Hockey Pool, Week 4

First of all, many thanks to Chall and ScientistMother for hosting the last two updates!

Here are this week’s results:

Congratulations to Thomas, who reclaimed top spot from Bob this week!

You two must be getting lonely at the top there, but luckily ScientistMother is making a bid to join you. I think it’s obvious that we need to have a Canadian in the top spot, so yay Scientist Mother!

Chall and Gerty Z also had strong weeks, climbing from 6th to 4th and 7th to 6th, respectively. Ricardipus held on to 5th place, and Lavaland continues to hold steady in 8th.

And as for me: well, clearly, I suck. I can put some of the blame on the NHL scheduling gods; the Canucks only played one game in the last ten days, so I ditched all three of my lovely Canucks (who’d been doing pretty well for me), and chose players from busier teams who’d scored the most points for their cap value. Clearly this technique is not as effective as choosing your own team’s top scorers.

I did see one of the Sedin twins in Safeway on Saturday though, so the week wasn’t a total write-off, hockey-wise.

The Canucks play four games this week. Onwards and upwards!

Posted in hockey pool | 16 Comments

How the scientists stole Hallowe’en

Here’s some classic X-Files dialogue from an episode called “How the ghosts stole Christmas“:

Mulder: [alarmed at a noise] Shhh! What was that?
Scully: [irritably rational] These are tricks that the mind plays. They are ingrained clichés from a thousand different horror films. When we hear a sound, we get a chill, we, we- we see a shadow and we allow ourselves to imagine something that an otherwise rational person would discount out of hand.
[Mulder just continues up the dark staircase. Frustrated, Scully pulls out her flashlight and follows him]
Scully: [continuing to rationalize nervously] The whole, Mulder- the whole idea of a benevolent entity fits perfectly with what I’m saying, that, I mean, that a spirit would materialize or return for no other purpose than to show itself is silly and ridiculous. I mean, what it really shows is how silly and ridiculous we have become in believing such things. I mean that… that we can ignore all natural laws about the corporeal body, that… that we witness these spirits clad in their own, shabby outfits, with the same old haircuts and hairstyles, never aging, never- never in search for more comfortable surroundings… it actually ends up saying more about the living than it does about the dead.
Mulder: [only half-listening] Mmm-huh.
Scully: [clearly rattling on in fear and nervousness] And Mulder, it doesn’t take an advanced degree in Psychology to understand the unconscious yearnings that these imaginings satisfy. You know, the… the longing for immortality, the hope that there is something beyond this mortal coil, that we might never be long without our loved-ones… I mean, these are powerful, powerful desires. I mean, they’re the very essence of what makes us human… the very essence of Christmas, actually.
[a door nearby suddenly opens on its own with a loud creak]
Mulder: [breathless; whispering] Tell me you’re not afraid.
Scully: [breathless also, but stringent] All right, I’m afraid. But it’s an irrational fear.

And now, just in time for Hallowe’en, a scientist has proven just how irrational that fear is*…

…or has he?

Well, the explanation satisfies me… partially.

Certain sound frequencies have been shown to induce feelings of “unexplainable dread, chills and depression”. And now it’s also been shown that these vibrations can be “powerful enough to resonate with the average human eyeball, causing “smeared” vision. This is a phenomenon where the eye vibrates just enough to register something static — say, the frame of your glasses or a speck of dust — as large, moving shapes”.

After solving the problem of a “haunted” lab by removing a vibrating fan that was emitting such infrasound waves, the researcher in question “went on to test this explanation for ghostly apparitions in the cellar of a nearby “haunted” abbey. According to the locals, as soon as someone would step into the cellar they would freeze up, see strange gray ghosts and have to leave because of nausea. Vic discovered that the shape of the cellar, the hallway leading to it as well as nearby factories all contributed in making the haunted cellar a perfect resonating chamber. The vibrations created were exactly 18.9Hz and were most powerful at the threshold of the cellar, where most people became sick and terrified”.

So, an explanation for “haunted” buildings where many people have independently experienced the same feelings of dread and sightings of unexplained entities. Right?

Well, like I said, I’m only partially satisfied. The most interesting and compelling ghost stories I’ve heard have involved people seeing things much more specific than grey blobs. And this explanation doesn’t cover the famous Roman soldier ghosts from my home town of York. As I’ve said before, my own (extremely dubious) interpretation is that we sometimes see glimpses of things that happened in the same place at a different point in time, due to flaws in the space-time continuum or some such. But that doesn’t stop me from getting spooked when someone’s telling stories around a campfire…

(And while we’re on the subject, the viral video of a “time traveller” using a “cell phone” in a Charlie Chaplin video from 1928 is NOT an example of this phenomenon.  Who the fuck would the person be talking to, and how the hell would they get reception without towers and satellites?! This explanation seems much more likely.

Hilarious comments from my Facebook friends when I posted the “time travel” video:

We were looking at this last night, and think that the phone call went like this: “I did it! I went from 2002 to 1928! I can prove it – I’m in a Chaplin film *right now* and it’s all over YouTube in 2010!”

and 

1) shes not holding anything in her hand
2) The bloke has far too much time on his hands
3) all of caths points (the same ones I made above)
4) Does nobody think they had mad old women in 1928 who went around muttering to themselves? hell, I look that half the time.”
 

Anyway, the infrasound explanation of hauntings and ghosts is perfect. It should thoroughly satisfy those who wish to remain sceptical, while leaving enough gaps for those who wish to remain entertainingly spooked at Hallowe’en.

Happy Hallowe’en from Pied Piper and the Disco Bunny! May it be as spooky (or as rational) as you were hoping!

(Better shot of my costume, with rats on my shoulder and hat. I had more running down my leg, too. I also discovered that black cherry vodka mixed with coke tastes like Dr. Pepper. Mmmmmmm).

——-

*H/T GrrlScientist, who tweeted the link

Posted in freakishness, photos, science, technology, television | 8 Comments

Context is everything

Gotta love the intersection between science / clinical trial acronyms and automated word choice suggestions:

Yes, lots of people eat rye bread in the former colonies, but that’s not quite what I was going for.

In other news, I started quite the debate on Twitter today when I asked whether it should be wildtype, wild-type, or wild type. According to a Nature subeditor who replied, wild type is a noun, wild-type is an adjective, and wildtype can be either.

Posted in English language, science, silliness, technology | 14 Comments

Loopholes

I’m still too embroiled in deadline stresses to come up with anything original myself, so here are some little tricks and loopholes devised by two of my more ingenious friends. Use at your own peril, especially the first one…

  • The first friend used to work in retail sales, and had a fairly standard complaint for someone in that industry, namely having to deal with eejits on a regular basis. He invented a trick that I’ve occasionally thought of applying to certain colleagues, but I’ve never quite managed to summon up the courage. 

    If an especially obnoxious customer was giving my friend an especially hard time, he’d say “my manager lets me tell one customer per month to fuck off. But I’m not going to waste that on you“.

    If anyone complained, he could legitimately say that in fact he very specifically did NOT tell that customer to fuck off.

    This person no longer works in retail sales, and is much happier as a result.

  • The second friend comes from a very religious Irish Catholic family, but never voluntarily goes to mass or confession. However, these are not optional activities on her trips back to Ireland to visit her folks. On the first trip home after leaving the country, she told the priest in the confession box at the local church the truth – i.e. that it had been 11 months since her last confession. She got a very stern lecture and a whole heap of penances (she retains enough of her family’s beliefs that not doing the penances given to her by her priest would be unthinkable; she had to do them all, to the letter).

    On her second visit home, she told the priest that it had been two weeks since her last confession.

    And then she listed her sins as “lying”.

    A half-hearted slap on the wrist and she was out of there with a fraction of the penances of the first time.

Genius!

(Hi Mermaid! I told you I could get a blog post out of the first anecdote on this list!)

Posted in career, silliness | 8 Comments

Derailed

My biweekly, half-hour progress update meetings have been running for about a year now, and are proving their usefulness yet again as I work towards Friday’s progress report deadline.The cast is never the same for two performances in a row; some people attend every time, others show their face every six months, and the rest of the team fill the entire spectrum in between. This has allowed me to notice a couple of correlations:



Yeah. Short, snappy updates do not mix well with the professorial tendency to focus on the ins and outs of one sub-sub-project for an hour at a time… 

Don’t get me wrong, the focusing is extremely useful – especially for the person running the actual experiments, but also for me, as evidenced by the reams of notes I take in these sessions. I just need to be more assertive about asking people to take their detailed discussions off-line! 

Either that or bring glazed doughnuts to counter the various pairs of glazed eyes around the table…

Posted in career, communication, science, silliness | 7 Comments

Quiz format changes – another reader poll!

I’ve looked through the remaining pages of my now-famous desk calendar, and there is one more sciency quiz left!

In the quizzes I’ve done so far, I’ve kept the comments completely open but asked that people submit only one answer per commenter per hour. There’s always lots of very entertaining banter and trash-talk when we do it that way, BUT:

1) someone always fails to read the rules and posts multiple answers in one comment;
2) people in other time zones always moan at me that all the answers were gone by the time they got there.

So, for the remaining quiz (and any others that I may come across or invent myself in the future), I’ll leave it up to my readers to decide on the format. I see two basic alternatives to the status quo:

a) increasing the shut-out time, or
b) switching on comment moderation for that post only, letting people answer as many questions as they can while the comments are hidden, and approving all comments after a 24 hour period so everyone can see all the answers at once.

The drawback to the former approach is that quizzes could drag on for days…

The drawback to the latter approach is that we’ll lose the real-time trash talk and banter…

but I’ll let you guys decide if it’s worth it.

The results of the following poll will be binding, unless someone suggests another alternative in the comments that I think is better than all the listed options, at which point I will shout “screw democracy!” and use that format. You have one week to submit your answer, and will not be allowed to moan once the decision is made 🙂 

What format should we use for all future quizzes?

Posted in competition, meta | 11 Comments

Blades of glory (with reader poll!)

I went ice skating on Saturday! With people I barely know, for added adventurousness!

Well, it was more of a shuffle than a skate, but not bad, considering I’ve only skated three times before:

  • The first time was at primary school, when a company came in one weekend and laid down big slabs of weird Teflon-type stuff that fitted together like a jigsaw, and that you could skate on. Kinda. It was a huuuuge deal – I remember everyone talking about it for weeks before it happened, and having to sign up for a specific time and skate size well in advance. I also remember being part of a pack of kids careening around the tiny school gym, barely in control (none of us wearing gloves or helmets, of course) having a whale of a time during our half-hour slot.
  • The second time was when I was about 14 and we went on an uncharacteristically awesome school trip to the Doncaster Dome, over an hour away (our closest ice rink). We spent the morning in the wave pool and on the water slides, and the afternoon skating around the dual level rink: around the top part, down the slope, around the bottom part, and up the other slope, a set-up my new Canadian friends described as “crazy” when I told them about it. I had to stop early because a smaller kid cut me off just as I was coming off the downwards slope and, not wanting to hit her but not knowing how to stop, I grabbed hold of the side with one hand to stop myself, swung around in an arc, and slammed right into the hoardings, knees first. Someone else (not from my school) fell over and had her hand run over by a skate – I didn’t see it, but some of the kids from my school did, and they told us all about it. No-one was wearing gloves or a helmet, of course. 
  • The third time was on New Years Eve a couple of years ago, when we were staying with Mr E Man’s sister and her family up near Kamloops, BC. Someone had created a community rink by flooding the tennis courts using a hose pipe, so after dinner we borrowed skates and hockey sticks from a neighbour and went and shot pucks at the only kid in the village who had a full set of goalie gear. I was using hockey skates, rather than the figure skating kind I’d used before, which were also a size too small; add in the choppy ice and the fact that there was nothing to hold onto other than my brother-in-law, and I took the skates off and was running around playing hockey in my hiking boots within ten minutes (yes, the ice was choppy and rough enough that you could run around in hiking boots while pleasantly drunk and not fall over. Much). I wore gloves that time (it was soooooo cold), but no helmet, of course – just a toque.

    I recounted this history to the people at Friday night’s party who were proposing the outing, and they reassured me that none of them had skated for years. I found out the next day that for two of them this statement came with the caveats “not since high school, when I played lots of hockey”, and “not on ice, although I’m a roller derby referee so I’m on roller skates all the time” (I’ve roller skated maybe twice as an adult), but it was really fun to do something so different, and everyone was very nice and encouraging! I wore my ski gloves and bike helmet this time, and spent the first circuit hanging onto the wall all the way around, before getting gradually more confident; by the end of our 40 minutes (a steal at $9 including skate rentals), I could make it almost all the way along one long edge of the arena without grabbing hold or falling over. I was still very wobbly and attracted various scornful / pitying looks from the hordes of small children flying backwards around the arena doing leaps and twirls, and my feet and ankles were in agony, but it was a blast!

    We went out for beer and snacks afterwards and as we were sharing some poutine, someone said “well, you’re properly Canadian now”. However, I’m not sure that this was actually the most Canadian thing I’ve ever done – there are other candidates.

    So here’s a poll:

    What’s the most Canadian thing Cath has ever done?

    Anyway, three cheers for trying new things and making new friends!
    Posted in 2010 Olympics, Canada, drunkenness, exercise, food glorious food, personal, silliness, sport | 18 Comments

    Meep Meep!

    I’ve discovered another reason to keep cycling on rainy days:

    That’s the second one this month! The first was a scruffy little fella who suddenly appeared from a patch of mist in the cemetery when I was out for a run; he looked terrified, and ran away immediately. Today’s sighting was a magnificent specimen: fully grown, with a gorgeous coat and big bushy tail, a brave and handsome boy who stood and watched me for a while before deciding I wasn’t a threat and getting on with his day.

    I used to see foxes almost every week on my bike commute in Glasgow – usually in the woods, but sometimes in the vet school campus where I worked – and it always made my day. Coyotes still seem terribly exotic to me, and the sightings are rarer, so that thrill goes double.

    I wasn’t scared at all – hey, if he’d started chasing me he’d no doubt have slammed into a cliff or fallen into a canyon within a few seconds* – but it was a great reminder of why the cats need to stay inside at night!

    ETA: right on cue, the BBC have an article today on the role of cemeteries in preserving urban biodiversity!

    —————-
    *hi, Facebook and Twitter friends! Yes, I recycle my jokes for the good of the environment.

    Posted in cycling, furry friends, nature, photos, silliness, Vancouver | 4 Comments

    RBO Cycling

    • I’ve commuted by bicycle almost every day since I started my PhD in 1998. That’s a lot of kilometres, a lot of near accidents, a lot of hills, and a LOT of rain (we’re talking Glasgow and Vancouver here, two cities notorious for their wet weather). And yes, I’ve always ridden year-round, rain or shine, although I do take the bus on icy or snowy days. Really, if you have the right gear and your journey takes less than half an hour or so, how wet are you gonna get?! Plus it’s still cheaper, faster, cleaner, and more fun to ride in the rain than to take a steamed-up bus full of wet people. With a hot shower available at both ends of the trip, the worst thing about wet weather riding is the ickiness of putting still-damp leggings and shoes back on at the end of the day before the ride home, but that’s just a fleeting sensation. I’ve done this for so long now that it’s part of my identity, and if I’m 100% honest I do feel a certain sense of superiority over fair-weather cyclists, enabled by friends and colleagues who say things like “you rode today?! Wow, you’re so dedicated! I’d never ride in weather like this!”

      This autumn, though, feels different. I sense a growing reluctance to ride in the rain, characterised by a bad case of the DON’T WANNA!s when I look out of the window on wet mornings. I blame the Vancouver-Seattle ride I did in June: I got thoroughly drenched on one of my long training rides, damp on a couple of others, and soaked to the skin to the point of what a nurse colleague tells me was almost certainly early-stage hypothermia on the ride itself*.

      Now, if you’d asked me back in hot and sunny August what effect those experiences might have on my commuting habits in the future, I’d probably have said “none” – surely after all that misery, I’d power through my wet 20 minute commutes thinking “this is NOTHING!”, right?

      Wrong.

      I think that second day of the ride just plain ol’ exceeded my tolerance limits for rain for the year, if not longer. Rainy rides now just take me back to the misery of that second day, when the rain and the hills just. Would. Not. Stop., and I got so cold I started making near-fatal bad decisions. I just DON’T WANNA! any more.

      I’m going to try to push through this. I don’t want to be a fair-weather cyclist, I don’t want to take steamed-up buses full of wet (and germy) people, and more importantly I feel the need to get out there and make all the naysayers realise that yes, there IS a point to building new cycling infrastructure in a rainy city, because people WILL use it year-round (a major point of contention in Vancouver right now as our awesome mayor and council commit to building more and more separated bike lanes downtown and elsewhere).

      I’ll let you know how it goes…

    (don’t worry, the remaining bullets are much shorter)

    • As a caveat to the above: I no longer ride on (most) Fridays. I started this habit during my training, as I did two long rides most weekends, and Friday seemed like a good choice of rest day. But I quickly realised that there are other benefits, such as not having to choose between the “leave bike at work and then not have it over the weekend” and the “ride bike to pub/friend’s house and then either ride home after drinking or leave it at friend’s house” options when a friend texts at 3pm on a Friday to suggest a spontaneous get-together.

    • When I first learned to ride a bike, I started on a two-wheeler with removable stabilisers (training wheels, if you’re from North America). So did all the other kids in my town. But all the kids I see around here who are just learning to cycle have two-wheelers, no stabilisers, and no pedals – they push themselves along with their feet. I guess that sometime in the last 30 years or so, someone decided that it’s better for kids to learn balance first, rather than mastering pedalling/steering first, as I did. It makes sense, actually, and I wonder how many bruises and scraped knees I might have been spared if I’d learned this way!

    • Once the local kids graduate to pedalling normal bikes, many of them start to accompany their parents on rides on the city’s designated bike routes (side streets with some traffic-calming measures in place, but which are unfortunately still very popular with drivers because you get favourable stop signs, plus lights to cross all the major cross-streets). This is great – with the right parents! Some let their kid(s) ride behind them or on their left, where they’re prone to wander all over the road or make sudden changes in speed and/or direction, which is very dangerous when faster riders and cars are trying to pass. And of course you can’t say anything to these parents without getting yelled at (I’ve tried).

      So it was such a joy to see two counter-examples in the last couple of weeks. In the first case, a father was riding behind his son, keeping up a constant commentary along the lines of “go wide! That driver’s stopped in front of a parking space, so she might start backing up and swinging out!”, “I don’t think that driver’s seen us, so let’s slow right down even though he has a stop sign and we don’t”, “wave and nod to say thank you!”, “remember to keep in a straight line”, “look behind you if you want to slow down”, etc. It was awesome, and I told him so (“great job on the training!”) as I passed. The other case, on a different route and a different day, involved a mother riding behind her daughter, giving similar advice and reminding her to always try and figure out where other road users want to go and what they might do next.

      Awesome job, guys! I salute you, and I wish there were more out there like you!

    • That is all. Sorry this got so long. Bullets FAIL.

    —————–
    *apparently my self-treatment prescription of hot-tub, beer, and spicy Thai food was “kinda dumb”, but hey, what doesn’t kill ya makes ya stronger, right? 🙂

    Posted in cycling, drunkenness, education, environment, exercise, fund raising, personal, politics, rants, Vancouver, whining | 14 Comments

    Days of hours of minutes

    A blog buddy (who may or may not wish to identify themselves in the comments) posted a wee ditty on their Facebook page recently that rang very true indeed:

    just received something from a fellow sufferer that will only be funny to Secretaries (with a capital ‘S’):

    “And so while the great ones depart to their dinner,
    The Secretary stays, growing thinner and thinner.
    Racking his brain to record and report,
    What he thinks that they think that they ought to have thought.”

    The post made me literally laugh out loud. I’m responsible for taking minutes at several recurring meetings – it only takes one instance of “it was decided that the prospect of cruel would be better than the reflex perspective analysis*” to see why someone with a scientific background is needed for this task – and part of the reason for my relative bloggy silence recently is that I was down in San Diego last week at a research collaboration progress meeting, typing away so fast that I’m surprised my laptop keyboard is still intact and functional.

    The meetings themselves are hard work, both physically and mentally. I type and type and type almost non-stop for hours on end, battling through the hand, wrist and shoulder pains (laptop keyboards are not designed for such marathon sessions) as I try to capture every single little thing that’s said, struggling with the balance between brevity and speed versus future intelligibility. Unlike the other attendees I can’t zone out or divert my attention to another task even for a couple of minutes, a lesson I learned the hard way after embarrassingly failing to capture an important action item at one of my first meetings with these collaborators, while I was checking my (work!) email. I even have to keep typing during the coffee and lunch breaks, as people come up to me asking for additions to be made to the minutes following one-on-one conversations they just had with another attendee while getting their coffee.

    The most stressful part comes at the end of each day, though, when I’m asked for a list of all the action items generated. This request took me completely by surprise the first time, but luckily I’d decided that it might be useful to have the action items highlighted in red text. Even now though it can be an embarrassing process that can make me look really stupid as I scroll through pages and pages of text** trying to read out the action items in a coherent manner. I’m not sure everyone realises that there’s just not enough time in the heat of the moment to type in more than “ACTION: [PI] will get back to [collaborator] with answers to the above questions”. This item might refer to a full page of discussion about how to proceed with a project, but makes no sense when read out in a list, separated from its original context.

    I also colour code (in blue) any amusing little conversations or observations that pop up that can’t go into the actual formal minutes, but that might make good blog fodder. The bloggable LOLs from this meeting include an amusing conversation:

    My boss: “Who did this scoring and analysis? This project needs to be led by a human pathologist”.

    Hilarious collaborator: “Well, he’s definitely human…”

    a promise to myself:

    “I hereby swear to never, ever, use ‘homozygose’ as a verb” (my boss had just done this, in the context of trying to engineer a cell line homozygous for a gene mutation that we only ever see as a heterozygote in a certain tumour type).

    and an observation from me about another lazy bit of technical jargon that, like “poor prognostic marker“, doesn’t stand up to grammatical scrutiny. This time the example was “spontaneous mouse models”, which caused me to have to suppress a snigger as I imagined a bunch of white mice suddenly popping into existence in a lab. Sure, “mouse model of spontaneous tumour development” is more of a mouthful, but at least it’s accurate.

    Unlike the person in the verse , I do at least get to go to dinner – an excellent Mexican restaurant this last time. Mmmmm, guacomole. A few of us also enjoyed some excellent local beer on a beachfront patio on the second day, as the meeting finished a couple of hours early and we couldn’t change our flights home. The chances of me growing thinner and thinner on one of these trips are, well, slim.

    The effort continues when I get back to the office and have to prepare formal, neat versions of the notes for circulation to all internal and external collaborators and their bosses. I have to re-order the original minutes to capture follow-up comments and action items that someone suddenly thought of in the middle of a presentation about another project, to make the information flow more logically within and between sections, and to remove some of the more random dead-end tangents completely. I also have to clarify or remove any items that really don’t make any sense (I’m usually too busy typing for any critical analysis of what I’m writing), and add some context into all the action items.

    I also have to fix all the typos and auto-corrects, turning all the “serious ovation cancers” back into “serous ovarian cancers” and such, and adding all the optional little luxuries that I don’t have time for during the actual meetings – luxuries such as full words, sentences, paragraphs, and grammar. You know, the minor details. Once that’s done I can format the document, try to proofread it, realise I’m heartily sick of the damn thing and only be able  to bring myself to skim it superficially, send it out, and then spot an embarrassing surviving typo as I go to close the document.

    Oh well, at least I remembered to take out my observation about mice spontaneously popping into existence.

    An action item about the cakes to be served at the next meeting did make it through, but that was deliberate.

    Nope, definitely not gonna get any thinner playing this game.


    ————
    *Seen in minutes from a meeting that took place before my time, when the admin assistants were responsible for all minutes, including those of very technical meetings. Sentence should read “it was decided that prospective accrual would be better than retrospective analysis”. I  think.

    **At the actual 1.5 day meeting I typed a total of 30 pages of notes, which translated to 31 pages of nicely formatted formal minutes with each major item starting on a new page. 

    Posted in career, communication, English language, food glorious food, medicine, science, silliness, travel | 7 Comments