How much do you know about science topics?

[nwdiver]

It was not that difficult, and I’m a biologist.

[SeanPatrick]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Consider asking them this:
"What term do we give for 9 with respect to the average of numbers 1, 14, and 15?"

Insist on a single-word answer...

Close?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Singularity

The reason that 9 is important in the given problem is precisely because it neutralizes probability.
...

Another load of psychobabble.


(From your comments, I'm guessing you have a worthless PhD in some esoteric soft discipline)



Still waiting for a sensible answer.

[Bullshooter]

Well I am a retired biologist and I missed one, according to them. However, I believe my answer to the antacid question was correct. I definitely know that a base works to counteract acid, but you would normally not want to add a base to acid to neutralize it, as rapid swings in pH would eventually occur. (You would not want a very basic pH in the stomach either).

I figured that an antacid tablet would more likely have a buffer in it, which tend to bring pH from extremes towards a neutral 7.0. Sure enough, I looked up ingredients of antacid tablets, and they tend to be salts, i.e. buffers. More neutral than strong base. Admittedly they have pH higher than 7 though, so could be considered a weak base.

"Antacids are a combination of various compounds with various salts of calcium, magnesium, and aluminum as the active ingredients."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK526049/

Go ahead and call me a sore loser, but I actually knew all of this and I said neutral, although I suspected the quiz makers might say that base was correct.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Bullshooter

Well I am a retired biologist and I missed one, according to them. However, I believe my answer to the antacid question was correct. I definitely know that a base works to counteract acid, but you would normally not want to add a base to acid to neutralize it, as rapid swings in pH would eventually occur. (You would not want a very basic pH in the stomach either).

I figured that an antacid tablet would more likely have a buffer in it, which tend to bring pH from extremes towards a neutral 7.0. Sure enough, I looked up ingredients of antacid tablets, and they tend to be salts, i.e. buffers. More neutral than strong base. Admittedly they have pH higher than 7 though, so could be considered a weak base.

"Antacids are a combination of various compounds with various salts of calcium, magnesium, and aluminum as the active ingredients."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK526049/

Go ahead and call me a sore loser, but I actually knew all of this and I said neutral, although I suspected the quiz makers might say that base was correct.

You're nailed it...an appropriate salt for this application will only dissociate...showing it's base properties...once in solution. And an appropriate salt for this application will only go into solution enough so as to soak up surplus protons...and not to excess so as to result in a non-physiologic basic pH.

But overall the quiz was itself a litmus test, such that they weren't looking for the finer details.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Singularity:
Consider asking them this:
"What term do we give for 9 with respect to the average of numbers 1, 14, and 15?"

Insist on a single-word answer...


Inconsequential

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by StuM

Another load of psychobabble.

(From your comments, I'm guessing you have a worthless PhD in some esoteric soft discipline)

Still waiting for a sensible answer.

From your comment, I'm guessing that you're either petulant, or you are suffering from the problem that some guy got a Nobel for in 2002. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

When you engage in intense System 2 thinking, Kahneman says, something happens to your body. Your pupils dilate. Your heart rate increases. Your blood glucose level drops. You become irritable if someone or something interrupts your focus. You become partially deaf and partially blind to stimuli that ordinarily command your attention. Kahneman writes that “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind."

https://www.businessinsider.com/nobel-prize-winner-this-is-the-difference-between-thinking-fast-and-slow-2012-6

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Singularity

From your comment, I'm guessing that you're either petulant, or you are suffering from the problem that some guy got a Nobel for in 2002. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

When you engage in intense System 2 thinking, Kahneman says, something happens to your body. Your pupils dilate. Your heart rate increases. Your blood glucose level drops. You become irritable if someone or something interrupts your focus. You become partially deaf and partially blind to stimuli that ordinarily command your attention. Kahneman writes that “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind."

https://www.businessinsider.com/nobel-prize-winner-this-is-the-difference-between-thinking-fast-and-slow-2012-6

Still waiting for a sensible answer

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Singularity

From your comment, I'm guessing that you're either petulant, or you are suffering from the problem that some guy got a Nobel for in 2002. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

When you engage in intense System 2 thinking, Kahneman says, something happens to your body. Your pupils dilate. Your heart rate increases. Your blood glucose level drops. You become irritable if someone or something interrupts your focus. You become partially deaf and partially blind to stimuli that ordinarily command your attention. Kahneman writes that “intense focusing on a task can make people effectively blind."

https://www.businessinsider.com/nobel-prize-winner-this-is-the-difference-between-thinking-fast-and-slow-2012-6

More pyschobabble from a "behavioural economist"?



Calling "The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" "a Nobel" is a stretch.



"The interest is to be divided into five equal parts and distributed as follows: one part to the person who made the most important discovery or invention in the field of physics; one part to the person who made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who, in the field of literature, produced the most outstanding work in an idealistic direction; and one part to the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses. The prizes for physics and chemistry are to be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical achievements by the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm; and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be selected by the Norwegian Storting."

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by StuM

More pyschobabble from a "behavioural economist"?

Calling "The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" "a Nobel" is a stretch.

"The interest is to be divided into five equal parts and distributed as follows: one part to the person who made the most important discovery or invention in the field of physics; one part to the person who made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who, in the field of literature, produced the most outstanding work in an idealistic direction; and one part to the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses. The prizes for physics and chemistry are to be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical achievements by the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm; and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be selected by the Norwegian Storting."

So you think you know a thing or two about physics?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Singularity

So you think you know a thing or two about physics?

still waiting for a sensible answer


Just as a reminder:

"What term do we give for 9 with respect to the average of numbers 1, 14, and 15?"
Insist on a single-word answer...

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by StuM

still waiting for a sensible answer


Just as a reminder:

"What term do we give for 9 with respect to the average of numbers 1, 14, and 15?"
Insist on a single-word answer...

1, 9, 10, 14, 15 <what the heck does 9 have to do with this number set?

This problem exploits a brain wiring problem of people who think linearly. If this sounds like "psychobabble" now, I can understand. But when the answer is clear, really clear, it ought to be apparent why someone should get a Nobel for pointing this out. But...upon further investigation...one can find that at least in Western civilization Heraclitus pointed out this problem around ~2,500BC. He's the guy who came up with the idea of "logic" (logos) supposedly in the first place. I wouldn't call a fundamental logic problem (owing to Aristotle) that defines most of the conflict in Western civilization's thought "psychobabble."

It also explains why smart people who know all the answers to a test don't get 100 on tests.

Painting is of Heraclitus...as if he was praying back then that someone would understand him...but the "flux" works out mathematically in the Fourier transform, uncertainty principle....so called "wave collapse" aspect of consciousness. Not psychobabble...fascinating I'd say.

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by StuM

still waiting for a sensible answer


Just as a reminder:

"What term do we give for 9 with respect to the average of numbers 1, 14, and 15?"
Insist on a single-word answer...

precedent?

Heck I am just glad I got 'em all, I guess they'll let me keep my job as a science teacher

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Singularity

1, 9, 10, 14, 15 <what the heck does 9 have to do with this number set?

...but the "flux" works out mathematically in the Fourier transform, uncertainty principle....so called "wave collapse" aspect of consciousness. Not psychobabble...fascinating I'd say.

Why have you completely changed the framing of the original question?
"What term do we give for 9 with respect to the average of numbers 1, 14, and 15?"
Presumably your addition of "10" is meant to refer to "the average"?
But neither 9 nor 10 are part of the original "number set".

To answer your new question:
9 is the second member of that number set.

Apart from that, just more psychobabble, this time with an addition of a semantically null string of scientific terms.
STILL waiting for a sensible answer to your original question, but I'm starting to suspect that you don't have one.

[Wotname]

I dunno about the psychobabble one way or the other but it's pretty clear that Sing hasn't come even close to a giving us one word answer so far. In fact, the posts have been very wordy...

Perhaps it's time to put up or shut up i.e. post a one word answer or move on (IMHO); heck it was Sing's idea to have the answer short, very short coupled with a suggestion that a wordy answer suggested lower intelligence or some such.