Tuesday, February 10, 2015

Unboiling an Egg...sort of

New podcast day!!!

In this podcast Sam, Dorea, and Chad talk about a new paper out that shows a method for unboiling an egg. But is that really what it's all about?


Show notes:

Reddit AMA with the author

Link to the paper

Monday, January 5, 2015

Our Favorite Chemicals!

New Podcast!!

 In this episode Sam, Dorea, and Chad discuss their favorite chemicals and what makes them awesome!


Sunday, November 30, 2014

Health Food Fads

New podcast!

Yes, it's been a bit longer than a fortnight, but it's here. In this podcast we talk about health food fads and where we should draw the line beween McDonald's and the food babe.

Monday, November 3, 2014

TCW Book Review #1 - Undeniable, by Bill Nye

We're really excited about this podcast.

The Collapsed Wavefunction was recently given an advanced copy of Bill Nye's new book Undeniable: Evolution and the Science of Creation. In this podcast Sam, Dorea, and Chad discuss their thoughts on the book.

If you're a science lover you'll love the book. If you're not...well, listen to the podcast for our full opinion.

Saturday, October 25, 2014

Don't Anthropomorphize Chemicals, They Don't Like It!!

New podcast!!

Sam, Dorea, and Chad talk about anthropomorphic examples in chemistry. Come take a listen!

Saturday, October 11, 2014

The 2014 Chemistry Nobel Prize!

New Podcast!

That's two in a week, but we just couldn't let the week pass without a podcast about the Chemistry Nobel Prize!!


~4:30 - Sam, Dorea, and Chad take turns saying things wrong while trying to explain the problem behind this year's Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

~8:00 - We give Lauren Wolf a round of applause for correctly predicting this year's Nobel winner.

~13:30 - Dorea gives an explanation of Stefan Hell's work.

~17:00 - Chad gives an explanation of Betzig and Moerner's work, including an analogy to explain this Nobel Prize winning work.

~25:00 - Answering questions from Twitter.

~39:00 - Listeners decide the content!

3 Sentences from the hosts explaining this prize:

(To be posted shortly)

Monday, October 6, 2014

Am I a scientist? Are you a scientist?

In our most recent podcast we talked at length with Janet Stemwedel, from the Doing Good Science blog on Scientific American, about the obligations that scientists have to society. One of the earliest questions in the podcast (~ ) was about defining what it meant to be a scientist. The conclusion was more or less that it wasn't very easy to define, but many broad definitions were possible - just like you don't need to have a record deal to call yourself a musician you probably don't need an active R01 grant to call yourself a scientist.

Enter Emanuel Derman:

This Tweet makes me incredibly angry. The science community on Twitter is strong - it's the only reason I'm even on Twitter. Yes, there are incredible science journalists, but actual practicing scientists (myself included) have a very strong Twitter presence. There are entire lists of scientist to follow (some much, much better than others - but that's a discussion for a different time). There are Hashtags used primarily - or only - by practicing scientists. #RealTimeChem is one that comes to mind. #RealTimeChem is a hashtag for Tweeting about chemistry research as it is being done. It's a hashtag that wouldn't be possible without scientists contributing in real time.

But what makes me angry about this tweet is not that Emanuel Derman is wrong. It's that he attempts to define the identity of tens of thousands of individuals with one conjecture. On Twitter you will find scientists in every field, of every race, of varying ages and beliefs. Bad things happen when you generalize identity, and it's even worse when you try to define someone else's identity. I am a scientist and most of the people I follow on Twitter are scientists. So how does Emanuel Derman define scientist, I wonder? Is it someone actively doing research? Someone with a published paper in the last N months? A Nobel prize winner? Someone with an active R01 grant? Someone that is in a lab this instant discovering something? With each and every one of these - on just about any given day - you will find someone on Twitter meeting the requirements of a scientist. Emanuel Derman's conjecture quickly becomes a "No True Scotsman" fallacy (thank you, @jfreebo).

Conjecture: If you're making a statement about someone else's identity you're probably wrong.