Galactic, Planetary Resources, Orbital Sciences (although they have been around for a while and seem pretty old guard) - why is this happening now?

2
Physiology & Medicine / What killed my dog - anaphylaxis, africanized bees, overdose?
« on: 25/09/2013 16:28:29 »
We're pretty upset right now about losing our dog last night. I just don't feel sure what happened, and i'd like to know.

We have bees. A contractor for a neighbour upset them yesterday and they swarmed. She was stung a lot. She took off in the chaos and we didn't recover her for maybe an hour, we found her a kilometer away. The vet came to the house. I didn't see the treatment, but there was at least one injection, and he left her with an I.V. drip attached to her and we had two more needles we were supposed to give her today. She had been lethargic before he got here but she was exhausted and in pain. She didn't throw up, i didn't see any drooling. She refused water and food. She has been stung before, in fact once she was stung a number of times during another bee fiasco (we thought would never be repeated).

We thought she was out of danger. She was woozy but we attributed that to the painkillers and continuing exhaustion. She was wagging her tail sort of at random so i thought she was high. She vomitted a little once, but was clearly conscious, i just cleaned it up. An hour after that from another room we heard her howl in alarm, once, for a few seconds. By the time we reached her she was already unconscious. She convulsed once a few seconds after that, and that was it.

This is Mexico, and the bees are wild - they moved into our property and we decided not to kill them. We have had them for several years. From what we know, they could be a mixed breed, crossed with Africanized bees.

The vet has looked after our animals for years, i trust him. But i want to search farther afield for an explanation, because if what he gave her was a factor, he might not answer honestly, good man though he is. What i have found so far online doesn't give me a clear picture of what killed her. I feel terrible that i didn't get her safely inside sooner, didn't see signs she was in danger in the evening, didn't know what to do. :-'(

3
New Theories / What if we find life beyond the Earth, how does physics get rewritten?
« on: 04/09/2012 00:30:51 »
I'm taking another stab at this one, i had a much longer-winded version. If we find life elsewhere, which seems increasingly plausible, how could that not imply that the universe has a powerful tendency to organize into incredibly complex systems? After all, one of the most fundamental aspects of life is that it adapts and spreads, as much as possible. Once it becomes intelligent, something that strikes me as bound to happen where ever a biosphere reaches sufficient complexity, the imperative to spread becomes astronomical - unless the intelligent species is destroyed, it will eventually spread beyond its own planet. Any discovery of life elsewhere, all the more if we discover it more than once, is a powerful indication that the universe is organizing on a vast scale, and that this is inherent in its nature. That mechanism would need to be described.

4
New Theories / Life: Does it show that Entropy has a challenger?
« on: 01/09/2012 20:05:28 »
We are all waiting to see if there is life on other planets, searching for it with increasing fervour as our ability to do so balloons. Piecemeal indications seem to show that the preconditions for life occur far more often than we suspected or dared hope even a decade ago. We are also learning that life can survive in circumstances far more hostile than we believed in the recent past. Many have reflected on the sea-change in human attitude that would follow the discovery of any life elsewhere in the universe, be it only lowly micro-organisms.

The public dialogue never seems to explore what this would imply about the universe itself. If we are not the only instance of life anywhere, ever, the idea of life being a stupendous fluke would be dealt a huge blow. So what is the alternative to that? Wouldn't that necessarily imply that the universe tends to spawn life where conditions permit? And does that not then also imply that the universe has a tendency towards organization, not just in isolated pockets, but as part of its very fabric? That however fundamental entropy is, all the forces and properties and particles of the universe add up to the creation of extraordinary organization as well, that could potentially be of similar power?

However speculative that is, the scope of its implications is so big i think it deserves a big place in our collective consciousness. Especially since it is increasingly plausible. Even more especially since we are the most elaborate example known of that process. Sure, lots of other organisms are just as complicated and specialized as we are, but we are the only one single-mindedly programmed to go out and create more organization, everywhere. We hate entropy. If we are not ourselves destroyed by chaos we can't control, we will attack chaos on every front possible. Currently we kind of hate ourselves for the destruction we have caused in our new capacity as rulers of the Earth. The chaos we have caused, the entropy we have increased. Once we make it through this phase, we'll do everything possible to put a stop to that nonsense. That may seem inconsequential, if we imagine ourselves in 100 years. But what if we imagine ourselves in 10,000 years? A million years?

Perhaps we will soon discover the first tentative signs of life elsewhere in our galaxy. If we don't, the case here is not disproved. What would disprove it is no life elsewhere, and our own destruction. I too am concerned that this is possible, but i think the window for such a possibility will close within a thousand years. If we aren't destroyed, and we don't find life elsewhere, we will set about creating it where ever possible, and giving it the power to spread as quickly as possible. Despite the astronomical barriers, i'd say an intelligent species - one that we have made, that is better adapted, if we ourselves are insufficient - will live on another planet thanks to human effort within 200 years. In another solar system. Soon after, many other solar systems will be in the same state. At that point, there is no known cataclysm, even on intergalactic scales, that could wipe us out. Then you have only to read Isaac Asimov's The Last Question, or hear David Deutsch talk about our place in the cosmos to get another perspective on what i'm talking about. We'd mount all out war on entropy. We might do a pretty good job of it.

Never mind which side would eventually win such a battle. Is not the implication still that the universe, due to its inherent properties, not only produces life, but produces intelligence? Nothing succeeds like intelligence, whether it be the ability to think abstractly, or the ability to accurately calculate in a fraction of a second the actions necessary to capture prey, or escape from a predator, or the observational tools to locate food. Separating the emergence of intelligence from the emergence of life, and separating the emergence of life from the fundamental operations of the universe, is a false division. In broad terms, it is why we argue about god. Mock the simplistic nature of god concepts if you will, but some concepts are not so simplistic, and anyhow, perhaps the point is that even in the childhood of our species, just now drawing to a close, we recognized and tried to express the fundamental truth that we are the culmination, in our astronomical neighbourhood, of the universe's act of creation. That our purpose is to propagate that creative force to the best of our ability. That this isn't random, it is intentional, for lack of a better word. Call it a god principle, if you will.


5
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / How would the Earth be affected by a supernova really close by, say 10 ly?
« on: 28/08/2012 22:24:46 »
Just as a fun, apocalyptic tv series kind of thought experiment, how would that play out for us? Is 10 light-years enough for the full Mad Max effect, without wiping us out completely?

6
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / How do you calculate the total heat energy absorbed by a solid heated on 1 side?
« on: 28/08/2012 22:08:15 »
I'm trying to calculate how much heat energy will be absorbed by the thermal mass in a (hopefully) passive solar workshop. The floor and walls are essentially the same material, rammed clay soil stabilized with lime - that's the plan, anyhow. Let's say all thicknesses are 40cm for now - with a formula for decent calculations, we'll set about deciding what dimensions would be best given budget, climate, etc. If the proper calculation is very complicated, is there a way to come up with a decent estimate?
Probably there is a great page on this somewhere, i just don't know how to properly phrase the search.
Thx.

7
Physiology & Medicine / Could increasing my lung capacity help with my fatigue?
« on: 10/04/2011 02:32:28 »
I have had a fatigue problem since my early teens at least - i don't remember a time when i didn't feel tired a lot of the time. I could go on and on about that, but let's just say i didn't treat it as a medical issue until i was about 30. I am now 43, and i am still struggling to find ways to reduce my fatigue. Extensive diet changes have helped, exercise helps as long as i limit it carefully.

Where we live in Mexico is 7000 ft above sea level. When i go home on visits to the Toronto area, which is only about 400 ft above sea level, i feel GREAT. When i lived in Toronto, i definitely did not feel great. Sure, some of it is just the pleasure of being home, but wow - i get up at 6 a.m. every day because i don't want to be in bed anymore, and it is hard to express how much that is unlike me. On our visits we tend to have long days, often with a lot of walking, and i handle it just fine.

Recently i saw a doctor here in Mexico because at this time of year i tend to get a minor sense of a lack of air, which has now become noticeable enough to do something about it. I was given pills to dilate my bronchii, and told that because of the extreme dryness and sudden temperature changes of this season in this region, complaints like mine are common at this time of year.

I was also advised to condition my lungs by spending 2 minutes every day blowing bubbles through a straw into a yoghurt container filled with water. I have done that, and have now increased it to three
minutes, and intend to increase it more, on a hypothesis that i could help my fatigue in general by increasing my lung capacity as much as i can.

Could that work? Since i have now lived at high altitude for 8 years, is it possible i will keep some of the improved lung capacity that has given me long term, when we move up to southern Ontario?

8
Just Chat! / test, test - why can't i post to the forum?
« on: 09/04/2011 22:55:47 »
erm, just testing...

ok.... so why can't i post to the medical forum?
i've been trying to start a new topic, and when i press post, i get a message saying something like:

'posting failed for the following reason:'
and then there is no reason...

9
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Which way does gravity attract on objects with irregular shapes and densities?
« on: 06/04/2011 17:41:37 »
Gravity comes from mass, right? So, if the mass of a large object isn't concentrated in its core, how would gravity pull at things on its surface? Really large things become spherical because the gravity that comes with very heavy things makes that the only stable shape, but what if the shape was different, just supposing? What if the core of the Earth wasn't there, say - how would gravity affect you if you were on the inside surface of the hollow spherical space that would create? Would the net gravity pull you towards the surface of the Earth 'above' you, and stick you to the wall of the hollow space? Would your experience of gravity be that it is a lot less, because of the effect on you of the mass on the other side of the hollow space?

10
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / what technology do we need to build a space fountain?
« on: 02/04/2011 19:39:34 »
I was reading the recent thread about space elevators, and i wondered, as i often have since i learned about space fountains, why that idea doesn't get discussed more. The barriers to its construction seem a lot lower.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_fountain
And then there is the idea of launch loops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_loop
I don't care what wacky super-expensive futuristic device gets me into orbit, i just want to get there. There is so much to do!

11
Physiology & Medicine / How are powerful experiences burned into your memory so quickly?
« on: 09/02/2011 17:06:33 »
I have noticed that if our dogs really enjoyed or were really upset by something, they remember that forever after, even if the experience was brief, or it happened somewhere we don't return to for years. I have strong memories of a few occasions in my life that were also very emotionally loaded, but because i am human, i go over such experiences in my mind many times, and so of course the memory is reinforced. Presumably, our dogs don't do that.

Is there something hormonal or something like that that happens during very emotional experiences which causes strong permanent memories of those experiences to be formed? Is the mechanism understood at all?

12
Physiology & Medicine / What is the best way to limit the risk of recreational drug use?
« on: 06/02/2011 22:56:56 »
If you've seen my previous question in this forum, you already know what i think - legalization, and a comprehensive regulatory system. But how can legal recreational drug use be made as safe as possible?

I am Canadian. In Ontario, where i grew up, alcohol was only available from government-run stores. Although outright government ownership isn't necessary, there are some good things about that system: all stores and all staff have to meet stringent government standards. That would be a big help in managing the risk of drug use, which is a whole lot more complicated than alcohol use. In my mind, to be a manager of such a store, or to be a server in any bar offering drugs, should require extensive training. It should be required of you to take a certain degree of direct responsibility for the health of your clients, making sure they understand the ins and outs of drug use, and keeping watch over those who use patterns are risky. Drugs sold should be categorized according to the dangers involved in their use, and different rules should apply to each - the risky ones should only be available by asking at the counter, the taxes on them should be way higher, the safe ones should be actively promoted as a better choice. All purchases should be recorded to a database and tracked. There are all kinds of things that can be done in terms of regulating the packaging, labeling, marketing, and client care to minimize the risks of drug use.

And, it should be noted, many currently illegal drugs are a lot safer than alcohol. Only a few would require rigorous monitoring. The point of legalization is to prevent people from buying drugs on the street. Legal drugs can easily be made safer than that, but some hard drugs do need to be offered, or the black market won't go away. Here's my list:

Depressants: marijuana (plant material)-- benzodiazepines (bretazenil), GHB, and kava kava, all sold as drinks -- opium (the natural plant latex).

Stimulants: coca leaf, khat leaf (only leaves sold) -- methylphenidate, dextroamphetamine, MDMA,  modafinil, all sold as drinks -- amyl nitrate, in small sniffing vials

Hallucinogens: LSD, psylocybin mushrooms, salvia, blue lotus, all sold as drinks --  DMT (dimethyltryptamine), as a smokable product

NOT sold: no concentrates - no pills, powders or blotters. No cocaine or methamphetamine - the amphetamine stimlants available offer a comparable, but safer high. No barbiturates - bretazenil is much safer and equivalent. No heroin - the opium available is also a lot safer (to me, this is the most controversial offering, but i think it is defensible)

One more thing - Addiction happens when people with inadequate coping mechanisms experience stress above a certain level. These people turn to drugs as a coping tool. I believe population studies establish this pretty well. It is true that sufficient exposure will cause physical addiction, and that in some cases addiction becomes extremely chronic. To be sufficiently exposed for this to happen, it is necessary to use that drug heavily enough that it changes your brain permanently. That isn't hard to avoid in the vast majority of cases. Legalization would not increase the incidence of addiction.

So. I have a big thing about this issue. I have all kinds of ideas, the main ones being summarized here. I need more information on all kinds of medical and technical aspects of this, and i could use more ideas, too.

Can you weigh in?

13
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Why is the solar system a disk?
« on: 04/02/2011 17:07:03 »
Why are all the planets and other bodies orbiting the sun on a single plane (mostly)? Is it related to the early dust cloud that formed the solar system spinning? How flat is the plane of the solar system?

14
Physiology & Medicine / What is the ratio of recreational dose to overdose for methylphenidate?
« on: 03/02/2011 23:40:07 »
First, i don't do drugs recreationally, and i don't take methylphenidate. My interest is because i am writing about how drug regulation and oversight might work in a system where recreational drug use is legal.

I understand that the ratio of therapeutic dose to lethal dose is higher for methylphenidate than it is for most other stimulants. I am hypothesizing a system where it and amphetamines are legal for recreational use. However, i can't find information on how much more than a typical recreational dose a user would have to have taken for negative effects to begin, in particular an unhealthy elevation of blood pressure and heart rate.

The concept is to sell these drugs in drinks, as energy drinks are sold, to make overdose unlikely. But from the limited data i've been able to scrounge up online, just double a recreational dose could cause bad effects in many people, although not anything dangerous. Is that the case? Can anyone direct me to a source of information publically available online with good info about this?

Pages: [1]
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.074 seconds with 54 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.