Like there are vitamin integrators, of stuff that should boost cheratine production, yet there's no fda/other corp advise, with the latter although they suggest to not use it as it's not tested/regulated

Then there are those who suggest trims an the kind, but I see no point? It grows from the scalp not from the ends

You see lot's of people claiming one thing over another, but no reputable source it seems snake oil

There are few drugs approved for hair growth such as minoxidil or finastrrine, or hair transplants which sre know to work

I was watching medical TV show and this person had locked-in syndrome or something but some doctors thought he was dead. One other Docter said that the patient was looking at the people moving through his field of vision, to which anther doctor dismissed it as an instinctual reaction, and that sounds dumb.

I know it's a TV show not a documentary

Hi.

Basically I've been told my whole life that reusing water as much as possible is a better approach, and in my country's case, Peru, this reusage can get a bit crazy rapidly and a lot of families end up throwing really, really, really dirty water down the drain.

My question is:

Is there an argument for cleaner wastewater? Say, if people used as much water as needed -instead of prioritizing reusage- in a manner that basically reduces the contaminants in wastewater, does it have any benefit? Does it get extremely contaminated in the pipes anyway? Are treatment plants just that good?

Or are they not? I'll admit I've freaked out myself a bit reading from water enthusiasts/experts regarding what tends to be considered at "safe consumptions levels" in treatment plants, heck, in developed countries.

I read a very scary scenario once from a person explaining how a person could get rabies camping outside or being bit by a bat so small at night outside that they didn’t know it was a bat, but thought it was a flying bug or something like that.

Is that really possible? I don’t know what the smallest bat in existence is, but I’m assuming that even with the baby of that smallest bat, you’d be able to know it’s a bat while it’s flying because the long wing length would give it away? Or are there really bats so small that even when flying, you could mistake it for a flying cockroach or other similar flying size bug?

I’m a reporter in the climate beat, so I’m doing a lot of science-based reporting but I don’t have a formal education in any of the sciences.

How should I go about analyzing scientific studies (climate change, pollution, ecology, etc.) to make sure I truly understand them?

I've been sorta wracking my brain on this. Does the potential for observation change the result? Maybe even a functional camera that is not set to take any measurements is there, does it still result in a particle?

I am finishing my phd and would like to structure all my knowledge about science. So, I am looking for some widely accepted book(s) that would clarify everything for me. Specifically, I am interested in:

• the role of theories and models,
• different types of reasoning (abductive, deductive, etc),
• various paradighms (positivism, pragmatism, etc),
• definitions of "goal" and "problem" in science,
• principles underlying reliable qual and quant research,
• the role of science in the modern world,
• connections between theoretical and applied sciences.

P. S. My field is Human-Computer Interaction.

Hi,

I recently co-published a review article with a bunch of colleagues, and we have received post-publication concerns regarding overlap with other published articles. There are no verbatim, but some of the co-authors messed up and basically paraphrased some paragraphs from published reports, with the same references, flow of ideas,.etc.

Now that has been retracted, how can it affect our career as post-doc? Will the publisher notify our universities? Will it be extremely difficult for the co-authors to publish again or have grants?

In this link:

https://stevespangler.com/experiments/why-does-the-water-rise/

It is said that when the flame inside the container dies out, the air inside cools or contracts which then creates "a low pressure."

However when air contracts, doesn't that mean it has high density which then also creates high pressure? So then how does the air outside the container wants to go inside the container to reach equilibrium?

Maybe I'm showing my lack of knowledge here, which I admit, but why don't we (common laymen) hear of quarks being exploited for use? I tried to post this in the main sub but it got deleted.

I'm talking exclusively about Meditation as Mindfulness and Training in Attention, not Religious Meditation.

What is the state of scientific research on the benefits of Meditation? Are there basis for the claims of improved health? Is the credibility really there?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-019-0663-9

Abstract

Matter-wave interference experiments provide a direct confirmation of the quantum superposition principle, a hallmark of quantum theory, and thereby constrain possible modifications to quantum mechanics. By increasing the mass of the interfering particles and the macroscopicity of the superposition, more stringent bounds can be placed on modified quantum theories such as objective collapse models. Here, we report interference of a molecular library of functionalized oligoporphyrins with masses beyond 25,000 Da and consisting of up to 2,000 atoms, by far the heaviest objects shown to exhibit matter-wave interference to date. We demonstrate quantum superposition of these massive particles by measuring interference fringes in a new 2-m-long Talbot–Lau interferometer that permits access to a wide range of particle masses with a large variety of internal states. The molecules in our study have de Broglie wavelengths down to 53 fm, five orders of magnitude smaller than the diameter of the molecules themselves. Our results show excellent agreement with quantum theory and cannot be explained classically. The interference fringes reach more than 90% of the expected visibility and the resulting macroscopicity value of 14.1 represents an order of magnitude increase over previous experiments2.

Molecules of 2000 atoms were put through the double slit experiment and displayed the same results as individual electrons (right?). This means very large molecules could interfere with each other in some quantum mechanical way?

Hello, I am 18-year-old and after reading some of Carl Sagan and Richard Feynman. I realized I have a passion for science more specifically Physics & Astronomy. I am going to college for anyone of those but unfortunately non of the schools around me have that major except for the Private expensive ones. So, my current options are a double major in Physics & Mathematics or in Physics & Computer Science. Either one works fine but what would you as scientist's recommend?

I'm an 8th grader and never took this I was bored and decide to for some reason calculate an energy of a nuke c is speed of light times speed of light and that's about 90b so how does a nuke release only 220k joules of energy even tho it's supposed to be 90billion joules also does it matter if I used grams kilograms and how do I change it depending on this

A Lightyear is how far light travels through a vacuum in one Earth-year. Alpha Centauri is ~4.3 light years away so when we look at it we see it as it appeared ~4.3 years ago. If we look at the Andromeda Galaxy we see it as it was 2.5 million years ago when early man was running from saber-toothed tigers.

But this stops making sense to me when we deal with galaxies a LONG way away. Google says the furthest away galaxy is HD-1, 13.5 billion light-years away. But in the 13.5 billion years since the light left HD-1 the entire universe has expanded. Back when the light left HD-1 the galaxy was a lot closer, the universe was only 300,000 years old.

So if we point JWST in the direction of HD-1 we're seeing it as it was 13.5 billion years ago when it was really close. How close was it 13.5 billion years ago? Would it be close enough that it LOOKS closer than some galaxies that are legitimately close-ish to us now? If we make a telescope that can see further than JWST could we see a galaxy even further away that looks like it's closer than Andromeda because we're seeing the light from 13.7999 billion years ago?

Hey everyone, I’m doing some research to start a science podcast, and I’d love to hear your opinions. What scientific topics do you feel are underrated or rarely covered in podcasts?

So was watching so videos and came across one talking about 2023 achievments in physics. It talked about Hotta quantum energy teleportation. The article/video below seemed to discuss

(main part is around 6:15 to 715) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=580V0wRl1Lo

At 8:05 to 8:15 they discuss how the data was transferred faster than light. Here is the article I guess they reference that includes further links research papers.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-use-quantum-mechanics-to-pull-energy-out-of-nothing-20230222/

So its been put into me since a child that nothing can go faster than the speed of light. Others have made the point that quantum mechanics does not allow for data to be transferred faster than light. Can someone explain whats going on in the above and how I must be interpreting things incorrectly? It almost sems like Hotta proved his theory?

Hello, everyone. I am an 18-year-old in high school (about to graduate in a few months -- May) and I have a question about learning science. Recently I have discovered a passion in astronomy, I unfortunately am not one of those people who has loved it since I was a kid, but I have this passion now. It feels awesome whenever I think about it and even better when I actually stargaze even taking AP Physics this year has been awesome. Finding the formula may be hard but it's fun, it's like solving a complex puzzle that feels so invigorating in the end.

Anyway, I wanted to ask how I should learn science? I have realized more and more, I do not understand the science I am being taught, I would usually do well in the class and move on forgetting almost everything I learned. Now, I want to learn as much Science as possible. Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Mathematics. How would you as scientists go about this? Oh, I want to be an Astronomer someday, I feel like this subject is an intersect between all four (Astrophysics, Astrochemistry, and Astrobiology) are fields within astronomy.

Also another question: is the boundary of the Observable Universe/Cosmological Horzon expanding due to Dark Energy, because at the edge of our Observable Universe, space is litterally expanding faster than light?

Two questions really.

The Quaternary glaciation has been ongoing for 2.58 million years, as far as I know mainly meant to be caused by the Panama Isthmus separating the Pacific and Atlantic and also various Milankovitch forcings. Thus began the cycle of glacial and interglacial.

A) Assuming anthropogenic global warming does not abort this entirely and force a transition back to permanent hothouse, is there any educated guess we can make at how much time the glaciation has left before the cycle ends and the northern ice sheets melt permanently? The only figure I've seen was on the order of ten million years, and it wasn't by anyone with any qualifications.

B) Also - the cycle length of glacial-interglacial switched from 41kyr to 100kyr 1.25 million years ago. As the cycles continue (ignoring AGW for a moment) could this change happen again, the other way? Do we have a good enough grasp on the factors involved to give a rough date for any such future transition?

I want to start by saying, please no mean comments. My upbringing and my own cognitive impairments have made a lot of things difficult for me, including doing well in school. Although, I will take responsibility for the fact I could’ve tried harder. I am also not in the greatest company. Most of the people I’m around and have always been around are not academic and don’t care to be. I am now 25 and I want to start learning as in my spare time I take care of children (mostly picking them up from school, taking them to the park and making sure they eat etc.) and the children ask me a lot of questions about the world: like why is the sky blue and how do plants grow. And in those moments it occurred to me, I have no clue about anything. I apologise to them for not knowing and ask them to ask their parents or teachers because they are good questions. It’s an uncomfortable and disturbing feeling to know I know nothing about the world I live in, I just accept I exist in it and that’s that. Everyone I’m close to, like my family and friends, seem to be the same way. I don’t want to be that way anymore. So, where do I start? Any book recommendations, YouTubers, podcasts? Any sites I can go to for practise questions and answers? Please, very low level stuff. When I say I don’t know a damn thing, I really don’t know a damn thing.

I’d assume catalyst development might be one of the most promising approaches, given how it can make reactions more efficient and reduce energy consumption. Would you agree, or is there another technique that’s even more impactful?

Would a more durable glass make a stronger prince Rupert's drop?

Could you make them out of crystals like quarts or sapphire or other crystal minerals?

Question asked with the background that if to involve search engine to search Internet for term Design Science the list of matches quickly lands to design science research field.

Not every source providing the introduction to the design science field make clear the elaboration to be made in scope of information systems. Signals had been encountered for IS to be the branch where term DSR originates.

Using my own perspective, a layman's one I interpret two terms following way - no guarantee the understanding to be correct

design science - the science addressing questions/problems of designing a stuff

design science research - research conducted to add to state of design science new findings

Ganymede is the largest moon in the solar system. It has a mass comparable to 2.48% of that of earth, with a gravity comparable to 14.6% of earth.

The moon has a mass comparable to 1.23% of earths mass and gravity of 16.6% of earth’s gravity.

How do these moons have so much gravity with so little mass compared to earth, and why does our moon have more gravity than the moon with the most mass in the solar system?

TIL the fact that mass spectrometers are apparently quite rare to use in testing for things such as allergens or gluten in commercial food production. Instead, ELISA enzyme assay tests are preferred, even though they have known flaws and inaccuracies (e.g., the 20 ppm standard set by the National Celiac Association and adopted by the FDA, et al, is actually the margin of error of the tests available around 2005, not actually because it is specifically medically sound).

This technology is obviously not new, and a quick search indicates that submission of samples to labs for either testing method appears to be a similar cost. Why has no one thought to use it for this until recently?

Hi,

The last coal power station was shut down a couple of weeks ago, but sometimes, steam still comes from the cooling towers. I assume this is part of the 'two-year decommissioning process', but what would they be doing during that time that requires the turbines to run, and how are they running now that all the coal stores (at least outside the plant) have been used up?

Here is the wiki page for the power station in case anyone doesn't know about it: Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station - Wikipedia

It's usually just a couple of towers, which I assume are two towers per turbine, so only one turbine is running at once.

Basically the title, I’m not any sort of astronomer, astrophysicist, or engineer, so I don’t know much but I enjoy discussion on the topic.