I really like RING - really interesting new gene.
I really like RING - really interesting new gene.
And his wife’s was Smith. They combined their names when they married.
It should be said that this is from Science Abridged Beyond the Point of Usefulness by Zach Wienersmith.
They are the same, just divided to 10 differently.
I very quickly checked wikipedia, because I couldn’t easily identify the extra one. It lists all 16 of the 10 commandments… The table looks like different branches of christianity bundle some of them together (mostly various coveting) or don’t even consider the first and last a commandment, so they always only count to ten. So it’s an easy mistake to make.
But the fact that they couldn’t even count the paragraphs is riddiculous.
If you want to be able to write practically anything on mobile, including ≠, ≈, ‰, ℝ etc., have a look at Unexpected keyboard. No spellcheck or autocomplete, though.
Photons have zero rest mass, right? They have mass while moving, don’t they?
Cosmology and astrophysics are considered classical? I would expect both quantum physics and relativity to play a major role nowadays.
deleted by creator
For plants, PlantNet works very well for me.
I didn’t read the original paper yet, perhaps it’s there, but it isn’t in the linked article nor its source Ars Technica article. Can authors themselves upload their papers to these archives, and if so, how to do it correctly to make it findable both by DOI and other means? Does anyone know?
“Rimmerworld” episode of Red Dwarf is a lot like that.
We see the same side all the time.
Not completely same all the time:
For partial eclipses, very cool is watching the light underneath trees. The small holes between leaves work a bit like camera obscura, so they effectively project crescents of the sun on the ground.
That sounds very interesting. The time I saw total eclipse, at 99 % I was to excited about totality and it was cloudy. But I think I remember seeing the shadow rushing over the landscape.
What percentage was the eclipse? It probably got dim, but human eyes are very good at filtering out wide range of intensity changes to handle both full sun and cloudy sky. You really only notice an eclipse maybe at 80-90 %. But it isn’t that special even at 99 %. On the other hand, total eclipse is absolutely incredible.
Wow, thank you, this is a great source! So less than 90% of the income is used to run the companies and do all the R&D. Honestly, that’s less than I thought and shows how greedy they are. If I read it right, they are more profitable than other large companies. Wow. So a state-owned non-profit pharma company could in theory produce new medicine 10 % cheaper and still be fine. Provided that state-owned company could be as efficient as a private one…
You don’t need profit in the sense of making lots of extra money compared to how much money you actually put in. I would be very interested in how much net profit is compared to gross in relative numbers. It’s a lot in absolute numbers, but I suspect not so much in relative. The problem why drug development is so very expensive is that you don’t just pay large sums for the drugs that are developed, but also for all those that are not, because they prove not useful during the testing. And there is way, way more than the successful ones, perhaps 100 to 1? I don’t have numers at hand. So in the end, you have to charge a lot of extra money above the production cost if you want to have enough money to develop any drugs at all.
Of course, that isn’t true for old drugs. Which is a reason why generics are so much cheaper. And also why patents need to exist.
I’m sure pharma companies abuse the system as much as they can, but not as much as it might appear at a first glance.
There are also wimps. They might be dark matter.