Group items tagged

Do we acquire it throu

These theories, however, were developed in a time when learning was not impacted through technology.

In many fields the life of knowledge is now measured in months and years.

However, whether consciously or subconsciously, the danger is that these data may sometimes be interpreted in a certain, more favourable, light. With private funding of basic research on the increase, potential conflicts of interest are becoming more With private funding of basic research on the increase, potential conflicts of interest are becoming more frequent frequent and scientists may have more than their reputations at stake when making their results public

Jump to: navigation, search Robert Hooke Portrait of Hooke, 2004. Born 18 July 1635Freshwater, Isle of Wight, England Died 3 March 1703 (aged 67)London, England Fields Physics and chemistry Institutions Oxford University Alma mater Christ Church, Oxford Academic advisors Robert Boyle Known for Hooke's LawMicroscopyapplied the word 'cell' Influences Richard Busby Contents [hide] 1 Life and works 1.1 Early life 1.2 Oxford 1.3 The Watch Balance Spring 1.4 Royal Society 2 Personality and disputes 3 Hooke the scientist 3.1 Mechanics 3.2 Gravitation 3.3 Microscopy 3.4 Astronomy 4 Hooke the architect 5 Likenesses 6 Commemorations 7 See also 8 References 9 Further reading 10 External links //

Hooke is known for his law of elasticity (Hooke's law), his book, Micrographia, and for first applying the word "cell" to describe the basic unit of life

Micrographia

See It Now focused on a number of controversial issues in the 1950s, but it is best-remembered as the show that criticized McCarthyism and the Red Scare, contributing if not leading to the political downfall of Senator Joseph McCarthy. On March 9, 1954, Murrow, Friendly, and their news team produced a half-hour See It Now special entitled "A Report on Senator Joseph McCarthy".[9] Murrow used excerpts from McCarthy's own speeches and proclamations to criticize the senator and point out episodes where he had contradicted himself. Murrow knew full well that he was using the medium of television to attack a single man and expose him to nationwide scrutiny, and he was often quoted as having doubts about the methods he used for the report. Murrow and Friendly paid for their own newspaper advertisement for the program; they were not allowed to use CBS' money for the publicity campaign or even use the CBS logo. Nevertheless, the broadcast contributed to a nationwide backlash against McCarthy and is seen as a turning point in the history of television. It provoked tens of thousands of letters, telegrams and phone calls to CBS headquarters, running 15 to 1 in favor. In a retrospective produced for Biography, Friendly noted how truck drivers pulled up to Murrow on the street in subsequent days and shouted "Good show, Ed. Good show, Ed." Murrow offered McCarthy a chance to appear on See It Now to respond to the criticism. McCarthy accepted the invitation and made his appearance three weeks later,[10] but his rebuttal only served to further decrease his already fading popularity.[11] In the program following McCarthy's appearance, Murrow commented that the senator had "made no reference to any statements of fact that we made" and contested the personal attacks made by "the junior senator from Wisconsin" against himself.[12]

Imagine if prices declined the further you went down the Tail, with popularity (the market) effectively dictating pricing. All it would take is for the labels to lower the wholesale price for the vast majority of their content not in heavy rotation; even a two- or three-tiered pricing structure could work wonders. And because so much of that content is not available in record stores, the risk of channel conflict is greatly diminished. The lesson: Pull consumers down the tail with lower prices.

And what this means is that if you look at a pedigree like this, and for example, here we have a mother and a father, girls are always round, boys are square. And here you'll see the mitochondrial DNA, it's donated to all of the children, but the fact is that these boys, when they mate, when they have offspring, they will no longer pass along her mitochondrial DNA, so it will be lost. And the only way the mitochondrial DNA can be transmitted is through one of her daughters, who in turn, have daughters.

Here's some other interesting principles. Mitochondrial DNA passes always from the mother, so when a fertilized egg is formed, Dad gives his chromosomes, but he doesn't donate for any, doesn't donate any mitochondrial DNA.

animals are related to one another. This is kind of a fun undertaking. Look at this. Why is it fun? Well it's, it's kind of an amusing idea, how often were cows domesticated during the history of humanity? How often were sheep domesticated? Pigs, water buffalos, and horses. And what you see here is that cattle were domesticated on two occasions, probably once in Western Asia, the middle east, and once in Eastern Asia. Sheep were domesticated twice, all modern sheep following these two families here

This is in many ways a wonderful thing. There is strength in weak ties, as the sociologist Mark Granovetter has observed. Our acquaintances—not our friends—are our greatest source of new ideas and information. The Internet lets us exploit the power of these kinds of distant connections with marvellous efficiency. It’s terrific at the diffusion of innovation, interdisciplinary collaboration, seamlessly matching up buyers and sellers, and the logistical functions of the dating world. But weak ties seldom lead to high-risk activism.

The evangelists of social media don’t understand this distinction; they seem to believe that a Facebook friend is the same as a real friend and that signing up for a donor registry in Silicon Valley today is activism in the same sense as sitting at a segregated lunch counter in Greensboro in 1960.