This week in science

[systemofpurplelimpminion]

not quite this week, but making a burger patty out of beetroot juice was cool

 

[RiaX]

A good read. Highlights some important points. I usually find people are interested in the pretty pictures and not necessarily the actual science behind how those pretty pictures are generated.

+1

but you cant blame them. Proper science now a days its quite complex

 

[Sherbang]

Coma: Researchers Observe Never-Before-Detected Brain Activity

Sep. 18, 2013 — Researchers from the University of Montreal and their colleagues have found brain activity beyond a flat line EEG, which they have called Nu-complexes (from the Greek letter n). According to existing scientific data, researchers and doctors had established that beyond the so-called "flat line" (flat electroencephalogram or EEG), there is nothing at all, no brain activity, no possibility of life. This major discovery suggests that there is a whole new frontier in animal and human brain functioning.

Dr. Amzica's team then decided to recreate the patient's state in cats, the standard animal model for neurological studies. Using the anesthetic isoflurane, they placed the cats in an extremely deep -- but completely reversible -- coma. The cats passed the flat (isoelectric) EEG line, which is associated with silence in the cortex (the governing part of the brain). The team observed cerebral activity in 100% of the cats in deep coma, in the form of oscillations generated in the hippocampus, the part of the brain responsible for memory and learning processes. These oscillations, unknown until now, were transmitted to the master part of the brain, the cortex. The researchers concluded that the observed EEG waves, or Nu-complexes, were the same as those observed in the human patient.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130918180246.htm

 

[OrbitalDawn]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130918180246.htm

Interesting. Even less space for NDE's.

 

[porchrat]

+1

but you cant blame them. Proper science now a days its quite complex

You have a point. Still if one did truly "fscking love science" one would be able to summon up the effort required to learn the fundamentals of the field, gather a passable understanding of the frequently used terms and then attempt to understand how exactly those pictures were generated and why they are significant.

 

[grok]

but you cant blame them. Proper science now a days its quite complex

Not in Nigeria .. evidently a few magnets, a rooster and a Bible gets you on the fast track to a Nobel over there.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

You have a point. Still if one did truly "fscking love science" one would be able to summon up the effort required to learn the fundamentals of the field, gather a passable understanding of the frequently used terms and then attempt to understand how exactly those pictures were generated and why they are significant.

Not sure if this is a dig at me? I am actually a scientist (well, mathematician), so I'm well aware of the way things work.

This thread is intended to provide a summary of interesting things accomplished during the past week. Those interested in the actual details are more than capable of reading up on it if they find anything in particular interesting...

 

[Unhappy1]

Not sure if this is a dig at me? I am actually a scientist (well, mathematician), so I'm well aware of the way things work.

This thread is intended to provide a summary of interesting things accomplished during the past week. Those interested in the actual details are more than capable of reading up on it if they find anything in particular interesting...

Nah man, its all in response to the link that Abzo posted. Its not directed at you.

 

[Sherbang]

Not sure if this is a dig at me? I am actually a scientist (well, mathematician), so I'm well aware of the way things work.

This thread is intended to provide a summary of interesting things accomplished during the past week. Those interested in the actual details are more than capable of reading up on it if they find anything in particular interesting...

It's like people who use a thread about this week in science to argue about a stupid facebook page.
Clearly they don't friggin love science as much as they love facebook!

 

[porchrat]

Not sure if this is a dig at me? I am actually a scientist (well, mathematician), so I'm well aware of the way things work.

This thread is intended to provide a summary of interesting things accomplished during the past week. Those interested in the actual details are more than capable of reading up on it if they find anything in particular interesting...

Not a dig at you at all.

If you read the article that started that little aside you will see that it talks more about the existence of the IFLS ... thing (seriously what is the Facebook account/page thing called? ), and how when pretty images are posted to the ... thing... then people swarm all over it 'liking' it and when the actual science behind the image is posted it is largely ignored by those subscribing/following/facebooking/whatever to a ... thing... entitled "I Fscking Love Science". Those who do this don't fscking love science, they fscking love pretty pictures.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Not a dig at you at all.

If you read the article that started that little aside you will see that it talks more about the existence of the IFLS ... thing (seriously what is the Facebook account/page thing called? ), and how when pretty images are posted to the ... thing... then people swarm all over it 'liking' it and when the actual science behind the image is posted it is largely ignored by those subscribing/following/facebooking/whatever to a ... thing... entitled "I Fscking Love Science". Those who do this don't fscking love science, they fscking love pretty pictures.

Ah ok, I get you now. I subscribe to that page because it does actually serve a purpose to me - I don't have the time to keep abreast of things so when something interesting pops up on my news feed then I can read up on it

 

[porchrat]

Ah ok, I get you now. I subscribe to that page because it does actually serve a purpose to me - I don't have the time to keep abreast of things so when something interesting pops up on my news feed then I can read up on it

Yea but you have at the very least a BSc (or BMagic whatever they award you guys dealing in that dark art we call Mathematics ). You very likely already know the fundamentals as you would have been forced to take all the standard subjects at a tertiary level up to some point. I'm guessing that for you, when you take an interest in something posted to that ... thing ... it is usually just a case of looking up a few key terms you aren't familiar with and looking up some of the more specialised concepts that you weren't exposed to at university. After that you get the general idea behind the science. You aren't an expert sure, but you know enough to sort of follow along without being totally lost.

I think the article refers mainly to the layman. The person who has next to no knowledge of science, likely didn't even take science as a high school subject, and yet likes images without having much of an understanding of what they represent simply because the image instils a sense of wonder into them. Like images of a galaxy or a nebula. I'm guessing a disturbingly high number of people liking pictures of nebulae on that ... Facebook threadish thing (argh to people who use Facebook: what is it called?) don't know what a nebula is.

The people liking pictures of nebulae without knowing what a nebula is don't actually like the concept of nebulae... they like pictures. They like photography.

Actually not even photography as some of those things are electron micrographs which use electrons as opposed to photons but you get the idea.

 

[RiaX]

actually they digital artwork

most people actually think that cosmologists take pictures that look like that

 

[RiaX]

You have a point. Still if one did truly "fscking love science" one would be able to summon up the effort required to learn the fundamentals of the field, gather a passable understanding of the frequently used terms and then attempt to understand how exactly those pictures were generated and why they are significant.

ya but now the fields are so vast. Im battling myself to master medicinal chemistry which is a smaaaaaaaaall division of chemistry where biology meets it. There is no way a layman can simply read up and gain the level of knowledge I have because to understand the science I do you have to do it in the lab.

Like most people that go and say quantum mechanics or gravity or evolution is rubbish. Are these people capable of doing the mathematics ? have they done the experiments ? have they looked at the evidence? and if if they have researched the topics they are simply incapable of understanding it.

You cant read up for 40 years on how to do surgery but that doesnt make you a surgeon.

 

[grok]

You cant read up for 40 years on how to do surgery but that doesnt make you a surgeon.

I've never really cultivated a love for biology & the ex-wife has a masters in anorganic chemistry which might have put me off the chems for good, but I studied engineering so maths & 'specially physics give me goosebumps.

Despite not being in that profession anymore, it's still a huge interest and reading up or learning about it keeps me in the loop.

We aren't all surgeons, and while I don't really have time to keep up with everything, nothing prevents me from being passionate about the subject.

 

[RiaX]

yeah thats all good but my point is simple. If you arent a scientist in today age of knowledge its extremely difficult to grasp the pinnacle of scientific research.

Like me for example. I am a pharmacist but for me to understand the pinnacle of pharmaceutical sciences thats done at an R&D level is very difficult. So a lay person it would be next to impossible also proper information is generally restricted to journals and textbooks so their sources arent very good. Most people arent going to spend money of expensive journals or textbooks and are going to read stuff of the internet.

its quite hard for the average person.

 

[porchrat]

ya but now the fields are so vast. Im battling myself to master medicinal chemistry which is a smaaaaaaaaall division of chemistry where biology meets it. There is no way a layman can simply read up and gain the level of knowledge I have because to understand the science I do you have to do it in the lab.

Like most people that go and say quantum mechanics or gravity or evolution is rubbish. Are these people capable of doing the mathematics ? have they done the experiments ? have they looked at the evidence? and if if they have researched the topics they are simply incapable of understanding it.

You cant read up for 40 years on how to do surgery but that doesnt make you a surgeon.

Of course. I don't blame these people. I think they are just using the wrong words. They aren't fans of science. They are fans of pretty images.

Though I'd argue that a person who has read up on the domain of surgery for 40 bloody years would be capable of comprehending the articles.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Those who do this don't fscking love science, they fscking love pretty pictures.

You got something against pretty pictures, eh?

While I agree with you, I think things like this page help bridge the gap between the science and the layman. Sure, people don't love the technical details that actually make the science work, but if it gets people interested isn't that a good thing? Look at something like Through The Wormhole or Cosmos. It tries to package the science in a way that would interest more people whose eyes just glaze over when they see calculations.

 

[RiaX]

Of course. I don't blame these people. I think they are just using the wrong words. They aren't fans of science. They are fans of pretty images.

Though I'd argue that a person who has read up on the domain of surgery for 40 bloody years would be capable of comprehending the articles.

comprehending yes. Performing no

 

[porchrat]

You got something against pretty pictures, eh?

While I agree with you, I think things like this page help bridge the gap between the science and the layman. Sure, people don't love the technical details that actually make the science work, but if it gets people interested isn't that a good thing? Look at something like Through The Wormhole or Cosmos. It tries to package the science in a way that would interest more people whose eyes just glaze over when they see calculations.

IF looking at a picture of a nebula encourages the person looking to go and read up on what a nebula actually is then I agree with you. Unfortunately for the vast majority of those hundreds of thousands of likes on those pictures I doubt that is the case. Yet of course they still apparently "fscking love science".

comprehending yes. Performing no

Of course yes. Just as avidly keeping abreast of advancing techniques and concepts in the world of surgery doesn't make one a surgeon, avidly keeping abreast of scientific advancement doesn't make one a scientist. Still I'd argue that avidly keeping abreast of scientific advancement does label one as someone who "fscking love science".