Why is the universe structured the way it is? How do galaxies behave on large scales? Where does the Milky Way fit into this picture? The above image is a recent map of the “nearby universe” or “local universe” (you can see the Milky Way labeled in the middle (slight right)). An international team of researchers also created a video mapping galactic movement. These cosmic maps will help researchers better understand how dark matter dictates the motion of visible matter, and consequently, better understand the evolution of structure in the universe. The dominant feature of this map is “The Great Attractor,” which is an area of our local universe with the highest density of dark matter. (via PhysOrg)
Pop-upView Separately

Why is the universe structured the way it is? How do galaxies behave on large scales? Where does the Milky Way fit into this picture? The above image is a recent map of the “nearby universe” or “local universe” (you can see the Milky Way labeled in the middle (slight right)). An international team of researchers also created a video mapping galactic movement. These cosmic maps will help researchers better understand how dark matter dictates the motion of visible matter, and consequently, better understand the evolution of structure in the universe.

The dominant feature of this map is “The Great Attractor,” which is an area of our local universe with the highest density of dark matter.

(via PhysOrg)

New Vsauce! What is the greatest honor?

Honoring one another is a very human behaviour. Honoring one another with awards, trophies, respect, and in a variety of other ways promotes group cohesion. It is a by-product of the fact that we evolved to live in highly social and large groups. So take the tour through the world of human honor with Michael Stevens!

My first post for Humanity+ Magazine was published yesterday: The Future of Intelligence. Human intelligence, like everything related to biological systems, is an evolving phenomenon. It has not been static in the past, and will not persist in its current form into the future. The human-version of intelligence has made our species the most powerful agent of change ever produced by the earth’s biosphere. Therefore, understanding its evolutionary past should be a primary concern for evolutionary theorists. Also, understanding this evolutionary past should give us our best opportunity to predict what the future of intelligence may be. We have a good idea of how biological systems operate and change on the scale of hundreds of thousands, and even millions of years. We have no idea how we should suspect high intelligence to operate and change on comparable scales. This makes the future of intelligence simultaneously the most perplexing and most pressing evolutionary issue for 21st century science. Full article: The Future of Intelligence
Pop-upView Separately

My first post for Humanity+ Magazine was published yesterday: The Future of Intelligence.

Human intelligence, like everything related to biological systems, is an evolving phenomenon. It has not been static in the past, and will not persist in its current form into the future. The human-version of intelligence has made our species the most powerful agent of change ever produced by the earth’s biosphere. Therefore, understanding its evolutionary past should be a primary concern for evolutionary theorists. Also, understanding this evolutionary past should give us our best opportunity to predict what the future of intelligence may be. We have a good idea of how biological systems operate and change on the scale of hundreds of thousands, and even millions of years. We have no idea how we should suspect high intelligence to operate and change on comparable scales. This makes the future of intelligence simultaneously the most perplexing and most pressing evolutionary issue for 21st century science.

Full article: The Future of Intelligence

Last year I had my mind blown by the existence of supervolcanoes. Supervolcanoes are volcanic eruptions that are 1000x more powerful than typical volcanic eruptions. They can destroy continents. This year I discovered that our planet can also experience earthquakes and tsunamis that can effect continents as well. These are called megathrust earthquakes. One of the largest and most frequently recurring megathrust earthquakes appears to be off the coast of North America. How frequently do they occur? Paleoecologists attempted to understand this by studying the sedimentary layers of western North America. They concluded that 22 such events have occurred over the past 11,000 years. That means that they happen on average every 500 years. As of now, these events cannot be prevented. Western North America, brace yourself. Via ScienceDaily
Pop-upView Separately

Last year I had my mind blown by the existence of supervolcanoes. Supervolcanoes are volcanic eruptions that are 1000x more powerful than typical volcanic eruptions. They can destroy continents.

This year I discovered that our planet can also experience earthquakes and tsunamis that can effect continents as well. These are called megathrust earthquakes. One of the largest and most frequently recurring megathrust earthquakes appears to be off the coast of North America. How frequently do they occur? Paleoecologists attempted to understand this by studying the sedimentary layers of western North America. They concluded that 22 such events have occurred over the past 11,000 years. That means that they happen on average every 500 years.

As of now, these events cannot be prevented. Western North America, brace yourself.

Via ScienceDaily

Latest post in The Ratchet: 5 Human/Chimpanzee Differences Want to know exactly what makes you special? Ok, read on. Charles Darwin was primarily interested in divergence. He wanted to know what evolutionary pressures made organisms different. In The Descent of Man he spent a considerable amount of time contemplating what it was that made humans unique or special. Comparisons with the “mental faculties” of apes was often used to explore this: “We must also admit that there is a much wider interval in mental power between one of the lowest fishes, as a lamprey or lancelet, and one of the higher apes, than between an ape and man; yet this immense interval is filled up by numberless gradations.” - Charles Darwin (The Descent of Man) This quote reveals two things: 1) Darwin was aware that human intelligence made us completely distinct from the rest of the animal kingdom, even from our closest relatives. 2) Darwin was also aware that this intelligence must have evolved gradually over time from a species that was “more ape-like” (i.e., more like a chimpanzee) than like a modern day human. However, Darwin did not (and could not) have a grasp on what those exact differences between humans and the great apes were. The behavioural research just wasn’t well developed. In fact, modern day primatologists are still searching. We are getting closer every year. But what do we know right now? Can we make a list of the key intellectual differences between our closest relatives and humans? Full Article: 5 Human/Chimpanzee Differences
Pop-upView Separately

Latest post in The Ratchet: 5 Human/Chimpanzee Differences

Want to know exactly what makes you special? Ok, read on.

Charles Darwin was primarily interested in divergence. He wanted to know what evolutionary pressures made organisms different. In The Descent of Man he spent a considerable amount of time contemplating what it was that made humans unique or special. Comparisons with the “mental faculties” of apes was often used to explore this:

“We must also admit that there is a much wider interval in mental power between one of the lowest fishes, as a lamprey or lancelet, and one of the higher apes, than between an ape and man; yet this immense interval is filled up by numberless gradations.”
- Charles Darwin (The Descent of Man)

This quote reveals two things:

1) Darwin was aware that human intelligence made us completely distinct from the rest of the animal kingdom, even from our closest relatives.

2) Darwin was also aware that this intelligence must have evolved gradually over time from a species that was “more ape-like” (i.e., more like a chimpanzee) than like a modern day human.

However, Darwin did not (and could not) have a grasp on what those exact differences between humans and the great apes were. The behavioural research just wasn’t well developed. In fact, modern day primatologists are still searching. We are getting closer every year. But what do we know right now? Can we make a list of the key intellectual differences between our closest relatives and humans?

Full Article: 5 Human/Chimpanzee Differences

Image Credit / Nickolay Lamm Latest post in The Ratchet: Humans evolved. We have been aware of this reality for 150 years, yet the implications are not apparent to most. What we have discovered about evolution is that it is A) not goal oriented and B) not hierarchical (i.e., there is no end state). This means that humans, as we currently exist, will not always exist. Let me be clear before proceeding. This does not mean extinction is inevitable. But it does mean that our current form cannot persist indefinitely. We will change. As a result of this knowledge, geneticist Dr. Alan Kwan and graphic designer Nickolay Lamm attempted to understand what we might look like in 20,000-100,000 years. Unfortunately for both individuals involved, there work is not science and should only be considered misleading science fiction. Most biologists have a fantastic understanding of evolution (obviously). Biologists have revealed how the entire biosphere evolved. The theory of evolution by natural selection can explain in fantastic detail how a colony of the first replicating cells could diversify over time to produce endless forms most beautiful, including highly intelligent species like our own. Despite the theory of evolution’s beautiful simplicity, clearly many people do not understand how it works at all. Evolution is a theory that can explain the history of organisms. Evolution can explain how things change. However, the theory is very rarely useful in predicting specific changes. Read the Full Article: Future Humans
Pop-upView Separately

Image Credit / Nickolay Lamm

Latest post in The Ratchet:

Humans evolved. We have been aware of this reality for 150 years, yet the implications are not apparent to most. What we have discovered about evolution is that it is A) not goal oriented and B) not hierarchical (i.e., there is no end state). This means that humans, as we currently exist, will not always exist.

Let me be clear before proceeding. This does not mean extinction is inevitable. But it does mean that our current form cannot persist indefinitely. We will change.

As a result of this knowledge, geneticist Dr. Alan Kwan and graphic designer Nickolay Lamm attempted to understand what we might look like in 20,000-100,000 years. Unfortunately for both individuals involved, there work is not science and should only be considered misleading science fiction.

Most biologists have a fantastic understanding of evolution (obviously). Biologists have revealed how the entire biosphere evolved. The theory of evolution by natural selection can explain in fantastic detail how a colony of the first replicating cells could diversify over time to produce endless forms most beautiful, including highly intelligent species like our own.

Despite the theory of evolution’s beautiful simplicity, clearly many people do not understand how it works at all. Evolution is a theory that can explain the history of organisms. Evolution can explain how things change. However, the theory is very rarely useful in predicting specific changes.

Read the Full Article: Future Humans

I have fallen down a YouTube rabbit hole. I had seen Melody Sheep’s videos before but didn’t realize that there was an entire channel dedicated to amazing remixed popsci! It is really hard to pick a favourite but I have linked a more recent video that has gotten less exposure than some of the channel’s more famous videos.

Transcript for video:

Say, do you like mystery stories?
Well we have one for you.
The concept: relativity. That strange fantastic relationship between time, distance, and mass.
Before we’re finished, I think you’ll agree that truth is stranger than the strangest fiction.

Why do the stars shine?
Why does the galaxy light up?

E equals MC squared
That is the engine that lights up the stars
Energy turns into mass
E equals MC squared -
That is the secret of the stars

Now listen carefully:
The faster you move
THe heavier you get
The energy of motion turns into M, your mass
Energy of motion

Energy equals Mass times the speed of light squared
An awful lot of energy
For a tiny amount of mass

Light travels at the same speed
No matter how you look at it
No matter how I move, relative to you,
Light travels at the same speed

No matter who is doing the measurement
And no matter what direction you are moving
The speed of light is the same
No matter what direction, or how fast

As you travel faster
Time slows down
Everything slows down

Time slows down when you move
Time passes at a different rate
Clocks run slow
It’s a monumental shift in how we see the world

The beauty, the majesty,
The power of the universe
Into a single equation

(refrain)

It’s a beautiful piece of science
It’s a beautifuly elegant theory
It’s a beautiful piece of science

A planet like the Earth is kept in orbit
Because it follows curves
In the spatial fabric caused
By the sun’s presence

Space and time are bent by stars and planets
As things move through this curved space, they bend

Now all of this is illustration of the fact
that time and space are linked together.

As you’re moving through bent and curved space and time,
You feel like you feel a force (x2)
That force is gravity

(refrain)

That is the secret of the stars

Illustration by Claire Scully / via Aeon Magazine The discussion of whether maths exists independently of humans has been a tension within the sciences for centuries. However, over the past two weeks it seems like the internet has become really interested in it. PBS Idea Channel’s last episode tackles the question head on, and a recent Aeon Magazine article by Margaret Wertheim explores how the reality of maths could impact future research in physics. I highly recommend checking out both. The following is an excerpt from the The Limits of Physics by Margaret Wertheim: Most physicists are Platonists. They believe that the mathematical relationships they discover in the world about us represent some kind of transcendent truth existing independently from, and perhaps a priori to, the physical world. In this way of seeing, the universe came into being according to a mathematical plan, what the British physicist Paul Davies has called ‘a cosmic blueprint’. Discovering this ‘plan’ is a goal for many theoretical physicists and the schism in the foundation of their framework is thus intensely frustrating. It’s as if the cosmic architect has designed a fiendish puzzle in which two apparently incompatible parts must be fitted together. Both are necessary, for both theories make predictions that have been verified to a dozen or so decimal places, and it is on the basis of these theories that we have built such marvels as microchips, lasers, and GPS satellites. Quite apart from the physical tensions that exist between them, relativity and quantum theory each pose philosophical problems. Are space and time fundamental qualities of the universe, as general relativity suggests, or are they byproducts of something even more basic, something that might arise from a quantum process? Looking at quantum mechanics, huge debates swirl around the simplest situations. Does the universe split into multiple copies of itself every time an electron changes orbit in an atom, or every time a photon of light passes through a slit? Some say yes, others say absolutely not.
Pop-upView Separately

Illustration by Claire Scully / via Aeon Magazine

The discussion of whether maths exists independently of humans has been a tension within the sciences for centuries. However, over the past two weeks it seems like the internet has become really interested in it. PBS Idea Channel’s last episode tackles the question head on, and a recent Aeon Magazine article by Margaret Wertheim explores how the reality of maths could impact future research in physics. I highly recommend checking out both.

The following is an excerpt from the The Limits of Physics by Margaret Wertheim:

Most physicists are Platonists. They believe that the mathematical relationships they discover in the world about us represent some kind of transcendent truth existing independently from, and perhaps a priori to, the physical world. In this way of seeing, the universe came into being according to a mathematical plan, what the British physicist Paul Davies has called ‘a cosmic blueprint’. Discovering this ‘plan’ is a goal for many theoretical physicists and the schism in the foundation of their framework is thus intensely frustrating. It’s as if the cosmic architect has designed a fiendish puzzle in which two apparently incompatible parts must be fitted together. Both are necessary, for both theories make predictions that have been verified to a dozen or so decimal places, and it is on the basis of these theories that we have built such marvels as microchips, lasers, and GPS satellites.

Quite apart from the physical tensions that exist between them, relativity and quantum theory each pose philosophical problems. Are space and time fundamental qualities of the universe, as general relativity suggests, or are they byproducts of something even more basic, something that might arise from a quantum process? Looking at quantum mechanics, huge debates swirl around the simplest situations. Does the universe split into multiple copies of itself every time an electron changes orbit in an atom, or every time a photon of light passes through a slit? Some say yes, others say absolutely not.