Category: Science

Who shows up for experiments?

Peer nominations of pathological personality traits were collected on
1442 freshmen participating in a study regarding personality and 283
students who initially provided consent to participate but failed to
show up for the assessment.  Ten peer-based personality disorder scales
and eight IIP-64 scales were entered into two separate multiple
logistic regression procedures to predict the probability of
nonparticipation.  There was a significantly higher probability of
participation if peers nominated someone as having more histrionic,
obsessive–compulsive, self-sacrificing, and intrusive/needy
characteristics.  Students were significantly less likely to participate
if peers nominated them as being higher on narcissism or
non-assertiveness.  Results suggest it may be more difficult to obtain
sufficient numbers of people high in narcissistic traits than
individuals with other personality traits.  Researchers may need to
employ novel strategies to recruit individuals with narcissistic traits
for experimental studies.

By the way, I’ve never showed up for any experiments.  I would think the procedure also discriminates against the anti-social, a trait which may be to some extent correlated with narcissism.

The link is from BPS Digest, which also informs us that people born in late winter are smarter; I can only imagine how smart tall, left-handed people, born in late winter [alas, I am not tall], must be…

In a nutshell, mentors:

The most common response to the question ‘What inspired you to take up science?’ – given by respondents including Dr Colin Berry, Peter Cochrane, Jorge Mayer, Simon Singh and Christopher Llewellyn Smith – is that they were inspired by teachers or mentors. Typical of such reponses are Alom Shaha‘s description of ‘gifted teachers, whose enthusiasm for their subjects was relentless and infectious’, and Michael Wilson‘s account of ‘inspirational and rigorous teachers in high school, who engendered an insatiable intellectual hunger for factual knowledge, and who encouraged observation and deductive thinking’.

Survey respondents often point to one or two particular individuals who made a lasting impact. Josef Penninger, for instance, was inspired by ‘a great mentor and teacher’, and argues that ‘most of us became what we became because of one dominating person, who moved us into a certain direction’. Frances Downey, James Enstrom, Pat Norris, John Zarnecki and Anton Zeilinger describe inspirational mathematics and physics teachers, Thomas Addiscott and Eliot Forster discuss inspirational chemistry teachers, and Kenneth Freeman had ‘a very capable and very overworked teacher’ who taught him mathematics, physics and chemistry. Meanwhile, Professor Sir Colin Berry, Keith Davies and William Ledger found inspiration in their biology teachers.

Here is much more, via www.politicaltheory.info.  Here is the answer of Sophie Petit-Zeman: falling in love with the teacher.

“How tall your parents are compared to the average height explains
80 to 90 percent of how tall you are compared to the average person,”
Dr. Vaupel said. But “only 3 percent of how long you live compared to
the average person can be explained by how long your parents lived.”

“You
really learn very little about your own life span from your parents’
life spans,” Dr. Vaupel said. “That’s what the evidence shows. Even
twins, identical twins, die at different times.” On average, he said,
more than 10 years apart.

Here is the full story, which is interesting throughout.  But of course the day is young, and I haven’t seen Bryan, Robin [Hanson], and Alex yet…

Some of the Irish claim to have invented a perpetual motion machine. 

As a young child I read this was impossible, but frankly I’ve long been convinced of the contrary.  The universe itself seemed like a counterexample.  It goes and goes and goes and goes.  Lots of stuff happens.  Stars explode, galaxies crash, planets get downgraded, etc.  Where does a vacuum get its energy from anyway?  And isn’t the "cosmological constant" a big free push?

Now perhaps our universe is not truly "perpetual."  Or perhaps it involves "no net expenditure of energy."  I’ve heard it called "a free lunch," through some kind of quantum effect and subsequent inflation. 

But still, the universe, as a perpetual motion machine, seems to me like a good enough version of what people have been looking for.  (Imagine your venture capital pitch: "Well, it’s not as Big or as Important as The Universe, but it does operate according to the same physical laws…")  The universe was produced by some process, and perhaps a smaller and more local version of the idea is possible.  Or does it come only in one size?  Well…I’d better stop before I make any more scientific blunders…

I can’t get over the idea there is a free lunch floating around out there.  Perhaps I read too much Julian Simon in my formative years.

Addendum: Here are the seven warning signs of bogus science.

New mothers lose an average of seven hundred hours of sleep in the first year postpartum.

…In one study, mother rats were given the opportunity to press a bar and get a squirt of cocaine or press a bar and get a rat pup to suck their nipples…Those oxytocin squirts in the brain outscored a snort of cocaine every time.

Both are from the new and noteworthy The Female Brain, by Louann Brizendine.  Here is a very brief (and somewhat skewed in the direction of politically correct) summary.  Here is more.  Here is a Deborah Tannen review.

There are way way way too many books on gender differences.  Most of them just string together the usual well-known templates, but I read every page of this one with interest.  The best parts focus on the role of hormones.

Not everyone will appreciate the punchy style — "There’s a new reality brewing in Sylvia’s brain, and it’s a take-no-prisoners view" — but everyone who wants to marry or have kids should read this book.

In rural Hindu villages in India…widows are expected
to be perpetual mourners, austere in their habits, appetites and dress;
even so, they often jockey for position, said Richard A. Shweder, an
anthropologist in the department of comparative human development at
the University of Chicago.

“Many
compete for who is most pure,” Dr. Shweder said.  “They say, ‘I don’t
eat fish, I don’t eat eggs, I don’t even walk into someone’s house who
has eaten meat.’  It’s a natural kind of social comparison.”

The article focuses on the psychology of fame-seeking.

In one experiment, experts in karate, boxing, kung fu, and tae kwon do all took turns striking the dummy in the face.

The researchers were surprised to find that boxing is the fighting style capable of delivering the most force in a single punch.

Boxer Steve Petramale delivered about 1,000 pounds (453.6 kilograms) of impact force, the equivalent of swinging a sledgehammer into someone’s face…

The tae kwon do spinning back kick delivered more than 1,500 pounds (680.4 kilograms) of force, while the kung fu flying double kick produced about 1,000 pounds (453.6 kilograms) of force.

But the undisputed winner practices a discipline known for its ability to deliver a knockout: Muay Thai, also known as Thai boxing. 

Melchor Menor, a former two-time Muay Thai world champion, uses a simple technique to incapacitate his opponents: a knee to the chest at close quarters [TC: I guess that doesn’t count as a "punch"  Oh well.].

Menor himself was surprised at how powerful this move can be.

"I wasn’t expecting to have the highest force. When he said the power of the knee [kick] was equal to the power of a 35-mile-an-hour [56.3-kilometer-an-hour] car crash, it was humbling."

It also turns out that a kung fu punch is as fast as a snake.  Who would have known?  Here is the full story, which perhaps explains why I prefer tennis.

Here is the list, courtesy of GeekPress.  But they are not trying very hard.  Here is one candidate:

3. Superfluid space-time

One of the most outlandish new theories of cosmology is that space-time is actually a superfluid substance, flowing with zero friction. Then if the universe is rotating, superfluid spacetime would be scattered with vortices, according to physicists Pawel Mazur of the University of South Carolina and George Chapline at Lawrence Livermore lab in California – and those vortices might have seeded structures such as galaxies. Mazur suggests that our universe might have been born in a collapsing star, where the combination of stellar matter and superfluid space could spawn dark energy, the repulsive force that is accelerating the universe.

Duh!  That’s not weird at all.  My favorite weird cosmology is missing from the list: time is an illusion, all possible universes exist, and that includes many universes with false memories and traces of a supposedly distant past.

Then there is always "elephants all the way down…"

There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it’s only a hundred billion. It’s less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.

Richard Feynman, physicist, Nobel laureate (1918-1988)

Here is the source.  Here is a video of Feynman.

The air conditioner is one of them.  Count inadequate sleep and medications as well.  Michael Blowhard piles on.

Here’s a sentence you don’t read very often.

Radioactive scorpion venom a safe cancer cure.

and this was pretty cool:

Bacteria made to sprout conducting nanowires.

Hat tip to Boing Boing Blog.

1. Here is the story.

2. Your English is better than you think.  But on incorrect uses of "hopefully" I will not cede ground.

3. Some books do better in paperback.

4. A Delta list of best barbecue restaurants, based on reader input, via Bob Lawson.  The Virginia selections are weak plus they left off Lockhart, Texas altogether.  It is a better list for the South proper.

5. Jane Galt on deficits, and also on "unfair competition," do go send her some compliments in return…

6. Gorbachev on Bush and Putin.

Take The Big Here Quiz, via Jason Kottke.  I got about five right out of thirty-four.