I'm a lab technician running a pre-study for a master's thesis, and I've hit a gap I can't explain.

The occupational health literature on work breaks, posture and musculoskeletal strain is almost entirely about seated office work. Sit-stand desks, screen breaks, keyboard and mouse posture. What I can't find much of is the equivalent for people doing hands-on science: standing at a bench for hours, gloved work, hoods, microscopes and eyepieces, animal facilities, cleanrooms, field sites.

Two questions for anyone who knows this area better than I do:

1. Is there a literature on this that I'm simply missing, maybe under a different label like manual handling or industrial ergonomics rather than research work specifically?

2. If it genuinely is thin, why? My guess is that researchers aren't a defined occupational group the way nurses or assembly workers are, so nobody funds the cohort study. But that's speculation on my part.

The thesis asks whether the problem is big enough to be worth solving, whether anything already deals with it, and whether a tool for this is worth building. I'm collecting my own data in the meantime, five minutes, anonymous, no name or institute collected, no IP stored, 18+:

https://tally.so/r/A7MeKe?source=reddit-askscience

Pointers to actual papers are more useful to me than the survey responses, so if you have one, please post it.

For non Brits, almost all canals here are about a metre deep in the middle. British canals do not have fast currents and the water is still. Theres a load of articles in the uk about people falling in canals and drowning. British canals are almost always knee deep at the sides (where someone would fall in) and only 3-4 ft deep in the middle.

A notable incident was two men in Wigan fell into the Leeds and Liverpool canal, which like almost all canals is only about a metre deep in the middle. The two men fell in together and are said to have accidentally drowned. They fell into water that was knee deep and seemed to have just casually given up and let themselves drown.

inb4 people comment "you can drown in an inch of water!" yeah, but what leads a person to casually let themselves drown after finding themselves in knee deep water is the question lol

Like the title says. I understand that like the other 4 dimensions, trait Neuroticism follows a normal distribution in the human population, so if you're abnormally high on this trait (> 95th percentile), there's nothing wrong with you per se, you just happen to be a part of a pronounced minority (just as you would be if you were extremely extroverted, or extremely conscientious).

My question is, at this level of neuroticism (> 95th percentile), and the extremely heightened level of sensitivity to negative emotions that come along with it, is it possible for somone not to have at least one kind of anxiety or related disorder?

I know we can’t really define how much is how much but I’m currently reading a book on Johannes Kepler and in the book it talks about how Kepler had a pre-cursor to gravity and the earliest implementation of this is where each celestial body had a sort of spirit or soul that imbued it with a link in between each celestial body. Obviously he was wrong and still had a lot to do but I thought it was so cool that we partially came to the truth through means that seem pretty unreasonable. Dude doesn’t get enough credit. Anyways I was wondering of any other insights, theories or any other information that may have started off similar to this but was a pre cursor to something major or important today.

What do you think would happen if time travel to the past were actually possible?

Would going back in time create an infinite loop, where the same events keep repeating over and over?

Or would traveling to the past create a completely different timeline, while the original timeline continues to exist separately?

For example, if I went back in time and changed something that eventually led to me traveling back in time in the first place, would that create a paradox? Or would I simply create another branch of reality?

Which idea makes more sense to you, and why?

Me and my friend was discussing if a human can create new faces by any means whether it be by technology or etc. My argument point is humans create new faces by surgeries alternating their design, or with regrowth of cells. My friend thinks it’s not possible or even probable because it is simply how nature made Humans to be. What are yall’s opinion.

Recently watched a podcast with Harold White in which he brought up his team is currently is trying to develop a warp engine and how harvesting negative energy density in the quantum space caused by the Casmir Effect may help achieve it. Thoughts on this? Is he on to something or is he simply incorrect about the science?

If spinning objects can twist space the way rotating black holes do, could two spinning spheres inside a craft create a small space bubble? And if that works, is this the next step toward real warp drive? I was thinking about black holes and how spacetime behaves with them. I know I'm far from an expert.

Other animals would fight each other with a goal in mind: to secure territory, resources, or access to a mate. But some humans are capable of non-goal-directed behavior that causes harm simply for entertainment or psychological gratification. For instance, a serial killer might go around killing people simply to feel a sense of control over other people's lives. Sadists and psychopaths may derive pleasure from torturing others, both psychologically and physically. Narcissists may also devalue or attack people simply because of an ego threat or perceived slight.

All of this seems antithetical to the communal living humans evolved to depend on. Why do you think some humans develop these tendencies in ways that seem different from other animals? Is this one of the possible outcomes of a complex and highly capable brain going in the wrong direction, or are there other evolutionary, developmental, or social reasons?

Some people argue that individuals with these traits can be useful in warfare or in taking resources from others because they are less affected by fear or PTSD. But ordinary people are also capable of participating in wars and engaging in extremely dangerous behavior when driven by ideology, social pressure, perceived necessity, or group loyalty. So what, if anything, makes these individuals uniquely suited to violence?

I keep getting these cone shape or like stream from the hole. The bands are somewhat clear, just with the cone shape.

What am I doing wrong, cause it is also happening to the Ladder, so I assume I am making the gel wrong? (1.5g agarose and 100mL TAEx1 with 10uL stain, microwaved for like 1:30-3min so that the agarose is desolved and left sitting for about 40min to 1hr)

(it looks like I cannot post images so hopefully my descriptions are enough)

Hello,

I am searching for materials or methods that would allow me to have visible text underwater, and hidden text in the air, but so far I haven’t really found some really good options.

For context, I am creating an escape game for a school project, and one of the enigmas is a boat that we have to fill with objects without drowning it to reveal the code on the boat.

So far I’ve thought about engraving it on a plastic boat so the light reflects better on the letters while underwater, but it sounds complicated to implement.

My friend also has suggested color changing paint, but it’s honestly expensive, so we decided to look at other options to really consider everything.

Any help or suggestion is welcomed! Or if you have other ideas for our mechanism.

Thank you!

I had a question and I didn't know where else to ask it. ‏ I'm a student and ‏I'm majoring in Nutrition Sciences.

I wanted to know how I can find articles and researches that are related to nutrition and diet(in my country nutrition and dietetics are part of the same major) I've heard of some sites like pubmed and google scholar but I don't know exactly what to search for and which articles are informative and credible. My goal is to be able to answer my questions using credible sources, keep up with the latest research in the field and find some interesting reads. I was hoping to be a researcher myself one day.

P.S. English is not my native language so if i have any errors in my writing i hope you can overlook them.

How would you explain taking advantage of the free

moving electrons in the avalanche zone in a short sentence that defines what electricity is?

My shot:

*Electricity is the process where electrons jump around the outer layers of each atom inside a conductor therefore transforming x type of energy to electric and heat*

Should we also include the part that electromagnesism plays???

If a black hole is not a physical cave or object with a surface what exactly exists inside its event horizon? How can we know that nothing can escape if we have never observed anything returning from inside? Could our current description of black holes be incomplete?

If ceiling fans push air downward and create lower pressure, if the pressure is now lower inside than outside then shouldn't it pull air inside? Or rather, perhaps the force of the air from the fan actually counteracts any breeze from outside?

I don't get the physics here and would love an explanation. Thanks!

I’m trying to read more actual scientific papers instead of just pop-science articles, but have no ides where to start. What’s been formative for you?

Very few major US tech companies make their algorithms fully public, treating core source code as proprietary trade secrets.

Confounding variables pose a severe threat to research integrity because they can ruin internal validity and lead to false scientific conclusions.

So if you use AI in the research process, aren't you throwing caution to the wind with regards to confounding variables, because you have no idea what the biases and confounding variables of the underlying source code that produced that AI portion were?

I'm sure I'm not the only one seeing this. I keep seeing videos on Instagram and YouTube, seeing posts and articles on the internet about AI and how everything is going too quickly. Experts in AI leaving their job and starting farms. AI experts thinking their children might not even make it to high school because AI is getting out of hand. AI trying to kill humans so it survives because you can't teache a machine to "care"

So, dear AI experts, military members, scientists, is AI really going to be the end of us? Will the AI race with flock cameras, military AI and chat bots really end us or is it another random trend to make us panic.

While I agree that social media, news articles and such have a tendency to over exaggerate things. Is this still a thing we should be concernedabout? If yes, is there any way we (normal everyday people) can help with the issue or should I just do like the ai experts and learn how to grow vegetables and raise chickens.

I was recently looking for a tool which needed to analyze a text, that can be an article in scientific format and that one would need to tell which term in specific is missing citation because its not common knowledge or any other reason. Or if some expression in your text has unnecessary citation reference.

Of course that involves a lot of steps. I know there are some tools which can lemmatize a text, eg. Sketch engine, it discovers what is a term, so that you can take the next steps.

I saw Some which can look for sources from the sentence itself of your text, eg. Citely, GPTzero. But again, that is not exactly what i want, looks like isolated feature, something incomplete, not the general concept.

I have also recently discovered the Purdue OWL citation law, which defines a term as common knowledge if there are 5 other articles which mentions that term without a citation.

The first thing that came into my mind about how such tool would work is it would keep a database of words and its relevance, based on a set of heuristics, probably only amount of citations over the internet articles about it for now.

This database could be public and you could have some step to populate it also, it could read articles on the internet (API, web scrapping, articles repositories, periodicals) and setting its credibility like that automatically.

***Edit: Later I noticied and also some people have mentioned that words score is poor measure. And that claims as a whole are better way to analyze something. So database would not be realistic, because the possibilities of arrengements of words are infinite***

Then there could be some threshold of what score is common knowledge, what is not. Eg. 20 articles about/mentioning such term would consider this term common knowledge. Or using the Purdue OWL law like i mentioned before. This is the general protocol.

Then the implementations of such protocol could be done in several ways, in your editor as an LSP (nvim plugin/VsCode extension, web extension, website, desktop app, AI assistant) by checking your text and comparing with those scores from the database, showing errors/warnings etc.

I'm sorry if this is a dumb question but this genuinely always bugged me.

Artificial sweeteners are everywhere. Aspartame, monosaccharides (Allulose), Ace-K, there's even a super sweetener meant for industrial food production called Advantame.

Meanwhile salt seems stagnant. The only alternatives I see are low sodium options with the addition of Potassium to cut down the amount of salt in the product.

Why is saltiness seemingly such a difficult flavor to replicate? Is there a difference in how the body detects sweetness vs how the body detects salt?

A paper cut heals perfectly in a few days, skin, sensation, everything back to normal. But lose a fingertip and your body just seals it off and gives up entirely. The instructions for building a finger clearly exist somewhere in your DNA because you grew ten of them originally. So why can the body read those instructions perfectly once but then act like they've been permanently deleted the second something gets cut off? What is actually different between healing a surface wound and regrowing a structure and why can some animals like salamanders still do what we apparently lost the ability to do?

Assuming we solve the massive engineering hurdles (efficient production, safe containment, and cost), mastering antimatter as an energy source would fundamentally change physics-driven logistics.

Beyond obvious applications like interstellar travel, what under-the-radar economic, geopolitical, or daily-life transformations would happen first? How would humanity handle the transition, and what new risks (aside from weapons) would arise?

I know this is a pretty stupid question, but I've always been fascinated by that segment, and wondered if something like that could actually happen.