//////////AVOID TRIGGER FOODS
Most everyone has at least one, and for some of us, they're the biggest obstacles when it comes to weight loss. I'm talking about trigger foods — the things you just can't resist, and tend to overeat when they're available. Cookies are one of my trigger foods. They're a particularly bad trigger because they usually come in a pack, and the ones that don't are often the size of a hockey puck and contain 500 calories or more.
What's the best way to deal with trigger foods? Acknowledge them, and then avoid them. Not even a bite, or you'll be a goner. Keep them out of your house and out of your line of sight when you shop. Most trigger foods contain unhealthy ingredients like butter, sugar, and white flour (so it's not like your nutritional status will suffer if you cut them out completely!). In fact, in addition to losing weight, you may even get healthier overall when you toss the triggers. Once you hit your weight-loss goal, you can try experimenting with trigger foods, but if you find yourself slipping into old patterns, it's back to cold turkey
////////////////////
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/5550488/Homosexual-behaviour-widespread-in-animals-according-to-new-study.html
Homosexual behaviour is a nearly universal phenomenon in the animal kingdom
////////////////wiki=
The Decameron (subtitle: Prencipe Galeotto) is a collection of 100 novellas by Italian author Giovanni Boccaccio, probably begun in 1350 and finished in 1353. It is a medieval allegorical work best known for its bawdy tales of love, appearing in all its possibilities from the erotic to the tragic. Some believe many parts of the tales are indebted to the influence of The Book of Good Love. Many notable writers such as Chaucer are said to have drawn inspiration from The Decameron (See Literary sources and influence of the Decameron below).
//////////////////Recipe for Life: Water and a Little Lava
By Phil Berardelli
ScienceNOW Daily News
15 June 2009
Astronomers scanning the skies for another Earth might need to narrow their search. New research suggests that even if a world lies within the Habitable Zone, in which water is liquid, too much or too little volcanic activity can render it lifeless.
When assessing a distant planet's habitability, astronomers currently focus on one main criterion: Could the planet have liquid water on its surface? Too close to its sun, and that water evaporates away; too far, and it's locked in ice.
But the equation isn't quite that simple, says planetary scientist Rory Barnes of the University of Washington, Seattle. In an upcoming issue of The Astrophysical Journal Letters, he and colleagues argue that E.T. seekers also need to throw volcanoes into the mix.
We wouldn't be here without volcanoes. Early in Earth's history, volcanic eruptions spewed carbon dioxide and water vapor from deep beneath the surface, creating conditions that would eventually support photosynthesis. Mars, with an inactive core and hence little volcanism, wasn't so lucky. But too much volcanic activity can also be bad: Jupiter's moon Io is jostled so much by the gravitational pull, or tidal force, of its gigantic parent and neighboring moons that its volcanoes erupt almost continuously--enough to coat the moon's surface with fresh lava about every million years. These eruptions presumably would snuff out any incipient life.
BIOLF-WHAT A VOLCANIC AXDENT
////////////////////Home > Technology & Science
Get a Grip: Truth about Fingerprints Revealed
Mystery Surrounding the Reason for Fingerprints Remains
By EWEN CALL
The long-held notion that fingerprints marks help us grip more firmly appears to be wrong. Instead, a new study finds that the marks actually reduce the friction between skin and surfaces.
Scientists say long-held notion that fingerprints help us grip more firmly may not be true.
(/ABC News)
"Because there are all the gaps between the fingerprints, what they do is reduce the contact area with the surface,
///////////////////lrb=A Car of One’s Own
Andrew O’Hagan
This was the day General Motors came to the end of the road. I once asked a Sudanese politician to name the thing that in his eyes proved a nation was a nation. He didn’t hesitate: ‘The ability to make cars.’ Britain was a nation because it made Jaguars. Germany was a nation because of Volkswagen. America ran the world because of General Motors. Italy made Fiats and France made Peugeots, Japan made Toyotas, and even the Russians, struggling along the highway towards modernity, had the easily underestimated Lada. Was making cars once an indicator of national self-sufficiency? Is it still? Rover, Morris, Austin, Triumph, Vauxhall, Aston Martin, Rolls-Royce, Mini, Land Rover: when we hear the names of these firms, we think of the cars they made, and of cars driven by parents or grandparents, sisters or old boyfriends. But we also think of the places in Britain where the cars were built, places that map out a productive nation. Say ‘Rover’ and people will, depending on their age, think of Coventry, Solihull, Cowley or Longbridge. Say ‘Vauxhall’ and they will think of Luton; say ‘Hillman Imp’ and they think of Linwood. When people consider their own lives and how well they have done, or are doing, they may well think of the cars they have owned, the notion of aspiration having a lot to do with what you drive; and if that is the case, then the almost permanent decline of the car industry in Britain must be fairly closely entangled with our sense of who we are. The cars that are built here now are mainly built by foreign companies – Jaguar and Land Rover are owned by Tata Motors of India, BMW owns Mini and Rolls-Royce, Volkswagen owns Bentley, while the MG is owned by Nanjing Automobile Group of China – which might be one of the things that explains a degree of loose wiring in the English nationalist brain.
/////////////////SLATE=Periodic Discussions
Element 112 was discovered more than a decade ago. Why wasn't it given a place on the periodic table until now?
By Sam Kean
Posted Friday, June 12, 2009, at 3:59 PM ET
Ununbium in the extended periodic table
The periodic table added its 112th official element Wednesday, when scientists in Darmstadt, Germany, announced they had received official approval for ununbium from an international body of chemists. But the discovery of the new element wasn't news to anyone—it was first announced back in 1996, when the Darmstadt scientists claimed to have created two atoms of the stuff in a 400-foot particle accelerator. It's just taken 13 years of formal reviews and appeals for their colleagues around the world to believe them. How did the most basic question of science—what are the fundamental materials that make up our universe?—turn into the science equivalent of a Supreme Court decision?
It seems as if the makeup of the periodic table would be as rudimentary as apples falling down, not up. There's evidence for elements like oxygen, iron, and silicon all around. Heck, you're made of evidence. But that's not true for the dimmer corridors of the table that run along its very bottom, where elements like ununbium sit. No one has ever seen element 112 with their own eyes—we've only assumed its existence based on a smattering of computer blips stored on a couple of hard drives around the world. How to interpret those blips has become a matter for endless committee meetings and debates over whether it's OK to add a new square to the most precious real estate in science.
//////////////////KING OF QUEENS
////////////////////
No comments:
Post a Comment