Lifeboat Foundation: Safeguarding Humanity
Toggle light / dark theme

Blog

Music: Hans Zimmer — Mountains (Interstellar Soundtrack)
Lyrics: «Do not go gentle into that good night» by Dylan Thomas.

Voice: Anthony Hopkins.

FILMS:
«2001: A Space Odyssey» (1968, dir. Stanley Kubrick)
«Alien» (1979, dir. Ridley Scott)
«Aliens» (1986, dir. James Cameron)
«Armageddon» (1998, dir. Michael Bay)
«Avatar» (2009, dir. James Cameron)
«Battleship» (2012, dir. Peter Berg)
«Cargo» (2009, dir. Ivan Engler, Ralph Etter)
«Elysium» (2013, dir. Neill Blomkamp)
«Europa Report» (2013, dir. Sebastián Cordero)
«Event Horizon» (1997, dir. Paul Anderson)
«Gravity» (2013, dir. Alfonso Cuarón)
«Guardians of the Galaxy» (2014, dir. James Gunn)
«Interstellar » (2014, dir. Christopher Nolan)
«Lockout» (2012, dir. James Mather, Stephen St. Leger)
«Lost in Space» (1998, dir. Stephen Hopkins)
«Man of Steel» (2013, dir. Zack Snyder)
«Mission to Mars» (2000, dir. Brian De Palma)
«Moon» (2009, dir. Duncan Jones)
«Oblivion» (2013, dir. Joseph Kosinski)
«Pandorum» (2009, dir. Christian Alvart)
«Prometheus» (2012, dir. Ridley Scott)
«Solaris» (1972, dir. Andrey Tarkovskiy)
«Solaris» (2002, dir. Steven Soderbergh)
«Star Trek» (2009, dir. J.J. Abrams)
«Star Trek: Into Darkness» (2013, dir. J.J. Abrams)
«Star Wars: Episode IV — A New Hope» (1977, dir. George Lucas)

«Star Wars: Episode VI — Return of the Jedi» (1983, dir. Richard Marquand)

«Starship Troopers» (1997, dir. Paul Verhoeven)
«Sunshine» (2007, dir. Danny Boyle)
«The Fountain» (2006, dir. Darren Aronofsky)
«The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy» (2005, dir. Garth Jennings)

«The Last Days on Mars» (2013, dir. Ruairi Robinson)
«The Signal» (2014, dir. William Eubank)
«Thor: The Dark World» (2013, dir. Alan Taylor)
«Transformers: Dark of the Moon» (2011, dir. Michael Bay)

Read more

Bigger isn’t always better, but in this case it might be. Research has found that a large hippocampus gives you a memory boost and may shield you from dementia.

The hippocampus is rooted deep in the brain and deals with a range of things, but it’s also a major seat of neurogenesis; making new brain cells. The seahorse shaped structure plays a leading role in translating your experiences to long term memory and it’s made up of two sides. The left helps you record language, and the right hippocampus deals with spatial memory, like an interior google map.

The seat of memory?

Read more

Electrocorticography (ECoG) was pioneered in the early 1950s by Wilder Penfield and Herbert Jasper, neurosurgeons at the Montreal Neurological Institute. The two developed ECoG as part of their groundbreaking Montreal procedure, a surgical protocol used to treat patients with severe epilepsy. The cortical potentials recorded by ECoG were used to identify epileptogenic zones – regions of the cortex that generate epileptic seizures. These zones would then be surgically removed from the cortex during resectioning, thus destroying the brain tissue where epileptic seizures had originated. Penfield and Jasper also used electrical stimulation during ECoG recordings in patients undergoing epilepsy surgery under local anesthesia. This procedure was used to explore the functional anatomy of the brain, mapping speech areas and identifying the somatosensory and somatomotor cortex areas to be excluded from surgical removal. This week we learned that Google has filed a patent relating to this medical field titled “Microelectrode Array for an Electrocorticogram.”

2AF 55 - GOOGLE PATENT FIG. 6

Google’s patent FIG. 6 noted above shows an application of the microelectrode array 1 according to the invention when recording an electrocorticogram of a human being. The microelectrode array is wirelessly connected to an electronic control device 10, which comprises in particular an amplifier for the electrode signals and a data acquisition system. The microelectrode array, implanted e.g. below the patient’s scalp, has an energy receiving coil 60 and an antenna 61 for bidirectional data transfer between the microelectrode array 1 and the electronic control device. It is also possible for the energy receiving coil simultaneously to be used as an antenna, such that no separate antenna is required.

Read more

In physics there are two broad ways to look at the world. One is the classical realm of Newton and Einstein, where objects have definite form and interact in clearly determinate ways. The other is the quantum realm, where objects seem nebulous, with a strange mix of particle-like and wave-like behavior. The classical view gives us a wonderfully accurate description of everything from planets to baseballs. The quantum view is necessary to accurately describe the behavior of light and atoms. The classical world dominates on the scale of our daily lives, but nature seems to be rooted in quantum theory at its most basic level.

While both the classical and quantum approach are extremely accurate in their respective regimes, what happens in the intersection of the two regimes is still unclear. We don’t have a rigorous theory combining our classical and quantum models. We also don’t have certain key observational evidence, particularly in the nexus of quantum theory and gravity. But as quantum experiments increasingly study more massive objects and gravity experiments become increasingly sensitive, we’re approaching the point where “quantum gravity” experiments could be made. That’s the goal of a recently proposed experiment.

Since there isn’t yet a unified theory of quantum gravity, folks have instead focused on approximate approaches. One such approach is to add gravity to quantum theory a little bit at a time. This perturbative approach quantizes objects and their gravitational fields, and it works well for weak gravitational fields. One of the predictions of this approach is the existence of gravitons as the field quanta of gravity, much like photons are the field quanta of electromagnetism. However with stronger gravitational fields the approach becomes problematic. Basically, perturbative gravity builds upon itself in a way that is unphysical, so the model breaks down.

Read more

“Tens of billions of dollars have been spent in the past 60 years, entire careers have been invested, but the ability to produce a commercially viable nuclear fusion reactor remains undemonstrated.”

For 60 years the world’s been waiting for cheap, clean, safe, sustainable power from nuclear fusion. Are we there yet?

Read more

Micah's DNA Brendan I. Koerner at Wired, explores the ramifications of the authorities requesting DNA from ancestry sites:

Mitch Morrissey, Denver’s district attorney and one of the nation’s leading advocates for familial DNA searching, stresses that the technology is “an innovative approach to investigating challenging cases, particularly cold cases where the victims are women or children and traditional investigative tactics fail to yield a solid suspect.” Familial DNA searches have indeed helped nab people who might otherwise have evaded justice. In the most celebrated example, Los Angeles police arrested a man believed to be the Grim Sleeper serial killer after discovering that the crime scene DNA shared a significant number of genetic markers with that of a convicted felon—who turned out to be the man’s son.

But the well-publicized success stories obscure the fact that familial DNA searches can generate more noise than signal. “Anyone who knows the science understands that there’s a high rate of false positives,” says Erin Murphy, a New York University law professor and the author of Inside the Cell: The Dark Side of Forensic DNA. The searches, after all, look for DNA profiles that are similar to the perpetrator’s but by no means identical, a scattershot approach that yields many fruitless leads, and for limited benefit. In the United Kingdom, a 2014 study found that just 17 percent of familial DNA searches “resulted in the identification of a relative of the true offender.”

The technology’s limitations have the potential to cause real harm: What if Michael Usry was not a filmmaker, for example, but rather a high school teacher whose alleged involvement in a girl’s murder was leaked to the media? Yet despite all that can go wrong, few states have developed guidelines. California, Colorado, Virginia, and Texas have detailed policies regarding how and when familial DNA searches can take place; Maryland and the District of Columbia explicitly forbid the technique. Elsewhere in the nation, cops are largely free to search as they see fit, which is why Idaho Falls police decided it was OK to sift through an Ancestry database of genetic data from thousands of people with no criminal records.

Read more

In the last few years, the topic of artificial intelligence (AI) has been thrust into the mainstream. No longer just the domain of sci-fi fans, nerds or Google engineers, I hear people discussing AI at parties, coffee shops and even at the dinner table: My five-year-old daughter brought it up the other night over taco lasagna. When I asked her if anything interesting had happened in school, she replied that her teacher discussed smart robots.

The exploration of intelligence — be it human or artificial — is ultimately the domain of epistemology, the study of knowledge. Since the first musings of creating AI back in antiquity, epistemology seems to have led the debate on how to do it. The question I hear most in this field from the public is: How can humans develop another intelligent consciousness if we can’t even understand our own?

It’s a prudent question. The human brain, despite being only about 3 pounds in weight, is the least understood organ in the body. And with a billion neurons — with 100 trillion connections — it’s safe to say it’s going to be a long time before we end up figuring out the brain.

Read more

Unfortunately, the answer is no. At least for now. But that’s not to say this isn’t important, promising new research.

The reports centre on the supposedly serendipitous discovery of a link between an experimental malaria vaccine for pregnant women and a molecule that sits on the surface of cancer cells.

So what did the study – published in the journal Cancer Cell – actually show?

Read more

While walking along the Jersey Shore, a woman recently stumbled upon a rare spearhead about 10,000 to 11,000 years old, according to experts who believe the ancient artifact may hold clues into prehistoric life in the Americas.

The projectile point was examined this past Tuesday by curators at the New Jersey State Museum after Audrey Stanick — a 58-year-old resident of Lanoka Harbor, New Jersey — made the discovery on Oct. 6 while walking along a Seaside Heights beach with her sister looking for sea glass after a recent storm.

“I noticed it because it was very dark and shiny, and my sister from Florida who likes to collect sharks’ teeth taught me to always look out for dark and shiny things at the beach,” Stanick said. “Then, I remembered a boy made a similar discovery last year, so I got in contact with the museum.”

Read more