10 9 / 2014

staff:

Today’s the day. The day you help save the internet from being ruined.

Ready? 

Yes, you are, and we’re ready to help you.

(Long story short: The FCC is about to make a critical decision as to whether or not internet service providers have to treat all traffic equally. If they choose wrong, then the internet where anyone can start a website for any reason at all, the internet that’s been so momentous, funny, weird, and surprising—that internet could cease to exist. Here’s your chance to preserve a beautiful thing.)

24 8 / 2014

pyrrhiccomedy:

edens-blog:

heartbeatofatimelord:

physcoaustin:

tardisol:

IF YOU HAD ROOM WITH ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN IT AND THE WALLS CEILING AND FLOOR WERE MADE OF MIRROR WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IN THE MIRRORS

No.

Holy shit I asked my dad who’s a physics teacher…

(Source: teenytomlin)

29 6 / 2014

bbglasses:

Watch this giggly video of running on oobleck.

We think you will get a giggle watching it. 

Our Science-U Summer Camp rocks ooblecks!

So cool!

16 6 / 2014

16 6 / 2014

humanoidhistory:

Happy birthday to trailblazing scientist Barbara McClintock (June 16, 1902-September 2, 1992). One of the world’s most distinguished cytogeneticists, she is best known for her discovery of DNA transposition, the moving of genetic material from one part of a chromosome to another. Basically, she helped to prove genes were not static and unchanging as they passed from one generation to another. McClintock won 1983 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for “her discovery of mobile genetic elements.” Here’s the bulk of her speech at the Nobel Banquet in Sweden on December 10, 1983:
"I understand I am here this evening because the maize plant, with which I have worked for many years, revealed a genetic phenomenon that was totally at odds with the dogma of the times, the mid-nineteen forties. Recently, with the general acceptance of this phenomenon, I have been asked, notably by young investigators, just how I felt during the long period when my work was ignored, dismissed, or aroused frustration. At first, I must admit, I was surprised and then puzzled, as I thought the evidence and the logic sustaining my interpretation of it, were sufficiently revealing. It soon became clear, however, that tacit assumptions - the substance of dogma - served as a barrier to effective communication. My understanding of the phenomenon responsible for rapid changes in gene action, including variegated expressions commonly seen in both plants and animals, was much too radical for the time. A person would need to have my experiences, or ones similar to them, to penetrate this barrier. Subsequently, several maize geneticists did recognize and explore the nature of this phenomenon, and they must have felt the same exclusions. New techniques made it possible to realize that the phenomenon was universal, but this was many years later. In the interim I was not invited to give lectures or seminars, except on rare occasions, or to serve on committees or panels, or to perform other scientists’ duties. Instead of causing personal difficulties, this long interval proved to be a delight. It allowed complete freedom to continue investigations without interruption, and for the pure joy they provided."
(NobelPrize.org/U.S. National Library of Medicine)

humanoidhistory:

Happy birthday to trailblazing scientist Barbara McClintock (June 16, 1902-September 2, 1992). One of the world’s most distinguished cytogeneticists, she is best known for her discovery of DNA transposition, the moving of genetic material from one part of a chromosome to another. Basically, she helped to prove genes were not static and unchanging as they passed from one generation to another. McClintock won 1983 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for “her discovery of mobile genetic elements.” Here’s the bulk of her speech at the Nobel Banquet in Sweden on December 10, 1983:

"I understand I am here this evening because the maize plant, with which I have worked for many years, revealed a genetic phenomenon that was totally at odds with the dogma of the times, the mid-nineteen forties. Recently, with the general acceptance of this phenomenon, I have been asked, notably by young investigators, just how I felt during the long period when my work was ignored, dismissed, or aroused frustration. At first, I must admit, I was surprised and then puzzled, as I thought the evidence and the logic sustaining my interpretation of it, were sufficiently revealing. It soon became clear, however, that tacit assumptions - the substance of dogma - served as a barrier to effective communication. My understanding of the phenomenon responsible for rapid changes in gene action, including variegated expressions commonly seen in both plants and animals, was much too radical for the time. A person would need to have my experiences, or ones similar to them, to penetrate this barrier. Subsequently, several maize geneticists did recognize and explore the nature of this phenomenon, and they must have felt the same exclusions. New techniques made it possible to realize that the phenomenon was universal, but this was many years later. In the interim I was not invited to give lectures or seminars, except on rare occasions, or to serve on committees or panels, or to perform other scientists’ duties. Instead of causing personal difficulties, this long interval proved to be a delight. It allowed complete freedom to continue investigations without interruption, and for the pure joy they provided."

(NobelPrize.org/U.S. National Library of Medicine)

(via scinerds)

08 6 / 2014

skunkbear:

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

I was recently reminded how much I still enjoy this endlessly zooming video from 1968, “Powers of Ten”:

You’ve got to watch the video for the narration and the kickin’ soundtrack. For a modern, interactive take, check out “The Scale of the Universe" by Cary Huang. Get some perspective!

(via freshphotons)

01 6 / 2014

The other day a townie in Ithaca told me I reminded them of the pink power ranger. All my life has led up to that moment. Thank you mysterious CRT volunteer

26 5 / 2014

25 5 / 2014

Graduated from Ithaca College! Dual science degrees (Physics and Environmental Science) and an unofficial degree in adventuring!

13 5 / 2014

"

Q: Girls are discouraged? That sounds so 1970s.

A: There was a 2001 study that showed in fourth grade, 68% of boys and 66% of girls like science. Starting in sixth, seventh and eighth grade, we lose girls and boys, but we lose more girls and for different reasons: lingering stereotypes, societal pressures. It’s well known that many girls have a tendency to dumb down when they’re in middle school. Just last week, I was talking to senior executives, and a woman told me that she was the best biology student in high school and had the highest exam scores. At the end of the semester, a teacher told her: “I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to give the award in biology to a boy, because it’s more important to him.” Almost every time that I give a speech or meet with a group of women, I’ll hear such stories.

Q: Boys earn 70% of the D’s and F’s in school and account for 80% of dropouts. Shouldn’t we fear more for their future?

A: It’s a big problem. Women earn the majority of undergraduate degrees in the U.S. and last year earned more Ph.D.s than men. But keeping girls in the science and math pipeline is a separate problem with different causes. It’s important we address both. You don’t stop research on breast cancer just because heart disease is also deadly. You work on both.

Q: Suppose you were an executive of a corporation that needs engineers. You meet a girl in high school. She scored in the 99th percentile in math on her SATs, yet says she wants to major in psychology or go to law school, because those careers sound more interesting. What do you tell her?

A: I’d introduce her to the coolest female engineer in the company. Girls tend to have a stereotype of engineers being 65-year-old guys who wear lab coats and pocket protectors and look like Einstein. Try to make it personal to them and show them some of the cool things that they can do in engineering.

Q: Let’s talk Lawrence Summers. The Harvard president recently resigned after giving a controversial speech a year ago suggesting that men might simply be predisposed to be better at math and science. Is there at least a grain of truth in what he said?

A: (Laughs). Suppose you came across a woman lying on the street with an elephant sitting on her chest. You notice she is short of breath. Shortness of breath can be a symptom of heart problems. In her case, the much more likely cause is the elephant on her chest.

For a long time, society put obstacles in the way of women who wanted to enter the sciences. That is the elephant. Until the playing field has been leveled and lingering stereotypes are gone, you can’t even ask the question.

Q: I will anyway. There are many obvious biological differences between men and women. This can’t be one?

A: There are obvious differences, but until you eliminate the more obvious cause, it’s difficult to get at the question scientifically. Look at law, medicine and business. In 1970 — that’s not ancient history — law school was 5% female, med school was 8% and business school was 4%. You could have taken a look at those numbers and concluded that women don’t make good lawyers or doctors. The statistics might have supported you. But today, all of those fields are about 50-50.

"

Sally Ride (the first American woman in space) giving awesome answers to insipid questions in this interview.  (via itsawomansworld2)

(via rosie-the-ribbiter)