Rodot t1_jeecabt wrote

I wonder how the complex pharmacology of these two compounds compares in effectiveness to other psychedelics. Ibogaine is both a dissociative (like ketamine) and a psychedelic and 5-MeO-DMT is an atypical psychedelic that primarily acts through 5HT1A rather than 5HT2A (though it still has strong affinity for the latter)


Rodot t1_j476jeg wrote

I wonder if this applies to psychedelics as well. They bind to the serotonin-2 receptors which, among other things, promotes platelet aggregation (and many SSRIs have increased bleeding risk because they down-regulate these receptors) . So would psychedelics also promote faster wound healing? I know, like with weed, some psychedelics (like DOI, LSD, LA-SS-Az, and TCB-2) are also anti-inflammatory. Perhaps sub-perceptual dosages of these things could also have medical application in wound healing? DOI especially because of its extremely long duration of action would make it a medication you take once a day in the morning.


Rodot t1_j27g9oy wrote

There is a frame in which everything is in the Hubble follow, basically moving with the redshift one would expect from the expansion of the universe. But within this flow you can independently move (e.g. you can get in a car and drive any direction). This will then deviate you from this flow. Though if not acted upon by another force, you'll eventually be "dragged" into this flow since the universe continues to expand in all directions.

In other words spacetime is kinda fucky


Rodot t1_ixx2lzk wrote

Yes, to highest order the fractional error (percentage of the outcomes the error represents) goes as the inverse square root of the number of samples. Barring other factors such as experimental design and representation of the samples, you're usually hitting around 1% error at 100 samples.

One doesn't actually need a ton of samples to get good statistical significance depending on the design and results of the study. Of course, there are factors that can increase or decrease these rates depending on if you are getting a little Bayesian or not


Rodot t1_ivopmiw wrote

Think of a photon as similar to a musical note when you play an instrument. For a string instrument, you pluck the string and it causes it to vibrate at a specific frequency depending on the length (i.e. it's boundary conditions). This is kind of like a photon but instead of plucking a string you are "plucking" the electromagnetic field and it makes a vibration at a certain frequency depending on the boundary conditions (electrons, ions, etc) of the system.


Rodot t1_ivmvufb wrote

According to Maxwell's equations, a changing electric field creates a magnetic field, and a changing magnetic field creates an electric field. If you set this up as a set of differential equations you get perpendicular propagating waves in the electric and magnetic fields.

A charged particle moving at a constant speed makes a constant magnetic field. An accelerating charge makes a changing magnetic field which makes a changing electric field etc. which makes an electromagnet wave. The quantization of this field results in the waves propagating as photons.


Rodot t1_ivl46ap wrote


Rodot t1_ivjua01 wrote

It's black body radiation, usually taught in stat mech classes when deriving the Planck distribution (distribution of energies in a gas of photons). It's low level mechanism comes from what are called "continuum" interactions. They are called that because they produce a continuous spectrum unlike atomic interaction which are discrete.

Some examples of continuum interactions include Thomson/Compton scattering (photons bouncing off electrons, Thomson scattering is the low energy approximation and Compton is the relativistic case), Bremsstrahlung radiation (electrons scattering off ions), photoionization (electrons being kicked out of their atoms), collisional interactions (atoms and ions bumping into eachother), and autoionization (atoms with multiple excited electrons reconfiguring to shoot off an outer most electron through quantum tunneling). For those for who it's not clear where exactly the light comes from in all of these, accelerating charged particles emit light.

All of these interactions together create the Black-body (or Planck) distribution.

Source: I'm one of the developers of an astrophysical radiative transfer code