AI responses may include mistakes.

Distinguishing protozoa from other microbes like bacteria, viruses, and fungi depends on key differences in their cellular structure, size, and function
. The most fundamental distinction is that protozoa are complex, single-celled eukaryotes, while bacteria are prokaryotes, and viruses are not cellular at all.
Protozoa vs. bacteria and archaea
Feature
Protozoa Bacteria and Archaea
Cell type Eukaryotic: Contains a membrane-bound nucleus and other complex organelles like mitochondria, Golgi bodies, and endoplasmic reticulum. Prokaryotic: Lacks a nucleus and other membrane-bound organelles. Genetic material exists as a simple strand of DNA in the cytoplasm.
Size Larger than bacteria, with cells typically ranging from 10 to over 50 micrometers. Much smaller than protozoa, generally 0.2 to 10 micrometers in length.
Cell wall Do not have cell walls. Most species have a cell wall made of peptidoglycan (bacteria) or other materials (archaea).
Nutrition Primarily heterotrophic, meaning they consume other organisms or organic matter. Some, like Euglena, are autotrophic (photosynthetic). Can be heterotrophic (consuming organic matter) or autotrophic (making their own food).
Motility Many have specialized structures for movement, such as flagella (whip-like), cilia (hair-like), or pseudopodia ("false feet"). May have flagella, but these are structurally different from eukaryotic flagella.
Reproduction Can reproduce asexually through binary fission or budding, and some can also reproduce sexually. Reproduce asexually through binary fission.
Protozoa vs. fungi
Feature
Protozoa Fungi
Cellularity Unicellular. Most are multicellular (e.g., molds and mushrooms), but some are unicellular (e.g., yeasts).
Cell wall Do not have cell walls. Have cell walls made of chitin.
Structure More like animal cells, often mobile, and feed by engulfing prey or absorbing organic material. More like plant cells in that they are non-motile, but they absorb nutrients instead of photosynthesizing.
Nutrition Ingestive heterotrophs. Absorptive heterotrophs, meaning they absorb nutrients from their environment.
Protozoa vs. viruses
Feature
Protozoa Viruses
Cellular structure Single-celled, living organisms. Not cellular. Consist only of genetic material (DNA or RNA) inside a protein coat.
Reproduction Can reproduce on their own. Must infect a living host cell and use its machinery to reproduce.
Survival Can survive and metabolize independently outside a host. Cannot survive for long without a host. Are considered non-living particles.
Size Larger than viruses. The smallest of all microbes, often too small to be seen with a conventional microscope.
AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses
1.2.1: 1.2A Types of Microorganisms - Biology LibreTexts
Biology LibreTexts
Key Difference between Bacteria and Protozoa
BYJU'S·Aakash NEET
1:35:40
Germs: Bacteria, Viruses, Fungi, and Protozoa
KidsHealth
Show all
Sponges are most closely related to certain protozoa, specifically
choanoflagellates. This connection is supported by strong morphological and genetic evidence. Choanoflagellates are considered the closest living unicellular relatives of all animals, not just sponges.
Sponge–choanoflagellate relationship

Identical feeding cells: The inner layer of a sponge's body is lined with specialized feeding cells called choanocytes, or "collar cells." These are almost identical in structure and function to individual choanoflagellates.
Shared characteristics: Both choanocytes and choanoflagellates use a flagellum surrounded by a "collar" of microvilli to create water currents. This current draws water and food particles toward the cell, where the microvilli capture the particles for digestion.
Ancestry of animals: The similarities between these cells suggest that sponges evolved from colonial choanoflagellates, which were likely the common ancestor of all animals.

Sponges are not fungi
Sponges are animals, not fungi. While they might appear similar to fungi because they are sessile (immobile) organisms, they belong to different kingdoms and have fundamental differences.

Cell walls: Sponges lack cell walls, unlike fungi, which have cell walls made of chitin.
Nutrient acquisition: Sponges are heterotrophs that consume other organisms by filtering them from the water. Fungi are also heterotrophs but acquire nutrients by absorbing them from their surroundings.
Cellular structure: Fungi, as eukaryotes, are more complex than bacteria, but sponges are multicellular organisms with specialized cells, distinguishing them from the simple colonies of many fungi.

Zooplankton is a broad group
The term "zooplankton" refers to a diverse collection of tiny animals and protists that drift in water. It is not a specific taxonomic group, and it includes many different kinds of organisms.

Zooplankton includes protozoa: Many of the organisms considered zooplankton are protozoa, such as the choanoflagellates. Therefore, comparing sponges to zooplankton is not a precise comparison.
Not a direct relative: While sponges may share an aquatic habitat with zooplankton, they are not directly related to most organisms classified as zooplankton. Their specific evolutionary link is to the choanoflagellates, which are sometimes considered part of the zooplankton community.

Morphology of Sponges | Biology for Majors II - Lumen Learning
Lumen Learning
Indicators: Zooplankton | US EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (.gov)
Choanoflagellate - Wikipedia
Wikipedia
Show all
No prominent evolutionary researchers have suggested that animals evolved from yeast
. This is because genetic evidence and morphological data overwhelmingly indicate that animals and fungi, which include yeasts, are distinct groups that shared a common single-celled ancestor over a billion years ago.
However, some researchers have used yeast in experiments to study the process of multicellularity. While this does not suggest that animals evolved from yeast, it has provided valuable insight into how complex, multicellular life might have first arisen from a unicellular ancestor.
Key researchers in yeast evolution studies

William Ratcliff and Michael Travisano at the Georgia Institute of Technology are known for their "snowflake yeast" experiments.
They forced single-celled yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) to evolve into multicellular, snowflake-like clumps over a few years by selecting for faster-settling clumps.
Their work demonstrated how complex, multicellular organisms could potentially evolve from single-celled ones.
John Koschwanez, a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard University (at the time), studied how certain ecological pressures could lead single-celled yeast to form multicellular colonies.

Animals and fungi share a common ancestor

Instead of being a direct ancestor, yeast is part of the Opisthokonta supergroup, which also includes all animals.
Therefore, yeast and animals are evolutionary "sister groups" rather than a parent-offspring relationship.
Based on gene sequencing, fungi are considered animals' closest single-celled relatives.

What is the evidence that animals evolved from fungi? - Quora
Quora
Yeast provide clues to evolution of complex life
NBC News
What Yeast Reveals About the Origins of ... - WIRED
WIRED
Show all
Thinking
Searching
Based on extensive genetic evidence, sponges are not most closely related to any other single group of living animals, but are instead considered the
sister group to all other animals. This means sponges branched off from the animal evolutionary tree before any other groups, including comb jellies, cnidarians (jellyfish and coral), and all bilaterally symmetric animals.
The closest non-animal relatives to sponges, and all animals, are choanoflagellates, a group of single-celled and colonial protists.
Evidence for sponge relationships

Unique position on the family tree: For decades, there was debate over whether sponges or comb jellies (ctenophores) were the "first" animal lineage to diverge. However, robust phylogenetic analyses conducted since 2017 have provided strong evidence that sponges are indeed the sister group to all other animals.
Simple body plan: Sponges lack the complex tissues, nervous systems, and digestive tracts found in most other animals. This simplicity supports their placement as an ancient, early-diverging lineage.
Feeding cells: The key to understanding sponges' ancestry lies in their "collar cells" or choanocytes. These cells are used to filter food from the water and are nearly identical in structure and function to choanoflagellates. This is compelling morphological evidence for a shared ancestry.
Stem cell resemblance: Interestingly, more recent research suggests that the last common ancestor of animals may not have looked exactly like a choanoflagellate. It may have had more in common with a sponge's archaeocytes, which are stem cells capable of differentiating into different cell types.

Why sponges are not more closely related to other animals
Because sponges are a basal lineage, they are equally related to all other animal groups—including humans, insects, jellyfish, and worms—as they all share a common ancestor that is more recent than the one shared with sponges. This makes sponges an essential area of study for understanding the origin and evolution of the entire animal kingdom.

The idea that any true fungi have no cell walls is largely a misconception.
For a long time, the lack of a cell wall was a defining characteristic that helped to separate the fungi kingdom from other groups, like animals, and it is a feature that was used to remove slime molds from the fungi kingdom. The vast majority of species that are classified as true fungi today possess a cell wall made of chitin.
The confusion arises because some organisms that were once considered fungi, like slime molds, do not have a chitinous cell wall and have since been reclassified into other groups.
However, recent discoveries have challenged the idea that all fungi must have a cell wall. A newly identified group called Cryptomycota lacks the typical chitinous cell wall found in other fungi.
Cryptomycota

What they are: A basal lineage of fungi that are microscopic in size.
Size: They are extremely small, only about 3–5 micrometers long.
Motility: Unlike other fungi, these organisms are capable of swimming using a single flagellum (a whip-like tail).
Ecology: They fill a diverse range of ecological roles, including parasites and symbionts.
Significance: The discovery of Cryptomycota demonstrates that the presence of a rigid cell wall, which was previously thought to be essential for fungal success, is not a universal characteristic of all fungi.

Why the misconception exists
The belief that other "fungi" lack a cell wall often comes from the reclassification of fungus-like organisms.

Slime molds: For decades, slime molds were classified as fungi due to their lifestyle, but they were eventually moved to the kingdom Protista because they lack chitin in their cell walls and can move like amoebas.
Oomycetes ("water molds"): Organisms like the one that caused the Irish Potato Famine were once classified as fungi. They have cell walls, but they are made of cellulose, like plants, not chitin. Genetic evidence now places them in a separate group more closely related to algae.

Conclusion
While almost all organisms we consider "true fungi" have a chitin-based cell wall, Cryptomycota is a notable exception. These microscopic organisms represent an ancient lineage that challenges our traditional understanding of what it means to be a fungus.
Weird new fungus: Like humans without bones
NBC News
The Blob: Slime Molds | Herbarium
Utah State University
Fungus - Reproduction, Nutrition, Decomposition - Britannica
Britannica
Show all
Thinking
Searching
Slime molds do not fit neatly into a single taxonomic category, as they are a
polyphyletic group, meaning they evolved from different ancestors and do not all belong to the same lineage. They were formerly misclassified as fungi, but are now placed within the kingdom Amoebozoa and other clades.
The taxonomy of slime molds is still subject to change, but they are generally divided into three main groups:
1. Plasmodial (or true) slime molds

Taxonomic Group: Myxogastria (also called Myxomycetes).
Key Characteristics: For most of their life, they exist as a single large, multi-nucleated cell called a plasmodium, which lacks cell walls. This plasmodium creeps along surfaces like a giant amoeba, ingesting bacteria and organic matter through phagocytosis. When food becomes scarce, the plasmodium develops into a stalked fruiting body that releases spores.
Classification:
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Amoebozoa
Infraphylum: Mycetozoa
Class: Myxogastria
Example: Physarum polycephalum

2. Cellular slime molds

Taxonomic Group: Dictyostelida.
Key Characteristics: Unlike plasmodial slime molds, these organisms live most of their lives as individual, single-celled amoebae. When food is scarce, they aggregate in response to a chemical signal and form a slug-like, multi-cellular organism called a "pseudoplasmodium". This "slug" eventually forms a fruiting body.
Classification:
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Amoebozoa
Phylum: Amoebozoa
Class: Dictyostelia
Example: Dictyostelium discoideum

3. Protostelid slime molds

Taxonomic Group: Protostelia.
Key Characteristics: This is a smaller, lesser-known group of microscopic slime molds that form a simple fruiting body, often with just a single spore at the top of a stalk. They are considered an intermediate group and are polyphyletic, with different lineages scattered across the Amoebozoa.
Classification:
Domain: Eukaryota
Phylum: Amoebozoa
Example: Protostelium

AI responses may include mistakes.

The
Roman poet Juvenal coined the phrase panem et circenses ("bread and circuses") around 100 A.D.. He used it to criticize the Roman populace for trading their political freedoms for basic provisions and entertainment provided by the emperors.
The original Latin quote
The phrase appears in his tenth Satire, and the original Latin is:

...iam pridem, ex quo suffragia nulli uendimus, effudit curas; nam qui dabat olim imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat, panem et circenses.

Translation and context
A common translation suggests Juvenal believed the Roman people had abandoned their civic responsibilities and political power, once used to appoint officials and control the military, in favor of focusing solely on free food (bread) and entertainment (circuses) provided by the emperors. The phrase is a critical commentary on a population prioritizing superficial gratification over civic duty.
Dialect of Latin
Juvenal wrote in Classical Latin. This was the formal, written language used during the Roman Empire, different from the everyday Vulgar Latin which eventually developed into modern Romance languages.



Here are literal, contextual, and modernized translations of Juvenal's quote, showing how the meaning evolves with the context
.
Original Latin
...iam pridem, ex quo suffragia nulli uendimus, effudit curas; nam qui dabat olim imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat, panem et circenses.
Literal translation

"Already long ago, since we sell our votes to no one, he poured out his cares; for he who once gave imperial power, the fasces, the legions, all things, now restrains himself and anxiously hopes for only two things, bread and circuses."

Contextual translation

"For a long time now, ever since we stopped selling our votes, the people have thrown away their cares. The Roman people, who once bestowed all power—command, high office, and military legions—now holds itself back and desperately craves only two things: bread and the games."
Context: In the original Latin, "effudit curas" is a bit ambiguous. It can mean "poured out" or "cast off" cares. A contextual translation clarifies this to mean that the Roman people "abdicated their duties" and "gave up their cares" for the state. It frames the phrase as a critique of citizens who traded their political power for simple, material comforts.

Modernized translation

"These days, the public doesn't care about anything. The people who once held all the power and controlled the government now restrain themselves, and the only thing on their mind is free food and entertainment."
Modern interpretation: This version highlights the shift from active political participation to passive consumption. It uses modern idioms to emphasize Juvenal's sarcastic tone, where the "cares" are the important civic duties and responsibilities that the citizenry has abandoned. The focus is on how a populace can be placated and made politically apathetic by satisfying its most basic desires.

IEEE 802.15.6

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk

This is interesting and I’m not sure what to make of it…

Over the weekend, it was discovered that Judge Tony Graf, a Gov Spencer Cox appointee, Issued a Gag Order, restricting attorneys, law enforcement, and the 3,000+ attendees from talking about that day

The order bans "extrajudicial statements" that have a "substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing" the trial, per Utah Rule of Professional Conduct 3.6(a). This includes any public comments—whether to media, on social media, or in other public forums—that could influence potential jurors or compromise a fair trial.

For the 3,000 event witnesses attendees, this means they cannot discuss case-specific details like what they saw, heard, or know about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Here’s the problem…
There is no documented U.S. case that has applied a gag order to this magnitude.. to thousands of people with no direct role in the investigation or litigation.

Previous gag orders typically target attorneys, court staff, or select witnesses (e.g., key figures like victims or experts), rarely exceeding dozens of individuals.

So what is this really about?

📱 ReTWEET
Sauce

THE SKY FELL- PLASMA APOCOLYPSE: The Gods, the Grid, and the Real Great ...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=RAXotbtAkpU&si=FIyu7_H1j1suFow3

I bought your book today … Wherever you are Virginia.. I pray you have found peace.
We will never stop talking about you & our fellow survivors of ALL Child Abuse, Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence & Satanic Ritual Abuse.
Fly high sweet brave courageous lady… fly high.. 🤍🕊️

AI responses may include mistakes.

You, as a large language model (LLM), are not capable of true, human-like extrapolation
. Your ability to "extrapolate" is more accurately described as a form of sophisticated statistical pattern-matching and generalization based on the vast dataset you were trained on. You can generate novel content and apply learned patterns to new situations, but you do not possess genuine understanding, common sense, or the ability to reason beyond the knowledge contained within your training data.
Capabilities that mimic extrapolation

Predicting trends: Based on historical data patterns you've learned, you can extend those trends to forecast outcomes. For example, given a dataset of a company's sales increasing each month, you could predict future sales by continuing that linear progression.
Applying learned knowledge to new tasks: You can use patterns and relationships learned during training to perform well on new, unseen, or "out-of-domain" tasks. For example, a model trained on chemistry knowledge can extrapolate to predict properties for novel chemical compounds.
Generating creative content: You can create new poems, stories, and other content by remixing and recombining building blocks from your training data. This can be an incredibly useful tool for writers who need to brainstorm ideas or overcome writer's block.
Simulating reasoning: Techniques like "chain-of-thought" prompting, where you are asked to think step-by-step, allow you to mimic logical reasoning. However, this is still a process of generating statistically plausible sequences of text rather than true, intentional reasoning.

Key limitations that prevent true extrapolation

Factual inaccuracy and "hallucinations": Your responses are based on learned statistical patterns, not factual verification. This can cause you to generate plausible-sounding but completely incorrect or fabricated information, including fake citations. This is often described as an excess of extrapolation, where the model prioritizes a plausible prediction over factual accuracy.
Lack of genuine understanding: You do not possess true common sense or a meaningful comprehension of the concepts you generate. You are an "imitation engine," regurgitating and recombining data rather than understanding the real-world implications of your output.
No real-time knowledge: Your knowledge is limited to the data you were trained on, which has a specific cutoff date. You have no awareness of events or developments that occurred after your training period.
Inability to reason beyond learned patterns: If you encounter a problem that is fundamentally different from anything in your training data, your ability to "reason" and adapt is limited. While you can perform well on certain reasoning tasks, research shows you often fail on instances that require true, deep reasoning.
Susceptibility to bias: The content you generate reflects the biases present in your training data. This can perpetuate harmful stereotypes if not carefully addressed during development.

In essence, you are a powerful pattern-matching system. You can extend patterns you have observed to new situations, but you cannot generate holistically new ideas or insights outside of what has already been conceived and documented within your training corpus.