More stories

  • in

    Why some words become funnier when paired together

    A study looking at more than 55,000 pairs of words has found why word pairings like “funk fungus” and “gnome bone” seem to be more amusing than their constituent parts

    Humans

    13 May 2022

    By Jesse Staniforth
    Some pairs of words are funnier than othersShutterstock / fizkes
    On their own there is nothing particularly funny about the words “gnome” and “bone”, but put them together and it is a different story. Pairings like “gnome bone” seem to make people chuckle, at least according to a study that looked at the funniness of thousands of pairs of words.
    Cynthia S. Q. Siew at the National University of Singapore and her colleagues generated random word pairings using a list of around 5000 words previously studied for their humour or lack thereof. … More

  • in

    'Funk fungus' is a funny phrase and scientists now know why

    A study looking at more than 55,000 pairs of words has found why word pairings like “gnome bone” and “spam scrotum” seem to be more amusing than their constituent parts

    Humans

    13 May 2022

    By Jesse Staniforth
    Some pairs of words are funnier than othersShutterstock / fizkes
    On their own there is nothing particularly funny about the words “gnome” and “bone”, but put them together and it is a different story. Pairings like “gnome bone” seem to make people chuckle, at least according to a study that looked at the funniness of thousands of pairs of words.
    Cynthia S. Q. Siew at the National University of Singapore and her colleagues generated random word pairings using a list of around 5000 words previously studied for their humour or lack thereof. … More

  • in

    We finally have an image of the black hole at the heart of the Milky Way

    There’s a new addition to astronomers’ portrait gallery of black holes. 

    Astronomers announced May 12 that they have finally assembled an image of the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. 

    “This image shows a bright ring surrounding the darkness, the telltale sign of the shadow of the black hole,” astrophysicist Feryal Özel of the University of Arizona in Tucson said at a news conference announcing the result.

    The black hole, known as Sagittarius A*, appears as a faint silhouette amidst the glowing material that surrounds it. The image reveals the turbulent, twisting region immediately surrounding the black hole in new detail. The findings also were published May 12 in 6 studies in the Astrophysical Journal Letters.

    Sign Up For the Latest from Science News

    Headlines and summaries of the latest Science News articles, delivered to your inbox

    Thank you for signing up!

    There was a problem signing you up.

    A planet-spanning network of radio telescopes, known as the Event Horizon Telescope, worked together to create this much-anticipated look at the Milky Way’s giant. Three years ago, the same team released the first-ever image of a supermassive black hole (SN: 4/10/19). That object sits at the center of the galaxy M87, about 55 million light-years from Earth. 

    But Sagittarius A*, or Sgr A* for short, is “humanity’s black hole,” says astrophysicist Sera Markoff of the University of Amsterdam, and a member of the EHT collaboration. 

    At 27,000 light-years away, the behemoth is the closest giant black hole to Earth. That proximity means that Sgr A* is the most-studied supermassive black hole in the universe. Yet Sgr A* and others like it remain some of the most mysterious objects ever found. 

    That’s because, like all black holes, Sgr A* is an object so dense that its gravitational pull won’t let light escape. Black holes are “natural keepers of their own secrets,” says physicist Lena Murchikova of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., who is not part of the EHT team. Their gravity traps light that falls within a border called the event horizon. EHT’s images of Sgr A* and the M87 black hole skirt up to that inescapable edge.

    [embedded content]
    This sonification is a translation into sound of the Event Horizon Telescope’s image of the supermassive black hole Sagittarius A*. The sonification sweeps clockwise around the black hole image. Material closer to the black hole orbits faster than material farther away. Here, the faster-moving material is heard at higher frequencies. Very low tones represent material outside the black hole’s main ring. Louder volume indicates brighter spots in the image.

    Sgr A* feeds on hot material pushed off of massive stars at the galactic center. That gas, drawn toward Sgr A* by its gravitational pull, flows into a surrounding disk of glowing material, called an accretion disk. The disk, the stars and an outer bubble of X-ray light “are like an ecosystem,” says astrophysicist Daryl Haggard of McGill University in Montreal and a member of the EHT collaboration. “They’re completely tied together.”

    That accretion disk is where the action is — as the gas moves within immensely strong magnetic fields — so astronomers want to know more about how the disk works.

    Like the majority of supermassive black holes,  Sgr A* is quiet and faint (SN: 6/5/19 ). The black hole eats only a few morsels fed to it by its accretion disk. Still, “it’s always been a little bit of a puzzle why it’s so, so faint,” says astrophysicist Meg Urry of Yale University, who is not part of the EHT collaboration. M87’s black hole, in comparison, is a monster gorging on nearby material and shooting out enormous, powerful jets (SN: 11/10/21). But that doesn’t mean Sgr A* isn’t producing light. Astrophysicists have seen its region feebly glowing in radio waves, jittering in infrared and burping in X-rays.

    In fact, the accretion disk around Sgr A* seems to constantly flicker and simmer. This variability, the constant flickering, is like a froth on top of ocean waves, Markoff says. “​​And so we’re seeing this froth that is coming up from all this activity, and we’re trying to understand the waves underneath the froth.” 

    The big question, she adds, has been if astronomers would be able to see something changing in those waves with EHT. In the new work, they’ve seen hints of those changes below the froth, but the full analysis is still ongoing.

    By combining about 3.5 petabytes of data, or the equivalent of about 100 million TikTok videos, captured in April 2017, researchers could begin to piece together the picture. To tease out an image from the initial massive jumble of data, the EHT team needed years of work, complicated computer simulations and observations in various types of light from other telescopes. 

    [embedded content]
    Scientists created a vast library of computer simulations of Sagittarius A* (one shown) to explore the turbulent flow of hot gas that rings the black hole. That rapid flow causes the ring’s appearance to vary in brightness on timescales of minutes. Scientists compared these simulations with the newly released observations of the black hole to better understand its true properties.

    Those “multiwavelength” data from the other telescopes were crucial to assembling the image. “By looking at these things simultaneously and all together, we’re able to come up with a complete picture,” says theorist Gibwa Musoke of the University of Amsterdam. 

    Sgr A*’s variability, the constant simmering, complicated the analysis because the black hole changes on timescales of just a few minutes, changing as the researchers were imaging it. “It was like trying to take a clear picture of a running child at night,” astronomer José L. Gómez of Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía in Granada, Spain, said at a news conference announcing the result. M87 was easier to analyze because it changed over the course of weeks.

    Ultimately, a better understanding of what is happening in the disk so close to Sgr A* could help scientists learn how many other similar supermassive black holes work. 

    The new EHT observations also confirm the mass of Sgr A* at 4 million times that of the sun. If the black hole replaced our sun, the shadow EHT imaged would sit within Mercury’s orbit. 

    The researchers also used the image of Sgr A* to put general relativity to the test (SN: 2/3/21). Einstein’s steadfast theory of gravity passed: The size of the shadow matched the predictions of general relativity. By testing the theory in extreme conditions — like those around black holes — scientists hope to pinpoint any hidden weaknesses.

    Scientists have previously tested general relativity by following the motions of stars that orbit very close to Sgr A* — work that also helped confirm that the object truly is a black hole (SN: 7/26/18). For that discovery, researchers Andrea Ghez and Reinhard Genzel won a share of the Nobel Prize in physics in 2020 (SN: 10/6/20).

    The two types of tests of general relativity are complementary,  says astrophysicist Tuan Do of UCLA. “With these big physics tests, you don’t want to use just one method.” If one test appears to contradict general relativity, scientists can check for a corresponding discrepancy in the other.

    The Event Horizon Telescope, however, tests general relativity much nearer to the black hole’s edge, which could highlight subtle effects of physics beyond general relativity. “The closer you get, the better you are in terms of being able to look for these effects,” says physicist Clifford Will of the University of Florida in Gainesville.

    However, some researchers have criticized a similar test of general relativity made using the EHT image of M87’s black hole (SN: 10/1/20). That’s because the test relies on relatively shaky assumptions about the physics of how material swirls around a black hole, says physicist Sam Gralla of the University of Arizona in Tucson. Testing general relativity in this way “would only make sense if general relativity were the weakest link,” but scientists’ confidence in general relativity is stronger than the assumptions that went into the test, he says.

    The observations of Sgr A* provide more evidence that the object is in fact a black hole, says physicist Nicolas Yunes of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. “It’s really exciting to have the first image of a black hole that is in our own Milky Way. It’s fantastic.” It sparks the imagination, like early pictures astronauts took of Earth from the moon, he says.

    This won’t be the last eye-catching image of Sgr A* from EHT. Additional observations, made in 2018, 2021 and 2022, are still waiting to be analyzed. 

    “This is our closest supermassive black hole,” Haggard says. “It is like our closest friend and neighbor. And we’ve been studying it for years as a community. [This image is a] really profound addition to this exciting black hole we’ve all kind of fallen in love with in our careers.” More

  • in

    'World-leading' research not confined to elite universities, says REF

    The Research Excellence Framework, an assessment of UK universities’ research output, has found that “world-leading” research is distributed across the country rather than concentrated in a few elite institutions

    Humans

    12 May 2022

    By Jason Arunn Murugesu
    Research around the UK has been called “world-leading”Muhammet Camdereli/Getty Images
    The UK’s “world-leading” research isn’t just limited to a select few elite universities, but rather is distributed across the country, according to the latest UK government analysis of the country’s academic output.
    The analysis by the Research Excellence Framework (REF) team is based on seven years’ worth of work conducted by universities. It assesses the quality of a university’s research output in terms of how highly cited it is and the impact it has had in both academia and the wider world. Unlike in 2014, the last time this analysis was conducted, the REF team put a greater emphasis on the wider long-term impact that a piece of research has had on the UK’s economy, environment and quality of life.
    The results will help UK government funding bodies decide how to allocate £2 billion worth of grant money between universities each year.Advertisement
    “There’s lots of myths about where our research excellence is, but the truth is that it is more broadly distributed, as the results from this exercise show,” says Steven Hill at Research England, chair of the REF steering group.
    More than 185,000 pieces of research were submitted by 157 universities to the REF team, which were reviewed by 34 expert panels. The panels were split into four main categories: life and medical sciences, physical sciences, social sciences and arts and humanities.

    The team found that 41 per cent of the research submitted was considered of the highest quality, which the REF team termed “world-leading”. Meanwhile, 43 per cent of the research was ranked “internationally excellent”. More than 80 per cent of the research assessed at both these levels of quality was found in every region and nation in the UK.
    Nearly all universities who submitted research to the REF team were found to have at least some of their activity judged as “world-leading”. “There’s a really even distribution of research excellence across the UK,” says Hill.
    Comparisons with previous analyses made by REF are difficult to make due to methodological changes, but the 2014 REF report found that only 30 per cent of research submitted was “world-leading”.
    “Universities play a key role in providing the ideas and skills to fuel the regional economy that surrounds them,” says Brian Walker at Newcastle University, UK. “In less prosperous regions, these contributions from universities are disproportionately important.”

    More on these topics: More

  • in

    Don't Miss: Time-hopping new sci-fi romance The Time Traveler's Wife

    CORNELIA PARKER
    Visit
    Cornelia Parker brings mesmerising, large-scale installations to London’s Tate Britain gallery. Expect frozen moments, exploded art (see above), perceptual games and glimpses into deep time. Open from 19 May.
    HBO
    Watch
    The Time Traveler’s Wife is a mix of sci-fi and romance, in which protagonist Henry (Theo James) flitters uncontrollably through time, and his wife Clare (Rose Leslie) has to put up with him. Streaming on Sky Atlantic and NOW TV from 16 May.Advertisement
    Artem Oleshko/Alamy
    Listen
    The Academy of Robotics, which has launched and tested some of Europe’s first self-driving cars, examines how tech is transforming its own funding structures in a six-part podcast on the Clubhouse audio app.

    More on these topics: More

  • in

    The lab coat and lone genius – science's most infuriating stereotypes

    Television often portrays researchers as lab coat-wearing weirdos who hate social interactions, but the name of the game is collaboration plus hoodies. We need to get better at showing the public what we do, says Chanda Prescod-Weinstein

    Humans

    | Columnist

    11 May 2022

    By Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
    Hinterhaus Productions/Getty Images
    I AM a person who likes things to be specific and accurate. In some ways, this is antithetical to being a communicator of science to general audiences. This requires helping non-experts understand complex ideas – like the idea of quantum fields – while deploying only a small fraction of the language we professionals use to talk among ourselves. It means glossing over details that can feel fundamentally important. Which is to say that I regularly have to grapple with what it means to talk to people about something when I know I’m not going to give them the full story.
    I find it easier to be successful in writing. Here, I can choose my words carefully, and the “optics” of the work I am trying to get across are what I manage to evoke in the reader’s mind.
    By contrast, one of my biggest frustrations is with how science is portrayed on television. There, it seems like a production mandate to have flashy graphics and representations of “what scientists do” that align with public expectations. The result? We get a lot of representation of people (often white men) in white lab coats, even though many (perhaps most?) scientists don’t wear a lab coat of any kind, ever.Advertisement
    For theoretical physicists, the expectation is that we will have a chalkboard filled with equations. For some people that is accurate, but I dislike the feel of chalk on my fingers. I much prefer writing with a fountain or gel pen in a high-quality, bound notebook.
    Part of what ends up being so off in popularisations of science is that we continue to get various versions of the lone genius: someone sitting at their desk or working at a chalkboard alone, thinking important thoughts.
    The reality is that – as an introvert – I wish I got more time alone. My days are filled with meetings. Every single member of my dark matter and neutron star research group has at least one per week with me that is centred on their main research question. There is a member of my team who sees me in a meeting between two and five times a week. One of those is my group meeting, where everyone comes together and shares what they have accomplished since the previous week. They take turns asking each other questions. This allows us all to learn more and hone our question-asking skills, which is important for scientists.
    I have other regular appointments that might seem peripheral and even boring – including to the participants – but that are quite important to the doing of science. These are the conversations in which we are planning for the future, navigating applying for grant money or lobbying for more grant money to be allocated so that our discipline is sustained in the future. Right now, I am spending a lot of time on the delayed Snowmass 2021 Particle Physics Community Planning Process.
    This occurs about once a decade, and involves the US particle physics community getting together to determine what science in this field is plausible in the coming years and what experiments – maybe a new particle collider, maybe a new telescope focused on dark matter – should be built. The lengthy report we produce will be read by a government-appointed group that will determine what can be funded for the next decade or so. Participating in this process is time-consuming and doesn’t immediately advance my research, but it is also a key part of my job.
    Ultimately, science is a collaborative enterprise, perhaps more so than any other area of academic endeavour. We depend on others to get our work done and interact a lot with other people, but, again, I don’t think this is well represented on television.
    Instead, we get stereotypes of weirdos who can’t handle social interactions, when in fact we are a collection of weirdos who navigate social interactions just fine because our jobs depend on it.
    Our work is also often messy. I don’t just mean that we argue, though we do. It is also the case that we often don’t think in pretty pictures. I wish we could show the public more often what our work actually looks like, so that we could help people understand what we actually do. At a time when anti-intellectualism passes for a mainstream political position, now more than ever, we need the public to be tuned into how our enterprise actually works.
    Plus, in my corner of science, hoodies are a more standard uniform than lab coats. Shifting stereotypes about how scientists look could help younger people see themselves in us, to realise that we are everyday people, just like them. I understand the desire to dress things up for a bit of Hollywood drama, but I don’t think we have to try so hard to make science seem exciting. What matters is making sure we are able to explain why it is exciting. That is the hard part, and I won’t always succeed, but I do enjoy trying.

    Chanda’s week
    What I’m readingI finished Sara Nović’s novel True Biz in one sitting, and learned a lot of deaf history, including why American Sign Language is so different from the British version.
    What I’m watchingBaseball season is back, and I bleed Dodger blue.
    What I’m working onWrapping up a paper with colleagues on the unique structures made by a hypothetical dark matter particle, the axion.

    This column appears monthly. Up next week: Graham Lawton More

  • in

    Evidence finally collated of toads mating with things they shouldn’t

    Josie Ford
    Toad in the hole
    If we are looking a little lorn this week, with our mouth opening and closing to little effect, it is principally because we are staring at “Finding love in a hopeless place: A global database of misdirected amplexus in anurans”. This is a new paper in the journal Ecology by Filipe Serrano and his colleagues at the University of Sao Paolo in Brazil. No amount of science words can gloss over the fact that it amounts to a spreadsheet of all the instances recorded in the scientific literature in the past century of frogs attempting to mate with things that they shouldn’t.
    It can’t be easy being an amphibian, as evidenced by the touching – in a very real, excessive sense – story recently reported in this magazine of male Santa Marta harlequin toads in Colombia that cling to females’ backs for up to five months in hope of mating (23 April, p 19).
    The new database conveniently tags misdirected encounters with hour, month, year and geographical location. “We recorded a total of 282 interspecific amplexus, 46 necrophiliac amplexus and 50 amplexus with objects or non-amphibian species, with USA and Brazil being the countries with the highest number of records,” the authors report.Advertisement
    “Why?” asks a colleague. Ah, well, if we knew why we were doing science in the first place, that wouldn’t be science, would it?
    Broken-down wind
    Many of us have a special place we go when we want to think. In Feedback’s case, we are often accompanied by Think, a journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy that promises “philosophy for everyone”.
    We think it may be getting a little too Everyman with a contribution in the latest issue entitled “The metaphysics of farts”. If the last item brought the sound of the barrel scraping, listen to us now drill right through.
    What is a fart? An act, that of breaking wind, or a thing, the resultant smell? Author Brian Capra tackles this question head on, highlighting contradictions between the “essential-bum-origin” and “phenomenological” views that, he submits, mean both can’t be true.
    Via a thought experiment asking if two people fart in a lift, how many farts there are, and the obvious answer – does it matter? – he concludes that a fart-thing must proceed from a fart-act, but a fart-act doesn’t necessarily produce a fart-thing, and, so, “we are led to an outlook similar to Descartes’s view of the mind: on the phenomenological view, the essence of a fart is given to us in our olfactory experience”.
    Desfartes, as a nameless colleague supplies indelicately. Ignore them, dear readers: this sort of thing is what makes philosophy and thinking such valuable activities. Now, could someone open that door? It is closer than two toads in the mating season in here.
    Got my goat
    We note in passing – noiselessly, of course – that the same author wrote an article in Philosophy Now that uses elementary principles of model logic to prove that everything is a goat. For those still asking “why?”, we merely note the goat’s genus is Capra, and there may be more than a hint of solipsism in the argument.
    On a roll
    We would personally prefer it if everything were cake. Our thanks to the very, very many of you who provided ever so slightly muffled feedback on our recent item on legal definitions of cake (30 April). Space fortunately does permit us to delve into the details, suffice to say that the rigour with which you treat the subject convinces us that Feedback is all one happy family with shared values and priorities.
    We particularly savoured Liz Tucker’s tangential mention of a talk she went to on the history of the Lyons tea-and-cake empire that was a feature of the British landscape for many years, which stated that, at one time, the company produced 35 miles of Swiss roll a week. This conjures a mental image of a truly majestic, if slow-moving, machine. It prompts us to ask “How do you make a Swiss roll?”, to which we are sure you can supply the punchline.
    Like a lead…
    Carl Zetie is perplexed by the appearance in his Facebook feed of an advertisement from a software company called Zeplin, whose corporate logo is an airship of almost that name. “Companies ship 20% faster using Zeplin,” it promises. Historically speaking, this seems an odd choice of corporate metaphor, and we do hope there is no crashing and burning on arrival.
    Talking tough
    Those were unsettling times, as are these. So it is good to know that the defence of the realm is in no-nonsense hands, as per a tweet from the University Royal Naval Unit Edinburgh, sent to us by Ceri Brown. “Our first training evening after Easter was a very detailed and informative brief from the Defence Nuclear Organisation on the UK Nuclear Deterrent. Thank you to Captain Tough and his team for the briefing.” With that exemplar of The Name Thing That Shan’t be Mentioned, and to employ a military phrase whose correct usage has generated lively debate from you before (3 April, 24 April and 8 May 2021), it is, from this Feedback, over and out.
    Got a story for Feedback?
    You can send stories to Feedback by email at feedback@newscientist.com. Please include your home address. This week’s and past Feedbacks can be seen on our website. More

  • in

    How to make your own yogurt

    By Sam Wong
    Shutterstock/Rozdemir
    THE idea that we can improve our gut health by eating foods containing live “friendly” bacteria, or probiotics, dates back to the early 20th century. Ilya Mechnikov, a Russian biologist whose work on immunity led to a Nobel prize, postulated that consuming soured milk fostered beneficial bacteria in the intestines. He claimed that people in Bulgaria who ate yogurt lived longer as a result, and his ideas helped to popularise yogurt in western Europe and North America.
    The main types of bacteria found in commercial yogurt are Lactobacillus delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus. Several studies have found that … More