tea-coffee

Imagine if Richard Feynman used his IQ as a metric for deciding whether he should become a physicist. Physics would not be the same.

I am certain that there are mathematicians below, near, and above an IQ of 145 that all have great research productivity. IQ tests do not approximate the creativity, effort, and collaboration required in a mathematician. Not to mention the dubious nature of the 145 claim.

Of course, there are some people that will have a greater aptitude for mathematics than others. But you do not need to be a genius, and this is echoed by Terence Tao [0].

[0] https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/does-one-have-t...

Not sure if it is mentioned in the app description, but how is heart rate calculated? Using the Apple Watch?

This approach would be interesting to use in league football (La Liga, Premier League, etc) as there is a lot more data available across different seasons.

Which data did you use? Since the leagues were from the Quarterfinals and onwards, was it data from the group stages, euro qualifiers? Averaging the last 5 games would introduce a lot of variance, especially in tournament football.

I think I remember reading somewhere that electric planes would have a much lower energy density than liquid fuel, making its utility minimal. How does hydrogen-powered flight compare regarding energy density?

Any physicists in here that could layout a path of going from rudimentary first year level physics knowledge to being able to understand on a deeper level topics such as gravitational waves?

These articles are interesting but are very abstract when you do not have knowledge from first principles.

This is a basic question, but how is the accuracy of the predicted biomolecular interactions measured? Are the predicted interactions compared to known interactions? How would the accuracy of predicting unknown interactions be assessed?

From the Methods section of the paper (under "study design"): "We also included meta-analyses that pooled data from primary prospective/retrospective cohort or case-control studies. These studies were the focus because of their ability to assess causality for observational research".

While "causality" is a strong word in the sentence above, the data is much stronger than simple correlation. Of course, outright causality has not been established, but the evidence to determine a predictive association is strong.

What makes this book different from R for Data Science by Hadley Wickham, Mine Çetinkaya-Rundel, & Garrett Grolemund?

Very true about consuming more stories. As Stephen King famously said, "If you want to be a writer, you must do two things above all others: read a lot and write a lot."

Yeah, I've heard other authors using ChatGPT in a similar way. Could definitely be helpful.

Do you have advice on generating ideas? Been interested in writing fiction, but can't seem to fully immerse myself into a fictional world.

It depends on what you mean specifically by "worth your time"? What "value" (in the sense that you're using) are you trying to get from the book? If you are reading to solve a specific problem, then a book being worth your time would depend on its ability to help explain the problem or approximate ways towards a solution. However, if you are reading non-fiction for other reasons, such as leisure, then the value-approach becomes more complicated.

"The winners will have to prove by 2030 that their intervention can turn back the clock in older adults by at least a decade in three key areas: cognition, immunity, and muscle function."

"To win the competition, teams have to develop a “proactive, accessible therapeutic” that improves muscle, cognition, and immune function by an amount equivalent to a 10- to 20-year reduction in age in healthy people aged 65 to 80."

It's nice to have optimism, but the fact that the therapeutic has to be "proven" in healthy humans (not animal models) by 2030, makes this impossible.

The author just recently published a nice piece in the New Yorker [1].

1 = https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/11/20/a-coder-consid...

It's an interesting idea, but I'm not aware of a tool that can allow you to organize papers in such a way. There might be, not sure. Also, if I understood you correctly, the tool would work in a way that would enable you to visualize the historical narrative leading to the latest paper. What would be really interesting, if not only could you manually organize papers in such a way, but have the software automate this process to delineate the most relevant papers.

What's the profitability of part-time tournament versus part-time cash games?

I believe CPI is unchanged in October. I did not take a close look at the CPI numbers, but I believe the steady index is in part due to energy falling. But rents and food are increased. Not an economist, so I'm not sure how much to read into that.

While science does indeed lay out the "available objective evidence", it is highly unlikely that a layman would understand them.

Sports are played for entertainment, that doesn't mean that there isn't a huge business around it.

"Worthy" is a relative word. For historians, translating these tablets is incredibly worthy however mundane it is to the layperson.

I understand. I meant "bit different" in the nuanced context of this study. As the authors note in their introduction of the paper [1]: "Regrettably, these studies used ascorbic acid, a compound associated with the induction of metabolic acidosis and acidemia [15]. This makes it uncertain whether the unclear effects in human sepsis were due to the administration of a suboptimal preparation of the study medication. In contrast, sodium ascorbate (NaAscorbate) has a physiological pH, does not contribute to acidosis, can be given at a much greater dose, and may carry a different efficacy profile."

1 = https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-02...

Would they need to have 2 placebo arms to make this an optimal study design then? One for glucose (as sodium ascorbate was diluted using a glucose solution), and another placebo group for sodium chloride?

This is using sodium ascorbate, bit different from vitamin C (ascorbic acid).

Of course it is not a revolution. In modern medicine, there are hardly ever revolutions, more so incremental progress.

This looks to be the 2nd edition. Can anyone comment on how the 1st edition was?

Really skeptical of the potential EMG and EEG capabilities, feel like they would just be noise-filled approximations, but the other potential features of monitoring body temperature and hearing seem worthwhile.

The paper that this article is referring to looks interesting, they performed single neuron recordings in neurosurgical patients. But I am wondering if these findings scale to people with large working memory capacities.