Slashdot Mirror
Science in 1999
gfoyle writes "If you want a run down of the science highlights of 1999, read the Science News article Science News of the Year. I offer as a teaser an item on the technology list: "Some garments fought germs (Sept. 11, vol. 156: p. 170), others commingled with computers, furthering a trend toward wearable cyberassistants (Nov. 20, vol. 156: p. 330)." Unfortunately, not all articles are posted on their web site, but what you can't find on their site, you can find in your library. "
Popular Science also has it's rundown of this years greatest inventions, prety cool. http://www.popularscience.com/fea tures/bown/bown99/.
Why is it that people always hear what I say, and not what I mean?
Was it only this year that scientists determined that they have cultural traditions?
I could've sworn I knew several years ago that chimpanzees had different cultural adaptations for eating and drinking: "Do I go with the long blade of grass, or will some bunched up leaves do the trick for getting at termites? Do I use some chewed up leaves as a sponge to get water, or is there a better way? Do I whack something with a log or do I use a rock?" and that these techniques were communicable from one population to the next via various interactions and learning.
Or is that all just what they found out this year and I just dreamed the rest?
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
The first item listed under technology leaves me wondering this. If you are going to attempt to grow organs, why whould you start with a bladder? I can think of a lot of organs that would be a bit more usefull to have lying around. If you lose your bladder you don't usually have time to go to the doctor and say, "hey, can I have a new bladder? Mine seems to have burst."
-----
I thought furbies were introduced in '98 :)
Two reasons:
1) It's just a bag (significantly uncomplicated) and that makes it a good organ to start with. The technology is still a ways off before we'll be growing complicated organs like artificial eyes, etc.
2) You wouldn't believe the number of chronic ailments that exist which would be solved by just replacing the whole thing. Interstitial cystitis comes to mind. If you're living with a disorder like that for twenty years, you'll start to hope that someone will just show up and yank the whole thing out and replace it.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Is every year as fruitful as this past one? This is a really impressive list - except for the NASA crash on Mars and a couple of other setbacks. A bunch of surprises in there too: we're nearly finished the Human Genome project and somebody thinks we have twice as many genes as previously estimated? And 3 new elements were created for the first time this year? Some of the stuff seems a bit superfluous though. Pi to over 2 billion digits? And the return of cloud seeding... But generally a very very impressive list. Science has been pretty busy at the end of this millenium.
Energy: time to change the picture.
Yeah I know that the linked article was really about wearables, but since germ-fighting clothes were mentioned I think this post is on topic.
Germ fighting clothes (toys etc) is bad because:
A) Some bacteria is actually good for you. You dont want them killed.
B) Give a child a sterile environment and the first flu that gets through will kill it
C) If you knock out 99.99% of the bacteria with a substance, those that survive and multiply will be those with recistancy to that substance.
DONT BUY ANTIBACTERIAL STUFF!!!
Then again if by jacket could identify and destroy that special kind of germ called Spammer... moahahahaa!
All opinions are my own - until criticized
Efforts to avert year-2000 computer-chip and software problems held the attention of computer experts, engineers, and public officials throughout 1999
The Melissa computer virus exposed new software vulnerabilities, while researchers looked for ways to render computers immune to such digital pests
Advances in computer technology and mathematical techniques threatened the security of the current standard encryption system
superblog.org: all your favourite blogs on o
While I realize that "Top-n"-style lists like this are subjective, I find it amusing that the Earth Science section mentioned the (relatively insignificant) fact that people sweated out tornadoes in concrete rooms, while ignoring the launches of the Landsat 7 and TERRA spacecraft. The Landsat 7 spacecraft's Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus instrument and the TERRA spacecraft's vast array of instruments will be invaluable to Earth scientists studying climate change, urban sprawl, deforestation, drought, famine prediction, and dozens of other scientific disciplines.
I'm not saying that any of the items listed in the review are not noteworthy; I'm just pointing out that the list does not appear to be particularly exhaustive.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
Just reading the bullets in Earth Sciences makes it hard to deny global warming any longer:
The carbon dioxide buildup in the air has stunted coral reef growth (April 3, vol. 155: p. 214).
Research linked ancient climatic chaos to the release of carbon-rich gas (Oct. 23, vol. 156: p. 260).
Global temperatures in 1998 proved the highest in 140 years (Jan. 2, vol. 155: p. 6).
Signs of climatic warming appeared in the Arctic Ocean (Feb. 13, vol. 155: p. 104).
Meteorologists predicted that La Niña will skew U.S. winter weather (Oct. 30, vol. 156: p. 278) and started factoring global warming into extended forecasts (March 20, vol. 155: p. 188).
Scientists studied ways to adapt to climate change (Aug. 28, vol. 156: p. 136).
But don't, like, panic or anything.
"You can't get something for nothing." - my grandfather, on the stock market and Reaganomics.
Science News is a publication for those people interested in intellectual pursuits, but who are not technical enough in nature to read a peer-reviewed journal such as Science or Nature. Science News, IMHO, is a very good publication for children, as it will keep them intellectually stimulated every week.
Now while I agree that it's a good publication for children (bright ones over about 12 or so anyway) I also think that Science News is good reading for adults. And not just those who aren't technical enough to read peer-reviewed journals.
The wonderful thing about Science News is how it covers events from all areas of science. You can find articles about parallel processing on one page, and something about Neanderthal cave paintings or the sense organs of honey bees on the next. I doubt there are many people who would be willing to struggle through the peer-reviewed journals of computing, paleoanthropology and entomology, but lots of us have at least a passing interest in all of those subjects - and the many others that Science News covers.
Science and Nature are also fine periodicals, but they're not weekly, and they cost a good deal more than Science News. And the articles in Science News are shorter, so I can read them in the bathroom, or on my break at work.