Podcasts about luigi galvani

Elektriciteit stroomt door ons lichaam. Elke beweging, emotie en beslissing wordt aangestuurd door elektrische impulsen in de hersenen.  Luigi Galvani en zijn vrouw Lucia Galeazzi ontdekten samen voor het eerst elektriciteit vanuit het lichaam. We maken een sprong naar 250 jaar later. "Veel mensen realiseren zich niet dat het lichaam alleen maar kan werken dankzij elektriciteit,” zegt Damiaan Denys, filosoof en hoogleraar psychiatrie aan het Amsterdam UMC. Maar wat doet die stroom eigenlijk met ons? En kunnen we die inzetten in ons voordeel? In deze Focus aflevering duiken we diep in het brein: ⚡Damiaan Denys (https://www.damiaandenys.com/) onderzoekt Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) en laat zien hoe gecontroleerde elektrische stroompjes gedrag kunnen beïnvloeden en zelfs depressie kunnen verlichten. “In tegenstelling tot andere therapieën, zag je mensen eigenlijk in een milliseconde verbeteren.”

PALERMO (ITALPRESS) - "Speravo che il biglietto fosse rimasto a me, ma non è stato così. Comunque, sono contenta ugualmente". Così all'Italpress Ina Casesa, la titolare della pasticceria Porretto, in via Luigi Galvani 51, a Palermo, dove è stato vinto il terzo premio della Lotteria Italia da 2 milioni di euro. "Siamo felicissimi, spero che la fortuna abbia baciato qualcuno che sia bisognoso, che si ricordi pure di noi", aggiunge. La pasticceria si trova nel quartiere Settecannoli ed è frequentata soprattutto da residenti della zona, dove è già partita la caccia al neo milionario. "Qui vengono clienti abitudinari, ma qualcuno di passaggio c'è sempre - spiega la titolare della pasticceria -. In questi giorni sono venute tante persone, molti amici, e di biglietti ne ho venduti tanti". "Spero che il vincitore si ricordi di noi - ribadisce -. Gli auguro il meglio della vita, che sappia gestire la vincita e tanta felicità, soprattutto se a vincere è stato un bisognoso". Quello vinto nella pasticceria della periferia palermitana è il terzo premio, serie G, numero 330068. xd8/vbo/gtr

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for December 8, 2024 is: galvanize • GAL-vuh-nyze • verb To galvanize people is to cause them to be so excited or concerned about something that they are driven to action. // The council's proposal to close the library has galvanized the town's residents. See the entry > Examples: “The original Earth Day was the product of a new environmental consciousness created by Rachel Carson's 1962 book, Silent Spring, and of public horror in 1969 that the Cuyahoga River in Ohio was so polluted it caught fire. … On April 22, 1970, some 20 million people attended thousands of events across America, and this galvanizing public demand led in short order to the creation, during Richard Nixon's presidency, of the Environmental Protection Agency (1970), the Clean Air Act (1970), the Clean Water Act (1972), and the Endangered Species Act (1973), and much more after that.” — Todd Stern, The Atlantic, 6 Oct. 2024 Did you know? Luigi Galvani was an Italian physician and physicist who, in the 1770s, studied the electrical nature of nerve impulses by applying electrical stimulation to frogs' leg muscles, causing them to contract. Although Galvani's theory that animal tissue contained an innate electrical impulse was disproven, the French word galvanisme came to refer to a current of electricity especially when produced by chemical action, while the verb galvaniser was used for the action of applying such a current (both words were apparently coined by German naturalist Alexander von Humboldt, who modeled them after the French equivalents of magnetism and magnetize). In English, these words came to life as galvanism and galvanize, respectively. Today their primary senses are figurative: to galvanize a person or group is to spur them into action as if they've been jolted with electricity.

I 1780 satte den italienske læge Luigi Galvani strøm til en død frø og kunne fra dens spjættende lår konstatere, at livet er elektrisk. Siden da er vores viden om såkaldt bioelektricitet kun blevet dybere og mere raffineret. Elektriske ladninger strømmer gennem celler, væv, muskler og hjernedele i både menneske- og dyrekroppe. Flere hajer, fisk og sågar næbdyr har udviklet evnen til at sanse og udnytte elektriske felter omkring dem. Og på havets bund har forskere for nylig opdaget nogle forunderlige bakterier, der kan samle sig til kabelagtige superorganismer, som kan lede strøm. Hverken fysikken eller mikrobiologien kan endnu forklare kabelbakteriernes evne til at føre strøm, og selv kalder elektromikrobiologerne, der studerer dem de mærkværdige væsner for livsformen, som ingen havde forestillet sig. Samtidig har neurobiologer i dag fået en uhyre nuanceret forståelse for de komplekse måder, neuroner skaber forbindelser i vores hjerner og nervesystemer ved hjælp af elektrokemiske signaler. Men hvor forskellig er kabelbakteriernes strømføring i grunden fra processerne i komplekse organismers kroppe? Taler de besynderlige, flercellede havbundsorganismer samme sprog som cellerne i vores hjerner – eller er det en helt anden elektrisk forbundethed, der er på færde? Spids ører, når neurobiologen Jakob Balslev Sørensen og kabelbakterieforskeren Lars Peter Nielsen kaster lys over bioelektricitetens mystiske verden.

Hello Interactors,A Frankenstein announcement from Musk this week punctuated my recent fascination with the author of that popular novel, Mary Shelley. Her isolated lived experience in a time of intense technological discovery, social and geo-political unrest, AND a climate crisis rings true today more than ever.But she also was subtlety representing a scientific movement that is largely ignored today, but just may be experiencing a bit of a resurgence in areas like biology and neuroscience.Let's dig in…FRANKEN-MUSK“It was already one in the morning; the rain pattered dismally against the panes, and my candle was nearly burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs.”Mary Shelley was intrigued, and maybe a little scared, by the idea of electrifying organs. She admits as much in her 1831 forward of her famous novel, “Frankenstein”, first published January 1, 1818. She wrote,"Perhaps a corpse would be re-animated; galvanism had given token of such things: perhaps the component parts of a creature might be manufactured, brought together, and endued with vital warmth."Bioelectrical experimentation had been happening for nearly 40 years by the time Shelley wrote this book. Luigi Galvani, an Italian physician, physicist, and philosopher demonstrated the existence of electricity in living tissue in the late 1780s. He called it ‘animal electricity'. Many repeated his experiments over the years and ‘galvanism' remained hotly debated well into the 1800s.I've been thinking a lot about Shelley and her “Frankenstein” lately. The hype and hysteria surrounding AI, human-like robots, and biocomputing make it easy to imagine. Just last week Elon Musk tweeted that his company, Neuralink, implanted its brain chip in a human for the first time. He wants to make ‘The Matrix' a reality. Here we are some 200 years later, wanting to believe ‘perhaps the component parts of a creature might be manufactured, brought together, and endued with vital warmth.'‘Vital warmth' seems a borrowed phrase from another scientific movement of the time, ‘vitalism'. Vitalism is the belief that living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities, like computer chips, because they are governed by a unique, non-physical force or "vital spark" that animates life. A kind of teleology for which some contemporary biologists now have empirical evidence.One prominent vitalist of the 18th and 19th century, the German physician, physiologist, and anthropologist, Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, is best known for his contributions to the study of human biology. He developed the concept of the "Bildungstrieb" or "formative drive," which he proposed as an inherent force guiding the growth and development of organisms. Contemporary science explains these processes through a combination of genetic, biochemical, and physical principles like encoded DNA, gene expression networks, and morphogenesis — the interactions between cells and their responses to various chemical and mechanical forces.THE INDUSTRIALIST'S VITAL SPARK‘Formative drive' was a vitalist response to the mechanistic explanations of life that were prevalent in the Enlightenment period. The same mechanistic fervor that endues so many technologists today, like Musk, with vital warmth. Blumenbach argued that physical and chemical processes alone could not account for the organization and complexity of living beings. Instead, he suggested that some other vital force was responsible for the development and function of organic forms.Vitalists had their skeptics. Chiefly among them was Alessandro Volta. He was critical of Galvani's ‘vital spark'. In Galvani's frog leg experiments, he discovered that when two different metals (e.g., copper and zinc) were connected and then touched to a frog's nerve and muscle, the muscle would contract even without any external electrical source. Galvani concluded that this was due to an electrical force inherent in the nerves of the frog, a concept that challenged the prevailing views of the time and eventually laid the groundwork for the field of electrophysiology.Volta, however, believed the electrical effects were due to the metals used in Galvani's experiments. Volta's work eventually led to the development of the Voltaic Pile, an early form of a battery. Hence the term ‘volt'. The Voltaic Pile enabled a more systematic and controlled study of electricity, which was a relatively little-understood phenomenon at the time. It provided scientists and inventors with a consistent and reliable source of electrical energy for experiments, leading to a deeper understanding of electrical principles and the discovery of new technologies.One such technology was the invention of the telegraph in the 1830s. The availability of electric batteries as power sources is what made it possible for Samuel Morse to revolutionize long-distance communication, profoundly effecting commerce, governance, and daily life. As he wrote in his first public demonstration, “What hath God wrought?”The mechanists gained further favor as more and more scientists, inventors, and eventually economists succumbed to the allure of reductionism. They believed understanding complex phenomena could be done by studying their simplest, most fundamental, and mechanistic parts. Including body parts.ECHOES OF THE INDUSTRIAL AGEIt was around the time of Morse's tinkering that Mary Shelley reissued ‘Frankenstein'. She revealed in her 1831 forward how she was influenced by the scientific and philosophical ideas of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. This included galvanism, the debates around vitalism, and the Romantic movement's reaction to the Enlightenment's emphasis on reason and science.This was also a period marked by significant political, social, and technological upheavals. The consolidation of nation-states and the expansion of political power were central themes of this era, leading to debates over government intervention and the balance between order and liberty. Shelley's narrative, set against this backdrop, can be seen as a reflection on the consequences of unchecked ambition and the ethical responsibilities of creators, themes that are increasingly relevant in today's discussions about artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, and other forms of technological innovation.Moreover, Shelley's personal history and the socio-political context of her time deeply informed the themes of her novel. As the daughter of Mary Wollstonecraft, a pioneering feminist thinker, Shelley was exposed from an early age to, what were then, radical ideas about gender, society, and individual rights. Her own experiences of loss, isolation, and vulnerability were compounded by the societal upheavals of the Little Ice Age and the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. "Frankenstein" is imbued with a profound sense of existential questioning. It critiques the dehumanizing aspects of technological and industrial progress — themes that resonate with many today.Like the early parts of the Industrial Revolution, we are living in a period of transforming economies, social structures, and daily life, ushering in new forms of labor, consumption, and environmental impact. The creation of Shelley's ‘Creature' can be seen as a metaphor for the unforeseen consequences of industrialization, including the alienation of individuals from their labor, from nature, and from each other.Shelley's narrative warns of the dangers of valuing power and progress over empathy and ethical consideration, a warning that remains pertinent as society grapples with the implications of rapid technological advancement and environmental degradation. Mechanistic reductionism, with its emphasis on dissecting complex phenomena into their most basic parts, undeniably continues to dominate much of science, technology, and conventional thought.Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein," while serving as a cautionary tale about the hubris and potential perils of unchecked scientific and technological ambition, has paradoxically also fueled the collective imagination, inspiring generations to dream of creating a human-like entity from disparate parts and mechanisms.Yet, there is an emerging renaissance that harks back to the holistic perspectives reminiscent of early vitalism. As scientists increasingly traverse interdisciplinary boundaries, embracing the principles of holism and complexity science, they are uncovering new patterns, principles, and laws that echo the intuitions of early vitalists.The groundbreaking research of Michael Levin at Tufts University, with its focus on bioelectric patterns and their role in development and regeneration, offers a compelling empirical bridge to Blumenbach's ‘formative drive'. While Levin's work eschews the metaphysical aspects of a "life force," it uncovers the intricate bioelectric networks that guide the form and function of organisms, echoing vitalism's fascination with the organizing principles of life.This shift acknowledges that life's essence may not be fully captured by reductionist views alone. Levin shows how it's not the mechanisms of DNA that unlock the mysteries of biological organization but the communication between cells and their environment. It points towards a more integrated understanding of the natural world that respects the intricate interplay of its myriad components.Shelley's pondering remains relevant today, “perhaps the component parts of a creature might be manufactured, brought together, and endued with vital warmth." Either way, "Frankenstein" continues to remind us of the need for humility and ethical consideration. After all, as we navigate the complex frontier between mechanistic ambition and our fragile, emergent, and interconnected life neurobiology tells us our own neural connections are being reshaped by both environmental interactions and cognitive activity, reflecting principles of embedded cognition those early vitalists would surely endorse. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

It's that time of year! SpooOOOoooOOOookey stories! First we talk about a hotbed of paranormal interdimensional activity in the heart of Mormon country; Skinwalker Ranch! After that we deep dive into the sci-fi classic Frankenstein. We wrap with a quick reminder to get out and vote along with catching up on listener mail!   Show Notes:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Burns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_S._Taylor https://www.linkedin.com/in/ecbard https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/Soil%20Electrical%20Conductivity.pdf https://www.reddit.com/r/sdr/comments/v4577h/16ghz_signals_a_simple_question_skinwalker/ https://www.utah.com/articles/post/what-is-skinwalker-ranch-and-whats-really-going-on-there https://www.iflscience.com/skinwalker-ranch-bastion-for-the-paranormal-or-hoax-69969 https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/claims-about-pentagon-ufo-program-how-much-is-true/ https://www.hullingermortuary.com/obituaries/junior-hicks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinwalker_Ranch https://www.deseret.com/1996/6/30/19251541/frequent-fliers https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2316/ML23165A245.pdf   MOGP:    Mary Shelley: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Shelley  Percy Bysshe Shelley: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Bysshe_Shelley  Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus, by Mary Shelley: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein  Frankenstein Castle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein_Castle  Luigi Galvani: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Galvani  Giovanni Aldini: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Aldini  Lord Byron: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Byron  Happy News:  Just get out and vote, y'all!   Come see us on Aron Ra's YouTube channel! He's doing a series titled Reading Joseph's Myth BoM. This link is for the playlist:   https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXJ4dsU0oGMKfJKvEMeRn5ebpAggkoVHf  Check out his channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@AronRa   Email: glassboxpodcast@gmail.com  Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/GlassBoxPod  Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/glassboxpodcast Twitter: https://twitter.com/GlassBoxPod  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glassboxpodcast/  Merch store: https://www.redbubble.com/people/exmoapparel/shop Or find the merch store by clicking on “Store” here: https://glassboxpodcast.com/index.html One time Paypal donation: bryceblankenagel@gmail.com   

Descubra la fascinante historia y las aplicaciones de la estimulación magnética transcraneal (EMT), una técnica de neuromodulación que utiliza campos magnéticos para alterar la actividad eléctrica del cerebro. Analice las raíces de esta tecnología, desde los primeros experimentos con electricidad de Luigi Galvani hasta las visiones electrificantes de la vida en la novela de Mary Shelley, "Frankenstein". Comprenda cómo la EMT ha evolucionado hasta convertirse en una herramienta potencialmente revolucionaria para tratar una variedad de trastornos neurológicos y psiquiátricos, desde la depresión hasta el dolor crónico. Discuta también las críticas y controversias en torno a la EMT, ya que no todos los estudios han encontrado beneficios claros y algunos argumentan que aún se necesita más investigación. En medio de este debate, los avances en nuestra comprensión del potencial de acción neuronal y su relación con la EMT ofrecen nuevas perspectivas. ¿Está preparado para sumergirse en este intrigante campo de la neurociencia y explorar su potencial para transformar la medicina y nuestro entendimiento del cerebro? Keywords: Estimulación Magnética Transcraneal, EMT, neurociencia, Galvani, Frankenstein, historia de la electricidad, potencial de acción, depresión, dolor crónico, trastorno obsesivo-compulsivo, neuromodulación, campos magnéticos, actividad cerebral, trastornos neurológicos, trastornos psiquiátricos, controversia EMT, investigación EMT, críticas EMT, estudios EMT, evolución EMT, corriente eléctrica, estímulo magnético, técnica de neuromodulación, potencial neuronal, neuroplasticidad. #EMT, #Neurociencia, #HistoriaDeLaElectricidad, #Galvani, #Frankenstein, #PotencialDeAccion "Electrificando el Cerebro: La Estimulación Magnética Transcraneal y su Potencial Revolucionario" "De Galvani a la EMT: Un Viaje Electrizante a través de la Historia de la Electricidad" "La Luz y Sombra de la EMT: ¿Promesa Médica o Controversia Científica?" "Desbloqueando el Potencial del Cerebro: ¿Es la EMT la Clave?" "El Potencial de Acción y la EMT: Comprendiendo la Neurociencia de la Estimulación Magnética Transcraneal" Links: 📘 Descubre nuestro nuevo libro: El Mapa de la Ansiedad 🌐 Conócenos más en nuestra Página Web 👍 Síguenos en Facebook 📸 Mantente al día en nuestro Instagram 🎥 Suscríbete a nuestro canal de Youtube Amadag TV

Episode: 2440 Johannes Georg Sulzer, and two views of the word taste.  Today, taste in the mind and taste on the tongue.

When we think about electricity, we most often think of the energy that powers various devices and appliances around us, or perhaps we visualise the lightning-streaked clouds of a stormy sky. But there is more to electricity and “life at its essence is nothing if not electrical”. In this episode of Bridging the Gaps, I speak with Professor Timothy Jorgensen and we discuss his recent book “Spark: The Life of Electricity and the Electricity of Life ”. The book explains the science of electricity through the lenses of biology, medicine and history. It illustrates how our understanding of electricity and the neurological system evolved in parallel, using fascinating stories of scientists and personalities ranging from Benjamin Franklin to Elon Musk. It provides a fascinating look at electricity, how it works, and how it animates our lives from within and without. We start by discussing the earliest known experiences that humans had with electricity using amber. Amber was most likely the first material with which humans attempted to harness electricity, mostly for medical purposes. Romans used non-static electricity from specific types of fish. Moving on to Benjamin Franklin, we discuss how he attempted to harner the power of electricity and we discuss the earliest forms of devices to store electric charge. We then discuss experiments conducted by Luigi Galvani on dead frogs and by his nephew on dead humans using electricity. As interest in electricity grew, many so-called treatemnts for ailments such as headaches, for bad thoughts and even for sexual difficulties also emerged that were based on the use of electricity; we discuss few interesting examples of such treatments. We then move on to reviewing the cutting edge use of electricity in medical science and discussed medial implants, artificial limbs and deep stimulation technologies and proposed machine-brain interfaces. This has been a fascinating discussion. Complement this discussion by listening to "The Spike: Journey of Electric Signals in Brain from Perception to Action with Professor Mark Humphries" available at: https://www.bridgingthegaps.ie/2021/06/the-spike-journey-of-electric-signals-in-brain-from-perception-to-action-with-professor-mark-humphries/ And then listen to "On Public Communication of Science and Technology with Professor Bruce Lewenstein" available at: https://www.bridgingthegaps.ie/2022/02/on-public-communication-of-science-and-technology-with-professor-bruce-lewenstein/

Subscribe to Quotomania on Simplecast or search for Quotomania on your favorite podcast app!Mary Shelley is an English novelist whose work has reached all corners of the globe. Author of Frankenstein: or, The Modern Prometheus (1818), Shelley was the daughter of the radical philosopher William Godwin, who described her as ‘singularly bold, somewhat imperious, and active of mind'. Her mother, who died days after her birth, was the famous defender of women's rights, Mary Wollstonecraft. Mary grew up with five semi-related siblings in Godwin's unconventional but intellectually electric household.At the age of 16, Mary eloped to Italy with the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, who praised ‘the irresistible wildness & sublimity of her feelings'. Each encouraged the other's writing, and they married in 1816 after the suicide of Shelley's wife. They had several children, of whom only one survived. A ghost-writing contest on a stormy June night in 1816 inspired Frankenstein, often called the first true work of science-fiction. Superficially a Gothic novel, influenced by the experiments of Luigi Galvani, it was concerned with the destructive nature of power when allied to wealth. Familiar to scholars, librarians and the entire literary world, the novel tells the story of Doctor Victor Frankenstein and a creature he creates in an unorthodox scientific experiment. It was an instant wonder and spawned a mythology all of its own that endures to this day. After Percy Shelley's death in 1822, she returned to London and pursued a very successful writing career as a novelist, biographer and travel writer. She also edited and promoted her husband's poems and other writings.From https://www.bl.uk/people/mary-shelley. For more information about Mary Shelley:“Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley”: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/mary-wollstonecraft-shelley“The Strange and Twisted Life of ‘Frankenstein'”: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/12/the-strange-and-twisted-life-of-frankenstein“Frankenstein at 200”: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/13/frankenstein-at-200-why-hasnt-mary-shelley-been-given-the-respect-she-deserves-

Un grande bolognese del passato, LUIGI GALVANI al quale si deve uno dei più grandi contributi della scienza moderna. In studio Silvia Parma ed Ettore Pancaldi

We've all heard the story of "Frankenstein's Monster." A bat shit crazy scientist wants to reanimate dead tissue and basically create a fucking zombie baby… BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU GET FUCKING ZOMBIES! Anyway, Dr. Frankenstein and his trusty assistant, Igor, set off to bring a bunch of random, dead body parts together, throw some lightning on the bugger and bring this new, puzzle piece of a quasi-human back to "life." At first, the reanimated corpse seems somewhat ordinary, but then flips his shit and starts terrorizing and doing what I can only imagine REANIMATED ZOMBIES FUCKING DO!    Mary Shelley was born Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin in Somers Town, London, in 1797. She was the second child of the feminist philosopher, educator, and writer Mary Wollstonecraft and the first child of the philosopher, novelist, and journalist William Godwin.  So, she was brought into this world by some smart fucking people. Mary's mother died of puerperal fever shortly after Mary was born. Puerperal fever is an infectious, sometimes fatal, disease of childbirth; until the mid-19th century, this dreaded, then-mysterious illness could sweep through a hospital maternity ward and kill most new mothers. Today strict aseptic hospital techniques have made the condition uncommon in most parts of the world, except in unusual circumstances such as illegally induced abortion. Her father, William, was left to bring up Mary and her older half-sister, Fanny Imlay, Mary's mother's child by the American speculator Gilbert Imlay. A year after her mother's death, Godwin published his Memoirs of the Author of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which he intended as a sincere and compassionate tribute. However, the Memoirs revealed Mary's mother's affairs and her illegitimate child. In that period, they were seen as shocking. Mary read these memoirs and her mother's books and was brought up to cherish her mother's memory. Mary's earliest years were happy, judging from the letters of William's housekeeper and nurse, Louisa Jones. But Godwin was often deeply in debt; feeling that he could not raise Mary and Fanny himself, he looked for a second wife. In December 1801, he married Mary Jane Clairmont, a well-educated woman with two young children—Charles and Claire SO MANY MARY'S! Sorry folks. Most of her father's friends disliked his new wife, describing her as a straight fucking bitch. Ok, not really, but they didn't like her. However, William was devoted to her, and the marriage worked. Mary, however, came to hate that bitch. William's 19th-century biographer Charles Kegan Paul later suggested that Mrs. Godwin had favored her own children over Williams. So, how awesome is it that he had a biographer? That's so badass.  Together, Mary's father and his new bride started a publishing firm called M. J. Godwin, which sold children's books and stationery, maps, and games. However, the business wasn't making any loot, and her father was forced to borrow butt loads of money to keep it going. He kept borrowing money to pay off earlier loans, just adding to his problems. By 1809, William's business was close to closing up shop, and he was "near to despair." Mary's father was saved from debtor's prison by devotees such as Francis Place, who lent him additional money. So, debtor's prison is pretty much EXACTLY what it sounds like. If you couldn't pay your debts, they threw your ass in jail. Unlike today where they just FUCK UP YOUR CREDIT! THANKS, COLUMBIA HOUSE!!!  Though Mary received little education, her father tutored her in many subjects. He often took the children on educational trips. They had access to his library and the many intelligent mofos who visited him, including the Romantic poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and the former vice-president of the United States Aaron Burr. You know, that dude that shot and killed his POLITICAL opponent, Alexander Hamilton, in a fucking duel! Ah… I was born in the wrong century.   Mary's father admitted he was not educating the children according to Mary's mother's philosophy as outlined in works such as A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. However, Mary still received an unusual and advanced education for a girl of the time. She had a governess, a daily tutor, and read many of her father's children's Roman and Greek history books. For six months in 1811, she also attended a boarding school in Ramsgate, England. Her father described her at age 15 as "singularly bold, somewhat imperious, and active of mind. Her desire of knowledge is great, and her perseverance in everything she undertakes almost invincible." My father didn't know how to spell my name until I was twelve.  In June of 1812, Mary's father sent her to stay with the family of the radical William Baxter, near Dundee, Scotland. In a letter to Baxter, he wrote, "I am anxious that she should be brought up ... like a philosopher, even like a cynic." Scholars have speculated that she may have been sent away for her health, remove her from the seamy side of the business, or introduce her to radical politics. However, Mary loved the spacious surroundings of Baxter's house and with his four daughters, and she returned north in the summer of 1813 to hang out for 10 months. In the 1831 introduction to Frankenstein, she recalled: "I wrote then—but in a most common-place style. It was beneath the trees of the grounds belonging to our house, or on the bleak sides of the woodless mountains near, that my true compositions, the airy flights of my imagination, were born and fostered."   Mary Godwin may have first met the radical poet-philosopher Percy Bysshe Shelley in between her two stays in Scotland. When she returned home for a second time on 30 March 1814, Percy Shelley became estranged from his wife and regularly visited Mary's father, William Godwin, whom he had agreed to bail out of debt. Percy Shelley's radicalism, particularly his economic views, alienated him from his wealthy aristocratic family. They wanted him to be a high, upstanding snoot and follow traditional models of the landed aristocracy. He tried to donate large amounts of the family's money to projects meant to help the poor and disadvantaged. Percy Shelley, therefore, had a problem gaining access to capital until he inherited his estate because his family did not want him wasting it on projects of "political justice." After several months of promises, Shelley announced that he could not or would not pay off all of Godwin's debts. Godwin was angry and felt betrayed and whooped his fuckin ass! Yeah! Ok, not really. He was just super pissed. Mary and Percy began hookin' up on the down-low at her mother Mary Wollstonecraft's grave in the churchyard of St Pancras Old Church, and they fell in love—she was 16, and he was 21. Creepy and super fucking gross.   On 26 June 1814, Shelley and Godwin declared their love for one another as Shelley announced he could not hide his "ardent passion,." This led her in a "sublime and rapturous moment" to say she felt the same way; on either that day or the next, Godwin lost her virginity to Shelley, which tradition claims happened in the churchyard. So, the grown-ass 21-year-old man statutorily raped the 16-year-old daughter of the man he idolized and dicked over. In a graveyard. My god, how things have changed...GROSS! Godwin described herself as attracted to Shelley's "wild, intellectual, unearthly looks." Smart but ugly. Got it. To Mary's dismay, her father disapproved and tried to thwart the relationship and salvage his daughter's "spotless fame." No! You don't say! Dad wasn't into his TEENAGE DAUGHTER BANGING A MAN IN THE GRAVEYARD!?! Mary's father learned of Shelley's inability to pay off the father's debts at about the same time. Oof. He found out after he diddled her. Mary, who later wrote of "my excessive and romantic attachment to my father," was confused. Um… what? She saw Percy Shelley as an embodiment of her parents' liberal and reformist ideas of the 1790s, particularly Godwin's view that marriage was a repressive monopoly, which he had argued in his 1793 edition of Political Justice but later retracted. On 28 July 1814, the couple eloped and secretly left for France, taking Mary's stepsister, Claire Clairmont, with them.  After convincing Mary's mother, who took off after them to Calais, that they did not wish to return, the trio traveled to Paris, and then, by donkey, mule, carriage, and foot, through France, recently ravaged by war, all the way to Switzerland. "It was acting in a novel, being an incarnate romance," Mary Shelley recalled in 1826. Godwin wrote about France in 1814: "The distress of the inhabitants, whose houses had been burned, their cattle killed and all their wealth destroyed, has given a sting to my detestation of war...". As they traveled, Mary and Percy read works by Mary Wollstonecraft and others, kept a joint journal, and continued their own writing. Finally, at Lucerne, lack of money forced the three to turn back. Instead, they traveled down the Rhine and by land to the Dutch port of Maassluis, arriving at Gravesend, Kent, on 13 September 1814. The situation awaiting Mary Godwin in England was packed with bullshit, some of which she had not expected. Either before or during their journey, she had become pregnant. She and Percy now found themselves penniless, and, to Mary's stupid ass surprise, her father refused to have anything to do with her. The couple moved with Claire into lodgings at Somers Town, and later, Nelson Square. They kept doing their thing, reading, and writing and entertained Percy Shelley's friends. Percy Shelley would often leave home for short periods to dodge bill collectors, and the couple's heartbroken letters would reveal their pain while he was away. Pregnant and often sick, Mary Godwin had to hear of Percy's joy at the birth of his son by Harriet Shelley in late 1814 due to his constant escapades with Claire Clairmont. Supposedly, Shelley and Clairmont were almost certainly lovers, which caused Mary to be rightfully jealous. And yes, Claire was Mary's cousin. Percy was a friggin' creep. Percy pissed off Mary when he suggested that they both take the plunge into a stream naked during a walk in the French countryside. This offended her due to her principles, and she was like, "Oh, hell nah, sahn!" and started taking off her earrings in a rage. Or something like that. She was partly consoled by the visits of Hogg, whom she disliked at first but soon considered a close friend. Percy Shelley seems to have wanted Mary and Hogg to become lovers; Mary did not dismiss the idea since she believed in free love in principle. She was a hippie before being a hippie was cool. Percy probably just wanted to not feel guilty for hooking up with her cousin. Creep. In reality, however, she loved only Percy and seemed to have gone no further than flirting with Hogg. On 22 February 1815, she gave birth to a two-months premature baby girl, who was not expected to survive. On 6 March, she wrote to Hogg: "My dearest Hogg, my baby is dead—will you come to see me as soon as you can. I wish to see you—It was perfectly well when I went to bed—I awoke in the night to give it suck it appeared to be sleeping so quietly that I would not awake it. It was dead then, but we did not find that out till morning—from its appearance it evidently died of convulsions—Will you come—you are so calm a creature & Shelley (Percy) is afraid of a fever from the milk—for I am no longer a mother now." The loss of her child brought about acute depression in Mary. She was haunted by visions of the baby, but she conceived again and had recovered by the summer. With a revival in Percy's finances after the death of his grandfather, Sir Bysshe Shelley, the couple holidayed in Torquay and then rented a two-story cottage at Bishopsgate, on the edge of Windsor Great Park. Unfortunately, little is known about this period in Mary Godwin's life since her journal from May 1815 to July 1816 was lost. At Bishopsgate, Percy wrote his poem Alastor or The Spirit of Solitude; and on 24 January 1816, Mary gave birth to a second child, William, named after her father and soon nicknamed "Willmouse." In her novel The Last Man, she later imagined Windsor as a Garden of Eden. In May 1816, Mary, Percy, and their son traveled to Geneva with Claire Clairmont. They planned to spend the summer with the poet Lord Byron, whose recent affair with Claire had left her pregnant. Claire sounds like a bit of a trollop. No judging, just making an observation. The party arrived in Geneva on 14 May 1816, where Mary called herself "Mrs Shelley." Byron joined them on 25 May with his young physician, John William Polidori, and rented the Villa Diodati, close to Lake Geneva at the village of Cologny; Percy rented a smaller building called Maison Chapuis on the waterfront nearby. They spent their time writing, boating on the lake, and talking late into the night. "It proved a wet, ungenial summer," Mary Shelley remembered in 1831, "and incessant rain often confined us for days to the house." Sitting around a log fire at Byron's villa, the company amused themselves with German ghost stories called Fantasmagoriana, which prompted Byron to propose that they "each write a ghost story." Unable to think up an account, young Mary became flustered: "Have you thought of a story? I was asked each morning, and each morning I was forced to reply with a mortifying negative." Finally, one mid-June evening, the discussions turned to the principle of life. "Perhaps a corpse would be reanimated," Mary noted, "galvanism had given token of such things." Galvanism is a term invented by the late 18th-century physicist and chemist Alessandro Volta to refer to the generation of electric current by chemical action. The word also came to refer to the discoveries of its namesake, Luigi Galvani, specifically the generation of electric current within biological organisms and the contraction/convulsion of natural muscle tissue upon contact with electric current. While Volta theorized and later demonstrated the phenomenon of his "Galvanism" to be replicable with otherwise inert materials, Galvani thought his discovery to confirm the existence of "animal electricity," a vital force that gave life to organic matter. We'll talk a little more about Galvani and a murderer named George Foster toward the end of the episode. It was after midnight before they retired, and she was unable to sleep, mainly because she became overwhelmed by her imagination as she kept thinking about the grim terrors of her "waking dream," her ghost story: "I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together. I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with an uneasy, half vital motion. Frightful must it be; for supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavour to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world." She began writing what she assumed would be a short, profound story. With Percy Shelley's encouragement, she turned her little idea into her first novel, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus, published in 1818. She later described that time in Switzerland as "when I first stepped out from childhood into life." The story of the writing of Frankenstein has been fictionalized repeatedly, and it helped form the basis for several films. Here's a cool little side note: In September 2011, the astronomer Donald Olson, after a visit to the Lake Geneva villa the previous year and inspecting data about the motion of the moon and stars, concluded that her waking dream took place "between 2 am and 3 am" 16 June 1816, several days after the initial idea by Lord Byron that they each write their ghost stories. Shelley and her husband collaborated on the story, but the extent of Percy's contribution to the novel is unknown and has been argued over by readers and critics forever. There are differences in the 1818, 1823, and 1831 versions. Mary Shelley wrote, "I certainly did not owe the suggestion of one incident, nor scarcely of one train of feeling, to my husband, and yet but for his incitement, it would never have taken the form in which it was presented to the world." She wrote that the preface to the first edition was her husband's work "as far as I can recollect." James Rieger concluded Percy's "assistance at every point in the book's manufacture was so extensive that one hardly knows whether to regard him as editor or minor collaborator." At the same time, Anne K. Mellor later argued Percy only "made many technical corrections and several times clarified the narrative and thematic continuity of the text." Charles E. Robinson, the editor of a facsimile edition of the Frankenstein manuscripts, concluded that Percy's contributions to the book "were no more than what most publishers' editors have provided new (or old) authors or, in fact, what colleagues have provided to each other after reading each other's works in progress." So, eat one, Percy! Just kidding. In 1840 and 1842, Mary and her son traveled together all over the continent. Mary recorded these trips in Rambles in Germany and Italy in 1840, 1842, and 1843. In 1844, Sir Timothy Shelley finally died at the age of ninety, "falling from the stalk like an overblown flower," Mary put it. For the first time in her life, she and her son were financially independent, though the remaining estate wasn't worth as much as they had thought. In the mid-1840s, Mary Shelley found herself in the crosshairs of three separate blackmailing sons of bitches. First, in 1845, an Italian political exile called Gatteschi, whom she had met in Paris, threatened to publish letters she had sent him. Scandalous! However, a friend of her son's bribed a police chief into seizing Gatteschi's papers, including the letters, which were then destroyed. Vaffanculo, Gatteschi! Shortly afterward, Mary Shelley bought some letters written by herself and Percy Shelley from a man calling himself G. Byron and posing as the illegitimate son of the late Lord Byron. Also, in 1845, Percy Shelley's cousin Thomas Medwin approached her, claiming to have written a damaging biography of Percy Shelley. He said he would suppress it in return for £250, but Mary told him to eat a big ole bag of dicks and jog on! In 1848, Percy Florence married Jane Gibson St John. The marriage proved a happy one, and Mary liked Jane. Mary lived with her son and daughter-in-law at Field Place, Sussex, the Shelleys' ancestral home, and at Chester Square, London, and vacationed with them, as well. Mary's last years were blighted by illness. From 1839, she suffered from headaches and bouts of paralysis in parts of her body, which sometimes prevented her from reading and writing, obviously two of her favorite things. Then, on 1 February 1851, at Chester Square, Mary Shelly died at fifty-three from what her doctor suspected was a brain tumor. According to Jane Shelley, Mary had asked to be buried with her mother and father. Still, looking at the graveyard at St Pancras and calling it "dreadful," Percy and Jane chose to bury her instead at St Peter's Church in Bournemouth, near their new home at Boscombe. On the first anniversary of Mary's death, the Shelleys opened her box-desk. Inside they found locks of her dead children's hair, a notebook she had shared with Percy Bysshe Shelley, and a copy of his poem Adonaïs with one page folded round a silk parcel containing some of his ashes and the remains of his heart. Romantic or disturbing? Maybe a bit of both. Mary Shelley remained a stout political radical throughout her life. Mary's works often suggested that cooperation and sympathy, mainly as practiced by women in the family, were the ways to reform civil society. This view directly challenged the individualistic Romantic ethos promoted by Percy Shelley and Enlightenment political theories. She wrote seven novels / Two travel narrations / Twenty three short stories / Three books of children's literature, and many articles. Mary Shelley left her mark on the literary world, and her name will be forever etched in the catacombs of horror for generations to come. When it comes to reanimation, there's someone else we need to talk about. George Forster (or Foster) was found guilty of murdering his wife and child by drowning them in Paddington Canal, London. He was hanged at Newgate on 18 January 1803, after which his body was taken to a nearby house where it was used in an experiment by Italian scientist Giovanni Aldini. At his trial, the events were reconstructed. Forster's mother-in-law recounted that her daughter and grandchild had left her house to see Forster at 4 pm on Saturday, 4 December 1802. In whose house Forster lodged, Joseph Bradfield reported that they had stayed together that night and gone out at 10 am on Sunday morning. He also stated that Forster and his wife had not been on good terms because she wished to live with him. On Sunday, various witnesses saw Forster with his wife and child in public houses near Paddington Canal. The body of his child was found on Monday morning; after the canal was dragged for three days, his wife's body was also found. Forster claimed that upon leaving The Mitre, he set out alone for Barnet to see his other two children in the workhouse there, though he was forced to turn back at Whetstone due to the failing light. This was contradicted by a waiter at The Mitre who said the three left the inn together. Skepticism was also expressed that he could have walked to Whetstone when he claimed. Nevertheless, the jury found him guilty. He was sentenced to death and also to be dissected after that. This sentence was designed to provide medicine with corpses on which to experiment and ensure that the condemned could not rise on Judgement Day, their bodies having been cut into pieces and selectively discarded. Forster was hanged on 18 January, shortly before he made a full confession. He said he had come to hate his wife and had twice before taken his wife to the canal, but his nerve had both times failed him. A recent BBC Knowledge documentary (Real Horror: Frankenstein) questions the fairness of the trial. It notes that friends of George Forster's wife later claimed that she was highly suicidal and had often talked about killing herself and her daughter. According to this documentary, Forster attempted suicide by stabbing himself with a crudely fashioned knife. This was to avoid awakening during the dissection of his body, should he not have died when hanged. This was a real possibility owing to the crude methods of execution at the time. The same reference suggests that his 'confession' was obtained under duress. In fact, it alleges that Pass, a Beadle or an official of a church or synagogue on Aldini's payroll, fast-tracked the whole trial and legal procedure to obtain the freshest corpse possible for his benefactor. After the execution, Forster's body was given to Giovanni Aldini for experimentation. Aldini was the nephew of fellow scientist Luigi Galvani and an enthusiastic proponent of his uncle's method of stimulating muscles with electric current, known as Galvanism. The experiment he performed on Forster's body demonstrated this technique. The Newgate Calendar (a record of executions at Newgate) reports that "On the first application of the process to the face, the jaws of the deceased criminal began to quiver, and the adjoining muscles were horribly contorted, and one eye was actually opened. In the subsequent part of the process the right hand was raised and clenched, and the legs and thighs were set in motion."  Several people present believed that Forster was being brought back to life (The Newgate Calendar reports that even if this had been so, he would have been re-executed since his sentence was to "hang until he be dead"). One man, Mr. Pass, the beadle of the Surgeons' Company, was so shocked that he died shortly after leaving. The hanged man was undoubtedly dead since his blood had been drained and his spinal cord severed after the execution.   Top Ten Frankenstein Movies https://screenrant.com/best-frankenstein-movies-ranked-imdb/

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for December 3, 2021 is: galvanize • GAL-vuh-nyze • verb Galvanize means "to cause (people) to take action on something that they are excited or concerned about." // The council's proposal to close the library has galvanized the town's residents. See the entry > Examples: "I think circumstances we've been through helped get us to this point. Whether it is the natural disaster, the pandemic or some of the tough losses … all of it helped galvanize this team." — Dwain Jenkins, quoted in The Advocate (Louisiana), 19 Oct. 2021 Did you know? Luigi Galvani was an Italian physician and physicist who, in the 1770s, studied the electrical nature of nerve impulses by applying electrical stimulation to frogs' leg muscles, causing them to contract. Although Galvani's theory that animal tissue contained an innate electrical impulse was disproven, the French word galvanisme came to describe a current of electricity especially when produced by chemical action. English borrowed the word as galvanism, and shortly after the verb galvanize came to life.

Aux XVIIIe et XIXe siècles, les travaux de Luigi Galvani et Alessandro Volta sur l'électricité permettent d'en mieux comprendre les mécanismes. Ils débouchent également sur le "galvanisme", dont l'un des buts n'était rien de moins que de ressusciter des cadavres !Des expériences sur l'électricitéComme tous les naturalistes de cette fin du XVIIIe siècle, l'anatomiste Luigi Galvani a l'habitude de disséquer des grenouilles pour mieux comprendre certains mécanismes corporels.Au cours de l'une de ces expériences, il place la patte du batracien, qui est reliée à un crochet de cuivre, sur un objet métallique. En touchant la patte de la grenouille, il s'aperçoit qu'elle est agitée de vives contractions.Il est persuadé qu'il vient de démontrer, par hasard, l'existence de l'électricité animale. Mais, pour le physicien Alessandro Volta, cette électricité ne provient pas de la grenouille.Elle est produite par le contact entre deux métaux, le cuivre du crochet et le fer de l'objet sur lequel la grenouille a été déposée. En 1800, pour prouver que la source de l'électricité est bien métallique, il confectionne une pile. Autrement dit des disques de métal empilés les uns sur les autres, qui produisent bien de l'électricité.Une tentative pour ressusciter les mortsCes expériences sur l'électricité font germer une idée, a priori saugrenue, dans l'esprit de certains scientifiques. Si une décharge électrique peut provoquer des contractions musculaires, ne peut-on utiliser cette technique pour ranimer un mort ?Aussitôt dit aussitôt fait. Ainsi, un scientifique italien, Giovanni Aldini obtient l'autorisation de faire une expérience sur des condamnés à la décapitation. On pensait en effet que, pour être efficace, la méthode du "galvanisme" devait s'appliquer sur des cadavres encore chauds.Aldini place alors deux fils métalliques dans les oreilles du supplicié, reliés à une pile. La tête s'anime alors de contractions qui s'emparent des muscles du visage, formant de sinistres grimaces.La même expérience, mais sur un cadavre de pendu, entraîne des contractions dans tout le corps. Le galvanisme suscite l'engouement du public, mais, contrairement aux attentes, il ne ramène pas les cadavres à la vie. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Luigi Galvani was one of the Enlightenment's brightest medical minds. His experiments challenged people to consider the nature of existence and might have been so influential that they contributed to the end of the Enlightenment.

Season 4Ep 18Reanimation Who shall conceive the horrors of my secret toil, as I dabbled among the unhallowed damps of the grave, or tortured the living animal to animate the lifeless clay?- Dr. Victor Frankenstein     From mummies to zombies to the creature himself, Frankenstein's monster, the tales of reanimating the dead span thousands of years.  For many people Mary Shelly's Frankenstein is or was their introduction to the subject of reanimation. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is a cautionary tale about the abuses of science — in particular, the potential pitfalls of screwing around with corpses and lightning. If you're not familiar with the story of Frankenstein then see yourself the hell out right now. Are they gone? Good fuck em. If there are any untrustworthy folks left that are still here even though they don't know the story, here's a recap. The actual title, which most of you probably don't know, is "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus''. Shelly began writing the story when she was 18. The first edition was published anonymously in 1818 when she was 20. It began as a short story that unfolded into a novel. Although later versions of the tale popularly have the creature (he is referred to as the Creature, and as we all should know, the creature isn't Frankenstein) he’s essentially sewn together from various bodies parts and reanimated during a science experiment using lightning, this is not how the creature was originally written and conceived. In the original novel the creature was also not a big dumb lumbering idiot as he is usually portrayed. In Shelley's original work, Victor Frankenstein discovers a previously unknown but elemental principle of life, and that insight allows him to develop a method to imbue vitality into inanimate matter, though the exact nature of the process is left largely ambiguous. After a great deal of hesitation in exercising this power, Frankenstein (that’s the doctor for you slower passengers) spends two years painstakingly constructing the creature's proportionally large body (one anatomical feature at a time, from raw materials supplied by "the dissecting room and the slaughter-house"), which he then brings to life using his unspecified process. All of that aside, and all the differences and nuances aside, the idea is the same, the goal of reanimation of dead or inanimate things. While Shelly may have written an early example of the concept, process, and consequences of reanimation, she was not the first to think of this concept. There were scientists and thinkers earlier than her dreaming up ideas of reanimating animals and even humans. Science behind reanimation Okay Jeff, bear with us here, it's gonna get a little nerdy from time to time. You've all heard the old saying, there's nothing sure in life but death and taxes, but what if death wasn’t such a sure thing? Scientists have been attempting to restore life to the dead for hundreds of years. People have used water, electricity, chemicals and other things to try and reanimate dead animals and people.        A basic example of reanimation using water could be that of the ever popular sea monkey! Sea monkeys are actually brine shrimp. Their dried eggs, sold in pet stores, contain embryos that will revive when put in salt water, hatch, swim about, grow to be a quarter-inch long and make good fish food. Another example is the tardigrade. It is so small -- the size of a sand grain -- that most people are unaware of its existence, yet several times a year it performs one of the most astonishing feats known to science. When there has been no rain for a long time and its habitat dries out, the little animal's body loses its own water, shriveling and curling into a wrinkled kernel. Without water, the animal plunges into a profound state of suspended animation. The creature stops eating or crawling. It does not breathe. Its internal organs shut down, no longer digesting food or sending signals through its nervous system. Even metabolic processes inside cells shut down -- the usually busy genes going dormant and the enzymes that normally carry out thousands of biochemical reactions every second cease to function. Its body dries to a crisp. So profound is the loss of activity that, according to a common textbook definition of life, which says metabolism is a hallmark of life, the little animal is… dead. And yet, after days or even months, if moisture returns, the animal soaks up the water and resumes all normal activities. The creature is informally called a water bear or, more formally, a tardigrade, which means "slow walker." On the evolutionary tree, it lies between worms and insects, one of the many small but remarkable life forms on Earth known almost solely to those who study biology. So there is one issue with these guys and others like them. There's an argument on whether they are truly being reanimated or if there is just some weird sort of hibernation going on. The chief hallmark of life, textbooks often say, is metabolism, the sum of all genetic and enzymatic processes that go on inside cells and in interactions among cells. If one accepts that definition, then an organism in suspended animation is not alive. That conclusion, however, raises a semantic problem because if it is not alive, it is dead. If so and if it revives, then life has been created, a phenomenon that would violate a cardinal principle of biology -- that complex life forms cannot be spontaneously generated but only come from living parents. To avoid this logical trap, the few biologists who have studied the phenomenon generally refer to it as cryptobiosis, meaning "hidden life." So strong, however, was the metabolism-centered view of life that until recently most biologists suspected that cryptobiotic organisms were not totally inactive. They argued that enough water remained inside the animals to permit metabolism to continue at a rate too slow to be detected. After all, they knew some higher animals can reduce their metabolic rates by hibernating in winter, and others enter a state of even lower metabolism, called estivation, that allows them to endure dry, summer heat. Cryptobiotic animals, many researchers suspected, were simply extending a familiar capacity to a previously unknown extreme. Recently, however, scientists have established that, although even the driest organisms retain a few water molecules, they constitute only a small fraction of the minimum needed for metabolism. For example, most of the workhorse molecules of metabolism, proteins, must be awakened in water to assume the shape essential to their functions as enzymes. Tardigrades and nematodes, like most animals, are normally 80 percent to 90 percent water. In the cryptobiotic state, the organisms contain only about 3 percent to 5 percent water. Under laboratory conditions, the water content of some has been reduced to 0.05 percent, and they were revived. Most authorities now agree that no metabolism occurs during cryptobiosis. The term no longer means "a hidden form of ordinary life" but rather "a state of being in which the active processes of life are temporarily suspended." In the cryptobiotic state, all that remains of a living organism is its structural integrity. A dry animal may be shrunken, but it maintains all connections that keep together the structures of its cells. In other words, biologists now hold, molecules hooked together in a certain way will metabolize if given water. Life is not the result of some mystical animating force that inhabits proteins or the nucleic acids that make up DNA. It is the structural arrangement of certain molecules that will behave chemically in specific ways in the presence of water. So what does that all mean? Fuck if we know. But essentially it seems that in these tiny organisms, if the law of the land is followed to a T, then it seems they are dead, dried, shriveled up things with no metabolisms, thus no life, that can actually be reanimated with water. Interesting indeed. There's a ton more cool info on this in an article from the Washington Post titled "Just Add Water" from 1996 that this information was taken from. If you're really into the science behind this stuff we definitely recommend this article!  Electricity Now if one were to think that Frankenstein, despite being an early foray into the world of reanimation, was possibly influenced by real world attempts at the same result, one would be correct. In the late 18th century many doctors and scientists began toying with dead things and electricity. In 1780, Italian anatomy professor Luigi Galvani discovered that he could make the muscles of a dead frog twitch and jerk with sparks of electricity. Others quickly began to experiment by applying electricity to other animals that quickly grew morbid. Galvani’s nephew, physicist Giovanni Aldini, obtained the body of an ox, proceeding to cut off the head and use electricity to twist its tongue. He sent such high levels of voltage through the diaphragm of the ox that it resulted in “a very strong action on the rectum, which even produced an expulsion of the feces,” Aldini wrote.     People outside of science were also fascinated by electricity. They would attend shows where bullheads and pigs were electrified, and watch public dissections at research institutions such as the Company of Surgeons in England, which later became the Royal College of Surgeons. When scientists tired of testing animals, they turned to corpses, particularly corpses of murderers. In 1751, England passed the Murder Act, which allowed the bodies of executed murderers to be used for experimentation. “The reasons the Murder Act came about were twofold: there weren’t enough bodies for anatomists, and it was seen as a further punishment for the murderer,” says Juliet Burba,  chief curator of an exhibit called “Mary and Her Monster” at the Bakken Museum in Minnesota. “It was considered additional punishment to have your body dissected.” On November 4, 1818, Scottish chemist Andrew Ure stood next to the lifeless corpse of an executed murderer, the man hanging by his neck at the gallows only minutes before. He was performing an anatomical research demonstration for a theater filled with curious students, anatomists, and doctors at the University of Glasgow. But this was no ordinary cadaver dissection. Ure held two metallic rods charged by a 270-plate voltaic battery to various nerves and watched in delight as the body convulsed, writhed, and shuddered in a grotesque dance of death. “When the one rod was applied to the slight incision in the tip of the forefinger,” Ure later described to the Glasgow Literary Society, “the fist being previously clenched, that finger extended instantly; and from the convulsive agitation of the arm, he seemed to point to the different spectators, some of whom thought he had come to life.” Ure is one of many scientists during the late 18th and 19th centuries who conducted crude experiments with galvanism—the stimulation of muscles with pulses of electrical current. The bright sparks and loud explosions made for stunning effects that lured in both scientists and artists, with this era of reanimation serving as inspiration for Mary Shelley’s literary masterpiece, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. While most scientists were using galvanism to search for clues about life, Ure wanted to see if it could actually bring someone back from the dead. “This was a time when people were trying to understand the origin of life, when religion was losing some of its hold,” says Burba. “There was a lot of interest in the question: What is the essence that animates life? Could it be electricity?” Lying on Ure’s table was the muscular, athletic corpse of 35-year-old coal miner, Matthew Clydesdale. In August 1818, Clydesdale drunkenly murdered an 80-year-old miner with a coal pick and was sentenced to be hanged at the gallows. His body remained suspended and limp for nearly an hour, while a thief who had been executed next to Clydesdale at the same time convulsed violently for several moments after death. The blood was drained from the body for half an hour before the experiments began.Andrew Ure, who had little to no known experience with electricity, was a mere assistant to James Jeffray, an anatomy professor at the University of Glasgow. He had studied medicine at Glasgow University and served briefly as an army surgeon, but was otherwise known for teaching chemistry. “Not much is known about Ure, but he was sort of a minor figure in the history of science,” says Alex Boese, author of Elephants on Acid: And Other Bizarre Experiments. One of Ure’s main accomplishments was this single bizarre galvanic experiment, he says.   Others, such as Aldini, conducted similar experiments, but scholars write that Ure was convinced that electricity could restore life back into the dead. “While Aldini contented himself with the role of spasmodic puppeteer, Ure’s ambitions were well nigh Frankesteinian,” wrote Ulf Houe in Studies in Romanticism. Ure charged the battery with dilute nitric and sulphuric acids five minutes before the police delivered the body to the University of Glasgow’s anatomical theater. Incisions were made at the neck, hip, and heels, exposing different nerves that were jolted with the metallic rods. When Ure sent charges through Clydesdale’s diaphragm and saw his chest heave and fall, he wrote that “the success of it was truly wonderful.”Ure’s descriptions of the experiment are vivid. He poetically noted how the convulsive movements resembled “a violent shuddering from cold” and how the fingers “moved nimbly, like those of a violin performer.” Other passages, like this one about stimulating muscles in Clydesdale’s forehead and brow, are more macabre: “Every muscle in his countenance was simultaneously thrown into fearful action; rage, horror, despair, anguish, and ghastly smiles, united their hideous expression in the murderer’s face, surpassing far the wildest representations of a Fuseli or a Kean,” wrote Ure, comparing the result to the visage of tragic actor, Edmund Kean, and the fantastical works of romantic painter Henry Fuseli. He continued: “At this period several of the spectators were forced to leave the apartment from terror or sickness, and one gentleman fainted.” The whole experiment lasted about an hour. “Both Jeffray and Ure were quite deliberately intent on the restoration of life,” wrote F.L.M. Pattinson in the Scottish Medical Journal. But the reasons for the lack of success were thought to have little to do with the method: Ure concluded that if death was not caused by bodily injury there was a probability that life could have been restored. But, if the experiment succeeded it wouldn’t have been celebrated since he would be reviving a murderer, he wrote. Ure is just one of many scientists and doctors at this time experimenting with reanimation. We’ll discuss some others in a bit. In modern times a case can be made that we reanimate people all the time. Without getting into semantics of clinical death versus biological death versus this versus that blah blah, we can look to the use of a defibrillator as a basic use of electricity to revive a person who is technically dead. Would that not be reanimation? There are arguments being made and in  discussions about reanimation it seems like this usually comes up. Then there is a giant sciencey biology fight and much ink is spilled and pocket protectors destroyed and still no consensus.. so we'll spare you the agony of those arguments.  Electricity seems to be the most popular medium in historical attempts at resurrection, mostly because of its effects on muscles and the ability to move body parts after death. These days we know that this is simply a reflex action due to the stimulation of the muscles and nerves and has nothing to really do with reanimation so to speak. CHEMICAL So what about using chemicals? Can chemicals reanimate cells and bring the dead back to life? Well according to many zombie movies yes, but according to a Yale university study...also yes. Yale neuroscientist Nenad Sestan revealed that his team has successfully reanimated the brains of dead pigs recovered from a slaughterhouse. By pumping them with artificial blood using a system called BrainEx, they were able to bring them back to “life” for up to 36 hours. Also you heard that right… The call it fucking BrainEx. If that doesn't Scream B horror movie..I don't know what does. Admittedly, the pigs’ brains did not regain consciousness, but Sestan acknowledged that restoring awareness is a possibility. Crucially, he also disclosed that the technique could work on primate brains (which includes humans), and that the brains could be kept alive indefinitely. This is interesting because it raises some interesting questions. If consciousness could be restored to the brain if a human… Would it be worth it. What would it be like to just be a brain?  Even if your conscious brain were kept alive after your body had died, you would have to spend the foreseeable future as a disembodied “brain in a bucket”, locked away inside your own mind without access to the senses that allow us to experience and interact with the world and the inputs that our brains so crave. The knowledge and technology needed to implant your brain into a new body may be decades, if not centuries, away. So in the best case scenario, you would be spending your life with only your own thoughts for company. Some have argued that even with a fully functional body, immortality would be tedious. With absolutely no contact with external reality, it might just be a living hell.  According to some, it is impossible for a disembodied brain to house anything like a normal human mind. Antonio Damasio, a philosopher and neuroscientist, has pointed out that in ordinary humans, brain and body are in constant interaction with each other. Every muscle, nerve, joint and organ is connected to the brain – and vast numbers of chemical and electrical signals go back and forth between them each and every second. Without this constant “feedback loop” between brain and body, Damasio argues, ordinary experiences and thought are simply not possible. So what would it be like to be a disembodied brain? The truth is, nobody knows. But it is probable it would be worse than being simply tedious – it would likely be deeply disturbing. Experts have already warned that a man reportedly due to have the world’s first head transplant could suffer a terrible fate. They say his brain will be overwhelmed by the unfamiliar chemical and electrical signals sent to it by his new body, and it could send him mad. A disembodied brain would be likely to react similarly – but because it would be unable to signal its distress, or do anything to bring its suffering to an end, it would be even worse. So, to end up as a reanimated disembodied human brain may well be to suffer a fate worse than death. Now maybe if you had a body things wouldn't be so bad, but as stated earlier many think that it would be extremely tedious to live forever if it was possible. None of us expected to make it this long… Fuck living forever.  Another player in the chemical game actually is a mix of chemical and biological attempts at reanimating recently dead brains.  The company Bioquark, plans to initiate a study to see if a combination of stem cell and protein blend injections, electrical nerve stimulation, and laser therapy can reverse the effects of recent brain death. They're literally trying to bring people back from the dead. "It's our contention that there's no single magic bullet for this, so to start with a single magic bullet makes no sense. Hence why we have to take a different approach," Bioquark CEO, Ira Pastor, told Stat News. As Pastor told the Washington Post last year, he doesn't believe that brain death is necessarily a permanent condition, at least to start. It may well be curable, he argued, if the patient is administered the right combination of stimuli, ranging from stem cells to magnetic fields. The resuscitation process will not be a quick one, however. First, the newly dead person must receive an injection of stem cells derived from their own blood. Then doctors will inject a proprietary peptide blend called BQ-A into the patient's spinal column. This serum is supposed to help regrow neurons that had been damaged upon death. Finally, the patient undergoes 15 days of electrical nerve stimulation and transcranial laser therapy to instigate new neuron formation. During the trial, researchers will rely on EEG scans to monitor the patients for brain activity. Sometimes the dead come back on their own! Lazarus syndrome is the spontaneous return of a birthday cardiac rhythm after failed attempts at resuscitation. Its occurrence has been noted in medical literature at least 38 times since 1982. It takes its name from Lazarus who, as described in the New Testament, was raised from the dead by Jesus. Basically this occurs after a person has died and attempts to revive then using cpr or other means have failed and since time will pass and the heart will start back up on its own! The causes of this syndrome are not understood very well. With some hypotheticals being there build up of pressure on the chest following cpr, hyperkalemia (elevated potassium levels in the blood), or high doses of epinephrine. Some of these cases are pretty crazy. Is this spontaneous biological reanimation? Heres a few tales:  A 66-year-old man suffering from a suspected abdominal aneurysm suffered cardiac arrest and received chest compressions and defibrillation shocks for 17 minutes during treatment for his condition. Vital signs did not return; the patient was declared dead and resuscitation efforts ended. Ten minutes later, the surgeon felt a pulse. The aneurysm was successfully treated, and the patient fully recovered with no lasting physical or neurological problems.According to a 2002 article in the journal Forensic Science International, a 65-year-old prelingually deaf Japanese man was found unconscious in the foster home he lived in. CPR was attempted on the scene by home staff, emergency medical personnel and also in the emergency department of the hospital and included appropriate medications and defibrillation. He was declared dead after attempted resuscitation. However, a policeman found the person moving in the mortuary after 20 minutes. The patient survived for 4 more days.A 45-year-old woman in Colombia was pronounced dead, as there were no vital signs showing she was alive. Later, a funeral worker noticed the woman moving and alerted his co-worker that the woman should go back to the hospitalA 65-year-old man in Malaysia came back to life two-and-a-half hours after doctors at Seberang Jaya Hospital, Penang, pronounced him dead. He died three weeks later.Anthony Yahle, 37, in Bellbrook, Ohio, USA, was breathing abnormally at 4 a.m. on 5 August 2013, and could not be woken. After finding that Yahle had no pulse, first responders administered CPR and were able to retrieve a stable-enough heartbeat to transport him to the emergency room. Later that afternoon, he again suffered cardiac arrest for 45 minutes at Kettering Medical Center and was pronounced dead after all efforts to resuscitate him failed. When his son arrived at the hospital to visit his supposed-to-be deceased father, he noticed a heartbeat on the monitor that was still attached to his father. Resuscitation efforts were resumed, and Yahle was successfully revived.Walter Williams, 78, from Lexington, Mississippi, United States, was at home when his hospice nurse called a coroner who arrived and declared him dead at 9 p.m. on 26 February 2014. Once at a funeral home, he was found to be moving, possibly resuscitated by a defibrillator implanted in his chest.[11] The next day he was well enough to be talking with family, but died fifteen days later.And probably the craziest one: Velma Thomas, 59, of West Virginia, USA holds the record time for recovering from clinical death. In May 2008, Thomas went into cardiac arrest at her home. Medics were able to establish a faint pulse after eight minutes of CPR. Her heart stopped twice after arriving at the hospital and she was placed on life support. Doctors attempted to lower her body temperature to prevent additional brain injury. She was declared clinically dead for 17 hours after doctors failed to detect brain activity. Her son, Tim Thomas, stated that "her skin had already started hardening, her hands and toes were curling up, they were already drawn". She was taken off life support and funeral arrangements were in progress. However, ten minutes after being taken off life support, she revived and recovered. Again… Spontaneous biological reanimation? Who knows! So these are some of the concepts of reanimation. Let's talk about a couple people that were into the reanimation game: Lazzaro SpallanzaniSpallanzani was a Catholic priest, and a professor of natural history at Pavia University in the late 1700s. He started small, adding water to microscopic animals and announcing that he had managed a resurrection when they came to life. But he wasn't really satisfied. For some reason, Spallanzani turned for spiritual guidance to noted French cynic and atheist Voltaire. Spallanzani asked him what he thought happened to the souls of animals after death. Voltaire must have liked the guy, because he replied gently that he believed Spallanzani about the reanimation, and that the priest himself would be best qualified to answer the question. Although the priest's next trick was cutting the heads off snails to see if they'd grow back, he was definitely the least mad of the mad scientists. He was the first person to prove that chemicals inside the body helped with digestion, and was the first to spot white blood cells Andrew CrosseAndrew Crosse was messing around with lightning in 1837. He strung about a third of a mile of copper wire around his estate, and concentrated all the electricity it picked up in his laboratory. Specifically, he focused on a sterile dish of a primordial soup that he'd carefully prepared. After zapping the soup, he noticed that crystals were growing in it. Hoping he could graduate to something way cooler, he tried giving the soup long exposures to weak currents. To his amazement, he found that after long weeks, animals shaped like mites began to form, and then move around. He repeated the experiment again and again, and to modern readers it seems that he kept the environment pretty sterile if he followed all the procedures he described. Still, we have to assume it was contaminated. The Victorians assumed the same thing, but they also assumed that Crosse was a jerk. The scientists believed he was making a play for false glory. The theists assumed he was trying to play god. The neighbors just thought he was going to burn his, and subsequently their, house down. He was disliked by all and had to leave his estate, until the scandal cleared. Johann DippelThis was the actual guy who inspired the Frankenstein legend. He lived in the Frankenstein castle, and signed his name as Frankenstein. Surprisingly, he was less like the good doctor than most people think, since he was more interested in preserving life than reanimating it. He did rob graves in the area — or is said to have — but only because he wanted to mix up an elixir of immortality, and for some reason he thought buried corpse parts might do it for himMyThe Doggie ScientistsIn the first half of the 20th century, it was not a good time to be a dog. People were apt to, say, stick you in a tin can and send you into space. But at least, that way, you got to see something. You really didn't want to be in range of the doggie Frankensteins. Robert Cornish would suffocate dogs and attempt to bring them back to life via emergency medical measures. He actually managed to bring two back, although they sustained brain damage. Sergei Bryukhonenko attached his newly-invented heart and lung machine to a dog's head and kept it alive for quite some time, lying on a plate and eating and drinking. Giovanni AldiniNow this was a Frankenstein extraordinaire that we mentioned earlier. Having learned about how to use electricity to make the muscles of a corpse jump, he took it to the extreme in public. He zapped the heads of slaughtered oxen, in order to get them to twitch in front of audiences. He moved on to the heads of executed prisoners, applying the electrodes to the ears. He cut open corpses so he could zap their spinal cords. He claimed he could zap the suffocated and the drowned, in order to revive them completely. And he bragged that he could "command the vital powers." He also took a sideline into researching whether or not there was a way to make objects and people fireproof. Not much is said about his experiments in the latter area — but perhaps that's for the best. His tireless self-promotion never got him the chance to bring someone back to life, but it got him plenty of attention. He eventually traveled to Austria, where he was made a knight, and awarded a political position. Unlike many of the scientists on this list — and certainly unlike Frankenstein himself — Aldini died a rich and happy man. JAMES LOVELOCKIn the 1950s, the field of cryobiology was so new, it didn't even have a name yet, so budding cryobiologists didn't always have the exact tools they needed for a particular procedure. James Lovelock was one such scientist, and he outlined a method to bring rodents back to life.Lovelock's procedure involved putting a rat in a bath at minus 5 degrees Celsius for 90 minutes. After the rat was good and frozen, Lovelock would attempt to bring it back to life. Back then there weren't fancy lab tools like rat heart defibrillators, so Lovelock brought the rats' hearts back with a warm spoon.By restarting the heart, and gradually warming the body, Lovelock brought the mice back to life. Although we can't say that's what the mice would have wanted. One quick sidebar, is there a difference between resurrection and reanimation? The short answer is yes. As verbs the difference between resurrect and reanimate is that resurrect is to raise from the dead, to bring life back to while reanimate is to animate anew; to restore to animation or life; to infuse new life, vigor, spirit, or courage into; to revive; to reinvigorate; as, to reanimate a drowned person; to reanimate disheartened troops; to reanimate languid spirits. As an adjective reanimate is being animated again. Looking into it more than this leads to an exhaustive ordeal involving many many religious websites trying to explain why Jesus is not a zombie. Which is as ridiculous and hilarious as it sounds and is definitely recommended reading.  The subject of reanimation brings up many different facets of not only biology and chemistry but ethics as well. There are lines that are not meant to crossed, is this one? Would you want to be brought back from the dead? The lines between reanimation, resuscitation, and resurrection seem to be thin and sometimes vague. That's why there are such different topics being discussed in this episode.  Either way it's a hell of a trip!Now with all that being said we are bringing back an old favorite! We are talking top ten movies baby! Today is obviously the top ten movies about reanimation! This list is home to a wide variety of movies that some may consider reanimation related and some may not. But they all involved people coming back in some form.https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword/?keywords=reanimation Here's a top 8 list that's much better https://www.google.com/amp/s/io9.gizmodo.com/8-movies-featuring-reanimation-that-arent-about-zombie-1833752947/amp The Midnight Train Podcast is sponsored by VOUDOUX VODKA.www.voudoux.com Ace’s Depothttp://www.aces-depot.com BECOME A PRODUCER!http://www.patreon.com/themidnighttrainpodcast Find The Midnight Train Podcast:www.themidnighttrainpodcast.comwww.facebook.com/themidnighttrainpodcastwww.twitter.com/themidnighttrainpcwww.instagram.com/themidnighttrainpodcastwww.discord.com/themidnighttrainpodcastwww.tiktok.com/themidnighttrainp And wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts. Subscribe to our official YouTube channel:OUR YOUTUBE

Det er uhyyyyggeligt! I anledning af Halloween tager vi fat på en oprindelsen af en af de største gysere nogensinde. Mary Shelleys roman, Frankenstein, skræmte bukserne af alle, da den udkom i 1818. Historien om en gal videnskabsmand, der vakte de døde til live var både horribel, uhyggelig og drabeligt realistisk. Bogen tog nemlig direkte inspiration i videnskaben galvanisme, som særligt de gale videnskabsmænd Alessandro Volta og Luigi Galvani stod i spidsen for. De eksperimenterede nemlig begge med at bruge elektricitet til at genoplive de døde.... Afsnittet er optaget live på Odd Fellow Palæet i Odense d. 31. oktober 2020.

Galvani glaubte, es müsse sich um ein geheimnisvolles Fluidum handeln, das das Lebendige lebendig hält. Als er bei seinen Froschschenkelversuchen durch Zufall die elektrische Erregbarkeit von Muskeln entdeckt, glaubte er den Schlüssel gefunden zu haben.

Elektrizität ist heute für uns etwas ganz Alltägliches. Als die Elektrizität entdeckt wurde, da dachte kein Mensch daran, dass sich damit einmal Maschinen, Gerätschaften wie zum Beispiel das Radio, betreiben lassen könnten. Sie galt als Schlüssel zu einer anderen Welt! Vielleicht sogar zum größten Geheimnis der Menschheit...

Wo sitzt bloß das, was das Lebendige lebendig hält? Luigi Galvani glaubt, es müsse sich um ein geheimnisvolles Fluidum handeln. Seit Jahren schon seziert er Vögel, Frösche und anderes Kleingetier, um es in den Körpern zu finden - bislang vergeblich. Aber an diesem Tag sollte er tatsächlich eine herausragende Entdeckung machen. Autor: Marko Rösseler

QDEP el Tío Sean Connery! El día de hoy (y todos los días), recordamos a las personas que se nos adelantaron, y precisamente la sección de Entorno de Fher trata de eso. Por otro lado en la sección de Betty nos platica sobre la Teoría de Luigi Galvani, bastante interesante que de verdad da para sacarle más jugo, para hacer un episodio completo sobre el tema. Tenemos la sección de las palabras de Reny, en éste Día de todos los Santos. Y también hablamos sobre una película de horror psicológico que nos habla de un tiempo muy complicado en la historia de África, de su gente buscando refugio en otros países, escapando de la tiranía de la gente de sus países. Así como de una serie de comedia de horror con los inseparables Nick Frost y Simon Pegg. Redes sociales: Blackeagle Dreamer (Facebook), Blackeagle_Dreamer (Instagram), blackeagledream (Twitter). Saludos y que tengan una excelente semana. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/frank-black7/support

Welcome back to the third episode of Spooktober here at the Wheel of Crime Podcast! Today Jenn and Em talk about "Sexy Monsters" or monsters that some people find sexy. Jenn tells the tale of real life Italian physician, physicist, biologist and philosopher, Luigi Galvani. Emily goes through the history of sexy monsters, and *spoiler alert* the crime is Satan?Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/Wheelofcrime)

EPISÓDIO 07 - O Livro dos Espíritos, publicado é o primeiro livro da Codificação Espírita publicado por Hippolyte Léon Denizard Rivail sob o pseudônimo de Allan Kardec. Foi publicado em Paris em 18 de abril de 2020. Esta obra contém os princípios da Doutrina Espírita sobre a imortalidade da alma, a natureza dos Espíritos e suas relações com os homens, as Leis Morais, a vida presente, a vida futura e o porvir da humanidade (segundo os ensinamentos dos Espíritos Superiores, através de diversos médiuns, recebidos e ordenados por Allan Kardec). É uma das oito obras fundamentais para o estudo da Doutrina Espírita. Apresentação: Marcelo Uchôa - Produção: Marcelo Uchôa e Regina Mercadante.

Recebemos uma pergunta da ouvinte Janaína Schiavon sobre uma modalidade de exercícios físicos que tem crescido muito na atualidade: a estimulação elétrica neuromuscular. A ouvinte nos perguntou se havia benefícios ou até possivelmente prejuízos em se exercitar utilizando esses equipamentos e roupas que promovem a estimulação elétrica dos músculos. O primeiro ponto que devemos esclarecer é que a estimulação elétrica para produzir movimento humano não é um procedimento novo. Em 1790, Luigi Galvani observou o movimento pela primeira vez após aplicar fios elétricos em músculos separados do corpo de sapos, e em 1831, Michael Faraday mostrou que correntes elétricas poderiam estimular os nervos para criar um movimento ativo. O potencial que a estimulação elétrica possui para a reabilitação é imensurável. Atualmente, a estimulação elétrica é usada de várias formas para facilitar alterações na ação e desempenho muscular. Em situações clínicas, a estimulação elétrica pode ser usada para melhorar a força muscular, aumentar a amplitude de movimento, reduzir o edema, evitar a atrofia muscular, cicatrizar tecidos e diminuir a dor. No entanto, os benefícios para pessoas saudáveis ainda são divergentes nas publicações científicas. E agora?

Beginning with Luigi Galvani himself, this episode of Mania treads down a winding corridor that explores the same events which inspired Mary Shelley’s The Modern Prometheus, also known as Frankenstein, and digs at the heart of the dark realities behind the gory moments of Galvanic reanimation.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/harlequingrim)

She's back at it again! Tune in as Laura studies lots and lots of water, clarifies some exceptions to Boyle's Law, lends out her laboratory and skills to assist other scientists, and finally scores a physics chair despite, y'know, men Laura Bassi (and husband):  Laura Bassi and Science in 18th Century Europe - The Extraordinary Life and Role of Italy's Pioneering Female Professor, by Monique Frize, 2013 (book) "Science as a Career in Enlightenment Italy: The Strategies of Laura Bassi"Author(s): Paula FindlenSource: Isis, Vol. 84, No. 3 (Sep., 1993), pp. 441-469 "The Desire to Contribute: An Eighteenth-Century Italian Woman of Science"Author(s): Gabriella Berti LoganSource: The American Historical Review, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Jun., 1994), pp. 785-812 a little more on Caldani/Fontana: Medicine and science in the life of Luigi Galvani (1737–1798), by Marco Bresadola, 1998 Vanadium oxide (exception to Wiedemann Franz rule): https://phys.org/news/2017-01-metal-electricity.html

Não tem FRANKENSTEIN na sua estante? Compre aqui: http://amzn.to/2C8kNZ6 Acesse nosso SITE: goo.gl/hDQkSw e FACEBOOK: goo.gl/3mGhfd O livro Frankenstein estreou em 1818, escrito por Mary Shelley. Influenciada pelos avanços científicos da época, entre eles, os experimentos de Luigi Galvani, a esposa do famoso poeta Percy Shelley passou por uma série de circunstâncias que moldaram a obra. Além da famosa noite gótica, em 1816, quando ela e o marido visitaram outra figura de respeito no mundo das letras, Lorde Byron, seu romance traz vários detalhes que se confundem com sua própria história de vida. De forma alegorizada, é claro, a autora inseriu várias de suas angústias reais. A história de Victor Frankenstein, com sua obsessão em dar vida a uma criatura feita de pedaços de cadáveres, dominando assim a morte, continua atual por uma série de fatores. Diferente da figura que o cinema popularizou, com a cabeça quadrada, parafusos no pescoço e falta de inteligência*, a criatura apresentada no livro cria facilmente uma identificação com seus leitores. Inteligente e articulado, o monstro não é apenas uma metáfora para os perigos da ciência irresponsável, cujos atos punem seu criador, mas toda situação em volta dele evoca assuntos sobre religião e família, entre vários outros tópicos. Janeiro de 2018 marcou os 200 anos do livro Frankenstein. Nada melhor do que um podcast para comentar o alcance e a relevância do clássico. Ouça e comente! Não esqueça de mandar um email para podcast@formigaeletrica.com.br .

Dr. Becky Winkler is a corporate psychologist who identifies and develops executive talent. She works with private equity, asset management and business clients throughout the world. She has led research on learning agility and predictors for executive success in collaboration with leading universities. Becky has conducted over a thousand executive-level assessments and coached numerous executives to breakthrough performance. It is the profound connection and meaningful perspectives she shares with others that inspires her work. Becky helps people more fully realize themselves - their talents, skills and aspirations - whether in her professional life traveling the globe or as board chair of a local chapter of a network of college-preparatory public charter schools serving students in educationally underserved communities. She graduated summa cum laude with degrees in psychology, women's studies and Chinese from the University of Georgia Honors Program. She earned an M.A and Ph.D. in industrial and organizational psychology from DePaul University. This episode is perfect for anyone interested in the art and science of assessing executive talent, and the trade-offs of a business consultancy life 'up in the air.' IN THIS EPISODE Becky explains her process for identifying and recommending talent to private equity and corporate clients. She shares the aspect of her work that is a constant playground. She discusses the five enabling elements of learning agility and the one disabling element that gets in our way. Becky assesses her own talents as a corporate psychologist. She responds to the question of whether she is like the fictional Wall Street psychologist and performance coach television character Wendy Rhoades. She talks about working with clients who are 'masters of the universe.' She shares how reading people professionally is very different than reading people personally. Becky reflects on her life growing up and the influence of her mother and father. She talks about the impact of losing loved ones and their presence in her life. She explains why she chose her fields of study and how she found her way to the work she does. Becky discusses the particular challenges and opportunities women executives havein their path to success. She shares the trade-offs of living life 'up in the air.'  Becky shares what happiness and success is for her. After the conversation, host Mark Peres adds a personal word that begins this way, "When I listen to Becky talk about animating talent, I'm reminded of the 18th century scientists Luigi Galvani and Franz Mesmer..."  

Martha explains how experiments with dead frogs and live wires led to the invention of the battery, and inspired a couple of familiar English words.I had to change the batteries in my flashlight the other day, and that makes think, as it always does, of Luigi Galvani. No, really, it does. Let me explain: Galvani was an 18th-century Italian physician and physicist whose experiments accidentally paved the way for modern batteries.The focus of his research? Galvani experimented with dead frogs and live wires. In 1791, he published a paper describing how he'd touched a dead frog's leg with one wire, and touched another wire to both the frog and the first wire. When the second wire made contact, the lifeless body jerked. Galvani believed these convulsions were the result of 'animal electricity,' a mysterious substance secreted by the body. What Galvani failed to grasp was that by touching wires made of two different metals to the frog -- and to each other -- he'd simply created a closed circuit.At the time, Galvani's report was nothing short of astonishing. As one of his contemporaries wrote in a letter: 'Now here the experiments are also repeated in ladies' salons, and they furnish a good spectacle to all.' A generation later, Mary Shelley would write her novel Frankenstein, and specifically credit Galvani's experiments as an inspiration. But his work also inspired further research by another Italian scientist, one who didn't buy the idea of 'animal electricity.' His name was Alessandro Volta. He suspected that the frog's body didn't secrete electricity, it conducted it. Soon Volta was stacking pieces of zinc and silver and, instead of animal tissue, cardboard soaked in brine. The electrifying result was the first 'voltaic pile,' forerunner of the batteries we use today. As you may have guessed, Volta's name lives on in our word for that unit of electrical measurement, the volt. Despite his scientific mistake, Galvani achieved a measure of linguistic immortality as well. Today you'll find his name inside a word that means to 'jolt' or 'jump-start': galvanize.Incidentally, if you're having a hard time picturing Galvani's many experiments, there are lots of illustrations on the Web, including here and here.http://galvanisfrog.com/Home.phphttp://www.batteryfacts.co.uk/BatteryHistory/Galvani.html --Get your language question answered on the air! Call or write with your questions at any time:Email: words@waywordradio.orgPhone: U.S. toll-free (877) WAY-WORD/(877) 929-9673, London +44 20 7193 2113, Mexico City +52 55 8421 9771Site: http://waywordradio.org.Podcast: http://waywordradio.org/podcast/Forums: http://waywordradio.org/discussion/Newsletter: http://waywordradio.org/newsletter/Twitter: http://twitter.com/wayword/Skype: skype://waywordradio Copyright 2009, Wayword LLC.

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss Vitalism, an 18th and 19th century quest for the spark of life. On a dreary night in November 1818, a young doctor called Frankenstein completed an experiment and described it in his diary: “I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet…By the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open…”Frankenstein may seem an outlandish tale, but Mary Shelley wrote it when science was alive with ideas about what differentiated the living from the dead. This was Vitalism, a belief that living things possessed some spark of life, some vital principle, perhaps even a soul, that distinguished the quick from the dead and lifted them above dull matter. Electricity was a very real candidate; when an Italian scientist called Luigi Galvani made dead frogs twitch by applying electricity he thought he had found it. Vitalists aimed at unlocking the secret of life itself and they raised questions about what life is that are unresolved to this day. With Patricia Fara, Fellow of Clare College and Affiliated Lecturer in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at Cambridge University; Andrew Mendelsohn, Senior Lecturer in the History of Science and Medicine at Imperial College, University of London and Pietro Corsi, Professor of the History of Science at the University of Oxford.

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss Vitalism, an 18th and 19th century quest for the spark of life. On a dreary night in November 1818, a young doctor called Frankenstein completed an experiment and described it in his diary: “I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet…By the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open…”Frankenstein may seem an outlandish tale, but Mary Shelley wrote it when science was alive with ideas about what differentiated the living from the dead. This was Vitalism, a belief that living things possessed some spark of life, some vital principle, perhaps even a soul, that distinguished the quick from the dead and lifted them above dull matter. Electricity was a very real candidate; when an Italian scientist called Luigi Galvani made dead frogs twitch by applying electricity he thought he had found it. Vitalists aimed at unlocking the secret of life itself and they raised questions about what life is that are unresolved to this day. With Patricia Fara, Fellow of Clare College and Affiliated Lecturer in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at Cambridge University; Andrew Mendelsohn, Senior Lecturer in the History of Science and Medicine at Imperial College, University of London and Pietro Corsi, Professor of the History of Science at the University of Oxford.