Stupid science headlines

ConversazioniScience!

Iscriviti a LibraryThing per pubblicare un messaggio.

Stupid science headlines

Questa conversazione è attualmente segnalata come "addormentata"—l'ultimo messaggio è più vecchio di 90 giorni. Puoi rianimarla postando una risposta.

1drbubbles
Giu 15, 2011, 9:24 am

Yahoo! news article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20110615/sc_space/unusualtotallunareclipsecoincideswithfullmoontonight;_ylt=AvyCnLYiPfea6WTtoWX8vnUPLBIF;_ylu=X3oDMTN0NTduMG5xBGFzc2V0A3NwYWNlLzIwMTEwNjE1L3VudXN1YWx0b3RhbGx1bmFyZWNsaXBzZWNvaW5jaWRlc3dpdGhmdWxsbW9vbnRvbmlnaHQEcG9zAzEwBHNlYwN5bl9hcnRpY2xlX3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDdW51c3VhbHRvdGFs) has this headline: Unusual Total Lunar Eclipse Coincides with Full Moon Tonight

2AnnaClaire
Giu 15, 2011, 10:04 am

Oy. Anyone ever hear of a total lunar eclipse that coincided with a different moon phase?

3dukedom_enough
Modificato: Giu 15, 2011, 8:32 pm

It's almost a perfect example of how to mislead with true statements. Total lunar eclipses are kind of unusual, and, well, it is a full moon. No falsehoods there - but the inclusion of "coincides with full moon" as a qualifier carries the connotation that an eclipse might happen at some other phase, as you both note. No real harm done here, but it's a great method for crafting lies that can appear to be defensible, true statements.

4timspalding
Giu 15, 2011, 9:10 pm

That's excellent.

5drbubbles
Giu 15, 2011, 9:51 pm

My 7th grade geography teacher began the school year by telling us that the phases of the moon were caused by Earth's shadow.

I guess, given how much is gotten wrong in science reporting, this is small potatos. But Jebus, how much of a pass do they want?

6jjwilson61
Giu 15, 2011, 10:16 pm

I must have known this at some point, but why isn't every new moon a total lunar eclipse?

7Jesse_wiedinmyer
Giu 15, 2011, 10:24 pm

No. A new moon is when the moon passes between the sun and earth. We're then viewing the dark side of the moon. If everything aligns, you then have a solar eclipse.

8AnnaClaire
Giu 15, 2011, 10:29 pm

...Which, unlike a lunar eclipse, can't be total. Even with the moon's relative nearness, the enough difference in relative size that there will still be a ring of sun visible around the moon's shadow.

9Jesse_wiedinmyer
Giu 15, 2011, 10:32 pm

Which is referred to as the corona.

10jjwilson61
Giu 15, 2011, 10:49 pm

I can't visualize how the moon can be between the earth and the sun yet the observer can see the moon while also being on the nightside of the earth.

11AsYouKnow_Bob
Giu 15, 2011, 11:05 pm

#5 My 7th grade geography teacher began the school year by telling us that the phases of the moon were caused by Earth's shadow.

Huh. My 5th grade teacher told us that Mars was red because it was an old star.

12Jesse_wiedinmyer
Giu 15, 2011, 11:10 pm

Try this, maybe.

13dukedom_enough
Giu 16, 2011, 7:25 am

jjwilson61@10,

If it's new moon and it's midnight where you are, the moon's indeed on the other side of the earth. If it's only near the new moon, the moon could be in the sky at dawn or dusk. You might see a faint crescent.

14dukedom_enough
Giu 16, 2011, 7:28 am

jjwilson61@6,

If you meant to ask why every full moon isn't a lunar eclipse, it's because the plane of the moon's orbit around the earth is tilted relative to the plane of the earth's orbit around the sun. Most months, the moon passes ahead of, or behind, the earth's shadow cast back from the earth in its orbit.

15dukedom_enough
Giu 16, 2011, 7:31 am

drbubbles@5, AsYouKnow_Bob@11,

Your teachers told you what?!

16drbubbles
Giu 16, 2011, 8:30 am

>8 AnnaClaire:, 9

Most total solar eclipses actually are...well...total, except for the corona, which is above the photosphere (the 'surface' of the sun); it's one of the curiosities of the universe that the apparent diameter of the Moon is almost exactly that of the Sun just at the time we Homo sapiens are around to marvel at such things. See here.

However, if the Moon is at apogee during a solar eclipse, the apparent diameter of the Moon is slightly less than that of the Sun, and there will be an (even rarer) annular eclipse, so-called because a ring of photosphere, not just corona, is visible around the Moon at peak eclipse (image-google "annular eclipse").

17AsYouKnow_Bob
Giu 16, 2011, 7:40 pm

#15: Your teachers told you what?!

#15, Yeah, she was old. And, famously, the Worst Teacher in the school. I got the sense that she was kept from retiring only by the influx of boomer keeping a demand for her services....

18drbubbles
Giu 16, 2011, 9:25 pm

I don't know what my teacher's excuse was. I was really into astronomy at the time and it seems like every day for two weeks I was taking in another book to show him. In retrospect, that must have been awfully galling.

Aside from astronomy, though, he was a fine teacher who broadened my horizons and introduced me to some of what are now my fundamental understandings of the world.

19guido47
Giu 17, 2011, 12:36 am

Dear drbubbles et. al.

Another babyboomer here (1st lot) who also had an ancient "science teacher" yanked out of retirement.

But he was Kool...

He laughed when he mentioned he was taught the "plum pudding model of the universe" (in the 19th centuary)
And he had contacts at the Victorian Observatory here in
Melbourne and took us science types for visits.
Yes it was a BIG "Victorian era" telescope". I think there was brass as well :-)

Guido.

20timspalding
Giu 17, 2011, 12:39 am

My science teacher in middle school was Tom Snyder, who went on to found Tom Snyder productions, one of the best early-PC educational game companies (eventually sold to Scholastic). He was, perhaps, proof that even the best and most inspirational science teachers can't make a humanities boy into a science boy.

21WholeHouseLibrary
Giu 17, 2011, 4:25 am

One other factor in the "total-ness" of a solar eclipse is the distance between the Earth and the Moon. It'll vary 40,000 miles over the course of a lunar month. If the Moon is at apogee (it's furthest distance), the Moon appears smaller in the sky, and if this happens during solar eclipse and there's perfect alignment, there would be no period of totality and you actually would see the Sun as a ring. With the Moon at Perigee (remember back just a few months ago), the totality of a solar eclipse could last over 7 minutes. That's what occurred back in '91 over the Baja Peninsula. A friend of mine videotaped it.

I also want to stress that the apparent "largeness" of the Moon and Sun varies more due to how much atmosphere we're looking through to see it - always largest at the horizon, and smallest directly overhead.

22timspalding
Giu 17, 2011, 7:35 am

It's too bad we didn't leave a camera on the moon pointing at the sun so that some day we might catch a total terrestrial eclipse of the sun.

23drbubbles
Giu 17, 2011, 7:50 am

Now that's just crazy talk.

24timspalding
Giu 17, 2011, 7:52 am

25jjwilson61
Giu 17, 2011, 9:12 am

I also want to stress that the apparent "largeness" of the Moon and Sun varies more due to how much atmosphere we're looking through to see it - always largest at the horizon, and smallest directly overhead.

I've always heard that that was from an optical illusion due to the moon or sun being close to objects on the horizon that are familiar to us. It has nothing to do with the amount of atmosphere you're looking through.

26clamairy
Giu 17, 2011, 10:07 am

Apparently the jury is still out on the moon illusion. Current thought is that there are more than one illusions at work: http://facstaff.uww.edu/mccreadd/index.html

27WholeHouseLibrary
Giu 17, 2011, 1:58 pm

I've done the angular size experiment, probably a half dozen times prior to my first marriage. Having worked in the Pattern Shop of a foundry, I own a large pair of callipers. Holding them at arm's length, I adjusted them to just "kiss" the edges of the Moon as it got above the horizon. I then placed the callipers on a ruler and measured the distance. Several hours later, as the Moon was near Zenith, I repeated the procedure. I don't recall what the numbers were, but there was a significant difference in the angular size each time.

I had my hand propped in a brace to eliminate (or minimize, at least) the possibility of skewing the results by tilting the callipers closer to or further away from me.

An additional influence is our physiology, but I limited my #21 response strictly to the extraterrestrial considerations.
Our bodies are designed for looking more straight ahead and down rather than upwards. When we look towards Zenith, we stretch muscles in our neck, and the muscles around our eyes, and this causes the eyeballs to warp slightly. This causes a distancing (albeit, small) of the retina from lens of the eye, which makes things seem smaller.

28drbubbles
Giu 17, 2011, 2:21 pm

I was going to suggest that lying on one's back to look at the moon overhead would control for warped eyeballs, but then stupid, stupid gravity would draw the lens closer to the retina and in either case the apparent caliper-distance would change as much as the moon since both are perceived through the eye...oh, why must science obstruct us at every. single. turn.??

I do like your caliper experiment. It seems photos of the moon on the horizon and at the zenith would serve for comparison, if the focal length could be kept constant, but I don't know enough about photography to know whether other confounds might exist.

29timspalding
Giu 17, 2011, 5:43 pm

I'm still struggling to explain to my five year old why the moon follows us everywhere...

30BruceCoulson
Giu 17, 2011, 6:13 pm

The moon is a creepy stalker of the Earth?

No, then they'll be afraid to go outside at night.

Tie a nerf ball to a long string, then walk while spinning it around you. Gravity is the 'string'.

31Jesse_wiedinmyer
Giu 17, 2011, 6:22 pm

I think this may be my favorite LT thread in months.

32AsYouKnow_Bob
Modificato: Giu 17, 2011, 11:04 pm

The actual distance to the moon changes by some large fraction of the earth's radius in the course of the night - say a variation of 1-2% between moonrise and High Moon.

That's enough to be measured with drbubbles' calipers.

Edited to add:
Whoops - - it's been pointed out that the calipers are WHL's at #27, not Dr. B's at #28. Sorry.

33clamairy
Giu 17, 2011, 8:10 pm

"That's enough to be measured with drbubbles' calipers."

I love it when you talk that way, Bob.

34AsYouKnow_Bob
Giu 17, 2011, 8:12 pm

I have an endless line of sweet talk like that....

35lorax
Giu 17, 2011, 8:29 pm

I'm still struggling to explain to my five year old why the moon follows us everywhere...

Point out to him how much faster nearby things seem to move, compared to things that are farther away -- trees right next to the road go whizzing by compared to hills on the horizon. Then explain that the moon is much, much farther away than anything else, so it's going to seem to move much, much less than anything else.

As for the apparent lunar diameter issue, a significant portion of it is that we're really bad at judging angular scales overhead, not due to physiological distortion but just because it's not something our brains have had to do a lot. If you ask someone to point to 45 degrees above the horizon, unless they've had practice in estimating this and actually measure it off, they'll very consistently be low. This is very easy to demonstrate -- tilt your head on its side when the moon is low, and it will appear to shrink. Tilt it back, and it grows again.

32>

The actual distance to the moon changes by some large fraction of the earth's radius in the course of the night - say a variation of 1-2% between moonrise and High Moon.

True, but it continues changing after the moon crosses the meridian, and in the same direction. So this would predict that the moon appears very large at moonrise, smaller when it crosses the meridian -- which is correct -- and then even smaller than that at moonset. Oops.

36timspalding
Giu 17, 2011, 9:28 pm

I have an endless line of sweet talk like that....

Why Bob, something else is getting larger. (blink) (blink)

Sorry, couldn't resist.

>35 lorax:

My son has a very narrative mind. I'd be better off casting it in story form.

37AsYouKnow_Bob
Giu 17, 2011, 9:31 pm

#35: Well, no: it's further at rise and set - by about the radius of the earth - and closest to us when the moon is high overhead: the size of the earth is not quite negligible here, it's 1-2% of the total distance; and the earth's rotation brings the observer several thousand miles toward the moon (...and then away again...).

38drbubbles
Modificato: Giu 17, 2011, 10:44 pm

Lunar perigee is an average of 363K km and apogee averages 405.5K km, a difference of 42.5K km over roughly two weeks. I know the distance doesn't change linearly but I'm too lazy to do it properly; so, the moon changes its distance from Earth by roughly 3K km/day, or 750 km every 6 hrs (rough time from horizon to zenith {I'm also ignoring that the moon seldom if ever reaches the actual zenith for a given observer}). Sometimes it's coming nearer, other times going further. Meanwhile Earth has a mean radius of 6371 km, by up to 3185 of which an observer nears the moon as the moon rises from horizon to zenith.

So depending on whether the moon is coming or going in its orbit, the observer–moon distance could change by 3935 km between horizon and zenith, which is a touch more than 1% of the average lunar orbital distance.

Some math suggests that that could change the moon's apparent diameter by 15 arc-minutes. But the rule of thumb is that the full moon subtends about half a degree, or 30 arc-minutes, so I probably did the math wrong.

ETA Also, Bob, the moon-calipers are WholeHouseLibrary's. My own calipers measure something else; and anyway they're graduated in Hz.

39AsYouKnow_Bob
Modificato: Giu 17, 2011, 10:40 pm

So depending on whether the moon is coming or going in its orbit, the observer–moon distance could change by 3935 km between horizon and zenith, which is a touch more than 1% of the average lunar orbital distance.

(Less than that, actually - that's the maximum value, at the equator....so when I was saying "1-2%" up at #32 and #37, I meant "nearly 1%". Still, that's detectable with a pretty basic reticule.)

40drbubbles
Giu 17, 2011, 10:46 pm

Less than that, actually - that's the maximum value, at the equator

Oh, um, yes, obviously...in fact, so obviously obvious that I didn't see any need to point out that I was ignoring that consideration, too. (Yeah, that's the ticket.)

41AsYouKnow_Bob
Modificato: Giu 17, 2011, 10:58 pm

Isaac F. Newton used to say that the motion of the moon gave him a headache.

Edited to add:
And Googling for that phrase quickly turns up hours of fun here:
http://www.dioi.org/kn/sequence.htm

(minutes later...) More: Ah, here it is:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ySYULc7VEwsC&pg=PA650&lpg=PA650&dq=...

...he told Halley that the theory of the moon made his head ache and kept him awake so often that he would think of it no more.


(Hey, I wonder if Isaac Newton was the True Author of Shakespeare's plays?)

42dukedom_enough
Giu 18, 2011, 2:38 pm

AsYouKnow_Bob@41,

Wow, Newton had a time machine?! Cool!

43drbubbles
Modificato: Giu 18, 2011, 2:58 pm

>41 AsYouKnow_Bob:

Then who wrote Newton's Principia, smart guy? Christopher Columbus?

Anyway, I'm amazed to learn that Newton considered the moon to be just a theory.

P.S. >42 dukedom_enough:: not that Halley; the other Halley.

44AsYouKnow_Bob
Giu 18, 2011, 7:39 pm

Then who wrote Newton's Principia, smart guy?

Leibniz.

45Jesse_wiedinmyer
Giu 18, 2011, 8:00 pm

Oh, my. Them's fighting words.

46Jesse_wiedinmyer
Giu 18, 2011, 8:09 pm

I think you've just fucked yourself, Bob. Newton doesn't take too kindly to people passing off his ideas as someone else's. And now that he has a time machine, I'd watch your back if I were you.

47clamairy
Modificato: Giu 18, 2011, 8:19 pm

48drbubbles
Modificato: Giu 18, 2011, 9:45 pm

>46 Jesse_wiedinmyer:

That is the best post on the internet.

Also, this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9dpTTpjymE

49DugsBooks
Giu 18, 2011, 11:34 pm

Ridiculous !!!! I remember what was written on the cover of the book in that Twilight Zone episode "How to Serve Man", Some strange characters that looked like kAlkuulUssS - and once the horrid, alien hieroglyphs inside were deciphered we know what the result was!! We were warned!! Be wary of any big headed aliens carrying books with similar evil runes inside.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIufLRpJYnI

50Carnophile
Gen 6, 2013, 12:05 pm

I forget the newspaper, but I once read in a science article, "When it is noon on Mars, it is midnight on earth."

God, the pain!

51timspalding
Modificato: Gen 8, 2013, 8:52 am

Ow.

That said, I'd like to see a timeline of night and day with two bands—the latest rover and the US.

52Carnophile
Gen 9, 2013, 10:44 am

I believe that one of the landers the human race put on Mars in the last decade was in fact the context of the confused statement in #50.

>29 timspalding:, 35

Come on, you two, quit ignoring the important issue, the real issue: "Parallax" is one of the 50 coolest words in the English language. Any excuse to use it should be seized upon immediately!

53justifiedsinner
Gen 9, 2013, 11:00 am

A recent issue of New Scientist reported on an article about whether a Bohm-like interpretation of quantum mechanics would have become the most prominent interpretation if it was published before Max Born's probabilistic one which led to Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation. The title was:

"Would Bohr be born if Bohm were born before Born?"

54lorax
Gen 9, 2013, 11:18 am

52>

Even in that context, though -- "When it's midnight for the lander, it's noon on Earth" still doesn't make sense, since it's always noon somewhere on Earth. And even "When it's midnight for the lander, it's noon for the science team at JPL" is only right in the stopped-clock sense, because a Martian sol is longer than an Earth day (by about 40 minutes), so scientists keeping Martian time slowly drift in and out of sync with their local time zone. (I know people who did this. It wasn't fun - you can adjust to a slightly longer day fairly easily, but being completely out of sync with your family and trying to go to the grocery store when you get off work at 3 AM - remember that this week you need to run any necessary errands before work -- aren't fun.)

55Carnophile
Gen 10, 2013, 8:57 pm

Even in that context, though -- "When it's midnight for the lander, it's noon on Earth" still doesn't make sense, since it's always noon somewhere on Earth.

I know, that's the main reason, of several, the statement is so appallingly hilarious!

56Carnophile
Feb 25, 2013, 11:52 pm

Otters’ Penis Size Shrinking!

I'm not sure if this is "stupid," but it sure does raise questions. Like

"Who the hell is running around measuring otter penises?"

And, "Why?"

And, to whoever is doing it, "Would you say you have a lot of time on your hands?"

57lorax
Feb 26, 2013, 9:45 am

56>

Feminization of animals in general due to the massive amount of female hormones (and chemicals mimicking their effects) in the water (largely due to the nearly-universal use of hormonal birth control) is actually a well-known issue and a fairly serious problem. It's best-documented amongst amphibians, especially frogs; this is the first I've heard of it being documented in mammals. The potential implications for ecosystems as a whole and for humans should be reasonably obvious. I'm used to this sort of anti-science mockery from, well, anti-science types (like Republicans in Congress who take a particular study out of context as you're doing here and use it to argue that science is a waste of money), but I'd have expected better from this group.

58DugsBooks
Modificato: Feb 28, 2013, 6:17 pm

Hmmm, In a situation like that, isn't it most likely that someone measured an otter penis in the past and, once done, it becomes a part of the data stream about the organism - possibly with no real immediate practical implementation?

{Amazingly!!} I remember one of the basic concepts I learned in college labs that when you record data, even for a specific purpose which requires specific data, you break down the data measured into the smallest bits possible. Not for any particular reason I was told it was just that "rest assured someone much smarter than you or I can come along some day and use the data to derive real knowledge." I was surprised, and the professor included himself, but by then the list of people I found out who were smarter than me was already pretty long. ;-)

So when they started measuring otter parts they did not stop with weight & length etc. It is still funny to say "otter penis" however!

::edit:: To little to late, but I meant they probably have been counting the number of otters caught for fur every year for ages and from there the quality of pelts, size of the otter etc. so perhaps there was a previously existing data base that was used or considered.

59guido47
Feb 26, 2013, 6:43 pm

Does anyone remember the tale gould told of a scientist who measured a species of snail/clam for most of his life, well into his 'old age'.
Often chest deep in swampy waters... His aim was to leave a legacy (for evolutionary studies) after his death. Just some data points.
Of course the beastie became extinct (Human activities?)
I was moved and saddened. I didn't find it trivial or "funny" at all.

If you remember which book it was in I will be grateful.

60DugsBooks
Feb 26, 2013, 7:36 pm

I had never heard of Gould, following your link it looks like he published a lot of accessible & interesting books. I am sure his tale of the snail is another sad instance of extinction.

If addressed to me, I don't see how finding saying "otter penis" is funny trivializes anything as long as you recognize the context.

61guido47
Modificato: Feb 26, 2013, 8:28 pm

Dear Dugs, it was not address at you at all. Just a general observation. And I do find 'Monty Python' very funny. Imagine the fun they would have had with "otter penis lengths".

I understand that some 'evolutionary biologists' disagree with some of the directions Gould took, but no one could take exception with his "NATURALIST" writings and essays.

He wrote one a month for almost 30 years and they were collected into many books. I always found (the books) a treasure and highly recommend them.

ETA. I also remembered that my Dad, who was a 'mathematical statistician' said that Goulds The Mismeasure of Man was one of the best popularizations on the nuances of statistics he had read.

62Carnophile
Feb 26, 2013, 10:52 pm

Questo messaggio è stato segnalato da più utenti e non è quindi più visualizzato (mostra)
>57 lorax: I'm used to this sort of anti-science mockery from, well, anti-science types (like Republicans in Congress who take a particular study out of context as you're doing here and use it to argue that science is a waste of money), but I'd have expected better from this group.

Jesus, chill the fuck out!

63Carnophile
Feb 26, 2013, 10:53 pm

Has someone had a problem getting her NSF grant renewed recently, or something?

64Carnophile
Feb 26, 2013, 10:57 pm

How can you NOT find the idea of someone going around measuring otter wangs funny?

Do they show them otter porn to get them, er, fully extended, or what?

Anyway, I'm all for science. I like how it illuminates our world. For example, there's a stream that runs through the woods behind my backyard, and now I know why all the female otters there have been looking so... disappointed... lately.

65pgmcc
Feb 27, 2013, 4:23 am

#58 DugsBooks It is still funny to say "otter penis"

It might even be funnier to say, "sea otter penis".

66justifiedsinner
Modificato: Feb 27, 2013, 12:19 pm

Stephen Jay Gould was himself a student of marine snails (if I remember correctly looking at the distribution of their left and right handed forms) before he published his theory of punctuated evolution. Most biologists do what seem to be trivial and highly detailed studies often of obscure organisms before they go on to more general work.

67Carnophile
Feb 27, 2013, 3:33 pm

>58 DugsBooks: when you record data, even for a specific purpose which requires specific data, you break down the data measured into the smallest bits possible.

Length, width, circumference, albedo (that one’s for you, lorax), mass, electrical charge...

And I’m still wondering how they get them “firmed up” for measuring.

68pgmcc
Feb 27, 2013, 3:57 pm

#67 Length, width, circumference, albedo

I used to edit stories and write reviews for Albedo1 magazine. It was called Albedo1 as the founders wanted to use the first definition of the word in the dictionary.

69jbbarret
Feb 27, 2013, 4:03 pm

>67 Carnophile: That link doesn't work here. I get "This video contains content from EMI, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds".
Would like to know what we are missing.

70jbbarret
Feb 27, 2013, 4:07 pm

It's not necessary to get them “firmed up for measuring".
Nor is it necessary to be "running around measuring otter penises".
The organs of otter corpses are regularly examined, and in this context it is merely necessary to measure the bone.

71pgmcc
Feb 27, 2013, 4:10 pm

#70 The organs of otter corpses are regularly examined purely for scientific reasons (I hope).

72jbbarret
Feb 27, 2013, 4:11 pm

I've only just read the article linked in #56, and it confirms #70

73pgmcc
Feb 27, 2013, 4:12 pm

Phew!

74Carnophile
Modificato: Feb 27, 2013, 4:41 pm

>69 jbbarret: It's a link to the Billy Squier song The Stroke.

>68 pgmcc: My dictionary has just one definition, basically reflectivity.

75pgmcc
Feb 27, 2013, 5:03 pm

74 Specificly, The proportion of incident light that is reflected by a surface.

It is used in astronomy in relation to the light reflected from a planet or other mass. Moonlight is the result of the moon's albedo.

Of course, not having been present when the magazine was named, and not having a copy of the dictionary the founders used, I do not have a clue as to the second definition.

Albedo 1 website for those who are interested.

76guido47
Feb 27, 2013, 5:20 pm

‖ albedo

(ælˈbiːdəʊ)

L. albēdo whiteness; f. alb-um white.

1.1 Whiteness; spec. in Astr. The proportion of the solar light incident upon an element of the surface of a planet, which is again diffusedly reflected from it. Hence in extended use, applied to the proportion of light reflected from various surfaces. Also attrib.

1859 Monthly Not. R.A.S. XX. 103. 1878 Newcomb Pop. Astron. 549 When the albedo of a body is said to be 0·6. 1879 Syd. Soc. Lex. s.v., Urinary conditions‥were called the crystalline, the snowy, the limy, and the limpid albedo. 1936 Brit. Jrnl. Psychol. Jan. 313 Experiments on albedo perception. 1936 Nature 11 July 70/1 The albedo of different types of soil and vegetation. 1937 Jrnl. R. Aeronaut. Soc. XLI. 410 The albedo of clouds and the earth's surface.

2.2 A white structure, tissue, or material (Webster 1934); spec. the white pith of the inner peel of citrus fruits.

1949 J. B. S. Braverman Citrus Products iii. 77 Penetrating further into the peel of citrus fruit, one comes to the white, spongy, parenchymatous layer (mesocarp), generally known as the albedo.

3.3 Nuclear Physics. (See quots.)

1949 W. E. Siri Isotopic Tracers v. 134 The effect of a reflector‥is expressed in terms of its albedo γ, defined as the ratio of the number of neutrons that flow back in across the boundary to the number that flow out. 1962 Gloss. Terms Nucl. Sci. (B.S.I.) 8 Albedo, of a given object, the fraction of radiation (e.g. slow neutrons) reflected from it (Symbol: β).

......................................

From the OED.

77pgmcc
Feb 27, 2013, 5:37 pm

#76 guido47, I only had the Compact edition to hand.

78DugsBooks
Modificato: Apr 18, 2013, 6:00 pm

From #65 by pgmcc

#58 DugsBooks It is still funny to say "otter penis"
by pgmcc
It might even be funnier to say, "sea otter penis".

Hmmm, Sorry but while wearing my science hat I can find not much funny about "sea otter penis". However for sea otters, whose favorite pastime is to back float on the surface with a clam on the tummy and whack it with a big rock, I would look for penis size to be determined by the average size of the local whacking rocks perhaps? No matter how hungry you are if you the otter are too well endowed one over zealous whack with a inordinately sized rock would cause a long delay before your next meal! and making easy prey for hungry fish. ;-) ::edit yep tongue in cheek::

{I do take the above mentioned study seriously about chemical pollution! Horrid stuff!!}

79AsYouKnow_Bob
Feb 28, 2013, 12:41 am

To address the first of the questions posed in #56
("I'm not sure if this is "stupid," but it sure does raise questions. Like

"Who the hell is running around measuring otter penises?")


The answer is very likely to be:

"Graduate students".

80AnnaClaire
Feb 28, 2013, 1:18 am

>79 AsYouKnow_Bob:
Aren't college students in Psych 101 a substantial portion of psychological-study guinea pigs?

81AsYouKnow_Bob
Feb 28, 2013, 1:31 am

Sure.

But field-work for published research in biology?

Nine times out of ten, it's the grad student that does the PI's dirty work.

82pgmcc
Feb 28, 2013, 5:23 am

#78

I remember the fantastic film of sea otters preparing their meals that was released shortly after they were discovered off the North Western coast of the US. It is one of those iconic pieces of natural history film.

83Carnophile
Mar 1, 2013, 10:10 pm

84AsYouKnow_Bob
Mar 1, 2013, 11:53 pm

Right.

85Sandydog1
Mar 22, 2013, 9:42 pm

You can do any study using prisoners and college students...

86guido47
Mar 22, 2013, 10:31 pm

And get any result you desire :-)

87rgurskey
Apr 16, 2013, 5:51 pm

>3 dukedom_enough: and others.

In the movie Dolores Claiborne, a full moon is visible one night with a solar eclipse occurring the next day. I got quite a laugh at that.

88Carnophile
Lug 26, 2017, 1:27 pm

Just came across this and thought of the post upthread in which someone mentioned feminiazation of animals due to exogenous hormones in the water:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/sperm-count-western-men-plunges-10869887

89stellarexplorer
Lug 26, 2017, 4:36 pm

>88 Carnophile: Yeah, that certainly sensationalizes the issue. But the recent finding of reduced sperm counts in western men, and the question of whether it's related to exposure to environmental plastics has gotten a lot of deserved attention in the medical and mainstream media.

90Carnophile
Lug 27, 2017, 1:06 pm

>89 stellarexplorer: I wouldn't say it "sensationalizes" it.

91stellarexplorer
Lug 27, 2017, 2:37 pm

>90 Carnophile: That's cool. To me "plunges to record low as scientists blame chemicals in everyday products for crisis" does do so with its use of dramatic attention-grabbing words like "plunges" and "crisis". These are sensationalized terms used not for objective journalistic descriptive purposes. I thought that was why you posted it in the first place?

Contrast with, for one example, the Washington Post's headline: "Sperm concentration has declined 50 percent in 40 years in three continents"

Anyway, to each his own as far as what you want to call it.

Iscriviti per commentare