Anatomy is for everyone. It is easy to relate to, because we all live in fleshy anatomical bodies that rouse our curiosity from an early age, and everywhere in nature there are surprising parallels with -- as well as bizarre differences from -- our anatomical body-plans.
There are limits to connectivity maps. As one scientist put it, so far they give information only on the level of interstate highways and major cities; smaller towns and roads are not yet on the map. Other scientists wonder which should come first -- the maps or the specific questions we hope to answer with them.
The past two weeks, I have argued that the headlines of mainstream media stories on science are misleading the public and doing science a disservice. In my critique, I have often wondered if people are only reading the headlines.
Your body is in a constant state of transformation and regeneration, and your experiences, no matter how seemingly inconsequential, from bullies to crushes to sloppy joes, have all left an indelible mark within you -- and more importantly, within your genome.
Throughout all seasons of Breaking Bad, the science was strong; at times it seemed as if science was a separate character, such as the scene in which Walter and Jesse use thermite to break into the chemical storage building to obtain methylamine.
Einstein believed in something like Spinoza's "God": a powerful entity that transcends the world. To Einstein, "God" was the maker of the laws of physics that he, Einstein, saw as his life's role to uncover. This is far from the "God" of organized Western religions, to be sure, but it is equally far from Lawrence Krauss "universe from nothing."
My curiosity for science began early in life with my passion for space. I was 13 years old during the first lunar landing. Seeing human beings on another celestial body opened my eyes to the infinite possibilities of technology.
If we're serious about human exploration of Mars (or even the moon), then we have to come up with realistic estimates, factoring in all kinds of unforeseen costs.
With the global landscape shifting and new national and regional powerhouses emerging, countries long established as eminent in science have begun to cede their shares of worldwide research output as well as their dominance in producing the most influential results.
Wives still report doing about twice as much housework and childcare as their husbands. One difference is that today's couples, even if they unconsciously embrace traditional gender stereotypes and live less-than-egalitarian lives, may publicly proclaim more egalitarian values.
Egged on by well meaning (and not so well meaning) experts and by greedy drug companies, we are fast approaching this dystopic wonderland of universal childhood mental illness.
He tweeted from the International Space Station. Now astronaut Chris Hadfield tells the amazing story of going blind in space. Then he covers David Bowie, just because.
The oxygen we breathe, the water we drink and the sugar we eat are all chemicals. But somehow "chemical" has become a dirty word, synonymous with "toxin," and "chemical-free" is now a popular, albeit nonsensical, advertising slogan.
In an effort to capture the hearts and minds of people, a group of reef mappers with the Catlin Seaview Survey have set out to visually document coral reefs, before they're gone.
Lisa Feldman Barrett's Feb. 28 New York Times op-ed seeks to undermine the science showing universality in the interpretation of facial expressions. We feel compelled to respond so that the public is not misled and is apprised of the broader, Darwin-inspired science of emotional expression that many scientists are working on.
Last month a study of siblings found that breastfeeding conferred no health advantages, while a second study declared older paternal age to be associated with psychiatric problems in children. A third study found no link between saturated fats and heart disease. It was a month of unexpected, and sometimes unsettling, science.
Isolation, challenging environment, the allure of a biological blank slate -- what's not to love? I found it impossible to explore Heron Island in Australia without coming up against evolutionary questions at every turn.
I'm fascinated to see how the world's media covers a paper out this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS). It has an irresistible combination of clickbait-ready elements: a cute small mammal, booze and serious questions about monogamy.
Can examining science fiction, also known as speculative fiction, teach students something valuable, and maybe even game-changing, about science?