Marshalscienceguy

So I had too many pages open in my computer. I do this often but sometimes it gets to the point where it freezes and I have to reboot. So that is exactly what I did. However this time when I did it all I got was a black screen. Since I have very little actually on my computer anyways I just hit reset. I figured things would be just as easy the second time around but its not. Before it said I could not install windows defender and when I deleted Norton it let me install windows Defender. However now the only thing on it that will work is "Microsoft security". I went into Microsoft security and put it to Off mode but it still wont let me add WindowsDeffender. I am currently in Administration mode. As well at this it wont let me go back to edit the setting of my user either. I fear maybe I erased something I wont be able to get back anymore but I don't know how to repair it now. Could someone please help me?

Hello everybody

 

I need some help.

 

The problem is production some chlorine gas as unwanted result of reaction during manufacturing main product. We can’t let it go to the air. So I search for any method to discard it in a safe way and reasonable price.I am not familiar with this. I think maybe we can pass it throughout something like limestone or gypsum (or any other material, I don’t know) and by this way turn it to safe material.

 

So I ask for any way to do this.

I heard of special containers and bags you can get to dispose of hazard material. You are suppose to get these special containers to toss things like batteries as well but most people simply toss them in the trash. I seen container with lockable lids that are suppose to keep everything in. http://www.denios.co.uk/shop/container-with-plastic-pallet-800l-hazmat.html Here is a link that sells hazard material containers.

Narcissism is a classification. All classifications are artificial. They are designed to simplify complex variables and their relationships. If we treat them as concrete objects we are in danger of being constrained in our response to them.

 

This is a commonplace fallacy. I am sure there are one or two examples of this kind, but the vast majority of geniuses were recognised as such by their contemporaries, or - at the very least - were not thought to be fools.

 

I don't expect you to accept this, so give me three examples of great inventors or geniuses who were thought to be stupid. (I can think of three, but I can also think of three thousand to whom this does not apply.)

So how would you classify mental illness and disorders?

All I see on posts is the green up arrow. How do I down vote a post?

 

Clarissa

You have to have so many posts before you can vote up and Down.

I have the ability to vote up and down but I don't really use the down function that much.

You might not have reached your post count yet.

Narcissists must get narcissistic supply which is "Attention" however if you think about it all people desire some amount of attention. If a person has all the Symptoms of a narcissists other than stuff which is outwardly harmful such as self entitlement, or purposely abusing others, lack of responsibility, can they still be classified as one? Or would they be classified as something else entirely?

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201311/6-signs-narcissism-you-may-not-know-about

The symptoms listed here don't really list that.

Also how does one know when they are unique?

A person can be told they are stupid by society but are

really the next genius. Every great inventor or genius was

probably told they were stupid or crazy at one point but they

just saw things a lot more clearly than most people.

So how do you differentiate between if they are really grand or they are just over inflating themselves?

People with various disorders cant communicate well either. So if

someone cant communicate well they might have a symptom but

does that mean they are narcissistic?

Since Narcissism is a type of Defense mechanism wouldn't it be possible for someone to develop some of the coping mechanisms and not act like a full narcissist would?

I myself like others have a look of a girl that is highly, attractive, when looks like the look that is. What in the brain does makes you attracted to this certain almost percise look?

I like leather and goth apparel and suits but I think anyone looks good in it.

I should like to see an answer to this to. It was the first thing - and only important thing - that struck me about the OP.

Not an assumption.

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims,

Okay, but none of that addresses any of the core points I have made. Yes, kidnappings often last for extended periods of time. Nobody was contesting that.

You asked how long. I was saying these cases are generally months to years. So I think its probably going to develop over months to years vs a couple of days.

There is a debate going on in a gaming forum that I'm apart of that has to do with Free Thinking(Freewill) and why people come to different conclusions. Now personally I think this is more of a stupidity argument rather than a Free Thinking, but I'll present it here to get some outside information.

 

The argument is pretty much this:

 

If you take two people and give them an article about something, why do they come to different conclusions with the exact same information.

 

For example:

 

I give two separate people the exact same information on Man Made global warming. The information is factual proof that global warming exists. Now one person reads the information and believes the information to be true, while the other reads the information and doesn't find the information to be true.

 

Why does this happen...?

 

In this situation we can say most likely there are 3rd party influences hindering thought process. Say the person who believes in global warming has a better education and understands the material better. Maybe the person that doesn't believe in global warming had a bad experience with scientist, and is letting his emotions cloud his judgement. There is a lot of factors at play like genetics, and you can fathom up a lot of 3rd party influences.

 

We're past determined probability, 3rd party influences, and are looking more into the thought process itself.

 

Take the same global warming situation, but say the 2 people are identical twins, have the exact same life experience and education. It seems probable that they would both agree, since they're exactly the same(Same as we are going to get for the sake of the argument.), it seems most likely that they would come to the same conclusion every time. Say they don't, and one believes in global warming while the other doesn't. There isn't any 3rd party influences that are effecting the thought process, so it's most likely that the thought process is being corrupted within. The question really comes down to where are thoughts stored and compiled in the brain. Why is the logic being corrupted of the person not believing in global warming. Is there some form of neuron damage etc...

 

This is where we run into a wall. We all understand how the brain works, but none of us majored in neuroscience either. We just don't know how to investigate this further, and would like a little outside help.

 

I tried to explain this the best I can, but if any clarification is needed. I will do my best to sum up any information needed.

 

It really comes down to Aumann's Agreement Theorem

There could be several different possibilities to a single action. So saying "There is always only one right answer" is not always right. a person can leave the house at 8 AM every morning to go to school so people might assume she is going to school but she can one day not go to school but based on what always happens you will assume its that. When people are working on a problem people guess which possibility is going to happen. Lets say there is 100 horses running a race. Everyone bets on which horse is going to win. Now even if you go by statistics there is still a possibility that horse you bet on might lose for whatever reason. So its not like things are absolutely certain. Multiple people might be guessing of different possibility's to the same outcome and they might all be accurate in which of those conclusions are possible but not all of those conclusions are going to necessarily happen at that point. You can say A, B, D, C, E, or F might happen and you even if they are all equally possible outcomes only ONE is going to happen at a time. So NO simply choosing B in a list of probable outcomes does not make you a moron. Even if B does not necessarily happen.

But upon release that need can easily be filled by someone else, yet the connection to the captor often persists despite the availability of others in the community. How does your conjecture account for this? Based on what you've shared so far, it does not seem to. If the bond with the captor forms due to an inherent human need for community, then why isn't that bond replaced by better ones once the victims community expands once again?

 

So now your assertion involves the duration of captivity? How long must one be captive for Stockholm syndrome to manifest? 10 days? 10 months? 10 years? Is it the same for each captive? Why do some victims experience the syndrome but not others?

 

Listen... I think some of your points are valid, but I also think you're over simplifying the syndrome far too much. There are many underlying layers to this phenomenon that should be included in our thinking. Also, I'm not entirely clear who you think is suggesting it is irrational. When viewed correctly, it it the outcome of incredibly logical thinking and motivations, IMO.

 

This page below summarizes the key points pretty well. Notice how your idea is included, but also significantly expanded upon in some very reasonable and intelligent ways:

 

http://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/mental-disorders/stockholm-syndrome2.htm

 

Well generally these type of kidnapping cases last months to years. In fact some of these cases happen when the child is in the early pubescent stages of development and are trained to be perfect wives for the captures. So they might kidnap a 13 year old and keep her to age 19 and by 19 she is not going to leave if there is other people around that could help her escape or not. There has even been cases of women staying with the captures when they have wives and no one questioning it but not realizing why the girl is really even there. However the victem wont auctully speak about why she is there to begin with.

But then why would these bonds persist even long after the captive is released? Stockholm syndrome tends to continue in victims even when they are no longer in custody, even when they are once again free, and even when they are surrounded once again by their social community. Your idea here does not seem to account for these issues, even though there is definitely some merit to it as pertains to the formation of such bonds during the time they spend being held.

1.They developed a psychological need for the person since they make the victim dependent on them

2.Culture shock (They been in the new environment so long they are not necessarily sure they can function in another one)

Culture shock actually happens with troops as well. They are in the new environment so long that when they get out of the service its sometimes very difficult for them to function. Despite the fact they came from the outside world they adapted to military life and when the world isnt like the military it sometimes become very difficult for them to re adapt.

Now I see this a lot and I can identify the cause but I don't understand why this happens. You also cant always predict what person is going to become bad after something changes. Now I don't mean stuff like "Oh my grandfather died" since yes I can understand how that can have a DRASTIC change on your personality. Not that it will in every case. What I mean is things like "Got a Girl/Boyfriend for the first time" or "Won the lottery" stuff like that. Than the person becomes intolerable and impossible to deal with after that. It can happen to both men and women and I don't completely understand why this happens or what it means about the person. I know that some people when good things happen to them do not become jerks but this does seem to happen with a number of people and whats disappointing is initially these people will seem like some of the greatest people around. They could be gift giving, remember everyone's birthday, Always their for everyone and than get a date for the first time and start treating everyone like trash. At which point a lot of people try to put up with it believing they will do better but eventually just end up leaving the person since they can no longer take the abuse. This means they lose the partner than originally likes them because they thought they were sweet, they lose their best friends and pretty much anyone else who had faith in them.

Your liberal use of sweeping generalizations, unsupported assertions and leading questions suggests that you might not be approaching discussion in good faith. In addition, all drugs have side effects and virtually any condition can be misdiagnosed. You could pretty much use you logic to argue against the use of any treatment for any condition.

 

A meta analysis of over 400 studies evaluating elevated suicide risk associated with SSRI use found no elevated risk of suicide, and only a slight increase in the risk of non-suicidal self harm. http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7488/385

 

So the risk of suicide is negligible. Let's examine efficacy - SSRI's significantly reduce the symptoms of moderate and severe depression, with less side effects in most patients than TCA's. http://cat.inist.fr/aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1835031

 

 

According to the evidence, the limited risk and high efficacy of SSRIs most likely make their prescription for the conditions they are designed to treat worth it.

Yes they do all have side effect but if a drug has side effects of something as serious suicide or depression should we allow it to be prescribed to teenagers and children?

I cant pick a major I want to go to school and I am interested in many subjects. Most of them involving science.

I have slimmed it down to four but I don't know if that is too many.

Accounting: Taxes, dealing with money and credit scores

Psychology:Sociology, abnormal psychology and dealing with children and dealing with coworkers and presenting yourself.

Parsitology: covers chemistry, microbiology, and computer knowledge.

physics:

Psychology and accounting will help you at life and help you get a job.

Everyone needs to deal with money and taxes everyday and psychology

helps you understand how to deal with people. You also need to have good social

skills if you are going to work in the medical field. Accountants are also required to

have good presentation skills and how to communicate well with others. Psychology

also gives you the means and ability to deal with a variety of people in the correct

way. Psychology, biology and Chemistry says how the body works and how the body

and various things react to certain chemicals and how people react to each other.

So they all fall into the medical field. What should I do?

people keeps saying things will be easier if I get a degree, that I can get a better jobs with a degree

and I need to pick one and go to college but I cant pick one even if I want to go. Most of the sciences are connected

in some way.

world is connected and everything is effected by everything else. People are effected by life stock and the eviorment and people behavior is effected by chemicals in their body's, This effects psychology and sociology which is also effected by the government and social standards, than one day we can all be blown up because something like our sun died and killed us all or our galaxy collided with another one and messed up earths orbit.

Should drugs which cause people to become suicidal be allowed to be prescribed to teen or Children? ADD and many depression medication is said to have side effects of suicidal thoughts and behavior as well as worsening depression. Now teen and children are going to be more depressed naturally. If a child has to go through stuff like divorce or just neglectful parents they are not going to be very happy. Teens are often depressed since they are hitting puberty and don't always know how to handle it and often this results in them picking on other innocent teens who never did anything. Now instead of dealing with kids social problems and teaching everyone HOW to handle stress they simply drug them. However when these type of drugs cause suicidal thoughts, behavior and depression should we really risk it? OR should it be reserved for adults who have a choice to determine to risk their sanity and health? Some people have gone to the mental ward for suicide issues. Now if someone takes medication that makes them suicidal and is than drugged with medication that turns them into a zombie is it really fair to put them their when they were forced to take medication that made them that way? A lot of times ADD is misdiagnosed or mistaken for things like OCD. So there is also the added result of giving it to a child that doesn't even have that disorder and so you are just giving the child unnecessary medication.

What should we pray to God?

Some people don't believe in god. So if they don't believe why would they pray?

If there would be anything to pray for it would be that deformed and retarded babies were never born and that all children would be born into families that could afford taking care of them and sincerely wanted them. Now this is not saying I hate children with deformities or these type of developmental problems but everything is so difficult for these people and its often very difficult on their parents having to keep up with the additional costs and care for these children. As well as often bullying from other children which I personally have witnessed and have defended some of these people against. Its so sad watching a group of children picking on a retarded child because he is too retarded to realize that they are mocking them.

In schools when a students have good grade and doesn't have a lot of friends they complain they are not social enough. If you are too social and don't pay attention in class than they say you have to focus more and stop socializing. Children end up bullying each other since they don't know how to handle stress or puberty. We force them to work in teams but we don't assign a leader and expect them to just figure it out. There is also always the issue of one kid taking over all the work of the group and the rest of the group doing nothing. We also don't teach children how to interview or even do taxes or handle money. Of all the things they teach why is this never stressed in school? If you cant present yourself and there is 100 other people with the same credentials the better presentation probably has better chances. Some people don't have good social skills but its not like anyone teaches it either. We have people growing up not ready to work, not ready to pay taxes, Not ready to interview and lacking proper socialization skills. The best GPA in the world doesn't matter if you don't have basic living skills.

It's my senior year in high school and I've been trying to figure out exactly what I want to do as a career. I love mathematics and had originally decided to go into a field of physics so as to add some practicality to the math. Over the last year or so, however, I've become increasingly interested in computers and specifically their low level, hardware functionality. As such, I have tried thinking of ways in which I can combine my love for math and computers into one field or profession. Normally, I would go right into a career in computer science or computer engineering but I always hear of the low job prospects that computer science holds in the future. Any suggestions guys? Thanks.

There is computer engineering. Where you literally build the parts for the computers as well as designing the programs and things that go into the computers. It combines engineering and computer knowledge.

If you wish to become a multimillionaire you should stay with Business Studies. The fact that you don't like it has nothing to do with making money. If you study hard, work in a dedicated and focused manner applying what you have learned and bringing your own original ideas into play, while setting fun to one side you are almost assured of success. I am unable to comment on your state of happiness.

 

However, if you choose a subject you like, then you will do well at it almost naturally: the effort will seem more like fun than an effort. Even if you don't make much money at it you will be doing something you enjoy.

Why didn't you just do a major in business and a minor in Science? I think Business is something that is very good to learn. You need to know this kind of stuff to do taxes, balance check book and basic things you NEED to know When you deal with money. So I don't think business is ever a bad thing to learn. Schools before university never teach us how to do taxes or any basic skills like that so if you don't have someone who already knows and not everyone knows you have to pay someone else to do it for you. Along with this business is a very broad category. You can have a business in anything such as ice cream, bars, restaurant, technology, toys or simply management. So often business will require you know multiple subjects anyways.

 

I never said "prohibit prospective parents from actual courtship.". Actually having virtual kids is only a simulation towards a real life scenario and helps you both emotionally and intellectually to deal with the actual process of child-rearing.

 

As an extension, we could also have virtual pregnancies...with statutory warnings about the deleterious effects arising out of promiscuity...how does that sound?...I think even this as an extension to the postulate, has definite social benefits accruing thereby.

So you are saying to have kids that they would first have to qualify with a simulation? Well yeah I agree with that idea.

not detailed enough, are you referring to Loop quantum cosmology? Loop quantum gravity?

 

IN string are you referring to M theory or ADS/CFT correspondance? also which do we agree with most in lines of what? Cosmology?

Sorry Loop Quantum gravity.

Which do you agree with?

Please state why.

This is often a disorder associated with people who have suffered rape, or witnessed a murder, have been abused or have come back from war. Not something you think about when you think about a Teenage girl breaking up with her infatuation. I was discussing this with someone about the movie "Twilight". She starts getting severe nightmares and starts waking screaming and its due to the fact her boyfriend dumped her and moved away. Now as someone who has had some very horrible breaks up in the past myself I dont really see how this would give you nightmares but I wanted to discuss it. Do you believe its possible to get PTSD from someone simply breaking up?

First off I would like to thank everyone who commented on this post answering my question.

Second most of the posts I see with negative points seem to have negatives for a legitimate reason.

So I don't really see the voting system being abused much on this site. Though I understand where

Dekan is coming from saying it should be based on what they wrote not who they are. Since often voting systems

will be abused to attack people that are generally disliked vs those who are more likable in a community. Regardless

of how good a comment is or what it was about.

 

As a spin-off of this I see the following benefits accruing :

 

1) Developing a compassionate and empathizing personality.

2) Developing a need to procreate (at least in the long run...is this an evolutionary adaptation?

3) Maybe this experiment could be extended to pets...and further more..more hybrid species could be generated by computer algorithms which could be offered for virtual "adoption". This offers new vistas in parenting.

4) Parents could be offered courses based on virtual parenting where they could take their digital "wards" to a virtual cinema and see how their "wards" react. This is a sociological exercise and prepares parents for the challenges ahead if they are in courtship.

5) It promotes serious parenting as opposed to frivolous exchanges which more often than not end in discord.

 

i agree on the latter assertion though. Philosophers and scientists are not mutually exclusive. Consider...

 

a) Archimedes

b) Pythagoras

c) Hypatia of Alexandria

 

and the list goes on... I would even include Isaac Newton on the list.

Everyone would still die out since you are not allowing them to have real children. Teaching better parenting doesn't matter if everyone is dead.