Everyone is born with a personality, and some people are more prone to anxiety than others. I know I am a born worrier.

Probably naturally anxious people are more likely to get PTSD after traumatic experiences ,but I'm sure it could happen to anyone after bad enough experiences.

[removed]

That's what they said about the dinosaurs! and yet here we are 47 movies in and they are still wreaking havoc!

Life, uh, finds away.

You take that back!!

jk

The science doesn’t support that view.

We are still learning about the relationship between trauma and PTSD or anxiety disorders. It is thought that the development of a disorder is influenced by what happens after the traumatic event. If a person has the agency to take action to protect themselves, and the opportunity to create meaning from the traumatic event (eg by spending time with people who make them feel safe, or speaking to a therapist) then PTSD is less likely to develop.

Double the precision is good. Especially considering the tradeoff between location and motion.

Pine plantations already work this way and are a huge part of sustainable building.

[removed]

CPTSD is the worst

It will never go away and I've accepted it

Hmm that’s interesting. I have an anxiety disorder and I will get caught in a worst case scenario loop in my mind about something. After I work myself through it and everything turns out fine, I will have lingering anxiety even the next day. I’ll just wake up feeling anxious even though the thing causing my intense anxiety had already passed. My body just hangs on to that stress and treats that as its baseline and it’s awful.

[removed]

Out of all the minds to help she chose prisoners. That's so nice of her.

The suburbs would beg to differ

I’ve had bad anxiety most of my life, had a lot of regular emotional trauma/neglect + some other things growing up. Then I got roped into an extremely abusive relationship with an actual sociopath for two years. I feel like I “should” have developed PTSD from it, but afaik I don’t meet the criteria for it, but I do for trauma. Granted, it’s been 10 years since I went through that and I did quite a bit of self-therapeutic MDMA over the years, and I only got the PTSD test last year

Let's start taking bets on what the future holds on this:

A) Taxpayers and districts willingly fund workshops, trained professionals and or extra time to teach said strategies to high school students

Or

B) Teachers are just expected to figure it out and are responsible for another extraneous variable other than teaching

I would be interested in what and where this school is located.

[removed]

So, okay

I've worked my way through the article

And... I don't know.

First, potentially is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Lots of things are potentially energy-effecient, but a quick 'command+f' shows no mention of 'carbon neutral' or 'carbon negative'. But, hey, if its more environmentally friendly than alternatives, that's great too, and an easier bar to reach. From my reading, it sounds like that's not the goal either, this isn't attempting to be the future of carbon capture, but rather to reduce emissions concerning construction, which, great.

But the second, arguably bigger hurdle, is affordability, and that, I can't find any mention of. There's no price comparison between this method, vs contemporary materials.

Corporations would jump on this like nothing else if it were cheaper than present methods.

Scalability would definitely help towards this end, yes. But would it achieve it is still up in the air. And I've no reason to believe a construction company would want this, instead of, say, normal wood. Yes, its more durable than regular wood, but so are a lot of things. What in the normal construction process is this aiming to replace?

And as the news article says, thats not even something they've figured out, yet. That's their 'next step'. The primary article just outlines how they made it.

So I frankly, don't have a lot of hope for this project. The science behind it, great. But its real world applicability? That's not something they've figured out.

Could have told you that years ago

[removed]

Disclaimer: Degree in physics but not a focus on particle physics

This doesn’t have much use for physical applications. It’s kind of particle physicists doing particle physicist things.

The goal of this experiment is to get a more stringent physical measurement of a calculated value. This has a few potential purposes:

1. physical measurements begin consistently never matching calculated value. This will suggest unknown interactions/particles. Particle physicists love inventing these. This leads to the third point

2. Gaining more information on the fine structure constant (one of the spooky fundamental values of the universe) (Probably the most useful aspect of this experiment)

3. the paper apparently ties this to dark matter in a very particle physicist manner. This measurement supposedly helps disprove some proposed limits on dark particles masses for them to just arbitrarily alter their equations to overfit the data.

[removed]

I had meditation classes in my school growing up - I didn’t get the point, until I graduated and lived amongst the adults who hadn’t.

You likely do. Ive worked in the legal field around divorce, partner and child abuse, neglect, abandonment, and a whole host of much, much worse things. Also had my own traumatic af divorce. Wanna know the weird thing? I see the same kinda of trauma responses coming out of bad divorces as I have cases where say, massive trigger warning btw, >!a kid was deliberately tortured.!<

Be gentle with yourself and take it slow. Believe it or not, there can be an after to the after that destroyed your before.

I think it's important to point out that the study you linked failed to find evidence that it helped. That's not the opposite of what this study found.

There is a lot of good discussion happening about false positives and false negatives in science. It's complicated. But not finding a result you're looking for is not the same as proving it's false.