There is an old myth that while listening to music mundane tasks can be performed just fine, but tasks that require creative thinking become very difficult because the creative center of the brain is occupied by the music.
I believe this myth may have originated in the book, Peopleware. In my experience, I have found this to not be true.
But I'm curious, could the mythbusters prove whether listening to music actually hurts or helps creative problem solving skills?
This whole thing strikes me more as kids playing the "telephone" game in kindergarten than a legitimate news story.
The peer reviewed article at wkhealth.com states the the dogs were in full cardiac arrest for 60 minutes, and that only 1/2 of the dogs survived to 72 hours under intensive care. It does not state whether the dogs survived after the 72 hours in IC. This is not that different from someone falling into an icy lake and being revived an hour later to varying degrees of success.
Now the posted article states that the dogs were dead for 3 hours (triple what was stated above), and makes no mention of the 50% of dogs that weren't able to be revived.
Finally, through some leap in logic, Timothy posts "The technology will be tested on humans within the next year." This is a far cry from even the posted article which merely states: "Plans to test the technique on humans should be realised within a year".
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be pretty pissed if someone used taint tissue on me too!
There is an old myth that while listening to music mundane tasks can be performed just fine, but tasks that require creative thinking become very difficult because the creative center of the brain is occupied by the music. I believe this myth may have originated in the book, Peopleware. In my experience, I have found this to not be true. But I'm curious, could the mythbusters prove whether listening to music actually hurts or helps creative problem solving skills?
Fasterfox seems to be compatible w/ the new version already, that's really the only extension I need.
Let's not forget Bell Labs also invented C++ and the solar panel.
Instead of "home" and "pro" versions, are they planning an Alta Vista and a Baja Vista?
This whole thing strikes me more as kids playing the "telephone" game in kindergarten than a legitimate news story.
The peer reviewed article at wkhealth.com states the the dogs were in full cardiac arrest for 60 minutes, and that only 1/2 of the dogs survived to 72 hours under intensive care. It does not state whether the dogs survived after the 72 hours in IC. This is not that different from someone falling into an icy lake and being revived an hour later to varying degrees of success.
Now the posted article states that the dogs were dead for 3 hours (triple what was stated above), and makes no mention of the 50% of dogs that weren't able to be revived.
Finally, through some leap in logic, Timothy posts "The technology will be tested on humans within the next year." This is a far cry from even the posted article which merely states: "Plans to test the technique on humans should be realised within a year".
Doesn't anyone RTFA anymore?