Chimps are from Mars, Bonobos are from Venus

Next week a group of scientists from the Max Planck Institute will be traveling to the Congo to study our close cousins, the Bonobos. We're just as closely related to these great apes as we are to Common Chimpanzees, but a lot more behavioral study and comparison has been devoted to the later. The contrast between the patriarchal chimp social structure and the matriarchal bonobos is of particular interest. While chimps tend to be more aggressive or violent, Bonobos are generally more cooperative, and they are noted for their use of sexual behavior to ease tensions. The researchers will be trying to learn more about the thought processes behind their behavior.

The sad irony is, their work is made more difficult by the recent violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Maybe while we're learning more about bonobos, a little emulation wouldn't be out of order.

Science Live

A friend recently sent me a link to an animation about Black Holes. For the most part, it’s pretty good textbook stuff. The description of the event horizon is a little weak. The reason it's called the "event" horizon is because it's the point where time, relative to surrounding space, starts to warp. Their description doesn't really emphasize that enough. I suspect that the "point of no return" is actually a bit farther out than the event horizon itself.

I’m not sure how many scientists take the wormhole theory seriously. I suspect most agree that we probably couldn't construct a ship strong enough to withstand the gravitational forces involved, rendering the idea useless even if it were true. But hey, it's a flashy idea, and someone took the time to make the math work, so why not play with it?

What I really do like here is the use of simple, episodic animations to teach science, and this is a pretty good example. It’s short, fun to look at, and presents one concept in a neat little package. I’m also encouraged by the increasing popularity of films, long and short, that teach various concepts of science. I'm guessing we're a long way from seeing "The Evolution Story" in claymation on Winter Solstice Eve, it’s still pretty cool.

The Eagle Has Landed

Lunar Advent

Sorry for the short entry. Busy drawing rockets and astronauts with my kids. This is our Lunar-Landing Advent Calendar. We're having oatmeal in plastic baggies and Tang for breakfast tomorrow!

Apollo 11 Launch Anniversary

Today marks the 38^th anniversary of the Apollo 11 launch. That mission carried three astronauts, Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin to the moon. When Armstrong stepped out onto the Lunar surface, he not only fulfilled the goal set forth by President John F. Kennedy, he realized the work of scientists and researchers stretching back nearly a century, and the dreams of humanity going back to some of our earliest fiction.

I mention this today for two reasons. First, it took the mission four days to get to the Moon and land safely, on July 20^th. That gives you a few days to put together a party for this coming Friday, invite some friends, get some rockets to launch, some Tang, and other astronaut food for your guests. The Lunar Landing really deserves celebration.

Second is what the Moon Landing demonstrated. We landed men on the moon on a handful of theories. The Apollo 11 capsule carried them over 200,000 miles through a vacuum to land on the surface of another planetary body with different gravity and no atmosphere to speak of. Then it carried them home again, making the perilous journey through the atmosphere where most objects burn up on entry.

Many people dismiss scientific theories because they define them in the common parlance as little more than opinions or guesses. “Well, it’s just a -theory- anyway.” As used in science, a theory is a logical and mathematical explanation that can be repeatedly demonstrated. The Apollo missions demonstrated that “theories” can be pretty powerful.

Freefall

One of the roadblocks to human exploration of space is the effect of freefall on our muscles. We can only stand about six months in zero-G before our muscles start to irreversibly jellify. Since Mars and other popular destinations are considerably farther than we can travel in that short a time, NASA is working on the problem with carbon nanotube neural implants. Yep. You read the right.

Now this is a positively delicious idea for even the most casual sci-fi fan. Brain implants to facilitate space travel! It could pioneer all sorts of new technologies. This particular research is directed at transmitting impulses to the brain. But if that research could lead to receiving impulses, then the possibilities really open up. Imagine what a pilot could do if they didn’t have to rely on their physical reflexes to fly an air or space craft? OK, I know, I’ve seen too many movies.

There is another interesting question that rises out of this line of research. Exploring implant technology indicates that we’re willing to use them to achieve several months, or years in space. It’s not a stretch to assume that some might also endure other enhancements, from the cybernetic to the genetic, in order to travel to other worlds. If we adapt ourselves to space to travel to other planets, will we ultimately find ourselves more at home in the space between them?

An apple a day?

It may take a little more than an apple a day to keep the doctor away, but apparently there are enough politicians around to keep the medicos at bay. Former Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona never got to release his report on global health issues, or promote comprehensive sex education. Sadly, it will probably require a groundswell of cultural change to keep the anti-scientific out of office, and culture of that kind changes slowly.

Deep Impact on the 4th of July

Today, NASA's Deep Impact hit the comet Tempel 1 with a "smart" projectile to study the comet's composition, and the effects of the impact. Although this impact is not likely to divert the comet's path, it is exciting to think that 65 million years after the Yucatan impact, there are earthlings who might be able to prevent the next such threat to life on our little pale blue dot.

Family Pictures

I have a relative who spends a lot of time researching our family genealogy. But sadly, she refuses to believe we evolved from a common ancestor with apes. "Why haven't they found any of the missing links?" she asks. I've got two people I'm going to ask her to add to our family tree: 3.2 million year old Lucy, and 3.3 million year old Lucy's Daughter.

A Culture of Science

I've got a lot of reasons to promote a culture that embraces science. My father suffers from a terminal disease for which the treatment is still experimental. I like breathing and eating fish, so I'd like cleaner transportation and more responsible fishing practices. I'd like my kids to live in a better world. I'd like my great-grand children to live on another world. Some of my reasons are personal, others a bit farther reaching.

Thankfully, I'm not the only one thinking about the place of science in our larger culture. Discussion of a "two culture" split as originally proposed by CP Snow, can be found on sites like Serendip, like this one. It's all well and good to discuss the cultural divide between scientists and non-scientists, but I prefer a more engaged approach. When Alexander the Great defeated Persia, he not only allowed a lot of local autonomy, he encouraged his soldiers to marry the locals. Seems that newborn grandchildren have a way of quelling rebellious notions. No, I didn't change subjects.

If science is ever going to be embraced by culture, it has to be a cultural element in and of itself. Very little of any culture is defined by what happens in a lab or at an academic conference. (OK, maybe some of the culture is defined by what happens at the after-hours hotel party at a conference, but that's not the point) In order the thrive in our culture, science has to be a part of our culture.

Culture is expressed in the ways we interact. In restaurants, at company picnics, community fairs, and family birthday parties, we express our culture. Even the television shows we watch or the blogs we write in; active or passive, it's all about communicating culture. So what I find really encouraging is seeing science in things like the poetry and art of The Evolutionist's Prayer,
or the music of Emerald Rose in We Come From Monkeys.
I'm not forgetting the hazard of culture contaminating the objectivity of science. It's a concern that already colors research. I recently read an article about the problem with circumcised scientists researching the benefits of circumcision. But I'd rather risk the possibility of culture having a bit of influence in science than risk the theory of "intelligent design" having to much influence in public schools.

Let's outsource to Mars

Noted physicist Lowell Wood recently outlined a bold plan to terraform Mars. He defines humanity as a terraforming species, pointing to the alterations of our own home planet over the last 10,000 years. He makes some really good points, but the real key phrase he uses when predicting our terraforming future is: "if-and-as" humanity becomes a truly space faring civilization.

A lot depends on whether humanity gets a foothold in space before we push Earth's biosphere past the point of being able to support human civilization. Building a space program, whether private or public, requires a complex infrastructure. If environmental change advances faster than our ability to adapt to the changes, we may no longer be able to mount a space program over and above our struggle to survive. Ironically, we still seem to lack an effective motivation. Even the promise of space tourism on the horizon isn't exactly taking off like a rocket. Maybe the real secret is to tell big business they can emit all the greenhouse gases they want on Mars.

Technorati here we come

In the change or die spirit I do my best to embrace, it's high time I got with the program at Technorati...

Technorati Profile

Out of the petry dish and into irrelevance

So once again, dear old George W. Bush has vetoed stem cell research. No big surprise there. Bush and his ilk seem content to allow our culture to sink into technological irrelevance. Or, maybe the Republican elite is simply content to outsource the research to other countries while pandering to the most conservative portion of their political base.

But he has left a small back door open. While he has denied researches access to important federal funding, he hasn't outlawed the research. The next best thing to federal funding might be a charitable organization like The Stem Cell Research Foundation to support stem cell research. This group provides public education and funds research. They also accept tax deductible charitable donations.

I Don't Need 55

I live about 6 miles from where I work. The place I lived before that was about 10 miles from work. Most of the people I work with live less that 45 min away. The car I use to go back and forth is just a beater. It was my grandfather's last car. For the most part, it goes back and forth to where I work, and otherwise just takes up space in my driveway. You could replace it with a glassed-in golf cart, and I would barely notice. (Actually, a golf cart might ride smoother...) When I go out with my wife and kids on the weekend, we take the family car.

My point here is, the ongoing litanies about how hard it would be to reduce emissions by replacing gas-powered cars just doesn’t wash. We could replace quite a few gas-guzzlers by simply making affordable electrics available. The trick is, they don’t need to be high performance. I don't need a car that will do 0-60 in under a minute to get back and forth to work. In fact, the highest speed limit between work and home for me is 45mph.

Now I know this isn't the case for many other folks out there. I also know people who spend over an hour on the highway to get to work every day. But if these disparate groups represent thirds or even quarters of the driving population, there’s an opportunity to put a big dent in our carbon footprint. I don’t think the solution to these problems is one-size fits all. It’s obvious that we need more fuel-efficient cars, better public transport, and more emphasis on pedestrian traffic. Beyond that, we could reduce emissions with more careful city planning. Traffic circles would reduce commute time, and cut down on idling engines. And, incidentally, the only reason grandpa’s beater hasn’t been replaced with a bicycle is the lack of sidewalks or bike lanes on very busy roads between here and work.

Got Roots? An update...
Back in March I suggested that gardening just might be the secret to sustainable, healthy living. Last weekend my wife and I took the kids outside and started our simple container garden. We started with blackberries, rhubarb, strawberries and mint. We'll probably add more before the summer. We spent the day working and playing in the yard. We even ate our dinner outside. It was the best night's sleep we'd had in a long time.

Gliese 581 C

Astronomers at the Geneva Observatory recently announced the discovery of what might be a terrestrial planet in around the star Gliese 581 in the constellation, While there’s still some debate about just how much solid ground there might be up there, it is interesting to see the progress we’ve made in our picture of the universe.

Four centuries ago, Galileo Galilei ran afoul of the Catholic Church for upholding the idea of a heliocentrism. We’ve since learned that even our Sun isn’t the center of the universe. It’s not even the center of our own galaxy for that matter. Now we’re closer to finding evidence that our solar system isn’t wholly unique in having terrestrial planets.

The discovery of a terrestrial planet in another solar system, some 20 light years away, fills in the edges of our biggest map in some very important ways. And it wasn’t all that long ago that we had a hard time getting a reliable map of someplace right here on Earth! (Really, not long ago at all. The last time I downloaded driving directions to somewhere… but I digress.)

Physicist Steven Hawking has said that in order to survive, the human species must go into space. Finding terrestrial planets outside our own solar system is certainly a step in the right direction, but we shouldn’t get too excited about looking for a westward passage to China just yet. In order to seriously explore the challenges of interstellar travel, we've got to establish a foothold in space right here in our own solar system.

It's also been said that if we can get into orbit, we're halfway to anywhere. In this case, I think the "we" is most important. We need established and functioning bases in orbit or on the moon, and we need to test our legs on Mars. By the time we get those things accomplished, planet hunting astronomers should have a pretty good selection of interstellar destinations to choose from.

The Automotive X Prize

On April 2, the X Prize Foundation announced the new Automotive X Prize http://auto.xprize.org/. Like the recently awarded Ansari X Prize for space flight, this prize will go to the first group to successfully demonstrate a car that gets 100mpg, or equivalent energy usage, and is an economically viable production model. The group has already been fielding inquiries from well-known and unknown automakers alike. The foundation was inspired by similar competitions in history, like the Orteig Prize. Charles Lindbergh won the Orteg in 1927 by being the first to fly non-stop from New York to Paris. Funds for the X prizes are supplied by a collection of forward thinking corporations and entrepreneurs.

Announcement of the new X prize came on the same day of the Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. the Environmental Protection Agency. The lawsuit included a number of states and organizations frustrated with the Bush Administrations lack of action on global warming. The court’s 5-4 ruling asserts that the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. This is in contrast not only the Bush Administration’s position, but to the stated position of the EPA as well. However the court has yet to rule on whether the Agency is in fact required to regulate emissions. Furthermore, a set of standards by which to regulate these emissions would also have to be agreed upon by Congress and the White House.

I’m struck by the contrast in these two announcements. Both reflect the growing concern in our culture over the environment, yet they each represent a very different approach, and pace of change. On the one hand we have the gears of bureaucratic democracy and judiciary slowly responding to public pressure, and on the other we have the enthusiasm of competition and the race to be first in something new.

The winner of the new Automotive X Prize is anybodies guess at this point. But another interesting contest is being played out here. The role of influencing change in our technology and even our culture for the betterment of our environment is in question. Historically, culture and especially market forces move much faster than legislation or justice. But in the end, it’s likely that both governments and the private sector will find some role to play. Maybe for once, the real winners will be consumers and the environment.

Get in touch with your roots

I humbly offer you a seemingly unrelated set of questions that have been bugging me of late:

One: With all the discussion about our impact on the environment and our need to adopt more sustainable living practices, what does a sustainable culture really look like?

Two: How can we effectively combat the growing trend of obesity in youth in the developed countries?

Three: How can we effectively care for soldiers struggling with the emotional problems caused by the trauma of war?

I submit that all three of these questions are related by their answer: Plant vegetable gardens.

Tens of thousands of years of evolution shaped us to be successful as hunter-gatherers, and thousands more have molded our agrarian skills. For millions of years, we humans had our hands in the dirt. We worked, physically laboring with simple tools, working with the forces of nature and other living things. The force of natural selection demanded that we be good at these things. And yet, most of us no longer do any of them.

So lets get down to just what planting a vegetable garden will do to help with such diverse problems. The first one is simple. Food grown in your own yard doesn’t have to be shipped on a truck to your local grocery store. Now unless you can manage a really ambitious garden, you won’t be putting those folks out of work. You’ll still need to run down there for a few things you can’t grow where you live, or can’t grow enough of; but you’ll maybe buy a little less.

But on to the next problem: childhood obesity. Hey, for that matter, I could stand to eat better myself! Homegrown vegetables taste better. And kids who get to pick those veggies, (I know from first hand experience) are actually more excited about eating them. Imagine how much more excited they would be if they actually helped plant and cultivate them. Now we’re teaching work ethic AND good eating habits. This is all to say nothing of the fact that gardening is exercise.

Now maybe you’re with me so far, but how about those vets, you ask? As a veteran myself, this is a subject close to home. I can’t even imagine what some of those young men and women go through. And yet, for all our bumper stickers in support of the troops, it seems, those most in need are the easiest to forget. Many have to learn to walk, or talk or use prosthetics or just function on a daily basis, all over again. Imagine what it could mean for someone to take the time to teach him or her how to nurture a seed. To watch it grow. To nurture something with the same time and care they so desperately need themselves.

Now I’ve already been shopping for some new terra-cotta pots for the container garden I’ll start in the spring. I looked up the local Farmer’s Market, and I’ve even found someone at work who sells farm-fresh eggs. But if you’re still not sold, then I’ll give you one simple thing to do. This coming fall, get yourself a little bucket, or basket, even and old butter tub will do. Drive, or if you can, walk to the nearest clump of woods you can find. Look alongside farmer’s fields, or along the edges of tree-lines. Hunt for berries.

Raspberries, blackberries, or mulberries; they’re all delicious. Careful you don’t pick anything poisonous. If you don’t know, ask someone who does. You’ll get scratches from brush and thorns. Your fingers will be stained with juice, and your feet might even get wet. Your legs will ache from trudging around in the woods, using muscles you’d forgotten you had. But they will be the best tasting berries you’ve had. Sweeter. Brighter. Better.

Yesterday I ran across this site, and would you believe, there are folks out there who think that a "Voluntary Human Extinction Movement" is the right way to go. And yes, they are serious. Just as the name implies, their basic philosophy is that human beings have such a negative impact on the "natural environment" of planet Earth, that we should voluntarily stop breeding and let the human race die out, so that the Earth can return to it's "natural state."

OK, I can sympathize with the notion that human civilization is overtaxing our environment to the point of disastrous consequence, but none-the-less, I find a few holes in their theory:

I've already addressed the notion that human beings are not so divorced from the "natural environment" as these folks seem to think. Nor would we be the first creatures to massively impact our environment to the point of causing other species, and even ourselves, to go extinct. So I won't dwell on that here.

I also find this idea more than just a little shortsighted. Sooner or later, this planet will become un-inhabitable through some very "natural" means. Near-Earth object, Gamma radiation, wandering black holes, or the end of our own sun, take your pick. Life on Earth is a limited engagement, even if we human beings do clean up our act. Human being actually represent the best chance for life on Earth being transplanted elsewhere in the Universe, and hence, averting that end to life as we know it. To let life simply be winked out would certainly be natural, but hardly desirable. I like being alive. So does my dog. So does that squirrel in my back yard.

If I had to choose between being tortured to death tomorrow, or never having been born, I'd take the torture. Better to live and die horribly, than not to live at all.

Thankfully, these folks do have a sense of humor. They realize the futility of trying to convince billions of human beings to stop breeding. But I can't help feeling that their effort might be better spent on another front. If human beings can come to dominate, irrevocably alter, and ultimately threaten the whole of the global environment without really trying to do so, what could we accomplish if we had our minds set on living sustainably within our environment? It's not as if the Environmental movement has been around long enough to really make an impact, either culturally, or environmentally. Both of those things take a great deal of time. And even if we are fumbling at this point, there are people working for change.

Al Gore's new book/movie "An Inconvenient Truth" may be bubbling with political overtones, but there’s also real substance there. The would-be president seems genuinely committed to educating people about the realities of climate change. And people are listening to him. If he changes the thinking of enough people, he may even swing enough votes to win in an electoral college.

At the same time, more and more hybrid and electric cars are reaching the market. There’ve been many to decry this as a false start. Hydrogen and electric power still use fossil fuels in their production, so these cars aren’t yet the cleanly fueled transport we hoped for. And yet, by purchasing these cars, consumers are sending a message to industry that consumers want ecologically sound products. Industry rarely misses a chance to exploit the fullest potential of a market.

Tenure

In a recent talk, Steven Hawking expressed the need for humanity to colonize other worlds in order to avoid extinction. He spoke specifically about the eminent threats to human survival, like asteroid collisions and nuclear war, as well as the development of near light travel. He also spoke of his own determination to go into space.

It struck me while reading about this talk, that colonizing other worlds would involve a lot more than just the technology to get there. We would need to survive there. And even a planet that already supports life of some kind isn't likely to have everything on hand that human beings would need to survive. It's most likely that we would need to engineer environments on new worlds to make homes for ourselves. A biosphere transplant.

The leading Paleontologist Richard Leakey, in a speech at Cameron University in 2001, stressed the need to preserve genetic diversity of species "in order to ensure our tenure on this planet." I think he's right, and I would also take that a step further. We need to preserve genetic diversity of species in order to ensure our tenure in the universe. The worlds we may find to call home outside this solar system will almost certainly run the full spectrum of environments that can support life. To create viable biospheres on such worlds, we may need creatures as diverse as carrier pigeons and woolly mammoths. All the more reason for us to be careful with our environment.