Quantcast
Channel: Popular Science | RSS
Viewing all 20161 articles
Browse latest View live

The Tech Changing Horse Racing

$
0
0

Ron Garrison/Lexington Herald-Leader via Getty Images

This month, thoroughbred horses will race down the one-mile-long Churchill Downs track in Louisville, Kentucky, for the 140th year. Although the Kentucky Derby is steeped in tradition, horseracing embraces new science and technology.

1) RACE TRACK

While Churchill Downs is dirt, synthetic tracks are becoming popular. One study found that fatal horse injuries dropped by 37 percent on such tracks. Other experts think they may cause more minor injuries, leaving horses open to catastrophic
ones later.

2) LEADERBOARD

The world’s largest 4K screen—roughly the size of three NBA basketball courts—debuts at the Kentucky Derby this year.

3) HORSESHOES

Last fall, Australian scientists shod a racehorse with the first pair of 3-D printed horseshoes. Made from titanium, they’re up to half as light as traditional aluminum shoes and could provide a much better fit. Before 3-D printers take over, though, they’ll need to get faster. The shape of a hoof can change within an hour; printing a shoe currently takes several hours.

4) MASK

Horses born earlier in the year have the advantage of maturity when racing against others in their age bracket. Irish company Equilume designed a new mask to trigger earlier breeding times. The mask shines blue light into a mare’s eye, which tricks her body into thinking it’s already summer. As a result, she produces less melatonin and so prepares for breeding.

 

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.









The 10 Best Things From May 2014

$
0
0

Philips Norelco BeardTrimmer 9100
Meet the first beard trimmer with a laser. You read that correctly. The laser serves as a guide to pre-align the razor for precision and symmetry. $90
Courtesy Philips








Invention Awards 2014: 360-Degree Infrared Vision

$
0
0

Thermal Radar
Photograph by Ralph Smith

Michael Dortch was building video surveillance trailers for industrial parks in Colorado when his clients started asking for near-omniscient views of their properties. They wanted to see intruders in the dark from all angles, but such coverage required up to seven thermal infrared cameras and cost more than $100,000. So Dortch and a colleague spent four years developing a cheaper, more capable alternative. Their Thermal Radar system provides 360-degree infrared coverage that can spot people, fires, vehicles, and more.

The heart of the invention is a single, spinning thermal sensor. Onboard processors constantly stitch images together for a refreshing panoramic video feed, and intelligent software finds threats.

A finished unit will cost about $16,000—many times cheaper than any system that comes close—and should be ready for its debut later this year. The first and biggest market will be corporate security. But the forest service, the Utah Department of Transportation, and even the Pentagon, Dortch says, also have his invention on their radar. 

How It Works:

Warm objects—people, car engines, tires, etc.—emit infrared light.

A spinning camera takes up to 16 thermal images per second, eliminating the need for multiple, expensive cameras.

Software stitches the images together and heat signatures are triangulated with GPS to show their location as a blip on a radar-like applet.

Lead inventors: Michael Dortch, Larry Price

Development cost to date: $3.7 Million

Company: Thermal Imaging Radar LLC

Market maturity:•••••

 

Click here to see a flat bike helmet, a robotic exoskeleton, and more from our 2014 Invention Awards.

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.








Middle Initials Make You Seem Smarter

$
0
0

Medieval Alphabets and Initials
Flickr/Cesar Ojeda

Nobody really knows when middle names came about—the aristocrats, of course, had multiple names first. The choice of the name could be a woman’s maiden name turned into her middle name after marriage, or a perhaps middle name added to a family name to distinguish a person from similarly monikered relatives (I knew a James Charles James the Fourth).

We often only include our first and last names when asked, but a new paper suggests that if you want to seem more intelligent, you should add a middle initial, at least when identifying yourself in writing. Psychologists Wijnand A. P. van Tilburg and Eric R. Igou (ahem) published a paper in the European Journal of Social Psychology that argued, “the display of middle initials increases positive evaluations of people's intellectual capacities and achievements.”

The research investigates how middle initials in names affect the perception of a person by others. The team performed seven experiments to see how the inclusion of middle initials affects a name's perceived social status.

In one study, researchers at the University of Limerick presented 48 university students (12 men and 36 women) with four organizations associated with intellectual performance (e.g., the International Research Council) and four organizations not associated with intellect (e.g., the Karaoke Club). Students indicated whether they expected a person named "David F. P. R. Mitchell" to use his middle initials in these organizations or not; they also rated, on a scale from one to seven, the perceived intelligence of each group's members. Overall, the students were more likely to expect middle initials to be displayed by members of the organizations linked with intelligence.

In another study, participants read a piece of writing by an author whose name was displayed with varying numbers of middle initials (from zero to four). They rated the writing more positively when the author's name included at least one middle initial.

The researchers concluded that a Jane F. P. R. Smith would be "expected to have a higher intellectual capacity and performance, be more admired, respected, and earn more" than your average Jane Smith, as perceived by others.  

Now might be a good time to update your Twitter handle. If you don’t have a middle name, it’s not too late to give yourself one, like journalist Jennifer 8. Lee did for herself. 

[Time








Kill Switches Will Save Your Smartphone

$
0
0

iPhone 5S with iOS 7
Apple

On an otherwise ordinary Saturday, someone grabbed Kristine Swartz’s iPhone from her gym locker. At first she was annoyed—phones are expensive and filing a police report takes time, with little hope of recovery—but then she considered other implications. “There are a lot of details that I didn’t think were revealing until my phone was in someone else’s hands,” she says. Fortunately for her, she could use a new iOS 7 feature, activation lock, to remotely disable her phone. Unfortunately for those without iPhones, activation lock isn’t an option. 

Activation lock is a type of kill switch, a piece of software that allows a phone’s owner to remotely deactivate and wipe a lost device, effectively turning it into a fancy paperweight. Until now, it’s been up to individual smartphone makers to add kill switches to phones. But with smartphone theft on the rise—one estimate puts the spike in New York City at 40 percent since 2012—so is the need for kill switches. In February, U.S. Senators proposed a law that would require manufacturers to include a kill switch on all new phones (California and New York legislators have also proposed similar laws). By destroying the worth of a stolen phone, the law would also destroy any incentive to steal one in the first place. It’s a good idea, but the lawmakers have a fight on their hands.

The mobile-phone industry doesn’t see things the same way. The Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) insists that kill switches aren’t necessary. They assert that users should instead password-protect their handsets and install third-party apps, such as Prey or Cerberus, that offer kill-switch-like functionality. In reality, most people aren’t that careful. According to a Consumer Reports survey, less than half of users set a passcode on their device. For those that do, some of the most-popular PINs are still “1234,” “1111,” and “0000.” Also, two thirds of users prefer to remain logged into any accounts. A lost phone can be a goldmine. 

Less than half of users set a passcode. For those that do, some of the most-popular pins are “1234” and “1111.”

Rather than get behind kill switches, the CTIA, in partnership with the FCC, recently developed its own theft-protection system. The association compiles the unique ID numbers of phones reported as stolen, and the carriers agree to not reactivate phones on the blacklist. That’s certainly better than nothing, but the database only applies to the U.S. and Europe, and a lot of stolen phones end up outside those regions. An iPhone on the black market in Hong Kong, for instance, can fetch $2,000.

So, why does the CTIA—and by extension carriers—oppose a kill switch? Some suggest that it’s a conspiracy to sell insurance. For a nominal monthly fee, users can insure phones against damage or loss; it’s a $7.8 billion business. Discourage theft, and insurance becomes less necessary. The CTIA isn’t commenting on that, but the association does warn that kill switches could open up security threats, in which hackers start killing phones at will. What that argument is missing, though, is a clear incentive for the presumed hackers—you know, like the one that thieves have to target phones right now.  

Update: On April 15, after the publication of this article, the CTIA announced that key players in the mobile phone industry, including major manufacturers and service providers, had made a voluntary commitment to include anti-theft features on handsets.








Reemergence Of Polio Is A Global Health Risk

$
0
0

Polio Immunization In India

As recently as March, the World Health Organization was touting major gains in the battle to eradicate polio: Southeast Asia was deemed polio-free. But meanwhile, in countries like war-torn Syria, the amount of children vaccinated dropped dramatically, and the virus was once again spreading. Today, WHO declared an international health emergency: "If unchecked," according to an emergency committee, "this situation could result in failure to eradicate globally one of the world’s most serious vaccine preventable diseases."

Two years ago, it seemed that the fight to wipe polio off the planet—a feat that has only been accomplished once in history, with smallpox—would be won. But now, WHO is singling out countries where the virus has spread. Cameroon, Pakistan, and Syria will now require major, international efforts to hold the virus at bay, according to the committee:

During the 2014 low transmission season there has already been international spread of wild poliovirus from 3 of the 10 States that are currently infected: in central Asia (from Pakistan to Afghanistan), in the Middle East (Syrian Arab Republic to Iraq) and in Central Africa (Cameroon to Equatorial Guinea).

The number of new cases rose from 223 in 2012 to 417 in 2013, and 60 percent of the new cases in 2013 were in formerly polio-free regions. The virus usually effects children, but a list of WHO recommendations for infected countries suggest all travelers receive a vaccine before visiting. 

Despite major accomplishments like the eradication of the virus in India since WHO first declared war on polio in 1988, this could be a reminder of how precarious the ground we're standing on still is.








Rejuvenating Effect Found In Blood Of Young Mice

$
0
0

Albino lab mouse
Wikimedia Commons
When people speak of the regenerative power of "young blood," they usually mean it metaphorically. But a trio of new studies show that compounds in the blood of young mice can rejuvenate older animals in a number of ways--and suggest that same could possibly apply to humans. In some of the studies, blood from young mice flowed into older ones when their circulatory systems were directly connected; in another study, blood from youngsters, as well as a protein called GDF 11, was injected into elder rodents. In all cases, the older mice showed a number of improvements in health, almost as if they had become young again, as National Geographic reported:

The DNA of old muscle stem cells was repaired; muscle fibers and cell structures called mitochondria morphed into healthier, more youthful versions; grip strength improved; and the mice were able to run on treadmills longer than their untreated counterparts.

The protein used in the study, called GDF11, was already known to reduce age-related heart enlargement, which is characteristic of heart failure. But [Harvard researchers Amy] Wagers said the new work shows that GDF11 has a similar age-reversal effect on other tissue, in particular the skeletal muscle and brain.

"That means that this protein is really acting in somewhat of a coordinating way across tissues," she said , and that drugs could be developed to target a "single common pathway" seen in a variety of age-related dysfunctions, including muscle weakness, neurodegeneration, and heart disease.

The tranfusions also stimulated the growth of neurons in regions of the brain responsible for memory formation and a sense of smell. These mice were better able to distinguish between different odors, and remember how to navigate a maze, reversing declines in these abilities normally seen in the course of again.

But it is reasonable to think this won't be some sort of silver bullet. Here is one important caveat, as noted in the New York Times

But scientists would need to take care in rejuvenating old body parts. Waking up stem cells might lead to their multiplying uncontrollably.

"It is quite possible that it will dramatically increase the incidence of cancer," said Irina M. Conboy, a professor of bioengineering at the University of California, Berkeley. "You have to be careful about overselling it."








IBM's Watson Can Now Argue For You

$
0
0

Watson
IBM

IBM's Watson supercomputer has already mastered Jeopardy! and can even whip up an innovative recipe. Next step: it'll be elected to the presidency after dominating against humans in a series of debates.

The computer's new Debater function is what it sounds like: after being given a topic, Watson will mine millions of Wikipedia articles until it determines the pros and cons of a controversial topic, and will the enumerate the merits of both sides. Argument over. Move along.

Or, maybe not. In the video below you can see a demonstration of the process at 45:25. Watson searches Wikis for the pros and cons of banning the sale of violent videogames to minors. After less than a minute, the computer churns out a few points, but they're conflicting: Watson suggests violent videogames both cause violent acts and that there is not a causal link between violent games and real violence. Which, in fact, is about right. Different studies have come to wildly different conclusions about the correlation between violence in games and violent acts. That's why Watson doesn't yet make value decisions about which side of a debate is "correct," but only lists the points generally brought up by both sides.

So you'll still have to make up your own mind about what's right. (Ugh, I know. Sorry.) But if nothing else, contrarianism just got a lot easier. 

 

 

[Engadget]









How Mountains In Our Solar System Compare [Infographic]

$
0
0

Hawaii's Mauna Kea is a gigantic mountain—but it doesn't quite stack up to some of the other landforms in our solar system. Here's a look at our neighbors' most impressive peaks.

Space Mountains
Lillian Steenblik Hwang

 

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.








App That Finds Stolen iPhones Breeds Homespun Justice

$
0
0

iPhone 5S
Apple
If you lost your very own version of Apple's most iconic mobile device, the aptly-named "Find My iPhone" app can help you find it, and has indeed led thousands of would-be-victims to thieves. But that presents problems. What if they don't want to give it back? 

"It opens up the opportunity for people to take the law into their own hands, and they can get themselves into really deep water if they go to a location where they shouldn’t go," San Francisco district attorney and former police chief George Gascón told the New York Times.

There are many success stories, for example the case of Sarah Maguire, a 26-year-old yoga instructor who tracked her phone to an exurb of Los Angeles and got it back without incident. But cautionary tales also abound. For example the one about a New Jersey umpire who attacked a man on an iPhone, thinking it was his device. (It wasn't.) 

If you've lost your phone, officials recommend contacting the police. It is less advisable, they suggest, to arm yourself with a hammer, as this guy did

All this would be more of less moot with the use of a kill switch, which could render your phone useless to a thief. But debate has sprung up around this issue--the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) insists that kill switches aren’t necessary, as covered yesterday (May 5) in Popular Science.

Over at Digital Trends you'll find six more stories of vigilantes who used "Find My iPhone" to, well, you know. 








Nick Offerman On Why We Should Build Stuff

$
0
0

Nick Offerman
Photograph by F. Scott Schafer

On the TV show Parks and Recreation, Nick Offerman plays the whiskey-quaffing, meat-loving, self-reliant Ron Swanson. He’s also a skilled woodworker who grew up working on a farm in Illinois and got into acting by building sets. “Keeping whatever calluses I can on my hands is an important part of my personality,” he says. Offerman sat down with Popular Science to explain why.

Popular Science: One of our favorite Ron Swanson lines is: “Any moron with a crucible, an acetylene torch, and a cast-iron waffle maker could have done the same.... People who buy things are suckers.” How much have your own interests crept into your TV character?

Nick Offerman: A great deal of Ron is taking aspects of my life and writing them in a cartoony way. I would not have the ability to rip a couple sconces off the wall and hand you a couple wedding rings a half an hour later, but I do make a lot of stuff at my shop. It’s a frequent topic around the writers’ room. The fact that I could make a canoe or a paddle or a jig for flattening wood slabs seems like absolute necromancy to them.

PS: What’s your shop in L.A. like?

NO: I’ve been in here for about 14 years, and four or five woodworkers work with me. They’re always cranking out prototypes—everything from old-fashioned shaving kits to canoe paddles to meat-carving implements. We’ve got one big room with machines where you can pretty much make anything you dream up out of wood. The other room is full of wood slabs. Whether we’re building an enormous dining table or a tiny box for an engagement ring, we come in and look at the big pile of wood.

PS: What do you think of newfangled fabrication tools like 3-D printers?

NO: I think they’re really neat-o. But here at Offerman Woodshop, part of our flavor is that everything is made by hand. I draw the line far beyond a 3-D printer. We won’t even use a cutter jig to cut our dovetail joints. Depending on the intelligence of machinery, to me it’s a liability factor in woodcrafted pieces. Unless you put your hands on every inch of the piece, you don’t know if there might be a flaw.

PS: The Invention Awards celebrate people who build things too, often in their own home or garage workshops. Does woodworking sometimes feel like invention?

NO: I’m astonished by the flat-out smarts of these inventors. They’re in an entirely other league. But one of the things that’s so addictive about woodworking is that it is just a sequence of problem solving: How can I use these tools and these hands and this pencil to turn this stack of tree limbs into a beautiful chest of drawers? It requires a tinkerer’s brain.

PS: A lot of the people who entered our Invention Awards are proud tinkerers, whatever their chosen hobby.

NO: What’s beautiful about the human being is that there are those of us who have a propensity for problem solving. We say, “Okay, this screen door keeps blowing open. How can I most conveniently solve that problem?” The majority of people wouldn’t have the inclination to go into their box of miscellaneous hardware and say, “Here’s a spring, here’s a hinge, here’s a shim—how can I MacGyver these into a solution?”

To propel and steer Lucky Boy, Offerman milled a paddle from a single plank of American cherry and detailed the handle with cocobolo, a tropical hardwood.
Photograph by F. Scott Schafer

PS: Does woodworking have anything in common with acting?

NO: If you take a couple steps back and squint your eyes, you can see some similarities. They both require tools and technique that you want to keep sharpened so they cleave your material as cleanly as you would desire. But one allows you to get your hands much dirtier than the other.

PS: If you could give one piece of shop advice, what would that be?

NO: Generally I find that if I keep my shop neat and organized, I get a lot more done. I work with people building scenery, especially in the theater, that have a very messy shop. That’s part of their vibe. They’re a Pigpen-style whirlwind, and when the dust settles, they’ve built this beautiful throne or whatever it is. But we spend so much time looking through piles of detritus for a 5/8-inch socket. When you know where everything is, it just makes for a much more efficient work system.

PS: One thing you would advise them never to do?

NO: I’d advise people to be wary of time-saving gadgets. Things that generally cost a lot and are simple are that way for a reason.

PS: You’re an accomplished woodworker now, but there must have been a lot of experimentation along the way. How important is it to fail?

NO: It’s incredibly important. My dad taught me that in his basement workshop. When I screwed up my first projects as a seven- or eight-year-old, he said, “That’s good— you can’t learn to do things right any other way than by doing them wrong first.”

PS: What’s your favorite tool?

NO: Probably the spokeshave. It’s so named because it was used to make spokes in the days of the wooden wagon wheel. It’s really satisfying because you can use it to sculpt anything of a certain length or a serpentine shape quite expeditiously.

PS: You posed in a scenario that Norman Rockwell painted as our October 1920 cover. Why did that appeal to you?

NO: It’s because I want my life to resemble a Norman Rockwell painting as much as possible. No matter what happens, I always want to remember that all I need is some space and a table saw and a spokeshave and some friends, and we can make some stuff.

Click here to see a flat bike helmet, a robotic exoskeleton, and more from our 2014 Invention Awards.

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.








Climate Change Already Having Wide-Ranging Effects On U.S., Report Finds

$
0
0

Flooded VW Bug
This car with smashed windows near Avenue C in Manhattan was one of hundreds tossed around and flooded by an unprecedented storm surge.
Dave Mosher
When it comes to climate change, the future is now; it no longer makes sense to (solely) talk about potential impacts in the future, since it is already having a wide range of effects in the United States, according to a large report released today by a group of scientists overseen by the government. Climate change is largely caused by humans, it has already affected you, and will affect you much more in the future, the report suggests. Here are some of the things climate change has already wrought, as the report noted:

Summers are longer and hotter, and extended periods of unusual heat last longer than any living American has ever experienced. Winters are generally shorter and warmer. Rain comes in heavier downpours.

And it gets worse: 

Residents of some coastal cities see their streets flood more regularly during storms and high tides. Inland cities near large rivers also experience more flooding, especially in the Midwest and Northeast... Hotter and drier weather and earlier snow melt mean that wildfires in the West start earlier in the spring, last later into the fall, and burn more acreage.

"Climate change is not a distant threat--it is already effecting every place in the country and key sectors of the economy," said John Holdren, President Barack Obama's senior advisor on science and technology issues, in a conference call today. The report, part of the National Climate Assessment, was presented at the White House, and President Obama planned to spend part of the day outlining some of the findings to weather forecasters. 

The data isn't all new, but this is by far the most wide-ranging report of its kind to date in the U.S., and provides the clearest glimpse yet that humans are causing climate change, and that it has real impacts on real people--from "corn producers in Iowa" to "oyster growers in Washington State and maple syrup producers in Vermont"--along with city-dwellers throughout the U.S. In other words, you should care about this information, unless you don't care about anything. This is the third report of its kind; the last was issued in 2009. 

The most worrisome things that are already happening: sea level rise, drought and high temperatures in the Southwest (and the related issue of wildfires), and extreme downpours, said Jerry Melillo, a researcher at the Marine Biological Laboratory. 

Sea level rise is a particularly thorny issue. According to the report, ocean levels will between one and four feet by 2100, Melillo said, higher than some previous estimates. Cities like Miami, where certain areas regularly flood at high tide, are already grappling with sea level rise, and plan to spend hundreds of millions in mitigation efforts. 

One notable new result: Extreme downpours have increased by as much as 70 percent in the Northeast, as a warmer atmosphere is able to hold more water, said Tom Karl, director of the National Climatic Data Center.

Will this report have any effect on politics? "The Hill is challenging right now, hopefully this information will begin to change some minds up there," Holdren said. 

But by merely informing, it will hopefully help lead people to support efforts to reduce carbon emissions, and projects to mitigate some of these effects, scientists said.

This the first report to provide a comprehensive look at the effects of climate change on the U.S.--a report released in late March by the United Nations, the fifth report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, found that climate change has already harmed hundreds of millions around the world. 








How Humans And Squid Evolved To Have The Same Eyes

$
0
0

Reef Squid
Flickr/actor212

Eyes and wings are among the most stunning innovations evolution has created. Remarkably, these features have evolved multiple times in different lineages of animals. For instance, the avian ancestors of birds and the mammalian ancestors of bats both evolved wings independently, in an example of convergent evolution. The same happened for the eyes of squid and humans. Exactly how such convergent evolution arises is not always clear.

In a new study, published in Nature Scientific Reports, researchers have found that, despite belonging to completely different lineages, humans and squid evolved through tweaks to the same gene.

Eyes are the prize

Like all organs, the eye is the product of many genes working together. The majority of those genes provide information about how to make part of the eye. For example, one gene provides information to construct a light-sensitive pigment. Another gene provides information to make a lens.

Most of the genes involved in making the eye read like a parts list–this gene makes this, and that gene makes that. But some genes orchestrate the construction of the eye. Rather than providing instructions to make an eye part, these genes provide information about where and when parts need to be constructed and assembled. In keeping with their role in controlling the process of eye formation, these genes are called “master control genes”.

The most important of master control genes implicated in making eyes is called Pax6. The ancestral Pax6 gene probably orchestrated the formation of a very simple eye–merely a collection of light-sensing cells working together to inform a primitive organism of when it was out in the open versus in the dark, or in the shade.

Today the legacy of that early Pax6 gene lives on in an incredible diversity of organisms, from birds and bees, to shellfish and whales, from squid to you and me. This means the Pax6 gene predates the evolutionary diversification of these lineages–during the Cambrian period, some 500 million years ago.

The Pax6 gene now directs the formation of an amazing diversity of eye types. Beyond the simple eye, it is responsible for insects' compound eye, which uses a group of many light-sensing parts to construct a full image. It is also responsible for the type of eye we share with our vertebrate kin: camera eye, an enclosed structure with its iris and lens, liquid interior, and image-sensing retina.

In order to create such an elaborate structure, the activities Pax6 controlled became more complex. To accommodate this, evolution increased the number of instructions that arose from a single Pax6 gene.

 

Complex beauty.pacificklaus, CC BY-NC

Making the cut

Like all genes, the Pax6 gene is an instruction written in DNA code. In order for the code to work, the DNA needs to be read and then copied into a different kind of code. The other code is called RNA.

RNA code is interesting in that it can be edited. One kind of editing, called splicing, removes a piece from the middle of the code, and stitches the two ends together. The marvel of splicing is that it can be used to produce two different kinds of instructions from the same piece of RNA code. RNA made from the Pax6 can be spliced in just such a manner. As a consequence, two different kinds of instructions can be generated from the same Pax6 RNA.

In the new study, Atsushi Ogura at the Nagahama Institute of Bio-Science and Technology and colleagues found that Pax6 RNA splicing has been used to create a camera eye in a surprising lineage. It occurs in the lineage that includes squid, cuttlefish, and octopus–the cephalopods.

Cephalopods have a camera eye with the same features as the vertebrate camera eye. Importantly, the cephalopod camera eye arose completely independently from ours. The last common ancestor of cephalopods and vertebrates existed more than 500 million years ago.

Pax6 RNA splicing in cepahlopods is a wonderful demonstration of how evolution fashions equivalent solutions via entirely different routes. Using analogous structures, evolution can provide remarkable innovations.

The Conversation

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.








Invention Awards 2014: A Powerful, Portable, And Affordable Robotic Exoskeleton

$
0
0

Titan Arm
Photo by Marius Bugge
Surviving a stroke or debilitating injury is often the start of a very long ordeal. Physical therapy can be slow and strenuous with no guarantee of recovery. Robotic exoskeletons can sometimes provide the support a ravaged body needs to heal—and strength when it can’t—but they typically cost more than a car and must be anchored to a wall and plugged into a socket.

In late 2012, a team of mechanical engineering students at University of Pennsylvania set out to build a portable, affordable exoskeleton. Two semesters of late nights and long weekends later, Elizabeth Beattie, Nicholas McGill, Nick Parrotta, and Nikolay Vladimirov had the Titan Arm: an efficient, lightweight, and surprisingly powerful robotic limb. Its actuator, or electronic muscle, could provide resistance during therapeutic exercises and can augment strength, allowing its wearer to lift an additional 40 pounds with little effort.

To ensure a slimmer frame than other exoskeletons and make Titan Arm easier for patients to use, the team situated its actuator in a backpack instead of in the limb itself. They also milled load-bearing parts out of aluminum to limit weight and power consumption. McGill, the electronics lead, created a software-and-sensor package to track arm movements and wirelessly relay the data. This would allow a patient to use a Titan Arm at home and a therapist to remotely monitor the exercises.

Potential beneficiaries, including stroke victims and an injured snowboarder, have already reached out to the team with encouraging comments. The positive response to their $2,000 prototype has made Titan Arm’s makers eager to push their invention toward a finished product and, to that end, they are now designing a more refined version. “We’ve been looking at 3-D printing to fully customize components, like tailoring a suit,” says Parrotta. 

1) POWER:

Lithium-polymer battery packs provide a day’s worth of power.

2) MUSCLE:

An electric motor in the backpack winds steel cables to rotate pulleys and induce arm movement. Beattie (left) designed a support system to safely distribute weight across a hip belt, elbow straps, and back plate.

3) BRAINS:

Software reads the positions of magnetic sensors in the steel joints to instruct movement, which the operator controls from a handheld device.

Inventors: Elizabeth Beattie, Nicholas McGill, Nick Parrotta, Nikolay Vladimirov

Development cost to date: $2, 000

Company: N/A

Market Maturity:•••••

 

Click here to see a flat bike helmet, a thermal radar with omniscient view, and more from our 2014 Invention Awards.

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.








Magnetic Brain Stimulation May Trump Drugs For Severe Depression

$
0
0

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
A schematic showing how TMS stimulates the left prefrontal cortex, activating areas deeper in the brain.
Neurostar

Drugs are the most common psychiatric treatment for depression. But about 40 percent of people fail to respond to this first-line of antidepressants. What to do? The answer to date has often been more and different drugs. 

But transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), a technique that can revive activity in neurons in the brain's prefrontal cortex using an electromagnet, has been receiving more attention as a possible treatment for these stubborn cases of depression. In 2008, the FDA approved TMS for this purpose. Data since that point has been promising, but questions remain: How does it compare to antidepressant drugs? Is it cost-effective? 

Research presented today (May 6) at the American Psychiatric Association's annual meeting in New York suggests that the technique is perhaps better than previously thought. In the study, the researchers compared two groups: those who had received TMS after failing to respond to drugs, and those who were given new antidepressants after not getting better on prior meds. The finding: 53 percent of those receiving TMS had no or mild depression after six weeks of treatment, compared with 38 percent taking a new or augmented type of antidepressant. 

The study also looked at the economics. It found that TMS therapy would cost about $1,000 per patient per year, which is considered quite affordable, according to study co-author Kit Simpson, an economist at the Medical University of South Carolina. Over the course of two years, TMS would actually become more affordable than the current default of additional rounds of drug therapy, said Dr. Mark Demitrack, a study co-author and chief medical officer of Neuronetics, which makes a widely-used type of TMS called the NeuroStar TMS Therapy System.

The data seems to suggest that TMS 'might be more effective than drugs.'

The results show the technique is better than drugs for this type of depression, Dr. Demitrack told Popular Science.

"Until now there has been a lot of research showing its efficacy but mostly compared to placebo, not other treatments," said Paul Fitzgerald, a researcher at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, who wasn't involved in the study. "It is clearly very safe, better tolerated than medication and now the data seems to suggest that it might be more effective."

But there are some caveats. It should first be noted that this was not was not a randomly-assigned, placebo-blind study, the gold standard in gauging how effective treatments are, said Dr. Philip Janicak, at Rush University, who wasn't involved in the research. Rather, it compared two different groups of patients. The first group consisted of 307 patients who were treated with TMS at 42 clinics throughout the U.S., after failing to respond to drugs. The second group, or rather second pool of data, was taken from a previous nationwide study, completed in 2006, of patients who were given new antidepressant medications after failing to respond to previous drug therapy. The patients in the latter group were chosen to match the former group as closely as possible, on measures such as sex, age, severity of illness, etc. 

Another factor to consider is that most (about 90 percent) of the patients receiving TMS were still taking their old antidepressants, Dr. Janicak added. 

That said, Dr. Janicak has been treating patients with TMS for 15 years, and has seen the technique turn around people's lives. "I have to say I am amazed... we are seeing very significant improvements in these patients," he told Popular Science. Dr. Janicak's work has shown that about 55 to 60 percent of patients who have failed to respond to antidepressants respond to this technique, and see at least a 50 percent improvement in measures of their depression. About 35 percent of those patients have "remitted," with enormous reductions in measures of depression, and some are no longer clinically depressed.

In TCM therapy, an electromagnet is applied to the left side of the forehead. This induces currents in neurons in the left prefrontal cortex--where brain imaging studies have shown a deficit in activity in depressed patients. It is thought that this can induce activity and blood flow to this area, but also causes changes in areas deeper in the brain (responsible for mood regulation) to which neurons in the cortex connect. Side effects of TCM tend to be mild, especially compared to antidepressants, and the most common complaint is a mild headache, Simpson said.

Exactly how TCM works is a mystery, Dr. Janicak said. But the same can be said of antidepressants, he added. 









The Conspiracy Theorist Who Duped The World's Biggest Physicists

$
0
0

Geocentric Model
Wikimedia Commons

In December, the trailer for a star-studded new documentary about the universe was uploaded to YouTube. "Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong," promised Kate Mulgrew, who played Captain Kathryn Janeway Star Trek: Voyager and, more recently, Galina "Red" Reznikov on the Netflix series Orange is the New Black. "There is a crisis in cosmology," said physicist Michio Kaku. What crisis?

"You can go on some websites about NASA and see that they've started to take down stuff that might hint at a geocentric universe," the trailer continued, as we heard from Robert Sungenis, proprietor of the perhaps unsubtly titled blog Galileo Was Wrong, geocentrist, and Holocaust denier.

The film, called The Principle, promotes the long, long-debunked idea that the Earth is the center of the universe. When it started getting attention in April, Raw Story, Slate, the Washington Times, the Huffington Post, and countless others wrote about the film. It was a hit, for all the wrong reasons.

The Principle and its premise were almost instantaneously disavowed, even by the people appearing in it. Lawrence Krauss, one of the physicists in the film, wrote an article for Slate saying he had no idea how he'd ended up in the film:

I have no recollection of being interviewed for such a film, and of course had I known of its premise I would have refused. So, either the producers used clips of me that were in the public domain, or they bought them from other production companies that I may have given some rights to distribute my interviews to, or they may have interviewed me under false pretenses, in which case I probably signed some release. I simply don't know.

Meanwhile, Mulgrew, the film's narrator, issued a statement through Facebook that also tore down the trailer. "I was a voice for hire, and a misinformed one, at that," she wrote. "I apologize for any confusion that my voice on this trailer may have caused."

But questions lingered. Did the filmmakers truly believe the Earth was the center of the universe? Who were these people, anyway?

* * *

My own search started with Cosmos.

"The Principle" features narration by Kate Mulgrew ("Star Trek Voyager", "Orange Is The New Black", and "Ryan's Hope"), stunning animations by BUF Compagnie Paris ("Life of Pi", "Thor"), and commentary from prominent scientists including George Ellis, Michio Kaku, Julian Barbour, Lawrence Krauss, and Max Tegmark.

The production company that did the animations for The Principle, BUF Compagnie Paris, also works on the newly rebooted Cosmos series, starring astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. (For the record, I did reach out to a Cosmos representative about this, but never heard back.)

"They cleverly tricked a whole bunch of us scientists into thinking that they were independent filmmakers doing an ordinary cosmology documentary."If the actors in the documentary hadn't been fully apprised of the film's thesis, it seemed reasonable to think the special effects company hadn't, either. I called the company's Los Angeles branch. Yes, I was told, BUF worked closely on the film with the film's producer, Rick DeLano, and even "were involved in some of the cut just on a friendship basis." Robert Schajer, the Los Angeles visual effects producer for The Principle, told me he was under a non-disclosure agreement but would be more than happy to speak generally about the film.

"Both Cosmos and The Principle came out of our work on Thor," he told me. DeLano, he said, had been nothing but supportive through the process -- complimenting the company's work, going so far as to show it off to others. I asked Schajer if he'd seen the trailer for the film, and he told me he hadn't. Was he at least aware of the film's thesis? That the Earth is actually the center of the universe?

He sounded taken aback. We were toeing into the conditions of the NDA, he said; any details of the exact work BUF did, he couldn't comment on. He did say, though, that the company only worked as a "hired gun," regardless of the content in a film they contributed to. Beyond that, his lips were sewed shut -- although he could introduce me to DeLano, who might be able to help more.

* * *

"I want you to put the first feather in your cap right now," DeLano told me when I called him. After "thousands and thousands of blogs," had written about The Principle, after "millions of hits," he said, I was the first one to talk to him directly. "So, feather in your cap."

DeLano sounded furious. All of these so-called journalists writing, telling him about his own film, as if they knew what it was about based on the trailer on YouTube. They hadn't the faintest idea about The Principle. Only an anointed group had even seen the final cut. Clearly "a profoundly impressive power" had colluded in a massive media effort to kill the film. "Somebody's very scared of my movie," he said.

"The film is not about geocentrism," DeLano told me flatly. Rather, it's about the Copernican principle -- Copernicus's idea that the Earth doesn't occupy a cosmically special place in the universe. DeLano then took me on a circuitous talk -- through dark matter, through Galileo, through the cosmic microwave background -- before landing on his thesis: "The fact of the matter is we don't know whether the universe has a center," he said, "but we can obseeeeeeeerve through a telescope that there is a center and guess who's sitting at the center of it -- us." His favorite phrase, employed whenever I failed to understand or follow, was, "Do your homework."

"These are facts, Colin. They're in my film," he said. "These facts are so shocking that somebody very important has tried to take this film out."

Why, I asked, had the scientists he'd interviewed readily disavowed the film after the trailer got attention?

"Scientist," he corrected. "No s. Do your homework."

He was right. At that point, only one scientist who appeared in the trailer had issued a statement: Lawrence Krauss, a well-respected, media-friendly professor of theoretical physics and cosmology at Arizona State University. Even though he denounced The Principle in no uncertain terms -- he calls it "nonsense" -- he wrote that he was unsure if he'd been interviewed directly by the Principle filmmakers, who'd then engaged in some creative editing, or if they had taken the footage from somewhere else. DeLano had an answer for that: Krauss had willingly been interviewed and signed a release for the film. I told DeLano I'd love to see that release. "Oh, I'm sure you would," he said, but he wasn't ready to tip his hand yet.

"The fact of the matter is we don't know whether the universe has a center, but we can observe through a telescope that there is a center, and guess who's sitting at the center of it—us."As we talked on the phone, he mentioned photons and preferred directions in space; the cosmic microwave background and its implications for the universe; the Copernican principle and its unresolved problems; satellites, equinoxes, and orbital motion. He'd talk about the "worldwide disinformation campaign" meant to discredit him and his film. He'd show me his evidence and become frustrated when I couldn't share his excitement, when I couldn't quite see how he hoped to blow the world's collective noggin. He said he could prove what, according to him, Krauss really thought. He told me to look up an article, and read aloud a certain paragraph, apparently a quote from Krauss. It ends like this:

We're looking out at the whole universe. There's no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun -- the plane of the earth around the sun -- the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.

There was a pause. "Do you have any idea what you just read?" DeLano asked me. I didn't respond.

But the conversation had turned. By the time I asked how he'd funded his film -- a question he immediately dismissed as irrelevant -- he was ready to hang up.

"Was it what you expected?" he asked me, talking about himself. 

"Partially, it was."

"I can certainly say the sentiment was fully reciprocated." (Pause.) "Have a great day, Colin."

"Thanks. You too."

* * *

I did do more homework after our talk, as was commanded of me. Here's what I learned about DeLano.

He's the proprietor of a blog, Magisterial Fundies, which focuses on his theories, and The Principle specifically. He spars with detractors who've taken to other blogs to debunk geocentrism. He posts about recent -- and legitimate -- scientific discoveries, then uses them to bolster his ideas, which, after reading more of the blog, take on a Catholic hue. (Despite distancing himself from the term "geocentrism" in our interview, it crops up regularly in his writing.) Here's a characteristic snippet from Magisterial Fundies:

The evidence is astonishing, and rapidly mounting, that the Copernican Principle- the foundational metaphysical assumption about reality which lies at the foundation of our modern scientific world view- is wrong.

It does not adequately express the reality we observe around us.

Does this, in itself, prove geocentrism is true?

No.

It does not.

It does, however, establish that the ancient Catholic cosmology is, in important ways, a more truthful representation of reality, of the way things really are, than is the current Big Bang scientific creation myth.

Go back far enough in the blog's archives, and you find political opinions, frequently about gay marriage: "May I say that the incredibly disoriented, intellectually and morally weak voters of Maryland, of Washington, of Maine, and of Minnesota, have contemptibly surrendered their children to indoctrination in radical homosexualist propaganda."

The About section on the blog shows a small, pixelated photo of a man -- DeLano, presumably. You can only barely make out bushy eyebrows, a suit jacket, and a smile.

Sometimes he's effusive, as when I spoke to him; you can find him on YouTube, excitedly pacing, camera struggling to catch up. But he can be less energetic, too. Chatting about The Principle on what appears to be a Catholic radio show, he lays out what's, to his mind, the crisis in modern science: "We are finding evidence that we are in a special, non-Copernican position." The interviewer asks about the scientists he interviewed, if they're in the mainstream. "I purposely set out to include as many of the big names as I could get, and also some mavericks, and also some flat-out radicals," he says. You get the sense, based on how he refers to The Principle -- always as "my film" -- and the fact that he apparently orchestrated the interviews and, assuming they exist, any waivers, that he believes it's mostly the result of his effort, whether that's true or not. (DeLano says Sungenis is the executive producer of the film.)

 

 

Along with Krauss, at least two of the mainstream scientists who appear in the film aren't so happy about it. Max Tegmark, a brilliant MIT cosmologist and science communicator, is spoken of admiringly by DeLano in the radio show. When I asked about his appearance in the film, Tegmark emailed: "They cleverly tricked a whole bunch of us scientists into thinking that they were independent filmmakers doing an ordinary cosmology documentary, without mentioning anything about their hidden agenda or that people like Sungenis were involved." Ditto for South African mathematician and cosmologist George Ellis, a well-respected professor at the University of Cape Town who wrote The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time with Stephen Hawking. "I was interviewed for it but they did not disclose this agenda, which of course is nonsense," he wrote me. "I don't think it's worth responding to -- it just gives them publicity. To ignore is the best policy. But for the record, I totally disavow that silly agenda."

DeLano isn't alone in his beliefs. Multiple blogs are dedicated togeocentrism, as well as to debunking the idea. In a Chicago Tribune article from 2011, meekly titled "Some Catholics seek to counter Galileo," Sungenis is quoted as saying, "False information leads to false ideas, and false ideas lead to illicit and immoral actions -- thus the state of the world today. ... Prior to Galileo, the church was in full command of the world; and governments and academia were subservient to her."

Court records for DeLano turned up one unexpected hit: In 2002, a Rick DeLano was listed as a defendant in a $10 million suit alleging he and others had participated in a scheme to misrepresent stock in internet companies. "Defendants Perlman, DeLano, and Levy introduced Plaintiff to several individuals whom they claimed were officers and directors of these fifty-four companies ('Companies'). Plaintiff alleges that these representations were intentionally and willfully misleading," according to the records. In the suit, DeLano is listed as a California resident; his current phone number has an area code that puts him in California, too, which would also go some way toward explaining his relationship with the film production company. The case settled for an undisclosed amount.

* * *

The week after Easter, I called him again, and though he didn't answer the first time, he eagerly returned my call. Compared to the last time we spoke, he was lucid and forthcoming, willing to expand on his theories and his film. He told me he was determining "who the fair-minded media contacts are," and would divulge new information to them accordingly, perhaps even let them interview the director. He clarified that the goal of the film, in his view, was to consider geocentrism as one competing theory among many. When I asked if the film fully discounted geocentrism, he told me: "Of course not. That would be a lie."

But when I asked what he could tell me about the company listed in the lawsuit I had turned up, the chat suddenly bottomed out. "That would have nothing to do with my film and I think this conversation is over," he said. "Thank you very much."

Then -- click -- we were done.

* * *

Despite its absurdity, the mere fact that DeLano, Sungenis, and the rest of their crew were able to fund and execute a slickly produced film, and to cajole famous physicists to sit and chat for it, makes the geocentrist fringe startlingly real: people who believe in these ideas not only exist, but have the wherewithal to make a movie. There's nothing simple about producing a film, much less one with some of the most technically-minded people on the planet. In DeLano's case, he is (or at least was) apparently steadily employed, eventually on chummy terms with a respected production company, and seems intimately familiar with science, even though his interpretations of it are a minority view, to put it charitably. If the film is absurd (it surely is), its creation was something clear-eyed, thought through.

Why did the creators bother to make the film if they realized that the respected scientists appearing would immediately denounce it? There's the chance they didn't expect the denouncements, but that seems unlikely. Another possibility, suggested by DeLano's initial eagerness to talk to me, was that the establishment backlash had been part of the plan all along. Surely The Principle, after those countless media reports -- including this one -- is in a better position than it was before, even if potential viewers check it out only for novelty's sake. Even if it's fleeting, being the center of the universe has its perks.








This Plastic Is Made Of Shrimp Shells

$
0
0

Shrimp
Shrimps shells could be used to make bioplastic.
US Government / Wikimedia commons

There ain't no reason why we can't replace plastic with something biodegradable. Here's one option: a material called shrilk. It is made from a chemical in shrimp shells called chitosan, a version of chitin--the second-most abundant organic material on the planet, found in fungal cells, insect exoskeletons, and butterfly wings.

Researchers at Harvard's Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering said the material could be relatively easily manufactured in mass quantities and used to make large 3D objects. The material breaks down within a "few weeks" of being thrown away, and provides nutrients for plants, according to a statement

Chitosan can be obtained from shrimp shells, which are usually discarded, but also used to manufacture makeup and fertilizer. Fortunately, people with shellfish allergies don't seem to react to chitosan, according to a study of chitosan-coated bandages. 

Plastic from table scraps? Count me in. And somebody tell that guy in The Graduate. The technology is further discussed in a study in the journal Macromolecular Materials & Engineering








The First Lawn Mower That Sits Upright

$
0
0

Toro Recycler with SmartStow
Photography by Brian Klutch

A lawn mower takes up more than its fair share of garage space, especially considering how infrequently most homeowners use it. Now there’s one you can tuck neatly into a corner. The Recycler is the first mower with a leak-free engine, which enables it to fold and store upright. To pull that off, Toro engineers reconfigured the fuel tank’s shape, designed a weep-free carburetor, and built new gaskets and caps for the oil-fill tube and air cleaner.

Toro Recycler with SmartStow

Footprint: 1.9 x 1.5 feet

Footprint of a typical mower: 1.9 x 5 feet

Price: $369

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.








'Chameleon' Vine Looks Like Whatever Tree It Climbs

$
0
0

Boquila Vines (red arrows) mimicking two different tree leaves (blue arrows)
Courtesy E. Gianoliemail, F. Carrasco-Urra via Current Biology

Chameleons aren’t the only species that excel at mimicry, as biology professor Ernesto Gianoli discovered in Chile’s temperate rainforests.

The woody vine Boquila trifoliolata, Boquila for short, is a climbing plant, and has the abilities to mimic the leaves of its supporting trees, as detailed by Gianoli and his student Fernando Carrasco-Urra in their paper

Gianoli first came across the Boquila vine when he abandoned his usual rigorous schedule of fieldwork that day and opted for a slow observational walk: he saw two different stems—one much thinner—whose leaves were the exact same, and realized while the thinner stem was actually a Boquila vine in disguise, its leaves were the same as its neighbor, National Geographic reported.

Further research shed light on just how good a mimic the vines are. They can match the nearest leaves in terms of size, shape, color, and orientation, and even grow a spiny tip when they're next to spine-tipped leaves. And a single strand of Boquila vine can copy several different leaves as it climbs from plant to plant.

“Even orchids, the world’s best known plant mimics, just mimic one specific model, or just share the general appearance of several similar flowers,” says Anne Gaskett from the University of Auckland. “This vine seems to mimic many specific models, depending on its host—something we’ve previously only seen in animals.”

How does the vine mimic their host trees without any contact? Carrasco-Urra and Gianoli have several hypotheses. The vine might be sensing airborne chemicals released by the trees to help it choose what disguise to adopt. Or the vine might be borrowing and using genes from its host trees—which would explain why it mimics the nearest leaf, even if the leaf is not from the tree the vine is climbing on. Gianoli’s team is investigating the mysterious Boquila further.

[National Geographic]  








Good Idea/Bad Idea: Use A Stun Gun To...

$
0
0

Good Idea: Lift Fingerprints

On a hunch, crime scene investigator Richard Warrington, now retired, found a new way to fight crime with a stun gun: lifting prints. Warrington’s hack involves placing a sheet of sun-blocking film over a freshly dusted print. He attaches the loose end of a wired probe to one outer contact of a stun gun. While holding the wire’s probe one quarter inch above the film, he turns on the gun and slowly guides the electricity-shooting probe around the perimeter of the film, electrostatically charging it. Then Warrington turns off the gun, waits 10 to 15 seconds, and glides a foam brush across the film’s surface to attract a reverse image of the print for forensic analysis.

Bad Idea: Remove Poison From Wounds

For two decades, survivalist forums and even some doctors have recommended shocking snake and spider bite wounds to neutralize venom. Science says this idea bites: You’re most likely to get burned—and remain poisoned.

WARNING: Stun guns are very dangerous, so try the "good idea" at your own risk. And by "bad idea," we mean never attempt it! 

This article originally appeared in the May 2014 issue of Popular Science.

 








Viewing all 20161 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images