Sweet tooth drives tool use in chimpanzees
30 May 2009 by Bob Holmes Magazine issue 2710.
Some chimps use multi-purpose tools to forage honey from hives (Image: clix, stock.xchng)
IF YOU'RE impressed that chimps can use tools to hunt or crack nuts, wait till you hear what they do when foraging for honey. Not only do they construct several different tools for the purpose, but they use them sequentially - an achievement approaching the abilities of early Stone Age humans.
A team led by Christophe Boesch of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, studied chimps living in Loango National Park in Gabon. They found that the chimps built and used five different types of tools to help them find beehives and extract honey: thin, straight sticks to probe the ground for buried nests; thick, blunt-ended pounders to break open beehive entrances; thinner lever-like enlargers to break down walls within the hive; collectors with frayed ends to dip honey from the opened hive and bark spoons to scoop it out. Various tools were often found near the same hive, suggesting that the chimps employ them in sequence (Journal of Human Evolution, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.04.001).
A few tools even appeared to have two uses, with enlargers at one end and collectors at the other. This is the first example of a non-human species constructing multipurpose tools.
A few tools had two uses: the first example of a non-human species making multipurpose tools
Some of the tools would require several steps to make, so making and using the entire toolkit implies an impressive ability to plan ahead, compared with, say, cracking a nut with a stone.
Probing for underground hives also requires the chimps to conceive of the existence of unseen objects. The mental skills needed for this and the tasks that follow rival those displayed by humans in the early Stone Age, says Boesch. Indeed, he believes the desire to successfully obtain honey could have been one of the pressures that favoured increased intelligence as humans evolved.
Sweet tooth drives tool use in chimpanzees
30 May 2009 by Bob Holmes Magazine issue
IF YOU'RE impressed that chimps can use tools to hunt or crack nuts, wait till you hear what they do when foraging for honey. Not only do they construct several different tools for the purpose, but they use them sequentially - an achievement approaching the abilities of early Stone Age humans.
A team led by Christophe Boesch of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, studied chimps living in Loango National Park in Gabon. They found that the chimps built and used five different types of tools to help them find beehives and extract honey: thin, straight sticks to probe the ground for buried nests; thick, blunt-ended pounders to break open beehive entrances; thinner lever-like enlargers to break down walls within the hive; collectors with frayed ends to dip honey from the opened hive and bark spoons to scoop it out. Various tools were often found near the same hive, suggesting that the chimps employ them in sequence (Journal of Human Evolution, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.04.001).
A few tools even appeared to have two uses, with enlargers at one end and collectors at the other. This is the first example of a non-human species constructing multipurpose tools.
A few tools had two uses: the first example of a non-human species making multipurpose tools
Some of the tools would require several steps to make, so making and using the entire toolkit implies an impressive ability to plan ahead, compared with, say, cracking a nut with a stone.
Probing for underground hives also requires the chimps to conceive of the existence of unseen objects. The mental skills needed for this and the tasks that follow rival those displayed by humans in the early Stone Age, says Boesch. Indeed, he believes the desire to successfully obtain honey could have been one of the pressures that favoured increased intelligence as humans evolved.
domingo, 31 de maio de 2009
Decoding antiquity: Eight scripts that still can't be read
Decoding antiquity: Eight scripts that still can't be read
27 May 2009 by Andrew Robinson
WRITING is one of the greatest inventions in human history. Perhaps the greatest, since it made history possible. Without writing, there could be no accumulation of knowledge, no historical record, no science - and of course no books, newspapers or internet.
The first true writing we know of is Sumerian cuneiform - consisting mainly of wedge-shaped impressions on clay tablets - which was used more than 5000 years ago in Mesopotamia. Soon afterwards writing appeared in Egypt, and much later in Europe, China and Central America. Civilisations have invented hundreds of different writing systems. Some, such as the one you are reading now, have remained in use, but most have fallen into disuse.
These dead scripts tantalise us. We can see that they are writing, but what do they say?
That is the great challenge of decipherment: to reach deep into the past and hear the voices of the dead. When the Egyptian hieroglyphs were deciphered in 1823, they extended the span of recorded history by around 2000 years and allowed us to read the words of Ramses the Great. The decipherment of the Mayan glyphs revealed that the New World had a sophisticated, literate civilisation at the time of the Roman empire.
So how do you decipher an unknown script? There are two minimum requirements. First, there has to be enough material to work with. Secondly, there must be some link to a known language. It helps enormously if there is a bilingual inscription or identifiable proper names - the Rosetta Stone (see image), for example, is written in both ancient Egyptian and ancient Greek, and also contains the name of the Ptolemy dynasty. If there is no clear link, an attempt must be made to relate the concealed language to a known one.
Many ancient scripts have been deciphered (see "The great decipherments" and The ancient scripts), but some significant ones have yet to be cracked. These fall into three broad categories: a known script writing an unknown language; an unknown script writing a known language; and an unknown script writing an unknown language. The first two categories are more likely to yield to decipherment; the third - which recalls Donald Rumsfeld's infamous "unknown unknowns" - is a much tougher proposition, though this doesn't keep people from trying.
Most of the undeciphered scripts featured here have been partially deciphered, and well-known researchers have claimed that they have deciphered some much more fully. Further progress is possible for most of them, especially if new inscriptions are discovered, which fortunately happens fairly often.
27 May 2009 by Andrew Robinson
WRITING is one of the greatest inventions in human history. Perhaps the greatest, since it made history possible. Without writing, there could be no accumulation of knowledge, no historical record, no science - and of course no books, newspapers or internet.
The first true writing we know of is Sumerian cuneiform - consisting mainly of wedge-shaped impressions on clay tablets - which was used more than 5000 years ago in Mesopotamia. Soon afterwards writing appeared in Egypt, and much later in Europe, China and Central America. Civilisations have invented hundreds of different writing systems. Some, such as the one you are reading now, have remained in use, but most have fallen into disuse.
These dead scripts tantalise us. We can see that they are writing, but what do they say?
That is the great challenge of decipherment: to reach deep into the past and hear the voices of the dead. When the Egyptian hieroglyphs were deciphered in 1823, they extended the span of recorded history by around 2000 years and allowed us to read the words of Ramses the Great. The decipherment of the Mayan glyphs revealed that the New World had a sophisticated, literate civilisation at the time of the Roman empire.
So how do you decipher an unknown script? There are two minimum requirements. First, there has to be enough material to work with. Secondly, there must be some link to a known language. It helps enormously if there is a bilingual inscription or identifiable proper names - the Rosetta Stone (see image), for example, is written in both ancient Egyptian and ancient Greek, and also contains the name of the Ptolemy dynasty. If there is no clear link, an attempt must be made to relate the concealed language to a known one.
Many ancient scripts have been deciphered (see "The great decipherments" and The ancient scripts), but some significant ones have yet to be cracked. These fall into three broad categories: a known script writing an unknown language; an unknown script writing a known language; and an unknown script writing an unknown language. The first two categories are more likely to yield to decipherment; the third - which recalls Donald Rumsfeld's infamous "unknown unknowns" - is a much tougher proposition, though this doesn't keep people from trying.
Most of the undeciphered scripts featured here have been partially deciphered, and well-known researchers have claimed that they have deciphered some much more fully. Further progress is possible for most of them, especially if new inscriptions are discovered, which fortunately happens fairly often.
sábado, 30 de maio de 2009
Stretching Your Mouth Affects What You Hear
Stretching Your Mouth Affects What You Hear
Depending on how a mechanical device pulls and tugs areas around the mouth, the volunteer will hear and interpret speech sounds differently
By Erica Westly Scientific American Magazine - May 28, 2009
Neuroscience textbooks typically portray the five senses as separate entities, but in the real world the senses frequently interact, as anyone who has tried to enjoy dinner with a stuffy nose can attest. Hearing and vision seem similarly connected, the most famous example being the “McGurk effect,” where visual cues, such as moving lips, affect how people hear speech. And now new research shows that touch can influence speech perception, too.
David Ostry, a neuroscientist with co-appointments at McGill University and the New Haven, Conn.–based speech center Haskins Laboratories, has been studying for years the relation between speech and the somatosensory system, the network of receptors in skin and muscle that report information on tactile stimuli to the brain. In his most recent study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, he and two Haskins colleagues found that subjects heard words differently when their mouths were stretched into different positions. The results have implications for neuroscientists studying speech and hearing as well as for therapists looking for new ways to treat speech disorders.
In the study, a specially designed robotic device stretched the mouths of volunteers slightly up, down or backward while they listened to a computer-generated continuum of speech verbalizations that sounded like “head” or “had,” or something in between. When the subjects’ mouths were stretched upward, closer to the position needed to say “head,” they were more likely to hear the sounds as “head,” especially with the more ambiguous output. If the subjects’ mouths were stretched downward, as if to say “had,” they were more likely to hear “had,” even when the sounds being generated were closer to “head.” Stretching subjects’ mouths backward had no effect, implying a position-specific response. Moreover, the timing of the stretch had to match that of the sounds exactly to get an effect: the stretch altered speech perception only when it mimicked realistic vocalizations.
Depending on how a mechanical device pulls and tugs areas around the mouth, the volunteer will hear and interpret speech sounds differently
By Erica Westly Scientific American Magazine - May 28, 2009
Neuroscience textbooks typically portray the five senses as separate entities, but in the real world the senses frequently interact, as anyone who has tried to enjoy dinner with a stuffy nose can attest. Hearing and vision seem similarly connected, the most famous example being the “McGurk effect,” where visual cues, such as moving lips, affect how people hear speech. And now new research shows that touch can influence speech perception, too.
David Ostry, a neuroscientist with co-appointments at McGill University and the New Haven, Conn.–based speech center Haskins Laboratories, has been studying for years the relation between speech and the somatosensory system, the network of receptors in skin and muscle that report information on tactile stimuli to the brain. In his most recent study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, he and two Haskins colleagues found that subjects heard words differently when their mouths were stretched into different positions. The results have implications for neuroscientists studying speech and hearing as well as for therapists looking for new ways to treat speech disorders.
In the study, a specially designed robotic device stretched the mouths of volunteers slightly up, down or backward while they listened to a computer-generated continuum of speech verbalizations that sounded like “head” or “had,” or something in between. When the subjects’ mouths were stretched upward, closer to the position needed to say “head,” they were more likely to hear the sounds as “head,” especially with the more ambiguous output. If the subjects’ mouths were stretched downward, as if to say “had,” they were more likely to hear “had,” even when the sounds being generated were closer to “head.” Stretching subjects’ mouths backward had no effect, implying a position-specific response. Moreover, the timing of the stretch had to match that of the sounds exactly to get an effect: the stretch altered speech perception only when it mimicked realistic vocalizations.
sábado, 23 de maio de 2009
Rethinking the Global Money Supply
Rethinking the Global Money Supply
Less reliance on the U.S. dollar by international reserves would be widely beneficial
By Jeffrey D. Sachs From the June 2009 Scientific American Magazine
The People’s Bank of China jolted the financial world in March with a proposal for a new global monetary arrangement. The proposal initially attracted attention mostly for its signal of China’s rising global economic power, but its content also has much to commend it.
A century ago almost all the world’s currencies were linked to gold and most of the rest to silver. Currencies were readily interchangeable, gold anchored exchange rates and the physical supply of gold stabilized the money supply over the long term.
The gold standard collapsed in the wake of World War I. Wartime financing with unbacked paper currency led to widespread inflation. European nations tried to resume the gold standard in the 1920s, but the gold supply was insufficient and inelastic. A ferocious monetary squeeze and competition across countries for limited gold reserves followed and contributed to the Great Depression. After World War II, nations adopted the dollar-exchange standard. The U.S. dollar was backed by gold at $35 per ounce, while the rest of the world’s currencies were backed by dollars. The global money stock could expand through dollar reserves.
President Richard Nixon delinked the dollar from gold in 1971 (to offset the U.S.’s expansionary monetary policies in the Vietnam era), and major currencies began to float against one another in value. But most global trade and financial transactions remained dollar-denominated, as did most foreign exchange reserves held by the world’s central banks. The exchange rates of many currencies also remained tightly tied to the dollar.
This special role of the dollar in the international monetary system has contributed to the global scale of the current crisis, which is rooted in a combination of overly expansionary monetary policies by the Federal Reserve and lax financial regulations. Easy money fed an unprecedented surge in bank credits, first in the U.S. and then elsewhere, as international banks funded themselves in the U.S. money markets. As bank loans flowed into other economies, many foreign central banks intervened to maintain currency stability with the dollar. The surge in the U.S. money supply was thus matched by a surge in the money supplies of countries linked to the U.S. dollar. The result was a temporary worldwide credit bubble, followed by a wave of loan defaults, falling housing prices, banking losses and a dramatic tightening of bank lending.
China has now proposed that the world move to a more symmetrical monetary system, in which nations peg their currencies to a representative basket of others rather than to the dollar alone. The “special drawing rights” of the International Monetary Fund is such a basket of four currencies (the dollar, pound, yen and euro), although the Chinese rightly suggest that it should be rebased to reflect a broader range of them, including China’s yuan. U.S. monetary policy would accordingly lose its excessive global influence over money supplies and credit conditions. On average, the dollar should depreciate against Asian currencies to encourage more U.S. net exports to Asia. The euro should probably strengthen against the dollar but weaken against Asian currencies.
The U.S. response to the Chinese proposal was revealing. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner initially described himself as open to exploring the idea; his candor quickly caused the dollar to weaken in value—which it needs to do for the good of the U.S. economy. That weakening, however, led Geithner to reverse himself within minutes by underscoring that the U.S. dollar would remain the world’s reserve currency for the foreseeable future.
Geithner’s first reaction was right. The Chinese proposal requires study but seems consistent with the long-term shift to a more balanced world economy in which the U.S. plays a monetary role more coequal with Europe and Asia. No change of global monetary system will happen abruptly, but the changes ahead are not under the sole control of the U.S. We will probably move over time to a world of greater monetary cooperation within Asia, a rising role for the Chinese yuan, and greater symmetry in overall world monetary and financial relations
Less reliance on the U.S. dollar by international reserves would be widely beneficial
By Jeffrey D. Sachs From the June 2009 Scientific American Magazine
The People’s Bank of China jolted the financial world in March with a proposal for a new global monetary arrangement. The proposal initially attracted attention mostly for its signal of China’s rising global economic power, but its content also has much to commend it.
A century ago almost all the world’s currencies were linked to gold and most of the rest to silver. Currencies were readily interchangeable, gold anchored exchange rates and the physical supply of gold stabilized the money supply over the long term.
The gold standard collapsed in the wake of World War I. Wartime financing with unbacked paper currency led to widespread inflation. European nations tried to resume the gold standard in the 1920s, but the gold supply was insufficient and inelastic. A ferocious monetary squeeze and competition across countries for limited gold reserves followed and contributed to the Great Depression. After World War II, nations adopted the dollar-exchange standard. The U.S. dollar was backed by gold at $35 per ounce, while the rest of the world’s currencies were backed by dollars. The global money stock could expand through dollar reserves.
President Richard Nixon delinked the dollar from gold in 1971 (to offset the U.S.’s expansionary monetary policies in the Vietnam era), and major currencies began to float against one another in value. But most global trade and financial transactions remained dollar-denominated, as did most foreign exchange reserves held by the world’s central banks. The exchange rates of many currencies also remained tightly tied to the dollar.
This special role of the dollar in the international monetary system has contributed to the global scale of the current crisis, which is rooted in a combination of overly expansionary monetary policies by the Federal Reserve and lax financial regulations. Easy money fed an unprecedented surge in bank credits, first in the U.S. and then elsewhere, as international banks funded themselves in the U.S. money markets. As bank loans flowed into other economies, many foreign central banks intervened to maintain currency stability with the dollar. The surge in the U.S. money supply was thus matched by a surge in the money supplies of countries linked to the U.S. dollar. The result was a temporary worldwide credit bubble, followed by a wave of loan defaults, falling housing prices, banking losses and a dramatic tightening of bank lending.
China has now proposed that the world move to a more symmetrical monetary system, in which nations peg their currencies to a representative basket of others rather than to the dollar alone. The “special drawing rights” of the International Monetary Fund is such a basket of four currencies (the dollar, pound, yen and euro), although the Chinese rightly suggest that it should be rebased to reflect a broader range of them, including China’s yuan. U.S. monetary policy would accordingly lose its excessive global influence over money supplies and credit conditions. On average, the dollar should depreciate against Asian currencies to encourage more U.S. net exports to Asia. The euro should probably strengthen against the dollar but weaken against Asian currencies.
The U.S. response to the Chinese proposal was revealing. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner initially described himself as open to exploring the idea; his candor quickly caused the dollar to weaken in value—which it needs to do for the good of the U.S. economy. That weakening, however, led Geithner to reverse himself within minutes by underscoring that the U.S. dollar would remain the world’s reserve currency for the foreseeable future.
Geithner’s first reaction was right. The Chinese proposal requires study but seems consistent with the long-term shift to a more balanced world economy in which the U.S. plays a monetary role more coequal with Europe and Asia. No change of global monetary system will happen abruptly, but the changes ahead are not under the sole control of the U.S. We will probably move over time to a world of greater monetary cooperation within Asia, a rising role for the Chinese yuan, and greater symmetry in overall world monetary and financial relations
Old seasonal flu antibodies target swine flu virus
Old seasonal flu antibodies target swine flu virus
Lab results could explain why young patients are hardest hit by current H1N1 strain.
Heidi Ledford Published online 21 May 2009 | Nature
Antibodies against some seasonal flu strains from prior years may be active against the new H1N1 swine flu currently circulating the globe, a recent study reports. The findings suggest an explanation for why swine flu appears to infect the young more often than the elderly, who are normally more susceptible to seasonal flu viruses.
Only 1% of swine flu cases in the United States are in people over the age of 65.CDC
The study, published today in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, analyzed blood samples taken from 359 participants in flu vaccine studies conducted from 2005 to 2009. 33% of the samples from people over 60 years old had antibodies that reacted with the swine flu virus, as compared to 6%-9% of the samples from people aged 18–64 years, and none of the samples taken from children 1.
The results match the apparent current epidemiology of swine flu infection, says Anne Schuchat, interim deputy director for the Science and Public Health Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta. Most cases of swine flu have occurred in people who are under 60 years old, and only 1% of confirmed swine flu infections in the United States were in patients over the age of 65.
Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution, Schuchat urged in a press briefing today. Researchers have shown that the antibodies react with the virus in test-tube assays, but they have not yet shown that the antibodies can fend off the virus in animals or people. "Whether this particular assay will pan out over time as predictive of clinical protection, we can't say," Schuchat said.
Lab results could explain why young patients are hardest hit by current H1N1 strain.
Heidi Ledford Published online 21 May 2009 | Nature
Antibodies against some seasonal flu strains from prior years may be active against the new H1N1 swine flu currently circulating the globe, a recent study reports. The findings suggest an explanation for why swine flu appears to infect the young more often than the elderly, who are normally more susceptible to seasonal flu viruses.
Only 1% of swine flu cases in the United States are in people over the age of 65.CDC
The study, published today in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, analyzed blood samples taken from 359 participants in flu vaccine studies conducted from 2005 to 2009. 33% of the samples from people over 60 years old had antibodies that reacted with the swine flu virus, as compared to 6%-9% of the samples from people aged 18–64 years, and none of the samples taken from children 1.
The results match the apparent current epidemiology of swine flu infection, says Anne Schuchat, interim deputy director for the Science and Public Health Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta. Most cases of swine flu have occurred in people who are under 60 years old, and only 1% of confirmed swine flu infections in the United States were in patients over the age of 65.
Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution, Schuchat urged in a press briefing today. Researchers have shown that the antibodies react with the virus in test-tube assays, but they have not yet shown that the antibodies can fend off the virus in animals or people. "Whether this particular assay will pan out over time as predictive of clinical protection, we can't say," Schuchat said.
Lab results could explain why young patients are hardest hit by current H1N1 strain.
Heidi Ledford Published online 21 May 2009 | Nature
Antibodies against some seasonal flu strains from prior years may be active against the new H1N1 swine flu currently circulating the globe, a recent study reports. The findings suggest an explanation for why swine flu appears to infect the young more often than the elderly, who are normally more susceptible to seasonal flu viruses.
Only 1% of swine flu cases in the United States are in people over the age of 65.CDC
The study, published today in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, analyzed blood samples taken from 359 participants in flu vaccine studies conducted from 2005 to 2009. 33% of the samples from people over 60 years old had antibodies that reacted with the swine flu virus, as compared to 6%-9% of the samples from people aged 18–64 years, and none of the samples taken from children 1.
The results match the apparent current epidemiology of swine flu infection, says Anne Schuchat, interim deputy director for the Science and Public Health Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta. Most cases of swine flu have occurred in people who are under 60 years old, and only 1% of confirmed swine flu infections in the United States were in patients over the age of 65.
Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution, Schuchat urged in a press briefing today. Researchers have shown that the antibodies react with the virus in test-tube assays, but they have not yet shown that the antibodies can fend off the virus in animals or people. "Whether this particular assay will pan out over time as predictive of clinical protection, we can't say," Schuchat said.
Lab results could explain why young patients are hardest hit by current H1N1 strain.
Heidi Ledford Published online 21 May 2009 | Nature
Antibodies against some seasonal flu strains from prior years may be active against the new H1N1 swine flu currently circulating the globe, a recent study reports. The findings suggest an explanation for why swine flu appears to infect the young more often than the elderly, who are normally more susceptible to seasonal flu viruses.
Only 1% of swine flu cases in the United States are in people over the age of 65.CDC
The study, published today in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, analyzed blood samples taken from 359 participants in flu vaccine studies conducted from 2005 to 2009. 33% of the samples from people over 60 years old had antibodies that reacted with the swine flu virus, as compared to 6%-9% of the samples from people aged 18–64 years, and none of the samples taken from children 1.
The results match the apparent current epidemiology of swine flu infection, says Anne Schuchat, interim deputy director for the Science and Public Health Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta. Most cases of swine flu have occurred in people who are under 60 years old, and only 1% of confirmed swine flu infections in the United States were in patients over the age of 65.
Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution, Schuchat urged in a press briefing today. Researchers have shown that the antibodies react with the virus in test-tube assays, but they have not yet shown that the antibodies can fend off the virus in animals or people. "Whether this particular assay will pan out over time as predictive of clinical protection, we can't say," Schuchat said.
sexta-feira, 22 de maio de 2009
Adaptor die
Adaptor die
Mar 5th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Consumer electronics: A new push is under way to let mobile
IF THE father of electromagnetism, Michael Faraday, could be transported into the 21st century, he would no doubt be awestruck by the iPhone. After five hours of tapping its touch-screen to browse the internet, make calls, play games and determine his location via satellite-positioning, he might also find himself a little puzzled. Why, with all the advances in technology and communications, would such a sophisticated device still need to be plugged in to be recharged? If phone calls and web pages can be beamed through the air to portable devices, then why not electrical power, too? It is a question many consumers and device manufacturers have been asking themselves for some time—and one that both new and established technology companies are now hoping to answer.
To seasoned observers of the electronics industry, the promise of wireless recharging sounds depressingly familiar. In 2004 Splashpower, a British technology firm, was citing “very strong” interest from consumer-electronics firms for its wireless charging pad. Based on the principle of electromagnetic induction that Faraday had discovered in the 19th century, the company’s “Splashpad” contained a coil that generated a magnetic field when a current flowed through it. When a mobile device containing a corresponding coil was brought near the pad, the process was reversed as the magnetic field generated a current in the second coil, charging the device’s battery without the use of wires. Unfortunately, although Faraday’s principles of electromagnetic induction have stood the test of time, Splashpower has not—it was declared bankrupt last year without having launched a single product.
Thanks to its simplicity and scalability, electromagnetic induction is still the technology of choice among many of the remaining companies in the wireless-charging arena. But, as Splashpower found, turning the theory into profitable practice is not straightforward. One of the main difficulties for companies has been persuading manufacturers to incorporate charging modules into their devices. But lately there have been some promising developments.
Mar 5th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Consumer electronics: A new push is under way to let mobile
IF THE father of electromagnetism, Michael Faraday, could be transported into the 21st century, he would no doubt be awestruck by the iPhone. After five hours of tapping its touch-screen to browse the internet, make calls, play games and determine his location via satellite-positioning, he might also find himself a little puzzled. Why, with all the advances in technology and communications, would such a sophisticated device still need to be plugged in to be recharged? If phone calls and web pages can be beamed through the air to portable devices, then why not electrical power, too? It is a question many consumers and device manufacturers have been asking themselves for some time—and one that both new and established technology companies are now hoping to answer.
To seasoned observers of the electronics industry, the promise of wireless recharging sounds depressingly familiar. In 2004 Splashpower, a British technology firm, was citing “very strong” interest from consumer-electronics firms for its wireless charging pad. Based on the principle of electromagnetic induction that Faraday had discovered in the 19th century, the company’s “Splashpad” contained a coil that generated a magnetic field when a current flowed through it. When a mobile device containing a corresponding coil was brought near the pad, the process was reversed as the magnetic field generated a current in the second coil, charging the device’s battery without the use of wires. Unfortunately, although Faraday’s principles of electromagnetic induction have stood the test of time, Splashpower has not—it was declared bankrupt last year without having launched a single product.
Thanks to its simplicity and scalability, electromagnetic induction is still the technology of choice among many of the remaining companies in the wireless-charging arena. But, as Splashpower found, turning the theory into profitable practice is not straightforward. One of the main difficulties for companies has been persuading manufacturers to incorporate charging modules into their devices. But lately there have been some promising developments.
domingo, 10 de maio de 2009
Suffering for science
Suffering for science
May 7th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Europe votes for better regulation of animal experiments
FIFTY years ago, William Russell, a classics scholar, and Rex Burch, a microbiologist, outlined how the use of animals in scientific research could be made more humane. They wanted scientists to restrict the use of animals, to refine their experiments to minimise distress and to replace testing on animals with alternative techniques. Although the “3Rs” have become a guiding principle, the number of animals used today remains far higher than Russell and Burch would have accepted. Finally, that may be changing. On May 5th the European Parliament voted to update the rules on the use of animals in research.
Some 12m animals are used in scientific procedures each year in Europe. Most are mice and rats. The European directive on how such animals should be treated dates from 1986, long before research led to the breeding of the first creatures that carried the genes of another species. Some countries have more restrictions than others. Britain, for example, uses far fewer primates in scientific research than does France. The European Commission said in November 2008 that it wanted to update the rules to better protect laboratory animals throughout Europe. It received hundreds of amendments, but has adopted few of them.
In particular, the politicians decided against an outright ban on the use of great apes. Instead they voted to allow such experiments only when they are intended to conserve the number of chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orang-utans, or when using these species becomes essential to tackling a disease that threatens people. In practice, no great apes have been used in Europe for years and there are no breeding colonies from which to take them. In America, chimpanzees are being used to develop a vaccine for hepatitis C because they are the only creatures, other than humans, to be afflicted by the disease.
Another proposal was to ban the use of primates caught in the wild. Scientists prefer to work with the offspring of animals raised in laboratories because knowledge of the creatures’ complete medical history makes them more dependable.All experiments will be classified according to the degree of pain and distress they cause. If mild or moderate, animals can be used again. Those that experience severe pain will be killed. The legislation would allow mild procedures to be approved by an employer. But those causing moderate or severe pain would need the permission of a national authority.
May 7th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Europe votes for better regulation of animal experiments
FIFTY years ago, William Russell, a classics scholar, and Rex Burch, a microbiologist, outlined how the use of animals in scientific research could be made more humane. They wanted scientists to restrict the use of animals, to refine their experiments to minimise distress and to replace testing on animals with alternative techniques. Although the “3Rs” have become a guiding principle, the number of animals used today remains far higher than Russell and Burch would have accepted. Finally, that may be changing. On May 5th the European Parliament voted to update the rules on the use of animals in research.
Some 12m animals are used in scientific procedures each year in Europe. Most are mice and rats. The European directive on how such animals should be treated dates from 1986, long before research led to the breeding of the first creatures that carried the genes of another species. Some countries have more restrictions than others. Britain, for example, uses far fewer primates in scientific research than does France. The European Commission said in November 2008 that it wanted to update the rules to better protect laboratory animals throughout Europe. It received hundreds of amendments, but has adopted few of them.
In particular, the politicians decided against an outright ban on the use of great apes. Instead they voted to allow such experiments only when they are intended to conserve the number of chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orang-utans, or when using these species becomes essential to tackling a disease that threatens people. In practice, no great apes have been used in Europe for years and there are no breeding colonies from which to take them. In America, chimpanzees are being used to develop a vaccine for hepatitis C because they are the only creatures, other than humans, to be afflicted by the disease.
Another proposal was to ban the use of primates caught in the wild. Scientists prefer to work with the offspring of animals raised in laboratories because knowledge of the creatures’ complete medical history makes them more dependable.All experiments will be classified according to the degree of pain and distress they cause. If mild or moderate, animals can be used again. Those that experience severe pain will be killed. The legislation would allow mild procedures to be approved by an employer. But those causing moderate or severe pain would need the permission of a national authority.
The sound of silence
The sound of silence
May 7th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Sound generators will make electric and hybrid cars safer
WHEN cars run on electric power they not only save fuel and cut emissions but also run more quietly. Ordinarily, people might welcome quieter cars on the roads. However, as the use of hybrid and electric vehicles grows, a new concern is growing too: pedestrians and cyclists find it hard to hear them coming, especially when the cars are moving slowly through a busy town or manoeuvring in a car park. Some drivers say that when their cars are in electric mode people are more likely to step out in front of them. The solution, many now believe, is to fit electric and hybrid cars with external sound systems.
A bill going through the American Congress wants to establish a minimum level of sound for vehicles that are not using an internal-combustion engine, so that blind people and other pedestrians can hear them coming. The bill’s proponents also want that audible alert to be one that will help people judge the direction and speed of the vehicle. A similar idea is being explored by the European Commission.
Although there is little data on accidents, the latest research suggests there is cause for concern. Vehicles operating in electric mode can be particularly hard to hear below 20mph (32kph), according to experiments by Lawrence Rosenblum and his colleagues at the University of California, Riverside. Above that speed the sound of the tyres and of air flowing over the vehicle start to make it more audible.
The researchers made sophisticated recordings of Toyota Prius hybrids running on electric power and petrol-engined cars approaching at 5mph from different directions. These were played to a group of subjects wearing headphones. The subjects were asked to press one of two buttons to identify which way the vehicle was coming from as quickly and accurately as possible. As expected, they could determine the direction of the petrol-engined cars much faster. When natural background sounds, like the engine tickover of a parked car, were added, the hybrids’ direction sometimes could not be detected until they were perilously close. Both sighted and blind subjects gave similar results.
May 7th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Sound generators will make electric and hybrid cars safer
WHEN cars run on electric power they not only save fuel and cut emissions but also run more quietly. Ordinarily, people might welcome quieter cars on the roads. However, as the use of hybrid and electric vehicles grows, a new concern is growing too: pedestrians and cyclists find it hard to hear them coming, especially when the cars are moving slowly through a busy town or manoeuvring in a car park. Some drivers say that when their cars are in electric mode people are more likely to step out in front of them. The solution, many now believe, is to fit electric and hybrid cars with external sound systems.
A bill going through the American Congress wants to establish a minimum level of sound for vehicles that are not using an internal-combustion engine, so that blind people and other pedestrians can hear them coming. The bill’s proponents also want that audible alert to be one that will help people judge the direction and speed of the vehicle. A similar idea is being explored by the European Commission.
Although there is little data on accidents, the latest research suggests there is cause for concern. Vehicles operating in electric mode can be particularly hard to hear below 20mph (32kph), according to experiments by Lawrence Rosenblum and his colleagues at the University of California, Riverside. Above that speed the sound of the tyres and of air flowing over the vehicle start to make it more audible.
The researchers made sophisticated recordings of Toyota Prius hybrids running on electric power and petrol-engined cars approaching at 5mph from different directions. These were played to a group of subjects wearing headphones. The subjects were asked to press one of two buttons to identify which way the vehicle was coming from as quickly and accurately as possible. As expected, they could determine the direction of the petrol-engined cars much faster. When natural background sounds, like the engine tickover of a parked car, were added, the hybrids’ direction sometimes could not be detected until they were perilously close. Both sighted and blind subjects gave similar results.
What a waste
What a waste
May 7th 2009 | CAIRO
From The Economist print edition
Is it wise to kill the capital’s rubbish-ridding pigs?
IN A city not much noted for efficiency, Cairo’s traditional rubbish collectors, or Zabbaleen, have long been something of a paragon. While failing to keep Egypt’s teeming capital very clean, the Zabbaleen, nearly all of them members of Egypt’s 6m-plus Coptic Christian minority, do an excellent job of processing waste(lixo). Trucking refuse to the half-dozen rag-picking settlements that ring the city, they carefully sift out(separar) recyclable glass, paper and plastic. The rest is fed to pigs.
But in response to the global threat of swine flu, Egypt’s government has decreed (decretado)that the pigs, perhaps 250,000 of them, must go. Teams of surgical-mask-wearing pig-hunters were met at first with a barrage of rocks, bottles and manure(esterco) hurled(jogar violentamente) by the angry Zabbaleen. Now, backed by riot police and promising compensation, they are systematically hauling(lever) the beasts off for slaughter(abate, extermínio), a process expected to take several months.
With no cases of swine flu reported in Egypt to date, officials from both the UN and the World Health Organisation have condemned Egypt’s porcicide as a drastic overreaction. Some disgruntled(mal humorado) Copts, who have long complained of petty(pequena,discriminatória) discrimination and fear the influence of Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, say the move unfairly(injusto) targets(alvos) them. Others, noting that Egypt’s minister of health consulted Coptic clergy before announcing the cull(abate), see it as a plot by wealthy businessmen to uproot (arrrancar pela raiz, extirpar, remover)the Zabbaleen and seize (tomar, arrancar)their valuable land on the edge(limite) of the city. Still more rumours explain the government’s swinophobia as a ploy(blefe) to distract attention from other failings, such as not paying a promised salary bonus.
Yet most of the 80m-odd Egyptians seem relieved. While Muslims shun(afastar) pigs as ritually unclean, many Copts also fear them as disease-carriers, with panic over swine flu heightened as Egypt has suffered at least 26 deaths from avian flu since 2006, the most in any country outside Asia. Besides, the crowded pig pens(chiqueiro), surrounded by mounds(montes) of self-combusting biodegradable slime(lama, sujeira) and hemmed in(rodeado) by dense human settlement, are a stinky(fedorento) eyesore(algo desprezível). But the question no one seems to ask is, if pigs are no longer there to munch away(devorar) at them, where will Cairo’s giant piles of leftovers(sobras) go?
May 7th 2009 | CAIRO
From The Economist print edition
Is it wise to kill the capital’s rubbish-ridding pigs?
IN A city not much noted for efficiency, Cairo’s traditional rubbish collectors, or Zabbaleen, have long been something of a paragon. While failing to keep Egypt’s teeming capital very clean, the Zabbaleen, nearly all of them members of Egypt’s 6m-plus Coptic Christian minority, do an excellent job of processing waste(lixo). Trucking refuse to the half-dozen rag-picking settlements that ring the city, they carefully sift out(separar) recyclable glass, paper and plastic. The rest is fed to pigs.
But in response to the global threat of swine flu, Egypt’s government has decreed (decretado)that the pigs, perhaps 250,000 of them, must go. Teams of surgical-mask-wearing pig-hunters were met at first with a barrage of rocks, bottles and manure(esterco) hurled(jogar violentamente) by the angry Zabbaleen. Now, backed by riot police and promising compensation, they are systematically hauling(lever) the beasts off for slaughter(abate, extermínio), a process expected to take several months.
With no cases of swine flu reported in Egypt to date, officials from both the UN and the World Health Organisation have condemned Egypt’s porcicide as a drastic overreaction. Some disgruntled(mal humorado) Copts, who have long complained of petty(pequena,discriminatória) discrimination and fear the influence of Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, say the move unfairly(injusto) targets(alvos) them. Others, noting that Egypt’s minister of health consulted Coptic clergy before announcing the cull(abate), see it as a plot by wealthy businessmen to uproot (arrrancar pela raiz, extirpar, remover)the Zabbaleen and seize (tomar, arrancar)their valuable land on the edge(limite) of the city. Still more rumours explain the government’s swinophobia as a ploy(blefe) to distract attention from other failings, such as not paying a promised salary bonus.
Yet most of the 80m-odd Egyptians seem relieved. While Muslims shun(afastar) pigs as ritually unclean, many Copts also fear them as disease-carriers, with panic over swine flu heightened as Egypt has suffered at least 26 deaths from avian flu since 2006, the most in any country outside Asia. Besides, the crowded pig pens(chiqueiro), surrounded by mounds(montes) of self-combusting biodegradable slime(lama, sujeira) and hemmed in(rodeado) by dense human settlement, are a stinky(fedorento) eyesore(algo desprezível). But the question no one seems to ask is, if pigs are no longer there to munch away(devorar) at them, where will Cairo’s giant piles of leftovers(sobras) go?
sábado, 2 de maio de 2009
The pandemic threat
The pandemic threat(ameaça)
Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition
It’s deadly serious; so even if the current threat fades, the world needs to be better armed
Illustration by KAL
IT IS said that no battle-plan survives contact with the enemy. This was certainly true of the plan drawn up over the past few years to combat an influenza pandemic. The generals of global health assumed that the enemy would be avian flu, probably passed from hens to humans, and that it would strike first in southern China or South-East Asia. In fact, the flu started in an unknown pig, and the attack came in Mexico, not Asia.
The hens, though, deserve some credit. The world has not had a pandemic (a global epidemic) of influenza since 1968. Four decades are long enough to forget that something is dangerous, and people might have done so had they not spent the past ten years considering the possibility that a form of bird flu which emerged in Hong Kong in 1997 might be one mutation away from going worldwide.
The new was raised on April 29th to just one notch below the level of a certified pandemic by the World Health Organisation. In an effort to halt(parar) the spread of the disease, Mexico’s president, Felipe Calderón, has announced that non-essential services should close down between May 1st and 5th, and people should stay at home. Part of the reason for worry is that, unlike ordinary flu, which mostly carries off the old, the victims of this disease are mostly young and otherwise healthy.
Still, this epidemic has not actually killed many people yet. That there have been a mere handful of confirmed deaths is probably the result of a lack of proper tests. But even if all the possibles are counted in, a couple of hundred fatalities cannot compare with the 30,000 deaths caused in America each year by seasonal influenza. So how scared should we be?
Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition
It’s deadly serious; so even if the current threat fades, the world needs to be better armed
Illustration by KAL
IT IS said that no battle-plan survives contact with the enemy. This was certainly true of the plan drawn up over the past few years to combat an influenza pandemic. The generals of global health assumed that the enemy would be avian flu, probably passed from hens to humans, and that it would strike first in southern China or South-East Asia. In fact, the flu started in an unknown pig, and the attack came in Mexico, not Asia.
The hens, though, deserve some credit. The world has not had a pandemic (a global epidemic) of influenza since 1968. Four decades are long enough to forget that something is dangerous, and people might have done so had they not spent the past ten years considering the possibility that a form of bird flu which emerged in Hong Kong in 1997 might be one mutation away from going worldwide.
The new was raised on April 29th to just one notch below the level of a certified pandemic by the World Health Organisation. In an effort to halt(parar) the spread of the disease, Mexico’s president, Felipe Calderón, has announced that non-essential services should close down between May 1st and 5th, and people should stay at home. Part of the reason for worry is that, unlike ordinary flu, which mostly carries off the old, the victims of this disease are mostly young and otherwise healthy.
Still, this epidemic has not actually killed many people yet. That there have been a mere handful of confirmed deaths is probably the result of a lack of proper tests. But even if all the possibles are counted in, a couple of hundred fatalities cannot compare with the 30,000 deaths caused in America each year by seasonal influenza. So how scared should we be?
Pain but no panic
Pain but no panic
Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition
A traditionally crisis-prone region is belying its reputation. But that has not spared it from the world recession
UNTIL recently many Latin Americans saw the financial crisis and the global recession as events happening somewhere else. But in the past six months the region’s economies have swiftly slumped along with the rest of the world, showing double-digit falls in industrial output. Workers have been laid off in Mexican car factories, Brazilian aircraft plants and Peruvian building sites. For Latin Americans such woes are sadly familiar: income per person in the region has fallen on five separate occasions since 1980. What is different this time is that Latin Americans are faring no worse than the rest of the world. And there are reasons to believe that their recession may be relatively short and mild. That may not be cause for celebration but it is a crumb of comfort.
The bad news is, however, quite bad. Latin American countries have been hit by four different recessionary forces. As the financial crisis in the developed world transmuted into a collapse of manufacturing, trade plunged: total exports for five of the region’s larger economies fell by a third between August and December, partly because fewer goods were sold and partly because the price of commodities fell.
The flow of capital to the region also dried up, leading to a steep rise in borrowing costs for governments and companies. The Institute of International Finance, a bankers’ group, thinks that net private capital flows to Latin America will fall by more than half this year compared with last, to $43 billion (down from a record $184 billion in 2007). Foreign banks have trimmed credit lines, especially for trade. In addition, remittances from Latin Americans working abroad have begun to contract, and fewer tourists have come visiting.
Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition
A traditionally crisis-prone region is belying its reputation. But that has not spared it from the world recession
UNTIL recently many Latin Americans saw the financial crisis and the global recession as events happening somewhere else. But in the past six months the region’s economies have swiftly slumped along with the rest of the world, showing double-digit falls in industrial output. Workers have been laid off in Mexican car factories, Brazilian aircraft plants and Peruvian building sites. For Latin Americans such woes are sadly familiar: income per person in the region has fallen on five separate occasions since 1980. What is different this time is that Latin Americans are faring no worse than the rest of the world. And there are reasons to believe that their recession may be relatively short and mild. That may not be cause for celebration but it is a crumb of comfort.
The bad news is, however, quite bad. Latin American countries have been hit by four different recessionary forces. As the financial crisis in the developed world transmuted into a collapse of manufacturing, trade plunged: total exports for five of the region’s larger economies fell by a third between August and December, partly because fewer goods were sold and partly because the price of commodities fell.
The flow of capital to the region also dried up, leading to a steep rise in borrowing costs for governments and companies. The Institute of International Finance, a bankers’ group, thinks that net private capital flows to Latin America will fall by more than half this year compared with last, to $43 billion (down from a record $184 billion in 2007). Foreign banks have trimmed credit lines, especially for trade. In addition, remittances from Latin Americans working abroad have begun to contract, and fewer tourists have come visiting.
Life in thin slices
Life in thin slices
Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition
An ancient smile may predict a modern divorce
A GRIM expression in a yearbook photo or family snapshot could mean more than just a passing bad mood. It could also signal that the subject is more likely to get divorced than someone with a big smile for the camera. Matthew Hertenstein and his colleagues at DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana asked old boys and girls of the university to answer questions about their current sexual relationships and whether they had ever been divorced. The team then looked up pictures of their volunteers in the university’s yearbooks and graded the degree of their smiles. The less a person smiled, it turned out, the more likely he or she was to have been divorced over the course of a lifetime.
This research is a dramatic example of how “thin slices” of information can predict important aspects of people’s personalities. In past studies, researchers have shown that with very limited information—less than half a minute of interaction, the viewing of a video clip or just a look at a photograph—people can make accurate predictions about others’ sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, teaching ability and personality.
Dr Hertenstein was following up research which had shown that the women who smiled most in their college photos were most likely to be married by the age of 27, among other things. He wanted to see if the same held, over the longer term, for divorce. His study, to be published in Motivation & Emotion, looked at three groups. The first, of 306 people, came from alumni of the psychology department. The second group, of 349, was recruited from general alumni. The third, of 55 people, was recruited from the town. (In the last case, people were asked to send in photos of themselves, but were not told that the study was about smiling.) The researchers rated the photos of the subjects on a scale of two to ten. They also asked their volunteers various questions, including whether they had ever been divorced.
The relationship between smiling and divorce also held up among townspeople, even though many sent photographs of themselves as children. Facial expression predicted divorce even when the smile or frown was on a ten-year-old’s face. A photograph that records a split second from a lifetime is a very thin slice indeed. How could it predict a divorce decades in the future?
Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition
An ancient smile may predict a modern divorce
A GRIM expression in a yearbook photo or family snapshot could mean more than just a passing bad mood. It could also signal that the subject is more likely to get divorced than someone with a big smile for the camera. Matthew Hertenstein and his colleagues at DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana asked old boys and girls of the university to answer questions about their current sexual relationships and whether they had ever been divorced. The team then looked up pictures of their volunteers in the university’s yearbooks and graded the degree of their smiles. The less a person smiled, it turned out, the more likely he or she was to have been divorced over the course of a lifetime.
This research is a dramatic example of how “thin slices” of information can predict important aspects of people’s personalities. In past studies, researchers have shown that with very limited information—less than half a minute of interaction, the viewing of a video clip or just a look at a photograph—people can make accurate predictions about others’ sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, teaching ability and personality.
Dr Hertenstein was following up research which had shown that the women who smiled most in their college photos were most likely to be married by the age of 27, among other things. He wanted to see if the same held, over the longer term, for divorce. His study, to be published in Motivation & Emotion, looked at three groups. The first, of 306 people, came from alumni of the psychology department. The second group, of 349, was recruited from general alumni. The third, of 55 people, was recruited from the town. (In the last case, people were asked to send in photos of themselves, but were not told that the study was about smiling.) The researchers rated the photos of the subjects on a scale of two to ten. They also asked their volunteers various questions, including whether they had ever been divorced.
The relationship between smiling and divorce also held up among townspeople, even though many sent photographs of themselves as children. Facial expression predicted divorce even when the smile or frown was on a ten-year-old’s face. A photograph that records a split second from a lifetime is a very thin slice indeed. How could it predict a divorce decades in the future?
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)
