Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2019 October 17
| Miscellaneous desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 16 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 18 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
October 17 edit
Animal dreaming awareness edit
Do animals sometimes know they are dreaming, in the same way that humans sometimes do? 60.225.197.39 (talk) 05:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Most animals aren't even self-aware. For example, they don't seem to recognize themselves in a mirror. So, they might just think of a dream as some type of illusion, like the mirror, and not think about it past that. For the few animals that do recognize themselves in a mirror, who knows ? SinisterLefty (talk) 05:16, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- I think it is faulty to assume that failing the mirror test implies lack of self-awareness. Realistically it indicates lack of understanding of mirrors. To the original question, I think it is unknowable whether animals ever recognize that they are in a dream state, as there would not appear to be any way for the animal to communicate this to you, except possibly with a talking parrot or signing ape (though apparently Koko (gorilla) never mentioned having a dream, though it's not apparent she even knew what one was [1]). Now, we might also ask if animals think what they dreamt was real, after they wake up. Also probably impossible to know, however, there is one idea that maybe could poke at this. It is well established that animals can remember things, and many have some degree of understanding of object permanence. Simple things like remember where things are. If animals believed that dreams were real, I think you might expect a lot of really confused animals. Indeed, studies of canine concepts of object permanence show dogs visibly displaying what is often interpreted as confusion or disbelief when a researcher surreptitiously alters their environment without their knowledge. You know, that or they just can't remember the dream. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:10, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- There's a strong tradition in animal psychology of behaviorism (and also for humans), which holds that so-called "internal thoughts" are not themselves observable by a neutral observer, so a proper scientific approach to psychology should ignore such things and focus on what can be observed. That is, in order for an independent observer to know what you are thinking (or are dreaming, etc.) they require you to report those thoughts. They can only observe what you say, they cannot directly observe those thoughts themselves. This is somewhat problematic for people, since this introduces problems of reproduceability and of bias and of accuracy, but it is majorly problematic for animals who cannot meaningfully communicate such things for studying. --Jayron32 12:34, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- I know the internal thoughts of all my pets. It is "Food? Is that food? Can I have food? Where's my food? Food? More food?" 135.84.167.41 (talk) 13:29, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Animals seem to be in constant search of food; instinctive behavior, even for well-fed pets. Everything our cat does seems to connect to food in some way. Petting the cat or playing with it, the next step is usually a run to the food dish. It might have been Jackson Galaxy who said that when cats play, they are "imagining" pursuit and capture of prey. And similarly, stroking a cat stimulates the cat, including the salivary glands. So what next after playing or petting? Eating, of course. With no actual mouse or bird there, they go for the consolation prize - the food dish. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:05, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- I know the internal thoughts of all my pets. It is "Food? Is that food? Can I have food? Where's my food? Food? More food?" 135.84.167.41 (talk) 13:29, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- There's a strong tradition in animal psychology of behaviorism (and also for humans), which holds that so-called "internal thoughts" are not themselves observable by a neutral observer, so a proper scientific approach to psychology should ignore such things and focus on what can be observed. That is, in order for an independent observer to know what you are thinking (or are dreaming, etc.) they require you to report those thoughts. They can only observe what you say, they cannot directly observe those thoughts themselves. This is somewhat problematic for people, since this introduces problems of reproduceability and of bias and of accuracy, but it is majorly problematic for animals who cannot meaningfully communicate such things for studying. --Jayron32 12:34, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- I think it is faulty to assume that failing the mirror test implies lack of self-awareness. Realistically it indicates lack of understanding of mirrors. To the original question, I think it is unknowable whether animals ever recognize that they are in a dream state, as there would not appear to be any way for the animal to communicate this to you, except possibly with a talking parrot or signing ape (though apparently Koko (gorilla) never mentioned having a dream, though it's not apparent she even knew what one was [1]). Now, we might also ask if animals think what they dreamt was real, after they wake up. Also probably impossible to know, however, there is one idea that maybe could poke at this. It is well established that animals can remember things, and many have some degree of understanding of object permanence. Simple things like remember where things are. If animals believed that dreams were real, I think you might expect a lot of really confused animals. Indeed, studies of canine concepts of object permanence show dogs visibly displaying what is often interpreted as confusion or disbelief when a researcher surreptitiously alters their environment without their knowledge. You know, that or they just can't remember the dream. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:10, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- One observation which may be relevant is that pets that are clearly having active dreams (paws moving and making sounds as they sleep) don't seem at all affected when they awaken. That is, they aren't in an elevated state, as one would expect after chasing or being chased. This implies that they don't remember. SinisterLefty (talk) 14:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- This being a reference desk, here are some references:
- What do Animals Dream About, a BBC article by Dr. Jason G. Goldman, a freelance science writer based in Los Angeles.
- Animals have complex dreams, MIT researcher proves from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- The Evolution of REM Dreaming: New Research Includes All Mammals by Richard Wilkerson of the Smithsonian Institution, DC.
- Alansplodge (talk) 17:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Final question: maybe I have improved ... :-) edit
Hi, ok, that's my last request in this area, also because then I ran aground and I'm sorry. Returning to the 2000 US elections, citing the infamous Palm Beach county as an example, I was told that the absentee ballots were counted by hand. And here is my definitive question: since they were not from punched, is it established, is it possible that they were ballots that had bubbles to be filled like today's optical scan ballots? Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.100.198 (talk) 14:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Will we be mentioned in your book? Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 16:19, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- A surprising number of questions get answered after they are archived -- sometimes years later. If for no other reason, I recommend that you create a Wikipedia account so that you can be notified if one of yours is answered. Either post back here or to my talk page using that account and I can help you get a note on those archived questions.
- Have you tried contacting the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections office? -- ToE 03:08, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
I contacted them, and I am also confident about the answer. It is not the first time I contact them. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.100.198 (talk) 07:30, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Flat pints of Magners & other drinks edit
How long does it take for a pint of Magners (known as Bulmers in Ireland) to go flat? How does this compare to pints of Budweiser, Foster etc? (78.18.0.82 (talk) 18:48, 17 October 2019 (UTC))
- That's an interesting question. Some quick Googling didn't give me any immediate answers, but it does seem clear that people are generally more concerned about beer/cider going bad than flat. Discussion about flatness (and, mostly, about how to avoid it) is centred around soda pop. The answer for pop, BTW, seems to be about 3-4 days, but I've got to think that's subject to lots of variables, including temperature and vessel size/shape. If you want to do the experiment yourself (science is fun!), the answer may be quite different depending on how you decide to define "flat" - is it only when all the CO2 is out? 50%? 10%? Do the items you're comparing start with the same amount? Matt Deres (talk) 03:02, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- The solubility of a gas in a liquid is determined by Henry's law, to figure out how that evolves over time is going to be very complex. I doubt someone worked that particular bit out for a single brand of beer, and compared it to others. --Jayron32 12:28, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Just to note that Magners is actually a brand of cider, but I'm not sure that it makes much difference. Real cider is flat anyway. Alansplodge (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- This forum discussing home-brew beer says 48 hours if you decant it into another sealed container (a lot quicker in a glass I would think). Alansplodge (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- This forum discussing home-brew beer says 48 hours if you decant it into another sealed container (a lot quicker in a glass I would think). Alansplodge (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Just to note that Magners is actually a brand of cider, but I'm not sure that it makes much difference. Real cider is flat anyway. Alansplodge (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- The solubility of a gas in a liquid is determined by Henry's law, to figure out how that evolves over time is going to be very complex. I doubt someone worked that particular bit out for a single brand of beer, and compared it to others. --Jayron32 12:28, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. (78.18.0.82 (talk) 12:43, 23 October 2019 (UTC))