Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 April 7

= April 7 =

Inflammatory Diseases Caused by Defect in the TLR Pathway
Hello. Would someone please list an inflammatory disease caused by a defect in the Toll-like receptor pathway? Thanks so much in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 01:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * -- Jayron  32  02:48, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Jayron. I have done some research. I could not find what I was looking for. (Instead, I found sources about beneficial mutations.) I posted half of my question so I can have better search terms. After then, I will write my essay on my own. I graciously ask for your understanding. --Mayfare (talk) 04:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It sounds as though research is an essential part of the assignment. Searching Pubmed for "tlr AND autoimmune" produces many interesting results - the top 5 of which include direct answers to your question. -- Scray (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

viroids
what are viroids? a)infectious nucleoprotiens   b)infectious nucleic acid c)infectious proteins   d)infectious lipoproteins  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.227.142.217 (talk) 02:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * We won't answer homework problems, but you should know that the answer to your question is in our articles:
 * what are viroids?

a)infectious nucleoprotiens   b)infectious nucleic acid c)infectious proteins   d)infectious lipoproteins
 * it's often a good start just to type the words in the question into the search box. SemanticMantis (talk) 03:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Are there any planetariums where the dome screens touch the floor?
Because some planetariums' dome screens don't reach the floor. Having a dome screen that touches the floor is better because it's more realistic that way. Because if you're outside, it looks like the night sky touches the ground, and that's the kind of experience I'm looking for in a planetarium. Therefore, the planetarium needs to have a dome screen that touches the floor. Are there any planetariums like this that exist? Mattdillon87 (talk) 07:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't the people in the audience get in the way of the projected images? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes there is. And it's portable too! --TammyMoet (talk) 10:24, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Source
I need a source for a statement at the behest of another. The statement is: "There are no commercial sources for azanes." This intends to say that there are no naturally occuring reserves of azanes, which are commercially exploited. Azanes include ammonia, Hydrazine, etc. Plasmic Physics (talk) 09:42, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a very unusual meaning of "commercial sources". By that definition, there are no commercial sources of aluminium or sulphuric acid.  I don't think the statement can really be substantiated. Tevildo (talk) 12:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Bauxite doesn't contain 'aluminium' per se, but it does contain various aluminium oxides and hydroxides, which must be processed to obtain aluminium actual. Plasmic Physics (talk) 12:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Addendum: To me it seems an obvious statement in need of no citation according to WP:BLUE, based on my inability to find sources supporting a contrary position. Plasmic Physics (talk) 10:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Ammonia can be made from urine, a lot more easily than aluminum can be made from bauxite. It's unclear to me whether that would count as a "commercial source" in this context. Looie496 (talk) 16:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Linking to the article: azane. Said statement is at the first paragraph, last sentence. OsmanRF34 (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * First off, the statement "There are no commercial sources for azanes" is just simply bad, even if it's referenced and true under whatever particular definition of "commercial sources" you're using. It isn't clear just from that statement what that definition you're using here is, so someone else reading it will not understand your meaning. Rephrase to be more precise and clear. (Finding references might depend on what that rephrasing is. I'm still not sure what the meaning is intended to be.) - I also think WP:BLUE doesn't quite apply here. It's applies to things which are common knowledge. The "commercial sources" of azanes is far from common knowledge. If the statement regarding it is noteworthy enough to be stated as it is now, it probably should be substantiated. (Especially since the statement is highly dubious. (What do you mean by "no commercial sources"?) "Inability to find sources on the contrary position" doesn't cut it as justification, especially when no sources can be found for the collaborating position. There's a whole host of statements one could make that have no sources for or against. Only a small subset would actually be true on closer examination. -- 71.35.122.64 (talk) 20:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Before we go further, what is the interpretation of "commercial sources" in the statement featuring the term, in the introductory paragraph of alkane. My intention is to use the same definition, but apply it to Azane. Plasmic Physics (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The alkane statement, for reference, is "There are two main commercial sources: crude oil and natural gas.". So, the main commercial sources for ammonia are air and methane (see Haber-Bosch process), and the main commercial sources for hydrazine are air, methane and brine (see Olin Raschig process and sodium hypochlorite).  Tevildo (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * How about "All commercially available azanes are synthetically derived"? 202.155.85.18 (talk) 03:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * That could work. Plasmic Physics (talk) 07:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Check these facts
I have found some unbelievable facts. Four of them are as following -

Please check whether the following facts are right or wrong

1. Some species of earthworm can have as many as 10 hearts.

2. Space expand faster than the speed of light.

3. A bird’s heart beats 400 times per minute while they are at rest. When they are flying however, their heart could beat up to 1000 beats   per minute.

4. Electricity travels at the speed of light.Scientist456 (talk) 12:48, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * 1. Earthworm: "Segments in the esophageal region contain muscular commissural vessels connecting the top and bottom vessels that function like hearts to pump the blood (these are called aortic arches). There are five pairs of hearts, more or less."
 * 2. Metric expansion of space: "While special relativity constrains objects in the universe from moving faster than the speed of light with respect to each other, it places no theoretical constraint on changes to the scale of space itself. It is thus possible for two objects to be stationary or moving at speeds below that of light, and yet to become separated in space by more than the distance light could have travelled, which can suggest the objects travelled faster than light."
 * 3. We don't have an article on that, but small hearts beat very fast, it's true. We do have a piece on Hummingbird: "With the exception of insects, hummingbirds while in flight have the highest metabolism of all animals, a necessity in order to support the rapid beating of their wings. Their heart rate can reach as high as 1,260 beats per minute, a rate once measured in a Blue-throated Hummingbird." Perhaps as amazing, at night they can slow their heart rate to 50-180 beats per minute as part of a hibernation-like state.)
 * 4. Speed of electricity: "The word "electricity" refers generally to the movement of electrons (or other charge carriers) through a conductor in the presence of potential and an electric field. The "speed" of this flow has multiple meanings. In everyday electronics, the signals or energy travel quickly, as electromagnetic waves, while the electrons themselves move slowly." — AKA it's complicated. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It is not our purpose here to enjoy a miscelany of odd facts. Our purpose here is to answer questions about things which you do not know or understand, but would like to.  We ask that you do your own homewark first, then post a question if & when yiou get stuck.  However, taking your numbered items in turn:-
 * 1. Googling "earthworm anatomy" reveals a host of websites that show that earthworms don't actually have any true hearts.  The dorsal blood vessel contracts to push blood about.  If, by "heart", you mean the aortic arches, which assist in moving blood to the capillaries, then yes, there are typically 5 pairs of arches.
 * 2. I'll leave that to those knowlegeable in the subject for a definitive answer, but suspect that this too is a misunderstanding of the facts.
 * I'm no expert, but from what I understand, #2 is a key aspect of the theory of inflation (cosmology) used to explain away the horizon problem. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * 3. Large birds such as pelicans and albatrosses have pulse rates much the same as humans.  I've held chickens in my hands and felt their heart beating through their chest.  They run a little fast but nothing like 400 bpm.  Small birds such as pidgeons and parrots run about 160 (rest) to 500 (maxium effort climbing flight) or so.  Birds meet their high oxygen requirments for flight by having comparitively larger hearts and higher blood pressure for their body mass, compared to mammals.
 * 4. Electricity certainly does not travel at the speed of light.  How fast electrical energy propagates down a wire or cable depends on the distributed inductance and capacitance, and for typical cables is around 0.5 to 0.7 x the speed of light.  Note that the speed that electrical energy travells IS NOT the speed at which electrons move.
 * Wickwack 58.169.234.119 (talk) 13:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * DFT, FFS. And please don't tell me we should treat questions in good faith, That is how the Nigerian scam worked. This question(s) are clearly bait. Caesar&#39;s Daddy (talk) 14:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what your contribution is all about. OsmanRF34 (talk) 15:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, Gaius might be converting a finite list of equally-spaced samples of a function into a list of coefficients of a finite combination of complex sinusoids, ordered by their frequencies, or might be considering a dynamic - cognitive approach to human decision making, or might be referring to a quantum mechanical modelling method used in physics and chemistry to investigate the electronic structure (principally the ground state) of many-body systems, in particular atoms, molecules, and the condensed phases, or any one of a choice of interpretations of his first TLA, but I don't think the second one refers to reconstructive surgical procedures that alter typically male facial features to bring them closer in shape and size to typical female facial features. Does this clarify things?  I don't understand, either, and I wish people wouldn't assume that everyone else uses the same abbreviations.   D b f i r s   16:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:DFT was intended, unjustifiably IMO. Tevildo (talk) 16:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, don't feed the trolls, for fuck's sake. Now I get the message, but still doesn't know what's wrong with the series of questions above. They seem to be general curiosity. OsmanRF34 (talk) 16:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that solves one mystery. Quote from that redirected link: "If a user seems to be asking stupid questions, try to give them the resources to help themselves."  I think the replies to the seven questions have been directed towards that aim, and I found the questions basic, but more interesting than disruptive.    D b f i r s   17:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

24k Silver
If gold and silver are about the same hardness, why doesn't 24k silver exist for jewellery?Curb Chain (talk) 15:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The carat only applies to gold - for silver (and precious metals in general), the measure used is Millesimal fineness. According to that article, the finest silver commonly used for jewellery is Britannia silver at 958.  Tevildo (talk) 15:56, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That's the same purity as 23karat. CS Miller (talk) 16:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I think there is some confusion to my question: What I attempted to ask is "Gold jewellery exists in 24k.  Why doesn't silver jewellery exist as widely at this purity?".Curb Chain (talk) 02:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it's more reactive, and harder to purify (also less valuable, which means there's not as much need for ultra-high purity). 24.23.196.85 (talk) 02:19, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Is silver that much more harder to purify that there is no demand for pure silver jewellery?Curb Chain (talk) 10:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "Pure" silver is less suited to many applications because it is softer and has a higher melting point than sterling silver and other alloys. DMacks (talk) 02:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

East
East Africans are better at long-distance running while west-Africans are better at short-distance sprinting. Can this be attributed to evolution? Pass a Method  talk  19:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * note The winners of last years Olympic long distance events (800m, 500m 10,000) were of East African descent. The winners of short-distance events (100, 200m, 400m) were all of West-African descent. Pass a Method   talk  19:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * According to [], Kenyans at least are not better long-distance runners due to their genes. OsmanRF34 (talk) 19:55, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * (ec) My gut feeling is that this has to do with fast-twitch and slow-twitch muscle fibers. A quick Google search confirms  Poking NCBI the same way I get  and  .. apparently there can also be a downside, in obesity stats .  I didn't generally sort out the details of which populations and genes are involved (a large task) but it looks like alpha-actinin 3 has a special role, being completely absent from a billion individuals but being absent in only 6% of sprinters vs. 18% of the general population. .  However, a study of it  didn't find that it had an effect on the number of sprinters, because it is present at only 1-11% in the African populations they looked at.  I expect you'd have to tot up many such genes and studies to get to the truth... perhaps there's a review I missed...  Wnt (talk) 20:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * There's enough genetic diversity within African, American, Asian or European populations to find enough individuals of any genetic markup, equivalent to what you expect to find in an Olympic runner. The key difference is how many individuals would ever try to become good at running in a specific geographical area. Long-distance running is very popular in Kenya. And it is by no means a fact of life that Eastern African are the best long-distance runner. If my memory doesn't fail me, in the past Finland and Hungry were overrepresented. In the same way that Norwegians are overrepresented at biathlon or Romanian at weight-lifting. OsmanRF34 (talk) 20:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * (ec) The flip answer is "I think you just did."
 * The slightly longer answer is "Yes, but that's probably not the question you meant to ask." That is, individual sources which have attributed the difference to evolutionary pressures are readily discoverable through a cursory Google search.  What I'm guessing you're really interested in is whether or not those conclusions are true.  There exists lots of evidence supporting a genetic basis for the dominating superiority of East Africans (at least, individuals of East African genetic heritage) in long-distance running, and West African supremacy in sprints.  Probably the best-known popular treatment of this topic is Jon Entine's Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We’re Afraid to Talk About It, though it may be a bit dated since it was published in 2000.
 * That gets us to the meatiest but probably least satisfying answer. While it's tempting to say (post hoc ergo propter  hoc) that every genetic result in biology is driven by evolutionary (selection) pressure, you can also get some weird coincidences and counterintuitive outliers.  Suppose there was an isolated East African population that coincidentally carried genes for distance running, which have been passed down through some sort of founder effect?  Some have suggested that this is indeed a big part of East African distance running success&mdash;many marathoners are drawn from a a single tribe, the Kalenjin people of the Rift Valley Province of Kenya, .  Alternatively or relatedly, as the likely origin of the human species and home to the oldest human population, Africa is also home to the greatest human genetic variation&mdash;more genetic mixing and matching and a more 'complete' set of founders means more opportunity to coincidentally come up with the most effective 'sprinter' and 'runner' phenotypes.
 * Is there something intrinsic to the environment of the Rift Valley that would apply a particular selection pressure in favor of distance running? Or in favor of sprinters in West Africa?>  The jury's still out, as far as I can tell, but there doesn't seem to be any compelling argument or evidence for it so far:.
 * Study is further complicated or confused by an overwrought (and sometimes reflexive) accusation that looking for genetic factors contributing to these atheletes' abilities is inherently racist, and that scientists who examine these questions are somehow attempting to dismiss the hard work and training of African athletes as nothing more than a well-he-was-just-born-that-way genetic lottery ticket . TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd say theres definitely a genetic element to this, because you see the same pattern in immigrant communities as in native communities. In other words, both East African immigrants and East Africans themselves are great long-distance runners. Same pattern with West Africans at 100m. Pass a Method   talk  20:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure; I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. I'd say that the general consensus is that there is a (strong) genetic factor to the success of (East|West) Africans in (long|short)-distance running.  The open question is whether or not this is a fluke or if it is due to an identifiable selection pressure.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=73C786F70EF0911ED6A9BD665E87A4E7.journals?fromPage=online&aid=793784
 * http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/olympic_games/world_olympic_dreams/8886705.stm
 * --Guy Macon (talk)


 * As said in the article linked by Guy Macon: "however, any genetic component to their success is unlikely to be limited to East Africans and is more likely to be found in other populations. At present it is unjustified to implicate a role for genetics in the success of East African runners when no genes have been identified as being important to their performance." No matter what genes are good for it, if any, you'll find them elsewhere. Americans are dominant in baseball. Spaniards are good in bull-fighting. Swedish and Canadians in curling. Japanese in Sumo. Is that all genetically motivated? Note: TenOfAllTrades' linking to Forbes and Guardian as sources and claiming that there is broad consensus is kind of funny. OsmanRF34 (talk) 01:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ten gave a good answer. I should explain that the reason why looking for a genetic edge, even a racial genetic edge, is more plausible in these competitions than in normal life is that we are measuring extremely small differences and doing so in a very small subset of the population.  If two races have a hundredth of a point difference in their IQ scores, it will not be detected nor is it grounds for discrimination, but if they have a hundredth of a second difference in running time of their very fastest sprinters, it could really matter.  These tiny differences also matter only under the probably reasonable assumption that all the best athletes are putting everything they possibly can into their training and competitions.  Even so - nobody is going to be able with current technology to point at an athlete and say for sure that his genes won the race; it is at best a statistical hypothesis, and rarely developed far enough for that. Wnt (talk) 04:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The assumption "that all the best athletes are putting everything they possibly can" is not necessarily true. Americans and Europeans who are into sports have plenty of options, and therefore many who would be good runners end in different sports, playing at a high level. The question I asked above stays in the room, for all that believe that the gens of a population made them be better at something: Are Swedish and Canadians better in curling due to their genetic predisposition? Even if you found that the runners have different genes (which is pretty probable, they must at least be thin and not too tall, in the case of marathon runners), that wouldn't mean that the East African population can produce more runners than say the Czech population. OsmanRF34 (talk) 16:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

There was a BBC Horizon documentary about this a long time ago. They concluded that what makes East Africans better at long distance running is that certain leg bones are longer, making running more efficient for them. They tested this by monitoring the progress of British and Kenyan boys at running. Their fitness and running performance was monitored over time as they exercised. What became clear is that for the same value of indicators of fitness like VO2 max etc., the Kenyans would run faster. Count Iblis (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I wonder what scientific studies are there, which are not in Forbes or BBC or Guardian, about the relationship between genetics and African runners. If you pick some fatty English boys for a comparison, then sure, the Kenyans will run faster. Can we say that this or that population is better at being the runner elite? No, even if we know that height and fat are partially genetic determined. OsmanRF34 (talk) 19:41, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If the BBC documentary was right, then it is mainly an issue of biomechanics. It may be that there are many genes involved so you don't really have clean genetic signal from DNA analysis. However, if biomechanical experts link it to the typical East African bodybuild, then you don't need to study the DNA. I'm sure that there are peer reviewed scientific studies that make this point. In case of the 100 meters sprint, while the biology is less clear here, the data points to an even larger disadvantage for Europeans. There is only one white person who has ever run the 100 meters in less than ten seconds.


 * This same biomechanics that allows Kenyans to run more efficiently than Europenas has also been invoked to explain why Neaderthalers died out. Apparently the body build of Neaderthalers made them a lot less efficient to walk or run large distances than Homo Sapiens. They used to hunt animals by ambushing them and killing them from close range. Due to environmental changes the dense forests disappeared making hunting this way less efficient compared to trail seeking and stalking animals which involves covering large distances as our hunter gatherer ancestors used to do. Count Iblis (talk) 23:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The article I linked from The Atlantic makes a point of providing inline links to its primary sources and other relevant references, including a detailed study of running ability in the Kenyan population. The Forbes column was written by John Entine; I provided it as an accessible summary for readers who didn't have a copy of Entine's book at hand.  The Guardian article I included merely to acknowledge the political angle to the discussion.  Of course, OsmanRF34 would be aware of this if he had actually looked at the sources, instead of just mocking them. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


 * aside from the fast twitch slow twitch thing, there's differences in the mechanical design of a sprinter vs a marathoner, similar to the reasons why a top fuel dragster can get along without a radiator but a le mans car can't, for instance. http://naturallyengineeredcom-files.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/olympic-sprinters-body-infographic.jpg and http://naturallyengineeredcom-files.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/olympic-marathon-body-infographic.jpg. Gzuckier (talk) 06:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Effect of galvanisation on steel used as anode in electrolytic rust removal
I would like to use electrolytic rust removal. Can galvanised steel be used for the anode? Would this have any effect on the process or finished piece? 89.241.233.102 (talk) 20:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Specifically, I want to restore this vice. Would it matter if it got some zinc plating on it? Would it interfere with the rust removal? --89.241.233.102 (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * My suggestion is, first to strip it apart. Apply tape to the screw and nut -to protect it. Then de-rust parts  in a weak 3 ½ % solution of hydrochloric acid (spirit of salts). Then dry and paint with a good quality enamel paint. Electrolytic Rust Removal is great for maybe archaeological exhibits but it only goes part way to restoring the original morphology but no way to restoring the granular structure of the steel itself.  If you use electrolysis for this application you will just end up with crud in the nut and it will soon seize up. --Aspro (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your advice! How and why do I need to apply tape? Why aren't archaeological exhibits de-rusted in hydrochloric acid? What do you think is the most economical form for me to buy hydrochloric acid in? I'm in the UK, if that makes a difference. I can get it on eBay but maybe there's somewhere local, if I know where to look. A hardware store? An arts store? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.233.102 (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Archaeological finds are mostly iron oxides. If the conservationists removed all that crud with acid, there  would be little left. Electrolytic Rust Removal reverses the process back to something resembling  the original form.  However,  the object is still very delicate. So, say a Spanish cannon, after years on the sea-bed, was so thus restored -it would likely explode if it it was fired again. It may look good but the original crystal structure (which gave it its  tensile strength) would not have reformed. The average guy  can readily buy hydrochloric acid in the UK as 'spirit of salts' (sold as a drain cleaner) from DIY stores, high street Chemists,  etc. (locally it only cost about £2 for 500ml). The bottle  will state its strength.  From this one can work out how much water you should add it to. Note: All ways pour acid into water.. not add water to acid. A friendly pharmacist (not Boots, their always too busy) should be able to advise you how much water you need to achieve a  3.5% solution.    Hydrochloric acid for swimming pools come in much larger bottles – far too much. You need to apply tape because this your first time. The screw is the most important part. You don't want to dissolve the metal itself. Once you know how to remove just the rust, on the lesser import  parts, then you can tackle removing 'just' the rust on the screw. Then take it out and wipe it with steel wool.  After the acid bath, it will be very clean in deed, so immediately apply some oil or grease, to prevent re-rusting.  The nut may well be brass or bronze -if it is a good vice. One need not use acid on them, as all they may need is a good clean, in paraffin (kerosene). Likewise, oil or grease immediately. Lastly, be careful of telling your friends and neighbors in the UK  that you  are doting  on your  old   'vice'  – they may take it the wrong way.Aspro (talk) 00:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hydrochloric acid is readily available as a swimming pool chemical. You'd have to determine the concentration to work out how much to dilute it for the desired concentration.  — Quondum 23:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * When sold as a swimming pool chemical, hydrochloric acid is often called "Muriatic Acid"...same stuff. SteveBaker (talk) 16:09, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Sleep Deprivation
So, I believe I have the new record for number of consecutive days without sleep. I was awake for a period of eighteen consecutive days starting from approximately 9am, June 1st, 2012 and ending at approximately, 4am, Central Standard Time June 19th, 2012. During the course of this ordeal, I was subjected to a small variety of medication prescribed and given to me by a psychiatric in San Antonio, Texas. The reason for my involvement with the psychiatric firm was to treat a simple sleep loss issue and not obviously to be writing this email.

I emailing the "Help" desk with the Wikipedia to inquire how to legitimize my claim and update the Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.11.190.179 (talk) 22:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * See Randy Gardner (record holder). Guinness World Records no longer maintain this as a live record.  The unofficial record, according to our article, is 18 days, 21 hours, 14 minutes (longer than your 17 days 19 hours, I'm afraid). Tevildo (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Randy Gardner also set his record without any stimulants, so you'll have to try again, with the proper documentation, and without the pharmaceuticals from the psychiatric in San Antonio, Texas. 202.155.85.18 (talk) 02:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I doubt it's a good idea to be encouraging this sort of thing. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * See also Fatal familial insomnia. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Without documentation in the form of continuous EEG recordings, claims like this are essentially meaningless. Lots of people think they are continuously awake when they are actually taking intermittent short naps.  I'm not asserting that that's the case here, just that without evidence there is no way of proving it one way or the other. Looie496 (talk) 00:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Very possible. Even so, I wonder whether such feats could be possible by unihemispheric slow-wave sleep.  That is a phenomenon only known to occur in animals - but a very broad range of animals, which tends to make me wonder if the species that display it are the extreme expression of a possibility that remained in all the transitional forms between. Wnt (talk) 05:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Giulio Tononi argues that it is possible for the sleep state to be restricted to particular parts of the brain -- for example he interprets sleepwalking as a state where the frontal part of the brain is asleep while the posterior part is awake. So I don't think we can rule out things like that.  But I'm not aware of any evidence for anything like unihemispheric sleep in humans. Looie496 (talk) 15:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * "Whether or not the brain is asleep or awake is not an either-or proposition, according to some scientists." Also: "If this partial-sleep hypothesis is correct, some parts of the brain may be asleep while we actually appear to be awake, and vice versa." Bus stop (talk) 15:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. However, the parasomniac activities described in many of these cases are hard to qualify as wakefulness, and it is not clear that the person can go indefinitely in such a state.  The unihemispheric mechanism seems to offer a way for an organism to maintain what we might agree is "a level of" wakefulness that is consistent for long periods.  But if humans can do it at all it is clearly very rare - just plausible enough that, if reported, I could seriously consider that somewhere there could really be someone who ceaselessly chants from his holy book or something for years on end. Wnt (talk) 16:21, 8 April 2013 (UTC)