search results matching tag: breakthrough

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (148)     Sift Talk (8)     Blogs (10)     Comments (250)   

22 Problems Solved in 2022

eric3579 says...

1) 1:48 NASA nails asteroid

2) 3:03 US joins Kigali amendment

3) 4:05 purportedly extinct species make comeback

4) 5:11 malaria vaccine progresses through trials

5) 6:33 lyme disease vaccine nearing market return

6) 8:04 US soccer teams strike monumental deal

7) 8:58 free lunches programs expand

8 ) 10:04 Europe standardizing charging ports

9) 11:02 US ev tipping point hit this year

10) 12:13 plan created for plugging orphan wells

11) 13:28 Canada pilots prescriptions for outdoors time

12) 14:18 military suicides see decline

13) 15:26 HIV vaccines progressing through trials

14) 16:18 art museums solve funding issue

15) 17:08 battery swap technology spreading

16) 18:22 ethereum achieves major efficiency gain

17) 19:42 MLB figures out authentication

18) 20:54 Klamath river set for return

19) 22:03 Intel launches deepfake detector

20) 22:47 solution for removing pfa's found

21) 24:16 US States ban slavery

22) 25:42 nuclear fusion breakthrough

PILLOW FIGHT PRANK - Assault with a bedly weapon

newtboy (Member Profile)

US sues to block TX abortion law

newtboy says...

Jane you ignorant slut…..MY tangent straw men!?! Lol!!! You mean like how many ultrasound techs I’ve known!? Or what my personal hands on experience is….as if one can only have an opinion on abortion or knowledge of the stages of development if they are ultrasound techs. Aaaaaahahahaha. That must be good meth.
Ok, here….again…. Illiterate Fool: you aren’t so blatantly hypocritical that you are both anti choice and anti mandatory vaccination, are you?

No one said it makes one a doctor besides you. Another paper tiger you set up for yourself. It’s not clever, you aren’t “winning”, you need your Ritalin.

My degree is general science, so I’m actually qualified to answer general science questions like this one. What’s your degree in again?

Bob, if you won’t or can’t read, there’s no point repeating myself again….Your question, replete with grammatical errors, was answered multiple times above. Reading comprehension is obviously not a strong suit for you.

In short, my hands on knowledge is decades of science education well beyond biology, necessarily including basic medical education (like topics like this), a continuing curiosity about how things work that keeps me up to date on most mainstream science including medical breakthroughs and quackery like your arguments, and ties to the Stanford medical community because my mother edited all their publications for decades, forwarding me the most interesting advancements they made, often before they were published.

Now, again I ask…what’s your personal experience on this topic? I’m absolutely certain it’s less, there’s no way an 8th grade dropout works in medicine. You have no experience and no education, no understanding, no knowledge at all, just what bubba dun told you down to da boars nest.

It’s what there is at 6 weeks. The whole thing is less than a newt in the egg, no limbs, 1/2 the size of a pea….the heart isn’t formed at all. Get someone to read for you, watch a film, this isn’t hard info to find if you remove your head from your anus. Look at real medical sites, not anti abortion propaganda sites, they lie, exaggerate, and obfuscate.

bobknight33 said:

What was you question of me? One gets tired of you tangent straw man arguments and can get lost in you incoherent gibberish.



Also reading some books and tagging along with you mom at the hospital does not make you a Doctor or any medical official.



Your medical degree is in what?
Bullshitology?



Yet you haven't responded to this simple question...

So AGAIN

Elitist Tool:
What actual hands on knowledge you you fucking have about this topic?


Or is this you response...
You saw a 6 week old cell clusters twitch ..


Was this a YouTube or your spent jizz left in the fridge as a "scientific" study?

US sues to block TX abortion law

newtboy says...

There can be no heartbeat without a heart, which takes another 6-8 + weeks to form chambers, and 16 or more more weeks to develop valves and functional muscle tissue and actually pump blood. There is no heartbeat at 6, 8, or even 10 weeks by any definition, there's a twitch in the place a heart will one day develop.

This abdication of the state's duty to private citizens has been ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court when states allowed churches to veto liquor licenses and bars challenged them and won. The government cannot deputize the populace to enforce a law, nor can it pay them with the state imposed fines even if they call it a judgement...You cannot pre set a judgement amount in a law for a civil case.

There has been no medical breakthroughs that change the standard, if it can't survive outside the womb, it's not viable. Period. End of discussion. That's what not viable means.

"Mutually incompatible"!? Nonsense. Legally there is no baby to be harmed, that's the law this is trying to end run around. Covid harms everyone. It's a paper tiger argument, a total fake red herring, there is NO public health danger if a woman has an abortion, you cannot catch abortion. Covid you can catch, and spread, and it's deadly to actual, real, fully cooked legal people AND embryos.

One wonders if the Texas legal system has nothing to do and had this passed as job security...because it's the only kind of civil case they'll be hearing now.

One also wonders if the state has too much money, because there's apparently they weren't smart enough to include exemptions for the state if they help facilitate any abortions by, let's say, offering bus service, maintaining roadways, or supplying electricity and water to the buildings. Any of these is grounds to sue them for $10000. If you live in Texas, file your case now before there's no money left and they rewrite the law to just target liberals.

They'll have to defend every case filed costing another $10000+ in legal fees (they'll have to pay the plaintiff's costs too). Pair that with the companies fleeing the state to avoid boycotts, Texas is going to be so poor they become America's Hati soon. Yee haw!

bobknight33 said:

Derp ^

I Changed Astronomy Forever. He Won the Nobel Prize for It.

I Changed Astronomy Forever. He Won the Nobel Prize for It.

newtboy says...

Kind of, but the head of department is morally and ethically obligated to make note of the subordinate who made the actual discovery or breakthrough and usually shares the prize at least if it doesn’t go directly to the discovery maker alone. This is especially true when the head misinterprets and discards the data and denies any discovery was made until the discoverer, on their own, forms a hypothesis, tests it, and repeats it, all without the head of department’s involvement.

In this case, one person made the discovery and the department head dismissed it, then that subordinate on her own continued her investigation and formed her own hypothesis, tested and verified it, and only then her department head became convinced, then took ALL credit for the discovery with no mention of her. That is NOT how scientific teams work.

This wasn’t just her discovery, she figured out what it was too…her hypothesis and her testing, her repeating the discovery, almost certainly her writing it up. If she were a man, she definitely would have gotten credit for both the discovery and the hypothesis, and for confirming her hypothesis. She might not have been given the “prize” individually, but she would have definitely gotten the credit and shared in the accolades. (I think a male in the same position would have shared the prize at a minimum, and had the department head claimed credit as they did here, would have publicly disgraced the department head by proving they not only had nothing to do with the discovery, they had dismissed it when shown and added nothing at all to the hypothesis or testing it, and they would have been drummed out of the scientific community for plagiarism and theft of intellectual property).

When he dismissed her findings completely, he removed himself from the discovery and she became group leader of her own separate project. She deserves both prizes, both monetary awards, a public apology from the man who stole her work without giving her credit, and a serious civil judgement against him for any bonus, advancement, raise, accolades, or paid engagements he received based on his lie that he discovered pulsars. That’s her money that he stole.

vil said:

OK I will take a risk on this one. Every scientific breakthrough is supported by scientific personnel who run experiments and collect data. The head of the laboratory or institution gets to interpret the data and get the Nobel Prize. That is how teams work in science.

Its even in the video, getting the discovery discovered is a lot of tedious work, someone has to find the anomalous signal, that is great, someone else then gets to state a hypothesis about what it means, which when it proves to be right gives them the prize. Seems fair. Even if its just one on one student and professor, unless the student comes up with a fundamental concept, just noticing an anomaly does not make a Nobel Prize laureate of the student. Even if his line of search is originally against the opinion of the professor.

Now arguably in this case Ms. Bell made a bigger contribution than just collecting data and if you juxtapose that with how women were treated back then, its a nice story. But if she were a man in the same position there would be no Nobel Prize either. And possibly no compensating prize years later.

And yes she deserves her prize, I believe.

I Changed Astronomy Forever. He Won the Nobel Prize for It.

vil says...

OK I will take a risk on this one. Every scientific breakthrough is supported by scientific personnel who run experiments and collect data. The head of the laboratory or institution gets to interpret the data and get the Nobel Prize. That is how teams work in science.

Its even in the video, getting the discovery discovered is a lot of tedious work, someone has to find the anomalous signal, that is great, someone else then gets to state a hypothesis about what it means, which when it proves to be right gives them the prize. Seems fair. Even if its just one on one student and professor, unless the student comes up with a fundamental concept, just noticing an anomaly does not make a Nobel Prize laureate of the student. Even if his line of search is originally against the opinion of the professor.

Now arguably in this case Ms. Bell made a bigger contribution than just collecting data and if you juxtapose that with how women were treated back then, its a nice story. But if she were a man in the same position there would be no Nobel Prize either. And possibly no compensating prize years later.

And yes she deserves her prize, I believe.

Covid Vaccines: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

spawnflagger says...

It's < 1 in a million chance of dying from CVST complication, but it's still not "zero deaths". (the number of "breakthrough" cases of covid leading to death were still higher)
---

Not sure where you got those car stats - annual fatalities peaked in 1972 at around 55,000 per year and have been declining since (under 40k in 2019).
So ~10x more covid-related deaths in US.

Injuries are around 4M a year (2017) and I couldn't find a source that distinguished maiming vs other injury. This infographic said 2M "permanent injuries" per year. (older 2010 data, from what I can tell)

And I bet most of these car accidents are caused by the same aggressive tailgating coal-rolling drivers who are more likely to be anti-vaxxers as well.

luxintenebris said:

any medicine, procedure, or vaccine carries risk. no guarantees, just probabilities. and the blood clotting risk is - what? greater than 1 in a million?

love to have those odds...say a million to one that Scarlett Johansson would reject an improper advance versus one in a million to ever suffer an immediate reprisal.

it'd be worth a shot.

more concerned that not enough citizens will help get the population up to the point of herd immunity. the consequences of that maybe become a catastrophe.

BTW: 1 in 5 chance, of any american car passenger, over their span of life, will be killed or maimed for life. is this worth the risk? doubt many ever give it a concern.

Tesla China - Shanghai Gigafactory production line

wtfcaniuse says...

You're assuming the people calling you out on your BS are liberals. That is one of your mistakes.

I was trying to be nice. I actually appreciate you contributing something for once.

Tesla is not leading the EV market today and they will not be leading it in ten years. The biggest EV market is China and Tesla makes up maybe 1/5th. China and India are the biggest emerging EV markets and both have locally developed EVs.

Telsa is not 5 years ahead of Panasonic, LG, BYD, et al. The breakthroughs are coming from labs you've never heard of.

Don't put all your stocks in the one EV basket. As Stukafox mentioned Hydrogen is the future. Current EV's are a stopgap.

bobknight33 said:

Well replying to a Liberal is like beating you head against the wall. Since I am so out numbered here,I don't even try.

Grreta Thunberg's Speech to World Leaders at UN

newtboy says...

@bcglorf Here's a tome for you....


It's certainly not (the only way). Converting to green energy sources stimulates the economy, it doesn't bankrupt it, and it makes it more efficient in the future thanks to lower energy costs. My solar system paid for itself in 8 years, giving me an expected 12 years of free electricity and hot water. Right wingers would tell you it will never pay for itself....utter bullshit.

Every gap in our knowledge I've ever seen that we have filled with data has made the estimates worse. Every one. Every IPCC report has raised the severity and shrunk the timeframe from the last report....but you stand on the last one that they admit was optimistic and incomplete by miles as if it's the final word and a gold standard. It just isn't. They themselves admit this.

The odds of catastrophic climate change is 100% in the next 0 years for many who have already died or been displaced by rising seas or famine or disease or lack of water or...... and that goes for all humanity in the next 50 because those who survive displacement will be refugees on the rest's doorsteps. Don't be ridiculous. If we found an asteroid guaranteed to hit in the next 50-100 years, and any possible solutions take a minimum of 50 years to implement with no surprises, and only then assuming we solve the myriad of technical issues we haven't solved in the last 100 years of trying and only if we can put the resources needed into a solution, not considering the constantly worsening barrage of smaller asteroids and the effects on resources and civilisation, we would put all our resources into solutions. That's where I think we are, except we still have many claiming there's no asteroid coming and those that already hit are fake news....including those in the highest offices making the decisions.

Every IPCC report has vastly underestimated their projections, they tell you they are doing it, only including data they are certain of, not new measurements or functions. They do not fill in the gaps, they leave them empty. Gaps like methane melt that could soon be more of a factor than human CO2, and 100% out of our control.

The AR5 report is so terrible, it was lambasted from day one as being incredibly naive and optimistic, and for not including what was then new data. Since its release, those complaints have been proven to be correct, in 5 years since its release ice melt rates have accelerated 60 years by their model. I wouldn't put a whit of confidence in it, it was terrible then, near criminally bad today. I'll take NOAA's estimates based on much newer science and guess that they, like nearly all others in the past, also don't know everything and are also likely underestimating wildly. Even the IPCC AR5 report includes the possibility of 3 ft rise by 2100 under their worst case (raised another 10% in this 2019 report, and expected to rise again by 2021, their next report), and their worst case models show less heat and melting than we are measuring already and doesn't include natural feedbacks because they can't model them accurately yet so just left them out (but noted they will have a large effect, but it's not quantitative yet so not included). Long and short, their worst case scenario is likely optimistic as reality already outpaces their worst case models.

Again, the economy benefits from new energy production in multiple ways. Exxon is not the global economy.

It took 100 years for the impact of our pollution to be felt by most (some still ignore it today). Even the short term features like methane take 25+ years to run their cycles, so what we do today takes that long to start working.

If people continue to drag their feet and challenge the science with supposition, insisting the best case scenario of optimistic studies are the worst we should plan for, we're doomed....and what they're doing is actually worse than that. The power plants built or under construction today put us much higher than 1.5 degree rise by 2100 with their expected emissions without ever building 1 more, and we're building more. Without fantastic scientific breakthroughs that may never come, breakthroughs your plan relies on for our survival, what we've already built puts us beyond the IPCC worst case in their operational lifetimes.

There's a problem with that...I'm good with using real science to identify them without political obstruction and confusion, the difference being we need to be prepared for decisive action once they're identified. So far, we have plans to develop those actions, but that's it. In the event of a "surprise" asteroid, we're done. We just hope they're rare.
This one, however, is an asteroid that is guaranteed to hit if we do nothing, some say hit in 30 years, some say 80. Only morons say it won't hit at all, do nothing.
Climate change is an asteroid/comet in our orbit that WILL hit earth. We are already being hit by ejecta from it's coma causing disasters for millions. You suggest we don't start building a defense until we are certain of it's exact tonnage and the date it will crash to earth because it's expensive and our data incomplete. That plan leaves us too late to change the trajectory. The IPCC said we need to deploy our system in 8-10 years to have a 30-60% chance of changing the trajectory under perfect conditions....you seem to say "wait, that's expensive, let's give it some time and ignore that deadline". I say even just a continent killer is bad enough to do whatever it takes to stop, because it's cheaper with less loss of life and infinitely less suffering than a 'wait and see exactly when it will kill us, we might have space elevators in 10 years so it might only kill 1/2 of us and the rest might survive that cometary winter in space (yes at exponentially higher cost and loss of life and ecology than developing the system today, but that won't be on my dime so Fuck it).' attitude.

Florida Man Refuses To Be Repoed

C-note (Member Profile)

President of American College of Cardiology: No Meat Is Safe

transmorpher says...

Well you won't die early :-)

They can't do anything about death yet, but people seem confident it's just a matter of time before they solve that too. Who knows, if you make it to 120 like so many Okinawan's do then perhaps it'll get you there. Some people say that if you are able to live until 2060, then they'll have technology that allows you to extend your life for another 80 years - long enough until the next big breakthrough, and so on. It's of course sci-fi right now, but I like the idea of it :-)

Mordhaus said:

So this means if I don't eat meat, I won't die? Ponce de León was looking in the wrong place!

New Rule: The Lesser of Two Evils

enoch says...

@newtboy
i like the 'failing liver" analogy.
appropriate and easily understood.

and i can understand where milkmandan is coming from,but my perspective is more aligned with yours newt.

what consistently baffles me,is how so many people are willing to simply accept this short term strategy from our politicians.

there is no surprise when corporations push for this,they are just focusing on their own interests and bottom line,which is short term profit.

or the politicians who bow to their neoliberal masters to receive those tasty campaign contributions.

or even the banks,who again focus on their short term gains.

these players are all behaving as they always have:for their own self interest.so there should be no shock or surprise when they act exactly as they have always acted.

but when i see everyday,normal people defend the behavior and actions of oliticians,financial institutions and multi-national corporations.it baffles me as to why they would choose to do such a thing.

we can understand why those players seek to retain a system which benefits them,their shareholders and their bottom line,but that system no longer serves the interests of the people,community and society as a whole.

so why make arguments defending it?

it is,quite frankly,killing us slowly as a species.

look at germany.
that country has slowly been recruiting,educating and now poised to corner the market in:new energy,renewable energy and are leading the world in breakthrough technologies in all energy fields.

germany has long played the long game.
they now dominate the entire EU in finance,and are now focusing on dominating the globe with new energy technology.

and what are we doing here in america?
pushing through more and more neoliberal policies that immiserate the working poor,both here and abroad.desperately continuing our destruction of entire ecosystems to exploit our natural resources for:oil and gas.military conflicts,which only make this country less safe,all to exploit other nations and extract THEIR oil and gas,and the cost in human lives is absolutely indefensible.

all of it.
every single bit of it for short term gains for an extremely small minority.

and here we are,with trump opening the flood gates to further exploit and destroy our natural resources with no thought or plan for the future.no investment in our communities,nor our society as a whole.

and for those who wish to make an argument that hillary would be better.i will only concede that on a domestic level this may have been true,but hillary is a neoliberal corporatist,and she would have pushed for even MORE military intervention in the middle east.MORE sanctions against countries unwilling to play ball,in order to politically squeeze them out,and even MORE of this countries policy of "regime change" to exploit and extract from those countries their precious resources.

i strongly suspect Iran would have been next on her agenda.

so when are some of these people going to step up,and realize that both trump AND clinton are (or would have been) disasterous for us as a community,a nation and as a species?

because they both only offer short term solutions to long term problems.and those short term solutions only benefit a minority of the population.

we could turn this ship around TODAY,right now,if we so choose.
we need more politicians like elizabeth warren and tulsi gabbard.we need more integrity in our media and journalists willing to do their job and criticize power,not bow to it just for access.we need the people to become engaged and confront their representatives,and make them uncomfortable,not treat them as celebrities.

and we need to reject the system where rich people choose who we get to vote for,and begin to dismantle this two party duopoly.

because trump vs hillary?
this election cycle has just revealed that both these candidates are not the disease,but rather the symptom of a very broken,and dysfunctional political system.

we need to begin to invest in the future.
and reject the status quo as no longer being viable for the continued existence of the human species.

and with the newly energized american public,who are growing in numbers daily,and is a direct response to the unmitigated disaster that is trump.there may be hope for us yet.

because if we stay on this trajectory,we are fucking doomed.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon