Recent comments in /f/askscience
[deleted] t1_j3yfmfh wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3yff59 wrote
[removed]
Researcher_1129 t1_j3yekrg wrote
Reply to Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
They kill them because they cannot control the spread of the flu/virus. If you kept the ones that survived they could actually carry the virus. If you got new stock it could get them sick. It also can be mandated by the authorities I recommend doing some research online about how it is mandated.
[deleted] t1_j3yedhx wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3ya3l8 wrote
[removed]
MrHippopo t1_j3y9gvv wrote
Reply to comment by Bob_Skywalker in Why are coastlines crinkly near the poles but smooth in the tropics? by emsot
Other than these causes, the origin of the islands matter. Atolls by example will not be rugged.
[deleted] t1_j3y8bnb wrote
Reply to comment by Alittlebitmorbid in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
[removed]
Chemomechanics t1_j3y7rbt wrote
Reply to Is the uncertainty principle a general law, or just subjective to our own experience? by Turokr
An analogy I've found useful: where is a 1 Hz sinusoidal wave? Well, it's everywhere. Having a precise frequency goes hand in hand with extending from -∞ to ∞. It has no single location.
What's the frequency of a point? Well, it doesn't have one; there's no physical extent for us to examine its periodicity.
In between these two extremes, you could have a localized wave whose position can't be well defined because it's not pointlike. Its frequency also can't be well defined because it's not perfectly periodic. You could estimate these two values, but they'll always contain ambiguity; in fact, as one becomes more certain, the other becomes less certain. This has nothing to do with a measurement limitation. It's a fundamental constraint.
[deleted] t1_j3y64pr wrote
Reply to comment by dittybopper_05H in Why are coastlines crinkly near the poles but smooth in the tropics? by emsot
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3y5nu4 wrote
[removed]
JennaSais t1_j3y4vkw wrote
Reply to comment by poorbill in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
Unfortunately, this Highly Pathenogenic Avian Influenza has a 90%-100% mortality rate among infected poultry. From that kind of loss, the odds of you getting birds that will be breeding quality in sufficient numbers to be able to replicate the resistant traits well would not be worth the risk of it jumping species.
BloodshotPizzaBox t1_j3y40cp wrote
Reply to comment by poorbill in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
Selective breeding doesn't seem like a great strategy here in the first place, as viruses probably have a vastly shorter generation time (and hence a faster adaptation rate) than chickens.
[deleted] t1_j3y2tbj wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3y26hx wrote
Reply to comment by noworries_13 in Why are coastlines crinkly near the poles but smooth in the tropics? by emsot
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j3y0uuo wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3y0dhl wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j3xym9i wrote
H4zardousMoose t1_j3xyimx wrote
Reply to comment by Ambitious_Jelly8783 in Will water ice melt faster if allowed to drain, or remain in the meltwater? by terjeboe
I think you are conflating thermal conductivity (how well thermal energy propagates through a material, measured in W/kg*K) and thermal capacity (how much energy a given amount of a material can hold, usually measured in J/kg*K).
Water has high values in both btw. So it takes a lot of energy to heat up and cool down, but it also exchanges energy quickly within itself and to it's surroundings.
Now instinctively I thought that water would have a higher thermal conductivity than ice, because Iglus insulate so well. But snow isn't ice (crazy I know:D) and it turns out ice has about a 4 times higher thermal conductivity than water at 0°C.
Therefore: If you cover the ice in a thin layer of water, this should slow down the melting. But if you put the ice into a decent sized container with water, where the total surface area of the mixture becomes more than 4x larger than the surface area of the ice it should speed up the melting process. This effect should also increase the further along the melting process you are, since the surface area of the ice will decrease (less of it left), where as the surface area of the mixture remains mostly equal (ice has a bit less density I know, but small effect).
So I learnt something: Solids generally conduct heat better than liquids. But the original point, where it depends on the container and it's conductive surface area still mostly remains valid.
noworries_13 t1_j3xyikq wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Why are coastlines crinkly near the poles but smooth in the tropics? by emsot
Mercator has nothing to do with it, because that's what it actually looks like in real life if you are boating through those coastlines
Eomycota t1_j3xxvgr wrote
Reply to comment by poorbill in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
It definitly would and they might be doing it, but it is a very long process since it involve multiple breed. They would need to find out how to make children of the children resistant. They never breed the chickens they sell. They mix a+b= c than c+b= d where d is the final breed, but they always restart at c+b, never breed d with d or the result would be different.
I knew a guy which did that with bees for varroas and he lost over 90% of his bees. It took him years to come back, but his hives now deal better agaist the varroa, but he is a crazy one.
[deleted] t1_j3xx09a wrote
Reply to comment by poorbill in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
[removed]
byfpe t1_j3xvqf5 wrote
Reply to comment by poorbill in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
I imagine there are research farms for which immunity is a business and they are interested in “breeding” survivors. But for a commercial farm this wouldnt make economical sense.
In any case all these virus are like the human flu, you can catch them year after year because they mutate.
As someone else posted. Also note that many of these farms dont run the whole business cycle from egg to fully grown chicken. Some farms will be breeders, some will buy the small chicken and are just interested in growing it.
[deleted] t1_j3xv5sv wrote
poorbill OP t1_j3xuwg8 wrote
Reply to comment by Eomycota in Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
Yes but wouldn't resistance to bird flu be a desirable trait as well? I would think some chickens would survive out of millions infected.
[deleted] t1_j3yfn06 wrote
Reply to Why do poultry producers kill their stock when they get bird flu, rather than keeping survivors to reproduce? by poorbill
[removed]