The Endangered Elements Song

Yesterday, I mentioned the rather serious issue of periodic threats, materials security, and dwindling elemental resources. I rather flippantly suggested that someone ought to do a cover version of the classic Tom Lehrer song, The Elements, which is sung to the tune of Gilbert & Sullivan’s I am the very model of a modern Major-General from their operetta The Pirates of Penzance.

So, here are Lehrer’s lyrics redacted to take into account the fact that supplies of some elements are under serious or increasing threat this century because of socioeconomics, political machinations and plain old chemistry. Of those not redacted in the revised lyrics sheet, the majority are radioactive elements and some may be endangered but there is not enough information to say one way or the other.

Anyway, here’s the lyrics sheet, see if you can sing along, might be easier to sing the whole song and use buzzcocks to beep out the endangered chemical species.

Climate change and digital music

Information technology has a carbon footprint, that’s beyond doubt. Now, writing in a special issue of the Journal of Industrial Ecology, Christopher Weber, Jonathan Koomey and Scott Matthews in the US in work supported by grants from Microsoft Corporation and Intel Corporation have calculated that purchasing music digitally reduces the energy and carbon dioxide emissions associated with delivering music to customers by between 40% and 80% from the best-case physical CD delivery, depending on whether a customer then burns the files to CD (it’s five times better if they don’t). They point out that digital media services, such as subscription and streaming systems, like Spotify, last.fm and Pandora have higher energy usage than direct downloads, such as iTunes, Zune, amazon mp3 or any of myriad file sharing tools.

The team concedes that their calculations are very sensitive to both behavioural assumptions of how customers use digital music and several important parameters in the logistics chain of retail and e-tail delivery, such as customer transport to the store, CD packaging method, and final delivery to the customer’s home for e-tail.

“In particular,” they say, “online music’s superiority depends on the assumption that customers drive automobiles to the retail store.” Therein lies one of the biggest issues surrounding any carbon footprint calculations: the fact that it is relatively easy to overlook or overegg a specific factor depending on the stance one wishes to take.

Research Blogging IconWeber, C., Koomey, J., & Matthews, H. (2010). The Energy and Climate Change Implications of Different Music Delivery Methods Journal of Industrial Ecology, 14 (5), 754-769 DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2010.00269.x

Weber is at the Science and Technology Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. and Carnegie Mellon University. Koomey was visiting professor at Yale and is now at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Matthews is at Carnegie Mellon.

Whatever happened to the audiophile?

UPDATE: 8 SEP 2011 – The Register follows up on the loudness wars – “It is a standard sound engineer complaint, as well as of serious listeners. And, those that have simply listened and (easily) heard the difference. It was propelled by increased CD listening in cars (to further standout over more background noise). Louder and faster records on radio and jukeboxes are earlier variants. Louder ads on radio and TV is another.”

This video, which I think I saw at the time I wrote my original article highlights the difference between the sound engineering of today and yesteryear:

Back in the 1970s my parents had friends who had stacks of hi-fi separates with gold contact wiring and speaker stands on metal spikes. They were only playing Perry Como on vinyl, but that was their idea of fun, so good luck to them. When the CD emerged on to the market with its claims of superior quality and scratch resistance, the hi-fi enthusiasts split into two camps: those who clung to their “warmer” but crackly analogue vinyl and their hissy tapes and those who went digital and got optical wires to hook up their shiny new CD player to those spiky speakers.

Manufacturers propagated the upward spiral for both camps marketing ever more elaborate systems and even selling green pens to colour the edge of a CD to prevent laser leakage. Personally, I grew up with a “stereogram” and a personal radio-cassette and was quite happy with it, whiling away countless hours listening to prog rock, Jean Michel Jarre, Talking Heads, and the occasional Perry Como album.

But, was it all for nothing? Within another generation the notion of digital audio had been compressed using the audio equivalent of the lossy image format jpeg and music fans were listening on pocket devices or watching Youtube clips with embedded music on poor-quality computer speakers and really not caring either way, whether the sound was great or not.

Jerald Hughes of University of Texas Pan American in Edinburg writing in the International Journal Services and Standards has a nice table showing the technical specification of the human ear and comparing it to the various analogue formats:

Audio system Frequency range/Hz Decibel range/dB
Human ear 20-22,000 110+
Vinyl LP 30-15,000 50-60
8-track tape 45-8000 45
Cassette tape 50-12,000 45-50
Chrome cassette 50-16,000 60
Reel to reel 30-20,000+ 66+

So, the only system that ever came close to the full range of human hearing was reel-to-reel and I don’t recall seeing many of those around even among the most extravagant separates hi-fi aficionados of my parents’ acquaintance.

So, how does the CD fit into this picture?

Audio system Frequency range/Hz Decibel range/dB
Human ear 20-22,000 110+
Compact disc 20-22,000 90+
DVD audio 10-95,000 144

Not bad? It really was a golden era, then, apart from that lack of “warmth” and “colour” that the analogue stalwarts claimed. And, with DVD audio quality (and SACD, superaudio CD) far outstripping even CD. These latter formats are well-known to devoted adherents of jazz and classical where dynamic range and complex frequency content tends to be more common than in rock and pop, although there are serious mastering problems with many modern recordings in all genres.

Today, there are almost as many audio “formats” as there are audio files. One can choose a download or rip at almost any rate, a lossy or lossless compression algorithm, and countless other options and codecs to playback a music file on myriad devices. But, consumers in general, have gravitated towards a quality that is much lower than the human ear is capable of discerning and much lower than top-end equipment is capable of reproducing. It’s as if the hi-fi nuts never existed…

Perhaps that’s the point though, my generation was perfectly content to listen to vinyl albums duplicated on cassette tapes (remember: home taping is skill in music killing music, it never did) and today, the kids are quite happy to listen to downloaded 128kbps mp3 files through the cheap earbuds that come with portable music players.

Human senses and sensibilities have limits. It’s not that the human ear cannot receive the finest of musical details, it most certainly can, it’s just that most people perceive satisfaction in listening to a good-quality mp3 and are not worried about the top notes or the quiet moments that might be lost in the compression process that squeezes their collection of thousands of songs on to a sliver of silicon embedded in a case no bigger than a thumbnail.

Audio cassettes were popular because they were convenient – mix tapes, copying albumbs, recording off the radio all infinitely simpler with cassettes than with a reel-to-reel machine. In the post-digital era of music on chips rather than disks consumers are trading-off audio quality for convenience just the same as they ever did. Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.

Research Blogging IconJerald Hughes (2009). Emergent quality standards for digital entertainment experience goods: the case of consumer audio Int. J. Services and Standards, 5 (4), 333-353

I spoke to Hughes who confessed that he too is a prog-rock fan, and admitted that the first album he ever bought with his own money was the YesSongs triple live album. He also told me he is still listening to his Technics direct-drive turntable with hyperelliptical stylus through Bose 501 speakers and said, “it really IS ‘warmer’…”

 

Classic musical science and Stradivarnish

It won’t necessarily be music to the classical purist’s ear, but chemists have been instrumental in revealing the secret beneath the varnish on a Stradivari violins, and the secret is: there is no secret.

Antonio Stradivari is perhaps the most famous instrument maker of all time. He is especially celebrated for his violins, which he made in Cremona circa 1665 till his death in 1737. The “legendary” varnish on his instruments has fascinated musicians, violin makers, historians, and others ever since and has led to repeated speculation that there was a secret ingredient that endowed a Stradivari violin with its unique and beautiful tone.

Stradivari violin

Now, European researchers have taken minute samples from carefully selected parts of five violins and subjected them to microscopic and spectroscopic analysis. Although the different instruments were made over a period of three decades it turns out that their varnishes are all very similar. It is only the red pigments that seem to vary through Stradivari’s career and, for those listening in black and white, the colour of a violin has no aural impact.

I asked the creative director at ClassicFM, Tim Lihoreau, what he thought about the discovery. I almost expected an angry, or at least resistant, response along the lines of, “how could the scientists shatter the illusion,” but he was actually rather encouraged by the analytical chemistry:

“At first, I was surprised by this news,” Lihoreau told me, “I’d always heard that it was something in the varnish that made Strads so special – the vintage Rollers of the fiddle world, as it were. Having said that, in many ways it only adds to the mystique of the Cremonese creator – that, in some ‘weird science’ way, it’s his magic art that is the key: a blend of all his crafts, coming together to make such legendary instruments.”

Anyway, more on that story and others in my latest SpectroscopyNOW column.

25 Scientific musos or 25 musical scientists

Science is fun, but there are times when even the most dedicated begoggled labcoat wearing bench monkey has to relax and lots of science types seem particularly drawn to playing music. Now, I’m not saying any of these people are bench monkeys, but they do all play music, as far as I know:

London
Harpist, musician, science writer, cake baker and knitter
oh_henry Henry Scowcroft
London
I write and geek for Cancer Research UK. This has nothing to do with them. Oh I play music too.
London, United Kingdom
A Royal Society of Chemistry PR, I like science, technology, media, journalism, Mac, PC, iPhone, guitar, jazz, rock, comedy and miscellany.
CameronNeylon CameronNeylon
N 55°56′ 0” / W 3°11′ 0”
Open Science, Open Access, and bringing more experimental techniques to the biosciences. I work for the UK STFC but tweets are my personal opinion.
UK
David Bradley Science Writer, Cambridge, UK, loves family, conversation, guitar, photography, singing, walking, cycling…science
iPhone: 52.509792,13.377736
physicist, hacker, opensource dev, family guy, piano player
Erlangen, Germany
Physicist (PhD, Priv.Doz.), Theory of Complex Systems, Biophysics. Plays Jazz piano. Loves Japan.
lmuzzi luigi muzzi
Rome – Italy
physicist (superconductors; energy; nuclear fusion); piano player; critical consumer (GAS-Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale); hope in a more sustainable society
renehh René Steiner
Hamburg, Germany
I'm piano player, physicist, bridge player, husband, tekkie, golfer, father and finance director
Málaga! SPAIN!!
20 years old, I play guitar in a band called THE CRUSH, I study biology…and I love the music more than all 3
pathoadaptation MarkStrom
Seattle, WA, USA
Microbiologist/molecular biologist, genomics applications, Mac User, part-time blues guitar player
arareko Mauricio Herrera C.
Mexico City
alpinist. biologist. climber. dirtbag. geek. guitar/bass player. hacker. headbanger. photographer. traveler. ultrarunner. viking. ex-yahoo!.
robajackson Rob Jackson
Keele, United Kingdom
Chemistry Lecturer and Researcher in Computational Solid State Chemistry; Chemistry Recorder, British Science Association; trombone player.
mndoci Deepak Singh
Between a molecule and a byte
Manage biz dev for Amazon EC2. Scientist, musician, wannabe hacker, Open Data geek
ngeise Nick Geise
Tacoma, WA
scientist, musician, vegan, DIYer
Wirral UK
dad, chemistry teacher, plays guitar in soul/funk band, also into bach and mozart, movie fan
Sarokrae Chengy
Cambridge, UK
Nerd girl. *heart* Maths, Physics, Music, Piano, Clarinet & Internet
Exeter, UK
The name's Ken. I'm studying for a BSc in Maths at Exeter University. I am a gamer, Arsenal fan and dispenser of wisdom. I play guitar, piano, cello, drums.
London, UK
Musician, physicist and podcaster. Not necessarily in that order.
San Diego, CA
Musician, aspiring Biologist, and amateur disc golfer. I like sports
formerly of Albany
Biologist, Webmaster, Mommy. Musician (vocalist), LIT (Librarian in Training) :-)
Adamleeguitar Adam Lee
UK
Guitarist, prodcucer, musician, biologist! :-D
Preston, Lancashire
Biologist, Botanist, Writer, Illustrator & Musician, but not necessarily in that order.
Beaufort, NC
Marine Biologist, Writer, Musician, Purveyor of the Spineless, Evangelist of Open Access
bobmaccallum Bob MacCallum
London
The original, and best uncoolbob…

This is the original list of 25 scientific musos on Twitter, I won’t be updating it here. I will be adding to the actual live list on Twitter, at least until I have 500 members and then I’ll stop (that’s the twitter list limit).

I found out about this musical scientific site after I started compiling my list – http://scientistmusicians.wordpress.com/

Everybody’s Free to Wear Goggles

wear-gogglesFor the chemical class of 1999…

More than a decade ago, American journalist Mary Schmich offered her advice to youth in the form of a spoof graduation speech centering around the crucial maxim ‘wear sunscreen‘, the article was published in the Chicago Tribune. As is the way with these things it struck a chord among the literati and quickly spread to the Internet through the usenet and discussion groups. [Of course, today, it would be simply tagged linkbait or tweeted and would be said to have gone viral.]

But at the time, somewhere along the wire, Schmich’s text was attributed to American cult novelist Kurt Vonnegut as a student prank and the ‘wear sunscreen’ speech somehow gained its own cult status.

Then, Australian film director Baz Luhrmann (Romeo & Juliet, Strictly Ballroom, Moulin Rouge) picking up on the Vonnegut vibe, put the words to music and at the beginning of June the ‘song’ was released as a single in the UK…just in time for countless graduations around the academic world. At the time, I thought chemists probably needed their own speech…but somehow ‘wear sunscreen’ was not quite right…so…

Wear goggles…

If I could offer you only one tip for your career, goggles would be it. The long-term benefits of goggles have been proven scientifically, whereas my other advice has no basis more reliable than my own ramblings. This advice is dispensed below.

Enjoy the size and power of your first grant. You will not understand just how small it is until the next bill. But, in 20 years, you’ll look back at all those lost grant applications and recall with fondness the possibilities that lay before you and how little cash you had to fulfil them.

You do not have as many pens in your breast pocket as others imagine.

Don’t worry about that overnight experiment. Well, worry, but know that worrying is as effective as trying to solve a crystal structure by chewing the crystals first. The real troubles in your lab are likely to be things that never crossed your worried mind, such as lab technicians smoking over open ether bottles at 4 pm on a lazy Tuesday.

Do one experiment every day that scares you, such as a Grignard reaction in the bath.

Distil.

Don’t waste other people’s reagents. Don’t put up with people who waste yours.

Evaporate.

Don’t waste your time on jealousy. Sometimes you publish first, sometimes you don’t. The experiment is long and, in the end, it’s only chemistry.

Remember the acceptance letters you receive. Forget the rejections. If you succeed in doing this, tell your older colleagues how.

Keep your old lab-books. Throw away your old COSHH forms.

Re-crystallise.

Don’t feel guilty if you don’t know what you want to do in the lab. Some of the most interesting chemists around didn’t know at 22 what they wanted to do with their labs. Some of the most interesting 40-year-olds still don’t.

Get plenty of acetone. That chocolate stain might just come out of your lab-coat.

Be kind to your reaction flasks. You’ll miss them when they’re gone and there’s no budget for new glassware till next semester.

Maybe you’ll synthesize, maybe you won’t. Maybe you’ll have by-products, maybe you won’t. Maybe you’ll become an accountant at 40, after all, maybe you’ll collect your Nobel Prize on your 75th birthday. Whatever you do, don’t congratulate yourself too much, or berate yourself either. Your yields are half chance. So are those everybody else.

Enjoy your Bunsen. Use it every way you can. Don’t be afraid of it or of what other people think of it. Don’t worry about it’s size, they are all the same. Remember, it’s the greatest instrument you’ll ever own.

Analyse, even if you have nowhere to do it but the back office.

Read the literature, even if you don’t follow it.

Do not read glossy science magazines. They will only make your results look feeble and pointless and make you resent journalistic hype.

Get to know your mentors. You never know when they’ll be gone for good.

Be nice to your lab-mates. They’re your best alibi when things go wrong but the people least likely to remember where you put your spatula.

Understand that reactions come and go, but a precious few will go to completion. Work hard to bridge the gaps in geography and disciplines, the tighter funds get, the more interdisciplinary research is likely to complete a successful grant application.

Work in industry once, but leave before it makes you hard. Work at the University of Utopia once, but leave before it makes you soft.

React.

Accept certain inalienable truths: Reaction yields will fall, enantiomeric excesses will dwindle. Referees will criticise. You, too, will get old. And when you do, you’ll fantasise that when you were young, yields approached 100%, compounds were optically pure, referees were always fair and post-grads respected their supervisors.

Respect your supervisor.

Don’t expect anyone to support you, except funding councils, industrial collaborators and your institute. Maybe you have a patent. Maybe you’ll have a wealthy benefactor. But you never know when either one might run out.

Don’t mess too much with your hair – unless you work with sulphur or selenium – or by the time you’re 40 it will look you did, already.

Be careful whose advice you buy, but be patient with those who supply it. Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of distilling the past, evaporating off the solvent, recrystallising the product and recycling it for more than it’s worth.

But trust me on the goggles.

With a nod and a wink to Mary Schmich of The Chicago Tribune who wrote an article entitled ADVICE, LIKE YOUTH, PROBABLY JUST WASTED ON THE YOUNG, which has recently been resurrected as a pop ‘song’ by Baz Luhrmann under the title Everybody’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)

Incidentally, if this seems familiar, I first published it in my weekly Catalyst column on the original ChemWeb.com back in the spring of 1999, at the time Lurhmann had the hit record.

Did you survive the decade in the lab? Find out who almost didn’t in Monday’s Sciencebase post on Stupid Science.

Science Books, Hayfever, and Plectrums

f1-guitar-pickI’ve let quite a pile of review books accumulate on my desk again as well as a couple of non-book oddities, so here’s a quick round-up.

First up is the Instant Egghead Guide to the Mind by Emily Anthes published by Scientific American. The first in a series, Anthes breaks down the overwhelming topic of mind into bite-sized chunks. She covers the basics of how the various parts of the brain work individually to what happens when they come together. “We go all the way from how does a neuron work and what is a neuron to what is consciousness, which is probably one of the biggest ideas that’s out there,” she says.

Next is Steven Holzner (author of Physics for Dummies) who has put together a more focused follow-up Quantum Physics for Dummies. The subject is never going to be one for any kind of dummy to understand, and Holzner, by necessity, presents a very mathematical treatment. I suspect that the lay reader hoping for a quick explanation of Young’s slits experiment, quantum tunnelling, or to learn the fate of Schroedinger’s feline friend will be sorely disappointed. This is one for fledgling physics students.

Echoes of Life by Gaines, Eglinton, and Rullkoetter presents a fascinating history of fossils, but not the stony, bony impressions with which we are all familliar, they home in on fossils at the molecular level revealing what ancient chemistry can tell us about life millions of years ago.

Is God a Mathematician? It seems a facile question, but Mario Livio is not concerned with the theistic implications he is hoping to explain why the universe seems to follow mathematical rules. Is the universe intrinsically mathematical or is its mathematical behaviour simply a product of the human mind? Would an alien intelligence use a different system to explain the laws of the universe?

My good friend Scientific American editor Mark Alpert sent me a copy of his novel Final Theory. It’s a gripping, fast-paced thriller hinging on a hypothetical unified theory of the universe left unpublished by Einstein. The theory could be quite literally earth shattering and certainly tips its hat to the unfounded concerns about the Large Hadron Collider. It’s a good read although the explanations of autistic behaviour in one character perhaps unfold the stereotype a little too brashly.

In Sex and War, Malcolm Potts and Thomas Hayden offer a biological solution to humanity’s eternal efforts at self destruction. They suggest that war and terrorism are essentially male aggressive behaviours locked into our primordial biology. Our evolutionary status is not our destiny, they offer, and suggest that empowering women could help the biology of peace win out against the biology of war.

So, what about the hayfever and plectrums? Well, Jenny Liddle sent me a sample of HayMax Pure, which is a non-greasy gel hayfever that sufferers can apply to the edge of their nostrils to prevent the entry of pollen during peak times. It’s the end of March, so I, as a sufferer of allergic rhinitis, should soon have a chance to test the product. I’m sure it’s a more pleasant alternative to smearing on petroleum jelly and may even allow me to cut down on my antihistamine intake this summer, here’s hoping. UPDATE: June, 2010: Now, I’m well into the second season of HayMax use and I can certainly vouch for its benefits. I’m not entirely without symptoms but at this time of year I’d usually be unable to step out doors without suffering.

Finally, Allen Chance sent me a mixed bag of F-1 ergonomic guitar picks to try out. From his description of the benefits I had high hopes of many happy hours strumming and plucking. In one sense they’re nice and bright sounding, but I’m not convinced of their ergonomic value. It’s one’s fretting fingers that need the ergonomic reassessment.

Moreover, the picks are designed to prevent them from rotating in your fingers, but, deliberate rotation is crucial to getting different sounds such as scrapes and pinched harmonics, as well as for allowing fast shredding or big power chords. I’m sure some guitarists will find them very useful, but personally, I’ll be sticking to conventional picks and fingerstyle for the time being.

Make Music, Boost Brain

Power of musicI’ve played guitar – classical, acoustic, electric – for over three decades, ever since I pilfered my sister’s nylon string at the age of 12, although even before that, I’d had a couple of those mini toy guitars with actual strings at various points in my childhood. Even though I never took a single guitar lesson, I eventually learned to follow music and guitar tablature, but was only really any good at keeping up with a score if I’d already heard someone else play the music, it don’t mean a thing if it ain’t got that swing…after all.

Meanwhile, I took up singing in a choral group (called bigMouth) and have felt compelled to become ever so slightly more adept at reading music in a slightly more disciplined environment than jamming on guitars with friends. Big Mouth formed in the autumn of 2007 and we meet weekly for singing practice and have now done a few small “local” gigs. We even put together a last-minute audition video tape for the BBC’s Last Choir Standing, but didn’t make it through to the heats, (un)fortunately.

Anyway, that’s probably enough detail. The point I wanted to make is that until I joined Big Mouth and began making music regularly with a group, I’d always felt like I was quite useless at remembering people’s names. Like many people I’d always had to make a real conscious effort to keep new names in mind. However, in the last few months, with no deliberate action on my part, I’ve noticed that I seem to remember stuff like fleeting introductions, the names of people mentioned in conversations, or press releases and other such transient data much better than before.

I’m curious as to whether it’s the ever-so-slightly more formal discipline of group music practice that’s done something to the wiring in my brain or whether it’s simply to do with expanding one’s social group in a sudden burst like this. Ive heard of people claiming increased brain power after taking music lessons, here you can find piano teaching resources. It’s probably a combination of both and my suspicions about the power of music for boosting the brain are bolstered somewhat by a recent TED talk from Tod Machover and Dan Ellsey on the power of music

I also wonder whether there’s some connection with the Earworms concept for language learning, which I reviewed back in 2006.

Rush Natural Science

Rush natural science, photo by David BradleyEarlier this week, I went to see “one” of my childhood musical heroes, progressively rocking Canadian three piece Rush. The band was on top form as ever and the crowd jostled to the music almost in synchrony like so many atoms in a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) as the band raised the energy levels. They played most of their latest album, covering themes of humanism and faith without religion as well as resurrecting some stonkers from their vast back catalogue including the epic Natural Science from 1980 album Permanent Waves.

It was just before that album came out, 78-79, that I first got into Rush, perhaps it’s no coincidence, that the technicality of their music appealed to my early noodlings on the guitar while the content of their lyrics, which aren’t so much sword and sorcery as science and nature, appealed to my inner geek. Not the more usual sex, and drugs, and rock & roll for the maturing Rush of late 1970s, more the cynical take on our place in the world, with tracks such as the aforementioned Natural Science discussing the balance between the natural and the synthetic world and how integrity of purpose could allow us to reach an equilibrium between control and understanding through science.

Science and Rush were always a likely match. They did a song called Chemistry, after all, and a two-part conceptual epic spread over two albums about the black hole Cygnus X-1, and guitarist Alex Lifeson is on record as being quite a science fan. I’m quite proud of the sheer coincidence that not long after I published an article about earthshine, drummer and lyricist Neil Peart saw fit to write about that very subject as an allegory of the public perception of our inner selves. But, it’s no coincidence that Rush generally top the ubergeek’s playlist.

In fact, just for fun here’s a few other scientifically minded fans of the band: Paul May, chemist, Bristol Uni, creator of MotM, Steve Sain, statistician, unfortunately also confesses to having seen Billy Joel in concert, Mark Lewney, physicist, and rock doctor (think Einstein meets Hendrix), Nicole Biamonte, Iowa University music theorist, David Muir, educational computing guy, Arvind Gopu, lead systems analyst for the Open Science Grid Operations group at Indiana University, Anthony Francis, artificial intelligence researcher and science fiction author, Jon Price, geotechnogeek at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Let me know if you want to add your name and link to the list.

Now, tell me what is the biophysics behind post-gig ringing in the ears?