Jump to content

Squawk 1200

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Squawk 1200

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    aerospace engineering

Recent Profile Visitors

1874 profile views
  1. But what to do if I want to switch from top 1% of most anxious and nervous people to top 1-5% people at the opposite end of the scale, i.e. extremely extroverted sensation seekers? I am 23 and up until 3 years ago I wasn't even able to go to a store that is 400 meters away from my house (even though I felt ok at school always) because my heartbeat would race so much that I needed like 2 minutes to calm dawn afterwards - and every noise stronger than usual (such as people shouting at each other) would exceberate it even further. Even when some stranger asked me something, I would be so exhausted afterwards that I would almost faint. From age 13 to 21 i never ventured more than 150m from outside on my own house and I can do it now only if the place is familiar and I NEVER feel completely at ease. I am a preemie (a severely visually impaired one) and I have a familial history of mental ilness (my paternal grandmother - severe lifelong depression plus several lifelong anxirty disorders - generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder and severe lifelong hypochondriasis at the top of that)
  2. Is there a way to significantly increase personality traits of Extraversion and Openness to experience and at the same time, significantly decrease the trait of Neuroticism? I am talking the Big Five personality traits. May be via pharmacological means.
  3. When a dangerous situation takss place, people (generally) react in a very predictable way - they panic and completely lose ability to think clearly. Is there a subgroup of people who naturally (without training) react the opposite way (slowed down heart and breathing rate, lower blood pressure, general relaxation)? OT more simply, a subgroup of population that finds situations most people find dangerous to not be dangerous at all or even pleasant?
  4. Do people with solid background in science (physics and math) enjoy pop-sci books, tv shows etc. or do they have a "oh my head hurts so much from that BS/oversimplification" type of reaction?
  5. You're so sure nothing will change for worse?
  6. Given ever-increasing automation of everything, how will the job market look like in 2030 or 2050? Will the idea of a "job" even exist?
  7. When do you think will repair of a damaged retina be possible and with what technology? Asking this as a ROP (retinopathy of prematurity) survivor... one with very poor eyesight. I can barely see a human from 100 meters away (and they appear really really tiny) I can't properly recognize facial features from 10m away (I can recognize people though) and I can't read normal books except from a few cm's away. Most of my field of view is in my right eye, my left eye is even weaker and I can't read anything with it (it is not blurred but I still can't see). No medical intervention for my condition is currently available.
  8. This law does not legalize domestic violence. It only changes the character of the sanction, if no physical harm is done, from criminal to administrative so instead of getting a criminal fine one pays an administrative one. Other cases are still under criminal jurisdiction if at least mild physical harm is done.
  9. I think everyone who wants to become a theoretical physicist should ask why they want to become one. If it's for fame, then it's a bad career choice since 99% of physicists (even world class ones) ar not known by anyone except other physicists and maybe, mathematicians. Theoretical physics also looks nothing like stuff depicted in popular science documentaries - it's just math, math, math. It takes not just high intelligence but a highly specific personality type to succeed and feel well doing this job.
  10. I think it is perfectly possible to teach yourself classical mechanics from textbooks. It should also be possible to teach yourself calculus and differential equations. Knowing that stuff is extremely helpful in formal education. By the way, Ed Witten's story is quite interestomg - he got a M.Sc in history and then stepped right into M.Sc. in physics and got a Ph.D. around 3 years later. He had to be exceptionally briliant (how else would you expect a history major to be allowed to get right into physics graduate program of a major university and then into a PhD program under a recent Nobel Proze winnter?)
  11. My are aof study is law. Should I then be worried about the value of my knowledge in everything except making money?
  12. What's the practical usefulness of less hard sciences?
  13. Do you consider this division to be valid? Math, physics and chemistry are usually considered to be "hard" sciences while sociology, economics, law and political science are considered to be "soft". Anectodal evidence says that hard sciences are more intellectually demanding, harder to master and at college level they have entry requirements and higher dropout rates - does data back this claim up? I have even seen economics being classified as a pseudoscience... by people with academic background in economics (one of them also had a minor in pure math).
  14. Ramjet engines are the simplest but not the best for normal applications as they get efficient at very high speeds (mach 2 and above) and cannot produce thrust without airspeed. THough, if you want to build a supersonic aircraft cruising at Mach 3 at 80,000 ft, ramjet would be a way to go.
  15. At the beginning may be 50-60 passengers with baggage or equivalent amount of cargo. Maybe with a closed wing configuration, like the one below but with much more slender airframe (that one looks like a full blown wide body airliner) and two high bypass turbofans rather than four piston engines:
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.