mrblond5311

Our eyes use chemicals in the rods and cones in the retina to detect light. These work by breaking up when light of a particular wavelength hit is (red' date=' gree, and blue). The chamicals are actually very similar to one an other and some people have some that respond roughly equally to 2 different wavelengtha, these people are called colour blind.

 

Now as these chemicals have to break up when the light hits them (and stimulating the nerve cells), this means that the chemical gets used up, but the eye makes more of it.

 

So if you look at an object that has a lot of contrast (say a white shape on a dark page or dark computer screen), then the light sensitive chemicals that are used to detect the ligt get used up wher the white object is. When you shift your gaze to something else (say a white coloured wall) the light from the wall activtes the chemicals all over the eye, but where you had the white object before you have used up a lot of the chemicals there and so the activity there is lower than elsewhere in your feild of vision. You see this as a darker patch.

 

Now we have 3 colour receptors in the eye and if one of those colours gets used up by the others don't, then if we look at a white area we will see the unused receptors giving a strong output and the receptor of the colour that we were looking at will give us a weak output. So if we were looking at a blue object, then we will see a Red/Green (which is yellow) after image. If you were looking at a yellow object then the after image would be blue.

 

If, for some reason your eyes are not replenishing these chemicals fast enough, then you will get these after images more often.

 

But still, go see a doctor if you are at all concerned about this.[/quote']

 

 

Since these cases normally deal with dim lit rooms or darker objects couldn't vision purple (the chemical produced by your brain that helps you see in the dark) have something to do with the color contrast and the after effect since he's going from dark to light or vice versa? The chemical change could explain why it's hard for other chemicals to be replenished and explain the after effect if there is vision purple being switched on then off since it requires light to destroy it. Could his eyes be "over reactive" to darkness; especially since he quoted he's very sensitive to light. Synthesis, do you experience any pain or discomfort while this is going on?

 

I was never really sure what triggered vision purple - the presence of darkness or the contrast between light and darkness. Could focusing on a dark object enable your brain to produce vision purple even in daylight? Any help?

So does this mean you don't believe in using the pill or an IUD as contraception?

Sorry I'm behind in the times. What's an IUD? and how do they work?

Do you not think that it would be punishment for the child to be born to a mother who wants to love it but is reminded of the awful event that resulted in the conception every time she looks at it? Do you not think that it is punishment growing up knowing that your father is an evil rapist?

 

It is not something that you want to broadcast if you are raped and become pregnant and endless questions about the identity of the father if you are single is not going to help you emotionally recover from the ordeal.

 

It's not as simple as 'have the baby and adopt it'. If I carried a baby for 9 months I don't think I could give it away' date=' regardless of who the father was. But at the same time I don't know if I could give it the life it deserved. Or if I would love it as much as future children I would have with someone who I did love.

 

And what happens during those 9 months carrying the child? You might have to leave school/college/uni because of being pregnant and if you cannot continue at a later date you may have wasted years of education. You may not have the support of your family and they may disown you. And current partners may not be able to cope with you keeping a rapists baby and relationships may break down.

 

Is that fair to a woman who never asked for any of this?[/quote']

 

 

It's not punishment for the child. Punishment is the action for doing something wrong which the child did not. The mother should also do her best to make sure her child should does not percieve it that way. They also should not find out as a child but more of a young adult. The child would most likely respect their mother more for being able to go through with the birth even though it would be painful. All of your reasons deal with certain circumstance's which are not always present in these cases (which is why the word "may" is so common in your reply).That mother "may" also have a better life because of the child. The child "may" grow up to be someone great. I am pro-choice but I don't believe that every woman in this scenario should be able to abort an unborn child. As far as continuing college why wouldn't you be able to finish? There are alot of programs out there and plenty of ways to get help with that if the mother is willing. And if your family disowns you because you decide to keep the baby than that wasn't much of a true family to begin with. Your' "family" should be there to support you whether they agree with it or not. I understand it might break current relationships down but why would you want to be with someone who had different morals than you and wouldn't do all they could to help you? As far as being fair goes; if the world were fair she wouldn't have been raped in the first place. Why not at least give the child a chance to be what they can be and decide for themselves how their life should be. To make that decision for the child would just make the situation even more unjust.

 

I agree adoption is not easy and it's not always the answer but the mother does have that option and if after 9 months she's grown close enough to that baby to want to keep it then that would overpower the negative circumstance that got her pregnant and help her through the tough times and bad memories.

 

I'm prochoice because I believe no one has the right to make that decision for her; but then again no one has the right to make that decision for an unborn child. Why would you assume they would have a bad life and wish that they were aborted? A wise man once told me "Assumptions are the mother of all screw ups" and I think it would be a "screw up" for anyone to assume anything for an unborn child.

Here in Ohio, U.S. we were having a normal winter until new years hit. Since then it's been pretty mild. It's supposed to hit 70 degrees tomorrow then drop to 35 the next day. January averaged like 15 degrees above average here.We've had alot up and down with the temps this winter. Last year (04-05)we had the snowiest winter ever recorded but then we also had tornadoes in November/December. Last summer was one of the mildest I've ever seen; not as hot and there weren't any of the big thunderstorms that I like. I guess the biggest difference I've seen is the erractic behavior of the weather. Not really a whole season out of whack it's just a little jumbled together and from one extreme to the other anymore. Although, it might have something to do with living by a bunch of large freshwater lakes? I heard were like 1 out of 2 places in the world to have lake effect snow. I've seen the weather change drastically in an hour mostly because the wind started blowing over the lake.

I understand that you think boredom will lead to a bad memory...which is where I was trying to go with my previous post.If you read my question it read "Do you think that a bad memory could be the cause of boredom?" Which in essence is what you're saying too. He sometimes remembers things he enjoys...but even that in itself seems to be vague at times. "

 

-That may worry me. It probaly wouldn't hurt to get him checked out."

 

Well' date=' that's a given...that something we both know for sure

 

 

 

I would love to know...so hopefully someone could answer this brilliant question...I myself will try and find out. It sure would make sense if that's the case.

 

 

 

I agree that one needs the right kind of stimulation, yet whether stimulation can lead to a higher IQ I think is debatable...Because, no matter how much stimulation you get I think that it depends on your ability to memorise and understand as well. I mean, some people just can't grasp complex concepts. No matter how many times you go over it with them.

 

People who have the ability to increase their IQ will be good candidates for such a study, thus making your point valid. But what happens to the rest that can't?[/quote']

 

 

-I believe the right kind of stimulation promotes a higher IQ regardless of the person. It's doesn't matter the quantity of the stimulation if it's not the right kind. I think the stimulation gives you the ability to better memorize things. Now understanding is a different topic than memory. I could memorize any mathmatical equation in the world but that wouldn't mean I understood it. Just going over something a lot doesn't mean you're stimulating them. Only some people respond to repetition as a stimulate to memory. Just like Autism. Autistics have the ability to memorize very complex things but they don't necessarily understand them. Now it may sound crazy to some people but I believe anyone can be stimulated into learning complex things. It may not take just one stimulate but a process of stimulations to help them memorize it than understand it; or vice versa. I think before you can say the last thing you quoted you would have to prove that there a people, that beyond a doubt, can't increase their IQ with any means of stimulation. That would be the main thing I would disagree with. What would cause a person to lose the ability to learn?

if a bone gets broken and isn`t set and put into a cast' date=' but is kept broken due to use, what happens?

 

does it heal eventualy anyway? does it stay broken forever and continue hurting?

does something else happen?[/quote']

 

I ad a friend who broke his finger (not the knuckle) and didn't go to the doctor until it was too late. When he finally went because it had healed wrong & he was in constant pain they had to give him a device that he had to wear for about 14 hours a day. This device was set up like a brace that was attached to his finger and constantly bent it up and down. He had to adjust the thing everyday so that it put more pressure on it until it finally rebroke. This process took him about 3 months. If I were you I would go. I hurt my wrist a while back and now it hurts most of the time and I constantly have to "crack it" to relieve the pain. You should see the looks I get when I pop it and it sounds like I'm breaking it. I'm not sure if the bone healed wrong or if because I didn't get it checked out it damaged my tendons but I wish I would've had it checked.

Ok, I have a question for you(anyone who would like to answer) . Do you think that a bad memory could be the cause of boredom? Could it be because certain people with a higher level of intelligence need more brain stimulation and that unstimulating events/things in general are just forgotten because it has little or no significant effect on the brain/person? Reason I ask this is because my husband is struggling with short term memory loss and he has one of the best memories I've ever seen in a human. So this is a little worrying, and I'm trying to decide whether it is neurological or if it's because his work isn't stimulating enough for his brain.

I feel as though it's the opposite. I'm not a neurologist or anything but I think boredom will lead to a bad memory; at least of the boring things. Does he have a good memory of things he enjoys? For me it's really hard to remember things that don't interest me. I can remember things from science class as far back as third grade (I can replay it in my head) but I can't remember anything from a history class in my life; not even the teachers. It sounds to me that his work doesn't intrique or stimulate him enough to let him memorize anything from there. Maybe the presence of seratonin or some other brain chemical brought on by stimulation helps you retain a better memory. Does anyone know if this is true? Stoned I don't think it has anything to do with the level of intelligence or needing more stimulation. I think it just has to be the right kind of stilmulation. And I think that brain stimulation can lead to a higher IQ. Anyone agree?

I'm quite sure you'll have a very hard time finding a compound, which you can safely eat and which on the other hand has the cooling effect you want. If I were you, I would stick to the good old ice cubes .

Ok what if I could add something that would raise the freezing point. I think table salt does this but I'd like to stay away from that.

The solids in the inner bag dissolve in water and due to this' date=' the water cools down. Some compounds take up quite a lot of heat while they dissolve. You can experience this effect yourself somewhat by dissolving a lot of table salt in water. Even better is dissolving ammonium nitrate (from fertilizer). You certainly will notice the cooling down. The mixture in the bags is chosen such that the maximum amount of solid can dissolve in water at a fairly constant rate, the solids being such that a lot of heat is taken up.

 

The opposite effect also is quite common. If you dissolve e.g. sodium hydroxide (drain cleaner), then you'll notice a strong heating of the solution.[/quote']

 

 

Thanks for the help. Silkworm and I were talking about this and he was wondering what is reacting with what in the bag; as far as the processes go. You have 2 ammoniums, 2 chlorides, an acetate, and a nitrate. It seems like they over did it to me. Any help will be appreciated!

'']ammonium nitrate. but ull proablly die if u drink it

Lol, well I guess that would help if I was serving the food to death row inmates!

1. 5614

2. Even though we have our disagreements "ecoli is one smart guy"

3.AzurePhoenix

4.Bascule

5.AzurePhoenix amuses me

6.Can't say. Not as faithful as I'd like to be

Lol, should we have one for the person who asks the most questions? Or perhaps the most intriguing?

Are there any edible substances (compounds?) that can be added to food to cause an endothermic reaction? Kind of like putting an ice cube in hot soup to cool it down but using a compound instead & getting more of an effect like an instant ice pack. I'm thinking it might depend on the food but I'm not sure. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks!!!

I'm the same way & my doctor also told me it's a sign of ADHD. Sometimes the reason I can't remeber things is because I don't pay attention when things are being told to me; not on purpose though. I just sorta fade off alot and think about 20 different things but then I can remember things as far back as when I was 3 and memorize numbers and codes very well. I've tried to improve my attetion span with out any luck I feel it's because it's so inadvertant I don't know when to concentrate harder. Eithert way I still hate walking into a room & forgetting why I went there. I even bought some ginko biloba pills to help but I can't remember to take them, lol. Something I read said the consumption of glutens will increase this affect. Does anyone know if this is true?

Hey,

I was just wondering what process of reactions is going on in an instant ice pack. I've included a link with all the ingredients.

"Endothermic composition and cold pack

Document: United States Patent 4081256

Abstract: A particulate composition producing an endothermic reaction when mixed with water, and a cold pack containing such a composition, and water isolated therefrom until the intended time of use. The composition consists essentially of, in parts by weight, about 65 to about 130 parts urea, about 35 to about 80 parts hydrated sodium acetate (Na C.sub.2 H.sub.3 O.sub.2 .multidot.3H.sub.2 O), about 18 to about 40 parts potassium chloride, potassium nitrate, or mixtures thereof, about 18 to about 30 parts ammonium chloride, and about 6 to about 10 parts quar gum. A cold pack comprises an outer sealed, flexible, impermeable enclosure containing the composition, and an inner sealed, flexible, impermeable, easily ruptured enclosure containing about 85 to about 140 parts by weight water. The pack reaches and maintains a temperature of about -7.degree. C for up to 30 minutes, and is moldable to conform to the surfaces being cooled."

http://freepatentsonline.com/4081256.html

Ammonium hydrogen carbonate or Ammonium acid carbonate perhaps?

 

http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/a5616.htm

"Ammonia powder is ammonium bicarbonate' date=' a leavening agent that is a precursor of today's baking powder and baking soda; it must be ground to a powder before using. It is also known as hartshorn, carbonate of ammonia or powdered baking ammonia."

Sorry, should have googled it [u']first[/u]. My fault!

Does anyone know another name for ammonium bicarbonate? I hear it's more popular in the UK than in the USA. I've never heard of it and I was looking to buy some but couldn't find it in the grocery store so I thought that possibly there's a more common name for it. I'm looking to use it as a low sodium replacement for baking soda. Thanks!

Bluenoise is correct. Blue eyes are linked to a pale skin which is an adaptation displayed by peoples living in european northerly climates. The reason for it is because northerly latitudes have lower sunlight levels which make the production of vitamin D by the skin from sunlight more difficult. ('Eskimo' type peoples have other adaptations for living in even colder latitudes but probably retain brown eyes because they traditionally have a diet rich in vitamin D and also need dark eyes due to snow and sand glare).

 

The eyes of negroid peoples are not brown in exactly the same way as indo-europeans though' date=' as it also involves pigmentation of a different part of the iris.

 

I don't think the Neanderthal reason is really 'needed' for an explanation, but I wouldn't discount it totally as there may be other peoples who lived in similar conditions to early europeans who never developed blue eyes...[/quote']

 

 

 

So if my wife consumes less vitamin D and avoids the sun while she's pregnant there's a better chance of my son coming out with blue eyes? We're both caucaian and she has red hair, pale skin, & dark blue eyes; I have brown hair, year round tan, and dark brown eyes. I'm just curious if maybe I have dominant genes because all of the males on my dads side look the same, including me and my first son. My second son came out with dark hair, dark skin, dark blue eyes (for now). He looks like a mini me except for the eye color which would be a first on my dad's side for a while. What would it take to have my gene for the eye color "overpowered" so to speak?

Sorry, I know this is an old thread I was just wondering why does cancer go into remission and can slacking in a healthy diet cause it to start again? Also, from reading this thread it seems like the best "cure" is going to be prevention. Why don't we teach this (in depth) to kids in school? I'm sure teachers skim over it but it seems the best thing is to explain to kids why a healthy diet is so important; not just tell them it's good for them. This article alone scared me enough to make sure my family and I eat healthier (more b vitamins too).

Also, just something I noticed. It seems that since americans diets are targeted more towards convenience than health maybe that's why cancer has been evolving much faster than we can keep up with. Why can't the government just enforce more foods (especially "convenience" foods) be vitamin-fortified? This seems to make the most sense for prevention to me. Obviously the public won't just switch their diets overnight so you would have to make vitamins almost inevitable in foods. Although, I think I read somewhere that just vitamins alone aren't what you need it's where you get them from and how you take them.

Also, why can't we reverse the mutation or make the make the mutated cells mutate Again into something non-harmful? Just curious.

The hair and nails aren't growing, they are becoming apparently elongated because the body is drying out.

Thank you. I thought there was something else to that.

The position of extreme anti-abortionists is logically inconsistent. They assume that life begins upon conception. However' date=' conception is more analogous to biochemistry than life. For example, when a person dies, their hair and fingernails continue to grow. Why doesn't this biochemistry of a dead person constitute part of their life, such that all funerals are postponed until this last little bit of their biochemistry stops?

 

For a religious person death is a rebirth to life ever after. This would logically imply that life and death have complementary definitions. Death is not based on biochemistry, such as hair still growing after death, but rather is based on the heart stopping or the brain ceasing to function, i.e., kept alive with machines. The religious continuity of life/death should logically imply that the definition of life is as soon as the unborn's little heart begins to beat and its brain begins to give off brain waves.[/quote']

 

 

I'm not saying the actual life has begun. The process of the life has begun. When you know you're pregnant you know fully well that molecules inside of the female will turn out to be a human life. Aborting this is then ending the process of the life. Shouldn't the cells forming together to create organs and cartilage be considered life? It's not a cancer or a disease that should just be removed and forgotten. It's almost a miracle that women get pregnant considering the circumstances that have to be just right. As for death not ending till you hair and fingernails stop growing (which I'm not sure is entirely correct, I thought it was something else happening): your life has ended and death has begun...not the continuation of life. Your cells aren't reproducing or creating anything anymore; they're being decomposed by micro-organisms. Totally different process. You can't kill a dead man or end his process of life; it has already occured.

Nevermind. I copied it then pasted in Internet Explorer and it worked. That is pretty nice.

It acts like it wants to load then redirects to this:

can't find the web site

500 Unknown Host

The site may no longer exist or it may have moved.

Double-check for any misspellings, punctuation errors, or extra spaces.

If these suggestions do not work, try restarting your computer.

Error: Can't find web site mrl.nyu.edu.nyud.net

http://mrl.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/multitouchreel.mpg[/url'] :eek:

This link won't work for me. It says web page can't be found. Any help?

Assuming you misspelled "morallistic" and wasn't talking about something I've never heard of before... I am looking at it from a morallistic point of view: my own. From my perspective' date=' a baby isn't a person until it's head touches air. Until then, it's just a body without a soul. So, don't go claiming I'm immoral when you don't even know what my moral's are.

 

 

- I was suggesting you take a look at your own morals. I never said you were immoral; and what does having the babies head touch air have to do with them having a soul? Thanks for the spelling lesson by the way. I still like the "prefect" and "cime" spellings you used.-

 

I believe your description of what happens to children of rape victims is a 'best-case senerio' type thing. And while we would all love to believe everyone can find happiness given the situation, I would rather look at the world more realisticly... after all, it is people's lives we are talking about here.

 

- I don't see how you're looking at it "realisticly". You're viewing it from the worst case scenario. I'm just saying that you never know and I think it's better to atleast give them the benefit of a doubt. Would you kill a fetus if it's parents were known criminals? or if they both had alot of medical problems? Seems like you'd be taking the same chance to me.-

 

 

 

No, it isn't. It's more like arguing for the death penalty because our jails are getting full... but even then, it's not really the same, because I don't believe that a fetus is a person.

 

 

 

I repeat, how is it fair to a child to grow up in a home with a poor or mentally unstable mother. If the mother gives up the child, how is it fair for the child? If the child never was born, perhaps the mother wouldn't be mentally unstable or as poor. IMO, the present and future needs of the mother outweigh the needs future needs of a fetus.

 

-It's not about the needs of either one of them it's about the rights of the baby. Whether the sex was consensual or not. Now I still believe it should be her choice but I don't see how she could justify it just because she's poor or would become poor or if she was mentally unstable. I might be a little biased because my mother gave me up for adoption; she wasn't raped but the father left her after she had me so it's almost the same.I grew up going from foster home to shelter than finally I ended up with my grandmother.My mother is a bi-polar schizo, I never knew my father,and I grew up VERY poor and I turned out fine. No criminal record or physcological problems what so ever. I'm fine with the way I grew up and with the decisions my mother and father made. It made me who I am today and if I would have grown up differently I would be alot different. I feel that my childhood lets me view things differently than most people do. I'm almost grateful for the way things went.-

 

 

 

Yes, the world isn't fair or perfect... so you can't really convince me what situation would be "less fair." That's completely subjective.[/quote']

 

 

You have the right to your own opinion.

Ecoli:

"And if the mother can't afford to keep the baby? It's not like it was her decision to have one... is it fair to bring a baby into the world that can't supported by it's own mother. Even adoption is not the prefect solution, preventing unwanted children from being born allieviates stress on the adoption clinics. Some children spend years being shifted from foster home to foster home, never finding a real place for themselves... often falling to cime... does that sound like the usual love and care?"

Dude,

The world isn't fair or perfect. If it was the lady wouldn't have been raped in the first place. It's less fair to make that decision for the baby and not give it a chance. The mother being poor or mentally unstable is by no means an excuse to end an unborn childs life. You would rather "allieviate" stress from the adoption clinics and crank up the business for the abortion clinics? That's just like saying we should stop arresting criminals because our jails are getting full. Some children who started out in a perfectly good homes end up in foster shelters and others who mothers can't or won't take care of them will be taken in by family members and lead a fulfilling and productive life. Seems like you need to take a look at it from a marolistic point of view than from a business perspective.