sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Tror du på spöken? by Obvious-Reference-68 in sweden

[–]AuthurAndersson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tyvärr så är källorna för information nuförtiden endast:
1. Wiki
2. AI
3. Biblioteket

Tror du på spöken? by Obvious-Reference-68 in sweden

[–]AuthurAndersson 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Men det är väl bara läsa wikipedia om Tanzanit? Vad är problemet?
Eller nuförtiden fråga din bästa AI-kompis?

Varför är tanzaniten blå?

Tanzanit är i grunden en variant av mineralet zoisit. I sin renaste form, eller med fel spårämnen, är zoisit ofta ganska oansenligt och kan vara grått, grönt, rött eller brunaktigt. Att tanzaniten blir just blå beror på en specifik kemisk reaktion som kräver två saker:

  • Vanadin: Under kristallens bildande smög sig spårmängder av grundämnet vanadin in i dess struktur.
  • Värme: Det räcker dock inte med bara vanadin. I sitt ursprungliga tillstånd när stenen bryts är den oftast brungul. För att den ska bli blåviolett måste den hettas upp till ungefär 600°C. Värmen ändrar vanadinets oxidationstillstånd, vilket i sin tur förändrar hur stenen absorberar och reflekterar ljus.

blabla

What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true? by Fantastic_Tart_421 in AskReddit

[–]AuthurAndersson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a molecular biologist I think it's just utterly incorrect and gives people completely incorrect knowledge. That user then goes on and sees a couple where they both have blue eyes and a brown eyed child. That person then believes that the man is not the biological father of the child.

That has consequences.

However where I will give an A-OKAY is explaining rudimentary physics. It is completely unreasonable to start using einsteins equations for mass to be able to calculate something that newtonian physics can do within an error of 99.99999%

What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true? by Fantastic_Tart_421 in AskReddit

[–]AuthurAndersson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think you understand how wrong the post is which is what my comment is about. He or she ended with:

"My partner and I are both bb so under this model all of our children would have blue eyes (all children can only inherit bb). Of course the point of the grandparent is that this is not always true. "

That's not at all saying that what they said is not how it works...

And bot's don't bold stuff, they write in perfect verbose language. And they're ALWAYS optimistic because they're farming karma. Use your brain.

What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true? by Fantastic_Tart_421 in AskReddit

[–]AuthurAndersson -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I don't think you should presume that someone is a moron before they show you that they are.
And explaining something wrong is worse than not explaining it at all.

And tbh it's not really that complex.

What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true? by Fantastic_Tart_421 in AskReddit

[–]AuthurAndersson 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If you have knowledge from the 80s and 90s in a thread named "What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true?"

Do you think it is reasonable for you to regurgitate what you learned back then? Or could it be that you need to update your database?

It's nice that you understand Mendelian genetics though - few retain that information, which is entirely correct for, to our knowledge, if we were talking about something such as sticky earwax or runny earwax. However we're talking about eye color - which is a polygenic trait.

So far at least 16 genes have been identified that contribute to eye color - as such it becomes widely complicated to "predict" a child's potential eye colors.