search results matching tag: stimulate

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (104)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (2)     Comments (485)   

Is reality real? Call of Duty May Have the Answer

GenjiKilpatrick says...

He seem pretty confident about a bunch of theoretical stuff..

Wouldn't you need an enormously powerful computer to stimulate a universe?

In what reality or universe does that computer exist?

Aren't we right back at the "big bang doesn't work because what happened before it" paradox?

Interesting.. but sorta silly.

I feel like the Tenth Dimension theory explain things better.

ChaosEngine (Member Profile)

GenjiKilpatrick says...

D'aw. You're gonna be all butthurt now because called you mildly aspy?

All I want is to restore the Videosift community to the somewhat thought-provoking and stimulating place it used to be.

If you made a good point, I would acknowledge it.

However.. You generally nitpick, trivial points on about minor details which - again - completely miss the point of the video.

Not my fault if you can't reason well Chaos. Have a nice life tho.

ChaosEngine said:

Yeah, silly me for thinking the point of this site was to comment on videos. Fuck knows what I was thinking.

and since you clearly have nothing of any value to add other than bitching about other peoples posts... ignore

First Ever Photograph of Light as Both a Particle and Wave

dannym3141 says...

Neither, they've stimulated an oscillation of the free surface electrons in a wire and taken a diffraction pattern of that standing wave of electrons, using an electron microscope. It's sensationalism.

newtboy said:

So I'm guessing the rainbow 'wave' is the wave portion, and the squiggles under it are the photon? Or are the bumps on the 'wave' the photons? Anyone?

First Ever Photograph of Light as Both a Particle and Wave

dannym3141 says...

I was immediately apprehensive when the video stated that the light was confined to travelling along the nanowire and that it is reflected at either end and forms a standing wave. What is the photon interacting with at either end of the wire that reflects it?

The answer is that they haven't imaged light, but instead surface plasmons - oscillations of free electrons on the surface of the wire. Light is used to stimulate the plasmon, and the plasmon is used as a representation of light, which is imaged. However, electrons have mass and light does not.

A lot of reasonable people are calling this pop-science bullshit generated by the publicity department of whatever group published the study. Or rather, not that it's bullshit but that the explanation and headline are gross misrepresentations of what physical interactions are making the image.

Andrew Dice Clay's routine - Banned from cable TV for life

JiggaJonson says...

I never really got this whole thing. I mean I guess I get the swearing part of it, but he's no Lenny Bruce in terms of breaking down barriers. Nor is he as funny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDkoCtMOFOg
"If the word motherfucker stimulates you sexually you're in a lot of trouble"
-Lenny Bruce, decades before often-subtle sexual nursery rhymes

Although, maybe that's it. He wasn't as funny.

Greece's Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis on BBC's Newsnigh

RedSky says...

Nah, I think he's saying that there is a cultural bias towards being overly cautious on inflation. Whereas the kind of fiscal policy size needed to stimulate Greece is in excess of what politics would allow in Germany, who is effectively dictating Greece's debt terms at the moment.

I mean, right now the eurozone as a whole is risking falling into deflation because of this cautiousness, where people spend less in expectation of lower prices, the value of debts rise and you get secular stagnation a la Japan's lost decade.

oritteropo said:

Are you suggesting that it ought to be Germany rather than Greece who leave the EU?

Cat goes crazy for a can of olives

eric3579 says...

Found the video more enjoyable once i read this:

Both green olives (Olea europaea) and Pimentos (Capsicum annuum) contain isoprenoids that are structurally similar to the methylcyclopentane monoterpene nepetalactone, which is responsible for binding to receptors in you cat's vomeronasal organ and consequently the mind-altering effect your cat experiences.
These compounds are not unusual, although thie configuration varies widely between plant species.
These compounds resemble pheromones, and as such some of them function as a natural mock-pheromone pest repellents for the plant, which is likely how such high levels of these constituents within a plants' essential oils evolved.
The vomeronasal organ is what your cat (and most other animals with the exception of humans, although there is a small indented area and partial nerve channel where it would be, left over from our evolution) uses to sense pheromones, and is where the nepetalactone in catnip stimulates pheromone receptors resulting in space-kitty.

TL;DR - it is likely that either the green olives or pimentos have a chemical in their essential oil that is similar enough to the active chemical in catnip to have a similar effect on the same receptors in the part of kitty's nose that are responsible for catnip getting her high.
(from Yahoo Answers via reddit)

russell brand attacks christmas ads

A10anis says...

Bah-Humbug. I suppose he had to find something, at this time of good cheer, to stimulate his vainglorious existence.
Still, could've been worse. He might of shattered the faith of our little ones by saying that Santa doesn't exist, and far from rewarding well behaved children, Santa is simply another marketing tool invented by the EVIL corporations.....
Merry Xmas Russell, you sad individual.

american prison warden visits the norden in norway

newtboy says...

Guards have the power to make it what they wish. Inmates do not. The guards choose to make it gross, dehumanizing, and worse. We should NOT feel sad or understanding for them, as they did it to themselves intentionally. Feel sad for the one's with 0 power to control the situation, less and less control over their own actions and surroundings, and the one's that are the victims of the system they didn't set up, not the one's perpetrating and perpetuating the one sided system set up to punish and control rather than correct and re-habilitate. Not the one's that lobby to create MORE prisoners for smaller and smaller crimes, including the crime of poverty.
BTW....boring is NOT more humane in most cases. Lack of stimulation leads to psychosis, behavior problems, and does absolutely nothing to re-habilitate. "Idle hands are the devil's tools..." and such. Just look at any study of what happens to those in solitary, a normal 'boring' type of imprisonment today. You don't get well adjusted citizens from that, you get angry, violent, paranoid, psychotic people out of that....and they go right back in. It's perfect for the prisons, but not for anyone else. I think private prisons should have to pay back part of their 'fees' if a prisoner re-offends. (EDIT: or better yet, they should have to re-imprison them for free, since they failed the first time and 'created' the re-offender by not re-habilitating them. Guaranteed, it would change overnight if that was the case.) It means they failed completely in re-habilitation, a large part of what they're paid for, and so they should not be paid in full.
'Would rather live out west'?....as opposed to living in prison? Um...yeah, I think most people would choose that.

Lawdeedaw said:

Prison is no utopia for either guard or inmate. It is gross, dehumanizing and worse. If we take that into context, in theory, we should feel sad and understanding for both sides. Guards, like convicts, snap and is it any wonder why?

Also, the jails where I live are quiet, calm, boring. Oh the inmates hate it. It is actually funny to hear how boring it is and that they would rather live out West or somewhere. Like, really? (Boring means more humane btw.)

the man who gets 100 orgasms a day

Jinx says...

It sounds as though it has nothing to do with his sex organs at all. He had a back injury, one assumes that the problem stems from damage to his nervous system. I'd guess castration would lead to a similar scenario to those who suffer from chronic pain in phantom limbs. Likewise there are neurological conditions, such as tinnitus, where the symptoms are caused by essentially an aural hallucination due to a lack of stimuli. So yeah, the problem might not be over-stimulation but rather a lack of it.

Anyway, it sounds horrible. Hope they find a cure or at least a way to alleviate the symptoms.

MilkmanDan said:

Is castration off the table? Would it not help? If not that ... full on gelding?

That sucks dude, but maybe desperate times call for desperate measures.

20 Misconceptions About Sex (mental_floss)

Stu says...

Go talk to women with larger breasts and ones with smaller. Do your own study. Their "sexual sensitivity," as in their stimulation for pleasure is much less. That has been my personal experience. Women with breasts C cup and under like fondling and breast play more.

Lilithia said:

As he said, studies have shown that bigger breasts are less sensitive, but this only makes a difference if you try to feel "hair-like filaments". If you're not trying to feel a single hair on your breasts, it seems to make no difference.

Why Does 1% of History Have 99% of the Wealth?

scheherazade says...

That's true for a post industrial POV.
When machines already exist, and you just need energy to get things moving.

The energetic concerns of bygone eras were :
Whale oil, and later kerosene. For lighting. (note: back then, a day's work would only buy minutes of light)
Firewood, and later coal. For heating.
Manpower was the only energy user when it came to food production.

Early machines such as the combine were horse drawn, and did not need an energy architecture in place. (ignoring "food" as an energy)

Later machines used steam power, and hence could piggy back on the already existing wood/coal energy architecture (in turn stimulating it to grow larger).

Once the machinery industry was established, and the revenue generation was in place, it was possible to invest in improvements and alternative energies - ultimately leading up to oil burning machinery being common.

In any case, historically, industrialization drove the energy industry. (As it should, why have an industry to produce a product (energy) that isn't needed?)
And industrialization depended on a conducive society. A place where an inventor could own his invention, and could sell it, allowing things that were no more than ideas or garage trinkets to transition into products - which in turn place demand on other resources such as [forms of] energy.

In the past, there was nothing, so everything was build from the ground up. Industries grew out of nothing, they weren't established up front.
Modern times are different, where you have investment capital from entities who's entire existence revolves around investing, and you can front the establishment of an industry in the calculated hope of future demand.
(Granted, lords/aristocrats had a hand in industrial investment. Just not the kind or scale that you can see today.)

What you say applies a bit later, when industrialization was already well under way. Like when Thomas Edison used investment capital to fund power plants and an electrical network, in order to power the first [practical, but not 'first'] light bulb in New York.

-scheherazade

criticalthud said:

perhaps, but first things first. Economic policy is secondary to energetic concerns. Innovation is seriously impeded if a society is primarily worried about feeding itself. You don't innovate if u spend ur time digging in the dirt for primary needs. Agrarian societies require energetic resources to become industrial.
Once that is considered, then u can argue economic policies. Until then, it's seriously premature.

Guess why this coffee break is worth sifting?

scheherazade says...

AFAIK you can stimulate lactation by suckling [albeit with a time delay].
I suppose she could be helping a friend/sister/whatever breastfeed.

-scheherazade

Gilsun said:

I dont know... Im calling BS on this. Firstly she doesnt look like a lactating woman, unless she is right at the end of recovering from a pregnancy. Next its all rather perfectly shot, finally.. why?

Sixty Symbols -- What is the maximum Bandwidth?

charliem says...

You are thinking about QAM, Quadrature Amplitude Modulation. Thats an interesting question because QAM essentially produces the same results that the prof talks about in this video. By using interesting ways to change the beat and phase of a single carrier, one can represent a whole array of numbers greater than just a 1 or a zero with a single pulse, case in point.

In QAM, lets just use the easy example of QAM, QPSK (4QAM), where there are 4 possible binary positions for any given 'carrier' signal at a known frequency.

By shifting both phase and amplitude, you can get a 0, 1, 2 or 3, where each position represents a power of 2, up to a total value of 16 unique numbers.

Rather than just a 0 or a 1, you can have 0 through to 15. However doing this requires both a timeslot, and a known carrier window.

The fastest the QAM transmitter can encode onto a carrier is limited by the nyquist rate, that is, less than half the frequency which the receiver can sample at its fastest rate (on the remote end). As you increase the speed of the encoding, you also increase the error rate, and introduce more noise into the base carrier signal, in turn, reducing your effective available bandwidth.

So it then becomes a balancing act, do I want to encode faster, or do I want to increase my constellation density? The obvious answer is the one we went with, increase in constellation density.

There are much more dense variants, I think the highest ive heard of was 1024 QAM, where a single carrier of 8MHz wide could represent 1024 bits (1,050,625 unique values for a given 'pulse' within a carrier).

I actually had a lot more typed out here, but the maths that goes into this gets very ugly, and you have to account for noise products that are introduced as you increase both your transmission speed, and your receiver sensitivty, thus lowering your SNR, reducing your effective bandwidth for a given QAM scheme.

So rather than bore you with the details, the Shannon Hartley theorem is the hard wired physical limitation.

Think of it as an asymptote, that QAM is one method of trying to milk the available space of.

You can send encoded pulses very fast, but you are limited by nyquist, and your receivers ability to determine noise from signal.

The faster you encode, the more noise, the less effective bandwidth....and so begins the ritule of increasing constellation density, and receivers that can decode them....etc....

There is also the aspect of having carriers too close to one another that you must consider. If you do not have enough of a dead band between your receivers cut off for top end, and the NEXT carrier alongs cutoff for deadband at its LOW end, you can induce what is known as a heterodyne. These are nasty, especially so when talking about fibre, as the wavelengths used can cause a WIDE BAND noise product that results in your effective RF noise floor to jump SUBSTANTIALLY, destroying your entire network in the process.

So not only can you not have a contiguous RF bandwidth of carriers, one directly after another...if you try and get them close, you end up ruining everyones day.

I am sure there will be newer more fancy ways to fill that spectrum with useable numbers, but I seriously doubt they will ever go faster than the limit I proposed earlier (unless they can get better SNR, again that was just a stab in the dark).

It gives you a good idea of how it works though.

If you want to read more on this, I suggest checking wikipedia for the following;

Shannon Hartley theorem.
Nyquist Rate
Quadrature Phase Shift Key
Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
Fibre Optic Communication Wavelengths
Stimulated Brillouin Scattering
Ebrium Doped Fibre Amplifiers

Absurd Method To Stabilize a Downed Fighter

Chairman_woo says...

I suppose there is a twisted logic to what they are doing.

That region of the body is assumed to have one of the highest concentrations of nerve endings and so stimulating might be more likely to elicit a response than other parts of the body.

That said the soles of the feet and solar plexus (which one guy is massaging also) would be waaaay better candidates & even if you are going to stimulate the groin the "gooch" is a much better place to start as that's where the nerve centre is. (top tip, if your trying to disable someone aim for the "gooch" rather than the balls, it's more likely to overload the nervous system and stun them!!!)


All of that said, pretty sure it's all largely ineffectual for someone that's been KO'd like that. Points for trying though!



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