Certainly a feature. I recommend a sensitivity level which uses breeds for each level. I further recommend the highest sensitivity be "Great Pyrenees" as I can attest my dog barks at every false positive.
That's just a bad name. This is essentially a nonrandomized unblinded controlled trial using representative sampling. Only two steps below a full RCT unless you suspect foul play.
I'm not sure how you'd blind lack of sleep and that's not the point, so the only issue is lack of randomization.
Quasi-experiment is not necessarily a bad thing. It is to denote a study that does not have a traditional control-experiment structure with explicit pre- and post-measurements. This is particularly difficult to do with real time data analysis over time periods or with concepts that have ill-defined units of measurement.
For example, productivity and learning would be considered ill-defined. How can you prove more sleep makes you more productive? Since that is difficult, you can instead do a quasi-experiment or case study to observe the effects.
This may be a silly question, but where are all of the stars? This image is amazing! I love that you can even see the moon. When I saw this I thought, if I can see the earth and its moon clearly from Saturn, then I should be able to see Saturn and her moons from Earth (then I remembered all of the stars, and how hard it would be to make that out in the night sky).
Most cameras only have a range of brightness they can pickup. The rings of Saturn and the Earth are very bright compared to the background stars.
The camera is set to let only a little light in, perhaps by having a shorter exposure or something similar. Not enough light comes in to make out the stars but the brighter objects come through clearly.
If they more light, even to see the stars then the brighter objects would appears whitewashed with brightness and may even otherwise interfere with the photo.
To be fair, the book was most likely not written by the actual Moses. Most believe it's a compilation from several priestly writings. But it's definite silly sounding.
The Bible and other religious texts have a lot of accumulated wisdom in them. I think of them as the Wikipedias of their time, edited by everyone, partly useful information, partly full of shit, accepted uncritically by the more naive
Interesting but I disagree. Basically the entire Old Testament is edited and to enforce a certain interpretation of the Israelites' history, namely that turning away from God caused bad things to happen. It has a fairly consistent and coherent agenda.
I would love to talk about that more. It's been a long time since I have read the Old Testament. I meant to buy the "Five Books of Moses" translation a few years back.
reply