Science

Goggle Up! Science is about to happen…

Scientific explanation for those interested:

For the benefit of the wider science community, I thought I would explain the basic principles behind this video. The electric fence used was a pulse electric fence. It shoots an electric pulse every few seconds. Note the first in line is holding the electric fence for the entire duration of the film. He is standing on plastic which is an insulator, therefore the electric current couldn’t travel through the plastic into the ground so it just keeps going down the wire and not into the human chain. However, when the last in line takes of his shoes, it means the electricity can run right through the chain through his feet and into the ground. I have heard from other sources that the closer you are to the end of the line the more resistance you cause and therefore get the greatest shock. Poor guy! 🙂 Hope that helps!

Debating the futility of war with a member of the military is pointless — it could also earn you a punch in the mouth for your troubles. A large-scale UK study has found young men who have served in the Armed Forces are three times more likely to commit violent crimes compared to their civilian counterparts.

What’s interesting is that the psychological effects of active combat are only partly responsible: put simply, many of these men were aggressively violent to begin with.

Researchers at King’s College London studied the police records of 13,856 randomly selected serving and ex-serving UK military personnel who had been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The study found that 20.7 percent of servicemen under 30 years old had been convicted of a violent crime; compared to 6.7 percent of male civilians in the same age bracket.

Men with direct combat exposure were also 53 percent more likely to commit a violent offence than men serving in a non-combat role.

Curiously, despite committing a higher number of violent crimes, military men were otherwise more law-abiding than the general population — the study found that when all offence categories were lumped together, ex-soldiers had a lower overall crime rate — via redwolf.newsvine.com

Access to steady supplies of clean water is getting more and more difficult in the developing world, especially as demand skyrockets. In response, many countries have turned to the sea for potable fluids but existing reverse osmosis plants rely on complicated processes that are expensive and energy-intensive to operate.

Good thing, engineers at Lockheed Martin have just announced a newly-developed salt filter that could reduce desalination energy costs by 99 percent.

The Reverse Osmosis process works on a simple principle: molecules within a liquid will flow across a semi-permeable membrane from areas of higher concentration to lower until both sides reach an equilibrium. But that same membrane can act as a filter for large molecules and ions if outside pressure is applied to one side of the system. For desalination, the process typically employs a sheet of thin-film composite (TFC) membrane which is made from an active thin-film layer of polyimide stacked on a porous layer of polysulfone. The problem with these membranes is that their thickness requires the presence of large amounts of pressure (and energy) to press water through them.

Lockheed Martin’s Perforene, on the other hand, is made from single atom-thick sheets of graphene. Because the sheets are so thin, water flows through them far more easily than through a conventional TFC. Filters made through the Perforene process would incorporate filtering holes just 100nm in diameter — large enough to let water molecules through but small enough to capture dissolved salts. It looks a bit like chicken wire when viewed under a microscope, John Stetson, the Lockheed engineer credited with its invention, told Reuters. But kilo for kilo, its 1000 times stronger than steel — via redwolf.newsvine.com

When you think of naturalists, you probably think about people in green cargo pants traipsing about in the forest, writing down notes and catching bugs. But being a naturalist can be extremely dangerous. At Strange Behaviours, a couple years back Richard Conniff started collecting stories about naturalists who lost their lives on the job. He writes:

We go to great lengths commemorating soldiers who have died fighting wars for their countries.  Why not do the same for the naturalists who still sometimes give up everything in the effort to understand life?  Neither would diminish the sacrifice of the other.  In fact, many early naturalists were also soldiers, or, like Charles Darwin aboard HMS Beagle, were embedded with military expeditions.

So he made that list, which you can find here. Many of these naturalists were murdered by people in the regions they were working. Others died of horrible diseases. And still others lost their lives to their research subjects themselves. People like:

Abe, Takuya (1945-2000)  termite ecologist at Kyoto University, drowned, age 55, when their small boat was caught in a storm during an expedition on the Sea of Cortez.

Bassignani, Filippo (1967?-2006), Italian zoologist and lover of travel, large mammals, and the conservation of nature, died age 39, on a trip to Mozambique, after being charged by an elephant that had been wounded by poachers.

Bossuyt, Francis J (1970-2000), University of California at Davis animal behaviorist, disappeared while bathing in the lake at Cocha Cashua Biological Station in Peru, age 30.  Colleagues found only his shoes and towel on the dock; he was possibly taken by a caiman.

Brown, Kirsty M (1974-2003), marine biologist with the British Antarctic Survey, drowned, age 29, when attacked while snorkelling and dragged 200 feet underwater by a leopard seal.

Douglas, David (1799–1834), Scottish botanist and explorer, said to be the greatest plant collector ever, died age 35, on falling into a pit trap already occupied by a bull, in Hawaii.

York, Eric (1970-2007) biologist killed, age 37, by pneumonic plague after autopsying a mountain lion in the Grand Canyon.

— via redwolf.newsvine.com