Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science

Pieces of World Cup trophy falling back to Earth

I just saw on a YouTube video that the background story to the 1994 video game Soccer Kid says that the alien pirate Scab tried to steal the World Cup trophy by pulling it from Earth to his spaceship but the trophy hit a passing asteroid on the way and smashed into pieces. The pieces then fell back to Earth.

This struck me as wrong. Assuming the asteroid is far away from Earth not to crash into it, shouldn't the pieces have fallen down on the asteroid as it was the dominating body of mass where the trophy was smashed? JIP | Talk 01:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

That would depend on the mass of the asteroid as well as the force with which it smashed into the cup. If it was a massive asteroid at slow speed then the cup pieces would settle on the asteroid, but that is impossible. The pieces would either fly off into space or fall to earth. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:32, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

At typical interplanetary speeds of a few tens of kilometres per second before the collision, the pieces (if the trophy wasn't vaporised) would most likey move much faster than the escape velocity of the asteroid (no more than a few meters per second). The pieces would end up in heliocentric orbit, but they might hit Earth again in the future. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:27, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It also strikes me as wrong that the disappearance of a World Cup trophy was not a major news item at the time, and also that alien pirates would be interested in such trinkets as World Cup trophies. Surely, this is a projection of base human traits on unsuspecting aliens, so we need to invoke the doctrine of artistic licence. Restricting ourselves to physics as we know it, even a tiny asteroid, with a mass comparable to that of the trophy, will almost certainly have enough kinetic energy to smash it, if not into oblivion, then to smithereens. Surely, even if the asteroid was quite massive, their velocities will now be much higher than the escape velocity, so they will not be captured by the asteroid. If the asteroid was in an orbit around the Sun – a reasonable assumption – a relatively large amount of its momentum, tangential to the orbit and probably directed away from Earth, is transferred to the pieces, which, it seems in the narrative, were already moving away from Earth before the collision occurred and are now scattered into orbits moving even farther away. Some of these orbits may intersect Earth's orbits so after months or years one piece or another may be intercepted and give a brief flash as a meteor. There is zero chance of them conspiring to give some kind of meteor shower.  ​‑‑Lambiam 10:40, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@Lambiam: ...also that alien pirates would be interested in such trinkets as World Cup trophies – I tell you, they are definitely not very intelligent. Would any intelligent being fly across the Galaxy just to steal a cow...? --CiaPan (talk) 06:50, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Counter-intuitive impedance

It is well-known that the input resistance of an infinite chain of four-terminal elements, each consisting of a 1-ohm resistor in series and another across the output terminals, is the golden ratio, about 1.618 ohms. Each added element increases the number of parallel paths, so the input resistance falls steadily from its initial value of 2 ohms. A similar analysis, for the case of replacing the shunt resistor in the element with a capacitor of reactance 1 ohm at the applied frequency, shows that the input impedance of an infinite chain is very nearly 1.3 - 0.625i, this having a magnitude of about 1.443 ohms. The initial input impedance is 1 - i with a magnitude of root 2, about 1.414 ohms. So the added parallel paths do not give a steady reduction in magnitude, which seems counter-intuitive.~2026-15082-11 (talk) 15:49, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

But this is the nature of complex numbers. Ruslik_Zero 18:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

A popular chatbot that claims the advantage of having no biological brain or intuition whatever nevertheless claims "I have thought" about the question as follows. I need to compute the input impedance of a ladder circuit. The first module has a series resistor (1Ω) between IN and OUT, and another 1Ω resistor from OUT to ground. So, the input impedance seems like 1Ω in series with 1Ω to ground, but wait, the OUT node is only connected to a resistor to ground. After thinking it through, I realise the input impedance is 2Ω in series.

For two modules in series, the impedance is R1 + the impedance seen from node A to ground, which is R2 in parallel with (R3 + R4). This gives 5/3Ω.

For an infinite chain, the impedance from node A to ground satisfies X = 1 || (1 + X).

Working through the RC-modules

I’m calculating the impedance for a module with a series 1Ω resistor and a shunt capacitor with reactance -j1Ω. For a single RC-module, the input impedance is 1 - jΩ, with a magnitude of √2. For two RC-modules in series, the impedance from node A is calculated as Z_A = (1 - 3j)/5, giving a total input impedance of 1.2 - 0.6jΩ, with a magnitude of 1.342Ω.

For an infinite chain of [RC circuits], the impedance equation becomes Z = 1 + (-j || Z), leading to a quadratic equation. Solving this gives Z ≈ 1.30 - 0.63jΩ, with a magnitude of 1.442Ω. ~2026-15106-48 (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

see continued fraction Golden ratio#Continued fraction and square root and Khan, Shahryar (22 January 2024). "Resistors, Continued Fractions and the Golden Ratio". fiveby(zero) 23:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

The intuition is correct for resistors; it is Rayleigh's monotonicity law. catslash (talk) 23:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Saying that "this is the nature of complex numbers" hardly addresses the specific query. I accept, from the numerical results, that the impedance magnitude does not decrease with each added path (sometimes it does, sometimes it increases), but was hoping for a reasoned explanation as to why there is not always an increased current flow for a given applied voltage when the shunt capacitor in the first element is given an extra parallel path.~2026-15082-11 (talk) 16:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

"First element" is ambiguous - I meant the capacitor closest to the new element.~2026-15082-11 (talk) 16:20, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

It is like an arago spot that counterintuitevely appears in the center of a circular shadow. Sometimes you need to accept that your intuition leads to a wrong conlusion. Ruslik_Zero 20:40, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Anything in characteristic impedance help, the derivations? iterative impedance? Your chain of resistors and capacitors is like a transmission line w/o inductance or conductance. Instead of starting with first element and adding more, start with and infinitely long transmission line and add more, the characteristic impedance doesn't change. Start with an infinite chain already and add one more element, the iterative impedance does not change. fiveby(zero) 21:34, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

A counterintuitive or seemingly paradoxical result, such as the OP's observation that adding a current flow path to a finite RC ladder may increase rather than decrease the input impedance magnitude, both piques our intellectual curiosity and motivates us to seek a better understanding of how it could happen. A near-parallel result is Braess's paradox the counterintuitive result in traffic network theory showing that adding a new road or bypass can make overall traffic flow worse. Similarity of the paradoxes is only partial: Braess's paradox arises because drivers act selfishly, each being too tempted to choose their own fastest route especially when it is novel, while the collective result becomes worse for everyone. However electrons flowing inevitably from negative to positive potential in a circuit are not like selfish conscious drivers. The two paradoxes here identified do have similar negative corollaries: A road network planner who is ignorant of Braess's paradox may never realize that traffic flow in his network can be improved by closing off a particular road. A circuit designer who needs to reduce the input impedance magnitude of an RC ladder might without the OP's help never realize that can be achieved by cutting out components. ~2026-15106-48 (talk) 17:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC) (edited)

For the RC case, does it help the intuition to consider the fact that going into the ladder, the currents in each section lag those in the previous section by (I reckon) about 38.6683°? So after about 9.30996 sections, the currents are the reverse of what you want. catslash (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Have you calculated 360° / 38.6683° ≈ 9.30996 ? Why ? Current is reversed by a 180° shift. The OP's intuition was about the magnitude of the input impedance which is a measurement blind to phase. ~2026-15106-48 (talk) 20:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, just that. Because the input current is the sum of the capacitor currents. The magnitude of the sum is less than sum of the magnitudes unless all terms have the same sign – which they haven't. Also, as you spotted, I was stupid and should have said 4.65498 sections. catslash (talk) 23:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

On reflection, my answer could be better. Intuition does not rest on numbers. Try this: In both the resistive ladder and the RC ladder, whether finite or infinite, the input current is the sum of the rung (shunt) currents. In the resistive ladder all the rung currents flow in unison and so do actually add. Conversely, in the RC ladder, the rung currents are out of step and so partially cancel, giving a reduced total (i.e an increased-magnitude impedance). catslash (talk) 00:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Mutation

A complicated question about consuming junk food

If I do OMAD (One-meal-a-day fasting), which is less harmful to health: eating junk food for two minutes every day or eating junk food for one hour every month? ~2026-14733-34 (talk) 12:04, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

That's a question for your doctor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

I assume the two-minute daily junk food feast is not your whole single daily meal. Eaten in moderation, so-called "junk food" is not by itself particularly harmful. An unbalanced diet is. If the unbalanced and therefore unhealthy diet consists largely of junk food, it is particularly unhealthy. Also, overeating is unhealthy and overeating on junk food is particularly unhealthy. Eating moderate amounts of junk food in addition to an otherwise healthy diet is not harmful to one's health.  ​‑‑Lambiam 23:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

What if they're allergic to something in the junk food? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:47, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

And what if they are tube-fed?  ​‑‑Lambiam 10:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Same as if they're allergic to anything in the normal or super healthy food. --CiaPan (talk) 11:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Is this diagram meaningful?

It's used at Electromagnetic_pulse#Effects. If it illustrates wireless power, why are there wires?  Card Zero  (talk) 10:12, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

We'd have to ask the creator, but their last contribution was the addition of the diagram, so we are not likely to receive a response. Next to the wires, which I think would be absent in the case of a solar flare, lightning strike or nuclear detonation, there is also a curious mislabeling throughout the diagram: what looks like a wire is labeled "Magnetron", what is presumably the magnetron is labeled "Microwaves", what looks like intended to represent the microwaves is unlabeled, and the irrelevant base of the light "bulb" is labeled "Capacitive coupling through air". There are also curious dashed arc segments as if the radiation is reflected by the "bulb". If the purpose is to explain in a diagram how an electromagnetic wave induces a gradient of electric potential across a circuit, it is IMO not helpful. (The article Electromagnetic pulse also does not attempt to explain this.) It is probably just as helpful to illustrate this with a bolt labeled "EMP" directed at an explosion star labeled "KABLOOEY!".  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:36, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I may have to revert this edit, too. I suppose football players are a kind of fauna.  Card Zero  (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

The peculiar labels on the diagram give an illusion of an explanation where there is none. The phenomenon to be demonstrated is lighting by an external electromagnetic field of a fluorescent lamp with no galvanic wired connection. This can be seen in a video here. The short video shows a fluorescent tube that is hand held without wires. Cause and effect are demonstrated by presenting the tube in two positions: A) far from a radio frequency source - TUBE UNLIT and B) close to the radio frequency source - TUBE LIT. My suggestions for a more helpful diagram are:

• show a hand held tube and a generic "Radio wave source", no wires visible
• show alternative situations A and B by either a two-part diagram or together alternately in an animation
• the diagram title is STRONG RADIO FIELD DETECTED BY FLUORESCENT TUBE. This avoids the concept "wireless powering" that could mislead one to think this is a practical way to use fluorescent lamps.
• I advise against adding text beyond the essential labels "Radio transmitter" and "Fluorescent light bulb". I don't feel we can adequately teach the electromagnetic field and its near-field coupling to the tube in a single diagram. ~2026-15106-48 (talk) 13:42, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, I remembered demonstrations using fluorescent tubes, and was surprised by their absence from the Wireless power transfer article, although Tesla is pictured doing something similar. "Capacitive coupling" is incorrect in this context, isn't it? The edit summary for the diagram was "Added photo of Electro Magnetic Radiation", which I think describes all photos except for unexposed ones and this diagram.  Card Zero  (talk) 13:53, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Such a diagram is better suited for use in Wireless power transfer § Inductive coupling than in Electromagnetic pulse § Effects.  ​‑‑Lambiam 14:25, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Any practical value of the interesting contrivance of converting Non-ionizing radiation (em source) to Ionizing radiation (within lighting tube) and back to non-ionizing radiation (light) was probably exhausted during Nicola Tesla's efforts to promote what turned out by 1906, to everyone except Tesla, to have been a towering waste of money. Even after suggested improvements, the diagram will look for a home. A future (red link) List of conjuring tricks might accomodate it. ~2026-16372-61 (talk) 13:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Pregnancy

How soon after giving birth can a girl get pregnant again? ~2026-16378-24 (talk) 18:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

See Lactational amenorrhea#Return of fertility which, although emphasising the effects of breastfeeding, contains information directly relating to the question. It's written rather (too?) technically, but in short – it depends on the circumstances of the individual, and 'almost immediately' is within the range of possibilities. Other responders may be able to answer more fully.

(I have assumed in good faith that this is a general question about human biology, and not a request for medical advice, which Wikipedia cannot give. If there is any possibility that this relates to a current real situation, the in-person advice of a health professional must be sought – the ramifications of potentially creating a new human life are far too serious to trust to internet enquiries.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 20:53, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

According to this source, fertility can return as early as 21 days after childbirth. This source concurs. There is, of course, no guarantee that this is the absolute minimum.  ​‑‑Lambiam 10:57, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Crossword Unconsciousness

In Linklater's "Waking Life", two characters have a conversation concerning a study about crossword puzzles:

"They isolated a group of people over time, and they monitored their abilities at crossword puzzles, right, in relation to the general population. And they secretly gave them a day-old crossword, one that had already been answered by thousands of other people, right. And their scores went up dramatically, like 20 percent. So it's like once the answers are out there, people can pick up on 'em."

I couldn't find a source for this study anywhere. The full conversation implies a "telepathic sharing of experiences", maybe akin to something like Morphic Resonance or more loosely Genetic Memory, but I don't think either are very feasible (on account of being very theoretical or pseudo-scientific). But to me, the idea of the answers of a crossword puzzle being subconsciously proliferated by the people who solved them is not ridiculous. Could people solve these puzzles more easily because their answers have been integrated into the subconscious of their peers who had solved them before?

Do any such studies exist? Fzinu (talk) 18:52, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Monica England Nottingham University. https://earlybirdstreehouse.wordpress.com/2014/12/01/the-crossword-puzzle-phenomenon-by-monica-england/

MR does not rely on brains, it was supposedly responsible for chirality of DNA etc. Greglocock (talk) 20:22, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Sheldrake, who was named a fellow of the Institute of Noetic Sciences in May 1989, describes England's experiment in the 2011 edition of his 1988 book The Presence of the Past: Morphic Resonance and the Habits of Nature:

     In 1987, the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), near San Francisco, California, offered an award for the best student research on morphic resonance. An independent panel of judges assessed the entries, and the results were announced in 1991.²⁹
     The winner of the undergraduate award was Monica England, a psychology student at the University of Nottingham, England. Her test was stimulated by anecdotal evidence that some people find it easier to do newspaper crosswords the day after they have been published than when they first appear, an effect that could be due to morphic resonance from thousands of people who have already done the puzzle.
     The experiment involved two puzzles from a London newspaper, the Evening Standard1, which was not distributed in Nottingham. The newspaper kindly co-operated by supplying two unpublished puzzles a week before they appeared: the ‘easy crossword’ and the ‘quick crossword’. The easy crossword had simple cryptic clues, and the quick crossword single-word clues that required synonyms as answers.
     Monica England tested about 50 students the day before the crossword puzzles were published in London, and a further 50 the day after. Both groups of participants were also given two control puzzles, which had been published in the Evening Standard two weeks earlier. The participants were given ten minutes with each crossword to solve as many clues as possible.
     On average, participants solved significantly more clues with the easy puzzle after it had been published than before. There was no change with the control crossword. By contrast, with the quick crossword there was no significant difference in the test crossword relative to the control.

---

29. Institute of Noetic Sciences Bulletin (Autumn, 1991).

I haven't found an online copy of the Autumn 1991 issue of the Institute of Noetic Sciences Bulletin, nor in fact of any other issue either.  ​‑‑Lambiam 22:13, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks everyone ! resolved ! Fzinu (talk) 05:27, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Cold fusion benefits

Imagine that the 1989 experiment announcing cold fusion had been replicated and become a common process. What benefits would be derived from it? The primary benefit from ongoing nuclear fission reactions is related to its heat; other benefits, e.g. the production of technetium for nuclear medicine, is minor compared with the heat effects. I can't understand how we'd benefit significantly from converting hydrogen into helium through a process that's cool enough to be conducted on a tabletop; helium reserves are non-renewable, but helium production is hardly a major aspect of the world economy. Nyttend (talk) 05:40, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

There's actually a helium shortage developing right now due to the Iran war (helium is captured as a by-product of natural gas extraction, so it's closely linked to oil and gas production) and helium (used as a coolant for superconducting magnets) is one of the main operating costs for an MRI scanner (estimates online vary, but all have the cost of helium for an MRI machine at tens of thousands of dollars a year). It would be good if hospitals didn't face big price fluctuations and possible shortages every time a war breaks out in a gas producing nation. Smurrayinchester 09:00, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Only some, far from all, natural gas fields contain significant helium, so there's a correlation between natural gas producers and helium producers, but this correlation isn't overwhelmingly strong. It appears though that Qatar has become a large producer of helium in recent years.

Even cold fusion would release heat and even at 370 kelvin this heat could be used to run a heat engine. A heat engine running at a kilokelvin would be better, as it has higher efficiency. A megakelvin doesn't improve efficiency that much and comes with some problems. I think that nuclear fusion at 1200 K could be considered cold fusion, but it would be great for power generation. PiusImpavidus (talk) 11:19, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Our article on cold fusion says that the reason they thought it was successful was that they measured excess heat. Perhaps it was cool enough to be conducted on a tabletop at the scales they were experimenting with, but at industrial scale it would have produced enormous amounts of heat (to turn turbines or whatever) without the difficulty and expense of containing the wildly hot plasma that to my understanding is one of the key obstacles to "hot" fusion power. -- Avocado (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Cheap IR Scanner

I've been looking into tech to scan for animals in a yard. Normal IR won't work. It is the wrong bandwidth. The IR scanners I've found are rather expensive - and they don't even have screens anymore. They use your phone for the UI. They are just the camera. For the task of just a yes/no sensor - is there a warm body in that direction? How cheap of a device can I get? What is it called? ~2026-16820-81 (talk) 17:01, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

If it's just detecting the presence of a (warm) body in a given direction, why not just wire up a digital infrared thermometer (IR gun)? cmɢʟee τaʟκ (please add {{ping|cmglee}} to your reply) 17:38, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

The question "is there a warm body in that direction?" suggests that you want to control the direction. I presume, though, you mean, "in the (fixed) direction" of the yard. There are many IR motion detectors on the market, from cheap to expensive. It is not easy, though, to find enough technical details to see if they will be satisfactory for your purpose. I presume you want a good sensitivity but no alarms for every scurrying squirrel and also not for every time the sun starts shining onto the yard.  ​‑‑Lambiam 17:51, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I would like to be able to point it at a bush and know if there's a hedgehog in there. Point it at a tuft of grass. Is there a hedgehog in there? Point it at the pile of leaves in the corner. Is there a hedgehog in there? When I know the yard is safe, I can mow without worry of mowing over another hedgehog that just rolls in a ball instead of running away. It is a laziness device - instead of stamping around kicking through all the grass, I want to stand on the porch and just point. ~2026-16820-81 (talk) 18:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Another hedgehog :( ... it does sound like an infrared thermometer is your cheap option. I suppose hedgehogs lurk in piles of leaves because they provide insulation, though, which will spoil this plan. The scanning system mentioned in that article sounds useful (one thermometer plus a rotating mirror), though I don't know what industrial equipment source you'd need to buy it from. It would take advantage of the hedgehogs staying still.  Card Zero  (talk) 18:55, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

As I thought - this is all rather expensive. I'll keep working on the rake and duct-tape system. I can't mow near the fence easily, but the rake bumps them away before the mower gets to them. ~2026-16820-81 (talk) 19:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Hedgehogs enter through small gaps in fences or hedges and dislike walking on sharp gravel. That suggests a passive defence of your yard. Hedgehogs proceed by pushing their sensitive snout forward to sniff. That suggests the low-tech solution of an electric fence BUT there are animal rights supporters and even wildlife rescue groups who discourage it. ~2026-16372-61 (talk) 23:25, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

The OP doesn't say they want to exclude hedgehogs, but rather to detect and by implication avoid injuring them. In the UK hedgehogs are viewed with affection, and are desirable in gardens (they are excellent pest controllers and do no significant damage). Many people regularly feed them and purposely leave or actively construct suitable hibernacula in their gardens. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2026-76101-8 (talk) 01:56, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Meanwhile the Department of Conservation encourages the use of deadly traps to control the European hedgehog in New Zealand, although gardeners may still be fond of the creatures.  Card Zero  (talk) 06:24, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Infrared thermometer guns need not cost more than 20 USD.  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:34, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

The FOV on those is about 70 degrees. To identify an object in the distance, it needs to be about 5 degrees. I've been learning a lot more than I wanted to learn about infrared sensors. Passive infrared won't work, period. They identify movement. A tehermopile may work, but the FOV has to be small because they average everything they see. So, you are pointing at mostly cold ground and vegetation, it will average out a tiny animal and you won't get a reading off it. A thermal array can compare one point in the distance to other points - it is a collection of narrow FOV thermopiles for the cheapest models. I am going in a different direction now. I was staring at a lamp shade designed to help keep you from knocking over the floor lamp. Instead of bars, the shade is held on with springs. If I had a big metal ring mounted around the mower on springs, I could still press it close to the fence or a wall, but if I hit a hedgehog with the ring, hopefully it will scurry away. ~2026-16820-81 (talk) 12:50, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Simply wear a full-length hoop skirt when you mow the grass.  Card Zero  (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

If the intention is to repel hedgehogs from lawnmowers, how about trying ultrasound? cmɢʟee τaʟκ (please add {{ping|cmglee}} to your reply) 03:13, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

According to an article I read this morning about a hedgehog hospital expansion, hedgehogs respond to ultrasound by curling up in a ball and staying still. Ultrasound deters most other animals though. Of course, you'd think the lawnmower is enough to scare most animals away. If I heard something huge and noisy coming at me, I would likely move away. ~2025-42594-02 (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

T-rex, the only known dinosaur species - but why?

Tyrannosaurus rex is not only the most famous dinosaur, it is also the only dinosaur species whose full name in binomial nomenclature is commonly known. For all other famous dinosaurs, only the genus name is widely known. While the full names can be looked up in Wikipedia - who has ever heard of Triceratops horridus, Brachiosaurus altithorax or Velociraptor mongoliensis? This raises the obvious question: Why? Of course the nice, short species epithet "rex" invites the usage of the short name "T-rex"; however this seems to have spread too late to be the explanation. So, why? --KnightMove (talk) 16:17, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Irritator challengeri is quite memorable for Arthur Conan Doyle fans. We have an article on catchiness. (On closer inspection that's entirely about tunes, sorry. Catchphrase, then. What a shocking bad hat!)  Card Zero  (talk) 16:58, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Why settle for "tyrant lizard" when you can have "tyrant lizard king"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:10, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

@KnightMove T-Rex fossils are relatively common as it had a wide range. Also it was of impressive size: Although some other theropods might have rivaled or exceeded Tyrannosaurus in size, it is still among the largest known land predators, with its estimated bite force being the largest among all terrestrial animals. By far the largest carnivore in its environment. And it lent its name to a popular band. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:47, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

There were (are?) children's jokes in which a tyrannosaurus is addressed as "Mr. Rex". Also, one of the enormous Cabazon Dinosaurs, a roadside-attraction completed in 1981, is named "Mr. Rex". These may have contributed to the epithet being sealed in.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:37, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

How does consciousness change as brain complexity increases?

How does something with a much simpler brain experience stimuli? How would it think? What would it feel like to be a nematode with 300 neurons, or a fruit fly with 100,000 neurons? Would it just be like some kind of reflex machine, and you'd have very little actual autonomy outside of doing what you must in order to survive? Furthermore, what would it be like to experience life as something with a brain far more complex than a Human's? New emotions? Greater control over the mind?

I understand it's probably very difficult to conceptualize something like this from a Human perspective. Fzinu (talk) 03:06, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

We have no idea and even no idea on how to get an idea. There is no commonly agreed definition of consciousness, neither scientifically nor philosophically, and the relation between the physiological processes (whose internal communication goes not only across neurons but also uses the endocrine system) and the resulting subjective experiences is very poorly understood. The current human experience has been shaped over millions of years in an evolutionary process driven by reproductive fitness. A hypothetical race of transhumanoids, with a zillion times more neurons and an experience shaped by whatever would shape it, will not be able to describe their experiences in a way we could even begin to understand. See also our article on "What Is It Like to Be a Bat?".  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:23, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

That's an interesting read. I feel fairly certain (based on no particular evidence) that animals are every bit as self-aware as we are (or think we are). Our veterinarian, discussing our pets, put it this way: "They live in their own little worlds." And in some ways, that describes humans also. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:41, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm reminded of this quote from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: "[a human] no more knows his destiny than a tea-leaf knows the history of the East India Company [to describe Arthur Dent's ignorance of his own fate]." But consider the flip side: How much does the East India Company know what it's like to be a tea-leaf? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:45, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

The hypothesis about a zillion-fold increase in neurons, saying that this would cause a wild shift in understanding, a super-human experience inaccessible to regular humans with their ordinary number of neurons, is a big assumption. It's similar to the superintelligence concept that's often bandied around in the context of predictions about AI (by those with AI to sell). Since, as you say, we don't really know what we're talking about when we talk about consciousness, it would be extrapolation from no data to say that superintelligence would bring more of this undefined thing, consciousness. Or even more intelligence.  Card Zero  (talk) 11:29, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

It's maybe a cousin to arguing for or against the existence of God, without defining what God actually is or would be. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:39, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

That's a good point. What can we infer about brains of higher complexity than ours? Is it just impossible to assume anything, when like @Lambiam said, the human experience (and brain) "has been shaped over millions of years in an evolutionary process driven by reproductive fitness"? Combined with the fact that so much of human intelligence is developed postnatally, on the basis of "experiences", does it just come down to "it depends"? Fzinu (talk) 17:22, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

I gave the experience of the putative transhumanoids as "shaped by whatever would shape it". This may involve minds "designed to order". Customized designs of the nervous and endocrine systems can have possibly very different architectures than the human one, giving, for example, rise to a "hive mind" within an individual specimen. I did not say that it would bring "more" of consciousness or intelligence. All I tried to say is that there would be no shared vocabulary for them to communicate to us "what it is like" to have a hive mind (or whatever), not because it is different, but because there are no words for "what it is like" in human language. Compare trying to describe the sensation of seeing a sunset to a person who is born blind.  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:40, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

For interest, the paper 'Profiles of animal consciousness: A species-sensitive, two-tier account to quality and distribution' is an example of people trying to address these kinds of questions in a structured way. Sean.hoyland (talk) 12:22, 21 March 2026 (UTC)