How Can Hollywood Help? #sciamlearning

This post originally appeared on Digital Science’s Event Blog: https://www.digital-science.com/blog/events/how-can-hollywood-help-sciamlearning/

By Laura Wheeler

 

On August 4th, I was honored to be invited to the 3rd annual STEM Summit, co-sponsored by Scientific American and Macmillan Education in New York. It proved to be an inspiring day discussing issues around women in STEM and today’s educational landscape.

If you want to see what was discussed during the event, I urge you to check out the active social media hashtag #sciamlearning, or to read Laura Wind’s summary of the Summit here. The hosts, Mariette DiChristina and Susan Winslow, did a phenomenal job at creating an interactive and thought-provoking day with real outputs.

I could pick out many highlights from the discussions, but for the purpose of this blog, I am going to concentrate on just one subject that was touched upon during the day- the role of Hollywood in portraying science:

Should scientists have a role in helping Hollywood portray science and the image of scientists? 

We were fortunate enough to hear from two inspirational scientists, Dr. Jon Sotos and Dr. Donna J. Nelson, the scientific advisors for the hit TV shows House and Breaking Bad. Their session was titled, “Changing The Idea Of Who Is STEM” and focused on how Hollywood can help.

Screen Shot 2015-08-29 at 22.19.47

Jon and Donna

Popular media does have an impact on society and behaviors, but not all examples prove to be accurate. For instance, we were told during the Summit that applications for library cards went up by 500% after “The Fonz” said he was going to the library to pick up girls in the 1970s hit TV show “Happy Days.” It seems that this is actually a popular myth. Nevertheless, the sentiment remains and it’s certainly unsurprising to think that a TV show might have such an impact.

It would be encouraging if the impact of TV could be more positive. In contrast to the Happy Days’ story, an article in The Telegraph featuring Professor Ellis Cashmore, an author on celebrity and media culture, claims the global success of Breaking Bad could be to blame for the surge in crystal meth suggesting that the hit show instantly makes people “curious” about crystal meth. The inevitable question is: to what extent should the popular media be expected to balance its intended creativity and entertainment with its responsibility to society in general?

One recent controversial example is the film “Gravity” which received acclaim for raising the profile of certain areas of science while at the same time enduring criticism for its lack of scientific accuracy. In order to achieve its main aim of providing an exciting and original piece of entertainment, it seems that certain realities had to be sacrificed. In defence of it, Kevin Grazier, the science adviser for the film, reminded its critics that “No one said it was a documentary.” Is this an acceptable excuse? Does the plus side of engaging an audience’s interest in a science themed area make up for the many inaccuracies in the facts?

In contrast, the film Interstellar won praise for its attention to detail in the physics of the piece. It has been heralded as inspirational to young people who can gain real insight into topics such as black holes and wormholes without losing any pleasure in the drama of the story. The director of Interstellar, Christopher Nolan, feels that there is no excuse for getting the science wrong in a dramatic presentation, believing that the facts of science can only add to the audience’s fascination with the vast possibilities of the universe.

It’s clear Hollywood has a responsibility not only to portray science accurately and alongside that, to support the images of women in STEM. We need to have positive images of scientists in popular media and move away from the perpetuating stereotypes. The session concluded that what we need to do is reveal real scientists and women in STEM, while making sure we don’t romanticise and fictionalise them in the process.

One comforting fact, however, is that real scientists are being used to advise the scripts of hit Hollywood shows. Although advice can easily be ignored, explained Donna playfully; pure meth would certainly not be blue – perhaps advice the Breaking Bad directors overlooked? But of course, Walt needed a trademark – now that’s Hollywood!

Explaining scientific research: introducing audio-visual summaries

Guest blog by Steven Inchcoombe, CEO of Nature Publishing Group, and Hazel Newton, Head of Author Services

Today we are introducing an experimental collaboration with independent research communication company Research Square to help authors explain their research to the academic community with audio-visual summaries. This six-week trial is part of Nature Publishing Group’s (NPG) ongoing drive to better understand and meet the needs of our authors and readers. To do this, we regularly refine our services and policies, and pilot new services to gather feedback.

Here we explain the rationale for this experimental collaboration, how the trial will run and what we hope to learn.

What is the problem we are trying to solve?

Quickly grasping the main points and conclusions of a scientific paper can be challenging, particularly when it lies outside one’s field of expertise.  The language is often technical and discipline-specific, and deciphering methodologies and techniques from prose can be tricky. Visual representations of the work can help with this.

Expanding the reach of new research can be important to academics, institutions and funders.   However, academics have ever greater demands on their time and consume information in a variety of formats and media.

The solution we’re exploring

Nature Publishing Group and Research Square have been considering this challenge for some time as part of our ongoing efforts to better serve the research community and harness our expertise in science communication.  We think we can help  to alleviate some of the pressure on authors to spend their time translating their results into different formats for audiences broader than their immediate colleagues and others working directly in their field.

Together we have decided to trial an experimental collaborative project to produce audio-visual summaries of selected research papers published in NPG journals, releasing the first of these summaries this week (see below for an example of a summary of a Nature Photonics paper and here for an example of a summary of a Nature Materials paper).

How it will work

For the next six weeks Research Square will produce and release 2-4 minute audio-visual summaries for selected papers from seven Nature research journals.

This is optional for authors, so NPG will gain agreement from the corresponding authors that they would like to participate in the trial. During the production of the summaries, all information about the research will be kept confidential, and the summaries will not be made public until the papers to which they relate are published.  At that point, they will be free to view for readers on various NPG and Research Square’s social media channels and wherever else the authors choose to post and share them. The service will be provided free-of-charge to those authors whose papers are involved in this trial.

As this is primarily an author service, the author approves the audio-visual summary, and they also retain the right to post and share it.  The audio-visual summaries are not peer-reviewed, subject to editorial approval or published by Nature Publishing Group. Responsibility for the content rests with the author and Research Square.

The papers for this experimental phase are picked by NPG. The Nature editors are consulted from time-to-time and check the AV summary for accuracy.

Throughout the project we’ll be collating and assessing feedback from the authors of the papers, which will help NPG determine whether to offer an optional paid-for service to authors in the future.

We’re interested from hearing from you, too. What do you think of the audio-visual summaries? Is this a service you find helpful as a reader, and would value as an author? How can we make these as useful and informative as possible?

We’ll report back on our findings at the end of the trial, as well as posting the audio-visual summaries on this blog so that if you wish to watch them and provide feedback, you can do so easily.

We don’t yet know what the research community will make of these audio-visual summaries or how they may choose to use them – that’s part of the interest in testing possible services alongside trusted partners, and asking you what you think.  But we do know that we’re committed to working with the research community to identify where we can provide support and be responsive to demand and interest.

We hope that this trial will help both researchers to better communicate their work and NPG and Research Square to better understand how we can support global research communication.

About our partnership with Research Square

Nature Publishing Group collaborates with Research Square on several projects and services to better meet the needs of authors. The two organisations share a passion for improving research communication and its power to impact society. Since 2008, NPG has provided NPG Language Editing, supported by Research Square’s American Journal Experts (AJE) brand. The two organizations are independent, collaborating on specific services and initiatives. You can find out more about Research Square here.

Research Square will run a separate and independent trial of audio-visual summaries to test messaging and pricing on their own site for any interested author in parallel to its collaboration with NPG.

Pushing the limits – Light in the 21st Century

Guest post by Congcong Huang, Associated Editor, Nature Communications and Nicky Dean, Team Manager Physics, Nature Communications.

This week we conclude our series of ‘beautiful experiments with light’ featured in our poll and finally reach the new millennium in which lasers continue to enable powerful and diverse experiments.

Our story begins with the generation of ultrafast laser pulses. Following the invention of lasers in 1960 enormous efforts were made to shorten the pulse duration which led to femtosecond lasers in the late 1980s and finally in 2001 to the first reports of attosecond laser pulses. In one attosecond (10-18 s), light travels slightly more than the length of a water molecule, while molecules are essentially frozen during this time, with molecular vibration at femtosecond (10-15 s) and rotation at picosecond (10-12 s) timescales. This makes it possible to access the timescale of electron dynamics inside molecules.

As light pulses have been made ultrashort –short enough even to capture the motion of electrons – a natural question is whether the speed of light can be controlled to the same extent. It is not surprising that light slows down when it travels through glass or water, but this is only a modest effect. It was thus a stunning observation, made by Lene Hau and her group in Harvard in 1999, that light travels at a cycling speed – 7 orders of magnitude slower than c – in a sodium atom cloud right below its Bose-Einstein condensation temperature. The cold atoms alone cannot do the work; the use of a laser field that efficiently cancels light absorption, known as electromagnetically-induced transparency, makes the trick possible. The demonstration sparked a new chapter for laser controlled optical materials.

Meanwhile, more attempts at controlling the behavior of light were underway. As mentioned above, light slows down when it passes through a medium, an effect characterized by the medium’s refractive index. This index is normally positive, and it tells us how light rays will be bent when they move from one medium into another. You can see this effect by looking at a straw in a glass of water which appears to be sharply bent at the surface. In the late 1960s, Victor Veselago wondered what might happen if the refractive index was negative. He predicted that light entering such a medium should bend in the opposite sense to what we normally expect (as if the straw would bend the ‘wrong’ way). In 2001, David Smith and colleagues realized this prediction by constructing an artificial material, or ‘metamaterial’, made of an array of copper split-rings on circuit boards. Their metamaterial exhibited a negative refractive index at around 10 GHz. Following Smith’s demonstration, many more negative-index metamaterials have been made using all kinds of different structures, across a range of frequencies, including the visible spectrum.

Diffraction pattern of a virus particle, taken with an X-ray free electron laser.

Diffraction pattern of a virus particle, taken with an X-ray free electron laser.

Continue reading

Back to light, back to reality

Guest post by Federico Levi, Associate Editor Nature Communications

The experiments in this week ’s blog entry accompanying our poll of ‘ the most beautiful experiment with light’ were carried out in the second half of the twentieth century, in which physicists were still struggling to accept the counter-intuitive implications of quantum physics.

One of the most bewildering embodiments of quantum theory is quantum entanglement.  When two particles are entangled, performing a measurement on one of them seems to instantaneously influence the other particle, even if it is light-years away. This paradox, famously termed ‘spooky action at a distance’ by Albert Einstein was formulated by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (EPR) in 1935. To restore reality, they argued that quantum physics could simply be our limited understanding of a deeper and less troubling theory, classically constructed over a set of ‘hidden variables’.

It took almost thirty years to devise a way to test their hypothesis. In 1964 John Stewart Bell demonstrated the famous theorem carrying his name, which showed how there would be an experimentally measurable difference between the prediction of quantum physics and that ‘less troubling theory’ imagined by EPR. Light provided the means to carry out this test. In 1972, by looking at the correlations in the linear polarization of photons emitted by an atomic cascade of calcium, Stuart J. Freedman and John F. Clauser tested Bell’s theorem at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in California. The result was a landmark confirmation of quantum mechanics.

Jumping more than 10 years ahead, we find researchers dealing with the consequences of yet another quantum principle, namely the indistinguishability of fundamental particles. Two particles in exactly the same quantum state have to be considered essentially indistinguishable, and photons make no exception. In 1987 at Rochester University, New York, Chung Ki Hong, Zhe Yu Ou and Leonard Mandel showed what may be the most direct evidence of this principle. When a photon hits a beam splitter, it can continue in one of two ways with 50% probability. If two indistinguishable photons hit a beam splitter coincidentally, quantum interference forbids the outcome where they follow different output paths. The pronounced ‘dip’ in the measurement of simultaneous arrivals at the two outputs is a hallmark of the indistinguishability of a photon pair, a sought-after quality for quantum information applications.

Large-area metallic photonic crystal layer rolled onto a glass rod.

Large-area metallic photonic crystal layer rolled onto a glass rod.

Continue reading

From the Big Bang to atomic clocks

Guest post by Amos Martinez, Associate Editor, Nature Communications

We kick off this week’s experiments for our poll with the discovery of a special kind of light: cosmic microwave background. The story of this discovery is a beautiful example of the fortuity of scientific discovery.

In 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were looking for radio emission from the Milky Way using an antenna originally built for radio-wave satellite communications. They soon noticed a noise in the microwave region evenly spread in all directions of space. After eliminating every known noise source, including a pigeon’s nest in the 6m antenna, they reached the conclusion that the noise could only be coming from outside this galaxy.

Elsewhere, cosmologists were debating whether the universe had a beginning and had been created by a Big Bang or had always existed. Advocates of the big bang theory Robert H. Dicke, Jim Peebles, and David Wilkinson had predicted that had the big bang taken place it would have generated an enormous blast of radiation that should still be detectable in the microwave region with a sensitive enough device. Sure enough, that persistent noise measured by Penzias and Wilson turned out not to be caused by pigeons but by radiation generated during the creation of the Universe. This discovery represented the first solid experimental proof of the Big Bang and, as Stephen Hawking put it, the final nail in the coffin of the steady-state theory.

Cosmic microwave background: Big Bang’s afterglow. (Credit: ESA, HFI & LFI consortia.)

Cosmic microwave background: Big Bang’s afterglow. (Credit: ESA, HFI & LFI consortia.)

Continue reading

Into the laser era

Guest post by Rachel Won International Editor, Nature Photonics

This week’s set of experiments featured in our poll  are all about the advent of the maser (microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) and the optical maser, now known as the laser, and the remarkable wide impact these inventions had in science, technology and society.

The concept of stimulated emission was introduced in 1917 by Einstein, who found that the process of absorption by atoms must be accompanied by an amplification process such that the received radiation can stimulate the emission of the same kind of radiation. It was not until 1953 that the effect was experimentally demonstrated by Charles Townes and his two graduate students at Columbia University in New York. Their maser used stimulated emission in a stream of energized ammonia molecules to produce amplification of microwaves at a frequency of about 24.0 GHz. The development of a maser was simultaneously carried out by Nikolay Basov and Alexander Prokhorov at the Lebedev Institute in Moscow.

The achievements led to the award of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1964 to Townes, Basov and Prokhorov.

The invention of the maser kicked off a race to create a similar device for visible light, now known as a laser (with ‘microwave’ replaced by ‘light’). In 1958 Townes, together with Arthur Schawlow, then at Bell Labs, published a paper extending the maser techniques to the infrared and optical region. The first working laser, however, was built by Theodore Maiman at Hughes Research Laboratories in 1960. His laser used a solid-state synthetic ruby crystal pumped by a flashlamp to produce red laser light at 694 nm.

Theodore Maiman and his invention, the first laser. (Photo credit: HRL Laboratories, LLC)

Theodore Maiman and his invention, the first laser. (Photo credit: HRL Laboratories, LLC)

Continue reading

Betwixt and between

Guest post by Leonie Mueck, Associate Editor, Nature

In last week’s post you heard about beautiful experiments with light featured in our poll from the turn of the century. This week, we will talk about the time until the 1950s. And, while so many turning points in politics and history fall into that period, advances in optics and photonics were a bit betwixt and between. Scientists were modernizing their methods and instruments but still didn’t have modern-day tools like the laser, which in the 1960s would completely transform light-related research.

They did have highly advanced telescopes. When Edwin Hubble arrived at Mount Wilson Observatory in California it was 1919. By a lucky coincidence something else arrived there at around the same time: the Hooker Telescope, which allowed Hubble to perform detailed investigations on spiral nebulae. Thanks to his measurements, we now know that those nebulae are in fact distant galaxies. As jaw dropping as this finding was to his contemporaries, Hubble went on to show something even more ground-breaking. Looking at the Doppler shift of as many galaxies as possible, he found that the shift was proportional to the galaxies’ distance in 1929. The only plausible explanation for this phenomenon was that we live in an expanding Universe!

Andromeda Galaxy taken by Spitzer in infra-red, 24 micrometres. (Image: NASA/JPL–Caltech/K. Gordon, University of Arizona)

Andromeda Galaxy taken by Spitzer in infra-red, 24 micrometres. (Image: NASA/JPL–Caltech/K. Gordon, University of Arizona)

Continue reading

Flash forward: new surprises with light

Guest post by Maria Maragkou, Associate Editor at Nature Materials

This week’s entries for the poll of the most beautiful experiments with light occurred around the turn of the 19th century.

Wilhelm Roentgen, a physics professor in Wurzburg, changed the course of medicine when he accidentally discovered X-rays, energy waves at frequencies from 0.1 – 10 nanometres. In November 1895, while experimenting with an electron-discharge tube covered with black cardboard, he noticed that a fluorescent screen further away was illuminated. Eventually he realised that the tube emitted a type of ray – marked X for unknown – that was blocked by dense material, such as lead or bones, but could penetrate other objects. As he held a piece of lead in front of the X-rays, he could see the contrast between bones and flesh on the fluorescent screen. A few weeks later, Roentgen took an X-ray picture of his wife’s hand, who allegedly claimed “I have seen my death” upon seeing it. With the discovery of X-rays, it became possible to look inside the human body without surgery and Roentgen earned the first ever Nobel Prize in Physics in 1901 for this remarkable invention.

Classic Nature Paper 1896.

Roentgen’s first X-ray image featured in Nature in 1896.

Continue reading

From despair to repair: Empowering communities to restore their oceans

Dr Ayana Elizabeth Johnson with Barbuda Prime Minister, Baldwin Spencer.

Dr Ayana Elizabeth Johnson with then Antigua and Barbuda Prime Minister, Baldwin Spencer. (Image: Waitt Institute)

Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson is a marine biologist and Executive Director of the Waitt Institute. Johnson’s mission is to collect, create, actualize and amplify the best ideas in ocean conservation. Her work has been featured in the New York Times, on her blog for National Geographic, in The Atlantic, and elsewhere. She holds a Ph.D. from Scripps Institution of Oceanography, a BA from Harvard University in Environmental Science and Public Policy, and has worked on ocean policy at both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). You can find her talking oceans on Twitter @ayanaeliza

“People used to talk about the size of the fish they caught vertically,” says a perspicacious 15-year-old Curaçaoan holding his hands off the ground at head height. “But now we show fish size horizontally.” As the young man lowers his hands at shoulder width apart to demonstrate this, it is strikingly clear the great fishing catches of old have all but gone in the southern Caribbean Sea.

The vibrantly scenic shores and glistening beaches of this bustling island are in stark contrast with the rather gloomier outlook of the once thriving Caribbean ecosystems that supported local fisheries. Speak to any of the older residents or fishermen on Curaçao and they’ll swear by the unprecedented changes they’ve seen in their oceans in the last half century.

This is a familiar picture across the Caribbean, which is suffering from the same threats of overfishing, climate change, pollution and habitat loss, seen worldwide. In August 2014, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) listed 20 species of coral as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, including five Caribbean species. Projected impacts of global warming and ocean acidification motivated this action, but as marine biologist Ayana Elizabeth Johnson eloquently writes in a New York Times op-ed: “climate change really is only half the story.”

Johnson’s encounter with the young Curaçaoan and his jarringly precocious words struck a chord with her eight years ago, in the midst of her PhD research. Focusing on fisheries management and ecology in the southern Caribbean, she interviewed more than 400 fishermen, scuba divers, and locals in Curaçao and Bonaire, to inquire what major changes they had seen in their oceans.

“It is critical to understand what local people see as the threats to the ocean, as the perceived problems have a huge influence on what the perceived solutions should be,” says Johnson. “Often scientists’ outside perspective can be very different to the local one – and this can lead to disconnect when discussing sustainable policy and solutions.”

Continue reading

npj Parkinson’s Disease: Opening Up Access to Scientists and Patients Alike

Guest post by James Beck and Paul Zimmet, Parkinson’s Disease Foundation.

Many scientists, as evidenced by recent discussions, appreciate the value of an open access journal – the convenience of being able to immediately and freely access the latest articles, for example, and the value in a freer exchange of scientific ideas. But what may be less obvious is why this matters to the community served by the Parkinson’s Disease Foundation (PDF) – the patients whose lives are directly impacted by the advances and disappointments in Parkinson’s disease research.

Just two months ago, when the PDF announced its partnership with Nature Publishing Group (NPG) in launching npj Parkinson’s Disease, both communities were on our minds. Our primary goal of working with NPG is to create a home where the best science about Parkinson’s disease can be gathered in one place for all to read and freely shared. But equally important to PDF is the goal of empowering the Parkinson’s community to be a part of the research that will ultimately solve their disease.

People with Parkinson’s disease, or any chronic condition, need to be well-informed about their own disease in order to fight it effectively. But how can you do that when most people do not have direct access to the latest research on the disease?

PDF believes that open access can help to change that. In this way, open access is the right thing to do for the patient community. But even more compelling, we would argue that it is the effective thing to do … because it can accelerate Parkinson’s research.

This has been our experience working with our network of more than 200 PDF Research Advocates. They (including one of the authors of this blog) can directly attest to the effectiveness of this patient engagement approach.

PDF Research Advocates "in action"- educating the Parkinson's community about the importance of participating in PD clinical research studies. (Image: PFD)

PDF Research Advocates “in action”- educating the Parkinson’s community about the importance of participating in PD clinical research studies. (Image: PDF)

Continue reading