Category Archives: science

medical, personal, pleasures, science

And Not a Holiday in Sight

I’ve not been blogging as much as I would have liked over recent weeks. I blame the day job which has been manic especially as I’ve spent a chunk of July and most of August covering for colleagues who are on holiday.

And now summer has gone and, yet again this year, I’ve not had a holiday. Every plan we’ve made to get a break away this year (excepting our 5 days in February) has turned to dust for one reason or another. We had 2 weeks off in early June, but couldn’t get away as we couldn’t get either a cat feeder or get the little buggers into the local cattery. We were planning a trip to Sweden in late-October/early November but our work has scuppered that with important meetings etc. and the friends we were going to see are moving then.

So we’ve had to compromise and are taking a week in mid-September – though having decided where we wanted to go we’ve been unable to book anywhere, so it’s going to be another stay at home break. Still we already have a couple of away-days planned, including a trip to see my favourite aunt who has just come out of hospital after a stroke. The only problem is that if we stay at home we don’t relax properly and you always that never-ending list of jobs round your neck like an albatross.

All of which means we’ve had one 5 day break away in the last two years, mostly because of clashes caused by my work and Noreen’s – at any time one or the other of us has been tied to immovable project dates and schedules. And the medics seriously wonder why I get depressed. It’s enough to drive you mad!

Maybe we can get that Swedish break in next Spring. And plans are already afoot for Autumn 2009. By then I might have won the lottery and be retired. Well at least I can dream!

science, thoughts

Odd Facts: Feet

1 Comment

Consider this fact:

Most people have an above average number of feet.

How can this be? People have two feet. Do they? Consider …

The norm for humans is to be born with two feet. So far so good. A vanishingly small number (maybe, say, 1 in a million, probably fewer) are born with 3 or more feet. But for a variety of reasons a significant number will be born with only 1 foot or even no feet. And of course some people unluckily go on to lose a foot or even both feet. I don’t know the real numbers but let’s guess, for the sake of example, that 1 in 100 people have only 1 foot and 1 in 1000 have no feet at all.

So what is the average number of feet on a human? It clearly isn’t two! Using the above figures by way of example the average number of feet is 1.988 per person. Yes that’s less than 2! But for every million people 988,999 have two feet. So it is correct to say that most people, indeed the vast majority of people, have more than the average number of feet.

Amazing what simple statistics reveal and the logic we all pass over every day!

beliefs, people, science, thoughts

50 Years Ago in Scientific American

Reading the latest issue of Scientific American earlier today I spotted the following two items reprinted from their September 1958 issue.

The first is from the great thinker Jacob Bronowski, who older UK readers may remember for his 1973 TV series The Ascent of Man. As usual Bronowski is right on the money:

THE CREATIVE PROCESS
The most remarkable discovery made by scientists is science itself. The discovery must be compared in importance with the invention of cave-painting and of writing. Like these earlier human creations, science is an attempt to control our surroundings by entering into them and understanding them from inside. And like them, science has surely made a critical step in human development which cannot be reversed. We cannot conceive a future society without science.

The second, equally revealing but in a different way, is from eminent physicist Freeman Dyson. While many discoveries and developments have been made in particle physics and cosmology in the last 50 years, I think this statement is still true today:

INNOVATION IN PHYSICS
My view, the skeptical one, holds that we may be as far away from an understanding of elementary particles as Newton’s successors were from quantum mechanics. Like them, we have two tremendous tasks ahead of us. One is to study and explore the mathematics of the existing theories. The existing quantum field-theories may or may not be correct, but they certainly conceal mathematical depths which will take the genius of an Euler or a Hamilton to plumb. Our second task is to press on with the exploration of the wide range of physical phenomena of which the existing theories take no account. This means pressing on with experiments in the fashionable area of particle physics. Outstanding among the areas of physics which have been left out of recent theories of elementary particles are gravitation and cosmology.

history, science, thoughts

The Importance of Knowing How

Interesting article by AC Grayling in the “Commentary” column of last week’s New Scientist under the above title. The “Commentary” column, written on alternate weeks by Grayling and Lawrence Krauss, always provides food for thought. This week’s column was, in my view, especially important. As usual because New Scientist don’t make their articles available on-line to non-subscribers here is an edited version.

Philosophers investigating the nature of knowledge and the best methods of acquiring it have always distinguished between knowledge of facts and knowledge of techniques. Knowing that Everest is the highest mountain, and knowing how to measure the height of mountains, are respective examples of the two kinds of knowing. The interesting question is, which is more important?

[…] an education system worthy of the name should equip people with both kinds. But it is still worthwhile to ask which is more important, for the equally obvious reason that no head can first cram in, and then later recall at need, everything that passes as currently accepted fact. What’s more, the number of currently accepted facts is tiny in comparison with what we know we still do not know, which is in turn probably a tiny fraction of what might be knowable.

So although everyone coming out of an educational system should at least know [basic facts] they are much more in need of knowing how to find things out, how to evaluate the information they discover, and how to apply it fruitfully. These are skills; they consist in knowledge of how to become knowledgeable.

[…] information is not knowledge […]

[…] it is no bad thing that the internet is such a democratic domain, where opinions and claims can enjoy an unfettered airing […] This increases the necessity for internet users to be good at discriminating between high and low-quality information, and between reliable and unreliable sources.

We teach research skills in higher education differently for the sciences and humanities […] In the sciences, laboratory technique and experimental design and methodology are fundamental; in the humanities, the use of libraries and archives and the interpretation of texts are in the basic tool kit […]

Knowing how to evaluate information, therefore, is arguably the most important kind of knowledge that education has to teach […] only the International Baccalaureate makes critical thinking […] a standard requirement, and in this as in so many ways it leads the field […] I wonder whether the need for critical thinking lessons is more urgent in the humanities than the sciences because the latter, by their nature, already have it built in. The science lab at school with its whiffs, sparks and bangs is a theatre of evaluation; the idea of testing and proving is the natural order there […]

When we talk of scientific literacy, one thing we should mean is acquisition of just this mindset; without it, too much rubbish gets through.

It’s no wonder that people don’t think is it!?

medical, science

Sputnik Virus, A Viral Parasite

The following is from ProMED, an officially run mailing list for those interested in emerging infectious diseases. I’m posting it here because it is an interesting and unexpected piece of science — and because it arrived as an email I can’t add it to the “shared” list on the right.

A ProMED-mail post <http://www.promedmail.org>
ProMED-mail is a program of the International Society for Infectious Diseases <http://www.isid.org>

Date: Wed 6 Aug 2008
Source: The Scientist, NewsBlog [edited] <>

A virus’s virus
Researchers have discovered the 1st virus to infect another virus, according to a study appearing tomorrow in Nature. The new virus was found living inside a new strain of the viral giant, mimivirus. “This is one parasite living on another parasite, which is really fascinating,” Michael Rossman, microbiologist at Purdue University, who was not involved in the study, told The Scientist.

Didier Raoult and colleagues at the Universitee de la Mediterranee in Marseilles, France, discovered mimivirus in 2003 from a water-cooling tower in the UK [see ProMED-mail reference below]. It primarily infects amoeba, although antibodies have been found to the virus in some human pneumonia cases. It measures in diameter about 400 nanometers (nm), while medium-sized viruses such as adenovirus and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) measure closer to 100-200 nm.

In this study, Raoult’s team found a new strain of mimivirus in water from a cooling tower in Paris. This new strain was even larger than [the UK] mimivirus, so the researchers named it mamavirus. To their surprise, while examining the new strain by electron microscopy they saw a smaller virus attached to mamavirus. This small virus comprises only 20 genes (mimivirus has more than 900 protein-coding genes) and the researchers named it Sputnik.

The team quickly set to work to see what effect Sputnik was having on the mamavirus. They found that Sputnik infects the replication machinery in mamavirus and causes it to produce deformed viral structures and abnormal capsids, where viral genetic information is stored. It had a similar effect on mimivirus. Because Sputnik’s behavior so closely resembles what bacteriophage do to bacteria, the researchers called the new type of virus a virophage, and suspect it may represent a new virus family.

The researchers found that Sputnik’s genes shared homology with genes from all 3 domains of life: archaea, bacteria, and eukarya. Some of the genes were homologous to novel sequences that scientists previously detected in a metagenomic study of ocean water. This supports the idea that Sputnik is part of a larger family of viruses, Bernard La Scola, researcher at the Universite de la Mediterranee (University of the Mediterranean) and 1st author on the paper, told The Scientist.

The size of a virus may dictate whether it can be infected by smaller viruses such as Sputnik, he added. For this reason, viruses that affect humans — like HIV and influenza — are likely too small to be infected by Sputnik-like viruses, said Rossman.

La Scola added he is sure that there are other giant viruses yet to be identified in the world, but they won’t necessarily be infected by smaller viruses. “We need to be lucky to find another Sputnik.”

[Byline: Andrea Gawrylewski]
—
Communicated by: ProMED-mail <promed@promedmail.org>

amusements, memes, quotes, science, topographical

Zen Mischievous Moments #142

Connioseurs of 1970s UK police soap operas will remember the refrain “Let’s be ’avin’ you” when an arrest was about to be made. Our attention has been drawn to an example not of nominative determinism, but of locational determinism – the existence of a police facility on Letsby Avenue in the Yorkshire town of Sheffield (it’s right next to Sheffiled City Ariport). Sadly there is as yet no news of an “Onyer Way” or “Evenin Hall” in the vicinity.

[HT Feedback @ New Scientist]

amusements, medical, memes, personal, photography, pleasures, science, thoughts

Getting to Know You Meme

1 Comment

Getting to Know You Meme, originally uploaded by kcm76.

1. A perfect weekend watching Tom & Jerry on tv and laughing…, 2. Amur Leopard, 3. A TRIBUTE TO A DEAR FRIEND. (KILKENNY, IRELAND), 4. Untitled, 5. ₪ Rhizomatic in-between typewriter ₪, 6. “Timemachines”, 7. 14th August 2007 / Day 226, 8. The cake i Made for my mother’s birthday, 9. Embracing the sun … {}, 10. day 151 Caught with crabs in my merkin! , 11. Walking in the rain 1_2499, 12. Smiles of Tibet in Exile

The concept:
a. Type your answer to each of the questions below into Flickr Search.
b. Using only the first page, pick an image.
c. Copy and paste the html into your blog or Flickr stream (the easiest way is to copy the URLs and then head over to the fd’s flickr toys link above and use the mosaic maker).

The Questions & Answers:
1. What makes you laugh? Cats
2. What makes you cry? Animal suffering
3. Who is the one person you trust the most in the world? My Mother
4. Who broke your heart? Jill (no, not you Mistress Weekes; long before that!)
5. Where was your first kiss? I really don’t remember
6. What body part do you love most (your body)? My mind
7. What body part do you love least (your body)? My fat
8. What candy fits your personality? Coffee creme chocolate
9. What color would you paint your room if you could pick any color? Magnolia
10. A word that makes you laugh? Merkin
11. What emotion do you express most often? Depression
12. Who inspires you? The Dalai Lama

Created with fd’s Flickr Toys. for the Flickr My Meme group.

amusements, current affairs, memes, quotes, science, topographical

Zen Mischievous Moments #141

The “Feedback” column this week’s New Scientist contains this item …

Thanks to Terence Dunmore for alerting us to a report in the 11 June issue of Professional Engineering about the UK’s new Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations (WEEE regulations). It warns readers: “If you are a producer of WEEE, you must make sure it is disposed of in an environmentally sound manner, including the treatment, reuse, recovery and recycling of components where appropriate.”
Dunmore is puzzled. “Isn’t the local sewage department already doing just that?” he asks.

beliefs, medical, science, thoughts

Quote: Decency

Each person has inside a basic decency and goodness. If he listens to it and acts on it, he is giving a great deal of what it is the world needs most. It is not complicated but it takes courage. It takes courage for a person to listen to his own goodness and act on it.

[Pablo Casals]

amusements, beliefs, science, thoughts

Zen Mischievous Moments #140

The following is from the Feedback column of the current issue of New Scientist …

The $500 cable

EAGLE-EYED readers have pointed us to an intriguing offer. The US website for Japanese electronics giant Denon is inviting consumers to pay $499 for what appears to be a 1.5-metre network cable of the type that usually costs only a few dollars. So what’s so special about Denon’s AK-DL1 patch cord?

According to Denon’s website it has “woven jacketing to reduce vibration” and the cable structure is “designed to thoroughly eliminate adverse effects from vibration”. In addition, “signal directional markings are provided for optimum signal transfer”. Plus, the AK-DL1 is made from “high purity copper” which “will bring out all the nuances in digital audio reproduction”.

As puzzled as our readers, we emailed Denon via the website to ask for an explanation of what causes vibration in a network cable, what the adverse effects are, why signal directional markings optimise signal transfer, and how high-purity copper wire brings out the nuances of a digital signal.

Within minutes an email winged back that failed to answer any of our questions. Although the AK-DL1 may look like an ordinary ethernet cable, it told us, “the similarities end there… the cable is designed in such a way that vibration is all but eliminated so that sound being passed is as pure as possible… That being said, this cable is not going to provide you with much of a difference unless used with top of the line equipment across the board.”

Denon helpfully gives some examples of such equipment, including a DVD player that costs $3800 and an amplifier costing $7000. So all we have to do to check Denon’s claims for the $500 cable is pay $10,800 for something to plug it into. Isn’t that nice?

Shortly after this exchange with Denon, we came across an item on the BoingBoing gadget site at www.cablereviews.notlong.com. It quotes “brilliant” reviews of the Denon cable from what BoingBoing describes as “perhaps the best Amazon [reader] reviews page of all time”. Our favourite is this: “A caution to people buying these: if you do not follow the ‘directional markings’ on the cables, your music will play backwards.”