Good evening! I am reading up on electricity just for the fun of it. I am still a complete beginner.

With that out of the way, I wonder: are electrons negatively charged inanimate objects, perhaps particles, or are they merely negative charge with no physical form? But perhaps without there being an object to exert charge there is no charge?

An other way of asking this question would to my beginner mind be: could we tag and track an individual electron as it flows - perhaps in a piece of copper without significant voltage so that the electron doesn't rush away in the speed of light?

I guess I want to know this in order to understand whether electrons actually loop around in a closed DC circuit in the speed of light or are they just pushing the electron in front of them, creating a domino effect, not actually traveling very far?

Please excuse my incoherent formulation. It's late at night where I am and of course these questions come to mind when I'm trying to sleep.

First sincere apologies if this is the wrong community, I don't have lab science friends to ask about this.

Over the last few months my ph probe has been working well, then over a few days it started to drift down to reporting a ph of 2-3 instead of the 6-7 I would expect. There are so many cleaning procedures out there for ph probes, and knowing how to clean them depends on knowing what is causing them to foul.

I tried using generic probe cleaning solution, 0.1M HCL, and even just a light detergent. Nothing has worked so far.

I was reading that black spots on the ceramic could be from sulfides. And this probe is used 24/7 in my aquarium, where I dechlorinate freshly added water with a dechlorinate that I believe uses sodium thiosulfate. Could that be interacting with the probe's silver /silver chloride?

I just got thiourea and I'll be trying to prepare a thiourea/hcl solution.

What else should I try? What else might be causing this kind of fouling/errant results?

What kind of lab equipment and tools would be needed and is there any open science oriented resource on the process?

Had a relative say he was going to take it as a treatment for his ADHD and he'd read some articles. This relative is all over the place with legit ideas mixed with ones I don't think have the scientific backing. I thought about looking it up like I usually would and just felt tired (there are so many fake sites and articles about medical stuff to sift through...). But someone here maybe already researched it or has actual background on the subject? For all I know, this is a completely well known and mundane treatment for it.

I watched a few vids of chickens developing in eggs without shells (see here for an example, somewhat graphic), and got to wonder.

You'd think that all the yolk is uniform and therefore it could develop anywhere, but is there an underlying mechanism that could cause the primitive streak and everything to develop near the centre? Maybe a sort of yolk density mechanism, that it starts where the yolk is densest? The furthest from oxygen exchange at the shell?

Or does such a mechanism not exist?

Have we just all become googlets. Or something? How does a person get hard copies of stuff for science and other things for a fiscal year? I can further explain if need be.

Let me clarify what I mean:
If you put 80W of electrical energy into an ideal electrical heater, it will put out 80W of heat energy.
But what if you put 80W of electrical energy into a CPU and let it calculate things, creating new information?
Will it also output exactly 80W of heat?

Or is some energy transformed into "information", so the CPU will radiate less heat?

My instinct is that if information isn't energy, then you could theoretically create it (thereby reducing entropy) without expending energy, and that's a no-no.

But if it is energy, then a CPU running a random number generator (creating no information) at max load would get hotter than one doing actual calculations. Which also sounds wrong.

(I'm neither a physicist nor a computer scientist, in case that wasn't obvious)

So, I've been page-hopping on wikipedia pages about arthropods, as one does, and learned the difference between cheliceriforms sea spiders, limules and arachnids) and mandibulates (crustaceans, myriapods and insects) is that the prior have cheliceres where the latter have mandibles. Splendid, but these seem like the same things and both take extremely different forms, so how can the distinction be so clear cut? Now, of course, I followed the white rabbit deeper in its hole, and this page told me cheliceres evolved from the second pair on antennae of other arthropods. I already had a book about insects that told me their mandibles evolved from limbs, so I thought I had the whole picture: A common ancestor with two pairs of antennae, both having round tardigrade-like mouths and two of its descendants developping articulated mouthpieces separately, one from its antennae giving rise to cheliceriforms, and the other from its front legs, birthing the mandibulates, and everyone's happy.

But the next day, I was bugged again when I wondered where trilobites fit into this, and I found this cladogram that groups them with the mandibulates within antennulata. So now I get that cheliceriforma and mandibulata are not sister groups, but also, cheliceriforma is outside of the group caracterized by having antennae. Am I to conclude that none of their ancestors had antennae? Then what did their cheliceres evolve from? Is it also legs, and then they're only different from mandibles in the sense that they evolved separately? Or is it yet something else?

The individual gets the genetic code of a deceased person using that towards fresh stem cells (becomes a fetus) in which the newborn later on inherits the genetic traits that person but what remains a mystery is: will they also inherit the same behavior or mannerisms as that individual? Genes only carry attributes of a individual (appearance, hair color, eyes, etc). rather than their attitude (personality).

As from their genetic code, they look & resemble that person but will they act the same? Will they possess the same memories as that person? They may resmble someone you once knew however behave like a complete stranger, so it's rather a gamble plus despite them looking like someone you know: is it really them or another stranger despite the very similar appearance and physical traits they have?

It’s like if you imported all modern technology into the past: an iPhone alone would standout in the 50s for example. You have the device in hand but no service (cellphone towers are non existent during that era, nor is the internet & social media) so its functions remain basic (note taking, photos, voice memos) while pretty much all apps won’t function (no phone calls either).

You could record what happened back then via video but you’ll be too late when the internet’s infrastructure comes into fruition, so that “1950s lifestyle video” becomes old fast by the time you returned to the present day, but would you be believed if you said “this is shot in 1956” despite the resolution being in 4K in color or consider it mere fiction even though it is not.

Nuclear is taboo, but a mass moving at high velocity in space and then impacting the Earth is just as powerful, if not more so. Seeing it launch, and knowing it is coming but unstoppable except through leveraged diplomacy is more strategic. The timeline is long, but the potential for a redistribution of geopolitical power structures is large.

I think it is likely a distant future type of problem. Refueling of a large craft in space is likely a major factor, but we are nearly at that point now. I am curious if such a technology comes before large scale space colonies or after. Does it make more sense to weaponize some low earth orbit asteroid for the mass, like covering the surface with an expanding ablative resin before redirecting it to a target.

If all major wars last for years, when (if ever) does it make sense to have a launch platform around a Jovian moon for the largest gravitational assist.

Not that I want any such thing. I am thinking about hard science fiction and the overall timeline.

For example how come I can be playing a video game and it seems to me time as sped up? Or how about someone in prison or jail and it appears to them that time has slowed? And other. Both groups know its not as speed up or down but just seems that way? Why is this?