Monday, 30 April 2012

How Humor Makes Your Life Better

The key concepts:



  • The concept of laughter as a cure for disease lacks scientific support, but humor may indeed have significant effects on the psyche.
  • Laughter relaxes us and improves our hearing and hearing jokes may ease anxiety. Amusement can also counteract pain.
  • Cheerfulness, a trait that makes people respond more readily to humor, is linked to emotional resilience—the ability to keep a level head in difficult circumstances—and to close relationships. Life satisfaction may increase with the ability to laugh.

The community of patients inspired by such miracle treatments believes not only that humor is psychologically beneficial but that it actually cures disease. In reality, only a smattering of scientific evidence exists to support the latter idea—but laughter and humor do seem to have significant effects on the psyche, even influencing our perception of pain. What is more, psychological well-being has an impact on overall wellness, including our risk of disease.
Laughter relaxes us and improves our mood, and hearing jokes may ease anxiety. Amusement’s ability to counteract physical agony is well documented, and as Cousins’s experience suggests, humor’s analgesic effect lasts after the smile has faded.
Cheerfulness, a trait that makes people respond more readily to laugh lines, is linked to emotional resilience—the ability to keep a level head in difficult circumstances—and to close relationships, studies show. Science also indicates that a sense of humor is sexy; women are attracted to men who have one. Thus, in various ways, life satisfaction may increase with the ability to laugh.

Sunday, 29 April 2012

Why Music Moves Us?


In the most basic terms, sound is merely a pressure wave that ripples through air. So how does the combination of sound waves that we know as music become, as Tolstoy put it, “the shorthand of emotion”? Or, to put it another way, how can mechanical vibrations have such a moving effect?
The answer, according to Philip Ball, author of The Music Instinct, lies not in the notes themselves, but in our brains. 
Whatever your favourite kind of music, your brain has to work hard to make sense of it. Its remarkable skill at pattern detection will take the extraordinary richness of a note on a piano or flute – which is crammed with harmonics – and magically collapsed it in our heads, so that we perceive it as a single note rather than a forest of overtones.
“We are pattern seekers,” explains Ball, “and music helps us to find patterns in sound. We come equipped with all sorts of rules of thumb to make sense of what we hear, and those are the brain mechanisms that we use to organise sound and make sense of music.”
Medical scanners have shown that this process is not limited to one part of the brain. Different aspects of music activate different areas: we use our temporal lobe to process melody and pitch, our hippocampus to recover musical memories and our “rhythm-processing circuits” to fire up motor functions (which might explain why it is hard to sit still when listening to Music, or tunes with similarly propulsive beats).
Interestingly, the brain gives out the same signal of confusion when it encounters examples sentences of that sense make don’t, like this one, as music whose “syntax” seems wrong, as when the chords don’t seem to fit. And if you study how we react to patterns of notes, you find there is something special about a pitch that is double the frequency of another – the interval better known as an octave.
The biggest question, however, is whether this kind of mental circuitry is designed specifically to handle music, or if songs and tunes are just “auditory cheesecake”, as Harvard University’s Steven Pinker puts it – sounds which accidentally generate pleasure, via neural systems that evolved to respond to other kinds of stimuli?
The disappointing truth, says Ball, is that we just don’t know. But we do know that the way we learn to appreciate music is profoundly affected by how were raised. A few years ago, Ball wrote in New Scientist about how music seems to have a national character, probably as a result of the rhythms and cadences of each different language. The English tend to vary the pitch of their speech, and the length of their vowels, more than the French, and their composers follow suit in the rhythms and intervals they use. On the latter measure, Elgar was found to be the most “English” composer – which perhaps helps explain why his Pomp and Circumstance March No 1 is at the heart of the Last Night of the Proms.
Similarly, concepts of what is harmonious boil down to a matter of convention, not acoustics. Many old fogeys struggle with modern music and complain that it is dissonant. “Actually, dissonance – horrible clashing notes – has always been in music,” says Ball. “Listen to Beethoven and Chopin, which are full of it. It is a matter of convention: what we regard as consonant now was thought dissonant in the Middle Ages.” The augmented fourth (the spine-tingling interval in West Side Story's Maria) was thought sinister in medieval times, when it was dubbed “diabolus in musica”. We still find it slightly unsettling today – which is perhaps why the music of Black Sabbath relies on it heavily.
Towards the end of our meeting, Ball answered a question whether music’s effects on the brain can be harnessed for good. It was a perfect set-up for him to examine the so-called “Mozart effect”: the belief that playing your infant classical music will make them brainier. He cited an experiment conducted in 1996, when one of the “Megalab” mass experiments run byThe Daily Telegraph and the BBC showed that playing babies Blur worked better than Mozart. The important thing was not the music per se, but the fact that it put the children in a good mood.
For Ball, the definition of the “music instinct” is that we are predisposed to make the world a musical place. Apart from the tiny proportion of the population who really are tone-deaf, it is impossible to say: “I am not musical.” Even if it may seem that way whenever you get dragged along to the karaoke.

Saturday, 28 April 2012

The Sunny Side of Smut


   The article “The Sunny Side of Smut” is written to expose about the different view towards pornography where it can be seen as a positive side. The excerpt by Melinda Wenner Moyer suggested that it is not immoral act to watch pornography as it is able to prevent many serious sex cases like rape and sexism. As we know, pornography has been labelled as an immoral action to be done but this article inversely comes up with the ideas of seeing pornography in positive view. In fact, despite of others example the writer came up, we could barely think critically that pornography is a bad idea to educate people.

    Porn along with controlled masturbation improves performance. Sex therapists often recommend using masturbation as practise for sex. Adding porn into the mix can help make it more realistic, improving the ability of man or women to respond and perform during the real thing. However, Porn makes women seem less attractive to men, Naomi Wolf. "The Porn Myth." The Atlantic. 2010: "The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.” Far from having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention”. Porn can serve as a (partial) substitute for sex life. For people that (for various reasons) don’t have a sexual life, pornography can (partially) serve as its substitute. This holds especially well for men, who are much more visually oriented (with regard to sex) than women are, as can be seen from the fact that the clear majority of pornographic material focuses on the female form. Nevertheless, Porn leaves men feeling empty and upset with themselves. David McLeod, a marketing executive, said to the Guardian in a 2003: "You can easily get too much of it. It's deadening, nullifying, gratuitous, unsatisfying. At one point I was single for three years and I used a lot of porn then. After a while, it made me feel worse. I'd feel disgusted with myself and have a huge purge”
Porn degrades human romance to mere sex. It debases human interactions by eliminating love, laughter and all other emotions, and reducing them to the crudely sexual. While this is not always the case with porn, it is generally true, thus sending the wrong message to men and women about how they should prioritize sex in their lives.
Pornography encourages promiscuity and shallow relationships. Ray Wyre, a specialist in sexual crime, said to the Guardian in 2003 that pornography "encourages transience, experimentation and moving between partners. Pornography does damage because it encourages people to make their home in shallow relationships”.

Thursday, 26 April 2012

The Gods Must Be Crazy


It's no wonder The Gods Must Be Crazy was a huge hit upon its release some 20 years ago, as the film contains enough elements to please the majority of audiences. The film is jam-packed with moments of physical comedy, romance, and even abrupt violence. It's a bizarre mix that nevertheless manages to entertain, primarily due to writer/director Jamie Uys' obvious enthusiasm for his material.

There's not a single storyline at work here, though the most famous (not to mention effective) remains Xi (N!xau) and his efforts to throw a seemingly demonic coke bottle off the edge of the world. Said bottle has brought his tribe nothing but bad luck, so he's taken it upon himself to extricate the item from their lives the only way he knows how. Meanwhile, romance is in the air for a fetching young teacher (Sandra Prinsloo) and a bumbling scientist (Marius Weyers). The third plot strand, involving an evil revolutionary, is easily the film's weakest - but does serve to unite the other two stories in the movie's last act.

The Gods Must Be Crazy works best during the opening sequences, in which the film apes a documentary - complete with voice over from a stuffy British narrator. It's an intriguing way to introduce the various characters, and nicely sets the absurd tone that follows. The oddly named N!xau, who was actually a bushman when he was cast, proves to be a natural actor, winning us over with his charm and memorable facial expressions (and without speaking a single word of English!)

It's not hard to understand why the film was such a worldwide sensation, as it's entirely possible to watch the movie without understanding any of the dialogue. The Gods Must Be Crazycontains enough moments of physical comedy - along the lines of The Three Stooges or Abbott and Costello - to keep the majority of audiences semi-entertained. While there's no denying that the film is overlong by at least 20 minutes, primarily because of that needlessly violent subplot dealing with the villainous rabble rouser, the easy-going nature of the characters makes it easy enough to overlook such flaws.

Sunday, 22 April 2012

All the cool kids are quitting facebook

Since facebook been found by Mark Zukerberg, a new phenomenon of social network have been discovered where people see the definition of facebook well that is "connecting people"..However,there are some arguments that shown how uncool it is to be part of Facebooker.

There are obviously two sides to this argument, and it all depends on what your opinions are. People who like Facebook can spend hours on it browsing through other people's profiles, whereas some people cannot even stand the sight of it, even though they know how to use Facebook wisely. Here are some of the well-known pros of Facebook.
  • You have the ability to find old friends and reconnect with them.
  • You can keep in touch with your friends, no matter how far apart you'll are physically.
  • You can keep your friends and family members updated about what is happening in your life.
  • You can promote yourself and any other work that you do.
  • You can make many new like-minded friends by joining various groups and communities.
  • You can share your favorite music and videos with your friends.
  • You can play many different games and use many different applications.
  • You can communicate with your friends at any time you want.
To balance out these advantages, there are bound to be some cons of Facebook as well, and these are what deter many people from joining Facebook.
  • You will get bombarded with unwanted friend requests from many unknown people.
  • Your friends and family members will be able to snoop around and know what is happening in your life at all times.
  • Your pictures could be misused.
  • You might mistakenly befriend an individual with dishonorable intentions.
  • You will get unwanted newsfeeds about every single activity that your friends perform on Facebook.
  • Your friends will get newsfeeds about every single activity that you perform as well.
  • You will get bombared by spam and annoying advertisements from time to time.
  • You will witness unnecessary dramatization of unimportant occurrences in your friends lives.
  • Anyone on Facebook will be able to see your information and pictures, if you do not update your privacy settings regularly.
  • Your friends may tag you in a picture that you do not want others to see.
  • Applications will ask you for many details that you would not normally give out.
  • You will waste many hours because Facebook is addictive for most people.
Since there are more cons than its pros, we can obviously says that quitting Facebook make us cool and we haven't waste anything on it.

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

The Steve Jobs Nobody Knew



 "The Steve Jobs Nobody Knew" an article by Jeff Goodell that gives inside look of Steve Jobs along his career life until his death. The one that been praised by all the gadget-lovers who inspired him much towards his invention. When talk about Jobs, the first thing come out in people's mind must be about Ipod, Ipad, Iphone etc. 

But do people know who Jobs really is beside all his great achievement in his life? Credit to Jeff Goodell for revealing the true position of Jobs to the worlds where people can open up their mind towards the people they 


    Steve Jobs has inspired many people who admired him as the father of new technology, however Steve sets a bad example in workplace by his abrasive personality and his unapologetic brutality. He  had cruelly a casual way of driving employee to the breaking point and tossed them aside when he finished with them. He also never appreciates what people say as the right thing only about him and what he has done.

     His leadership leads the company to the biggest success and the made him one the most successful person in world, but t he people in the company somehow irritate with the way Steve behaved towards his employee. Plus, he demanded perfection and originality in every detail and to ensure that happens, his employee has to be the victims for his bad attitude.  In order to be one step forward from anybody else, Steve dare to hijack a team that was working in another project and can risk the company’s name. His  innovation does impress people outside but after he resulted to be the greatest invention, he does touch everybody around him. Stunning people with his carrier life turn him out to greatest machine world ever have.

      In order to create something better for the future, Steve has already abandoned his future long time ago. Steve forgets to treat himself well for the sake of his work arts. Perfection he seeks only can be found on his career not on his life. This show that how fails is Steve to be a good example to the people who never knew him well. His deniable towards his daughter Lisa increase the impossibility of him as the father-figured best example. People will lose respect to him if they know about the real Steve Jobs that nobody knew.


    Maybe people will see Steve as a God but beneath of his attitude people might want to re-judge him again.

Friday, 6 April 2012

What is Eureka Moment?

Unplanned ideas are often best illustrated by 'Eureka!", or 'Aha!', moments, like Einstein's clock tower moment that sparked his special relativity, or Archimedes’ bathtub water-displacement idea. 
aha eureka light bulb


some of conditions where we can find it is 'Eureka Moment'


  • Is when everything from confusion finds his way.... and you feel better.
     
  • when you see something unexpected that completely changes what you thought was possible.
  • happens when you've done your homework and you know enough to recognize something astounding and understand immediately what it means. 
  • To see the striking similarities from other research areas and understand how much of it is pertinent to your research.
  • when you 
  • find out good principles to turn video games into good educational tools.
Example of eureka moment from the story of Archimedes and the Golden Crown:

It all started when King Hiero II was skeptical about his new laurel leaf-shaped crown. The king wanted to know whether the crown was solid gold, or if some other metal had been added.

It was up to Archimedes to figure this out. Only there was one catch: he couldn't destroy the crown.

After what probably felt like days with the Jeopardy theme song playing in his head ad nauseum, Archimedes drew a bath and suddenly it all became clear. He could determine the density of the crown by noting how much water it displaced. If any other material had been added to the crown, it would be less dense than if it were made entirely of gold.
Archimedes was so excited that he ran naked through the streets (remember, he was about to take a bath) shouting, "Eureka! I have found it!"


He may not have been the first person in history to get a sudden flash of inspiration, but Archimedes is the man who made eureka famous.



Sunday, 1 April 2012

Euthanasia: Should humans be given the right to play God?

Should humans be allowed to play the role of God? Legalizing euthanasia would do just that! The power to play with people's lives should not be handed out under a legal and/or medical disguise. Thus euthanasia should not be legalized.
The term 'Euthanasia' comes from the Greek word for 'easy death'. It is the one of the most public policy issues being debated about today. Also called 'mercy killing', euthanasia is the act of purposely making or helping someone die, instead of allowing nature to take its course. Basically euthanasia means killing in the name of compassion. On the contrary, it promotes abuse, gives doctors the right to murder and in addition, is contradictory to religious beliefs.
Whether one agrees or not, past experiences as well as the present continuously point out that euthanasia promotes abuse. Dr. J Forest Witten warned that euthanasia would give a small group of doctors "the power of life and death over individuals who have committed no crime except that of becoming ill or being born, and might lead toward state tyranny and totalitarianism." (1)
An example of this very statement by Dr. J Forest Witten was seen in Pennsylvania, in 1947 when forty seven year old Ellen Haug admitted having killed her ailing seventy-year-old mother with an overdose of sleeping pills. Her excuse was that she couldn't endure her crying and misery. Ellen said that her mother had suffered too long and Ellen, herself was on the verge of collapse. Her excuse was that "if something had happened to her, what would have become of her mother?" (2) Her reason was not only vain; as a matter of fact it was very selfish. Ellen was not putting her mother out of misery but she was getting herself rid of a responsibility. She was merely taking the advantage of calling her cold-blooded murder euthanasia. Likewise, a recent Dutch government investigation of euthanasia came up with some disturbing findings. In 1990, 1,030 Dutch patients were killed without their consent. Twenty-two thousand and five hundred deaths were caused due to withdrawal of support, 63% (14,175 patients) were denied medical treatment without their consent and twelve percent (1,701 patients) were mentally competent but were not consulted. These findings were widely publicized before the November 1991 referendum in Washington State, and contributed to the defeat of the proposition to legalize lethal injections and assisted suicide.(3) Euthanasia, at the moment is illegal in most parts of the world. In the Netherlands it is practiced widely even though it remains illegal. The Dutch incident is an ideal example of how euthanasia has promoted abuse in the past and therefore as the old proverb goes we should "learn from past mistakes to avoid future ones".
Euthanasia gives physicians, who are only humans-the right to murder. Doctors are people who we trust to save and cure us, we regard them as the people who have been trained to save our lives but euthanasia gives doctors the opportunity to play God and most seize this opportunity. A perfect example of an opportunist would be Dr. Jack Kevorkian, better known as "Dr. Death" who took advantage of his patients' sorrows and tragedies and murdered them. In fact, Kevorkian has helped more than 100 people commit suicide and not all of his patients were terminally ill. In addition, in the late 1980s the lunatic created a machine for murder, it was a "suicide machine" that allowed a person by pressing a button, to dispense a lethal dose of medication to himself or herself. Later, Dr. Kevorkian was sentenced to ten to twenty-five years in prison for second-degree murder for providing lethal injection to a seriously ill patient.(4) Dr. Jack Kevorkian, however, is not the only example of a doctor who tried to "play God".
One can also learn a lot from the mass murder that took place in Germany during World War II. Over 100,000 people were killed in the Nazi's euthanasia program. During the War, the doctors were responsible for, selecting those patients who were to be euthanized, carrying out the injections at the killing centers, and generating the paperwork that provided a medically credible cause of death for the surviving family members. Surprisingly, organizations such as the General Ambulance Service, Charitable Sick Transports, and the Charitable Foundation for Institutional Care transported patients to the six killing centers, where euthanasia was accomplished by lethal injections or in children's cases, slow starvation.(5) Throughout the past and the present, euthanasia has given doctors an excuse to get away with their crimes; it has given mere humans the power to play God.
The physician's role is to make a diagnosis, and sound judgments about medical treatment, not whether the patient's life is worth living. They have an obligation to perform sufficient care, not to refrain from giving the patient food and water until that person dies. Medical advances in recent years have made it possible to keep terminally ill people alive for beyond a length of time even if it is without any hope of recovery or improvement. The American Medical Association (AMA) is well known for their pro-abortion campaigns and funding. Ironically, the AMA funds many hospices and other palliative care centers. They have a firm stand on life. The AMA has initiated the Institute for Ethics, designed to educated physicians on alternative medical approaches to euthanasia during the dying process.(6)
Other than promoting abuse and giving doctors the right to murder, Euthanasia also contradicts religious beliefs. Euthanasia manages to contradict more than just one religion and is considered to be gravely sinful. For instance, the Roman Catholic Church has its own opinion on Euthanasia. The Vatican's 1980 Declaration on Euthanasia said in part "No one can make an attempt on the life of an innocent person without opposing God's love for that person, without violating a fundamental right, and therefore without committing a crime of the utmost sin." It also says that "intentionally causing one's own death, or suicide is therefore equally wrong as murder, such an action on the part of a person is to be considered as a rejection of God's sovereignty and loving plan."(7)
In fact, a Jewish Rabbi Immanuel Jakobovits warns that a patient must not shrink from spiritual distress by refusing ritually forbidden services or foods if necessary for healing; how much less he may refuse treatment to escape from physical suffering. As there is no possibility of repentance or self-destruction, Judaism considers suicide a sin worse than murder. Therefore, euthanasia, voluntary or involuntary is forbidden.(8)
Islam too finds euthanasia to be immoral and against God's teachings. Actually, the whole concept of a life not worthy of living does not exist in Islam! There is absolutely no justification of taking life to escape suffering in Islam. Patience and endurance are highly regarded and rewarded values in Islam. Some verses from the Holy Quran say- "Those who patiently preserve will truly receive a reward without measure" (Quran 39:10) and "And bear in patience whatever (ill) may befall you: this, behold, is something to set one's heart upon" (Quran 31:17). The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) taught "When the believer is afflicted with pain, even that of a prick of a thorn or more, God forgives his sins, and his wrong doings are discarded as a tree sheds off its leaves." When means of preventing or alleviating pain fall short, this spiritual dimension can be very effectively called upon to support the patient who believes that accepting and standing unavoidable pain will be to his/her credit in the hereafter, the real and enduring life. (9) This shows that euthanasia is contradictory to most religious beliefs and is certainly baloney to those who believe in God and the sanctity of life.
Euthanasia should not be legalized. It is by no means a solution to human suffering. Though euthanasia is a controversial subject, it is evident that it only disrupts the normal pattern of life and leads toward creating a more violent and abusive society. Life is a gift and not a choice and practices such as euthanasia violate this vital concept of human society.


Friday, 30 March 2012

Men or Women Live Longer??

       
    Recent research has shown some statistic about the women and men life-span that can be argued about women live longer than men. In line with all the statement, there are secrets behind all the portion of women survive longer than men.
      
If female longevity is the product of evolutionary forces, then one might wonder what physiological mechanisms have evolved to support the preferential survival of women over men. As we have mentioned, sex hormones are thought to be important factors in determining the relative susceptibilities of the genders to aging and disease. Less obvious is the contribution that menstruation might make to longevity. Because of the monthly shedding of the uterine lining, premenopausal women typically have 20 percent less blood in their bodies than men and a correspondingly lower iron load. Because iron ions are essential for the formation of oxygen radicals, a lower iron load could lead to a lower rate of aging, cardiovascular disease and other age-related diseases in which oxygen radicals play a role. Indirect support for this theory comes from studies at the University of Kuopio in Finland and the University of Minnesota Medical School. In these studies, male volunteers who made frequent blood donations had less oxidation of LDL cholesterol--a key step in the development of atherosclerosis and heart disease.

      Women also have a slower metabolism than men--a distinction that makes them more prone to obesity. But there may also be an inverse relation between metabolic rate and life span. Evidence of this link comes from animal studies of food restriction, which slows metabolic processes: in experiments sponsored by the National Institute on Aging, monkeys that ate 30 percent less of the same diet as their free-feeding peers seemed to age more slowly.
      Studies of so-called clock genes in microscopic worms have also demonstrated the connection between metabolic rate and life span. Siegfried Hekimi of McGill University has observed that worms with particular mutations in these genes live five times as long as normal animals and have much slower physiological functions. Although it is still not known why men's metabolism rates are faster than women's, it is becoming clear that this difference is present almost from the moment of conception, when male embryos divide faster than female ones. The faster metabolic rate may make men's cells more vulnerable to breakdown, or it may simply mean that the male life cycle is completed more promptly than the female one.
Finally, chromosomal differences between men and women may also affect their mortality rates. The sex-determining chromosomes can carry genetic mutations that cause a number of life-threatening diseases, including muscular dystrophy and hemophilia. Because women have two X chromosomes, a female with an abnormal gene on one of her X chromosomes can use the normal gene on the other and thereby avoid the expression of disease (although she is still a carrier of the defect). Men, in contrast, have one X chromosome and one Y chromosome, and so they cannot rely on an alternative chromosome if a gene on one of the sex chromosomes is defective.
      This disadvantage became more ominous when, in 1985, researchers at Stanford University reported the discovery on the X chromosome of a gene critical to DNA repair. If a man has a defect in this gene, his body's ability to repair the mutations that arise during cell division could be severely compromised. The accumulation of such mutations is thought to contribute to aging and disease.
       There is also increasing interest in women's second X chromosome as a longevity factor in and of itself. Although one of the two Xs is randomly inactivated early in life, the second X seems to become more active with increasing age. It may be that genes on the second X "kick in" and compensate for genes on the first X that have been lost or damaged with age. This compensation could have a sizable influence, as it appears that roughly 5 percent of the human genome may reside on the X chromosome. In recent years the X chromosome has also become the focus of the search for genes that might directly determine human life span.

Thursday, 22 March 2012

Jack The Ripper



A well known unidentified serial killer who was active in the largely impoverished areas in and around the Whitechapel district of London in 1888. The name originated in a letter, written by someone claiming to be the murderer, that was disseminated in the media. The letter is widely believed to have been a hoax, and may have been written by a journalist in a deliberate attempt to heighten interest in the story. Other nicknames used for the killer at the time were "The Whitechapel Murderer" and "Leather Apron".
Attacks ascribed to the Ripper typically involved female prostitutes from the slums whose throats were cut prior to abdominal mutilations. The removal of internal organs from at least three of the victims led to proposals that their killer possessed anatomical or surgical knowledge. Rumours that the murders were connected intensified in September and October 1888, and letters from a writer or writers purporting to be the murderer were received by media outlets and Scotland Yard. The "From Hell" letter, received by George Lusk of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, included half of a preserved human kidney, supposedly from one of the victims. Mainly because of the extraordinarily brutal character of the murders, and because of media treatment of the events, the public came increasingly to believe in a single serial killer known as "Jack the Ripper".
Extensive newspaper coverage bestowed widespread and enduring international notoriety on the Ripper. An investigation into a series of brutal killings in Whitechapel up to 1891 was unable to connect all the killings conclusively to the murders of 1888, but the legend of Jack the Ripper solidified. As the murders were never solved, the legends surrounding them became a combination of genuine historical research, folklore, and pseudohistory. The term "ripperology" was coined to describe the study and analysis of the Ripper cases. There are now over one hundred theories about the Ripper's identity, and the murders have inspired multiple works of fiction.

Attacks ascribed to the Ripper typically involved female prostitutes from the slums whose throats were cut prior to abdominal mutilations. The removal of internal organs from at least three of the victims led to proposals that their killer possessed anatomical or surgical knowledge. Rumours that the murders were connected intensified in September and October 1888, and letters from a writer or writers purporting to be the murderer were received by media outlets and Scotland Yard. The "From Hell" letter, received by George Lusk of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee, included half of a preserved human kidney, supposedly from one of the victims. Mainly because of the extraordinarily brutal character of the murders, and because of media treatment of the events, the public came increasingly to believe in a single serial killer known as "Jack the Ripper".
Extensive newspaper coverage bestowed widespread and enduring international notoriety on the Ripper. An investigation into a series of brutal killings in Whitechapel up to 1891 was unable to connect all the killings conclusively to the murders of 1888, but the legend of Jack the Ripper solidified. As the murders were never solved, the legends surrounding them became a combination of genuine historical research, folklore, and pseudohistory. The term "ripperology" was coined to describe the study and analysis of the Ripper cases. There are now over one hundred theories about the Ripper's identity, and the murders have inspired multiple works of fiction.