The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions at one of the pages linked to above.
I think that would pretty much be a fair fight. The gull's aspect-ratio is not compromised; and if anything, the horse's bone-structure is now augmented. But, despite its stronger-than-needed bones (for its now reduced size), the horse still lacks in terrifying beak and wings. Who would win? Nimur 00:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The bagel would win, the seagul is too tired from being in so many questions--71.247.125.144 00:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think I am hereafter going to devote myself to changing every instance on this reference desk of the characters "seagull bagel" to "bagel". Not because this is a rational response, but because I have been driven to the edge of sanity by seagull bagel questions. --Bmk 00:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Guys.. honestly, answering serious questions with jokey answers (before real answers have been given) is already not-very-helpful, but to turn the reference desk into a series of endless in-jokes is really degrading to it. The creation of endless non-serious questions is additionally pointless and non-helpful. Perhaps we can leave this one by the wayside? It has really lost any humor it may have once had, and now is just getting distracting. A little fun now and then is fine, but this is becoming boring and is cluttering up an otherwise great resource. --Fastfission 01:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hear hear. Straight faces everyone now please!--Light current 20:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Universities start up again in about a week, I'm sure we'll get more serious questions again when that happens, in the mean time, we might just be over run by flying ratsseagull bagels--71.247.125.144 01:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And I think this all started with a question about a crotch; I'm not sure ANY real answers would have been satisfactory. 24.211.161.77 01:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, speaking of universities... a creative professor might be able to teach a serious biology course with the motivating theme of an animal kingdom deathmatch. Perhaps a light seminar for non-specialists? Just think of the description in the course catalog! Melchoir 01:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I work in a care home of 20 residents and 2 of them suffer from 'Hydrophilia'. Because of this both are restricted to a maximum of 1,500 ml of fluid per day which seems insufficient to me especially during hot weather. I've searched and can find no record of 'Hydrophilia' as an identifiable condition. If anyone can enlighten me I would be grateful.
macthewrite
Of course, breaking the word into its Greek-roots, hydro means water, and philia means lover or attracted to. Hydrophilia in chemistry refers to chemical compounds that absorb water. I've never heard of it as a medical condition in humans. Nimur 01:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Normal people should have 3 or 4l of water per day. Are you trying to kill them?--Light current 01:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is of course possible that they may be restricted on fluids due to hypertension or other conditions! Hydrophilia may mean that they retain more water than is normal leading to edema?--Light current 01:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[1]A tendency of the blood and tissues to absorb fluid. I assume this is related to edema. Perhaps they have hypertension or high blood pressure? Maybe too much sodium in their diet? Nimur 01:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
According to a source I trust (but which you shouldn't, because this is a reference desk, not a doctor's office), some medications may cause people to drink much more than is recommended, so perhaps that is the reason for the water rationing. --Bmk 02:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there's not a condition like this. The closest you can come is Psychogenic polydipsia, in which psychiatric illness causes a person to drink 10, 15 liters a day. It's rare and probably not what is going on here. Most likely these people have the Syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone which is common and is treated with water restriction like that which you mention. Basically, the hormone which controls how much water their body retains is secreted in excess amounts (lung and brain disease are common causes) and their sodium drops as a result. The treatment is to limit their water intake. Other possible causes for a water restriction are kidney disease and heart disease, though sodium is more appropriately limited in those diseases - InvictaHOG 02:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on how you define "wasp" there are from 15000 species in a more narrow sense (the family of Vespidae), to 75000 species in the widest sense (the suborder Apocrita of the order Hymenoptera, excluding the bees and ants). Most (and as far as I know all) have colour vision – at least I have been unable to find counterexamples. But it is quite possible that among all these species some are nocturnal, and then it is not unlikely they have lost the ability to see colours, trading it in for sensitivity to very low light intensity. --LambiamTalk 07:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone here know how long a hospital will typically tell you to go without food before having a general anesthetic? I may be facing this tomorow, but the hospital didn't give any instructions (it could be a lack of communication that they think I won't need any). It is now at least 7 hours before I go to the hospital, and I want to have a few pieces of toast before I get a bit of sleep. CG janitor 07:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Or maybe a bagel... CG janitor 07:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard that you should not eat or drink anything from 12 hours before the procedure. Skip that seagull bagel. --LambiamTalk 07:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, I don't have any seagull bagels anyway, lol. But seriously, thanks.
I think you can drink plain water. 8-|--Light current 20:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the lack of food is to prevent nausea from the anesthetic, or, if you are nauseous, it will at least make vomiting less severe, which could otherwise be a serious problem due to the respirator. StuRat 23:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are probably right Stu, though I could have had the toast last night because I ended up not getting anesthetic today. I was right that the hospital didn't know that I needed it, so now we will procede tomorow. They've now told me that I can't eat after midnight. - User:CG janitor, at the hospital. 142.233.100.220 23:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just to fully answer, the reason is because when you are anesthesia, they want your stomach to be empty so that you don't vomit. InvictaHOG 02:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good answer, I wish I'd said that. :-) StuRat 06:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, today's the day... they'll be getting me ready in less than 3 hours. CG janitor 12:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck, I hope they don't accidentally give you a sex change operation. :-) StuRat 07:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, they didn't. CG janitor 20:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IIRC, the magnetic north pole was once located near today's equator.
Q: Approximately when was this?
Ancillary Q: has the geophysical pole ever moved this much?—Preceding unsigned comment added by BartB (talk • contribs)
A1: I don't think so. A2: Moved? The geographic pole is fixed at 90° to the equator by definition. See North Pole and South Pole.--Shantavira 13:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The rotation of the earth about its axis drives a liquid dynamo in the earth's molten iron-rich core - that process naturally creates a magnetic dipole oriented along the axis of rotation. Due to processes that are very poorly understood, they sometimes undergo, as macDavis noted, a reversal of polarity, probably due to complex phenomena involving chaotic turbulence and magnetohydrodynamic effects. During the reversals, it seems that the field becomes pretty mixed up before reforming into a reasonably nice dipole like the one we have today. The South Atlantic Anomaly may be a precursor to a pending magnetic reversal in the next few thousand years. Cool stuff. --Bmk 21:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that the land currently over the equator may well have been over the poles, and the land currently over the poles (well, the South Pole anyway) may well have once been over the equator, due to continental drift. StuRat 22:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your information. This question was prompted by some who
claim that plants found under the ice of the South Pole confirms
that Global Warming is underway. The logic of how a 500-Million-year-
old event proves anything about today's climate escapes me.
It begins to look like continental drift is the most reasonable
explanation for finding tropical plants under the ice.
BartB 05:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)BartB[reply]
The presence of the plants under the ice in Antarctica isn't evidence for global warming, but the fact (if true) that enough ice has melted away so you can see plants that have been covered in ice for millions of years certainly would indicate global warming has occurred. StuRat 05:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From where? Which file? Weregerbil 13:07, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably the dumbest question we've had in a while. I'm adding it to my list of "dumbest questions in Science." Try searching for words that might be in it in google. For bittorrent, the question we get most often about generic downloading, you want to go to bittorrent.com, download that, go to a tracker site like thepiratebay[2] or torrentreactor[3] or mininova[4] or even the bittorrent site[5] now, and search for the file you want, download that, open the file in bittorrent, and click the start/play button. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
See download. Most of the time you don't need to do anything. If you can read this page, that means you successfully downloaded in onto your computer. If you want to download an application or some data, such as music or video, you can do so when there's a button somewhere on the screen that says "download". Just click on it and follow the instructions. But it would help if we knew just what it is you want to download. --Shantavira 15:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You should probably ask this at the computing desk. Perhaps in the process of doing so the question will become sensible. At the very least they'll find it amusing as well. --Fastfission 22:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wish people would be kinder to those who are communicating in what is to them a foreign language. I've noticed that people who only speak rudimentary english are often made fun of. Learning a foreign language (including english) is very difficult. I doubt if people here could do better trying to ask questions in for example malaysian or hindi or even just french. Try learning a foreign language yourself before knocking others. I have the impression that the internet is available in rural indian villages, so the question may be a great achievement by someone who is perhaps uneducated (through no fault of their own), speaking in a very different language, and probably very young.
The market square in my home town has a seagull problem. Sh... er, guano everywhere, they steal your food right out of your hand, make a horrendous racket, disease & apocalypse feared by townfolk. Any JavaScript or other removal tools would be appreciated! Preferably non-deadly as some gulls belong in protected species. Also killing temporary solution only as the buggers breed like there's no tomorrow. Googling for gull scaring devices I find only little orange flags and such, will work only if gulls laugh themselves to death at them. Weregerbil 13:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do NOT feed them. If they come up to you asking for food, give them a sharp tap on the beak-- then run!--Light current 13:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Feeding a bagel to a seagull bagel is like cannabisism cannibalism. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
You don't need JavaScript!
Select your hometown by pressing CTRL + A. Then copy, by pressing CTRL + C. Use your start menu to select:
Start Menu
Programs
Applications
Notepad
Press CTRL + V to paste your home-town into notepad.
Press CTRL + H to open the Replace- window.
Type seagull into your "find what" box; and replace with bagel. Your town will thank you!!! Nimur 14:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That would be vandalism. You lose. :( — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Yeah. Game over! you lose! 8-(--Light current 18:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're using msWindows. You lose! DirkvdM 09:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Extraction of DNA from the rabbit spermatozoa[edit]
I tried to do the cell lisis using a hyperosmotic alcaline solution of NaCl (2,5M), Tris, EDTA, Triton x-100, DMSO and mercaptoethanol, and a final digestion using proteinase K (100 micrograms per ml) in a overnight incubation, just like the protocols sugested by all authors that works with DNA ladder and Single Cell Gel Eletrophoresis.
Unfortunally these cells do not lised. I would like to know what may be hapenning,if I missed any step. I would like to Know how can I stract the DNA from the rabbit spermatozoa.
Celia Badu
I'm not an expert. but that sounds a lot like the protocol for bacterial lysis. Are you sure you're using the correct manual? Also, are you positive that the cells haven't lysed? Or have you just not recovered any DNA from the process? have you considered that it may have been denatured? But that the lysis might have still been successful? --BagelCarr 13:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A person I have reason to believe said that lymphoma isn't actually cancer even though it is often said to be. Wikipedia says it is, for example. Let's review the Wikipedia definition of cancer:
Cancer is a class of diseases or disorders characterized by uncontrolled division of cells and the ability of these cells to invade other tissues, either by direct growth into adjacent tissue through invasion or by implantation into distant sites by metastasis.
Arguing that lymphoma isn't cancer, they pointed at the lack of metastasis (but did not mention invasion). What can be made of all this? Should lymphoma be called cancer? —Bromskloss 14:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it is a cancer. There are lots of times someone does not want to use a specific label for a disease because it means something worse to the person than to the doctors who use it. Examples are seizure disorder for epilepsy, reactive airway disease for asthma, disorder of sexual development for intersex condition, congenital hypothyroidism for cretinism and many more. Doctors typically do not hit a patient over the head with a label the person finds frightening, misleading, or otherwise unpleasant. alteripse 16:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but according to the definition, it must have the ability to spread (possibly not the right word). Does it really? Btw, your examples remind me of the adoption of magnetic resonance in place of nuclear magnetic resonance. :-) —Bromskloss 19:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lymphoma spreads everywhere. It is cancer by any definition of the word. Part of the staging of Hodgkin's lymphoma is where it has spread. InvictaHOG 20:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, non-Hodgkin's spreads too. --M1ss1ontomars2k4(T | C | @) 21:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think I may have this problem. This is the third day, and it hasn't let up. Every morning I can hardly hear anything out of my right ear, but it gets better as time passes on until I go to sleep. Can I wait it out? Anything I can do before I go to the doctor? The only bad thing is music is not as good because I hear less in my right ear, no negative effects yet, other than lack of positive. I generally try and stay away from cleaning my ears because word around the New England Journal of Medicine is that you shouldn't really stick anything in your ear bigger than your fist (don't stick that in either), and I do not clean my ears out very much. I believe the problem came from me sleeping on my ear all night, because that is the only option I have to think about. When I woke up I noted that my ear was so compressed against the side of my head, I must have been in that position for hours—then I noticed I couldnt' hear out of it. Thanks — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Well your know our advice Mac! Could be congestion in the eustachian tubes but.. Go see (an ear) doctor! What you could do is put a few drops of olive oil in each ear at night. THat tends to clean them out and is a :rcommended traetment for wax.--Light current 16:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not the eustachians, I can open and close them voluntarily. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Thats clever!. Can you also wiggle your ears?--Light current 18:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You havent been using your mobile phone whilst asleep again, have you?
You can also get ear drops - intended for cleaning out the ears and not for coating a pan before nicely searing a ripe red pepper before topping it with anchovies and gargonzola cheese (like olive oil). --Kainaw(talk) 17:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Olive oils cheaper and safer--Light current 17:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Olive oil's also less effective, than say, carbamide peroxide. - Nunh-huh 18:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah but you can keep on using it with no side effects (except it dripping down your neck). Its the thing recommended by doctors etc over here now for ear cleaning. Ear drops are taboo--Light current 18:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it's most likely ear wax buildup. However, my advice is to use a cotton swab to clean it out. Of course you can damage your ear if your jam a filthy Q-tip in so far that you puncture the eardrum. My advice, don't do that, use a clean one, and use it properly. BTW, wouldn't the residual olive oil in the ear turn rancid ? StuRat 22:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would certainly NOT stick anything solid into your ear. You risk pushing any obstruction further in and can damage the eardrum. Olive oil does not turn any more rancid than your earwax (which it will gently dissolve")--Light current 22:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Earwax has evolved to stay in the ear, so, like beeswax, I doubt if it would go rancid. Olive oil, however, definitely did not evolve to be left in the ear. StuRat 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know it didnt!. But olive oil is harmeless to ears! Q tips are dagerous in the wrong hands (and earhole)--Light current 23:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are Q-tips really that dangerous, or is it just the makers' method of covering all bases to prevent some idiot who stabs himself in their ear from suing them? Hyenaste(tell) 22:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You've got it, there's no epidemic of Q-tip caused deafness. StuRat 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldnt bet on it. Ive heard stories of people getting Q tips (or at least the cotton) stuck in thier ears.--Light current 23:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From our own article:
Like outer ear trauma, middle ear trauma most often comes from blast injuries and insertion of foreign objects into the ear. Skull fractures that go through the part of the skull containing the ear structures (the temporal bone) can also cause damage to the middle ear. Small perforations of the tympanic membrane usually heal on their own, but large perforations may require grafting. Displacement of the ossicles will cause a conductive hearing loss that can only be corrected with surgery. Forcible displacement of the stapes into the inner ear can cause a sensory neural hearing loss that can not be corrected even if the ossicles are put back into proper position. Because human skin has a top waterproof layer of dead skin cells that are constantly shedding, displacement of portions of the tympanic membrane or ear canal into the middle ear or deeper areas by trauma can be particularly traumatic. If the displaced skin lives within a closed area, the shed surface builds up over months and years and forms a cholesteatoma. The -oma ending of that word indicates a tumour in medical terminology, and although cholesteatoma is NOT a neoplasm (but a skin cyst), it can expand and erode the ear structures. The treatment for cholesteatoma is surgical.
Yes, as I said, jamming a filthy Q-tip as far as you possibly can in your ear will definitely cause a problem. That doesn't mean, however, that the proper use of a clean Q-tip is dangerous. Using your argument, people should avoid eating altogether, and get their nutrition intravenously, because a great deal of disease is caused by what is ingested. StuRat 06:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, as long as hearing malfunctions and cell phones have been mentioned on the science desk, I'm going to advertise a newbie's article for improvement. Rinxiety has a lot of science to be added, mostly from the NYT article, and if you're quick it can appear in WP:DYK. Melchoir 17:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To MacDavis, if you're still watching this topic. I have the exact same problem as you, and recently it's started happening to me more frequently. I guess I may have started producing wax at a higher rate? Or perhaps the smog in the city I live is getting to me. Sleeping on my side I also often find that my ears (usually my right) get blocked up, and I've tried a lot of things (starting with delicate Q-tip application, then ignoring the warnings and moving on to vigorous Q-tip application and folded tissue application, I've also tried mineral and vegetable oils and crooked-nozzle syringe-style apparati) but I've never been to a doctor... partly because I don't trust them here. Nothing I have done has ever worked, I assume simply because the ear cavity is too small for anything to be shoved into it without pushing the clump of wax further. My right ear was blocked for almost a month this spring, but after loads of jaw excercizes, and being rather careful with it for a long time (even limiting the amount of water that entered while showering) it eventually cleared up, and now I can listen to music with headphones properly again.
I don't believe all the hype about Q-tips being dangerous, though it would be a good idea to tell most of the world's population that, who don't have as much control over their Q-tips as they think they do, but I have managed to make my wax problem considerably worse on more than one occasion, and I stay away from Q-tips now. Putting oil in my ear was probably one of the worst things I ever did, and though I know that it is recommended as a home remedy in a few places, all it ever did for me was declump the ready-to-fall-out dried pieces of wax and blocked my ears even worse. I would guess that you have a "wet wax" problem as well.
I won't recommend anything, because I tend to be stupid when it comes to my own security, but maybe you'll learn something useful from my experiences. 220.146.214.149 12:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How dy know they were ready to fall out? Anyway, after the wax has softened sufficiently youre supposed to go and get your ears syringed by the nurse!--Light current 16:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know for sure, but there is a slight different sensation when the wax is dry or wet, and after I put in a few drops, all I got was the wet sensation. I do actually have a fitted syringe, but it hasn't helped me very much, so I'm not sure what's up with that home-remedy. Actually, I'd like to bring that up because I could never figure it out before. How is oil expected to soften up wax? I seem to remember something related to water solubility that I learned in high school... but it's not coming out properly. freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ 17:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its just a solvent for wax cos its a similar substance I think.--Light current 17:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks everybody. I think the topic has had its round here. I think it is nice you guys are saying there is nothing wrong with q-tips cleaning around the ear canal, but no evidence has been posted. I can't wiggle my ears. Never figured that one out, that facial muscle group (they really all move in groups, unless you can isolate them) is pretty tough for me. I can however dilate my nostrils pretty largely. If the last guy is still here I'd like to ask "how frequently?" — [Mac Davis] (talk)
That guy was actually me, I forgot to log in. I can't wiggle my ears either, but I've read that the act of sticking your jaw out (and moving it around, I guess) helps wax progress out of the ear, and the ear may even rely on that action to assist in the process. I can't really tell if it helps or not, because it's supposedly a slow process; all I know is that it cleared up a few days after I started paying attention to my jaw motions (like, a couple times a day?), so it at least didn't make the problem any worse. It can be pretty stressful when all you can think about is the fact that one of your ears doesn't work, and your audible sense of direction and ability to isolate sounds disappears, but if it's just wax, it's a natural bodily fluid so it shouldn't be doing any damage to your inner ear as long as it's the only thing in there. Let me know if it gets better, I'm still trying to think of ways to stop it from happening again (as I speak I can feel the wax in my ears, seemingly as a reaction to the smog and humidity of the city). freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ 17:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As I said before (and Ill say it one last time) the current medical recommenation for keeping your ears clean and stopping wax build up is a couple of drops of olive oil in each ear once or twice a week. I know this becuase it is on a medical advice leaflet I got from the doctors when I thought had trouble with my ears.
"The annex includes a global cap of 4.5% m/m on the sulphur content of fuel oil and calls on IMO to monitor the worldwide average sulphur content of fuel."
The above sentence is an extract from IMO annex VI. Can anyone please let me know what the term m/m stand for?
Thanks
Dhirendra210.214.75.12 16:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it means "Mass of Sulphur" per "Mass of Fuel Oil" - as opposed to, say, Mass of Sulphur per Volume of Fuel Oil. See Molality and Molarity for similar issues. Nimur 18:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you mean "volume of sulphur per volume of fuel oil" rather than "mass of sulphur per volume of fuel oil". —Bromskloss 20:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, that would be v/v and m/v. This is m/m - mass per mass. Rmhermen 00:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, check out Crude Oil#Classification to learn about sulphur in oil. When crude is called sweet it means there is very little sulphur in the un-refined oil, making it cheaper to process. This does not mean it would be a good idea to coat a baking pan with sweet crude, top it off with a seared red-pepper and anchovies. That would be olive oil. Nimur 18:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is not the usual use of the reference desk, but I was looking over T-Z in this category and thought that people here could help clear up the accuracy of these specific articles.--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 18:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Interpreting aural information as visual sensation[edit]
I'm trying to find the psychiatric or neurological term for a particular disorder: the translation of aural input (like a sudden, loud noise) to a visual experience("seeing" a blue field, or even a specific object), typically when the subject's eyes are closed. My searches for various combinations of aural, audio, translates, visual, brain, psychiatry, etc. didn't hit upon it. -- JHunterJ 19:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
THis should be on science ref desk--It is now!Light current 15:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you have too much of it, yes I would say.--Light current 21:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Every ingestable substance is a poison. Substances just vary in the harmful dose. This is true for water, oxygen, sugar, vitamins, and everything else. alteripse 21:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The point of the rhetorical question was that just because methane can asphyxiate does not mean it is toxic. In general we do not regard water as toxic but clearly it can asphyxiate.
I had not intended it to be posted here so sorry to waste your time light current and alteripse. i do appreciate the answers nonetheless. I will add to alteripse answer that by drinking too much water one can go into a coma. Too much water leads to a salt inbalance such that action potentials can not occur and neurons can no longer function correctly. So in massive doeses even water is toxic. And as alteripse points out this principle is true for most substances. David D.(Talk) 22:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Youve not wasted our time. Thats why we're here! 8-)--Light current 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, don't forget me! You wasted my time! :) — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Toxins inhibit the normal function of vital enzymes or organs. You cannot only drown in water, but an excess of water in your body unbalances concentration of proteins, hormones and other substances leading to either hyper= or hypotension and the death of cells. signal transduction in the brain depends on the difference in sodium and potassium concentrations inside and outside neuron cells. - Mgm|(talk) 11:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Earths magnetic field - effects of reduction[edit]
If the earth's magnetic field were to be reduced substantially (possibly in advance of a magnetic pole reversal) what effects would this have on life on earth? --Light current 21:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No we wouldnt get lost now we have GPS. Any other serious answers?--Light current 22:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Increased exposure to charged particles thrown of from the sun, as a result of a loss of the magnetosphere, possibly raising cancer risks, dramatically. Among other things, im not sure what the effects would be, but I know whenever there would be a solar storm people would have to hide for safety. PhilcTECI 22:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Geomagnetic reversal#Future of the present field has some information. It probably won't kill us, but it'll mess with all our electronics, and probably cause other effects. Anyone have a more complete answer, or references? —Keenan Pepper 22:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it's survivable, and we know this because it's happened many times in the past. StuRat 22:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its happened many times yes. But were humans around when it happened?--Light current 22:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The last reversal was 780,000 years ago, and there were some hominids around then, sure. Also, no mass extinctions are associated with reversals, so anything other animals can survive, we could likely survive, too. StuRat 23:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about the lights. Perhaps a necessary acceleration of incoming electrons would go missing. —Bromskloss 22:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK then weed get more of the suns particles hitting us broad side. Wouldnt that do more damage than them spiralling towad the poles?--Light current 22:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Earth's magnetic fieldTrajectory of an electron in Earth's magnetic field
You mean because people usually don't live near the poles? I guess so. But I'm actually not sure how many of the incoming particles actually reach the surface of Earth even as it is today. You know, when a charged particle travels (spirals) along a magnetic field toward a region where the field is stronger (the field lines are closer together), it slows down and can even start going in the other direction. (In that image, the particle initially comes from the right.) As can be seen on a drawing of Earth's magnetic field, this is the situation at the poles. —Bromskloss 23:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a long term effect, but it is possible that eventually the earth would lose its atmosphere if it permanently lost its magnetic field. The solar wind, undeflected by any planetary field, could slowly drag at the outer layers of the atmosphere and rarify the atmosphere. It is speculated that this is why Mars has such a rarified atmosphere - at one point Mars had a strong planetary magnetic field, but when the field shut off, possibly due to cooling of the core, the atmosphere was slowly stripped away. Note also that many animals like sea turtles and birds probably have used the magnetic field to migrate for thousands of years, and significant disturbances, including extinctions could occur. --Bmk 02:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
However, the Earth would definitely not lose it's atmosphere if it is just a reversal. There have been many File:Lowrie.gifBlack means current polarity, white means opposite. geomagnetic reversals recorded in the history of the Earth from magnetic dating. We still seem to have an atmosphere. Even if some of it was lopped off (or even added, who knows?), it happens very... lethargically... excruciatingly slowly—humans and other life would not be affected by that. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
However, as I said, if the earth permanently lost its magnetic field, and it will eventually, as did Mars, then the atmosphere may be stripped away, which would significantly affect life eventually. --Bmk 15:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) melt and cause intense interference to electronics and radio signals, therefore, humans could only communicate by continuously making new electronics from scratch, to replenish those destroyed. The public internet would be a lot smaller, because all the satellites would be vulnerable due to the temporary collapsing of the field. When the poles flip, and during, magnetic field dependent gyroscopes wouldn’t work well, because they rely on the earth’s magnetic field to function. A plane uses about ten gyroscopes to navigate, ships use them to stabilize, and all spacecraft rely on gyroscopes to stay in orbit and to get up to space. Furthermore, geoelectromagnetothermodynamisists (say that two times fast) hold the possibility that the magnetic poles could even divide into four, which then the magnetic field would be “quadrupolar,” having four poles, and theoretically even eight. That would make compasses obsolete and navigation by the stars would once again become the simplest way to navigate. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
...Yeah. If you see anything wrong in my post you can edit if you want. It took longer to type that and your sig in. :) — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Surely if say the effect was world wide and all computers where trashed we have a slight problem (other than the fact we would find it hard to acces wikipedia) that there would be no computers to make new ones? --Colsmeghead 22:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah thanks all. But what Im not getting out of this is how long the reversals take Imean is it 50 yr, 1000yr, 10K ys or what>--Light current 21:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The duration of magnetic excursions and reversals are typically 6000-10000 years but in those periods strong departures of the dipole have been recorded with erratic changes within few years. — [Mac Davis] (talk)
Persactly. Now if one of those quick reversals took place in the near future, there would be a considerably amount of time during which we were not protected from the solar wind!.--Light current 13:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
