Jump to content

gib65

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    1009
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Nice

About gib65

  • Rank
    Protist
  • Birthday 12/29/1976

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.shahspace.com/art

Profile Information

  • Location
    Calgary
  • Interests
    writing, drawing, philosophizing...
  • College Major/Degree
    B.Sc. computer science & B.A. psychology
  • Favorite Area of Science
    quantum/relativity/modern... the deep stuff
  • Occupation
    web/software developer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Why isn't the universe just a big soup of chemicals? Why is it that when we find water, or dirt, or air, we find it with more water, dirt, or air. In other words, why not just a single water molecule by itself? Why do water molecules tend to stick around with other water molecules? When we look around the world, we don't see one uniform substance making up everything--we see rocks, trees, sky, clouds, rivers, animals, and so on. In other words, different substances clumping together and staying separate from other substances. Take the sky for example. It is not only composed of oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide, but water molecules. Water molecules tend to clump together as clouds, separating itself from the rest. Of course, the rest of the molecules--the oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide--seem to stay evenly mixed (I think), but in general, there seems to be this tendency of molecules and atoms of one kind to stick together with other molecules and atoms of the same kind. The consequence is that, at the macroscopic level, we see objects made of specific substances separately from other objects made of different substances rather than a uniform soup of chemicals permeating everything. Why do molecules and atoms do this?
  2. Thanks very much Nevim, those are good links
  3. Hello, I remember reading an article a long time ago about the tendency of people to disagree with depressed people. So if a person suffers from depression, people are more likely to disagree with that person's statements and opinions. It doesn't seem to matter what those statements or opinions are (positive or negative, offensive or flattering), and it doesn't seem to matter whether the depressed person makes their depression evident or acts as if they are happy. I can't find that article. I can't seem to find any research on any studies that would support the above. No doubt, my google search skills aren't as refined as they could be. I'm wondering if anyone can corroborate with the above or link me to some research that supports the above (or perhaps disproves it). Thanks.
  4. They say that to get over a fear, one has to expose themselves to that fear over and over until the fear goes away (assuming of course they experience no adverse effects). For example, I have a fear of public speaking. I'm trying to get over it by going to public speaking sessions. For example, toastmasters. I've been going for the past several months and I'm not experiencing the effects I was expecting. I still get very nervous speaking in front of crowds and it shows. What I'm wondering is, is there any research to show that to get over a fear of public speaking (or any phobia), one has to expose themselves to that fear at a sufficient frequency? I mean, to take a ridiculously extreme example, I don't think one would ever get over a fear by exposing one's self to it once a year. But do it once a day, then maybe. I go to Toastmasters once a week and I'm wondering if that's not frequent enough. I'm wondering if it should be more like twice or three times a week. Has there been any research to show that the frequency with which one is exposed to a certain fear makes a difference? In particular, is there a frequency below which it has no effect whatsoever?
  5. Thank you Strange, What is the earliest that scientists can "see" the state of the early universe? I mean, I know scientists can look at the early universe by observing the CMBR in deep space, but this happened much after the first picosecond. Can they actually "look" that far back, to the first picosecond, or is it all based on mathematical models at that point?
  6. I am told that scientists don’t know what happened within the first picosecond of the universe. If this is true, I have a question: How do they know it was a picosecond? I guess the assumption is that if you extrapolate the current expansion of the universe back to its origin, you don’t have to assume anything unusual in the first picosecond. But what if scientists could somehow see into the first picosecond? Is it possible that what they find is that it was way longer than a picosecond? In other words, the universe originally started expanding very slowly, and for the longest time didn’t grow much bigger than its original size, and then for some reason went through the explosive expansion scientists are familiar with?
  7. Hello,I'm wondering if there are any books out there on the subject of finding substitutes to drugs. Specifically, I'm looking for substitutes to caffeine. It doesn't have to be other substances either like yerba mate or probiotics, but lifestyle changes or changes in perspective as well.I figure that finding substitutes to drugs is such a common approach to overcoming substance abuse that there must be tons of research on it. <-- That's what I'm looking for.Can anyone help me out? Thank you so much. PS - I realize this is not the place to ask for medical advice (or any kind of advice) so please take this as a request for information resource (books, articles, studies, etc.). Thank you.
  8. Hello, I've been doing some research on hypnosis. Trying to understand how it works. I came across this website here: https://gshypnosis.com/does-hypnosis-work-understanding-the-science-of-hypnotherapy-2/# I thought I'd ask about this on a science forum like this one. According to the link above, the way hypnosis works is by inhibiting what they call "top down" thinking thereby allowing "bottom up" processing to work more effectively. Top down thinking is the way our expectations and assumptions influence the way we interpret our immediate experiences. One example they site is this: So their expectation of how the wine should taste, which was set by being told it was more expensive, determined how the wine actually tasted. Their expectation is an example of "top down" thinking. The link suggests that hypnosis inhibits top down thinking so that whatever is suggested to them (which would count as bottom up thinking) has a much more powerful effect. How established is this theory in science? Should it be dismissed as bunk? As well established? Unknown? And what's everyone opinion on it?
  9. ^ This is a great abstract. Thanks everyone for your responses.
  10. I've quit consuming caffeine. I no longer drink coffee. But on occasion, I will order a decaf. Now, it may just be the placebo effect, but I swear on some occasions, the decaf gives me a slight buzz. Is decaf coffee really 100% caffeine free? Or is it more like 99%? 95%? Maybe only 90%?
  11. Hello, Some people just don't listening. Everyone's encountered them. I usually get them on the phone--the customer service reps--and when they talk, they don't listen to me when I try to intervene with my own input. For example, I was on the phone the other day with a bank rep. I had transferred some funds from them to a different institution and was charged a $50 fee for doing so. The other institution I transfered money to was willing to compensate me for the $50 fee but wanted proof that the original institution charged it. The rep on the phone was explaining to me that they don't issue out statements indicating the fee but it is their policy to charge $50. While he was rambling on and on about it, I tried to intervene with the suggestion that if it is a policy, they must have it written somewhere and that if he could direct me to their terms and policy on their website (where presumably the $50 fee is stated), I could forward that to the other institution. But I tried 3 times to suggest that to him without his hearing me at all. He just kept rambling on for 5 minutes. Finally, when he was done, I repeated my question for the fourth time, and then he heard me, forwarding me to the excat spot where the transfer fee was stated. But my question is not about banking or self-absorbed bank reps... it's about how the human brain listens when interupted. I'm wondering if some people's brain literally block other people out when they're talking. Was the bank rep really that self-absorbed or could he literally not hear me while he was talking. I've only ever noticed this while on the phone. In person, it seems people generally notice when I've trying to intervene and stop talking. So it might require some visual cues for some. Then I wonder if everyone's like this--even me. I do remember plenty of times being interrupted (and stopping to listen to the other person), but do I remember every time? And do I remember times like this while on the phone with someone? I think this is an interesting question for neurology and I wonder if any studies have been done to answer it.
  12. Have scientists invented an age reversal pill yet? Or some equivalent technology? Is it likely we'll see such a technology within, say, the next 50 years?
  13. Hello, I'm looking for substitutes to caffeine. A friend told me that vegetable juices raise one's alkaline levels. Raised alkaline levels are supposed to increase oxygen levels and higher energy levels. Is any of this true? Are there other substitutes to caffeine for raising one's energy levels and alertness?
×
×
  • 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.