Podcast Transcript

The Naked Scientists: Science Radio & Science Podcasts

Crisp Packet Fireworks - Science Experiments to Try at Home

Typhoons trigger earthquakes

Scientists have uncovered evidence that large storms can trigger certain types of earthquake.

From his vantage point high above the earth in the International Space Station, Astronaut Ed Lu captured this broad view of Hurricane Isabel.Writing in this week's Nature, Taiwan-based researcher ChiChing Liu from Academic Sinica in Taipei together with two scientists from the US, explains how between 2002 and 2007 he and his colleagues used underground strain-sensitive devices to follow how the ground deformed over time.

The researchers found that they could pick up the arrival of typhoons, which occur predominantly in the second half of each year.  These storms are accompanied by very low pressure, which usually causes the ground to swell and this is what the team could see on their subterranean strain-meters. But occasionally they would pick up the reverse - the ground appeared to have shrunk.

They detected eleven events like this, all associated with typhoons. The likelihood of this occurring by chance is less than one in a million, and the only explanation, say the scientists, is that the typhoons are occasionally triggering 'slow earthquakes', which are ground movements that occur over much longer timescales - hours to days - compared with their normal vigorous counterparts.

The storms unleash the slow quakes, say the researchers, by increasing the stress across faults.  This occurs because the arrival of the storm causes atmospheric pressure to drop over land, but to remain unchanged over the sea.  This stretches the fault and if it is primed to move then a quake follows.

Paradoxically, this mechanism might actually help to protect Taiwan, where Philippine Sea plate and the Eurasian plate are running into one another at more than 8cm per year, by helping to periodically 'unload' the fault and preventing the build-up of energy that would otherwise be unleashed subsequently and with potentially deadly effect.

14th Jun 2009


Betelgeuse the shrinking star

Betelgeuse, as well as being an 80’s classic film is one of the brightest stars in the sky. It is also Orion’s right shoulder. It is one of the largest stars we know known as a red supergiant, with a mass about 20 times larger than the sun and a radius about 1000 times larger than the sun.
 

BetelgeuseThis week Charles Townes from Berkley in California has announced that its radius has shrunk by about 15% over the last 15 years and this contraction is getting faster.

This is interesting because Betelgeuse is already in the closing stages of its life despite only being about 8-9 million years old where as our sun is about 5 billion years old.

It is so large that its gravity crushes the gasses in its cores to much higher pressure and temperature than our sun. This speeds up the nuclear fusion reactions going on and means that Betelgeuse has already burned up all its hydrogen, When this happens to a star its core cools down, and as the only thing which supports the star against gravity is gas pressure, the core starts to collapse, as it does this it heats up until it can start burning helium to form carbon.

Depending on the size of the star this process can occur several times, each time the core gets smaller and hotter, and starts burning heavier elements. first it burns Hydrogen then Helium, to form Carbon, and this reacts to from Neon then oxygen and Silicon. At each stage the nuclear reactions release less energy until there is nothing left to burn.

The change in size of Betelgeuse indicates that something interesting is happening in the core.

Why is this interesting to anyone other than Astronomers? Well in a large star like Betelgeuse, eventually there are no more reactions to take place, and the core keeps shrinking until it effectively forms a huge atomic nucleus – a neutron star. This releases an immense amount of gravitational energy (about 1/4 of E=mc2) and the star explodes incredibly violently  as a supernova.

If Betelgeuse goes supernova it will be as bright as the full moon but concentrated into a point, and it will be visible during the day for several months. It is 600 light years away so although it would be close enough to be spectacular, it should be distant enough to be safe for the planet earth.

Whether it will actually go bang in the next few years, nobody knows, as we have never watched the early stages of a supernova, as they are so rare, and noone has been lucky enough to have a telescope pointing at the right star at the right time, but if it does it should be spectacular.

14th Jun 2009


Understanding Huntington's Disease

Huntington's disease is a degenerative disease of the nervous system that sets in when a person is in their 30s or 40s, although they show no signs of the disease before it kicks in. Over a decade ago, researchers discovered that sufferers all have a fault in a specific gene, which makes a protein called huntingtin.

Neurons with mHtt inclusionBut why are faults in this protein not harmful when sufferers are young, but has serious effects when they hit later life?  That’s what researchers at the University of Illinois wanted to answer. And in a new paper published in the journal Nature Neuroscience this week, the team, led by Scott Brady, may have discovered how huntingtin wreaks its havoc on the nervous system.

The scientists discovered that the faulty version of huntingtin, found in patients, switches on an enzyme called JNK3, which is only switched on in nerve cells.  At low levels of huntingtin, this activation of JNK3 blocks transport within nerve cells, stopping nerve cells from shuttling proteins from the middle of the cell along long fibres called axons.

This is bad news for nerves, as it means signals don't get properly transmitted down the nerve fibres, which causes the nerves cells to eventually die off, causing the problems of Huntington's disease.

The scientists think that activating JNK3 cuts down on transport in the nerve cells, but doesn't completely stop it. When nerve cells are young, they can cope with a reduction in transport. But as a person gets older – and their nerve cells get older – the cells become less able to cope.

The researchers think that this pattern of progressive nerve breakdown could also play a part in diseases like Alzheimer's, and other adult-onset neurodegenerative diseases. In fact, the scientists have coined the term 'dysferopathy' to describe these kinds of diseases – the word is from the Greek 'fero', meaning transport.  So perhaps by targeting this “Achilles heel” of transport within nerve cells, we might be able to find new ways to prevent or treat these kinds of disorders in the future.

14th Jun 2009


Plants take a leaf out of insects' books

Scientists have discovered the trick that keeps certain trees' seeds aloft - and it turns out they use the same strategy as insects.

Acer pseudoplatanus - Helicopter SeedsWriting in this week's Science, Harvard researcher David Lentink and Caltech scientist Michael Dickinson explain how they have cracked the puzzle of how the mini 'helicopter' shaped seeds of maples and hornbeams manage to fly so well.

"We immersed in oil a robot fly designed to mimic the seeds' wing shape and programmed it to turn in a circular fashion resembling the seeds as they fall," explains Michael Dickinson.  "By illuminating a slice at a time of the oil with a laser beam we could see how the fluid was flowing around the wings."

What the team saw was a phenomenon called a leading edge vortex - LEV - which is like a miniature tornado turned on its side and sitting against the wing.  "These vortices create enormous lift, which is what keeps the seeds up for much longer as they fall," Dickinson explains.

To prove that real seeds do what the robot model predicts they should, Lentink came up with a way to film the seeds 'falling' in a wind tunnel.  The vortices were clearly visible and, intriguingly, they match the exact same mechanism that keeps insects aloft.
According to Dickinson, "the falling seeds, as well as insects (which engineers say shouldn't be able to fly!), have their wings arranged with a very high angle of attack, which is what makes these vortices.  Insects twirl their wings like a figure of eight in flight, these seeds spin."

The result is an incredible example of convergent evolution - how two totally different organisms have hit upon the same solution to a problem - but can it inform future flight?
"We think it might help us to solve some problems regarding how to build better turbine blades in future," says Dickinson.

14th Jun 2009


Pot Dating

 

If you are an archeologist looking at a new site, one of the first things you want to know is how old it is. Radiocarbon dating can answer this question for organic objects that contain carbon, but carbon can be quite rare as organic material gets eaten.

One thing that is very common in almost all archeological sites is pottery. It is easy to make and cheap, it breaks easily and you can't recycle it, so there was a lot thrown away and it lasts thousands if not millions of years. So it gets everywhere, unfortunately there is no carbon in it and it is very difficult to date.

However Moira Wilson and colleagues may have come up with a solution. When you make pottery, you fire it. You heat clay up to a temperature between 1000 and 1400 Celcius which sinters it, causing the particles of the clay to stick together and crucially drives the water out of  some of the minerals which make up the clay.

Then as soon as the clay cools down a very slow reaction between these minerals and water starts, and the team is using this reaction to date the pottery.

It is easy to measure the amount of water in the minerals of the pot, you just dry the pot out normally to get rid of the water in amongst the grains, then cook it at 600C for a few hours and measure the difference in weight.

Different pottery takes up water at different rates, but the rate at which it starts taking up water for a couple of days after it is dried out predicts how it will take up water over the next few hundred years very accurately, and crucially as Moira told us:

The reaction is sustained by an incredibly small quantity of water so there's actually sufficient moisture in the atmosphere to keep the reaction going. So it doesn't actually matter whether your brick is sitting on the table, or sitting on the bottom of a lake. As long as there's enough water there to sustain the reaction, any excess water, for example if the material is saturated it doesn't contribute to the reaction it just sits there doing nothing.

In fact the only thing that does affect the rate of uptake of water seems to be the temperature, which is going to be reasonably constant over a fairly large area, so if you can take this into account, by measuring a few pots you know the ages of, you can make remarkably accurate predictions.
 

They Dated brick from a Charles the second buildig in greenwich which was built between 1664-1669 and altered 1690s as dating from 1691 ± 22 years.

A roman brick was dated as 2000 years old, and is known to be 2001 years old.

They had more problems with a medieval brick from canterbury which they repeatedly dated to be 60 years old. but it turned out that during the blitz there was a major fire in this area, essentially refiring the brick and resetting the timer

If this system turns out to be as good as it promises to be it should be able to date thousands of sites which are so far undated giving us a much more accurate view of the past..

14th Jun 2009


A New Element - Ununbium

Victoria Gill, BBC Science Correspondent

Chris -   And also this week scientists have come up with a reason for you to tear up that periodic table which is on the wall of your chemistry laboratory or your school classroom, and replace it with a new one.  This is because we have a new element to add to it.  And here to tell us about that new element is someone who occasionally contributes to the Naked Scientists, but is also a BBC science reporter, and that’s Victoria Gill.

So, why have we got this new element Victoria?

Periodic Table - UnunbiumVictoria -   Well this is element 112 or Ununbium, called that because its atomic mass, the mass of its nucleus is 112 [from the Latin un, un, bi – one, one, two].  It was discovered by Professor Sigurd Hofmann, in 1996 actually, but it was such a tricky experiment to replicate that it’s taken all of this time for the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry [IUPAC], which is the official maker and formulator of our ubiquitous and wonderful periodic table to recognise it and credit Hofmann and his team at the Centre for Heavy Ion Research in Darmstadt, Germany, with it’s discovery.

Chris -   How did they actually make the new element, Victoria?

Victoria -   So they’re using a particle accelerator, and they’re essentially firing a beam of ions at a target and fusing two nuclei together.  This is a very tricky thing to do when you get to the very heavy elements of the periodic table because these fusion reactions require a lot of energy.  To create element 112 or Ununbium as it’s temporarily been known, they fired a beam of charged zinc atoms, or zinc ions, at lead atoms in the hope that some of them would fuse together and form a new element, and so they did.  What’s very tricky about this is that these elements are very unstable; as soon as they form they actually just start to fall apart.  The nuclei start to emit energy, but that’s quite useful because you can detect the energy that they’re emitting and use that to estimate the size of the nucleus.  So you can tell that you have a new element.  But these fusion reactions don’t happen very often, you have to fire this beam at these lead atoms for a very long time and you only get a few successful fusion reactions.  In 1996 they only created or saw one atom of element 112.  But other teams have had to replicate those experiments in order that IUPAC, the society that draws up our periodic table, can recognise that discovery and say “Yes, this is officially a new element, and we will add it to your periodic table.”

Chris -   So that’s hardly a massive amount of money in the bank in terms of this, four atoms in the last twelve years.  But where on the periodic table would we put this, if we were to add the square today, where would we be adding this?

Victoria -   Well it’s a metal – it would go underneath Mercury on the periodic table, that’s where its square would be.  In actual fact, because it’s been around for so long, because we’ve known about it for so long other teams have done some experiments on it to find that its properties are very similar to that group and it fits quite nicely into that group.

Chris -   Given that it hangs around for such a short space of time, I mean, looking at the half lives of some of the isotopes of element number 112, we’re talking less than half a minute, why is this useful?

Victoria -   Well this is about really finding out how atoms work and how matter works.  And in actual fact what Professor Hofmann’s team are doing in the longer term is looking for what they’ve referred to as “the island of stability”.  So they think there’s a whole new class of elements which have electron shells much further out that are full, that will be able to hang around for much longer, so you’re dealing with whole new groups of elements and matter that behaves in a completely different way.

Chris -   And given, as you say, that they think there might be the prospects of getting very big elements, built the same way but way beyond the size of this one, could this therefore be used as something like a stepping stone, so you could build some of this and then very quickly add some more to it to get you into the realms of these very big atoms that might have all these exciting properties?

Victoria -   That’s right, because if, as we’re seeing, atoms behave and are built in the way that we would expect, and these fusion reactions are working in the way that we expect, then we can incrementally build these experiments to carry out new fusion reactions and build atoms in exactly the same way, we just need bigger particle accelerators, better equipment and we can get there in the end, it’s all just stepping stones as we say.

Chris -   Thank you very much Victoria.  That’s Victoria Gill, explaining how the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, also known as IUPAC for short, have confirmed the existence of a new element this week – was actually developed in the 1990’s of course, but had to be proved to exist.  They’ve given it the exciting name of Ununbium temporarily; that’s un, un and bi in Latin.  But, I’m told the IUPAC, they’re going to be considering a new name for it, its official name in the next few weeks.  They will listen to what the general public think too.  So, if you got a name, you think that this element should have a certain name, tell us what you think and also, tell IUPAC as well.

 

June 2009

Kat Arney suggested KatArnium.  I like it!
- BRValsler - 17th Jun 09
Hmmm...this should do for interesting listening, I'll download it right now!
- Chemistry4me - 18th Jun 09
I'd call it scarce; mighty scarce.
Or how about emergencyum
- Bored chemist - 18th Jun 09
"notmuchaboutyium" ?
- chris - 19th Jun 09
What about "Berzelium"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6ns_Jakob_Berzelius
- lightarrow - 19th Jun 09
I quite like ununbium - it's memorable!
- chris - 21st Jun 09
How about ' Cuddles ' or ' Poopsy ' ?
- neilep - 21st Jun 09
See the whole discussion | Make a comment


Why does water go the opposite way in the Southern Hemisphere?

When the plug is taken out of the sink full of water, the water goes down the plug hole and the water goes down empty on a clockwise direction. I e-mailed a friend of mine in Australia and asked him to check and he tells me that the water goes on a clockwise direction. Can you explain why? Mike Butcher, Galston

Dave -   Okay, this is an effect, which theoretically would work in certain circumstances.  It definitely works with big weather systems or low pressure areas.  Essentially, if you’re a low pressure area or anything which is sucking liquid in from a long way away, the stuff which is to the North; because the Earth has a smaller radius out there is moving, going round the Earth once a day, but it’s not going very far so it’s not moving very fast.  But, the stuff nearer the equator, you’re further away from the axis of the earth.  So, the distance you travel everyday is further so you’re travelling faster.  If you then suck the stuff in towards the central point, the stuff which is going faster, from the South will overtake stuff from the North and it will sort of start to spin around into the center.  Now, this is an effect which does happen, cyclones go anti clockwise in northern hemisphere and clockwise in southern hemisphere.  But, when you start talking about emptying basins and sinks, the problem is this effect is there, but it’s absolutely microscopic, it’s tiny.

Chris -   People have measured it.

Dave -   People have measured it, yes.  Americans did make a huge bath, several meters across.  They put a little bit of water in it and left it to sit for a fortnight and they pulled the plug out in a very controlled manner.  If you do that, it does always get out anti clockwise in northern hemisphere.  Problem is in a normal sink, it’s much more affected by which tap you use to turn it on.  How you move your hands in it within hours before you left it to pull the plug out, and exactly how you pull the plug out.  And so, we did this experiment on the Naked Scientists a while ago and we found it’s essentially random in both northern, southern hemispheres.

Kat -   You mentioned about cyclones going different ways.  What happens to the cyclones moves across the equator?  Does it suddenly stops and start going the other way?

Dave -   They generally slow down and I don’t think they normally do - I’ve never seen one.

Chris -   It wouldn’t be energetically favorable probably for it to do that.

Kath -   So it wouldn’t do it, it would grind to a halt.  Crazy.

June 2009

Mike Butcher asked the Naked Scientists: Can you confirm (and explain) that water goes around in an anti-clockwise direction down the plug-hole in the Northern Hemisphere and clockwise in the Southern hemisphere? What do you think?
- Mike Butcher - 14th Jun 09
It is true, but only of very controlled experiments. you can't just fill your sink up then unplug it and watch it, its called the coriolis effect and is only a very insignificant force in terms of deciding the direction of the water spiralling, any motion in the fluid before you pulled the plug would mostly determine it. To actually observe the effect you need a very large shallow dish of uniform shape, leave it for a long time so that any of the initial motion in the fluid has pretty much all stopped, and would have to be at constant temperature to stop any convection currents occuring, and then let it drain through a very small hole (you'd have to unplug from the bottom, putting your hand in the fluid and pulling a plug out would obviously give the fluid motion again).

Then the effect can be observed, it would spiral counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere, clockwise in the southern.
- Madidus_Scientia - 14th Jun 09
There was this: http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=18951.0
Also a poll that I cannot find at the moment.
- Chemistry4me - 14th Jun 09
See the whole discussion | Make a comment

Why don't we choke when we drink through a straw?

If you’re drinking a milkshake or any other drink with a straw, when you finish, you can use your lungs to suck up all the last bits through the straw. It doesn’t matter how hard you suck, why don’t we choke? Stephen, New Jersey

Kat -   Okay, I have done extensive research into this question myself last night with some rum-based cocktails.  So, this is….

Chris Smith:  It would have to be rum or can it be anything?

Kat -   Anything would work, yes, but I’d like Margaritas.  But, you can’t really drink them through a straw and I will be publishing my results in the journal of Inebreology very soon.  But, basically, the reason is, is that when you’re drinking a drink that’s a full drink, you create a vacuum in your mouth and that’s basically what forces the liquid up the straw.  You’re not really kind of sucking it up.  You’re actually dropping the pressure in your mouth and that causes the liquid to go up the straw.  What happens when you get right down to the bottom of your drink is that there’s very little liquid there.  So, if you start there’s not really a lot of liquid that’s gonna go up into your lungs even it was to get there.  The other thing is that fluid is a lot heavier than air and when you actually do the motion of sucking something up from the bottom of your cocktail glass or your milkshake, you kind of form a barrier at the back of your throat with like soft palate or things like that.  So, the dregs of fluid come up the straw, they get into your mouth, they kind of go 'phleh' into your mouth while the air gets..

Chris Smith:  How it go again?

Kat -   'Phleh'

Chris Smith:  Just checking.

Kat -   That’s the scientific term I think you’ll find.  It sort of goes 'phleh' into your mouth.  They don’t really make it to the back of your throat to go down your lungs, but if you are a clumsy or a very enthusiastic drinker.  It is possible to inhale fluid into your lungs up a straw, but most of us have kind of learned how to drink so we don’t do it.

June 2009

Owdbadger asked the Naked Scientists: Hi, I'm an English scientist living in New Jersey, USA (born in Cambrideshire). I must have listened to nearly all your podcasts while mowing the lawn or driving to work (US radio is rubbish). I love the show. I've noticed that when people have finished a milk shake (or any other drink for that matter), and they suck in all the last bits and bubbles with a straw from the bottom of the glass, it doesn't matter how hard they suck, they never get any bits or bubbles in their lungs. I've tried it myself. Why don't we choke? Thanks Ste (short for Stephen) What do you think?
- Owdbadger - 12th Jun 09
Blame it on the straws.
- Chemistry4me - 12th Jun 09
I reckon it's the way you put your tongue sort of around the end of the straw, all the liquid runs into it instead of going straight down your neck
- Madidus_Scientia - 13th Jun 09
The back of your mouth is extremely sensitive and is aware of very tenuous substances which are hanging around there. You swallow the foam down and don't breathe it in because of this protective mechanism which would make you stop inhaling. Most of these bubbles you refer to, will burst when they reach your palate / tongue - possibly because of the saliva. You could MAKE yourself choke if you fought the reflex - but that could get crud into your lungs so it's not to be recommended.
It is quite possible to choke, though, if a bland liquid at body temperature finds its way there and sneaks past the automatic defences. When I am not thinking what I'm doing, I often let a small amount of saliva get there (especially when sucking a sweetie) and it can set me off coughing and choking - silly old sod, I hear you cry.
In any case, making 'that noise' is an extremely coarse habit and I should expect better of a TNS contributor. Consider yourself reprimanded. Kids today!
- lyner - 18th Jun 09
See the whole discussion | Make a comment

How can I boil water without killing the fish that lives in it?

A glass jar is half filled with water. There is a live fish swimming in it. How can we boil the water that is inside the jar, without killing the fish? Neeraja Raghavan

Chris -   I love that question.  What is he doing?  It’s basically fish bowl…

Dave -   He’s apparently got a live fish swimming in the fish bowl and he wants to boil the water without harming the fish.

Chris -   He wants to boil the water without harming the fish.  Well, thinking about it.  I mean, what we know about the boiling point of water.  You can make water boil by raising the temperature that gives the water molecules more energy so they can escape from the body of water against the force being applied to the water surface by atmospheric pressure.  You can also make water boil at the same temperature by reducing the pressure above the water.  So, I suppose if you put the fish bowl into a very large space that he could evacuate very abruptly - so in other words, take all of the air out so the fish bowl is sitting in a vacuum, the water would boil without getting hot and therefore, wouldn’t harm the fish through heat.  The problem is all the dissolved gases would presumably boil out instantly so the fish would asphyxiate very quickly unless you did it transiently, just quickly make it boil and then stop again.  Just as a party trick to prove that this is possible.

Dave -   I guess the other problem is if the water is boiling around the fish even if its not damaging the proteins because it’s not hot. the fish is probably going to get the bends because any water or gases...

Chris -   Indeed because fishes have swim bladder, don’t they? This is how they regulate their buoyancies like a diver’s BCD, which makes them buoyant, neutral buoyancy in the water.  So, if you had a fish that has a swim bladder, it could explode.  I presume under those circumstances.

Dave -   Even if you have a little shark or something which didn’t and then it’s gonna get the bends, so it’s probably not going to be a happy fish.

Kat -   Horrible people.

Chris -   But, it may not die straight away.  So, there you go, there is the solution to your problem. 

June 2009

Neeraja Raghavan asked the Naked Scientists: Dear Naked Scientists:   A glass jar is half filled with water. There is a live fish swimming in it. How can we boil the water that is inside the jar, without killing the fish?   Regards, Neeraja.   Dr Neeraja Raghavan What do you think?
- Neeraja Raghavan - 10th Jun 09
Take the fish out!
- Don_1 - 10th Jun 09
Presumably you mean "boil SOME OF the water"?
You could plunge a red hot iron rod in and boil some of it without frazzling the poor ol' fish.

Or do you put an insulated container with cold water in it into the glass (the other half) and put the fish in that?

Is the clue in "half"?
- lyner - 10th Jun 09
Have you discovered some kind of super heat resistant fish species?
- Chemistry4me - 10th Jun 09
Drop in a furuncle!
- Don_1 - 10th Jun 09
Boiling point depends on external pressure...
If you connect your jar's opening to a void pump, at 4.58 mm of Hg (for example) your water will boil at 0.01 °C. At greater pressure the boiling point will increase.
At ~ 17 mm Hg, the water will boil at 20°C.
- lightarrow - 10th Jun 09
Compression and decompression would have to be done slowly otherwise the fish would die from “the bends”
- RD - 10th Jun 09
A fish with a swim bladder would be in real trouble. Also, dropping the pressure until the water boiled would draw all the dissolved oxygen out of the water.
If there are fish that live near the volcanic vents at the botom of the sea they might just survive  the heat but there's still a problem with oxygen. One of the best ways to remove dissolved gases from liquids is to boil them.
- Bored chemist - 10th Jun 09
I'll go along with Don_1's answer.
- Madidus_Scientia - 10th Jun 09
lightarrow,  you are a clever lad!!!!
- lyner - 10th Jun 09
I'm not getting into the debate on boiling fish alive just to check, so here's a related  observation.
If you wrap an ice cube in metal wire so it sinks you can put it in a narrow tube full of cold water then heat the water near the top of the tube until it boils, without melting the ice.
Water is a fairly poor conductor of heat and, with this setup there's no convection current to distribute the heat.
- Bored chemist - 11th Jun 09
- lightarrow - 11th Jun 09


Which one?

I'd go with the first one myself.
- fishytails - 11th Jun 09

Use a little shark, then - no swim bladder afaik.
- lyner - 11th Jun 09
So it dies of anoxia rather than trauma.
- Bored chemist - 12th Jun 09
Ok, what about steam distillation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distillation#Steam_distillation
but used at the reverse, that is, instead of using water to lower the boiling point of an organic liquid, use an organic liquid to lower the water's boiling point? If you use more different phases, you can add the various vapour pressures and so you lowers even more every substance' boiling point. 
- lightarrow - 12th Jun 09
Are you suggesting getting the fish pissed during the exercise?
Just to prove the point, you'd only need to do it briefly and - hell, it's only a fish! You could eat it afterwards.
- lyner - 12th Jun 09
You could use inert chemicals, like perfluoropentane:
http://www.fluoromed.com/fluoromed/products/perfluoropentane.html
which has a boiling point of 29°C. (If you are worried for oxygen loss, you can add it to the mix).
- lightarrow - 13th Jun 09
That would spoil the taste!
- lyner - 13th Jun 09


  It's impossible
- raghavendra - 15th Jun 09

A rather odd assertion after several of us have said how it can be done.
- Bored chemist - 15th Jun 09
His arguement doesn't boil down to much in the end.
- Chemistry4me - 15th Jun 09
Does Dr Neeraja Raghavan have a great secret he will be sharing with us some time? And why does he wish to boil some poor fish's life support system anyway?
- Don_1 - 15th Jun 09
Another solution of the problem could be this: take the fish and transfer it to another jar with water, than boil the water in the first one.  
- lightarrow - 15th Jun 09
Don already said that, first reply!
- Madidus_Scientia - 15th Jun 09
Gulp! Haven't even seen it!  
- lightarrow - 16th Jun 09
See the whole discussion | Make a comment

Why do my eyes take time to adjust to the dark?

I've noticed it takes my eyes a few minutes to adjust when walking outside into the dark but my dog can run out and she seems to see everything as if it was daylight. Is this because they can only see black and white or something else? Rowan, Australia

Chris -   You’ve got two important questions there.  First of all, getting used to the dark.  We’ll have to think John Gamel for this, who is an ophthalmologist over in America and he sent me some ideas.  One of the most important points with eyes getting used to the dark is actually how your eyes see in the first place.  Which is when that you’re looking at something, There are beams or rays of light of certain wavelengths or   colours coming into your eye and they interact with the photo pigment.  A chemical which is sensitive to certain wavelengths which is in your retina.  When the light waves hit that pigment, they cause the pigment to change its configuration.  It is so called bleach.  When it changes its configuration, it then signals the cell to change its behaviour so that’s basically how the retina turns light waves into brain waves.  It’s turning the information into pulses of nerve activity the brain can understand.  For a period of time, when that pigment has been bleached, it can’t to respond to light again until its regenerated, until its shape goes back to its original starting confirmation.  So, when you go from a very light area where on average many of your pigment molecules in your retina will be being bleached out any given time and then you go into the dark; Many of those bleached-pigment molecules will slowly turn back into unbleached pigment molecules, they’re sensitive again.  So, in other words, the longer you spend in the dark, the more pigment molecules becomes sensitive and therefore, the more sensitive your eyes become.  

That’s the first point.  The second one is also that the retina is a very dynamic electrical organ.  There are two different ways in which the retina responds to light.  There are cone cells, which are not very sensitive to light.  They need a lot of light to activate them, but they see in colour and then all the rod cells which are very sensitive to light.  But, they can only see in black and white, and what the eye can do is at low light conditions, you can connect via electrical coupling called a gap junction some rod cells to the cone cells and what this means is that the rod cells trigger the cones at a lower amount of light and they otherwise would need to turn them on.  So, as a result, you can actually see in colour at much lower light than you would otherwise.  It takes a little while for these gap junction connections between the different classes of rods and cones to actually get activated.  So, there’s also that process of adaptation.

Now, in terms of what happens when your dog goes out into the dark.  The reason dogs can see so well at night is because in common with many animals that are nocturnally active, dogs have a structure at the back of their eye called a tapetum lucidum which is Latin for bright carpet.  If you look at the back of the dog’s eye also sheep have this, cows have this, horses have this.  The back of the eye is very, very reflective and shiny.  This means that any light that comes into the eye that misses the retina the first time can bounce off the back of the eye and back on to the retina.  The benefit then is that it makes the eye much more sensitive to light, but slightly less able to pinpoint precisely where the light is coming from.  So, there’s a small loss of acuity which comes at the cost of increased sensitivity.  So, that’s basically how your dog can see much better in the  dark than you can.

Dave -   So, is this tapetum lucidum the reason why if you try to light the dog’s eyes they bright up so brightly?

Chris -   When you shine light into a person and you see this when you do flash photography and you see red eye.  The human retina looks red to the camera because the light illuminates the very dense rich blood supply at the back of the eye because the retina has one of the highest metabolic rates of all the tissues in the whole body.  But, in the dog or one these other animals, because the back of the eye has this tapetum lucidum, this bright carpet.  The light that goes into the eye immediately turns around and bounces straight back out again in that very demonic way.  It’s because it’s like reflecting at the back of the eye that makes your dog’s eyes look very bright, but the same thing doesn’t happen with the human.

Dave -   Also, I think the lens focuses the light straight back where it came so all the light which you shone into the eye comes right back at you standing next to the torch.

June 2009

Rowan Jennion asked the Naked Scientists: I've noticed it takes my eyes a few minutes to adjust when walking outside into the dark but my dog can run out and she seems to see everything as if it was daylight. Is this because they can only see black and white or something else? Cheers Rowan Australia - Podcast What do you think?
- Rowan Jennion - 23rd Mar 09
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=949.0 should cover it pretty well.
- Chemistry4me - 23rd Mar 09
See the whole discussion | Make a comment

Snapping Spaghetti

What happens when you snap a simple piece of spaghetti? Believe it or not, this is a question that has baffled some of the finest minds in the world. Why not have a go yourself?

What you need

A few pieces of spaghetti

What to Do

Take a piece of spaghetti, hold onto each end, slowly bend it until it breaks.

How many pieces does it break into?


What may Happen

You should find that the spaghetti breaks into 3,4 or even 5 pieces but hardly ever 2


Naked Scientists Science Radio Show Home Who are The Naked Scientists Information about Naked Scientists
Naked Scientists Podcast Ask the Naked Scientists Podcast Question of the Week Podcast
Naked Science Articles Experiments to do at Home Science Discussion Forum
Science News Stories Answers to Science Questions Interviews with Famous Scientists

Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.

Click here for the Naked Scientists PODCAST

The contents of this site are © The Naked Scientists® 2000-2012. The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks.