Discussion:
Umami and other nonsense
(too old to reply)
occam
2019-08-13 06:47:51 UTC
Permalink
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.

When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.

Why is the science of taste so far behind those of vision and hearing?
Waves provide an adequate explanation of both. However the science of
taste (and smell) seem to lag far behind. Why is this? Any theories?
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-13 08:02:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.

I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...

It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
Post by occam
Why is the science of taste so far behind those of vision and hearing?
Waves provide an adequate explanation of both. However the science of
taste (and smell) seem to lag far behind. Why is this? Any theories?
Because taste and smell tend to be very subjective and there's a wide variation in sensitivity among people. It wasn't until relatively recenty that it was even possible to figure out how taste buds worked, but "smell buds" aren't rally a thing. There are receptors in the nose but they're rather different from the receptors in the eye and on the tongue. Years ago it was suggested there were four basic "smells"- goaty, floral, and I forget the others, but these days they think there are ten:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-human-nose-can-sense-10-basic-smells-1355489504

Eventually it will be figured out.

Have some patience.


Dr. HotSalt
occam
2019-08-13 09:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.

There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
Why is the science of taste so far behind those of vision and hearing?
Waves provide an adequate explanation of both. However the science of
taste (and smell) seem to lag far behind. Why is this? Any theories?
https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-human-nose-can-sense-10-basic-smells-1355489504
Eventually it will be figured out.
Have some patience.
Dr. HotSalt
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-13 12:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.
In fact there is in a few humans, and in a wide variety of animals,
a fourth (and in some of them, up to a seventh) visual receptor --
see the adjacent thread on tetrachromy, and listen to the RadioLab
podcast on color (which also includes Guy Deutscher, citing Gladstone,
on the lack of a word for 'blue' in Homer).
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
You are wrong, Hot Salt is right. Most "teste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
Why is the science of taste so far behind those of vision and hearing?
Waves provide an adequate explanation of both. However the science of
taste (and smell) seem to lag far behind. Why is this? Any theories?
https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-human-nose-can-sense-10-basic-smells-1355489504
Eventually it will be figured out.
Have some patience.
Tak To
2019-08-13 14:38:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.
In fact there is in a few humans, and in a wide variety of animals,
a fourth (and in some of them, up to a seventh) visual receptor --
see the adjacent thread on tetrachromy, and listen to the RadioLab
podcast on color (which also includes Guy Deutscher, citing Gladstone,
on the lack of a word for 'blue' in Homer).
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
You are wrong, Hot Salt is right.
Most "teste" is actually "smell."
(tasteless joke withdrawn)
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-13 14:49:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.
In fact there is in a few humans, and in a wide variety of animals,
a fourth (and in some of them, up to a seventh) visual receptor --
see the adjacent thread on tetrachromy, and listen to the RadioLab
podcast on color (which also includes Guy Deutscher, citing Gladstone,
on the lack of a word for 'blue' in Homer).
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
You are wrong, Hot Salt is right.
Most "teste" is actually "smell."
(tasteless joke withdrawn)
Since it would have left you in bad odor here.
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales.
So I imagine some of the best evidence that most flavor is smell comes
from the few people with no sense of smell (anosmia), who indeed can
only distinguish sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami.
Post by Tak To
The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
I did not know that.
--
Jerry Friedman
HVS
2019-08-13 15:11:03 UTC
Permalink
-snip-
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Tak To
The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
I did not know that.
Presumably that's why people seldom notice if they have bad breath, and
that the usual way people check is to breathe into their hand, and give
that a sniff.
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng (30 yrs) and BrEng (36 yrs),
indiscriminately mixed
occam
2019-08-20 12:44:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by occam
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from
Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste  was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
   It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of
flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were
only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences).
Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two
or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not
covered by them.
   I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste
because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste
the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's
sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot
taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't
taste are...
   It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our
eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the
spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by
those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because
we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near
ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had
cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.
In fact there is in a few humans, and in a wide variety of animals,
a fourth (and in some of them, up to a seventh) visual receptor --
see the adjacent thread on tetrachromy, and listen to the RadioLab
podcast on color (which also includes Guy Deutscher, citing Gladstone,
on the lack of a word for 'blue' in Homer).
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is),  and that this fourth receptor allows
us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
You are wrong, Hot Salt is right.
Most "teste" is actually "smell."
(tasteless joke withdrawn)
Since it would have left you in bad odor here.
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth.  It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales.
So I imagine some of the best evidence that most flavor is smell comes
from the few people with no sense of smell (anosmia), who indeed can
only distinguish sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami.
Jerry, I am not sure if you are expressing a hope ('I imagine'), or have
indeed seen some studies carried on anosmiacs?
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-20 17:00:17 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by occam
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth.  It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales.
So I imagine some of the best evidence that most flavor is smell comes
from the few people with no sense of smell (anosmia), who indeed can
only distinguish sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami.
Jerry, I am not sure if you are expressing a hope ('I imagine'), or have
indeed seen some studies carried on anosmiacs?
It was a surmise. I haven't seen any studies.
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-13 15:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.
In fact there is in a few humans, and in a wide variety of animals,
a fourth (and in some of them, up to a seventh) visual receptor --
see the adjacent thread on tetrachromy, and listen to the RadioLab
podcast on color (which also includes Guy Deutscher, citing Gladstone,
on the lack of a word for 'blue' in Homer).
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
You are wrong, Hot Salt is right.
Most "taste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing. The epiglottis
makes sure particles don't fall into the trachea.
Tak To
2019-08-13 15:59:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from Japanese. As
both words and food are on topic in AUE, please excuse the rant that
follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste was
explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic tastes
(sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then, and still is,
even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences). Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes. They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a simple
experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can reproduce any
colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and green beams onto a
white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the intensities. Hey presto!
Pick a colour, any colour, and we can reproduce them.
In fact there is in a few humans, and in a wide variety of animals,
a fourth (and in some of them, up to a seventh) visual receptor --
see the adjacent thread on tetrachromy, and listen to the RadioLab
podcast on color (which also includes Guy Deutscher, citing Gladstone,
on the lack of a word for 'blue' in Homer).
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
You are wrong, Hot Salt is right.
Most "taste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing. The epiglottis
makes sure particles don't fall into the trachea.
The epiglottis closes the entrance to the trachea but not that
to the nasal cavity.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-13 16:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing. The epiglottis
makes sure particles don't fall into the trachea.
The epiglottis closes the entrance to the trachea but not that
to the nasal cavity.
That's the job of the velum.

And you can't, as you put it, exhale under those circumstances. (Nor
inhale, either, which would seem more useful in first getting the
aroma of something new.)
Janet
2019-08-14 12:08:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing. The epiglottis
makes sure particles don't fall into the trachea.
The epiglottis closes the entrance to the trachea but not that
to the nasal cavity.
That's the job of the velum.
And you can't, as you put it, exhale under those circumstances.
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.

Janet.
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-14 13:18:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing. The epiglottis
makes sure particles don't fall into the trachea.
The epiglottis closes the entrance to the trachea but not that
to the nasal cavity.
That's the job of the velum.
And you can't, as you put it, exhale under those circumstances.
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-15 05:20:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will
experience only one or more of the five sensations, or
complete blandness (if the substance happened not to stimulate
any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing. The epiglottis
makes sure particles don't fall into the trachea.
The epiglottis closes the entrance to the trachea but not that
to the nasal cavity.
That's the job of the velum.
And you can't, as you put it, exhale under those circumstances.
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.


Dr. HotSalt
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 11:35:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-15 12:00:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
I *have* wondered about that but I've never had the opportunity to ask a piper why they didn't invent (or employ, if they knew about it) circular breathing.


Dr. HotSalt
charles
2019-08-15 12:28:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 12:49:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
Nonetheless, since it was Janet who introduced the topic, it is appropriate
to mention the best-known example.
Janet
2019-08-15 12:58:42 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@candehope.me.uk>, ***@candehope.me.uk
says...
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.

Janet
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 13:50:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Janet
says...
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.
Janet
T*ny, you can't hide by pretending to be Janet.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-08-15 16:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Janet
says...
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.
No, but he might have heard of Schwanda the Bagpiper -- not an
obviously Scottish opera title.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 17:04:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Janet
says...
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.
No, but he might have heard of Schwanda the Bagpiper -- not an
obviously Scottish opera title.
So you too failed to take note of the context?

Do you mean *Schwanda der Dudelsackpfeifer*, an operetta notable mainly
for its silly title?
s***@gmail.com
2019-08-15 20:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Janet
says...
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.
No, but he might have heard of Schwanda the Bagpiper -- not an
obviously Scottish opera title.
So you too failed to take note of the context?
Do you mean *Schwanda der Dudelsackpfeifer*, an operetta notable mainly
for its silly title?
Oh, go to hell. Actually, that's what Schwanda did,
and there's a great dance tune at the end.

Also notable for being a very popular opera when premiered,
and then shut down by the Nazis.

/dps
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 21:20:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Janet
says...
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.
No, but he might have heard of Schwanda the Bagpiper -- not an
obviously Scottish opera title.
So you too failed to take note of the context?
Do you mean *Schwanda der Dudelsackpfeifer*, an operetta notable mainly
for its silly title?
Oh, go to hell. Actually, that's what Schwanda did,
and there's a great dance tune at the end.
Also notable for being a very popular opera when premiered,
and then shut down by the Nazis.
It was even once used as an intertitle in an episode of *Frasier*.
Quinn C
2019-08-15 22:02:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Janet
Post by charles
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
You can't expect PTD to know about anything beyond his deep hole in
New Jersey.
No, but he might have heard of Schwanda the Bagpiper -- not an
obviously Scottish opera title.
So you too failed to take note of the context?
Do you mean *Schwanda der Dudelsackpfeifer*, an operetta notable mainly
for its silly title?
Or is it notable for being referred to by its German title, because
that sounds so amusingly silly to people like you?

Reason to void your linguist card, btw.
--
Woman is a pair of ovaries with a human being attached, whereas
man is a human being furnished with a pair of testes.
-- Rudolf Virchow
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-17 04:25:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.

Since then, as you say, I came to find that they're played in many places:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes

(And no, I can't play any of them.)


Dr. HotSalt
Ross
2019-08-17 10:36:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes
(And no, I can't play any of them.)
Dr. HotSalt
Recently saw Cristina Pato, awesome Galician bagpiper, with
Silk Road Ensemble.


(She makes her entrance about 1:30)

Or this solo item:


Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-19 09:42:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes
(And no, I can't play any of them.)
Recently saw Cristina Pato, awesome Galician bagpiper, with
Silk Road Ensemble.
http://youtu.be/hoIdreKJSzU
(She makes her entrance about 1:30)
I quite liked the first bit before they went all "party down".
Somewhere between slow Jazz and some 60s/70s Prog rock.
Post by Ross
http://youtu.be/FQwngnd445M
That's what I'm talking about (above). She'd have made a fine guest
player with early Pink Floyd.


Dr. HotSalt
Sam Plusnet
2019-08-17 19:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes
(And no, I can't play any of them.)
Then you are no gentleman sir.
--
Sam Plusnet
Peter Moylan
2019-08-18 00:27:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Dr. HotSalt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes
(And no, I can't play any of them.)
Then you are no gentleman sir.
A gentleman being someone who knows how to play the bagpipes, but doesn't.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-18 00:38:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Dr. HotSalt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes
(And no, I can't play any of them.)
Then you are no gentleman sir.
You will no doubt be pleased to know that I never claimed to be one,
even in the sense explained by Mr. Moylan.


Dr. HotSalt
John Varela
2019-08-18 02:09:05 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bagpipes
(And no, I can't play any of them.)
Dr. HotSalt
--
John Varela
RH Draney
2019-08-18 09:22:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
Kerr-Mudd,John
2019-08-18 09:34:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Kerr-Mudd,John
2019-08-18 09:38:24 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 GMT, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
Note also the "other" Albania; "confused? you will be".
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Quinn C
2019-08-19 18:01:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 GMT, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
Note also the "other" Albania; "confused? you will be".
A classmate's grandparents were from the other Galicia, now in Ukraine.
--
I found the Forshan religion restful. I found the Forshan
religious war less so.
-- J. Scalzi, Redshirts
charles
2019-08-19 21:38:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 GMT, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
Note also the "other" Albania; "confused? you will be".
A classmate's grandparents were from the other Galicia, now in Ukraine.
I always think of the other'Georgia'.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-20 20:43:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Quinn C
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 GMT, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
Note also the "other" Albania; "confused? you will be".
A classmate's grandparents were from the other Galicia, now in Ukraine.
I always think of the other'Georgia'.
The one that's on your mind, or the one that's always on your mind?


Dr. HotSalt
charles
2019-08-20 20:59:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by charles
Post by Quinn C
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 GMT, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the
Gauls lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the
names "Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
Note also the "other" Albania; "confused? you will be".
A classmate's grandparents were from the other Galicia, now in Ukraine.
I always think of the other'Georgia'.
The one that's on your mind, or the one that's always on your mind?
Dr. HotSalt
no - Uncle Joe's one.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-21 08:37:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by charles
Post by Quinn C
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 GMT, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night
PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the
Gauls lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the
names "Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
Note also the "other" Albania; "confused? you will be".
A classmate's grandparents were from the other Galicia, now in Ukraine.
I always think of the other'Georgia'.
The one that's on your mind, or the one that's always on your mind?
no - Uncle Joe's one.
Ah, that would be the first one then, the one the Beatles sang about:



...not the one Mr. Charles sang about.


Dr. HotSalt
John Varela
2019-08-18 21:08:18 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:34:15 UTC, "Kerr-Mudd,John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS
show
Post by RH Draney
Post by John Varela
Post by Dr. HotSalt
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
Was that the one that tried to claim a connection between the names
"Iberia" and "Hibernia"?...r
There were 2 Iberias IIRC; One in the Caucasas region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iberia_(antiquity)
And the Galatia of the Bible was another place where Gauls were
found.
--
John Varela
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-18 12:06:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Varela
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 04:25:06 UTC, "Dr. HotSalt"
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by charles
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
Some years ago I was astounded when I watched a late-night PBS show
about traditional bagpipes in northern *Spain* of all places.
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Madhu
2019-08-18 12:44:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?

I think galatia was only ever in turkey
Julian
2019-08-18 14:12:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody.
They have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc.
Probably a lot longer. It's a nice place to live.
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-18 17:44:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Julian
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody.
They have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc.
Probably a lot longer. It's a nice place to live.
Then how does their language come to be a variety of Ibero-Romance?

Their territory is singularly devoid of inscriptions in what may or
may not represent pre-Roman populations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_scripts
charles
2019-08-18 18:05:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Julian
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody.
They have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc.
Probably a lot longer. It's a nice place to live.
Then how does their language come to be a variety of Ibero-Romance?
Their territory is singularly devoid of inscriptions in what may or
may not represent pre-Roman populations.
they have bagpipes, isn't that enough for you? They also have the Celtic
Harp
Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_scripts
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-18 18:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Julian
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody.
They have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc.
Probably a lot longer. It's a nice place to live.
Then how does their language come to be a variety of Ibero-Romance?
Their territory is singularly devoid of inscriptions in what may or
may not represent pre-Roman populations.
they have bagpipes, isn't that enough for you? They also have the Celtic
Harp
While Ibero-celtic survived into Roman times (long enough to be written
on a few monuments), it hasn't survived in present-day Galicia, and
there is no inscriptional evidence for it earlier than Roman times.
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_scripts
Julian
2019-08-18 20:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Julian
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody.
They have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc.
Probably a lot longer. It's a nice place to live.
Then how does their language come to be a variety of Ibero-Romance?
Dunno.
Peter Moylan
2019-08-19 03:10:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Julian
Post by Peter T. Daniels
* "Peter T. Daniels"
On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 10:09:08 PM UTC-4, John
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because
the Gauls lived there, pushed to the edge of the
continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody. They
have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc. Probably a lot
longer. It's a nice place to live.
Then how does their language come to be a variety of
Ibero-Romance?
Dunno.
Languages change through contact with neighbours, among other reasons,
even in populations that have stayed in the same place for a long time.
How does the dominant language in Ireland come to be a Germanic language?

This newsgroup is probably full of people who don't speak their
ancestral language(s), despite the high level of literacy.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
John Varela
2019-08-18 21:11:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Julian
Post by Madhu
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by John Varela
That northwest region of Spain was named Galatia because the Gauls
lived there, pushed to the edge of the continent.
The biblical Galatians were in central Anatolia.
Galicia? in spain?
The Galicians in Spain weren't pushed there by anybody.
They have been in NW Spain since no later than 1500bc.
Probably a lot longer. It's a nice place to live.
Pushed there in the same sense that the Irish, Welsh, and Scots (but
not the Bretons) were pushed to the edge. If you like, we could
call them "remnants" but I prefer to think of them as "hold-outs".
My surname is probably Galician.
--
John Varela
Peter Moylan
2019-08-17 11:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 1:20:15 AM UTC-4, Dr. HotSalt
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 6:18:08 AM UTC-7, Peter T.
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 8:09:05 AM UTC-4, Janet
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes (chanter
and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
In Ireland they'll tell you that the Irish sold bagpipes to the Scots,
but the Scots never got the joke.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-17 14:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 6:18:08 AM UTC-7, Peter T.
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 8:09:05 AM UTC-4, Janet
Except by  circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes (chanter
and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
In Ireland they'll tell you that the Irish sold bagpipes to the Scots,
but the Scots never got the joke.
Was the selling done by Unionists?

(I know I shouldn't explain jokes, but that's not a political reference.)
--
Jerry Friedman
Kerr-Mudd,John
2019-08-17 16:05:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 14:58:07 GMT, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 8:09:05 AM UTC-4, Janet
Except by  circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes (chanter
and drones) going.
bagpipes also exist in other parts of tehnworld.
In Ireland they'll tell you that the Irish sold bagpipes to the Scots,
but the Scots never got the joke.
Was the selling done by Unionists?
(I know I shouldn't explain jokes, but that's not a political
reference.)
For political trouble, ask what sort of union are they talking about.
(the Unionists want to remain (actually Brexit) part of the UK, the
Republicans want an United Ireland. AFAICT, IMO etc.)
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Janet
2019-08-15 12:56:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/

Janet
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 13:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.

Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
Tony Cooper
2019-08-15 14:29:27 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:50:01 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.

Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Quinn C
2019-08-15 16:22:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 06:50:01 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.
I am blocked, too.

Sometimes I can view a small number of pictures on Pinterest before
they ask, but eventually, they will. And that despite the fact they
profit entirely from material that others publish. No sympathies from
me there.

<https://imgur.com/a/NhqRFvb>

After circumventing that, I find the video is on Youtube anyway, so it
should have been posted as:

--
If Helen Keller is alone in the forest and falls down, does she
make a sound?
CDB
2019-08-15 16:58:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an "x" in
the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to delete the
request and went on to see more.
s***@gmail.com
2019-08-15 20:56:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an "x" in
the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to delete the
request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel Anführungszeichen
around words, and enfaches Anführungszeichen around a letter)
but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.

Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged into a partner,
Facebook being the leading partner.

/dps
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-15 21:24:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an "x" in
the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to delete the
request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel Anführungszeichen
around words, and enfaches Anführungszeichen around a letter)
but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.
Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged into a partner,
Facebook being the leading partner.
Heaven forfend.
Quinn C
2019-08-15 22:06:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an "x" in
the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to delete the
request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there
I had never noticed it before, but after CDB's remark, I tried again,
and found the X in the corner of the semi-transparent overlay, far from
the information-bearing part of the popup.

So add annoying, deliberately misleading web design to my Pinterest
gripes.
--
Be afraid of the lame - They'll inherit your legs
Be afraid of the old - They'll inherit your souls
-- Regina Spektor, Après moi
Tony Cooper
2019-08-15 23:50:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before viewing
an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is that
requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I click on it,
and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an "x" in
the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to delete the
request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel Anführungszeichen
around words, and enfaches Anführungszeichen around a letter)
but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.
Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged into a partner,
Facebook being the leading partner.
That is certainly not the case with me. I would as soon drink from
specimen collection cups at a methadone clinic as log into Facebook.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Kerr-Mudd,John
2019-08-16 09:06:54 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 23:50:14 GMT, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there was
a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from the pipe
to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register before
viewing an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is
that requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I
click on it, and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an "x"
in the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to delete the
request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel
Anführungszeichen around words, and enfaches Anführungszeichen around
a letter) but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.
Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged into a
partner, Facebook being the leading partner.
That is certainly not the case with me. I would as soon drink from
specimen collection cups at a methadone clinic as log into Facebook.
Us Usenet fogeys need to stick together.

(I'm getting foggier)
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
CDB
2019-08-16 13:07:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with
the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there
was a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from
the pipe to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their
elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register
before viewing an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is
that requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I
click on it, and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an
"x" in the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to
delete the request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel
Anführungszeichen around words, and enfaches Anführungszeichen
around a letter) but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.
Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged into
a partner, Facebook being the leading partner.
The only social medium I subscribe to is Twitter -- I wanted to follow
some news there -- and never a word have I tweeted. Service is a bit
spotty, because I refuse their repeated requests to confirm my identity;
I might consider delisting myself, but you have to sign in for that too.

I say they're surveillance corporations, and I say the hell with them.
Kerr-Mudd,John
2019-08-16 14:08:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with
the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
Not the ones I watched in my church basement every time there
was a celebration. They regularly removed their mouths from
the pipe to breathe, while keeping the noise going with their
elbow.
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register
before viewing an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it is
that requires this, you have. The link opens and plays when I
click on it, and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that is
"pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was an
"x" in the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it to
delete the request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel
AnfÃŒhrungszeichen around words, and enfaches AnfÃŒhrungszeichen
around a letter) but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.
Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged into
a partner, Facebook being the leading partner.
The only social medium I subscribe to is Twitter -- I wanted to follow
some news there -- and never a word have I tweeted. Service is a bit
spotty, because I refuse their repeated requests to confirm my
identity;
Post by CDB
I might consider delisting myself, but you have to sign in for that too.
I say they're surveillance corporations, and I say the hell with them.
I'll bet google tracks all my (and your) searches and map requests, and
...?
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
CDB
2019-08-16 15:30:13 UTC
Permalink
[the pipes, the pipes]
Post by CDB
Post by CDB
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by CDB
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Otherwise one does not want to get too close to bagpipers.
Post by Janet
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
Not interested in pinterest, which demands that I register
before viewing an image.
I do wonder what strange internet connection, or whatever it
is that requires this, you have. The link opens and plays
when I click on it, and no registration is necessary.
Maybe it's because you try to access the brewery version that
is "pintrest".
Very clever, Tony. Make sure you're holding the right end of the cat.
Post by CDB
I got the same request (register to see more), but there was
an "x" in the upper-right corner of the window. I clicked it
to delete the request and went on to see more.
The 'x' isn't always there (my style guide says doppel
Anführungszeichen around words, and enfaches Anführungszeichen
around a letter) but inspect-element has sometimes been useful.
Also, some sites will considered you logged in if you're logged
into a partner, Facebook being the leading partner.
The only social medium I subscribe to is Twitter -- I wanted to
follow some news there -- and never a word have I tweeted. Service
is a bit spotty, because I refuse their repeated requests to
confirm my
identity;
Post by CDB
I might consider delisting myself, but you have to sign in for
that
too.
Post by CDB
I say they're surveillance corporations, and I say the hell with them.
I'll bet google tracks all my (and your) searches and map requests,
and ...?
My email is gmail, but my default search engine seems to be by
Microsoft. Divide and rule, or twice as many stalkers?
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-16 16:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
I'll bet google tracks all my (and your) searches and map requests,
and ...?
My email is gmail, but my default search engine seems to be by
Microsoft. Divide and rule, or twice as many stalkers?
You use Bing? Is it adequate?
s***@gmail.com
2019-08-19 22:39:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
Whereas in Janet's beloved Scotland they had to invent an
air-bladder to keep the airstream into the sounding pipes
(chanter and drones) going.
Pipers use circular breathing, you silly little boy.
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/339669996874301402/
I thoght you were going for this one:



/dps
Peter Moylan
2019-08-17 11:30:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Janet
Except by circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
I'm jealous. I own a didgeridoo, but have never managed to get past the
initial burst of sound.

I've never tried an oboe. I'm inclined to think of that as an ill wind
that nobody blows any good.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
occam
2019-08-21 10:00:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Except by  circular breathing. I won't bother with the link.
Oboists of the world, unite!
I'd have said didgerido, but I can actually play that.
I'm jealous. I own a didgeridoo, but have never managed to get past the
initial burst of sound.
I also have one, decorated in aboriginal art. I suspect it is a
'tourist' didgeridoo. Where I failed, my 18-year old succeeded, after
watching several YouTube videos on circular breathing. He played it in
his school play, as background sound.
Post by Peter Moylan
I've never tried an oboe. I'm inclined to think of that as an ill wind
that nobody blows any good.
Quinn C
2019-08-13 17:28:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Most "taste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing.
If you swallow food as soon as it reaches your mouth, there's something
seriously wrong with your approach to eating.
--
The lack of any sense of play between them worried Miles. You
had to have a keen sense of humor to do sex and stay sane.
-- L. McMaster Bujold, Memory
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-13 18:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Most "taste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing.
If you swallow food as soon as it reaches your mouth, there's something
seriously wrong with your approach to eating.
I don't think that's what he was suggesting. Your autonomous nervous system
is fairly sophisticated -- it won't let your bolus into your lungs no matter
how short you've been chewing it.
Quinn C
2019-08-13 22:28:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Quinn C
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Most "taste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing.
If you swallow food as soon as it reaches your mouth, there's something
seriously wrong with your approach to eating.
I don't think that's what he was suggesting. Your autonomous nervous system
is fairly sophisticated -- it won't let your bolus into your lungs no matter
how short you've been chewing it.
Are you talking about yourself in the third person now?

You brought up swallowing. We can inhale and exhale during chewing, so
swallowing is irrelevant to the discussion.
--
Humans write software and while a piece of software might be
bug free humans are not. - Robert Klemme
bill van
2019-08-14 06:28:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Quinn C
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Most "taste" is actually "smell."
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are swallowing,
there's something seriously wrong with your plumbing.
If you swallow food as soon as it reaches your mouth, there's something
seriously wrong with your approach to eating.
I don't think that's what he was suggesting. Your autonomous nervous system
is fairly sophisticated -- it won't let your bolus into your lungs no matter
how short you've been chewing it.
Then I suppose a holus-bolus is right out.

bill
CDB
2019-08-14 13:24:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill van
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Quinn C
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Most "taste" is actually "smell." If you close off your
nose when tasting something, you will experience only one
or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if
the substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste
buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is
connected to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals
when one exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory
stimuli that it receives when exhaling from those when
inhaling.
If you are able to in/exhale at the same time you are
swallowing, there's something seriously wrong with your
plumbing.
If you swallow food as soon as it reaches your mouth, there's
something seriously wrong with your approach to eating.
I don't think that's what he was suggesting. Your autonomous
nervous system is fairly sophisticated -- it won't let your bolus
into your lungs no matter how short you've been chewing it.
Then I suppose a holus-bolus is right out.
Not if it's an Elvis movie.
Quinn C
2019-08-13 17:28:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If you close off your nose when tasting something, you will experience
only one or more of the five sensations, or complete blandness (if the
substance happened not to stimulate any of the "taste buds").
One can't close off the nose completely, since it is connected
to the mouth. It can detect the airborne chemicals when one
exhales. The brain differentiates the olfactory stimuli that
it receives when exhaling from those when inhaling.
I assume some of the seeping of smells into the nose from the mouth
works independent of breathing. Having a cold can block the smell much
more effectively than just holding your nose.
--
In the old days, the complaints about the passing of the
golden age were much more sophisticated.
-- James Hogg in alt.usage.english
Garrett Wollman
2019-08-13 13:57:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.

-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can,
***@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is
Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015)
Quinn C
2019-08-13 17:28:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
--
The least questioned assumptions are often the most questionable
-- Paul Broca
... who never questioned that men are more intelligent than women
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-14 03:49:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for very good reason if you think about it a bit.

It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion) has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found in foods that are therefore said to have umami flavor.

It's easy to look up. I cannot imagine why occam didn't do a little homework before posting the question.


Dr. HotSalt
Tak To
2019-08-14 18:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized
amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined
receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that
neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for
very good reason if you think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion)
Alas, free glutamate is not just a carboxylate anion. The receptors
are pretty specific.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found
in foods that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
It's easy to look up. I cannot imagine why occam didn't do a
little homework before posting the question.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-15 05:23:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized
amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined
receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that
neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for
very good reason if you think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion)
Alas, free glutamate is not just a carboxylate anion. The receptors
are pretty specific.
That's why I wrote "*part* of the MSG molecule". That's all it takes- the rest can hang over the side like feet off a too-short mattress and the umami receptor fires just the same.
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found
in foods that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
It's easy to look up. I cannot imagine why occam didn't do a
little homework before posting the question.
Dr. HotSalt
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-15 13:09:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized
amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined
receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that
neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for
very good reason if you think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion)
Alas, free glutamate is not just a carboxylate anion. The receptors
are pretty specific.
That's why I wrote "*part* of the MSG molecule". That's all it takes- the rest can hang over the side like feet off a too-short mattress and the umami receptor fires just the same.
The rest being just the sodium ion?
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found
in foods that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
It's easy to look up. I cannot imagine why occam didn't do a
little homework before posting the question.
Dr. HotSalt
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-08-20 17:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized
amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined
receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that
neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for
very good reason if you think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion)
Alas, free glutamate is not just a carboxylate anion. The receptors
are pretty specific.
That's why I wrote "*part* of the MSG molecule". That's all it takes-
the rest can hang over the side like feet off a too-short mattress and
the umami receptor fires just the same.
The rest being just the sodium ion?
Once it's in aqueous solution it doesn't know or care what the cation is.
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found
in foods that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
It's easy to look up. I cannot imagine why occam didn't do a
little homework before posting the question.
Dr. HotSalt
--
athel
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-20 18:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Tak To
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized
amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined
receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that
neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for
very good reason if you think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion)
Alas, free glutamate is not just a carboxylate anion. The receptors
are pretty specific.
That's why I wrote "*part* of the MSG molecule". That's all it takes-
the rest can hang over the side like feet off a too-short mattress and
the umami receptor fires just the same.
The rest being just the sodium ion?
Once it's in aqueous solution it doesn't know or care what the cation is.
...

Yes. I was trying to clear up the confusion. Tak To thought that
Dr. HotSalt's "part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion)" meant
just the carboxyl group, not the whole glutamate ion.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-15 02:52:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized amounts of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined receptors in the mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that neurotransmitters fit into receptors in neural synapses, and for very good reason if you think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate anion) has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found in foods that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
...

Does it just happen, or does having receptors that fit glutamate and
other amino-acids anions mean we like protein-rich (and maybe somewhat
decayed) foods? --
Jerry Friedman
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-15 05:26:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized amounts
of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined receptors in the
mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that neurotransmitters fit
into receptors in neural synapses, and for very good reason if you
think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate
anion) has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found in foods
that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
...
Does it just happen, or does having receptors that fit glutamate and
other amino-acids anions mean we like protein-rich (and maybe somewhat
decayed) foods? --
It "just happens" in that evolution is not directed, and those molecules are prominent in edible things that generally don't tend to kill us. At least not right away.


Dr. HotSalt
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-15 13:52:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized amounts
of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined receptors in the
mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that neurotransmitters fit
into receptors in neural synapses, and for very good reason if you
think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate
anion) has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found in foods
that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
...
Does it just happen, or does having receptors that fit glutamate and
other amino-acids anions mean we like protein-rich (and maybe somewhat
decayed) foods? --
It "just happens" in that evolution is not directed, and those molecules are prominent in edible things that generally don't tend to kill us. At least not right away.
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
--
Jerry Friedman
Garrett Wollman
2019-08-15 15:05:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.

-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can,
***@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is
Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015)
Jerry Friedman
2019-08-16 03:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.
I don't follow. The receptor that makes glycine taste good would have
the same advantage.

Do you know of another theory for why glutamate or any of the other
umami substances taste good to us?
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-08-20 18:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.
It is indeed true that glycine is sweet (it tastes much like sucrose)
but I'm not sure how famous that information is. Several times I've
asked classes of biochemistry students if anyone can tell me why it's
called glycine, and I've never found one who could. If biochemistry
students don't know how likely it is that members of the general
population know?
--
athel
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-20 21:05:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.
It is indeed true that glycine is sweet (it tastes much like sucrose)
but I'm not sure how famous that information is. Several times I've
asked classes of biochemistry students if anyone can tell me why it's
called glycine, and I've never found one who could. If biochemistry
students don't know how likely it is that members of the general
population know?
Apparently it was given that name *because* it tastes sweet. It is an
essential amino acid though, so that fits the "theory".

On the other hand, so does lead [II] acetate.

Seems to me to be just another example of undirected evolution sometimes
having awkward consequences.


Dr. HotSalt
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-08-21 06:24:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.
It is indeed true that glycine is sweet (it tastes much like sucrose)
but I'm not sure how famous that information is. Several times I've
asked classes of biochemistry students if anyone can tell me why it's
called glycine, and I've never found one who could. If biochemistry
students don't know how likely it is that members of the general
population know?
Apparently it was given that name *because* it tastes sweet.
Yes. It used to be commonplace for organic chemists to taste newly
isolated compounds. The psychodelic effects of LSD were discovered by
William Perkin Jr. after a crystal "accidentally" landed in his mouth.
I doubt whether it was really accidental -- he was too skilled a
chemist to have that sort of accident.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
It is an
essential amino acid though,
It's not as simple as that. It used to be considered non-essential,
because it can be synthesized from serine, which is readily available.
Nowadays many nutritionists call it "conditionally essential." The
problem is that formation from serine is regulated by the demand for C1
units needed for anabolic metabolism, and not by the demand for
glycine. That works fine for small animals and growing animals, which
consume lots of C1 units, but not for large adult terrestrial animals,
which need a huge amount of glycine (collagen is the most abundant
protein in the human body, and one-third of it (by counting residues)
is glycine, or one-quarter (by mass)). Elderly people, as well as
elderly elephants and rhinoceroses in the wild, suffer from
osteoathritis and other collagen-related diseases.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
so that fits the "theory".
Not really. There is almost no free glycine in nature, and combined
glycine isn't sweet.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
On the other hand, so does lead [II] acetate.
Wealthy Romans used to store their wine in lead vessels, which leached
out the acetic acid (vinegar) and made the wine less sour and sweeter.
This must have had effects on their health and fertility.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Seems to me to be just another example of undirected evolution sometimes
having awkward consequences.
Yes.
--
athel
Dr. HotSalt
2019-08-21 08:32:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.
It is indeed true that glycine is sweet (it tastes much like sucrose)
but I'm not sure how famous that information is. Several times I've
asked classes of biochemistry students if anyone can tell me why it's
called glycine, and I've never found one who could. If biochemistry
students don't know how likely it is that members of the general
population know?
Apparently it was given that name *because* it tastes sweet.
Yes. It used to be commonplace for organic chemists to taste newly
isolated compounds.
I've heard some horror stories about that.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
The psychodelic effects of LSD were discovered by
William Perkin Jr. after a crystal "accidentally" landed in his mouth.
I doubt whether it was really accidental -- he was too skilled a
chemist to have that sort of accident.
I thought that was Hoffman?
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
It is an essential amino acid though,
It's not as simple as that. It used to be considered non-essential,
because it can be synthesized from serine, which is readily available.
By "essential" I meant Life As We Know It can't do without it.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Nowadays many nutritionists call it "conditionally essential." The
problem is that formation from serine is regulated by the demand for C1
units needed for anabolic metabolism, and not by the demand for
glycine. That works fine for small animals and growing animals, which
consume lots of C1 units, but not for large adult terrestrial animals,
which need a huge amount of glycine (collagen is the most abundant
protein in the human body, and one-third of it (by counting residues)
is glycine, or one-quarter (by mass)). Elderly people, as well as
elderly elephants and rhinoceroses in the wild, suffer from
osteoathritis and other collagen-related diseases.
Huh. Sounds like I needs me some then for my arthritis.

Yeah, I know, supplements don't really help.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
so that fits the "theory".
Not really. There is almost no free glycine in nature, and combined
glycine isn't sweet.
Just poking a little fun.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
On the other hand, so does lead [II] acetate.
Wealthy Romans used to store their wine in lead vessels, which leached
out the acetic acid (vinegar) and made the wine less sour and sweeter.
This must have had effects on their health and fertility.
I've read claims that they deliberately boiled the leftovers of winemaking in lead pots to make the stuff which was then added to certain wines to sweeten them.

There are historical cases of deliberate poisoning using it, and several
accidental cases.

Of course more than one person has wondered about the behaviors of some
notable Romans as possibly being due to the accidental effects.


Dr. HotSalt
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-08-21 08:59:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by Jerry Friedman
I think it's more that the glutamate anion has the same kind of
biological function (amino acid) as a number of other molecules that
don't fit those receptors and that are not just edible but essential.
And those molecules are found together, being the components of
proteins. So a receptor that just happened to fit glutamate has the
adaptive value of helping us like protein-rich foods, which is why we
still have that receptor.
Well, famously, glycine is sweet (i.e., it binds the sweetness
receptor, hence the name), so I think your theory may explain too
much.
It is indeed true that glycine is sweet (it tastes much like sucrose)
but I'm not sure how famous that information is. Several times I've
asked classes of biochemistry students if anyone can tell me why it's
called glycine, and I've never found one who could. If biochemistry
students don't know how likely it is that members of the general
population know?
Apparently it was given that name *because* it tastes sweet.
Yes. It used to be commonplace for organic chemists to taste newly
isolated compounds.
I've heard some horror stories about that.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
The psychodelic effects of LSD were discovered by
William Perkin Jr. after a crystal "accidentally" landed in his mouth.
I doubt whether it was really accidental -- he was too skilled a
chemist to have that sort of accident.
I thought that was Hoffman?
Could be. I was relying on my memory, and with Alzheimer coming on
that's not reliable.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
It is an essential amino acid though,
It's not as simple as that. It used to be considered non-essential,
because it can be synthesized from serine, which is readily available.
By "essential" I meant Life As We Know It can't do without it.
In ordinary everyday language you're right, of course, but
nutritionists use "essential amino acid" in a technical sense to means
ones that must be in the diet because we can't make them ourselves.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Nowadays many nutritionists call it "conditionally essential." The
problem is that formation from serine is regulated by the demand for C1
units needed for anabolic metabolism, and not by the demand for
glycine. That works fine for small animals and growing animals, which
consume lots of C1 units, but not for large adult terrestrial animals,
which need a huge amount of glycine (collagen is the most abundant
protein in the human body, and one-third of it (by counting residues)
is glycine, or one-quarter (by mass)). Elderly people, as well as
elderly elephants and rhinoceroses in the wild, suffer from
osteoathritis and other collagen-related diseases.
Huh. Sounds like I needs me some then for my arthritis.
Unfortunately it's a long-term effect. You need to take it when you're
young. Having said that, I've been taking a few grams a day since about
2007. Before that I used to have pain in my feet when walking, and now
I mostly don't, so there may be some short-term value. I've also been
taking aspartic acid (NOT aspartate: you don't want all that sodium),
which does have a short-term effect and reduces the craving for
carbohydrates. Much nastier to eat than glycine, but you get used to
it. Both need to be food-grade, incidentally; chemical-grade products
may be 99.9% pure, but the 0.1% is stuff like arsenic that you don't
want to eat, and 0.1% in 5-10 g is not trivial.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Yeah, I know, supplements don't really help.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
so that fits the "theory".
Not really. There is almost no free glycine in nature, and combined
glycine isn't sweet.
Just poking a little fun.
OK. I thought you probably were, but the pedant in me took charge.
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Dr. HotSalt
On the other hand, so does lead [II] acetate.
Wealthy Romans used to store their wine in lead vessels, which leached
out the acetic acid (vinegar) and made the wine less sour and sweeter.
This must have had effects on their health and fertility.
I've read claims that they deliberately boiled the leftovers of
winemaking in lead pots to make the stuff which was then added to
certain wines to sweeten them.
There are historical cases of deliberate poisoning using it, and several
accidental cases.
Of course more than one person has wondered about the behaviors of some
notable Romans as possibly being due to the accidental effects.
Such as the tremendously high level of adoption of boys from poorer
families into richer ones for inheritance purposes.

I first heard about this 50 years ago from the wife of a colleague at
Berkeley. She did her PhD in ancient history; he has become a
distinguished scientist.

Surprisingly, he doesn't seem to have a wikiparticle, though his
daughter does. I remember when she was born. Everyone in the lab was
expecting babies at the same time in 1969. My then wife and I won the
race, and they came second.
--
athel
phil
2019-08-21 09:28:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Yes. It used to be commonplace for organic chemists to taste newly
isolated compounds. The psychodelic effects of LSD were discovered by
William Perkin Jr. after a crystal "accidentally" landed in his mouth. I
doubt whether it was really accidental -- he was too skilled a chemist
to have that sort of accident.
An indicator of how things have changed. During my first degree I
remember reading a paper by a group who used HPLC to isolate the bitter
principle from ladybirds. To identify the desired fractions, they tasted
them all. Simple, elegant, and wouldn't be acceptable now.

Ten years on, my D. Phil supervisor complained that most of his
chemistry undergraduates wouldn't even know what acetone smells like.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-08-20 17:37:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by Quinn C
Post by Garrett Wollman
Post by occam
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
No, it's pretty specifically glutamate, although apparently tyrosine
and nucleotides also play a role. That's why things that are supposed
to have a "meaty" flavor often include "hydrolyzed vegetable protein"
as an ingredient -- it's a way to add free glutamate that doesn't
require the maker to put the word "glutamate" on the label.
The most famous brand of MSG in Japan - and generic word for the
substance itself - is Ajinomoto, "the essence of taste". Since 1908.
Like smells, taste is determined by the shapes of, and the
arrangements of atoms in (and therefore patterns of localized amounts
of charge in) molecules that fit into peptide-lined receptors in the
mouth and nose. It's a lot like the ways that neurotransmitters fit
into receptors in neural synapses, and for very good reason if you
think about it a bit.
It just so happens that part of the MSG molecule (the carboxylate
anion) has the same shape and patterns of charge as parts of a lot of
other molecules that also fit those receptors, molecules found in foods
that are therefore said to have umami flavor.
...
Does it just happen, or does having receptors that fit glutamate and
other amino-acids anions mean we like protein-rich (and maybe somewhat
decayed) foods? --
It "just happens" in that evolution is not directed, and those
molecules are prominent in edible things that generally don't tend to
kill us. At least not right away.
Yes, but when it comes to things that evolution never thought of, like
lead and beryllium salts, ghastly errors can arise.
--
athel
CDB
2019-08-13 14:11:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Dr. HotSalt
Post by occam
"Umami" apparently means "savoury taste", a loanword from
Japanese. As both words and food are on topic in AUE, please
excuse the rant that follows.
When studying school science, I was surprised to find that taste
was explained as a combination of one (or more) of the four basic
tastes (sweet, sour, bitter, and salty). This was nonsense then,
and still is, even with the addition of "umami" to the equation.
It's not nonsense; it's because there are five known types of
flavor receptors in the human mouth (we used to think there were
only four, but we were wrong- that's allowed in the sciences).
Everything you can taste is either one of them or a mixture of two
or more. There is no flavor *that you can taste* that is not
covered by them.
I inserted that caveat because there are things we can't taste
because we don't have receptors for them the way birds cannot taste
the "heat" of peppers (that's not really a "flavor" because it's
sensed with a different type of receptor entirely), and cats cannot
taste sweet. Of course we don't know what the flavors we can't
taste are...
It's analogous to the three types of color receptors in our eyes.
They respectively can detect red, green and blue parts of the
spectrum with some overlap. Nothing you can see isn't covered by
those three receptors, but there are "colors" we can't see because
we don't have receptors for them, like bees can see "near
ultraviolet" but we can't. (Well, those of us who have had
cataracts replaced can, a little bit.)
I accept all of the above. However, we can demonstrate - with a
simple experiment - that by combining those three colours, we can
reproduce any colour that the eye can see. Just shine red, blue and
green beams onto a white screen, overlap them, and simply vary the
intensities. Hey presto! Pick a colour, any colour, and we can
reproduce them.
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour. There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By
bundling them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami'
is like saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or
whatever the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor
allows us to see all colours not reproducible by the three existing
receptors. It *IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe
deficiency in our understanding of taste.
A lot of what is interesting in taste is in your nose, Shirley. There
are many different chemical receptors up there.

Imagine the delirium of flavours available to a dog.

[...]
Tak To
2019-08-13 15:50:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
[...]
There is no such clear demonstration for taste (or smell). The main
reason is this fifth receptor 'savoury taste' is a catch-all for all
other tastes not covered by salt, bitter, sweet, sour.
It is not.
Post by occam
There are
hundreds (if not thousands) of different 'savoury' tastes. By bundling
them all together in one receptor and calling them 'umami' is like
saying there is a fourth visual receptor called 'Colour' (or whatever
the Japanese equivalent is), and that this fourth receptor allows us to
see all colours not reproducible by the three existing receptors. It
*IS* nonsense, or at least it points to a severe deficiency in our
understanding of taste.
... your own understanding of taste.

As explained elsewhere, what we perceive as flavor is the
combination of signals from the olfactory sensors in the nose
and the taste buds on the tongue, as well as heat and cold
sensing cells inside the mouth.

Humans have ten million olfactory neurons in the brain, each
designed to bind to a number of different chemicals with
different affinities. To my limited knowledge, there is very
little study on the dimensionality of the human olfactory
space. Estimations on the number of distinguishable odors
vary from one trillion to a few thousand.

In comparison, the taste space is much simpler. There are five
major types of taste buds. The most important type of umami
receptors binds to free glutamate ions.

As to why certain culinary traditions do not have umami as a
taste dimension, my guess is that they don't have flavoring
agents that are rich in free glutamate and little flavor else.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Peter T. Daniels
2019-08-13 15:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Humans have ten million olfactory neurons in the brain, each
designed to bind to a number of different chemicals with
different affinities. To my limited knowledge, there is very
little study on the dimensionality of the human olfactory
space. Estimations on the number of distinguishable odors
vary from one trillion to a few thousand.
Presumably they can be trained, just as a painter might be more sensitive
to minute color variation than an ordinary person, or a conductor to nuances
of vocal or instrumental timbre.
Post by Tak To
In comparison, the taste space is much simpler. There are five
major types of taste buds. The most important type of umami
receptors binds to free glutamate ions.
As to why certain culinary traditions do not have umami as a
taste dimension, my guess is that they don't have flavoring
agents that are rich in free glutamate and little flavor else.
It's probably safe to blame Aristotle.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...