|
|
|
|
| SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY |
|
|
|
Evolution has influence on naming of children
Study shows dangers of chemical used in plastic packaging TRENDS
Restrictive drug laws censor science, say researchers Weather satellite revived after ‘micrometeoroid hit’ Second rover finds hint of a life-friendly ancient Mars Prof Yash
Pal THIS UNIVERSE |
|
|
Evolution has influence on naming of children
PARENTS’ choice of baby names is influenced by an evolutionary tendency to make boys sound large and girls sound small, thus improving their chances of procreating, scientists have claimed. Popular boys’ names — like Thomas, Oliver and Jack — are far more likely to contain broad vowels that we associate with largeness, while common names for girls — like Emily, Olivia and Sophie — tend to be smaller-sounding by comparison, researchers said. The study, carried out by psychologists and an anthropologist at Queen Mary, University of London, drew on previous research which found that people have a strong sense of “sound symbolism” — associating different vowel sounds with different sizes and shapes — because our brains are hardwired to associate low frequency noises with large, dominant or threatening people or animals, while high frequency sounds are connected with smaller vocalisers. Parents might be unconsciously choosing names that, from an evolutionary perspective, would “boost their son or daughter’s success in life by increasing the chance of passing on their genes”, scientists said. “In general, Western societies tend to think of relatively taller men as more masculine and more successful with the opposite sex, whereas shorter, slimmer women are perceived as having attractive feminine qualities,” said Dr Benjamin Pitcher, from Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences. “It seems that over time the English language has developed a preference for names that reflect our society’s attitudes of what we deem to be attractive qualities in different sexes.” Researchers examined the top 50 boys’ and girls’ names in England, the USA and Australia to test their hypothesis that popular boys’ names would contain “large” vowels such as “o” as in “top” and “a” as in “back”, while girls’ names would contain “small” vowels such as “i” as in “bid” and “e” as in “set”. Of the top 50 boy’s names, almost all displayed the large vowel characteristics, while almost all the top 50 most popular girl’s names were made up of “small” vowel sounds. In many mammals, including humans, larger individuals produce lower sounds. The report’s authors said that the process of choosing larger sounding names for boys bore “similarities to the sexually selected breeding vocalisations of other mammals, where males advertise body size when calling”. The scientists said they would investigate whether the gender bias in vowel sounds is also seen in languages other than English, and whether societies where different attributes were considered desirable had different naming conventions. For instance, the authors said that in South African Zulu societies, larger women were generally considered more attractive, and that girl’s names “symbolic of larger sizes may be favoured in such societies”. Co-author Dr Alan McElligott said that the study showed that the names historically given to boys and to girls were not arbitrary in origin. “Even though popular names change culturally, this explains why we perceive certain names as masculine and certain names as feminine. It is linked to an expression of body size,” he said. — The Independent |
||
|
Study shows dangers of chemical used in plastic packaging FURTHER evidence has emerged showing that a chemical used widely in plastic packaging and the lining of drinks cans may be harmful to health. The latest study has shown that bisphenol A (BPA) can affect the way genes work in the brains of laboratory rats, although other scientists have questioned the relevance of the findings to humans. Researchers found that feeding BPA to pregnant rats was associated with lasting alterations to the “epigenetic” structure of genes in the brain tissue of their offspring, causing possible changes to certain aspects of sex-specific behaviour, such as chasing, sniffing and aggression. Previous studies on laboratory animals have also pointed to a possible link between BPA and ill health, but this research was criticised by other experts for using very high doses of the chemical, which would not be relevant to levels of human exposure, and to injecting the substance rather than feeding it through the diet, which is how BPA enters the human body. The latest study by Frances Champagne of Columbia University in New York, published in the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences, used what the scientists said were “environmentally relevant” doses of BPA, which were fed to the rats through their diet. The researchers concluded: “This study provides evidence that low-dose maternal BPA exposure induces long-lasting disruption to epigenetic pathways in the brain of offspring…. Importantly, our findings indicate that these BPA-induced changes occur in a sex-specific, brain region-specific and dose-dependent manner.” Professor Richard Sharpe of the Medical Research Council’s Centre for Reproductive Health in Edinburgh said although the study is well conducted there are still problems that make it difficult to extrapolate the findings to human health. “Whilst these findings raise the possibility that comparable effects of bisphenol A could occur in humans, several factors suggest this is unlikely. First, the lowest dose used is still 10-20 times higher than normal human bisphenol A exposure,” Professor Sharpe said. Another problem is that there were large variations in the results beween individual animals, making reproducible results questionable. A third issue was the suggestion that BPA works by interfering with the female hormone oestrogen, as oestrogen levels are much higher in pregnant women than in pregnant mice, Professor Sharpe said. “If the effects described work through an oestrogen mechanism, they are unlikely to be human relevant because pregnancy levels of oestrogens in humans are far higher than in mice and would swamp any weak oestrogenic effects of bisphenol A,” he said. BPA, which can interfere with the female sex hormone, is found in small quantities in most people but the levels of exposure are thought by most experts to be too low to result in biological effects. However, some researchers, particularly in the US, have disagreed with this assertion. — The Independent |
||
|
Restrictive drug laws censor science, say researchers LONDON: The outlawing of drugs such as cannabis, magic mushrooms and other psychoactive substances amounts to scientific censorship and is hampering research into potentially important medicinal uses, leading scientists argued on Wednesday. Laws and international conventions dating back to the 1960s have set back research in key areas such as consciousness by decades, they argued in the journal Nature Reviews Neuroscience.
Weather satellite revived after ‘micrometeoroid hit’ CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida:
A weather satellite that failed just before the start of an expected busy hurricane season is back in service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. Engineers believe a micrometeoroid hit a solar wing panel on the GOES-13 spacecraft on May 22, knocking it off balance and triggering its instruments to shut down, NOAA wrote on its website.
Second rover finds hint of a life-friendly ancient Mars CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida:
A Martian rock analysed by NASA’s rover Opportunity contains clays formed in non-acidic water, an environment potentially suitable for the chemistry of ancient life to brew. The solar-powered Opportunity landed on Mars in January 2004 for what was expected to be a 90-day mission to look for signs there was once water. It, and a twin rover, Spirit, which succumbed to the harsh Martian environment three years ago, had both found rocks altered by highly acidic water. — Reuters |
||
|
THIS UNIVERSE What are your views on time travel? According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, the possibility of time travel is very low but if we connect all the four forces of Nature, is it possible that it produces enough energy to enlarge a wormhole or Einstein-Rosen Bridge? I am quite amazed at the frequency of questions related to time travel. There is something in the air that is making us pseudo scientific. Let me try to explain why I think such dreams have nothing to do with science. There is story as to how Einstein as a young man of 16 came to the conclusion that nothing can travel faster than light. He did a thought experiment and decided to ride on light photon, ride a little faster than light and turn around to see where he was coming from. All he could see was a stationary oscillating electric and magnetic field. But he was sure that there was nothing in physics that allowed a stationary oscillating electric field. Ergo, we cannot travel as fast as light. I know this might be asking a bit too much but sometimes at least we should try to think like a 16-year-old Einstein. It is marvelous to dream of time travel but that is a game best left to cinema producers. We know that mass can be converted into energy by the relation E=mc2. Is it possible to convert energy into mass? Yes, the basic reaction can also do it. It is seen in cosmic rays, also in many reactions. There is no magic required. Readers can e-mail questions to Prof Yash Pal at palyash.pal@gmail.com |
