Wacky news that makes you go "wtf?"

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by xilman

You may be surprised to discover that some beautiful ladies are themselves geeky science nerds. If you don't already know, find out who is named as co-inventor on the patent for spread-spectrum radio communication. Another example: who first published examples of computer software?

By the latter I assume you mean Ada and not Grace.
I would submit Dr. Fiorella Terenzi, Kari Byron (Mythbusters), Jennifer Garner (Chem major), and Danica McKellar.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

By the latter I assume you mean Ada and not Grace

Correct.

Despite being a geek, at least she wasn't mad, bad and dangerous to know.

Paul

[S485122]

Originally Posted by retina

We both stand atop some high place, no higher than say 300m above the Earth's surface (like for example the Leaning Tower of Pisa)

The tower of Pisa is not only leaning but also growing ? Until recently it was less than 60 meters high !

Jacob

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by S485122

The tower of Pisa is not only leaning but also growing ? Until recently it was less than 60 meters high !

I'm fairly sure that retina meant that the Pisa tower is "no higher than ... 300m above the Earth's surface".

[cheesehead]

http://zinjanthropus.wordpress.com/2...-environments/

(yes! They eat potatoes!)

[retina]

Originally Posted by S485122

The tower of Pisa is not only leaning but also growing ? Until recently it was less than 60 meters high !

As cheesehead rightly points out, the Pisa Tower is less than 300m high so it fits the description.

Of course I mentioned that particular building because of the experiment carried out there that was closely related to the discussion in progress at the time.

[xilman]

Not only white rabbits but also chickens appear to be vicious killers: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8548564.stm

[xilman]

Originally Posted by retina

Perhaps, but for the original article that sparked all this, I still think it was plainly obvious. Just ask anybody (male or female) over about 13 years old and see if they can honestly claim that they have never noticed it.

I can honestly say that I have never noticed increased levels of testosterone in such situations. I don't have very good sensory receptors for measuring testosterone levels in others.

I agree that increased risk taking is common among young men in the presence of young women. It is not, to my mind, "plainly obvious" what the underlying mechanism might be. For instance, a plausible explanation may be that the increased risk is taken not to attract women directly but rather to increase ones status among the male peer group. Demoralizing the opposition is a widely used strategy in all sorts of competitions.

How would you design an experiment to distinguish between these two hypotheses? It seems to me that measuring testosterone levels goes some way towards answering that question.

It is also "plainly obvious" that boys under the age of puberty tend to take greater risks when in the presence of others. Is this status-raising activity? If so, might that reason also play a role after puberty?

My opinion remains that the original research was good science. Not very fundamental science, perhaps, but good science nonetheless. My digression into the physics of falling bodies was to show that "plainly obvious" phenomena are worthy of serious investigation using carefully designed experiments to distinguish between different hypotheses.


Paul

[davieddy]

I have evidintly missed out on a humorous exchange.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1Y7VKYWdUo

My excuse is that I am recovering from a night out with WBLipp.

(Recommended)

David

[99.94]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/entert...-1225838480965

[petrw1]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/...087/story.html