HOW TO STAY YOUNG:
Starve-destroy-recycle-eat-build-eat-build-starve...
The human ecosystem (our internal environment) has the same processes as the environmental ecosystem. Destruction & Reconstruction is a universal process. This is how we stay young.
https://t.co/MW7oFn6bgm
1 The brain ‘improves’ in response to hunger;
2 The body preserves itself in response to deprivation.
Seen as an evolutionary survival mechanism the fasting rationale becomes clear.
https://t.co/DTKkLkLGMc
More from Science
Recently I learned something about DNA that blew my mind, and in this thread, I'll attempt to blow your mind as well. Behold: Chargaff's 2nd Parity Rule for DNA N-Grams.
If you are into cryptography or reverse engineering, you should love this.
Thread:
DNA consists of four different 'bases', A, C, G and T. These bases have specific meaning within our biology. Specifically, within the 'coding part' of a gene, a triplet of bases encodes for an amino acid
Most DNA is stored redundantly, in two connected strands. Wherever there is an A on one strand, you'll find a T on the other one. And similarly for C and G:
T G T C A G T
A C A G T C A
(note how the other strand is upside down - this matters!)
If you take all the DNA of an organism (both strands), you will find equal numbers of A's and T's, as well as equal numbers of C's and G's. This is true by definition.
This is called Chargaff's 1st parity rule.
https://t.co/jD4cMt0PJ0
Strangely enough, this rule also holds per strand! So even if you take away the redundancy, there are 99% equal numbers of A/T and C/G * on each strand *. And we don't really know why.
This is called Chargaff's 2nd parity rule.
If you are into cryptography or reverse engineering, you should love this.
Thread:
DNA consists of four different 'bases', A, C, G and T. These bases have specific meaning within our biology. Specifically, within the 'coding part' of a gene, a triplet of bases encodes for an amino acid
Most DNA is stored redundantly, in two connected strands. Wherever there is an A on one strand, you'll find a T on the other one. And similarly for C and G:
T G T C A G T
A C A G T C A
(note how the other strand is upside down - this matters!)
If you take all the DNA of an organism (both strands), you will find equal numbers of A's and T's, as well as equal numbers of C's and G's. This is true by definition.
This is called Chargaff's 1st parity rule.
https://t.co/jD4cMt0PJ0
Strangely enough, this rule also holds per strand! So even if you take away the redundancy, there are 99% equal numbers of A/T and C/G * on each strand *. And we don't really know why.
This is called Chargaff's 2nd parity rule.
1/ Automobiles and Intake Fraction. Since cars are back in the news I thought I would retweet this model result I offered in early April 2020. I focused only on 1 micron particles & accounted for windows completely closed & cracked slightly open.
2/ Related air exchange rates were based on experimental results in literature for mid-sized sedans. Particle deposition to indoor surfaces were accounted for, as the surface to volume ratio in a 3 m3 cab is large. An important outcome was the intake fraction (IF)
3/ Here, IF is the number of particles (or virions in collective particles) inhaled by a receptor DIVIDED BY the number or particles (or virions in collective particles) emitted by an infector.
4/ Integrated over the two hour drive (in this example) the IF for all windows closed & a receptor at rest is 0.08 (8% of what comes out of the infectors respiratory system ends up in the respiratory system of the receptor). 8%! That is a very high intake factor.
5/ With additional ventilation from cracking a window open drops the IF to 0.012 (1.2%) still relatively high. Can get lower by opening more windows.
Simulation: Riding in car for 120 min w/ infected passenger who seems fine other than a cough every few mins. (1) a lot of SARS-CoV-2 virus (in fine aerosol particles) accumulation in car cabin w/ windows closed; (2) cracking window open slightly = dramatic reduction. #COVID19 pic.twitter.com/bCmrmnLUPG
— Dr. Richard Corsi (@CorsIAQ) April 4, 2020
2/ Related air exchange rates were based on experimental results in literature for mid-sized sedans. Particle deposition to indoor surfaces were accounted for, as the surface to volume ratio in a 3 m3 cab is large. An important outcome was the intake fraction (IF)
3/ Here, IF is the number of particles (or virions in collective particles) inhaled by a receptor DIVIDED BY the number or particles (or virions in collective particles) emitted by an infector.
4/ Integrated over the two hour drive (in this example) the IF for all windows closed & a receptor at rest is 0.08 (8% of what comes out of the infectors respiratory system ends up in the respiratory system of the receptor). 8%! That is a very high intake factor.
5/ With additional ventilation from cracking a window open drops the IF to 0.012 (1.2%) still relatively high. Can get lower by opening more windows.
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
