"It can't read your mind" however watching the brain and determining simple things is already well established. Presumably the model with the electrode hairnet is not far off. Lots of potential, here.

*nochannel
*science

With no explanation, there's no education or learning to be had, certainly no electronica, it has not been debunked, it's not magic, and it's probably not geeky.

A simple explanation that the electrodes interact with the acid to create a small electrical charge would have made a few of those tags proper, but this was more like "magnets....how do they work?" level education.

Flux core would remove any slight oxidation between deposits on a continuous weld, or a media blast nozzle in front of the weld zone.
I agree with you if they intend to use it for load bearing structures, but it wouldn't be difficult. Just a loose seal around the work area and positive gas flow keeping oxygen out, problem solved.
The downside I see is cost. It's expensive to 'make metal' with a mig....or any welder. Electrodes/wire aren't cheap, and then there's the electricity. Bending or milling sheets, castings, or blocks is almost always going to be cheaper. This will be useful for designs that require complex interior shapes impossible to do conventionally, but not much else, imo.

Your video, Electrode Massager + Face = AWESOME, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Not even close, rat! Must be one of those lab-rescue rats-Hair just grew back in, electrodes removed, Motor cortex: Questionable.

This is one of the standard methods for investigating sound production in vertebrate animals. You can also hook up electrodes to the muscles surrounding the vocal folds to study how they are involved in modulating the sound.
The trachea functions as a resonant structure. By pulling on it, he is increasing the volume of that structure and lowering its tuning.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by pumkinandstorm.

sorry, but

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/electrodes-on-the-face-set-to-music-test2

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by mintbbb. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

I'm a neuroscientist. I get it. I'm not saying it doesn't suck for this kid. Lots of things that happen suck for lots of people. I'm saying one cop tasering one kid doesn't constitute national news. People get tasered all the time. This one is particularly jarring because it's a kid. Thus, it's a heartstrings story, not one that will help you inform your decisions in any way whatsoever.

>> ^Murgy:

I'm not sure you understand what it is like to be shot with a taser, my friend.
To give you a very brief picture, I can pretty well guarantee that this child wouldn't have noticed the puncture wounds from the electrode prongs until long after the incident itself.
In a nutshell, an electroshock weapon seeks to exploit the way the nervous system works to make the brain think electrical impulses are being send from every muscle in the affected are to contract, even if a pair of said muscles are in direct opposition to each other. Obviously muscles pulling against each other is quite a painful thing. Hell, if an adrenaline release has occurred, these conflicting muscles can literally tear themselves off of the bone with a long enough shock.
At the time, though, much of the real pain comes from the simple interaction of sensory nerves and electricity. For the sake of simplicity, we'll call prong one A, prong two B, and motor nerve pathways C.
For the brief moment that said energy moves from point A to point C, all affected sensory nerves send the maximum amount of electrochemical signals as possible in response to what the nerves think is a harm causing force far greater than an electric shock actually is. This manifests itself as the greatest possible amount of pain from an extremely localized area, the amount of possible pain being proportional to the concentration of sensory nerves in the affected area. This then repeats itself during the transition from point C to point B.
>> ^bmacs27:
They aren't exactly knocking on doors or digging through leaked memos here. This story doesn't really address any of the real issues we're facing. It doesn't address unemployment, or our economic crisis. It doesn't address the global clusterfuck we're in the midst of. It isn't telling us anything we need to know about our elected officials, or how we're being governed (really, unless you consider some local cop to be governance). In the end it's just another piece about some asshole cop because that's what gets eyeballs from lefties. Same shit, different patriotic backdrop.

I'm not sure you understand what it is like to be shot with a taser, my friend.
To give you a very brief picture, I can pretty well guarantee that this child wouldn't have noticed the puncture wounds from the electrode prongs until long after the incident itself.
In a nutshell, an electroshock weapon seeks to exploit the way the nervous system works to make the brain think electrical impulses are being send from every muscle in the affected are to contract, even if a pair of said muscles are in direct opposition to each other. Obviously muscles pulling against each other is quite a painful thing. Hell, if an adrenaline release has occurred, these conflicting muscles can literally tear themselves off of the bone with a long enough shock.

At the time, though, much of the real pain comes from the simple interaction of sensory nerves and electricity. For the sake of simplicity, we'll call prong one A, prong two B, and motor nerve pathways C.
For the brief moment that said energy moves from point A to point C, all affected sensory nerves send the maximum amount of electrochemical signals as possible in response to what the nerves think is a harm causing force far greater than an electric shock actually is. This manifests itself as the greatest possible amount of pain from an extremely localized area, the amount of possible pain being proportional to the concentration of sensory nerves in the affected area. This then repeats itself during the transition from point C to point B.

>> ^bmacs27:

They aren't exactly knocking on doors or digging through leaked memos here. This story doesn't really address any of the real issues we're facing. It doesn't address unemployment, or our economic crisis. It doesn't address the global clusterfuck we're in the midst of. It isn't telling us anything we need to know about our elected officials, or how we're being governed (really, unless you consider some local cop to be governance). In the end it's just another piece about some asshole cop because that's what gets eyeballs from lefties. Same shit, different patriotic backdrop.

@quantumushroom

I'm gonna find you. and attach electrodes to your bawls. And everytime you say "libtard" or "taxocrat" or "liberal media" ..you're going to be shocked.

first a little.. then a lot.

The american media is not conservative or liberal. It's fuckin' corporate.

It bows to its masters and its master are rich white blokes. Some of whom call themselves conservatives, some liberal, all evil and corrupt as fuck.

News used to be about Journalism - exposing the truth of facts surrounding major events, powerful people & daily atrocities

Tho because of ignorant polarized individuals like yourself. Corporations have repackaged "news" into shit like CNN FOX & MSNBC.

You're holding all of society back by being a zealot.

Heres my live-comment on the video

"New knowledge has shaken the foundations of Darwins theory"

No. In fact, everything in biology, especially the discovery of DNA in 1953 have confirmed, and established once and for all that the foundation of Darwins theory based on the Natural selection of hereditery properties (Darwin called them traits, we now call them genes) is true.

"When Darwin was alive, they thought the cell was a simple blob"

Wow, that was only like 3 seconds between lie #1 and lie #2! Impressive, Behe. Lets drag up Darwins corpse, and see what he had to say, even if its largely irrelevant to the fact of evolution and the practice of modern biology:
http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2007/07/16/darwin_and_the_cell_not_just_p/

"Like a car factory where everything has to fit together"


Not really, cells are messy things, and the processes inside is based on chemical reactions and physical laws (such as entropy) They look nothing like these tidy animations meant for illustration purposes. The production of proteins, for instance,is a process where the amino acids float around and bind themselves chemically to rna, not in an orderly "wait my turn"-style, but they latch on naturally to the RNA because they are chemically attracted to the 5 different nucleic acids on the RNA chain. It would be more similar to a redox reaction you can do with electrodes in water where the iron rod attracts the oxygen molecules, forming rust.(in the sense that theres nothing intelligent going on, just chemistry.)

"Darwinism was a lot more plausible when we thought the cell was a blob"

No.

"Flagellum"

A , Behes flagship of his idiot argument, he always pulls it out, all debunking be damned, he cant even hear how people have destroyed this silliness over and over:

http://youtu.be/a_5FToP_mMY

Utter bullshit.

Is he hooked up to electrodes?

>> ^blankfist:

All land is owned but people buy land all the time. There's not some evil Bill Gates sitting on the land, laughing maniacally because he won't sell any of it. If you want to "rent" the land, then it's in the interest of the landlord to offer that land at a competitive price. Again, it's not a crazy Bill Gates charging a poor family a zillion dollars just because he can.

I think you're missing my point. My point is why should I give a shit what Bill Gates thinks? Why does he get to threaten me with violence unless I give him something, just so I can create my own food to sustain myself?

Because he or some government drew a line in the sand, put a gun in my face, and told me I can't?

>> ^blankfist:
What threats of violence? You mean if you "steal" the food from the grocer who in turn had to pay the shippers and the farmers?

Why did the grocer "have to" pay the shippers and farmers? Threats of violence if he didn't?

>> ^blankfist:
If you create a victim out of the grocer and steal his property, then of course he'd have the right to protect it. It seems like you're grasping at straws trying to paint self-defense and defense of property (that which is purchased by the profit of your own labor) as the same violence used by the state. It is not.

Like I said, you might think the violent threats are justified. That doesn't change that you're talking about threatening violence against someone whose only crime is violating the edict of some authority who said "don't eat this food, or I'll inflict violence on you".

All you're doing is saying you side with the violent authoritarian, because you think his authority is legitimate.

>> ^blankfist:
The state, in your scenario, is more like the person who claims he's in need of the food and must take his fair share from the grocer. This is in fact stealing. What's the difference?

Absolutely backwards. The grocer is the one who's saying he must take his "fair share" from the hungry man. If he doesn't get it, he'll use violence. That certainly deters our starving poor from trying to take food from grocery stores without paying the grocer's ransom.

I don't see the difference between what the state does and that, honestly.

>> ^blankfist:
And this is the important part, so feel free to grab your pad and pen: One is offensive violence, and one is defensive violence. There's a big difference between a woman being attacked and using pepper spray versus, say, a group of white Mississippi cops spraying a bunch of "negro" protestors during a 1960s civil rights march.

But those are examples of person-on-person violence. The hungry man who eats the grocer's food isn't being violent at all, yet he will have violence inflicted on him for defying the wishes of the grocer.

Not unlike the poor non-violent resident of California who will have electrodes strapped to his nuts for failing to pay his taxes.

>> ^blankfist:
I don't think California is a "better deal". You're way off base. It's not a better deal. It's my fucking home. The US is my home.

Okay, but it's also not a prison. If you wanted to leave, you could. Staying is a choice, and one you make absent any coercion.

The US is also not your property. The allodial title is held by the US government. Buying real estate in California does not grant you a tract of sovereign territory. You are still obligated to follow the laws of California, and the US, including the ones regarding taxes.

If you don't like the rules and obligations that come with living in the US, you don't have to live in the US, just like if you don't like your local grocer's rule of "no shirt, no shoes, no service" you can shop somewhere else.

In both cases, you can complain all you like, and try to persuade the property owners to change things to be more to your liking. But according to your own views on property, there is no issue of "rights" that would compel either property owner to accede to your desires.

However, if you just take what you think you're entitled to over the objections of the property owner, then you're committing the same crime you accused my hungry man of: stealing.