Cool Science

...happened in the science world this week. But why write about that when we can take this to another level. Yes, I can only be referring to lab coats. They look cool on tv shows, so they must be good for you. I have to put in the politically and technically correct issue first: when used properly, lab coats can provide a major increase in laboratory safety. But I don't like them because they are too easy to mis-use, to give false impressions of safety, and to even increase risk when mis-used.

There's the rub. If you get something on your lab coat, you MUST take it off right away. If you spill some chemicals on your sleeve and leave it on all day because you 'feel' safer, you're actually succeeding in giving yourself a long term exposure to whatever is soaked onto the sleeve.

Snap, crackle, pop. For reasons I don't understand, some lab coats are made with a variety of angst-inducing buttons. It should only fasten with snaps so that the coat can be ripped off at a second's notice. If your lapel is on fire, do you want to be fiddling with buttons?

It's a wash. And then you have to wash it regularly, and the ideal is if this is done on the premises by your employer in a washer/dryer set aside for this purpose only. If you don't wash it, you get even longer term exposure to the chemicals you spill on it. I am always deeply worried about people who have been wearing the same lab coat for years.

False security syndrome Wearing a lab coat seems to make people feel a little TOO much security and hubris in the lab and more willing to take risks, let things spill on the coat, etc. It's the NFL padding effect - the development of amazing new pads is being blamed for the extraordinary rise in hard hits and concussions.

Alarming. This is a controversial one, but here goes. Accident detection is more difficult with a lab coat. That's not controversial - it's a second layer of clothing so that when you spill on a lab coat, you may not even know it. But here is a conundrum - if you spill on a layer of clothing that does contact the skin directly you will detect it right away and be able to respond immediately, but you risk the consequences of skin exposure. If you spill on a lab coat, you may not know it for a long time so that you avoid the direct skin contact, but you do give yourself the long term exposure.

Klutzy. Look, maybe this is only me, but the lab coats I've dealt with back in the day had baggy sleeves right around the wrist. It was so easy to knock things over, dip it into things, get it too close to the flame, etc... I hated those sleeves - maybe they've fixed that with tapered sleeves now.

Well, that's my rant about lab coats. I know that it's not popular to complain about a safety garment, especially one that makes you look really, really good looking and smart. But there it is.

Posted by Dave at 10:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

Unexpectedly, I learned some chemistry tonite from David Blaine . Is it bad form to give away an illusionist's secrets? Hmmm. Well, I guess I'll risk it seeing as how I don't figure out most of his illusions/tricks any way and it's very interesting science.

The illusion is a great one for Blaine's street magic style; he wanders down the street until he spots some one drinking a hot beverage. That's important. He urges one of the coffee-drinker's friends to produce some coins, a whole bunch. That is also important. He plucks a nickel (interesting choice) from the palm of this unsuspecting person and places it in his own hand. Blaine then pours the other dude's coffee into his own hand onto the coin. Before everyone's eyes the coin melts and slips through Blaine's fingers.

At first, I felt outrage, feeling certain that Blaine had polluted the streets of fair NYC with mercury, lead or both. But I was wrong. I did know he could have only used an alloy with a peculiar property. And after a few moments on the 'net, I knew this could only be Field's metal, a sufficiently non-toxic alloy of bismuth, indium, and tin which has the marvelous property of being a fairly deep eutectic (by 'deep' I just mean that it is a particularly low melting alloy compared to other eutectics). So what is a eutectic alloy? It's a specific mixture of elements which forms a solid well below the melting points of any of the individual components. Of course if any one in my lab were to be caught discarding a few grams of bismuth, tin and indium in the streets I would be fired and my host institution would be fined a six figure sum. Call it 'magic' and apparently the EPA doesn't care anymore. Sigh.

Perhaps the best known eutectic alloy is solder, which epitomizes what a eutectic is all about. Solder is a eutectic metal alloy which melts low enough that we can work with it fairly easily and safely with soldering irons. Another way to look at it is that solder solidifies very quickly once the heat is removed, which is a nice feature since you don't want to risk having the solder deform while you're waiting for it to cool and solidify.

So you have surely figured out now also how this works. Back in his studo, Blaine (or an assistant?) made plaster casts of all of the silver colored coinages and then made a good stash of them all using Field's Metal, which melts at 62 Celsius and therefore is trivial to melt and pour into casts (and is also silvery in appearance). As per the above link, it's so easy to cast Field's Metal that it can be a children's toy! Since Field's Metal melts at 62 Celsius these fake coins will stay solid in Blaine's pocket with no trouble. Blaine urges the bystander to pull out a bunch of change - he needs to spot a good match to the fake coin he has stashed somewhere in his sleeve. When Blaine takes a real coin out of his victim's hand, he only needs a sleight of hand to substitute his own coin. Then pouring hot coffee (a good bet the coffee is hotter than 62 C) onto the fake Field's Metal coin, he lets everybody watch it melt in the palm of his hand and then let's the molten metal slip through his fingers for extra drama.

So 'eutectic' is a pretty scary word, but just recall Blaine's amazing melting coin as an easy mnemonic.

Posted by Dave at 11:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Here are a few tips which I'll feel better about after I exorcise them here. Some of these are 'official' and some are 'dave-isms'. Can you spot which are which? Enjoy:

1.
spectra : plural
spectrum : singular
spectrums : NOT A WORD

Use in a sentence: "My last spectrum fit well with the other spectra I acquired today."

2.
Tick marks in figures should never lie inside the figure body, since they aren't data.

3.
data:plural

Use in a sentence: "None of these data support the model that..."
Trick: replace 'data' with 'facts' to determine if you have written your sentence properly

4.
OK, this is not specific to science, but never begin a sentence with 'Because'.

5.
Similarly, never begin a sentence with 'This'

6.
Omit figure titles. If you *must* have one, then don't regurgitate the axis labels.

7. Incredibly, contractions are making it into publications (don't, can't, etc.) showing that some editors don't (pardon: do not) seem to care about proofing for these any more. Catch these yourself or else.

Posted by Dave at 12:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

It's almost Father's Day and the golf cliches are building to an unimaginable high. Is it too much to ask to spread out the emphasis a little? Geek dads every where rise up, rebel, let your iphones be heard! Honestly, De Beers look like amateurs compared to the golf lobby who might just succeed in taking over Father's Day. What is the world coming to?

Of course, that's what we should be saying about this oil spill. Americans are demanding that new technologies and science be brought to bear to remediate the oil, but nobody seems to get it. BP has created a disaster it can't afford and doesn't know what to do. That's obvious. The government is in a trickier position of having to explain to Americans that seemingly miraculous solutions for soaking up oil may have more sinister problems. The government would appear to be sticking (hmmm, pun not intended but it works) to conventional approaches which have passed the myriad of regulatory hurtles to show that they make some sense and won't do more harm than good. The reason is obvious: the feds don't want to make things worse - the well known and rightly feared 'law of unintended consequences'.

And so I made the mistake of tuning into Huckabee. Sigh. I got excited when he started an episode with a basin of water in front of him and revealed a studio full of lab-coat clad people all with basins of water and oil samples ready to demonstrate new technologies to remediate oil. SCIENCE, I thought. And so I watched intently...as Huckabee proceeded to roll a previously recorded smear on Obama for several minutes. I think 'ok, I should have expected this, I'll tune back in a few minutes'. So I channel surf for 5 minutes or so, come back hoping to see some creative science and exciting ideas and...Huckabee is running another over-produced smear on Obama for many minutes. So I assume he got to it at some point, but not before over-indulging his political feelings and discouraging me of my patience.

Well dads, as at least a symbolic touch we could all go into our garages and turn in those random jugs of used motor oil we all seem to have. I just did that recently - felt good. This is where I'd really like to cook up some cool idea to use Father's Day to rally a fresh attack to stop the oil in the gulf coast. I got nothing (ok, not entirely true) - but it's not going to be that easy. As for Father's Day, let's reclaim our day : - stop the toil on the golf course.

Posted by Dave at 09:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This is where I confess that for some time now I have been surfing the web and youtube for information on the brown recluse spider, because now that we have kids and we live in an old house with lots of spiders I get just a little defensive and paranoid. The outcomes of a nibble are gross, and I'm not even going to link to the youtube videos, and let's just leave it at that. Now even though the brown recluse doesn't do well in our fair state, I'm allowed to be concerned.

So the other day we get in the car to drive to the PO to drop off a netflix and I notice that there's this elongated piece of debris like fine straw streaming horizontally off of the sideview mirror like a thin bunch of sticks, flapping wildly in the breeze. It's flying right next to my arm which is hanging out the window and I think about flicking it off. But then at a stop sign, out of the corner of my eye this little group of twigs unfolds in Ridley Scott fashion into a nicely sized half-dollar sized spider. And when I go again it stretches out and goes flapping in the breeze again holding on by just a thread of silk. I'm impressed and feeling both some admiration and sympathy for the arachnid, but also a little creeped out...because a big, freakishly strong spider is flying chaotically next to my arm in a 30 mph breeze. I soon draw my arm into the car.

So I pull over to take a closer look at the spider. It's light brown, with long thin legs. But so are like half of all the spiders in the world so I need to be a little more intelligent than that. First, it was big and in the right size range for an adult recluse, and out of range of the size of many common spiders. Next, it was very fast and was darting with surprising speed between the mirror and the hood when I brought a piece of paper nearby it, also classic 'recluse' behavior like the videos which stress the unusual speed and retreating reaction. Further, the body was fairly small compared to the legs, consistent with expected recluse appreance. And for what it's worth, in the very minor menagerie of spiders I've encountered so far, I hadn't seen any one like this before.

Now remember the recluse is not happy in our climate and has to be introduced from a warmer one, like the fair states of VA and NC where we had just spent time a couple days prior, and has to be somewhere warm also (like the warmth of a car - and our weather had been unusually warm the whole time also). In other words, it seemed plausible to me that this fellow could have been a stow away and enjoyed the warm spell that we were in.

So the only remaining challenge is to spot the violin (aka 'fiddle back') on a big, fast moving spider. This specimen was a lighter tan color, suggesting it might not be doing well and which is also a normal variant for the recluse also. But this does make it harder to spot the violin due to the weaker contrast, especially for a total novice. I did see darker coloration behind the head in the right area, but couldn't pin it down and had no interest in doing so.

The abdomen was the only thing that gave me doubt, as it seemed narrower than in the classic pictures which depict a rounder abdomen. But to be perfectly honest the little bugger had an appearance some what in common with this guy and the size and speed and shape were too close for comfort. So as this large, brown, agitated spider darted back and forth unpredictably around my open window with the kids strapped in nearby I flattened it unceremoniously with Jenn's flip flop.

Could have been a smart move, or could have been a dumb city guy doing in a perfectly harmless spider after watching one too many youtube videos. A candidate for something harmless and admittedly more likely would be the 'giant house spider', a nice big brown spider also. It's a strange world.

Posted by Dave at 12:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I greatly enjoyed my stay in your hotel that normally costs as much per night as an iPad, but which fortunately I could afford because of a group conference rate. Truly I felt like a minor celebrity for a night. But if I may be so bold, I think you may benefit from some advice. First, although having a doorbell on my room made me feel like I was in my own apartment, I must ask where is the flat screen tv? Come on guys, does a blurry CRT that was well over 15 years old really cut it? Next, although it was awesome to be on the highest floor and enjoy amazing views, what is the deal with the mini-fridge in which every item (including a Butterfinger candy bar, surreal) is held with an electronic sensor? Truly, nothing conveys hospitality and luxury more than letting your guests know they are electronically monitored. I was afraid to touch any item in the room (how much to open the window curtains?) for fear it would trigger a fee that only a Kardashian could afford to pay. How relaxing. Oh, and there was actually no room in the mini fridge to put any of my stuff. Thanks! You have indeed thought of everything. Finally, although it's true that the plethora of polished marble made the bathroom shine like I was on the inside of some gemstone, when it comes to something a guest might actually need like the 'net why the heck are you charging extra for internet access? It's always complementary at the 'lesser' hotels who charge a fraction of your Trump-esque costs. Thanks for thinking of the things your guests will need and then excluding them in your fee while phoning in superficial luxury. Once again, you have thought of everything.

Overall, looking past these constructive comments, it was actually fun to play along with the charade and role-play a more decadent life for a night. Heck, I almost put on the robe and slippers hanging (nay - taunting me) in the closet but was afraid they might have been attached to a sensor too. I know now why celebrities and rich execs are so neurotic. I don't feel sorry for these guys, I just don't want to be one of them.

Sorry guys, no science here, just a little rant before I hit the hay after a really good conference...

Posted by Dave at 11:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I should be grading, but probably a little procrastination would be good for me. Anyway, music has suddenly been the theme of the last week or two and I feel driven to share.

First, I broke down and bought a pair of budget headphones (Philips SHP2500) for home. I didn't realize it until now, but the Grado SR80's I listen to at work have really spoiled me and I'm mildly stunned at the difference. Budget headphones get the job done and sound better than budget headphones of 20 years ago, and I'm happy since they were cheap. But I have noticed that sounds blend together and have less depth and I find myself straining to pick out things that I take for granted I will hear on my high end 'phones. I think somehow I've become a sort of mild headphone audiophile. Translation: I'm destined to lose my hearing at an early age. Sigh.

Second, I started in on a xylophone project for Henry and whipped up something with a PVC frame and pine boards for notes. The complexity of sound from the pine planks is really surprising and tuning this thing is rough. The electronic tuner seems to have no idea which frequency to analyze. Tuning longer boards is getting interesting because the density of the wood makes two boards of equal length have very different tones, and the method of suspending the planks (hooks, string, etc.) not to mention the tension, plays a role in the tone too. So I really underestimated this project, but it's fun and Henry seems to dig it.

As I was striking the wooden planks and listening to them carefully, I experienced a big flashback to a nice era in nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) when many spectrometers would play the audio equivalent of your data. The ear (technically the brain I suppose!) can sometimes analyze the character of the signal better than visual inspection of the raw data as it would appear on a scope. It's a long story, but NMR has a great deal in common with an FM radio station. Anyway, the NMR data we generated usually sounded like a slightly metallic bell with various reverberations and complexities that we trained ourselves to pick out by ear. I long for that again, for its deeper sensory connection to the data and the work we do. In addition to some potential advantages to processing our data by listening, the use of more senses forged a deeper emotional connection to the work also I have to admit.

If you think about it, in the chemical sciences at least, sound plays virtually no role in the application of our senses to the discovery of knowledge. We view data and we handle chemicals - so sight and touch are especially important. Smell can still be useful, and taste is forbidden for obvious reasons. But I claim that hearing is underutilized. So I'll end on a speculative question for fun if nothing else: is it possible to better engage our hearing in the conduct of scientific inquiry?

Posted by Dave at 10:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)