All In The Name of Science

Estrogen and Neuronal Physiology, why am I sometimes irrational?

noreply@blogger.com (Kelly Studebaker) — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:58:00 +0000

I came across this thought reawakening byway of a paper 'Acute effects of Estrogen on Neuronal Physiology' by Catherine S. Woolley, via the Department of Physiology at Northwestern University. This paper is largely the source of my researching all the facts they present in the paper and worth the read. As I am a woman, and thus invested, whom is also highly introspective, I can gauge my rationale disruptions literally around my estrus cycle, and as a thinker, I find it forever annoying that there is a clear variance sometimes in my ability for rational thought. SO, I decided to see what sort of information was available regarding this area and hormones effects on my oh so precious brain.

And oh what a fascinating journey it has become. I knew already that both the brain and ovaries produce estrogen, but have learned that the amazing temporary organ, the placenta, also produces estrogen as part of its function. Additionally, some types of estrogen in minute quantities are also produced in the liver, the adrenal glands, the breasts, and fat cells! Not only does estrogen, as well as testosterone, effect our sexual cycles and natures, along with androgens, but they do many other 'jobs' as well. Its effects spam mood, serotonin, breast cancer, promoting wound healing, and so on. But I digress... But, what of MY mind?

In the 1970's, Martin Kelly produced conclusions that estrogen has the power to effect the firing rate of hypothalamic neurons within a mere few minutes, years later studies and results have concluded that estrogen receptors exist in the hippocampus, that receptors can exist inside actual synapses (thus effecting memory and predisposed behavior), as well as has a significant effect on memory.

Oh boy, I don't think chamomile tea is going to be strong enough to prepare me for this one...

So yay, good news first, estrogens have been numerously associated to a better ability at memory retention, though these effects are short lived as with most things also counter studies exist, not to mention quite a bit of controversy over hormone replacement therapy for cognitive degenerate diseases. Interestingly, there has also been studies to show that estradiol synthesis might happen post synapses formation, and potentially effect neuronal networks surrounding it. Thus, with influxes, not only is new memory formation potentially modified (or different than sans estrogens influx) but also that other memory can be effected as well. From 'Estogens and memory in physiological and neuropathological conditions':

"Ovarian hormones can influence brain regions crucial to higher cognitive functions, such as learning and memory, acting at structural, cellular and functional levels, and modulating neurotransmitter systems. Among the main effects of estrogens, the protective role that they may play against the deterioration of cognitive functions occuring with normal aging is of essential importance. In fact, during the last century, there has been a 30 years increase in female life expectancy ... Therefor, women are now spending a greater fraction of their lives in a hypoestrogenic state. Although many cognitive functions seem to be unaffected by normal aging, age-related impairments are particularly evident in tasks involving working memory (WM), whose deficits are a recognized feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Many studies conducted over the past two decades showed that the female gonadal hormone estradiol can influence performance of learning and memory tasks, both in animal and humans. There is a great deal of evidence, mostly from animal models, that estrogens can facilitate or enhance performance on WM tasks; therefore, it is very important to clarify their role on this type of memory."

Overall, my general understanding of these studies perused, articles absorbed, and research of the predominant publications, is that estrogens have a significant effect on the minds formation of information, ongoingly is able to continue modifying, they have the ability to far more quickly form synapsis, and as expected, play both a role in our perception as well as emotion. What is not entirely clear scientifically, is that during cycles of estrus, is whether the perception is temporarily modified, or if we are literally reprogramming things that already exist due to the modification of current perception. The increased speed of neuronal firing creating and forming information both more quickly as well as more solid and permanent, makes me believe that perhaps it is somewhat of an adjusting process.

Perhaps women are not 'crazy' at times of the month, but rather, temporarily brilliant ;)

Bios Urn - Be reborn as a Tree!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Kelly Studebaker) — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:11:00 +0000

This wonderful innovation was put together with the minds of Martin Azua and Gerald Moline, unfortunately, their site is not is english, but nonetheless, I'm quite certain adaptations will take place in our red, white and blue neck. The product as is, is a biodegradable coconut shell, peat and cellulose, along with a tree seed of your choice, and, ahem, your remains.

Yes!!! Finally an afterlife I can get behind. Of course, being forever inquisitive my first thought was; but what exactly remains that a tree might be able to use? Followed by; is this legal? All the while quite convinced that I will be being planted as a tree no matter what.

In pursuit of my questions I discovered a number of things, cremation is a process of burning organic material, most of which dissipates, and the remaining chemicals include any metals we have amassed (lead, mercury, etc.) as well as phosphorus, carbon, and calcium (largely the remnants of bone only). This wonderful essay discusses the remnants far more knowledgeably than I. And Time also wrote an informative discussion on the topic as well.

I'm sold. Grow me up as a tree, let my yard be speckled with loved ones, let life be reborn instead of wasted in boxes-

1500 Year Old Wine anyone?

noreply@blogger.com (Kelly Studebaker) — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 22:35:00 +0000

Over at archeoblog, yet another fascinating exploration into the comings and goings of our human predecessors regarding the making of wine! (always a sell for a wine lover like me).

Introducing, the Amazing Dictyostelid!

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:14:00 +0000

So, this week I read an awesome, stimulating book "Intelligence in Nature" by Jeremy Narby. All about the capacity of intelligence among animals and other life and what 'intelligence' actually is.

In the English language there are a few terms for mental capacity. Intelligence is used most commonly, followed by smart or smartness. Intelligence has different definitions - Webster says that intelligence is "the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new and trying situations, the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria" So, I assess, that intelligence is the capacity to store information for future use; use the information to analyze and decide; and to make self beneficial changes in the environment. This is only one version of a definition for a word, of course. The English word 'intelligence', comes from the Latin word 'intellegere' (to understand.) Intelligence has evolved to mean far more than understanding. Now its the ability to reason and think abstractedly and even complex computation (and a list of other attributes depending upon belief and specialities and opinion) Smart on the other hand, is more related to the ability to assess and decide.

I learned that the Japanese version of intelligence is 'chi-sei' meaning simply 'to know'. This is a far easier definition to work with, I think. It implies knowledge or information storage and the ability to use it. I'm getting to slime mold, I promise. So, though many disagree on the qualifications for intelligence, far fewer argue that intelligence exists without a brain.

Dictyostelium does not have a brain. It is so simply, or not so simply, a combination of single cells working together as one entity. This entity can move and maneuver and eat. The cells only become 'slime mold' when triggered by starvation as a survival (common good) solution to the problem. The cells in distress begin to release Cyclic adenosine mosophosphate (cAMP) which triggers other cells to either do the same (to increase the signal) or to join the cells already doing so. Eventually thousands do so and turn into a 'slug' that can begin moving and collecting food.

Presumably as the result of enough connective cells and abundant food, the 'slug' turns into a 'fruiting body' as part of its life stage. It elevates itself on a cellulose base and holds up a 'pod' that upon fruiting will burst open, releasing newly formed single cells, to go about the world with their little single celled goals.

Check out this amazing video!!

KAS

Evolution Books Reviews!

noreply@blogger.com (Kelly Studebaker) — Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:24:00 +0000

A couple nice reviews of new evolution science books over at Evolution Blog (a favorite source of chess news as well)!

The perplexing world of memories

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 22:43:00 +0000

So, this week I've been reading 'I am a strange loop' by Douglas Hofstadter. It's all about the self and consciousness - the 'I'. It is a fascinating read that I am enjoying in my favorite manner, reading piece by piece as opposed to cover to cover. I have enjoyed a week of contemplating time and perception and this book is complimenting it all quite well.

This all got me thinking, about memory. The storage of time within brain matter, available for reflection for ~all time. Interesting. So, if we think and then store that information to later use in further thinking, we are essentially combining times for use in our now.

Memory is a fascinating aspect of our realities; both the mechanical qualities as well as the philosophical. We wander through this life, accumulating mass quantities of information and filing it all away in the fleshy brain tissue that is our existence.

hm... so, I came upon this article about the first imaging of memory being formed. Through my new understanding of the use of proteins for visualization, I have a vague grasp on what they accomplished. And I must say, post ignorance, is much more satisfying than pre.

I continued my exploration with a fascinating article about music and the brain. How a song triggers memories and the integration of the two. I find this particularly intriguing as I used to use music for memorization; by singing difficult subject matter as a study technique. Worked well.

Most interestingly, I found an article discussing how neurons, single cells, can store memories temporarily.

More disturbingly, scientists have recently learned how to erase memories...

There are some beneficial aspects; like improving memory. 'Memory editing' whew, scary!

KAS

Cytoskeleton, Cells Bones!!

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 16:54:00 +0000

Things are not always what they seem to be... sometimes, in our lives, the paths chosen are put into question. Sometimes, learning something new, clarifies our vision; makes us question things we thought of as fitting ~ cells are more interesting to me this week than atoms.

It's along this diversion of topic that I came across cellular structure; as another path calling my name had me reading publications on this topic, greatly to my dismay ~ as if, no matter what I know I should do, I can't do it- the other option is far to enticing.

A Cytoskeleton is like the structure of a cell, like 'bones'. These 'bones' are not solid and give the cell mobility and malleability among other things. A big difference from the basic idea of a cell being an encasing (I always imagine gelly like) with innards of floating components that do stuff (yes, that is exactly how I thought of it prior to reading these past two weeks) I never thought about the fact that cells move (thinking more in terms of a flow of liquid pushing the cells through the body - which is a childlike comprehension of both cells and cell mobility) But, now upon learning that cells actually have an internal formed structure allowing for malleability, I'm flabbergasted.

It turns out that these inner structure components (in Eukaryote cells) come in three types; microfilaments, intermediate filaments and microtubules.

Microfiliments are the thinest of the three, linear and flexible - allowing for strong resistance capabilities. They also enjoy an actoclampin-driven...

"Actoclampin is a generic term that applies to all actin filament end-tracking molecular motors, irrespectivveof whether they are driven actively by an ATP-activated mechanism or passively when the monomer concentation exceeds the (+)-end critical concentration (Dickinson & Purich, 2002, 2006, 2007; Dickinson, Caro & Purich, 2004)." Sourced from here

So, basically, without researching the entire weekend away; I summarize this as the Microfiliments having the capacity to transmit messages for reactions.. these messages either are in response to an outward stimulus or an internal informative direction. These Microfiliments are what enable the cell to 'crawl'.

Intermediate filaments are a little more complex to summarize; best I can tell they are the 'instruction' components and their lacking of polarity, protein base (yay proteins) and genetic implications lead me to this conclusion. Read more here

Microtubles are a structural component as well; they add mass while also partaking in processes such as growing and shrinking to create force and they are involved in molecular modifications. So, as a layman interpretation; they are involved in both structural support and movement as well as action within the whole cytoskeletal mechanism.

To sum up what would take many a post to explain; a cytoskeleton is akin to a skeletal, neurological and muscular components of a body. Wow, so much happening in so tiny an organic structure!

It is in this summarization that I take my call to end. It's moments in life when questions arise that I wonder -- what do I know, if nothing. What can I learn, if everything. And, who can I learn it from?

KAS

Tardinrades, the original E.T. ?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 02:45:00 +0000

Water bears, known formally as tardigrades, are speck-sized things, less than 1.5 millimeters long. The invertebrate creatures endured 10 days in space, and upon return to Earth, scientists found that even some of those exposed to solar radiation had made it through.

Neanderthals ~ a life not unlike our own, explored

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 04:07:00 +0000

There has been a great deal of news about Neanderthals over the past few weeks. Firstly, I noticed a few articles on the Neanderthal diet and then it was the imagination inspiring National Geographic's special the Neanderthal Code that intrigued me. So, with interest and imagination bursting from the seams of my consciousness, I started dreaming. Dreaming of a day in which I could have said, Hi- to my fellow man... A day in which our people would not be able to boisterously exude superiority over all other life, as someone could have argued their case. I can feel the reality of a day when a fellow 'success of evolution' shared my path and was possibly so close an evolutionary cousin that we could have bred. It is so stimulating to read about Neanderthal's and their affiliation or integration with Homo sapiens. With each new discovery, more questions are raised. Thankfully, others are just as passionate and the information is beginning to flow. The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and 454 Life Sciences are the facilitators of the Neanderthal Gene sequencing project. ; Through the discovery of a rarely well preserved femur bone that was luckily full of wonderfully dense Neanderthal DNA, we may soon have more answers than we were looking for…

Many specimens have been tested in this search, and if I remember correctly, (I think the source may be the Neanderthal Code special) they had yet to ever find a quality nuclear DNA sample and only had been able to procure Mitochondrial DNA prior to this discovery. Mitochondrial DNA only contains (10 as I thought I heard, 12-13 per some internet resources) pairs of proteins and does not carry nearly as much material as a Nuclear DNA.

Every day we are exposing our presumptions about what Neanderthals were, and every day we are surprised at our how close we really are to the Neanderthal. Here's an article on the complexity of Neanderthal Tools and a general one about Neanderthals that discusses the larger brain cavity of the Neanderthal compared to Homo sapiens. Larger brain cavities!

Now, the complete coding of the DNA of Neanderthals is what is going to answer all the questions of cognitive differences as well as a vast collection of other knowledge that I am simply gitty to find out about. But, in the meantime, let's daydream. Let's wonder what it would have been like for Homo sapiens to mate with Neanderthals. Or, more specifically, let's imagine love, family, mixed species children. Let's imagine how likely that mixed families would be welcome among the masses, or were the Homo sapiens simply exiled to live among the Neanderthals or vice versa? Were there multiple generations of mixed species, followed by half species mixing with full etc.? Did the only 'mixing' happen among the exiled and were they exiled from the Homo sapiens communities as well as the Neanderthal, to live in some sort of community of their own? Or, were they considered so alike, that interbreeding was barely noteworthy?

It was speculated that Neanderthals did not have much linguistic ability, which has since been debunked, by the first results out of the above mentioned nuclear DNA project. The differences are less and less, the intrigue- more and more. These 'people' that we lived along with in time, were very much like us. The gene sequencing should answer just how close our cousins are. Also, whether interbreeding took hold enough, if at all, to show some effect or evidence upon our own DNA.

The intriguing, though I feel unlikely, question is; are the Neanderthals still alive and well, living among our genes?

*National Geographic Image

~KAS

Alcohol & Perception ~ Computing Fractions Naturally ~ Known Protein Found in New Profession

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Interesting article from Scientific American about the affects of moderate alcohol on ones perception and the psychological aspects of behavior in social situations under these conditions.

Thought provoking article on the natural capacity of the mind to compute fractions.

An intriguing role for a well known protein has recently been discovered to have a significant effect on cognitive function; could lead to treatments for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.

KAS

Intelligence Among Species, White Brain Matter, Glial Cells

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 07:01:00 +0000

What do you think about when pondering the intellectual capacity of brains in other species? An article in Scientific American discusses how the brain of a Sperm Whale is larger than the brain of a Human; it is nearly five times the size of ours. Does size reflect intellectual capacity? Or, is it the complexity of the brain's structure? If it's complexity, how might you go about making judgments; perhaps through tests that might reflect activity or firing of neurons? hmmm.

I have thought on this significantly prior to reading this article . and have independently come to the conclusion that different species have different types of intelligence. Whereas our intelligence has lead to advances in our social applications; like communication and expression and we have the biological ability of fine motor skills; I think that other species have abilities and strengths that we lack. I certainly witness intellectual capacity in my two cats that after some affiliation is obvious. It is apparent in other species as well; like Elephants, Big Cats, Bears and Monkeys. Dogs have a social intelligence factor as well, in my opinion, in their abilities to interact so successfully.

But, past the assumptions and on to the facts; there are different ratios to take into account in this thought process; absolute size (or weight) and brain size vs. body size ratios. "The lemming. (Kicrostonyx groenlandicus), for example, has a higher ratio than man." American Naturalist. And, "The brain of a sperm whale is about 60% larger in absolute mass than that of an elephant. Furthermore, the brains of toothed whales and dolphins are significantly larger than those of any nonhuman primates and are second only to human brains when measured with respect to body size." Plos one.

Then there is circumstance; "Brain tissue, which is metabolically expensive, requires constant high levels of oxygen and glucose, regardless of the state of mental activity (Sokoloff 1981). Hofman (1983) determined that the proportion of metabolic expenditure required by the brain relative to that of the rest of the body is generally less than 10%... Hofman (1983), like Robin (1973), suggested that large-brained species have relatively shorter dive times than small-brained divers." The American Naturalist. However, the following line is the important one as I can see it, "Superficially, this conclusion seems obvious; however, it does not consider the possibility that other adaptations to the aquatic environment have taken place." The American Naturalist.

So, here we see claims of size disparity due to the 'needs' of the brain in order to function. These needs are oxygen and glucose and seem to be a reasonable explanation as to why different brain sizes exist in aquatic species. But, alas, this is all disproved by analysis of varying species including the sperm whale, manatee and pinnipeds . This additional analysis showed that some species had longer dive times, while still harboring larger brains.

So, though this last part gains ground more in the environmental factor's of brain size and less in measurement of intelligence; the purpose of it's mention is to prime the mind for such affects.

Interestingly, the sperm whales brain comes in at an impressive 8,000 cubic centimeters; whereas human brains are about 1,300 cubic centimeters. Now, although we mention the Lemming above, Scientific American states that it is the Tree Shrew .~ as one is far more current than the other… I presume they are more likely correct; as is stated here "Porpoises and elephants, fellow mammals known for their extraordinary mental abilities, also have bigger brains than we humans. But that's not fair. Those animals are humongous. You need to take into account brain-to-body size. When that is done, the winner is.. well, the tree shrew, followed by humans and then porpoises." Scientific American.

So, here we see again, proof that the brain-to-body size is not relevant, nor is the absolute weight or size. So, we must dive deeper. "Nina Eriksen and Bente Pakkenberg of the University of Copenhagen take the investigation of whale intelligence to the microscopic level and ask a simply question: If the whale brain is so much bigger than the human brain, does this mean it has more neurons?" From " Total Neocortical Cell Number in the Mysticete Brain " "Logically, brain function and intelligence must relate to the number of neurons. Intelligence resides in neocortex (the thin, convoluted "rind" of the brain_ rather than in other, underlying areas devoted to controlling vital housekeeping functions for the body… The frontal lobes of the dolphin brain are comparatively smaller than in other mammals, but the researchers found that the neocortex of the Minke whale was surprisingly thick. The whale neocortex is thicker than that of other mammals and roughly equal to that of humans (2.63 mm). However, the layered structure of the whale neocortex is known to be simpler than that of humans and most other mammals. In particular, whales lack cortical layer IV, and thus have five neocortical layers to humankind's six. This means that the wiring of connections into and out of the neocortex is much different in whales than in other mammals." Now, we are getting somewhere!

The results of this investigation was that the Minke whale had a total number of 12.8 billion neocortical neurons; 13 times that of the rhesus monkey and 500 times that of rates; whereas it was only 2/3 that of the human neocortex.

So, here we come to another groundbreaker; we can simply measure the neocortex of each species to get a somewhat effective judgment. But alas, there's more, called Glia . Glia are non neuronal cells whose purpose is support of nutrition and signal transmission in the nervous system among other things. Further into Eriksen and Pakkenbergs' studies, they find that there were 98.2 billion non neuronal cells, called glia, in the Minke whale neocortex. This is the highest number of glial cells in neocortex seen in any mammal studied to date. The ratio of neocortical glial cells to neocortical neurons is 7.7 to 1 in Minke whales and only 1.4 to 1 in humans. So, now we are getting where I thought it to be all along.

So, there are different constructions of brains, presumably due to circumstance or environmental factors as well as evolutionary need. The true question to ponder is; in what way do other species minds think? What do they think of us, when we harpoon their families or sell their friends as bush meat? What do they feel emotionally?

No, whale's are not able to paint like Picasso; but, they might be able to think in ways that we have yet to discover and may never completely understand. Shouldn't we allow their survival so as to contribute towards the wonders of intelligence and the value of intelligence among other species…

KAS

Mercury ~ Why the drama?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 22:45:00 +0000

This weekend was wonderful. I enjoyed Saturday night in Boston at Improv Asylum on the North end, followed by unauthentic pizza that was deliciously greasy and ended at a nearby hookah bar with a glass of amaretto. It was fantastic. As I recently have been trying to legitimately heal an unstable relationship with the person I enjoyed this with, this was all particularly beneficial.

I know this has nothing to do with Mercury :)

Mercury; well, I know that a friend of mine, Eric, has a small jar of Mercury. He broke a bunch of thermometers as a teen and compiled the element into a rather impressively large blob of liquid metal. Very cool to look at and manipulate by rotating the jar.

Yes, I am aware now that I should not have been turning a jar of Mercury around in my palms, reveling is such a dangerously toxic element's beauty.

Mercury is interesting for numerous reasons. It is one of only six liquid metals and is the only one that remains a liquid at room temperature, which makes it uniquely variable in it's uses. Mercury was named after a planet, but it's chemical name is Hg which is derived from the Latin hydrargyrum (meaning watery & silver). It has one of the narrowest temperature ranges in it's liquid state and is worth discussing because it is a really beautiful element. cont...

Mercury is not utilized in the body for anything whatsoever. It's a heavy element; it's atomic number being 80 (meaning 80 protons and 80 electrons) and was used throughout history in medicines to improve 'passability' through the digestive track with no then known detriment. It has been considered by the ancient Chinese to be an effective 'fountain of youth' potion and was taken to generally maintain good health... The ancient Egyptians used mercury in cosmetics and were occasionally (significantly) 'complexionarily' compromised as the result.

Then there were the alchemists, whom reveled in the idea that through molecular modification, the valuable element, gold, could be fashioned from other prospects ~ particularly mercury.

Contamination of mercury is unnatural. As mercury is one of the rarest elements in the Earths crust, it exists- because humans pulled it out of the ground or found it at the entry to hot springs or volcanoes and proceeded to fashion everything from electric/electronic components, fillings in teeth, fluorescent light bulbs and lamps, thermometers, cosmetics, production of chlorine, filtering water, other measuring/balance instruments and many medicines. Also, it is used as the preservative in vaccines (same form as in cosmetics ~ thiomersal) which metabolizes into ethyl mercury (organic mercury) and it has been speculated that this can cause or trigger autism in children...

But, a use not mentioned that has a large and detrimental effect on many humans, was it's use as a mining agent. Mercury was used to add weight to gold in hydraulic gold mining (to keep the gold at the bottom to be filtered and is still used in controlled environments for purity) and was also used in silver mining. Of course, all of the mercury was spread carelessly throughout the entire mine, trecked in and out of the location and left in abandoned mines.. It is estimated that there could be hundreds of tons of mercury unaccounted for in the united states.

So, why the drama you ask? Well, mercury is a wondrous, exotic, unique element that can disrupt many aspects of human biology. The bad news will follow shortly... The good news being that many affects, based on many studies, are reversible in most instances in which the exposure was as an adult not an overdose. Also, Salmon & Shrimp- my favorite seafood, are on the bottom of the list for mercury risk.
Mercury is toxic in all it's forms; the effects depend on how the Mercury is absorbed into the body. Mercury is particularly dangerous as a vapor due to it's ease of absorption through the respiratory tract.The most detrimental effects happen prenatal and to small children. Due to it's effects of various types of cells (essentially modifying) and neurological/central nervous system effects including irritability, memory loss, depression, hallucinations, delirium, and stunted intellectual capacity in newly forming brains. There can be muscular effects including fine tremors or violent muscular spasms as well as effects like chest pain, cough, dyspnea, hemoptysis and impairment of pulmonary function... all among various exposure levels and duration. Most are reversible with treatment or time, but in children and with prenatal exposure the effects can be acute.

Lastly, the most amazing thing I learned about mercury, was that it can combine with proteins and become an organic form- ethyl mercury. <- data-blogger-escaped-further...="" data-blogger-escaped-into="" data-blogger-escaped-is="" data-blogger-escaped-kas="" data-blogger-escaped-looking="" data-blogger-escaped-span="" data-blogger-escaped-this="" data-blogger-escaped-worth="">

Children's Science Books - other than 'everyone poops'

noreply@blogger.com (Kelly Studebaker) — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 23:15:00 +0000

Over at Cocktail Party Physics is an incredible list of children's science books anyone one with little people would just love!!!

James Woodward, Religion and Suicide Bombs-

noreply@blogger.com (Kelly Studebaker) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 22:42:00 +0000

Jim Woodward video, on if religious belief actually does account for suicide bombings and the like, via the ever active blog evolving thoughts!!

Utterly engaging, worth a watch.

RNA ~ post grew from 'A Simpler Origin for Life' (Scientific American; Feb. 12th, 2007)

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 04:16:00 +0000

I started my exploration tonight on something I had heard a few weeks back about the origin of life and how prior to DNA / RNA world of today, that life was likely all RNA based. Additionally, there are theories into a more simplistic age in which life was based on something that was neither RNA nor DNA; but, that is for another post…

When I think about DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid); what comes to mind is programming. That DNA is like the playwright of life. The intricacies of ourselves that these DNA programs control, not only outline what we are, but also explain how we are. We start out in life, depending on how you look at it, as two pieces; one peace being the Ovum (ironically the largest cell in the human body)the other being the Sperm. Each providing data, pre-programming and the materials necessary to begin the production; together they complement and initiate the replicable genetic programming that is necessary to make a new human.

The way that this happens is the Ovum and Sperm are dense with life granting materials, balanced except for mDNA of which only the Ovum contains , which then go through the rapid process of organizing and building the blocks in a process called genetic recombination and Meiosis that will eventually become a little, smelly, needy, cute human baby.

So, how do components of RNA and DNA combine? Well, in nature, atoms combine into molecules of all sorts (H2O, Protein, Amino Acids etc.), which in turn gravitate towards other molecules in order to make combinations. These combinations of molecules, depending on how they work out, can create life. Each molecule has a job, based on the Atom's abilities that make up each molecule. If all the right components of are brought together you get a strand of RNA or DNA ~ enough instructions as well as materials to make life.

The 'gravitation' is the main question that needs answering. It is found that in large collections of organically rich water, for example, that many combinations are made. However, no matter the concentration, it appears that molecules will combine into simplistic structures; and those more complex combinations, like RNA and DNA, do not seem to happen due to proximity alone. The issue here lies in the fact that scientists can find no examples of these natural complex combinations and research does not imply random connection of complex molecular structures like nucleotides (nitrogen, carbon and oxygen atoms as well as carbon sugar and one phosphate group) Nucleotides are a precise combination of particular various types of atoms, that exist in RNA.
So, for further thought. How do atoms host attributes that will control a life's immune system, nerves or neurons? What trigger meiosis (the convergence of genetic material?) And, what triggers genetic material to replicate? Most of all - how do these complex, life granting combinations - come to be?

Now to digress a minute as I learned that there are multiple comets that have crashed into earth, that contain molecules! I found this very exciting. Not only were many molecule's matching those on Earth- present, there were also a number of new ones not found on Earth. Here is one of the organically rich comets; Murchison Meteorite

KAS

What makes a Human - Human? (Philosophical)

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 07:48:00 +0000

What makes a human, human?

A human is what? Well, humans are mammals, or more specifically a bipedal primate species called Homo sapiens. We have a large brain cavity and an intellectual ability that allows us to reason abstractly, communicate in complex manners and to learn and expand on knowledge progressively (primarily through the communication of learnt or discovered information.) Humans are also emotional, creative, and singularly talented. As group behavioral aspects go; we are by far the most cooperative creature in known existence, at least in regards to information. We operate in societal structures with powerful factors such as religious collective belief and instruction; government influenced behavioral guidelines and rules, learned morals and mannerisms to dictate social behavior and regulated perceptions. This combination of forces influencing humans’ communication and coexistence is a powerful contributor to our progression. If we cared little to share or corroborate; growth in collective knowledge and discovery would be far more difficult. Our mind has not changed in size since the first known modern human (est. 200,000 yrs ago.) We had the same brain mass, but much less knowledge. Hence the benefit of information sharing… Without information already discovered – to learn, we would appear to be much less intelligent. But, we aren’t (at least compared to our earthly counterparts.) Many other species on earth show signs of intelligence. Some other animals show learned behaviors, teaching and problem solving. So, if animals have a mind capable (even minimally) of the analytical capability to problem solve (as dolphins and chimpanzees have shown) they do not lack in the intellectual ability department. As my theory goes… The ingredient lacking is the sharing of information. Many animals communicate; but can any share learned information? If so, even minimally, I would argue that it is not the mind that differentiates humans from other animals.

If it is not the mind then, is it the body?

As this article about chimps barter ability.
Or this article on a court proceeding regarding classifying another primate as human for the purpose of taking caretaking custody shows, no.

KAS

Missing Matter Mystery (partially) solved!

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 04:32:00 +0000

Great news for Science! Astronomers have made a huge advance in our understanding of the Universe, by finding 'lost matter'. This discovery is paramount in not only supporting the hypothesis (of additional matter being available to find); but, also by expanding our field of understanding. This discovery is supported by the Big Bang Theory and the hypothesized amount of matter distributed by the initial expansion/i.e. big bang. The problem is that our estimates of all galaxies collectively considered, only barely make a dent in what scientists believe was dispersed. This 'missing matter' is what has now been (1/2) found.

This discovery was made by evaluating the light being generated by quasars and the diffusion of that light as it passed through space. These evaluations created the necessary data to work in combination with the current understanding of Baryons (which is ordinary matter - the makeup of elements) and the affect of light when filtering through matter. They then utilized the Hubble Telescope and NASA's Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer on the presumed locations in order to look for evidence of the matter & found oxygen and hydrogen. They further speculate/theorize that there are even larger pools of invisible hydrogen in a heated, ionized form. The theory is that the heated hydrogen is invisible due to its temperature being too high for visible light, while being too cool for X-ray detection. They are utilizing known science as well as their observance of other ionized forms of hydrogen (as Hubble picture above illustrates) and ionized oxygen as well as their understanding of dark matter to come to these conclusions.

KAS

Macaque Monkey, killed for suburban convenience??

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 01:00:00 +0000

in this article about killing Macaque monkeys for infringing upon our domestic comforts, I saw another unfortunate example of the restriction of another life forms, for our self centered gain. (And the monkey was or is...) As a distant cousin (approximated at branching 25 million years ago - what was Lucy... 2.5 million and the Taung child around 7 million?) far closer in genetic relation, then the feline I coddle on a daily basis. The Macaque Monkey is noted as the most widespread strain of primate (other than ourselves, of course,) am I really reading of extermination or 'culling' for the purpose of such convenience. Ughh… Then of course, testing comes into mind; a subject I attempt to regularly exercise ignorance about – as it obviously infuriates my sensitivities (as a life form and all.) So, I read and read... and find this article about a famous infantile Macaque Monkey saved from testing named Britches. Something along the lines of testing for the progression of the lives of blind humans. Oh dear...

Now, don’t get me wrong. I eat meat. I would kill as necessary to eat, protect my kin or self or in order to claim something I needed for survival. However, I do not believe that I (as a life form) am more valuable than a monkey, or any other animal for that matter; and do not believe death should be an occurrence at any time other than as necessary for protection or for food. Yes, I do exterminate my cellar for spiders and eat hamburgers; but, I can live without the newest mascara and can surely wait for a humane progression in medical advances; allowing animals to live as they deserve. Animals went through the battle that is 'evolution' just as we have; they should be able to exist without being hindered by our greed, control or desires (as should I - and wish for it regularly.)

In the Wiki article is mention of a 2007 DNA mapping concluding a 93% match to our DNA. Which lead me to this site, showing the DNA stand of the Macaque Monkey of which I am far from educated enough to understand (but, I enjoyed flipping through the Human vs Monkey vs mice strands. Of which I also linked; for DNA strand (mapped so far) comparison or learning purposes.

KAS

Photon Transfer by Cells used to exchange information?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:35:00 +0000

While perusing what new listings have come out in PLoS ONE, I came across a few understandable gems. The most intriguing being "Cellular Communication through Light" that is, Photon transfer by cells which contain information for communication. What form is the information in, how does it get in transport and how it it received (physically and interpretively) I wonder?

Another article of interest is "A Novel Method for Detection of Phosphorylation in Single Cells by Surface Enhanced Raman Scattering (SERS) using Composite Organic-Inorganic Nanoparticles (COINs)" A newly progressed technology allowing for more precise detection of a cell's components with the use of (my favorite) nano technology.

They say "it's all in the blood"... in this article on The European Dynastys' blood line and the proposed results of a such an exclusive blood line having vastly consisted of inter-breeding is discussed in "The Role of Inbreeding in the Extinction of a European Royal Dynasty"

KAS

pi

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:27:00 +0000

Again, I am surprised by my new found ignorance of pi... .But, what is time anyways, I didn't know then, but know it now- making the subject regardless. So, early this morning, I was 'off to the races' to explore this new term, this new bit of information about an odd, interesting and as I perceived it unnatural number.

Unnatural, you might ask? Well, it's only strange that a number might not end because.. a number is a measurement of something. Quite obviously, a number cannot be a representation, if it is incomplete. This number is so very, very long that in decimal form- it's been measured to millions of digits of decimal numbers after the number 3. A common approximation is 3.14159...but, it never ends (at least to the extent it is currently understood.)

Let me explain. pi is the ratio of the circles radius to the circumference. It doesn't matter the size of the circle, it is always the same. O.k.,,, makes sense. I can comfortably shake that about my globe. But, at some point, doesn't a number hit 3.2? So, the number should, rationally, end! Imagine, if you will, ten lines between the number three and the number four. Imagine again that there are also ten smaller lines between each of those ten lines (and so on...) If 3.1 is one line and 3.2 is another- pi must lie on some line somewhere in between. Where it lies, must be rigid.. no?

Circles.. hmmm. So, is round a predominant state in the universe? Or, some fundamental law or universal basis for math? From planets and stars to cells and to atoms?

So, here I manage to stray my attention (happens often.) I turned right at round and ran into atoms; happened as I wrote the word atom, remembering simultaneously that we cannot see atoms- I questioned. How can I state that atoms are round if I do not understand how we know that atoms exist. hmmm again.

Just as a minimal diversion; I must explain what I found. I thank Dr. Bill Robertson for this wonderful conceptual explanation that I have recreated (revision) below;

Imagine you are in a room. You are sitting in a chair and you open your eyes to complete darkness. You try to move and are unable to do so because, rope is tied around your waste and securing you to that chair. You feel around in the dark, leaning your arms and hands as far to the surrounding floor areas as possible. You find something. A pile of rocks.. you think, hmmm. I am tied to a chair in the dark with a pile of rocks within reach. Hmmm.

You hear nothing, but think that waiting is likely a detrimental survival plan choice. You have seen Saw and Saw two... So, you pick up a rock and decide that you want to know what the room is like. You decide that the noise is irrelevant as someone left you there and knows where you are and someone also left you a pile of rocks. So, you chuck a rock to judge the distance between where you are and where whatever the rock hits- is. It's not far. You repeat this experiment until you learn that the room is small and judging by the dimensions and different impact noises, you gestimate that you are in a rectangle shaped bathroom. You now have a good estimate of both the size and the shape of the room.

This is exactly how atoms are measured.. albeit, from the outside. I'll leave it at that as I started to wander on to STM or scanning tunneling microscopy- a method of the above test that results in images. These images are in appearance, not circles.　

Alas. nonetheless, pi is invariably interesting for the reason I initially state. If numbers are representations of a measurement of something. What the hell is pi a measurement of?

KAS

Atomic Structure of Water

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 01:56:00 +0000

Raindrops fall on the green leaves this afternoon and my thoughts wander to water. I have two small tomato plans, growing in the window, needing water and light alone to prosper. Little bristles of organic promises and wisps of petals to be grown to new leaves. It's scent, a musky and poignant one of fruitful promises. This life granted by drops of water, poured into dirt and absorbed through roots. Utterly fascinating, that such things happen from so little.

Here on Earth, we live on a planet covered by water. Over seventy percent of our world, is water. Over fifty percent of our bodies is water. Hydrogen, one of the only chemical elements not created in a star, has held a special spot for longevity among the cosmos and is a key component of water.

There's oceans, ice burgs, raindrops, evaporation and condensation, fog and hot water springs. There are a foundation of organic liquids that allow for physiology. Flesh and all life is founded on the malleability and utility of water. We sustain our bodies through copious consumption of water, we bath and Christen and swim in water. It brings life to us, while also hindering and taking it.

Rain holds special relevance in human life and across the globe, populations view rain as life granting, crop growing as well as with ominous and fearful connotations. Rain, at night, is my absolute favorite.

Water, like all substances, is made of atoms. Most water is a combination of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom; creating the molecule H2O. Hydrogen is number one on our periodic table, as it consists of only one electron and one proton and as such is the lightest atom; though it's various isotopes include a neutron or two neutrons within the nucleus (sharing it's space with the one proton constant) It's the most abundant element in the cosmos, occupying about 75% of all space. It also is highly capable of connecting to other atoms as atoms connect with other atoms via electrons in available occupancy space (like a puzzle, an atom with two electrons can connect with another that allows for the occupancy of two additional electrons). As the Hydrogen atom has only one electron, it has seven remaining connectible spaces. Water is amazing, life granting and transfixing.

This week is going to be a rainy one... You know, we never touch a thing due to atoms; all matter is opposing all other matter. The drops don't really touch your skin, they hover above the electrons of your skins atoms, shivering.

KAS

Quantum Mechanics & General Relativity

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 17:00:00 +0000

So, I've been reading about Quantum Gravity (a convergence of both Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity) and it inspired me to learn more about Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity and though I had a gist of the two; I wanted to take the time to look at the fundamentals as opposed to my generalist understanding of each.

The Small ~ Quantum Mechanics
A theory initiated in order to better explain the fundamental properties of matter. In early 1900's while studying the interactions of matter and radiation; scientists ran into an issue. Neither Classical Mechanics nor Electromagnetism solved certain radiation effects on atoms. Particularly, scientists were perplexed by the nature of light; as was discovered by Joseph von Fraunhofer (1787-1826) through analyzing peculiar lines in the spectrum of sunlight. These lines were recorded as existing; but, no one could explain their origination. Same such occurrences were seen through radiation experiments with atoms.

A hundred years later, scientists established Quantum Mechanics to explain this conundrum among others. Quantum Theory was not established by one scientist, as the theory of relativity was, but as a collective and progressive effort. Though there were some key players, if you will, by the names of Niels Bohr (The Bohr model,) Erwin Schrodinger, Wolfgang Pauli, Max Born and predominantly Max Planch (1858-1947~credited as originator of Quantum Theory) & Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976~formulated on of the most eminent laws of quantum theory, the Uncertainty Principle.)

Uncertainty Principle is a principle that states that 'Any two variables which do not commute cannot be measured simultaneously- the more precisely one is known, the less precisely the other can be known (I had a difficult time with this, but I think it's saying that you may be able to learn about the velocity; but lack the ability to find out the expanse at the same time; whereas is you are looking for the expanse, you cannot find the velocity at the same time… so, at any given moment you can only know one of the two attributes as one is changing while you’re looking at the other… but, I could have it all wrong.)

*** which it turns out I do (update 2/28/09) This is because the matter is being perceived by an observer. The observer is the manipulation of what the matter appears to do... it's like, there are two marbles that are actually one and portrayed as two by a projector... and, that projector also has the ability to play out different possible actions of the same marble's abilities. So, you look at the marble on the right and think about spinning and... it spins. Then you look at the one to the left and imagine it rolls... and it rolls. Both marble's are simultaneously doing things that the observer, um, observes. It seems that matter can do multiple things due to living on multiple universe's of reality. It can be something, while being another if across planes of universe's because of a connection that I cannot grasp.. a connection of absolute, or complete malleability, affect and an 'observer' control Umm.. let me try this. A particle of matter can be anywhere/do anything, without restriction; it is your eyes that make it do what it does in your universe. With no connection/communication/link whatsoever the same particle can exist differently among many universe's, but with only one existence and formation is due to something observing it. This is much like a tree falling in the forest and trying to figure if it makes a sound if no one is around to hear it. They can be the same thing, in two different places!

Back....

So, after compiling a need and producing a theory; scientists went to work on applying it. This is where we run into the 'large' vs 'small' conundrum that is trying to be solved in current day theories; including Quantum Gravity. The Quantum Mechanics in all its refinement was fantastic at explaining many components (that were previously unexplainable) but, it stumbled once faced with the more complex atoms. So, as with most theory's that lead to more questions, Quantum Mechanics had to produce additional formula's to add on to the theory in order to try explain these additional problems. So, here enters those additional theories; Matrix Mechanics and Wave Mechanics both to assist with legitimizing Quantum Mechanics and larger atoms like Hydrogen (Werner Heisenberg, Max Born and Pascual Jordan; Erwin Schrodinger- respectively.) Then through the exploration of the interactions between electrons, positrons and photons; Quantum Electrodynamics was theorized. There are other components that make up the field as it is; but, these are the originators.

There are many components to the theory that are criticized multiple scientists, including Einstein, who have not accepted the fundamental concept that dictates a certain randomness or indeterminacy of reactions between atoms (that although they are the same; randomness in reaction still exists) and instead concludes that there must be another property that is not yet known-a hidden variable- that would explain the difference between nuclei and in turn would presumably end the randomness of reactions between atoms.

The big~General Relativity
To begin, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was founded due to his work in the four-dimensional continuum that is known as his Special Theory of Relativity. This theory explains the interactions between curved space and time as well as a fourth dimension only explainable via mathematics. Generalized; it states that the result of true distance and perceived distance disparities are due to space curvature. His General Theory goes on to prove that the curvature is the result of mass; the larger quantity of mass in any given location of space; affects space around it- causing curving or 'dips' in space. He goes on to create the physics law E = mc2; which shows that mass and energy are potentially interchangeable (the 'E' is the energy of matter with the mass as 'm' and the 'c' is the speed of light.) Einstein goes on to predict that if matter is distributed in a particular way throughout the universe that should the 'world lines' (the warped space dimension and distance due to it, if you will) become long enough; that they would curve in on themselves- creating a closed and curved piece of space, if I understand correctly.

So, to sum both up. Quantum Mechanics is a theory pertaining to the interactions between atoms as well as the actualities of atoms. Atoms make up matter. General Relativity is a theory pertaining to the interactions between space, time and matter on a colossal scale; like planets and stars.

Check out the great free resources over at the Boston Public Library.
All you need to do is sign up for a free pin to access JSTOR and Encyclopedia Britannica among others.

A great summery of Quantum Gravity-a theory on converging the two-on wiki.

KAS

*Mini Hiatus...

Glaciers…. what glaciers?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 01:00:00 +0000

For an undisclosed reason, I thought it fitting to post on an environmental scientific issue today (how did I choose among the many degenerate conditions, you ask?) Well, I chose something fitting not only per the environment, but also reminiscent of this past weekends New England snow storm and the icicles I was cursing this morning while chipping away at the inch thick layer of concrete ~ I mean ice ~ on my windshield. It's also a lonely morning as the relationship front is about as stable as these icebergs... hence the source of this material. Crumbling, unsteady and volatile.

So, the planets melting… it's melting as the result of our use of natural resources (including forests) and fuel (oil, gas, coal etc.) and mainly due the fact that there are Billions of Humans utilizing these sources. What does this mean, you ask? Well, on a grand scale, the Earth's climate changes are somewhat cyclical and extremes are the norm, occasionally, over the long term. So, the Earth likely would fair through this and solve the problem with temperate extremes that could invariably take care of the cause (humans.) Not only could we die, but likely such changes could kill off most organic life. Though, these extremes naturally happen on our little blue dot in the sky, it's our activities that are likely advancing that change to a point were we are progressively dooming ourselves and all other species along with us.

Though, I am not nearly knowledgeable enough in what exactly happens with global warming; green house gasses appear to be smothering our atmosphere, in affect, as far as I can understand it. The Ozone layer surrounding the Earth holds in the Earths' heat (collected from the suns solar rays) and the gasses that we emit by burning fuel including deforestation's and forest fires collects in the Ozone, leading to more trapped heat. So, with the smothering of the Earth due to all the excess gasses retaining heat on our planet; the icebergs are melting.

Ice solid, if immersed, takes as much space as melted… Like, ice cubes in a glass. But, when ice is floating atop the liquid; it's only the immersed portion that contributes to the level of the fluid (the ocean.) So, as is apparent in the pictures above, you can see that the iceberg is submersed as well as floating above. The portion above water does not affect the level of the water; just the portion below. So, when one of these beauties melts; the part that once floated has now joined the immersed portion and is now contributing to the overall level of the liquid.

There are many ramifications as a result of this. One is the loss of land due to rising ocean levels as the result of the added water. Another is the loss of 'land' that the icebergs themselves provided to life forms like Seals, Penguins and Polar Bears; and likely many other oceanic creatures and organic life forms above and below the berg. Another painful blow is the loss to valuable scientific research that can be found within the frozen ice as the ice froze thousand or even millions of years ago and provides data, organic record and environmental records that can be found no where else on Earth.

There are other implications as well; the lost of reserves as many glaciers act as reserves of water during wetter years or colder months; melting in the warmer years and months and releasing the valuable resource that is more needed at that time. The ecosystems that are tied to glaciers and the process of glacier freezing and melting are too numerous to recount (nor do I have a thorough understanding of all affected as would be required to do so)

The Earths bergs melt and as a result we are reminded that we are the cause of these widespread changes. Many, if not all, will be detrimental to us directly or indirectly through eco systems and extreme weather. What can you do to help? Be energy conscious, don't support dirty fuel (like coal) and furthermore support absolutely clean fuel sources; like the sun and water (like in Switzerland) don't support economies that limit regulation (like… o.k. I won't say it, but you know) and lastly, plant trees. Yes, trees. They not only store detrimental carbon dioxide and produce beneficial oxygen, but also they will provide shade that I imagine will be needed… not funny really, but likely true. Lastly, and I know it's a pain, but recycle. Recycle paper and plastic at least.

Don't be mistaken, damage is already done. It is the speed in which the end zone becomes clear, that we can try to control. The goal here being to try and protect organic life by progressing enough ourselves to be prepared for the extreme as well as to slow down the progress as much as possible to grant us a better chance of such success. In order to either protect ourselves as well as other life; or, to leave the planet… as is necessary to survive.

It's likely that in a period of time- our planet would go through a cyclical extreme anyway; be hammered by space 'junk' of some kind or in some other way be affected in a manner that would force humanity to adapt/leave the planet in order to survive. So, it's probably not a bad idea to be prepared anyway.

KAS

Deep-Sea Fish Seeing Red – And Other Colors Too

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 13 Nov 2010 00:33:00 +0000

In a fascinating discovery made by a multi-national research team, it seems that elephent Sharks are able to see in color. That's right. Elephant sharks can see color in the deep sea the way we see it at sea level. It is one of the most broad color vision spectra ever discovered. This discovery could have some very interesting implications as research continues as well.

According to an article in Science Daily, the elephant shark, an ancient deep-sea fish, can see color in much the same way as a human being can. The discovery was published in the March 2009 issue of Genome Research and could be used to better understand the idea of color vision evolution in ancient vertebrates over the last half millennium. These “ancient vertebrates” include human beings and their early ancestors.

"It was unexpected that a 'primitive' vertebrate like the elephant shark had the potential for color vision like humans. The discovery shows that it has acquired the traits for color vision during evolution in parallel with humans," said Byrappa Venkatesh, Ph.D. who, along with David Hunt, Ph.D., headed the research team.

Researchers were able to establish that the elephant shark has, just like humans, three “cone pigments” for color vision. Genome mapping is being used to assist in the telling of the full story. The shark has changed little in almost 500 million years and has many of the same features as the earliest elephant sharks. Because of the evolutionary process, the shark's genome and the human genome are grounded in the same “ancestral genome.” It would seem the elephant shark's DNA is closer to the man's than any other fish.

Sequencing of the genome is nowhere near complete and is not expected to be so until early 2010, when the researchers anticipate it will be fully mapped. This development is obviously very exciting to the scientific community as scientists consider possibilities for genetic exploration and the integrity of a genetic map that has remained unchanged longer than almost any other living creature. Continued research is likely to yield some amazing finds when it comes to the study of the elephant shark.

This post was contributed by Courtney Phillips, who writes about the (certified nurses assistant). She welcomes your feedback at CourtneyPhillips80 at gmail.com

An absolute must buy, Richard Dawkins~Modern Science Writing

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 04:22:00 +0000

A fabulous read. I'll post on the material after I finish. I found myself reading articles various times and was often caught in contemplation.

KAS