Heuristic Rotating Header Image

Science

Science in the future

I’ve been watching the increasing numbers of crowd-funded science projects with some fascination. I don’t think this is the way to fund all science, but some things are quite possible, and more likely to get funded this way than through traditional channels.

For instance, here’s a perfect candidate, just languishing:

Herpetology In Latin America: An Interdisciplinary Approach: ethnoherpetology and conservation in Latin America. How can you not think that’s neat, and want to chip in a few dollars to see it succeed?

Or this potentially ground-breaking project:

Poikey, the Cancer Killer
: A possible physical method to improve targeting of anti-cancer drugs. I find the presentation rather fluffy, but the creators have been good about responding to questions about scientific capabilities.

What do you think of crowdfunding as a possibility for art? For science? Seen anything worth sharing lately?

Lunchbreak

I think Chris Hadfield is fabulous, and this is just nifty.

Progress

I have four stories out right now, one of them brand-new. That’s a personal record. One is a story I feel strongly about, one is a story Nick feels strongly about, one is perfect for the venue I sent it to (in my admittedly biased opinion), one I’m not sure about but Nick likes. Submitting is the part I can control; publication is out of my hands.

Let the rejections begin!

If only I had four journal articles out right now… those take inordinately more time, but pay a whole lot better. (Salary, that is, nothing for the article itself, and often quite a lot of money in page charges. Academic publishing is almost entirely unlike fiction publishing.)

Edit: Yep, I now have three stories out. Nice rejection letter, though. (Enjoyed it, but can’t use it; please send more.)

Edit: Back up to four stories out, subtitled, or what’s a late lunch break for?

Science and art

This is SO COOL.

The perils of science

Cartoons

Today is a good day for cartoons.

This is sad, and true, and entirely representative of human history up until this point. Question is, how do we fix it?

This is also true, but not sad. Annoying, definitely.

Science redefined

From Mother Jones:

HB 291, the “Missouri Standard Science Act,” redefines a few things you thought you already knew about science. For example, a “hypothesis” is redefined as something that reflects a “minority of scientific opinion and is “philosophically unpopular.” A scientific theory is “an inferred explanation…whose components are data, logic and faith-based philosophy.” And “destiny” is not something that $5 fortune tellers believe in; Instead, it’s “the events and processes that define the future of the universe, galaxies, stars, our solar system, earth, plant life, animal life, and the human race.”

What the fuck?

The bill is mostly intended to promote teaching of creationism, and is sponsored by self-proclaimed “science enthusiast” Rick Brattin.

Don’t try this at home

It’s Friday. Let’s blow things up!

Lunch break

My new short story, “The Cries of the Dead and Dying,” will be published by Daily Science Fiction on 12/12/12. A free subscription will get you a new short work every weekday, and stories are published on the website a week after they go out to subscribers. But why not just subscribe?

I just started reading The Naming of Names last night, a history of botanical names by Anna Pavord. Think it sounds dull or esoteric? Ursula Le Guin liked it, and the illustrations are wonderful. I’m only a chapter in; I’ll let you know what I think later.

Monday bouquet

A collection of things for you:

Ada Lovelace Day was weeks ago. Um. Here, have a nice article on Rachel Carson from the NY Times.

Some advice on writing from David Brin.

Need something to read? Complete collection of OMNI magazine available online. Free.

Not new, but an article by Jo Walton on reading SF that is relevant to my interests, and quite possibly yours.