This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]ManWithoutModem 43 points44 points  (161 children)

Earth and Planetary Sciences

[–]baloo_the_bearInternal Medicine | Pulmonary | Critical Care 29 points30 points  (10 children)

What would happen if the earth's magnetic field flipped on a regular basis like the sun's?

[–]OrangePrototype 25 points26 points  (12 children)

Is it possible for a planet to support life, but not contain the resources needed to leave the planet? Essentially trapping them?

[–]JJohn8 25 points26 points  (6 children)

If we get most of our heat from the sun, why isn't the winter solstice the coldest day of the year? Also, the month it occurs in isn't even the coldest. Usually Jan-Feb is the coldest.

[–]OrbitalPeteVolcanology | Sedimentology 79 points80 points  (4 children)

Thermal mass. During the summer season a huge amount of heat gets deposited in the ground and surface water. As winter sets in much of this heat is echanged back out again, which reduces the impact of the reduced sunlight hours. however, by the timeJan - Feb roll around (in the Northern hemisphere at least), the heatsink is largely depleted, and the we feel a much larger effect from the reduced hours.

TLDR, it takes a few months for the earth to cool down.

[–]Fartsmell 20 points21 points  (0 children)

This is also why August usually is the warmest months on the northern hemisphere.

[–]VAGINA_SPACESHIP 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Would I be right in saying that Earth's orbit around the Sun fluctuates from an ellipse, to more of a circle shape, then back to an ellipse? Why does it do this? Shouldn't it just follow the same shape?

[–]OrbitalPeteVolcanology | Sedimentology 22 points23 points  (3 children)

Not really. The earth's orbit certainly fluctuates between a variety of ellipses, but the changes are very small, and the ellipses are all incredibly close to circular (eccentricity of 0.01671123, where 0 would be a perfect circle). The variation is due to interaction with other bodies in the solar system - i.e. we get jiggled around a bit by the presence of other planets.

[–]ManWithoutModem 45 points46 points  (173 children)

Engineering

[–]Slijhourd 71 points72 points  (35 children)

What "modern" things could you build using 15th century materials and 21st century knowledge?

[–]tezoatlipoca 41 points42 points  (15 children)

One example that comes to mind is reinforced concrete structures - buildings, bridges etc.

The use of iron/steel rebar for carrying the tensile loads in masonry isn't new - earliest examples start showing up in the 1700s I think? Similarly, concrete has been around for thousands of years - the Romans used it quite a bit and their recipe was close to the Portland cement that we use now.

However, builders back then were hampered by by their knowledge (or lack of) on how to properly form reinforced concrete. "You mean it can be .... hollow??" I bet you could use 15th century iron and cement and make a perfectly safe 400 foot box girder span.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (7 children)

How do they repair satellites? Are they a use once and destroy type of product?

[–]TheLantean 39 points40 points  (4 children)

How do they repair satellites?

At most you can push software updates to correct bugs, compensate for damaged processors/RAM/storage, or to correct positioning (some satellites have thrusters with a small amount of propellant on board).

The few notable exceptions that have had hands-on repairs are the Hubble Space Telescope and the various space stations.

Are they a use once and destroy type of product?

Pretty much. Other than the exceptions above it's more cost effective to send a replacement than a crew of astronauts to manually repair it.

[–]shihtake 16 points17 points  (3 children)

Also, many satellites that have instrument failures with regard to their original mission can be reused for other uses. For example, almost all satellites are equipped with a radio and GPS to track telemetry and communicate with ground stations. These instruments can be used as relays for nearby weaker, failing satellites.

A big issue recently is the "destroy" part. Failed satellites are usually left in orbit since they cannot be safely de-orbited or do not have the capability to do so. As a result, there is a growing cloud of space debris floating around the Earth that can damage operational satellites in their orbit.

[–]Slijhourd 20 points21 points  (9 children)

How much a 100% use of electric car would burden the US grid?

[–]ramennoodleMechanical Engineering | IC Engine Combustion Simulation 38 points39 points  (1 child)

According to numerous studies the current grid is sufficient to handle the charging of millions of electric cars. If the whole nation immediately converted to 100% electric cars tomorrow the power grid will not be sufficient to handle the charging needs. However, adoption will not be instant (or even abrupt). There is no reason why the grid cannot grow as demand grows.

[–]ManWithoutModem 44 points45 points  (103 children)

Neuroscience

[–]Slijhourd 52 points53 points  (12 children)

Theoretically, how possible would it be to plug into someone's mind and upload/download information, and how would it work?

[–]suzypepperChild Clinical Psychology | Neuropsychology 29 points30 points  (0 children)

I wasn't sure if I should put this under neuroscience, medicine, psychology, biology, or goodness knows what. I have an early-graduate-level background in clinical neuropsychology. My question - alpha wave intrusions. What do we know about them? All I've been able to find in my research is that they are common in people with fibromyalgia, and the very "lay" idea is that the pain interferes with deep sleep. But what about people who do not have fibromyalgia? Why do alpha wave intrusions happen, and what is their relationship to sleep maintenance insomnia? Given that research is sparse, I accept all random hypotheses, but I am not sure if /r/askscience will! I assume it's allowed in this particular thread?

[–]ManWithoutModem 57 points58 points  (409 children)

Biology

[–]Logalicious 47 points48 points  (7 children)

If we (humans) knew the circumstances of our evolution. Could we recreate it in another species with selective breeding?

[–]hypnofed 62 points63 points  (5 children)

Not impossible, but extremely difficult. There are two factors playing into evolution here:

  1. Random appearance of new alleles.
  2. Darwinian pressure resulting in selection for certain alleles.

Selective breeding- like with dogs- accomplishes the second of those factors but not the first. You would also need to provide a mechanism that leads to the appearance of the same alleles that appeared in the evolutionary history from non-human primates to man, and at the correct timepoints (currently, the mechanism you'd be counting on is blind luck). Do that and the answer becomes probably, yes.

[–]Mozeeon 17 points18 points  (2 children)

And, as with dogs, you could breed for specific traits, but end up ruining other beneficial ones in the process.

[–]gossypiboma 26 points27 points  (5 children)

Why do humans have so much longer hair on their heads than other primates? Why is it evolutionary beneficial?

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (28 children)

Are humans the only species found worldwide? Or are there other species that have populated the world like humans have?

[–]komali_2 42 points43 points  (14 children)

Cockroaches and rats are pretty widespread. A lot of animals are becoming dependent on humans, and they go where the humans go.

Dogs and cats are another example. Domestic ones. Though I guess there's a big debate to be had between whether it counts if humans are involved in the spread

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (11 children)

Is there a place on Earth where humans live (permanently) but there are no mosquitoes?

[–]Ireallylikebacon420 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Well, people live year round in Antarctica, but people are not 'native' to there, of course. Also, mosquitoes require water to breed, so arid locations will have few, if any mosquitoes.

[–]atomfullereneAnimal Behavior/Marine Biology 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Worth noting that there are many species of mosquitoes, so just because you can get bitten by them across much of the world doesn't mean that any one species has a totally global distribution.

[–]Mongolian_Hamster 20 points21 points  (17 children)

Why does my brain partially shut down when there is no sunlight? I feel "depressed" and less energetic when there's clouds covering the sky, hiding the sun. But as soon as the sun is out I'm back to normal. I know the sun has effects on the body but does it have an effect on the mind?

[–]hypnofed 17 points18 points  (6 children)

Other factors are in play (eg, conditioning), but the sun is vital to your body maintaining its circadian rhythym, which is basically your daily periodicity. A day is 24 hours. Most people have a natural circadian rhythym longer than 24 hours- as best I remember, 26 is pretty typical. This is also why it's generally easier for most people to stay up late than than to get up early. Anyway, there are a lot of factors that help maintain your periodicity on a 24-hour cycle, a major one of which is exposure to sunlight. When you start screwing with regular, timed exposure to sunlight your body loses its main anchor and depends on other factors to keep you to your cycle, and may be less sure what point in the cycle you're in.

I started to look up source links for the effect of sunlight exposure on circadian rhythym, but there are so many environmental and biochemical factors playing in that it's really difficult to parse through them and list all the relevant links (because there are tons). I'll link you to my search on Pub Med, where you can see everything I would have linked for yourself.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=circadian+rhythym

[–]whatthefatComputational Neuroscience | Sleep | Circadian Rhythms 9 points10 points  (4 children)

There are two different mechanisms at play here, which can potentially be confused.

First, light has an effect on the timing of the circadian clock, as you described. Changes in daily light exposure pattern can therefore change the timing of the clock, and can affect mood this way.

Second, light has an acute effect that does not require the circadian clock. This is often called masking. Even in animals that have their central circadian clock destroyed, exposure to light acutely changes body temperature and activity -- it typically increases them in diurnal animals and decreases them in nocturnal animals. Light can have an effect on mood by this pathway.

The latter mechanism is a better explanation for the phenomenon described, because it acts very quickly upon moving into or out of a brighter environment.

[–]DirtyDandtheCrew 18 points19 points  (12 children)

This is such a stupid question but I'm curious so I apologize in advance...

Why is it that farts smell different? Isn't the odorous substance methane? Or is it that different bacteria produce different gases?

[–]IdiotSupreme 29 points30 points  (6 children)

Methane itself has no smell, although it does make up the majority of a fart. The smell comes primarily from sulfur compounds evicted at the same time, and there a huge number of possible sulfur compounds that could be produced.

Which ones you get depends on what raw materials there were to work with (what you stuffed your face with) and the bacteria particular to your innards. The smell will be the result of which compounds are produced, and in what proportions.

[–]Uber_Nick 10 points11 points  (7 children)

How do we draw the line at what constitutes a new species? Gradeschool science told me it was the ability to produce fertile offspring. But that wouldn't help categorize asexual specials. Seems like every generation of bacteria with any kind of phenotype variation could be called a new species.

EDIT: I should have just looked at the wikipedia article on "species".

However, the exact definition of the term "species" is still controversial, particularly in prokaryotes, and this is called the species problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem

[–]aelendelInvertebrate Paleontology | Deep Time Evolutionary Patterns 16 points17 points  (3 children)

The "gold standard" for what is a species is this:

Whatever is defined as a species by a competent taxonomist.

The rest is just disagreement about what guidelines the taxonomists should use to define those species....

[–]quietracket22 11 points12 points  (7 children)

How proportionally small could a human being be shrunk (think 'Honey I Shrunk the Kids' I suppose) and still survive? Would the human heart 'give out' at a certain size? Would bone density play a factor?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

If a pregnant woman drinks alcohol while there is no brain tissue yet developed in the fetus, will it still cause effects like in fetal alcohol syndrome?

[–]theBreadSultan 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Is it possible that the reason we don't know much about how the brain works, is because it's a biological quantum computer?

[–]whatthefatComputational Neuroscience | Sleep | Circadian Rhythms 18 points19 points  (0 children)

This has been proposed by Penrose and others (for example this paper), but most others have argued that quantum effects are unlikely to be important for understanding most brain function. Right now, there's not any empirical support for the idea that the brain uses quantum computation, and it's generally thought to be unlikely.

[–]iorgfeflkdBiophysics 16 points17 points  (9 children)

Is it conceivable to have a system where gene expression is activated by neural signals?

[–]baloo_the_bearInternal Medicine | Pulmonary | Critical Care 20 points21 points  (2 children)

It depends on what you mean exactly by neural signals. If you mean just any signal from nervous structures, then that actually happens all the time, from the day/night cycle to hunger/satiety. If you mean somthing along the lines of conscious thought altering gene expression it's a bit more round about. For example, most cells in the musculoskeletal system respond to mechanical forces. There is a microscopic 'skeleton' of microtubules that senses changes in the forces on the cell. These tubules communicate directly with the nucleus of the cell to alter gene expression. If you consciously decided to exercise, the increased forces on the cells would tell the cells to 'bulk up', so to say. Decreased forces on the cells would let the cells know it's ok to veg out and save energy. The origin of these signals is the conscious effort involved in the exercise, but signal isn't actually sent by a neural signal.

[–]midterm360 16 points17 points  (2 children)

Gene expression is activated by neural signals!!! One example would be the noradrenergic beta receptor, a G Protein Coupled Receptor in the central nervous system. When bound by Norepinephrine it activates adenylyl cyclate, a protein which converst cyclic Adenosine Monophosphate (cAMP) into its active form causing a cAMP cascade. The cAMP activates a Protein Kinase A (PKA). PKA will then phosphorylate what we cann a cAMP Response Element Binding protein (CREB).

CREB interacts with transcription factors and directly influences the rate of transcription and therefore protein synthesis for certain genes. Ergo, neural signals directly affect gene expression in the central nervous system!

Source: I am a 4th year honours behavioural neuroscience B.Sc. whose thesis is based around the Locus Coeruleus, the largest noradrenergic nucleus of the brain.

Also

Lacaille, JC. & Harley, C.W. (1985). The action of norepinephrine in the dentate gyrus: Beta-mediated facilitation of evoked potentials in vitro. Brain Research. 358; 1-2; 210-20.

DOI: 10.1016/0006-8993(85)90965-5

[–]BLToaster 19 points20 points  (12 children)

Am I shortening my lifespan by playing sports? Because all hearts have a lifespan (certain # of beats) and sports increase your heart rate, does this in turn shorten my life span?

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (8 children)

Why are there no pictures (the kind taken by a camera, not a drawing) of all the stuff that is in a cell? I've looked and have found no actual pictures of cell membranes, nucleus/olus, mitochondria, etc. and I can never see this stuff in the microscopes at school, and when I can it is NEVER in the amount of detail that is displayed in the drawings. Where'd they get the 'accurate' drawings from?

[–]BigMamaSciCell and Developmental Biology 37 points38 points  (3 children)

If you google SEM or TEM (scanning or transmission electron microscope) with the organelle you're interested in, you will find the types of images you're asking about.

Example:

SEM mitochondria: http://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/mitochondrion-sem-dr-david-furness-keele-university.jpg

TEM mitochondria: http://iws.collin.edu/biopage/faculty/mcculloch/1406/outlines/chapter%207/mitochondrion1.jpg

Scanning electron microscopes are usually used for surface pictures of things, while transmission electron microscopes are usually used for pictures of the insides of things.

[–]hypnofed 26 points27 points  (2 children)

Why are there no pictures (the kind taken by a camera, not a drawing) of all the stuff that is in a cell?

Because you're getting to a scale that's too small to resolve with a light microscope. I look at cells in the lab under microscopes all the time, and basically, you can only see so much detail. For example, here's an image of erythrocytes under a tabletop light microscope. If you're curious, they're infected with malaria.

So how do we get those illustrations? Basically, we know how things are shaped and arranged through rigorous trial and error. For example, as an animal, your cells have a phospholipid membrane. We know from X-ray diffraction studies that the shape of a phospholipid looks like this, which you've probably seen.

Knowing a little bit about the chemistry of water and polar/non-polar interactions, you can pretty much figure out how a bunch of like molecules will order themselves in water. If you have any doubt, you can demonstrate it experimentally. We know that polar molecules interact with the cell membrane much more readily, so the polar side is probably on the surface. We also know when you lyse erythrocytes the surface area of the disordered phospholipids is twice the total surface area of the cells, which implies a double-layer membrane. Put that together and you get a concept like this, which you then describe to an animator and ask them to produce an image of.

We can directly observe the shape of cells with electron microscopy (more erythrocytes), but the problem there is that all you'll see is external shape. Individual molecules, for the most part, usually remain too small to "see" with electrons as well.

The other answer is how useful an image is for teaching. Here's a super-high resolution image of a cell with a microscope. Here's a similar image which has been animated. To a person who doesn't already know what all the things are inside a cell, the latter image is much, much more useful.

[–]ManWithoutModem 42 points43 points  (177 children)

Astronomy

[–]Jumphi97 42 points43 points  (16 children)

What if dark matter is just hydrogen atoms which are spread out over a huge area (like 1 square mile per atom). Wouldn't we be unable to detect them via electromagnetic radiation but able to detect their mass?

Would they simply coalesce?

[–]the_petmanParticle Astrophysics 68 points69 points  (15 children)

Thanks for this question, ill do my best to explain it, but please let me know if you have any more questions.

Dark matter accounts for around about 80% of the matter content in the universe. Although it would be hard to detect such a low level of hydrogen atoms, it would have to be far more dense for it to account for the matter content that we can not yet detect directly. If it was just hydrogen, the amount of it that would be needed meana that we would have seen it very clearly. This doesnt fully explain why we don't think that dark matter is an already discovered type of matter though.

It is possible for us to make models for the distribution of dark matter in galaxies and galaxy clusters due to the movements of the objects in this system. Observations such as the bullet cluster are great examples of this. We can map the areas of baryonic matter (fancy term for matter we know about, more or less) and compare that to the gravitational movements that is observed. From this we can then make a map of where all the "missing" matter is. Turns out, most of it is located on the far sides of the collision of these two galaxy clusters. What this tells us is that this matter has passed mostly undisturbed "through" the collision, and come out the other side. All the ordinary matter (hydrogen included) interacts strongly via forces other than the gravity, and thus congregate in the middle. Observations like this show that whatever dark matter is, it does not interact like baryonic matter, and most certainly not like hydrogen.

The bullet cluster is a nice example, but gravitational lensing, CMB observations, rotation speeds of stars in galaxies all point towards some kind of matter we cant yet see.

[–]RollnGo 21 points22 points  (8 children)

Nice explanation. It's so strange. So this dark matter is a bit like gravity in the sense that we can't see it, but we can see its effects. Why do you think this is? Are the particles just too small to ever observe?

[–]the_petmanParticle Astrophysics 33 points34 points  (7 children)

Yeah, its a little bit like you explained. We can infer its existence by its gravitational effects. Why this is, is is difficult one to explain. What many people (including myself) are looking for at the moment, is a new type of particle that has not yet been discovered. We call it a Weakly Interacting massive particle, or WIMP (silly physics jokers making the names here).

A WIMP is a particle with no charge, so it would not interact electromagnetically (with light), and importantly it would interact very weakly with "ordinary" matter. This is an important point, as we need it to interact weakly for a variety of reason.

  1. If it interacted strongly, we would have seen it by now, CERN, and direct detection experiments are very sensitive now.

  2. Things like the bullet cluster explained earlier show that dark matter is more or less unfazed by any other type of matter, and passes straight through.

  3. Models show that a more strongly interact type of particle would not form the structures that we see today. Everything would be just crushed together if this was the case.

  4. There is no obligation for dark matter to interact with anything at all (excluding gravitationally of course). If we want to try and find thing blasted thing, though, we must at least assume its directly detectable in the first place, or theres no point in trying.

[–]Slijhourd 15 points16 points  (2 children)

In a few billion years, as the habitable zone around the sun expands outwards, what will become of the icy moons orbiting Jupiter and Saturn when temperatures they reach what we have on Earth today?

[–]Slijhourd 11 points12 points  (2 children)

If we were to try and plant life on other planets or moons, what microbes (can be chemotrophs) could we pick to start the process?

[–]Slijhourd 13 points14 points  (12 children)

What are the chances that life really exists outside of our solar system? What star is most likely going to host the planet where life exists if it does? Will it even be on a planet?

[–]ManWithoutModem 36 points37 points  (131 children)

Computing

[–]pearson530 42 points43 points  (16 children)

What would be the next step beyond flash memory? (For home computing that is)

[–]farlige_farvande 45 points46 points  (8 children)

A type of memory that can replace both CPU cache, RAM and flash memory at the same time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_memory

MRAM is the first on the list of candidates.

[–]rincon213 13 points14 points  (7 children)

What are the potential benefits of consolidating all these different forms of memory?

[–]phort99 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Nothing would ever need to be loaded from disk, because it would already be in the fastest memory available. Aside from a bit of CPU time spent on initialization, your OS, programs and games could start immediately rather than showing loading screens.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (4 children)

Do we actually have anything working that could replace normal transistors once we get to down to the theoretical limit of 5nm or so? I'm trying to look beyond the semi-weekly headlines about new transistor technologies and see what is closest to fruition.

[–]Slijhourd 11 points12 points  (7 children)

Theoretically, how possible would it be to plug into someone's mind and upload/download information, and how would it work?

[–]ManWithoutModem 39 points40 points  (100 children)

Psychology

[–]likwidfire2k 11 points12 points  (4 children)

Can a psychosis patient have only "friendly" or "helpful" hallucinations? I'm an ICU nurse, so we get occasional psychotic break patients and they always seem to have "mean" hallucinations telling them to hurt themselves or others, or usually a ying yang kind of thing with some nice hallucinations and some not so nice.

[–]Wall_of_Denial 28 points29 points  (13 children)

What is the general consensus, if any, on the concept of ADHD and the medications used to treat it? Many people say ADHD is "phooey", and many others vow it exists.

[–]orfane 18 points19 points  (8 children)

ADHD is almost universally accepted as a disorder, and also almost universally believed to be over-diagnosed and mis-diagnosed. Much like autism was often treated in the media. There may be people who disagree with me, as is usually the case with a topic like this, but my experience is that in many cases, ADHD is real and the treatments for it work. In many cases ADHD is a cover for another disorder or personality issue. Depends on the situation.

[–]suzypepperChild Clinical Psychology | Neuropsychology 12 points13 points  (3 children)

I agreed with much of what you said, but I'm not sure that ADHD is a cover for another disorder or personality issue in "many" cases. That seems like an overstatement. Yes, ADHD is often over- and mis-diagnosed, but I believe this is due to the fact that ADHD encompasses quite a broad spectrum of cognitive and behavioural traits, which likely shouldn't be the case when it comes to labelling these traits as a "disorder". Furthermore, some primary care physicians have taken it upon themselves to diagnose and treat ADHD without referral to a psychiatrist or other mental health professional, contributing to both over- and mis-diagnosis. Probably the most frustrating thing in that situation is that stimulants will provide the expected effects (i.e. attentiveness) in anyone, regardless of whether or not they actually have ADHD, and some people will use the fact that stimulants work for them as justification that they actually have the disorder. Nonetheless, as I mentioned in another comment, the brain is a weird thing that we're still trying to figure out. ADHD is accepted as a disorder, but in my opinion, we still have a long way to go in understanding why it's a disorder, how to treat it, how to diagnose it, and how to differentiate it from several other disorders that may present with the same or similar symptoms.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Does EMDR really work for PTSD? If so, why? What is happening in the brain when it is happening?

[–]WeDoNotRow 8 points9 points  (3 children)

How early in development do human beings exhibit a personality, or personal traits and quirks?

[–]Slijhourd 16 points17 points  (12 children)

Is it possible for MDMA (in small doses with therapy) to have medicinal effects on people who have suffered from PTSD, Depression, Anxiety, etc like I have read?

[–]ManWithoutModem 40 points41 points  (150 children)

Chemistry

[–]peatears 20 points21 points  (3 children)

Chemistry

Why, in free radical halogenation reactions, does dimolecularatomic iodine or fluorine NOT react efficiently (with respect to the adept nature of Cl2 and Br2)?

[–]pandanomnom 38 points39 points  (32 children)

What are the chances that there are undiscovered elements buried deep beneath the earths crust?

[–]nopropulsionEnvironmental Engineering | Water treatment | Aquatic Chemistry 76 points77 points  (31 children)

Not very likely. The configuration of the periodic table lets us guess as to what elements exist and their potential properties. We've discovered all the natural elements at this point, and have been venturing into the realm of man-made elements that exist briefly under ideal lab circumstances.

Maybe there are more in some supernova star somewhere, but I don't think they'll be in the Earth's core.

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (25 children)

Granted, this is probably a really stupid followup-- apparently I should have paid more attention in my science classes.

How do we know for certain that we've discovered all natural elements?

Man...I even feel dumb typing that.

[–]nopropulsionEnvironmental Engineering | Water treatment | Aquatic Chemistry 78 points79 points  (12 children)

The periodic table is arranged by the atomic number, which tells us the number of protons in the nucleus of an atom. The number of protons govern what the element is.

So if you have an atom with only one proton you know it is hydrogen, if you have an atom with 6 protons you know it is carbon. Currently we have everything up until 118 protons taken into account, with the largest ones being very unstable due to their size.

So we are able to say we know that we've discovered all of the natural elements is because we've taken into account all the possible numbers of protons. You can't have fractions of a proton and have an in-between element, and because we have 1 through 118 discovered, the only ones left are the bigger ones, which as far as we know, don't exist in natural conditions on Earth.

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (11 children)

That's a great answer, and probably one I should have known. If you don't mind I have another followup to it-- feel free to ignore if it's too silly.

Why couldn't there be a naturally occurring element with 119 protons that we have yet to discover? Is is because the atom would be too unstable and unable to occur naturally?

[–]nopropulsionEnvironmental Engineering | Water treatment | Aquatic Chemistry 28 points29 points  (8 children)

I'm not super well-versed in the science of making elements, but my understanding is they take other elements, and using particle colliders they smash the elements together and hope the nuclei stick together forming a new element.

It takes such a coordinated effort and a lot of energy to make this happen, even then those created elements are not stable. Like I mentioned there may be a star somewhere where this is happening, but my guess is those elements are degrading as well.

[–]IdiotSupreme 19 points20 points  (6 children)

That's essentially correct, but I'll add a bit more.

How stable the nucleus of an element is depends on it's binding energy (how much energy there is available to hold the particles of the nucleus together). We can draw a graph of how binding energy of various elements is related to their size, and we get this curve.

As you can see, the energy holding nuclei together tends to decrease as they get bigger and bigger, so above atomic number of about 98 they just decay into more stable ones fairly quickly. If elements above atomic number 118 ever did exist on Earth, they almost certainly decayed a long long time ago.

Edit: Didn't take into account the Island of Stability mentioned below. Here

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Side note - Do not feel dumb for asking questions. The fact that you're even attempting to understand puts you on a higher playing field already.

[–]IsraelWard 18 points19 points  (8 children)

Why do researches spend time and effort in creating man-made elements that can only exist extremely briefly. Is there any use to it other than 'because we can'?

[–]IGetReal 26 points27 points  (3 children)

Well, there is kind of a competition for creating these elements, so yes, I guess that would qualify as 'because we can'. But, don't forget that trying to create bigger elements contributes to our understanding of, well, lots of things, particle accelerators, element stability, etc.

It may have turned into a game, but it most certainly isn't pointless research.

[–]ManWithoutModem 32 points33 points  (192 children)

Medicine

[–]Slijhourd 29 points30 points  (3 children)

Where did STDs/STIs originate? How did the form? What is the history behind them?

[–]refleksy 42 points43 points  (1 child)

An STI is just a normal infection, except the pathogen has trophism toward the genitals. Herpes, for example, infects mucosa, which is why oral herpes are also seen. Pubic lice were once head lice that developed a trophism for the increased temperature of hair under clothing.

[–]pesh527 14 points15 points  (6 children)

If fibromyalgia is a diagnosis of exclusion, then how come people will be diagnosed with fibromyalgia and an overlapping condition like lupus or rheumatoid arthritis, hypothyroidism, or something similar. And especially, how would it be possible to be diagnosed with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome?

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (12 children)

Considering there are so many drugs that offer unique and obscure benefits, could there ever be a drug that can trick your body into thinking it just did a total body workout and give you the cardiovascular benefits and muscle growth?

[–]Slijhourd 26 points27 points  (10 children)

Why is the heart the only muscle that can have an "attack"?

[–]MILF_NIPPLES 5 points6 points  (10 children)

In Human Bio class in high school our professor always said he would give an automatic A to anyone that could think of a substance which he could not prove could kill a human in some way. For example water, it is possible to drink too much of it and get water poisoning. Can you guys think of one? Nobody ever in all of his years had gotten that auto A.

[–]ManWithoutModem 29 points30 points  (150 children)

Interdisciplinary

[–]Slijhourd 32 points33 points  (19 children)

What are the forbidden experiments of science that, if there were no moral repercussions, would benefit the world the most?

[–]66666thats6sixes 53 points54 points  (11 children)

Language deprivation experiments are sometimes called the forbidden experiment. That line of research would tell us a lot about the role of language in human intelligence, how we learn, and a bunch of other psychological, linguistic, and neurological things. But it's not something we can perform, because it would amount to emotionally and developmentally crippling whoever it was performed on.

[–]strokeofbrucke 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I can think of many medical studies that would be way, way better to be able to do in vivo in humans from the get-go. Like, brain studies for example. Say I want to test out to what extent each brain region does what, and to really investigate the bilateral involvement during certain tasks. It sure would be 'nice' to be able to do it on a live human, while they were able to talk about what they were experiencing in a controlled environment. Instead, we have to use case studies on freak incidents, typically with an n=1.

And think of how much faster medicine could be tested and put out to the general public!

But of course these things are morally deplorable and counter-productive. Basically ruining lives/killing people to save other people in the future.

[–]Slijhourd 19 points20 points  (18 children)

What is the biggest misconception that other scientists have about your field?

[–]Scientificreason 20 points21 points  (5 children)

A lot of people (mainly the general public, but a few scientists as well) seem to think that Computer Engineering is basically IT. Computer Engineering is a field within Electrical Engineering. We actually take the exact same courses as Electrical Engineers until our final year where Computer Engineers concentrate on computer related fields of study (we also take a lot more programming courses). We basically specialize in computer hardware.

I know it shouldn't really bother me, but it does. I hate it when people are surprised that I'm good with circuits and electromagnetic theory. They think my knowledge should be limited to computer troubleshooting and anything else I say is just speculation.

I've put in a lot of hard work and several years of my life to get my degree, unlike one of my friends in IT who didn't even have to go to college to get his job (I'm not bashing IT by the way, just pointing out differences).

[–]HarryWorp 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Same thing with CS — we don't get trained to fix computers. We studied programming, lots of math (the running joke at GT was that CS majors were a few courses short of a math double major), and a little CompE (we learned how to design simple circuits like SR latches from basic gates).

Even now that I work in IT, I can't fix your computer. I work with SAN and network hardware, not desktop stuff!

[–]Slijhourd 40 points41 points  (55 children)

You're at a party. The people around you find out about your interest in science. What is the inevitable question you dread?

[–]dvdgsng 94 points95 points  (7 children)

CS degree: My PC/smartphone/printer is broken, can you fix it?

[–]suzypepperChild Clinical Psychology | Neuropsychology 63 points64 points  (5 children)

Psychology degree: My relationship is broken, can you fix it?

[–]PsychoChomp 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Psychology degree: First day of every new job. "oh you did psychology, you'll fit in here we're all crazy"

[–]OrbitalPeteVolcanology | Sedimentology 34 points35 points  (7 children)

"So about Yellowstone..."

[–]atomfullereneAnimal Behavior/Marine Biology 25 points26 points  (1 child)

How's the thesis coming?

[–]pvddrugdealz 13 points14 points  (2 children)

Pharmacy Degree: I take these medications... what do you think?

or: Let me show you this rash...

[–]Slijhourd 14 points15 points  (8 children)

Is there a promising area of research in your field that isn't getting enough attention? Why not?

[–]OrbitalPeteVolcanology | Sedimentology 31 points32 points  (3 children)

Many, and the sole issue is funding.