Review: When Science Goes Wrong by Simon LeVay
Posted on | April 22, 2010 | No Comments
Whenever scientific activities are undertaken there is the potential for it to go wrong. Sometimes that just means that nothing happens – as many science teachers will tell you, after building up their classes expectations! Unfortunately, it also means that bad things may happen as well.
This book documents twelve cases in which scientific activities went wrong in an extreme way. Covering a wide range of disciplines, including neuroscience, space science, microbiology and engineering, Simon LeVay describes a scenario and what went wrong, and then he explains the science behind each event before exploring lessons learned.
In the same way that “disaster television” is compulsive viewing, this book is a fascinating read. Perhaps what is most fascinating is the varied ways in which the problems are caused. From researchers totally disregarding control procedures in their quest for results, leading to the death of a volunteer subject, to a simple problem of the wrong use of units, which causes the destruction of a multi-million dollar Mars orbiter, the mess-ups are as diverse as the results.
There is no overall lesson to learn from this book, except that science can and does go wrong in a variety of ways. Some of the accounts demonstrate the wisdom of Review Boards and safety equipment, others demonstrate that cutting costs can lead to problems, while others just support the well-known truth that “accidents happen”. The interesting conclusion that LeVay leaves us with is that risks have to be taken in science if progress is going to be made, and with risks comes the possibility of disaster. We should be grateful that in addition to many careful and safety conscious scientists, there are others who are willing to take risks in order to advance the cause of science.
To buy the book click the image above.
Buy A Chemistry Set!
Posted on | April 5, 2010 | No Comments
One of my happiest memories as a child, is the hours I spent at a small bench at the back of our garage mixing the chemicals provided by my chemistry set. In fact, the best part about a chemistry set was not the set experiments suggested by the instructions, it was the random mixing to make different smells and colours!
A chemistry set containing a variety of simple chemical compounds, some test tubes and a spirit burner, can provide an inquisitive mind with hours of fodder. You begin by following some of the set experiments, mixing an acid with iron filings or with a carbonate and generating gases. Then, you find some coloured chemicals that can be made to change colour by adding other chemicals, and the instructions get left behind as curiosity takes over.
All young people with inquisitive minds should have the opportunity to experiment with “wet” chemistry. Computer simulations are useful and instructive, and enable experiments to be done which go beyond the capacity of a chemistry set. But the actual interaction with temperature changes, smelly gases and physical colour changes are irreplaceable.
It is with “toys” like these that the future ground-breaking scientists of the future will be nurtured!
(Click the image above for the opportunity to purchase a good quality Chemistry Set)
Chemistry Lab
PiHKAL – A Chemical Love Story
Posted on | March 20, 2010 | No Comments
Click on the image to link to Amazon
Review of the book by Alexander and Ann Shulgin
A unique book, combining an interesting semi-autobiographical love story, with the account of the scientific investigation of the effects of a range of mind-altering psychedelic chemical compounds. Through open and honest description, the two authors also give an intriguing insight into the human mind (and soul), while the second half of the book gives detailed descriptions of the method of synthesis, effects and other information relating to 179 chemicals the couple have tested.
Reading this book evokes a wide range of emotions. From admiration for a scientist who, investigating chemicals’ effects on the human body, is prepared to administer them to himself first of all, to frustration at a long, drawn out account of the relationship between two highly educated but emotionally insecure human beings. There is envy, for the experiences they describe which are deeper than anything the regular man in the street would understand, and concern, as they and their friends expose themselves to huge risks in taking newly synthesised chemicals which could permanently disable or even kill them.
From a scientific point of view, to read of Alexander Shulgin’s desire to undertake totally independent, systematic research on compounds that are regularly vilified by the authorities (I admit that I was surprised when I discovered that the MDMA compound – which the authors consider to be almost a Holy Grail of psychological treatment – is actually Ecstasy – which has been linked to the death of many young people involved in the rave scene), is a shot in the arm (pardon the pun!). In this age in which scientists are driven by the need to obtain commercial or political support for their activity, it is refreshing to read of this man whose aim is to find out how chemicals that affect the mind might help in psychological treatments, regardless of finance or politics.
The title, PiHKAL, stands for Phenethylamines I Have Known And Loved, and the subtitle, “A Chemical Love Story” is ambiguous enough to suggest both the human love story between the two main protagonists and the love between Shulgin and the substances he is investigating. The first 450 pages of the book tells the story of the relationship between Alexander (Shura) Borodin and a woman called Alice, who meets and falls in love with him. The story is told, first from the point of view of Shura, then Alice, and then a mixture of the two. It is slow in places, but with enough variety to keep the reader interested. The second half of the book contains detailed instructions of how to synthesise the compounds in a well equipped laboratory, and is a potentially useful reference for organic chemists and others interested in mind-altering chemicals.
Overall the book is a fascinating insight into the potential of these chemicals for sensible humans beings to explore their consciousness, and indeed their spirituality. It leaves the reader in a state of depression realising that this potential is unlikely to be realised while national governments react to their misuse with heavy-handed legislation.
Magnetic Water Conditioning
Posted on | March 16, 2010 | No Comments
I just wrote an article about hard water and one of the solutions I came across is called “Magnetic Water Conditioning”.
This essentially involves applying a magnetic field across the water pipe which brings water into the house. In some way this action conditions hard water in such a way that lime scale is prevented from forming.
Water is classed as “hard” when it has calcium, magnesium, hydrogencarbonate and sulphate ions dissolved in it. These ions come from the rocks the water has passed through, especially limestone and chalk. The effects of the presence of these ions are: first, more soap and detergents are required to have an effect, and, second, when the water is heated or the pressure is reduces, solid calcium carbonate is precipitated out as limescale, which blocks pipes, damages heating elements in kettles and washing machines, and leaves unsightly stains on surfaces.
Water hardness can be reduced by several methods. Water can be filtered or passed though an ion exchange water softener, both of which remove the unwanted ions, although calcium and magnesium are useful for the human body. Some chemicals can be added which reduce the effect of hardness on detergents, improving washing effects.
Magnetic water conditioning, however, does not remove the ions from the water. So, how does it work?
Companies that are selling the systems for magnetic water conditioning talk about the magnetic field affecting the charged particle in the water in such a way that they are not able to combine to form solid limescale. The term magnetohydrodynamics was used on one site, referring to a the academic discipline studying electrically conducting fluids.
There are many others on the Internet who would call magnetic water conditioning “pseudoscience” because there is no clear explanation of the mechanism. There is even some doubt as to whether it works or not.
Essentially there have not been many properly controlled scientific studies on this topic, but there are lots of companies that seem to be making money from selling the systems – some with money-back guarantees. I would be interested in any comments people may have.
Improving Science Communication
Posted on | March 7, 2010 | No Comments
How is Science's Image? Photo by Svilen Milev
In the recent controversy over climate change – both the UEA emails and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) misuse of data – one thing that has become clear to me is that scientists need to learn how to communicate the results of their work, and the public need to learn how to listen to scientists.
For too long, science has taken on a status of some kind of higher level of existence – distinct from the rest of humanity, beyond our understanding and simply to be trusted blindly. Like some kind of religious entity.
From time to time scientific research is reported by the media: “Scientists have discovered that…” or “Scientists have proved that…” with some black and white statement – usually involving the connection of what we eat or do with our health or the environment. Then, in the most interesting or bizarre cases, the media discusses it – with various celebrities suggesting ways that it will affect their lives, some jokes being made – and within a few days it is forgotten. The Scientists remain unseen, separate, unquestioned beings who are there to accumulated.
Even the issue of climate change has been like that. The number of times people make comments during a bad winter about how they can’t see evidence of global warming is staggering. But slowly the whole issue of carbon emissions has become a monster in its own right – overshadowing all other aspects of science. Individuals and businesses have become obsessed with reducing carbon footprints and saving energy, as much because it makes you look better as for any particular concern for the glaciers in the Himalayas or starving farmers in Africa. There were a few who questioned the issue but they were generally dismissed as freaks who didn’t understand – The Scientists have proved it!
Then came “Climate-gate”, suddenly the mythical scientists were real people who wrote emails and seemed to be pulling the wool over our eyes. The Scientists had lost a lot of their mythical nature, and sceptics rejoiced. But, what are we left with? When the TV newsreader next tells us: “Scientists have proved that eating grapes prevents heart disease” – what will be our response? Will it be – ‘that’s good – better get some grapes next time I’m shopping’, or ‘What do scientists know – I bet its all some conspiracy with grape farmers’?
We need to look at the way we communicate science. Scientists need to work on a way of explaining their conclusions in a way that shows how they were reached, and how certain they are. The media need to find ways of avoiding giving an impression of scientists as godlike creatures who are always right. And the general public needs to remember that scientists are real people, like poor Professor Phil Jones of the UEA, who harboured suicidal thoughts when his emails were stolen and incriminating sections published.
Alan Thorne of the Natural Environment Research Council claims that scientists do not have to fight a battle over climate change. I think now is the perfect time to fight a battle for a better, more sustainable public image. Scientists are just humans who are accumulating knowledge in order to understand the world better – they are not infallible gods, but neither are they conspiring monsters.
Why Do We Do Science?
Posted on | March 1, 2010 | 2 Comments
Isn't it just fascinating?
Science is the systematic investigation of natural processes in order to understand it better. But, why do we do it?
I am sure many High School students have asked this question. Why do I need to know that when I put a piece of magnesium in some acid in a test tube it fizzes? What is so amazing about litmus paper turning red? Why is my teacher so excited that ice floats?
Curiosity
There are different levels of answer to this question. Maybe the most basic is curiosity. It is fascinating to discover that every single living organism on earth has DNA that provides a code for every protein that it will need to use. I am always amazed when I mix two chemicals together and the temperature goes down so far that it can freeze water, or that just by adding a drop of one liquid to a pile of crystals causes a violent flame and lots of smoke. I just want to know why. Equally the whole idea of the size of the universe, or of the make up of the atom, drive many scientists to simply want to know more, just for the sake of it.
Economic Development
Another reason we do science is so that our society will develop economically. Whatever you may think of industry, it has been the development of scientific understanding that has enabled mankind to be able to travel around the globe in hours instead of months. It is scientific discovery that has provided us with the materials and gadgets that make our lives so much more comfortable, and have fuelled the development of civilised society. It is not all good – witness climate change and the exploitation of workers in so many countries, but there is also some benefit.
Improving people’s lives
Perhaps the highest level of scientific endeavour is that which aims to improve our lives. Pharmaceutical scientists searching for new drugs to treat diseases, geneticists searching for the cause of hereditary conditions, seismologists trying to find ways of predicting earthquakes in order to save lives, and climate scientists trying to understand why the climate is changing so much. These are all people who are devoting their abilities for the good of mankind.
So, science is worth it. There is so much that science can do. Of course it is not all done with the purest of motives, it does not always lead to the good of mankind, often quite the opposite, but it is worth doing. And it should be done. And it should be encouraged.
Siestas Improve Your Memory
Posted on | February 26, 2010 | 2 Comments
Have a nap - its good for your brain!
An article in the Economist summarises the results of research by scientists at the University of California into the effects of an afternoon nap, or siesta, on a person’s ability to learn information.
It turns out that a nap of around an hour and a half actually improves your capacity to learn. Subjects that had 100 minutes of sleep after one learning session at noon, actually did better in another learning session at 6pm, while those who had no nap did worse.
The explanation is that the period of REM (rapid eye movement) sleep, during which we dream, enables the brain to make connections between old memories and those recently laid down. This clears the short-term memory for further learning.
All we need to do now is persuade our bosses that a longer lunch break, including a nice siesta will actually help us in the long run!
What is Science?
Posted on | February 26, 2010 | 1 Comment
Is Science About Bottles and Books?
When somebody hears the word “Science”, it will conjure an idea in their mind. This idea or image will vary depending on that person’s background and experience of science. For some it will be a bespectacled man in a white coat beavering away at a bench laden with bubbling glassware; for others the word will suggest impenetrable formulae and impossible equations; while to others it will signify technology, gadgets and even space travel.
It has been said that science is everywhere. But is this true? Certainly natural processes are going on everywhere and we all now use technology developed by science, but does that mean we are involved in science or that “SCIENCE” is happening?
I recently came across a web page for a course at the University of Georgia in the US. The course is in the department of geology and one of the lectures is simply entitled “What is Science?”. One of the connected resources is a collection of definitions of science, beginning with more conventional definitions and leading to less conventional ones. There is material in that section for several articles in sciencerity.com.
This is how the author of the course (Dr Bruce Railsback) defines science:
Science is the concerted human effort to understand, or to understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding.
This implies that science involves actual investigation. It is an effort to understand how natural processes work. And it uses observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding.
So, science is not everywhere.
The results of science – reasoned investigation of natural processes – are more-or-less everywhere now.
Natural processes – the raw material that science investigates – really are everywhere, but they only become science when they are being studied.
I would like to think that clear, structured explanations of science, could be considered as science – because that is what I do best!
Welcome to Sciencerity
Posted on | February 18, 2010 | No Comments
This blog will become a comprehensive homage to Science.
It will be driven by the motto Structure and Clarity.
If you find a lack of either of these, leave a comment and take me to task!
Please come back often, and tell your friends.
Categories
Recent Posts
Blogroll
Method – a Science Blog
