Yes, unfortunately the Velociraptor mongoliensis is more like a very aggressive roadrunner than a man-eating murder machine. But those aren’t the ‘raptors from the movies. The “velociraptors” of Jurassic Park fame are actually Deinonychus, a (slightly) taller, equally roadrunnerish combination of tail and sickle-shaped toe claw. D-nikes (I made that name up) were not huge, but that claw could easily split you open like a bag of spaghetti. There’s no real confirmation that they were “clever girls” or hunted in packs, and the insistence of JP’s directors on not adding feathers to these almost-certainly feathered death-chickens is kind of like a claw-toed slap in the face to paleontology. Just like the great T. rex (which we talked about last week), our image of these dinos changes with new science, and will continue to change. Our fiction needs to change with them. Edit: Several people have noted that Utahraptor is a close match in size to the movie ‘raptors (a death-ostrich, if you will), but that’s a lucky coincidence since it wasn’t discovered until after Jurassic Park was released (or at least close enough that they weren’t willing to change the movie). (Dino images via Colin Douglas Howell on Wikipedia)
Zoom Info
Yes, unfortunately the Velociraptor mongoliensis is more like a very aggressive roadrunner than a man-eating murder machine. But those aren’t the ‘raptors from the movies. The “velociraptors” of Jurassic Park fame are actually Deinonychus, a (slightly) taller, equally roadrunnerish combination of tail and sickle-shaped toe claw. D-nikes (I made that name up) were not huge, but that claw could easily split you open like a bag of spaghetti. There’s no real confirmation that they were “clever girls” or hunted in packs, and the insistence of JP’s directors on not adding feathers to these almost-certainly feathered death-chickens is kind of like a claw-toed slap in the face to paleontology. Just like the great T. rex (which we talked about last week), our image of these dinos changes with new science, and will continue to change. Our fiction needs to change with them. Edit: Several people have noted that Utahraptor is a close match in size to the movie ‘raptors (a death-ostrich, if you will), but that’s a lucky coincidence since it wasn’t discovered until after Jurassic Park was released (or at least close enough that they weren’t willing to change the movie). (Dino images via Colin Douglas Howell on Wikipedia)
Zoom Info
Yes, unfortunately the Velociraptor mongoliensis is more like a very aggressive roadrunner than a man-eating murder machine. But those aren’t the ‘raptors from the movies. The “velociraptors” of Jurassic Park fame are actually Deinonychus, a (slightly) taller, equally roadrunnerish combination of tail and sickle-shaped toe claw. D-nikes (I made that name up) were not huge, but that claw could easily split you open like a bag of spaghetti. There’s no real confirmation that they were “clever girls” or hunted in packs, and the insistence of JP’s directors on not adding feathers to these almost-certainly feathered death-chickens is kind of like a claw-toed slap in the face to paleontology. Just like the great T. rex (which we talked about last week), our image of these dinos changes with new science, and will continue to change. Our fiction needs to change with them. Edit: Several people have noted that Utahraptor is a close match in size to the movie ‘raptors (a death-ostrich, if you will), but that’s a lucky coincidence since it wasn’t discovered until after Jurassic Park was released (or at least close enough that they weren’t willing to change the movie). (Dino images via Colin Douglas Howell on Wikipedia)
Zoom Info

Yes, unfortunately the Velociraptor mongoliensis is more like a very aggressive roadrunner than a man-eating murder machine. But those aren’t the ‘raptors from the movies.

The “velociraptors” of Jurassic Park fame are actually Deinonychus, a (slightly) taller, equally roadrunnerish combination of tail and sickle-shaped toe claw. D-nikes (I made that name up) were not huge, but that claw could easily split you open like a bag of spaghetti.

There’s no real confirmation that they were “clever girls” or hunted in packs, and the insistence of JP’s directors on not adding feathers to these almost-certainly feathered death-chickens is kind of like a claw-toed slap in the face to paleontology.

Just like the great T. rex (which we talked about last week), our image of these dinos changes with new science, and will continue to change. Our fiction needs to change with them.

Edit: Several people have noted that Utahraptor is a close match in size to the movie ‘raptors (a death-ostrich, if you will), but that’s a lucky coincidence since it wasn’t discovered until after Jurassic Park was released (or at least close enough that they weren’t willing to change the movie).

(Dino images via Colin Douglas Howell on Wikipedia)

I definitely spoke to soon on that previous answer. Bird songs are absolutely a form of culture. I actually don’t know what I was thinking, other than maybe answering a question on my phone might be a good idea? Anyway, bird songs and other not-so-melodic calls are certainly culture, because at its core culture is simply learned and communicated behaviors. Take zebra finches, for instance … hallo, zebra finch! Zebra finch males court their mates with melodic calls. Usually they learn those calls from their fathers and uncles. But if they are brought up in isolation, they will tweak those calls and come up with their own personal version (much to the ire of the females, because they know what they like). But as those “creative” males have male offspring, their children and grandchildren will gradually shift the song back to the “official version”.  Is the song behavior coded in their genes somewhere? Do they shift it back because the females pressure them to through mating success (if ya know what I’m saying)? Who knows? But it’s certainly learned and transmitted culture, as well as imprinted culture. Some people just call that “social learning”, but I think that’s splitting hairs to make us feel special as humans. You can read more about these zebra finch songs at Wired if you’re so inclined. But the real question under all of this is are bird songs music? I argue no. There’s an intent to the creation of music that birds just don’t have. A premeditation that says “I have an idea and I want to communicate it with these sounds.” Birds don’t (seem to) do that premeditation part.  But whales on the other hand … (I’m going to continue pondering this idea … hopefully you will do the same. Social behaviors and bird songs be weird, man. Maybe my opinion will evolve over time.)
Pop-upView Separately

I definitely spoke to soon on that previous answer. Bird songs are absolutely a form of culture. I actually don’t know what I was thinking, other than maybe answering a question on my phone might be a good idea?

Anyway, bird songs and other not-so-melodic calls are certainly culture, because at its core culture is simply learned and communicated behaviors. Take zebra finches, for instance … hallo, zebra finch!

Zebra finch males court their mates with melodic calls. Usually they learn those calls from their fathers and uncles. But if they are brought up in isolation, they will tweak those calls and come up with their own personal version (much to the ire of the females, because they know what they like). But as those “creative” males have male offspring, their children and grandchildren will gradually shift the song back to the “official version”. 

Is the song behavior coded in their genes somewhere? Do they shift it back because the females pressure them to through mating success (if ya know what I’m saying)? Who knows? But it’s certainly learned and transmitted culture, as well as imprinted culture. Some people just call that “social learning”, but I think that’s splitting hairs to make us feel special as humans. You can read more about these zebra finch songs at Wired if you’re so inclined.

But the real question under all of this is are bird songs music? I argue no. There’s an intent to the creation of music that birds just don’t have. A premeditation that says “I have an idea and I want to communicate it with these sounds.” Birds don’t (seem to) do that premeditation part. 

But whales on the other hand …

(I’m going to continue pondering this idea … hopefully you will do the same. Social behaviors and bird songs be weird, man. Maybe my opinion will evolve over time.)

I want to assure everyone that just because we are overlooking all the fatal parts of being in space without a spacesuit (cold, heat, vacuum, radiation, etc.), we are still going to be scientific up in here. You are absolutely right that energy can’t be destroyed, even if you’re really mad at it and hit it with a goblin sword. This is a fundamental Law of Physics™. And to review, the reason that sound doesn’t travel in space is because there is no medium with which to transmit it. We can take that one step further, though. Not only does sound not travel through space, there is literally no sound in space. And it doesn’t violate any laws of physics. Promise. I think what you’re really wondering is “If my vocal cords vibrate, then where does that vibrational energy go?” Well, your vocal cords can’t vibrate in the vacuum of space. Making sound in our throats requires building up air pressure behind our larynx, bringing the vocal folds together like two blades of grass pressed between your thumbs, and then pushing that air upward in order to create a vibration. The oscillating folds of your vocal cords displace air in a repeating pattern, many times per second. Just like when you move your hand through water, it is the displacement of the air by the vocal folds that creates the wave, and the sound is simply the effect of that wave traveling through air. Make sense? If there’s no air to be displaced, there’s no wave (and no sound). Also, even if you had a lungful of air before you took your space helmet off, you wouldn’t be able to hold the air back from rushing into the vacuum of space. “Woosh” is the sound the last breath in your lungs (doesn’t) make as it is sucked out into the vacuum. No breath control? No vibration. But what about vibrations that don’t require a lungful of air? What about something like a tuning fork? Well, a struck tuning fork would vibrate in space. And like the above case, it still wouldn’t make any sound, because no air, etc. Would a tuning fork vibrating in a vacuum vibrate forever? If you let it float away, with no air or other medium to vibrate in, would it still be buzzing a hundred thousand years from now, should aliens find it? Nope.  Vibrating objects like tuning forks or space stations struck with large hammers will lose the vibration over time thanks to something called “thermoelastic damping”. A vibration is slowly converted to heat thanks to the atoms in the metal (or whatever’s vibrating) being compressed. And because of the very physics that we mentioned at the start of this question, the vibration dies away, the energy is converted to heat, and Newton is happy! Of course, don’t try this at home.
Pop-upView Separately

I want to assure everyone that just because we are overlooking all the fatal parts of being in space without a spacesuit (cold, heat, vacuum, radiation, etc.), we are still going to be scientific up in here.

You are absolutely right that energy can’t be destroyed, even if you’re really mad at it and hit it with a goblin sword. This is a fundamental Law of Physics™. And to review, the reason that sound doesn’t travel in space is because there is no medium with which to transmit it. We can take that one step further, though. Not only does sound not travel through space, there is literally no sound in space. And it doesn’t violate any laws of physics. Promise.

I think what you’re really wondering is “If my vocal cords vibrate, then where does that vibrational energy go?” Well, your vocal cords can’t vibrate in the vacuum of space. Making sound in our throats requires building up air pressure behind our larynx, bringing the vocal folds together like two blades of grass pressed between your thumbs, and then pushing that air upward in order to create a vibration. The oscillating folds of your vocal cords displace air in a repeating pattern, many times per second. Just like when you move your hand through water, it is the displacement of the air by the vocal folds that creates the wave, and the sound is simply the effect of that wave traveling through air. Make sense?

If there’s no air to be displaced, there’s no wave (and no sound). Also, even if you had a lungful of air before you took your space helmet off, you wouldn’t be able to hold the air back from rushing into the vacuum of space. “Woosh” is the sound the last breath in your lungs (doesn’t) make as it is sucked out into the vacuum. No breath control? No vibration.

But what about vibrations that don’t require a lungful of air? What about something like a tuning fork?

Well, a struck tuning fork would vibrate in space. And like the above case, it still wouldn’t make any sound, because no air, etc. Would a tuning fork vibrating in a vacuum vibrate forever? If you let it float away, with no air or other medium to vibrate in, would it still be buzzing a hundred thousand years from now, should aliens find it?

Nope. 

Vibrating objects like tuning forks or space stations struck with large hammers will lose the vibration over time thanks to something called “thermoelastic damping”. A vibration is slowly converted to heat thanks to the atoms in the metal (or whatever’s vibrating) being compressed. And because of the very physics that we mentioned at the start of this question, the vibration dies away, the energy is converted to heat, and Newton is happy!

Of course, don’t try this at home.

How do we know that dinosaurs RAWR-ed? That is far from a silly question! I mean, how DO we really know? That’s the hardest part of studying a long-extinct group of animals like dinosaurs: None of us were around when they were around. When we see dinos in the movies, they always come complete with fearsome roars. From the jerky rubber lizards of the 1940’s to the blood-curdling thunderclap of the T. rex in Jurassic Park, where there’s a saur, there’s a rawr. But those movie roars are created by sound engineers from a mixture of modern sounds. The T. rex shriek in Jurassic Park is actually a mix of the calls from a baby elephant, a tiger and an alligator. The problem is that the anatomy that animals use to make sounds doesn’t fossilize. Soft tissues like vocal chords and resonating throat sacs don’t last the way bones do. So we have to play dino detective, using a combination of structures that do fossilize and studying reptilian relatives that exist today. Crocodilian reptiless and birds, two modern evolutionary cousins of dinosaurs, use soft tissues to make noises. The deep groaning vibrations used by crocodiles and reptiles come from the larynx. Much like in our own vocal chords, air from the lungs vibrates folds of tissue to create rather intimidating vibrations that sound like this. Birds, on the other hand … or wing … use a structure called the syrinx, which is close to a larynx but probably evolved independently. That means that roars and rooster calls could have a different evolutionary origin. One, both or neither of those structures may have existed in various families of dinosaurs. But that’s not the only way dinos made noise. You’ve probably seen this fossil before in a childhood dinosaur book, a hadrosaur: That large crest on top of the duck-billed head is hollow, like our sinuses. Many paleontologists think that hadrosaurs could have used them as resonating sound chambers to communicate over long distances, like a built-in didgeridoo used to warn of danger. These otherwise average herbivorous dinos, called the “cows of the Cretaceous”, roamed in huge herds (numbering into the thousands), and these sound chambers may have helped them communicate when predators were near. Of course, we also know that dinosaurs had ears of some kind. Evolution wouldn’t have kept them if they weren’t useful (it’s not quite that simple, actually, but go with me here), and studying those fossilized skull structures may give clues as to what they heard. While we can be sure that they didn’t sound like they do in the movies, the precise nature of Cretaceous cacophony and Triassic tumult may forever remain a mystery. But I’m confident there would have been plenty to hear in the Age of the Dinosaurs.
Pop-upView Separately

How do we know that dinosaurs RAWR-ed?

That is far from a silly question! I mean, how DO we really know? That’s the hardest part of studying a long-extinct group of animals like dinosaurs: None of us were around when they were around.

When we see dinos in the movies, they always come complete with fearsome roars. From the jerky rubber lizards of the 1940’s to the blood-curdling thunderclap of the T. rex in Jurassic Park, where there’s a saur, there’s a rawr. But those movie roars are created by sound engineers from a mixture of modern sounds. The T. rex shriek in Jurassic Park is actually a mix of the calls from a baby elephant, a tiger and an alligator.

The problem is that the anatomy that animals use to make sounds doesn’t fossilize. Soft tissues like vocal chords and resonating throat sacs don’t last the way bones do. So we have to play dino detective, using a combination of structures that do fossilize and studying reptilian relatives that exist today.

Crocodilian reptiless and birds, two modern evolutionary cousins of dinosaurs, use soft tissues to make noises. The deep groaning vibrations used by crocodiles and reptiles come from the larynx. Much like in our own vocal chords, air from the lungs vibrates folds of tissue to create rather intimidating vibrations that sound like this. Birds, on the other hand … or wing … use a structure called the syrinx, which is close to a larynx but probably evolved independently. That means that roars and rooster calls could have a different evolutionary origin. One, both or neither of those structures may have existed in various families of dinosaurs.

But that’s not the only way dinos made noise. You’ve probably seen this fossil before in a childhood dinosaur book, a hadrosaur:

That large crest on top of the duck-billed head is hollow, like our sinuses. Many paleontologists think that hadrosaurs could have used them as resonating sound chambers to communicate over long distances, like a built-in didgeridoo used to warn of danger. These otherwise average herbivorous dinos, called the “cows of the Cretaceous”, roamed in huge herds (numbering into the thousands), and these sound chambers may have helped them communicate when predators were near.

Of course, we also know that dinosaurs had ears of some kind. Evolution wouldn’t have kept them if they weren’t useful (it’s not quite that simple, actually, but go with me here), and studying those fossilized skull structures may give clues as to what they heard. While we can be sure that they didn’t sound like they do in the movies, the precise nature of Cretaceous cacophony and Triassic tumult may forever remain a mystery. But I’m confident there would have been plenty to hear in the Age of the Dinosaurs.

Regarding this post … Any electron microscope image you have ever seen is falsely colored. They are imaged using electrons, not light, so everything you’re looking at was reconstructed by a computer in order to produce the beauty of smallness. It comes out in black and white, and then they are manually colored by artists. Sometimes, those artists get a little silly (and scary). Same with all those Hubble telescope images, actually (check out this video to see how they make ‘em). Those are imaged in several different wavelengths, with sometimes hundreds of single images individually colored and edited to make all that gorgeous spaceporn. These kind of things are a trade-off. They let us add a little imagination to that which is beyond our vision, but we have to make sure that the imagination is true to science. (made rebloggable by request)
Pop-upView Separately

Regarding this post …

Any electron microscope image you have ever seen is falsely colored. They are imaged using electrons, not light, so everything you’re looking at was reconstructed by a computer in order to produce the beauty of smallness. It comes out in black and white, and then they are manually colored by artists. Sometimes, those artists get a little silly (and scary).

Same with all those Hubble telescope images, actually (check out this video to see how they make ‘em). Those are imaged in several different wavelengths, with sometimes hundreds of single images individually colored and edited to make all that gorgeous spaceporn.

These kind of things are a trade-off. They let us add a little imagination to that which is beyond our vision, but we have to make sure that the imagination is true to science.

(made rebloggable by request)

Sadly, no. Not possible. It’s one of those pesky limitations of space and time. You can’t even see a “present image” of your hand at the end of your arm. Factoring in the time that light takes to travel from one point to another, the biological processes that must take place in order for your retinas to register a stimulus, the speed of nerves firing on their way to the back of your brain (where visual input is analyzed), the neural processing time that it takes to interpret and process the meaning of any image … and you’re always looking at least a hefty fraction of a second into the past. Even when just staring at the coffee cup on the table in front of you. Next time someone tells you to stop living in the past, remind them that you just can’t help it! Radiolab took a really fascinating look at just how delayed our perception of the world is in a recent episode called Speed. You might be surprised what your fastest perception is (Hint: Sneak up behind someone and clap really loud).
Pop-upView Separately

Sadly, no. Not possible. It’s one of those pesky limitations of space and time.

You can’t even see a “present image” of your hand at the end of your arm. Factoring in the time that light takes to travel from one point to another, the biological processes that must take place in order for your retinas to register a stimulus, the speed of nerves firing on their way to the back of your brain (where visual input is analyzed), the neural processing time that it takes to interpret and process the meaning of any image … and you’re always looking at least a hefty fraction of a second into the past. Even when just staring at the coffee cup on the table in front of you.

Next time someone tells you to stop living in the past, remind them that you just can’t help it!

Radiolab took a really fascinating look at just how delayed our perception of the world is in a recent episode called Speed. You might be surprised what your fastest perception is (Hint: Sneak up behind someone and clap really loud).

Steven Pinker believes that we are certainly evolving into more peaceful beings, and I think it’s safe to say that empathy is a large component of that. Especially in the sense that in an interconnected world, pain is no longer distant, it is broadcast and highly visible. The more we are aware of other living things in general, the harder it is to exert privilege over them. According to some, anyway. That being said, I don’t see a reason to believe that increasing our empathy will result in anything that we would term “psychic abilities”. We see no scientific evidence that a thought can be communicated beyond the physical realm or that it exists beyond a neurochemical network (what I call “meatspace”). We can currently only transmit thoughts or information via some form of physical medium, whether it’s paper or electrons, overt or subliminal. We certainly may one day learn to be more in tune with the finer facets of human or animal emotion as our empathy and connected nature increase, but to extend that to anything like what sci-fi shows term “psychic” thought would be a huge stretch. Much as Uri Geller could not actually bend spoons with his mind, there’s little to make us think we can bend other minds with our own. But hey, even if we don’t become psychics, I certainly like the direction we’re heading.
Pop-upView Separately

Steven Pinker believes that we are certainly evolving into more peaceful beings, and I think it’s safe to say that empathy is a large component of that. Especially in the sense that in an interconnected world, pain is no longer distant, it is broadcast and highly visible. The more we are aware of other living things in general, the harder it is to exert privilege over them. According to some, anyway.

That being said, I don’t see a reason to believe that increasing our empathy will result in anything that we would term “psychic abilities”. We see no scientific evidence that a thought can be communicated beyond the physical realm or that it exists beyond a neurochemical network (what I call “meatspace”). We can currently only transmit thoughts or information via some form of physical medium, whether it’s paper or electrons, overt or subliminal. We certainly may one day learn to be more in tune with the finer facets of human or animal emotion as our empathy and connected nature increase, but to extend that to anything like what sci-fi shows term “psychic” thought would be a huge stretch. Much as Uri Geller could not actually bend spoons with his mind, there’s little to make us think we can bend other minds with our own.

But hey, even if we don’t become psychics, I certainly like the direction we’re heading.

I get to teach in a couple different settings: As part of my grad school work, I’ve taught several classes. And here, with all of you, in the world’s most interesting science classroom. What’s my favorite thing? That moment when someone GETS it, and those tiny little squinchy stress muscles in their face relax and they go “ohhhhhhh” and on rare occasions even smile … that’s like crack cocaine mixed with meth for me (I assume that’s what it’s like, anyway, having never tried either). Nothing like the a-ha moment. That and knowing that through hard work and personal connection and respect and commitment and graciousness and patience you can help influence someone’s life for the better. It can be as simple as giving them a sense of accomplishment for the afternoon and maybe making their day, or as significant as steering them to a whole new path in life. I’ve been lucky enough to do both, and everything in between, and it makes me feel humbled with joy. And of course, I hear the money’s good … HA! Stay curious and you’ll discover great things.
Pop-upView Separately

I get to teach in a couple different settings: As part of my grad school work, I’ve taught several classes. And here, with all of you, in the world’s most interesting science classroom.

What’s my favorite thing? That moment when someone GETS it, and those tiny little squinchy stress muscles in their face relax and they go “ohhhhhhh” and on rare occasions even smile … that’s like crack cocaine mixed with meth for me (I assume that’s what it’s like, anyway, having never tried either). Nothing like the a-ha moment.

That and knowing that through hard work and personal connection and respect and commitment and graciousness and patience you can help influence someone’s life for the better. It can be as simple as giving them a sense of accomplishment for the afternoon and maybe making their day, or as significant as steering them to a whole new path in life. I’ve been lucky enough to do both, and everything in between, and it makes me feel humbled with joy.

And of course, I hear the money’s good … HA!

Stay curious and you’ll discover great things.

Q:What are your five most popular posts?

superneurons

Took me a while to figure that out, but I found this tool. I think it only does photo posts, but those are usually the most popular. Here’s the top 4 it picked out, and #5 is just a fairly popular personal fave:

  1. One Neptunian Year
  2. Humans Fire Laser Into Sky, Sky Responds With Lightning
  3. The Amazing Math of 1/998,001
  4. The X-Ray of a Sting Ray
  5. A Bacterium on an Diatom on an Amphipod

Are those YOUR favorite posts of mine? Spend a few days digging through my archive and let me know if you have a personal fave. It was pretty interesting to look back and remember all those, as well as see what you guys loved.