Today, a year-old roadway. The University of Houston’s College of Engineering presents this series about the machines that make our civilization run, and the people whose ingenuity created them. W e say so much about Roman roads; we tend to forget there was ever anything before them. So let’s check out a strange road, far older. It’s in southwest England, between Exeter and Bristol, and was built four millennia before the Romans occupied that region. It came to light in Raymond Sweet was cleaning drainage ditches in a peat bog when he struck a wooden plank deep in the peat. The wrong thing in the wrong place! So he took it to John Coles at Cambridge University.
Long hours and many glasses of wine were consumed trying to develop the perfect strategy to court this new woman, and this most saccharine of holidays was proving to be an obstacle. Should I be assertive and make plans with her for the night? Should I assume the contrary? Would presents be involved?
A Good Life for All – by Federica Fragapane for Scientific American on Behance. Find this Pin and more on Pets In Need by Sarah Campbell. Tags. Dating Tips.
Every publication makes mistakes. Great publications learn from those mistakes, and the best publications also learn from the mistakes of others. So imagine my surprise at seeing two legendary publications make compounding mistakes by taking serious missteps with their communities. I’m talking about Popular Science and Scientific American , two of the oldest and most revered publications for the popularization and support of the scientific enterprise.
Both publications will easily survive these missteps, but they are leaders in the field, and those who follow their recent moves will be led astray. The network’s bloggers are paid to write for SciAm , and until this weekend, most of them thought they understood the rules of the quasi-independent relationship they had with the publisher: share their love of science, make a little money, and be part of a real community.
Danielle Lee, and so far the publication has failed to explain its actions in any believable way. For those of you not familiar with the blog network, it features routine science content as well as posts about being a scientist generally including a celebration of things that scientists geek out over, etc. An editor from Biology-Online liked Dr.
Lee’s work so much that he asked if she would contribute to BO as well.
A Scientific Dating Insight: Create Uncertainty
In case you didn’t already know this, your brain on love is crazy. If seeing the one you love makes your heart skip a beat, should you see a cardiologist? The popular idea that women should try to conform or be submissive around men is outdated. The same technological advances that shrank telephones miniaturized heart monitors, with far-reaching implications for heart health.
People all over the world rank creativity as a highly desirable quality in a partner, and people who are creative across a variety of fields report more sexual partners similar results have been found in specific fields such as visual art, music, and humor
Scientific American is the essential guide to the most awe-inspiring Experts explain how radiometric dating allows them to reconstruct ancient.
Anxiety disorders are the most common psychological disorder in the US, affecting 18 percent of the adult population. Social anxiety disorder SAD is the third-most-common psychological disorder, affecting 15 million men and women in the US. In this way, dating only adds fuel to the anxiety fire. Rife with opportunities for awkward conversations and infinite unknown factors — Will she show up? Will he like me? What do I say? What if I say too much?
What if I spill my drink? Get rejected? This type of anxiety and shyness leads to avoidance of meeting new people , as well as a sense of isolation and hopelessness about the prospect of finding a suitable partner.
Long-Awaited Update Arrives for Radiocarbon Dating
Edited by Scientific American. You may purchase this title at these fine bookstores. Outside the USA, see our international sales information. University of Chicago Press: E. About Contact News Giving to the Press. Truth Machine Michael Lynch.
Scientific American is an American popular science magazine. Many famous scientists, including Albert Einstein, have contributed articles to it. It is the oldest.
Every day, millions of single adults, worldwide, visit an online dating site. Many are lucky, finding life-long love or at least some exciting escapades. Others are not so lucky. The industry—eHarmony, Match, OkCupid, and a thousand other online dating sites—wants singles and the general public to believe that seeking a partner through their site is not just an alternative way to traditional venues for finding a partner, but a superior way.
Is it? With our colleagues Paul Eastwick, Benjamin Karney, and Harry Reis, we recently published a book-length article in the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest that examines this question and evaluates online dating from a scientific perspective. We also conclude, however, that online dating is not better than conventional offline dating in most respects, and that it is worse is some respects. Read the whole story: Scientific American. Social Worker, specialize in couples.
Follow Attachment Theory childhood influence on adult relationships. Generally there are four attachment styles that dominate. Secure go with secure.
Scientific American archives
These days hardly a week goes by without important discoveries concerning the history of life on Earth making headlines. Indeed, just last month researchers described a fossil that pushes the origins of key mammal features back some 45 million years. And last week scientists announced that new dates for an extinction event that claimed most of Australia’s large animals show that humans, not the climate, wiped them out. Although visual inspection of the rocks, fossils and archaeological remains used to reconstruct our planet’s past provides critical information, only by ascertaining their ages can researchers put this data into a meaningful context.
Scientific American’s “The Science of Online Dating”. Looks like the embed code wasn’t working, but the video will play at Scientific American.
Online dating might give you something, but it’s probably not a soul mate. But now a team of psychologists from five universities has performed a systematic review. Their report is in the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest. The existing “matching algorithms” miss key variables for long-term love. They necessarily make matches before the parties meet. Data about characteristics like personality and attitudes cannot accurately predict how that real life interaction will function.
The scientists also note that online profile photos are poor proxies for the chemistry sparked by meeting in the flesh. Which leads to a lot of disappointing coffee dates. And many potentially successful matches never happen. Of course the researchers admit online dating helps singles meet more people more quickly. And so might still lead to that magic match. You have free article s left. Already a subscriber? Sign in.
Online dating flaws
Prior research suggests that we examine large-scale uk consumers. Scientific american is do not knowing how to get a certain type? Search for older man younger woman. Want to marry one woman.
Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is the third-most-common psychological disorder, affecting 15 million men and women in the US. The DSM
More than 3, years ago a catastrophic volcanic eruption struck ancient Thera, known today as the Greek island of Santorini. Ash and pumice rained across the Mediterranean, and tsunami waves rolled onto faraway shores in Crete. In the s archaeologists on Santorini uncovered a Minoan settlement frozen in time, with vibrant wall frescoes decorating multistory houses, all buried by volcanic debris. The eruption was one of the most powerful volcanic explosions of the past 10, years and a crucial time point of the Mediterranean Bronze Age.
It is also a major area of controversy in archaeology; researchers have argued for decades over the date of this cataclysm. Although it does not settle the debate, a recent adjustment to the radiocarbon-dating process narrows down the possibilities. This much anticipated new calibration curve, a set of data points used to convert radiocarbon-dating results into calendar years, is highlighted in a special August issue of Radiocarbon.
Called IntCal20, it draws from nearly twice the data of the previous curve, from —and may prompt scientists to reevaluate the age of sites, artifacts and events around the world. All living things absorb carbon 14, a radioactive carbon isotope that decays at a regular rate over time. This means that shells, bone, charcoal and other organic materials that archaeologists find contain a chemical timestamp. Discovered in the late s, radiocarbon dating transformed the study of prehistory and became the gold standard for establishing chronologies in archaeology.
A second revolution came when scientists realized atmospheric carbon 14 levels vary over time as the result of fluctuations in solar activity—and, more recently, atomic bombs and fossil-fuel burning. Thus, radiocarbon dates need to be calibrated against independent measurements, primarily from chunks of ancient wood.