There's an apocryphal story that, faced with the fact that ballpoint pens don't work in zero gravity, NASA paid a lot of money to develop the Fisher space pen. Meanwhile, the Russians used pencils.
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Friday, May 24, 2013
"A Snapshot of the Inside of an Atom" at ScienceNOW
My first story for ScienceNOW in quite a long time, and it's a fun one. Scientists at FOM Institute AMOLF took a picture of the quantum wave function of electrons as they emerged from hydrogen atoms.
Wave function? AMOLF? Google the latter. As for the former, the wave function is the fundamental piece of quantum weirdness, something that physicists have tried to wrap their heads around for eighty or ninety years — and failed. For more, read the story.
Wave function? AMOLF? Google the latter. As for the former, the wave function is the fundamental piece of quantum weirdness, something that physicists have tried to wrap their heads around for eighty or ninety years — and failed. For more, read the story.
Labels:
amolf,
atomic physics,
experiments,
news,
physics,
reporting,
science,
sciencenow,
snow
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Seeing the Forest for the Splotchy Green Blob
Lesson for today: statistics is hard. Specifically, it's hard to sort out real patterns from random noise, especially when you don't have a lot of data. Nonetheless, people sure do their darndest.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Jesus? He's On Your Side
A string of attacks on religious institutions including Muslim and Sikh houses of worship got me thinking about the sort of psychology that justifies these things. That led me indirectly to one of the more significant questions of our time: What would Jesus do?
Labels:
Jesus,
news,
politics,
psychology,
voting
Monday, July 2, 2012
The Perils of Predicting Politics, or Hari Seldon Was Right
When Hari Seldon, the sort-of protagonist of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation novels, developed a method of forecasting he called psychohistory, he never thought it could predict the future perfectly — any number of fundamentally random events might intervene and muck around with what he thought most likely to happen. Seldon had no illusions that he could predict exactly what would happen — instead, he argued he could compute how likely an event was to occur.
Labels:
Congress,
Hari Seldon,
news,
physics,
politics,
social science
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Walking Through Walls (Sort Of) at ScienceNOW
A long while ago, I taught a summer camp class called "How to Walk Through Walls." It was a physics class that culminated in the idea that matter is really made of waves of probability, and these waves could in principle transport through barriers — that is, you could in theory walk, metaphorically speaking, through a wall.
Well, you can't, but a team in Finland has proposed observing the effect, called quantum tunneling, in a mechanical system. That's something no one's done before, and if they succeed, it will be really, really cool.
Read the story here.
Well, you can't, but a team in Finland has proposed observing the effect, called quantum tunneling, in a mechanical system. That's something no one's done before, and if they succeed, it will be really, really cool.
Read the story here.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Why People Know What They Know About Politics
In my two previous posts, I looked at what people know about politics, and I looked a bit at who knows what about politics. The general theme is that people don't know very much overall, but there's variation—people know more about some things than others, and some people know more than others.
Today, I want to look at why people know what they know, and fortunately we've already seen some hints at the explanation. For example, we've seen that more people know about high-profile issues than about others. Putting that together with everything else we've seen so far suggests a fairly simple explanation for why people don't know that much about politics: it's actually kind of hard to follow, and most people have better things—or at least more pleasant things—to do than think about the awful state of the economy or whether gay people should be allowed to marry each other.
Today, I want to look at why people know what they know, and fortunately we've already seen some hints at the explanation. For example, we've seen that more people know about high-profile issues than about others. Putting that together with everything else we've seen so far suggests a fairly simple explanation for why people don't know that much about politics: it's actually kind of hard to follow, and most people have better things—or at least more pleasant things—to do than think about the awful state of the economy or whether gay people should be allowed to marry each other.
Monday, June 6, 2011
One other thing about what people know…
One of the things I didn't mention last time is that people tend to forget the issues and the politicians of yesterday, and that at least partially accounts for Americans' lack of political knowledge. Apropos, former Senator Rick Santorum, who lost his seat in a 17 point loss in 2006 — which, I should point out, is an unusual loss and an unusually huge landslide — is running for President.
Santorum used to be a Republican superstar. Today, according to Pew, fewer than half of Republican-leaning voters even know who he is.
You can read about Santorum's announcement here.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Santorum used to be a Republican superstar. Today, according to Pew, fewer than half of Republican-leaning voters even know who he is.
You can read about Santorum's announcement here.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Labels:
news,
pew,
political knowledge,
political science,
politics,
polls,
santorum
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Organization in the News
I've now written a couple times about how policy changes and the importance of political organization and why it's hard to come by. In yesterdays's New York Times, columnist Bob Herbert points out Lewis Powell's advice—in 1971, to business leaders—to, among other things, organize. Herbert rights about the importance of organization in the context of labor unions. An interesting column and one you might like to read, which you can do here.
Thanks to Chris Mathieson for drawing my attention to this.
Thanks to Chris Mathieson for drawing my attention to this.
Labels:
mancur olsen,
news,
nytimes,
organization,
political science,
politics,
public policy
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Metaphors and Crime at ScienceNOW
I have a brief story up at ScienceNOW on how the metaphors others use to describe crime affects how we think about dealing with crime. This is part of a broader research program — both on the authors' part and on the part of the political science, communications, and psychology fields — focusing on how subtle changes in language affect how we think about all manner of things.
In fact, I've written on this before, when I wrote about Teenie Matlock and Caitlin Fausey's research on the effects of grammar on electability. Caitlin, who I knew when we were grad students at Stanford, was a student of Lera Boroditsky, one of the authors of the crime and metaphors paper — but, like I said, lots of people are interested in this stuff.
In fact, I've written on this before, when I wrote about Teenie Matlock and Caitlin Fausey's research on the effects of grammar on electability. Caitlin, who I knew when we were grad students at Stanford, was a student of Lera Boroditsky, one of the authors of the crime and metaphors paper — but, like I said, lots of people are interested in this stuff.
Labels:
framing,
metaphor,
news,
politics,
priming,
psychology,
social science
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Grammar in the Real/Political World
My friend, the illustrious John Bullock of the Yale University Political Science Department, points this observation out. I can't vouch for the blog or its content, but it is intriguing.
Readers may, with bemused curiosity, recall that one of my first stories was on grammar and perceptions of political figures. The story is here.
Stay tuned for a post on physics: how gravity really works!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Readers may, with bemused curiosity, recall that one of my first stories was on grammar and perceptions of political figures. The story is here.
Stay tuned for a post on physics: how gravity really works!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Labels:
news,
political science,
psychology
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Feeling Blue? Try a Dose of Blue Light at New Scientist
After a bit of a lull, it's been a busy week (and day) at Nathan Explains Science. This afternoon I have a new story over at New Scientist (link below) on using a blue-light activated, algae-derived protein called Channel Rhodopsin 2 (ChR2) to cure depression in mice.
Labels:
depression,
news,
psychology,
reporting,
social science
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Black Holes and Extra Dimensions
Cool (and wacky) new story on using Sgr A*—the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy, rather than the one in that Muse song—and gravitational lensing to search for extra dimensions.
Fun fact: I did final edits on this story over the phone this morning while we were driving north on the Grapevine section of I-5.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Fun fact: I did final edits on this story over the phone this morning while we were driving north on the Grapevine section of I-5.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Labels:
astrophysics,
gravity,
news,
physics,
space
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)