Jump to content

studiot

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    11674
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

studiot last won the day on February 21

studiot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1811 Glorious Leader

About studiot

  • Rank
    SuperNerd

Profile Information

  • Location
    Somerset, England
  • Favorite Area of Science
    applications of physical sciences
  • Occupation
    Semi Retired Technical Consultant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It was nice of you to thank me for my reply. Did you follow it up?
  2. Your male friend has decided ? What does the baby's mother think? If and when a coronavirus vaccine is developed would he wish to refuse that ? What about polio ? I don't know what country you are in but part of the problem in the UK was the insistence of the authorities to only offer a coctail vaccine. Many were afraid of the coctail effect, egged on by the then Doctor that String Junky refers to, and refused the MMR vaccine. Sadly there has been a large spike in measles cases in the UK in youths who did not receive the measles vaccine. Measles can be extremely serious in youths of their age (late teens to early twenties) whilst quite mild in smaller children. The cause of Autism is unknown, but recently changed methods of classification and the offer of special funding may well have led to an increase in diagnosis in the UK.
  3. Which nicely illustrates the one point I have been consistently making. It is not a simple life/not-life classification; it is far more complicated than that. Yes it is worth makeing that distinction since life appears to be not one single phenomenon, but a class of phenomena. +1
  4. Yo baby. +1 It was only the minutest nit anyway, I agree with pretty much all you have said. (But surely a sample of atoms could contain only 1 atom ?)
  5. With respect I think you are sidestepping that issue. In 1960 there was already a debate about whether to classify viruses as alive or not. At least most were prepared to agree that there is an issue and to discuss it.
  6. Even if there is only one atom of Caesium left? We don't. The classic example is the second law of thermodynamics,developed in the 18202 and 1830s. By 1880 they were teaching "We don't know why this law is what is is, but it has never been observed to be broken" In 1990 they were still teaching this since no failure had been observed. I fully expect them to still be teaching it in 2090. The longer it goes on repeating a result the more confidence we have in what we know.
  7. Indeed for instantaneous implies a step function for which the derivatives used in the equations do not exist. If you would go learn some mathematics, as has been suggested, you would know this and not try to misuse equations.
  8. Yes it is worth makeing that distinction since life appears to be not one single phenomenon, but a class of phenomena. +1 I have to observe that the little bit of biology I did in the early 1960s gave all of those criteria plus a few more that I forget. But they did not require all life forms to exhibit all of these behaviours. They were also prepared for a fuzzy boundary between life and non life, where they placed viruses for the reasons CharonY gives. I don't see that we have improved on that approach since.
  9. I see you have now used up your 5 posts in the first 24 hours limit. Hopefully you have enough info to complete this and your other similar questions. Come back tomorrow and say how you got on.
  10. Just expanding on your TD (Tricky Dicky) statement.
  11. How about comparing with related questions? Is a ship alive because it carries a coat of barnacles, without the ship the barnacles would not survive. So is a planet alive because part of it contains microorganism with no locomotive capability, but which can change its chemistry dramatically (the Earth would not have an oxygen rich atmosphere without stomatolites) Can part of an object or a whole be alive or does it all have to be living ? What about dead tree branches ? Or can one livinh whole actually conmprise several living organims? For example stomach flora, without which I would have no digestion.
  12. Yes. But there is also a point to my DA observation.
  13. So do I after a good dinner and some whiskys.
  14. Do you realise you require a mass density distribution to do this, not "a body of mass M" and why ?
×
×
  • 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.