I don't think the 10 year part is right. After one year 96% of people haven't had a failure. By year two 96% of those remaining so it goes 0.96^10 = 0.66 or 34% failure rate in 10 years in your worst case and 0.98^10 = 0.82 or 18% for your best case.

Also note: A 2% or 4% chance of pregnancy is pretty good odds using only condoms for 1 year. If using only condoms for 10 years that number is creeping up on 20% or 40%.

This is a weird one as well because you aren’t taking into account fertility. Say someone gets into a serious relationship at 25, if your’re a women your fertility starts to decrease slightly in your late 20s and even more so after you hit 35.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Multiple factors all work in concert to make materials sticky, two main ones are Adhesion and Cohesion

Cohesion is the force that causes similar things to stick together, whereas adhesion causes different things to stick together.

Materials like pine tar (pitch etc) have high cohesion and adhesion. Water sticks to other materials (seen as surface tension in droplets on glass for example) so has a slightly high adhesion, but it is easy to pull water away from other water molecules.

Let’s use your fingers stuck together as an example. Pitch tar molecules don’t want to pull away from each other, and are quite closely packed together. This increased viscosity, density and cohesion makes it difficult when mechanically separated for air to be able to get into the material to displace the tar that coating your fingers, so as your fingers separate, it also causes a suction effect, as the air cannot get in to regulate pressure.

All these factors add together to apply mild forces that work together; Viscosity, Density, Adhesion, Cohesion and Suction

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

If a cluster of galaxies is virialized (its constituents are orbiting stably), we call it a cluster, not a supercluster. Superclusters are expanding with the Hubble flow by definition. A supercluster could certainly have a virialized cluster at its center though!

We can see the initial density fluctuations as temperature fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Almost all of the CMB was causally disconnected at its emission time, as the horizon scale at the time is around 1 degree on the sky. We see temperature variations larger than that, and since they are not causally connected, we know that they must have been frozen in time since whatever process created them in the much earlier universe. (Likely inflation, as I noted in another comment.)

Also, gravity can only amplify already existing density variations. Thus the smaller-scale (causally connected) CMB temperature variations, and the density variations in the universe today (responsible for galaxies and larger-scale structure), must have originated from similar initial density variations. In fact we understand quite well (mathematically) how density variations gravitationally amplify over time, and a wide range of observations generally all point to initial density variations having essentially the same average amplitude at every scale (the one part in 10-100 thousand that I mentioned).

That's a yes an no answer mostly because the space between the local clusters are too large. There's a region around the supercluster where objects are gravitationally bound to the center of gravity and outside of that radius the local clusters will eventually escape. Much like the orbital mechanic of our solar system. So from that region outward the dark force appears to dominate and expand the space.

Edit: With our current understanding of the universe, within the Supercluster the dark force responsible for the expansion of the universe is too weak to overcome the gravitational "force" within the bounded section of the supercluster.

[removed]

We don't know, but the most popular hypothesis is that the density variations originated as quantum fluctuations during inflation (the hypothesized early period of accelerated expansion). They would begin around the Planck scale but rapidly expand due to inflation. This process creates fluctuations over a huge range of scales, as fluctuations created earlier grow larger than later ones, and that matches what we observe.

[removed]

[removed]

Absolutely not. The biological liquid (blood or saliva usually) is taken from you and then exposed to an antibody testing material outside of your body. Antigens that react to antibodies are never injected into your body.

I worked for a biotech company. The methods tested are designed to deliver the drug via a specific route for a specific population versus a negative (typical standard of care) control. Someone working with a glaucoma drug that involves eyedrops is not going to test the drug for intravenous or rectal administration.

Not very common. I remember reading somewhere that it might be due to breeding habits being very different between the two (whitetail does run away and have to be caught, whereas mule deer don't). https://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/deer-scouting/deer-behavior/hybridization-a-unique-tail-of-whitetails-and-mule-deer

I live in Southern Alberta, Canada, and hunt both species. I’ve never seen a hybrid of a WT or MD. Is it common ? What are they called ?

[removed]

[removed]