This might work with Australia's smarter wildlife.
Ha! First, the article is about Tasmania, where the wildlife is small in number, and suffering from inbreeding. Just like the people, allegedly. But even in mainland Australia, the land animals are fairly primitive, having been isolated from mammalian evolutionary advances in the rest of the world for so long. The smart native animals seem to be the ones that can swim or fly across the seas, so not as genetically isolated. e.g. dolphins, and parrots.
Since it IS Texas, I've come to realize one reason why so many drive the oversized pickups.
Reason or rationalisation? The leading cause of death from deer is when drivers swerve to avoid them, and SUVs are more prone to rolling and killing the occupants, as well as safer in a direct impact with deer or smaller car.
But the result is that SUVs in Texas are a far, far greater menace on the roads than the wildlife.
The Guardian author seems to think the universe is finite and of known size. The scientists' 4x10^84 presumably is an estimate for the observable universe.
highly doubtful you respected him while he was president.
A *whole* lot of people who claim to respect him now were claiming he was hitler at the time.
Kind of like Trump now...
No. Bush I had an average approval rating of 61% in office, as high as 89%. Guess what Trump's approval rating is? No, lower.... lower still... keep going...
This puts us ahead of the Elephants, who turned mere millions of square km of jungle into grassland. But still well behind the cyanobacteria in changing the planet and causing mass extinction.
That phrase is the key to why fission isn't considered a renewable source.
It was used in the same humourous context as "by the time the sun runs out". Thorium and U238 are not going to run out in practise, because the timescale makes our current measurement of minable reserves irrelevant. Even with coal, the problem is not one of supply limits.
It is already well measured and understood that life expectancy is about lifestyle not genetics.
Not precisely. In a way, everything is genetics. Human lifespan is fundamentally determined by our genes, and lifestyle typically affects that only in a narrow range. An ideal diet and exercise will only add a couple of years to your life expectancy over average. Fruit flies have short lives, and tortoises long because of genes.
The real question is how much of the variance within a particular defined cohort, or difference between the average of two particular defined groups, can b explained by heritable factors. The answer may vary wildly depending on which groups you look at. And it gets harder because genes and lifestyle are not independent variables. Your genes affect your eating and exercise habits, in a way that interacts with environment (culture, opportunity). And genes also correlate strongly in ways that are not causal. So it is a difficult question.
If you are looking at a more genetically homogeneous society like Japan, you can expect environment to explain a greater portion of the variance, compared to a more diverse society like the US, where there is much greater variance, and genetics obviously plays a proportionally larger role. The question is always "how much" nature vs nurture, with qualifiers. Never a black and white answer.
For example, Japan has the longest life expectancy. Japanese-Americans who eat a traditional Japanese diet have life expediencies similar to people in Japan. And Japanese-Americans who eat a typical American diet have a typical American life expectancy. This was already well-established decades ago.
Really!? Source? I see no data to support your assertion. The majority of Americans of Japanese descent are now well-integrated into American lifestyle, and the life expectancy is still far higher. Be cafeful of picking one old study that supports what you want to hear, and ignoring everything else.
Also, it would be a terrible mistake to extrapolate that to the whole world, even if it were true that Japanese and white Americans had similar genetic influences on lifespan.
For individuals (in the same society), twin studies suggest "about 25 % of the variation in human longevity is due to genetic factors.".
Carbon waste sequestration from fossil fuel is not remotely solved. Storage of wind and solar power for 24/7 supply is complex and not fully solved.
Hydro is clean - aside from the pristine valley ecosystems that were wiped out. And Hydro dam failures make Chernobyl look like traffic accident. If there was a perfect solution, we would be using it.
They convert one resource ("fertile material") into fuel, but since that fertile material is itself not renewable the entire process isn't renewable.
U235 is a limited resource, but there is enough u238 minable with current tech for thousands of years, and then there is thorium. By the time that runs out, we should be close to getting fusion working.
The difference in suicide rate from AC's link is 12 per 100,000. (18 vs 6)
The overall death rate is 885 vs 632, a difference of 253 per 100k. So suicide rates, while high, only explain 5% of the white-hispanic male difference.
The good news is the end appears to be coming, and with a quickness.
The change in life expectancy is very small. I'd rather know about quality of life. How active are people in their later years? Is modern medicine making our lives better?
Black males are more than twice as likely to die, as Hispanic females of the same age. Which makes the overall death rate increase of 0.4% from last year, or 0.13% fall in life expectancy, look trivial.
The enormous difference between age-adjusted death rate of Whites and Hispanics is surprising. White males are dying at a 40% higher rate than Hispanics (age adjusted of course.) This is about the same as the gender gap in death rate, which starts from birth. Males are much more likely to die in cots, or as toddlers in pools. Is the racial gap across life like that, or appearing in middle age from diet-related disease?
Do the English-speaking children and grandchildren of Hispanic immigrants maintain that advantage if they live a mainstream American lifestyle? i.e. nature or nurture?
That's what every VP since Johnson has been: An assassination deterrent.
Then I guess John McCain was attempting to take that to a whole new level! But really, presidential candidates do not think that far ahead. They just want a running mate who will swing them a few votes in marginal electorates. Pence's job was to appease the religious right, who do not normally take kindly to people who boast of pussy-grabbing.
The problem now is that there are too many Netflix-like silos with one good show each, so to watch the good shows you end up needing to subscribe to them all, or give up and pirate
Another method is to switch between them when needed. You can even do a monthly rotation. If they start doing 12-month subscriptions, it will be back to the yo ho ho for me.
In Australia, the TV networks are circling the plug hole (anticlockwise, of course). Quality has gone through the floor - lots of "reality TV" and re-runs of imports. 15 minutes of advertising per hour, not including the product placement and travel, home improvement, etc shows that look more like infomercials.
Cable was super-expensive here (and still has adverts), so we were mostly moving to piracy and a bit of TIVO-ing until Netflix and the like arrived.
So you-tube heading in that direction does not sound like a good thing.
Cynical though I am, I am surprised we have not seen more tourism in Antarctica.
Does not bode well for Mars. While there will be huge excitement for the first visitors (Amundsen and Scott were famous in their day), the interest may drop off very quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
Are we going to find the N-word in device drivers a bunch of times now?
I hear the hard drive device drivers are riddled with racist hate speech. Especially the old IDE and SCSI drives.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.
You should hugging get out more.
This might work with Australia's smarter wildlife.
Ha! First, the article is about Tasmania, where the wildlife is small in number, and suffering from inbreeding. Just like the people, allegedly.
But even in mainland Australia, the land animals are fairly primitive, having been isolated from mammalian evolutionary advances in the rest of the world for so long.
The smart native animals seem to be the ones that can swim or fly across the seas, so not as genetically isolated. e.g. dolphins, and parrots.
https://theconversation.com/bi...
Since it IS Texas, I've come to realize one reason why so many drive the oversized pickups.
Reason or rationalisation? The leading cause of death from deer is when drivers swerve to avoid them, and SUVs are more prone to rolling and killing the occupants, as well as safer in a direct impact with deer or smaller car.
But the result is that SUVs in Texas are a far, far greater menace on the roads than the wildlife.
I remember as a kid seeing a picture of a real Tasmanian Devil for the first time.
They got their name because of the terrible noises they make at night.
Devils are nocturnal, rarely seen (alive) but were often heard.
The Guardian author seems to think the universe is finite and of known size.
The scientists' 4x10^84 presumably is an estimate for the observable universe.
Why does slashdot link to a paywall, and "digitasltrends" crap?
Here is a proper link. This program is not for the wombats and possums, but for the endangered Tasmanian devils that feed on their carcasses.
https://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/wild...
highly doubtful you respected him while he was president.
A *whole* lot of people who claim to respect him now were claiming he was hitler at the time.
Kind of like Trump now...
No. Bush I had an average approval rating of 61% in office, as high as 89%. ... keep going ...
Guess what Trump's approval rating is?
No, lower.... lower still
This puts us ahead of the Elephants, who turned mere millions of square km of jungle into grassland.
But still well behind the cyanobacteria in changing the planet and causing mass extinction.
30 seconds with google finds the answer:
Well, an answer. Sadly, finding the correct answer might take more effort. It is not so simple.
A. Coward is confusing "lifespan variability" within groups, with lifespan differences between groups. Totally different.
Suicide only explains 5% of the latter, as pointed out earlier.
White males are dying at a 40% higher rate than Hispanics (age adjusted of course.)
Citation required.
Wasn't it linked in TFS?
Here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/produ...
See the second graph.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/image...
"By the time that runs out"
That phrase is the key to why fission isn't considered a renewable source.
It was used in the same humourous context as "by the time the sun runs out". Thorium and U238 are not going to run out in practise, because the timescale makes our current measurement of minable reserves irrelevant. Even with coal, the problem is not one of supply limits.
It is already well measured and understood that life expectancy is about lifestyle not genetics.
Not precisely. In a way, everything is genetics. Human lifespan is fundamentally determined by our genes, and lifestyle typically affects that only in a narrow range.
An ideal diet and exercise will only add a couple of years to your life expectancy over average. Fruit flies have short lives, and tortoises long because of genes.
The real question is how much of the variance within a particular defined cohort, or difference between the average of two particular defined groups, can b explained by heritable factors. The answer may vary wildly depending on which groups you look at. And it gets harder because genes and lifestyle are not independent variables. Your genes affect your eating and exercise habits, in a way that interacts with environment (culture, opportunity). And genes also correlate strongly in ways that are not causal. So it is a difficult question.
If you are looking at a more genetically homogeneous society like Japan, you can expect environment to explain a greater portion of the variance, compared to a more diverse society like the US, where there is much greater variance, and genetics obviously plays a proportionally larger role. The question is always "how much" nature vs nurture, with qualifiers. Never a black and white answer.
For example, Japan has the longest life expectancy. Japanese-Americans who eat a traditional Japanese diet have life expediencies similar to people in Japan. And Japanese-Americans who eat a typical American diet have a typical American life expectancy. This was already well-established decades ago.
Really!? Source? I see no data to support your assertion. The majority of Americans of Japanese descent are now well-integrated into American lifestyle, and the life expectancy is still far higher. Be cafeful of picking one old study that supports what you want to hear, and ignoring everything else.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
Also, it would be a terrible mistake to extrapolate that to the whole world, even if it were true that Japanese and white Americans had similar genetic influences on lifespan.
For individuals (in the same society), twin studies suggest "about 25 % of the variation in human longevity is due to genetic factors.".
Carbon waste sequestration from fossil fuel is not remotely solved.
Storage of wind and solar power for 24/7 supply is complex and not fully solved.
Hydro is clean - aside from the pristine valley ecosystems that were wiped out. And Hydro dam failures make Chernobyl look like traffic accident.
If there was a perfect solution, we would be using it.
> Arguably, breeder reactors do renew the fuel.
They convert one resource ("fertile material") into fuel, but since that fertile material is itself not renewable the entire process isn't renewable.
U235 is a limited resource, but there is enough u238 minable with current tech for thousands of years, and then there is thorium.
By the time that runs out, we should be close to getting fusion working.
The difference in suicide rate from AC's link is 12 per 100,000. (18 vs 6)
The overall death rate is 885 vs 632, a difference of 253 per 100k.
So suicide rates, while high, only explain 5% of the white-hispanic male difference.
The good news is the end appears to be coming, and with a quickness.
The change in life expectancy is very small. I'd rather know about quality of life. How active are people in their later years?
Is modern medicine making our lives better?
"White men and women fared the worst"
Woah, you cant say that!
And it is a stupid comment, given that the year-to-year changes are very small, a tiny fraction of the persistent differences by race and gender:
See page 2: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/...
Black males are more than twice as likely to die, as Hispanic females of the same age.
Which makes the overall death rate increase of 0.4% from last year, or 0.13% fall in life expectancy, look trivial.
The enormous difference between age-adjusted death rate of Whites and Hispanics is surprising.
White males are dying at a 40% higher rate than Hispanics (age adjusted of course.)
This is about the same as the gender gap in death rate, which starts from birth. Males are much more likely to die in cots, or as toddlers in pools.
Is the racial gap across life like that, or appearing in middle age from diet-related disease?
Do the English-speaking children and grandchildren of Hispanic immigrants maintain that advantage if they live a mainstream American lifestyle?
i.e. nature or nurture?
That's what every VP since Johnson has been: An assassination deterrent.
Then I guess John McCain was attempting to take that to a whole new level!
But really, presidential candidates do not think that far ahead. They just want a running mate who will swing them a few votes in marginal electorates.
Pence's job was to appease the religious right, who do not normally take kindly to people who boast of pussy-grabbing.
The problem now is that there are too many Netflix-like silos with one good show each, so to watch the good shows you end up needing to subscribe to them all, or give up and pirate
Another method is to switch between them when needed. You can even do a monthly rotation.
If they start doing 12-month subscriptions, it will be back to the yo ho ho for me.
How is advertising-supported TV going in the US?
In Australia, the TV networks are circling the plug hole (anticlockwise, of course).
Quality has gone through the floor - lots of "reality TV" and re-runs of imports.
15 minutes of advertising per hour, not including the product placement and travel, home improvement, etc shows that look more like infomercials.
Cable was super-expensive here (and still has adverts), so we were mostly moving to piracy and a bit of TIVO-ing until Netflix and the like arrived.
So you-tube heading in that direction does not sound like a good thing.
The surface pressure of Europa's atmosphere is 0.1 Pa, or 10^12 times that of the Earth.[9]
So 0.1 Pa is a 1,000,00th of earth pressure, or 10^-6, not 10^-12.
Slashdot swallowed the "mu" from 0.1 micro-pascals in my cut & paste. Sorry. Unicode .
Obviously not a necessity, but aero-braking makes the delta-V budget a lot easier. See the chart.
It actually takes a much bigger rocket to get a given payload to the lunar surface than to Mars, using aerobraking.
atmospheres, such as Ganymede, Europa, and Callisto.
No. Near enough to vacuum. Mars atmosphere may be less than 1% of earth, but it is pea soup compared to those moons.
> The surface pressure of Europa's atmosphere is 0.1 Pa, or 10^12 times that of the Earth.[9]
A hotel on Mars would be awesome.
Cynical though I am, I am surprised we have not seen more tourism in Antarctica.
Does not bode well for Mars. While there will be huge excitement for the first visitors (Amundsen and Scott were famous in their day), the interest may drop off very quickly.