It's the question on everyone's lips, so I'd like to provide a few signposts to help navigate these waters with rocks in them.
STOP
ONE WAY
SPEED BUMP
NO STOPPING
2P TICKET PARKING 10-2 SATURDAYS
Friday, June 20, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Dopple Comic greats
Although this has nary a speck to do with science, I must report here that my wife recently shared the important news that her life, together with mine, was uncannily similar to that of the famed comic duo, Harvey and Costello. Thanks for listening, world.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Japan Team Plans New Nuclear Reactor In Wales
Aside from the obvious typo, this is a very disturbing - but some would say not entirely unexpected - development in the brave new world of ever scarcer energy resources. In what must seem a slap in the face to the Sea Shepherds and Australian Environment departments, Japan has announced plans to build nuclear reactors inside minke whales.
This is an enormous engineering challenge, with the Japanese team commencing construction next month inside the gastrointestinal system of four whales currently in captivity. When the reactors come online in 2013, the whales will be released into the ocean and controlled remotely using microcontroller technology.
Shipping and transport are the fastest growing sources of greenhouse emissions, so we can at least say the Japanese Government is taking seriously their duty to reduce these emissions by providing a mobile source of clean energy. The engineering team pointed out that the project neatly avoids the major obstacle in nuclear energy – waste disposal. When the minke whales die, presumably in their sleep of old age, their carcasses will fall to the bottom of the ocean, safely storing the nuclear waste for tens of weeks.
This is an enormous engineering challenge, with the Japanese team commencing construction next month inside the gastrointestinal system of four whales currently in captivity. When the reactors come online in 2013, the whales will be released into the ocean and controlled remotely using microcontroller technology.
Shipping and transport are the fastest growing sources of greenhouse emissions, so we can at least say the Japanese Government is taking seriously their duty to reduce these emissions by providing a mobile source of clean energy. The engineering team pointed out that the project neatly avoids the major obstacle in nuclear energy – waste disposal. When the minke whales die, presumably in their sleep of old age, their carcasses will fall to the bottom of the ocean, safely storing the nuclear waste for tens of weeks.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Trust Suzuki to get it right
I hadn't read any David Suzuki for a while, and I'd forgotten just how brilliantly he cuts to the core of things.
"We are the earth, and whatever we do to it we do to ourselves."
It's from a speech Suzuki gave at at the 2008 Commonwealth Lecture in London. I thank Online Opinion for drawing my attention to it, but for some reason they decided to chop it up - it's much better in full here.
Of course if I argue for a full reading rather than a misleading excerpt, that should apply to the above quote too. Screw it. The quote illustrates one of many points he makes during the talk: we cannot separate ourselves from the environment. This is the fundamental perspective shift Suzuki argues humans (at least those that wear suits) still need to make before we can think properly about how to solve the environmental problems that so beset us.
"We are the earth, and whatever we do to it we do to ourselves."
It's from a speech Suzuki gave at at the 2008 Commonwealth Lecture in London. I thank Online Opinion for drawing my attention to it, but for some reason they decided to chop it up - it's much better in full here.
Of course if I argue for a full reading rather than a misleading excerpt, that should apply to the above quote too. Screw it. The quote illustrates one of many points he makes during the talk: we cannot separate ourselves from the environment. This is the fundamental perspective shift Suzuki argues humans (at least those that wear suits) still need to make before we can think properly about how to solve the environmental problems that so beset us.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Zoo apes egged on by treats
THEY'RE used to eating plants and small animals, but these apes weren't about to give up a special present yesterday.
Siamang apes Puteri and baby Chanee were among scores of animals at Taronga Western Plains Zoo which received Easter treats.
The playful primates received their Easter goodies inside a $6,000 Louis Vuitton bag.
Renualdo Obierto, a spokesperson for Louis Vuitton, said the gift represented the company’s deep and abiding respect for our evolutionary cousins.
“At Louis Vuitton we’re all about luxury fashion and leather goods. These monkeys have given us so much, it’s time we gave something back.
The bags were filled with carob eggs and handheld power tools, much to Puteri and Chanee’s delight.
Zookeeper Brad Higgins said that it had been a tough year at the zoo, so they wanted to give Puteri and Chanee a break from their normal diet of plants and wildlife such as insects and small birds.
“After the debacle last year when they refused to eat chocolate eggs, we thought we’d try carob – the all natural chocolate substitute.
Siamang apes, originally from southeast Asia, are large, dark gibbon apes and are considered harmless by the Australian Defence Force.
They have dense, shaggy hair over most of their bodies and have senses surprisingly similar to humans including touch and taste.
Taronga Western Plains Zoo, which leads the world with its 1:1 zookeeper to animal ratio, is located at Dubbo, in central west NSW.
Story and photo Daily Telegraph, with an Artful Science Twist
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Your life, reduced to kilos of carbon dioxide
Every cremation creates around 160 kg (353 pounds) of carbon dioxide, compared to 39 kg of carbon dioxide for each burial.
From a story about an Adelaide crematorium claiming to offer zero carbon funerals.
It's a good thing that we now count the carbon dioxide emissions of a wide range of activities. Much is still unknown, and we need to calculate other environmental and social effects, not just emissions. But this is a great first step in purposefully creating a society where we know what's going on and choose activities based on their total impacts.
From a story about an Adelaide crematorium claiming to offer zero carbon funerals.
It's a good thing that we now count the carbon dioxide emissions of a wide range of activities. Much is still unknown, and we need to calculate other environmental and social effects, not just emissions. But this is a great first step in purposefully creating a society where we know what's going on and choose activities based on their total impacts.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
HARD DRUGS IN OUR DRINKING WATER
As usual, humans have been incredibly industrious in producing an assortment of society-saving goods (SSGs). Also as usual we are just now looking back over our shoulder and wondering whether the environment really does have a limitless capacity to absorb the byproducts of all these SSGs after all.
In this case the SSGs are pharmaceuticals. We are excreting them en masse into our toilets, and from there it’s but a plop, skim and pump to our sewage treatment plants, our waterways, our dams and our taps – and don't forget our bottled water. Hang on, our waterways? Who says their ours? Our propensity for property may actually spur us onto doing something in this case, as opposed to if it was just some remote wilderness that we didn’t claim or directly rely on.
This issue has been growing for a while, although it’s anyone’s guess as to whether it will turn out to be a big deal. The establishment says no big deal. Their argument is essentially “the solution to pollution is dilution.” Others say we should be worried – we’re talking massive and increasing quantities (albeit at very low concentrations - think pico, femto and attomolar) of drugs designed to act on humans, that could build up in our bodies over decades. There’s been very little research done as far as I know.
Yes, we need to investigate and no, I’ve no idea where this issue stands in relation to a bunch of other very pressing environmental problems. AP did some research, in their own journalistic ways (btw, halle-friggin-lujah, has anyone else noticed that real investigative journalism is dying a big fat death?) and the article that came out of it did a decent job. It gives a nice overview of some of the issues, with a sprinkling of scary quotes thrown in.
In this case the SSGs are pharmaceuticals. We are excreting them en masse into our toilets, and from there it’s but a plop, skim and pump to our sewage treatment plants, our waterways, our dams and our taps – and don't forget our bottled water. Hang on, our waterways? Who says their ours? Our propensity for property may actually spur us onto doing something in this case, as opposed to if it was just some remote wilderness that we didn’t claim or directly rely on.
This issue has been growing for a while, although it’s anyone’s guess as to whether it will turn out to be a big deal. The establishment says no big deal. Their argument is essentially “the solution to pollution is dilution.” Others say we should be worried – we’re talking massive and increasing quantities (albeit at very low concentrations - think pico, femto and attomolar) of drugs designed to act on humans, that could build up in our bodies over decades. There’s been very little research done as far as I know.
Yes, we need to investigate and no, I’ve no idea where this issue stands in relation to a bunch of other very pressing environmental problems. AP did some research, in their own journalistic ways (btw, halle-friggin-lujah, has anyone else noticed that real investigative journalism is dying a big fat death?) and the article that came out of it did a decent job. It gives a nice overview of some of the issues, with a sprinkling of scary quotes thrown in.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
World's Oldest Bat Discovered Under Fat Man
Here's one from the archives, that now assumes its rightful location at ArtfulScience. In fact, there's a stack of other archived material that really belongs at this blog, but the transportation costs are considerable, not to mention greenhouse gas emissions. So check em out please. On to the story...
World's Oldest Bat Discovered Under Fat Man
The oldest bat in the world was discovered on a couch previously occupied by a morbidly obese man. The bloodsuckler was a Townsend's Big Eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) and biological testing confirmed its age as 37, beating by seven the previous record held by a little brown bat.
The man involved was identified as Barry Templeton, a 62 year old man from a village near Bristol, England. Templeton, who weighs 132 kg, explained that he would not have noticed a thing, but his dog, Marmaduchess alerted him to the unlikely visitor's presence after he had gotten up to answer the door. Templeton took the bat to his local vet, who pronounced the bat dead on arrival. Templeton said he had "no idea" how the bat got there.
Although a battery of tests were used to establish the deceased bat's age, the clincher was DNA testing of blood which had dried around its lips. This was amazingly traced back to a male pig-tailed monkey (Macaca nemestrina) known as Bonnie, who died of heart failure whilst in orbit around the earth aboard the NASA spacecraft, Biosatellite III. The monkey passed away 9 days after being launched in June, 1969.Templeton, an amateur astronomer, casually mentioned the story to a friend working at NASA, who recounted the tale of Bonnie.
NASA regularly takes blood samples of humans and animals it sends into space for identification purposes. Although it usually keeps these records confidential, NASA had no problem releasing the data to the Bristol veterinarian.A NASA official was unable to confirm whether Bonnie had been bitten by a bat, but suggested that a trip to the zoo a few days before launch by members of the Biosatellite III team, including Bonnie, would have been the only time the monkey would have been exposed to bats.
World's Oldest Bat Discovered Under Fat Man
The oldest bat in the world was discovered on a couch previously occupied by a morbidly obese man. The bloodsuckler was a Townsend's Big Eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) and biological testing confirmed its age as 37, beating by seven the previous record held by a little brown bat.
The man involved was identified as Barry Templeton, a 62 year old man from a village near Bristol, England. Templeton, who weighs 132 kg, explained that he would not have noticed a thing, but his dog, Marmaduchess alerted him to the unlikely visitor's presence after he had gotten up to answer the door. Templeton took the bat to his local vet, who pronounced the bat dead on arrival. Templeton said he had "no idea" how the bat got there.
Although a battery of tests were used to establish the deceased bat's age, the clincher was DNA testing of blood which had dried around its lips. This was amazingly traced back to a male pig-tailed monkey (Macaca nemestrina) known as Bonnie, who died of heart failure whilst in orbit around the earth aboard the NASA spacecraft, Biosatellite III. The monkey passed away 9 days after being launched in June, 1969.Templeton, an amateur astronomer, casually mentioned the story to a friend working at NASA, who recounted the tale of Bonnie.
NASA regularly takes blood samples of humans and animals it sends into space for identification purposes. Although it usually keeps these records confidential, NASA had no problem releasing the data to the Bristol veterinarian.A NASA official was unable to confirm whether Bonnie had been bitten by a bat, but suggested that a trip to the zoo a few days before launch by members of the Biosatellite III team, including Bonnie, would have been the only time the monkey would have been exposed to bats.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
First ever missionary found in Africa
WASHINGTON - Leah, the first gorilla ever seen using tools, has secured herself another ‘small place’ in history by becoming the first gorilla captured on film mating face-to-face, researchers reported on Tuesday.
A team from the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Max Planck Institute for Marital Aids in Leipzig, Germany photographed the unusual scene in the Republic of Congo. Although other researchers have reported seeing gorillas in such a human-like position, none had ever been photographed.
"We can't say how common this manner of mating is, but if I had to guess I’d say about 15% of the time," said Max-Planck's Thomas Breuer, who photographed the gorilla couple along with colleague Mireille Ndoundou Hockemba and her husband.
"It is deeply satisfying to observe gorilla sexual behaviour."
The researchers have been studying the group of western gorillas in Nouabale-Ndoki National Park in the Republic of Congo.
"Understanding the behaviour of our cousins the great apes sheds light on the evolution of behavioural traits in our own species and our ancestors," Breuer added in a statement.
"This same adult female has been noted for innovative behaviours before, including using a stick to stimulate her partner."
Writing in the Gorilla Gazette, Breuer and Hockemba said they spent 45 minutes watching Leah mating with a silverback male named Barry, who dominates the small group.
"Leah was lying on the ground and Barry was looking into Leah's eyes," the report reads.
“They were both highly aroused and mated for what seemed like all day. We all went for coffee afterwards.”
The western lowland gorilla is a critically endangered species, with populations down 60 percent under pressure from human hunters, destruction of their habitat, and health threats such as the Ebola virus, which kills gorillas and humans alike.
Leah made headlines around the world in 2005 when she was seen using a stick to test the depth of a pool of water before breaking it.
Breuer said only a few primates such as bonobos mate in a face-to-face position, known technically as ventro-ventral copulation. Most usually mate while facing in the same direction.
"There have been unsubstantiated reports of primates mating while facing different directions - left and right, if you will," Breuer said.
Written by Reuters, with surprisingly little Artful Science twist.
A team from the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Max Planck Institute for Marital Aids in Leipzig, Germany photographed the unusual scene in the Republic of Congo. Although other researchers have reported seeing gorillas in such a human-like position, none had ever been photographed.
"We can't say how common this manner of mating is, but if I had to guess I’d say about 15% of the time," said Max-Planck's Thomas Breuer, who photographed the gorilla couple along with colleague Mireille Ndoundou Hockemba and her husband.
"It is deeply satisfying to observe gorilla sexual behaviour."
The researchers have been studying the group of western gorillas in Nouabale-Ndoki National Park in the Republic of Congo.
"Understanding the behaviour of our cousins the great apes sheds light on the evolution of behavioural traits in our own species and our ancestors," Breuer added in a statement.
"This same adult female has been noted for innovative behaviours before, including using a stick to stimulate her partner."
Writing in the Gorilla Gazette, Breuer and Hockemba said they spent 45 minutes watching Leah mating with a silverback male named Barry, who dominates the small group.
"Leah was lying on the ground and Barry was looking into Leah's eyes," the report reads.
“They were both highly aroused and mated for what seemed like all day. We all went for coffee afterwards.”
The western lowland gorilla is a critically endangered species, with populations down 60 percent under pressure from human hunters, destruction of their habitat, and health threats such as the Ebola virus, which kills gorillas and humans alike.
Leah made headlines around the world in 2005 when she was seen using a stick to test the depth of a pool of water before breaking it.
Breuer said only a few primates such as bonobos mate in a face-to-face position, known technically as ventro-ventral copulation. Most usually mate while facing in the same direction.
"There have been unsubstantiated reports of primates mating while facing different directions - left and right, if you will," Breuer said.
Written by Reuters, with surprisingly little Artful Science twist.
Monday, February 4, 2008
More science headlines*
Tiny gene differences make us who we are
Scientists have found a single tiny gene that accounts for variations across human populations including skin colour, height and vulnerability to flattery, according to a new study. The gene, only 2 base pairs long, makes we who us are. Who Us Are! Who Us Are!
Online justice a world first
A person received justice while on the internet, becoming the first ever person to receive justice of any kind in the history of personages. It is not clear what kind of justice the person received, except that it was "sweet."
Spare jawbone grown in gut
An Abu Dhabi man has successfully grown a jawbone in his own stomach. The man, who goes by the nickname 'Gutful', was said to be ecstatic at achieving the world scientific first. When it was pointed out that the jawbone would have to come out somehow, the man tugged at his collar and sweated profusely.
Ah! Why we scratch an itch.
Oh, it brings such blessed relief and now scientists can tell you why. Scratching an itch temporarily shuts off areas in the brain linked with unpleasant feelings and memories. Scientists asked subjects to remember incidents such as coitus interruptus by a parent in law, being caught red-handed doing something naughty, and being dumped entirely unexpectedly and slackly. When an itch was induced by pouring concentrated sulfuric acid on the subject's perinasal cavity, the painful memories were quickly forgotten.
Sleep no escape from a wired world
A man trapped in a 6' by 12' wire cage found that his predicament remained even after waking up from a nap. He was later released by scientists.
New languages evolve in sudden bursts
New languages often evolve quickly, in a sudden burst of new words coined as groups of people strive to describe the world around them, says an international team of researchers. The timespan involved is usually 25 to 35 minutes, while the features of the world that need describing include who is on the cover of celebrity magazines, what's stuck on the bottom of their shoe, and why there is so much entrenched institutional stupidity around.
Mercury delivers the unexpected
Scientists have been astonished by their latest findings about the planet Mercury. It turns out that it doesn't actually exist. Astronomer Dmitri Galiatov tells the story. "All images of Mercury so far have actually been obtained using the same telescope. The cleaning service for the telescope expired back in '67, and they only just recently got round to cleaning it again. When they did, Mercury disappeared! It was actually just a piece of dust or something on the lens. I'm surprised it's taken this long to realise." The finding is a blow to amateur planetary scientists who are already coming to grips with the loss of Pluto as a card carrying planet.
Warmer seas boosted cyclones by 40%
In a survey of British 13-17 year olds, it was found that warmer seas will make cyclones 40% more boosted. The survey also found that a slowed Atlantic current will decrease the average Greenland winter temperature, currently 0 degrees Celsius, by half.
Thick clouds cast shadows over Mars
Thick clouds have made it hard to see the red planet this past week. The clouds, which are mostly of the cumulo nimbus variety, are expected to pass late Thursday. "Man, this really sucks," said planetary scientist Rita Fringberg. "Funnily enough though, I just saw a cloud that really looked like U.S. tennis player Mardy Fish."
Personality-breast cancer link debunked
The idea that a woman's personality traits can make her more prone to breast cancer appears nothing more than a myth, say Dutch researchers. The researchers, who are examining the effects of ritalin on baby alligators, hit back at comments they were ill-qualified to comment on a field with little relation to their own.
*Coopted from ABC Science headlines, with an artful science double half twist with pike.
Scientists have found a single tiny gene that accounts for variations across human populations including skin colour, height and vulnerability to flattery, according to a new study. The gene, only 2 base pairs long, makes we who us are. Who Us Are! Who Us Are!
Online justice a world first
A person received justice while on the internet, becoming the first ever person to receive justice of any kind in the history of personages. It is not clear what kind of justice the person received, except that it was "sweet."
Spare jawbone grown in gut
An Abu Dhabi man has successfully grown a jawbone in his own stomach. The man, who goes by the nickname 'Gutful', was said to be ecstatic at achieving the world scientific first. When it was pointed out that the jawbone would have to come out somehow, the man tugged at his collar and sweated profusely.
Ah! Why we scratch an itch.
Oh, it brings such blessed relief and now scientists can tell you why. Scratching an itch temporarily shuts off areas in the brain linked with unpleasant feelings and memories. Scientists asked subjects to remember incidents such as coitus interruptus by a parent in law, being caught red-handed doing something naughty, and being dumped entirely unexpectedly and slackly. When an itch was induced by pouring concentrated sulfuric acid on the subject's perinasal cavity, the painful memories were quickly forgotten.
Sleep no escape from a wired world
A man trapped in a 6' by 12' wire cage found that his predicament remained even after waking up from a nap. He was later released by scientists.
New languages evolve in sudden bursts
New languages often evolve quickly, in a sudden burst of new words coined as groups of people strive to describe the world around them, says an international team of researchers. The timespan involved is usually 25 to 35 minutes, while the features of the world that need describing include who is on the cover of celebrity magazines, what's stuck on the bottom of their shoe, and why there is so much entrenched institutional stupidity around.
Mercury delivers the unexpected
Scientists have been astonished by their latest findings about the planet Mercury. It turns out that it doesn't actually exist. Astronomer Dmitri Galiatov tells the story. "All images of Mercury so far have actually been obtained using the same telescope. The cleaning service for the telescope expired back in '67, and they only just recently got round to cleaning it again. When they did, Mercury disappeared! It was actually just a piece of dust or something on the lens. I'm surprised it's taken this long to realise." The finding is a blow to amateur planetary scientists who are already coming to grips with the loss of Pluto as a card carrying planet.
Warmer seas boosted cyclones by 40%
In a survey of British 13-17 year olds, it was found that warmer seas will make cyclones 40% more boosted. The survey also found that a slowed Atlantic current will decrease the average Greenland winter temperature, currently 0 degrees Celsius, by half.
Thick clouds cast shadows over Mars
Thick clouds have made it hard to see the red planet this past week. The clouds, which are mostly of the cumulo nimbus variety, are expected to pass late Thursday. "Man, this really sucks," said planetary scientist Rita Fringberg. "Funnily enough though, I just saw a cloud that really looked like U.S. tennis player Mardy Fish."
Personality-breast cancer link debunked
The idea that a woman's personality traits can make her more prone to breast cancer appears nothing more than a myth, say Dutch researchers. The researchers, who are examining the effects of ritalin on baby alligators, hit back at comments they were ill-qualified to comment on a field with little relation to their own.
*Coopted from ABC Science headlines, with an artful science double half twist with pike.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Saddle sores and lil gold crystals
After a self-imposed hiatus of a quatter year or so, I'm back in the saddle, writing stories for Cosmos again. One of the secondary reasons for the break was to do some of my own writing, and I'm pleased to say that my production (if not quality) both here and at Hammertime's Brog has increased. The challenge will be to keep (get) it up.
So in the latest piece of dazzling research, scientists over United States of America way have bung together DNA and gold to form lovely, orderly lattices. Of course we're talking nanotechnology, a field that was massively buzzy a while ago but has kind of faded away in publicity compared to, say, biotechnology. Out of the public eye does not mean out of action though, and there is a mass of activity in the field at the moment. Expect to see the results permeate society in the coming decades.
For now, Nature still deemed the two articles which I wrote about worthy of front cover status, which is revealing in itself. Basically, the two teams stuck DNA (either single stranded or double stranded with an overhang) onto 15 nanometer gold particles. Take a bunch of these and mix them together, and the available base pairs of DNA will seek out their complementary base pairs and bind them nice and tightly. The result is nice and orderly little gold&DNA crystals, with different physico-chemico-electrico-whateverico properties.
Overall it seems scientists seem to be saying - screw nature, we're gonna build a superior product ourselves. This is a significant step on the way to doing so. Of course, there'll be a few unexpected twists and turns down the road, but that's half the fun, right? Who knows what disasters and scandals lurk out there in el futuro?
One thing I didn't get was whether they were planning on leaving the DNA in there, or getting it out somehow. And if they take it out, will the gold stay stuck together? I'm sure the scientists are on top of these questions. Overall very basic research, in the sense that applications will come a fair way down the track (I think). This heartens me, as a while ago I was convinced that governments were giving the finger to basic research in favour of applied research. Now I'm not so sure.
So in the latest piece of dazzling research, scientists over United States of America way have bung together DNA and gold to form lovely, orderly lattices. Of course we're talking nanotechnology, a field that was massively buzzy a while ago but has kind of faded away in publicity compared to, say, biotechnology. Out of the public eye does not mean out of action though, and there is a mass of activity in the field at the moment. Expect to see the results permeate society in the coming decades.
For now, Nature still deemed the two articles which I wrote about worthy of front cover status, which is revealing in itself. Basically, the two teams stuck DNA (either single stranded or double stranded with an overhang) onto 15 nanometer gold particles. Take a bunch of these and mix them together, and the available base pairs of DNA will seek out their complementary base pairs and bind them nice and tightly. The result is nice and orderly little gold&DNA crystals, with different physico-chemico-electrico-whateverico properties.
Overall it seems scientists seem to be saying - screw nature, we're gonna build a superior product ourselves. This is a significant step on the way to doing so. Of course, there'll be a few unexpected twists and turns down the road, but that's half the fun, right? Who knows what disasters and scandals lurk out there in el futuro?
One thing I didn't get was whether they were planning on leaving the DNA in there, or getting it out somehow. And if they take it out, will the gold stay stuck together? I'm sure the scientists are on top of these questions. Overall very basic research, in the sense that applications will come a fair way down the track (I think). This heartens me, as a while ago I was convinced that governments were giving the finger to basic research in favour of applied research. Now I'm not so sure.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Spilling the beans on edge
Over at Hammertime's Brog there's a rather strange exploration of the origins of the term 'to spill the beans', but that needn't concern us here. Of more import, or at least relevance to this blog, is that at the bottom it talks about a cool science website called Edge.
Edge is a science website (and notfer profit) created by literary agent John Brockman. I wouldn’t mind working for him. It contains articles, essays, videos and more, with an impressive range of regular contributors. Prominent are zoologist-cum-atheist flagbearer Richard Dawkins, maverick* molecular biologist Craig Venter, author Ian McEwan and astronomer Paul Davies. Sadly no Hofstadter there, but I like to think he just hasn’t sold out. I have to admit, there’s something a little wanky about being on the list of Edge contributors, but to be fair, if you have to be on a list it might as well be this one.
Anyway, there’s always something stimulating to read there, whether it’s about the definition of life, the end of the universe, or the vagaries of human nature. Even better, it’s meant for a lay audience but never dumbs down, there’s conflict a plenty but it’s usually respectful and with justification, and it celebrates life’s big questions.
Speaking of questions, what prompted me to make this post was the annual question and answer frenzy from Edge’s World Question Centre. Questions are posed and heaps and heaps of insightful, amusing or controversial answers are provided by the aforementioned range of contributors. This year’s question is: What have you changed your mind about? Why? Hey wait a minute, that’s two questions!
There’s always a few writers whose answers I look for – Judith Rich Harris, (she of the “peers are more influential than parents in determining our behaviour” theory), Simon Baron Cohen (similar name to Ali G’s creator), Susan Blackmore (author of the Meme Machine and a cool user’s guide to consciousness book. Am I present?), Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Daniel Goleman (of emotional intelligence fame), Jaron Lanier (who once proposed a more useful question like: What’s the single most effective thing we could do to make the world a better place, or something like that), John Allen Paulos (wrote Innumeracy and I Think Therefore I Laugh) and Robert Trivers.
But you never know who will write something that makes you think. So far this year I like Karl Sabbagh’s response, that he used to think experts knew better than he, but now realises they may be knowledgeable but that doesn’t make them wise. So except for their field of expertise (I would argue even in their field of expertise sometimes), you’re just as likely as them to be right about any given issue.
Here’s a list of all the questions, one per year starting in 2008 and working backwards. The last few have been turned into books – a great Christmas or Birthday gift for the whole family, nerds and idiots alike.
WHAT HAVE YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND ABOUT? WHY?
WHAT ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC ABOUT?
WHAT IS YOUR DANGEROUS IDEA?
"WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?"
"WHAT'S YOUR LAW?"
"WHAT ARE THE PRESSING SCIENTIFIC ISSUES FOR THE NATION AND THE WORLD, AND WHAT IS YOUR ADVICE ON HOW I CAN BEGIN TO DEAL WITH THEM?" —GWB
"WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION?"
"WHAT NOW?"
"WHAT QUESTIONS HAVE DISAPPEARED?"
"WHAT IS TODAY'S MOST IMPORTANT UNREPORTED STORY?"
"WHAT QUESTIONS ARE YOU ASKING YOURSELF?"
* this word is always used to describe him in the media. I prefer Word’s thesaurus alternatives: unconventional person, odd one out
Edge is a science website (and notfer profit) created by literary agent John Brockman. I wouldn’t mind working for him. It contains articles, essays, videos and more, with an impressive range of regular contributors. Prominent are zoologist-cum-atheist flagbearer Richard Dawkins, maverick* molecular biologist Craig Venter, author Ian McEwan and astronomer Paul Davies. Sadly no Hofstadter there, but I like to think he just hasn’t sold out. I have to admit, there’s something a little wanky about being on the list of Edge contributors, but to be fair, if you have to be on a list it might as well be this one.
Anyway, there’s always something stimulating to read there, whether it’s about the definition of life, the end of the universe, or the vagaries of human nature. Even better, it’s meant for a lay audience but never dumbs down, there’s conflict a plenty but it’s usually respectful and with justification, and it celebrates life’s big questions.
Speaking of questions, what prompted me to make this post was the annual question and answer frenzy from Edge’s World Question Centre. Questions are posed and heaps and heaps of insightful, amusing or controversial answers are provided by the aforementioned range of contributors. This year’s question is: What have you changed your mind about? Why? Hey wait a minute, that’s two questions!
There’s always a few writers whose answers I look for – Judith Rich Harris, (she of the “peers are more influential than parents in determining our behaviour” theory), Simon Baron Cohen (similar name to Ali G’s creator), Susan Blackmore (author of the Meme Machine and a cool user’s guide to consciousness book. Am I present?), Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Daniel Goleman (of emotional intelligence fame), Jaron Lanier (who once proposed a more useful question like: What’s the single most effective thing we could do to make the world a better place, or something like that), John Allen Paulos (wrote Innumeracy and I Think Therefore I Laugh) and Robert Trivers.
But you never know who will write something that makes you think. So far this year I like Karl Sabbagh’s response, that he used to think experts knew better than he, but now realises they may be knowledgeable but that doesn’t make them wise. So except for their field of expertise (I would argue even in their field of expertise sometimes), you’re just as likely as them to be right about any given issue.
Here’s a list of all the questions, one per year starting in 2008 and working backwards. The last few have been turned into books – a great Christmas or Birthday gift for the whole family, nerds and idiots alike.
WHAT HAVE YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND ABOUT? WHY?
WHAT ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC ABOUT?
WHAT IS YOUR DANGEROUS IDEA?
"WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?"
"WHAT'S YOUR LAW?"
"WHAT ARE THE PRESSING SCIENTIFIC ISSUES FOR THE NATION AND THE WORLD, AND WHAT IS YOUR ADVICE ON HOW I CAN BEGIN TO DEAL WITH THEM?" —GWB
"WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION?"
"WHAT NOW?"
"WHAT QUESTIONS HAVE DISAPPEARED?"
"WHAT IS TODAY'S MOST IMPORTANT UNREPORTED STORY?"
"WHAT QUESTIONS ARE YOU ASKING YOURSELF?"
* this word is always used to describe him in the media. I prefer Word’s thesaurus alternatives: unconventional person, odd one out
Monday, January 14, 2008
Recycled - hearts that spring back to life
PARIS: In experiments that would make Dr Frankenstein jealous, US scientists have coaxed recycled hearts taken from animal cadavers into beating in the laboratory after reseeding them with live cells, a study released today says.
Although entirely fictional, Dr Frankenstein was an egotistical and envious man . Literary experts agree that he would not have approved of anybody else doing work involving the revival of dead flesh, at least without speaking to his tax accountant first. When contacted for comment, the US scientists expressed surprise that anyone would raise the topic of Frankenstein in an interview.
If extended to humans, the researchers' procedure could provide an almost limitless supply of hearts, and possibly other organs, to millions of terminally ill people waiting helplessly for a new lease on life.
If extended to monkeys, the procedure could create a new super race of human-hearted monkeys, capable of love, greed and heartburn. It is predicted that of the millions waiting helplessly for a new lease on life, 612 will be able to afford the procedure.
About 50,000 patients in the United States die every year for lack of a donor heart, and about 22 million people worldwide are living with the threat of heart failure.
"The idea would be to develop transplantable blood vessels or whole organs that are made from your own cells," said the lead researcher, Doris Taylor, director of the Centre of Cardiovascular Repair at the University of Minnesota.
Intellectual property lawyer Steven Brodagge stressed the importance of patenting the bejesus out of the technology, enriching ourselves, our institutions, and most importantly our country in the process.
Philosopher of medicine Gordon Cumming mused: "I think of humans as 100-sided dice. Each side represents a category of illness - heart disease, cancer, depression, infectious disease. We have only enough resources to work on a few tens of faces. Cui bono? Plenty do, plentier don't. That is all."
The study is published in the journal Nature Medicine.
Co-opted from an Agence France-Presse article and given an Artful Science twist.
Although entirely fictional, Dr Frankenstein was an egotistical and envious man . Literary experts agree that he would not have approved of anybody else doing work involving the revival of dead flesh, at least without speaking to his tax accountant first. When contacted for comment, the US scientists expressed surprise that anyone would raise the topic of Frankenstein in an interview.
If extended to humans, the researchers' procedure could provide an almost limitless supply of hearts, and possibly other organs, to millions of terminally ill people waiting helplessly for a new lease on life.
If extended to monkeys, the procedure could create a new super race of human-hearted monkeys, capable of love, greed and heartburn. It is predicted that of the millions waiting helplessly for a new lease on life, 612 will be able to afford the procedure.
About 50,000 patients in the United States die every year for lack of a donor heart, and about 22 million people worldwide are living with the threat of heart failure.
"The idea would be to develop transplantable blood vessels or whole organs that are made from your own cells," said the lead researcher, Doris Taylor, director of the Centre of Cardiovascular Repair at the University of Minnesota.
Intellectual property lawyer Steven Brodagge stressed the importance of patenting the bejesus out of the technology, enriching ourselves, our institutions, and most importantly our country in the process.
Philosopher of medicine Gordon Cumming mused: "I think of humans as 100-sided dice. Each side represents a category of illness - heart disease, cancer, depression, infectious disease. We have only enough resources to work on a few tens of faces. Cui bono? Plenty do, plentier don't. That is all."
The study is published in the journal Nature Medicine.
Co-opted from an Agence France-Presse article and given an Artful Science twist.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
When you don’t understand why someone you like isn’t famous
I’m rereading I Am A Strange Loop by Douglas Hofstadter. I wouldn’t say it’s his best work, but it’s still damn good. It’s essentially a summary of his thoughts on how a self, an ‘I’, a ‘light on inside’, a mind’s eye can come from a lump of squishy grey stuff.
I’m only a couple chapters in, but I keep feeling compelled to write notes about what he’s written, on account of it triggers so many thoughts and ideas in mine head. In fact, if I go through with this audacious, yet bodacious plan, I’ll have a book by the end of it! It could be the first ever book written entirely in response to, and while reading, another book. At least I assume so. The working title is I Know You Are But What Am I: Reflections on DRH’s I Am A Strange Loop. Another working title is I Agree, And Here’s Why…
Look, what I’m trying to say is I get sick and sleepy with having to all the time explain who Douglas Hofstadter is. To my way of thinking, he’s one of the clearest, most perceptive, easy to read, riveting authors out there, and he’s written about many a topic that would interest many and many a person. Yet he just isn’t up there with the Richard Dawkinses, Carl Saganses and Tim Flanneryses of this world.
Likewise in music, there are phenomenal performers who go unheard of, unrewarded, and unsullied day in, day out. I must confess I make no claims to know and like any obscure but brilliant bands (but watch this space for Looking Glass). Though they are in an overall minority, I know there are thousands of others who, like me, really dig the Mars Volta, Crash Test Dummies, Split Enz and Ween (almost certainly not this combination though).
In fact, I believe that each and every person that this sentence refers to could list several awesome authors, musicians and whoevers that have touched their lives, delicately and deeply, but that can’t seem to get no respect, or at least general public awareness. I challenge these people to make that list.
These days the situation isn’t so bad with the internet. F’cryin’ out loud, I can now find people with a mutual interest in my newly acquired, top 10 All Time Coolest book, Codex Seraphinianus. Without the internet, I challenge anyone, anywhere to have heard of this amazing book (yes, I know the challenge was issued using the internet, a’F’eh!).
I guess this is all about information – how we get it, who controls its flow, and what it smells like. It’s also about personal differences in the kinds of things that profoundly resonate with (in?) our minds and hearts.
One last thing, it’s interesting to note that there is no analogous situation in sports. The best basketballers, sprinters and football players aren’t competing in D-Leagues, mid-week suburban track meets and lower grade Auckland comps. Aside from the scouts’ mythical undiscovered sporting geniuses tending sheep in a field somewhere, this phenomena just doesn’t happen in sport.
I’m only a couple chapters in, but I keep feeling compelled to write notes about what he’s written, on account of it triggers so many thoughts and ideas in mine head. In fact, if I go through with this audacious, yet bodacious plan, I’ll have a book by the end of it! It could be the first ever book written entirely in response to, and while reading, another book. At least I assume so. The working title is I Know You Are But What Am I: Reflections on DRH’s I Am A Strange Loop. Another working title is I Agree, And Here’s Why…
Look, what I’m trying to say is I get sick and sleepy with having to all the time explain who Douglas Hofstadter is. To my way of thinking, he’s one of the clearest, most perceptive, easy to read, riveting authors out there, and he’s written about many a topic that would interest many and many a person. Yet he just isn’t up there with the Richard Dawkinses, Carl Saganses and Tim Flanneryses of this world.
Likewise in music, there are phenomenal performers who go unheard of, unrewarded, and unsullied day in, day out. I must confess I make no claims to know and like any obscure but brilliant bands (but watch this space for Looking Glass). Though they are in an overall minority, I know there are thousands of others who, like me, really dig the Mars Volta, Crash Test Dummies, Split Enz and Ween (almost certainly not this combination though).
In fact, I believe that each and every person that this sentence refers to could list several awesome authors, musicians and whoevers that have touched their lives, delicately and deeply, but that can’t seem to get no respect, or at least general public awareness. I challenge these people to make that list.
These days the situation isn’t so bad with the internet. F’cryin’ out loud, I can now find people with a mutual interest in my newly acquired, top 10 All Time Coolest book, Codex Seraphinianus. Without the internet, I challenge anyone, anywhere to have heard of this amazing book (yes, I know the challenge was issued using the internet, a’F’eh!).
I guess this is all about information – how we get it, who controls its flow, and what it smells like. It’s also about personal differences in the kinds of things that profoundly resonate with (in?) our minds and hearts.
One last thing, it’s interesting to note that there is no analogous situation in sports. The best basketballers, sprinters and football players aren’t competing in D-Leagues, mid-week suburban track meets and lower grade Auckland comps. Aside from the scouts’ mythical undiscovered sporting geniuses tending sheep in a field somewhere, this phenomena just doesn’t happen in sport.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Free Won't
They say we have free will. They say we are free to choose how we act. The things we say, the thoughts we have, the things we like. However, it is self-evident that we are not free in many ways. We are not free to flap our arms and start flying. We are not free to hurt people we don't want to hurt, or like food we don't like. In short, we face some pretty hefty roadblocks to freedom, roadblocks inherent in the way our bodies and minds work.
We're freer, they say, to not do things. Free not to go here, not to buy that, not to kiss that. That has lead some(one?) to coin the term "free won't". That is, it is more fitting to define our special kind of freedom in terms of what we are free not to do.
I like this idea, although it is subject to the same criticisms as free will. Sometimes we're not free to not do something e.g. spill the beans about our friends' lovelives to our partner.
Perhaps we could rephrase the whole thing. Instead of having free will, maybe we have free tryingness. This new term has the added benefit of catchiness. It means that we are free to try to do (or not do) certain things. Delta Goodrem encapsulated this deep philosophical position in a very melodious way with her hit single Born To Try. Who said she has absolutely no idea about the human condition? Not I. No, not me, not I.
You could probably see this coming, but I'm afraid we're not always free to try (or try not to do) certain things. You might think I could try to enjoy Robbie Williams for a minute, but it's just not possible. Try as I might (hehe), I could not try to consider JW Howard Australia's finest Primer Minister since Keating. OK, this isn't the best example, but my point is this: There's always strings attached to our freedom. So the next time you're at the Philosophical Diner on Main St, don't forget to order Strings Attached with your Free Will. Ah, yeah.
We're freer, they say, to not do things. Free not to go here, not to buy that, not to kiss that. That has lead some(one?) to coin the term "free won't". That is, it is more fitting to define our special kind of freedom in terms of what we are free not to do.
I like this idea, although it is subject to the same criticisms as free will. Sometimes we're not free to not do something e.g. spill the beans about our friends' lovelives to our partner.
Perhaps we could rephrase the whole thing. Instead of having free will, maybe we have free tryingness. This new term has the added benefit of catchiness. It means that we are free to try to do (or not do) certain things. Delta Goodrem encapsulated this deep philosophical position in a very melodious way with her hit single Born To Try. Who said she has absolutely no idea about the human condition? Not I. No, not me, not I.
You could probably see this coming, but I'm afraid we're not always free to try (or try not to do) certain things. You might think I could try to enjoy Robbie Williams for a minute, but it's just not possible. Try as I might (hehe), I could not try to consider JW Howard Australia's finest Primer Minister since Keating. OK, this isn't the best example, but my point is this: There's always strings attached to our freedom. So the next time you're at the Philosophical Diner on Main St, don't forget to order Strings Attached with your Free Will. Ah, yeah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)