Science education has been the subject of much reform and debate over the years, sensitive to national test scores, career statistics, and perhaps most importantly, thw priority of science in many nations’ social and political agendas. Many stress the importance of science education as the best possible hope of solving the multitude of mankind’s problems, because only with a good education can scientific breakthroughs continue to populate news headlines and make their way into the average person’s life. It isn’t often, however, that the younger generation is able to teach the older generation, which is exactly what physics undergrad Xiaohang Quan has done in researching her thesis, according to The Daily Princetonian. (Read more…)

NPR’s Science Friday recently featured “a science project for the recession.” It’s Oobleck – made by combining simple corn starch and water in a ratio of 2:1. The resulting gooey mixture is termed a complex, or “non-Newtonian” fluid. Prepare a small batch and you’ll see why it seems to defy all physical laws.  Gently handled, it behaves like a liquid. But apply a quick stress, like a quick finger prick, and it behaves like a solid.

Check out the video on NPR.

Non-Newtonian fluids are being designed for use in helmets and bulletproof vests.

More amazingly, people have prepared giant pools of the stuff, which you can run across.

The NCCAM was set up under the NIH in 1992 through the effort of Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), with an initial outlay of $2 million of federal funding. Since then it has grown to a budget of $122 million.

Its mission is to investigate alternative medical practices such as acupuncture, homeopathy, and natureopathy.  Another part of the NIH also studies these types of treatments, for a total annual outlay of $300 million. Thanks to the efforts of the Science Based Medicine blog, Steven Salzberg’s blog on pseudoscience, and an article and blog posting in the Washington Post, this expenditure is now receiving some scrutiny.

Unfortunately, the scientific record for the alternative approaches that NCCAM has investigated have not been encouraging. (Read more…)

Bad news to report – I’ve been convicted by a crack group of crime scene investigators, many of which have not yet reached their 12th birthday. The group was investigating the theft of a backpack from the Robert R. McCormick Boys & Girls Club of Chicago.  Plenty of evidence was left at the scene: fiber, blood, fingerprints, and a ransom note. (Read more…)

Many times this winter, during the most bitterly cold days, I heard the sarcastic comment, “Where is this global warming everyone has been talking about?”

The truth is most of us will go on with our lives without experiencing noticeable differences due to climate change. This is especially true in the Midwest, where we generally live an extreme-free weather experience, sheltered from the effects of coastal sea-level changes, hurricanes, and water shortages seen in arid climates. It is hard to acknowledge and appreciate the large-scale effects global warming will have on the climates of different environments because “a few degrees warmer” when placed in the context of our personal lives does not hold much sway.

Historical minimum polar ice cap coverage.

The most noticeable changes in climate due to global warming are occurring on and around the polar ice cap. While far from our sight and minds, the polar ice cap serves as a beacon for melting of landmass ice that could be detrimental to coastal cities in the coming decades. The ice cap is changing rapidly because sea ice is particularly sensitive  to sun exposure and temperature changes. Ice normally reflects sunlight, but as the temperature warms and thin layers of water start to form, more sunlight is absorbed instead of reflected, and the warming cycle is accelerated. Under the same mechanism, as the polar ice cap shrinks and is replaced by open ocean, more sunlight is absorbed and the shrinkage rate is accelerated – so much so that, as can be seen in the diagram below, the minimum ice coverage has been cut in half over just a matter of a few decades.

John Huston moves through the ice rubble during day 13 on the polar ice cap.

Currently my friend and fellow Northwestern alum John Huston (Class of 1999) is attempting to be the first ever American team (with Minnesotan Tyler Fish) to ski unassisted to the North Pole. This means that they will not be re-supplied at any point during their trip as they navigate across the polar ice cap. They are skiing from the northerly most point of Canada, Ellesmere Island, to the North Pole, dragging behind them hundreds of pounds of food and gear on two sleds per person. They are currently two weeks into their journey that will total 55 days and over 400 miles. Their progress and daily updates can be tracked at www.forwardexpeditions.com/blog.html.

Expedition progress as of day 16.

One of the goals of their expedition is to promote climate change education, and there isn’t a better place for them to gain firsthand experience to share about this growing problem. Increased stretches of thin ice and open water must be crossed by swimming, wearing specialized dry suits. In addition, they must navigate through large boulders of ice, which form as a result of shifting currents that have caused ice plates to collide (much like the formation of mountains from tectonic plate collisions). As the ice cap shrinks, a larger proportion of it is made up of new sea ice. While new ice provides a much smoother surface for skiing, the continual shrinking of the polar ice cap could eventually make summer expeditions impossible. So, while they attempt to be the first American team to achieve this feat, the biggest effect of climate change on this expedition may be that it could also be the last time such a journey is even within the realm of possibility. Let’s just hope that they make it home safely.

A few weekends ago, when I arrived at a restaurant where I was supposed to meet a friend, I discovered it was closed for a private party. When I called my friend for an alternate venue, he told me to head west toward Southport and…

West? West didn’t help me at all. I am terrible with directions like this (please- give me a right or left). I realize that, especially in a city like Chicago, one should easily be able to orient themselves and follow cardinal directions. In my defense, it was dark, and raining, so I wasn’t in the mood for a learning experience. But, to be completely honest, I have a hard time finding my way west (or in any other direction) even on a bright, sunny day, unless the lake is in plain sight (east!) or I happen to be holding a compass.

Which is why I was intrigued when I found this article on NPR. Last year, researchers in Europe determined that cows have an internal magnetic compass (like bats) by observing that grazing and resting cows tended to face north or south. Now, they’ve determined that high-voltage power lines can disturb this compass, as cows in surrounding areas graze in random directions. Interestingly, if the power lines run east/west, then cows tend to align themselves east/west as well, further indicating that these magnetic fields affect cow behavior.

So, at least the cows that get lost heading to Southport have an excuse. Me? Not so much.

Not long ago, about 20 years, the largest amount of federal dollars on research was spent by federal funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Science Foundation (NSF) as part of their annual budgets. Each agency employed staff scientists to help determine which areas of study were ripe for new advancements or in need of more attention, which funding mechanisms were most appropriate (grants for seasoned investigators or fellowships to entice new scientists to enter a particular field), and which scientists should be invited to review the proposals that came in to fill those needs.

However, over the last two decades, there has been a major shift in how we fund science from line item budgets to “earmarking,” or congressional provisions that direct approved funds to be spent on specific projects and/or take place in designated districts. Federal agencies still have their budgets, but, because the big money is in appropriations, both big and small companies and nonprofits have hired lobbyists. They’ve also invented a new positions for employees to determine which way the wind is blowing in DC and to work with lobbyists to figure out how to get a piece of the pie. You may remember K Street, a short-lived 2003 HBO series about lobbyists and politicians in DC produced by George Clooney. It starred James Carville and Mary Matalin. Among other things, their job was to chase down and try to direct or earmark funds in the best interests of their clients.

If this sounds shady to you, you’re not alone. (Read more…)

If you do a Google Image search for “scientist,” seven of the first twenty pictures are either labeled outright as “mad scientist” or are clearly pejorative cartoons of carcinogen-toting, absented-minded professors.  This is sort of surprising in a world that’s heaving a collective sigh of relief to watch President Obama restore science to its rightful place.

But we’ve always been of two-minds about science.  On the one hand, we trust and respect it.  For example, the highly regarded General Social Survey released preliminary data last month showing that twice as many Americans have a “great deal” of confidence in the scientific community as they do in organized religion.

On the other hand, popular culture still reflects the sentiment uncovered in my Google search.  From “The X-Men” to “Heroes” to the opinion pages of the national’s leading newspapers, society vilifies scientists and highlights the archetypal fear that research runs amok if unchained.

Unchained greed is another theme that taints science.  Indeed, we can expect plenty of news coverage about overpaid doctors and big bad industry as policy makers rethink how we pay for health care and examine the way clinical research is reimbursed.

So, as scientists boldly answer the President’s call to re-enter the public arena, I hope they do so with humility and honor.  They are ambassadors of an exquisite power.  And like all powerful things, human beings revere and revile it.  We fear it even as we seek it out.  This is a great opportunity for science.  Don’t blow it.

Apologies in advance to the editorial staff and to the larger Science in Society community for this post, but I think it warrants mention that the innovations I proposed in the abstract as a first-grader are finally becoming a reality.  In something that qualifies as vaguely scientific, Topps, the baseball card company, has teamed up with Disney CEO Michael Eisner to create animated 3D baseball cards.  Hold the card up to a webcam and a fully-rendered 3D model appears, complete with animations of stretching, pitching, hitting… the whole nine yards…or innings.

Glass-half-empty, maybe this is a marquee example of the ways in which funds for science and technology are completely misdirected to frivolous endeavors, but I prefer to view it as a testament of science as an innovating force.  Scientists have taken a medium normally limited to low-quality cardboard packaged with stale, flavorless gum and transformed it into a stage on which a digitalized Ryan Howard can clean his cleats and practice his swing.

While it’s entirely possible that I just like cool, animated, 3D baseball cards, I also think that if it is possible for science to so completely transform lighthearted technology such as this one, it also must be possible to make similar revolutions in the development of cancer treatments, embryonic stem-cell research, and perhaps other serious disciplines and technologies.  But it’s true that I still do really like 3D baseball cards.