Scientists

Mathieu Orfila is known as the father of forensic toxicology. He made significant contributions to the field by developing methods to detect poisons in the human body through chemical analysis in the early 19th century. Orfila's work helped establish toxicology as a legitimate science used in criminal investigations and legal proceedings.

The choices are

-they were harmed by radiation therapy

-they died off because the cancerous cells deprived them of nutrients

-they died off due to natural causes

- they thrived with the cancerous cells

Isotopes help scientists by providing unique markers for tracing biological and chemical processes, dating artifacts, and studying nutrient cycling in ecosystems. They also help in understanding geologic processes, tracking pollutants, and in medical diagnostics and treatments.

Age at death estimates from the skull are based on the extent to which the various bones of the cranium have fused together. Unfortunately its been shown that the rate at which this fusion takes place is fairly variable, meaning the method is not that accurate.

Where teeth remain these provide a far more accurate indicator.

In practice the most accurate calculations come from taking age at death estimates based on as much of the skeleton as is available, and so studies of just the skull, especially without teeth can only provide a rough estimate at best.

Albert Einstein attained a degree in physics at ETH Zürich -- the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (FIT) in Zurich -- in 1900. He received a doctorate from the University of Zürich in 1905.

Scientists have updated their theories about Venus because of new data collected from recent spacecraft missions. These new findings have revealed a better understanding of Venus's atmosphere, surface, and geological features, prompting a revision of previous assumptions.

Standardized units of measure are important to engineering because if everyone was using different measurement systems, dimensions of different objects and inventions wouldn't be converted correctly from the inventor to other inventors or manufacturers.

(Had to be fixed because who ever wrote the originally answer was a a$$ hole)

The traditional view that one cannot prove the null hypothesis by a statistical analysis is a consequence of Ronald Fisher's structuring of the problem of probabilistic inference. Fisher argued that if one wanted to determine whether an experimental manipulation (e.g., a drug treatment or a treatment of some crop land) had an effect (on e.g., recovery rate or crop yield), one should compute the probability that one would obtain an effect (that is, a difference in the means of two samples, a control sample, and an experimental sample) as big or bigger than the one in fact obtained if both samples were in fact drawn from the same distribution (that is, if there were in fact no effect). In other words, how likely is it that one would see an effect that big or bigger by chance? If this probability is sufficiently low (say, less than one chance in 20), then one is justified in concluding that what one did had an effect (or that there was a difference in the average values in the populations that one drew the two samples from). Thus, if the difference in the means of the two samples was sufficiently greater than expected by chance, then one was justified in concluding that something more than chance was at work. This way of framing the problem has come to be called Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST, for short). In this formulation, you cannot prove the null hypothesis, because failing to reject it is not the same as accepting it--anymore than a verdict of "not proven" is the same as a verdict of "not guilty." Thus, if you think this is the right way to formulate the problem of probabilistic inference, then you cannot prove the null.

But this way of formulating the problem flies in the face of common sense. We all draw a strong and clear distinction between "not proven" and "not guilty." In this formulation, the only possible verdict as regards the null hypothesis is "not proven." This would perhaps be okay if null hypotheses were of no scientific or practical importance. But, in fact, they are of profound scientific and practical importance. The conservation laws, which are at the foundation of modern physics, are null hypotheses; they all assert that "under no circumstance does this change." And, for most people it matters whether a generic drug costing 1/10 the cost of a brand drug really has "the same effect" as the brand drug or just "has not been proven to have a different effect." If you frame it in the latter way, then many more people will opt to pay the additional cost than if you say that "the evidence shows that the effects of the generic drug and the brand drug do not differ" (a null hypothesis).

Moreover, and this is more technical, the traditional formulation violates basic mathematical/logical considerations. One of these is consistency: a rational treatment of the evidence for and against any hypothesis should have the property that as the number of observations "goes to infinity" (becomes arbitrarily large), then the probability of drawing the correct conclusion should go to 1. But, under the NHST formulation, when the null hypothesis is true, the probability of rejecting it remains .05 or .01 (whatever one regards at the crucial degree of improbability) no matter how many observations there are. Another curious aspect of the traditional formulation is that it licenses concluding the one's own (non-null) hypothesis is correct because the null hypothesis appears to fail, even though one's own hypothesis is never tested against the data, whereas the null hypothesis is. This is a little bit like concluding that one could oneself climb a formidable mountain just because someone else has failed to climb it. Fairness would seem to require that one's own hypothesis, whatever it may be, should undergo the same test that the null hypothesis has undergone. At a somewhat simpler level, How can a statistical method for drawing conclusions be valid if it prohibits ever drawing a conclusion in favor of some hypotheses (null hypotheses) that are of fundamental scientific and practical importance?

There is an alternative to the NHST formulation of the problem of probabilistic inference that dates back to the work of the Reverend Thomas Bayes in the 18th century. In the Bayesian formulation, both the null hypothesis and one or more alternatives to it are tested against the data. In this formulation, each of the hypotheses places a bet on where the data from the experimental treatment (or the other condition of observation) will fall. The hypothesis that does the best job of anticipating where the data in fact fall obtains the greatest odds of being correct (or, at least, more valid than the alternatives to it that have been proposed). In this formulation, it is perfectly possible for the null hypothesis to be the odds on favorite. In other words, in this conception of how to do probabilistic inference, it is possible to prove the null in the sense that the null may have arbitrarily greater odds as against any of the proposed alternative to it. Thus, in this formulation, the null is no different than any other hypothesis. This approach to the problem of probabilistic inference has gained considerable currency in recent years. According to its advocates, it is the only "normative" (mathematically correct) formulation, because, among other things, it does not prohibit any hypothesis from being accepted, and because it is consistent: as the data (number of observations) become arbitrarily large, the odds that the true hypothesis will be accepted increase toward infinity, regardless of whether the true hypothesis is the null hypothesis or an alternative to it. In short, the Bayesian formulation places the null hypothesis on the same footing as any other hypothesis, so it is just as susceptible of proof as any other hypothesis.

The story goes.... In the search for the relationship between the known elements, Dmetri Mendeleev's devised a card game made of elements; sort of like 'elemental solitaire'. In this game, each card had one element written on it with its atomic weight. He spent 2 sleepless days attempting to find a relationship by grouping the cards together on the table. On the third day there was a snow storm and Mendeleev's decided to stay home. Although restless he eventually fell asleep in which he dreamed a scientific breakthrough. In this dream he saw the elements arranged in a table and they were grouped together by various properties. When he awoke, he attempted to group the known elements in this manner and noticed that in order for this arrangement to work, he needed to leave spaces or gaps for other elements. Therefore, he also discovered that there were many other elements needed to be discovered.

particles, which led to the development of the concept of wave-particle duality in quantum physics.

Nikola Tesla made numerous discoveries and inventions in the field of electrical engineering and physics. Some of his most notable discoveries include the rotating magnetic field, the Tesla coil, and contributions to the development of alternating current (AC) electrical systems. Tesla also did research on wireless communication and wireless energy transmission.

Voltage was named after the Italian physicist, Count Alessandro Volta, who invented the electric battery in the late 18th century.

Marconi did not discover any new and revolutionary principle in his wireless-telegraph system, but rather he assembled and improved a number of components,

Scientists initially experimented with static electricity, generated through friction, such as rubbing amber with fur. This led to the development of Leyden jars for storing electricity. Later, they explored current electricity through the invention of batteries and early electrochemical cells.

Rekindling a relationship after a broken engagement is possible, but it requires open communication, trust, and willingness to address the issues that led to the breakup. It is important to take time to reflect on what went wrong and whether both parties are truly committed to making things work. Ultimately, the decision to get back together should be based on mutual understanding and respect for each other's feelings.

Copernicus did not have a traditional middle name like we use today. His full name was Nicolaus Copernicus or Mikolaj Kopernik in Polish.

What important contribution did Lavoisier make to Dalton's atomic theory of matter? Lavoisier helped the atomic theory of matter, by stating that matter is not destroyed or created, it just changes form. Located inside the nucleus, has a positive charge, and 1 amu.

Everyone uses a standard system, not just scientists. How would we ever do business with each other if each of us were free to define our own measurements? Most of the world uses the metric system of weights and measures while only the US have their own standards, but it is some math to determine the equivalent of gallons in liters or kilograms in pounds.

Tesla may have suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder or an Autistic spectrum condition and had many unusual quirks and phobias. He did things in threes, and was adamant about staying in a hotel room with a number divisible by three. Tesla was also noted to be physically revolted by jewelry, notably pearl earrings. He was fastidious about cleanliness and hygiene, and was by all accounts mysophobic.

Stephen Hawking was a renowned theoretical physicist known for his work in cosmology and quantum gravity. He was diagnosed with ALS at a young age, which left him quadriplegic, and he communicated using a speech-generating device. Hawking made significant contributions to our understanding of black holes and the universe.

You can purchase a Tesla coil online from specialized retailers, electronics stores, or directly from manufacturers. It's important to ensure you have the knowledge and safety precautions required to operate a Tesla coil safely.

In the 18th century, Benjamin Franklin conducted extensive research in electricity, selling his possessions to fund his work. In June 1752 he is reputed to have attached a metal key to the bottom of a dampened kite string and flown the kite in a storm-threatened sky. A succession of sparks jumping from the key to the back of the hand showed that lightning was indeed electrical in nature so Tesla is most famous for conceiving the rotating magnetic field principle (1882) and then using it to invent the induction motor together with the accompanying alternating current long-distance electrical transmission system (1888). His patents and theoretical work still form the basis for modern alternating current electric power systems. He also developed numerous other electrical and mechanical devices including the fundamental principles and machinery of wireless technology, including the high frequency alternator, the "AND" logic gate and the Tesla coil, as well as other devices such as the bladeless turbine, the spark plug and numerous other inventions.

Leo Szilard in 1933, he patented them the next year in the UK. But he could not build them by himself. It took 12 more years and a huge investment in industrial infrastructure before the US built the first bombs and usable nuclear power had to wait until after the war.

Heart failure. He was found dead on his New Yorker apartment by house service.

Scientists typically communicate the results of an experiment through scientific journals, presentations at conferences, or by publishing their findings in peer-reviewed research papers. This allows other scientists to review, replicate, and build upon the work.