Live data from Hacker News

Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

smithsonianmag.com

141–150 of 202 posts

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#141
When I was a kid, my school took us the boston science museum and I wandered off to the microscope exhibit. The museum collected and displayed a bunch of things from Boston Bay, and looking in- as a kid learning about computers- it seemed like some of the "animacules" behaved in complex ways- like a computer program with sensor input and mechanical actuators. Some would spiral endlessly while others would zip forward, then back, then turn and zip forward again. I decided then and there I would figure out how these things worked, applying my hacker knowledge of computers.

That led to a career in biology although I don't think I really used microscopes much at all over the next 30 years. Recently I adjusted my hobbies and built a microscope from components and use it to apply object detection to tardigrades. Guess what- the state of the art is to collect enormous numbers of images of a microbiotic organism and cluster them into a small number of states (like a markov model) and estimate the transitions between them. I don't even want to solve any specific problem- I just love watching tardigrades. They're hilarious little animacules.

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#145
post #138
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I'll disagree that this is off topic. What I quoted is a literal quote from the article. I wouldn't have mentioned it or caught it if it wasn't. From my perspective, the entire point of the article is the beauty and smallness of things that we are otherwise unaware of. The idea that books thousands of years old didn't anticipate, and thus don't accommodate, such is interesting. And I thought the discussion wa…

"religions present such a myopic view of life and what it means to be alive on Earth" etc. is generic religious flamebait. We don't want that on HN, because it leads (in the general case) to horrible threads that are as nasty as they are predictable. I'm sure that's not your intent, but we have to go by the effects these things generally have. You may be right about connections to the article (I haven't checked) but…

I'm gonna have to disagree here, I don't think the single line from the comment passes the threshold for flamebait. The comment wasn't offtopic, and the conversation it led to was both interesting and not really a flamewar.

I don't often see comments replying to dang's moderation (from people other than the ones he's moderating), and generally, I think dang's influence is beneficial, but I would like to see the moderation be more tolerant (IE, slight adjustment of thresholds around "generic flamebait").

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been in discussions with vegans over the 9.1x10^2 to 1.3x10^8 bacteria in the average indoor m^3 of air.

I guess I don’t see the relevance. Vegans eat other life forms like plants and fungi (it’s unavoidable). Their reservations are specifically about animals. Why would bacteria be an issue?

I think a better example would be the buddhist who goes out of their way to not step on an ant, while simultaneously killing bacteria in his gut.

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#147
post #138
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I'll disagree that this is off topic. What I quoted is a literal quote from the article. I wouldn't have mentioned it or caught it if it wasn't. From my perspective, the entire point of the article is the beauty and smallness of things that we are otherwise unaware of. The idea that books thousands of years old didn't anticipate, and thus don't accommodate, such is interesting. And I thought the discussion wa…

"religions present such a myopic view of life and what it means to be alive on Earth" etc. is generic religious flamebait. We don't want that on HN, because it leads (in the general case) to horrible threads that are as nasty as they are predictable. I'm sure that's not your intent, but we have to go by the effects these things generally have. You may be right about connections to the article (I haven't checked) but…

I suppose myopic can often, maybe more often than not, have a negative connotation, but it’s just been a word on the tip of my tongue lately (I’m sure there’s a word for that), and I generally mean it as having lack of foresight.

I think there can be a bit of religious protectionism, because I don’t see similar comments being labeled as scientific flame bait, because I have often provided much harsher myopia critique to non-religious topics.

But I can see the general moderation point of view and that, maybe disappointingly so, comments referencing religion can be hot, so to speak, and that my comment train got lucky.

Edit: I made the original comment somewhat in passing, and just commented on the part that caught my eye other than "wow, I need to read more about these things".

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have AFAICS: religious atheist agnostic Is it even possible to be a religious atheist I wonder

For sure it is. Scientism is an example. It even has creation myths, the stories of the Big Bang and Copernicus being two examples. This idea is developed in depth by Bishop Robert Barron. Very interesting to consider.

The big bang isn't a creation myth, it doesn't say anything about what existed beforehand, and if come up with enough evidence, the "theory" would be invalidated and replaced with one that is less inconsistent with our observations. I am not aware of- but would love to learn of- creation myths which are continuously updated as new data is available.

Scientism is something that philosophers claim exists when they don't want to get in an argument with a scientist.

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#149
post #65

Beautiful and interesting stuff! I have never heard of copepods before, but have now and will have to do some more reading. > Walter once got a call from an Orthodox Jewish organization wanting to know if there were pieces of non-kosher creatures floating in the New York City tap water. The answer was yes. Not to pick on them, but I found this illuminating on how religions present such a myopic view of life and what…

Why does that strike you as myopic? Just the opposite, if the Rabbinate decided that they've never heard of these little bugs in the water and so they don't count, that would be myopic. The fact that this is a question which was debated a bunch in the orthodox world shows a flexibility that I think is underrated in orthodoxy. Is religion incapable of fitting their model over the continuum of life, or does it continue…

[deleted]

Re: Photos capture life inside a drop of seawater

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That letter is really something. I tend to think of grandiose flattery towards royalty as something that belongs in the ancient world. The puns on "small" and "least" at the end were also unexpectedly funny. I wonder how much people took this kind of flattery seriously, or if it was done with eyes rolled and tongue in cheek.

Keep in mind that this letter and book helped guarantee funding for the Royal Society! Edit: The text “…Philosophy and Experimental Learning have prosper'd under your Royal Patronage. And as the calm prosperity of your Reign has given us the leisure to follow these Studies of quiet and retirement, so it is just, that the Fruits of them should, by way of acknowledgement, be return'd to your Majesty. There are, Sir, se…

Right, it's as much personal flattery of the king as it is a statement of allegiance to and gratitude for the institution of royalty! I'm sure the Civil War must've been quite a scary time, and I have no doubt that he's sincere about having greater peace and safety under the the restored monarchy. It's a really fascinating glimpse into that time period, beyond just the history of science.
Post reply on HN