EINSTEIN’S BRAIN GOES
DIGITAL WITH IPAD APP
Instructions: Instructions: mention in what way is
that the brain of EINSTEIN'S was created an app for the iPad and how it has
been over the years to the present.
The purpose of the activity is to provide skills to
the student to identify the times when the prayers are written.
Einstein’s
Brain Goes Digital With iPad App
By
Wired UK
Einstein’s
Brain Goes Digital With iPad App
By
Wired UK
09.25.12
11:15
AM
Categories:
Brains and Behavior, Tech
• By Liat Clark, Wired UK
• For a man who never actually donated
his brain to science, Albert Einstein’s grey matter sure does get around a
lot. Obsessed with the late, great’s genius, as everyone of his day was,
Princeton Hospital pathologist Thomas Harvey removed Einstein’s organ during
an autopsy in 1955 without permission, and proceeded to slice it up into more
than 200 cubes and slivers, preserve these in formaldehyde, then take them
home. He lost his job after refusing to give the specimens up, despite
getting permission from Einstein’s son retrospectively.
•
• If it were not for the initiative,
however creepy, that Harvey demonstrated while standing over the physicist’s
rapidly decomposing body nearly six decades ago, we would not have the prize
specimen we have today — an iPad app that offers the most detailed public
access view of Einstein’s brain to date.
• For $9.99, anyone can download the
app and take advantage of digitised images of nearly 350 brain slices taken
from the collection bequeathed to the National Museum of Health and Medicine
in Silver Spring, Maryland by the Harvey family estate in 2010. The National
Museum of Health and Medicine in Chicago digitized the slides for the app.
• The app experience is touted as
being like peering at this piece of history through a real microscope — the
cellular structure and tissue definitions are visible, since Harvey stained
each sample. Though it’s a great tool for students and researchers, there are
a few issues with the finished product — namely, we’re not always certain
what bit of the brain we’re actually looking at, despite Harvey taking a
series of photos of the organ from different angles.
• “They didn’t have MRI,” said Jacopo
Annese of the University of California’s Brain Observatory, San Diego, who
has digitised 2,400 slides from the brain of amnesiac Henry Molaison. “We
don’t have a three-dimensional model of the brain of Einstein, so we don’t
know where the samples were taken from.”
• The app does organise the slides
into general sections — brain stem, for instance — but cannot get more
anatomically accurate than that.
• Annese, whose work on Molaison’s
brain will be accessible online from December 2012, predicts that there will
be another Einstein, and when that individual dies, we’ll be prepared (we’re
hanging on for that 3D-mapped interactive specimen).
• Nevertheless, the app has finally
preserved Einstein’s brain for future generations, so even as the samples
begin to deteriorate we will always have this safe fail. It’s hoped that by
making Einstein’s brain open source (well, pretty cheaply available to anyone
with access to an iPad), studies will be more rapidly advanced.
• In the 57 years since the great
physicist died, we have managed to gather a few things from the samples.
Harvey sent out slides to various researchers in his day, with results of
varying degrees of success (there’s a great rundown here, taken from Brian
Burrell’s Postcards from the Brain Museum), but probably the most well-noted
investigation was Harvey’s own collaboration. The results, published in the
Lancet in 1999, showed that the parietal lobe — associated with our
processing of mathematics, language, and spatial understanding of things like
maps — was 15 percent wider then normal. From analysing Harvey’s photos of
the brain, it also became clear that parts of the brain were missing,
including part of the Sylvian fissure and parts located in the frontal lobe.
• According to Sandra Witelson, who
worked on the paper, “This unusual brain anatomy may explain why Einstein
thought the way he did… Einstein’s own description of his scientific thinking
was that words did not seem to play a role. Instead he saw more or less clear
images of a visual kind.” It was suggested that, because of how the brain
developed and grew in this novel way, neurons may have been able to
communicate better, or at least, in a different way.
• Using the app, neuroscientist Phillip
Epstein, a consultant to the National Museum of Health and Medicine, suggests
researchers could look for areas where neurons are more densely connected
than in “normal” brains.
• So, as we battle away, attempting to
prove that it’s not our fault we can’t get our heads round quantum physics in
one afternoon — Einstein’s brain was just better — one question remains. Just
how would the man himself, who requested that his remains only be cremated,
feel about his organ being put on show for the world to scrutinise.
• “I’d like to think Einstein would
have been excited,” said Steve Landers, who consulted on the app, the
proceeds of which are going to the National Museum of Health and Medicine and
its Chicago branch, due to open in 2015.
• “There’s been a lot of debate over what
Einstein’s intentions were,” museum representative Jim Paglia said. “We know
he didn’t want a circus made of his remains. But he understood the value to
research and science to study his brain, and we think we’ve addressed that in
a respectful manner.”
• Whether Einstein would have approved
or not, we are finally making the most of our access to his organ. And it all
could have been so different. Harvey, who also too it upon himself to send
Einstein’s eyes to his colleague William Ehrich, stored away the rest of his
sample collection after donating a few samples to museums and researchers. It
was not until reporter Steven Levy, who was tasked with “finding Einstein’s
brain” by his editor, visited Harvey at his home in 1978 that the remaining
pieces were uncovered, stored away in a box marked “Costa Cider,” behind a
beer cooler.
• The experience of seeing the
remaining samples, Levy said, was a “religious” one. We’ll see if the app can
get the general public at least part way to that euphoria.
SCIENCE CONFIRMS THE OBVIOUS: LITERATURE IS GOOD
FOR YOUR BRAIN
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-09/science-confirms-obvious-reading-literature-good-your-brain
A WOMAN’S PLACE
Instructions: Answer and commented in your
classroom the following questions with the help of your teacher make a vase
debate exposed to reading.
Activity:
In what way has impacted women California?
Does it mention that the man who is Manra recidente
in California will affect the woman develops and out in society?
What amount of women graduate for every man to
graduate?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/books/review/the-end-of-men-by-hanna-rosin.html?smid=tw-share
A Woman’s Place
‘The
End of Men,’ by Hanna Rosin
“The End of Men”? This is not a title; it is a sound
bite. But Hanna Rosin means it. The revolution feminists have been waiting for,
she says, is happening now, before our very eyes. Men are losing their grip,
patriarchy is crumbling and we are reaching “the end of 200,000 years of human
history and the beginning of a new era” in which women — and womanly skills and
traits — are on the rise. Women around the world, she reports, are increasingly
dominant in work, education, households; even in love and marriage. The
stubborn fact that in most countries women remain underrepresented in the
higher precincts of power and still don’t get equal pay for equal work seems to
her a quaint holdover, “the last artifacts of a vanishing age rather than a permanent
configuration.”
THE
END OF MEN
And
the Rise of Women
By Hanna Rosin
310 pp. Riverhead Books. $27.95.
And to whom do we owe this astonishing revolution? If
there is a hero in Rosin’s story, it is not women or men or progressive
politics: it is the new service economy, which doesn’t care about physical
strength but instead apparently favors “social intelligence, open communication,
the ability to sit still and focus” — things that “are, at a minimum, not
predominantly the province of men” and “seem to come easily to women.” And so,
“for the first time in history, the global economy is becoming a place where
women are finding more success than men.”
Human history? Global economy? Her evidence for women
the globe over consists of thin, small facts cherry-picked to support outsize
claims. We read, for example, that “women in poor parts of India” are rushing
ahead of their male counterparts to learn English so that they can man call centers.
But will this impressive display of initiative really liberate them? And even
if it did, are we to deduce a country from a call center?
But Rosin’s real focus is the United States, and here
she delivers a blizzard of numbers, studies, statistics. Consider: By 2009
there were as many women as men in the work force, and today the average wife
contributes some 42.2 percent of her family’s income — up sharply from the 2
percent to 6 percent that women contributed in 1970. The future, Rosin says,
looks brighter for women still. For every two men who will get a bachelor’s
degree this year, there will be three women graduates. And even if they remain
underrepresented at the top of just about everything, they have “started to
dominate” in lower-profile professions like accounting, financial management,
optometry, dermatology, forensic pathology and veterinary practices, among
“hundreds of others.”
Rosin has invented comic-book characters to explain
the momentous changes she sees: “Cardboard Man” is rigid, stuck in old habits,
mentally muscle-bound and unable to adapt to the fleet-footed and mercurial
global economy. “Plastic Woman” (an unfortunate name choice, given the surgical
“adaptability” it calls to mind) is infinitely malleable, nimble and endowed with
“traditionally feminine attributes, like empathy, patience and communal
problem-solving,” that make her the perfect match for the new economy. For her,
the only way forward is up.
But this “rise,” which Rosin so cheerfully reports, is
in fact a devastating social collapse. It starts with inequality and class
division. As Rosin herself shows, men at “the top” of society are not “ending.”
It is all happening to the lower and middle classes, because “the end of men”
is the end of a manufacturing-based economy and the men who worked there, many
of whom are now unemployed, depressed, increasingly dependent on the state and
women to support them. We know the numbers, and they are bad: since 2000 the
manufacturing economy has lost six million jobs, a third of its total work
force — much of it male. In 1950, 1 in 20 men in their prime were not working;
today the number is a terrifying 1 in 5.
1. - Listen to the song. There is one extra word in
each line. Cross it out.
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE
Wouldn’t
it be nice if we were much older
Then
we wouldn’t have to wait for so long
And
wouldn’t it be nice to both live together
In
the kind of world where we really belong
You
know it’s going to make it all that much better
When
we can say goodnight darling and stay together
Wouldn’t
it be nice if we could always wake up
In
the early morning when the day is new
And
after having spent the whole day together
Hold
each other close the whole long night through
Happy
times together that we’ve been spending
I
wish that every little kiss was never-ending
Wouldn’t
it be very nice
Maybe
if we think and wish and hope and pray it might all
Come
true
Baby
then there wouldn’t be a single little thing we
Couldn’t
do
Maybe
we could be married
And
then we’d be really happy
Wouldn’t
it be so nice
You
know it seems the more we talk about it together
It
only makes it much worse to live without it
But
let’s talk about it now
Wouldn’t
it be really nice
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario