Interview: Sam Molyneux

ScienceScape.org is organizing science in a way that has never been done before. By drawing from millions of peer reviewed papers and associating with scientific lab teams and institutes, the ScienceScape team is creating an interactive map of the human experience of science throughout history. I talked to Sam Molyneux, one of the co-founders of ScienceScape, about their beta testing, how they've organized an amazing amount of information and their mapping mission!

This might sound like a funny thing to say, but the website is almost in a pre-beta style right now?

Yes, that’s exactly right. We’ve been running a private beta since January 15^th. Essentially it was designed to test was if we could operate the site on a tiny subset of the biomedical literature, so we’ve been running it on 30,000 papers. What we wanted to see was whether or not some of our basic assumptions with the stats and math behind it worked, and what we found out was, it does. What we’ve been working on is scaling the product up to all 22 million papers. When we launch we’ll cover the entire history of science literature.

What is ScienceScape.org doing to organize all of this information?

There’s this pervasive problem in science now where there are thousands of papers coming out every day. Something that’s fun to do to experience the scale of is if, subsetting again to life sciences, that’s my background, if you go to Pub Med and set up the query you can see just the things that are published by day.  It’s staggering. There are between 2-4 thousand papers coming out every day.

And that’s just the one area- Life Science- so there are thousands of papers per day per area of science?

That’s right. There’s an estimated one and a half million peer reviewed papers every year.  Somebody has written all of those and they go into a data base and we search them but they are essentially unorganized in the data base. So the goal of the project is to do two things; organize all of the literature that came out from today back in history, and to do that in a way that makes sense. On the other side of the coin is to look at the publication front, the stuff that’s coming out instantaneously, organize it as it comes out and push it to all the researchers that need to see it. Right now there isn’t a good toll that organizes the literature and pushes new papers to you.

That seems like it’s a lot of information! How did you guys get your hands on and organize all that information from most recent papers all the way back?

What makes sense to me, being a researcher- I work in Cancer Genomics, so I’m interested in particular fields and topics. I’m interested in particular institutes and labs that are putting out key work and I want to know when it comes out, even places, for example I know there’s a greats density of Cancer genomisists in Boston, I want to pay attention- so I want to organize the entire literature by the human landscape of the literature. The fields and topics the work is related to, the people, the millions of historical and active authors, and the research teams. One thing we know now is that science is not done by individuals in general. The Myth of the lone genius is a thing of the past. We work in teams and we’re highly collaborative.

We’re organizing in contexts and categories with thousands of entities within them. We’re building a network of pages with just the right interfaces to let you dig into the archive of literature that relates to that context. For example, for Fields and Topics, we’ve created these stock market like graphs; no one’s ever done this before for scientific literature. You can look for peaks on the graph and the peaks are important papers;  for example if you look for a particular gene,  gene you can find the paper that was the cloning of the gene, the initial characterization of the gene, later in the fields history you find this gene associated with this disease- there’s all these patterns in the literature if you tie in the papers in the right context with the right impact data, like citation counts. That’s what we wanted to validate with our private beta. Can we pump the data base with 30,000 citations, pick a particular gene and without knowing anything about the history of the field, can we find all of the important papers? We can.

We’re geotagging millions of papers also based on the location institute that published the paper, so we’ve been able to tie in these timelines with a map of the world. You can drag the timeline back and forth and basically watch a replay of the publishing history of the field pop up on the map of the word.

Is this something you are creating for other scientists and researchers or something the general public will be able to use as well?

Everyone can use it; the site is totally free for the public and academics. We’re hoping the community in general will adopt it. There’s a lot of people that rely on the literature who don’t contribute to the literature, and you have all the people who are publishing and hoping to publish, all the allied medical and doctors relying on the literature for keeping up standard and practices, as well as whole industries built on the literature, for example, the biotech and pharmaceutical industries. Also, if you’re the public and you really want to understand in a field of science what’s happening I guess you can do it, but if you’re not in the field – I mean, I can’t interpret some of the stuff that’s not in my field.

The language is complicated if you’re not in that field of science?

It’s  totally obscure! But it’s meaningful to the people that work on it- we’re trying to organize the information for the people who need to see it.

So you are organizing peer reviewed, scientific team papers- not articles about subjects, but the actual papers themselves?

Right. The goal of the site is to take a data base for each domain of science, starting with life science, and say, Can we organize this all the way back in history, and can we organize them as they come out and get them to people who need to see them.

That sounds like a pretty daunting task- how many people are on the Sciencescape team?

It’s incredibly daunting! We’ve bitten off a lot. I have a background in bioinformatics and dealing with large data sets, and I think over time we can make a map of science that really does reflect the human landscape of research. I founded the company with my sister Amy who is a talented programmer. We’ve been working with about 5-7 people on the team for about two years. We’ve built a platform that can handle this task. We’ve been working with some of the people who built the software framework we’ve created the site in- to their knowledge, this is the largest website ever created in that framework.

5-7 people is a lot less than I thought you were going to say!

We need more! We’re stretched incredibly thin. All the stories you hear about startups running out of money and trying to take on far too much is all true about us. We’ve been running on vapors for about two years- for example, Amy had to move to Russia for various parts of the year. We’ve risked it all but we’re taking on a really important problem and I’m honored to take on this task.

Sam and Amy, founders of ScienceScape

 When do you expect to launch?

Amy just got back from Russia couple days ago, and we’re going to review how the site is running, do a little work on the interface and some final testing.  It’s updating to the current year; we have everything up to 2011, we’re getting 2012, the update is expected to last about 30 days, maybe a little bit longer. We want to see that the site will run for a couple thousand people, eventually we will try to generate a lot of attention and buzz.

How do you envision this website being used, both in terms of scientists using it and the general public?

What you’ll encounter when you first get to the site will direct you to one of two paths. Sciencescape is totally open; you can go in as an anonymous user, being able to explore and look at patterns and citations over history, or you can sign in and you’ll go through a quick wizard that allows you to choose a major discipline and a couple of fields, setting you up with feeds that will come to you. Say you chose immunology or declare yourself as a Cancer Biologist, you’ll be following cancer papers that are coming out in any of the top 15 journals, some of the key institutes in cancer biology, and after that you’ll get a home feed that’s just like a Twitter feed. You have papers coming in, you can save them or mark them for later, you can broadcast them if you are associated with a team on the site and your lab mates will get a broadcast about the paper and ultimately you can share it on Google +, Facebook and Twitter. If you want to find more content or context that relates to your work, you just walk around the map and search for new fields or institutes and click subscribe. If you subscribe, papers associated with that institute will be pushed to your account, to your homefeed and to email alerts. Eventually we’ll have an app so you can interact with the data.

The framework is able to hold thousands of institutes, but we’re not launching with thousands of institutes, we’re launching with a couple hundred. It will be up to users to add an institute if we’re missing it or add a field if they want to see it.

So there is the potential for user interaction on the site in terms of creating fields or drawing your attention to something you don’t have, but on the other side you’re not going in the direction where people are editing the information like Wikipedia; all of the content is peer reviewed science papers.

That’s right; you can’t edit anything to do with the citation itself. You might be able to flag a paper and describe it in plain English and you can participate in the mapping. It’s up to users to correct information, like associating your lab to papers or geotag them- you can augment our efforts.

To our knowledge no one has built an interactive map of science. We’ve been trying to figure out what it should feel like, what it should look like. 

Am I able to get in touch with research teams that have signed up on your site if I’m interested in a paper they’ve published?

We’re trying not to be the Facebook of science, but we have built a messaging module for the site. Like Twitter there will be a mechanism to directly message someone.  If you see a paper pop up in your feed you’ll be able to click through to that paper and you’ll see if it’s been mapped to any particular map. If you click through to that lab you’ll be if they are associated with the site and see their profile and who is involved. 

Find out more information about ScienceScape at ScienceScape.org where you can sign up to become one of the first users of this innovative new way to organize science literature:

http://www.sciencescape.org/
https://twitter.com/#!/sciencescape
http://www.facebook.com/Sciencescape

To find out more about Sam Molyneux:

http://ca.linkedin.com/in/sammolyneux

Interview: Dr. James Kakalios

Dr. James Kakalios is a Physics Professor and author of the Physics of Superheroes. I met him at the USA Science and Engineering Festival where he took some time out of his busy schedule to talk to me about his favorite heroes, the newest Iron Man vs Magneto fight in Avengers vs X-Men, his consulting work on the Amazing Spider-Man movie coming out in July and generally nerded out with me about comic books. Enjoy!

The Mythbusters at SciFest

See more like "What's your Favorite Food?" and "What Inspired Unchained Reaction?" on my Youtube Channel!

Coverage from the USA Science and Engineering Festival!

 

UPDATE:

All the awesome videos and photos can be found HERE! 
 

Come with me to the 2^nd Annual Science and Engineering Festival and Book Fair this weekend! I’m heading to Washington D.C. right now to participate in the science event of the year, where everyone from the Mythbusters to Bill Nye the Science Guy to Chief NASA Scientist Waleed Abdalati will be hosting events and talking to the public about scientific subjects. Robots, space, climate sustainability- you name it, it can be found at this completely free festival!

Larry Bock, founder and Executive Director of the festival, told me why they picked Washington D.C. as a venue;

“The USA Science & Engineering Festival is the only national science festival, and where else would you hold a national festival? For example, a regional Festival like the San Diego Science Festival might have two or three local universities participate.  We have 125 nationwide universities. All of the major professional societies are in D.C. All of the government science agencies are here. All our exhibitors want to come to D.C. to get in front of their congressional representatives and agency leads.”

The information to be found at this event has the potential to change our political conversation about science- private space travel astronauts will meet and greet the public while students participate in electric car contests. Scientists and Engineers will answer questions about their work, generating interest in science related jobs.The mission of the festival is to inspire the nation’s youth by introducing them to the wonders of science, math and technology and there are events, exhibitions and author signings to meet all age ranges. The future of Science and Politics will be in Washington D.C. this weekend!

I’ll be reporting from the festival by updating this post, my science blog and Twitter with photos, interviews and video- but the amount of interesting information that can be found at the Festival is limitless! That’s why I want help planning my trip- take a look at the exhibits and performances planned and let me know what YOU want me to attend! Don’t have time for all of that? Just tell me what scientific subjects you want to see more about; like “Space Travel”, “Environmental Issues” or “Crazy futuristic cyborg stuff”, and I’ll bring you everything I can find from the fest!

This post will be featured in Current Science all weekend, so check it out for upcoming videos and interviews! {current.com/science}

On Twitter, and use the hashtags #scifest and #sciencetime to follow updates and photos!If you are interested, it’s not too late to go! The event is completely free and all the information is on their website- if you are going to be there, let me know so we can meet up! Otherwise I hope you will virtually participate in this event with me, as science is very important to our nation’s development, our earth’s sustainability and our future in the universe!

Interview: Dr. Peter Jansen

 Dr. Peter Jansen, Cognitive Sciences

Dr. Peter Jansen is an eclectic scientist with the heart of a Trekkie. His Tricorder designs, inspired by the science of Star Trek, are open source and available online for anyone to build, experiment with and enhance. Dr. Jansen is also active in the Artificial Intelligence world, where he is taking "baby steps" in creating robots that think for themselves!

"Star Trek" has immensely inspired your scientific career - what was it that appealed to you? Do any specific episodes or childhood memories come to mind?

My dad and I used to watch Star Trek together when I was little, and so I really grew up watching these amazing scientifically-inspired stories about exploring space.  He's very much a science person, and is always asking questions and curious to learn about how the world works.  For work, he'd design these enormous computer controlled machines for all sorts of things -- building automotive parts, automated packing, etc., and has a workshop in the basement where he'd often bring work home with him.  My dad taught me how to make, create, design, build, program, and solder from a young age, and I think the combination of having him encourage me to learn more about the world, and encourage me to build things, led me to really want to become a scientist and make the technology that I was so inspired by in Star Trek a reality.  I secretly want to explore space, and when I (as a kid) learned we couldn't really do that yet, and that we hadn't even been back to the Moon in my lifetime, I was really inspired to set out and make it happen.  It turns out it's a little tricky to make warp drives, so I ended up having to start a little smaller!

In this way, I don't think any specific episode of Star Trek inspired me -- it was more the combination of watching it with my dad while being positively encouraged to learn more about science and making.

It's a funny story that my parents probably laughed about 20 years ago, but my dad had taught me soldering and basic programming in the second grade, at a time when they're just starting to graduate you from writing with a large kid pencil to a normal sized one in school. So my parents had this kid who was beginning soldering and writing computer code, while he was still so young he had to use a fat pencil!

Your most recent project, designing a Tricorder like the concept found in "Star Trek", is creating a lot of excitement among science enthusiasts and Trekkies- but how would you explain the Tricorder to the "Average Joe"?

In Star Trek a Tricorder is a handheld device that looks sort of like a flip phone, that people can use to sense or detect pretty much anything you could imagine, from life signs to radiation to the chemicals that make up an object.  An analogy that I like to use is that they're sort of like a "swiss army knife" of science -- they're very general tools that contain a variety of different sensors for learning as much as possible about the world, or something that you're scanning.  The Tricorders that I've released are of course much simpler than the ones on the show -- they can detect basic things relating to atmospheric measurements (like temperature, pressure, or humidity), electromagnetic measurements about magnetic fields or light, and spatial measurements about distance or motion.

Gene Roddenberry, creator of "Star Trek", was a Futurist who had a vision of the Universe where everyone worked together in the name of exploration and knowledge. Do you share this vision, and does it relate to your decision to keep the Tricorder and other projects Open Source?

Very much so.  I grew up in Canada with parents who were (and are) very generous even through very tough times, and very strongly believe that life is about bettering ones self and helping the people and the world around us.  Accessibility and science education is a huge part of the Tricorder project, and I would feel incredibly honoured to be able to look back in 20 or 30 years and see that I had contributed to kids being able to learn more about their worlds, and make positive change.
 

My hope -- and I think, the real beauty of having the project be Open Source -- is that the Tricorders become a sort of "living project" with a community of folks working to make the Tricorders capable of sensing more, make them less expensive (and more accessible), and to find better ways of visualizing complex phenomena.  If you have someone who knows about sensing radiation, or about chemical analysis, it's possible for them to use their expertise to add capabilities to the project -- but the Tricorders are simple enough that adding lights, off-the-shelf sensors, or swapping screens should be well within the reach of hobbiests.

A further (and more pragmatic) reason for having the project open source is that I think it would be difficult to raise the initial resources one would require to have the first batches of Tricorders mass produced.  The Tricorders are really something different -- very general scientific tools -- and that's something I don't think we've ever seen or had access to before.  While they're certainly useful for science education, I think it's going to take a few months (to a few years) of people actively walking around with them in their pockets before we find specific applications where they're not just great for science education, but they're also wonderfully economic tools that people would want to use everyday in their work. Using them to find heat leaks and other issues in home inspection is one such example where, in an applied sense, they have the potential to save folks a bunch of money.  When that happens, I'm sure there will be lots of folks interested in inexpensively manufacturing Tricorders, and you won't have to be handy with a soldering iron to have one -- which is of course the goal, to get them in the hands of as many kids as you can, as inexpensively as you can, where they can do a lot of good.

The Tricorder designs you have developed are meant to be easy enough for young adults to build and use. You want to establish an intuitive relationship with natural processes we can not see. Have you gotten any feedback, videos, etc of kids building and using these Tricorders?

This is a good question.  The Tricorder project website with the schematics, circuit board layouts, diagrams, parts lists, etc -- the source -- has only been online for a few weeks, the response has just been so incredible and folks have been so captivated by the idea of having their own Tricorders, that the project gained a huge amount of interest within only hours of going live.  It generally takes a few weeks to have circuit boards manufactured, and so I wouldn't expect to see any Tricorders out in the wild for, at the earliest, another couple of weeks.  To help this process along, I ran a contest on the Tricorder project for a bunch of parts to construct your own Tricorder that just ended, and I can't wait to see those (and other) parts put to good use.  I'm really excited to see not just my original designs out there, but also to see how people modify them, and what sorts of sensors and extra features they build in.

That being said, when I have the Tricorders with me I absolutely love to give them to folks to play with.  I recently gave an interview on PBS, and afterwards the stage crew came up and asked if they could use them, and I loved seeing them happily scanning each other and whatever they could find in the studio.  It's exactly what I made them for --people using them to see what they can't normally see, and learn about the science of the everyday world that's all around us.
 

Everyone these days is attached to their cell phones. Is there a difference between the functions of your Tricorder designs and what's available as an app? Have you or other people experimented with building this technology directly into a cell phone?

There's a great deal that's different between a Tricorder and a smartphone of today, although someday I imagine the two might become very similar devices.  Smartphones and tablets often contain a few sensors -- most often light sensors for automatically adjusting the brightness of the screen to increase battery life, or accelerometers/gyros/compases to automatically rotate the screen from portrait to landscape, or for motion-based video games.  Modern smart phones are extremely capable devices with a lot of graphical capabilities, and I've been experimenting with pairing Tricorders and smartphones together as one possible route to go, though I imagine for kids you'll definitely want an inexpensive standalone device that doesn't require an expensive phone.

Let's talk about some of your other work. You say you are working on Artificial Intelligence, using your Cognitive Science background to teach Robots how to interact and learn about their world the same way babies do. Can you elaborate on that?

You bet.  I just finished my PhD, where my research focuses on trying to figure out how people represent things like concepts and language in their brains, and then tries to get computers to do something similar, and learn concepts and language like babies do. There's a lot of
research out there that suggests that infants know a lot about their worlds and have a brain full of concepts (like about what a dog or house or car is) well before they learn their first words, and that it's this rich pre-linguistic conceptual system that really helps bootstrap their earliest acquisition of language.  A lot of early artificial intelligence research (and still some today) focused on trying to make a thinking machine by having a large group of researchers design a complicated knowledge system (sort of like a fancy database), and then try and figure out ways to get a computer to make inferences using that knowledge.  Sometimes it would work, but usually only for very limited tasks, or for very specific and limited fields of knowledge.

The problem is, it's really hard to build, say, a tree.  We're finding out that a better question to ask is, how could I build a /seed/, that if I design it simply and elegantly enough, will grow into a tree by virtue of nothing but it's exposure to the world and some simple rules that govern how the seed works.

My research focuses on trying to design something like a very early version of that seed. These take the form of cognitively-inspired self-organizing neural network models that are functionally similar to the neural networks in brains, and that (in my research) acquire concepts and language something like how we think babies do, through the sensory and motor experiences babies get by existing in and exploring their physical environment.  Most of my work uses simulated worlds or data sets, but in the last few years folks have developed very sophisticated and inexpensive humanoid robots, and so I hope that one day soon I can get my hands on one and have it roaming about learning aspects of language in a way that resembles something like a very young infant.

It's important to note that this cognitively-inspired approach to artificial intelligence and language learning is just one theoretical camp in language learning.  More traditional artificial intelligence techniques usually rely on massive statistical processing, which is particularly good for certain kinds of tasks -- Google and searching being just one example.

What do you imagine our relationship with artificially intelligent technology looks like in the future?

This is a bit coloured from my own research.  I imagine that the accessibility of inexpensive humanoid robots that are progressively more able to have rich sensory experiences similar to infants is for the first time going to enable collecting rich datasets and experiments in conceptual and linguistic knowledge representation that simply haven't been possible until now, and are really essential to meaningful conceptual and linguistic processing going on.  By "meaningful", I mean "semantic", in that computers will go from the extremely simple linguistic processing we have today largely centered around search and co-occurrence, and really begin to understand the /meaning/ behind the concepts and words that they're seeing and using. They'll know not just a word -- say, "cat" -- but also know from experience what a cat (and many other things) look like, how they behaves, how they might interact if you put them in a room together. I think transitioning from the "symbolic" computation that we've had for the last 70 years into "semantic" computation will really enable thinking machines, and I can't even imagine the discoveries and chances to our lives that that will create, from medicine to science and mathematics.

Are there any other projects in development that you can share with us?

One of my mentors in graduate school often had a bunch of independent projects going on at once, and I very much find myself the same. Something that I've become very interested in over the last 5 years is 3D printing, or more formally "rapid prototyping", or in Star Trek language, something like a "replicator".  My dad and I built our first 3D printer a few years ago now, and I remember the absolute amazement we both had as we watched something that we'd built together slowly /itself/ build an object out of plastic.  It was a very simple object -- just a box -- but we were both absolutely captivated, and sat in awe for 45 minutes as it slowly built a taller and taller box.  That got us hooked.  Today we've built a couple inexpensive 3D printers that are more sophisticated than that first one, and some have even printed off parts and upgrades for themselves from the thriving community of open source 3D printers and objects that have arisen in the past couple of years.

The inexpensive open source 3D printers of today are very cool, but still only capable of building objects out of a single material, usually plastic.  I've begun sketching and collecting parts for a machine that can act as both a 3D printer, circuit board mill, pick and place machine, etc., all in a single machine, that I'm hoping will demonstrate autonomously constructing a very simple device all on it's own that contains not just plastic, but also electronics.  I'm thinking of starting with making something simple, like a watch, and have the lofty dream of the machine constructing a little toy car or robot that rolls itself off the printer.  I don't think that there are any technological reasons why we couldn't construct such a machine -- a factory on your desktop -- I think we just really have to want to do it, and put the time in.  The RepRap project has the goal of constructing a 3D printer that can itself print out all the parts for another 3D printer, thus making a truly self-replicating machine.  I think we're still a ways off from that, but the project has spawned a huge amount of interesting work, and creative non-traditional approaches to design.  Like many things, it's the journey that we're especially excited for, and what we'll learn and develop along the way -- if we ever get too close to our goal, we usually take what we've learned and move our goal ahead to find even more interesting and exciting problems to solve.  That's (at least partially) what Science is about!

Find out more about Dr. Peter Jansen, scope out his Tricorder designs and learn more about the future of Artificial Intelligence on his website! http://www.tricorderproject.org/

Interview: Baratunde Thurston

Baratunde Thurston, TV Host 

 

Baratunde is a comedian and vigilante pundit who lives at the intersection of comedy, technology and politics. Currently, Thurston serves as the web editor for The Onion, but also writes for The Huffington Post and his own website baratunde.com. He has authored three books, including "Keep Jerry Falwell Away From My Oreo Cookies", was nominated for the Bill Hicks Award for Thought Provoking Comedy, declared a Champion of the First Amendment by Iowa State University, and called "someone I need to know" by Barack Obama. I chat with Baratunde about his experiences as the host of the Science Channel and Popular Science's new Future Of series as well as his opinion on how technology will effect the world! Future Of premiers TONIGHT, (8/10) at 9pm!

You’re a comedian and writer with an impressive list of credentials to your name - how did your interest in technology develop?  

First of all, I love what yall are doing at Current.com. You're helping define the future of media, so keep working that out. It's inspiring.

Almost all questions about my origins can be answered the same way: my mother. She raised my sister and me during the crack wars of the 1980s in Washington DC and made sure to keep us busy, engaged and educated. She was my hero. We were the first family on the block with a computer. An Apple IIe in the hood! As a kid, I took apart pretty much every thing that had a circuit board. I rarely put them back together, but it was the start of my infatuation with technology, and there's been no looking back.

I paid for a good chunk of college doing advanced computer support and software testing, and even as I've pursued my political and comedic interests, technology has remained an important part of my life. I mean, I used to read Information Week every week when I was in high school. Who reads Information Week!? I'm a geek.

 PopSci’s “Future Of” focuses on how technology will change human existence- would you say that humans, via science, are now in control of their own evolution?

 I've asked myself that very question so many times in my life and especially while shooting Future Of. We manipulate our environments more than any other species. We prolong life and in many ways defy nature. We intervene with disease and trauma, and if even some of what I've seen while making this show is true, we'll continue to do so at the genetic and possibly atomic level. I asked one of the scientists if he thought all of our technological innovation and intervention freed us from the constraints of evolution. He said he understood where my question came from but that humans aren't the only ones changing in our relationship to evolution. As we change, so do the conditions that might affect us. Thus we have superdiseases and more drastic environmental situations, for example. Who knows? Maybe we'll have to contend with nanobot infections in the not too distant future. We've certainly changed our historical relationship with evolution, but we haven't completely left it behind.

The “Sixth Sense” tech you try out in the first episode is like a portable computer, camera and communication system all in one. It looks incredible, but it’s a bit bulky at this point. What type of modifications do you think it will need before it’s street ready?

  They will need to lose the glued together Lego pieces and the magic marker caps users must wear on their fingers so the gesture system works. No advanced technology should fail due to a lack of magic marker caps. None. After that, the system would need to be a lot lighter and more physically stable. The projected image bounces around a lot just from your breathing, so I'd say they have some work to do. However, the early stage at which I get to play with these things is the fun part. I'm getting a glimpse of what might be, not a finished product.  

When you checked out the concept of bionic contact lenses, you show us a world where you could look at someone and automatically have access to their name, interests and other information. Do you think that this idea takes away from the experience of human interaction and getting to know people?
 

I think that question can be asked about a lot of the technology featured in the show and a lot of the tech that is already out there. Most of these tools can deepen our social connections or make them more superficial. Does someone's name tag at a conference take away from human interaction, or does it avoid potentially embarrassing situations and allow for more meaningful interactions? Besides, the president has someone whose job it is to whisper background info to him about the people he meets at functions. Can't we all have that power? According to the bionic lens, yes we can.

The prosthetics we get to see in the first episode of “Future Of” are amazing- in some cases, they function even better than the “real thing“! Should we expect a future where people replace the majority of their aging body parts with prosthetic pieces and advanced technology?

 I'm not sure about the majority, but we will certainly see more augmented bodies, and thanks to Moores Law and economies of scale, the $6 Million Dollar Man will probably cost about $20,000. Think about the way we treat clothing, accessories and cell phone face plates and ringtones. How we appear to the world is a form of expression and communication, and I can certainly see us extending this to enhanced body parts. Some of us have been doing this for years: colored contact lenses, plastic surgery and botox are just a few examples. There are people who inject elastomer into their butts! Their butts! So why not have a pair of legs for running and another for dancing? I know a few people who could really use a new pair of dancing legs. It would be a much safer, more enjoyable world for all of us.

What other imaginative innovations will we be blown away by in Popular Science's “Future Of” series?

This is easy. The episode on immortality involved the most imaginative innovation I've ever experienced, and there was no hardware, no software, no chemicals. You'll have to wait and see to know exactly what I'm talking about, but you'll know. It changed my life.

Did hosting this ground breaking series teach you anything new, or change your opinion on any major scientific issues?

No. I knew everything before I started working on this show. Everything.

In all seriousness, I learned several new things with every interview. That's been the fun part! I get access to incredibly smart people, and I get to pick their brains. It's a ridiculous job, and I know I'm very fortunate to have it. In terms of my opinions, I think I've become even more cautious of robots and androids. I'm very familiar with the Terminator documentary series, and found myself very troubled by some of the emotional intelligence and needs we're giving these robots. There's just no need for that. We all know how it ends.  

Your resume keeps getting longer- author, editor, blogger and all around awesome funny man- what’s the ‘Future Of” Baratunde Thurston?

I realize how incredibly, ridiculously fortunate my life is. I hold several awesome jobs (including at The Onion). It is my goal to hold every awesome job there is at some point in the future. Stay tuned.

Interview: Nar Williams

Nar Williams, TV Host and Nerd

This edition of Science is Speaking is dedicated to all nerds, geeks, fanboys and fangirls, lovers of sci-fi and cool tech! I have the awesome Nar Williams, who's blog Achieve Nerdvana is a go to source for savvy sci lovers and he's the host of the Discovery Science Channel's new show, Science of the Movies!

You’ve made a name for yourself as a source on Geekery- what inspired your love of nerdy things?

My love of anything comes from what I think is a.) Fun and b.) Interesting.

Movies, robots, video games, technology, Dungeons & Dragons, TV, and science fiction are all fun and interesting to me. They’re also considered nerdy.

To me a geek is anyone who is really passionate (and educated) about something. It can be anything. Consider the following:

Wine Connoisseur = Wine Geek

Baseball Fan = Baseball Geek

Fashionista = Fashion Geek

Gun Enthusiast = Geek with Guns

A lot more people are geeks than they realize!

On your blog, AchieveNerdvana.com, you discuss pop culture science tech and media. What type of technology do you most want to see developed in the future? 

Transhumanist technologies like artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, robotics, and genetic engineering interest me the most.

It’s unfortunate that sci-fi flicks like The Matrix and Terminator shape so many people’s views of the future. I love those movies, but I don’t let them scare me. Ethical software is now being developed for artificially intelligent robots, so that we don’t have to live through the dystopian nightmare envisioned by James Cameron.

With careful ethical guidelines, technologies that enhance the human condition will help transform mankind and the planet. I mean, how cool is it that you can freeze some of your own stem cells for use later in life so doctors can repair damaged tissues or organs (or maybe even aging)? 

On a selfish note, my one materialistic dream is to one day have a flying robotic dragon.

Your show on the Science Channel, Science of the Movies, goes behind the scenes to see how movie makers achieve those fancy Hollywood angles and effects. Tell us what it’s like to work with the artists and scientists responsible for movie magic!

The people I met while shooting Science of the Movies were pure genius. You hear people say "it's a collaborative medium" and I've always understood that on some level (in that I've been on sets and seen the legions that it takes to make a film). But this show has been eye opening for me because I've realized it goes way beyond being on set and earning their paycheck.

People like John Dykstra, John Frazier, Gary Theiltges (the list goes on and on) are literally inventing the tools that make the director/writer's imagination get on screen -- most without formal education in mechanical engineering, physics, or computer science… They're just brilliant.

Another fun aspect of the show is seeing how these inventors have borrowed technologies from so many different fields – medical, manufacturing, military – and made them work in the film industry.

Since you’re a movie nerd, I just have to ask: What’s your all time favorite movie and why?

 
This is just so hard it’s impossible. One? You really want one?? Here are a few of my favorites, in no particular order:

Harold and Maude, (Hal Ashby, 1971) – A comedy about death with the most inspiring ending of all time.

The Seventh Seal, (Ingmar Bergman, 1957) – A knight plays chess against the Grim Reaper during the Black Plague! Who thinks of this? Bergman. I love all his work, but the supernatural elements and beautiful dialogue seal the deal for me on this one.

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, (Peter Jackson, 2001, 2002, 2003) – You must watch these films together to really absorb the scope of this story and revel in the cinematic nerdvana of Tolkien’s Middle Earth. I haven’t watched them separately since 2003. Sure, it takes a day to watch them back to back, but are we men… or are we geeks?

The Holy Mountain, (Alexandro Jodorowsky, 1973) – If you are unfamiliar with Jodorowsky’s work, he is one of the most interesting and unusual minds in cinema. His films are full of symbolism, religious themes, magic, and… amputated dwarves. This film was partially financed by John and Yoko, partially based on an unfinished novel by a student of G.I. Gurdjieff, and partially shot under the influence of magic mushrooms. Holy crap does it show. Let’s put it this way: at one point costumed frogs and iguanas reenact the Spanish conquest of South America…

Then there’s Star Wars, The Matrix, Bedazzled (1967), The Thin Red Line, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, and about another dozen flicks I think are brilliant…

There’s Achieve Nerdvana, Science of the Movies, as well as your hilarious monthly show called Heads Up where you talk about everything from gaming to gadgets.  Any other projects that you want to tell us about?

This may be so 2004, but I still do an audio podcast twice a week called Nerdbunker with Goober & The Viking. It’s improv comedy with the following premise: What if two idiotic morning zoo radio DJs delivered science and technology news? You can hear it on iTunes or at Nerdbunker.com.

Any advice for the nerds/geeks/bloggers out there in internet land?

Geek out. Whatever gets your nerd on, embrace it and share it. Life is supposed to be fun, not boring!

Interview: Kari Byron

Kari Byron, Mythbuster

Welcome to Science is Speaking! This week I interview the talented and beautiful Kari Byron!

You know Kari Byron as the fun, fearless female of the Mythbusters Build Team-but did you know she’s also an amazing artist, sculptor and soon to be mom? In fact, Kari has worn many hats during her life from Secret Shopper to Toy Maker! I talk with Kari about her experiences and the connection between art and science.


Before Mythbusters, you traveled around the world! What‘s your favorite memory?

I traveled a whole year worth of memories; choosing a favorite is difficult. One of my favorites was reaching the Annapurna Base camp (26540ft elevation) in the Himalayas. I have never been super athletic and definitely not a mountain climber. It was a hard trek. I dislocated my knee near the top and got altitude sickness but was determined to reach the top. Standing there at the end of my journey, at the top of that beautiful mountain, with a feeling of supreme accomplishment, I experienced a moment of bliss I will never forget. Then I threw up. When faced with impossible tasks, I try to recall that memory (except for the barfing).

Your Mythbusters Bio says you’ve been experimenting in science since you were a child- were you always an artist as well?

According to my dad, I have always been an artist. My biggest accomplishment was a rocket ship/refrigerator box that I lived in for a week.

Arts and Sciences are often put together, but many people view Art as creative and emotional and Science as technical and logical. What connects them?

Not that I remotely qualify as a scientist, but I have made friends with quite a few. I think scientists have to be creative to ask the "questions". The best scientists are always the ones who are most passionate, a trait commonly associated with artists.

You’ve said you’d “go crazy” if you didn’t create a piece of art everyday. What inspires you?

That depends on the day. Sometimes it is the best of humanity, sometimes the worst. I like extremes. Most of all being surrounded by motivated people inspire me. My husband is the hardest working artist I have ever met. He keeps me creative.

Artist, Sculptor, TV Personality, Mythbuster… What comes next?

Mom. I am 9 months pregnant. I think this will be my greatest mountain.
 

See Kari Byron's AMAZING art on her webiste, http://www.karibyron.com/

You can also learn more about Kari by visiting her Mythbusters Bio!

I'd like to take a moment to recognize the photographer of the beautiful picture I used, Mitch Surprenant. You can find more of his work on his Flickr stream, including other pictures of Kari: http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=2&w=all&q=Kari+EIU&m=text

Interview: Brian Malow

Brian Malow, Science Comedian

 

Where does science meet comedy? Somewhere in Brian Malow’s universe. From museums to comedy clubs, Earth’s Premier Science Comedian brings the funny to this hilarious installment of Science is Speaking! 

 

What came first for you, comedy or science? 

 

Ah, the chicken or the egg, eh?…  Well, in terms of it being a passion and a potential career choice, science came way before comedy.  And I joke that I used to be an astronomer who got stuck on the day shift, but I never became a scientist.

 

Science was my first love:  dream girl, high school sweetheart, prom date.  But then I had a long torrid affair with comedy.  We ran off and eloped.  And it may have appeared to the casual observer that I had completely forgotten about science but, if you looked closely you could see the truth…  the heavy bias toward science geeky topics, habitual use of the language of science for analogies and metaphors – a tendency to invoke Newton’s equation for universal gravitation, for instance – or to use “molybdenum” as a punch line.

These were the signs that I would someday come running back to science, if she would have me.  But I didn’t want to give up comedy, my mistress.  Would I have to?  Perhaps not…

Comedy is both a science and an art.  And, for that matter, science is both a science and an art!

I’m not sure I can even tell them apart anymore.  We apply the same kind of critical thinking in both pursuits – but we also hope for and rely on those flashes of inspiration that come from somewhere beneath the level of conscious thought…  like Kekule’s day-dream that helped him solve the riddle of the structure of the benzene molecule.

You know, Einstein once said, “The only real valuable thing is intuition” and the classic, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.”

I know:  Easy for you to say, Einstein!

But seriously…  it has its surreal side, but my comedy has often emerged from the application of rational thinking to the reality of the human condition.  Thus, the name of my first science comedy CD:  “Rational Comedy for an Irrational Planet.”   I like to think I solve small problems that we didn’t know we had. 

You were inspired by science fiction authors whom you say “made it easy to understand and enjoy science” – is this your goal as well? 

I was referring specifically to Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke – and to their non-fiction – their science writing.  They were early influences on me.  I learned more science from Asimov and Clarke than from most of my teachers.  And they are still the best explainers, by the way – along with Carl Sagan.  They can’t be beat for teaching you complex ideas without losing you – and, in fact, engaging and entertaining you.  Their love and passion for science is well-communicated!  I implore you to find their old, out-of-print books!  Get thee to a used bookstore!  (or an internet connection).

Anyway, I never set out with such a noble goal as that.  I just wanted to entertain, make people laugh – hopefully, with my own brand of comedy (insert Registered Trademark symbol:  ® ).

But I guess there’s always been a little teacher in the 4-chambered classroom of my heart.  I can’t help it.  A comedy colleague of mine once said that my jokes had more information in them than most comics’ jokes.  I think I can take that as a compliment.

And, whatever my initial intentions…  now, yes, it has become a goal of mine to clearly and colorfully explain some science concepts – and certainly to show another side of science – that science can be fun as well as mind-blowing.  That having this knowledge, this familiarity, this understanding of nature can enrich your life in unexpected ways.  Funny ways.

Actually, now I think my science comedy does function rather like science fiction:  it may teach you a few new concepts along the way but mostly it aims to entertain you using bits of science as its raw material. 

Isaac Asimov once said “The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not ‘Eureka!’ (I found it!) but ‘That’s funny…’   What discoveries have you made while finding the funny in science? 

Well, I discovered many years ago that you shouldn’t say, “You can make me go to my room but you can’t make me go to sleep!” if either of your parents is an anesthesiologist.

And I discovered that science can, indeed, get massive mainstream media coverage as long as there is at least the suggestion that it may destroy the planet (cf. Large Hadron Collider).

Avogadro’s Number is well-known, of course, but I believe I was the first to discover his address.

I discovered that if, instead of asking strangers, “Where are you from?” you make a habit of asking them, “WHEN are you from?” it will improve your chances of tripping up a time-traveling tourist.

I discovered that some people talk to their plants, which is okay.  But you shouldn’t ask them a lot of questions.

And I discovered that whenever my mom loses weight, my dad gains weight.  And vice versa.  It’s like the Conservation of Mass, within our family.  My theory:  You never actually lose weight – you just give it to somebody else.  Fat can be neither created nor destroyed.  It’s one of the basic laws of the universe.  If you’re gonna live here, you gotta know the laws.

 

Any advice for upcoming comedians out there?

 

 Don’t try to mix science and comedy!  Go find your own ecological niche!  Run along!

:: Beats chest, roars, shakes rattle, spreads wings threateningly, generally attempts to appear larger and more intimidating ::

(Objects in State of Fear May Appear Larger Than Actual Size)

Honestly, the best advice I have is to learn how to be yourself.  Centuries-old wisdom:  to thine own self be true.  Watch a lot of comedy.  Study those who do it well – and realize you can also learn a lot from those who do it poorly!  And don’t limit yourself to comedians!  Absorb a broader swath of life than that.  But, in the end, don’t let yourself be over-influenced by your influences.  Try to be different from everything else you’ve seen.  Tap into what is unique about you.  Find your own voice.  Tell your own stories.  In two words:  Be yourself. 

You’ve entertained the likes of Microsoft, Apple and the National Association of Science Writers – what’s your next move?

I love what I’m doing and it gets more interesting every year.  I want to perform at more museums and for more science organizations, events, and festivals.  I recently performed in England for the first time and I’m anxious to return and to do other international events.

I’m doing video pieces for Time Magazine’s website (www.time.com), and working on some other television and multimedia projects.  I should blog more:  www.sciencecomedian.com/blog .

Long-term….  I’d like to be the first comedian with an extended run at an orbital space hotel.  Or just a one-nighter on the International Space Station.  I’d love to be the in-house comic for the first lunar or Martian colony.  I’d even consider a one-way ticket.  I should probably start with Virgin Galactic…  does anyone know Richard Branson’s email address?

*****

Find out more about Brian Malow and get on his mailing list:  sciencecomedian@gmail.com

See videos and subscribe to Brian’s YouTube Channel:  www.youtube.com/sciencecomedian

@sciencecomedian on Twitter

Interview: Darlene Cavilier

Darlene Cavilier, Science Cheerleader

 

You were a professional cheerleader for the 76ers, but now you cheer for a different team- Science! What is about science that you love? 

I love that science and engineering belong to everyone. We are born curious creatures. Exploration defines us as humans and it's the premise of science. But science is not immune from the same politicization that wiggles into most cultures. As a result, many adults feel, rightly so, disenfranchised from an institution that once was their own. For example, my older brother is one of the smartest people I know. His circumstances prevented him from going to college. He's a self-taught engineer but, apart from citizen science projects, there are very few opportunities for him and millions of adults like him, to become part of today's science culture. At the very least, he should be invited to learn about and weigh in on key science policy matters, particularly because citizens' taxes fund more than half of the basic research in this country. For the past 20 years, other nations have developed successful ways to enlighten the public and provide a platform that allows them to share their local knowledge, values and insights. This information can be used to help legislative bodies anticipate societal reactions to emerging technologies. The U.S. scientific establishment seems to be prepared to move in this direction but it's time to take one giant leap forward for  mankind in this realm. Restoring the Office of Technology Assessment and making public participation and major focal point of this agency can be that leap forward. Stay tuned!

ScienceCheerleader.com encourages Citizen Science - why is it important for people to get educated and engaged in scientific areas?

Citizen Scientists aren't waiting for an invitation to get involved. They are literally changing the way science gets done and the researchers who value their participation are seeing their dwindling budgets stretched, to put it mildly. It would be virtually impossible for an ornithologist, for example, to create an army of 48 million birdwatchers to observe and log data into a database so critical, ecological patterns can be uncovered. But Cornell University decided to harness the power of already established citizen scientists (birders) and their researchers, and more importantly the human population, ultimately reap the benefits.   NASA, through Yale's GalaxyZoo project, turns to amateur astronomers to help sort through millions of star formations and galaxies; the EPA depends on citizen scientists to monitor the health of water ways. All of this increases the public's science literacy rates and creates a shared value experience. It's important that the citizen scientists get something out of the project and for that to happen researchers must believe that the public is capable of more than just data entry. Volunteers should be given the opportunity to ask questions and draw upon the data. In its most successful forms, citizen scientists even help shape science policy.

Your Project Finder can match individuals to science projects based  on their interests. What are some examples of things regular people can do to get involved ?   

Tag butterflies to help track their migratory habits, count fireflies to help researchers better understand why they appear to be diminishing in some places but not others (talk about a fun family project; my kids and I learned how to differentiate between males, females and stealth predators!), sort through galaxies, help meteorologists predict weather patterns, record earthquakes, help project flu outbreaks, you name it!

Only 7% of the adult American population are Science Literate, according to your website. What exactly do you mean by Science Literate and what can be done to improve that percentage? 

That figure comes from Professor James Trefil of George Mason University. For so long, the term "science literate" was, well, elusive and impossible to define, no matter how many books I read on this subject. Then I came across a few of Trefil's. He wasn't afraid to say: "Hey, if we want people to be science literates, we need to tell them what they need to know." He came up with 18 broad but specific "big science ideas" and determined that once a person grasped these ideas, they could be consider a science literate. I was skeptical at first but came to believe there's no other option out there. Either we keep spinning our wheels and hope for the best or we start to share these ideas with the adult population in a way that's not off-putting or overwhelming and in a respectful manner that takes into account busy schedules. Hence, my partnership with Trefil and the 76ers Cheerleaders, aptly titled "Brain Makeover!"

You’re changing policy, raising scientific awareness to the public and writing for Discover- anything new things on your plate in the future?

Yes. Readers will start to see more first-person citizen science video reviews. I'd like to see more user-generated content on sciencecheerleader.com so folks should contact me if they're interested in producing content. And, I'm working on a full-functioning Mother-of-all-Citizen-Science websites that will match curious volunteers with appropriate citizen science projects. Stay tuned for that!

Thanks for your time! I think the Current community will be really interested in this and you are doing a great service to science and human progress!

Delia: thank you for the opportunity to participate in this interview!

Interview: Woodrow Clark II

Woodrow Clark II, Nobel Peace Prize Winner

 

Dr. Clark earned three separate masters degrees from different universities and his Ph.D. at University of California, Berkeley. He was Senior Advisor on Renewable Energy, Emerging Technologies, and Finance to California Governor Gray Davis from 2000 to 2003. In 2007, Clark was a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize due to his co-authorship and co-editorship for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1995-2000 in which he is still active today.
 

There are so many types of renewable energy sources; solar, wind, biomass- it seems we could easily run America on sustainable energy! What’s the biggest obstacle to this goal right now?

Primarily public policy -- it is far too limited and "afraid" of change. See what the Europeans and Japanese are doing. I am and some scholars refer to this difference as The Third Industrial Revolution (renewable energy, storage and new technologies, smart girds and cities etc). That is the USA is still in The Second Indsutrial Revolution that is influenced and "controlled" by lobbyists for the oil & gas industry as well as auto (alto that might change now!!! finally !!!)

What steps does America need to take to emerge as a leader in what you describe as the 3rd Industrial Revolution of sustainable energy?

We need to get elected officials in office. The Obama Admin is a good example of that. In many ways the young voters today (under 40 who get the issues and DEMAND change) get what he is all about. It reminded me of the Anti - Vietnam War era. And makes sense as the National Election "skipped a generation". Some scholars refer to them as the New Millenium.

In your UCLA lecture you discuss how politicians can be corrupted and even “bought off” by businesses like those involved in so called “Clean Coal” and Nuclear energy. Are you concerned that the scientific voice in America is overshadowed by corporate interests?

Absolutely. And there are signs in the Obama Admin that this is true even now. People who argue for "clean coal" are only delaying the need for society (globally) to get off the dependency on fossil fuels. They pollute and are the key cause to climate change.  What we need are these govenment funds focused instead on renewable energy and making The Third Industral Revolution real: in short it is "The Sequel to An Inconvenient Thruth" We are doing just that here in LA at the Community Colleges:

Let’s talk local- what’s the number one thing your average citizen can do to that will make a difference as we strive towards a sustainable future?

Aside from everyone being aware of the environment (turning off lights, computers and TVs etc) we all need to recycle and DEMAND that local programs are there to do it. That means participating in the local government and committees. Above all we need to vote, as they did in LA, for new programs that ensure our future as being off the dependency on fossil fuels. Here in LA, over 71% of the voters passed in the Nov 08 elections, 2 bond measures for making the  the K-14 schools and colleges less dependent on fossil fuels by putting renewable power generation, LEED level buildings and infrastructures on campuses along with education, training and job creation. IT IS A POLITICAL MYTH that voters do NOT want to pay higher taxes. What they need now is correct and positive information about what the taxes are for --- climate change is front and center on ALL the surveys today.

You’re a doctor, author, teacher, Nobel Prize Winner and more! What’s next for you?

An academy award for dramatic film that I am making on this topic along with Emmys for a TV/Cable series that will spring off of that. Another long story