Jump to content

Area54

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    936
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Area54 last won the day on May 3

Area54 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

226 Beacon of Hope

2 Followers

About Area54

  • Rank
    Protist

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    Astrobiology, vulcanology

Recent Profile Visitors

3587 profile views
  1. You don't seem to be asking for help, so much as asking for the answer. Have you no provisional thoughts on this? A suspicion as to which processes seem most likely? Have you checked your text book? Your class notes? I suspect members will be much more inclined to help if you demonstrate that you've done at least some work on this. That's just a suggestion. Of course you might get unlucky and someone will give you a complete answer, then you'll have missed another opportunity to learn how to learn. As written, the question seems to be missing some words, or one or more words have been mistyped. The sentence does not parse meaningfully.
  2. I I have done several of the online tests for amusement. Some of them are deplorable, testing only one aspect of intelligence, for example. All tests contain some elments of cultural bias that are difficult to remove, so that at best one can only compare oranges with naranjas. Most of the online tests I can recall were to short to arrive at a proper measure of IQ. I suspect they may be moderatly accurate for those in the mid-range i.e. the bulk of the population. But it is my impression that those in the upper levels of IQ can get an inflated figure by just making a lucky guess on a single question or two. I know that I consistently scored higher, by from 5 to 20 points, on online tests than on the professionally conducted test I took. That corroborates your suspicion of "implausibly high numbers".
  3. I was unclear in my post. I agree that we will require exceptional people to develop advanced AI systems. (At least until the AIs do it for us. :)) The people who will be less necessary, perhaps unnecessary are the bright people whose skills can be replaced by those AIs. Possible examples include design engineers or medical doctors. In practice, if our thinking is being done by AIs, our labouring work by robots and companies are run by psychopaths, there will be nothing left for the rest of us, other than to sit back and drink martinis. Sadly my IQ lies in the top couple of %. This forces me to acknowledge that my failure to be anything other than mediocre is because of a serious lack of tenacity or social nouse.
  4. Since the current pandemic has often been compared to a war, I am reminded of two military aphorisms. Generals are well prepared to fight the last war. No battle plan survives its first contact with the enemy. If true, these suggest that: We must be much smarter (and invest more money in planning and preparation) than we have been traditionally. Flexibility and rapid response must be built in at every level and in every location.
  5. Some thoughts,frequently speculative, in no special order, on the thread OP and some of the points made by other members: The OP contains the inherent assumption that IQ has a strong correlation with "success" of the individual and of society. I think it is generally understood that "success" is much more complex than that. Thus Nelson Mandela was undoutedly of above average intelligence, but it was his grit, determination and compassion that enabled his achievements. That raises the question, why would a decline in IQ (unless it were off a precipice) be of much concern? I would be more troubled by a fall in commitment and caring. I suspect that declining average IQ is unlikely to have a major impact on the value of the outliers. There should still be Newtons and Einsteins and lesser luminaries to do the heavy mental lifting for society. Most of us are drones compared with the 'top level thinkers'. The development of AI is likely to eliminate a large scale need for those with above above average IQs but that fall short of genius level. The increasing reliance on AI over the next century may be the real challenge we face in relation to societal intelligence. I keep getting flashes of the Eloi and Morlock of H.G. Wells' Time Machine, in which the decadent and now dumb elite are preyed upon by the subterranean worker Morlocks. (The novel was, at its heart, about the nature of society and its possible trajectory. The SF element was a device to enable that exploration.) I have long thought the main value of the IQ test was to determine how people would do on an IQ test. I benefited from a University education funded by the government, fees paid and sufficient money to live on, so that aspect (for undergraduates) of Moreno's proposals resonates positively with me. However, that was at a time when university education was, in the UK, for 5% of the population, not closer to 45%. I hope that this expansion of student population has not been achieved at the expense of standards, but I remain nervous on that point. Of all the points raised in the thread so far the drop in attention span is the one I find most concerning. Intelligence is only of value when it is employed effectively. That takes time and practice and application. In other words, it requires one's attention be focused on a problem until it is solved. On an upbeat note, perhaps we are developing aspects of intelligence that are appropriate to the environment we are now living in and that are not well discerned by the current tests.
  6. I strongly suspect that is not going to be the case in manner which is significant for this discussion. The Himalaya are, as you know, vast and contain a wide - and typical - variety of rock types. Their elevation and associated deep levels of erosion expose that range of rocks. I would be surprised if the deviation was significant. Certainly, the variation could not possibly be sufficient to make a meaningful dent in the CO2 released by human activity annually, which I understand is the point you are focusing on. Or, were you heading in another directIon? I think the climate change situation is alarming. What makes it more alarming is the refusal that you note by much of the public (and interested corporate bodies) to believe there is a problem. In that setting sober, documented and justified estimates of climate change and its consequences can be seen as alarmist by those who refuse to accept that there is a significant risk. "Alarmist" then becomes a rhetorical catchphrase used to excuse acceptance of the evidence. On the plus side, evolution may one day produce an animal that is not only as intelligent as homo sapiens, but is actually able to use that intelligence in a consistent and organised way.
  7. A good question. I shall trawl through some textbooks, but the simple qualitative answer is - a substantial amount. A more nuanced answer would be to note the following: Major silicate minerals fall into the following groups: Ortho-silicates: these include the olivine group minerals, in which the eponymous mineral is a solid solution of Fe silicate and Mg silicate. It is a major mineral in basic lavas, including basalt, the commonest lava on (and off) the planet. The ortho-silicates also include several common metamorphic minerals, such as garnet and staurolite, which contain calcium or magnesium as principal elements. Chain Silicates: These, especially the pyroxenes and amphiboles, are major minerals in both igneous and metamorphic rocks. There are many varieties, but magnesium is common in such minerals as the pyroxenes enstatite and hypersthene, and the amphiboles hornblende and glaucophane. Calcium is abundant in the pyroxenes pigeonite, augite and wollastonite. (The latter is CaSiO3). There are many more examples, but the ones mentioned are all important rock forming minerals. Sheet Silicates: Serpentine and chlorite are important metamorphic minerals rich in Mg. (Mg is the only metallic element present in chlorite.) Biotite, one of the two common micas, contains significant Mg. The clay minerals are exceptionally varied, but most varieties include Mg, or Ca, or both in their structures and are thus abundant in many sedimentary rocks. Framework Silicates: Of relevance here are the hugely important feldspars, in particular the plagioclase group. These contain Na and Ca as the dominant metallic ions. Mg is present in lesser amounts in some feldspars. So, you see that the major minerals, incorporating significant amounts of Ca, or Mg, or both are to be found in all major rock groupings, igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary. I recommend An Introduction to Rock Forming Minerals, by Deer, Howie and Zussman for anyone looking for something more on minerals. This is the classic on mineralogy. I think the latest edition came out in the early 90s, but I used my 1966 1st edition to check that my memory wasn't too far adrift on the brief notes above. On a separate point, re-atmosphere history, Chemistry of Atmospheres, by Richard P. Wayne Oxford University Press 1991, contains a chapter on atmosphere evolution. I've found it useful. Drat. I am not thinking logically. What you are actually asking is the proportion of Ca and Mg in the crust. That is readily available, as in this Wikipedia article. It give Ca as 4.15% and Mg as 2.33%, making them the 5th and 7th commonest elements in the crust. Those percentages may seem low, but keep in mind that almost 75% of the crust is composed of silicon and oxygen.
  8. The majority of the rocks you mention are composed predominantly of silicate minerals. These are weathered by carbonic acid, converting for the most part to clays, with a portion of the carbon dioxide now "trapped" as calcium carbonate. Unfortunately, the amount of CO2 removed by weathering globally is an order of magnitude less than the amount being released by human activity. The weathering/ocean sink is important for the long term carbon cycle, but does little to help us with the rapidity of change we have introduced. This is a basic summary of the factors involved. I agree with you, it was an excellent post by joigus .
  9. It is quite common for "retired" politicians to become much more statesman like in their words and actions. Freed of the need for political machinations they can speak more from the heart (something I thought May did not have). Taking a leaf from the fight against the virus, I wonder if we could take plasma from such politicians and inject it into the present incumbents, hoping that the antibodies would deal with the hypocrisy and kant flowing in their veins.
  10. Former UK Prime Minister, Theresa May, did little - in the opinion of many - to distinguish herself in that role. In an opinion piece in the Times she has delivered a forthright and seemingly sensible critique of the inadequacies of the global response to the corona virus crisis by governments. (It pleasently surprised this observer, but maybe that's just me.) Here is the link to the article. And Here is the BBC's take on the subject. I stole the thread title from them.
  11. Welcome to the forum. Your labset up looked interesting, however your mention of colloidal silver called to mind your earlier comment. I think that may well apply in that context; hopefully not in others. Again, welcome.
  12. I suspect your central message may be going past most members. I think you are saying, in summary: we have shown the ability, to varying degrees of success, to tackle large problems that we previously ignored. On the back of that we have an opportunity to make that approach an essential part of our way of running society. Let's not miss it. I wonder if you are not over-influenced by the situation in the UK where we have, as I understand it, at a stroke, eliminated homelessness and found cash, that was never there before, for the NHS. Sadly, in America the situation seems to have become yet another bi-partisan battleground and the only legacy may be mass graves and provocative invective. In the third world, where many are already at the bottom, what's another problem to add to the violence, the endemic illnesses, the corruption, the lack of work, etc? In Hong Kong and South Korea they dealt with problem efficiently and effectively. Arguably, they have no need of change. Each country and continent is different. That said I share your optimism in that we have do an opportunity to do things differently, to do them better. How we grasp it, time will tell.
  13. You beat me to it. I was going to post this under the title "Good things can come in small packages". The annual death toll from malaria runs just under half a million. Great to see a potential solution. Some more information on malaria in general here. (It's from the WHO, so Trump supporters should look away now.)
  14. I can't agree. @Angelo You are missing a great opportunity to learn from some knowledgeable people. Don't pass it up for some lightweight reason.
  15. This one caught my eye: Hydrocarbon seepage in the deep seabed links subsurface and seafloor biospheres Anirban Chakraborty, S. Emil Ruff, Xiyang Dong, Emily D. Ellefson, Carmen Li, James M. Brooks, Jayme McBee, Bernie B. Bernard, Casey R. J. HubertProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Apr 2020 From the paper: Significance The marine subsurface is one of the largest habitats on Earth composed exclusively of microorganisms and harboring on the order of 1029 microbial cells. It is unclear if deep subsurface life impacts overlying seafloor diversity and biogeochemical cycling in the deep ocean. We analyzed the microbial communities of 172 seafloor surface sediment samples, including gas and oil seeps as well as sediments not subject to upward fluid flow. A strong correlation between typical subsurface clades and active geofluid seepage suggests that subsurface life is injected into the deep ocean floor at hydrocarbon seeps, a globally widespread hydrogeological phenomenon. This supply of subsurface-derived microbial populations, biomass, and metabolic potential thus increases biodiversity and impacts carbon cycling in the deep ocean.
×
×
  • 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.