[Source: 1111 Comics | Follow “1111 Comics” on Twitter]
Millionaire [Comic]
Scientists have figured out how to ‘see’ through mice – could humans be next?
Timothy Hearn, Anglia Ruskin University
Imagine being able to see right through your skin to watch your muscles or organs in action. It sounds like science fiction, but a group of scientists at Stanford University were recently able to make the skin of live mice appear transparent – at least under certain light conditions.
This breakthrough has unquestionably opened up new possibilities in biological research and medical imaging. So how did they do it, and could it ever lead to humans becoming invisible?
When we look at objects, light reflects off them, allowing our eyes to see shapes and colours. However, living tissue such as skin behaves differently because it is comprised of things such as water, proteins and lipids (fats), which all bend light at different angles. This means that light is scattered by skin, which limits how deeply we can see into the body without invasive surgery.
To try and get around this problem, scientists have developed more sophisticated imaging techniques over the years, such as two-photon microscopy and near-infrared fluorescence. But they often require harmful chemicals or only work on dead tissue. Instead, the goal has been to find a way to achieve transparency in living organisms safely and reversibly.
In the Stanford study, the researchers turned to a surprising tool: food dye. Tartrazine (also known as E102), a common yellow food dye found in crisps and soft drinks, has a unique property. When dissolved in water and applied to skin tissues, it alters how light interacts with biological matter.
Imaging of internal mouse organs
The key to this lies in the physics of light absorption and refraction, specifically something called the “Kramers-Kronig relations”, which describe how materials interact with light across different wavelengths. Tartrazine has been used in microscopy for years as a way of staining certain parts of the anatomy to make them more visible, but it has never been used on the whole tissue of living animals.
By adding tartrazine to water and applying it to the tissues of anaesthetised live mice, the researchers were able to change the refractive index of water in the tissue, meaning the extent to which it bends light. This brought its refractive index closer to that of lipids, which enabled the light to pass through the skin of the mice more easily, making them appear transparent.
Astoundingly, the researchers were able to see in unprecedented detail deep structures inside the mice such as blood vessels and even muscle fibres. In one example, they could see the movements of the intestines in real-time through the transparent abdomen. This level of visibility was achieved without any apparent harmful effects to the mice, including being able to return their skin to its normal, opaque state once the dye was washed off.
This discovery could be revolutionary. Imagine being able to monitor organ function without invasive procedures, or see precisely where a vein is to draw blood. It could also pave the way for breakthroughs in understanding how diseases affect the body at a microscopic level.
Next stop, invisibility?
As fascinating as this all is, making humans fully invisible remains unlikely for several reasons.
Firstly, the transparency achieved in the Stanford study is clearly not total invisibility. And although the tartrazine allows light to pass through tissues, it works best with specific wavelengths of light, mainly in the red and infrared regions of the spectrum. This means that under normal lighting conditions, the mice aren’t truly invisible to the naked eye. Instead, they are transparent under specific imaging equipment designed to capture this phenomenon.
Secondly, this transparency only affects the tissues where the dye has been applied, and even then, it is limited by how deeply the dye can penetrate. Human bodies are significantly more complex and skin much thicker than those of mice. Making a whole human transparent would require a different level of application and technology.
For one thing, light behaves differently when passing through larger volumes of tissue. Also, even if we could scale up the technology, achieving full-body transparency would involve significant challenges, such as ensuring the dye reached all parts of the body evenly without causing harm. Tartrazine is safe to consume within daily limits, but can cause side effects, allergic reactions and, at large doses, there is conflicting data regarding it having toxic effects on cells or potentially causing genetic mutations.
In addition, the transparency effect works by modifying how light interacts with biological tissues, but it doesn’t address the issue of light absorption by other components of the body, such as bones, which are denser and would likely require different methods to become transparent.
So, is human invisibility possible? Not in the way we see in movies. But we may in future see further developments that push the boundaries of what’s possible with transparency in living organisms.
Timothy Hearn, Senior Lecturer in Bioinformatics, Anglia Ruskin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Monster Wine: Fermenting Bad Ideas Into Something… Delicious?
Ever wonder what would happen if you took the power of Monster Energy Drink and turned it into an alcoholic beverage? Well, one creative brewer at Golden Hive Mead did just that, and the result is something truly unique—Monster Wine! After multiple experiments and some serious trial and error, he discovered that some of Monster’s ingredients make it tough for yeast to thrive. But with a special brewing process, he managed to get the yeast to cooperate, unleashing the power of fermentation on Monster Energy.
The result? A wild creation that’s not quite beer, not quite wine, but something entirely its own. Monster Wine brings a whole new meaning to “energy drink,” packing the intense flavors of Monster with the smoothness of an alcoholic beverage.
And at least, it actually looks better than Monster pickles!
Monster Wine: Unleash the Yeast! Would you give it a try?
A Tribute to Dame Maggie Smith: Honoring Her Incredible Talent and Legacy
Antoine Ruault of Cinevore has created a touching tribute to the late Dame Maggie Smith, celebrating her remarkable versatility in drama, comedy, and mystery. This moving montage highlights her unforgettable portrayal of Lady Violet Crawley in Downton Abbey and captures the humility and gratitude that defined her career. As Dame Maggie once said, “I’ve had so much luck and so much good fortune that it frightens me somehow.” She passed away on September 27, 2024, at the age of 89.
[Via LS]
Today’s Hottest Deals: ELEGOO Neptune 4 Pro 3D Printer, Creality HALOT MAGE PRO 8K Resin 3D Printer, Megawheels Electric Scooter, Blink Mini Smart Camera, and MORE!
For today’s edition of “Deal of the Day,” here are some of the best deals we stumbled on while browsing the web this morning! Please note that Geeks are Sexy might get a small commission from qualifying purchases done through our posts. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
–ELEGOO Neptune 4 Pro 3D Printer, 500mm/s High Speed – $359.99 $284.99
–Creality HALOT MAGE PRO 8K Resin 3D Printer – $419.00 $251 (Use Promo Code STMAGEPRO at checkout)
–Blink Mini – Compact indoor plug-in smart security camera – $29.99 $17.99
–Luna Controller + FREE 1-month Luna+ cloud gaming service (new subscriber offer) – $69.99 $39.99 (For Prime Members)
–Funko Vinyl Soda: Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse – Spider-Gwen with Chase – $14.99 $7.99
–Megawheels Electric Scooter for adults and teens, 10IN Shock Absorbing Tires, 19 Miles Range, APP Control, Rated 15.5MPH – $379.00 $279.00
–IRON °FLASK Co-Pilot Insulated Mug w/Straw & Flip Cap Lids (40 Oz.) – $34.99 $19.99
–Philips Norelco Multigroom Series 5000 18 Piece, Beard Face, Hair, Body and Intimate Hair Trimmer for Men – $39.96 $29.96
–Microsoft Office Pro 2021 for Windows: Lifetime License – $219.99 $39.97
–1minAI: Lifetime Subscription – Why choose between ChatGPT, Midjourney, GoogleAI, and MetaAI when you could get them all in one tool? – $234.00 $39.99
–Breville the Barista Touch Espresso Machine with Grinder & Auto Milk Frother – $999.95 $799.95
–Ninja Air Fryer, Roast, Bake, Air Fry, Roast, Broil, Reheats, & Dehydrates, 4-in-1 – $129.99 $79.94
You can count female physics Nobel laureates on one hand – recent winners have wisdom for young women in the field
Filomena Nunes, Michigan State University
Out of 225 people awarded the Nobel Prize in physics, only five have been women. This is a very small number, and certainly smaller than 50% – the percent of women in the human population.
Despite several studies exposing the barriers for women in science and the many efforts to increase their representation, physics continues to be a male-dominated field. Only 1 in 5 physicists are women, a number that has not moved since 2010.
Three of the five Nobel Prizes in physics awarded to women have been in the past decade. As a woman physicist, seeing three women join the cadre of Nobel laureates in Physics in just a handful of years is beyond exciting.
Nobel Prize-winning work
The three woman physicists receiving Nobel Prize honors in the 21st century are Donna Strickland, who won in 2018, Andrea Ghez, who won in 2020, and Anne L’Huillier, who won in 2023. All three made important contributions to science.
Strickland, a physicist from the University of Waterloo, won the award for her work on lasers, implementing a method called chirped pulse amplification.
Ghez, an astrophysicist from UCLA, got the Nobel for her work observing stars, especially those near the center of the Milky Way.
L’Huillier, a physicist from the University of Lund, received the 2023 Nobel, also for her work with lasers.
What are some common threads in their lives?
Being a minority in a research field isn’t easy. Sticking with it long enough to have a storied career, as the three winners have, is a huge accomplishment. Since winning the prize, the three winners have recounted their research journeys and offered advice to the next generation of physicists in a variety of interviews. I’ve noticed a few common threads.
A career in academia is a long haul. All three women emphasize the timescale involved in going from first steps in their research to being recognized by the Nobel committee. L’Huillier refers to it as a long journey.
While winning a Nobel may come with some glamour and notoriety, if you are after a quick reward, this career may not be the right line of work. It now takes an average of 28 years between publishing a discovery and receiving a Nobel in physics.
You cannot predict which basic science topic is going to lead to a Nobel – nor, for that matter, which will end up having any kind of impact. The best an early-career physicist can do is to explore different topics, try new things, lean into discomfort and find something they’re passionate about.
All three women talk about how many times they ran into difficulties. Before she got the chirped pulse amplification method to work, Strickland had started to wonder whether she would ever get a Ph.D., having hit so many dead ends. The first time Ghez proposed the project that would lead to her celebrated work, she was turned down.
All three of them thought of quitting at some point. So don’t be discouraged if you are turned down or if others say you cannot do it.
“Keep going,” says L’Huillier. “You need to be obstinate.”
Ghez recommends seeing experiments that don’t work not as failures but as opportunities.
Movies and TV shows paint a picture of the scientist as a social misfit, an individual working alone in the laboratory. But that’s not how it works. All these women work in teams.
“Science is a team sport. You need to know what you don’t know and seek help for what is missing,” says Strickland.
Seeking help often leads to collaborations with other research groups. As Ghez puts it, “Science is a very social enterprise.”
And above all else, the three medalists referred to luck as an essential ingredient for success. The world is full of physicists just as dedicated and just as smart who don’t get the Nobel.
Themes specific to women
Strickland, Ghez and L’Huillier are always asked about their experiences being a woman in science and their views on diversity and equity in physics. All of them emphasize the importance of diversity.
The three laureates have recognized how critical female role models have been in their lives. To believe a physics career is even possible, you need to see people in the field who look like you.
They also mention the importance of a support network, especially for women. Having a group of people you trust to cheer you on can help when you feel discouraged.
The three women also talk about their experiences balancing work and life. It’s not always easy.
Strickland left the standard academic path after a postdoctoral fellowship to become a technician so she could be close to her husband and start her family. L’Huillier walked away from her job and moved from France to Sweden, where she was unemployed for a while. Ghez waited years to have kids. There is no single trajectory. But time away from research can give you fresh perspectives and inspiration to take the next steps.
They also talk about how diversity enriches the research itself. A team that is open to different points of view is more creative. It is also more fun to work in.
These women have pointed out that the culture for women in science has improved over their careers and they are optimistic about the future. If you calculate the percent of Nobel Prizes in physics awarded to women in the past decade alone, then about 1 in 10 Nobel recipients have been women. To me, this indicates that, indeed, things may be getting better.
And perhaps the Nobel committee is addressing, at least in part, possible gender inequities in their processes. For example, the lack of nominations of women and the influence that stereotypes could play in their evaluations. So it is with great expectation that I await this year’s announcement.
Filomena Nunes, Professor of Physics, Michigan State University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Coffee [Comic]
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Help Keep Geeks Are Sexy Alive – Save the Day, Geek Style!
Dear Geeks,
For 19 years, Geeks Are Sexy has been your one-stop shop for everything from lightsaber duels to epic cosplay photography. What started as a little passion project back in 2005 has grown into a geek haven for thousands, and as I just turned 50, I’m ready to keep this quest going—dragons, trolls, and social media algorithms be damned!
But here’s the problem: 2024 has thrown some serious battles our way. Thanks to Facebook’s ever-shifting algorithm, traffic to the site has dropped. As a one-man band running this small spot on the web (and single dad of three), it’s been difficult keeping all the gears turning without the usual XP. And did I mention I’m also battling a rare neurodegenerative condition called achalasia? Yup, it’s like my esophagus is a malfunctioning droid that won’t stop glitching—painful spasms that make me feel like I’m having a heart attack in the middle of most nights.
Even though life sometimes feels like I’m stuck in the Dark Souls of business challenges, my love for this community and our daily geek-out sessions keeps me going strong.
And here’s where you come in—my brave adventurers! This is my annual support request, and your contribution can ensure Geeks Are Sexy keeps leveling up for years to come. How can you save the day?
–Become a Patreon Supporter: Monthly contributions provide a steady mana pool to keep the site running smoothly, free from the chaos of social media.
–Donate via PayPal: Whether it’s a single health potion or a full-on revival spell, every bit helps cover the costs of keeping the server hamsters spinning.
Your support isn’t just a donation; it’s also a lifeline for a family that needs it.
Oh, and if you’re visiting from an external source, don’t forget to bookmark the site—there’s a whole universe of content beyond the social media galaxy!
Thank you for sticking with me on this epic journey. Your loyalty is like a trusty sidekick, and I couldn’t do this without you.
Will Meta’s Orion smart glasses be the next ‘iPhone moment’? Expert Q&A
Llŷr ap Cenydd, Bangor University; Panagiotis Ritsos, Bangor University, and Peter Butcher, Bangor University
Meta supremo Mark Zuckerberg unveiled Orion smart glasses, a new augmented reality (AR) prototype, at the annual Meta Connect developer conference. Ten years in the making, and still not expected on high streets until 2027, these will be a new way to meld the real and digital worlds. They will be controlled by the eyes and also the fingers via a neural interface on the wrist.
So what does this mean for the future of AR wearables and how we interface with computers? We asked three tech specialists at the University of Bangor, Peter Butcher, Llŷr ap Cenydd and Panagiotis Ritsos.
Why has Orion been such a technical challenge?
There are serious technical challenges in packing so much sophisticated technology into something so compact. This includes new holographic display technology, hand and eye tracking, off-device processing, cameras, speakers and microphones – all while ensuring the device remains aesthetically appealing and has decent battery life.
Meta’s chief tech officer, Andrew Bosworth, recently captured the scale of the challenge by saying: “In consumer electronics, it might be the most advanced thing that we’ve ever produced as a species.”
br>
The optical design is a huge challenge. Mixed reality headsets such as Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro rely on “passthrough” technology, in which external cameras capture real-time video of the user’s surroundings. This is displayed inside the headset, with digital elements overlaid.
In contrast, Orion’s holographic projection allows users to directly see through transparent lenses, with graphics projected into their view. This has demanded substantial R&D.
Are there other notable innovations?
One key factor that determines the immersiveness of mixed reality headsets is their field of view, meaning the angular range that the viewer can see through the headset. The state of the art is the 70° field of view of the Magic Leap 2, bigger holographic AR glasses aimed at businesses currently priced above US$3,000 (£2,240)]. They are made by Magic Leap, a US company whose backers include Google and AT&T.
With Orion, Meta has achieved a field of view of 70° in a much smaller product, which is a grand innovation and crucial for Zuckerberg’s vision of an unobtrusive wearable device.
The neural interface wristband is also vital. It listens to nerve impulses from the brain to the hand, allowing users to control the device using subtle finger gestures such as pinching and swiping thumb against index finger. Newer mixed reality headsets such as Apple Vision Pro are controlled similarly, but rely on external cameras to interpret hand movements.
An advantage of tapping into nerve impulses directly is that gestures do not require line of sight, and eventually might not even require the person to perform the full gesture – only to think about it. The technology also opens up brand new input methods, such as texting via mimicking handwriting, and is likely to mature before consumer-grade holographic displays become available.
Has Orion been more trouble than Meta expected?
Meta initially gave the Orion prototype only a 10% chance of success, so it has exceeded expectations. While there is still much work to be done, particularly in reducing costs and miniaturising components, Orion could eventually lead to a consumer-ready device.
Do you think Meta will get an affordable version launched by 2027?
Meta thinks the initial price will be comparable to flagship phones or laptops the new iPhone 16 starts at £799. We might see development kits released towards the end of the decade, aimed at early adopters and developers, much like how VR headsets were introduced a decade ago.
In the meantime, other AR glasses and mixed reality headsets such as Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro serve as platforms for developing applications that could eventually run on AR glasses.
Why are the Orion glasses still so expensive?
Holographic AR glasses remain expensive because much of the hardware – including Ledos micro-display panels and silicon carbide waveguides (which are used to optimise light transmission) – isn’t yet produced at scale. These components are critical for achieving high resolution and holographic displays – and production constraints are reportedly pushing Orion unit prices close to US$10,000. Even then, battery life is currently limited to around two hours.
Could anyone potentially beat Meta to market?
Thanks to Meta’s multi-billion dollar investment in R&D through its Reality Labs subsidiary, it has become a leader in virtual and mixed reality headsets, with a robust app ecosystem. However, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung and Google are developing similar technologies.
Microsoft’s HoloLens and [Snapchat owner] Snap Inc’s Spectacles series have made strides in AR, but responses have been mixed due to limitations such as narrow fields of view and lower graphics quality. Orion appears to be ahead in holographic display technology. Another company to particularly watch is Apple, which is refining Vision Pro and also exploring AR smart glasses.
Will AR glasses change the world?
AR glasses could ignite a transformative “iPhone moment” that redefines how we interact with technology. Zuckerberg envisions them as the next major computing platform, offering a more natural and intuitive alternative to smartphones.
The success of early mass-market smart glasses such as Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses, which allow users to make calls, capture videos and interact with Meta AI, hints that AR glasses could see widespread adoption.
Zuckerberg initially believed holographic technology would be necessary for smart glasses to offer functionality beyond the basic features of these Ray-Bans. But being able to incorporate an AI voice-powered assistant has made Meta realise that smart glasses can be developed from the ground up as a new consumer product category. While the four-hour battery life requires improvement, the positive feedback from both reviewers and users, particularly using them on Instagram and TikTok, demonstrates the potential.
What does the future look like?
Reading messages, watching a virtual screen on the wall, playing games, collaborative work – all the things you can do with mixed-reality headsets, but shrunk down to a pair of glasses. Friends will teleport into your living room, a video call where both people feel present in the same space.
It gets even stranger when you incorporate AI: virtual assistants can already see what you see, hear what you hear, talk to you, answer questions and follow commands using smart glasses. In future, AI will be able to manifest itself in your vision, and you’ll be able to have natural conversations with it.
By 2030, AI will radically change the ways in which we interact with each other, our physical world and computers. Orion aims to prepare us for a world in which the physical, artificial and virtual co-exist.
Llŷr ap Cenydd, Lecturer in Computer Science, Bangor University; Panagiotis Ritsos, Senior Lecturer in Visualisation, Bangor University, and Peter Butcher, Lecturer in Human Computer Interaction, Bangor University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.