TOW #19 The Intelligent Plant (Michael Pollan)

     

Mimosa pudica, or the Sensitive Plant, has been shown to "learn" from its environment and change its behavior accordingly.

     Mimosa pudica, the plant famous for its leaves that curl rapidly when disturbed (see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o18UUSJgQA), shakes violently and clenches its leaves. However, after 15 repeated shakes, the plants leaves begin to open. It has sustained no damage from the rhythmic jerking, and and begins to open its leaves again. In its own, botanical way, the plant has learned from its environment. The jerking stops, and resumes an hour later. The plant's leaves stay open. The jerking ends once more, and does not begin again until an entire month has passed. But Mimosa pudica does not react.

     This kind of "conditioning" in plants constitutes one of the most fascinating and controversial disciplines in life science: Plant Neurobiology. Often branded as anthropomorphising, Plant Neurobiology seeks to explain the intricate ways plants actively interact with their environment. Michael Pollan, in his article The Intelligent Plant, masterfully combined opinions and research on both side of the heated debate, while including enough anecdotal research and testimonies (such as the study above, by Monica Gagliano) compiled after an apparently long time.

     He begins at the extreme beginning of the plant neurobiology, a book titled The Secret Life of Plants. Contained within The New Yorker, a magazine with a wide variety of articles per issue, Pollan begins with these radical ideas to pique a peruser's interest. In the mentioned book, Cleve Backster describes plants that are able to pick out people who have killed other plants, respond to a distressed human, and exhibit sympathy. By beginning with this radical stance and fascinating examples, even though Pollan shows how they were all discredited, he effectively entertains his audience and draws them in.

    Pollan's goal in the article is not to provide credibility to plant neurobiology, it is simply to show the different sizes and simplify the mounting research in this amazing and applicable field. He himself describes lectures on the subject "highly technical" and a "kind of incremental science," something not likely to be popularized. To add intrigue, he employs imagery and anecdotes, such as the one I began by reciting, to interest his audience with radical research that can elicit contention or wonder.

   Overall, the article was very impressive. Pollan, though not an expert on the subject, clearly did a significant amount of research and applied his sources very well. He showed little bias, though he did include more stories of plants acting like animals than the professors who scoffed at the notion; I assume this is because they are simply more interesting.

TOW #18 Three Theories That Might Blow Up The Big Bang (Adam Frank)

Adam Frank presents 3 theories that challenge the popular Big Bang Theory.

Today's TOW comes from Adam Frank, a frequent writer on the subjects of space and time for Discover Magazine, and author of several books on the same subjects. Though not a researcher himself, Frank interviews leading scientists in these fields and frequently utilizes information directly quoted from them. This particular article was written in March 2008, the same year as the completion of the CERN Supercollider, a multi-billion dollar facility constructed to run experiments that simulate the beginning of the Universe as we know it, namely: the Big Bang. This model hypothesizes the Universe beginning more than 13 billion years ago as an inconceivably dense mass that rapidly expanded and condensed locally into the galaxies, stars, and planets we see today. This explains observed mysteries like cosmic background radiation and the expansion of the universe. Adam Frank showcases three theories that counter the Big Bang and propose very different ways our universe began (or didn't begin at all). His purpose is to give a simple explanation of each, effectively showing that there are several theories that exist beyond what we are taught in school. His audience are readers of the science-oriented Discover Magazine, so are expected to have knowledge of general physics. The organization is logical, with an introduction, three sub-headed theory explanations, and a conclusion. Each theory begins with a quick biography of its creator, establishing the credibility of the idea in question. A description of each idea follows, and then Smith explores their implications: the differences from the Big Bang Theory, and what it may mean to us. For example, the third presented theory is that of an infinite series of "Nows," that every possible arrangement of atoms exists simultaneously, an idea that claims time does not exist. This is, clearly, very difficult to imagine. So Frank uses the creator's own words, citing direct quotes and many analogies to help the reader better visualize what the theory means. For example, Frank quotes, "'Every integer exists simul­taneously. But some of the integers are linked in structure, like the set of all primes or the numbers you get from the Fibonacci series.'” He then adds his own elaboration on the idea, "Yet the number 3 does not occur in the past of the number 5 any more than the Big Bang exists in the past of the year 2008." By giving brief, tangible explanations, Frank saves us from the rigorous scientific articles of the scientists he cites. Overall, the article maintained my attention and delivered effective, credible explanations. The only thing I didn't like was his abrupt and ineffective conclusion,

IRB #3 The Prince (Niccolò Machiavelli)

For this marking period, I am going to read the book Joseph Stalin reportedly kept in the drawer of his bedside table: The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli. Machiavelli was a historian, political scientist, philosopher, comedian, and author in 16th century Italy. He was Secretary to the Second Chancery of the Republic of Florence from 1498 to 1512, when the Medici family was temporarily out of power. When the Medici reclaimed Florence, they exiled Machiavelli, who wrote The Prince and dedicated it to Lorenzo de'Medici. Whether the book was intended as satire or as a serious guide to rule is still unknown. Regardless, it is still his most famous work, mostly because it seemed to encourage actions that were generally frowned upon. For example, Machiavelli thinks that moral virtues are always detrimental to a state, and his proposed "Prince" is ruthless, understanding that the "ends always justify the means." The book earns Machiavelli credit as the founder of modern political science and political ethics. It is unique among political works of the time, as it was written in Italian vernacular. This makes my English translation very easy to understand. I am really fascinated by distopias (I love books like 1984 and Brave New World), and Machiavelli justifies what many would consider a tyrannical Prince. I hope to see how complex philosophical and political ideas can be expressed in common language. I want to use the book as a model for simplifying my own writing, as I often have trouble converting abstract ideas into understandable writing.

TOW #17 Who Will Win Super Bowl XLVIII? (Chris Burke & Doug Farrar)

Awww yeaaaa

There is no better time than now to write about the Superbowl. So this week, I have selected NFL.com's comparison of the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks. I read another article from a Denver newspaper, but I think that as the universal representation of every team, this article would be the least biased. The authors are Chris Burke and Doug Farrar, two writers that have teamed up in the past for game-day analyses and reviews of team performances in the NFL. The article is for an audience anticipating the game of all games, looking for facts over personal beliefs. It is structured with two major sections, one explaining why the Seahawks will win, and another explaining why the Broncos may come home with the trophy. It is divided into five subsections for each team, explaining weaknesses in the opponent or strengths in the chosen team. These include an analysis of the Broncos run-stopping defense and how it can be overpowered, previous pressure-performance by the Seahawks, and the variety of the Broncos' offensive weapons. To avoid the bias of the authors, the article relies primarily on outside sources, citing statistics and expert opinions. For example, "the Broncos have limited five of their past six opponents to fewer than 100 yards rushing" and "wide receiver Eric Decker said, 'He trusts the guys around him and that’s all you can ask for in a quarterback that will lead you Sunday on the field'" are used as evidence supporting the Broncos. These add to the credibility of the authors, because they are clearly making use of the vast resources of NFL.com, press conferences, and rosters to provide the aspects of play contributing to the game day performances. Additionally, the structure of the article is an appeal to logos, separating the two teams and dividing each winning outcome into five key components with a detailed explanation underneath. If someone wants to find information to support their team or a fact regarding a specific matchup, information is easily located under the headings. The article also utilizes theoretical situations to illustrate the author's point. For example, when describing the Bronco's offensive assault, Burke and Farrar write "Let’s say Sherman finds himself on Demaryius Thomas and the line generates a little pressure on Manning," and goes on to describe the variety of options the Broncos still have for success." Overall, I found the article suitably unbiased and informative, even though the Broncos are totally going to crush the Seahawks.