Improbable Research

The video of a cat adjusting to zero gravity recalls the article “Does a Cat Always Land on Its Feet?” which was published in the July/August issue of the Annals of Improbable Research (and which was featured on the cover).

(Thanks to Mark Dionne and Boing-Boing — which also spotlighted the Ig Nobel Prize-winning frog levitation work — for bringing this to our attention.)

PS. Anyone with an abiding interest in cats might also want to glance at the Special Cats Issue of AIR.

The juicy phrase “corruption in sumo wrestling” seems doubly delicious when you see it in the title of an economics research report….

So begins this week’s Improbable Research column in The Guardian. Read it here.

It is time, once again, to celebrate one of academia’s most memorable courses:

“Frankenstein in America: Science, Technology, and Values in the United States,” American Studies Program, Indiana University (1997).

A202, Section 0343, Spring 1997
Kenneth D. Pimple, Ph.D.
Tuesday-Thursday 8:00-9:15 am, Ballantine Hall 333

Description

The name “Frankenstein” evokes the very clear image of a monster created by a mad scientist. But the title character of Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus, is not the monster, but the scientist. The novel is a touchstone for attitudes toward science and technology in the modern era, exploring the wondrous promise of science as well as its potential dangers, including its significant moral dangers.

Science and technology have a pervasive and intimate impact on American life, and no one course can hope to touch on all aspects of the topic. In this course, we will examine a few intriguing texts to explore the intersection between values, science, and technology.
Objectives

Students who take this course will (a) learn about the relationship between science, technology, and values as expressed in a number of works of American literature and folklore; (b) explore their own attitudes toward science and values, and the place of science and technology in their own lives; (c) improve their ability to work collaboratively as a member of a team; (d) improve their critical thinking skills; and (e) improve their writing skills.

Having in recent days saluted Doctor Nurse, Doctor Student, and Doctor Modest, we now salute a Modest discovery about piercing and lactation. And a special salute to the modest doctor who made the discovery.

A reminder: next month the World Toilet Summit will convene in Beijing. It’s a three-day affari, on November 17-19, held under the auspices of the World Toilet Organization. Last year’s event proved to be photogenic.

(You may want to start a toilet association in your area. If so, the WTO is willing and eager to help.)

This year the U.S. Food and Drug Administration welcomed back not just leeches, but also maggots. In January the FDA, in case number K033391, approved maggots for use as a medical device.

(Thanks to John Bradley for bringing this to our attention.)

AIR editorial board member Mark Benecke is a devotee of maggots. He has posted on his web site a plethora of useful information and photos about the lovable little critters.

Some science books are deadly dull. But there is no dullness in Robert Cohen’s “Deadly” adventure series. It’s got plenty of good, old-fashioned deadliness…

So begins this week’s Improbable Research column in The Guardian. Read it here.

Let’s Corporation has a device that is said to make flowers talk and sing.

The Marcellus Mystery, described in the October mini-AIR, concerns a research paper that seems to have been co-written by three (3) people each named Lenora Marcellus. It prompted this letter from Alan W. Harris:

I don’t know about Marcellus, et al., but here’s another for you:

Alan W. Harris and Alan W. Harris, “On the revision of radiometric albedos and diameters of asteroids,” Icarus 126, 450-454 (1997).

If you check the article, you will find the following footnote:

1. Since the authors’ contributions to this work were equal, the order listed is alphabetical. And yes, the middle names are both “William”.

So this is a case of duplicity of three names. I leave it to the readers of AIR to decide if two authors with three identical names is more unusual than three authors with two identical names. I dare say the odds of either is less than being hit by an asteroid. Actually, both AWH’s specialize in that very question.

Cheers,

Al the elder

P.S. We’re not related.

P.P.S. If you cite the article, you can refer to it as “Al et Al”.

NOTE: The other Harris was honored in a splendidly backwards gesture: with the naming of an asteroid.

Investigator Earle Spamer send this news about recent Ig Nobel winners:

The CNN.com “over”view of the Ig Nobel ceremony leads with the Prize for the combover. But they have an even higher notice of distinction. They provide a Quick Vote box for the unscientific measurement of whether voters adhere (or not) to the five-second rule.

Investigator D. Edwards writes in reference to a citation we presented in mini-AIR 2004-07. The citation is:

“http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~fwelter/flyingsnails.htm”>Flying Snails — How Far Can Truncatellina (Pulmonata: Vertiginidae) Be Blown Over the Sea?” C. Kirchner, R. Krätzner and F.W. Welter-Schultes, Journal of Molluscan Studies, vol. 63, 1997, pp. 479-87.

Investigator Edwards offers this:

Here in bosky Penge (South-East London) we don’t wait for the wind to encourage molluscan aeronautics. The snails in our garden (Helix aspersa) are given free flying lessons over the fence. We know the lessons are effective because they don’t come back.

Yours strato-gastropodally,

David Edwards.

Further thoughts about flying snails appeared in the June 22 Improbable Research newspaper column.

The October issue of mini-AIR just went out.

British Gas, in trying hard to honor Murphy’s Law, has run afoul of it. A basic law of nature, Murphy’s Law is known by various names. British Gas favors the possibly-ancient, and probably-honorable, and almost-certainly British “Sod’s Law.” The company issued a press release which begins:

7 October 2004

The formula that proves that ‘Sod’s Law’ really does strike at the worst possible time

BOFFINS have finally proven mathematically a rule that everyone knows is perfectly obvious each time their e-mail crashes on a deadline or the shower runs icily cold….

The press release goes off the rails (and rails are a part of the saga of Captain Murphy), so to speak, when it tells the following, surprisingly wrong, history of Murphy:

Sod’s Law is the English expression for US saying ‘Murphy’s Law’, which was named after a US Air force boffin, Captain Edward Murphy, who in the late 1940s used his boss as a human guinea pig in a painful experiment that went embarrassingly wrong. The French call it ‘La loi d’emmerdement maximum’.

Historian Nick Spark recently did the detective work to track down the details of Captain Edward A. Murphy, Jr’s part in the story of Murphy’s Law. Spark’s report shows that there was and is quibbling about Murphy’s exact role — but that role certainly is very different than the nth-hand, much-mutated version in the British Gas press release.

(NOTE: Murphy and two other individuals were honored — posthumously in two out of the three cases — with a 2003 Ig Nobel Prize.)

As for the new formula… Well, anyone who wants detailed mathematical insights to the workings and misworkings and consequences of Murphy’s Law would do well to consult Robert Matthews. Matthews is the world’s preeminent authority on all things mathematical concerning Murphy’s Law. (And like Murphy, he has been awarded an Ig Nobel Prize for work concerning Murphy’s Law.)

(Thanks to Wendy Grossman for bringing this to our attention.)

A recent experiment in Germany shows that botox can make people’s armpits smell better. Botox - aka “botulinum toxin” - has had a curious reputation with the public. First it was feared: it can kill, after all. Then it was cheered: the fashionable were delighted to hear that something with a hint of danger could make their wrinkles vanish. Now we are on the verge of a third, and rather different, wave of acclaim….

So begins this week’s Improbable Research column in The Guardian. Read it here.

Ig Nobel Prize-winner Sanford Wallace is back in the news. In 1997, Wallace was awarded the Ig Nobel Prize in the field of Communications. The citation taciturnly identified Mr. Wallace and his early work:

Sanford Wallace, president of Cyber Promotions of Philadelphia — neither rain nor sleet nor dark of night have stayed this self-appointed courier from delivering electronic junk mail to all the world.

Numeous reports in the press say that Mr. Wallace has now become a prosperous pioneer in the spread of computer spyware. And that he is being prosecuted for again pursuing his proclivity. Phew!