The Science Thread

Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
7,313
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
7,313
I dont know if this is the relevant thread for this, but I recently have accepted that the earth is older than 6000 years. I didnt accept it formerly because the scientific method wasnt followed as in you are supposed to prove every other possibility false before saying that the one that works is correct. It used to be the case that scientists in that area only tested on thing several times to come to a conclusion.

Now multiple scientists work on one find doing multiple tests in that rock layer where the fossil is found at on the fossils and the fauna and flora in that rock layer. And they all come to roughly agreeing dates which is an acceptable scientific method to me.

Hopefully this becomes standard and we no longer get "pointed" dates, ie dates where scientists deliberately try to get and comes more naturally.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,388
orbital_mechanics.png
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,257
Location
Calgary, Alberta
Dark matter not existing is not a new thing. Although, it appear that Swiss has a different idea than the MOG/MOND theories.

Yes, there's long been a suspicion that dark matter might just be a fudge to account for problems in theory, or something else we're missing. But, although other alternate theories have proposed solutions to the formation of galaxies and velocities of stars, the elephant in the room has been gravitational lensing. When observing some distant galaxies, the gravitational lensing effect is far greater than the detectable mass would account for. This new theory will need to sort that one out if it is to be credible.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
I often wonder whether "dark matter" is just what Black Holes consist of ? I mean, they kind of "must" consist of some sort of mass, don't they ?

My thought was just this : Take enough unseen ( = dark ) black hole masses, and voilá ! You have enough literal(ly) "dark matter" !
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,950
Location
Old Europe
I often wonder whether "dark matter" is just what Black Holes consist of ? I mean, they kind of "must" consist of some sort of mass, don't they ?

My thought was just this : Take enough unseen ( = dark ) black hole masses, and voilá ! You have enough literal(ly) "dark matter" !

A black hole has a mass consisting of what matter was compressed, post star-collapse (not including what it's hoovered into it's gravity well, of course). It's basically a much more dense neutron star, except the surrounding gravity makes it impossible to observe what's actually happening with all that extra gravity and dense matter.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,257
Location
Calgary, Alberta
Well, the amnount of mass it contains could probably calculated via the mass it has absorbed. So to say. The only obstacle in this is that no known being is living long enough to actually watch what it absorbs (a whole galaxy, perhaps ?) so to calculate what went in there.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,950
Location
Old Europe
Well, the amnount of mass it contains could probably calculated via the mass it has absorbed. So to say. The only obstacle in this is that no known being is living long enough to actually watch what it absorbs (a whole galaxy, perhaps ?) so to calculate what went in there.

The problem with that, is that black holes also lose mass/energy over time, through Hawking radiation. Eventually, every black hole will evaporate to nothing.

But, though black holes pose some interesting questions, we can understand them in terms of normal matter and energy, without invoking dark matter and suchlike.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
@Dart;@Thrasher

Interesting and impressing.

pibbur who thinks(feels) things are moving a bit too fast now.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
3,971
Location
NH
Anaesthetics stop diverse plant organ movements

Background and Aims
Anaesthesia for medical purposes was introduced in the 19th century. However, the physiological mode of anaesthetic drug actions on the nervous system remains unclear. One of the remaining questions is how these different compounds, with no structural similarities and even chemically inert elements such as the noble gas xenon, act as anaesthetic agents inducing loss of consciousness. The main goal here was to determine if anaesthetics affect the same or similar processes in plants as in animals and humans.
[…]
Key Results
Mimosa leaves, pea tendrils, Venus flytraps and sundew traps all lost both their autonomous and touch-induced movements after exposure to anaesthetics. In Venus flytrap, this was shown to be due to the loss of action potentials under diethyl ether anaesthesia. The same concentration of diethyl ether immobilized pea tendrils. Anaesthetics also impeded seed germination and chlorophyll accumulation in cress seedlings. Endocytic vesicle recycling and reactive oxygen species (ROS) balance, as observed in intact Arabidopsis root apex cells, were also affected by all anaesthetics tested.

Conclusions
Plants are sensitive to several anaesthetics that have no structural similarities. As in animals and humans, anaesthetics used at appropriate concentrations block action potentials and immobilize organs via effects on action potentials, endocytic vesicle recycling and ROS homeostasis. Plants emerge as ideal model objects to study general questions related to anaesthesia, as well as to serve as a suitable test system for human anaesthesia.

Full article:
https://academic.oup.com/aob/advance-article/doi/10.1093/aob/mcx155/4722571
 
Personality and mood swings in bacteria

Bacteria can control where they go using a signaling network of protein molecules. Scientists at AMOLF have developed a microscopy method that allows them to see how individual bacteria use this network to make decisions.They discovered that bacteria are surprisingly diverse in personality and mood.

Bacteria, being single-celled organisms, do not have a nervous system, but are able to control their movements using a network of protein molecules that interact in a special way, much like the nerve cell circuits in our brain. “For example E.coli, a harmless bacterium that lives in our gut, ‘knows’ how to interrupt its otherwise straight swimming motion by occasional tumbles that sets it off in a new, random direction,” says Tom Shimizu, group leader of AMOLF’s Systems Biology group. “E.coli uses sensor proteins to detect things like food molecules or toxic chemicals to decide whether life is getting better or worse as it swims, and controls how often it tumbles to make sure it ends up in a good place.”
[…]
Personality
The bacteria used in the experiments had exactly the same DNA sequence (like identical twins) and were also grown under identical conditions. Nevertheless, the researchers discovered that the protein network in each of them behaves differently in the same chemical environment. “Each bacterium seems to have its own personality,” Keegstra says. “For example, we found that the chemical concentration to which bacteria respond, varies considerably between bacteria.”

Mood
Apart from the clear differences in responses between bacteria (personality), Shimizu and Keegstra also saw that within each bacterium, the molecular activity could change considerably over time. They witnessed that the way protein molecules in bacteria interact to control movement is not steady, but is constantly varying in time, even in ‘quiet’ environments with no changes in the amount of food or toxins. This ‘moodiness’ of cells means that the mechanism with which they ‘decide’ to tumble or swim straight on, does not receive a steady input, but instead an input that varies randomly.

The researchers believe these varying molecular messages must be caused by chance events within the cell. “We think that the bacterial individuality we found is not due to either nature (DNA sequences) or nurture (features of the environment), but rather to random events like molecular collisions inside the bacterium’s single cell, a classic example of what physicists call ‘noise’,” Shimizu says. “Importantly, the bacteria did not produce any new proteins during the experiment. This means that while differences in personality could be caused by differences in protein levels between bacteria, the mood swings had to be the result of noise in how these proteins interact in each bacterium.”
[…]
Keegstra: “The considerable variation in how moody the bacteria are could mean that some bacteria act as scouts that explore far away territories for occasional but large gains, while others remain nearby and efficiently exploit local resources. Such a division of labor could be useful for the population as a whole.”

The new insights on noise in biochemical networks create biotechnological opportunities, helping engineers to build systems (like bacteria producing insulin, for example) that are either more robust to noise or make use of it optimally. The findings on more steady differences (personality) in bacterial behavior can also impact medical strategies to target pathogenic bacteria without harming good bacteria.

The findings of the team:
https://elifesciences.org/articles/27455
 
Back
Top Bottom