No, it's not. Standard error of the mean estimate is SD/sqrt(n-1), so it depends on the signal/effect to noise ratio how much you can learn from it. SE of the mean difference for a between subjects design is slightly different but not miles off from that. You can squeeze even more info out of it by using within subjects designs.
What makes you think a sample size of 50 is irrelevant?
Mint's a native plant.
Lovecraft was especially racist by the standards of his time, though. https://www.reddit.com/r/writing/comments/1897rk2/was_lovecraft_racist_even_by_the_standards_of_his/
It's a pain perceiver where capsaicin activates it.
Our senses run on chemicals, and that means sometimes chemicals activate these senses. Capsaicin is similar to a different chemical that our bodies use as signal, and binds to the receptor instead.
You could imagine it like a vending machine that's supposed to dispense soda if you put Euro coins in, but it'll equally dispense soda if you put other flat pieces of metal in it.
Antiemetics prevent you from puking. It's the antimemetics division which doesn't exist.
Good author, too, iirc. I think this story's also by them: https://qntm.org/mmacevedo
Please don't.
Ah, a game of Unknown Arnies.
Das muss kesseln in den Ohrn
Skill issue. Learning to love an academic discipline beyond the flashy YouTube video level and into the depths of actually doing it every day involves, among other things, a lot of work, such as when you reconceptualize what it's all about and where the beauty lies.
"I fucking love science" and loving science are different games.
If you want I can try to put half a minute into an attempt so you can check the box. I can throw in a pitch for flattening eastern germany (bavaria to Mecklenburg-Vorpommern) for good measure, if you like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weber%E2%80%93Fechner_law