Small point of order: While you're right that switching is the right strategy in the Deal or No Deal game, this is not the reason why. In the Monty Hall Problem, the host will never open the chosen door as one of the "reveals", same as in Deal or No Deal. (In fact, were the DoND game not the same structure as the MHP, the MHP solution would not apply directly to Howie Mendel's abortion of a game). To explain why switching in this case is advantageous, I should explain that there are actually two versions of the Monty Hall Problem (more, actually, but only two that are pertinent to this situation). In one, the host (Monty) knows which doors are losers and which is a winner, and only opens losing doors. In the second, Monty doesn't know what's behind the doors, and opens them randomly (This is akin to DoND, because the contestant has no knowledge of what's in any of the cases). Choosing to switch in the first scenario leads to an increased probability of winning as per the MHP, because the host has reduced the number of "bad" possible choices. The problem with the second scenario is that Monty might open the door with the car! At which point your chances of winning drop to zero. In fact, it can be shown that in this version of the MHP, the choice of switching or not doesn't improve your odds, specifically because the number of times Monty will open the door cancel out the advantage you would get the few times that he didn't open the door. However. In this particular case (the DoND question asked), switching is the optimal strategy, because the contestant on the show (acting as both contestant and "random Monty") has chanced upon one of the few probability chains (possibly the only? I haven't looked at it closely) in which crazy old Monty didn't open the door with the car. And so the problem of switching or not actually reduces to the first MHP, because it's as though Monty "knew" and only opened goat doors. Sorry to be long winded, but I wanted to try to be as clear as possible. Yay, math.
Not quite. The Monty Hall problem works because in reality it's not a choice between two boxes. The MHP, as original formulated, ultimately offers you a choice of picking the single door you have, or both of the other doors. The intelligent choice of the quizmaster ensures that if the prize is behind either of the other two doors, you will get it. There is no similar choice in Deal or No Deal. To look at it another way, there are two scenarios at this stage of Deal or No Deal. The million is either in your box, or in the other box. The odds of each respectively (assuming 22 boxes, I forget the exact number): In your box = [odds you pick right at the beginning] = 1/22 In other box = [odds you pick wrong at the beginning, but miss the million every time thereafter] = 21/22*20/21*19/20*18/19....*1/2 = 1/22
This is a question I've always wondered about, especially when they show programs that involve any kind of gastric bypass. I understand that during a GB procedure the doctor essentially bisects the stomach in half and re-attaches a roughly one-ounce sized stomach pouch directly to the intestines, thus eliminating any room for food. My question is: what happens to the rest of the stomach? Is it removed? Does it stay in the abdomen? Is it attached to anything?
Wiki says... And, when you consider that most are perfomed via laparoscopy (i.e. a few small holes through which instruments are inserted), it looks like they just use a bunch of staples to close off a section of the stomach.
Well I'm no surgeon, but if you follow this diagram: So you see in the top part of the stomach it looks like something has been cut out of the stomach? And then, at the esophagus, it looks like there's an enlargening of the esophagus, and a suture, and then a connection to even more esophagus? That small enlargening is the new stomach, which then immediately empties into the small intestine. The large, remaining portion of the stomach is disconnected entirely so that it can't heal back together and reverse the surgery (i.e. form a fistula, as the article says). Now, the large part of the old stomach is still connected to the small intestine, as it normally would. A piece of small intestine had been cut away to connect with the new stomach, which then joins with the normally placed small intestine so that both parts of the stomach can still drain food. I couldn't give you the whole story as to why this is done, but important pancreatic and gall bladder enzymes are introduced to the small intestine closer to the stomach, and need to be present to absorb various fats, nutrients, minerals, etc - they'd just travel down the small intestine as normal until they reach food being introduced from the new stomach. Presumably, leaving the rest of the stomach intact, connected to the small intestine and still inside the body makes for a simpler, safer surgery with faster recovery time. Also, the more amount of small intestine that is bypassed, the less nutrients and minerals get absorbed, but more importantly, the less fat is absorbed. The purpose of the surgery is to reduce food intake and to reduce fat absorption.
Can I ever go swimming in the Gulf of Mexico again without fear of getting Cancer in my lifetime? (I'm 30)
Oil slicks don't have any special properties that prevent cancer that I know of, so you're going to be at the same risk for getting cancer that you always were. Sorry.
I think he's asking if the cancer risk is increased with oil spills and how long till the extra carcinogens are gone. One answer: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.google.ca/search?q=Oil+Spills+cancer&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.google.ca/search?q=Oil+Spill ... =firefox-a</a> Oil Slicks = More carcinogens.
On the topic of the Gulf of Mexico and oil and me asking what is likely an idiotic question: Lets hypothetically say that a hurricane came flying through the Gulf of Mexico. Can the hurricane suck up the oil that is currently floating around that part of the world and then rain oil down upon the unsuspecting citizens of, well, that area? If it got struck by lightning, would we have the worlds first Fire Hurricane? I got to stop thinking so much.
No. Oil does not vaporize like water in the environment. Hurricanes cause the barometric pressure to be lower, which enables more water evaporation, (Water can be boiled in a vacuum) which allows the hurricane to keep motoring along. Oil would remain in the ocean, sliming everything it came into contact with.
Can the water evaporate through the oil or does it form a barrier? Would the oil slick reduce evaporation of the water weakening the hurricane?
Water won't evaporate through oil. In practice, though, that won't matter. With the waves and wind in there to stir shit up, there's still plenty of water/atmosphere interface for evaporation.
What does a shattered bone (arm/leg) mean? Broken in multiple places, hundreds of places? What type of accidents would shatter a bone? Let's say a car runs over a person's arm or leg, would that shatter it? If not what type of damage can be expected? Lastly, is there any hope for 'fixing' a shattered bone or does it get amputated?
Whoever said there is no such thing as a stupid question skipped over this thread. Google the word shatter, apply your new found understanding of the word and apply this to a bone that is in your body. Or just headbutt 8 windows, they will all shatter, just some more than others. The ability to recover from a shattered bone varies depending on the degree of the injury, if it has been shattered into tiny fragments, you’re probably fucked, the corresponding tissue damage will combine to fuck your blood flow to the limb leaving you open to gangrene and septicaemia, these are bad. A friend shattered/compound fractured her forearm while skiing a few years back, she was advised she had a 30% chance of losing the limb from the elbow down and only a 20% chance of getting full movement back she’s now thankfully 90% good. She will set metal detectors off for the rest of her life.
How long is nicotine detectable through either a blood test or urinalysis? I have googled it, but it's hard to get a definitie answer.... Before I had like 8 cigarettes last night, the last time I had smoked was like 3 months ago. Thanks.
My understanding is that THC (Pot) and Nicotine have very simmilar detection profiles. There's less information about nicotine because very few people are tested for nicotine with any kind of negative outcome related to the answer. But the standard answers about pot will probably apply. The detectable half life will depend on quantity consumed over what time period, long term regularity of consumption, gender, body fat percentage, metabolic rate and to some degree what you've done since smoking. Masking consumption during detection testing isn't reliably possible - but some people claim success at masking pot consumption with various herbal teas. I've never heard of clinical testing showing them to be any more effective than plain tea. I suspect that frequent hydration and urination has some benefit - but that's about the end of the benefits of tea. Anything that raises your metabolic rate will help a little also. Exercise/eating breakfast as soon as you get up/etc. For an average person in average circumstances, I'd be surprised if 8 standard tobacco cigarettes after 3 months of zero consumption were detectable 72 hours after consumption. To be clear though, that's a pure guess based on information I got in a training session. I've got no way to real world test that information and as you've seen, it's not easy to find solid information about nicotine testing. It also assumes that you're talking about urine/saliva screening. Hair or fingernail testing will show any drug consumption in the time that the tested hair or nail was attached to your body. A surgical examination of a smoker or secondary smoker's respiratory system will usually show signs forever if they've had more then very, very mild exposure as an adult. But almost every adult in the first world has secondary exposure damage to some degree.
Scootah would know better than me but a friend of mine just got life insurance about a month ago. He was a pack a day smoker for about 14 years and he quit two weeks before they tested him for nicotine (Piss test I believe) and he was fine.