SCI-ART LAB

Science, Art, Litt, Science based Art & Science Communication

Q: Can ingesting diamond fragments and powder cause death like they show in the movies?

Krishna: Smugglers sometimes do swallow diamonds to avoid getting caught. But no ill effects have been reported. Diamonds cannot be digested as they are impervious to stomach acid. They just come out the natural way. Studies have found that most "foreign bodies"— non-food items that people swallow, from coins to rocks to pencils — work their way through the body without a hitch.

But objects with sharp edges or pointed tips have the highest risk of complications, up to 35%. 

65 percent of the time, pointy diamonds will not hurt you. But sometimes diamond swallowers find themselves among the unlucky minority. In 2010, a Sri Lankan man swallowed several condoms containing more than 2,000 diamonds worth $670,000 altogether, and attempted to smuggle the riches through an Indian airport (2). Local police commissioner SR Jangid said of the smuggler, "During questioning, he could not sit comfortably and when questioned, he told the police that he was suffering from piles." Piles are inflamed hemorrhoids caused by abnormal pressure in the anal canal that can result in rectal bleeding. This time it is caused by 2,000 diamonds!

Feeding commercial-grade diamond powder to animals produced no ill effects (1). “In the first tests, 5 carats of diamond powder (300-1600 mesh) were given to dogs, mixed into the food so that the powder would come into contact with tissue in the mouth, to test the effect on the entire digestive system. No toxic effect was observed. A cat was then fed with 2/3 meat and 1/3 diamond dust (5 carats of 300-1600 mesh) for a short period. A considerable part of its digestive system must have been filled with diamond powder for some time. No symptoms have been observed after a year – the cat is still well and shows no sign of any illness.

This list (3) says diamond toxicity : None known!

Q: What are the reasons for left handedness?

Krishna:   Why Are Only 10% of People Left-Handed? Science is still trying to understand this (4).

Why are just 1 in 10 of us left-handed? there are plenty of hypotheses that have been building for more than a century, and the evidence points to some kind of genetic influence. Why? Because the percentage of lefties is roughly the same, anywhere you look on the globe.

Why aren't left-handed and right-handed people born to a roughly 50:50 ratio? 

Some experts suggest that social cooperation, played out over thousands of years, has given righties dominant. In other words, when communities act together - in terms of sharing tools and living spaces - using the same hand as everyone else is beneficial.

Others suggest that it's to do with the way the brain is arranged in two hemispheres, with the left half controlling the right side of the body, and the right half controlling the left side of the body.

If most people's brains use the left hemisphere to control intensive language and fine motor skills, the thinking goes, that bias results in the right hand being more dominant too. 

In fact, one of the more unusual hypotheses to explain the rarity of left-handedness is that a genetic mutation in our distant past caused the language centres of the human brain to shift to the left hemisphere, effectively causing right-handedness to dominate, Alasdair Wilkins explains for io9 back in 2011.

And while genetics likely play a large role in determining handedness, it's probably not the whole answer. Left-handed parents are more likely to have left-handed children than right-handed parents - a preference that can even be seen in the womb - but they still tend to have more right-handed children overall. 

Researchers have struggled to identify exactly which genes are responsible for increasing the chances of being a leftie.

In 2019, an analysis of 400,000 individual records revealed the first genetic regions associated with handedness - four of them, to be exact. But other research suggests that there are probably dozens of genes that play a role in determining whether we end up writing with our left hand or our right.

On top of that, other studies have linked factors such as oestrogen levels and birth position to varying levels of left- and right-handedness.

In short, there seem to be a lot of considerations at play, and researchers are having a hard time tying them all together. That means we can't yet tell you exactly why you were born left or right-handed, but scientists clearly are working hard at finding an answer.

And when they do, they'll have to explain why some of us appear to be ambidextrous, too.

Q: What are the harmful effects of overthinking?

Krishna: I think overthinking is a relative term.

The way you think about something matters more than how much time you spend on it.

Let me explain. I think a lot. Most people do.

But my thinking leads to creative solutions, beautiful stories, poems, art works, articles and a lot more. I cannot survive without problems and thinking a lot about them. It is a fuel to run me and my mind. :)

So over thinking is not always bad.

Scientists think a lot to solve mysteries, explain things, and bring solutions to several problems. "Eureka moments" come only after thinking a lot!

So the way you think matters the most.

Everyone thinks; it is human nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself,
is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed, or down-right prejudiced. Yet the
quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depend precisely
on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is detrimental to science. It also effects the standard of our living. Excellence in thought must be systematically cultivated.

Therefore, Critical thinking is a part of science training. If you don't get this training properly, your science education is incomplete and useless.

You just need to commit yourself to remaining rigorous, clear-headed and honest in your analysis while conducting science.

Critical thinking is highly disciplined, knowledge oriented, analytical well directed ( informed by genuine evidence and data), monitored and a corrective process. It follows rigorous standards of excellence.

Critical Thinking

There are people who think a lot but end up with more problems than solutions. For them rumination can set up for a vicious cycle that is hard to break. Ruminating wreaks havoc on their mental health. Over analysing without following the right way does not solve problems. It might disturb their sleep that lead to health problems.

So if you face a problem try to think in the right 'way'. It leads to a positive outcome.

‘Way’ matters while thinking, ‘time’ doesn’t!

Q: Do all human inventions have an origin or link from natural phenomena directly?

Krishna: Scientific inventions, yes. They depend on scientific principles that govern this universe.

However, there are some ‘ primitive mind inventions’ like ghosts, spirits, gods, black magic which are figments of wild imaginations or blind beliefs. These ‘inventions’ took birth because in ancient times people couldn’t understand why a few things happened in nature and gave strange explanations that defied logic. These are wrong interpretations of natural phenomena.

But despite the scientific progress some people refuse to come out of these ancient thoughts and still live in bygone eras and treat them as ‘real’.

Q: Why do scientists get blind to some phenomena?

Krishna: What phenomena? I think you have things like paranormal, miracle cures and black magic on your mind when you asked this Question.

There is no evidence for such things. We have been stressing this over and over again. Your beliefs, imaginations and anecdotal evidences based on perceptions are not facts and evidence.

If you want you can live in your own boxes and refuse to come out of these delusions, but scientists are smart enough to get rid of useless things that cause harm to human societies.

I prefer to be blind to such phenomena. I don’t want to waste my time on things that hinder progress.

Krishna: There are more important things to do. Like protecting ever growing population from hunger, disease, death ….

Why should we waste our time and resources on just strange ‘human imagination’ and ‘silly beliefs’?

Scientists are smart. They know their priorities well.

Q: Why has modern technology and science failed to save nature? Even we have artificial intelligence.

Krishna: Why has modern technology and science failed to save nature?

It is easy and fashionable to blame science and technology for everything!

Scientists don’t take policy decisions. Politicians do ( Politicians in US and Brazil are good examples)!

People implement them, not scientists (Indonesia is an example)!

When both these types have no idea what science and scientists say and give more importance to economic considerations, why blame science and scientists for this mess?

Heard about population control to arrest destruction of nature? NO? The anti-abortion and pro-religion ideologies are putting hurdles before science!

Politicians, religions and people themselves are responsible for all this mess. Not science.

Get your information right before asking these Questions.

Q: Why do scientists view science differently than the public?

Krishna: Not all ‘scientists’ can do this! Only if you get a proper training and have a highly critical thinking mind can you see not only science but the universe differently from others around you.

I will give examples here. We are a bunch of researchers working in a lab.

One of my colleagues, who is also a microbiologist, once told me not to eat pulses when I cut my finger. "Eating pulses will make the injured part gather more puss", to my utter shock!

I hit her on her head and said: "You dumb idiot, tell me what happens when you cut your finger?"

"Bacteria and other microbes will enter into your body through the cut finger", she said innocently. "They will gather around the wound".

"Then?", I asked .

"Then your WBC will fight with them"

"Next what happens?"

"Some of the Microbes and WBC that are dead during the processes will form puss".

" In fact the proteins in pulses are useful in fighting the infection!"

"Yes, I know this!", she said again innocently!

"Then why did you say eating pulses will form the puss?"

She looked at me blankly and said, "Because my mother told me that!"

I put my hand to my head and screamed, "Oh, for the world's sake, forget what your mother and grandmother told you. Use your own grey matter. What is the use of studying Microbiology if you still want to listen to what your ignorant mother says?"

That is the affect your family , loved ones and your culture will have on you! Mere science literacy cannot remove this affect on the person.
Are you shocked too? Don't be. Most of the time this is what happens. The science education you get in schools, colleges and universities will be unable to overcome the cultural conditioning of your mind done by your loved ones most of the time. People fail to use their own brains/minds to critically think what is good, what is truth and what is a myth.

Science museums, fairs and shows shouldn't be aimed at students and...

Fitting in with your friends and family matters a lot more to people than getting climate science right!

Moreover, research shows (1) that it is difficult to change when you are alone. It can be difficult for people to change aspects of their personality based on desire alone. That doesn't mean people can't make the changes they want. They just might need outside help doing so—from a professional, a friend, family, group and societies in which they live.

Research also shows (2) that life's choices like energy related decisions can be contagious and are influenced by peer's behaviour.

Science training in several parts of the world - is faulty. People treat it like coaching in car driving - learn it on the road and forget it when you go home. Science is limited to the classrooms of the schools, colleges, universities and research institutes. You can erase it from your memory as soon as you cross their gates! This is the attitude of some of the people with regard to science.

Science communicators, get thick skinned to communicate science wit...

Moreover, various cognitive biases Cognitive-distortions and fallacies effect the way you approach your science.

Only a handful of people will have the courage and ability to think think critically and differently from their loved ones and friends. And only a few amongst them will have the courage to accept the truth, stand by it and swim against the current !

Having said that the answer to your main question is: when you can see the reality happening before your eyes, when your understanding goes to the ultimate depths of knowledge, when your mind can register it correctly the way it should be done, when you have evidence before your eyes, it changes your total perception.

Footnotes

  1. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-01-personality-easy.html?utm_so...
  2. https://techxplore.com/news/2020-02-energy-choices-contagious-insig...

Q: Are you a scientist if your discoveries, beliefs, and opinions bring you comfort?

Krishna: You are a scientist if your inventions and discoveries bring comfort to the world or if your new finding helps improve the knowledge.

You feel satisfied. Your comfort is secondary.

Beliefs and opinions have no place in the scientific world. Only data supported evidence matters.

Q: Will nature destroy science, or will science destroy nature?

Krishna: Will nature destroy science?

Nature is completely science based. Scientific principles govern this universe and run it.

If nature destroys science, it would collapse immediately and cease to exist! Nature cannot exist without the scientific principles that govern it!

If nature destroys the principles that run it, it would destroy itself!

Will science destroy nature?

Science is just the study with which we try to understand the universe around us. ‘ ‘Systematic Study’ cannot destroy it.

However, People, who cannot handle the knowledge they acquired might misuse it and destroy nature.

Q: Why do scientists react aggressively when faced by in-depth questions they cannot answer?

Krishna: Do we?

Well that depends on the way you frame your question! And the junk science you try to argue with.

Scientists give more importance to their time. If you try to waste it with unscientific arguments, they naturally get annoyed.

When we don’t know something, most of us would say, ‘we don’t know , yet’. There is nothing wrong in accepting that.

But, the problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter disastrous beliefs that should have been abandoned long back. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful. And this attitude feeds into the false equivalence between experts and non-experts that is an increasingly pernicious feature of our public discourse. Perhaps that’s one reason why enthusiastic amateurs think they’re entitled to disagree with climate scientists and immunologists and have their views “respected.” And do you respect ignorance, misconceptions and superstitions in the same way as facts based on evidence and true knowledge? How silly that looks!

There is evidence based on a scientists' years of toil, thorough analysis and testing and there is rubbish based on wild imaginations and perceptions. You cannot give equal importance to both.

More often than not, there is no “opposition party” or “other side” in science. There can be disagreement between various scientists when sometimes the research is incomplete and inconclusive. But non-experts cannot be given 'opposition status' in science. Someone who objects to scientific facts on non-scientific grounds simply cannot form part of the debate.There is the data and what it means. And there are facts whether anybody agrees with them or not. Period.

“One cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem.” - Stephen Hawking

So the answer to your Q is …

  1. When we really don’t know something, we are the first people to accept it. Science is still in an infant stage and it takes time to grow and answer all the questions we have now.
  2. You are entitled to have your own opinion but not to your own facts. We trust only evidence based facts. Any arguments which are belief and opinion based have no place in the scientific world.
  3. Someone who objects to scientific facts on non-scientific grounds simply cannot form part of the debate.
  4. A scientists’ time is very precious. Don’t waste it with unnecessary arguments.
  5. If both people talking are not subject experts, it would be like two blind men arguing about the most beautiful woman in the world. It is completely pointless.
  6. If only one person is a subject expert in any conversation and the other person is a layman, the layman is expected to ‘listen’ and try to ‘understand’, not argue.

If you cross any of these lines, you will have to face the music. Scientists can easily sense whether a person is genuinely interested in learning things or simply trying to confirm or authenticate his/her baseless beliefs and irrational view points.

I would simply shut off my door on the latter. Because I have better things to do.

Q: Is science settled? If so, why? If not, what are the interesting topics in basic (not applied) research?

Krishna: Just saying things without explanations create confusion. Okay let me explain it to you now.

Like I have been saying all these days, Science has two aspects:

  1. The principles that are responsible for the origin of our universe, governing it after its origin and running it. These are absolute facts because the evidence that this universe is running on them without any hitches is itself proof that they are beyond any question.
  2. The process with which we study our universe and try to understand it.

If you take the first aspect, i.e., the principles that govern this universe, the science is settled! It is not going to change!

But if you take the second aspect, it can be 'settled' only if the results of the second aspect fully tallies with the the first one. But because of the human mind limitations, it has become impossible most of the time. So scientists accept their limitations make the study with which we try to understand the first aspect very unsettled.

There are hundreds of topics. Which field are you interested in?

Q: Your research was rejected by a journal. However, the reviewers comment clearly indicate that they completely misunderstands and misrepresents your paper. What would you do?

Krishna: I would tell them that! Explain it clearly so that they could have a rethink on that. But then if people misunderstand your research paper, doesn’t that mean you ‘re not very clear? Some fault lies with you too! So I myself will have to get corrected too!
Q: What are some myths and the scientific reasons behind it?

Krishna: When people ask such questions, it is presumed that they don’t either know the meaning of the words or how these things originate and work.

Myths and science are oxymoronic.

Myth meaning: myth

  1. a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.
  2. a widely held but false belief or idea

Myth | Definition of Myth by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com also m...

Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment

Science | Definition of Science by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com ...

Originally, the word "science" (from Latin scientia) generically meant "study", "investigation", and the "knowledge" coming from them. Only later it came to denote more specifically the application of the "scientific method". So modern definition of science takes into account confirmation of science by using scientific methods and methodologies.

Can courts decide what is science and what is not? If they do, is t...

So myths and modern science originate and work in opposite ways. Why do you want to link them? And create pseudo-science in the process? Genuine science doesn’t endorse myths. There ‘s no science or you cannot have genuine science behind any myth. Period.

CITATIONS: 

1. http://www.nanomedicine.com/NMIIA/15.1.1.htm#:~:text=We%20now%20kno...

2. https://www.livescience.com/34190-what-happens-when-you-swallow-a-d...

3. https://www.gemsociety.org/article/gemstone-toxicity-table/

4. https://www.sciencealert.com/why-are-only-10-of-people-left-handed-...

Views: 59

Replies to This Discussion

54

RSS

Badge

Loading…

© 2024   Created by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service