OldTony

"The Bottom Line While the concept resonates with many individuals who feel different from group dynamics, it remains an informal, conversational label rather than a formally recognized psychological construc" Thank you iNow, I can accept completely what you say. Whether the concept does or does not deserve its own classification the fact is the description resonates strongly with me and I and I am wondering if it resonates with others on a science forum.

Well folks, I read the article (only once) and immediately thought it explained a lot about the way I have felt and the way I have organised my 88 years lived so far. I then read the description found by googling otrovert to my wife (one of the very few I feel close to) and asked " Do you think this seems a bit like me?" She laughed and said "100% like you!". I was wondering if anyone else on the forum would feel the same after reading some googled information :- An otrovert is an emerging personality concept for an emotionally independent individual who easily socializes but has no desire to fit into groups or follow the collective "hive mind". Coined by psychiatrist Dr. Rami Kaminski, the term combines otro (Spanish for "other") and vert (to turn). [1, 2] Key Characteristics Socially Adept, Not an Outcast: They are friendly and can navigate social settings, but they don't draw their identity or self-worth from peer validation. [1] Not an Introvert or Extrovert: Unlike introverts, they aren't necessarily drained by people; unlike extroverts, they don't gain energy from crowds. [1] Depth Over Breadth: They prefer intimate, one-on-one relationships rather than identifying with broad political, social, or communal groups. [1, 2] Independent Thinkers: They often march to the beat of their own drum and have a strong capacity for original, autonomous thought. [1, 2] The Debate Around the Trait Because this is a very new framework introduced in Dr. Kaminski’s book, The Gift of Not Belonging, it is not an officially established clinical diagnosis or formal category in traditional personality psychology. [1, 2] The Appeal: Many people who feel they never quite fit into clubs, cliques, or communal groups find the concept deeply validating and liberating. [1, 2] The Skepticism: Some psychologists and commentators, as discussed in University of Michigan Psychology News, suggest it is less of a groundbreaking biological "type" and more of a specific configuration of already-known traits like extreme individualism.[1, 2] Community Sentiments: On discussion forums like Reddit, users express mixed opinions; while many resonate strongly with the idea, others feel it's simply a new label for traits already covered by existing classifications. [1] 7 sites Are You an Otrovert?What Belonging Means and What It Doesn't Are You an Otrovert? What Belonging Means and What It Doesn't — A New Trio of Beings * An “otrovert” embodies the personality trai... Medium Enter the Otrovert - LinkedIn If Kaminski is correct, it adds further fuel to the debate about why or whether we need to pin labels on people. There's an argume... LinkedIn Otrovert - Wikipedia * Origin. Kaminski introduced the term in his 2025 book, The Gift of Not Belonging, and it appears in his writing about belonging, Wikipedia

Apparently, according to an article in "Science Focus", the classification of otrovert coined by a Dr. Rami Kaminsk is definitely not a position on a line between extrovert and introvert. To quote from the article written by Ian Taylor in that magazine "a person who doesn't fit in - not just in social groups, but in the existing personality types defined in the diagnostic manuals of professional psychology."

I have always felt a bit of a loner. I have a circle of people I get on well with but never felt the need for strong friendship. I have always liked individual sports, my favourite one in my younger years was gliding. Anyway, I took an online test and it seems I am an otrovert which apparently is something completely different to an introvert or extrovert. A description can easily be found by googling.

Human beings have accidents when driving cars - Insurance assessors can no doubt provide statistics on the risk factor. It seems likely to me that cars controlled by AI will also have accidents, but be developed to the point that statistics show them to be safer than humans. I can see a person in such a car that has an accident giving as an excuse "I gave control of the car to a system that statistics show improved safety on the road". Even more than that, when AI control is acknowleged as the safer option I can't see why the human occupant will even need to be able to drive at all. Is that a beautiful dream or a nightmare ?

Diplomatic agreements often involve statements that can be looked at in such a way that the end result gives both parties a different view of what the words can mean. In other words a different view of what both claim to be truth. The process is known as constructive ambiguity.

Well, it would seem to be true that if your communication skills are poor then your performance in tests involving communication will give you a lower IQ number than you deserve. This would be particularly true within the time that late talker children are "catching up" with their age group. Perhaps that basically sorts itself out by the time that speech skills become more in line with others of the same age group.

Perhaps I'm being a bit pedantic but I always understood that you cannot improve your fundamental IQ although with practice you can improve your score on IQ tests.

Nervous old lady at the flight booking in desk " Do your planes crash very often? " Answer from book in clerk " No madam, only once ".

It seems to me that if you lift the reservoir container as well as the air driven pump that would work better as it wouldn't have to suck so hard.

Apart from the other comments it seems to me that to let air out you need to let water in requiring two apertures both below the outside waterline. The inlet at the bottom of the vessel and the outlet near the top. This would seem to need enough ballast to sink it while full of air. If you wan't horizontal movement as the object sinks it seems to me that in the end you are employing gravity. Although it doesn't answer the OP's question stubby wings working on the same principle as glider wings in air would do the trick.

Ah well, I fell for that one - or perhaps a touch of "Two nations divided by a common language ".

Certain caterpillars, moths and butterflies have evolved to have imitation eyes so perhaps having such does confer a reproductive advantage ?

This is just an observation but seems relevant to the discussion. It is very difficult, apparently, for the human mind to produce a long list of truly random numbers. There are recognised tests for randomness and rather strangely, I think, that even if you produced a list of numbers by a method such as rolling a dice it may well produce a list of numbers that would fail a test for randomness. For that reason you can purchase a book of random numbers that agree with the rules of randomness.

Thank you, you are very kind. We are both chugging along with the help of modern science - bypass and pacemaker for me and a heart valve and pacemaker for my wife

Lol - I just looked up where you live - we didn't go to the same school but I spent a total of 11 years out my total of 22 years service at RAF Locking, near Weston-Super-Mare as an instructor and also a trade standards examiner. In the latter role I spent 4 years working on all aspects of multiple choice tests. More importantly I met and married a Somerset lass and we recently celebrated our 67th anniversary.

It appears to me that this is not really a question about multiple choice questions. As has been pointed out we do not know the parameters given to the question writer such as how many answers should be correct (including none). For some reason it brings to my mind an old conundrum where you are given a card and written on both sides of it are the words "The statement on the other side of this card is not true"

It seems to me it depends on the question One obviously expects there to be only one answer and so the question setter has a duty to make it so. But, for example, how would an examiner mark the following question? What is the square root of 36? a) -6 b)-3 c) +3 d) +6

hi Folks, you really do make me aware of my age One of the first motorbikes I had was a Panther 350 with an ignition timer control on the handle bars. It could give you a nasty kickback if you set it too far advanced when kick starting. On the other hand you could Get a gentle response that I'd describe as soft and soggy when travelling on icy roads. One of the first 4 wheeled vehicles I had was a Ford Thames van with a starting handle. The advice was don't wrap your thumb around the handle so that if it kicked back on starting it could jump out of your hand without hurting too much. BTW That was the early 1960's when I met a girl who happily rode pillion, seemed to get less keen when we got engaged and exerted all her influence on me to acquire 4 wheels once we were married. :)

That's true. I was just pondering what exactly is meant when the word "or" is used. It seems to me that if someone says to two people "I want you or you to do something" he is most likely wanting the exclusive or function to apply. He doesn't need to say "I want you or you to do something but not both of you". Perhaps I was being a bit pedantic, but thought it worth mentioning.

It's worth mentioning that small beer saved many lives in the 19th century . "During the 1854 cholera outbreak in Soho, London, small beer (a low-alcohol beer) played a critical role in saving lives, as brewery workers and residents who consumed it were spared from the contaminated water that caused the epidemic . PubMed Central (PMC) (.gov) +1"

It seems to me that Professor Shercliff is really focussing on transient conditions on switching on or off dc circuits and the operation of ac circuits. I notice the diagram does not include one or more switches therefore I would assume steady state conditions would be the purpose of the question. In any case even during the transient period, as I understand it, Kirchoff's laws apply at any specific point at any specific instant of time. Whether wanted or not every circuit has some inductance and some capacitance which have their effect during the transient period of microseconds or nanoseconds, but once the transient period is over neither has an effect in the steady state.

Just to add. My understanding is that Kirchoff's laws and equations apply to ac circuits if you add " at any given instant of time".

The circuit given is a dc circuit and a radio aerial only transmits when given an ac signal to create a magnetic field. Surely in a dc circuit Kirchoff's equations hold good ?

A night on Chinese food and beer in Singapore in the 1960's would ensure an ample sample............