http://www.guardian.co.uk/science Latest news and features from guardian.co.uk, the world's leading liberal voice en-gb &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 Sun, 05 Sep 2010 19:06:36 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds 15 http://image.guardian.co.uk/sitecrumbs/Guardian.gif http://www.guardian.co.uk/science http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/04/stephen-hawking-big-bang-gap/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/43220?ns=guardian&pageName=Stephen+Hawking%27s+big+bang+gaps+%7C+Paul+Davies%3AArticle%3A1447397&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=Guardian&c4=Astronomy+%28Science%29%2CUK+news%2CParticle+physics%2CPhysics+%28Science%29%2CSpace+%28Science%29%2CScience%2CStephen+Hawking+%28science%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Paul+Davies&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1447397&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Comment+is+free&c13=&c25=Cif+belief%2CComment+is+free&c30=content&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FCif+belief" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The laws that explain the universe's birth are less comprehensive than Stephen Hawking suggests</p><p>Cosmologists are agreed that the universe began with a big bang 13.7 billion years ago. People naturally want to know what caused it. A simple answer is nothing: not because there was a mysterious state of nothing before the big bang, but because time itself began then – that is, there was no time "before" the big bang. The idea is by no means new. In the fifth century, St Augustine of Hippo wrote that "the universe was created with time and not in time".</p><p>Religious people often feel tricked by this logic. They envisage a miracle-working God dwelling within the stream of time for all eternity and then, for some inscrutable reason, making a universe (perhaps in a spectacular explosion) at a specific moment in history.</p><p>That was not Augustine's God, who transcended both space and time. Nor is it the God favoured by many contemporary theologians. In fact, they long ago coined a term for it – "god-of-the-gaps" – to deride the idea that when science leaves something out of account, then God should be invoked to plug the gap. The origin of life and the origin of consciousness are favourite loci for a god-of-the-gaps, but the origin of the universe is the perennial big gap.</p><p>In his new book, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/stephen-hawking-big-bang-creator" title="Stephen Hawking">Stephen Hawking</a> reiterates that there is no big gap in the scientific account of the big bang. The laws of physics can explain, he says, how a universe of space, time and matter could emerge spontaneously, without the need for God. And most cosmologists agree: we don't need a god-of-the-gaps to make the big bang go bang. It can happen as part of a natural process. A much tougher problem now looms, however. What is the source of those ingenious laws that enable a universe to pop into being from nothing?</p><p>Traditionally, scientists have supposed that the laws of physics were simply imprinted on the universe at its birth, like a maker's mark. As to their origin, well, that was left unexplained.</p><p>In recent years, cosmologists have shifted position somewhat. If the origin of the universe was a law rather than a supernatural event, then the same laws could presumably operate to bring other universes into being. The favoured view now, and the one that Hawking shares, is that there were in fact many bangs, scattered through space and time, and many universes emerging therefrom, all perfectly naturally. The entire assemblage goes by the name of the multiverse.</p><p>Our universe is just one infinitesimal component amid this vast – probably infinite – multiverse, that itself had no origin in time. So according to this new cosmological theory, there was something before the big bang after all – a region of the multiverse pregnant with universe-sprouting potential.</p><p>A refinement of the multiverse scenario is that each new universe comes complete with its very own laws – or bylaws, to use the apt description of the cosmologist <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/martinrees" title="Martin Rees">Martin Rees</a>. Go to another universe, and you would find different bylaws applying. An appealing feature of variegated bylaws is that they explain why our particular universe is uncannily bio-friendly; change our bylaws just a little bit and life would probably be impossible. The fact that we observe a universe "fine-tuned" for life is then no surprise: the more numerous bio-hostile universes are sterile and so go unseen.</p><p>So is that the end of the story? Can the multiverse provide a complete and closed account of all physical existence? Not quite. The multiverse comes with a lot of baggage, such as an overarching space and time to host all those bangs, a universe-generating mechanism to trigger them, physical fields to populate the universes with material stuff, and a selection of forces to make things happen. Cosmologists embrace these features by envisaging sweeping "meta-laws" that pervade the multiverse and spawn specific bylaws on a universe-by-universe basis. The meta-laws themselves remain unexplained – eternal, immutable transcendent entities that just happen to exist and must simply be accepted as given. In that respect the meta-laws have a similar status to an unexplained transcendent god.</p><p>According to folklore the French physicist <a href="http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Laplace.html" title="Pierre Laplace">Pierre Laplace</a>, when asked by Napoleon where God fitted into his mathematical account of the universe, replied: "I had no need of that hypothesis." Although cosmology has advanced enormously since the time of Laplace, the situation remains the same: there is no compelling need for a supernatural being or prime mover to start the universe off. But when it comes to the laws that explain the big bang, we are in murkier waters.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/astronomy">Astronomy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/particlephysics">Particle physics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/physics">Physics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/space">Space</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/paul-davies">Paul Davies</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/g7cbvq7-8Whi7NY08l0zLZYpRx8/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/g7cbvq7-8Whi7NY08l0zLZYpRx8/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/g7cbvq7-8Whi7NY08l0zLZYpRx8/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/g7cbvq7-8Whi7NY08l0zLZYpRx8/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Astronomy UK news Particle physics Physics Space Science Stephen Hawking The Guardian Comment http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/04/stephen-hawking-big-bang-gap Sat, 04 Sep 2010 07:30:52 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/stephen-hawking-big-bang-creator/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/31813?ns=guardian&pageName=Stephen+Hawking+says+universe+not+created+by+God%3AArticle%3A1446388&ch=Science&c3=Guardian&c4=Stephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CScience%2CPhysics+%28Science%29%2CReligion+%28News%29%2CWorld+news%2CScience+and+nature+%28Books+genre%29%2CUK+news%2CBooks%2CCreationism+%28News%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Adam+Gabbatt+%28contributor%29&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1446388&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FStephen+Hawking" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">• Physics, not creator, made Big Bang, new book claims<br />• Professor had previously referred to 'mind of God'<br /><br /><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/poll/2010/sep/02/religion-hawking">Poll: Is Hawking right?</a></p><p>God did not create the universe, the man who is arguably Britain's most famous living scientist says in a forthcoming book.</p><p>In the new work, The Grand Design, Professor Stephen Hawking argues that the Big Bang, rather than occurring following the intervention of a divine being, was inevitable due to the law of gravity.</p><p>In his 1988 book, A Brief History of Time, Hawking had seemed to accept the role of God in the creation of the universe. But in the new text, co-written with American physicist Leonard Mlodinow, he said new theories showed a creator is "not necessary".</p><p>The Grand Design, an extract of which appears in the Times today, sets out to contest Sir Isaac Newton's belief that the universe must have been designed by God as it could not have been created out of chaos.</p><p>"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing," he writes. "Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.</p><p>"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."</p><p>In the forthcoming book, published on 9 September, Hawking says that M-theory, a form of string theory, will achieve this goal: "M-theory is the unified theory Einstein was hoping to find," he theorises.</p><p>"The fact that we human beings – who are ourselves mere collections of fundamental particles of nature – have been able to come this close to an understanding of the laws governing us and our universe is a great triumph."</p><p>Hawking says the first blow to Newton's belief that the universe could not have arisen from chaos was the observation in 1992 of a planet orbiting a star other than our Sun. "That makes the coincidences of our planetary conditions – the single sun, the lucky combination of Earth-sun distance and solar mass – far less remarkable, and far less compelling as evidence that the Earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings," he writes.</p><p>Hawking had previously appeared to accept the role of God in the creation of the universe. Writing in his bestseller A Brief History Of Time in 1988, he said: "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God."</p><p>Hawking resigned as Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University last year after 30 years in the position.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/physics">Physics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion">Religion</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/scienceandnature">Science and nature</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/creationism">Creationism</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/adam-gabbatt">Adam Gabbatt</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/TjlmqoomJ3PlhN6kBT7oRZ-BpcA/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/TjlmqoomJ3PlhN6kBT7oRZ-BpcA/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/TjlmqoomJ3PlhN6kBT7oRZ-BpcA/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/TjlmqoomJ3PlhN6kBT7oRZ-BpcA/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Stephen Hawking Science Physics Religion World news Science and nature UK news Books Creationism The Guardian News http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/stephen-hawking-big-bang-creator Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:56:09 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/life-and-physics/2010/sep/03/god-stephen-hawking-m-theory/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/6262?ns=guardian&pageName=God%2C+Stephen+Hawking+and+M+Theory+%7C+Jon+Butterworth%3AArticle%3A1446934&ch=Science&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Science%2CStephen+Hawking+%28science%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Jon+Butterworth&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1446934&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Science&c13=&c25=Life+and+Physics&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2Fblog%2FLife+and+Physics" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">I speak my brain on Channel 4 News about the booksellers' current favourite controversy - Stephen Hawking versus God</p><p>Yesterday, when I should have been writing a paper about data from the Atlas detector at <a href="http://atlas.ch/">Cern's Large Hadron Collider</a>, I was taxied across Geneva to talk live on television to Jon Snow about Stephen Hawking's apparent sudden conversion to atheism.</p><p>Talking about God is well out of my comfort zone but I thought I should agree to do it since I worry that manufactured religion vs science wars can be very damaging and I didn't feel I should wimp out of trying to inject some sense. </p><p>In fact Jon Snow and Channel 4 News hosted what I think was a very reasonable discussion. Phew.</p><p>Oh, and by the way, Stephen Hawking <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19391-hawking-hasnt-changed-his-mind-about-god.html">hasn't changed his mind about God</a>.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jon-butterworth">Jon Butterworth</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HPnuYY6IYDxTh_nPBZfl_1-FCuU/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HPnuYY6IYDxTh_nPBZfl_1-FCuU/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HPnuYY6IYDxTh_nPBZfl_1-FCuU/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HPnuYY6IYDxTh_nPBZfl_1-FCuU/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Science Stephen Hawking guardian.co.uk Blogposts http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/life-and-physics/2010/sep/03/god-stephen-hawking-m-theory Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:54:31 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/03/classicalmusicandopera/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/86524?ns=guardian&pageName=Keeping+up+appearances%3AArticle%3A1447441&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=Guardian&c4=Classical+music+%28Music+genre%29%2CScience%2CMusic%2CPsychology+%28Science%29&c5=Classical+Music%2CNot+commercially+useful&c6=Ben+Goldacre&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1447441&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Comment+is+free&c13=Bad+science&c25=Comment+is+free&c30=content&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FComment+is+free" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">A new study demonstrates that how women musicians dress alters the perception of how they play</p><p>Everyone likes to imagine they are rational, fair, and free from prejudice. But how easily are we misled by appearances? <a href="http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/research/social_futures/members.cfm?griffiths=true" title="Noola Griffiths">Noola Griffiths</a> studies the psychology of music, and she's published <a href="http://pom.sagepub.com/content/38/2/159.full.pdf+html" title="a cracking paper on what women wear">a cracking paper on how what women wear</a> affects your judgment of their performance. The results are predictable but the&nbsp;context is interesting.</p><p>Four female musicians were filmed playing in three different outfits: a concert dress, jeans, and a nightclubbing dress. They were also all filmed as points of light, wearing a black tracksuit in the dark, so that the only thing to be seen – once the images had been treated – was the movement of some bright white tape attached to their joints.</p><p>All these violinists were music students, from the top 10% of their year, and they were vetted to ensure comparability : they were all white Europeans, size 10 dress, size 4 or 5 shoe, and aged between 20 and 22.</p><p>They were even equivalently attractive, according to their score on the MBA California facial mask, which seems to be some kind of effort to derive a numerical hotness quotient from the best fit of a geometric mask over someone's face. I'm not saying that's not ridiculous, I'm just saying they tried.</p><p>In fact they did better. All the performances were also standardised at 104 beats per minute, so the audio tracks from each musician could be replaced with a recording of a single performance, recorded by someone who was never filmed, for each of the various pieces in the study.</p><p>This meant there was no room for anyone to argue that the clothes made the musicians perform differently, and when the researchers checked in a pilot study, nobody watching the clips had spotted the switch.</p><p>Then they got 30 different musicians – a mixture of music students and members of the Sheffield Philharmonic – to watch video clips with various different permutations of clothing, player and piece. All were invited to give each performance a score out of six for technical proficiency and musicality, and the results were inevitable.</p><p>For technical proficiency, performers in a concert dress were rated higher than if they were in jeans or a clubbing dress, even though the actual audio performance was exactly the same every time (and played by a separate musician who was never filmed). The results for musicality were similar: musicians in a clubbing dress were rated worst.</p><p>Experiments offer small constricted worlds, which we hope act as models for wider phenomena. How far can you apply this to wider society? Women are still discriminated against in the workplace, but each situation has so many variables it can be difficult to assess.</p><p>In the world of music, assessment of performance goals can be restricted to make individuals broadly comparable, and so there's a reasonably long tradition of the field being used as a test tube for bigotry. In the 1970s and 1980s, in an attempt to overcome biases in hiring, most orchestras changed their audition policy, and began using screens to conceal the identity of the candidate.</p><p>Female musicians in the top five US symphony orchestras rose from 5% in the 1970s to around 25%. This could have been due to wider societal shifts, so <a href="http://www.faculty.diversity.ucla.edu/search/searchtoolkit/docs/articles/Orchestrating_Impartiality.pdf" title="Goldin and Rouse">Goldin and Rouse</a> conducted a very elegant study, Orchestrating Impartality: they compared the number of women being hired at auditions with and without screens, and found women were several times more likely to be hired when nobody could see that they were a woman.</p><p>What's more, using data on the changing gender makeup of orchestras over time, they were able to estimate that from the 1970s to 2000 – the era which shifted from casual racism and sexism in popular culture, to more covert forms – the trend towards greater equality was driven simply by selectors being forced not to see who they were selecting. I don't know how you'd apply the same tools to every workplace. But I'd like to see someone try.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/classicalmusicandopera">Classical music</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/psychology">Psychology</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bengoldacre">Ben Goldacre</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKCJhoi85C51_TsEtYfrMGABAwc/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKCJhoi85C51_TsEtYfrMGABAwc/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKCJhoi85C51_TsEtYfrMGABAwc/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKCJhoi85C51_TsEtYfrMGABAwc/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Classical music Science Music Psychology The Guardian Comment http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/03/classicalmusicandopera Fri, 03 Sep 2010 20:11:56 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/sep/03/amateur-astronomy-telescope-night-sky/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/46959?ns=guardian&pageName=I%27m+in+heaven+with+my+telescope+%7C+Stephen+Curry%3AArticle%3A1446924&ch=Science&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Astronomy+%28Science%29%2CSpace+%28Science%29%2CScience&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Stephen+Curry&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1446924&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Science&c13=Blog+Festival&c25=Science+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FAstronomy" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Hubble, Kepler and sophisticated ground-based telescopes are all very well, but for <strong>Stephen Curry</strong> nothing matches the elation of seeing the stars and planets with his own eyes<br /><br /><em>Stephen writes the <a href="http://blogs.nature.com/scurry/">Reciprocal Space</a> blog</em></p><p>"The Earth is too much with us; late and soon, getting and spending we lay waste our powers; little do we see in Nature that is ours," wrote <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wordsworth">Wordsworth</a> of the commodification of the natural world by the industrial revolution. The poet's lyrical sonnet mourns the loss of intimacy between Man and Nature, a privation I recognised last month when I lugged my telescope on holiday to Cumbria, Wordsworth's birthplace and home.</p><p>My shiny eight-inch Newtonian reflector, a prized possession of just a few months, had till then only scanned the night skies of London. Though the view was dimmed by light pollution, I revelled in <a href="http://blogs.nature.com/scurry/2010/01/02/i-have-discovered-jupiter">my first magnified sightings</a> of the star-studded heavens. I saw the cratered moon, tracked down most of the globular planets and, on one memorable night guided by my daughter's sharper eyesight, the Orion nebula; to say nothing of the swarm of new stars made visible by my telescope.</p><p>I was <a href="http://blogs.nature.com/scurry/2010/03/02/not-at-all-saturnine-about-saturn">giddy</a> with an amateur's love but knew there had to be more. So I dismantled and packed the instrument for our trip to the darker night skies offered by the Cumbrian countryside, my wife looking on with a mixture of bemusement and pity.</p><p>"You're not serious?"</p><p>But I was. And this city boy was richly rewarded for his efforts with two clear nights in that August week. Further north, the skies didn't darken until about 10pm but when they did, what magnificent illumination was made visible. I stood and gazed and grinned at the feast of light: stars galore, everywhere I looked – even with the unaided eye – and, stretched across it all, the luminous swathe of the Milky Way. </p><p>The sense of superfluity was heightened by the sight of stars seemingly flung wastefully to Earth as the planet blundered through the Perseid cloud, its rocky fragments igniting as they shot through the upper atmosphere.</p><p>With my telescope I was in heaven. Old friends produced new wonders. I got my clearest view yet of Jupiter and could discern for the first time the banded pattern of clouds on its surface. Triangulating by the stars nearby I got my first fix on – my first fix of – Uranus, too dim for me to find from under London's orange canopy. </p><p>Beneath bright Vega, halfway between its starry partners Sulafat and Sheliak, I saw the ghostly halo of the Ring Nebula (M57). And there, towards the west, was the elliptical glow of the great galaxy of Andromeda (M31). It is the most distant object I have ever seen. Far outside our own galaxy, its light took two and a half million years to reach me.</p><p>My simple observations are nothing compared with the work of professional astronomers, who have access to the latest instruments. Of these, the <a href="http://hubblesite.org/">Hubble Space Telescope</a> has probably grabbed the most headlines, with its spectacularly detailed images of nebulae and galaxies. But last week, it was the turn of the <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/main/index.html">Kepler spacecraft</a> and the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/aug/25/new-solar-system-hd-10180">European Southern Observatory</a> to dance in the limelight, as reports came in of the first discoveries of multi-planet systems orbiting distant stars – solar systems something like our own.</p><p>These reports filled the newspapers because our precious sun has been demoted. It is no longer unique in its possession of planetary satellites. But despite my astronomical interests, the stories didn't grab me. In part, the revelations were hardly surprising, since our understanding of planetary formation made it inconceivable that planets would not exist elsewhere among the myriad stars in the universe.</p><p>But there's something else. A curious aspect of the Kepler and ESO results is that the planets that have been discovered have not actually been <em>seen</em>. Instead, they were <a href="http://novacelestia.com/space_art_extrasolar_planets/detect_extrasolar_planets.html">detected indirectly.</a> </p><p>For over six years the ESO group recorded the wobbles and subtle colour shifts of HD 10180 due to the gravitational pull of its invisible planets and deduced that the star is orbited by five Neptune-sized objects. Kepler, by monitoring the incremental dimming of the light from a star now called Kepler-9 as its planets passed in front, detected two Saturnine gas giants and tantalising evidence for a third Earth-sized object. </p><p>These results are outstanding feats, both of measurement – the disturbances of the stars by their planets are minuscule – and the complex analysis needed to decode the composition of each star system. I have no doubt that the scientists involved rejoiced in their discoveries. But the results, as presented, are numerical. For those outside the project there is nothing to see. Or to feel.</p><p>So, as exciting and dramatic as these new breakthroughs may be on the wider stage of astronomy, for me there is nothing to compare with the elation felt as I leaned time and again into the eyepiece on those Cumbrian nights, to discover new things about the night sky, not for the world, but for myself.</p><p>Those scientific nights let me see more of nature and bolstered a connection that would surely earn Wordsworth's approval. On the first clear night after my return to London I was disappointed with the dim and dismal prospect above me, the Milky Way washed out and so many newfound stars veiled by the electric glow. </p><p>But all is not lost. The sky is friendlier to me now; we are better acquainted and I look forward to deepening that relationship.</p><p><em><strong>Stephen Curry</strong> is a professor of structural biology, not astronomy, at Imperial College and writes a regular blog at <a href="http://blogs.nature.com/scurry/">Reciprocal Space</a></em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/astronomy">Astronomy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/space">Space</a></li></ul></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/qEmnbt--J2aPZOyy4KnUGgkjU4w/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/qEmnbt--J2aPZOyy4KnUGgkjU4w/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/qEmnbt--J2aPZOyy4KnUGgkjU4w/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/qEmnbt--J2aPZOyy4KnUGgkjU4w/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Astronomy Space Science guardian.co.uk Blogposts http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/sep/03/amateur-astronomy-telescope-night-sky Fri, 03 Sep 2010 11:57:38 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/aug/31/blogging-digital-media/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/8236?ns=guardian&pageName=Guardian+science+blogs%3A+We+aim+to+entertain%2C+enrage+and+inform%3AArticle%3A1445433&ch=Science&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Science%2CBlogging+%28Media%29%2CDigital+media&c5=Digital+Media%2CNot+commercially+useful&c6=Alok+Jha&c7=10-Sep-02&c8=1445433&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Science&c13=Blog+Festival&c25=Science+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FBlogging" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst"><strong>Alok Jha</strong> introduces the new Guardian science blogs network, and our science blogging festival</p><p>It's nearly the end of summer holidays, and there are plans afoot in the blogosphere.</p><p>You would not know it from general media coverage but, on the web, science is alive with remarkable debate. <a href="http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1602/new-media-review-differences-from-traditional-press" title="">According to the Pew Research Centre</a>, science accounts for 10% of all stories on blogs but only 1% of the stories in mainstream media coverage. (The Pew Research Centre's Project for Excellence in Journalism looked at a year's news coverage starting from January 2009.)</p><p>On the web, thousands of scientists, journalists, hobbyists and numerous other interested folk write about and create lively discussions around <a href="http://brianswitek.com/" title="">palaeontology</a>, <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/" title="">astronomy</a>, <a href="http://www.superbugtheblog.com/" title="">viruses and other bugs</a>, <a href="http://blog.deborahblum.com/" title="">chemistry</a>, <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/" title="">pharmaceuticals</a>, <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/" title="">evolutionary biology</a>, <a href="http://setiradio.blogspot.com/" title="">extraterrestrial life</a> or <a href="http://www.badscience.net/" title="">bad science</a>. For regular swimmers in this fast-flowing river of words, it can be a rewarding (and sometimes maddening) experience. For the uninitiated, it can be overwhelming.</p><p>The<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science-blogs" title=""> Guardian's science blogs</a> network is an attempt to bring some of the expertise and these discussions to our readers. Our four bloggers will bring you their untrammelled thoughts on the latest in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punctuated-equilibrium" title="">evolution and ecology</a>, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/political-science" title="">politics and campaigns</a>, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist" title="">skepticism (with a dollop of righteous anger)</a> and <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/life-and-physics" title="">particle physics</a> (<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science-blogs">I'll let them make their own introductions</a>).</p><p>Our fifth blog will hopefully become a window onto just some of the discussions going on elsewhere. It will also host the Guardian's first ever science blog festival – a celebration of the best writing on the web. Every day, a new blogger will take the reins and we hope it will give you a glimpse of the gems out there. If you're a newbie, we hope the blog festival will give you dozens of new places to start reading about science. And if you're a seasoned blog follower, we hope you'll find something entertaining or enraging.</p><p>We start tomorrow with the supremely thoughtful <a href="http://twitter.com/mocost" title="">Mo Costandi</a> of <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/neurophilosophy/" title="">Neurophilosophy</a>. You can also look forward to posts from <a href="http://twitter.com/edyong209" title="">Ed Yong</a>, <a href="http://twitter.com/laelaps" title="">Brian Switek</a>, <a href="http://twitter.com/jennyrohn" title="">Jenny Rohn</a>, <a href="http://twitter.com/deborahblum" title="">Deborah Blum</a>, <a href="http://twitter.com/deevybee" title="">Dorothy Bishop</a> and <a href="http://twitter.com/vaughanbell" title="">Vaughan Bell</a> among many others.</p><p>In his <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jan/25/cudlipp-lecture-alan-rusbridger" title="">Hugh Cudlipp lecture</a> in January, Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger discussed the changing relationship between writers (amateur and professional) and readers.</p><p><blockquote class="quoted"><br />We are edging away from the binary sterility of the debate between mainstream media and new forms which were supposed to replace us. We feel as if we are edging towards a new world in which we bring important things to the table – editing; reporting; areas of expertise; access; a title, or brand, that people trust; ethical professional standards and an extremely large community of readers. The members of that community could not hope to aspire to anything like that audience or reach on their own; they bring us a rich diversity, specialist expertise and on the ground reporting that we couldn't possibly hope to achieve without including them in what we do.</p><p>There is a mutualised interest here. We are reaching towards the idea of a mutualised news organisation.<br /></blockquote><br />We're starting our own path towards mutualisation with some baby steps. We will probably make lots of mistakes (and we know you'll point them out). Where we end up will depend as much on you as it does on us.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blogging">Blogging</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/digital-media">Digital media</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/alokjha">Alok Jha</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/SBzbsXCO3MpU6HefmpfgHgMrH7I/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/SBzbsXCO3MpU6HefmpfgHgMrH7I/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/SBzbsXCO3MpU6HefmpfgHgMrH7I/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/SBzbsXCO3MpU6HefmpfgHgMrH7I/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Science Blogging Digital media guardian.co.uk Blogposts http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/aug/31/blogging-digital-media Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:00:16 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/05/germany-weatherman-rape-trial/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/81012?ns=guardian&pageName=German+weatherman+faces+rape+trial%3AArticle%3A1447609&ch=World+news&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Germany%2CWorld+news%2CMeteorology%2CRape+%28Society%29&c5=Society+Weekly%2CNot+commercially+useful&c6=Kate+Connolly&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447609&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=World+news&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FWorld+news%2FGermany" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Colourful self-taught forecaster Jörg Kachelmann accused of raping long-term girlfriend</p><p>He is a household name in Germany, affectionately known for his five-o'clock shadow, kipper ties and colourful weather forecasts.</p><p>But tomorrow Jörg Kachelmann, Germany's top weatherman, is to go on trial charged with raping his girlfriend.</p><p>Kachelmann, 52, had been in a relationship with the journalist, identified only as Simone W, for 10 years. She accused him of holding a knife to her throat and raping her at her home near Frankfurt last February after she confronted him with her suspicions that she was not his only girlfriend.</p><p>Kachelmann has denied the charges.</p><p>Germany's media have raked over every aspect of the case. It has been a cover story on best-selling news magazines Spiegel and Stern.</p><p>The tabloids have been fighting to buy up the stories of Kachelmann's ex- and current girlfriends, as well as the alleged victim, and have uncovered the weatherman's complicated love life, including a penchant for S&M.</p><p>Kachelmann has not denied this, or that he had several girlfriends simultaneously, but has said no one was interested in his love life until now as long as he more-or-less correctly predicted the weather.</p><p>"When I was a mere fourth-class television celebrity, no one was much interested in my private life," he said in a recent interview.</p><p>The self-taught meteorologist owns a multi-million-euro weather service called Meteomania and is best known for his descriptions of "slurping winds" and "cauliflower clouds". In one of his more famous broadcasts, he scooped up a cat which wandered on set and held it while reading the weather map.</p><p>Kachelmann, who set up his company after becoming frustrated about inaccurate weather reports when he went sailing, beat the state-funded German Weather Service for the contract to provide forecasts for state television and hundreds of local radio and TV stations in 2002.</p><p>His company, which has hundreds of weather stations around the country, was credited with considerably increasing the accuracy of weather bulletins. It relies heavily on the British Met Office's "fine-mesh system", which produces 24-hour weather patterns. Meteomania's future has been in doubt since his arrest.</p><p>During the four months he spent in prison awaiting news of his trial, Kachelmann said he "missed the weather". "In order to see the sky I had to stand on the bed because the window was so high up," he told Spiegel magazine.</p><p>The court in Mannheim, where the case will open tomorrow amid high security, is due to hear evidence from 26 witnesses, including several of Kachelmann's former and current girlfriends. Kachelmann was arrested at Frankfurt airport on his return from the Vancouver Olympics in March. He was held in investigative custody until his release from prison in a surprise move at the end of July after the court ruled there was "insufficient evidence to continue holding him". The judge said the case would probably come down to Kachelmann's word against his girlfriend.</p><p>If convicted, he faces a year in prison.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/germany">Germany</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/meteorology">Meteorology</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/rape">Rape</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/kateconnolly">Kate Connolly</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKiR4xUv4XcMHrCxIu2pLGNIPyE/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKiR4xUv4XcMHrCxIu2pLGNIPyE/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKiR4xUv4XcMHrCxIu2pLGNIPyE/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kKiR4xUv4XcMHrCxIu2pLGNIPyE/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Germany World news Meteorology Rape guardian.co.uk News http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/05/germany-weatherman-rape-trial Sun, 05 Sep 2010 13:50:48 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/google-galaxy-zoo-climate-project/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/76655?ns=guardian&pageName=Google+and+Galaxy+Zoo+could+aid+global+climate+project%3AArticle%3A1447487&ch=Science&c3=Obs&c4=Meteorology%2CUK+news%2CEnvironment%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CScience%2CClimate+change+%28Science%29%2CGoogle+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology&c5=Climate+Change%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CEthical+Living%2CCorporate+IT&c6=Robin+McKie&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447487&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FMeteorology" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Climate scientists meeting in Britain this week hope to build a database to predict natural disasters precisely. And records of the voyages of the Bounty and Beagle will assist them in their task</p><p>Leading climate scientists will gather in the UK this week to finalise plans for a revolutionary project aimed at transforming their ability to predict meteorological disasters. The goal is to create an international databank that would generate forecasts of unprecedented precision.</p><p>The scientists' plans include:</p><p>■ Creating a global network of weather stations that would provide daily temperature readings for any spot on the planet. At present, only monthly readings are generated for the United States and Europe, while virtually no data is provided for much of Africa, the Amazon and Antarctica.</p><p>■ Digitising old sea logs – including those of the Bounty, the Beagle and Scott's Discovery – to build up a data set of historical weather patterns.</p><p>■ Persuading many countries that currently refuse to provide meteorological information to the rest of the world to open their data banks.</p><p>■ Seeking help from web companies and organisations such as Google and Galaxy Zoo to help volunteers decode data. In this way, meteorologists hope to transform their long-term forecasts.</p><p>"It is now very clear that humanity is changing the climate through the greenhouse gases we are pumping into the atmosphere," said Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring at the UK Met Office, one of the organisers of this week's meeting. "But we don't know yet, and what we really must find out is how those changes will affect a particular area.</p><p>"We need to answer key questions such as whether the onset of the monsoon in India will be delayed, how the frequency of droughts in the Horn of Africa is changing, or whether Europe will experience more severe heatwaves in future."</p><p>In recent months Moscow has been blanketed in smog from burning peatlands, a giant island of ice has splintered from Greenland and floods in Pakistan have killed about 2,000 and left millions homeless. Scientists believe that, as climate change takes an increasingly tight grip on the planet, more and more of these events will happen. They want to learn how to predict such occurrences and give vulnerable areas accurate warnings about potential catastrophes.</p><p>However, meteorologists are limited by the lack of data they receive from monitoring stations around the globe. Although there are more than 6,000 such stations providing data about temperatures, wind, precipitation and other variables, these only generate monthly averages for a particular locality.</p><p>"We need to get daily temperature readings if we are going to make accurate forecasts," said Peter Thorne, of the <a href="http://www.nrc.noaa.gov/ci/locations/cics_md.html" title="Co-operative Institute for Climate and Satellites">Co-operative Institute for Climate and Satellites</a> in North Carolina. At the same time, swaths of Africa and Antarctica and much of the Amazon have no stations at all.</p><p>One of the aims of this week's meeting is to discuss ways in which daily readings could be generated by increasing the number of these remote, unmanned stations. It is intended to begin negotiations with countries that refuse to give out readings from weather stations on the grounds that such information could be sold. Simply opening these nations' data banks would double the information available to world forecasters.</p><p>However, it is the decoding and digitising of old logs from some of Britain's most illustrious sea voyages – a process likely to involve assistance from organisations such as Google – that promises to be of particular public interest. Throughout the 19th century and for many of the early years of the 20th century, Britain's navy ruled the oceans. Daily information about weather conditions recorded in logs gives an invaluable insight into climate patterns for these decades. Examples include the logbooks of the ships of the East India Company, which are held in the British Library, the logs of Royal Navy ships during the first world war, which are held in the UK National Archives, and those of the major Antarctic expeditions, which are currently being digitised by the Met Office.</p><p>"The problem is that the data is stored in old logbooks and it is an extremely laborious business to turn that information into digital form," added Stott.</p><p>However, recent developments on the web have provided precedents for providing help for such work. Three years ago Chris Lintott, an Oxford physicist, set up a website called <a href="http://zoo1.galaxyzoo.org/" title="Galaxy Zoo">Galaxy Zoo</a> which asked the public to help classify photographs of a million galaxies. It has turned into the biggest citizen-science experiment on the web. Galaxies can be classified as spiral, elliptical or merging. However, with images of more than a million taken by astronomers, their categorisation – crucial for understanding the evolution of the universe – was daunting until Galaxy Zoo was set up. By logging on, members of the public can classify galaxies and have proved as good as, and in some cases better than, professional astronomers.</p><p>Now meteorologists hope that Galaxy Zoo, whose organisers have been invited to this week's climate meeting, can provide a model that will allow the public to help in the massive job of digitising the weather data left by sailors.</p><p>"We need not only to create climate data sets at daily or even shorter timescales, at a resolution of a few kilometres at most, but to generate data sets as far into the past as possible," said Stott. "That is why we are planning to take all these different approaches."</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/meteorology">Meteorology</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/scienceofclimatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/google">Google</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/robinmckie">Robin McKie</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/DKu35NULgqbqW_tcDIKoMiD5W9k/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/DKu35NULgqbqW_tcDIKoMiD5W9k/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/DKu35NULgqbqW_tcDIKoMiD5W9k/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/DKu35NULgqbqW_tcDIKoMiD5W9k/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Meteorology UK news Environment Climate change Science Climate change Google Technology The Observer News http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/google-galaxy-zoo-climate-project Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:07:11 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/anti-ageing-america-arlene-weintraub/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/88642?ns=guardian&pageName=America%27s+%2488bn+anti-ageing+industry%3A+dangerous+and+with+no+scientific+b%3AArticle%3A1447446&ch=Science&c3=Obs&c4=Ageing+%28science%29%2CUS+healthcare%2CUS+news%2CWorld+news%2CScience%2CHealth+%28Society%29%2CSociety&c5=Society+Weekly%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CUS+Elections%2CHealth+Society&c6=Paul+Harris&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447446&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FAgeing" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">A new book warns that millions face serious health problems caused by the gurus of hormones and dietary fads</p><p>The desire to defy age is as ancient as human history, but in the past 10 years a multibillion-dollar industry has sprung up in America promising decades of extra life and good health beyond your 100th birthday.</p><p>However, a new book has revealed a disturbing lack of safety regulation, outrageous unproved medical claims, risky products that could cause serious health problems, and a celebrity-dominated marketing machine promising an extended youth – much of it with little science to back it up.</p><p>Arlene Weintraub, who spent four years researching <em>Selling the Fountain of Youth</em>, says the anti-ageing industry has grown from virtually nothing to a staggering $88bn in 10 years, with few products and procedures regulated in the same way as normal pharmaceuticals and medical cures. Much of it is based on replacing the body's hormones as people grow older. But it also includes extensive use of products such as Botox, vitamin supplements and dietary fads. All have become hugely popular, but there is little proof that they work – or are 100% safe. Some female users of a popular hormone therapy called the Wiley Protocol have complained about their menstrual cycles starting again, with excessive bleeding and hair loss. The creator of the Wiley Protocol, a Californian called Susie Wiley, was found to have virtually no scientific or medical qualifications.</p><p>Such alarming reports have not slowed the huge expansion of the industry. The American Academy of Anti-Ageing Medicine (known by the acronym A4M) holds annual conferences that attract thousands of businessmen, chemists and physicians, all hawking their wares. Some critics of the organisation have dubbed it "all for the money" and say it has spearheaded the idea that getting old is basically a treatable condition.Across America chains of "rejuvenation centres" have sprung up touting the latest "cures" for getting old.</p><p>Weintraub argues that the current demographics of America have made the country especially susceptible to an anti-ageing message. The "baby boomer" generation – some 77 million strong – is just hitting the retirement age and millions are looking for ways to prolong their health and lifespan. "This generation, probably more than any before, wants to grow old in a different sort of way," Weintraub said. "Boomers have seen how their parents' generation aged and are trying to avoid that scenario."</p><p>She traces the birth of the anti-ageing industry to the discovery that human growth hormones used to treat stunted growth problems in children could also be used in adults, and in many cases appeared to have a rejuvenating impact.</p><p>The industry spread to include the use of Botox, derived from the deadly botulinum toxin and originally intended to treat muscle disorders. But anti-ageing doctors also frequently prescribe hormones such as testosterone and oestrogen, that are derived from plants such as yams and soy beans. Weintraub has documented cases where people are using such large amounts of these hormones, sometimes as skin creams, that their partners are absorbing them when they lie next to them in bed at night.</p><p>She says the main problem is that government regulation is too light and safety rules not as tight as for normal drugs, which require extensive medical trials before they get federal approval. She also points out that as ageing is not classified as a medical problem – and thus is not covered by insurance companies – the anti-ageing industry is largely founded on patients buying treatments from their doctors, which can easily lead to abuse and lax safety standards.</p><p>The industry frequently has its products touted on such influential shows as <em>Oprah</em> and <em>The View</em>. It's highest-profile celebrity proponent is Suzanne Somers, a former actress on the sitcom <em>Three's Company</em>, who has written three books on anti-ageing and is a regular on the talk show circuit.</p><p>All her books promise vastly extended lifespans and good health through anti-ageing treatments. Critics say she ignores the potential health risks of the products she endorses in favour of a vision of prolonged youth.</p><p>In her latest bestseller, Somers describes herself in 2041, when she will be 94: "Most mornings start with wonderful sex with my 105-year-old husband, Alan."Weintraub sees her book as a shot across the bows of such celebrity marketing. But she has seen first hand how powerful they are. Last year she was visiting an anti-ageing clinic when Somers appeared on <em>Oprah</em>. Suddenly the clinic was besieged by phone calls from interested potential patients desperate to stop the ageing process. "Their phones were ringing off the hook. It was crazy," Weintraub said.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/ageing">Ageing</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/healthcare">US healthcare</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa">United States</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/health">Health</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/paulharris">Paul Harris</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/rtCj68NEqLlqx5F4bp_WJczXkq8/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/rtCj68NEqLlqx5F4bp_WJczXkq8/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/rtCj68NEqLlqx5F4bp_WJczXkq8/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/rtCj68NEqLlqx5F4bp_WJczXkq8/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Ageing US healthcare United States World news Science Health Society The Observer News http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/anti-ageing-america-arlene-weintraub Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:07:07 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/05/hawking-atheism-religion-mary-warnock/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/85261?ns=guardian&pageName=We+must+learn+morality+from+each+other%2C+not+God+%7C+Mary+Warnock%3AArticle%3A1447423&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Stephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CReligion+%28News%29%2CAtheism+%28News%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Mary+Warnock&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447423&c9=Article&c10=Feature%2CComment&c11=Comment+is+free&c13=&c25=Comment+is+free%2CCif+belief&c30=content&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FComment+is+free" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The latest outbreak of hostilities between atheists and believers rehearses the same old confusion about what God stands for</p><p>Thursday's headline in the <em>Times</em>, "<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7976594/Stephen-Hawking-God-was-not-needed-to-create-the-Universe.html" title="">Hawking: God did not create the Universe</a>", reached new depths of absurdity. It provoked an immediate outbreak of hostilities between atheists and believers, raising again the question of the status of religion in an age of scientific advance that has been accelerating since the Enlightenment. Hawking appears to believe (and so far I can judge only from the extracts in the <em>Times </em>magazine, <em>Eureka</em>) that he has proved the nonexistence of God. But the trouble with his proof, as with so much religious discussion, is that he takes the name "God" to be used to refer to an object that exists (or does not exist) in the world as other natural objects exist.</p><p>And most people who are religious believers fall into the same confusion. They assume that God the Creator is a being, albeit supernatural, to whom can be ascribed other praiseworthy attributes, who can be identified with God the Loving Father, or God the Founder of all Morality, who literally, at one and the same time laid down both natural laws and moral principles.</p><p>It would be as well if people could take time off from the battle to read Section XI of David Hume's <a href="http://18th.eserver.org/hume-enquiry.html" title=""><em>Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding</em></a>. It isn't very long. But it contains the argument that even if we could infer from the nature of the world that God must have created it (a fashionable form of theology in the 18th century), this would be a useless inference, since we would have no grounds for ascribing any other characteristics to this creator. All the characteristics usually attributed to the deity – that he is morally perfect, that he loves his creatures, that his human creations are images of himself – all these are quite gratuitous additions to the inferred creative function. We would be landed with a God about whom nothing could be said except that he made the world.</p><p>The antagonists in the present engagement might prefer to read Kant, who denied that God's existence could be either proved or disproved, but held that all our language about God must be metaphorical. To think otherwise, he wrote, would be grossly anthropomorphic. Whence could we get the idea of perfect goodness or infinite forgiveness except from our knowledge of human goodness and human forgiveness?</p><p>The great monotheistic religions are powerful works of the human imagination that have woven themselves deeply into our culture. To some people, their imagery still appeals most strongly; their narratives convey truths and insights not elsewhere available. To others, they no longer have any but historical significance. The mischief done to science and religion by the current battle lies in the belief that all truth must be literal truth. One thing is certain. Just as, if Hawking is right, we do not <em>need </em>the idea of God to teach us the origin of the universes around us, so we do not <em>need</em> the idea of God to teach us what is good and what is bad. We can learn this from society itself, not from tablets of stone handed down from Mount Sinai.</p><p>Whatever the continuing role of religion today, in philanthropy, in education, in ceremonial, in music, in personal comfort and hope, there is no obligation to believe. We can value things without God to tell us what is valuable. We know, without faith, that love is better than war.</p><p><em>Mary Warnock's </em>Dishonest to God<em>, on keeping religion out of politics, will be published by Continuum, £16.99</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion">Religion</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/atheism">Atheism</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/marywarnock">Mary Warnock</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bDdBekCRkTYH2SRbgeOW83qekP0/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bDdBekCRkTYH2SRbgeOW83qekP0/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bDdBekCRkTYH2SRbgeOW83qekP0/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bDdBekCRkTYH2SRbgeOW83qekP0/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Stephen Hawking Religion Atheism guardian.co.uk Features Comment http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/05/hawking-atheism-religion-mary-warnock Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:07:05 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/05/wheat-price-fears-over-biofuels/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/99380?ns=guardian&pageName=Rising+wheat+prices+raise+fears+over+UK+commitment+to+biofuels%3AArticle%3A1447418&ch=Environment&c3=Obs&c4=Biofuels+%28Environment%29%2CFood+science%2CAgriculture+%28Science%29%2CScience%2CEnergy+%28Environment%29%2CRenewable+energy+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment%2CUK+news&c5=Environment+Conservation%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CEnergy%2CEthical+Living%2CFood+and+Drink&c6=Jamie+Doward&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447418&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Environment&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FBiofuels" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Converting up to a fifth of UK wheat into biofuel will force prices even higher at a time of food shortages, warn critics</p><p>The soaring price of wheat has raised questions about the UK's commitment to biofuels as it attempts to wean itself from its dependence on oil.</p><p>A network of biorefineries that convert wheat and other crops into bioethanol that can then be blended with petrol are being developed as the UK looks to meet its EU renewable transport fuels obligations.</p><p>But the huge amounts of wheat that will be used in the process – up to a fifth of the UK's current annual production within four years – have prompted questions about where the crop will come from.</p><p>At the end of a week in which the wheat price hit a two-year high as Russia, the world's fourth largest producer, imposed an export ban for the second year running, there were fears that the domestic move to biofuels would lead to further rises in the cost of wheat. The result would be a significant rise in shopping bills.</p><p>Currently there is only one wheat biorefinery operating in the UK. Owned by a company called Ensus, the Tees-side plant, which cost almost £300m to build and was temporarily closed due to teething problems, will use some 1.2 tonnes of wheat a year when at full capacity.</p><p>But four more plants that could use wheat, at Immingham, Corby, Grimsby and Hull, are also in development. According to the <a href="http://www.hgca.com/content.template/0/0/Home/Home/Home.mspx" title="">cereals and oilseeds division</a> of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, the three UK biofuel refineries that are expected to be fully operating by 2014 will require 3m tonnes, one-fifth of the wheat produced in the UK.</p><p>The demand is expected to rise further as the UK tries to meet recently agreed EU biofuel targets. The UK has recently signed up to a compulsory EU target that will see 10% of its transport fuels come from renewable sources by the year 2020.</p><p>The "dash for wheat" could see large amounts of land converted to arable use both in the UK and abroad. Green groups are concerned about what this will mean for developing countries.</p><p>The World Bank, the OECD and the <a href="http://www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk/" title="">UK government's Gallagher report</a> all identified biofuels as a significant factor in recent food price rises. But some reports suggest biofuels could actually help to "smooth out" the peaks and troughs associated with the wheat market by providing producers with more stable demand.</p><p>Concerns about the UK's wheat supply come at the end of a week in which the <a href="http://www.fao.org/" title="">UN Food and Agriculture Organisation</a> warned that world food prices have risen to their highest level in two years. It said that the increase was due partly to a drought in Russia, where government export restrictions have led the price to surge. Speculators have also been blamed for helping to drive prices higher at a time of general uncertainty.</p><p>A spike in food prices triggered deadly riots in Mozambique last week and experts worry that other countries that saw such unrest during the last global food crisis in 2008 could be hit again. In Egypt, where half of the population depends on subsidised bread, recent protests over rising prices left at least one person dead. There are also reports of price increases in flood-hit Pakistan.</p><p>Kenneth Richter, head of biofuels at <a href="http://www.foe.co.uk/" title="">Friends of the Earth</a>, said last week's riots showed that food should not be used for fuel. "In a time of rising food prices and global shortages, it is cynical to burn wheat in our cars," he said.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/biofuels">Biofuels</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/food-science">Food science</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/agriculture">Agriculture</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/energy">Energy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/renewableenergy">Renewable energy</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jamiedoward">Jamie Doward</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ClMaqwwSotwCvVc2DtsRhrOY4eM/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ClMaqwwSotwCvVc2DtsRhrOY4eM/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ClMaqwwSotwCvVc2DtsRhrOY4eM/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ClMaqwwSotwCvVc2DtsRhrOY4eM/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Biofuels Food science Agriculture Science Energy Renewable energy Environment UK news The Observer News http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/05/wheat-price-fears-over-biofuels Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:07:01 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/stem-cell-clinics-health-tourism/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/73986?ns=guardian&pageName=Stem+cell+clinics%3A+experts+insist+claims+of+cure-all+are+medically+unpro%3AArticle%3A1447352&ch=Science&c3=Obs&c4=Medical+research+%28Science%29%2CHealth+and+wellbeing+%28Life+and+style%29%2CHealthcare+industry+%28Business+sector%29%2CHealth+%28Society%29%2CMultiple+sclerosis%2CParkinson%27s+disease%2CScience%2CLife+and+style%2CUK+news&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CHealth+Society%2CHealth&c6=Denis+Campbell&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447352&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FMedical+research" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Health tourists travel the world and spend thousands, but their hopes of being cured are likely to be dashed</p><p>For the past decade stem cells have sparked huge excitement among scientists, dramatic media coverage about breakthroughs that could mean a cure for some of the nastiest diseases, and hope – sometimes desperate – among patients that the reality will match the hype. That has fuelled a booming trade in stem cell tourism – people heading to clinics abroad and forking out large sums for what are called stem cell treatments but which are unlikely to work and possibly do harm.</p><p>It is, as some of the UK's leading stem cells experts warned last week, a world of unproven therapies, patient optimism and predatory clinicians. Despite the lack of reliable evidence underpinning the treatments being offered, the number of people resorting to stem cell tourism is growing. Experts voiced their fears and frustrations after finding that many patients, often desperately ill, were asking their advice on whether to travel overseas.</p><p>"I've made some very strong comments which could potentially land me in court, but people still go to these clinics," said Professor Peter Coffey, director of the London Project to Cure Blindness at University College London. There are now several hundred clinics around the world which claim to have turned the potential of stem cells into effective treatments. They lure those suffering from diabetes, multiple sclerosis, heart failure, Parkinson's disease, autism, HIV, eye problems, spinal cord injuries and much else besides.</p><p>Several thousand people from around the world so far are estimated to have spent up to £20,000 or more in such places. Yet while stem cells could transform medicine, there is as yet scant actual proof of their efficacy. But still the tourists come.</p><p>The fact that scientists believe it is likely to be 15 to 20 years before the continuing worldwide flurry of trials and tests results in reliable treatments has not stopped clinics from offering exactly that already. Strong regulation means there are no such places in the UK or America. But the experts did single out the XCell Centre in Düsseldorf, Germany, and Beike Technology, which runs one in Shenzhen in China.</p><p>In 2008 the Multiple Sclerosis Society warned sufferers not to be taken in by Integrated BioSciences, a company registered in the Turks & Caicos Islands, which had offices in the Seychelles, Persian Gulf and Oxford, because there was no scientific backing for the claim that stem cells could cure the condition.</p><p>People's willingness to trust their savings and their health to such clinics recently prompted the International Society for Stem Cell Research to launch a website to educate patients about the risks involved. Anyone thinking about going would be well advised to check it out and think again.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/medical-research">Medical research</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/health-and-wellbeing">Health & wellbeing</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/healthcare">Healthcare industry</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/health">Health</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/multiple-sclerosis">Multiple sclerosis</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/parkinsons-disease">Parkinson's disease</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/deniscampbell">Denis Campbell</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/0b0X8JKPBBRO3xhePbfRLm9DxAk/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/0b0X8JKPBBRO3xhePbfRLm9DxAk/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/0b0X8JKPBBRO3xhePbfRLm9DxAk/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/0b0X8JKPBBRO3xhePbfRLm9DxAk/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Medical research Health & wellbeing Healthcare industry Health Multiple sclerosis Parkinson's disease Science Life and style UK news The Observer News http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/stem-cell-clinics-health-tourism Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:06:51 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/tv-not-twitter-spreads-slang/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/58720?ns=guardian&pageName=Twitter+spreads+regional+slang%2C+claims+an+academic.+He%27s+probably+just+a%3AArticle%3A1447277&ch=Science&c3=Obs&c4=Language%2CGavin+and+Stacey%2CTelevision+%28Culture%29%2CUK+news&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CTelevision+Media%2CTV&c6=Ian+Tucker&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447277&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FLanguage" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Brookside and Gavin & Stacey may do more to spread local slang than social networking sites</p><p>In one school in estuary Essex in the 1980s, when you had a good time you had a "grindle", and if you had a jolly good time you had a "right ol' grindle". Yet stray outside the catchment area of the school – my old school – and no one was grindling. Some years later in the offices of a monthly magazine, anyone who was proving irritating was a "nizer". Despite nize-derived terms accounting for every fourth word uttered, it was an expression never heard beyond a work leaving do.</p><p>But last week we learned that local argot isn't staying put any more. Dialect words are spreading across the nation thanks to social networking. Dr Eric Schleef, lecturer in English Sociolinguistics at the University of Manchester, said: "Twitter, Facebook and texting all encourage speed and immediacy of understanding, meaning users type as they speak. We are all becoming exposed to words we may not have otherwise encountered."</p><p>He said that Welsh terms like "tidy" and "lush" have spread nationwide thanks to social networking, yet surely <em>Gavin & Stacey</em> might have helped via old-fashioned television.</p><p>In the 90s <em>Brookside</em> introduced the nation to Scouse and resulted in folk in Sussex paying their "leccy" bills and getting arrested by the "bizzies". Would Cockneys have described their new Nike Air Max as "mint" before <em>Shameless</em>? We tend only to social network with people we already know, who probably speak a bit like us. It takes television, film and literature to introduce us to new language.</p><p>Not that Dr Schleef denies the influence of television. He cites the use of "bootiful", a word not heard outside East Anglia until Bernard Matthews' turkey adverts. But I've not heard anyone say that outside a TV set, let alone East Anglia. Despite all the airtime, "bootiful", like "nize" and "grindle", didn't catch on, not because Twitter didn't exist but because they were just a bit "whack".</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/language">Language</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/gavin-and-stacey">Gavin and Stacey</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/television">Television</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/iantucker">Ian Tucker</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oietomHrmPyG3US9l55wwqXK2kA/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oietomHrmPyG3US9l55wwqXK2kA/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oietomHrmPyG3US9l55wwqXK2kA/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oietomHrmPyG3US9l55wwqXK2kA/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Language Gavin and Stacey Television UK news The Observer News http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/tv-not-twitter-spreads-slang Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:06:44 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/05/gerry-mander-rafael-behr/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/85859?ns=guardian&pageName=Dr+Gerry+Mander%3A+the+therapist+the+stars+trust+%7C+rafael+behr%3AArticle%3A1447198&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=Obs&c4=William+Hague%2CPolitics%2CStephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CScience%2CReligion+%28News%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Dr+Gerry+Mander&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447198&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Comment+is+free&c13=On+the+Couch+%28series%29&c25=Comment+is+free&c30=content&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FComment+is+free" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Help! I love wearing baseball caps but it's got me and my friend into trouble</p><p><strong>Dear Dr Mander</strong></p><p><strong>I am a middle-aged man with a successful political career. But I have an embarrassing predilection. I sometimes wear baseball caps. It is not a new thing. I wore one many years ago at a carnival. But there was a great press hoo-ha, so I resolved never to don one in public again. But then I found a baseball cap that fitted me particularly well. And, since I was not in government at the time, I saw no reason not to sport it in the company of a young friend. </strong></p><p><strong>He and I have often exchanged hat tips. His advice on the subject was vital during the election campaign, so I appointed him my milliner-in-chief at the Foreign Office. But these events have been distorted by the media into crude smears. I have been forced into a humiliating public account of my headgear preferences. My hatter has resigned. Surely, what a man wears in the company of his friends is his own business.</strong></p><p>W Hague</p><p><strong>Dear Mr Hague</strong></p><p>There is no shame in wearing baseball caps, but it is worth recalling how recently they have been accepted as part of a grown man's wardrobe. Such tolerance is always slower in reaching figures in public life. An unspoken law demands that politicians shield their bonces more soberly than the wider public. But your situation is complicated by the fact that you put your friend on the public payroll. The suspicion was bound to arise that he was preferred more for the peak of his cap than his professional competence.</p><p>Not to have foreseen that danger was a mistake. But that does not diminish your right to wear what you choose. There are probably many men in positions like yours, stuck in suits, craving the liberation of denim, baseball cap and shades. Embrace the look and be a role model to repressed dressers everywhere.</p><p><strong>Dear Dr Mander</strong></p><p><strong>Rule one: I am the Lord your God; thou shalt have no other gods before me. How hard can it be? Pretty hard, apparently because people keep denying me. The latest is this guy Hawking, who claims to know how the universe works, says there are many parallel universes and that it's all held to together by superstring or silly putty or some such. Anyway, he says that with all these multiple universes, it stands to reason that I don't exist. The chutzpah! That was six days' graft. I've a good mind to smite him.</strong></p><p>Yaweh</p><p><strong>Dear Yaweh,</strong></p><p>You are understandably irritated by unbelief and idolatry. But vengeance is a very BC response. The current fashion is to set out arguments, as Stephen Hawking has done, in book form. You have not revealed your Word for several centuries now, which has left the field open to your detractors. A return to print could be a good way to reach a new audience. For tips on how to pitch the narrative so it is chatty in tone but with the hauteur of an omniscient being, and also for examples of how to settle old scores in memoir form, get yourself a copy of <em>A Journey</em> by your faithful disciple T Blair.</p><p><strong>Dear Dr Mander</strong></p><p><strong>We are writing to alert you to a possible breach of security with regard to your mobile phone account. Our records show unauthorised attempts were made to access your voicemail records remotely. Our investigation has traced the source of the attempts to an address in Downing Street, London SW1. We are pursuing the matter further. Meanwhile, we strongly recommend you change your voicemail access passcode as soon as possible.</strong></p><p>Customer services manager, VodaComNet</p><p></p><p><strong>Dear Sir</strong></p><p>I deal with high-profile clients in the world of media and government, for whom privacy is an issue of paramount importance. I would therefore appreciate maximum discretion on this matter and, to avoid causing undue distress, would request that the police not be notified at this time.</p><p></p><p><em>Dr Gerry Mander shares his consulting room with Rafael Behr</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/williamhague">William Hague</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion">Religion</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/gerry-mander">Dr Gerry Mander</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/15fIGWfQmRfYUHS3o14g-PIN-kk/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/15fIGWfQmRfYUHS3o14g-PIN-kk/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/15fIGWfQmRfYUHS3o14g-PIN-kk/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/15fIGWfQmRfYUHS3o14g-PIN-kk/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> William Hague Politics Stephen Hawking Science Religion The Observer Comment http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/05/gerry-mander-rafael-behr Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:06:38 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/05/africa-space-programme-david-smith/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/27997?ns=guardian&pageName=Africa+prepares+to+join+the+big+boys+in+the+space+race+%7C+David+Smith%3AArticle%3A1447090&ch=World+news&c3=Obs&c4=South+Africa+%28News%29%2CSpace+%28Science%29%2CTechnology%2CNasa%2CWorld+news&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CCorporate+IT&c6=David+Smith+%28Africa+correspondent%29&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1447090&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=World+news&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FWorld+news%2FSouth+Africa" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The African Union has approved a feasibility study for the creation of an African Space Agency</p><p>Science fiction writer Larry Niven shrewdly observed: "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space programme." Africa, the cradle of mankind, has been slow to heed the warning, but that could be about to change.</p><p>A decision by the African Union to approve a feasibility study for the creation of an African Space Agency prompted debate. A summit of ministers agreed that the study would also draft a common space policy for the 53 member countries. Some commentators argue that a rival to Nasa could provide jobs and spin-off technology. Others said the continent can ill-afford to pour scarce resources into stargazing when millions continue to face poverty, disease and food shortages.</p><p>But the future is already here, if unevenly distributed. Astronomers have worked in Cape Town for centuries and in 1820 established the Royal Observatory at the Cape of Good Hope, the first of its kind in the southern hemisphere. Africa has launched several satellites and, in 2002, internet millionaire Mark Shuttleworth flew on a Russian Soyuz rocket to become the first African in space.</p><p>The <a href="http://www.iau.org/" title="">International Astronomical Union</a> (IAU) recently awarded Cape Town its Global Astronomy for Development Office to help take astronomy to the developing world. Africa is also competing with Australia in a bid to host the world's most powerful radio telescope, able to peer back billions of years in time.</p><p>An international panel is expected to announce the winner from the two shortlisted continents in 2012, with the victor hosting the £1.25bn <a href="http://www.skatelescope.org/" title="">Square Kilometre Array </a>(SKA) telescope, 50 times more sensitive and 10,000 times faster than any other radio imaging telescope built.</p><p>The SKA telescope would eventually consist of about 3,000 antennas, half concentrated on the outskirts of Carnarvon in the Northern Cape in South Africa, with the rest distributed in Namibia, Botswana, Mozambique, Ghana, Mauritius, Madagascar, Kenya and Zambia.</p><p>, Johannesburg</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/southafrica">South Africa</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/space">Space</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/nasa">Nasa</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/davidsmith">David Smith</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oGSKfJ1sveLW7sedExP--rs44LQ/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oGSKfJ1sveLW7sedExP--rs44LQ/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oGSKfJ1sveLW7sedExP--rs44LQ/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/oGSKfJ1sveLW7sedExP--rs44LQ/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> South Africa Space Technology Nasa World news The Observer News http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/05/africa-space-programme-david-smith Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:06:34 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/05/climate-change-ice-caps-antarctica/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/54007?ns=guardian&pageName=A+climate+warning+from+the+deep%3AArticle%3A1446688&ch=Environment&c3=Obs&c4=Climate+change+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Science%29%2CEnvironment%2CScience%2CAntarctica+%28News%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CClimate+Change%2CEthical+Living&c6=Robin+McKie&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1446688&c9=Article&c10=Feature&c11=Environment&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FClimate+change" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The dispersal of tiny sea creatures in Antarctica has alerted scientists to the vulnerability of Earth's ice sheets</p><p>Bryozoans make unlikely prophets of doom. Nevertheless, scientists believe these tiny marine creatures, which live glued to the side of boulders, rocks and other surfaces, reveal a disturbing aspect about Antarctica that has critical implications for understanding the impact of climate change.</p><p><a href="http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/" title="">British Antarctic Survey</a> researchers have found the dispersal of these minute animals suggests a sea passage once divided Antarctica 125,000 years ago. The discovery was made for the ongoing <a href="http://www.caml.aq/" title="">Census of Antarctic Marine Life</a> project and involved comparing bryozoans from the Ross and Weddell seas. These two seas are separated by the west Antarctic ice sheet, one of the planet's largest masses of ice. Bryozoans found in the Ross and Weddell seas should have been fairly different in structure if the sheet had been stable and ancient. The two populations would have slowly evolved in different manners, if the sheet was millions of years old.</p><p>But Dr David Barnes and his team discovered that the two populations were almost identical, indicating the two seas must have been connected by a major sea passage in the recent past, around 125,000 years ago. "What we've got is this group of animals that don't disperse very well because the adults don't move at all and the larvae are short-lived and sink, so they find it difficult to get around," says Barnes. "So you're left with this nice signal of where things used to be connected and, in this case, it appears to be a connection between what is now an ice sheet."</p><p>The impact of the west Antarctica ice sheet melting sufficiently to let a major sea passage extend through it would have been considerable. A complete collapse of the sheet today would lead to a sea-level rise of between 11ft and 16ft, for example, though the event uncovered by Barnes may only have been a partial one. Nevertheless, the research indicates that the great ice sheet, once thought to be impregnable, is really highly&nbsp;vulnerable.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/scienceofclimatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/antarctica">Antarctica</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/robinmckie">Robin McKie</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/OQBDrMDljdPx-pQkLqYocD-nOYo/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/OQBDrMDljdPx-pQkLqYocD-nOYo/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/OQBDrMDljdPx-pQkLqYocD-nOYo/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/OQBDrMDljdPx-pQkLqYocD-nOYo/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Climate change Climate change Environment Science Antarctica The Observer Features http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/05/climate-change-ice-caps-antarctica Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:06:30 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/sep/05/my-bright-idea-timothy-taylor/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/64766?ns=guardian&pageName=My+bright+idea%3A+Timothy+Taylor%3AArticle%3A1446177&ch=Technology&c3=Obs&c4=Evolution+%28Science%29%2CBiology%2CScience%2CAnthropology%2CTechnology&c5=Environment+Conservation%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CCorporate+IT&c6=Robin+McKie&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1446177&c9=Article&c10=Feature%2CInterview&c11=Technology&c13=My+bright+idea+%28series%29&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FEvolution" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">From the moment our ancestors began making primitive tools, Homo sapiens and technology have existed symbiotically, argues the author of The Artificial Ape. Without it, we would be very different creatures</p><p>Timothy Taylor is an anthropologist and archaeologist based at Bradford University. In his new book, <em>The Artificial Ape</em>, he argues that the moment our apemen ancestors began chipping at lumps of stone to create their first tools, they released a force – technology – that has played a pivotal role in shaping the human species. Such innovations have altered the way we nurture our offspring, prepare our food, use our strength and establish cultures. We did not invent technology, this 50-year-old scientist argues. Technology invented us.</p><p></p><p><strong>So what insights do we get into human nature when we look at the role of technology in our evolution?</strong></p><p>There is a perception that technology – from the industrial revolution to the computer age – has suddenly put us into a new world, one that is a bit scary. We worry that computers might take us over, for example. But it was ever thus. The genus <em>Homo</em> is a product of the realm of technology. It underpinned our evolution and turned us into a highly intelligent creature. That is why I describe <em>Homo sapiens</em> as an artificial ape.</p><p></p><p><strong>When did this process begin?</strong></p><p>We can see from the archaeological evidence that by 2.6m years, our australopithecine apemen ancestors had learned how to chip at stones and make tools. Before then, they had used stones to cut things but now they were actually shaping bits of stone to suit various uses. That was the crucial moment, the one that triggered a social revolution.</p><p></p><p><strong>In what way?</strong></p><p>Well, one important development would have been the construction of the first slings for carrying around newborn babies. Without them, women would have expended more biological energy carrying their children in their arms than they would have used on providing them with milk, on lactation. But now, if you had tools to make spears, you could kill animals and remove their skins with the knives you had learned how to make and [from the skins] you could make a sling with which to carry your baby.</p><p>The implications of this development were enormous. It meant that babies could continue to develop outside the womb after birth and that their brains could continue to grow. They were not constrained by the size of their mothers' pelvises and could grow bigger and bigger for years. It gave us scope for intellectual expansion. We could give birth to children who were intellectually underdeveloped but whose brains could continue to develop outside the womb.</p><p>We can only infer that, of course. The skins or viscera that might have been used as slings have long since decayed.</p><p>In addition, though, tools provided us with the weapons we used to kill animals whose meat provided the protein-rich diets that were necessary for our brains to expand over the eons. Thus technology let loose processes that led to us evolving larger and larger brains. It does not explain why we developed big brains, but it shows how technology created the space in which that expansion could occur.</p><p></p><p><strong>We haven't looked back since then?</strong></p><p>Well, no, not quite. In fact, brain size has decreased slightly over the past 30,000 years and I think that has a lot to do with technology. By that period in our evolution, a caveman no longer needed to remember how many mammoth tusks he was owed by another caveman. He could mark that on the walls of his cave with paint. We had reached the stage where we had learned to use symbols. So technology has recently started to take away a little of our need for large brains. Indeed, we are now outsourcing our intelligences at a greater and greater speed, with the development of powerful personal computers, for example. So I would predict that, in the long run, humans are going to continue to get less biologically intelligent. This is not necessarily a bad thing, however.</p><p>Consider the example of eyesight.&nbsp;On average, it is probably deteriorating for our species. If I had to survive by being able to spot a deer and then shoot it down with a bow and arrow, I probably wouldn't be here. But I can not only see deer, I can see microbes and distant galaxies – using microscopes and telescopes – because of my symbiotic relationship with technology. So in many ways my eyesight is better than a caveman's or a hunter-gatherer's, but only in terms of me being a biotechnological creature. Through that my power has extended. That is why I talk about us being the weakest ape in the innate sense but, with technology, the&nbsp;strongest.</p><p></p><p><strong>Should we be worried about our growing dependence on technology?</strong></p><p>The answer is yes or no, depending on your optimism or pessimism. It could be that in the distant future Earth will become uninhabitable for humanity and if the technology to help us leave does not exist, we may eventually succumb to a dusty death. For example, without technology, we will not have the means to deal with the next huge meteorite that heads our way. On the other hand, with technology, we might make things so unpleasant down here that we really damage the planet and render it unfit for humans. It is a very finely balanced issue.</p><p>One fact is clear though. The thing is out of the box. There is no back-to-nature solution for us. It is too late. We are going to have deal with technology and learn to take charge of it in future.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The Artificial Ape: How Technology Changed the Course of Human Evolution<em> by Timothy Taylor is published by Palgrave Macmillan (£17.99)</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/evolution">Evolution</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/biology">Biology</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/anthropology">Anthropology</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/robinmckie">Robin McKie</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ZCYw7osj8vo5R9eYQSngiXJzcE8/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ZCYw7osj8vo5R9eYQSngiXJzcE8/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ZCYw7osj8vo5R9eYQSngiXJzcE8/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/ZCYw7osj8vo5R9eYQSngiXJzcE8/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Evolution Biology Science Anthropology Technology The Observer Features Interviews http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/sep/05/my-bright-idea-timothy-taylor Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:04:59 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/felix-baumgartner-michel-fournier-supersonic/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/19654?ns=guardian&pageName=Skydiving+from+the+edge+of+space%3A+can+a+human+break+the+sound+barrier%3F%3AArticle%3A1444068&ch=Science&c3=Obs&c4=Space+%28Science%29%2CScience%2CExtreme+sports%2CNasa%2CSpace+technology+%28Technology%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CTechnology+Gadgets%2COutdoor+and+Active&c6=Tom+Lamont&c7=10-Sep-05&c8=1444068&c9=Article&c10=Feature&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FSpace" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">A person freefalling from 120,000 feet would theoretically reach a supersonic speed of over 700mph. Two daredevils of the skies are racing to break the sound barrier – and face unknown hazards in their attempt</p><p>We know this. At around 120,000 feet, on the fringes of space, the air is so thin that a falling human body would travel fast enough to exceed the speed of sound. A skydiver, properly equipped with pressurised suit and a supply of oxygen to protect against the hostile elements, could feasibly jump from that height and, about 30 seconds later, punch through the sound barrier – becoming the first person ever to go "supersonic" without the aid of an aircraft or space shuttle.</p><p>Here our knowledge ends. Experts admit cluelessness. Our skydiver could render a mighty "krakoom!" across the high skies or history could be made in utter silence. Immense forces could knock the intrepid skydiver out cold, could peel the skin back from his body or simply cause a little wobble in the midriff, like a playful hug. Nobody is quite sure – but one of two men will soon find out.</p><p>They are Felix Baumgartner and Michel Fournier, rival daredevils who have long been formulating plans to travel up to 120,000 feet, far higher than any skydiver has yet been, from there to plunge back to Earth. Their plans share similar elements – helium balloons attached to mansize cradles, space-faring equipment, lots of complicated parachutes – but this pair could not be more different.</p><p><a href="http://felixbaumgartner.com/index.php?id=8" title="">Baumgartner</a> is an extreme sportsman from Austria, steely, serious and a parachutist who has completed all kinds of dangerous and newsworthy stunts over his 41 years. His effort to skydive from the edge of space – to "space jump" as the feat has come to be known – is backed by energy drink manufacturer Red Bull, who under the project banner Red Bull Stratos have outfitted Baumgartner with expensive kit, a hi-tech Californian base, a team of aeronautic and medical experts and funds fully to publicise the endeavour.</p><p><a href="http://www.legrandsaut.org/" title="">Michel Fournier</a>'s mission has not quite the same pizzazz. The French former paratrooper is 66 and not backed by an energy drink. His equipment has been laboriously sourced from various abandoned military projects over two decades and his publicity machine consists of an ill-updated website plus a beleaguered press agent called Francine. Plotting his space jump since the late 1980s, he was long ago banned by his own government from conducting the project in France (too dangerous) and has for the last 10 years been operating from a tiny airstrip in North Battleford, Canada.</p><p>Here, Fournier has made several attempts at a space jump, but all have gone wrong in the early stages – the very early stages. He has set a few records – highest skydive by a Frenchman! – but if Fournier has done anything really newsworthy to date, it has been for the type of exploit heralded by a wry broadcaster saying: "And finally…"</p><p>Baumgartner has been plotting his space jump for four years, Fournier for 20, and this autumn both projects are coming to a head – 50 years exactly since anyone even came close to leaping from such heights or plummeting at such speeds. That was Colonel Joseph Kittinger, a test pilot, who completed a series of high-altitude jumps from a helium balloon in August 1960, part of an equipment-testing project for the agency that would become Nasa.</p><p>Jumping from 102,800 feet, Kittinger fell at 614mph, about nine-tenths the speed of sound; a torn glove meant one of his hands swelled to twice its normal size. On a previous test jump, from 76,000 feet, a parachute cord wrapped around his neck and Kittinger passed out mid-fall; he was saved from death only by the automatic deployment of an emergency chute.</p><p>Every year since, says the American, now 82, some privateer has contacted him with plans to beat the record, to jump from higher and travel faster. No one has managed it. The effort has defeated, humiliated, pauperised, even killed challengers since 1960, largely due to the sheer difficulty of getting up high enough to attempt a jump.</p><p>It can't be done from an aeroplane (even a spy plane can only ascend to about 80,000 feet), nor from a rocket (any hopeful parachutist opening the hatch to jump out would be torn to pieces). Ballooning directly up is the only realistic option, but an option still fraught with difficulties. A helium balloon launched into the stratosphere needs continually to enlarge because of the changes in atmospheric pressure, and so must be made of a special expandable material that is less than a 1,000th of an inch thin; clingfilm thin. It also needs to be <em>huge</em>, about the size of an office block.</p><p>Inflating a building-sized balloon out of something like sandwich wrapping is not easy, as Michel Fournier can well attest. Preparing to launch his first space-jump attempt from North Battleford in 2002, a filling tube on his balloon tore, ending the mission before he'd even got into his capsule. In 2003, he was back on the same strip of tarmac, but the material ripped again, the mission aborted for a second time.</p><p>Raised on a farm in the Auvergne, Fournier joined the French army in his teens and rose to become a parachute officer and later a reservist colonel. In 1988 he was chosen by the European Space Agency to be part of a space-jumping effort that was soon nixed by budget cuts; nonetheless a seed had been planted and Fournier – bouncy, rubbery-faced, with an oft-described physical resemblance to Robin Williams – has pursued the project independently ever since. "I haven't led a very conventional life," he says. "I have to live at 1,000mph!"</p><p>Or, at least, 700mph – the kind of speed he could expect to reach during a successful space-jump. And so in 2006 Fournier returned to his North Battleford airstrip, newly equipped and ready for a third go. This time he was foiled by unfavourable weather, jet winds that might have carried him anywhere in Canada. In 2008, he was back again, his balloon reinforced with extra layers, Fournier in the capsule below, poised and excited and 20-years ready – when without warning his balloon floated away, the capsule unattached and left behind. A release-switch had fired prematurely and the balloon, worth around £120,000, flew off, landing in ruins miles away.</p><p>Nonetheless, for Fournier, "doing crazy shit for as long as possible is the only way to be". He reveals that <em>le grand saut </em>(or "the big jump"), as he calls his endeavour, has just about bankrupted him, that he has sold his car, his furniture, his war medals, even his house. "The main difference between Felix and me is means," he says. "If he has a problem with his balloon or anything else, Red Bull will cover it."</p><p>Red Bull <em>will</em> cover it – the company has ploughed billions into the sponsorship of sports as varied as football and Formula One, surfing and sailing. The biggest part of their portfolio, however, has always been extreme sports, and Felix Baumgartner has risen to become one of the company's stars.</p><p>He grew up in Salzburg, Austria, idolising Neil Armstrong, Spider-Man and James Dean. Determined and competitive, he always wanted to be the best at things, he says, "even in the sack race at school", and joined the Austrian army, there becoming a tank-driving instructor, a close-combat specialist, and a member of the military's parachute display team.</p><p>By the late 90s, out of the army, Baumgartner was making a name for himself in the sport of base-jumping, which required parachuting from a standing start off things such as buildings and bridges. "It came very close to my idea of being able to fly." In 1999 he set a world record by jumping from the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur. Four years later he became the first man to cross the English Channel in freefall, soaring for miles wearing a wing made of carbon fibre.</p><p>Luke Atkins is a close friend of Baumgartner, and an experienced parachutist himself. "There are three things everybody asks you as a skydiver," says Atkins. "What's the highest you've jumped from? What's the lowest you've opened your parachute? And have you ever worn one of those wing suits?" In an outrageous base-jumping stunt in Oman in 2007, Baumgartner had popped his chute less than 100 feet from the floor of a cave. "The only thing he hadn't done was jump from the highest."</p><p>Enter Red Bull. From 2006 to 2010, the pieces of the Stratos project were put together: a team of ex-Nasa scientists were assembled to do the hard planning; a documentary crew was invited to film preparations; and Luke Atkins was roped in as an extra to hurl his body around at the California HQ when Baumgartner was at home in Austria, riding around on his collection of vintage motorbikes.</p><p>Red Bull Stratos made one more intriguing signing: Joe Kittinger. He was persuaded to lend his name to this project after decades of saying no to wannabe space-jumpers because "they were doing it right, safe". Most of those who had contacted him in the past, says Kittinger, "had no idea of the hazards. I didn't want to be associated with people who died in the attempt."</p><p>Before hopping from his balloon-attached capsule, Kittinger had described to a ground-control team his surroundings at 102,800 feet. He saw "an absolute void" – "beautiful but hostile". It will be worse at 120,000 feet, where Baumgartner or Fournier will be exposed to the combination of a freezing cold atmosphere and the sun's unfiltered rays. Other risks include hypoxia (a lack of oxygen), decompression sickness, even hallucinations – all before leaving the capsule. Any breakage or failure of equipment at this point would be catastrophic; were the suit to lose its pressurisation, for example, it would trigger a process called vaporisation whereupon the blood, in the vacuum of near-space, boils inside the body. (It was this that made Kittinger's hand enlarge so grotesquely in 1960.)</p><p>The plunge itself, lasting around 10 minutes and including a five-minute float once the main parachute is deployed at 3,000 feet, should be relatively easy. All excepting that small matter of becoming the first humans to test-puncture the sound barrier. "That is the real unknown," says Red Bull Stratos's medical director, Jonathan Clarke. "And it's a real big unknown."</p><p></p><p>One Sunday in May, the same weekend that Baumgartner and Kittinger were due to conduct a round of interviews with the world's media to promote Red Bull Stratos, Michel Fournier was back on his airstrip in North Battleford. A fresh series of preparations had begun for the Frenchman back in January, around the time that Baumgartner had officially confirmed he was to attempt a space-jump in 2010. Fournier ordered a new balloon: his fifth. Probably wary of rousing the same pack of local journalists and science writers who had trooped out to the airfield so many times in the past, Fournier kept his plans quiet. A small crowd, nevertheless, made it to North Battleford to watch, mostly ballooning enthusiasts but also the mayors of two local towns, and Fournier's close friend Gil Bellavance. "I gave him a little salute," recalls Bellavance.</p><p>At the far end of the airstrip, Fournier's team were ready to start inflating the balloon, a process that once started cannot easily be stopped. They were told something had gone wrong: the fittings on Fournier's suit were giving him trouble. An hour later, the inflation team got word to start again; this time they got halfway through, the balloon starting to rise promisingly from the tarmac, before a second call to abort went around North Battleford. In his capsule, Fournier's parachute had popped open, three hours and 120,000 feet too early.</p><p>"I didn't hear Michel say anything," says Bellavance, "he had his helmet on. But I would imagine the word at that moment would not be printable." On the airstrip, the balloon was deflated and packed away. Fournier's capsule was craned back to its hanger. Around the edges of North Battleford, the enthusiasts dispersed.</p><p>"I will do everything in my power to reach the end of my dream," says Fournier, who has tentatively scheduled another attempt, his seventh, for the coming months. But if the end of that dream is Baumgartner getting there first? "I'll congratulate him. But you can bet that I'll do it second."</p><p>Should he fail, two decades of botched space-jumps have at least rewarded him with something. A bachelor for most of his life, Fournier met his wife, Kim, in 2003 while she was working as a receptionist at his North Battleford motel. Unable to woo her in English at the time, Fournier simply took her hand and kissed it over the desk. They were married that year.</p><p>Baumgartner, meanwhile, has been making final refinements. In one test jump over the California desert he realised that he couldn't twist his head in its helmet to see if his parachute had opened properly, and so mirrors were added to his gloves. His visor, meanwhile, has been fitted with a demister to stop any fogging from his breath. He seems to be on the cusp of history, and has even had time to contemplate a Hollywood film being made of his efforts; Steven Spielberg would be the preferred director.</p><p>The exact date of his jump has not been revealed, but it seems likely the attempt will take place very soon, as close as possible to the 50th anniversary of Kittinger's record leap (which passed last month). At 120,000 feet Baumgartner says he plans to take in the view for a moment before jumping. He doesn't yet know what he will say before he leaps, but it ought to be something quotable. ("Stop worrying about death," is one of his lines. "It's like worrying about the sunrise.")</p><p>Then he'll bunny-hop from the platform, feet first, in a position long practised because it will ready him best for the strangest skydive of his life. The atmosphere will be so thin and featureless that, at first, he'll feel the sensation of being completely still. In fact, he will plummet faster than anybody has yet travelled outside of a machine. Even if there is a "krakoom!" across the skies it will happen far, far behind the falling man. Baumgartner himself will simply hear a small beep in his ear, confirmation from his equipment that the mission has been a success, and that he has become the world's first supersonic man.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/space">Space</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/extreme-sports">Extreme sports</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/nasa">Nasa</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/spacetechnology">Space technology</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/tomlamont">Tom Lamont</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/C92P9hK-Oobb0ZiMY7eP06urUD4/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/C92P9hK-Oobb0ZiMY7eP06urUD4/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/C92P9hK-Oobb0ZiMY7eP06urUD4/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/C92P9hK-Oobb0ZiMY7eP06urUD4/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Space Science Extreme sports Nasa Space technology The Observer Features http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/05/felix-baumgartner-michel-fournier-supersonic Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:04:56 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/picture/2010/sep/04/space/print <p>Photographs from the Guardian Eyewitness series</p><br/><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/28qxpef9OT81tAkqg6x3BYq7WlQ/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/28qxpef9OT81tAkqg6x3BYq7WlQ/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/28qxpef9OT81tAkqg6x3BYq7WlQ/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/28qxpef9OT81tAkqg6x3BYq7WlQ/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Space guardian.co.uk Editorial http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/picture/2010/sep/04/space Sat, 04 Sep 2010 15:57:17 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/04/stephen-hawking-religion/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/68957?ns=guardian&pageName=A+conversation+with+Stephen+Hawking%2C+aged+five+years+old+%7C+Mark+Vernon%3AArticle%3A1447305&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Philosophy+%28News%29%2CReligion+%28News%29%2CStephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CScience%2CWorld+news&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Mark+Vernon&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1447305&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Comment+is+free&c13=&c25=Cif+belief%2CComment+is+free&c30=content&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FCif+belief" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">If Stephen Hawking was a boy again, what questions would he ask, and what would be the answer?</p><p>Imagine Stephen Hawking is reincarnated, and this time round his father is a philosopher. One day, when little Stephen is about five years old, they're sitting in the summer house with Fido, their pet dog. And Stephen asks one of those questions children love to repeat.</p><p></p><p><em>Daddy.</em> Yes Stephen? <em>Why is Fido?</em> Well, Stephen, Fido had a mummy and daddy like you.</p><p></p><p><em>Yeah but, why is Fido?</em> Err, you mean why is he a dog? That's because his parents were dogs, and his parent's parents were dogs too. They belong to what we call the same species. (Stephen is precocious in this life too.)</p><p></p><p><em>But why is Fido?</em> Well, we know that Fido's parent's parent's parent's parents – a long way back – were not dogs, but were wolves. That was before human beings made them pets.</p><p></p><p><em>Oh. Why is Fido?</em> Before there were wolves there was another species out of which wolves grow. We call it evolution, Stephen, and it's a very important process in the natural world.</p><p></p><p><em>Ev-o-lu-tion.</em> (Stephen likes the feel of that word.) <em>But why is Fido?</em> Before that species, there was another, and another, and another, all the way back to tiny animals we call cells.</p><p></p><p><em>Why IS Fido?</em> You're asking about biochemistry now. Err, roughly you can say that when the stuff of which everything is made is put together in a very complicated way – like a fantastic lego puzzle – then it takes on this very special property we call life.</p><p></p><p><em>WHY IS FIDO?</em> Before life, there was just stuff – matter. It hung around for many billions of years on planet earth.</p><p></p><p><em>But why is FIDO?</em> Before the earth, there were stars, and galaxies, subatomic particles and strange things like black holes. (Stephen has the very strange feeling that he knows all about black holes, even though he's only five.)</p><p></p><p><em>Yeah but, why is Fido?</em> Scientists think it all started with a big bang, Stephen, a kind of spontaneous eruption out of which everything came.</p><p></p><p><em>Wow! Why is Fido?</em> The big bang must have happened because of the laws of physics.</p><p></p><p><em>BUT WHY IS FIDO?</em></p><p></p><p>(At this point Stephen's father pauses. Being a philosopher, he realises that Stephen is now asking a very different question to all the ones he's asked before. You see, before, his questions could be answered with reference to some preceding state of affairs, out of which Fido can be said to have come. Now, though, he is asking about where everything came from, and being everything, there is no antecedent reality to refer to. To start to talk of nothing, not even abstract laws of nature, let alone wildly compressed energy, is to try to put everything in the context of nothing. But nothing is precisely that: not a quantum field fluctuating in the vacuum, not one universe springing out of a multiverse. Nothing is more radical than that. It is nothing. It's impossible to conceive of, in fact. It's no wonder Stephen's father pauses.)</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure we can ask that question, Stephen. It makes no sense.</p><p></p><p><em>But I want to know: why is Fido?</em></p><p></p><p>Well, some say the universe just is. There's a famous philosopher from about 100 years ago, Bertrand Russell, and he thought that.</p><p></p><p>(Stephen harrumphs.) <em>But why is Fido?</em></p><p></p><p>There is another answer.</p><p></p><p><em>Yes? </em>(Stephen sits up.)</p><p></p><p>Well, it's not exactly an answer.</p><p></p><p><em>Oh?</em></p><p></p><p>More like a mystery.</p><p></p><p><em>I like mysteries.</em></p><p></p><p>But I'm not sure you're going to like this one.</p><p></p><p><em>Tell me!</em></p><p></p><p>Well, there was another philosopher who was a friend of Bertrand Russell, in fact. He was called Ludwig Wittgenstein, and he said, "Not how the world is, but that it is, is the mystery."</p><p></p><p><em>Wow!</em></p><p></p><p>And the mystery is sometimes given a name.</p><p></p><p><em>What's the name?</em></p><p></p><p>It's called God.</p><p></p><p>(With thanks to Herbert McCabe)</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/philosophy">Philosophy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion">Religion</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/markvernon">Mark Vernon</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bloNKM8elzIqIj5jLOmrcAaMaBo/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bloNKM8elzIqIj5jLOmrcAaMaBo/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bloNKM8elzIqIj5jLOmrcAaMaBo/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/bloNKM8elzIqIj5jLOmrcAaMaBo/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Philosophy Religion Stephen Hawking Science World news guardian.co.uk Comment http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/04/stephen-hawking-religion Sat, 04 Sep 2010 14:00:52 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/sep/04/artificial-ape-technology-timothy-taylor/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/26190?ns=guardian&pageName=The+Artificial+Ape%3A+How+Technology+Changed+the+Course+of+Human+Evolution%3AArticle%3A1445615&ch=Books&c3=Guardian&c4=Books%2CCulture+section%2CReference+and+languages+%28Books+genre%29%2CScience+and+nature+%28Books+genre%29%2CSociety+%28Books+genre%29%2CTechnology%2CScience%2CAnthropology%2CEvolution+%28Science%29%2CBiology&c5=Environment+Conservation%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CCorporate+IT&c6=Peter+Forbes&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1445615&c9=Article&c10=Review&c11=Books&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FBooks%2FReference+and+languages" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Peter Forbes is fascinated by a study of the role of early technology in human evolution</p><p>There has been a rash of books on human evolution in recent years, claiming that it was driven by art (Denis Dutton: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/mar/08/art-instinct-brian-morton-review" title="Observer review"><em>The Art Instinct</em></a>), cooking (Richard Wrangham: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/oct/17/catching-fire-richard-wrangham-review" title="Guardian review"><em>Catching Fire</em></a>), sexual selection (Geoffrey Miller: <em>The Mating Mind</em>). Now, Timothy Taylor, reader in archaeology at the University of Bradford, makes a claim for technology in general and, in particular, the invention of the baby sling – not, as you may have thought, in the 1960s but more than 2m years ago.</p><p>All these theories and speculations are in truth complementary facets of an emerging Grand Universal Theory of Human Origins. The way they overlap, reinforce one another and suggest new leads is too striking to miss. What they have in common is a reversal of the received idea of evolution through natural selection. In this, a mutation takes place that happens to be useful; it is retained and spreads through the population. In the new theory, proto-human beings, through innovative technologies, created the conditions that led to a rapid spread of new mutations. In other words, we didn't evolve a big brain (three to four times the size of a chimp's) and then use it to develop human culture; we first departed from genetically fixed behaviour patterns, and this led to ever-increasing brain capacity and hence more innovations. The plethora of speculations as to how this happened is fascinating and will probably lead to a true understanding of the course of human evolution, but most people will want proof.</p><p>Impeccably detailed evidence is now emerging from the genomics revolution. Taylor cites one of the best attested examples of a human cultural innovation leading to genetic change: the drinking of cow's milk. In the ancestral human condition only babies up to the age of weaning could digest milk, but tolerance to cow's milk has spread though all populations that have practised cattle farming. Globally, this process is still incomplete and genomics has revealed that milk tolerance has evolved on several separate occasions by different genetic mechanisms.</p><p>After the switch to an upright posture, probably the biggest single anatomical change on the journey from apes to humans was the weakening of the jaw. In apes, the jaw is large and protrudes way beyond the nose. It is attached by muscle to a bony ridge on the top of the skull and has a force many times that of a human jaw. Recent genomics research has shown that a large mutation about 2.4m years ago disabled the key muscle protein in human jaws. We still have the disabled protein today, and that weakened jaw enabled a raft of innovations. The ape brain could not grow because of the huge muscle load anchored to the skull's crest, and apes cannot articulate speech-like sounds because of the clumsy force of their jaws. This mutation allowed the increase in human brain size and the acquisition of language.</p><p>But why did it happen? Wrangham maintains that it was cooking that led to the change. Cooked food does not need strong jaws. In genetics a function that becomes redundant always leads to the gene being disabled by mutations. Around 2.4m years ago an ape switched to mostly cooked food. In the fossil record, a new proto-human appeared 1.8-1.9m years ago: <em>Homo erectus</em> had a much larger brain and no crest on the skull, indicating that the weakened jaw muscle was now standard.</p><p>There were other advantages to cooked food. It seems that in all animals the gut and the brain compete for energy: creatures with large guts spend many hours a day eating and have small brains. Humans have a gut only 60% as big as you'd expect for their body size: cooked food made that possible, and the energy saved went into feeding that enormous brain.</p><p>Taylor endorses Wrangham's hypothesis but believes it is not enough. Not only is our brain very large, it is proportionately enormous at birth, creating problems at delivery for narrow-hipped, upright-standing women and even more during the first few years, when babies are extremely vulnerable. Factor in the African savannah 2m years ago, teeming with enormous predators, and you wonder how we are still here. For Taylor, the crucial innovation was the baby sling, which enabled proto-human mothers to carry their vulnerable babies (infant apes, of course, cling to their hairy mothers' backs).</p><p>Unlike milk tolerance, jaw muscles and gut length – all amenable to genetic investigation in the present – prehistoric baby slings have left no evidence behind, so this hypothesis is likely to remain speculative. For the lack of any clinching evidence, Taylor allows himself to be side-tracked in the second half of the book into Barthesian digressions on the role of the object in human cultures. Some of this material is far-fetched, reaching its nadir in the suggestion that in the mirrors given to them by French sailors in 1772, the doomed Tasmanian Aborigines saw "some premonition of the coming global age of screen culture".</p><p>This loss of focus is a pity because Taylor, along with the other writers mentioned, is clearly on to something. The new understanding of human evolution should be a massive relief to many. The anguish that Darwin caused – all purpose gone, chance and brute necessity rule – seems to be have been misplaced. There is no goal in nature, nor any God-given purpose, but human evolution has been driven by striving towards a better way of living. As they domesticated cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, horses, cats, dogs and bees, humans were simultaneously domesticating themselves. By our own efforts we made ourselves human.</p><p>Peter Forbes's <em>Dazzled and Deceived: Mimicry and Camouflage </em>is published by Yale.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/referenceandlanguages">Reference and languages</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/scienceandnature">Science and nature</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/society">Society</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/anthropology">Anthropology</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/evolution">Evolution</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/biology">Biology</a></li></ul></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HR97NtC6PZ4QjZphWU1bNAGgC-Y/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HR97NtC6PZ4QjZphWU1bNAGgC-Y/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HR97NtC6PZ4QjZphWU1bNAGgC-Y/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/HR97NtC6PZ4QjZphWU1bNAGgC-Y/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Books Culture Reference and languages Science and nature Society Technology Science Anthropology Evolution Biology The Guardian Reviews http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/sep/04/artificial-ape-technology-timothy-taylor Fri, 03 Sep 2010 23:06:02 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/04/mystery-wrapped-in-an-enigma/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/4913?ns=guardian&pageName=Letters%3A+A+mystery+wrapped+in+an+enigma%3AArticle%3A1447358&ch=Science&c3=Guardian&c4=Stephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CScience%2CPhysics+%28Science%29%2CReligion+%28News%29%2CWorld+news%2CCreationism+%28News%29%2CScience+and+nature+%28Books+genre%29%2CBooks%2CUK+news%2CPhilosophy+%28News%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1447358&c9=Article&c10=Letter&c11=Science&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FScience%2FStephen+Hawking" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>Stephen Hawking assumes that the big bang started from "nothing" (<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/stephen-hawking-big-bang-creator" title="">Universe not created by God, says Hawking</a>, 2 September). I would like to know what his definition of "nothing" is. It is no answer to point to the emergence of positron-electron pairs that appear from "nothing" as each of these have energy and this energy must have existed beforehand. It is difficult to think of a universe in which there is "nothing" because nothing means just that, no mass, no energy and therefore no means of making anything in this or any other related universe. This is the crucial phrase: how can anything be born of absolutely nothing? If we accept this definition then the universe has existed for ever – and will continue for ever. If anyone wishes to call this infinitely long existence "god", then fine, but it doesn't solve anything, it still leaves all the questions of existence that all organised religions fail to explain. Such as: if the gods created the big bang then what were they doing before then? And since it is impossible to make absolutely nothing from something, what will they do after Armageddon – start all over again?</p><p><strong>Professor AB Turner</strong></p><p><em>University of Sussex</em></p><p></p><p>• Spontaneous creation, "something from nothing", is puzzling coming from a physicist. No-thing means no physical reality, but all reality is logically the realisation of possibility; ergo possibility is <em>meta ta physica</em>: beyond the physical.If one considers nature as two interdependent domains: the universe of physical reality, and the metaphysical realm of logical possibility, then some-thing does indeed arise from no-thing. Physical nature arising from metaphysical nature makes a supernatural explanation for reality entirely unnecessary. That doesn't disprove the god hypothesis, of course, but it does offer arguably a more probable explanation for our existence. Mathematics is a form of logic by which possibility is reduced by a process of entertained argument to a hypothetical conclusion, which while logically consistent is not necessarily true. So M theory, by which the metaphysics of logical possibility is used to argue an explanation for physical reality, without the mind of god, is only one of many possibilities. The only truly definitive conclusion arises when there is only one possibility left, the end of the current universe and a new "big bang" nature of possibility and reality.</p><p><strong>John Stone</strong></p><p><em>Thames Ditton, Surrey</em></p><p></p><p>• The capacity for self-delusion of the enormously gifted and intelligent seems to be as limitless as that of the rest of us.</p><p>If Stephen Hawking thinks that everything will be explained by the laws of gravity and physics, well, what explains the existence of the laws by which everything is explained? Why and how should there be any laws of gravity? How did they happen to exist even before matter came into being?</p><p>His theory just leaves yet another question begging. Even if we did come from nothing, where did the nothing come from? The existence of nothing is surely just as mysterious and inexplicable as the existence of anything.</p><p>Hawking's theory is not a satisfactory answer even for an atheist like myself. There probably never will be a full explanation for our existence. To explain A in terms of B simply leaves B to then be explained, and so on down an infinite alphabet.</p><p><strong>Alex Shearer</strong></p><p><em>Backwell, Somerset</em></p><p></p><p>• God, gods, whomever, may well have become tired of the arguments about his/her/their existence (<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/03/stephen-hawking-in-praise-of-god" title="">In praise of… God</a>, 3 September). Two thousand years ago, the Epicureans maintained that, while the gods certainly existed (well, obviously), the Immortal Ones had no interest whatsoever in mankind; much, I suppose, as interstellar travellers feel about defective species generally.</p><p><strong>Tom Drane</strong></p><p><em>Mitcham, Surrey</em></p><p></p><p>• Professor Hawking's new book is called The Grand Design. Doesn't a design require a designer? Without one, it is "A Grand Accident". It's curious how atheists cannot help resorting to religious language.</p><p><strong>Rev Richard Haggis</strong></p><p><em>Oxford</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/physics">Physics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion">Religion</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/creationism">Creationism</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/scienceandnature">Science and nature</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/philosophy">Philosophy</a></li></ul></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/B3KrOe7W4RGymFqtyhgcDLw0F30/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/B3KrOe7W4RGymFqtyhgcDLw0F30/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/B3KrOe7W4RGymFqtyhgcDLw0F30/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/B3KrOe7W4RGymFqtyhgcDLw0F30/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Stephen Hawking Science Physics Religion World news Creationism Science and nature Books UK news Philosophy The Guardian Letters http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/04/mystery-wrapped-in-an-enigma Fri, 03 Sep 2010 23:04:52 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/04/marcus-du-sautoy-mirror/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/51425?ns=guardian&pageName=What+I+see+in+the+mirror%3A+Marcus+Du+Sautoy+%3AArticle%3A1443751&ch=Life+and+style&c3=Guardian&c4=Beauty%2CLife+and+style%2CMarcus+du+Sautoy%2CMathematics+%28science%29%2CPeople+in+science%2CScience&c5=Fashion+and+Beauty%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CUnclassifed+Contributors&c6=&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1443751&c9=Article&c10=Feature&c11=Life+and+style&c13=What+I+see+in+the+mirror+%28series%29&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FLife+and+style%2FBeauty" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">'It is a myth that mathematicians are all too busy contemplating the mysteries of prime numbers that we don't notice what we look like'</p><p>When I look in the mirror, I see a 10cm scar across my brow. It's new and I'm still getting used to it. Very conveniently, it runs the length of my left eyebrow but, to my eyes, it makes my face look very asymmetrical. As a mathematician who researches symmetry, this has caused me a huge amount of anxiety. Studies show that we are drawn to faces that are more symmetrical because it is an indicator of good genetic heritage. Bottom line, symmetry = beauty.</p><p>I got the scar after I clashed heads with a Swedish novelist in a recent tournament for the <a href="http://writersteam.co.uk/" title="">England Writers Football Team</a>. Playing football is my way of keeping fit. I don't work out but I jog, partly because I find the exercise gives my brain room to allow my subconscious to explore the latest problem I'm working on. Coffee and chocolate are my other key ingredients in proving mathematical theorems, but I'm conscious of what I look like in the mirror enough not to overdose on the chocolate.</p><p>I guess what other people expect to see if they were looking at a mathematician in the mirror is a bearded, bespectacled man with wild hair sprouting in every direction. My department does have those who conform to this 19th-century stereotype, but a good proportion don't. It is a myth that we're all too busy contemplating the mysteries of prime numbers to notice what we look like. As one of the public faces of my subject, I am keen to contradict people's preconceived idea of what a mathematician looks like.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/beauty">Beauty</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/marcus-du-sautoy">Marcus du Sautoy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/mathematics">Mathematics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/people-in-science">People in science</a></li></ul></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zD69YMe6Wmo1TgY1ihfOBz2IviI/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zD69YMe6Wmo1TgY1ihfOBz2IviI/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zD69YMe6Wmo1TgY1ihfOBz2IviI/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zD69YMe6Wmo1TgY1ihfOBz2IviI/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Beauty Life and style Marcus du Sautoy Mathematics People in science Science The Guardian Features http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/04/marcus-du-sautoy-mirror Fri, 03 Sep 2010 23:03:00 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/04/country-diary-new-forest-ponds-snails/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/38749?ns=guardian&pageName=Country+diary%3A+New+Forest%3AArticle%3A1447440&ch=Environment&c3=Guardian&c4=Environment%2CWildlife+%28Environment%29%2CBiology%2CScience&c5=Wildlife+Conservation%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CEthical+Living&c6=Graham+Long&c7=10-Sep-04&c8=1447440&c9=Article&c10=Feature&c11=Environment&c13=Country+diary+%28series%29&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FWildlife" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>Clive Chatters, chairman of the New Forest national park authority, pays tribute to the work of amateur naturalists in the recently published symposium Biodiversity in the New Forest.</p><p>Their observations and recording underpin the work of the professionals whose research helps to shape conservation policy and practice. The symposium suggests that most species are under great pressure and many are declining. But all is not yet gloom and doom, as ponds around Burley make clear.</p><p>During an enforced evacuation as the Blitz hit Southampton, schoolteacher LW Stratton studied a number of ponds in the area. His findings in 1942 were published after the second world war and much of his collection is now in the Manchester Museum.</p><p>His research has provided a basis for my study of the molluscs in these ponds that will span 60 years. The quest has involved a fair measure of social history. The ponds had to be located. Some have gone and one is now known by a different name. Another was found only when the records of the former village pharmacy came to light.</p><p>The changing landscape also had to be considered. Old photographs show the terrain around some of the ponds; one from the 1890s shows a leaning oak on the bank. The tree is still there, the water long gone.</p><p>There have been some gains, but the most noticeable change is the disappearance of the largest species formerly found in several of the ponds. Still resident in the garden pond where it was found in 1942, the great pond snail, <em>Lymnaea stagnalis</em>, seems to have vanished from the wild. It used to be abundant in the ponds along Pound Lane.</p><p>Locals recall that they were drained in the 1950s to eliminate the snails, which at the time were thought to be carriers of red water disease. Potentially fatal for cattle and ponies, the disease is actually tick-borne. If the locals' memories are correct, the snails were victims of a serious miscarriage of justice.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/wildlife">Wildlife</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/biology">Biology</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/grahamlong">Graham Long</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/7xWsxFL6d-CL1YkwurVJd95LBrg/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/7xWsxFL6d-CL1YkwurVJd95LBrg/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/7xWsxFL6d-CL1YkwurVJd95LBrg/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/7xWsxFL6d-CL1YkwurVJd95LBrg/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Environment Wildlife Biology Science The Guardian Features http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/04/country-diary-new-forest-ponds-snails Fri, 03 Sep 2010 23:00:53 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2010/sep/03/stephen-hawking-pr-help-god/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/44870?ns=guardian&pageName=Stephen+Hawking+gets+some+PR+help+from+God%3AArticle%3A1447128&ch=Books&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Publishing+%28Books%29%2CScience+and+nature+%28Books+genre%29%2CBooks%2CStephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CScience%2CCulture+section&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Richard+Lea&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1447128&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Books&c13=&c25=Books+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FBooks%2FPublishing" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">By invoking the deity, the eminent scientist has discovered the formula for creating a popular success from abstruse science</p><p>Hold onto your mitres, folks: Stephen Hawking is back in the news, with the revelation that science has proved the universe can do without God (<a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19391-hawking-hasnt-changed-his-mind-about-god.html" title="or something like that">or something like that</a>). This theologico-physical bombshell has landed him on the Times's front page (I'd link to it, but, you know ...), a slot on both <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11172158" title="the News at 10">the News at 10</a> and <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/life-and-physics/2010/sep/03/god-stephen-hawking-m-theory" title="Channel 4">Channel 4</a> and – according to the Daily Mail – has already <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1308616/Stephen-Hawking-Archbishop-Canterbury-attacks-claim-God-did-NOT-create-Universe.html" title="provoked a retaliatory jihad from the Archbishop of Canterbury">provoked a retaliatory jihad from the Archbishop of Canterbury</a>. Could it be that he's got a book out?</p><p>Ah yes. That'll be <a href="http://www.guardianbookshop.co.uk/BerteShopWeb/viewProduct.do?ISBN=9780593058299" title="The Grand Design">The Grand Design</a>, a "controversial new theory on the origins of the universe, from the world's most famous living scientist", out next week. The publicity department at Bantam must be breaking out the champagne, and with <a href="http://www.thebookseller.com/news/127578-hawkings-controversial-comments-see-sales-surge.html" title="a surge in pre-orders on Amazon">a surge in pre-orders on Amazon</a> since the media storm broke, their colleagues in sales won't be far behind. But what is it about the Lucasian professor of mathematics that makes him such a publishing phenomenon?</p><p>It's not just his <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation" title="undoubted brilliance">undoubted brilliance</a>, his rolling prose style, or his compelling back story – though the contrast between his wheelchair-bound physical existence and an intellectual life which ranges across the universe lends something of an emotional charge to pronouncements about far-flung corners of the cosmos. No, in Hawking's case, it's the G-word.</p><p>Cast you mind back to Hawking's bestselling A Brief History of Time - his Old Testament, if you will. This whistlestop tour of relativity, Big Bang theory and black holes went on to sell more than 9m copies – though how many of those copies made the transition from being bought to being read is another question. With only one equation, lots of excellent diagrams and the pleasingly brain-scrambling concept of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_time" title=""imaginary time"">"imaginary time"</a>, it was undoubtedly well put together. But the reason why Hawking ended up in a totally different galaxy, sales-wise, from colleagues such as Frank Close or Paul Davies who published similar books at around the same time, was his willingness to talk about God. He famously closed the book with the ringing declaration that "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of reason – for then we should know the mind of God."</p><p>Now he's at it again, suggesting that "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing ... It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going." I don't want to quibble with Professor Hawking's interpretation of <a href="Richard Lea to me show details 12:37 (2 minutes ago) http://www.theory.caltech.edu/people/jhs/strings/str154.html" title="M-theory">M-theory</a>, but if he's right then it can hardly be described as a theory of everything. You may not need God to create a universe, but a little religion goes a long way in creating a bestseller.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/publishing">Publishing</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/scienceandnature">Science and nature</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/richardlea">Richard Lea</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/2-NL1_GFPPZKQJd3QlBTsWt_EbM/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/2-NL1_GFPPZKQJd3QlBTsWt_EbM/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/2-NL1_GFPPZKQJd3QlBTsWt_EbM/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/2-NL1_GFPPZKQJd3QlBTsWt_EbM/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Publishing Science and nature Books Stephen Hawking Science Culture guardian.co.uk Blogposts http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2010/sep/03/stephen-hawking-pr-help-god Fri, 03 Sep 2010 13:15:11 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/interactive/2010/sep/03/stephen-hawking-god-physics/print <p><strong>Video:</strong> Jon Snow interviews Guardian science blogger Jon Butterworth about physics and Stephen Hawking's apparent conversion to atheism</p><br/><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zQqq4ocdXwEI2OF3CMzlxcWXBO8/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zQqq4ocdXwEI2OF3CMzlxcWXBO8/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zQqq4ocdXwEI2OF3CMzlxcWXBO8/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/zQqq4ocdXwEI2OF3CMzlxcWXBO8/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Stephen Hawking Physics Astronomy Science guardian.co.uk Editorial http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/interactive/2010/sep/03/stephen-hawking-god-physics Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:38:58 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/03/natures-harvest-photography/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/62377?ns=guardian&pageName=Capturing+nature%27s+harvest+for+seasons+to+come+%7C+Fergus+Drennan%3AArticle%3A1447038&ch=Environment&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Ethical+and+green+living+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment%2CFood+%28Environment%29%2CPlants+%28Science%29%2CScience%2CFood+and+drink+%28Life+and+style%29%2CLife+and+style%2CPhotography+%28Art+and+design%29&c5=Environment+Conservation%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CEthical+Living%2CPhotography%2CFood+and+Drink&c6=Fergus+Drennan&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1447038&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Environment&c13=Green+shoots+%28environment%29&c25=Green+living+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FEthical+and+green+living" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Photography adds another dimension to wild food foraging – not just for identification purposes but as an art form<br /><br />• Send your photos of nature's harvest to our <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/guardiangreenshoots/" title="">Green shoots Flickr group</a><br /></p><p>There are as many reason for the current resurgent rise in enthusiasm for all things wild food and foraging-related as there are wild foods themselves – from belt tightening austerity measures, to a desire to source local, sustainable food without the organic price tag and creativity in the kitchen. Some people choose to forage rather than shop in order to connect with seasonal rhythms instead of the discordant economic and clock-watching dictates of a mundane working week.</p><p>As a full-time forager – someone with an all-encompassing hobby that I sometimes try to pass off as work – all of the above, as well as deep-seated philosophical, psychological and spiritual reasons, have led me to an all-embracing commitment to wild food. It is a commitment that seeks to engage with – indeed even capture in some small way – the verdant, fleeting and ephemeral delights that nature exhibits.</p><p></p><p>As a child, the first books I encountered that seemed to capture in small part the magnificence of nature were Edith Holden's delightful 1906 <a href="http://debbieoverton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/01/17-down-9-to-go.html" title="">The Country Diary of an Edwardian Lady</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Keble_Martin" title="">Rev William Keeble Martin's exquisitely illustrated The Concise British Flora in Colour</a>. Later, as a teenager, I came upon the book <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wild-Natural-history-photographic-guides/dp/0330280694" title="">Wild Food</a> by the now grand master of photographic guides, Roger Phillips. His superb photography seemed to truly capture the mysterious elements that made foraging for wild food so appealing - delightfully arranged rustic compositions showed tarte aux myrtilles on the banks of a woodland stream; blackberry pies, tarts and jams against a backdrop of stubble-burning field, and Carragheen soup precariously balanced on craggy waveswept rocks. These pictures were alive with the raw beauty, hinted dangers and creative promise of wild food.</p><p>Being neither well-suited to poetry nor painting, photography allowed me to add an engaging and enjoyable dimension to my wild food pursuits. The photographic dimension to foraging is wonderfully varied: plant portraits for identification; final dish shots; underwater photography of seaweeds resplendent in their natural element, or arty photos just for the creative and celebratory joy of it all.</p><p>In the UK, the changing seasons and varied habitats of specific wild plant foods offer endless scope for exciting pictures: nuts, berries, leaves, roots and fungi, their fascinating colours naturally juxtaposed against storm-leaden skies, misty rivers, and sun-baked earth. Raw settings and macro lens offer up the unique perspective of the intimate and super close-up view, revealing hidden details and mysterious patterns in seed husks and fruit skins.</p><p></p><p>The following list of wild foods available in September is in no way exhaustive. Apart from Hottentot figs and bilberries, that don't grow here, and truffles that I've never been lucky enough to find, these are all the things I regularly forage down in Kent:</p><p></p><p><strong>Fruit:</strong> Elderberry, Juke of Argyle's "Goji" tea plant berries, black nightshade berry (some caution advised), dog rose hip, mulberry, wild service tree and other sorbus spp berries, Japanese rose hip, hawthorn berry (haws), staghorn sumac berries, blackberries, dewberries, bilberries, sloes, sea buckthorn berries, apples, crab apples, rowan berries, pears, figs, Hottentot figs, Himalayan honeysuckle berries (some caution advised), Yew berries (lots of caution advised), cherry plums, greengages, Juniper berries, hops.</p><p><strong>Leaves:</strong> Watercress, sea aster, seabeet, sea purslane, perennial wallrocket, fat hen, water mint and other mints, Canadian fleabane, sow thistle, wood sorrel, common sorrel, ox-eye daisy, sea plantain, marsh samphire (tips), bristly ox-tongue.</p><p><strong>Flowers: </strong>Yarrow, heather, common mallow.</p><p><strong>Roots/bulbs:</strong> Burdock root, horse radish root, dandelion root, ramsons/wild garlic bulbs (and roots).</p><p><strong>Nuts/seeds:</strong> Walnuts (soft - for making pate), beech nuts (mast), Himalayan balsam seeds, hazelnuts, great plantain seeds, wild carrot seeds, fennel seeds, poppy seeds, cabbage family plant seeds, common hogweed seeds.</p><p><strong>Fungi:</strong> Giant puffball, summer truffle, chanterelle, parasol, fairy ring, jelly ear, penny bun and other boletes, fly agaric (caution advised, toxins must be leached out first before consuming) summer truffles, cauliflower fungus, beefsteak fungus, field and horse mushroom and other agaricus species.</p><p><strong>Seaweeds:</strong> Dulse, laver, Carragheen, grape pip weed, oyster thief,</p><p><strong>Wracks:</strong> Bladder, toothed, horned, egg, spiral, channelled,</p><p><strong>Kelps:</strong> Oarweed, furbellows, sugar kelp, thongweed, sea lettuce, gutweed and other ulva species, dabberlocks, japweed, pepper dulse.</p><p></p><p>For those new to wild foods, apart from attending wild food or plant/fungi identification courses, I'd recommend <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wild-Natural-history-photographic-guides/dp/0330280694" title="">Roger Phillips's Wild Food</a>, <a href="http://www.nhbs.com/the_wild_flower_key_tefno_36108.html" title="">The Wild Flower Key by Francis Rose and Clare O'Reilly</a>, the photographic edition of <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Food-Free-Richard-Mabey/dp/0002201593" title="">Richard Mabey's classic Food for Free</a>, <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Forager-Handbook-Miles-Irving/dp/0091913632" title="">Miles Irving's The Forager Handbook</a> and the excellent web-based resource and database, <a href="http://www.pfaf.org/user/" title="">Plants For A Future</a>.</p><p></p><p>• <a href="http://www.wildmanwildfood.com/" title="">Fergus Drennan</a> is a broadcaster and writer.</p><p></p><p>•<strong> </strong>Send your photos of nature's harvest to our <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/guardiangreenshoots/" title="">Green shoots Flickr group</a></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/ethical-living">Ethical and green living</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/food">Food</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/plants">Plants</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/food-and-drink">Food & drink</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/photography">Photography</a></li></ul></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/UHgKLVCUn0Ifx9WhMtCOWiIUIxw/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/UHgKLVCUn0Ifx9WhMtCOWiIUIxw/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/UHgKLVCUn0Ifx9WhMtCOWiIUIxw/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/UHgKLVCUn0Ifx9WhMtCOWiIUIxw/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Ethical and green living Environment Food Plants Science Food & drink Life and style Photography guardian.co.uk Blogposts http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/03/natures-harvest-photography Fri, 03 Sep 2010 11:31:49 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2010/sep/03/australia-animalbehaviour/print <p>Predators appear to be pack-hunting off the Australian coast</p><br/><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/QEcH7p2Gz3X3db1k_NiSDzKMQEU/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/QEcH7p2Gz3X3db1k_NiSDzKMQEU/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/QEcH7p2Gz3X3db1k_NiSDzKMQEU/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/QEcH7p2Gz3X3db1k_NiSDzKMQEU/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Australia World news Animal behaviour guardian.co.uk News http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2010/sep/03/australia-animalbehaviour Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:18:35 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/03/physics-science-theology-universe/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/35660?ns=guardian&pageName=Stephen+Hawking+can%27t+use+physics+to+answer+why+we%27re+here+%7C+Eric+Priest%3AArticle%3A1446793&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Religion+%28News%29%2CWorld+news%2CStephen+Hawking+%28science%29%2CMathematics+%28science%29%2CPhysics+%28Science%29%2CScience%2CPhilosophy+%28News%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful&c6=Eric+Priest&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1446793&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Comment+is+free&c13=&c25=Cif+belief%2CComment+is+free&c30=content&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FCif+belief" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Modern belief in God is not about covering the gaps in our knowledge, but about answering different types of questions</p><p>Stephen Hawking makes the claim that it is <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/stephen-hawking-big-bang-creator" title="Guardian: Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God">not necessary to invoke God as the creator of the universe</a> and the assertion that physics alone made it.</p><p>He may be correct in his first statement, but to rule out a possibly important role for God is in my view unjustified. It is certainly possible that God sets up and maintains or underpins the laws of physics and allows them to work, so that being able to explain the big bang in terms of physics is not inconsistent with there being a role for God.</p><p>As a scientist, you are continually questioning, rarely coming up with a definitive answer. The limitations of your own knowledge and expertise together with the beauty and mystery of life and the universe often fill you with a sense of profound humility. Thus, unequivocal assertions are not part of a genuine scientific quest.</p><p>Mathematics as applied to physics may be the queen of sciences according to <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Carl_Friedrich_Gauss" title="Wikipedia: Carl Friedrich Gauss">Carl Friedrich Gauss</a>, but it does not answer every scientific question. Chemistry, biology, psychology and the social sciences have their own ways of analysing the nature of reality which are complementary to those of physics and mathematics: indeed, they are not reducible to physics but their insights emerge at their own level of complexity.</p><p>Furthermore, many of the questions that are most crucial to us as human beings are not addressed adequately at all by science, such as the nature of beauty and love and how to live one's life – often philosophy or history or theology are better suited to help answer them.</p><p>The complementary nature of different questions and in particular of the difference between how and why are important. If <a href="http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/public/qg_ss.html" title="Damtp: M-theory, the theory formerly known as Strings">M-theory</a> does indeed turn out to enable a unified theory, Hawking may be able in future to say how the universe started, but as a physicist he cannot answer the question "why?"</p><p>This is well illustrated by <a href="http://www.polkinghorne.net/action.html" title="Polkinghorne.net">John Polkinghorne's story about boiling a kettle</a>: I can describe with physics how it boils in terms of the stove making its temperature rise; but why it is boiling is a different type of question altogether – most probably in my case because my wife is thirsty!</p><p>The so-called "<a href="http://www.theopedia.com/God_of_the_Gaps" title="Theopedia">God of the Gaps</a>" is not part of modern religious faith. In this view, you invoked God to explain the inexplicable – at one time this would have been the weather or common diseases, and for Hawking apparently until recently the origin of the universe. Thus, when an alternative explanation arises, there is no longer any need for God.</p><p>The God followed by many people of a religious faith is not a God of the Gaps at all – rather a God who helps answer other nonscientific questions about why the universe and its amazing life exists and how to lead a good life. Also, they welcome the advances in understanding that modern science brings, since they reveal more of the incredible beauty, diversity and wonder of the nature of the universe.</p><p>You cannot prove whether God exists or not. But you can ask whether the existence or nonexistence of God is more consistent with your experience. It is up to each of us to reach our own conclusion, but for many of us it is and can make a profound and enriching difference to our lives.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion">Religion</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hawking">Stephen Hawking</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/mathematics">Mathematics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/physics">Physics</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/philosophy">Philosophy</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/eric-priest">Eric Priest</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/dyakl9oo2uUqDxv8zCILMdnmUME/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/dyakl9oo2uUqDxv8zCILMdnmUME/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/dyakl9oo2uUqDxv8zCILMdnmUME/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/dyakl9oo2uUqDxv8zCILMdnmUME/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Religion World news Stephen Hawking Mathematics Physics Science Philosophy guardian.co.uk Comment http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/03/physics-science-theology-universe Fri, 03 Sep 2010 08:00:17 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/03/sexist-language-bidisha/print <div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.4/79872?ns=guardian&pageName=Sluts+and+sweethearts%3AArticle%3A1446770&ch=Life+and+style&c3=Guardian&c4=Women+and+women%27s+interests%2CFeminism+%28World+news%29%2CLife+and+style%2CGender+%28News%29%2CInternet%2CLanguage&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CTechnology+Gadgets%2CWomen&c6=Bidisha&c7=10-Sep-03&c8=1446770&c9=Article&c10=Feature&c11=Life+and+style&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FLife+and+style%2FWomen" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Sexist language is on the rise, but now there is a new way to fight back</p><p>Women! Dare you approach the Pyramid of Egregiousness? This is the new chart that's been put together by women's groups in the US to classify the hate words used against us, from bad to worse to really quite stinkingly repulsive. Use your finger of&nbsp;defiance to log on and see it at <a href="http://www.nameitchangeit.org/pages/name-it/" title="Pyramid of Egregiousness">NameItChangeIt.org</a>. There, a reeking sewage system of sexist sideswipes has been organised into a colourful triangle. It's the latest project in contemporary feminism's use of the internet to network, campaign, critique and challenge, and it is spearheaded, among others, by renowned US feminist Gloria&nbsp;Steinem.</p><p>Looking at the Pyramid I am impressed by men's creativity, tenacity, complexity, sincerity and commitment for the very first time. It's a bit like the Top 40 Smash Hits countdown – a few old faves peppered among the contemporary classics, novelty jingles and one-hit wonders. At the pinnacle are terms classed as Severe Misogyny – outright objectifying and dehumanising hate words such as bitch, whore, slut, cunt, feminazi, and new entries such as cougar and MILF. BTW, MILF means Mom I'd Like to Fuck. And FYI, the first time I heard it was in New York at an otherwise all-male meeting of advertising guys at a major women's magazine corporation. Oh, how those men laughed among themselves as I worked out the acronym. I couldn't protest, because I'd lose my job and be labelled – yep – a&nbsp;feminazi.</p><p>Next down on the Pyramid are words classed as Really Damn Sexist. This is for all those backstabbing phrases, euphemisms and digs. Think ice queen, nag, shrill, difficult, cold. At the base of the Pyramid is Just Plain Sexist. This is your daily, standard, bread-and-butter misogyny. It includes commenting on a woman's appearance, calling her a girl, a babe, a sweetie or lightly saying she's bossy or flighty. The point of the pyramid, so to speak, is not to have every word filed in its rightful place. We are not 1950s librarians. All the terms are terms of hatred, originally invented (sometimes centuries ago) by men, now used by both sexes. The Pyramid is a symbol, a resource, a focal point, a concentration of their hate and our anger. You can add to it, and on the same site you can also testify about examples of media&nbsp;sexism.</p><p>I'd like to add some words to the Pyramid myself. There's humourless, paranoid, selfish, prudish, unable to take a joke, hysterical, man-hating, aggressive, butch: these words essentially just mean "shut up, woman". They're for any woman who dares to get angry and, instead of letting the insults sink deep, asks the perpetrator just what the hell they think they're doing. Man-hater in particular makes me laugh. Women waste a lot of time submissively explaining to misogynists, like good schoolgirls, why they don't hate men, how feminism benefits both sexes and how misogyny must be recognised by all of society. I'll say this: I do indeed hate any man who hates women and expresses his hate in his language, his manner, his behaviour and his art.</p><p>Then there are the so-called ironic seaside-postcard terms for women and our body parts. How about funbags? I think the Pyramid should proudly bear a rack of funbags. Or how about some casual infantilisation? In his last series Jamie Oliver made a meal for some inmates at a women's prison in Venice. He delivered it to them with a leer and the phrase: "Here you go, girlies."</p><p>Like a square of shit-soaked toilet paper, the Pyramid is a repository for so much nasty matter. But much misogynist language is far subtler than one-word disses. There is the question of tone, which renders any word – even one as seemingly innocuous as "she" – totally malign. The cleverest, most belittling insult I ever heard against a woman was a posh man at the Tate Modern, talking about Rachel Whiteread's Turbine Hall installation: "Yeah," he said. "She's <em>fun</em>." Delivered with an infuriating, mocking grin.</p><p>Then there was the radio network head I heard talking to a male producer about a globally famous pop star who came in and was professional, articulate and intelligent: "She's a funny one, isn't she?" "Yep," replied his flunky, "If you open her up you'll just find batteries and wires."</p><p>Even seemingly nice words are often used against us, delivered with sizzling spite and patent enjoyment of the victim's discomfort. The hisses of "That's good, keep doing that" and "That's nice" whenever I go jogging. The homeless guy who said to a friend, "Got a light? No? Well, you're looking quite smoking to me, babe." One afternoon at a road crossing in Covent Garden a man turned around and began harassing the woman next to me: "Hello! How are you, darling? You are so pretty. You look like a supermodel. Where are you going?" She didn't reply, he didn't stop. All these arseholes would say they were "only" complimenting their&nbsp;victims.</p><p>What are we going to do with our pyramid when it's all filled up, once we've exhausted ourselves typing our testimonies? Are we supposed to tote it, like a school art project, from pavilion to pavilion hoping to shame people into stopping? That won't work. Misogynists don't have any shame. They really enjoy attacking women. They are not afraid of us. They enjoy the sight of our anger and frustration.</p><p>One of my qualms about online activism – particularly <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/aug/20/street-harassment" title="G2: The end of street harassment">sites where we "out" harassers</a> and other types of sex attacker, or anonymously post reports of <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jul/30/casual-sexism-misogyny" title="the daily casual misogyny we all endure">the daily casual misogyny we all endure</a> – is that, while we feel better afterwards, we have not changed anything in the outer world. We have just invented a coping mechanism, a way to squeeze out and siphon off our rage. We have set up an online sympathy group, a survivors' forum, a venting arena. But we have not fought the&nbsp;perpetrators.</p><p>Much as I like and applaud it, I want to see the three-dimensional foldout version of the Pyramid of Egregiousness. I want a 3D glow-in-the-dark dodecahedron, a planet-sized Matrix of Misogyny, a Trillion-Faceted Dynamo of Jet Black Turbo Hate. Then I'd heave it aloft and hurl it into the sun, where it would set off a massive chain reaction and shoot out sky-scraping beams of feminist rage which kill anyone, male or female, who's ever used those words, wiping out (I'd say) 90% of human society, but leaving the non-woman-haters behind. Then we could all relax and be happy.</p><p><em>• Which sexist terms and phrases do you find most annoying?</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/women">Women</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feminism">Feminism</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gender">Gender</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet">Internet</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/language">Language</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bidisha">Bidisha</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" /> <p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Q8NEP1eEPk-wwAPrjtuwLcKqtDk/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Q8NEP1eEPk-wwAPrjtuwLcKqtDk/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a><br/> <a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Q8NEP1eEPk-wwAPrjtuwLcKqtDk/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/Q8NEP1eEPk-wwAPrjtuwLcKqtDk/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p> Women Feminism Life and style Gender Internet Language The Guardian Features http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/sep/03/sexist-language-bidisha Fri, 03 Sep 2010 06:00:17 GMT