Human Body

Watched a very moving BBC short on human physiology. My words can't do it justice, so I suggest you experience it yourself.

Fossilized Rain Drops!

Today I read an intriguing study about fossilized rain drop impressions and how they can be used to measure earth's atmospheric pressure 2.7 billion years ago!

(Image: Verrisimilus/CC BY-SA 3.0)

Firstly, it is pretty amazing that something as delicate as a rain drop impression can fossilize and survive for 2.7 billion years! All you need are perfect conditions - ground is covered with a fresh covering of volcanic ash and rainfall is not too heavy or too light but just the right size. The impressions may then harden into into stone, preserving them for present day scientists.

The second and more beautiful aspect is the implication. It turns out that size of a rain drop is strongly correlated with surface tension, force of gravity, and most importantly atmospheric pressure. By careful measurement of the indentations and some simulation, the atmospheric pressure seen by the earliest microbial lifeforms can be extracted. The value of atmospheric pressure is also useful to extract the amount of insolation the young earth received.

While geologists did have some idea about the gas composition of the ancient atmosphere, before this study almost nothing was known about the pressure. The full paper is under peer-review.

Immortal Game

Recently I have picked up Chess with mild enthusiasm. I have started learning about all the standard openings: Roy Lupez, Sicilian defence, King's Gambit, etc. Caught up on the history of the game, e.g. did you know that Chess comes from an ancient Indian game of caturaṅga(Sanskrit: four divisions [of the military] – infantry, cavalry, elephants, and chariotry, represented by the pieces that would evolve into the modern pawn, knight, bishop, and rook, respectively)?

Looking at historical games, it is hard to find a more audacious version of King's gambit than the "Immortal Game". German chess master Adolf Anderssen, while playing Lionel Kieseritzky, sacrificed the Queen, both Rooks and a Bishop, but still managed to checkmate his opponent with only three minor pieces!

While I agree that this happened in an era when chess defenses were not that well developed but it still is brilliant game play.

"Hope is a Thief"

Dying and Dinner Parties from ThinPlace Pictures on Vimeo.

It is hard to find anything wrong to say about hope! It makes a hard life worth living, keeps the society motivated and productive, allows us to tide over a bad day. For a more convincing defense, I advise you to watch Shawshank Redemption.

However, I also have Buddhist leanings. In fact among all the religions/philosophies I have come across, it is the one that makes most sense. Buddhism values only the present. Past or future are beyond ones control so no point worrying about them. In that perspective, hope isn't a positive feeling. By definition hopefulness betrays a yearning for future and should be avoided.

Personally, I am still on the fence. Can't really decide... Can you?

Molyneux's question

Frankly I had never heard of either Molyneux or his question before today morning. In brief, Molyneux wondered whether a man who has been born blind and who has learnt to distinguish and name a globe and a cube by touch, would be able to distinguish and name these objects simply by sight, once he had been enabled to see.

The question has been debated by philosophers for 300 years, and lately neuroscientists have become interested in it as well. According to Dr. Pawan Sinha of MIT, the question relates to how perceptions are formed in brain [1].

"Do the different modalities, or senses, build up a common representation, or are these independent representations that one cannot access even though the other modality has built it?"

While there has been some indirect evidence, no one was able to perform a direct test because of lack of test subjects. In rich countries, curable congenital blindness is identified and cured in infancy. Dr. Sinha realized that this was not the case in developing countries. In 2003 he conducted a study in India where he identified 5 young adults with curable blindness. By measuring their ability to discriminate between shapes first using touch and then sight, he was able to experimentally recreate the conditions posed by Molyneux.

The short answer, it turns out, is no. Although after restoration of sight, the subjects could distinguish between objects visually as effectively as they would do by touch alone, they were unable to form the connection between object perceived using the two different senses. So we do not have a central memory where information from all the senses in stored.

This makes me wonder how does brain cross-reference data from different senses in form one coherent version. Maybe the versions are not coherent. What if one version dominates over others and so we end up with a less than true version of reality!


[1] http://www.news.com.au/technology/sci-tech/molyneuxs-question-gets-answered-after-300-years/story-fn5fsgyc-1226037177460
[2] Held, R.; Ostrovsky, Y.; Degelder, B.; Gandhi, T.; Ganesh, S.; Mathur, U.; Sinha, P. (2011). "The newly sighted fail to match seen with felt". Nature Neuroscience. doi:10.1038/nn.2795

Journalism and Ethics

Today I read a very interesting article that highlights the ethical issues of journalism. Question is: at what point it behooves a journalist to stop reporting and sympathize with victims? How does a journalist best serve the society; by reporting the story in the most thought proving way or by reacting humanely?

Recently a photograph captured by photographer Paul Hansen, was chosen as the best International News Image at the Swedish Picture of the Year Awards. The subject is a 15-year-old Haitian earthquake victim Fabienne Cherisma who was shot in the head by the police for looting two plastic chairs and three framed pictures.

The image is striking. To me it signifies the scale of destruction in Haiti, the desperation of the poor, and psychological scarring of children. To others it may throw questions about police brutality, ethics of stealing for survival or the unfairness of life. But what we can all agree on is that the picture captures all that is sad about a phenomenal tragedy. Pictures like these force us to empathize with victims at a very personal level, and are instrumental in raising awareness and money for rescue and relief efforts.

But there is another side to the story. Here is a photograph by Nathan Weber, showing a group of photographers crowding around the poor girls body. Sadly, the media circus continued even in front of the bereaved family.

You can't help but wonder at the intentions of these journalists? Is it all about getting a big story? Do they even care about the victims? In fact is it their job to care about the victims? Don't they best serve the society by just doing their job? What about individual right to privacy? Why should anyone profit from a victims misery? And finally why should such controversial pictures be awarded top prizes?

Phan Thị Kim Phúc in Trang Bang, Vietnam
by Nick Ut/AP, 1972 Pulitzer Prize

Emaciated girl, Sudan 
by Kevin Carter, 1994 Pulitzer Prize

The debate is old. From Vietnam to Sudan, there have been photographs that make you question professional ethics. The problem is particularly severe for reporters because unlike professions like engineering or medicine, there is no objective measure of repercussions. A doctor can be sued for bad judgements on the operating table and an engineer can be tried for a faulty bridge. But how do make journalists accountable? In most democracies libel laws tend to side with the press, and rightfully so. The lack of negative feedback has led to a situation where there are no repercussions for screwing up. It is acceptable to run a story that is in bad taste or is false. Somebody's life gets ruined and all they can hope for is a one line retraction in the next issue. In some sense lawyers suffer from the same problem. It is part of the job to help acquit a serial killer on a technicality!


What do you think?

One Liners..

Saw a good post today. It was about interesting one liners. Some of my favorites are:

1. I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.
2. Before you insult a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, when you insult him, you'll be a mile away, and have his shoes.
3. Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
4. Depression is just anger without enthusiasm.
5. We never really grow up, we only learn how to act in public.