LadAShark

Certain spectrophotometers could, but I believe the one in question here is one designed to test absorbance spectrum (aka what does so and so substance absorb?) as opposed to emission. At least physically speaking, the spectrophotometer in question uses cuvettes that you need to insert into the machine, so I don’t believe you would be able to test an LED with it. I’m sure if you were very determined though, you could get it to work haha.

I was actually contemplating getting a spectrophotometer for this purpose myself, but since I mainly needed to use it for phosphates, calcium, magnesium, and some trace elements, I put it off because figuring out whether or not the spectrophotometer could detect various solutes/ions (and how to make it do so) was going to take too much time.

Interested in the lamarck angelfish and maybe some snails. Edit: decided I probably don’t want a kole tang that much.

If Geeklet doesn’t end up getting it, I’d like to have those.

Do you think a 50 gallon could handle that many clowns at adult size? But wow, I’d love to see it once it’s complete. Will you add other anemones to the mix for variety? (Like carpets and rock flowers).

Firstly, I’d like to note that even bringing up such a topic doesn’t feel very appropriate, but I digress. 1) There is no empire or significant power in the world ever in history to not have committed serious injustices in their rise and fall from power; there is no real better or worse nation historically speaking, the more research we do the more we find that people have always broken ethical bottom lines in the pursuit of power. 2) That said, the concept of slavery is completely different in Islam than it is in the western world; especially when it comes to the Americas, even more so when it comes to the European South American slave trade. In Brazil, slaves were an expendable commodity, with the maximum life expectancy of work being 8 years of labor. Under Islam’s rulings, the owner of the slaves is responsible for their welfare and is held accountable. Simultaneously, slaves were able, and did, consistently rise to high ranks in the government. It is worth noting that officially, only prisoners of war were allowed to become slaves (aka one could not just go out and capture slaves). There was unfortunately also sexual slavery, however, officially speaking the slave had to technically consent to it. Slaves did also have to be paid their just dues, in other words, they did have to be paid for their work so that they could eventually buy their freedom. Unfortunately, these were just the official rules. While widely implemented, there were and will always be many who skirt the legal systems. Another thing worthy of note is that Europe was also involved in this slave trade, with galleys from Europe regularly trading with the Ottomans. In addition, slavery was a pretty big thing worldwide, and colonialism was not really a lesser evil. Not having slavery, colonialism, or both would make you the exception. Hence condemning one specific nation or another for something that every nation actively partook does not make sense; it would be more fair to condemn all slavery and accept that every nation unfortunately participated in this evil. 3) Going back to the previous topic, the concept of marriage is also very different from ours. Divorce is uncontroversial, and marriage itself is considered a contract between two consenting individuals with approval from their guardians. No consent, and it is void. No approval, and it is also void (though unfortunately traditional, non Islamic, arranged marriages also took place). So when you see people who have had a certain number of wives historically, it’s worth noting that they usually didn’t have them at once. Both the man and the woman in the marriage could initiate a divorce whenever they wish, and it doesn’t take both parties agreeing to divorce for it to go through. “Till death do us part” is not a concept that exists in their marriage system; the romanticism of a forever partner is there, but it’s not core to their contract. 4) However, while even the Sultan was required to follow the laws of the country, there is quite a hit of evidence that there were loopholes people could follow around the legislation. For example, some sultans used this to pressure other Muslim nations into submission. War with other Muslims was expressly illegal, however by declaring other such nations as “heretics” they could skirt that law, leading to many nations simply surrendering/submitting before that could occur. I’m not by any means defending the Ottoman empire, but it is important to look at history objectively and from every angle. There are many perspectives, concepts, and behaviors that don’t really translate and and don’t have parallels between various cultures, so things like “marriage,” “slavery,” and many others might not actually be the same as those within our system and culture, despite carrying the same name. The implicit understanding of the same words is often potentially very different. Nonetheless, the Ottoman Empire definitely committed serious atrocities, as was and is natural for any empire or nation. The history of man is fraught with oppression by the powerful and significant violence between many for the benefit of a few. It isn’t worthwhile getting stuck on nations of old, instead it’s necessary that we take them as a forewarning and instead act to prevent our and other nations from walking down the same path.

It’s also badly coined. Harem was attributed to polygamy when in fact it was a matter of secluding/sheltering/protecting women from stranger men. Still not a nice thing but not done will ill intent. By the original definition, a “harem of clownfish” makes no sense. Here’s the wikipedia article on it, which I’ve found to be fairly well written and sourced: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harem And some of the more important excerpts of said article: “Harem (Arabic: حريم‎ ḥarīm, "a sacred inviolable place; harem; female members of the family")” “A harem may house a man's wife — or wives and concubines, as in royal harems of the past — their pre-pubescent male children, unmarried daughters, female domestic workers, and other unmarried female relatives.” “In the West, Orientalist imaginary conceptions of the harem as a hidden world of sexual subjugation where numerous women lounged in suggestive poses have influenced many paintings, stage productions, films and literary works.Some earlier European Renaissance paintings dating to the 16th century portray the women of the Ottoman harem as individuals of status and political significance. In many periods of Islamic history, women in the harem exercised various degrees of political power, such as the Sultanate of Women in the Ottoman Empire.” ”Where historical evidence is available, it indicates that the harem was much more likely to be monogamous. For example, in late Ottoman Istanbul, only 2.29 percent of married men were polygynous, with the average number of wives being 2.08. In some regions, like Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, prevalence of women in agricultural work leads to wider practice of polygyny, but makes seclusion impractical. In contrast, in Eurasian and North African rural communities that rely on male-dominated plough farming, seclusion is economically possible but polygyny is undesirable. This indicates that the fundamental characteristic of the harem is seclusion of women rather than polygyny.” To clarify this above quote, the source indicated that the average of 2.08 was of the 2.29% that had multiple wives, not of the whole population. So 2.29% of the population had approximately 2 wives, with a handful having more. Just to make sure nobody misunderstands this as the overall average being 2.08. That misunderstanding would mean that that 2.29% of the population had 48 wives on average for each man 😳😅. Q Anyway. To sum it up, the coinage of the term “harem,” meaning what it does at present, was partially an orientalist renaissance fantasy and partially a form of disinformation if not outright propaganda, but I’d personally like to hope it was just a misunderstanding. However, I’m not sure how else Taylor could have phrased this, because that is unfortunately the zoological terminology as milesmiles indicated. I’m not sure if it’s against the rules to post this since it’s somewhat historical and political, while also being sliiiightly off topic, but I felt it’s always good to be well informed!

Can’t seem to find stomatellas anywhere. I know they’re a hitchhiker but I haven’t had the luck to have some. I’d love to try to get some and have some reproduce in my tank.

I just saw this post and wow! I’m surprised no one’s going after these rocks. I recently bought livestock from Kenny And if I didn’t already have too much liverock I would have jumped on his liverock while they were priced at $2 a lb. They’re great, large rocks that would make for a great scape. I might need them several months down the line but as it stands right now I have more than I can handle now 😅

Does anybody have some macro (other than caulerpa) that they can share near Tigard?

Worst part is let’s say we followed their line of thought, and climate change wasn’t a big problem... Wouldn’t having clean air be worth it? It’s not going to hurt us to have breathable air and to not have trash polluting all the water and land.

I’ll take the blue tang, sailfin tang, foxface, and cow fish. Though I’d love to get photos of/see the fish first. Might be interested in an anemone or two as well, though not sure.

What sort of softies are available?

Yeah this is also true. They can get out of control pretty easily.

Don’t have any frags I can trade at the moment, but I would potentially be interested in buying some. How much would you sell them for?

So you tell me that I would be fine discussing the four humors here?

I’ll have to make time to come over that way then 😂

I was tired and gullible when I replied haha. Still pretty tired as I am now though haha. But to be honest it sounded so silly that I thought it was possible it might just be true 😂 Actually I just checked on the original article... or some of it anyway. Of course publicly funded research is behind a paywall thanks to Elsevier. The paper establishes that the ocean had many chemically distinct masses of water, some of which can be rediscovered stored in pores. It establishes a correlation between oxygen 18, deuterium (an isotope of Hydrogen), and chloride. It appears that the ratio of change is linear at 25 mM of Chloride, 1.2% oxygen, 9% deuterium. And it also establishes that the higher the strontium concentration, the lower the variation in calcium isotopes. Note this is correlation and not necessarily causation. Basically the biggest thing here, and they admit themselves, is this was an incidental discovery that opens up a whole lot of research to be done. Finding more of these pores and studying them can give us a much better idea of the ancient ocean; this is the first time they can directly measure what the Ocean was like instead of estimating, calculating, and extrapolating. So they spent a lot of time presenting some incidental data, but also a lot more time basically saying why this new line of research is so valuable. So all in all, this suggests it’s not possible to say “the ancient ocean was different in x, y, z ways,” because it turns out there were many different pieces to the ocean with significant variation to chemical makeup. It’s pretty interesting research. In theory, with a lot of time, money, processing power, and memory, they can now have a chemical map of the ancient ocean anywhere they can find these pores. I’ve accessed and downloaded the paper. If anyone cares to read it, just message me.

I assume they’re already gone but, share the love!

Might be interested in a frag myself, but not sure I will be in the area that soon. I might, I might not 😅

I assume the lps is gone too? I was interested in getting some lps colonies.

Pretty disappointed I missed out by being a few minutes too early to see your post first but I’m happy for the new owner. It’s sad to see you go as well. Hope you do well in your reefless life.

Wow that’s disappointing, but it’s good to know that it’s possible more water samples like that can exist so we can search out more of them!

Are you still giving these away? I messaged you but didn’t get a response.

I looked away for a little bit and I already missed this. I’ll take it if it somehow falls through even more.