Tag: science

Scientific Studies

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

(as I work to catch up posts, this is yesterday’s post today)

In skimming the newspaper, a few scientific studies of interest:

  • Crashing a Plane. Discovery Channel is crashing a 727 into the ground, all in the name of science. Fascinating read, and I’m sure it will be fascinating to watch. The basic conclusion, at least for this type of crash, is that you do better over the wings, and worst in First Class. The 727 was chosen because it was Bob Dole’s campaign plane because it has an exit in the rear out of which the pilots can parachute.
  • LOL Cats are Good For You. Evidently, watching pictures of cute kittens can improve your productivity. Who knew? Tests showed that an image of fluffy little critters “not only improves fine motor skills but also increases perceptual carefulness.” Specifically, the report indicated that they could be used “to induce careful behavioral tendencies in specific situations, such as driving and office work.”
  • Teens and Risk. Evidently, teens don’t do risky things because they are stupid, or because they are risk averse; rather, they have a higher tolerance for uncertain outcomes. Basically, according to the study’s author, “Teenagers enter unsafe situations not because they are drawn to dangerous or risky situations, but rather because they aren’t informed enough about the odds of the consequences of their actions.”
  • Online Behaviors. There is an explanation for why we are so rude online. According to soon-to-be-published research from professors at Columbia University and the University of Pittsburgh, browsing Facebook lowers our self control. The effect is most pronounced with people whose Facebook networks were made up of close friends, the researchers say. Most of us present an enhanced image of ourselves on Facebook. This positive image—and the encouragement we get, in the form of “likes”—boosts our self-esteem. And when we have an inflated sense of self, we tend to exhibit poor self-control.

Expect these to be seen soon on “Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me”.

Share

A Star Trek

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

Yesterday, an interesting “star trek” was announced: the trek of the orbiter Endeavor from LAX to the California ScienCenter. There have been a number of articles written (LA Times, Curbed LA, Daily Breeze, and of course, the California ScienCenter site itself). These articles provide lots of interesting details on the route and some of the incredible logistics that will be involved:

  • The shuttle will fly across the country on the back of a specially modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, arriving at LAX (weather permitting) on September 20, 2012. This should be neat; we will probably be able to see the landing from our offices here at Circle A ranch.
  • Once at LAX, the shuttle will be prepared for transport. Once there are assurances that wind conditions are below 10 mph, a pair of cranes and a giant sling will be used to lift the 170,000-pound orbiter off the NASA 747. NASA’s 747 plane will be backed out while an overland transporter rolls under the shuttle. From there, the Endeavour will be moved to a hangar provided by United Airlines, where crews will prepare the shuttle for the drive across LA. This includes installation of a final – yet arduous – haul through Los Angeles and Inglewood. This will include installation of a transponder so that the Shuttle can use the express lanes on the Harbor Freeway (just kidding).
  • The transportation of the shuttle itself won’t be easy, as it is 78 feet long and 58 feet high! The route from LAX to the museumwill be along city streets. The shuttle will leave LAX, take Westchester Parkway and LaTijera to Manchester, go along Manchester to Crenshaw, up Crenshaw to MLK Blvd, and thence to the California SciencCenter. This includes a bridge over I-405 that was probably not constructed to handle the weight of a shuttle (the shuttle weighs 165000 lbs when empty, but will be engine-less but have the transport trailer… so we’re still talking between 70-85 tons!). The city streets along the way probably can’t handle the weight too well either. It also includes numerous power poles and trees and such. One article notes that crews will need to remove 212 traffic signals and lights and move overhead utility lines so that the massive shuttle can slowly maneuver through the streets of Westchester, Inglewood and Hyde Park before it finally arrives at the museum. Trees will be pruned back or even uprooted. Power lines will be raised. Every tree removed along the route will eventually be replaced with two trees in an attempt to minimize impacts on surrounding communities.
  • The shuttle will move over two days: October 12-13, weather permitting. Along the way, the shuttle will arrive at Inglewood City Hall for an official launch ceremony on the morning of October 13. After that, it’ll go to Martin Luther King and Crenshaw Boulevards for a celebration produced and directed by Debbie Allen.
  • At its top speed, the giant mobile transporters carrying the shuttle will travel about 2 mph along the city streets. But there are some points along the route where Endeavour will have less than a foot of clearance on either side! The drivers better drive straight!
  • Once it arrives at the California ScienCenter, it will be housed in a temporary exhibit — open to the public Oct. 30 — until construction on a new Air and Space Center is complete. According to the CTC, “The public will be able to view the shuttle in the Samuel Oschin Space Shuttle Endeavour Display Pavilion at the Science Center while the Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center, a new addition to the Science Center, is being built. When completed, Endeavour will be the centerpiece of this new building, envisioned as part of the Science Center’s 25-year master plan”. No word if they’ll need to move it again at that time! In case you are curious, costs for the move and construction of the temporary and new exhibits will total about $200 million. The money will come entirely from donations.
  • Note that the shuttle is considerably lighter than the recent move of the “Levitated Mass” boulder. The 340-ton boulder sat atop a massive truck that crept 105 miles from Riverside County to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art during a 12-day journey. The shuttle is only 80-ton, so with the trailer, at worst, it is probably half the weight of the boulder. That really puts things in perspective. Where the shuttle tops the boulder is sheer size, at 78 feet long and 58 feet high compared to the boulder’s 21½ feet height and length. Here’s some more perspective. A story in a building is roughly 10 feet, so moving the shuttle means moving a 5-6 story building (when you add in the transport). A block is roughly 660 feet, so moving the shuttle means moving a 5½ story building that is 1/8 block long, including making 90° turns. Quite a challenge.

 

Share

Fear, Uncertainty, and Distrust

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

While I’ve been eating my lunch today, I’ve been thinking about various things in the news and how they reflect the fear, undertainty, distrust… and stupidity in our society today. Let me give you two examples:

And since we’re talking about knowledge, here are some “Did You Know?”s:

Share

Cool Crochet

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

Whilst reading our corporate paper over lunch, I happened upon an article on the Hyperbolic Crochet Coral Reef at the Smithsonian. The article was there because a colleague, fauxklore, contributed pieces to it. The entire reef exhibit consists of a variety of “sub-reefs” made by crocheting, and is a combination art project, mathematical wonder, science lesson, and environmental awareness effort. The basic approach is to use crochet to make models of hyperbolic space, where amount of surface area is maximized with a limited volume.

Cool. Nice work, Miriam!

Share

News Chum Stew

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

It’s Friday. Time to clear out the bookmarks, and make some news chum stew for your holiday party. Don’t drink too much eggnog.

  • From the “Survey Says” Department: Expect to see this one on Wait, Wait: a study has shown that wearing ugly underwear can ruin your day, at least for women. Specifically, the study shows: 27% of women say their mood is affected by wearing an ill-fitting or unattractive pair of undies; 10% of women own 35 or more pairs; 65% buy neural colors, with white being the most popular, followed by black and beige; 46% of women say briefs are the style they wear the most often. But women age 18-34 are more likely to wear the bikini style; 56% of women fold their panties; 27% just toss them in the drawer; 1 in 10 women admit that they will venture out of the house without underwear; Half of women have complaints about the way their underwear fit, with “wedgies” (30%) topping that list, followed by “doesn’t lay flat under clothes” (19%) and “not enough coverage in the rear” (14%). There. Now don’t you feel more informed.
  • From the “Go To Sleep” Department: Another recent study has shown that people who get a good night’s sleep are more attractive. Specifically, the study showed that sleep-deprived people appear less healthy, less attractive and more tired compared with when they are well rested. Again, Wait Wait fodder.
  • From the “A Weighty Matter” Department: One thing that is probably keeping teens up at night, especially those in AP Chemistry, is the change in the atomic weight of 10 elements. The elements with weight changes are boron, hydrogen, lithium, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon, sulfur, chlorine and thallium. Several other elements may change soon, including helium, nickel, copper, zinc, selenium, strontium, argon and lead.
  • From the “Sleepless Nights” Department: Also keeping kids (and camp and band directors) up is the change in schedule for LA Unified, which is moving to a new schedule, starting classes in mid-August. Van Nuys did this last year. It is a big deal: not only does it put students in classes during the hottest days of summer, it has major impact on kid’s summer activities, such as dates for summer camps and marching band competitions. Those may now need to shift, and will then bump into availability issues for staff on the June end.
  • From the “Smaller Spaces” Department: Of course, those not in school may be sleeping less as well, because their cubicles are shrinking. I’m very happy I work where I do: engineers get real offices with real doors. As they said in Datamation a long time ago: O is for office. My office has a wooden door, or else I’d work a whole lot more.

And on that note, I think I need to open my door and get back to lunch.

Share

A Sticky Situation

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

This has been a busy week, and I haven’t had much time to even look at the news during lunch. I did scan the NY Times one day, however, and there was a fascinating article… about tape. In particular, how scientists studying geckos have discovered a new adhesive, based on the fact that geckos have millions of microscopic hairs on their toes, each with hundreds of tips that adhere to surfaces, with no residue left behind. Based on this, UCB and Stanford scientists have worked up a prototype. The tape, which is reusable, was so strong, that one of the inventors said, that when they tested it, he was able to stick his 50-pound, 8-year-old daughter to a window with it. They don’t say what the daughter thought of that 🙂 Look for it in your stores in a few years.

The article goes on to talk about other tapes. A few excerpts:

“One of the most common is blue painter’s tape. This offspring of masking tape is stickier but leaves less residue, making it ideal for interior paint jobs.” Further, the article notes, “There is also red painter’s tape for use on exterior walls, and purple tape for use on delicate fabric wallcoverings (each about $8 a roll).”

The article talks about duct tape, but notes its sticky residue. Similarly, foam poster tape is eschewed. It also mentions my daughter’s favorite tape: “Gaffer tape is used by production companies to stick cords to a stage floor, but it has other uses as well. In garages without built-in overhead lighting, it can be used to create a makeshift pendant light, holding in place an electrical cord running across the ceiling. For media centers with multiple cords coming out the back, it can be used to tape the wires to the floor or wall, to prevent tripping. Gaffer tape is also easy to remove and doesn’t leave residue. It is made by various manufacturers and sells for $5 to $8 a roll at camera stores.”

Now, here’s another tape you might have not heard of (and it isn’t mentioned in the article, but is mentioned in the “Where Did You Get That” geeklist): Hugo’s Amazing Tape. A bit pricey, this is a vinyl-type tape that is reusable and is great for sealing game boxes.

So, what’s your favorite undiscovered tape?

Share

A Rant on Climate Change, Science, and Politics

Posted onAuthorcahwyguy

The last two days at lunch I’ve written about some news articles related to climate change, emphasizing the fact that I prefer to let those trained in the science of the areas make the judgement on the findings, as opposed to untrained politicians. I’ve gotten some predictable responses, all from a particular side of the political spectrum that seems to want tear down the notion of climate change. You know this side: they’re the ones that make fun of Al Gore, they’re the side that points to a freezing week and say “How can global warming be happening”. Although I don’t believe it is true of the individuals that responded, often those sharing that political side of the table are the same ones who dispute other scientific findings (such as evolution). This connection of science and political thought bothers me quite a bit. But this post, in particular, is about the issue of Climate Change. So while I eat my lunch today I would like to address the two sides of the question: the science, and the politics.

The Science

First, and foremost, I’m not an expert in the science in this area. I also have never made it through more that 15 minutes of “An Inconvenient Truth”, so I’m not an Al Gore devotee. I am aware that an extremely large portion of the mainstream scientific community believe there is some form of climate change happening (I’m not calling it “global warming”, because that creates the impression that every particular point will be getting hotter every day, and that’s not how weather, as opposed to climate, works). I’m also aware of the “hacked email” controversy. I’d give the latter more signficance if the bulk of the community was responding to it by publically withdrawing their support for the notion of “climate change”. They aren’t. The mainstream scientific community still seems to believe that climate change is happening, even in light of the publicized incidents. I have yet to hear about significant flaws in the theory in the popular science programs that I respect, NPR’s Science Friday or the CBC’s Quirks and Quarks. In particular, if the latter two programs aren’t picking up on the email story and reporting that it has invalidate the science (and they appear to pick up on any science related studies in the news), I’m guessing that in the long-run it is not changing the overall opinion. Thus, I’m of the belief there are non-tainted studies that still support the notion.

I should note, however, that I don’t go with the FUD that is surrounding this issue. I don’t believe that climate change will result in “sure-thing predictions of death, famine and pestilence”. I believe that adaption to the climate change will occur: it has before, and will again.

The Politics

However, the science is independent of the politics. It could be that folks like Sarah Palin view the science as “snake oil” because they don’t like where the politics has gone. Here, I might agree in some ways. I find the whole notion of trading carbon credits to be silly. Yet there are other political aspects that should be embraced even if climate change is bunk. For example:

  • Reducing our dependence on foreign oil makes sense. Even if climate change isn’t happening, depending on other countries for energy needs hurts the balance of trade, and as has been seen, forces us into conflicts to defend that source of oil. So, investing in locally-based solar, wind, and safe nuclear technology makes sense: it keeps the jobs in our country, it provides manufacturing jobs and technology jobs in our country. It just seems to make long-term strategic sense.
  • Reducing our dependence on oil makes sense. Irrespective of whether you believe in climate change, everyone does seem to agree that oil (at least fossil fuel) is a finite resource. If it is not managed, we will run out sooner. We depend on this for more things that running our cars: the plastics and polymers that come from the oil are critical to our technology success (ask yourself how your computer and other small technology would work without any plastics). It makes far more sense to save the oil for those uses than to simply burn it to make our cars go or our homes warm.
  • Moving to energy efficiency makes sense. As there has been more demand for energy, the cost has gone up. Whether or not you believe in insulating a building to prevent leakage to the surrounding environment, you should believe in energy efficiency because it saves dollars, and that should reduce the costs of goods and services. I have yet to hear people arguing for wasting energy.
  • Planning for oceanic rise makes sense. The Boy Scouts have always advised us to “Be Prepared” (it’s their solumn creed). I have yet to hear anyone say that sea levels are dropping, that glaciers are reforming and ice sheets getting thicker. Therefore, it would seem to make sense to be prepared for some rise in sea levels and make contingency plans for the long term. I’m not talking immediate rises of 20 feet, but rises in the area of a foot or less.
  • Reducing carbon output makes sense. Irrespective of whether you believe carbon output promotes climate change, it does increase pollution. Byproducts of combusion provably lead to things like acid rain, and they create compounds that when inhaled are injurious. It would seem to make sense therefore to reduce that output.

My Conclusion
So what’s my conclusion on this? What I said before: leave the issue of global climate change to the scientists, and get the politicians out of it. Irrespective of the fear of catastrophies, many of the ideas that have come out of the discussion make sense on their own terms. Let’s stop using this as a wedge to divide.

P.S.: As I noted at the top, this goes to the general concern I have these days by certain elements of society of dismissing science. I don’t think it is just in the area of climate change — in general, there seems to be a growing distrust of things scientific. Perhaps it is science overload, created by too many warnings of dire effects from everyday items, or perhaps it is from people who don’t understand how to read results. Whatever it is, it is a troubling trend.

Share