O (b LOG N)

Google’s Page urges scientists to market themselves

News.com

I like Larry Page. I’ve respected him, but I didn’t know I liked him before tonight. I just read about his urging earlier this week to members of AAAS to take their research out of halls of academia and engineer it into something that will benefit society, or, at least, make sure their findings can be consumed by someone who will. He also encouraged them to be politically active.

…take their scientific studies, market them better and make them readily accessible to the world. That way, the world might have a better chance at solving problems like energy consumption, poverty and global climate change.

“Virtually all economic growth (in the world) was due to technological progress. I think as a society we’re not really paying attention to that,” Page said. “Science has a real marketing problem. If all the growth in world is due to science and technology and no one pays attention to you, then you have a serious marketing problem.”

To that end, Page urged the group to take on more leadership roles in society, i.e., politics, so that they could control more funding for research and development. He also said that scientists should get in the habit of investing part of their scientific grant money to marketing budgets, in order to get the word out to the media about their research.

This concept of science having a marketing problem is not new. I’ve heard this discussed for years. However, I’ve not seen it discussed in such a public forum and it’s great to see it getting wide spread coverage. Also, Page’s emphasis on entrepreneurship (not included in the above quote) resonates with me. I believe entrepreneurship (and federally subsidized education) is what’s made our country the dominant world power.

So, we have:

1. Science should make every attempt to ensure research is accessible in order to maximize the potential that science benefits society.
2. Scientist should be politically active.
3. Academia should treat entrepreneurship as a positive outlet for their research.

All very obviously positive thoughts. It’s important to note that scientists need to be politically active now more than ever. Finally, Page provides us with some real world examples of how today’s science can be today’s solutions:

- Build fewer roads in underdeveloped parts of Africa. Instead, he suggested ultralight planes capable of traveling at up to 145 kmh and which would consume less gasoline than ground vehicles.

- Solar energy installations in the Nevada desert were capable of producing 800 megawatts per square mile (2.5 square km), somewhat less than half the 2000 megawatts of a nuclear power plant, he said. (A midsized natural gas-powered plant generates around 400 or 500 megawatts).

- A major limitation to wind power is the need for a distribution grid to move power from regions where wind blows to where populations are centered. He said 80 per cent of the electrical grid of Europe and North Africa could be served by an ambitious wind distribution grid cross-connecting the two regions. “Are we going to build that grid? I don’t think so. But I think it would be a good idea.”

As I write this I’m watching: “Who Killed the Electric Car“. Very relevant. It’s a good watch. Definitely infuriating.

Kansas Adopts New Science Standards

Slashdot | Kansas Adopts New Science Standards

“The Kansas State Board of Education has changed the state science standards once again, this time to take out language questioning evolution. This turnaround comes fast on the heels of the ouster given this past election to the ultra-conservative Board members who originally introduced the language. ‘Science’ has also been re-redefined as ‘a human activity of systematically seeking natural explanations’ (the word ‘natural’ had been previously stricken from the definition). If you’d like to see the new standards, a version showing all additions and deletions is available from the KS DOE’s website (PDF).”

This was just brought to my attention by SteveB. Why is the term ultra-conservative being used as a term to describe religious fanatics in the United States. Is this a way of lessening the rightfully negative stigma of someone who is intolerant and ignorant?

Non-Newtonian Fluid

In case you are wondering, a Non-Newtonian fluid is one that can temporarily exhibit the behavior of a solid. This occurs when there is a rapid application of force on the fluid at which time it exhibits what is called “shear thickening,” which is to say it appears to be solid. The rapidity of the application of force is critical. If you slowly apply force it will behave as one would expect, which is to say: as a fluid. Here is a fun demonstration.

In short, you too can have fun with Non-Newtonian Fluids. Corn starch and water is all you need. Read more about this at Wikipedia.

Giant figures unearthed in Peru

CNN

LIMA, Peru (AP) — Archeologists have discovered a group of figures scraped into the hills of Peru’s southern coastal desert that are believed to predate the country’s famous Nazca lines.

About 50 giant figures were etched into the earth over an area of roughly 90 square miles (145 square kilometers) near the city of Palpa, El Comercio newspaper reported.

So much yet to discover…

To the Mantle!

Wired

In the movie The Core, Hilary Swank saved humanity by drilling to Earth’s center. In reality, of course, that’s impossible - and not just because Swank isn’t the geologist type. Try as they might, actual scientists have yet to get through even the crust, the thinnest, outermost skin of the planet. It’s just too deep.

Enter the Chikyu - a 689-foot-long, 57,550-ton ocean vessel. Chikyu means “Earth” in Japanese, and the ship’s sole mission is to drill deeper than anyone has before: 6.2 miles down. After tests off the Japanese coast, researchers in June will head for deep Pacific waters, weigh anchor, and probe all the way to the mantle, that molten layer between the crust and the core.

And why are scientific feats like this not publicized mor- ohh, the game is on!
Thanks, Matt.

Nanotech Lighting the Way

CNet

Researchers at the University of Toronto have developed particles that potentially will make it easy, and cheap, to see in the dark.

The nanoparticles–developed under a project directed by professor Ted Sargent–can essentially detect infrared light, unseen by humans because of its long wavelengths. And like a solar panel, they can channel the energy to beneficial purposes.

Night vision binoculars and low-light cameras currently can produce images using the infrared spectrum, but the semiconductors inside these devices are complex to manufacture and expensive.

Conceivably, a manufacturer could mix the particles developed by Sargent into coatings, fabrics or plastics, and devise far less-expensive products. A specially treated camera lens could capture images in the dark by fielding infrared signals. Walls treated with infrared-sensitive paint could detect intruders or animals by intercepting their thermal signature, or body heat.