This week in Science...

[Chizzang]

So, you have a theorized form of matter that doesn't transmit any heat or momentum to regular matter and doesn't reflect or absorb or emit anything on the electromagnetic spectrum. It only has mass in the sense of gravity, and this matter is said to exist because the movement of galaxies suggests more mass than is actually present…

So how exactly do you verify or falsify the existence of this matter? I thought falsifiability was such a vitally important thing for any scientific theory to have?

Its crazy talk man... absolutely crazy
But in the meantime it will suffice as a placeholder like all steps in the method
While behavior is observed but still not understood the occams razor
The most logical assessment acts as the placeholder

That's all... no secret conspiracy - its all up for consumption and logical debate

Logical Debate
now there's a phrase you don't see in Christianity very often

[JohnStOnge]

Yes and nobody has ever observed an Electron either John
and if they didn't exist we would have to fundamentally change our model of electricity

I think that's a good point in the sense that we do have to remember that nobody has actually directly observed an electron. However, I think we're fine with respect to our practical models of electricity in that we can do controlled experiments in which we predict how electricity is going to behave then have it behave as predicted.

[SeattleGriz]

So, you have a theorized form of matter that doesn't transmit any heat or momentum to regular matter and doesn't reflect or absorb or emit anything on the electromagnetic spectrum. It only has mass in the sense of gravity, and this matter is said to exist because the movement of galaxies suggests more mass than is actually present…

So how exactly do you verify or falsify the existence of this matter? I thought falsifiability was such a vitally important thing for any scientific theory to have?

Its crazy talk man... absolutely crazy
But in the meantime it will suffice as a placeholder like all steps in the method
While behavior is observed but still not understood the occams razor
The most logical assessment acts as the placeholder

That's all... no secret conspiracy - its all up for consumption and logical debate

Logical Debate
now there's a phrase you don't see in Christianity very often

Did you drop something?

[houndawg]

OK, Chizz...time for you to catch up on real science...but it isn't scientists that are creating brave rats.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/mindsuckers/rat.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2014/ ... immer-text" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Fascinating stuff...and this, "zombie mind control" type of study has been done for a while, not just recently. But science is more definitively identifying proof of how animals/insects are being controlled...down to the genetic level, by parasites.

It appears that many types of animals are controlled by parasites. Scientists have isolated certain genes that control behavior...and have identified parasites that take control of a hosts body by manipulating the hosts brains/behavior. Some crickets are controlled by a parasite that forces them to commit suicide by jumping into water...the only place the parasites can continue their life cycle.

Rats get, "brave" and curious about the scent of cat urine...and guess where the only place the rat's parasite can develop is? Answer: inside a cat's belly ).

Some people are prone to drink too much alcohol...others too many sweets...even though they know it is bad for them.

Why do humans give in to their cravings?

Humans carry around a lot of non-human things inside of us. Bacteria outnumber human cells 10-1. I'm willing to bet (and I am certainly not the first to propose this, but I think the people that have are correct) that science will find that we have, "mind suckers" inside of us that direct us to feed their cravings.

Amazing stuff.

Of course we already know that certain drugs can change people's behavior. As we get better at this stuff, one has to wonder who long it will be (or if it already has been) before bad people use this info/actual stuff for their not-so-benevolent purposes (cue expandos).

...must vote for tea party...must vote for tea party...

[∞∞∞]

Just to put it out here, but we actually have pictures of electrons now. Science!!!

[Pwns]

Demonstration of the McGurk effect…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0#t=93" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chizzang]

Just to put it out here, but we actually have pictures of electrons now. Science!!!

I've seen the Monte Carlo simulated electron images...
but those are not electrons

please show me the images of an electron

[Pwns]

http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of ... st-1.18248" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Psychology's replication problem.

If you are applying for a job and your employer gives you a personality test thinking it works because "psychologists study this stuff" then try and suppress your laughter.

[JohnStOnge]

http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of ... st-1.18248

Psychology's replication problem.

If you are applying for a job and your employer gives you a personality test thinking it works because "psychologists study this stuff" then try and suppress your laughter.

That is a damned good article. A lot of truth in it and if you read it you can see that it goes beyond the field of psychology. It gets into the realm related to my opinion that people put WAY to much stock in the idea of publication in peer review journals. They think it's a serious quality control process and it's not.

The idea that you should automatically think something is true because it was published in a peer review journal and think something is not true because it was not is fallacy. And the fact that people don't realize that is a problem. At least I think so.