All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Yesterday
  2. Menthol can act as a numbing agent for general throat irritations. If I had a cough associated with other cold or flu symptoms, I'd take a better all around medication. For a cough by itself (from a tickle in your throat), I think anything that keeps your mouth and throat moist will work. I don't really think cough drops are very effective, but the mechanism is probably to relieve as much irritation as possible before the trickle of saliva & medications gets to your esophagus. You're right, once it gets there, the mechanisms for removing unwanted irritations involve less coughing and more vomiting. It could be part placebo too. I know when I go to weddings, plays, and funerals, I take some mints to suck on to keep my throat moist. It seems like the tickle always happens when you're supposed to be quiet, so there may be something psychosomatic going on there. I hope this was a spellcheck mistake.
  3. Look in control panel for "sound". Check settings to handle your devices.
  4. horatio weinerbutt

    Space Expansion

    More of a food for thought question, but theoretically, could space expand into itself? As far as I understand it isn't expanding into anything particular, like some sort cosmic container. Just trying to conceptualize
  5. By what mechanism do cough drops work...or don't they? Sucking on a cough drop and swallowing the product, it goes down the esophagus which leads to the stomach, but it seems to me the cough is located in the the trachea which leads to the lungs and no liquid normally goes down there. Therefore, how can sucking on a cough drop have any effect on the irradiation in the trachea where the irritation that causes coughs originate. Are the fumes from the medicated (or unmedicated) cough drops inhaled and as such deliver some soothing vapor, or are cough drops a placebo plain and simple?
  6. CharonY

    The inconvenient truth about genetics

    Well there are a variety of metabolites and co-factors that are enmeshed in the regulatory circuits required for proper functioning. And there is of course the perhaps trivial point that we need the proteins to interact with the DNA to actually read out information from the DNA (I thought that might what Eise mentioned with the hen and egg issue, but I may be wrong). In my mind there is much less hierarchy in the involved machinery but it is dependent on definition to some degree. None of which making the assertions in OP any less absurd, of course.
  7. CharonY

    Ph.D. in Chemistry for Free

    Well, if that went through a committee it would be a rather easy way to shut down fraudulent groups...
  8. nevim

    Today I Learned

    I don’t believe it is...
  9. swansont

    Pyramid Lies from the famous Scientists

    ! Moderator Note Rule 2 .7 Advertising and spam is prohibited. We don't mind if you put a link to your noncommercial site (e.g. a blog) in your signature and/or profile, but don't go around making threads to advertise it. Links, pictures and videos in posts should be relevant to the discussion, and members should be able to participate in the discussion without clicking any links or watching any videos. Videos and pictures should be accompanied by enough text to set the tone for the discussion, and should not be posted alone. Users advertising commercial sites will be banned. IOW, don’t spam us by just posting links and files, especially if it just goes back to your own work/site/channel Post what it is you want to discuss (i.e. type it in) or this will be closed
  10. John Cuthber

    Mizuno Seeks Replications

    I am reminded of the most telling question asked of Fleishman and Pons: "Why are you not dead?". They had no answer. If they really had nuclear fusion happening as they had claimed, the neutron flux would have killed them.
  11. Moontanman

    The inconvenient truth about genetics

    Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Citation please. Sherlock Holmes was wrong, this is nothing but a argument from ignorance, if you don't know then you don't know no matter how many things you think you've eliminated deciding something is the truth with no supporting evidence is not valid. Would you say there are no white swans because you've never seen one? Until Australia was discovered there were no white swans as far as anyone knew but there they were. The only thing absurd is using an argument from ignorance, I see no reason to think the "plan" in not contained in the genome just because you can't see it..
  12. On_the_geoelectric_structure_of_the_Sphinx_area_in_Egypt.pdf
  13. DanielBoyd

    The inconvenient truth about genetics

    Hi guys, just want to apologise for my tardiness in replying to your posts. I will get round to it, but hadn't anticipated such a response, and I've also got a day job... Which fortunately doesn't involve convincing anyone about wild ideas ;-)
  14. swansont

    Ph.D. in Chemistry for Free

    Plus we don’t condone academic fraud.
  15. Hrvoje1

    Epistemological Question

    OK, but how slower exactly? What is the ratio between protein synthesis rate when there is a normal concentration (density) of all required components present, and when there is for example no ribosomes, no RNA polymerase, no chaperones, and no DNA, but there is a sufficient supply of proteinogenic amino acids present in its usual concentration? I believe that's the monomer stuff that gets assembled (and not nucleotides as I said previously) into proteins, which are polymer stuff made of those. I also probably shouldn't have mentioned other components, because most probably I didn't mention all that is required.
  16. John Cuthber

    Is aluminum oxide combined with iron oxide reactive thermite?

    No. Aluminium is capable of extracting oxygen from carbon dioxide (in much the same way that it removes the oxygen from iron oxide). "Is aluminum oxide combined with iron oxide reactive thermite?" No.
  17. John Cuthber

    Today I Learned

    Is it onomatopoeic?
  18. John Cuthber

    The inconvenient truth about genetics

    Please indicate the parts of the apparatus of the cell that are reproduced, but for which there is no corresponding DNA. Now, I accept that, for example, water is a major part of cells, and there's no DNA which (meaningfully) makes water, but it's also hard to see that as the "information" needed to make a cell.
  19. md65536

    Acceleration (split from Relativistic Mass)

    I just realized the topic was split, but I wanted to sum it up to bring this back to the original topic anyway. Saying that it is "harder" to accelerate an object that is moving fast (as measured from some reference frame), can instead be said more precisely: A certain change in velocity of an object in a frame in which it is moving fast, requires a greater change in velocity (ie. higher rate of acceleration or acceleration for longer time) in a frame in which it is moving slowly, because the difference in the velocities is not the same in different frames of reference.
  20. CharonY

    Ph.D. in Chemistry for Free

    ! Moderator Note We ask new users to throw out links in order to minimize spam linking.
  21. LilyKay

    Ph.D. in Chemistry for Free

    So my Quantum Chemistry PhD Thesis is 30 years old this week. Hardly anyone read or referenced it so now, for the first time ever, you can have it for free. Modify it, change some fluorines to chlorines, swap Heisenberg for Schrodinger and away you go! Emboss it for that extra sizzle! Congratulations Dr. Professor !!! Cheers! Link deleted
  22. ..I will add: drivers? Microphone input, can be easily mixed with speaker output..
  23. Headset and computer jack must be compatible. You need first to find out what you have :
  24. Strange

    The inconvenient truth about genetics

    Maybe you could pick one of the many objections to your claims and discuss it...
  25. DanielBoyd

    The inconvenient truth about genetics

    Could you please drop the creationist thing? Since I am arguing for self-assembly over design, all of my objections apply equally well to intelligent design, and I could add a whole list more. Intelligent design is not science; the observations I make about the functional limitations of genetic information are at least valid in the sense that they are rational, even if radical. Rather than just blanket bombing, perhaps you could pick one of my assertions you disagree with? Then we could have a content-based discussion.
  26. dimreepr

    Today I Learned

    It's not even in susurration.
  1. Load more activity