There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

askscience

This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

lolcatnip , in [Biology] The umbilical cord: is it 'necessary' to sever it, or is it designed to disconnect on its own eventually?

The real question to me is what happens with animals in the wild?

mysoulishome ,
@mysoulishome@lemmy.world avatar

Nature videos exist and in my area you can go to the county fair and watch cows be born….

lolcatnip ,

Thanks that’s very helpful. Especially the part about county fairs—can’t get much more “in the wild” than that!

blazeknave ,

Okay. What advice would you not snark about?

lolcatnip ,

None. I’m asking for information, not advice.

blazeknave ,

You’re a douche. You act in bad faith and don’t respect the social contract. Kindly fuck yourself.

lolcatnip ,

Right back at ya, asshole.

blazeknave ,

I’m an asshole for having a problem with you being an asshole. Okay Trump.

its_prolly_fine ,

Most bite through it when they are in the process of consuming the cord and placenta.

WarmSoda , in Is there any scientific study about where should the bed be facing?

No

linucs OP ,

Thanks, have a good day

japps13 , in Is the air in a closed container at 100% relative humidity?

At equilibrium, I’d say yes.

alvvayson ,

I agree.

Due to temperature fluctuations it will not always be at 100%, but at equilibrium it will be.

captainlezbian , in Does everyone learn the same gravity in school or is it different everywhere?

In grade school i learned it was about 32 ft/s2, but by high school on it was all 9.8[1/06] m/s2. Then in engineering school it was sometimes 10. None of that had anything to do with local gravity and everything to do with Americans having to be special at first, followed by the fact that our science classes are actually in metric (statics and dynamics were in both as some fields of engineering haven’t metricated yet here). And the 10 is because you can round to a round number by barely even touching your fudge factor so why not.

AA5B ,

Interesting - what part of the US are you from?

I was going to say that even here in the US it was 9.81 m/s^2. I don’t remember ever being taught the number in feet (in NYS) nor seeing it for my kids (in MA). Science was always metric

captainlezbian ,

Ohio, and Catholic schools. It was clearly on its way out. In retrospect it was definitely a strange situation where different teachers had different opinions on metric. Some clearly thought it’s fine for science, and others clearly just wanted to quit our two measurement system that does nothing but prolongs the inevitable.

awwwyissss , in Is it possible that monozygotic twins are quantum entangled at conception?

I doubt it. Pretty sure quantum entanglement is between two sub-atomic particles.

dack ,

Yeah, even a single cell has way to many particles gor entanglement to be a factor.

corsicanguppy , in Since we can develop new allergies throughout life, and now I eat peanut butter every day, is it possible that suddendly one day I get an allergic reaction so strong it kills me?

everyday

This means ‘unremarkable’ or ‘common’ or ‘ordinary’

every day

This means ‘daily’.

Good luck .

linucs OP ,

Thanks, didn’t think about the difference, english is not my 1st language, corrected now

angrystego , in Can a desert turn into grassland through artificial means? How have deserts naturally turned into other forms of environments, historically?

I’d say the most important part is moisture. When a desert starts getting more rainwater, it starts to be an interesting habitat for algea and cyanobacteria (all they need is sun and moisture). These organisms start colonizing the desert, because it’s not hostile for them anymore. As they live and die there, organic matter starts to pile up and allows other organisms that consume this matter to colonize the desert as well. Soil is slowly developing and allowing more and more plants and animals to inhabit the place. The whole proces is very slow. You can do the same (and faster) through artificial means, but you have to water the land and take the water from somewhere else. If you stop watering, the land turns into desert again if there’s not enough rainfall. At some places that are not dry naturally you could reestablish a long term green habitat - e.g. instead of a dam and dry land surrounding it, you could recreate a wetland forest with a meandering river, which would help the surrounding area, because forests create their own small water cycles so more rain can be expected around them.

niktemadur OP , in Do we know how long it took for cuneiform to develop from counting cows and barley, to drafting official documents and contracts, to creating literature?

…and then to register astronomical observations! The birth of science, no less.

And all because every year like clockwork, the Eufrates and Tigris blanketed an area of hundreds of square kilometers with a fresh coat of silt (from the Taurus mountains in modern-day Turkey) that was perfect as a rudimentary but cheap, easy and quick writing medium, pushing the point of a stick into a pancake of soft clay, then leaving it to dry and harden in the sun.

meco03211 , in Is the heat produced by fossil and nuclear fuel negligible?

That heat is kinda overshadowed by the giant ass ball of fusion shitting metric shit tons of energy at us.

It got a bit technical in the middle. Hit me up if you need that ELI:5.

phcorcoran , in How dense would the atmosphere need to be to result in a cataclysmic chain reaction during a nuclear explosion?

I don’t know what chain reaction exactly they were thinking of, but from modern fusion research, I believe we can confidently say that the atmosphere would need to be interior-of-a-large-star-level dense, and even then I’m not sure you’d get nitrogen fusing with anything without a lot of hydrogen or helium around. Nitrogen-nitrogen fusion seems extremely implausible for sure

chuckleslord ,

Fusion of two nitrogen-14 nuclei and a hydrogen nucleus. That was the feared chain reaction, since both elements are abundant.

Source

phcorcoran ,

Thank you, the page you sourced references a 2024 paper inspired by the Oppenheimer movie that was super interesting to read

errer ,

Prolly the most relevant paragraph from the linked article for this discussion:

Today, especially after the detonation of the 50 MT Tsar hydrogen bomb on Novaya Zemlya in 1961, it is also experimentally verified that the danger of atmospheric or even oceanic ignition does not exist. Also, the experimental measurements obtained by Zucker and others demonstrate that the fusion probability is much smaller than the geometric cross-section for 14N+14N assumed by Teller and coworkers, further reducing the chances for such an event. Furthermore, the atmosphere is also heated only to temperatures of a few million degrees, so that the most efficient energies of the fusing nuclei are a few 100 keV and thus well below the Coulomb barrier and very much reduced by penetrability. These temperatures are noticeably lower than those in the late hydrostatic burning stages of massive stars.

Basically the temperature of the atmosphere is over an order of magnitude too low to have any chance of ignition (need 10s of millions of K), and the reaction rate is thus several orders of magnitude lower than the threshold.

lurch ,

i think the idea is that the part that already fused creates a blast wave that could create the conditions, including preassure required for more fusion. i have no idea if it’s possible though.

nickwitha_k , in How long will the Great Lakes last?

Until they become the Alright Lakes.

nis ,

This is askscience. We need a standardized scale for this.

Great should obviosly be near the top. But is Ok above or below Alright?

nickwitha_k ,

Point taken. I’d suggest something along the lines of this scale:

great > good > alright > ok > adequate > meh > fair > subpar > unfortunate > abysmal

myrrh ,

feeble < poor < typical < good < excellent < remarkable < incredible < amazing < monstrous < unearthly

…based upon how my elementary school teachers used to grade assignments, great is just above excellent, so they’ll diminish to excellent lakes first, then good lakes, then typical lakes…

TerrorBite , in What happens when you apply a force to an object at close to the speed of light?
@TerrorBite@pawb.social avatar

My main question, and the one that I initially came here to ask, is: if their ship continues applying the force that, under classical mechanics, was enough to accelerate them at 9.81 ms^-2^, would the people inside still experience Earth-like artificial gravity, even though their velocity as measured by an observer is now increasing at less than that rate?

Relativity says yes. There’s no absolute speed, only relative speed; within the local reference frame of the ship, everything will continue to work normally, including the force experienced due to acceleration.

My understanding is that a trip taken at the speed of light would actually feel instantaneous to the traveller, while taking distance/speed of light to a stationary observer.

The ship is not actually going to reach the speed of light (as seen by an outside observer) though. The faster the ship goes, the more its (observed) mass increases, and the 9.8m/s² acceleration will have less and less of an effect. But to the people inside the ship, it appears as though they can accelerate indefinitely, going faster and faster at their steady rate of acceleration. Due to relativistic effects, it’ll never look like they are passing any objects outside the ship at more than the speed of light; instead it will appear as though the distance they have to travel is compressed, so they don’t have to travel as far.

TerrorBite ,
@TerrorBite@pawb.social avatar

You can think about it this way. In relativity:

  • You’re not allowed to have any way to determine an absolute speed. If your perceived acceleration were to vary (for a constant thrust) depending on your speed, that would give you a mechanism to determine absolute speed, but absolute speed doesn’t exist in relativity.
  • Rather than “nothing can go faster than the speed of light,” given that we’ve just determined that absolute speed doesn’t exist, the next rule is instead: you are not allowed to observe anything travelling faster than the speed of light relative to you, and relativistic effects will ensure that this is so.
cynar ,

A minor nit pick. It’s worth noting that increasing mass is an inaccurate view. It works in the simple examples, but can cause confusion down the line.

Instead, an additional term is introduced. This term, while it could be combined with the mass, is actually a vector, not a scalar. It has both value and direction, not just value. This turns your relativistic mass into a vector. Your mass changes, depending on the direction of the force acting on it! Keeping it as a separate vector can improve both calculations and comprehension, since comparable terms appear elsewhere (namely with time dilation and length contraction).

giriinthejungle , in Do we have any theories as to why complex life eventually started requiring various metal elements as micronutrients?

Also, metals can easily accommodate varying number of electrons in the electron shells of their atoms and still be stable. That makes them very good to quickly store and release electrons which means they can help say transfer molecules around (iron for transport of gasses), scavenge free radicals (e.g. manganese) etc.

Mobiuthuselah , in How much longer will the age of Science last?

Perhaps I’m not understanding the question, but first and foremost, science is specifically not a belief system. My professors emphasized the fact that we were not to believe anything but rather accept or reject hypotheses based on evidence. Science is a tool. It’s a system of observing, recording, hypothesizing, testing, analyzing, and refining. If you’re asking when we will have refined everything to the point that there are no more questions, I don’t think that will ever happen. What I’ve found is the more questions you answer, the more questions you have.

MrJameGumb , in Is there any scientific study about where should the bed be facing?
@MrJameGumb@lemmy.world avatar

I don’t think it really makes a difference unless you’re really into feng shui. The best position for your bed is whichever one allows you to sleep most comfortably

fine_sandy_bottom ,

My mrs claims to be into “feng shui”.

Honestly most of it is just sensible layout advice wrapped in bullshit woo woo.

DirigibleProtein ,

I’d drop a link to the Penn and Teller: Bullshit episode about Feng Shui, but I can’t find one.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines