Educated cities

Considering the trend of growth of several cities, we'll see that it is strongly related to the historical period and the technological development of its nation. For example many cities, such as Detroit, Liverpool, Cleveland and St. Louis, are nowadays half the size they where in 1950. This decline happened in several cases in conjunction with the exponential growth of other cities. So what are the main factors that could shape the destiny of a city?

The main factor is related to the development of technology: the cities i have referred to before were mainly industrial cities, and this was the cause of their decline in the second half of the 20th century. The development of technology and communication systems lead to a shift of demand, that went from industrial and production sector, to services' one.

However not all cities accepted their decline, and many managed to reinvent themselves. For instance Seattle is now considered one of the capitals of the information sector, thanks to companies such as Microsoft, Amazon, AT&T and T-mobile.

On the other hand, more and more cities are basing their success on education. Boston and New York appear to be the greatest representatives of this trend, and their soaring success seems to confirm that this could be the most prolific sector for a city. Indeed, the presence of colleges in a metropolitan area in 1940 is associated with higher earnings and faster growth today. High education could be the only way to grant growth on long terms to a city.

Higher education leads to more specialized jobs and to higher wages. A metropolitan area characterized by a raised level of education implies the creation of several sectors in which local residents are specialized. The creation of a new skilled ruling class, able to face with required abilities, could eventually lead to a further development of a city.

On long term planning, the only possible foundation of growth could be instruction. Skills, not structures are the most effective way to avoid urban failure.

Survivors

Since the seventeenth century, over 90% of extinctions were caused by man. The main causes are overexploitation of environments, hunting, pollution and competition with alien species introduced in their environment by man.. Here follows a very short list of endangered species, which includes some of the most extraordinary creatures living on earth.

The white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) is a fish belonging to the Lamniformes order, last representative of the Carcharodon genus. Hunting for commercial purposes and fishing of the species on which it feeds are the main threats to the survival of the largest living predatory fish. According to a recent estimate, there are still about 3500 specimens distributed in the oceans of world.

The tiger (Panthera tigris) is the largest living felid, comparable in size to the ancient big felids. It is a formidable predator placed at the top of the food chain, but there are now only about 3000 specimens, mainly because of hunting.

The most endangered felid is probably the Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus), whose number of individuals is less than 100. It would be the first felid to become extinct since Smilodon populator about 10.000 years ago.

The mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) is a primate whose conservation status is classified by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) as "critically endangered", the level preceding the extinction in the wild: a recent census estimated a population of about 800 individuals. Another endangered member of the Hominidae family is the Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii); its population includes about 7000 specimens.

Many species of rhinoceros are considered critically endangered, too; their survival is threatened mainly by hunting. For example, there are only about 3600 black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis), 275 Sumatran Rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis) and only few tens of Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus).

This list, unfortunately, could go on for pages and pages.

Homeopathy: myths and legends

The German physician Samuel Hahnemann started this branch of alternative medicine in 1796. It is based on highly diluited solutions, that have been found to be no more effective than common placebos. The basic idea of this alternative medicine is that "like kills like". It is also known as the law of similarities, according to which "whatever causes your symptoms, will also cure them".

Hahnemann also proposed that the effects of those treatments could be improved by diluting them in water, according to the "law of infinitesimal". If we consider caffeine, to improve its power diluting a single drop in 99 drops of water. By taking a drop of this solution and diluting it in other 99 drops of water we'll get a 2C solution, that is 99,99% water and 0,01% caffeine. Homeopathic remedies are usually sold between 6C and 30C dilutions, in little balls of sugar. It's fundamental to underline that at 12C we reach the Avogadro Limit, where there is a big probability that nothing is left of the original substance.


Furthermore Hahnemann proposed another theory, also known as the "law of succussion", according to which shaking the homeopatic remedy would increase its potency. In fact this process would allow water to retain memories of the original substance, because of its vibration. The idea that water has the ability to remember whatever has been dissolved before dilution was proposed by Jacques Benveniste. For this theory he was awarded two times the IGNOBEL prize

Thus homeopathy cannot be considered as a real science, and cannot compete with real medicine. The problem is that nowadays many people still use it, even though it has been proved to be useless. This isn't such a big deal if the treatments are used to cure a common cold or flu, but problems arise if it is used for more serious diseases. In the first situation it cannot cause great damages, because the disease will be defeated as well, even though it could take more time. If it is used as a replacement of real medicine in case of more severe diseases, it could eventually lead to death because of the loss of real treatments.

However it's important to underline that this pseudo-medicine has no medical effect at all. Sometimes people are healed by those treatments, but the ratio is not different from the ones of placebo effect. It could indeed be a useful treatment for psychosomatic diseases. In those cases, in fact, just the idea of taking a certain medicine could be useful to cure them. The main point is that every disease that can be cured by homeopathy could be cured by placebo effect, too, because the effective chemical an physical action are equal.


Nevertheless no one would ever even think about curing cancer by placebo effect....