Hic Hic Hooray: Hiccups Explained
Anonymous Hero writes "Finally after millions of years (and zillions of hiccups) New Scientist gives us an explanation for this most annoying and least obvious of adaptations!"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Does it "matter?" I think this article is fascinating. The suggestion that specific adaptations might persist beyond their usefulness to an organism because they form a foundation for later adaptations raises really interesting questions about how complex neurological behaviors are "built up" in organisms, and research in this territory could lead to a greater understanding of the line between inherited and learned behaviors, and the evolution of neurological response. That's cutting edge.
Science is indeed more than speculation but science begins with speculation, hypothesis, and theory. When I want hard science news I go to the resources in the scientific community, I read my Chemical and Engineering News magazines. 95 percent of what I read there is so dry and technical it would be pointless to post it on Slashdot.
"Münchnones, or mesoionic 1,3-oxazolium-5-oxides, are versatile substrates for 1,3-dipolar additions in constructing biologically active heterocycles. They usually are made by multistep synthesis, but now, Bruce A. Arndtsen, an associate professor of chemistry at McGill University, Montreal, and coworkers have come up with an easier way [J. Am. Chem. Soc., 125, 1474 (2003)]."
That's "real" science reporting. And it is definately more groundbreaking, in the immediate sense, than an article speculating about hiccups. But there is nothing wrong with a "color" science article that makes me think and wonder and dream a little bit about larger issues.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries