Comment author: Error 05 January 2015 01:59:25PM 6 points [-]

almost as common as female heterosexuality here, as you would expect

I initially misparsed this as "the female bisexuality rate is as expected." I see that isn't what you meant, but had to re-read two or three times. Just FYI.

I feel like a 42.2% bisexuality rate among LW women is surprising enough to say something, but I'm not sure what.

In response to comment by Error on 2014 Survey Results
Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 05 January 2015 11:19:36PM *  3 points [-]

It is interesting. IME in real life and in OkCupid, female self-identification as bisexual correlates quite strongly with the geek/liberal/poly/kinky meme complex (edit: mirroring your experiences, didn't read carefully enough). Out of my top matches in OkCupid, over 80% of women interested in men seem to self-report as bisexual.

However, also IME, bisexual identification usually doesn't imply being biromantic! Many of those women have had, or would like to have, sexual experiences with other women, but still may prefer men in romantic relationships almost exclusively.

FWIW, I support adding a question about romantic orientation in the next survey.

Comment author: gwern 10 December 2014 04:39:20PM *  7 points [-]

SIA/anthropics strike again? "Fantastically Wrong: The Scientist Who Thought 22 Trillion Aliens Live in Our Solar System":

Here’s what [Thomas] Dick figured. At the time, there were an average of 280 people per square mile in England. And because he thought every surface of our universe bears life, it would naturally occur at roughly the same population density. So from comets and asteroids to the rings of Saturn, if you knew how big something was, you could guess how many beings live there. Thus, Jupiter would be the most populated object in the solar system, with 7 trillion beings. The least populated would be Vesta, the second largest asteroid in the asteroid belt, tallying just 64 million.

Dick, you see, was a very religious man, but also a voracious scientist, one of the last of the so-called natural theologists, who looked for signs of God’s influence in nature. For Dick, it simply did not make sense for God to have created the cosmos just to have it sit around unoccupied. There must be creatures out there capable of enjoying its beauty, because God wants all his work appreciated. In his book Celestial Scenery...

...You might think that living on other worlds might be difficult, but Dick assures us they’re arranged much like Earth, with mountains and valleys and such. The moon in particular has “an immense variety of elevations and depressions,” and while we can’t directly observe such features on Jupiter, Saturn, or Uranus, given their distance, when light hits them it reveals “the spots and differences of shade and color which are sometimes distinguishable on their disks,” thus betraying the uneven surfaces underneath. (We know today, of course, that these are all in fact gas giants.) God also provides atmospheres on other planetary bodies, “but we have no reason to conclude that they are exactly similar to ours.” Mars’ atmosphere, for example, is denser than our own, bestowing the planet that lovely red hue (it’s actually less dense). Others may be so thin that they allow their inhabitants to “penetrate much farther into space than we can do,” with the added bonus that such an atmosphere could “raise their spirits to the highest pitch of ecstasy, similar to some of the effects produced on our frame by inhaling that gaseous fluid called the nitrous oxyde.”...There is, though, the rather glaring problem of the crushing gravity of a planet the size of Saturn. But Dick posits that “the density of Jupiter is little more than that of water, and that of Saturn about the density of cork.” Jupiter, therefore, would have a gravity only twice as great as Earth’s—not so terrible in the grand scheme of things... And he wasn’t even the first scientist to argue that life existed elsewhere in our solar system. Far from it: It was none other than the famed astronomer William Herschel who argued that not only was there life on every planet, but on the sun as well. That blinding glow we see is simply a luminous atmosphere hiding a rocky surface that teemed with life.

(The Presumptuous Natural Philosopher notes: 'while it is true that we have no direct evidence of life on other planets, or indeed solid confirmation that the other bodies of the solar system are rocky and support life, all of this is at least consistent with our current knowledge, and consider the anthropic aspect: with a global population of ~1b in 1837, and a possible system-wide population of 22 trillion or 22,000 times the global population, would not the SIA provide crushing evidence that the other planets are likely inhabited?')

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 10 December 2014 09:22:57PM *  3 points [-]

But Dick posits that “the density of Jupiter is little more than that of water, and that of Saturn about the density of cork.” Jupiter, therefore, would have a gravity only twice as great as Earth’s—not so terrible in the grand scheme of things...

Well, that's kind of close. The average density of Saturn is in fact less than that of water, and the gravity at its cloudtops is only very slightly higher than at Earth's surface. Jupiter's isn't that bad, either, at ~2.5g.

Comment author: Laoch 06 April 2011 08:24:54AM 1 point [-]

Ah yes, didn't think of that. Even while I'm concious my brain is doing things I'm/it's not aware of.

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 07 April 2011 05:58:43PM 5 points [-]

Some deep hypothermia patients, however, have been successfully revived from a prolonged state of practically no brain activity whatsoever.

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 04 January 2011 09:23:32PM 11 points [-]

This is how Vetinari thinks, his soul exulted. Plans can break down. You cannot plan the future. Only presumptuous fools plan. The wise man steers.

—Terry Pratchett, Making Money

Although thought by a madman in the book, there seems to be truth in this quote. People often seem to think of the future as a coherent, specific story not unlike the one woven by the brain from the past events. Unpleasant surprises happen when the real events inevitably deviate from those imagined.

In response to Slava!
Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 04 October 2010 12:41:51PM 6 points [-]

African praise songs were sung not only to kings, gods, and heroes, but to plants and animals, who obviously cannot grant anything to those who praise them.

I'm not denying the powerful psychological effect of praise in these cases, but the animistic religions of a large number of indigenous hunter-gatherer cultures do assert that plants and animals (or, more accurately, their respective spirits) have agency, and that good fortune on future h/g excursions may be ensured by respectful behaviour towards the spirits in question.

Comment author: Perplexed 03 October 2010 04:49:29AM 21 points [-]

Unless you are familiar with the work of a German patent attorney named Gunter Wachtershauser, just about everything you have read about the origin of life on earth is wrong. More specifically, there was no "prebiotic soup" providing organic nutrient molecules to the first cells or proto-cells, there was no RNA world in which self-replicating molecules evolved into cells, the Miller experiment is a red herring and the chemical processes it deals with never happened on earth until Miller came along. Life didn't invent proteins for a long time after life first originated. 500 million years or so. About as long as the time from the "Cambrian explosion" to us.

I'm not saying Wachtershauser got it all right. But I am saying that everyone else except people inspired by Wachtershauser definitely got it all wrong. (70%)

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 03 October 2010 10:29:52PM 3 points [-]

You make the "metabolism first" school of thought sound like a minority contrarian position to the mainstream "genes first" hypothesis. I was under the impression that they were simply competing hypotheses with the jury being still out on the big question. That's how they presented the issue in my astrobiology class, anyway.

Comment author: Yvain 03 October 2010 10:38:53AM 19 points [-]

To be fair to the aliens, the actions of Westerners probably seem equally weird to Sentinel Islanders. Coming every couple of years in giant ships or helicopters to watch them from afar, and then occasionally sneaking into abandoned houses and leaving gifts?

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 03 October 2010 08:20:17PM 2 points [-]

That was a fascinating article. Thank you.

Comment author: Jonathan_Graehl 08 September 2010 10:54:58PM 4 points [-]

I'm a human and can easily imagine being attracted to Galadriel :) I can't speak for dwarves.

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 09 September 2010 12:36:13PM 11 points [-]

Well, elves were intelligently designed to specifically be attractive to humans...

Comment author: Snowyowl 03 September 2010 11:00:32PM *  0 points [-]

Thanks for the links. It all makes a lot more sense to me now (though at 2 trillion years, the timescales involved are much longer than I had considered). One last quibble: Relativity does not forbid the space between two objects (call them A and B) from expanding faster than c, it's true. But a photon emitted by object A would not be going fast enough to outrace the expansion of space, and would never reach B. So B would never obtain any information about A if they are flying apart faster than light.

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 04 September 2010 08:58:58PM *  1 point [-]

But because the expansion of the Universe is accelerating, the apparent receding velocity caused by the expansion is increasing, and, for any object distant enough, will at some point become greater than c, causing the object to disappear beyond the cosmological horizon.

This, obviously, assuming that the current theories are correct in this respect.

Comment author: cousin_it 16 August 2010 03:47:02PM 0 points [-]

I'm pretty sure Nature doesn't have one.

Comment author: JohannesDahlstrom 16 August 2010 04:55:31PM 3 points [-]

View more: Next