I got an e-mail the other day, followup on a survey I'd taken part in, that has apparently led to this scientific paper and this writeup for us non-experts

I barely remember doing it; I'm most likely to have participated because they were interested in how/if hyperphantasia or aphantasia are affected by visual impairments. I don't feel like I have a strong visual imagination and imagine that must be related to me not having strong visual signals at all. But I am far from aphantasic either -- or so I feel confident in saying because Andrew had it and how he described it seemed very different from my experience. But then I find it hard to distinguish this from my spatial reasoning (abnormally good for "my gender" when it was tested in school), sense of direction, and memory. I was better than my parents at those "Concentration" type games where you turn over two cards and see if they match, when I was like three or four. They were impressed but I think it's just how my brain deals with not being able to see very well: after I've been someplace once, I'm likely to have a pretty good idea of the path I took to and from so I am so much more relaxed any subsequent times.

This kind of spatial acuity does seem to be the other kind of hyperphantasia talked about here: "an enhanced ability to picture the orientation of different items relative to one another and perform mental rotations" and it also mentions a good sense of direction. I don't know if I have that to a "hyper-" worthy degree, and if I did I'm sure it'd be because of other parts of my brain chipping in to make up for the shitty signal my visual cortex gets -- the one MRI I had wasn't related to my sight but since if its about anything below your head, your head is also in the tube, and that meant the first thing the consultant said about it was that my visual cortex is both bigger and fuzzier than usual, which I presume is what this "let's all pitch in and help out" coping mechanism has led to. Having been born with my visual impairment, my brain developed with it as a constant factor. I do wonder what that does to the aphantasia/hyperphantasia spectrum.

Anyway all that is incidental. It's always cool to get to help with a science!

I haven't read the paper that this article is based on, so I'm sure I'm missing something, but my immediate thought upon reading that researchers "discovered a direct correlation between instances of bad grammar and subjects’ Heart Rate Variability (HRV)" was that this is less about how "our bodies go into stress-mode when hearing misused grammar" and more about our bodies going into stress-mode when we encounter a norm being breached.

Especially with the way most of us associate grammar with school, and thus our early years and related traumas.

Also, grammar snobs tend to be seeking comfort in the Single Correct Way to do things, and there are a number of reasons for that (insecurity, lack of control in other aspects of their lives, using language as a proxy for their bigotry because they really don't like non-white/young/multilingual/female speakers of English).

What is it we're really reacting to when we react to "bad grammar"? It's social constructs we've been taught, and I'm sure all kinds of those have physiological effects on us.

D is forever reacting, in medias res, to things he sees online. So when he just said "I want to do that road trip," I had no idea what to expect.

I was delighted to hear that it was the Swedish solar system road trip, and now I want him to do that too, so that I can go along!

I saw someone link to this paper on replacing the scientific term "plant blindness" and I found it very interesting.

The argument for replacing it rests on what I've come to realize myself: the metaphorical use of blindness is always about ignorance or apathy.

The problem that has been called plant blindness is a real problem; it seems complicated and significant.
The term “plant blindness” was introduced in 1999 and is defined as “the inability to see or notice the plants in one's own environment—leading to: (a) the inability to recognize the importance of plants in the biosphere, and in human affairs; (b) the inability to appreciate the aesthetic and unique biological features of the life forms belonging to the Plant Kingdom; and (c) the misguided, anthropocentric ranking of plants as inferior to animals, leading to the erroneous conclusion that they are unworthy of human consideration.”
But I know next to nothing about biology/botany, and I'm not really here to talk about that (though the article is short and accessibly-written and interesting), I'm here to talk about the metaphorical use of blindness.

I was extremely interested to see the article go on to say of the term "plant blindness"
Unfortunately, the term is difficult to replace, as it encompasses several phenomena that can be grouped into four categories: attention, attitude, knowledge, and relative interest.
To see the lack of all those things "encompassed" in the term blindness left me a little dispirited honestly. This is what I'm expected not to have, as a blind person: attention, attitude, knowledge or interest. (I was also intrigued that the author says they're visually impaired, too. I think that's a good thing.)

But what I really love about this, what made me want to share this, is the author's suggested replacement term: plant awareness disparity. I was particularly interested in the inclusion of disparity, even though I misunderstood it at first! The author explains
the word “disparity” in the term is especially important. I am often asked why plant awareness or plant unawareness are not sufficient to describe what was previously known as “plant blindness.” The reason I opted to include “disparity” is because the root of the issue is that people do not notice plants in their environment as often as they do other organisms (namely animals). I wanted to highlight that there is, in fact, a disparity between how we notice and treat plants and animals in our visual cognition processes. This disparity is then what causes the other components of PAD: when we do not notice plants as often as animals, we tend to be less interested in them, less knowledgeable about them, and we have a less positive attitude toward them.
The disparity is between noticing plants and noticing other organisms/animals. Whereas my first thought was that it could be considered a disparity between some people's awareness (of plants) and other people's. And I thought this might make awareness disparity a good general term to replace some of these metaphorical uses of blindness. Disparity is a good frame for this, because it says two things are not the same (like maybe how much I see and how much you see) without making such heavy value judgments. I feel like this kind of awareness disparity can be what's important, it's maybe currently underappreciated in our use of language.
The story about "tortured phrases" as a tell for fabricated academic papers, probably the result of automated translation or software that attempts to disguise plagiarism is mildly interesting to me, but somehow I'm finding the phrases themselves completely fascinating.

The idea is that common terms have been replaced with words that individually sorta mean the same thing but don't add up the same at all, like "profound neural organization" instead of "deep neural network." "Deep" is a bit like "profound," sometimes, and a network could be a kind of organization. But even people like me who have only the vaguest idea what a neural network is know that this new phrase does not mean the same thing.

The other examples are even better:
Big data > Colossal information
Artificial intelligence > Counterfeit consciousness
Cloud computing > Haze figuring
Signal to noise > Flag to commotion
Random value > Irregular esteem

All of those should be band names, or sci-fi novel titles, or something.
Today I've fallen down a rabbit hole of Marina Koren's writing for The Atlantic. I really love it.
  • Pictures like this can provide a dose of awe amid the doom-scrolling, a tiny break from a reality that itself feels like an alternate timeline for 2020, much in the same way that the sight of a fuzzy comet called NEOWISE has dazzled stargazers around the world in recent weeks. These are temporary delights. The comet will eventually fade from view, not to return for thousands of years, and the solar system in the new photograph is too far away to ever visit. But turning our attention to something otherworldly, even for a few moments, can distract us from pandemic despair.
  • Hörst says she and her colleagues often talk about how Titan rain might smell, making predictions based on their knowledge of the chemicals in its atmosphere. Compounds made of hydrogen and carbon would smell like gasoline, and cyanides like almonds. Some elements in the raindrops might resemble the smoky scent of barbecue.
  • Jupiter’s atmosphere is difficult to photograph for the same reason a puppy is: It doesn’t stay
  • Kaltenegger told me that she gets a version of the feeling that struck me when I read her paper, the shock of recognition that we might be someone else’s exoplanet. When she is out for a walk at night, she looks up at the sky and wonders who might be looking back. She hopes that our presence, a small absence of starlight in the distance, prompts them to feel as curious as we have felt, and to take a closer look. Charbonneau has had a similar thought—could our planet be intriguing enough to attract the attention of some other life-form? “It’s nice to be noticed, after all,” he says.
  • Schmidt curates the cosmos and hangs them in the ether of the internet, where people can pass through, like museum visitors, and tilt their heads at a particularly impressive bit of space that, for a moment, might make them feel small, but in a reassuring way. “I just hope that their life has improved for even just the few seconds that they took to look at it and they thought, Wow, that’s out there,” Schmidt told me.

[160/365]

Jun. 9th, 2021 10:53 pm
There are lots of great quotes in this article about NASA's newly announced missions to Venus
Currently, the Venus community is a bit like Boston Red Sox fans prior to 2004, who lived under the ‘curse of the Bambino’ for endless decades.
...
Instead, he says, Venus is “a planet nobody has given a shit about for 30 years.”
...
“Venus doesn’t really have [a PR campaign],” Sousa-Silva says, “probably because you can’t plant a flag on it.”
...
When he got to his phosphine slide, he said, “I don’t know what it means, and I don’t care. All I care about is that we’re talking about Venus!”
Pull-quotes aside, this is a long and compelling article, I really loved how it made me hold my breath along with the teams even though [personal profile] mother_bones had already told me missions to Venus had been approved before I read it...and indeed the title of this told me the same thing if I'd been paying attention to it, heh.

It was persuasive too: as I said when a Mastodon friend who's a planetary scientist asked today what everybody's favorite planet is (apparently a question they saw on someone's okcupid profile!), I said "I have such big love for Uranus and Neptune because we know the least about them, they're the underdogs of the solar system." So having only heard the destinations of the four projects, I would've been tempted to go for the Triton one. But by the time I was halfway through reading this, I was sold on Team Venus. I felt like I'd been on a big emotional journey by the epilogue.

Anyway, what's your favorite planet? The planetary scientist made it clear that this definition includes moons and asteroids and dwarf planets and stuff.

[140/365]

May. 20th, 2021 10:26 pm
I got to see Stuart today! Only (almost) a week after his birthday, which I was woefully unprepared for by having had one of the worst weeks I've had in a while.

He had a "birthday and Christmas" present for me though: a t-shirt that says "This top happily existed in all possible states before you observed it. Now it has collapsed into a single state. I hope you're satisfied." It has one of those bowling ball on a rubber sheet illustrations you always get to explain how gravity works. (Which is nothing to do with what the text is about but looks Quantum.)

It made me laugh but then Stuart told me "When I saw this, I heard it in your voice," which made me laugh more but in an alarmed way. Or maybe just surprised. Its very mean for me!

I think it's great that we observers have an effect on the universe! I'm delighted that you're here, reading these words and collapsing these waveforms right now.
Such is the extent of my nerdery that when [personal profile] diffrentcolours asked if I'd seen the link he sent me and I hadn't so he explained it was tomorrow night for the 60th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's flight. I said that was strange since the anniversary would actually be today -- displaying now just an unsurprising mastery of early spaceflight trivia but a truly uncharacteristic grasp on what the date is.

He said "oh maybe it's tonight then." I said "maybe I remembered it wrong." Surely he's more likely to know the date of an event he just looked at than I am of precisely when a human first flew into space.

But, no I was right.i think I actually know this particular bit of trivia from Public Service Broadcasting -- one of the unexpected bonuses of them using clips of archive reporting is that you can learn a lot if you listen to bits of newscast as avidly as you listen to songs you love, and their "Gagarin" is definitely a song I love.

So we watched "Yuri's Night" from the National Space Centre tonight while we ate the burgers I made for dinner (I feel like we have burgers all the time but they're tasty and they're one of the easiest things I can make when, for example, I went to lie down after work and felt worse when in got up than I had before). And really they said very little about Yuri Gagarin and could've held this on any night, heh. But it was a nice idea, and fun to watch space nerds getting all excited about astronauts and Artemis and the sky cranes on Mars and whatnot.
I was excited enough to read
"Lego launches epic 2,354-piece NASA Space Shuttle Discovery set" that I did such a big gasp it concerned [personal profile] mother_bones and I had to explain what caused it.

But then I saw a) it's of a specific mission and b) that means it has the Hubble Telescope inside it!!!

I'm fine, I know what I'm getting for my birthdays and Christmases, heh (this first but there's an ISS too! I didn't know about that! and then the Saturn V, which I did know about...)
The first scientific focus of NASA’s Perseverance rover is a rock named “Máaz” – the Navajo word for “Mars.” The rover’s team, in collaboration with the Navajo Nation Office of the President and Vice President, has been naming features of scientific interest with words in the Navajo language.
...
Mission scientists worked with a Navajo (or Diné) engineer on the team, Aaron Yazzie of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California, to seek the Navajo Nation’s permission and collaboration in naming new features on Mars.
...
one suggestion was “tséwózí bee hazhmeezh,” or “rolling rows of pebbles, like waves.” Yazzie added suggestions like “strength” (“bidziil”) and “respect” (“hoł nilį́”) to the list. Perseverance itself was translated to “Ha’ahóni.”
Here's the link.

From a linguistic perspective, I'm really curious how viable "naming stuff on another planet" is as a language revitalization plan or policy! And it's sad but unsurprising that Perseverance can't deal with the accented characters necessary to spell Diné words properly, a problem that befalls almost all the world's languages except the one the internet is written in (on that subject, here's an interesting article I read the other day about how that problem is playing out for Urdu script).


This artwork is etched onto a metal plate attached to the deck of the Mars Perseverance rover. The image depicts all of the rovers which have driven on Mars. On the far left is the Sojourner rover (1997), followed by twin rovers Spirit and Opportunity (2004), then Curiosity (2012), and Perseverance (2021). The rovers have gotten larger and more capable of exploring challenging terrain. Also pictured is Ingenuity, a helicopter which could demonstrate the first powered flight on Mars.

See an image of this plate in the cleanroom.
It's been a fun evening on Twitch, tuning into music from [personal profile] diffrentcolours's silly friends like we do a lot of Thursdays, and then switching to a livestream Q&A with the first 360° panorama from the new Mars rover, Perseverance.
Today I learned that octopuses punch fish, scientists aren't sure why but are willing to speculate that it might be out of spite.

The story is full of gems.
In fact, this antisocial fish-punching phenomenon – which scientists term "active displacement" of fish – occurs in the midst of collaborative hunting efforts, in which octopuses and fish team up to chase and trap prey together.
...
In much the same way as you or I might try to elbow-out fellow diners at a buffet, this 'partner control mechanism' therefore seeks to establish a sense of control and dominance in a food free-for-all. It's just that partner control – when delivered by an octopus – is a tad more brutal than your average buffet queue experience.

"To this end, the octopus performs a swift, explosive motion with one arm directed at a specific fish partner, which we refer to as punching," the researchers explain in a new paper.

"From an ecological perspective, actively punching a fish partner entails a small energetic cost for the actor (i.e. octopus), and simultaneously imposes a cost on the targeted fish partner.
...
"While we can't yet know for sure why octopuses are randomly punching fish like this, at least one of the theoretical explanations given suggests octopuses may have some serious attitude.
Is Freedom White?
By recognizing power, race, and the capacity for violence as core dimensions in what freedom means and how it moves, we gain a fresh perspective on central problems in American ideology. Such a framework begins to explain why cries for freedom so often exist in an uncomfortable romance with racial bigotry, religious intolerance, misogyny, land hunger, violence, and a belligerent form of gun rights."
"Fossil galaxy" found hidden in Milky Way
Astronomers have found a fossil galaxy, named "Heracles", inside the Milky Way. They analyzed the chemical composition of tens of thousands of stars in the Milky Way's halo, and found hundreds with compositions so strikingly different that they must have come from a different galaxy - one that collided with the Milky Way billions of years ago.
Famed Arecibo telescope, on the brink of collapse, will be dismantled
The Arecibo telescope’s long and productive life has come to an end. The National Science Foundation (NSF) announced today it will decommission the iconic radio telescope in Puerto Rico following two cable breaks in recent months that have brought the structure to near collapse.
I shared this link (from a friend who said of it "i will always remember how my stomach dropped out of my butt when i saw Contact") and [personal profile] diffrentcolours texted me to comment on it. It's good to have partners who know I will be sad about things like this! As I told him, Contact introduced me to Arecibo as well, and I imprinted hard on that book when I read it as a teenager. But he reminded me this makes Arecibo a relative elder telescope, and there are bigger and better now -- we know someone working on the Square Kilometre Array and that's pretty damn cool. We can always hope Arecibo can be restored enough to be a museum we can go see one day. How cool would that be?

We Didn’t Start The Fire: This Transgender Awareness Week, Meet Michael Dillon
This year has felt pretty “We Didn’t Start The Fire” all round, but nowhere more than in the arena of Trans Issues. J.K Rowling, Abigail Shrier, we don’t want no men in here, self-ID, where to pee, gender recognition fear. But I didn’t want to start this piece by talking about people who’re desperate to make the world aware of trans people in a way that fits a false narrative, one in which trans people are a new and pressing threat. They get enough time in the spotlight. I wanted to talk about Michael Dillon instead.
I think it's pretty unfair calling this a "fake asteroid." It's not trying to pretend to be an asteroid, has no intention to deceive us. It's not the spent rocket booster's fault if we think it's an asteroid!
I had the interview, I don't think it went well at all but I'll know in a few days.

[personal profile] innerbrat expressed interest in my interview outfit so here it is...or, the part that's presentable; I have neither trousers nor shoes smart enough for in-person interviews so it's a good thing those won't be happening to me!) so here it is.

I'd rather talk about Venus.

Venus! Maybe there's life on Venus? I really hope there's life on Venus, for the very selfish reason that I hate, haaaate, the idea of the Habitable Zone.

Like, I know we can't search easily for life we don't know the signs of (how do you even begin to do that? much less know when or if you've succeeded! it's hard to make such a thing fit a SMART goal, never mind the scientific method). But still, scientists talk about "Earth-like planets" and "well obviously liquid water has to be present" like they're the only way to have life, which I think is both boring and limiting.

If Venus was a newly-discovered exoplanet (a planet around another star, not in our solar system), Earth's scientists would immediately write it off. Like not even "wow, what a challenge this would be at our current understanding," but just "nope, no chance." And I know this is because science runs on funding and media attention and those things reinforce each other.

The received wisdom, which doesn't feel true to me but I have only the small biased sample of me and my friends to combat it, is that people are only going to care about life that is recognizable or understandable to a non-scientist earthling. It's like the "charismatic megafauna" problem on a planetary scale.

But! If we find life on Venus, our next-door twin-sister planet, something we're all used to hearing about and can even see in the sky so easily it's regularly mistaken for UFOs, that gives something for our earthling brains to relate to, a hook to hang future funding applications off. It would present a narrative that could help us look at more Venus-like worlds, and there seem to be a lot more places with its roiling hellscape of extreme temperatures and pressure, smothering greenhouse gases, constant lightning, sulfuric acid rain, etc. than there are other Earths.
So I wanted to talk about that "scientists prove bisexual men exist!" story we all rolled our eyes at the other day. At the time I just rolled my eyes too, but today when I saw this article shared with a quote that told me what it was actually talking about, I thought it was worth a little more investigation.

But first, I want to say that the dismissive reactions are totally valid and you don't need to care or read another damn word about this if you don't want to. Bi men exist, they know it, a bunch of us non-bi or non-men people know this too. Science is not objective truth; it can only be done by humans who can't help but come to it with our biases and those of our cultures. Plenty of marginalized and minoritized people are used to not finding their attributes described very well, if at all, by science and any amount of frustration with that is valid.

And the scientists agree that you don't need anyone's permission to roll your eyes or not care about this science. One of them, this paper's first author, said "If you identify as bi or pansexual, I don't think you have to wait for a scientist to validate you and tell you that your identity or your lived experience is real."

So why is this worth talking about at all? A notorious piece of research in 2005 got reported as "Straight, Gay or Lying," a phrase that'd plague a lot of bisexuals then and afterwards. I was pretty new to thinking of myself as bi in 2005, and two or three years later when I started meeting other bisexuals and then doing bisexual activism, this idea that women might be able to be bi but men could not be was causing ripples through the bisexuals I knew.

The guy who did that paper? Is also part of the team that did this new work. It's directly overturning his original conclusion that bi men don't exist.

This paper reviewed 8 earlier studies. These results are considered much more definitive than the previous stuff because this statistical analysis was much more thorough. Previous studies had methodological problems, small sample sizes, and apparently "some arcane problems with quadratic regressions." I can't get over the sample sizes; even from eight earlier research projects, this team only had the data from 500 people to work with. I haven't read enough to know if the eight earlier studies did involve more than a total of 500 people and some of them were just deemed unsuitable here for some reason, but even if that's so we're still unlikely to be talking about very big numbers. This number feels well in the realm of "amount of bi men I might have talked to," when you include not just my friends and a few BiCons but like outreach at Prides and people in my social media circles.

The study is far from perfect: it seems to be limited to cis men, it seems to acknowledge only binary genders, and it doesn't engage with dimensions of attraction or sexuality outside of physical arousal. Analyzing earlier studies inevitably means it's stuck in the past.

But incorporating the more robust data gives science better tools to do better work in future. Treating sexuality as a continuum rather than a dichotomy might make it easier to treat gender that way too, and to incorporate people from the various points on the romantic continuum who may be, say, biromantic and asexual.

This study corrects a flawed historical record that used science to invalidate bisexuality, and this is incredibly valuable not for queers to be patted on the back by Science and reassured we exist, but to throw at bigots who love to use "science!" to invalidate us. While yes we know the significant flaws with assuming that willy-twitching is either sufficient or necessary for "male biseuxality" to exist, that's all they think it is and there's no point trying to engage bigots on more complicated terms while they're still stuck on this. And if the science is going to get it wrong about us, even by its terrible metrics, it is nice to see science get it right and overturn that.
4 What picture is the wallpaper on the device you’re using right now?



This one (though the other way up, for some reason; it's the south pole so the jets should be at the bottom), of Enceladus, which is a little moon of Saturn and my favorite moon in the solar system (with the possible exception of the Moon, Earth's moon, but that's just provincial prejudice on my part).

It was the background picture on my old phone too, so I've been vaguely looking at it behind my app icons for at least like five years now.
Last night and today, I've been watching this weird Netflix thing called Mars. It's some mediocre near-future SF about the first human flight to Mars, mixed in with some actual present-day (as of the time this was made, three years ago) footage from real documentaries talking about Mars.

It's such a clever conceit, but I'm getting frustrated at the quality of the acting and the frankly tedious disaster-movie style of the fictional bits. I've found myself sad when the documentary bits stop and we get back to the bad acting, heh. It does have a cool theme song sung by Nick Cave, though.

It has also led [personal profile] diffrentcolours and I to talk about GPS on Mars, though, and at one point I was about to say the word "geosynchronous" but then realized it'd be wrong and couldn't for the life of me remember the Greek for "Mars" (because "geo" is Greek for "Earth" so by analogy...). Which is a sign of how tired I was, frankly: I think I knew this when I was about five because I was an astronomy-obsessed grade-schooler. Luckily [personal profile] diffrentcolours saved me with "Areosynchronous?" Later, I think still pondering GPS for Mars, he looked it up and yes, "areostationary" and "areosynchronous" are the words for those things when talking about Mars. So there's a thing I learned today.

Profile

the cosmolinguist

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 45 6 7
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags