Posts Tagged ‘science’

San Francisco cellphone warning law fails science, says judge

Posted on October 27th, 2011 • Filed under Learn • No Comments

Even the watered-down version couldn’t pass muster. San Francisco’s ordinance requiring retail outlets to inform consumers about the (alleged) effects of cellphone radiation has been blocked by a federal judge.

Upon passage, San Francisco’s ordinance was challenged by industry trade group CTIA-The Wireless Association, which claimed the ordinance’s requirement that retailers post messages about cell phone safety violated the First Amendment. San Francisco initially agreed to amend the ordinance after the CTIA filed suit, and made some changes, but they weren’t enough. Judge William Alsup found that the ordinance failed the sniff test on both scientific and First Amendment grounds.

“Whether or not cell phones cause cancer is a debatable question and, at this point in history, is a matter of opinion, not fact. San Francisco has its opinion. The industry has the opposite opinion,” wrote Judge Alsup.

The fact-sheet required by the ordinance is “misleading and must be corrected,” notes the judge. “Although each factoid in isolation may have an anchor in some article somewhere, the overall message of the fact-sheet (and the poster, for that matter) is misleading by omission in two important ways. The overall impression left is that cell phones are dangerous and that they have somehow escaped the regulatory process.”

The World Health Organization issued a report that seemingly butressed San Francisco’s position in May when it labeled cellphones “possibly carcinogenic,” meaning that there is “limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.” But results of a massive, 15-year-long study released earlier this month showed absolutely no link between cellphone use and cancer, echoing the findings of numerous other studies.

The judge left the door open to the possibility that a revised “fact sheet” could pass muster and stayed the enforcement of the law until November 30 so that both sides can file appeals. San Francisco has already promised to do exactly that.

Read the comments on this post

Read the original post on Ars Technica

 

The Food Lab: Ceviche And The Science Of Marinades

Posted on July 29th, 2011 • Filed under Taste • No Comments

It’s time for another round of The Food Lab. Got a suggestion for an upcoming topic? Email Kenji here, and he’ll do his best to answer your queries in a future post. Become a fan of The Food Lab on Facebook for play-by-plays on future kitchen tests and recipe experiments.

More tests, more results! Follow The Food Lab on Facebook or Twitter.

Sashimi and crudo may be the John and Paul of the raw seafood band, but ceviche is the George. A little less popular, a little less flashy, but altogether more complex, sharper, and complex, with a bit of acid. It differs from George in one key way though: It’s really easy to get into.

It comes in on the upper half of the Top 100 Easiest Dishes to Make Of All Time, and I’d bet good money that it’s #1 for Most Impressive Return For Your Time Investment. It’s a dish that looks and tastes elegant, yet is quite literally thrown together in a matter of moments.

Though the origins of the dish are not precisely known, with folks citing everything from Polynesia to Spain, the mostly likely true origins are Peru. Indeed, El Pais reports that archaeological evidence shows native Peruvians were eating a dish very similar to modern ceviche as far back as 2,000 year ago. Peru remains the country most closely tied with ceviche, though you’ll find it and its variants all along the South and Central American coasts.

Even the word itself is shrouded in mystery. It bears resemblances to escabeche, Spanish for pickle (as does the dish), as well as sakbaj, Arabic for vinegar-cooked meat, and even with siwichi, the original name for the dish spoken in Quechua one of the native languages of the region.

But I think I’m getting a bit ahead of myself here.

First off, what exactly is ceviche? At its most basic, it consists of slices or chunks of raw fish (or sometimes shellfish) tossed with an acidic marinade, most commonly plain citrus juice. As the pieces of fish sit in the marinade, the citric acid from the juice slowly causes the flesh’s proteins to denature, in very much the same way that heating will. The result is raw fish with the opaque appearance and firmed texture of cooked fish.

Tart, bright, and refreshing, the fish should be firm on the exterior, but with a tender, translucent center that gives as you bite into it. Flavorings run the gamut from passionfruit juice and mint to fried shallots and coconut milk to just plain lime juice, but the most traditional Peruvian version is made with sea bass marinated in bitter orange or lime juice and flavored with thinly sliced red onion, hot chiles, and perhaps some herbs. It all comes on a big platter along with chunks of corn on the cob (or perhaps large nuggets of fried Cuzco corn—A.K.A. Corn Nuts), and sweet potatoes.

It’s an exceedingly simple dish to make once you understand a few of the principles involved, and there’s only a couple of small difficulties involved. Getting perfectly fresh fish (and it must be perfectly fresh), and knowing exactly how long to let it marinate. Eat it too soon, and you end up with fish that’s nearly raw. Let it sit too long, and your fish turns dry and chalky as the acid works its way into the flesh. So what’s the best way to make sure your ceviche has perfect texture? Let’s see if we can figure it out.

Gone Fishing

First and foremost, ceviche must be made with the absolute freshest seafood available. Fish is traditional, but shrimp, scallops, even squid will work just fine. Just make sure it’s fresh.

Because seafood lives in, well, the sea, the bacteria and enzymes naturally present in it are used to operating at much much colder temperatures than those in, say, a cow. Because of this, even at regular fridge temperatures, they multiply much faster than bacteria from land-dwelling animals, which is what causes seafood to spoil so much faster than its terrestrial counterparts. With perfect care, fish can be stored for several days before it starts to go over the peak, but still, the fresher the better.

Here’s how to buy select the best fresh fish.

• Go to a trusted source. The best is obviously to catch it yourself, or if you’re lucky, have a dad who likes to go fishing for stripers three or four times a week (thanks, Dad). Next best is a dedicated fishmonger. Look for shops that are clean, busy, and scrupulous about their fish. If you see fish hanging out in pools of melted ice, chances are, the fishmonger doesn’t care much about freshness. Fish should always be stored on top of and under crushed ice, or in refrigerated display cases on top of ice. If the fish is treated roughly, folded in half, stacked haphazardly, you might want to think twice.
• Follow your nose. Fresh fish should not have a fishy smell at all, at most giving off a faintly briny, ocean-like aroma. The same rules apply for shrimp, scallops, squid, and other shellfish. If your fishmonger won’t let you smell his fish, find a new fishmonger, or eat burgers instead.
• Look for firm flesh. Fresh fish flesh should have a clean, slightly translucent appearance that doesn’t give when you push. If you poke it with your finger and leave a permanent dent, the flesh has most likely started to decompose.
• Look it in the eye. Fresh fish should have bright, clear, moist looking eyes. Avoid fish with dark eyes or eyes that have a cloudy film over them.
• Check the gills. They should be bright red and distinct. If they are brownish or have begun to stick together, the fish has been out of the water for far too long.

Virtually any fish will work for ceviche, but I prefer to use semi-firm, white-fleshed ocean fish such as sea bass, striped bass, grouper, or flat fishes like sole or flounder. The key is not to get locked into one fish before you get to the market—whatever is freshest is what you should go with, even if it’s not what you originally planned. The exception are certain types of fishes in the mackerel family, such as mackerel, sardines, or tuna. Other oily fishes like bluefish or jack don’t make the best ceviche either, nor do freshwater fish like trout or catfish.

For ceviche, you don’t need skin, so ask your fishmonger to remove it for you, or if you’ve got the skills, do it yourself at home.

Once You’ve Got It Home

Like disagreeing with your wife, the absolute best way to store fish is to not do it at all. Catch it or buy it, then cook it immediately. If you’ve absolutely got to hold it, you might think that tossing it in the refrigerator is good enough. Think again. At normal fridge temperatures (around 38°F), fish will decompose noticeably even overnight. So how do you keep it even cooler? With ice.

Here’s what you do: Line a shallow plastic tray or a plate with a couple of frozen ice packs or a layer of ice cubes, then place a layer of plastic wrap directly over them to cover. Lay your fish straight onto the plastic in a thin, even layer (be gentle!), cover with another piece of plastic, then top them off with a couple more ice packs. Store this whole get up on the bottom shelf of your fridge, right at the back. This should keep your fish down to at least 32 degrees. Ultra fresh fish can be kept like this for up to two or three days, but any longer is pushing it.

I like to keep my fish on ice the same way while working with it, placing the tray with the ice packs directly on my counter. That way, your fish will stay cold even at room temperature for several hours.

Slicing

There are a few theories as to how to cut fish for ceviche. Some like to cut it into paper thin slices, others into corn-kernel sized nuggets. I prefer my slices slightly thicker. One of the joys of really great ceviche is the contrast between the exterior and the center of the fish.

Consider each slice of fish to be like a little steak. You want a well-cooked exterior layer, but plenty of rare to medium-rare meat in the center. Quarter-inch slices are just about perfect for me—any thinner and they cook too fast, any thicker, and the outer layers get completely overcooked before they’ve cooked deep enough.

But what exactly is the ideal marinating time? I decided to find out, marinating slices of fish everywhere from one minute and up to two hours.

The photo above shows slices of fish marinated in straight lime juice (pH of about 2.5) for various amounts of time. From left to right, we’ve got:

• 0 minutes: Fish is completely raw. Slippery texture, like sashimi (I mean, it is sashimi).
• 1 minute: Fish is strongly flavored, but still essentially raw. No noticeable difference in texture yet.
• 2 minutes: Very exterior of fish is starting to show some textural changes.
• 5 minutes: Definite textural changes in fish, with a pleasing firmness to the exterior. Not ideal yet.
• 10 minutes: For my taste, this is where it begins to become ideal. Niceley firm on the outside, but still tender and moist in the interior.
• 15 minutes: Even better.
• 30 minutes: Still good, bordering on too cooked.
• 1 hour: Overcooked. The acid has begun breaking down the connective tissue in between the layers of the flesh, which causes it to start falling apart.
• 1 1/2 hours: The fish breaks into distinct chunks with even the slightest poke from a finger or fork.
• 2 hours: Completely gone. Fish has spontaneously started to break apart even without touching it. It’s cooked through to nearly the center, with a chalky, dry texture.

So as you can see, ceviche has got a pretty limited lifespan. Anywhere from the 5 minute to 30 minutes range is in edible-to-great territorty. Below that is fine if you’re into the slipperier texture of sashimi, but you don’t want to go for any longer, lest your fish turn dry and chalky.

There are, of course, those who prefer their fish this way, sometimes even letting their fish marinate overnight. I can accept that, about as much as I can accept those who prefer to have their meat cooked well-done. Just don’t do it to my fish. I’ve been to restaurants that do this, though one would assume that in those situations it’s more about ease of storage and expedience of service than the ultimate in taste.

There’s not all that much reason for having this photo in here, other than the fact that it illustrates just how much like cooking with heat the “cooking” with acid in a marinade is really doing. Just like cooking a steak over a high flame, the cooked zone slowly works its way into the fish. I like my steaks medium to medium-rare, and I feel the same way about my ceviche—the core should still be translucent.

Flavorings

Here’s where the fun begins. Your imagination, or more realistically, your palate are the only things stopping you here. I usually like to go the traditional route, with super-thin sliced onions (you can use a mandoline to help if you want), and jalapeño peppers from which I’ve removed the seeds and ribs so that I can add a ton of them. See, the heat in a pepper comes from capsaicin, a chemical that’s mostly stored in the ribs and seeds. Remove them, and you can add a ton of pepper, giving you real jalapeño flavor in each bite, instead of just blinding heat.

Some times I’ll use sour orange juice along with some smoked paprika and chopped olives. For these days, a can of good Spanish octopus might find its way alongside my fish as well. Other times, I prefer to take a Southwest Asian route, adding fish sauce, coconut milk, and perhaps a bit of chopped lemongrass, galangal, or kaffir lime leaf. Or if my wife is around, I’ll add some passionfruit juice and sub out the cilantro for another herb—perhaps chives or just sliced scallions (my wife is one of the strange ones who can’t stand cilantro).

You get the picture.

If any of you’ve got some great flavoring ideas for ceviches, I’d love to hear them in the comments. Oh, also, if anyone can think of who Ringo’d be in the raw seafood band, I’m all ears.

Check out the full recipe here!

More tests, more results! Follow The Food Lab on Facebook or Twitter.

Read the original post on Serious Eats

 

Gambiologia, the Brazilian art and science of kludging

Posted on July 19th, 2011 • Filed under Look • No Comments

Coletivo Gambiologia (Fred Paulino, Ganso and Lucas Mafra), Gambiociclo, 2010 (image Eduardo Berthier)

Gambiarra is the Brazilian practice of makeshifts, the art of resorting to quirky and smart improvisation in order to repair what doesn’t work or to create what you need with what you have at your disposal. Gambiologia is the ‘science’ that studies this form of creative improvisation and celebrates it by combining it with electronic-digital techniques.

Gambiologia is also the name of a collective of artists – Fred Paulino, Lucas Mafra and Paulo Henrique ‘Ganso Pessoa’ – who mix this art of improvisation with DIY culture & technology to develop electronic artifacts.

Saulo Policarpo, Prismatic Gambièrre. Image Pedro David

Mariana Manhães, Isso (Taça Azul) e Isso (Taça de Cristal). Image Pedro David

Last year, Fred Paulino gathered the work of Gambiologia along with the one of over 20 Brazilian and international artists in an exhibition titled “Gambiólogos – Kludging in a Digital Era”. The objects, sculptures and installations selected explored the concept of technological gambiarra: they adapt, reinvent recycled and found materials using electronic technologies and much improvisation.

Fred Paulino, who is an artist, designer, gambiologist as well as the curator of the exhibition, was kind enough to send me the catalog of the show a few months ago (you can also download the catalog in its PDF form.) I liked its content so much i thought it was my duty to pester him with my questions:

You translate ‘gambiologia’ with Kludging. How different is it from hacking?

Gambiologia is something like “The science of gambiarra”, which is a Brazilian cultural practice of solving problems creatively in alternative ways with low cost and lots of spontaneity, or giving unusual functions to everyday life objects. There is no exact translation for ‘gambiarra’ so we initially used kludge which means (from Wikipedia): ‘a workaround, a quick-and-dirty solution, a clumsy or inelegant, yet effective, solution to a problem, typically using parts that are cobbled together’. In the US they’d call it makeshift. Gambiologia is the study of ‘gambiarra’ in a technological context.

We actually stopped translating Gambiologia at all :^)

I ‘d say it is a specific kind of hacking – it’s the proposal of hacking not only electronics or codes, but objects as well. It’s about using things (or bits, maybe) in functions they were not initially proposed to. Modify them or join them in improvised and creative ways so they’ll not accomplish the original task anymore. Using parts that were not supposed to be together to create a distressing whole. In our case it’s also deeply linked to Brazilian folk culture.

Before we go to the artworks themselves, could you give us a few examples of everyday gambiology in the streets of Belo Horizonte?

It’s easy to find many samples of ‘gambiarras’ if you travel anywhere in Brazil. You can also get many pics if you google it but I attached some I collected myself.
Many Gambiologia’s – as we propose artistically – can be found at our group’s website www.gambiologia.net or at the collective exhibition I proposed about the theme.
Also in www.thereifixedit.com you’ll get it the north-american way.

Samples:

Audio cable fixed with candy wrapper:

Beer chilled in suspended pail:

Sound systems:

Shower in a pet bottle:

Mobile beer chilling:

Pet bottle lamp:

Car mirror:

Safe plug:

Simplest way to leave it open:

Among the works presented in the catalogue i was particularly curious about the following ones:. O Grivo, Polvo, Eles estão vivos, Furadeiras. Can you describe them briefly and tell us what they are about?’

Passo a Passo (Step by Step) is a work by the guys of O Grivo. They propose a random percussion symphony where different notes are played as the shadows of small pieces of wood are detected by sensors connected to a computer. Each of these pieces is attached by the end of a stick which rotates 360º at random speed, so when it gets to 0º, it plays its own note very loud. It proposes an interesting contrast between a very delicate structure and loud music tones in a kind of physically constructed musical timeline.

O Grivo, Passo A Passo, 2010. Image Pedro David

Polvo (Octopus) from Paulo Nenflidio is a sound machine made by plastic conduits. These are originally used to hold electric cables but Paulo used them to hold compressed air. As the visitor “plays” a keyboard made out of door ring bells, the conduits blow, generating different sounds. The seven bells form a complete tone set. This bizarre octopus-instrument still have an 8th note generated by an water spray on its top.

Paulo Nenflídio, Polvo, 2010. Image Pedro David

Eles Estão Vivos (They’re Still Alive) was created by Paulo Waisberg. I initially invited him to be the scenographer of the exhibition but he also came with this work. We had all these old displays and keyboards that were donated by the city’s council but we didn’t know how to use. Paulo created this artwork during the exhibition preparation just a day before the opening, using old footage of blinking eyes in the displays. In my opinion it tells a lot about how re-creating can be much more interesting than recycling. It’s also a good demonstration of how a strong sense of improvisation and spontaneity was incorporated all through the exhibition.

Paulo Waisberg, Eles Estão Vivos. Image Pedro David

Furadeiras (Drills) is one of the simplest exhibited artworks but surely one of the smartest. It’s by Guto Lacaz, an experienced artist from Sao Paulo. He proposed an unusual meeting between “different generation” drills – one being analogue and the other electrical. It’s an ironic interpretation between planned obsolescence and how technology evolves, sometimes just rotating around itself in an infinite loop. Or how the old (low-tech) and the new (high-tech) can live collaboratively.

Guto Lacaz, Furadeiras. Image Pedro David

How about Gambiociclo? What made you decide to create this ‘mobile unit of multimedia transmission”?
Have you used it outside of the exhibition space? How was the experience and how did people react to it?

The Gambiocycle is inspired on Graffiti Research Lab‘s mobile broadcast unit. I got to be friend with those guys a few years ago, we made some stuff together, they proposed to me run GRL Brazilian sister cell www.graffitiresearchlab.com.br . We run it in parallel to Gambiologia.

Sketch of the Gambiociclo (image by angelicasegui)

Coletivo Gambiologia (Fred Paulino, Ganso and Lucas Mafra), Gambiociclo, 2010

I always wish to have a multimedia vehicle that could project video and digital graffiti in public space. It’s terrific how that can be a straight path to a democratic dialogue between people and the city itself. But our MBU should be gambiological – reflecting the logics and aesthetics of ‘gambiarra’ with this strong Brazilian accent. So we built it inspired by trolleys of salesmen who ride here mostly selling products or doing political advertisement. The idea was to mix performance, happening, electronic art, graffiti and ‘gambiarras’.

Yes. People are always surprised as they’re not much used to digital graffiti or having electronic art in the streets here. But what impressed me the most is the immediate affinity that the Gambiocycle caused in ordinary people not directly involved to art. I was initially most worried about the vehicle’s funcionality or the performances’ visual contents, but probably due to the strong local aesthetics it incorporates, people were suddenly feeling more like touching the MBU, taking pictures with it or riding it. I believe it comes from this unconscious feeling of spontainity the work proposes and everybody practice some way since childhood.

And we just got the news that Gambiocycle got an Honorary Mention at Prix Ars Electronica 2011 yeah!

Alexandre B, O Instante Impossível. Image Pedro David

Is there a conscious art community of gambilogos in Brazil but also beyond it? Or is it more like a natural and widespread way of using technology that doesn’t really need a name or a purpose community to exist?

Gambiologia was initially the name our three guys’ collective but the word is now being used here to identify a new way of think about technology, hacking and (Brazilian) pop culture. Like a science or a movement… It somehow captured the feeling of many creators, and I believe not only in this country. Many artists worldwide are “gambiólogos” (gambiologists) without knowing that. I recently had been in touch with the work of European artists like Niklas Roy which are pretty much gambiological! That’s the feeling that Gambiólogos exhibition proposed to group and show.

It doesn’t need a name at all but if it had that should be in Brazilian Portuguese :^) Yes I strongly believe this country is a perfect example of chaotic miscegenation – cultural or technological – that results in a notion of creative spontaneity. As a colonial country we initially didn’t have enough resources for solving everyday problems so we had to invent simple and cheap solutions… Gambiologia tries to go beyond this, bring it into the art scene with an aesthetical and political discussion about technology.

Does Gambiologia have any consideration for aesthetics?

Sure! But for us we had enough of Apple-like clean aesthetics, we had enough newly-released electronics. People can’t stand so many rubbish and consumption… That’s why we love to work and play with recycling, remixing and – why not – reproposing the notion of “old” and “new”.

Obrigada Fred!

Read the original post on we make money not art

 

From Votives to Venuses: A Brief History of the Human Anatomical Model, July 5th, The Science Museum, London

Posted on June 28th, 2011 • Filed under Learn • No Comments

Hi All! Next Tuesday, July 5th, I will be giving a lecture at London’s Science Museum in the museum’s lecture theatre. The lecture if free and open to the public.

Full details follow; If you are free and in the neighborhood, why not stop by?

From Votives to Venuses: A Brief History of the Human Anatomical Model
An Illustrated Lecture by Joanna Ebenstein of The Morbid Anatomy Library
Date: 5th July
Time: 4 PM – 5 PM
The Science Museum’s Lecture Theatre
Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2DD (Map here)
Admission: Free and open to the public

In the 1690s, surgeon Guillaume Desnoues commissioned wax-worker Gaetano Zumbo to create a life-sized wax copy of one of his most important–and sadly deteriorating–human dissections. This partnership launched a long tradition of collaboration between artists and medical practitioners in the creation of extraordinary and uncannily lifelike anatomical models intended to preserve important anatomical preparations in perpetuity and to instruct and incite wonder in medical students and laypersons alike. Today, join artist and independent researcher Joanna Ebenstein for a lavishly illustrated walk through the world of these fascinating artifacts that are equal parts art and science and which flicker enticingly on the edges of relic and specimen, mysticism and medicine, life and death. This talk will discuss the histories of these objects and their makers as well as their uses and contexts of display; introduce you to many of the amazing museums that house these artifacts; and consider the ways in which these objects relate to a long tradition of religious, allegorical, and artistic approaches to mortality, supplication, and the quest for bodily immortalization.

To download a PDF with more on this and other associated talks, click here. You can find out more about The Science Museum by clicking here. For more information, please contact Selina Pang, Curatorial Coordinator at CuratorialServices@sciencemuseum.org.uk.

Image: “The Slashed Beauty,” full-length anatomical model in the Josephinum Collection, Vienna, Austria; Wax model with human hair in rosewood and Venetian glass case; Workshop of Clemente Susini of Florence, 1781-1786 Photographed by Joanna Ebenstein

Read the original post on Morbid Anatomy