No doubt everyone on the planet is or has been both. And it seems pretty obvious that people generally prefer one over the other. But I have a question about the amount of time we spend in both, because it’d be difficult to either live deep in the bowels of detail, or multitask all the time. And I also wonder …

… that when you drive up to an intersection, the second you do, for that brief moment, the coast is clear? But if you wait, then you wait for a very long time? I’ve wondered about this for years, and I’ve decided I can either take this as some sort of cosmic prod to just dive in, take the risk, …

I was surprised when I found out I don’t live in real time. Nobody does, which is slightly creepy. Here’s what I’ve learned… Though anyone would swear that what they see is one complete picture, in fact, it isn’t at all. The central area of your retina, called the fovea – is where you actually capture what you’re focusing on. …

This is something that’s nagged me for a very long time, and I’ve asked a ton of people for their opinion. And what’s interesting is that everyone answers immediately, DECISIVELY, one way or the other, and then they stop – and they think about it again, and they’re not so sure. I’m not sure either. I guess it all depends …

Days, weeks, months and years have passed since the newly minted scientist first launched herself on this quest to uncover exactly why this particular cell acts like a normal, happy member of society most of the time, but then suddenly veers toward a dangerous future, turning psychotic and threatening to turn all its neighbors into psychotics as well. Cancer – …

Pretty darned good, I’d say. But I’d like to answer that with a different question – what would the world look like if NOBODY embraced science and technology? Even if you decided to move to the farthest windblown, scorched or frozen, basically uninhabitable reaches of the wilderness, you’d still be using products and services that have grown from scientific inventions …