Recent submissions

Comment · 2 years ago
yea, maybe. Just checked after posted the post. How many scammers are there on HN and YC Startup School?
Comment · 2 years ago
I will be selling my property anyway, during the next 2 years, or so. So thus I can return the loan anyways.
Comment · 2 years ago
My bank in LT requires proof of income, and my income is lower than minimum, because I am a student of CS so far only. And i do not need 6 month or more to return it, I may return in a month.
Comment · 2 years ago
He could have tried injecting senolytics into the weared disks to remove senescent inflammatory phenotypes, as there is some research in senolytics (dasatinib+quercetin) improving arthritic knee joints by removal of senescent inflammatory cells which allows the new cartilage to grow.
Comment · 2 years ago
Reduced skeletal muscle tone during sleep is pretty much established. If you find out, that there remains some increased muscle tone which correlates with insomnia or reduces the efficiency of PTAS, you could target it. Though you're already targeting it indirectly via delta waves.
Comment · 2 years ago
That's ok. There just seem to be no explicit mentioning of that, that individual differences in real-time will be taken into account, just some textbook style description. Have you considered regulating skeletal muscle tone?
Comment · 2 years ago
There is no information on what do they actually measure in every individual. Without some real-time feedback it seems somewhat not enough basis to deliver the treatment to the intended target. (But if they're hiring...)

P.S. The website design is also imho a bit wacky.

Comment · 2 years ago
If 40 times a second is 40 Hz, than this frequency is pretty high for a deep sleep (in humans), 40Hz would mean some intense pattern recognition/focused attention.
Comment · 2 years ago
In parallel with Darwin also try more recent advancements,like Don Hoffman's "The case against reality", where they prove that the probability that evolution will equip an organism to see the true reality is Zero.
Comment · 2 years ago
Comment · 2 years ago
>>how is the intracellular space denser than the extracellular?

Gemini: ``` Yes, the intracellular space is denser than the extracellular space:

Here's why:

    Packing: Cells are packed with molecules like proteins, carbohydrates, and nucleic acids. These molecules take up a significant amount of space within the cell, leaving little room for just water.
    Solutes: The intracellular space contains a higher concentration of dissolved molecules (solutes) compared to the extracellular space. This contributes to a higher density.
    Extracellular Matrix: The extracellular space, on the other hand, contains a looser network of connective tissues and fluids like interstitial fluid. This allows for more space between molecules, resulting in a lower density.
```

>>Still, trying to really figure out what the 'intention' was all those billions of years ago is hard

With this logic you'll need another billion of years to randomly figure it out. I'd rather focus on how/efficiently does such position contribute to a specific current experimental methodology or results.

Comment · 2 years ago
All the empirical examples you mentioned pertain to the extracellullar space. So is this stochastic modelling also true in the intracellular space, which is like 100x times denser structurally, biochemically and bioelectrically (given that all biochemistry is effectively a type of electrical process involving very refined transfer/manipulations of charge densities), and allows to explain how do hundreds or thousands of biochemical reaction inside cells happen as required without interfering with each other?

Evolution also "tries" to save energy anywhere possible, so spending energy on the synthesis of endogenous ligands, which eventually will be discarded, seems a bit redundant. There is also a theorem in evolutionary game theory, that probability that natural selection will allow an organism to see reality as it is (=the truth) is exactly zero, as it's enough to make it just "good enough". I was arguing about that with Gemini, and it agreed with me. My point is that "evolution" is just a tool (like ChatGPT) with it's own instrumentally limited pool of empirical data (80% of which was also obtained from macroscopic enough observations rather than reverse engineering or experimentation) to build upon.

I actually want to apply one EE concept, which has some experimental basis. The reason why I am digging this, is that I am searching for some possible explanations of a couple of dozens of experimental studies in bioelectrics/magnetics I found. (though won't discuss in depth on a public forum)

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton