While Darwin's 200th birthday (last February) was celebrated with gusto, I think it's equally (if not more) important to toast his decision to publish his 'dangerous idea' about evolution. This was something he struggled long and hard with - until one day a letter arrived in the mail that would force his hand.
While Darwin's 200th birthday (last February) was celebrated with gusto, I think it's equally (if not more) important to toast his decision to publish his 'dangerous idea' about evolution. This was something he struggled long and hard with - until one day a letter arrived in the mail that would force his hand.
Stuff! It's all around us. The metals, plastics, glass, fibers and other materials that make up our homes, our cars, our electronics, our everything! Most of the time we accept this stuff for what it is and don't give it another thought. But not David Pogue.
David is a New York Times personal technology columnist and CBS news correspondent who wants to know, just what is all of our stuff made of? How strong can materials get? On how small of a scale can we work with them? How clean can we get our technology? And how smart can a material become? From the first man to craft a tool using a rock, to the future of robots so small they'll navigate your blood stream, we'll be following David as he searches for the stories behind the materials that make up our world in this four-part program set to air in the fall of 2010.
I'm Dan Parsons, a production assistant on the Stuff crew. So far in production we've locked down the treatment for one of the four episodes, titled "Strong, Stronger, Strongest" and should have the second, "Small Smaller Smallest" complete soon. We've lined up some interesting adventures for our host including trips to a demolition derby, an active Navy aircraft carrier, a steel mill, a diamond cutter and to MIT for a slow-motion look at exactly how things break. There's still a long road ahead of us, so keep checking back as production continues for an inside look behind the production of Stuff!
(Image courtesy Northrup Grumman/NASA)
When we last left LCROSS, in July, the spacecraft was speeding along its slingshot trajectory toward the moon. On October 8th, about 10 hours before impact, the satellite released Centaur--the white, cylindrical rocket stage in the image above--and nudged it into a collision course with the well of a crater on the moon's surface. The rest of the spacecraft followed about 10 minutes behind Centaur, ready to start taking data as soon as the initial collision kicked up enough dust to analyze.
The crash was less dramatic than hoped. Scientists originally predicted that the headlong impact could send plumes of material shooting up to 10 kilometers above the surface--a reaction that would be visible to telescopes across the country. But, perhaps because of the spongy nature of the moon's surface, the dust didn't spray much further than a single kilometer high. At first, the mainstream media deemed the mission a flop.
But in the months following that impact, NASA scientists sifted through the data and found that the plume, though smaller than anticipated, was hardly a disappointment. The results released last week show that plume contained at least 26 gallons of water. (None of that was water in the liquid form we're used to, since the lack of atmosphere on the moon causes solid ice to sublime directly into a gas.)
What does this mean? For one thing, the moon may be more viable as a way station in space than previously thought. If we can harvest and use the moon's water, either to sustain humans in space, or as the raw material for making hydrogen fuel, we might be able to use the moon as our stopping place and leapfrog on to other planets.
But, as our friend from Reading Rainbow used to say, you don't have to take my word for it.
Check out this podcast, in which David Levin talks to David Morrison of NASA's Lunar Science Institute and asks him to explain why we should bother going back to the moon.
Still not psyched about the new discovery?
Hit play to hear "Water on the Moon," a song composed (and performed in part) by LCROSS deputy project manager John Marmie.
Ever imagined reading your body temperature from contacts? It seems like this contact lens with built-in LEDs will beat out any fancy colored competitors.
Gentlemen, please take a moment to be thankful that you are not an Australian redback spider.
Just one in five bachelor redbacks ever finds a lady redback to call his own. If he's lucky enough to get that far, just as his search comes to an end and mating begins, she eats him. Alive. While they are mating. NOVA scienceNOW covered this gruesome seduction, and explained its evolutionary utility, in a profile of University of Toronto evolutionary biologist Maydianne Andrade. After all, if you only get to mate once, you had better be sure the mother of your spider babies isn't going to go hungry. Now, Andrade and her colleagues have uncovered a fiendish new detail in this strange romance. To earn the right to be devoured, the male redback has to perform a prolonged (100 minutes, minimum) courtship ritual. If his wooing isn't up to snuff, his would-be partner will eat him (are you sensing a theme here?) without mating and move on to the next suitor.






Recent Comments
Any reason you're using "material science" rather than "materials science?" Expected air dates? Can't wait to share this with our students. M. Daniels Advisor Materials Science and Engineering The Ohio State University
Why does it take a PBS production to bring this great achievement to my attention? In an atmosphere of gloom and doom this refreshing good news the should be shouted from the top of every TV tower. An excellent follow up series is HBO's "From the Earth to the Moon" Of the 12 one hour episodes my two favorite are the "Spider" and "Gallileo was right". This series is available on Netflix.
Great item.
Dr. X - Thanks for your reply. My post is very clear and *exactly* addresses the source material (by quoted section). I'm not surprised the only thing you could find to complain about was the minor point you raised (illustrating your apparent lack of comprehension and inability to synthesize). Yes - Gaia said they know what genes go in, where her conclusion was that "...there's no way a gene for a deadly toxin would 'accidentally' get into a crop." Well...per the real-world evidence, that seems to be *exactly* what happens with GM crops. Genes coding for toxic substances or other designer functions "accidentally" end up in unexpected places with unknown/untested impact and very wide distribution. Subsequently, corporations even use this "accidental" cross-pollination to assert their patent rights against traditional seed-saving farmers not specifically using their products. The goal of corporations is to force the farmers to capitulate and use their GM seed. As in my post, one aspect of the gross hubris of Big Biotech is that they think they can create GM crops (yes - with known sequences) that will not experience any random mutation or interaction among themselves or with related species in the wild (not to mention the other very clear points I raise in direct response to Gaia's blog). Her blog and your comments are both in the same categories - poorly conceived and apparently uninformed. So...try to find meaningful evidence-based arguments to support your critique of the issue and/or my very clear commentary, if you can and are so inclined. Thanks.