Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Too much serendipity

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 110 posts

Re: Too much serendipity

#51

Post by caffeinated_me »

wheybags wrote: post #43
GolfPopper wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an SF story I read years ago where the core concept was that humanity had somehow "missed" an obvious power-source/FTL drive, which meant that the "solution" to the Drake Equation is that the galaxy is full of intelligent, star-spanning empires that are effectively stuck at a late-1800s tech level (with starships), because getting to there was easy, and doing all the complex 20th century stuff humanity has…

Do you remember what it was called?

I believe they're referring to the short story of The Road Not Taken, by Turtledove.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_Not_Taken_(short_stor...

PDF of story: https://www.eyeofmidas.com/scifi/Turtledove_RoadNotTaken.pdf

Re: Too much serendipity

#52

Post by PakG1 »

jdewerd wrote: post #39
johngossman wrote: post #25

I recently learned that anesthesia is the same. Not only has no anesthesia ever been developed except through "serendipity." Not only that, but anesthesia that works for humans also effect a wide range of things including plants and bacteria. But why is an active area of research. There are even speculations that there may be quantum effects involved. Biology and chemistry are insanely complex.

> there may be quantum effects involved Quantum Mechanics is why atoms and molecules exist and form bonds. QM is the physics of chemistry. Without QM, chemistry does not happen. The universe would just be a big churning mess of particles and you would never get little lego pieces that snap together according to repeatable rules that, when repeated, form macroscopic substances of innumerable description up to and incl…

As a non-physicist and non-chemist who keeps running into quantum mechanics only through headlines, extra thanks for pointing this out. It's quite obvious in retrospect to acknowledge that quantum mechanics is the physics of chemistry, and I don't know why I didn't see that before. It certainly helps to view a lot of things in a new light.

Re: Too much serendipity

#54

Post by [deleted] »

wheybags wrote: post #43
GolfPopper wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an SF story I read years ago where the core concept was that humanity had somehow "missed" an obvious power-source/FTL drive, which meant that the "solution" to the Drake Equation is that the galaxy is full of intelligent, star-spanning empires that are effectively stuck at a late-1800s tech level (with starships), because getting to there was easy, and doing all the complex 20th century stuff humanity has…

Do you remember what it was called?

[deleted]

Re: Too much serendipity

#55

Post by Ductapemaster »

johngossman wrote: post #25

I recently learned that anesthesia is the same. Not only has no anesthesia ever been developed except through "serendipity." Not only that, but anesthesia that works for humans also effect a wide range of things including plants and bacteria. But why is an active area of research. There are even speculations that there may be quantum effects involved. Biology and chemistry are insanely complex.

There's a fascinating Radiolab episode about anesthesia that is worth a listen: https://radiolab.org/podcast/anesthesia

Re: Too much serendipity

#56

Post by gpsx »

perfectritone wrote: post #18

I'm left curious as to why our taste receptors are so attuned to sweetness if high sugar foods weren't historically correlated with being high in energy.

I have thoughts about that, but IANAN (nutritionalist). Not all energy is the same, as in fructose (in sucrose, which we sense as sweeter) versus glucose (what composes carbs, and also in sucrose), two simple sugars. Glucose goes more directly into the bloodsteam during digestion. Fructose does not go straight to the bloodstream but is processed by the liver. Although it gets into the bloodstream slower, it gets stored by the liver faster, and we use this as an energey resevoir when we are not getting energy directly thorugh digestion. So maybe we crave this somtimes when we need to rebuild our energy stores. Or at least it seems that way for me. I crave sugar/fruit sometimes, particularly after exercising. I don't generally even eat sweets/desserts, so my body apparently isn't fooled into always wanting sugar. I would guess from my experience sugar plays a specific role and I want it at a certain time and not others.

Incidently, I get a headache when I eat processed sugar, but not fruit. (However, fruit will also give me a headache if I carmelize it, cooking it at a high temperature for a long time.) Anyway that is one reason I avoid sweetened foods and maybe why I don't get sucked into eating sugar all the time. And people think I am trying to be super healthy...

Re: Too much serendipity

#58

Post by mcherm »

joneholland wrote: post #47

This “I did my own research” pseudoscience has no reason to be on hackernews.

Really? Because I think Hacker News often features posts by hackers and amateurs trying to tackle something normally handled by professionals.

The comments would be a great place to reply with references to the ACTUAL research on how often chemists taste the chemicals they are working with.

Re: Too much serendipity

#59

Post by [deleted] »

jdewerd wrote: post #39
johngossman wrote: post #25

I recently learned that anesthesia is the same. Not only has no anesthesia ever been developed except through "serendipity." Not only that, but anesthesia that works for humans also effect a wide range of things including plants and bacteria. But why is an active area of research. There are even speculations that there may be quantum effects involved. Biology and chemistry are insanely complex.

> there may be quantum effects involved Quantum Mechanics is why atoms and molecules exist and form bonds. QM is the physics of chemistry. Without QM, chemistry does not happen. The universe would just be a big churning mess of particles and you would never get little lego pieces that snap together according to repeatable rules that, when repeated, form macroscopic substances of innumerable description up to and incl…

[deleted]

Re: Too much serendipity

#60

Post by empath-nirvana »

FergusArgyll wrote: post #4

I loved the writing but I don't get the point or the title. Am I supposed to infer some sort of conspiracy theory? or is it just supposed to be funny?

The point is that chemists are tasting a lot of the novel stuff they synthesize, if it doesn't look like it's going to cause instant cancer, even they they aren't supposed to.

Watching NileRed regularly, it does not at all surprise me.

Post reply on HN