Fake Banner
Marijuana For ADHD?

Cannabis and THC, its main psychoactive compound, have been endorsed by people suffering from anxiety...

Rutgers Study - Forcing DEI Programs On People Increases Hostility

If you have done nothing wrong, do you want to be treated like a criminal? That was always the...

Minnesota Trial Lawyers Want To Ban Neonics - Here Is Why That Is A Mistake

Minnesota is having a challenging year, so challenging they are approaching California as the wackiest...

The Toxic Masculinity Of Disney Movies

Once upon a time, stories were just stories. They were fantasies that took people to a new world...

User picture.
picture for Tommaso Dorigopicture for Robert H Olleypicture for Hontas Farmerpicture for Ilias Tyrovolaspicture for Fred Phillipspicture for
Hank CampbellRSS Feed of this column.

I founded Science 2.0® in 2006 and since then it has become the world's largest independent science communications site, with over 300,000,000 direct readers and reach approaching one billion. Read More »

Blogroll
One thing you probably know about black holes, no matter how much science you took, is that they have never actually been seen.   Instead, the science consensus is that masses that sit at the centers of galaxies like our own Milky Way are presumed to be black holes.

Researchers in Nature Physics say a property of light called orbital angular momentum may be detectable because of a 'twist' in this momentum caused by black holes.  And we could detect it, if we just know what to look for.
Is a lack of diversity in science writing a bad thing?   Yes and no.   Obviously if science writing relied on conservatives and the free market where people will only work for what capitalism will bear, Science 2.0 could not exist.   Academics, progressives or liberals in America (I have made the case that they are quite distinct in America, however - see Like Freedom? Thank A Scientist - How Science Made America Possible), both famous and non-famous, have contributed here for no reason other than a desire to communicate science.
I don't get excited about the singularity the way some on Science 2.0 do (and certainly elsewhere) though I admire the optimism.    So when I got an email from a publicity person at PBS about NewsHour Science Correspondent Miles O’Brien’s report on the upcoming match between Jeopardy masters Brad Runner, Ken Jennings and the super computer Watson I had to wonder if this would lead to more claims about an upcoming singularity and exponential leaps in artificial intelligence.
While many in America were happy about the collapse of the Mubarak government, they were likely happy for the wrong reasons.   Optimists, it is said, are people who do not learn from experience and the toppling of a dictator in Egypt looks a lot more like Iran in 1979 than it does America in 1776.

But regardless of the irrational optimism of many in the political spectrum, plenty of scientists are going to be happy that protesters have now turned their sights on Zawi Hawass, a man who could only have gotten his job in a dictatorship and wielded his position just like one.
Online dating is mainstream big business, we all see television commercials for any number of sites catering to any number of interests - but do they work?
Nothing says science like Valentine's Day and we are positively littered with articles on neuroscience, chemistry and social aspects of romance.   Really, we cover it all.   

Not sure who to date? Garth Sundem answers it in The Valentine's Day Man-O-Meter. Be sure to take it as gospel because he never just makes stuff up.  If you need even more help than that, here is his Ultimate Valentine's Day Toolkit.