I, science
Guardian Student Media Awards 2005
Best Magazine Nominee
The Imperial College Science Magazine
I, science
Issue 2 Summer 2005
A science magazine for Imperial College
Science and Religion
Robert Winston’s Story of God
‘Syked’ about Science
Issue 3 Winter 2005
Cover-Contents-Editorial-BackCover2.indd 1
25/11/05 3:08:57 am
I, science
Issue 3 Winter 2005
Editor-in-chief
Mun Keat Looi
Section Editors
Imperial Features
Letitia Hughes
Helen Thomson
External Features
Amber Bauer
Stella Papadopoulou
Interviews
Chris Miles
Lilian Anekwe
News and Events
David Brill
Laura Middleton
Opinion
Duncan McMillan
Daniela de Angel
Reviews
Alex Antonov
Helen Morant
Web Editor
Laura Goodall
Graphics and Layout
Amber Bauer
Alex Antonov
Stella Papadopoulou
Liv Hov-Clayton
Meera Senthilingam
Laura Middleton
Nikki Manomaiudom
Elizabeth Connor
Advertising Manager
Viviane Li
Contributors
Kerri Smith
Alex Johnson
Dominique Driver
João Medeiros
Becky Coe
Michael Marshall
Jonathan Black
Francesca Young
Katherine Nightingale
Greg Foot
Illustrations
Katherine Antoniw
I, Science is produced and published
in association with
Felix, the student
newspaper of Imperial College
Felix Newspaper
Beit Quad
Prince Consort Road
London SW7 2BB
Tel: 020 7594 8072
Email: [email protected]
Registered newspaper
ISSN 1040-0711
Copyright © Felix 2005
Printed by St Ives Roche Ltd.,
Victoria Business Park, Roche,
St. Austell, Cornwall
PL26 8LX
2 I, science
Cover-Contents-Editorial-BackCover2.indd 2
From the Editor
S
CIENCE, LIGHT of our lives, fire of our minds. Science seeks
to explain our existence and purpose, but in doing so strays
into the territory of religion. So the conflict began. You know
the story: two households, both alike in dignity...
Here at I, Science we see little difference between the frying pan
and the fire. The row over Intelligent Design theory has reignited
the debate on both sides of the Atlantic. Google, the new ultimate
source of knowledge, finds an astonishing 118 million hits for the
term “science and religion”. Is there a place for science in religion, or
religion in science?
There is plenty of opinion at the Imperial College of Science,
Technology and Medicine: the Rector, Sir Richard Sykes (p18), the
Chaplain Andrew Willson (p25), Professor Lord Robert Winston
(p10) and the Reverend Sir John Polkinghorne (p12). Of course, we
take the opportunity to wax lyrical ourselves (p25).
Permit me my two cents worth. Professor Sir Richard Dawkins,
one of the major voices in the debate, spoke at Imperial recently.
Professor Dawkins once said that science is not a religion because
it “is free of the main vice of religion…faith”. But not everyone
understands the many facets of science. Yet a good proportion of
the public trust in the logic of scientific reasoning. “But science is
different!” I hear you cry. Everyone thinks they know what science
is. Everyone thinks they know what religion is too. Neither should
be masquerading as the other. Science may not be a religion, but it is
nevertheless something people believe in.
Having stoked the fire, I leave you to discuss.
Mun-Keat Looi
P.S. Congratulations to I,Science writer Zoe Corbyn, named
runner-up in the Best Student Features Writer at the 2005 Guardian
Student Media Awards. This very magazine was nominated in the
Best Student Magazine category. Kudos to everyone involved. We
didn’t win, but there’s always next year.
I,Science is your student science
magazine. We need your comments,
suggestions and contributions. If you
like to write for I,Science please contact
us at [email protected]
FRONT COVER ART
by Andrew Carnie
Image: Disperse, 2002
© Andrew Carnie
Courtesy of SciCult, London
‘Disperse’ was produced for
‘Hygiene – the art of public health’
at London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine in London. It
explores ideas around ‘removal’ and
thoughts about the departure of
the human body at death, looking
at processes by which the body
might be physically ‘dispersed’: be
rendered back to atomic particles.
Winter 2005
25/11/05 8:17:06 am
Issue 3 Winter 2005
I, science
22
10
24
Features
Interviews
8 Use it or lose It
10 The Story of Bob
Get out your GCSE French books ’cause
knowing a second language might keep you sane
in your old age.
13 Where are all the women?
Helena Cronin says women can’t do science.
Helen Richens disagrees.
14 A Christmas treat
The history of the Royal Institution Christmas
Lectures.
15 SciArt
It’s science, but it’s also art. It’s messing with
our minds!
18 Boy or Girl
The ethical issues surrounding sex selection
in the UK.
21 Nanotechnology
Nanobots: tiny, little, wee things. Is the iPod
Nano actually small enough to qualify for the
word ‘nano’? How about the iPod Wee?
22 Dancing to a different tune
It’s Einstein – expressed through dance!
Whatever next? Darwin, the opera?
24 I want my freedom!
Smoking: the big public health issue. Tell me,
if nicotine gum is so great, why aren’t we all
chewing it?
Winter 2005
Cover-Contents-Editorial-BackCover2.indd 3
Robert Winston on the science and religion debate.
12 Cousins under the skin
The Rev John Polkinghorne on the latest episode of
Family Guy. Or maybe science and religion.
16 Moving in the right direction
The Rector, Sir Richard Sykes, talks bacteria,
science education and Intelligent Design.
19 Popularising Palaeontology
Professor Richard Fortey on Trilobites, the Natural
History Museum and Marilyn Monroe.
20 Surely you’re joking Mr Isham
What exactly is theoretical physics? I can’t tell you,
but Professor Chris Isham can.
Regulars
4-6 News and Events
All the latest from Imperial and around the world.
25-27 Opinions
Everyone likes to wax lyrical, whatever that means.
28-30 Reviews
Books! Television! Exhibitions! Oh my!
31 One more thing...
Psst. You’ll never guess what so-and-so said.
I, science
3
25/11/05 3:00:09 pm
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
Imperial News
Lack of sex can
lead to extinction
OCTOBER: Imperial’s Dr Edward Draper
and colleagues have developed a new laser
imaging technique which can more fully
assess the strength of bones. It could help
detect the likelihood of future osteoporosis
in young women.
Dr Draper said “Traditionally, the only way
to predict bone strength has been through Xrays, but these can only measure part of the
bone’s strength. Using this new technique
we can get a more complete measurement,
allowing us to predict better the risk of
fractures as a result of osteoporosis.”
X-rays can be used to measure bone
mineral density, which only accounts for
part of the bone’s strength. The new Raman
spectroscopic technique allows scientists
to measure the collagen, which also affects
bone strength by eliminating the spectral
components of overlying tissues.
Dr Draper hopes the technique will develop
into a national screening programme used
by GPs.
“By identifying the risk of any problems
developing early enough, this could not only
make an enormous difference to the health
of individuals, but could help the NHS by
negating the need for more extreme and
costly interventions later”.
New TB test:
faster, cheaper
and easier
NOVEMBER: A standard test for TB
takes three to four weeks and costs £17-£23.
However, a new test has been developed
which takes just one week and costs only £1
to perform.
The new test, called MODS (Microscopic
Observation Drug Susceptible Assay), does
not require extensive training to perform
and its speed and low cost mean it could be
of massive benefit across the world.
“TB is a major cause of mortality in the
developing world, and eradicating it has been
made difficult through a lack of inexpensive
diagnosis equipment which can be deployed
quickly and easily. The MODS test provides
a simple solution to this,” said Professor
Jon Friedland of Imperial College, who was
involved with developing the test.
The MODS test won first place in the Best
Innovation to Improve Global Healthcare
category at the Medical Futures Innovation
Awards. The award was given to Dr. David
Moore, also from Imperial College.
Untitled © Nick Veasey
Give the doc a bone
Student binge drinking reaches new lows
We want your
brain
SEPTEMBER: Fed up of having a brain
you barely use? Want someone to benefit
from it after you die?
Dr. Kirstin Goldring of Imperial College
has called for more people to donate their
brains to medical research, suggesting that:
“Your brain could play a vital role in helping
develop better drug treatments or even
cures for diseases such as Parkinson’s and
Alzheimer’s.”
Brain for sale, only slightly used
NOVEMBER: Asexual organisms can
reproduce rapidly and initially prosper ahead
of their sexually active relatives. But new
research suggests that these benefits may be
confined to the short term.
The work was carried out on the P. marneffei
fungus, which is dangerous to people with
weakened immune systems, such as AIDS
patients. The researchers found that although
spores were able to travel far and wide, they
were unable to adapt to new environments.
Without sex, there is no mixing of genes and
therefore no adaptation.
One of the authors, Dr Bill Hanage,
concluded: “While becoming asexual may
provide short term advantages to a species,
in the long term they are likely to end up in
evolution’s ultimate dustbin : extinction.”
Readers should note that this work was
done on fungus, and humans should not be
worried about facing extinction if they are
currently experiencing a “dry spell”.
How brainy is
your phone?
SEPTEMBER: Your mobile phone could
one day have the memory size similar to a
desktop computer thanks to a microchip that
mimics the functioning of the brain.
Lead researcher Russell Cowburn,
Professor of Nanotechnology at Imperial’s
Department of Physics, explains: “The new
video mobile phones are very popular, but
they desperately need more memory so
that people can take longer videos and store
them. This technology has the potential to
transform mobiles into fully functioning
video cameras, in addition to a range of other
applications.”
This new nanotech microchip enables large
amounts of data to be stored in small volumes
by using a complex interconnected network
of nanowires, with computing functions and
decisions performed at the nodes, in similar
function to neurons and axons in the brain.
The team is now working with commercial
partners to develop the technology.
New phone unable to write dissertations
Meanwhile, staff and students at Imperial have been busy...
...Imperial physicist Prof Donal Bradley wins prize for outstanding research in flat panel displays... Dr David Moore wins Innovation in Healthcare
award for cheap and rapid tuberculosis test... Two Imperial students, Paul Bilokon and Ian Pong, win Science, Engineering and Technology
Students of the Year... Researchers from Imperial receive $28.8 million grant to tackle TB and malaria in developing countries... Dr Simon Barnes
wins entrepreneurship category of 2005 Business Week European Case Awards... Profs Gordon Conway and Peter Knight receive knighthoods...
Prof Chris Toumazou receives award for his contribution to education...
4 I, science
News and events.indd 2
Winter 2005
25/11/05 7:08:19 am
REVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
Other News
The Tao of brain
science
Scientists create
Danger Mouse
NOVEMBER: The Dalai Lama was the
unusual keynote speaker at the annual
Society for Neuroscience’s conference in
Washington last week. The society hoped
the talk would help their members to think
more deeply about their role in a broader
social context.
More than 500 of the society’s members
signed a petition to stop his speech, arguing
that it would blur the distinction between
science and religion, but the charismatic
Buddhist sage charmed thousands of
attendees with a talk on his preference for
scientific inquiry over religious dogma.
The Dalai Lama’s presence prompted
a focus on meditation research, which
some scientists believe is controversial.
Researchers presented findings on the topic
at the meeting. Sara Lazar, a psychologist
at Harvard Medical School, found that
areas of the brain associated with attention
and sensory processing were thicker in
meditators than in non-meditators.
Other research presented at the conference
found that the intensity of certain brain
impulses, associated with activities such as
attention and learning, increased with a type
of meditation geared at generating loving
compassion towards mankind.
So are the researchers now shifting their
focus to develop a surgical technique to
eliminate jealousy and hatred from the
human mind? His Holiness joked that he’d
be the first to sign up for it if they could.
NOVEMBER: Mice are not normally
renowned for their boldness. Geneticists,
however, appear to have created a fearless
mouse by knocking out a single gene.
Unlike puny lab rats, these super-mice are
seemingly indifferent to electrical shocks
and, in a slap in the face to Pavlov and his
dogs, even ignored a tone associated with
the shocks. Normal mice, when conditioned
in this way, become frozen with fear upon
hearing the tone. The mice also showed an
unusual willingness to explore wide open
spaces in a new environment, areas where
normal mice would fear to tread.
Fear stems from a part of the brain called
the amygdala. Researchers led by Gleb
Shumyatsky of Rutgers University, New
Jersey, knocked out a gene called stathmin
which regulates the development of
structural molecules in nerve cells. Stathmin
is predominantly expressed in the amygdala,
and without it, neurones do not form normal
connections with one another and memory
of fear is affected.
“Understanding the molecules that
regulate fear would allow us to characterize
the basic mechanisms of memory formation,”
said Shumyatsky.
Rumours that the mice are planning a
daring revolt against their captors have not
been confirmed.
The Dalai Lama as neuroscientist
Winter 2005
News and events.indd 3
T-Rex: not so scary after all
Ju-grass-ic Park
NOVEMBER: Years of bad publicity
have finally reached an end for dinosaurs.
Fossilised dung has revealed the surprising
fact that some dinosaurs actually ate grass,
not people on toilets as many have now come
to believe.
The team, led by Caroline Strömberg, a
palaeobotanist at the Swedish Museum of
Natural History, collected 65 million-yearold droppings from the Deccan Traps of
central India. The aim was to investigate
the diet of titanosaurs, a group that includes
Diplodocus.
Subsequent
investigation
found
microscopic silica structures, characteristic
of grass remnants. Grass was previously
not thought to have existed until some ten
million years after the dinosaurs, but it now
appears that they did indeed coexist.
“It was very unexpected,” says Strömberg.
“We will have to rewrite our understanding
of [grass] evolution … we may have to add
grass to the dioramas of dinosaurs we see in
museums.”
Paul Barrett of the Natural History
Museum, London, added: “It’s not good
dinner party conversation to say you work
on fossilized dinosaur turds, but they are the
best way to find out what dinosaurs ate.”
Opinion is divided as to whether the
Spielberg movies would have been more or
less exciting had the dinosaurs refused fresh
meat in favour of some tasty turf.
You looking at me?
I, science 5
25/11/05 8:19:44 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
Events
Global
Catastrophes:
A Punter’s Guide
Stella Papadopoulou
Will bird flu take over the world?
R.I. not afraid to talk risks | Amber Bauer
OCTOBER: With all the headlines
shouting about a potential bird flu pandemic,
the media and government’s roles in
assessing and interpreting risk have come
under intense scrutiny. Accordingly, a panel
at the Royal Institution of Great Britain led
a discussion concerning this issue, focusing
mostly on the current handling of bird flu.
The panel was composed of Bill Durodié,
professor at Cranfield University; Elliot
Morley MP, Minister of State for Climate
Change and Environment; Mary Riddell, a
columnist for The Observer; and Matthew
Wright, a Channel 5 presenter. Sheena
McDonald, an award-winning broadcast
journalist and presenter, chaired the
discussion.
Most of the panel agreed that both the
media and the government had probably
exaggerated the risk of bird flu. It was
pointed out that there was no guarantee that
the virus would mutate to become capable of
person-to-person infection.
“I’m more worried about dying in a car
crash to tell you the truth,” Wright said.
Morley was quick to point out, however,
that as a government official you have
to “think the unthinkable” in order to
protect the people. The government has
to pay attention to the ‘what-ifs’ – making
contingency plans and informing the public
of the danger – because, as shown with BSE,
there is more danger in not taking the risk
seriously enough.
The lack of substantial facts surrounding
the possible bird flu pandemic has caused a
problem in the media, according to Riddell.
There is really no “objective truth” to report.
Most of the stories are based on guesswork.
Thus, according to Durodié, the
government, the media and the public have
been lured into “worse case speculation”, the
majority of debates centring on vaccines and
government preparedness.
There was no consensus reached on how
risk should be communicated by both the
media and the government, although Riddell
said that in her experience, “The greater the
fuss, the smaller the risk – eventually.”
Art, just beyond the visible| Elizabeth Connor
NOVEMBER: If you were on the fifth
floor of Imperial’s Sherfield building in
mid-November, you may have stumbled
into a peaceful enclave of Spanish mountain
solitude. The walls of the Blyth Art Gallery
were adorned with the enchantingly
lucid tones of Andrew Machon’s infrared
photography. The exhibition, “Just Beyond
the Visible”, gave a glimpse into the strange
world of infrared. A stream of warm light
surged from a vine-laden Spanish window
on the far wall, a translucent snail hung
precariously by a thread of slime to the
right, wheel barrows, chairs mountains,
vases, trees – all familiar objects but aglow
with an eerie foreign light.
Andrew, the photographer, is a scientist
and an artist, with a PhD in Biochemistry
and an MA in Psychosynthesis (a type of
counselling). He has worked for almost
6 I, science
News and events.indd 4
twenty years as a change specialist,
manager and leader. In 2001, in search
of a simpler life he bought a house in a
mountain village in Andalucia, Spain where
most of the photos for the exhibition were
taken. Andrew feels that art and science
are intimately linked. “Maybe art and
science grow from the same seed – the
vital inquiry to discover and express who
we essentially are as human beings”.
Next exhibition
Slow Forming
Artists
Claudia Sarnthein, Yukako Shibata
and Amy Woolley
Until 15 December 2005
Blyth Gallery, Level 5,
Sherfield building
NOVEMBER: Rising seas, violent
earthquakes, monstrous lava emerging from
a crack in the earth’s crust, colliding asteroids
and acute climate changes were highlights of
The Annual Science Lecture at the Natural
History Museum by Professor Bill McGuire,
head of the Benfield Hazard Research Centre
at University College London (UCL).
The fragility of our planet has never been
so apparent. Last year we surfaced blearyeyed from the Christmas festivities to the first
news of the Indian Ocean tsunami, one of
the greatest natural catastrophes of modern
times. This year, the US was crippled by
one of the most costly natural catastrophes
ever, Hurricane Katrina. “In the aftermath of
Katrina, the city of New Orleans looked like
a scene from a post-apocalyptic Hollywood
film,” said Professor McGuire.
On average, according to the Professor,
about 50 volcanic eruptions, 100 earthquakes, 40 to 50 tropical storms and a dozen
tornadoes occur during a single year. In the
last 12 months alone natural disasters yielded
a death toll of 400,000 and $2 trillion worth
of damage costs.
How likely are we to experience events like
this during our lifetime? “They are all much
more likely than winning the jackpot on the
UK National Lottery, which is around 14
million to 1,” pointed out Professor McGuire.
Odds include an asteroid impact at 8,750 to
1; an ocean-wide mega-tsunami due to an
ocean island or submarine landslide (most
likely at La Palma in the Canary Islands) at
143 to 1; a climate-altering volcanic eruption
at 14 to 1 and a staggering 3 to 1 for an
earthquake (probably in Tokyo), with worldwide economic effects. However, “Disaster
prediction is an imprecise science,” reassured
Professor McGuire.
The lecture closed with a picture of
McGuire’s son Fraser under a hot and inviting
sun. The Professor expressed his hope that
“this lecture will help allay, at least partly, our
fears about global natural catastrophes.”
Annual science lecture: a heated debate
Winter 2005
25/11/05 4:36:45 am
If we haven’t,
maybe we should.
Every 19 minutes someone finds a job
through New Scientist. Look out for
New Scientist’s Graduate Careers Specials
in May and October.
SUBSCRIBE TO NEW SCIENTIST
MAGAZINE TODAY AND SAVE 50%
Get the latest news, opinions and jobs
delivered direct to your door every week for
just £66 – saving 50% off the annual cover
price of £132.60
Hotline: 08456 731 731 quote code 2450
www.newscientist.com/2450
News and events.indd 5
25/11/05 4:46:22 am
FEATURES
Use It or Lose It:
How speaking in tongues helps you
keep your marbles
Learning a foreign language might help you in business or on holiday, but recent
studies have shown that it might also help protect against age-related mental
deterioration. Kerri Smith looks at how learning languages affects the brain.
T
HE SMELL of coffee and freshly baked
baguettes permeates the Parisian
morning, where locals and tourists
alike sit at spindly-legged pavement tables
munching croissants and watching the world
pass by. An Englishman attempts his order
in slow, deliberate French, the unfamiliar
tones sticking to his tongue as he tries them
out, while at the next table two elderly local
gentlemen continue a raucous and emphatic
dialogue about the latest political storm-ina-teacup, their conversation overflowing
with colloquialisms and peppered with gallic
shrugs.
Although most of us would jump at the
chance to speak another language fluently
enough to understand what the two
gentlemen were discussing so passionately,
there is a tendency to get stuck at the level of
the halting Englishman, stumbling through
his phrasebook to procure a café au lait.
But no matter how inspired we may be to
book those evening classes, whether by the
romantic sounds of French when whispered,
or the emphatic tone of the choicest Spanish
phrases, the chances are that many of us will
remain firmly monolingual - quietly jealous
of those who can switch effortlessly between
tongues, those who have had bilingual
upbringings, and those who have picked up
a second language later in life.
For all of us experiencing this kind of
frustration, a reason for our struggle has
finally been pinned down. It does not
promise a miracle cure, but it does go some
way to explaining just why it’s so difficult to
learn another language as an adult. I have
always been convinced that my own lack of
authentic accent and frustrating forgetfulness
with phrases was a result of my laziness and
lack of practice. I’ve recently hit upon a
better excuse: my brain, as a monolingual,
might actually be structured differently from
those belonging to bilingual folks.
Last year, a team of researchers led by
Dr. Andrea Mechelli at the Institute of
Neurology, University College London
discovered that acquiring a second language
boosts the density of grey matter in a certain
part of the brain called the left inferior
parietal region. “The structure of the human
brain is altered by the experience of learning
a second language”, explains Dr. Mechelli.
What is more, the degree of change in
this area increases with your proficiecy
at a second language, just as muscle size
8 I, science
bilingual_brains.indd 2
and strength increases when you exercise.
Mechelli and his team conclude that the
earlier you start learning, and the longer you
have to practise, the larger the amount of
grey matter you will build – less mind over
matter than mind from it.
Keeping the brain speaking in tongues
might even guard against the biggest scourges
of growing older – devastating afflictions like
Alzheimer’s disease and senile dementia. The
increase in grey matter (our information-
finding the genes that programme language
into this part of our brains? Could keen
linguists have gene therapy to enhance their
linguistic aptitude? Or will companies who
need top-notch linguists start to headhunt
people, quite literally, by investing in a brain
scanner and only interviewing those with
abnormally well-developed brains? I can
hear the director schmoozing an interviewee
now: “My dear, what an impressive left
inferior parietal area you have…”.
© Katherine Antoniw
processing brain tissue) observed in
bilingual people might be responsible for the
protection offered by speaking two languages
against the inevitable decline in mental
processing ability with aging. Research by
Ellen Bialystok at York University, Toronto,
suggests that being bilingual can attenuate
the negative effects of aging, which include
a deterioration of faculties such as working
memory. Bialystok compared middle-aged
and older adults. Half the participants were
Canadian and spoke only English, and the
other half were from India and spoke both
Tamil and English fluently. “It appears…that
bilingualism helps offset age-related losses”
she says, adding that “the bilingual advantage
is greater for older people”.
So speaking in tongues should mean you
can worry less about losing your marbles on
the slippery slope to senior status. But what
does it mean that scientists have pinpointed
the brain region responsible? Are we close to
We needn’t start worrying about these
visions quite yet. What is emphasised in
these studies is that any structural differences
between a bilingual and a monolingual brain
are a result of experience, not of any genetic
dissimilarity. It’s not a case of winning the
genetic lottery so much as getting the right
experience at the right time. And the earlier
you get this experience, the better your
prospects.
Exercise your brain with languages as you
would your body with a daily jog through
the park, or a few lengths of the local pool,
and you may end up better at staving off
the ravages of an ever-increasing vintage.
Admittedly, those who have been ‘exercising’
their grey matter since childhood still outstrip
latecomers to language-learning. But at least
for me and my French, it turns out, all is not
lost. It’s just a small matter of time, effort, and
befriending some francophones…et voilà! ■
Winter 2005
25/11/05 8:21:55 am
FEATURES
FACULTY OF MEDICINE,
KENNEDY INSTITUTE OF RHEUMATOLOGY
PhD STUDENTSHIPS at The Kennedy
Kerri Smith
The Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology carries out research
into the basic science and disease mechanisms of rheumatoid
and osteoarthritis, supported by a substantial core grant
from the Arthritis Research Campaign (arc). The Kennedy
is based in well-equipped laboratories on the Charing Cross
campus of Imperial College London. The studentships are
available from the 1st October 206. Applications invited from
UK or EU nationals who are recent graduates or final year
undergraduates and have or expect to obtain a first or upper
second class honours degree (or equivalent). The stipend for
each studentship will be £16,000 per annum.
Kerri’s article “FOXhunting” won first prize
in the 2005 New Scientist/Wellcome Trust
Science Essay Competition. She talks to
Laura Goodall about how she did it.
Project 1
‘‘The molecular mechanism of collagenase triple helicase”
Supervisor: Professor Hideaki Nagase
Contact: [email protected]
How did you decide what to write about in your essay?
The essay competition was for postgraduate students to write about
the work they were doing, so I just used my research project for my
MSc in Neuroscience and wrote a shorter version of it.
Project 3
“Role of basic fibroblast growth factor and chondrocyte
modulators in preventing progression of experimental
osteoarthritis”
Supervisors: Dr Tonia Vincent, Dr Richard Williams &
Professor Jeremy Saklatvala
Contact: [email protected]
What made you enter the competition?
The prizes! I knew that the two week media placement with New
Scientist would really be a great experience in science writing.
How long did it take to write?
I just wrote it over a weekend, I think. I only found out about the
competition pretty close to the deadline but luckily, I already had my
research as a framework and so it was much quicker than starting
from scratch.
Did you choose a particular style of writing for the competition?
I tried to get the reader’s interest by relating my topic to them and
using light humour to make it more enjoyable to read. I also had a
look at the style of New Scientist articles and tried to keep my writing
at the same level as them.
What did you want the readers to get from the article?
During my project, I enjoyed reading the papers more than doing the
lab work and loved finding out about our relationship to apes through
language, so I really wanted to express my enthusiasm about this to
the readers.
How did you feel when you found out that you had won?
Completely shocked! The Wellcome Trust didn’t phone me when
they were supposed to announce the winners so I just assumed that
someone else had won. But then they called a week later completely
out of the blue!
What effect does winning the competition have on you now?
I had to make a winner’s speech to some big science writers and
editors, so itís great that those people know my name now and it’s
a foot in the door for me. Winning also justified my career choice
as a science writer and has helped me to become more confident in
myself.
You can read Kerri’s article in New Scientist (8 Oct 2005, p.55)
or access it online at the Wellcome Trust’s website (http://www.
wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTX027280.html). If you would like to have
a go at entering a science writing competition, Oxford University
currently has one open until 27th Jan 2006. See http://www.ox.ac.
uk/publicrelations/nsw/writing.shtml
Winter 2005
bilingual_brains.indd 3
Project 2
“Temporal and spatial regulation
metalloproteinase during cell invasion.”
Supervisor: Dr Yoshi Itoh
Contact: [email protected]
of
cell
surface
Project 4
“Modulators of bystander-activated T cell effector function.”
Supervisor: Professor Fionula Brennan
Contact: [email protected]
Project 5
“Regulation of inflammatory gene expression by MAP kinase
phosphatase enzymes”
Supervisor: Dr Andy Clark
Contact: [email protected]
Project 6
“From injury to arthritis; proteomics of inflammatory signalling
in articular cartilage”
Supervisors: Dr Robin Wait & Professor Jeremy Saklatvala
Contact: [email protected]
Project 7
“Investigating the genetic basis of IL-10 inhibition of tumour
necrosis factor”
Supervisors: Dr Lynn Williams & Professor Brian Foxwell
Contact: [email protected]
For more details see our website
http://www1.imperial.ac.uk/medicine/about/divisions/
kennedy/studentships
Applications consisting of a Curriculum Vitae and the details
of two referees should be sent to
Helen Bull, Divisional Administrator, Kennedy Institute of
Rheumatology, 1 Aspenlea Road, London W6 8LH or to
[email protected]
I, science
9
25/11/05 8:21:31 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
The Story of Bob
David Brill and Helen Morant met Professor Lord Robert Winston to discuss science,
religion and his new book, The Story of God.
I
T’S LUCKY that the reception area
of Hammersmith Hospital has very
comfortable sofas. We were kept waiting
there for an hour. We then found out that the
hour we had been promised could only be
half that due to a later engagement with the
BBC. Our opening question was described
as “very bad”, and a later one dismissed
as something every journalist asks. It is
a testament to the charm and reassuring
manner of Lord Robert Winston that not one
of these offences registered any damage. The
ease with which he spoke left us feeling that
we could have covered virtually any subject
and not run out of interesting material. We
concentrated on the relationship between
science and religion, beginning with the
existence of God.
“Each of us will have a different notion of
what we mean by God, even if we’re atheists.
I do believe that humans have a divine spirit
which is not explicable in purely evolutionary
terms, although I do think that there is
possibly a genetic basis for much religiosity
and spirituality … I think that if you’re asking
10 I, science
Story of Bob.indd 2
me if I believe in something irrational and
inexplicable that may contribute to us then
yes, I do. But if you’re asking me whether I
believe that there’s a white coated, bearded
figure, up there in the clouds who dictates
what’s going to happen to me when I walk
out of this building and will stop a brick
falling from the scaffolding, I don’t believe
that, no.”
“I do believe that humans
have a divine spirit
which is not explicable in
evolutionary terms”
Lord Winston does not shy away from
discussing some deep ideas about science
and the world around us: “It seems to me
that as we discover more and more about
the universe we understand less and less
about the universe. And I think that what’s
interesting about biologists is that they tend
to be so narrow that they arrogantly think
that they can explain the world - but it’s only
their world. As physics develops, on the other
hand, it uncovers more and more irrational,
inexplicable and unbelievable things which
make up the universe we’re in. And I find it
interesting that for that reason, “belief ” is
probably more common amongst physicists
than it is amongst biologists. And I think that
physicists are actually a bit more humble, to
see the moment we look at the universe and
realise that we probably will never explain it.
I think biology will become like that too. I
think that biology, far from getting more and
more explicable, will become less explicable.”
“I’ve always thought science isn’t that
objective, a lot of the time. It should be
objective but it isn’t. Religion isn’t objective
either, of course.” But should religion be
objective? “No. Because they’re different
systems, they’re different ways of looking
at the natural world. Science, of course, has
to test by experiment. Theologians on the
whole do not test things. They try to but
generally their tests are inadequate and by
our standards they are very imperfect.”
Winter 2005
25/11/05 5:16:27 am
REVIEWS
“The fallacy of some clerics, Muslim and
Catholic for example, explaining the tsunami
in terms of God destroying something
which was evil or wrong, or trying to give
a message to the world (or indeed the same
for the earthquake in Pakistan) is to my
mind completely irrational. I don’t think you
explain the irrationalities of nature by the
irrationalities of providence.”
“I take issue with the
fundementalist Christians
who take the literal word
of the Bible as absolute
truth and nothing can be
changed”
When asked whether religion is ever
misused, Lord Winston is remarkably frank
with his answer: “I think that’s something I
say in great detail in the book. I’m interested
in fundamentalism and I argue that both
religion and science are, to my mind,
essentially about uncertainty. We do science
because we are uncertain about what we are
going to find. We don’t really understand the
natural world, but our genetic imperative is
inquisitive, so we want to try and understand
it. I think that what we do in science is try to
underpin our uncertainties, and that’s exactly
what religion does. It’s also essentially about
uncertainty, and humans are very bad at
dealing with uncertainty. So, consequently,
religions often offer certainty, and so does
science. And I think that science and religion,
when they become certain are at their most
dangerous.”
“I argue that both religion
and science are, to my
mind, essentially about
uncertainty”
“I take issue with the fundamentalist
Christians (and there are a few fundamentalist
Jews who are admittedly of the same thought
proces) who take the literal word of the
Bible as absolute truth and nothing can be
changed. What’s bizarre about those people
living in Kentucky is that they think the
Colorado River and the Grand Canyon were
formed at the time of Noah’s flood, and that
God put the fossils there to confuse men.
They claim that this is what they get from the
absolute literal word of the text. Why that is
so inconsistent with any kind of rationalist
behaviour is of course that they read the text,
which is imperfectly translated from Greek,
which in turn was imperfectly translated
from the Hebrew. At least they should read
the original Hebrew manuscript. Now unless
you go back to the original texts you cannot
understand them. It isn’t actually possible
to do it - you get completely the wrong
view of what the phrase is about … I think
fundamentalism of that sort is flawed and
dangerous.”
The religious aspect of Lord Winston’s
life also affects his work on a practical level:
“Whatever I believe - I certainly don’t believe
I’m going to be punished if I don’t keep to the
Winter 2005
Story of Bob.indd 3
Sabbath for example - I don’t
generally work on religious
festivals, so-called holidays,
and I don’t work on Saturdays.
I think actually that frees me
up for work because having
one day of the week when you
don’t do any work is a hugely
healthy thing. I think it’s been
a saving grace - it’s a great
institution, actually.”
INTERVIEWS
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
Lord Winston on…
Richard Dawkins: “Lovely man,
one of the best science writers of
our time. Deeply religious in his
approach to evolution”
John Polkinghorne: “Delightful
man…..much more spiritual than
me”
Writing this book has taken
Magdi Yacoub: “He’s a workaholic”
Lord Winston on something of
a personal journey. “I think it
His iMac Powerbook G4: “PCs are
changed my views about both
for
inadequate people”
science and religion. I think
I became somewhat more
Sunday Trading: “I’m not sure it’s
sceptical of both and about my
really healthy”
own religion too.” Some critics
have suggested that in writing
this book he is dealing with an
I,Science: “It’s a better science
area outside his expertise. But
glossy than New Scientist”
he strongly refutes this idea:
“I think that is such a conceit,
actually. It’s a really arrogant thing to say
that of somebody else, because of course
we all have the ability to look at the whole
world, not just narrow bits of it. I don’t set
myself up as an expert in the book - I say
that I’m coming at it from a fairly particular
perspective.”
As well as tackling his critics, he showed a
willingness to make bold predictions: “I think
that we will find out that we can’t always
predict how genes are going to express,
and we may even find out that genes aren’t
the only unit of inheritance.” Our interview
concluded with a walk to BBC Television
Centre for another interview with Radio
Five Live. Ignoring the occasional glances
from passers-by, we spoke at length about
a wide range of subjects from Jewish ethics
and teachings to the atheism of Richard
Dawkins. Whatever the critics may have
to say about Lord Winston, it doesn’t take
long in his company to realise the immense
depth of his knowledge on religion, science
and, well, just about everything. An hour in
reception was a small price to pay. And they
were damn comfy sofas. ■
Robert Winston’s book “The Story of
God” is reviewed on page 28.
Win a copy of the Story of God
I,Science has a signed copy of Professor Lord
Robert Winston’s new book to give away.
For the chance to get your hands on this lovely
prize, tell us which is better: Science or Religion.
Send us your answer in 25 words or less. The
best answer gets the book.
Answers marked “Story of Bob” to:
[email protected] by 7th January 2006.
I, science 11
25/11/05 5:17:04 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
Cousins under the skin
According to the Rev Dr John Polkinghorne, the
search for truth is common to religion and science.
Duncan McMillan speaks to the respected theologian
and physicist to find out more.
I
’M A SUCKER for nice people. So it’s a
pity Rev Dr John Polkinghorne wasn’t a
less likeable man, because then I would
have had more cause to disagree with him.
The Reverend has written over twenty
books to date. Roughly coinciding with the
release of his latest one, Exploring Reality:
The intertwining of Science and Religion,
he addressed a large and diverse Imperial
College crowd on the subject of “friendship
between science and religion”.
The Reverend’s talk was about the
“crossover between the questions and
answers that science gives and the questions
and answers that religion gives.” He has spent
the past 20 years exploring this area.
Reverend Polkinghorne is more qualified
than most to claim to know what lies on either
side of that oft-disputed border. Fellow of the
Royal Society, Professor John Polkinghorne
resigned his chair in Mathematical Physics
in 1979. Two years later plain Dr. John
Polkinghorne could add ‘Rev’ to the front of
his title, and in 1997 was able to add KBE to
the end of it.
“Physicists are
impressed with the
wonderful order of the
world. Biologists see a
more ambiguous and
messy slice of reality.”
To many, such a career move might seem
utterly unexpected, but there has been a minor
tradition of physicists and mathematicians
who have tended towards the spiritual with Einstein, pioneering cosmologist/priest
Georges Lemaitre and (Polkinghorne’s own
teacher at Cambridge) Paul Dirac, amongst
others. I asked him, later that week, if he
thought it was a coincidence that there were
so many prominent religious physicists.
“No, it’s not a coincidence. Physicists are
impressed with the wonderful order of
12 I, science
Polkenhorn 2.indd 2
the world. [whereas] Biologists see a more
ambiguous and messy slice of reality.”
It is those slices to which the Rev refers in
his book - ‘Exploring reality: The intertwining
of science and religion’. He describes taking
“slices of reality” from the sciences, human
nature, religious encounters and Christian
thinking; but, he cautions: “The great
temptation for everybody is to take your
own particular ‘slice’ and try to make it the
whole story.” By this reckoning the biologists
have been making their own messy slices
the whole story, as they “are in a pretty
triumphalist mood at the moment; [but they
will] come out the other side.”.
Had any one of those six universal constants
been even slightly different, the universe
would not look even vaguely like it does and
life would have been an impossibility. One
way around the sheer improbability of this
universe having come about is to posit that
there is instead an infinity of other universes,
each of which is run according to a slightly
different set of rules – the ‘multiverse’
theory. According to the Reverend choosing
between that and God as a way of explaining
our miraculous universe is “...six of one and
half a dozen of the other. But it seems to
me that the multiverse only does one piece
of explanatory work... it is ontologically
prodigal, a meta-scientific speculation.” To
him, God has more explanatory power, and
he takes this divine involvement further:
“The world seems shot through with the
science of mind. I suggest that at least it’s a
hypothesis worth thinking about, that this is
because the mind of the Creator lies behind
it. That, to me, is the most intellectually
satisfying explanation of why science is
possible.”
But does this mind imply design? Yes and
no. Regarding the hot topic of ‘Intelligent
Design’ and Michael Behe’s assertion
that ‘irreducible complexity’ can only be
explained by ID, Polkinghorne says: “To ask
the question “Is there irreducible complexity
at the molecular level?” is actually a scientific
question. Behe asked an entirely sensible
question, [but] I don’t think Michael Behe
has the answer... I don’t think they’re good
listeners.” The Darwinists aren’t completely
blameless, however: “Francis Crick has an
agenda too. People like Dawkins and Crick
on the one hand and the Creationists on the
other deserve each other.”
“God had made
creatures that could
make themselves. This
is a more fitting form
of creation, instead of a
divine puppet theatre.”
Instead Polkinghorne stands somewhere
in-between those warring camps, believing
that “God had made creatures that could
make themselves. [This is] a more fitting
form of creation, instead of a divine puppet
theatre.”
Rev Polkinghorne describes himself as a
“bottom-up” thinker. I wondered if he ever
finds himself thinking top-down, of starting
with general beliefs and working down.
“Everybody has to think a bit top-down. It’s
a question as to what initiates your thoughts.
Some people begin knowing certain general,
self-evident principles about the world
which tend to end up being neither general,
nor self-evident.”
The Reverend’s approach is to “look at the
world with the eye of science and... with the
eye of religion or theology”. After talking with
him you can’t help wondering if you shouldn’t
see it this way too. Maybe it is possible, as
he puts it, to have “binocular vision”, but in
the end, I fear, we’d all end up cross-eyed.
There is too much unsaid in Polkinghorne’s
argument to convince me that science and
religion can ever be bedfellows, but I don’t
think that either is any the worse for having
him around. ■
Winter 2005
25/11/05 6:37:06 am
FEATURES
Where are all the Women?
Do men have an evolutionary advantage in the world of
Science? Helen Richens investigates.
W
ANDER INTO parts of the
underbelly of Imperial College and
you will be forgiven for thinking
that you have stumbled upon some men-only
club. Women comprise close to half of the
staff and student body in biology, whereas
in other disciplines, such as electrical and
mechanical engineering, the proportion of
women is a lot lower. So is evolution the
cause of this imbalance?
That’s the argument voiced by evolutionary
biologist Dr Helena Cronin, from LSE.
“Men, on average, have an advantage in
certain quantitative and spatial abilities
– particularly intuitive mechanics and “3-D
thinking”- that are key for engineering and
maths,” explains Dr Cronin. “These skills
enable you to do science and make you a
better scientist.
“The claim that ‘male’
skills are the ones which
are vital to science has
proved controversial”
So are these skills more attributed to men?
It is a commonly held view – go into the
Wellcome Wing at the Science Museum or
onto the BBC Human Body and Mind web
pages and you can test which ‘brain sex’
you are by your ability to solve spatial and
visualisation problems.
One female mechanical engineer spoke
of how she initially found certain modules in
her degree difficult: “At first I found it really
hard to do spatial and rotational problems.
The boys could just see it straight away but
I really struggled and it took a long time to
get it. But once I got it, that was it, I never
lost it.”
Dr Charlotte Williams, a chemistry
lecturer at Imperial, does not think that men
necessarily have more of a grasp in this area.
“I teach a course in molecular symmetry
and 3-D visualisation and I can definitely
refute the notion that men are innately
more talented in this area – some are, plenty
aren’t.”
Irrespective of how difficult, or not, women
find these skills, they do appear to be attracted
to different scientific disciplines than men.
“Often the chemical, environmental, and bioengineering departments are 50% women. I
do not believe these fields are easier than
electrical or mechanical engineering, just
of more interest to women,” says Dr Sandra
Shefelbine, a lecturer in bioengineering.
“Women work and think differently than
men. [They] are more likely to collaborate,
seek advice, and attack a problem from many
viewpoints.”
It has been continually emphasised,
however, that this different approach does
Winter 2005
women in science.indd 1
not affect women’s capability to do science,
and in some cases enhances it. What has
proved most controversial is the claim by Dr
Cronin that ‘male’ skills are the ones which
are vital to science.
“[Dr Cronin] assumes that science is
all about 3-D visualisation and aggressive
competition” states Dr Williams. “The idea
that science is done by one person sitting
alone, competitively pondering the meaning
of machinery is just wrong. The very best
science is done by those with huge creativity, if I would have emotionally distanced myself
imagination and inspiration and the ability more from my children (a feat that is easily
done by most men but comes more difficult
to work successfully with their teams”
Dr Cronin claims that the women for women - I call it the “mum” feeling),” says
scientists at Imperial “are extremely one female engineering lecturer at Imperial.
fortunate that they are at the high end of This difference between men and women is
the skills distribution curve. They already voiced by Dr Cronin: “Women’s disposition
have the skills that enable them to do science differs to men when they have children.
and are fortunate enough to add to that the Women become less interested in their job,
skills associated with females.” Does singling men often become more interested. They do
successful women out as being ‘lucky’ solve their bit by working more.”
That women can succeed in science is not
matters? In both sexes there is a distribution
of skills and ways of thinking. How easy is it under question. The view that men have
evolved skills which give them an advantage
to distinguish which approach is best?
Science, in itself, judges merit solely on the over women in science only stands firm if
basis of research output. But therein lies a you believe in a single approach to science.
problem. “The years of early independent Skills such as spatial awareness and 3-D
research critical for establishing a reputation visualisation can be taught and developed in
as a promising group leader, publishing good women. Yet these are by no means the only
research papers in high impact journals, skills which are needed to become a good
coincides with the period in a woman’s life scientist. Innovation and flexibility, coupled
when she is biologically programmed to turn with incredible motivation, are also essential
her mind and body to child-bearing and to long term success in science. ■
nurturing,” says Dr Jane
Saffell, a molecular cell
biologist.
Taking time off to have
children can make it very
difficult for women to get
back into research. “The
reduction in publications
that will inevitably result
from having children
will leave them at a
competitive disadvantage
when it comes to gaining
permanent positions (e.g.
lectureships) and research
funding,” explains Dr
Saffell.
Women may be equally
able as men to be good
scientists, but they might
not get the opportunity to
produce the only accepted
evidence of this ability – a
good publication record.
This issue is heightened
by compromises women
may make between home
and work once they have
children. “Having three
children has slowed [my]
career progress which
would not have happened Susan Greenfield, the lioness of science.
I, science 13
25/11/05 7:39:40 am
FEATURES
A Christmas Treat
The Christmas Lectures are the Royal Institution’s
flagship event, attracting top scientists to share their
expertise and enthusiasm. Alex Johnson goes back in time
to unfold the chain-reaction of events that marked the
birth of the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures.
“Be fit to compare to a candle; that you may, like it, shine as lights
to those about you; that, in all your actions, you may justify the
beauty of the taper by making your deeds honorable and effectual
in the discharge of your duty to your fellow men”
- Michael Faraday in “The Chemical History of a Candle”,
Juvenile Lecture of 1848 and 1860
I
T IS December 1848. An excited hum and
an air of great anticipation fill the lecture
theatre of the Royal Institution on Albemarle Street. Gentlemen exchange pleasantries, ladies gossip, the youngsters fidget. Two
ageing professors converse intently. A lawyer,
red-faced after his lunchtime tipple, laughs
too loudly; the earl in the front row frowns
disapprovingly before resuming his discussion with the philosopher by his side. Gradually, the noise subsides. Children are given final whispered warnings to behave. A doctor
puts on his spectacles. There is a rustle as the
ladies readjust their skirts. All attention fixes
upon the character on the stage. Michael
Faraday is casting his eye around the room,
waiting to begin his first Christmas Lecture
on ‘The Chemical History of a Candle.’
The exclusive audience in all its finery
is a far cry from the vision in the minds of
the distinguished gentlemen who founded
the Royal Institution half a century earlier.
They had pictured a society that would not
only establish a scene for research but also
form a centre for educating all social classes
in the practical applications of science.
They had even gone so far as to construct
an outside staircase, to allow labourers to
reach their gallery seats without distressing
The Faraday
Theatre has
served as the
home of the
Christmas
Lectures since
their inception
in 1847.
Image courtesy
of the Royal
Institution.
14 I, science
Xmas lectures.indd 2
the gentry in the foyer. This noble plan was
short-lived. The bourgeoisie caught a bloody
whiff of revolution from France and feared
that educating the lower classes would give
them the power to rebel. To avoid trouble,
the Royal Institution’s architect quietly
demolished his outside staircase. Instead, the
elegant building on Albemarle Street became
a philosophical club where only the wealthy,
eminent or learned could enjoy stimulating
conversation and the finest tea and coffee.
The Royal Institution’s greatest attraction,
however, was its lectures. In the early
nineteenth century visual entertainment
was limited. Panoramas and other cinematic
spectacles were yet to come and impractical
printing technology limited the illustration
of books. However, theatrical performances
were mistrusted by many for dangerously
arousing the passions. Lectures provided a
respectable alternative to the theatre, though
still promising a visual element, and, often,
the chance to see some celebrity du jour.
Nonetheless, the parallels between
dramatic performances and lectures were
realised and exploited, not least in the theatre
of the Royal Institution. Humphry Davy had
impressed the crowds from the beginning
with polished oratory, accompanied by
sensational demonstrations. Admittedly
there were occasions when he mismanaged
his displays; one attempt to demonstrate the
effects of inhaling nitrous oxide descended
into anarchy when the unfortunate volunteer,
a Mr Underwood, lost control until the
breathing bag was forcefully removed.
Such events were mercifully rare, and the
Royal Institution maintained its refined and
respectable reputation.
Despite its popularity, the institution did
not avoid the financial trouble that plagued
many nineteenth-century London societies.
By 1825, the members decided it was time
for a review of the lecture programme. One
of the new features was a set of Twenty two
Lectures on Natural Philosophy suited to a
Juvenile Auditory, during the Christmas,
Easter and Whitsuntide recesses. The chosen
lecturer was John Millington, Professor
of Mechanics at the institution. He was a
well-known character, and therefore a safe
choice, although his lecturing style was
rather dull; his emigration to Australia in
1830 due to financial trouble suggests he did
not pull huge crowds. Still, the new lecture
course must have enjoyed modest success,
as it was repeated the following year, albeit
in a revised format. Instead of one long
course, two six-lecture courses were offered,
one at Christmas and one at Easter. The
Easter course was poorly attended and not
repeated; it seemed the secret to success
was to offer the lectures as an additional
Christmas season entertainment, to join the
numerous exhibitions, operas, pantomimes,
and concerts.
At this time Christmas celebrations
were changing. In the eighteenth century,
hospitality was widely extended to friends
and the community. By the early nineteenth
century, it became more common to observe
the festival within a smaller family unit
so there was a great demand for suitable
events. Few could be more appropriate for
a respectable family than an enlightening
lecture on simple principles of natural
philosophy. So although the lectures were
advertised as ‘suited to a Juvenile Auditory,’
their appeal extended beyond the juveniles
with boys and girls of all ages attending,
accompanied by their parents. Everyone was
equally entertained.
Over Christmas 1827, Michael Faraday
delivered his first series of Juvenile Lectures.
He quickly became heavily involved in the
programme, delivering nineteen out of
thirty-four courses between 1827 and 1861.
He was the first to deliver his explainations
of everyday phenomena in a lecturing style
that was accessible to the younger members
of his audience. So genuine and irresistible
was his enthusiasm that his friend, Lady
Pollock, remarked: “One could fancy that
he had never seen the experiments before,
and that he was about to clap his hands with
boyish glee at the unexpected result!”
His legacy was impressive. Nowadays,
millions tuning into the Christmas Lectures
from their living rooms can join the audience
packed into the Royal Institution’s theatre.
Faraday’s 1848 audience might have frowned
upon the intrusion. Yet, it seems a fitting
tribute to the Royal Institution’s founders and
to Faraday himself that these events continue
to inspire and entertain so many through the
wonders of science. ■
Winter 2005
25/11/05 5:22:33 am
FEATURES
Twins by Andrew Carnie,
chemist and artist, zoologist
and psychologist.
At a first glance this
photographic image appears to
be two foetuses. Take a closer
look; it is in fact two portions
of bacon carefully organised.
This piece was part of a series
based on scientific specimens,
playing with aesthetic
ambiguities. What is real?
what is scientific? How much
can you take out of an object
before it becomes another one.
SciArt
Fusing science, art and imagination
Daniela de Angel
I
T MIGHT seem awkward to find science
and art blending into a single realm. It
is thought by many that science is brilliantly objective and art a delightfully subjective representation. Is SciArt then a passion
for facts blending into a passion for artistic
expression? SciArt has as many meanings as
there are SciArtists.
Imagination is usually attributed to
artists. However, who hasn’t encountered a
lecturer, supervisor or colleague enormously
ingenious and passionate about their field?
The amount of imagination in science is
utterly underrated.
For those who claim that science and
technology are too dull, that they are a
threat to nature and only an impersonal
version of it, SciArt resolves this conflict.
Science describes nature, and nature is art;
therefore SciArt is the perfect description of
Winter 2005
sciart3.indd 1
nature’s creative, inventive and imaginative
magnificence. Talented scientists passionate
about their field inspire you and make you
see art in science.
As bizarre as it seems, artistic
representations of science are extraordinarily
common throughout history. A good
example is Leonardo Da Vinci and his famous
painting Proportions of Man (aka Vitruvian
Man) - the logo for our own Imperial Union
bar. This great thinker did not discriminate
between art and science.
The connection between science and art
has proved a useful tool for overcoming
our limited senses and visualising strange
worlds. Concepts of microscopic scales,
human anatomy, complex technology, tricky
conceptual representations, even alien
environments like asteroids or a remote
period of geological time, are often shaped
by artists’ representations.
SciArt is a project for scientists interested
in creating new forms of expression, artists
inspired by scientific research, or anyone up
for a rather stimulating challenge.
If you feel compelled, then let the images
speak for themselves and share the splendour
of your own view of the scientific world.
The Wellcome Trust provides a unique
opportunity for scientists and artists to
research in collaboration through SciArt
projects. It offers £500,000 a year to support
and encourage innovative arts projects
investigating many aspects of science, its
social contexts and emotional implications.
Applications are available online at
www.wellcome.ac.uk/sciart
Images: courtesy of SciCult.
I, science 15
25/11/05 5:27:14 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
‘Moving in the
right direction’
Chris Miles talks to Sir Richard Sykes, Rector of
Imperial College, about his corporate past, Imperial’s
future and encouraging more students into science.
T
HE PROSPECT of meeting the Rector
filled me with a sense of trepidation
and an unwillingness to venture
into the unknown. Sir Richard’s reputation
for being forceful and ‘imperialistic’ can be
considerably off-putting, especially when
combined with the intimidating modern
interiors of the Faculty Building. Stereotypes
aside, few would disagree that the Rector’s
time at the helm has resulted in significant
changes to the college’s direction; our recent
position as the leading University in Europe
for Technology is testament to that.
Famed for his chairmanship of
GlaxoSmithKline before taking on Imperial,
Sir Richard started his pharmaceutical
career in 1972 as head of Glaxo’s Antibiotic
Research Unit. “I studied Microbiology at
university and got involved in drug resistance
mechanisms in the late 1960s, when a lot
of drug resistance was being seen against
antibiotics. The pharmaceutical industry
was quite interested in that and so I became
involved with Glaxo.”
The Rector is arguably best known in the
drugs world for leading the introduction of
16 I, science
Richard Sykes take 2.indd 2
the stomach acid inhibiting drug, Ranitidine.
However, his leading personal achievement
as far as pharmaceuticals are concerned was
introducing a new group of antibiotics, the
monobactams.
“Inevitably, you’ll
always get drugs that are
going to be resistant...
therefore you’ve got to use
antibiotics sensibly”
When confronted by the “all bacteria
which cause disease will be resistant to
all antibiotics by 2015” views of Ulster
University’s Professor McGavoc, Sir Richard
explains: “every time you put selection
pressure on a population, you get a response.”
Leaning back into his chair, he astutely retorts
“Inevitably, you’ll always get some bugs that
are going to be resistant; that’s evolution, it’s
going to happen, so therefore you’ve got to
use antibiotics sensibly.”
“We’re always at war with bacteria and
always will be. If you remember HG Wells’s
story, The War of the Worlds, it wasn’t the
bloody machine guns that killed the people
from Mars, it was the bugs because they had
no immune systems.”
Asked to draw similarities between
managing GlaxoSmithKline and leading
Imperial, he replies “If you’ve got good
people, if you’ve got smart, intelligent and
creative people and you look after them and
provide the right environment in which they’ll
operate, then it’s no different to whether
you’re in a university or in a business. People
are the key to success.”
“I’d get a liver, I’d get an
eye, I’d get this, I’d get
that and I’d go to school
and cut it up.”
Nevertheless, exactly which groups of
students the Rector defines as smart is
another matter entirely. Referring to some
institutions as ‘third rate’ back in 2004 and his
comment which sparked much controversy,
“a penny spent here [Imperial] is a hell of a
lot better than a penny spent at Luton for
the economy,” Sir Richard remains adamant
that Imperial should excel as far as student
funding is concerned. “It’s more expensive
to teach bright kids than it is to teach those
people, because bright kids are a challenge,”
he says.
I couldn’t resist questioning the Rector’s
well publicised views on university tuition
fees, although unlike the majority of students
I don’t instinctively flinch whenever the
mention of increasing tuition fees arises. As
the man himself believes, the money’s got to
come from somewhere. “If we charge the full
economic costs of going on the course then
we can obviously give a lot of that money to
people who can’t afford it,” says Sir Richard.
It soon becomes clear that the Rector is
an ardent admirer of America’s university
system, not limited to the financial aspects
but also the opportunity to transfer skills and
‘upgrade’ universities.
“If you can come out of school in America
not having done too well for all sorts of
reasons, you can then go to a community
college, you can then do well and go to
Harvard if you’re smart enough.”
In spite of this, encouraging the study of
science in university is no easy task. When
I suggested a few proposals to encourage
interest in science at school, such as using
multimedia in classrooms, he clearly
acknowledges that there is no quick fix and
that we have some fundamental issues which
need dealing with first. Referring to his own
school days compared to the ‘environment’
of today, I get the feeling Sir Richard isn’t
impressed with the ways in which teachers
convey science: “Even in the junior school
people would take you out for nature walks,
they’d explain new things, show you things.
They themselves, the teachers, took a great
interest.” How a current science teacher
might respond to this is best left to the
imagination!
One of Sir Richard’s extra-curricular school
activities (my words, not his!) was collecting
items for dissection at the butchers, “As I
went to grammar school, one of the things
Winter 2005
25/11/05 5:33:31 am
REVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
I’d do twice a week would be to call in at the
butchers, I’d get a liver, I’d get an eye, I’d get
this, I’d get that and I’d go to school and cut
it up.” Make from that as you will but for
the Daily Mail readers amongst you, who
think the only things kids cut up these days
are the teachers, it’s interesting to compare
enthusiasm rates amongst youngsters, and
especially science teacher recruitment
between the current day and when the
Rector was growing up. Sir Richard also isn’t
someone who likes to criticise people such as
Lord Robert Winston who try to popularise
science, “I mean it’s very important that you
put it across to the public in way that they can
understand it and it does get complicated”.
To start get the public to interact with
science and seeing beyond the equations and
textbooks might be a significant step forward
in encouraging future study.
Since the theme of this issue centres
around religion, I decided to ask whether
Sir Richard has views on intelligent design,
or for the less buzz-word savvy people
amongst us, creationism. “They now call it
intelligent design so some states are actually
encouraging schools to talk about intelligent
design along with evolution. I mean, in my
opinion, it’s absolute nonsense. It’s just
another way of imposing religion on to what
is scientific understanding and theory.” The
Rector agrees with Richard Dawkins in the
sense that there are a lot more science based
controversies we could challenge children
with, instead of proverbially teaching stork
theory in a sex education class.
Steering back towards Imperial, my final
questions were geared around the failed
merger proposal with UCL and what the
future holds for the college. Expecting
the Rector to still be supportive of such a
merger, I was surprised to learn his power
of hindsight when questioned about possible
redundancies. “On reflection, I think the
damage you might inflict in the process of
getting from A to B isn’t actually worth it.”
He did, however, reiterate the college’s desire
to withdraw from the University of London
as soon as possible, “I think students come
to Imperial College because they now want
to be part of the College, so we will be
taking that to council in December and then
progressing from there.”
“Intelligent design...
it’s just another way
of imposing religion
on to what is scientific
understanding
and theory”
As the interview drew to a close, I
reassessed my feelings of apprehension and
realised that they were, for the most part,
ill-founded. Certainly a man who isn’t afraid
to speak his mind, I found myself actually
starting to like the Rector, something which
probably shouldn’t be uttered within a 2 mile
radius of the Student Union. “We’re certainly
moving in the right direction. There is no
other institution in the world like it,” he says.
His friends describe him as a man who gets
results; well, it’s half term and his report card
is looking pretty good to me. ■
Winter 2005
I, science 17
Photos: Imperial College Press Office
Richard Sykes take 2.indd 3
25/11/05 5:34:00 am
FEATURES
Boy or girl?
News of a US study, launched to investigate the social effects of allowing parents
to choose the sex of their child, has re-focused attention on the contentious issues
surrounding sex selection. Dominique Driver delves into the UK government’s
current policy on the use of reproductive technologies, and asks how the public in
the UK feels about sex selection.
S
ANDRA CARSON and her team
needed nine years to gain approval from
their review board at Baylor College of
Medicine in Houston, Texas. The study will
be made possible by a technique known as
Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD).
PGD involves extracting the DNA of a single
cell of an eight-cell stage embryo created by
In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) for determining
the sex as well as checking for genetic
abnormalities. After result evaluation, the
‘desired’ embryos can then be implanted into
the mother’s uterus. At least fifty couples are
currently lined up to take part in the trial,
but only those who already have a child of
the opposite sex will be enrolled, a practice
known as ‘family balancing’.
“By allowing sex
selection for social
purposes we are
no longer valuing
children for who
they are”
The use of PGD for sex selection is legal
in the US, though, the American Society
for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) and
the American College of Obstetricians and
Gynecologists (ACOG) have openly stated
their opposition to using PGD in this way.
Across the Atlantic, at the UK front, social
sex selection is currently banned and the
Human Fertility and Embryology Authority
(HFEA) who regulate the all reproductive
technology will only licence PGD for serious
medical conditions.
Yet not everyone is in agreement over the
HFEA’s decision to invoke the precautionary
principle when it comes to reproductive
technology. Earlier this year, after reviewing
the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology
(HFE) Act, the House of Commons Science
and Technology Committee tentatively
recommended that the ban should be
withdrawn. The committee contended that
there was little evidence to support the
HFEA’s position: “It concerns us that the
potential for harm is often quoted without
18 I, science
boy or girl.indd 2
recourse to a growing body of evidence of its
absence…the bonus should be on those who
oppose sex selection for social reasons using
PGD to show harm from its use.”
Although the committee recognised that
the majority of the British public are currently
against sex selection, they concluded that: “on
balance we find no adequate justification for
prohibiting the use of sex selection for family
balancing”. However they steered clear of
recommending the more controversial uses
of sex selection, such as in helping rebuild
a family that has suffered the loss of a child,
or to support economic, cultural or social
preferences for one gender over the other.
These are often considered more problematic
because of the possible psychological effects
on the families, the view that these practices
may be sexually discriminating, and the
potential they have to skew the gender ratio
in certain communities.
Together with social and demographic
considerations, social sex selection raised an
array of ethical concerns. Some fear that by
allowing sex selection for social purposes we
are no longer valuing children for who they
are, and may be leaving the door open to
the selection of further non-medical traits,
creating so-called ‘designer babies’.
Dr Rony Duncan, Researcher in the
Medical Ethics Unit at Imperial College,
believes that although there is an ethical
distinction between sex selection for medical
reasons and sex selection for social purposes,
both are ethically acceptable. “Some people
with two boys want a girl. Some people want
a boy first. Others only want girls. People
have had preferences about the sex of their
children for centuries. We now simply have
an accurate way of helping them”. He explains
that in ethical terms the difference lies in the
motivation for each, but argues that there is
nothing inherently wrong with wanting to
have a child of one sex over the other. “There
is no evidence that having a preference for
the sex of your child makes you a bad parent,
or harms the future child. Parents should
be able to choose the sex of their children,
whether it’s to increase the chances of them
having a healthy child or simply because they
want to”.
However, while the current ban remains in
place it will be impossible for UK researchers
to assemble conclusive evidence on the
effects of social sex selection, something
the US trial will hopefully go some way
towards providing. Dr Peter Mills, Policy
Development and Co-ordination Manager
at the HFEA agrees that the US study may
help to shed light on these issues: “Although
the Authority has indicated that it does not
regard sex selection by PGD for non-medical
reasons as an appropriate use of reproductive
technology and would therefore be unlikely
to licence it in the UK, the results of any
well-designed follow-up research may well
advance some of the arguments around this
contentious use of the technology”.
“People have had
preferences about the
sex of their children
for centuries”
Where does that leave us now? In
response to the recommendations of
the House of Commons Science and
Technology Committee, the government
issued a statement maintaining that: “The
government has no plans to alter this
position to allow sex selection other than for
compelling medical reasons.” But as part of
its review of the HFE Act, the government
has also conducted a public consultation into
whether sex selection should be permitted
for family balancing purposes, the results of
which should be available next year. Dr Mills
of the HFEA insists that in the meantime:
“The Authority will continue to keep
emerging evidence and argument under
review, including information about the risks
associated with the techniques and about the
consequences of their use.”
So should we be embracing this potential
use of reproductive technology? The jury is
still out, but if pressure from the government
continues to grow, the HFEA may be forced
to rethink its position, or provide compelling
justification for standing by its current
policy. The assertion that the bulk of the
general public oppose social sex selection
may simply not be enough. ■
Winter 2005
25/11/05 5:39:47 am
REVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
Popularising
Palaeontology
Duncan McMillan spoke to Professor Richard Fortey
about trilobites, the Natural History museum and
Marilyn Monroe.
I
T TAKES a flight of stairs, a lift, a
short corridor, another flight of stairs
and another corridor to reach Richard
Fortey’s office from the Natural History
Museum’s Earth Galleries. So it comes as
a pleasant relief when you get there to find
yourself in an airy office stuffed with the
rocky remnants of a lifetime’s palaeontology,
sitting at the centre of which, smiling warmly,
is the man himself.
A doyen of the Natural History Museum’s
academic arm, Fortey has found recognition
from his peers in the shape of a Royal
Society fellowship, the Zoological Society
of London’s Frink Medal and the Geological
Society’s Lyell Medal; yet the success of his
popular science books makes it almost easy
to forget that he is an active geologist and
palaeontologist. Those books have variously
covered the origin and development of life,
the geological history of the Earth and the
300-million-year span of Fortey’s favourite
fossils – trilobites – and have yielded two
Aventis Prize and one Samuel Johnson Prize
shortlistings and one award from Rockefeller
University. But it seems the scope of his next
book will be somewhat more modest and
closer to home:
“I’m planning to do a Natural History of the
Natural History museum. It seems to me that
nobody out there in the world at large really
knows what goes on behind the scenes at the
museum – by which I mean the research that
goes on here. And the place is full, and has
been full, of the most remarkable characters,
people and stories.”
To Fortey, those stories are paramount:
“The problem with some popular science
books (and I name no names here) is that
what they are really is the scientist writing a
scientific paper and spicing it liberally with
rather bad jokes. And this is the idea that this
will somehow make it more accessible – I
don’t think it is. Most readers actually relate
to narrative… What a lot of people don’t
realise, they tend to think that science is a
sort of business conducted with white coats
in labs. But the actual narrative of how the
science is done is all too human. It involves
individual biographies and rivalries – all the
stuff of human life.”
However, it seems his enthusiasm for
storytelling has to be put on hold; there’s a
reason for the accumulation of years’ worth
of findings in his office:
“I’m at a stage where my actual retirement
date is approaching, so I’m really desperately
trying to finish things off that I’ve been
starting. I’ve been for years working on
trilobites from Wales that were discovered
Winter 2005
Richard Fortey Final.indd 1
a few years ago, which I’d never got round
to writing up… This is a new discovery of
a fossil fauna of this kind, so it ought to be
made note to the world. So that’s the last
thing I sent off to press.”
“Some popular
science books are
really scientific papers
with rather bad jokes”
Clearly the pressures on bringing a
discovery to the attention of the world are
somewhat less in the world of palaeontology
– it turns out that those Welsh trilobites
have been out of the ground for over ten
years. If palaeontologists aren’t rushing for
recognition, it may well be because so many
have given their names in Latinized form to
ancient species of plant and animal. As Fortey
points out, you can’t name a new discovery
after yourself, so it must be a measure of his
standing that he has been immortalised in so
many species of trilobite:
“There are various others who have
named things for me, so there are some
Forteyiis around and there’s a genus called
Forteyops, I think. It’s only a nomenclatorial
[immortality], and it’s quite possible in a
hundred and fifty years time, if the same
rules of naming organisms still apply, that
somebody’ll say “Who the hell’s Fortey?”
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
Richard Fortey is pretty confident that
Marilyn Monroe will be remembered a
century and a half hence, having named a
trilobite with an hour-glass-shaped head
after her. Since 1989 Fortey has been
working, in part, on the development of
diversity, focussing on the start of what is
known as the ‘Cambrian explosion’ – the
apparently sudden appearance of diverse new
invertebrate species, petrified in the famous
Burgess Shale of British Columbia. It is that
curiously sudden flowering of life that has
recently given ammunition to proponents of
Intelligent Design seeking to undermine the
Darwinian explanations for the development
of life.
“There we have something that’s a genuine
problem for the scientist. And I watched with
interest how Creationists, and now Intelligent
Designers, had done fancy footwork to kind
of reposition themselves continuously.
The Cambrian explosion of course is much
debated… Fossils do appear quite suddenly
in variety, low in the Cambrian and yes, you
cannot point to late Precambrian fossils and
say “this was the ancestor of that.” But to
make the claim that this means that there was
some kind of guiding hand, or something, at
that particular time, is sheer nonsense.”
This diversity has taken some fascinating
forms, as Fortey demonstrates with a paper
of his about a Devonian trilobite that
featured tiny sunshades over each enormous
eye. Such elegant evolution might incline
the weak minded to resort to an un-named
designer, but Fortey is conciliatory about
religion:
“…there is no necessary incompatibility
between religion and science. That is, I know
some very distinguished scientists who are
also religious and the two seem to sit quite
happily side-by-side.”
Fortey’s religion still seems to be the
beloved trilobites around which his career
has revolved. As he leads us out of the warren
of offices he stops to show us a 2-cm long
specimen with a sweeping, crescent-shaped
head. There, staring back through hundreds
of millions of years is a good enough reason
for a career spent digging up the past and
writing so wonderfully about it. ■
Richard Fortey and his favourite fossil, the Trilobite
I, science 19
25/11/05 5:48:20 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
Surely you’re joking
Professor Isham?
Theoretical physicist Professor Christopher Isham
believes there is a lot more to quantum reality than
nonsense and a lot more to life than science.
João Medeiros meets the Dean.
P
ROFESSOR CHRISTOPHER Isham
receives me in the office which, 35
years ago, he visited weekly as a
postgraduate student. He now occupies it as
the recently appointed Dean of the Faculty of
Natural Sciences (“They give me lunches and
they give me dinners”, he says laughing).
Isham has been a theoretical physics
professor at Imperial for more than twenty
years. Hs research concerns quantum
gravity; a highly speculative part of physics,
which has provided work for scientists since
Einstein’s time, when physicists first realised
that the theory of gravity and quantum
theory provided completely different views
of the physical world.
The theory of gravity is built upon
geometrical ideas, the token view being that
space-time behaves like a fabric that becomes
curved by the presence of mass. With it we
can, in principle, explain the planetary orbits,
the spread of galaxies and the expansion of
the universe.
On the other hand, quantum theory is
the physics that takes hold at the atomic
scale and below. The physics of materials
and high energy particle accelerators all rely
on quantum equations. However, quantum
mechanics has no logic at all: particles pop
up and disappear out of nothing, positions
and energies are ruled by uncertainty. As
Niels Bohr once put, “Anyone who thinks
they can talk about quantum theory without
feeling dizzy hasn’t yet understood the first
word about it.” That’s what Isham is trying to
change.
“One of my frustrations
is that hardly any of my
colleagues understands
what I am doing”
© Meilin Sancho
Isham with fellow theoretical phycisist Stephen Hawking
20 I, science
Chris Isham final.indd 2
Reasoning
that
ultimately there should
only be only one
theory to explain the
workings of the universe,
physicists set out to
find a larger theory
that can encompass the
two theories as mere
perspectives for different
situations. There have
been as many ideas to
solve the conundrum
of quantum gravity as
there are degrees of
imagination, but progress
has been slow. Some think
that the fundamental
particles are made up
of strings of finite but
indescribably small size,
others that space is not a
continuum but discrete,
even that we live in two
dimensions as holograms.
Physicists have ideas
and do the calculations
in the hope that a new
perspective can put
gravity and quantum
theory together.
Isham’s approach is
different. He has a keen
inclination to ask what
is, rather than what if. “I
always found the notion
of space and time very
strange things. When
I was a student I used to go to concerts at
the Royal Albert Hall and I would sit right at
the back. I would look at the orchestra and
found myself asking what it is between me
and them? It’s this thing called space, but
what actually is this thing?”
He worries that there is fair amount
of naivety in the way physicists intend to
represent the world.
“I noticed how passionate people can get
about certain things. I also found out that the
interpretation that people have of quantum
theory seems to be reflecting in some way
their actual personality in an unexpectedly
deep way.”
His aim is to steer clear from any personal
contexts and to build a theory with clear
mathematical principles in order to avoid
the usual bullshit factor spurred by wild
imaginations. This leads Isham to the rather
unique position of being as rigorous with
maths as he is with the physics.
Over the last decade he has been applying
a mathematical theory called topos theory
to quantum mechanics. “In topos logic you
can get statements which are partially true,
which in normal logic doesn’t make any
sense. When I realised this, I thought “My
goodness, things can partly exist as well!
That’s certainly how quantum theory is like!”
Partial existence? Neither yes nor no? My
face distorts into puzzlement. Yeah…maybe,
I say. He then gives me his first paper on the
subject, clearly expecting too much of me.
The difficulty of such matters is not
overwhelming for me alone. “One of my
frustrations is that hardly any of my colleagues
understands what I am doing” We’re very bad
at reading each others’ papers anyway and
when it involves a completely new branch of
mathematics it takes a long time to learn it
so why bother? So people will only take the
“Partial existence?
Neither yes nor no?
My face distorts into
puzzlement”
time to read about this stuff if I come up with
a truly spectacular application.”
These days, Isham seems to have become
a maverick of all things metaphysical.
Philosophers call him a great thinker,
theologians invite him to their conferences
and theoretical physicists hail him as a unique
influence. His main interest, although, is far
more earthly. “What really counts is how you
relate to other people, that’s by far the most
important thing”, he says with sincerity while
the last of the physicists’ stereotypes goes
out of the window.
Aiming to quickly recover the scientist in
him, I shoot: “So Professor Isham, what is a
thing?”
“We can’t say what is a thing, but you can
say what is not.”
“What is not?”
“Not what people think it is”.
Surely you must be joking Professor.
Isham? ■
Winter 2005
25/11/05 6:00:03 am
FEATURES
Nanotechnology:
Making big waves in a tiny world
In the expanse of London, Imperial and UCL are
venturing into the smaller world of nanotechnology.
Lilian Anekwe visits the London Centre for
Nanotechnology.
N
ANOTECHNOLOGY
STRIKES
me as one of those scientific words
that I ought to know the meaning of,
but in fact, don’t. Intuitively the word makes
me think of the technology of really small
things, but I’m at a loss to provide a definition more insightful than this. In today’s
world this problem is easily solved; a quick
Google search reveals that nanotechnology
is “The science and technology of building
electronic circuits and devices, of less than
100 nanometres, from single atoms and molecules”. 100 nanometres; that’s less than a
billionth of a metre, so I was right to think
that it involved really small things. But how
useful can experimentation into entities this
small really be in the big wide world?
My initial reservations notwithstanding,
nanotechnology is in fact booming. The
interest in manipulating single atoms and
molecules in order to give them newer and
more useful properties began with a lecture
given by the theoretical physicist Richard
Feynman in 1959. Feynman predicted that
there was nothing in the laws of physics that
meant that manipulating individual atoms
and molecules was impossible, but rather the
only limit was the development of sufficiently
dextrous tools.
“Most people
don’t realise that
nanotechnology is out
there in a big way”
Since then, nanotechnology has made
remarkable progress and has spawned
new branches of research in physics,
chemistry and biology. Dr Abid Khan, the
deputy director of The London Centre for
Nanotechnology, is well placed to comment
on the possibility of nanotechnology being
the panacea to all of our futuristic society’s
ills. The London Centre for Nanotechnology
was created in 2002 at a cost of nearly £14m,
and has a new £20m facility opening in
January 2006. It aims to provide a “hub for
a UK wide [nanotechnology] network”. As a
joint, integrated venture between Imperial
College London and University College
London, the centre is rapidly developing
a reputation as one of the world’s leading
centres for nanotechnology research.
Amongst the state-of-the-art facilities offered
at the centre is a ‘clean-room’; when working
with nanoscale molecules, contamination by
a single dust particle can spell disaster.
Dr Khan is keen to stress the spirit of
mutual collaboration in which the London
Winter 2005
nanotech.indd 1
Centre for Nanotechnology was born, as the
brainchild of Sir Richard Sykes and Sir Derek
Roberts, the rectors of Imperial College and
UCL, respectively. “The London Centre
for Nanotechnology’s quite a novel beast”,
explains Dr Khan. “It’s unique in that it is
one of the few centres for nanotechnology
in the world to unify teams across different
disciplines – in medicine, chemistry, physics
and engineering. Overall, there are more
than 200 researchers involved across the two
institutions”.
“The London Centre
for Nanotechnology is
quite a novel beast”
As you would expect of a multi-million
pound project that draws on the expertise
of two of the country’s leading universities
(including Imperial College’s own Professor
Tim Jones, head of the Centre for Electronic
Materials and Devices), there are exciting
research applications in the pipeline. Dr Khan
is clearly enthusiastic about the potential
uses of the research currently underway at
the LCN, not least because of the lucrative
research grants the LCN has attracted,
including a £2.3m award for a new type of
transmission electron micrograph for use at
Imperial – of which there are only around 10
in the world.
“Certain sites specialise in certain
things”, Dr Khan explains. “For example,
an important project currently going on at
Imperial is the development of solar cells,
backed by BP Solar. These are light, flexible
solar cells made with nano-structured
materials that can be used over much wider
areas than current solar cells, which use
more expensive semiconductor technology.
Theoretically, they could be made large
enough to cover the roof of a house. On
the other hand, at UCL, they are working
on some of the fundamental mechanisms
behind neurodegenerative disorders and
detectors for disease”. In keeping with the
cooperative spirit of the LCN there are
further joint ventures underway, including
the new Bio Nano Centre, where Imperial
and UCL researchers will work together to
build prototype products for the medical
industry. The successful application of the
fruits of nanotechnologists’ labours could be
the solution to problems the majority of us
haven’t even thought of yet.
Where will the LCN lead the nanotechnology
industry in the future? “In the medium
term, the major movement is going to be
in new materials processing in new types
of optical devices and display screens, such
as organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs)”
explains Dr Khan. “But in the longer term,
the major applications will be in medicine.
In fact, there are drugs with nano-structured
delivery mechanisms that have gained
US FDA (Food and Drug Administration)
approval, and others are currently in Phase
III trials”. It is only a matter of time before
we see the benefits of nanotechnology all
around us then? “What most people don’t
realise is that nanotechnology is already
out there in a big way, it’s already worth
billions of pounds. There are nanoparticles
in pregnancy tests. Cars have nanostructures
in the paintwork. Digital camera memories
use nanotechnologies”. It seems even though
we can’t see the technology, we can see its
innovations all around us. ■
I, science 21
25/11/05 6:13:58 am
FEATURES
Dancing to a Different Tune
“We all dance to a mysterious tune intoned in the distance by an
invisible player.”
-Albert Einstein
Undoubtedly so. To commemorate the centenary of Einstein’s
seminal papers the Institute of Physics commissioned an original
piece of contemporary dance from the celebrated Rambert
Dance Company. Becky Coe went to see the results of this effort,
Constant Speed, and caught up with Ray Rivers, Professor of
Theoretical Physics here at Imperial, who provided the dancers
with background on the pioneering work of the eminent father of
modern physics.
I
T WAS with some sense of trepidation
that I set off to see Rambert Dance
Company’s Constant Speed – partly
because I had to travel to the concrete
capital that is Milton Keynes, but also
because I was concerned that as a mere
biologist the complexity of physics portrayed
as dance would go over my head. I needn’t
have worried as I was quickly assured that
under no circumstances was this going to
be a physics lecture. As Professor Ray Rivers
explained: “It’s a celebration, a fanfare. If it’s a
soup there’s a bit of Einstein in the herbs but
the actual meat is in the choreography.”
In fact Constant Speed could be considered
the antithesis of the average physics lecture:
it is colourful, quirky, witty, sexy and, at
22 I, science
constant_speed.indd 2
© Ram Shergill
just 27 minutes long, over far too quickly.
It does not, thankfully, attempt to literally
represent Einstein’s seminal papers but does
make oblique references to some of the
ideas through movement, set, costume and
lighting. “You have to be very careful not to
be too naff,” says Rivers. “Occasionally you
see people in yellow suits pretending to be
quarks, and it just makes you cringe. That’s
not it!”
This is certainly not “Einstein: The Ballet.”
The references to physics are subtle and,
without reading the program, could be missed
entirely. However, a brief consideration
of the inspiration for this piece leads to a
greater insight, depth of understanding and
ultimately, enjoyment.
The most dance-friendly of Einstein’s 1905
ideas was that of Brownian motion – often
demonstrated to students by the apparently
random motion of pollen grains suspended in
water. The phenomena, originally identified
by biologist Robert Brown, could only be
understood when Einstein’s calculations
established the existence of atoms and
molecules: the pollen grains are jostled and
moved by water molecules too small to be
seen.
Rivers introduced the concept to the
Winter 2005
25/11/05 6:06:41 am
e
FEATURES
choreographer of Constant Speed, Mark
Baldwin, with the use of a “bumble ball.” This
is a battery-operated toy (originally designed
for children but now promoted to dogs)
resembling a brightly coloured landmine – its
centre of gravity constantly shifts, causing it
to mimic the erratic movement of a molecule
have benefited from the venture. Although
Rambert did not take the project on as an
exercise in publicity, it has reaped rewards
from the attention surrounding Einstein Year.
Similarly, theatre-goers, who probably buy
tickets based on the reputation of Rambert
with little regard for the particular content
It’s a celebration, a fanfare. If it’s a
soup there’s a bit of Einstein in the
herbs but the actual meat is in the
choreography.
bombarded by unseen forces. Part of the
final choreography incorporates the dancers’
improvisations based on playing with the
bumble ball, Baldwin uses the randomness
of the body movements to great effect.
Einstein’s revelation that light could act as
packages of energy, photons, which behave
like particles inspired another section of the
dance. The energy of the photon depends on
its colour, and we see weak, red men capering
with strong, blue women – a comic aside
which Rivers describes as “pure Mark.” This
leads into the spectacular rainbow finale,
which, complete with a two-tonne disco ball,
flirts delightfully with the kitsch. Baldwin
intended the disco ball to simultaneously
suggests the cosmos and the concept that
light arrives in packets. This was lost on me,
but the random scattering of light and the
dancers’ reflections was stunning.
The choreography is energetic, daring
and at points even acrobatic; the physicality
is irresistible. This is all set off by the music
of Franz Lehar, a Viennese composer and a
contemporary of Einstein. Baldwin had the
fanciful idea of Einstein dreaming up his
physics whilst listening to the pop music of
his time.
Rivers comments that although the
content of physics and dance are poles apart
they share the same “intensity of individual
visions and the quality which goes into
the work – and the uncertainty as how to
actually create something.” Similarly, in the
programme notes, Baldwin comments that
he has learnt that physicists can be charming
and obsessive – just like artists.
The concepts of energy, space and time,
so integral to Einstein’s ideas are also a
common currency in dance. The energy is
never lacking in Baldwin’s choreography, and
Rivers feels this is why dance is a much more
appropriate medium for representing physics
than a static form of visual art. There might
also be other similarities between physics
and contemporary dance, like the necessity
for a different mind set with which to view
them. Physicists often understand things
in mathematical equations, unintelligible
to many outsiders; dance aficionados learn
to read movements, rhythm and pace.
Perhaps this makes contemporary dance a
sympathetic medium to portray physics as
both are a bit misunderstood by the public
at large.
In the case of Constant Speed, it certainly
seems that both sides of the partnership
Winter 2005
constant_speed.indd 3
of the program, are introduced to some
potentially unfamiliar ideas. “It alerts them
to the fact that this is Einstein Year and there
is something called the Institute of Physics and if it gets just one or two other ideas over
in a simple way, then that is marvellous.”
Rivers said.
So does Constant Speed work? I would
say as an exquisite piece of art that takes
scientific ideas as its muse, it most definitely
does. If however, you were anticipating a
pedagogical work to furnish you with a
deeper understanding of Einsteinian physics,
you would be disappointed. Rivers declined to
speculate on whether Einstein himself would
have been impressed by Constant Speed, but
I feel it might be a fitting tribute to a man who
seemed to hold such a special place for the
creative side of scientific thinking. Einstein
said in an interview in 1929, “inspiration is
more important than knowledge. Knowledge
is limited, imagination encircles the world.”
If nothing else this collaboration between
science and art exudes imagination and
encourages it too. ■
© Ram Shergill
Although there are many overt physics references in “Constant Speed”, many
references are far less obvious, existing like a private joke between the physicists
and dancers involved.
I, science 23
25/11/05 6:07:35 am
FEATURES
I Want My Freedom!
Smoking: a right or a public health menace? The Government couldn’t decide.
Meera Senthilingam scrutinizes the issues.
S
HOPPING
CENTRES,
museums, and cinemas…
they’ve all done it! What
have they done you say? They’ve
all declared a vendetta on cigarettes and banned smoking on
their premises. Pubs and bars
are now to follow, stoking further debate nationwide.
Why pass a law to ban
smoking? The sight and smell of
smoke is a common occurrence
to us students who venture out
into London nightlife but do we
really know what we are being
exposed to? Every patron of
bars and smoky restaurants is
exposing themselves to passive
smoke. This is the combination
of side stream smoke, coming
from the tip of a lit cigarette;
and mainstream smoke, exhaled
from a smoker.
“87% of Imperial
students thought
the ban should
go ahead”
Countries such as Ireland and
Norway have already completely
banned you lighting up in their
workplaces, bars and restaurants.
Will England follow in these giant
footsteps? England is planning to
ban smoking in workplaces that
serve food, therefore including
all restaurants and many bars.
However, they are letting private
members’ clubs decide for
themselves. You may think this
sounds more reasonable than
a complete ban, but the British
Medical Association (BMA)
states that enforcing this partial
ban will prove much harder than
implementing a comprehensive
ban over all communal areas.
To ban or not to ban…who
actually cares about the outcome
of this legislation? I took to the
‘streets’ of Imperial’s walkway
24 I, science
smokingban advert edit.indd 2
to get your views on the matter.
87% of all the students I accosted
said they thought the ban should
go ahead, while 13% thought it
was unnecessary. However, 90%
of the people I stopped were
non-smokers, which obviously
biased my outcome.
To even out these stats I hit my
local and asked the opinion of
the patrons. In this environment
52% said they didn’t agree with
the ban. Considering that 2/3
of these people were smokers,
this is not as high as you would
presume.
So what were the reasons
justifying these opinions? The
majority of non-smokers felt
it was unfair for them to be
subjected to smoke when it’s
not a habit they have picked
up. They felt it forced them
into somebody else’s lifestyle.
I’m sure all girls have woken up
after a big night to the lovely
aroma of tobacco on their hair.
This stale odour after a night out
was a main reason among nonsmokers.
The smokers on the other
hand felt that passing such a law
would be almost totalitarian.
They felt that too much in life
is being regulated and the ban
would remove freedom. Yet
non-smokers could argue for
their right to go out in a smokefree environment.
Whilst agreeing that it
wasn’t fair to non-smokers, the
smokers I met felt that divided
areas within pubs and bars
would be a better alternative
allowing choice for both parties.
The problem with such divisions
however, is that most bars that
provide this have not installed
adequate ventilation systems
resulting in very little benefit.
Research here at Imperial
College has shown that 700
people die every year from the
effects of passive smoking and
at least one hospitality employee
dies every day. This evidence is
pretty conclusive, but hundreds
of theories have been passed
around on the health problems
associated with passive smoking.
What are the real concerns for
us to be aware of?
Tobacco smoke is made
up of over 4000 chemical
compounds and it is thought at
least 60 of these are potentially
carcinogenic. In the short-term,
just thirty minutes exposure to
passive smoke can reduce blood
flow through the heart.
In the long-term, the Scientific
Committee on Tobacco and
Health concluded that passive
smoke was involved in many
cases of lung cancer, heart disease
and respiratory problems.
The
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(EPA)
has classified Environmental
Tobacco Smoke (ETS) as a class
A carcinogen - in the same class
as asbestos. We all know the fuss
kicked up about asbestos, yet on
a daily basis we’re exposed to a
substance deemed as hazardous.
The smoking campaigning
group FOREST argue that the
case against passive smoke has
not been fully proven, but the
evidence backing the concerns
against passive smoking is
continually increasing.
It must be noted that while
only 59% of the Irish population
supported the ban before it was
introduced, over a year on 93%
now back it. There is worry that
trade in the hospitality industry
will suffer, though in Ireland
a small fall in trade was soon
followed by a rise and stands at
present with an overall loss of
only 3%.
Bringing the issue into context,
would a ban from smoking in
the union bar result in a loss
of revenue, a loss of student
drinking? I think not.
So all this considered, maybe
it’s time to follow the trend and
clear the air. ■
CiS is an international network of those
concerned with the relationship between
science and Christian faith, open to
scientists, teachers, students and all those
with an interest in this dialogue
Literature and resources
Keep up to date with the journal ������� ���
��������� ������, newsletters, and book reviews.
Conferences
Annual and local conferences aiming to address
current issues in science and Christianity.
Fellowship and support
Join our growing network of local groups.
CiS membership includes:
A subscription to ������� ��� ��������� ������
10% discount on books
Free registration for first conference
S tu d e n t
o ffe rs
One year’s
FREE online
membership
FREE online
access to the
journal
Book discounts
Conference
bursaries
Just send your
name, and details
of your course,
year and
university to
[email protected]
O n l i n e r e s o u r c e s a t w w w . c i s. o r g . u k
Winter 2005
25/11/05 6:18:42 am
REVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
Science and Religion
They’ve got no IDea
Intelligent Design: just how intelligent
is it? Michael Marshall finds out.
C
ONTROVERSY CONTINUES to rage in America over
Intelligent Design (ID), an ‘alternative’ view of the theory of
evolution. Evolutionary scientists across the globe are up in
arms, claiming that ID isn’t even a theory. Are they right?
One of the problems with tackling such a contentious issue is that
the debate has been polarised, over-strong claims are made on each
side. The spokesmen for ID have complained repeatedly that their
claims are being misrepresented as ‘creationism by any other name’.
ID, however, does not deny the advances of modern science. Several
key figures in ID are working scientists, urging a reinterpretation of
the evidence regarding evolution. So, here is their definition of ID,
taken unadulterated from www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org
“The theory of intelligent design (ID) holds that certain features of
the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent
cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. ID
is thus a scientific disagreement with the core claim of evolutionary
theory that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion.”
In spite of this new wording we are back in familiar territory.
Historically, opponents of the theory of evolution have argued that
complex features such as eyes could not have arisen by a mindless
process such as natural selection. There must therefore have been a
higher power, i.e. God, controlling how life developed.
ID’s proponents, however, are very keen not to bring the word
‘God’ into the discussion. They refer simply to the ‘Designer’, whose
identity and nature is left unspecified. This smacks of re-branding,
intended to give creationism more of a scientific feel.
“The Designer has not been
observed or defined, and he
certainly has not been studied”
Let’s think it through. The Designer is required to be aware
of the detailed circumstances of every life-form in the universe.
Conservatively, that’s 6 billion humans, all the rest of the mammals,
all the rest of the vertebrates, all the invertebrates, plus the trillions of
plants, fungi, bacteria, cyanobacteria and viruses. Furthermore, the
Designer is supposed to be able to continually and precisely adjust
all these life-forms at a genetic level, without any visible indications
of this process, such as hands coming out of the sky, telekineticallycontrolled pipettes, or the like.
That is one hell of a supposition. Scientific theories are expected
to use the fewest assumptions possible to explain a wide range of
Who’s the intelligent designer?
God, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Winter 2005
Opinionlayout2.indd 1
observations. By introducing an all-powerful Designer, ID fails
this basic test. Obviously, conventional evolution also relies on
‘assumptions’, like genes, mutations and changes in the environment;
however, all of these have been observed, defined and studied in
detail. The Designer has not been observed or defined, and he
certainly has not been studied. It becomes clear why the American
Association for the Advancement of Science claims that ID “has not
been demonstrated to be a scientific theory”.
One wonders why, if there truly is an all-powerful Designer guiding
the process of evolution, humans have an appendix. His machinations
have created several species of dark-dwelling mammals with residual
eyes that don’t work, birds that don’t go near water but nevertheless
have webbed feet, and multitudinous unfortunate creatures that are
manifestly ill-equipped to survive their environment.
I await an explanation with interest. ■
Religion has a place
In November Rev Dr John Polkinghorne
spoke at Imperial about ‘The Friendship
of Science and Religion’. Andrew Willson
explains why he invited him.
T
HERE SEEMS to be an unnecessary gap between the areas
of science and religion. Over my four years as Chaplain
at Imperial I have had some great conversations about
how science connects with religious practice and ideas. These
conversations however have been with individuals rather than in
public meetings. Where the connection has arisen in public debate
it has been in meetings where the explicit agenda was the promotion
of Christianity. In this instance the relationship between science and
religion becomes a football to kick about in an inconclusive debate
about the existence or otherwise of God.
I was pleased when John proposed the title for his talk, ‘The
Friendship of Science and Religion’. I wanted the talk and the
following dialogue to address the wide area that exists between the
extreme positions of fundamentalist secularists and fundamentalist
Christians. Between these two extreme points of view there seemed
to be a huge area for dialogue.
My view is that the supposed conflict between science and religion
is a false binary opposition. Making sense of our lives and the world in
which we live can not be reduced to the simplistic question: “Which
is right, science or religion? You decide!”.
The over-simplifying seems to occur at the extreme end of both
sides of the relationship. On the religious side there are Christians
who, because of a false and fundamentalist view of their faith, fail
to recognise that the Bible texts are not doing early 21st century
science.
There are also those of an intensely secularist pro-science view
who fail to look at the phenomenon of religion with the same kind of
curiosity and dispassion that they use in science.
So between these extremes I felt that there was need for a good,
academically sound and scientifically credible voice arguing the case
that science and religion both look at the world but focus on different
things, or are asking different questions.
Clearly John understands both religion and science from the
inside. What he was able to describe with authority were the ways
in which the two areas are both distinct and overlap. This is nuanced
and un-dramatic stuff. However, it is this area that proved to be of
such interest to over 200 people. This I guess is where the questions
actually lie for those who are themselves aware of the questions
that can be asked about the limitations and virtues of both science
and religion. There seem to be opportunities for both science and
religion to admit what they cannot answer; to admit the points at
which the models are only models, or that the scriptural images and
metaphors about God are just that – metaphors and images. Here
lies the beginning of interesting dialogue. ■
I, science 25
25/11/05 6:34:01 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
The Creativity Drain
Science is being taught in a way that
stifles creativity and the sciences are
suffering as a result, argues
Katherine Nightingale.
“Y
OU DROPPED science, I would guess, because it was
doled out to you in spoonfuls of distilled boredom.”
The author David Lodge got to the root of the problem
with science education in his recent novel Thinks. Is the way science
is taught in our schools, and the way science is perceived in general,
putting off creative young minds?
The number of students taking A Levels in science subjects is
dropping. This has knock-on effects in the science departments of
universities. Applications for degree courses in the physical sciences,
along with maths and engineering, have fallen by as much as 30% in
recent years.
Perhaps one of the problems facing the education of science is that
science itself is so embedded in the facts. Its very purpose - to find
out about the world - is often translated into a dull, fact-laden subject
in the classroom. The parrot-fashion learning of chemical equations,
for example, is not exactly stimulating. National Curriculum time
constraints can make it hard to emphasise the investigative and
pioneering aspects of science.
I don’t think I’ll ever forget the principle of evolution by natural
selection, illustrated by my GCSE biology teacher roaming the
classroom pretending to be one of the first fish to take a gasp of air,
complete with slurping noises and a look of wide-eyed confusion.
Explaining the principles behind the science in just such a way would
surely be more rewarding than the repetition of facts. Spoonfuls of
distilled boredom my biology classes were not.
The objective nature of science can make it appear detached and
dispassionate, an immediate turn-off for students who think of
themselves as creative and want a connection with their subject.
I certainly remember feeling bewildered at having to write up
science experiments in the passive voice. In trying to emphasise
the objectivity of science, and laying down the guidelines for the
experimental rigour that is undoubtedly the basis of ‘good science’,
science education almost deceives its students. There is no talk of
the motivations and passions of scientists, save the most famous
historical figures. It seems strange that we can learn about Darwin
and Einstein as humans, yet rarely do the same for contemporary
scientists. This detachment from human activity dissuades some
students from pursuing science further; many give it up for more
humanities-based subjects at the first opportunity, subjects in which
they perceive there to be more personal freedom and creativity.
“I don’t think I’ll ever forget my
GCSE biology teacher roaming
the classroom pretending to be
one of the first fish to take a gasp
of air, complete with slurping
noises and a look of wide-eyed
confusion”
Yet there is a great deal of creativity in scientific research, it is simply
rarely talked about. While the creative process itself is an important
part of the arts and evidently impregnates the final product, in science
the most important aspect is the end result. Science has created a
culture for itself where emotion is frowned upon and any admittance
of a creative, personal journey in the process of scientific research
would undermine the final product.
There is no use in denying the personal and creative exertion a
scientist can go through in order to gain results. Alan Lightman both a physicist and novelist - claims that the feeling of the creative
moment in both scientific research and fiction writing is the same: “a
stunning surprise joined with a feeling of rightness and inevitability”.
26 I, science
Opinionlayout2.indd 2
“There is a great deal of
creativity in scientific research,
it is simply rarely talked about”
It has been said that the ultimate aims of the artist and scientist
are alike; both are trying to understand and represent for others the
reality that lies beyond appearances and both have the ability to look
at situations in a different way to an established norm.
Acknowledging the more creative aspects of scientific research
could lead to a deeper understanding not only between science and
the arts, but between science teachers and the scientists of the future.
Whether this could ever be addressed in our education system
remains to be seen. ■
Humanities
Graduate...
And Proud
Should arts graduates stay away from the
sciences? Jonathan Black (BA English Lit.)
doesn’t think so.
I
F YOU’D LIKE to be a science communicator, I highly recommend
English Literature as a course of study. Now don’t all leave at once.
It’s brilliant fun, and you get to spend the rest of your life bothered
by the sense that everything happening to you you’ve read somewhere
before. One downside, however, is that it tends to inspire some pretty
beetled looks from scientists, especially when you tell them you want
to write about science. My own science credentials are really not
much: a bit of calculus, a bit of physics, and I got really irritated that
a guy I was going out with in second year had Walt Whitman’s love
poem to scientific ignorance When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer
stuck to his door. Read it, it’s barge-rinse.
I don’t come with expert knowledge in a scientific field, but that’s
not what you need to write about science for a general audience. The
experts themselves are only experts in the small corners of their field.
A science writer needs to know who the expert is and why his or her
findings are believed (or not) by others in science. That’s the same
for everyone who communicates science, regardless of how much
time they’ve spent at the business end of an Erlenmeyer flask. I’m not
saying that I don’t need to go and find things out. Each day there’s
more to get wrong about science than there was the day before, and I
don’t want to get things wrong.
Winter 2005
25/11/05 6:35:03 am
REVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
I promise to do my homework. I will also put this, my first published
piece of writing about science, in a handsome and heavy frame. If
you’ve done some science that I get wrong then you, yes you, can
come over and whack me with it. If my head is still vaguely spherical
after a few years, hopefully you’ll agree I can carry on.
“All of us, humanities
graduates, made fun of the
hardline postmodernist view
that knowledge is myth.
Then we went to the pub.”
But maybe I don’t want to get my facts right: it seems I may
have other, darker purposes to my scribbling. The Guardian’s Ben
Goldacre recently decided that once humanities graduates join
the media they’re consumed with antiscientific thoughts. Oh yes:
“…humanities graduates in the media, who suspect themselves to
be intellectuals, desperately need to reinforce the idea that science
is nonsense: because they’ve denied themselves access to the most
significant developments in the history of western thought for 200
years, and secretly, deep down, they’re angry with themselves over
that.” This potted bit of pop psychology isn’t true, but I do admire
its resemblance to the origins of a comic book villain. Goldacre can
dream up paintpot monsters to give you all nightmares if he likes, but
what he’s saying bears no resemblance to the humanities graduates
who are my friends. All of us made fun of the hardline postmodernist
view that knowledge is myth. Then we went to the pub.
There are benefits to having humanities kids like me hanging out
around science. The fact that artists, playwrights and others of the ilk
Will the lights
stay on this
winter?
Were they on in the first place? Despite
political rhetoric on the strength of the
UK’s Climate Change Programme, we
still have a long way to go, argues
Laura Middleton.
L
IKE MANY, I cringed when I heard Tony Blair’s backtrack
speech to the G8 environment ministers last week. It was
George W Jr. speaking when Blair said that the “blunt truth
about the politics of climate change” was that no country wants to
sacrifice its economy to meet the challenge and that focus needs to be
on technology, not binding international targets and agreements.
Blair’s new focus on technology comes exactly when his own
scientific adviser announced that UK is unlikely to meet its 2010
target of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 20%. He insists that
the UK will catch up to reach its 2050 target of a 60% reduction but
most policy research suggests the opposite.
Robust, measurable targets are exactly what we need - not just
vague aspirations. The technology to reduce energy demand and
supply, together with energy efficiency measures is already available.
If we launched a national wind, solar and combined heat and power
(CHP) programme along with energy conservation measures we
could really make a difference to the amount of carbon dioxide
produced in 2010. The challenge is to provide regulations and enough
economic incentives to persuade industry and households to take up
these technologies on a mass scale.
“Too many senior officials just don’t believe that you can get
energy this way,” said Jeremy Leggett of the solar power company
Solarcentury. “They believe that you get it from building a big box and
putting in it a nuclear reactor; it’s just the culture. “The government is
Winter 2005
Opinionlayout2.indd 3
have been inspired to talk about science is a sign of its success, not
its failure. Some of their portrayals will be suspicious in intention
or quality, and I’ll be around to spot the silly ones and applaud the
truthful ones. If science is meant to be for everyone, that should
include little old me - you’ll find the party’s better if not everyone
brings the same thing. I’m sorry to be so goody-goody about all this,
but trust an English grad. It worked out for the Montagues and the
Capulets in the end, but it will be better to try and resolve things
without quite so many of us taking, or talking, poison. ■
drip-feeding the renewables sector - barely keeping it alive,”
It’s the UK’s fragmented policy and lack of joined up thinking
that has resulted in us facing an enormous shortfall in electricity
provision compared to other European countries such as Germany,
which last year installed 100 times more solar capacity than the
UK.
Climate Change Science has never been more robust. There is
widespread scientific consensus that C02 emissions from humans
are increasing the earth’s average temperature and the debate has
moved on to examine how society must respond. Science has
developed state-of-the-art climate “scenarios” which look at how
climate change impacts vary with different government policies.
These scenarios can also be used to see what mix of policies would
be required to reach a 60% reduction in carbon emissions. Recent
advances in economic computer modelling have demonstrated
that we can have economic growth but at the same time reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
Science provides clear pathways towards a clean, decarbonised,
yet growing economy, but the call for leadership on climate change
that Blair triumphantly advocated during the recent G8 meetings
has not translated into real action. Recent research by the Tyndall
Centre for Climate Change Research points to how planned airport
expansions would mean that by 2050 aviation would be responsible
for 90% of all carbon emissions, yet the government still refuses to
tax aviation fuel or curb expansion.
The UK Government structure is too weak to respond to
climate change because its agencies are disjointed and do not
communicate. Defra are primarily responsible for the UK Climate
Change Programme (UKCCP), but the impacts of climate change
go beyond Defra’s remit. This requires policy integration and
consensus between DTI, DFT, the Treasury and the ODPM something which certainly won’t take place without clear targets.
Similarly the UKCCP, which mainly consists of the Energy
Savings Trust and the Climate Change Levy, is itself disjointed
and fragmented. The roles, responsibilities and pathways between
funding bodies, strategies and research organisations are not clear.
Much of the liaison between Defra, the UKCCP and other research
bodies is entirely ad-hoc and based-upon personal relationships.
There is little formal coordination or communication between
the many bodies contributing to it. Government departments and
the programme itself need an overarching, holistic framework
to integrate information, avoid duplicating efforts and share
knowledge. We need interdisciplinary government for an
interdisciplinary problem. ■
I, science 27
25/11/05 6:35:30 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
The divine idea
Katherine Nightingale finds there is less to
God’s story than she had hoped.
The Story of God
by Robert Winston
BANTAM PRESS / ISBN 0-593-05493-8
R
OBERT WINSTON is a brave
man. He has written a book about
the history of religion: from its
beginnings in the minds of our prehistoric
ancestors to its status in society today,
threatened by science. Written from his
perspective as a highly regarded scientist
and a practising Jew, this work is unlikely
to be entirely respected by either scientists or theologians.
The subject is undoubtedly compelling. It raises questions
central to human existence and consciousness: now that we have
science, do we need God? Why did we ever need God? What
makes us seek not only an explanation of the world around us, but
a why, something beyond perceptible human life? And how has
this ‘religiosity’ survived?
“Winston poses the most important
question and yet doesn’t tell us what
he thinks the answer is”
Winston charts the history of religion, which he calls the “Divine
Idea”, from the earliest civilisations to question what happened
after death, through organised religion, to the present day. The
prehistoric evidence he uses is understandably speculative and
shaky, and though Winston recognises this himself, his arguments
may still attract derision from his fellow scientists.
His arguments are occasionally muddled, especially the idea of
a ‘gene for religion’. He describes candidate genes involved in the
Creepy-crawlies
Greg Foot gets down and dirty with
a few billion invertebrates.
Life in the Undergrowth
presented by David Attenborough
D
AVID ATTENBOROUGH returns
to our screens with Life in the
Undergrowth, a series probing deep
into the lives of the invertebrates hidden
underneath our feet.
At a preview hosted by the Royal Television
Society, Mike Salisbury, the series producer,
took an invited audience through some of
the footage. I will never again look at the world in the same way. We
saw a snail’s tentacle unravel with an eye opening from its end. We
saw a springtail, a flea smaller than a full stop, keep itself moist using
an inflatable grooming arm. We saw beetles re-packing their wings
using what can only be described as expert origami.
Life in the Undergrowth films the often-neglected creepy-crawlies
living in our hedgerows. The series is a visual feast: screens are
filled with colourful shots of stunning organisms that have never
before been exposed in this way. Minute cameras, accompanied by
28 I, science
Reviews.indd 2
regulation of levels of different mood-controlling neurotransmitters
in the brain, linking these to a sense of peace achieved in spirituality.
These genes could have been favoured by natural selection if they
helped humans form cohesive societies based on religious codes.
However, Winston discounts this idea later, because cohesion
within groups can be achieved by other means. “Religion does not
seem to be produced by a specific part of our psychological makeup”. He makes no further mention of these genes yet describes
more evidence for a genetic component to religion.
His discussion of the birth and development of modern science
is engaging, and charts the complexities of science becoming a
valid world-view alongside, and often in contention with, religion.
While traditional, organised religion is in decline, the personalised
‘supermarket of faiths’ and religion for ‘the here and now’ have
become increasingly popular. It would seem that while science,
deeply rooted in observation and experiment, is explaining more
and more, the human mind cannot let go of the Divine Idea and
continues to seek something more than science can give.
Winston says that science will never completely answer the
questions behind human existence, yet he doesn’t offer an
alternative. He suggests instead that the search for the meaning
of life itself is sufficient meaning for man’s existence. He has posed
possibly the most important question for humanity and yet doesn’t
tell us what he thinks the answer is. Indeed, though there are many
references to both his professional life and his Jewish faith, he
never expresses an overt opinion. This is disappointing. He is in
an almost unique position, effectively spanning both sides of the
argument, but despite this denies us the personal journey promised
in the tagline of his book.
The Story of God takes us through a narrative that anyone
interested in human history will enjoy. The book explains many
of the disputes between science and religion with style and clarity,
yet the overall tone is descriptive rather than investigative. It is
certainly illuminating about the issues surrounding the debates of
science and religion. Perhaps Winston’s greatest skill is taking such
a massive topic and presenting it in a digestible and entertaining
way. He is never patronising and there is a sense that he is learning
along with us. Yet the fact that this book has been written by a
scientist may not work in its favour. Should scientists, religious or
not, be embarking on this kind of study? There is no doubt that this
will provoke further debate in the science versus religion battlefield.
As Winston himself concedes, “As a scientist writing about religion
I will inevitably be venturing onto contested ground.” ■
their own lighting rigs, delve deep into insect’s nests. Time-lapse
photography shows bee flight 4,000 times slower than the naked eye
could see it. Tiny lenses, mounted on an automated miniature robot,
march with an ant army during the invasion of a termite nest. In a
welcome addition to the standard natural history programme format,
the pioneering technology behind such pictures is presented in the
final ten minutes of each programme.
The series is at the cusp of scientific and technical knowledge. It
shows thermal imagery of insect antics that have never been seen
before, recording even the tiny sounds produced by larvae that
purposefully imitate red ants. This footage is being used to further
research, and papers based on it have already appeared in Nature.
Life in ihe Undergrowth highlights not only the incredible beauty
of the invertebrate world but also its importance: “If we and the rest
of the back-boned animals were to disappear overnight, the rest of
the world would get on pretty well. But if the invertebrates were to
disappear, the land’s ecosystems would collapse.”
One memorable sequence sees Attenborough using a pin to point
to a springtail, whilst the latest ‘deep focus’ technology enables us to
see both Attenborough and the animal together without the use of
digital trickery. Attenborough, however, is as brilliantly understated
as ever, giving the tiny insect centre stage.
The series is a delight to watch, and it is difficult to describe in
words how inspiring this footage is. Attenborough’s approachable
style and infectious enthusiasm will absorb everyone into this
fascinating miniature world found deep in our undergrowth. ■
Attenborough’s undergrowth
Life in the Undergrowth is a five-part series produced by
Mike Salisbury. Watch it on BBC1 Wednesdays at 9pm.
Winter 2005
25/11/05 7:41:19 am
REVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
OPINION
NEWS & EVENTS
Moth Surprise, Carlo Delli, Italy. (The Wildlife Photographer of the Year Competition is organised by the Natural History Museum and BBC Wildlife
Magazine. The images are for one use only and must not be archived.)
Wild creatures
The Natural History Museum’s wildlife
photograhy exhibiton is an annual treat.
Letitia Hughes picks out some gems.
A
S I STRUGGLED through the Natural History Museum,
full of screaming toddlers and school children brandishing
clipboards, the sanctuary of the Wildlife Photographer
Exhibition came as a welcome release. I won’t bore you with the details
of my visit here – I’ll leave you to visit yourself. In the meantime, here
are some highlights to whet your appetite.
If you think this exhibition is just walls of arty, useless photographs
of people’s pet bunny rabbits, you are wrong. The photos come from
all over the world, from places as diverse as the depths of the ocean
and the top of a volcano. The text accompanying each photo helps the
viewer discover some of the science behind it. The Animal Behaviour
category includes images of a Japanese macaque, selflessly acting as
a snowplough to help the other macaques to get past the deep snow
(Yukihiro Fukuda, Snow Trails) and a snake eagle eating a snake (José
B Ruiz, The Snake Eagle Family). A particularly impressive photo had
a swift diving behind a powerful waterfall to the ledge underneath, a
difficult journey bearing in mind its small size (John Aitchison, Swift
Dive). The photographer describes how in order to leave the ledge
the swifts had to fly down behind the wall of water until they gained
enough speed to punch through it. Penguins always amuse me and
here they are even more laughable as they attempt surfing. (Andy
Rouse, Surfing Gentoo).
Winter 2005
Reviews.indd 3
In the Animal Portraits category, the expressions of the animals
really spoke for themselves. Take the Glare of the Great Owl who
clearly did not want to be photographed (Scott W Sharkey), or
the majestic gorilla sitting unperturbed in the torrential rain (Joe
McDonald, Gorilla in the Rain), or even the comic genius of the Red
Deer who had acquired a stylish bracken headdress after a fight with a
rival (Danny Green, Red Deer headgear). The Composition and Form
category showed a close-up of what at first glance appears to be a
furry mammal’s eyes but is in fact a moth’s defensive markings (Carlo
Delli, Moths Surprise). A final eye-catching image was found in the
Wild Places category in a scene that looked like something out of
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, with monochromatic frosted
pines juxtaposed against a sunlit backdrop (Christophe SidamonPesson, Frosted Pines).
You can see all these images and more if you visit the exhibition. All
the winners are displayed, as well as the runners-up and the highly
commended entries. And if that is not enough, there is also a movie
of winning and commended entries from the past twenty years of the
Wildlife Photographer of the Year Award.
The overall winner was Manuel Presti’s Sky Chase, an action shot
of a dynamic peregrine falcon attack among a myriad of starlings.
The blurriness of the image only accentuates the speed and power
of nature. In his own words, it is “a stark dramatic picture of one of
the world’s greatest natural spectacles”. But don’t take his word for it
– see it for yourself and pick your own favourite. ■
The Wildlife Photographer Exhibition
Visit the exhibition at the Natural History Museum
in South Kensington until 23 April 2006.
Tickets are £6 and £3.50 (concs)
I, science
29
25/11/05 8:08:48 am
NEWS & EVENTS
OPINION
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWS
Obsessive genius
Liv Hov-Clayton learns about a woman
whose achievements came at a price.
Obsessive Genius: The Inner
World of Marie Curie
by Barbara Goldsmith
PHOENIX / ISBN 0-753-81899-X
M
ADAME CURIE made her mark on
history as the woman who braved
the fantastically male-dominated
world of science to discover radioactivity,
radium and polonium and win two Nobel
prizes. The myths surrounding this legendary
woman are certainly romantic: she overcame childhood adversity
and Russian oppression in her native Poland, studied at the Sorbonne
in Paris, met the love of her life and discovered radium in a rundown,
draughty shack in a Paris backyard – a discovery which made her
world-famous.
Barbara Goldsmith adds new details to this myth, while debunking
others. The true story is richer, more complex, and much more
scandalous. Madame Curie suffered bouts of deep depression
throughout her life, and only intense work and study could distract
her from them. As reflected in the book’s title, she possessed an
extreme sense of purpose in her scientific work; to prove her point
she often set out on exhausting scientific studies, which could take
years, rather than directly confront her critics. This was probably
a sensible approach since her womanhood only helped to diminish
her credibility in the male-dominated scientific circles. Any credit
she received for her work was hard won; when she was awarded the
Sex and suicide?
There’s more to mitochondria than
Francesca Young realised.
Power, Sex, Suicide:
Mitochondria and the
Meaning of Life
by Nick Lane
OUP / ISBN 0-192-80481-2
A
DRAMATIC TITLE like this may
lead biology fanatics to expect
the secrets of the world to unfold
before their eyes, while cynics would
expect a big let down. The man on the
street probably thinks this book belongs on the self-help shelves,
not too far from Jilly Cooper’s latest romp. Nick Lane’s unusual
history of mitochondria is something in between the first two and
nothing of the last.
Mitochondria are those tiny things that use oxygen to create
power, jammed inside living cells. But do they live up to the
book’s title? Lane does a good job of convincing us that they do.
Mitochondria were once considered to be merely the nucleus’
backing singers, creating the power for it to do the ‘real’ work, but
are now considered the key ingredients of the complex life we enjoy.
The remarkable evolutionary miracles that brought us here only
happened because of the symbiotic relationship that developed
between the freely living mitochondria and other cells.
30 I, science
Reviews.indd 4
Nobel Prize, she was not even allowed onto the podium to receive it.
However, in the experience of her daughter Eve, her almost obsessive
traits made her a very single-minded and cold mother with little
understanding for pursuits other than scientific knowledge.
Goldsmith’s story of Madame Curie’s life is also an intriguing
account of the scientific community a century ago. The pursuit of
scientific discoveries with the fame, honour and vital funding that
followed was a merciless, though surprisingly courteous race.
Scientists would lend each other vital pieces of equipment, chemicals
or data, knowing well it might cost them the credit of a discovery.
Mass media hotly pursued any breakthrough, and Goldsmith gives
astonishing accounts of the usages radium was put to, most notably
as a beauty product, with the gruesome deaths that inevitably
followed.
The fact that Madame Curie was a woman and a foreigner made
her an object of particular interest for the media. Her fame helped
secure important funding for her research, but also worked against
her, particularly when a decade after the death of her beloved husband
and research partner Pierre Curie, Marie had an affair with a married
fellow scientist, Paul Langevin. The newspapers did not think twice
about splashing this all over their front pages, and overnight her
reputation tumbled from being an object of admiration to one of
contempt. This is perhaps not so different from today, apart from the
fact that her male counterparts were left in peace. Goldstein points
out how Albert Einstein fathered a child out of wedlock without
suffering similar consequences.
Goldstein’s book is easy to read, accounts of experiments and
theory are intermingled with vivid descriptions of public hysteria,
infighting and Marie Curies’ well-concealed emotional life. Goldstein
draws parallels with the present by focusing on the dilemmas that
big scientific discoveries bring. Most scientists, including Madame
Curie, want their work to be only of benefit, but once “the genie is out
of the bottle”, it is difficult to control, and compromises are made to
attract further funding. Madame Curie’s daughter took her mother’s
findings further by unwittingly discovering fission, which has brought
about nuclear bombs as well as nuclear energy.
Barbara Goldstein reveals some surprisingly emotional, at times
shocking, aspects of an apparently grey, single-minded scientist,
brilliantly portraying the interactions of scientists a century ago. ■
Call me a university patriot (Lane studied biochemistry at
Imperial College) but his enthusiasm for the subject is infectious,
and it is as much his writing ability as the subject matter that turns
this book into “popular” science.
The “Power, Sex, Suicide” part of the title is an excuse for Lane
to describe the intricate workings of mitochondria. But the book is
not all hardcore cellular biology and evolution. Lane tells the story
of how theories about mitochondria evolved and the controversies
that surrounded them, concluding with Peter Mitchell’s 1978 Nobel
Prize winning discovery. Mitchell proposed that mitochondria carry
within them the secret of aging and thus also that of postponing
death. Even the most sullen arts student would find it difficult to
deny that this makes for charged reading.
“Mitochondria might carry the secret
of aging and of postponing death”
However, amongst this praise, it is only fair to issue a warning.
Funfairs have signs saying, “please do not board this ride unless you
are this tall”, posted on the most dramatic of rides. Mitochondria’s
jacket should ideally warn, “please do not attempt to read this book
unless you have a biology A-level”. And even if you do have one,
it’s fairly hard going. Explanations of biological processes essential
to understanding the text are given but sometimes not until much
further on. Non-scientist readers could be left wondering if there
was a salient point they have missed in their ignorance. And yet, so
much detail is embedded in this eccentrically arranged history of
mitochondria that even the most die-hard mitochondria enthusiast
would be tempted to make a cup of tea.
Whether you are an A-level biologist or hardcore mitochondria
enthusiast, this is a book worth reading. It might not be as useful
as Men are from Venus, Women are from Mars in solving your
troubles, but in return for your perseverance you’ll be rewarded
with one of the most dynamic stories in biology. ■
Winter 2005
25/11/05 7:53:10 am
One more thing...
“Science is the record of
dead religions”
Oscar Wilde
“In a certain sense, science is
myth-making just as religion is”
Karl Popper, philosopher
“The only way to reconcile
science and religion is to
set up something which is
not science and something
that is not religion”
H L Mencken, journalist
“Science without religion is lame,
religion without science is blind”
“I do not feel obliged to Albert Einstein
believe that the same God
who endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect intended
us to forgo their use”
Galileo Galilei
MSc in Science
Communication
(FT/PT)
MSc in Science
Media Production
(FT)
MSc in Creative
Non-Fiction Writing
(FT/PT)
“Isn’t it enough to see that a
garden is beautiful without
having to believe there are
fairies at the bottom of it too?”
Douglas Adams, writer
These courses are designed to provide science
and engineering graduates with the skills
and knowledge to switch to media or writing
careers.
Science Communication is a general
preparation programme. Science Media
Production is designed for those who want
to go into television or radio, while Creative
Non-Fiction Writing is for those aspiring
to write serious non-fiction for popular
audiences.
For more information contact Wynn
Abbott, Science Communication Group
Administrator, Room S508, Sherfield
Building, Imperial College London SW7 2AZ,
tel: 020 7594 8753, fax: 020 7594 8763,
email: [email protected]
web: www.imperial.ac.uk/
sciencecommunication
Closing date: 24 February 2006.
Valuing diversity and committed to equality of opportunity
one_more_thing.indd 1
25/11/05 8:52:12 am
Issue 3 Winter 2005
http://www.union.ic.ac.uk/media/iscience/
Cover-Contents-Editorial-BackCover2.indd 4
25/11/05 3:27:10 am