Gonna try to stay focused here at #SoCIA18 with "The Value of Astrobiology with or without Specimens" by Gonzalo Munevar. What can this discipline tell us, even if we never find ETlife?
Ex: Earth life favors left-handed amino acids, right-handed sugars. Are these accidents of evolution, or are there reasons? Why does DNA use only 4 bases? Why do proteins use 20 amino acids? All these would be addressed by even N=2 origins of life.
ETlife would have evolved under different history, geology, accidents (meteorite strikes etc), so alien road to complexity would be different from ours.
Well, if we fail to find organic evolution (despite expecting/predicting some), we may learn about our failed reasoning about origin of life. And pursuit of astrobiology is entwined with our understanding of extraterrestrial geologies.
Compare to ALH84001, that Martian meteorite found in 1984, where in 1996 David McKay at NASA claimed it had evidence of life (wormlike structures, globules of various hydrocarbons & sulfides). But other scientists disagreed.
One main reason why McKay's conclusions rejected: all of the compounds/structures could be produced by inorganic processes. Occam's Razor, let's not jump to the extraordinary conclusion (Martian life). Plus, the "wormlike structures" ~1/50 size of Earth bacteria.
However, there are counterarguments. Forex, the magnetite in the sample is extremely pure - on Earth only bacteria produce it so pure. Found bacterialike structures, typical bacterial food, typical bacteria excreta - all in close proximity. &more.
Controversy spurred interest in possibility of very small bacteria on Earth. And eventually located! In 2015 found ultra-small bacteria around the size of larger "Martian Wormlike Structures," and sequenced genome.
Primitive RNA bacteria could indeed be small enough to match those MWS. So at least one of our Rejection Criteria was wrong. Maybe we were too hasty... but more importantly, our rejection of Mars Life Data led to new discoveries on Earth!
That said, "Pooping Magnetite" is the name our new glam-punk band and/or interior design aesthetic.
unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Handedness comes in two groups, "right handed" and "not right handed." Most people use their right hands for almost all precision movement, but the other group is a broad spectrum from weakly-right to strongly-left. baen.com/handedness
The way we describe and define handedness creates the effect @CStuartHardwick rightly notices. Culture defines how we talk about it - but the behavior is mostly genetic. The % of righties has remained constant across continents and milennia.
Hand dominance is a more squirrelly thing than most people realize. For example, righties are better at *some* things with their left hand... and *some* of these asymmetries flip in lefties. Take a few minutes on #LeftHandersDay to learn more!
But you should read and learn from the #BlackSpecFic report anyways! The missing data is due to idiosyncrasies of the @EAPodcasts model, and has no impact on any other magazine's numbers.
Long story short, we treat reprints very differently from other magazines. For @escapepodcast specifically, they were ~45% of our 2017 stories, and our editorial process has one unified pipeline for originals + reprints together.
Regretting organizing my two Worldcon panels this year. It means I'm not free to throw up my hands in frustration and give up on programming. The last 24hrs have been the last worst icing on a bad cake that's long been baking.
I mean, my panels will be awesome. But if you're skipping programming because you don't trust the con, you've made a sensible choice.
There are always more people who want to be on programming than can fit. There's no way to make everyone happy. I get that. But this weekend's screwups come in the context of a long chain of trust-erosion.
So glad this one came out! "After Midnight at the Zap Stop" by @ouranosaurus is an awesome story - full of late-night grease, and the luckless & the worthy. But also because it's a #neuroscience teaching opportunity. Might even be a #NeuroThursday!
One offhand line explains a technology as "stimulating a particular set of mirror neurons." Which works as a story element just fine. It sounds plausible and authoritative! But as a neuroscientist, I have strong opinions about #mirrorneurons. I don't think they're real.
To be clear, mine is a controversial opinion. Many neuroscientists would disagree. But it's a hill I'm willing to fight on, especially given how often "mirror neurons" crop up in popular science.
This phenomenon - when you look away from a moving thing, and you briefly see illusory motion in the other direction - is the "Motion Aftereffect," and it comes from some very basic brain maneuvers. Who wants to join me on going full #NeuroThursday here? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_af…
Most neurons in the brain (and elsewhere) do this thing called "adaptation," where they accept whatever's going on as the new normal. For example, if you sit down with your laptop on your lap, you'll soon stop noticing the weight.
This can arise from the crudest single-cell level: some ion channels in the cell membrane have negative feedback loops that self-dampen.