Gray Matter: In Which I Fully Submerge My Hand in Liquid Nitrogen

Gray Matter: In Which I Fully Submerge My Hand in Liquid Nitrogen: "

A layer of bubbles protects the flesh from liquid nitrogen, though only for a split second. Need proof? Watch the video

When I first saw this photograph of a man’s hand submerged in liquid nitrogen at somewhere below -320° F, my immediate thought was, “That guy must be crazy! One second in that stuff, and you’re shopping for new skin!” My shock was tempered only slightly by the fact that it was my hand, and we’d taken the picture just a minute earlier.

I hadn’t realized that my hand was quite so deep into the liquid. Amazingly, I barely felt the cold at all. My skin didn’t get hurt for the same reason that water droplets dance on a hot skillet. An insulating layer of steam forms almost instantly between the water and the metal, keeping the droplets relatively cool as they float for several seconds without actually touching the hot surface. To liquid nitrogen, flesh is like that skillet—a surface hundreds of degrees above its boiling point. So the moment my hand touched the liquid, it created a protective layer of evaporated nitrogen gas, just as the skillet created a layer of steam. That gave me just enough time to put my hand in and pull it out again. Any longer than that, and frostbite would have set in.

The phenomenon is called the Leidenfrost effect (after Johann Gottlob Leidenfrost, the doctor who first studied it in 1756). I’d known about it for years, but when it came time to test it in real life, I have to admit that I used my left hand, the one I’d miss less.

I drew the line at another classic example of the effect. According to the books, it’s possible to stick a damp finger directly into molten lead without getting burned, if you do it fast enough. After some consideration, and remembering the times I’ve been burned by molten lead, I decided that it probably wouldn’t make a very good picture anyway.

ACHTUNG! Do not try this. If liquid nitrogen soaks into your clothes, you will not be protected by the Leidenfrost effect, and you can get frostbite very quickly.

ようこそ日本からの皆さん！他の動画はこちらから。

"

Evolution in Action: Lizard Moving From Eggs to Live Birth

Evolution in Action: Lizard Moving From Eggs to Live Birth: "

“Evolution has been caught in the act, according to scientists who are decoding how a species of Australian lizard is abandoning egg-laying in favor of live birth. Along the warm coastal lowlands of New South Wales (map), the yellow-bellied three-toed skink lays eggs to reproduce. But individuals of the same species living in the state’s higher, colder mountains are almost all giving birth to live young.

Only two other modern reptiles—another skink species and a European lizard—use both types of reproduction. (Related: “Virgin Birth Expected at Christmas—By Komodo Dragon.”) Evolutionary records shows that nearly a hundred reptile lineages have independently made the transition from egg-laying to live birth in the past, and today about 20 percent of all living snakes and lizards give birth to live young only.

But modern reptiles that have live young provide only a single snapshot on a long evolutionary time line, said study co-author James Stewart, a biologist at East Tennessee State University. The dual behavior of the yellow-bellied three-toed skink therefore offers scientists a rare opportunity. “By studying differences among populations that are in different stages of this process, you can begin to put together what looks like the transition from one [birth style] to the other.”"

Read more at National Geographic (Thanks David G)

"

More Poverty = More Religion

More Poverty = More Religion: "

Religion has a surprisingly high correlation with poverty, according to a Gallup survey conducted in more than 100 countries. The more poverty a nation has, the higher the “religiosity” in that nation. In general, richer countries are less religious than poorer ones.

The biggest exception? The United States, which has the highest religiosity relative to its wealth on the planet.

>

Religion & Poverty

graphic via NYT

>

Hat tip Flowing Data

>

Sources:

Religious Outlier

CHARLES M. BLOW

NYT, September 3, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/opinion/04blow.html

Religiosity Highest in World’s Poorest Nations

United States is among the rich countries that buck the trend

Steve Crabtree

Gallup, August 31, 2010
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142727/religiosity-highest-world-poorest-nations.aspx

"

How reliable is science?

How reliable is science?: "

It is not difficult find instances of fraud in science:

• Ranjit Chandra faked medical research results. He pocketed the money meant for running the experiments.


• Woo-suk Hwang faked human cloning, among other terrible things.


• Jan Hendrik Schön faked a transistor at the molecular level.

How did these people fare after being caught?

• Ranjit Chandra still holds the Order of Canada, as far as I can tell. According to Scopus, his 272 research papers were cited over 3000 times. As for his University? Let me quote wikipedia: University officials claimed that the university was unable to make a case for research fraud because the raw data on which a proper evaluation could be made had gone missing. Because the accusation was that the data did not exist, this was a puzzling rationale.


• According to Scopus, Woo-suk Hwang has been cited over 2000 times. Despite having faked research results and having committed major ethics violations, he has kept his job and… he is still publishing.


• Despite all the retracted papers, Jan Hendrik Schön has still 1,200 citations according to Scopus. He lost his research job, but found an engineering position in Germany.

Conclusion: Scientific fraud is a low-risk, high-reward activity.

What is more critical is that we still equate peer review with correctness. The argument usually goes as follows: if it is important work, work that people rely upon, and it has been peer reviewed, then it must be correct. In sum, we think that conventional peer review + citations means validation. I think we are wrong:

• Conventional peer review is shallow. Chandra, Hwang and Schön published faked results for many years in the most prestigious venues. The truth is that reviewers do not reproduce results. They usually do not have access to the raw data and software. And even if they did, they are unlikely to be motivated to redo all of the work to verify it.


• Citations are not validations. Chandra, Hwang and Schön were generously cited. It is hardly surprising: impressive results are more likely to be cited. And doctored results are usually more impressive. Yet, scientists do not reproduce earlier work. Even if you do try to reproduce someone’s result, and fail, you probably won’t publish it. Indeed, publishing negative results is hard: journals are not interested. Moreover, there is a risk that it may backfire: the authors could go on the offensive. They could question your own competence.


• There are many small frauds. Even without making up data, you can cheat by misleading the reader, by omission. You can present the data in creative ways, e.g. turn meaningless averages into hard facts by omitting the variance (see the fallacy of absolute numbers). These small frauds increase the likelihood that your paper will be accepted and then generously cited.

How do we solve the problem? (1) By trusting unimpressive results more than impressive ones. (2) By being suspicious of popular trends. (3) By running our own experiments.

Further reading: Become independent of peer review, The purpose of peer review and Peer review is an honor-based system.

Source: Seth Roberts.

"

Pat's Fantasy Hotlist: Optimus Prime vs Jesus Christ

Pat's Fantasy Hotlist: Optimus Prime vs Jesus Christ

Heaps of Fossils From Evolutionary 'Big Bang' Discovered

Heaps of Fossils From Evolutionary 'Big Bang' Discovered: "One of paleontology’s most revered fossil sites now has a baby brother. Scientists have discovered a group of astonishing fossils high in the Canadian Rockies, just 40 kilometers from the famous Burgess Shale location, at Stanley Glacier. About half of the animal groups found there, such as trilobites, are found at other Burgess sites in different abundances. But the creatures unearthed also include eight taxa previously unknown to science.

"

Alien Planetary Systems Are Both Familiar and Surprising

Alien Planetary Systems Are Both Familiar and Surprising: "We are at the point where astronomers can study the architecture of entire planetary systems."