Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Ants... In... Space 196

Posted by michael from the picnic-basket dept.
Ant writes "The Fowler students picked an experiment with ants, rather than plants, because they wanted to see some activity in space. They have been following the ants' progress on the web. The students and their teachers also have learned that sometimes the best thought-out hypothesis does not pan out in reality. 'We predicted that the ants would tunnel a lot slower in microgravity, but we're finding out they're moving a lot faster,' said Golash. The students have a control group of ants at their school, living in a similar environment except with gravity. After the shuttle returns from its scheduled 16-day flight in early February, the young scientists will have 30 days to put together a preliminary report. Their "Ants in Space" experiment was sponsored by SPACEHAB, an aerospace company that has worked with NASA for many years to design and build hardware for space experiments."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ants... In... Space More

Ants... In... Space

Comments Filter:

  • So if ants can lift ten times their body weight... (Score:5, Funny)

    by n.wegner ( 613340 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @04:49AM (#5160806)
    How can they lift anything in microgravity?
    • Because things don't weigh much. (The things are also in microgravity...)

      I can never tell if people are joking.

      • Re:So if ants can lift ten times their body weight (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TekReggard ( 552826 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:38AM (#5160907)
        I fear you fail to see the sarcasm. I have to agree with him on this one. The ant is said to be capable of lifting 10 times its own body weight, so why would the students predict that the ants would tunnel slower in space than on earth?

        I could only attribute this to concepts based on hinderences to human's movements in space. They probably assumed that since Humans have a harder time coordinating while in space suits on different worlds that Ants would have a harder time coordinating in small tunnels in a controled environment.

        This of course has so far been proved false, because the Ants have several legs and movement through said tunnels would probably be easier with lower gravity in the same way humans could probably move faster in tunnels on the moon than we could here on earth. Think of it this way, we could jump down a cooridor on the moon far faster than we could walk run or crawl through it on earth.

        • Why Humans Move Slow in Space (Score:5, Insightful)

          by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <{yoda} {at} {etoyoc.com}> on Sunday January 26, 2003 @06:00AM (#5160945) Homepage Journal
          Human are trained to move artificially in space. The first few times astronauts tried to work in space, they kept losing control. (Hell Cernin had to abort the second gemini EVA because he became so overheated that his helmet fogged up.)

          It wasn't until Buzz Aldrin's EVA during the last Gemini mission that they had worked out a set of maneuvers and restraints to make sure that when an astronaut turned a knob, he didn't turn instead.

          Now, an ant is never free floating. She always has something to hold onto, the tunnel. But if we have learned anything in space, you really can't assume anything. You have to observe it and see how it actually behaves.

          Take fire for instance. You take it for granted here on earth that you can see the flames. Well, flames are caused by convection, which does't happen in micro-gravity. Hot air has the same "weight" as cold air. Instead the plasma forms a sphere that is tricky to see. Smoke does not rise from the fire for the very same reason.

          With that sort of information, NASA found they had to design completely new fire detection systems for the ISS.

          • Okay, so this going to be an odd question, but I was thinking of it when I read your part about fire.

            How would a plant grow in a ball of soil in zero-gravity? For example, you take a seed, and wrap it in a ball of soil complete with nutrients, etc. (and light from every direction) Would it grow multiple stalks in various directions and grow into a giant ball?
            • I think with most seeds, the stalk starts to sprout straight out from a cerain point on the seed, then the stalk aligns itself with with gravity. I think in space a plant yould just grow straight out from that point on the seed.
        • Hmm. The website is http://antfarm.ma.cx/ -- the last time I visited a site that ended in .cx, I was in trouble.

    • Bad Science (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The space shuttle is not in "microgravity." It is in orbit around the earth meaning everything can be considered to be in freefall indefinitely. More than 90% of the earth's gravitational field is maintained at that distance.

      • Re:Bad Science (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Floody ( 153869 )
        The only point of the shuttle in actual perfect free fall (and thus zero-G) is the exact center of gravity. All other points experience tidal forces, which, while minute, are measurable and may (or may not) affect experiments.

        Thus the term "microgravity." It's not bad science at all, you just don't know what you are talking about.

  • The question is (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kohath ( 38547 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @04:50AM (#5160809)
    Can they sort tiny screws?

    • Re:The question is (Score:5, Funny)

      by nakedjames ( 442494 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @04:55AM (#5160821) Homepage
      dammit, that was my question. :(

      -Quick, save the queen!
      -Which one of us is the queen?
      -I'm the queen!
      -No you're not!

      -Freedom! Horrible horrible freedom!

      You fool! Now we'll never know if ants can be taught to sort tiny screws in space!

      • Re:The question is (Score:5, Funny)

        by helix400 ( 558178 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:02AM (#5160836) Journal
        Dangit! Both of you beat me to those. But here's another classic. =)

        Kent Brockman: Ladies and gentlemen, er, we've just lost the picture, but, uh, what we've seen speaks for itself. The Corvair spacecraft has been taken over -- "conquered", if you will -- by a master race of giant space ants. It's difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume the captive earth men or merely enslave them. One thing is for certain, there is no stopping them; the ants will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.

        Courtesy of The Simpsons Archive [snpp.com]

  • Ants in space, pigs in zen. What's the world coming to?

  • Hmm.... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Latrommi ( 615673 )
    What's next, SimAnts in Space?
    • Ant Experiment Edition. Online play is planned if, and only if, it becomes a cult phenomenon; $10/month "subscription" still required to play.

      Only available in colonies overrun by giant space ants.

  • Hrm... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Daleks ( 226923 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @04:55AM (#5160822)
    The ending to Ender's Game came to mind when I read this. Creepy.
  • YOU all look like ants!!!

  • So... (Score:5, Funny)

    by antaeogo ( 608846 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:07AM (#5160847)
    If the shuttle crashes during re-entry, they can blame it on a bug in the system?
  • ... where it was? It was on this really cool news site for nerd on stuff that matters... it was.. ... wait it was here! ;>

  • Questions about ants (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Entropy248 ( 588290 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:18AM (#5160867) Journal
    I wonder if it would even be possible for an ant to build a hive in low or no gravity situations. Maybe someone who passed physics can tell me if I'm wrong. I thought that if an ant pushed a stone up, it would keep going until it hit another stone, which would receive the first's momentum, absorb a little bit and pass it on, making all of the tunnels above what you just dug collapse upward.

    It would really suck if those ants got loose into the shuttle! Though they might find it to be a shocking experience to meet the electrical system (*cheap rim shot*)

    I bet that guy from *NSync is really pissed now that even the lowly ant has beaten him out.

    Uhhh... It's really late & I'm drunk.
    In Soviet Russia, ants launch you into space.
    Profit.
    ==
    And for my next trick, I will disappear.
    • *I wonder if it would even be possible for an ant to build a hive in low or no gravity situations* Bee's man .. BEE's have Hives

    • Re:Questions about ants (Score:5, Interesting)

      by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <{yoda} {at} {etoyoc.com}> on Sunday January 26, 2003 @06:14AM (#5160971) Homepage Journal
      You have to remember that at extremely small scales, different physical forces come into play.

      In this case, electrical charge. The rocks and pebbles "stick" to each other as a result. Even under the effects of Earth's gravity, this stickyness factor is a greater force than weight.

      If you remember, an aerospace engineer is credited with saying that bumblebees can't fly. (It's actually a misquote.) At that scale, air resistance is a greater influence than weight. They are constantly falling, but their terminal velocity is so rediculously slow that their puny little wings can push them up at a greater rate. Kind of like a blimb with a negative bouyancy.

    • Re:Questions about ants (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @12:27PM (#5162034) Journal
      Another thing you need to remember that hasn't been pointed out yet is that while the forces do indeed propogate upwards, they disperse. They don't maintain their strength in the way I'm almost certain you're imagining, they get weaker and weaker, until quite rapidly they are simply swamped by simple friction and other electromagnetic effects and get absorbed into the system as incredibly tiny amounts of heat.

      This is why when you jump on the ground, nobody on the opposite side of the planet suddenly feels a bump. The forces disperse to effective nonexistance (since they can't be conceivably detected anymore). Even really really large bumbs like Richter 7.5 earthquakes require very sensitive devices to detect them after a few hundred miles.
    • From the "special ant habitat" pop up link on the page at http://www.starsacademy.com/sts107/experiments/ant s_top.htm [starsacademy.com]:
      The tunneling medium is an agar-based gel. Numerous tests were performed with other types of media such as sand, soil, and vermiculite. With all of these media the tunnels risk collapse due to the vibration of landing, and tend to be prone to fungal infection if an ant dies within the habitat, or from food molding. The gel was chosen since it is firm enough to maintain integrity during launch/landing and provides fungus suppression through inhibitors in the gel. The colored gel will also make it easier to see the ants in the video.

      The ants tunnel through the gel just as they tunnel through sand. Workers bite off pieces and carry them out of the tunnel. A starter tunnel is provided to help the ants to commence tunneling once inserted into the habitat. The agar gel contains sucrose to stimulate the ants to eat it. Amino acids, vitamins and minerals are added to the gel to provide an appropriate diet for the ants. As the gel largely consists of water, the ants also receive all their water as they eat.

      The gel provides disease control by suppressing fungal and mold growth -- the primary cause of death in captive colonies. As the animals tunnel through the medium and eat it, the mold inhibitor contained in the gel is released and eradicates mold and fungal spores. This also helps prevent infection in healthy ants from the decomposition of ants that have died in the habitat.

  • SpaceAnts returned to Earth. Hastily dug, but severely weak tunnel systems collapsed. Ants all dead. What a bummer....

  • Their findings (Score:4, Funny)

    by yuckf00 ( 644870 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:20AM (#5160872)
    1. The ants were confused and scared. 2. The ants were confused and scared. 3. The ants were confused and scared.

  • Simpson's Jokes Aside (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <{yoda} {at} {etoyoc.com}> on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:36AM (#5160902) Homepage Journal
    Space Shuttle Orbiter: $4 billion
    Launch Preparations: $130 million
    Anti-Grav Ant Colony: $2000

    The fact that 30 years after we put man on the moon, this is the best NASA can come up with: Unfathomible.

    You know, how about we try seeing how ants tunnel in Lunar Regolith, or Martian soil. That would be intersting.

    This is great for the kids, but I think it just shows how far NASA has NOT come.

    • I'm all for space exploration. Real space exploration. The problem is that NASA can't get the funding for all the good stuff so they resort to wasting money to justify their own existence. Seriously folks it's a complete and total waste.

      International Space Station? Completely useless, and expensive at that. Come to think of it, NASA doesn't do anything cheap (not that I necessarily want to be on a cheap space shuttle).

      NASA needs to stop wasting money on crappy little projects and ant-colonies and do something worthwhile. Then maybe it gets a bit more funding.
      • The experiment was sponsored by an outside aerospace company, so the extra cost to NASA was minimal.

        Although the end result of this experiment probably won't contribute to the advancement of "practical" science, it did serve an educational purpose. It got a group of kids interested in science and space. To me, that's worth the expenditure.
        • Exactly. People seem to forget that public relations is extremely important. And public relations is one of the things that for quite some time now NASA has done very poorly at. If NASA wants more money, they are going to have to put more money into PR to get people interested. Things like this get people interested.
      • Ant colonies in space are far from worthless.

        This just proved that insect based terraforming engines would be possible, whether through mechanical, bio-mechanical, engineered, or just selectively bred.

        Not only that, but that ants, and perhaps other insects, do better in low g then in high g; meaning also that they represent a useful mechanical alternative to wheels and other locomotion devices. It also probably means, within unknown constraints due to blood flow, that ants could probably become much larger in space and still function.

        None of this is useless; the only reason it is useless is because you, the beholder, haven't the intelligence, creativity, or capbability to put *information* to use.

    • You know, how about we try seeing how ants tunnel in Lunar Regolith, or Martian soil. That would be intersting.

      Yay, teeny weeny ant spacesuits!

    • And why do you think they would experiment with ants in lunar regolith or martian soil without first discovering how ants react to zero g in the first place? Baby steps, right?

      This is *not* useless. This is *not* uninteresting.

      Ant colonies in space are far from worthless.

      This just proved that insect based terraforming engines would be possible, whether through mechanical, bio-mechanical, engineered, or just selectively bred.

      Not only that, but that ants, and perhaps other insects, do better in low g then in high g; meaning also that they represent a useful mechanical alternative to wheels and other locomotion devices. It also probably means, within unknown constraints due to blood flow, that ants could probably become much larger in space and still function.

      None of this is useless; the only reason it is useless is because you, the beholder, haven't the intelligence, creativity, or capbability to put *information* to use.

      In your position I see many possibilities. You just see a waste.

      Imagine ants 1' across used to terraform asteroids and planetoids! Partner them up with power sources, plants that create oxygen, and you've got a self limiting factory. As soon as the power dies, the oxygen goes, and the ants stop. But the end result is the possibility of miles of usable tunnels. And why 1'? Why not 2'? Or 4'? What's the limits of an ant's heart in zero g?

      Of course we don't know. Does that make an experiment of breeding giant ants worthless?

      Not at all! It just makes it one more thing we don't know that, if more people like you were in charge, we would *never* know.
      • I think the problem the parent was going after was not that the experiment was done, but that the people doing it had to go through a government agency that has zero interest in doing anything else. NASA's track record for experiments and missions that are fascinating, wonderful, even awe-inspiring, but in the end not really utilized one bit, is rapidly approaching parity. As long as any activity in space has to go through NASA (either by government fiat or persistently high launch costs), nothing will ever happen. When it comes to conquering space, the biggest weapon in our arsenal is entrepreneurial spirit and the sheer curiosity of tinkerers (yes, and entomologists). NASA has spent 40 years working on all the wrong problems and as a result a few million people who would colonize space for nothing more than potential of profit can do nothing.
    • The fact that 30 years after we put man on the moon, this is the best NASA can come up with: Unfathomible.

      I believe if you read, you will find that this is an experiment designed by school children. NASA has provided a small cylinder (if I recall it is about the size of a 5 gallon pail) as a sealed payload available to school programs to help interest children in science.

      While you are correct (by implication) that every pound of payload costs money in fuel etc. and is therefore expensive, the idea here is that you never know what child is going to be the next Einstein (or Zephram Cochran ;-) ) if given the right opportunities. So we donate a small area to the children.

      If you think about it, the kids also have to learn to plan for recording their data, launch and reentry forces, etc. It is no small thing that these kids are learning for themselves. Also, IIRC there is a competetion amongst schools to even receive the opportunity to use the payload space.

      So in fact the experience gained by the students may actually prove: Priceless

  • I think what we're suffering from here is a DSJ - Distributed Simpson's Joke - attack. Fer crying out loud, people - enough already ;^)
  • Next thing you know they'll try wearing pants in space instead of those silly jumpsuits.
  • Season 6 Episode 7: "The Simpsons already did it!".

  • Newts in space! (space space space) (Score:5, Funny)

    by t0qer ( 230538 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @05:56AM (#5160939) Homepage Journal
    I think slash needs a new mod point (weird) anyways..

    When I was 12-14 I was really into model rockets. I lived with my grandmother at the time and her yard had all kinds of newts and salamanders in it.

    "OOH ASTRONEWTS!" Was the first thing that popped into my head.

    I forget the model number, but it was an estes rocket with a clear payload chamber on it. I placed my "ASTRONEWT!" into the payload chamber, taped the fuse on the bottom of my C6-7 engine and then backed up for safety.

    "HOUSTON THIS IS MISSION CONTROL, BEGINNING FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR LAUNCH!" I could see the little critter had no idea he was about to be launched into the stratosphere as he wiggled and squirmed inside of his cramped quarters.

    "5-4-3-2-1 MAIN ENGINES ARE GO YOU HAVE CLEARED THE TOWER" This was about the 10th rocket I had built that year, everything on it was perfect, the wings had been sanded down and painted in 2 coats, same went for the body. This thing had to be the most arodynamically sound rocket I had ever built in my life because it just kept climbing and climbing.

    "HOUSTON THIS IS MISSION CONTROL, WE ARE SHOWING YOU HAVE DEPLOYED YOUR RE-ENTRY PARACHUTES"

    The rocket had flown so high I had to hop on my bike and chase it down. It ended up about 1/2 mile from where it had launched.

    "HOUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM"

    I looked at the rocket, and inside the poor newt wasn't squirming anymore. I don't know if he had died from shock, g forces, or what, but he was dead. I would have guess G forces from the condition of the corpse.

    Well, after that I ended the astronewt program. Yeah it was a fucked up thing to do, and I regret it as an adult, but we were talking about animal experiments in space right?
    • I had an Estes clear payloader in about 1986. Being similarly opportunistic, I launched a big (eh, 2 inch) grasshopper up in the thing. Made it all dramatic with lift off countdown, etc.

      Picture perfect flight. Way high, you know, up so fast you can barely keep track. Then it floated down on parachute into the middle of a small pond on the community college grounds where we lit the rockets off. Eventually, it drifted to shore. Thank god for that clear-coat!

      WEIRD! but there were now TWO big grasshoppers in the payload. Totally alive, dry, and happy to be freed onto the summer grass. I will say this, they were clinging to each other when I released them! I still don't understand what happened. I must have included two originally and not noticed. Or that's how I rationalize it.

  • This is of these experiments where scientist make perverted experiments with animals which are totally useless and provide no advances for the problems of this worlds.
    Most animal experiments can be done these days with artificial cell pads and simulations. There is definitely no need to use animals anymore. Furthermore the above mentioned experiment doesn't provide any new information. And it covers a niche of science which is partially useless for real world application anyway like feeding the hungry, stopping wars or curing illnesses.
    I think our society has come to a very bad point when scientists make sick experiments with animals just for curiosity or to feel power.
  • I was hoping I'd be the first to make the Simpson's "sort tiny screws in space" joke. But now I see that EVERY SINGLE PERSON who posted before me used a quote from the "Homer in Space" episode already.

    But, hey, maybe I can still milk this article for more Karma.

    "I don't understand, it was non-alcoholic champagne."
    or maybe...
    "You mean I waxed my bikini zone for NOTHING?"

    ---

  • Preliminary report.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by LilGuy ( 150110 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @06:21AM (#5160979)
    1. Ants dig faster in space than on Earth.

    2. We probably wasted thousands of tax dollars on this experiment.

    • Actually, the students get private grants and such to fund their own experiments, and they pay NASA for payload space/mass. So your precious tax dollars are safe to be spent elsewhere, like for "art" like bisected pigs being suspended in formaldehyde and put on display [eagleforum.org]. But hey, that's "freedom of expression", and this on only scientific research. Mustn't mess with our priorities here.

      But on a less obtrusive note, the research data that we could get from this ant experiment is far from valueless. By observing how different species adapts to microgravity environments, we can better determine how human beings might better adapt to weightlessness. We can, and do, learn a lot from studying nature's inventions, and the hope is that we can learn from her and improve ourselves.
    • 3. = Profit!
      Though I can't imagine how ;)
  • .. until some American git opened a bag of chips.

  • In other news..... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Nemus ( 639101 ) <astarchman@hotmail.com> on Sunday January 26, 2003 @06:32AM (#5160995) Journal
    In other news, it was discovered that when placed in a 0g environment, dung beetles still played with shit.

    "Eh, its a job." one beetle was reported as saying, before munching on a space turd.

    Seriously, I'm all for getting kids involved in science and mathematics, but this is probably one of the dumbest experiments I've ever heard of. Unless the ants evolve into giant mutant space ants before the shuttle returns, I don't see how this can be of any practical value.

    I'm trying and I really can't think of any solid benefits from trying this. Couldn't they have tried to design something a little more practical, or was this just dumbing down the project for lower-level students, like all schools do?

    I imagine some of the smarter students had some more interesting ideas, but they weren't accepted, cause lil john and jane wouldn't have a clue what was going on. God forbid we actually challenge kids to learn something advanced.

    • Unless the ants evolve into giant mutant space ants before the shuttle returns, I don't see how this can be of any practical value.

      I don't really thing giant mutant space ants are going to be very practical are they, I mean what do we feed them for one, and can you imagine a 600' high anthill? , that's definitely going to bring some complaints from the neighbours :)
      • I don't really thing giant mutant space ants are going to be very practical are they, I mean what do we feed them for one, and can you imagine a 600' high anthill? , that's definitely going to bring some complaints from the neighbors :)

        Well, not on Earth (they would die from the weak materials which make up the weight of their own weak exoskeletons) but they could have usage as low gravity allows them to grow, they are controlled by pheromone signals to which they mindlessly submit, they are devoted workers and can maintain crop farming (as some ants do). In space they could easily grow quite large.

        The downside is that robots and automated systems could also easily outperform any giant ant in strength & durability so the idea is of course moot.

        But... if someone really wants to carry the thought out further I could see giant ants doing work under moon domes if we ignore the fact that the giant ants would most likely tunnel to the outside and kill their colony & the moon dome. Otherwise it does seem a pretty useless experiment.
    • I'm trying and I really can't think of any solid benefits from trying this. Couldn't they have tried to design something a little more practical, or was this just dumbing down the project for lower-level students, like all schools do?

      And you're assuming that there's other more important science waiting to be done that this experiment is preventing? I get the distinct impression that there simply aren't that many scientists particularly interested in zero-G experiments any more.

    • Not to mention the costs of bearing the kids to Colorado (from New York), and back. Most of the article is just trying to justify or rationalize the expense; just look at any of the quotes.

      "It's not applied science. We're not going to find a cure for cancer, but there may be a lot of indirect results."

      "Someday something we learned may help in an ecosystem in space, or even on another planet."

      "The real value is connecting what kids do in math and science to a bigger world."

      The only redeeming feature is that the article gives the impression of an unmanned spacecraft, so at least an oaf won't screw up the experiments. Children should learn, but not by spending mountains of tax dollars on watching insects fly in space.
    • I was thinking the same thing, a little more practical would be maybe do it on earth in a simulated zero gravity chamber... I don't know though, maybe that wouldn't be COOL enough for the high schoolers.

    • Bad Assumptions (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SteveM ( 11242 )

      I'm trying and I really can't think of any solid benefits from trying this.

      This statement could have two interpretations. One, that there are no direct benefits to what could be derived from this experiment. Two, that there are no benefits at all, scientific or otherwise.

      I agree with number one. I disagree with number two. And furthermore, I think the assumption behind number one is faulty.

      I believe there are practical, non-scientific benefits from doing this. You mention that you are in favor of getting kids involved in science. What better way then having them directly involved in real science? With real scientific equipment? This appears to me to be a valid scientific effort, albeit of little practical value. But is will no doubt have an immense effect on the self esteem of the kids involved. And don't tell me that you went through high school as a geek and couldn't have used a boost to your self esteem. (Another post in this thread complained of wasted tax dollars for field trips from NY to CO. I see no differnce between this and elite sports teams travelling for interstate games.)

      The faulty asssumption is that scientific research needs to have immediate practical application. Because this assumption is so widely held, and in many cases not recognized as such, we have the situation where funding for basic fundemental research continues to shrink.

      Consider the fate of the Superconducting Supercollider. The SSC designed to answer questions in physics that would have little or no immediate practical applications. But because of the assumption that all science has to be for something now, it failed to secure funding.

      What that Newton, Maxwell, or Faraday had been forced to work under such constraints? Can you imagine Newton in a publish or perish environment? I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall for Newton's response to, "Yes, yes Issac, we all know prisms make pretty colors. But as to giving you money to play with such toys, well ...". And I believe it was Faraday who when asked what use his work was replied, "Of what use is a newborn baby?" (I have seen this quote attributed to both Faraday and Ben Franklin.)

      But without the basic work done by Faraday, Maxwell, et al, we would not have had the understanding of electromagnetism that many years later allows us to use computers to post comments on /.. Without the work done early in the last century on quantum mechanics we wouldn't have transistors or integrated circuits.

      Consider the Michelson-Morley experiment. No immediate practical benefit at all. And furthermore, one that obtained a negative result. They expected to measure the effect of the ether and did not. Imagine how it would be reported today? Experiment to measure ether a failure, no effect found. It was Edison who said, "I have not failed. I have found 10,000 ways that don't work." No well thought out and performed scientific experiment is ever a 'failure'. Unless your assumption is that all experiments should have the predictable result for practical benefits, stated in advance as justification in the funding grant request.

      The faulty assumption of immediate practical benefit precludes doing fumdemental research of possible long term benefit. So what knowledge that we haven't gained because the SSC was canceled would have been useful in 2050?

      There is a difference between basic research and applied research. The faulty assumption is that all research is/should be applied. This has the practical (i.e. in practise) result that in general, only those projects that have immediate payoffs get funded. This is a bad thing.

      Steve M

      • I always thought that the reason that insects could not grow larger than about the size of your fist was because the way their bodys were designed gravity would cause them to collapse and turn to mush. Now in space this shouldn't be a problem. So shouldn't it be possible to breed giant insects in space? Or what about on a planet with an earthlike atmosphere but lower gravity? You could have 10' long Centipedes, 50 pound blood sucking Ticks and hordes of termites the size of cars overrunning our colonies, we would have to do battle with them like in the film version of Starship Troopers. It would be cool.
        • Umm, I think it's pretty clear that gravity is not the limiting factor. Millions of years ago, insects MUCH larger than what we have now existed (eg, dragonflys the size of birds). So, unless gravity has changed (seems unlikely), something else must have changed.

          My understanding is that a larger insect would be unable to survive today because it would be incapable of absorbing enough oxygen to support such a large body. This is because, barring some recent discoveries, insects by-and-large respirate simply by diffusion (there was a recent article in SciAm which showed that there are insects which use a pumped mechanism as well). As a result, they would be unable to transfer enough oxygen into their blood to survive.

          The hypothesis that I've read which explains the change in insect size is that, in the past, oxygen concentration in the atmosphere was higher than it is now (and this is supported by ice core sample evidence, IIRC). As a result, larger insects could survive, as their respiratory needs would be met. This may also help to explain why other "giant" creatures, like the dinosaurs, were able to survive, and yet nothing on the same scale exists today.
        • The simple answer is that the design of their body does not scale. Applies to humans too, so sorry, no 50ft babes for you. The way to answer your question of what would happen, is to look in the depths of the ocean. The creatures there are living in nearly weightless conditions and subsequently you do get monster sized squids.

          Side rant, I hate those Discovery episodes that say, "If you were as strong as an ant, you could carry a tank!" It's ridiculous, the materials that an ant are constructed of aren't terribly strong in human terms. If you were as strong as ant, you'd rip your arms out of their sockets.

    • "Seriously, I'm all for getting kids involved in science and mathematics, but this is probably one of the dumbest experiments I've ever heard of. Unless the ants evolve into giant mutant space ants before the shuttle returns, I don't see how this can be of any practical value."

      You think this is dumb, you should see some of the experiments the adults come up with.

      The manned space program as it stands now is a hammer in search of a nail. We have all this expensive hardware floating around up here....now what? Tang II?

      I'd like to see much more done with unmanned probes to the moon and other planets. We brought back some rocks 30 years ago and have been content to stay in earth orbit ever since.

      I bet once the Chinese get a man in orbit and start talking about their own lunar landing NASA will suddenly pop up and say "HEY, lets go back to the moon!". Sometimes it seems it all more PR and showmanship than real substance doesn't it?

  • Ants? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Seehund ( 86897 ) on Sunday January 26, 2003 @06:41AM (#5161002) Homepage Journal
    Are the effects of space travel and microgravity on ants [starsacademy.com] inherently more interesting for Nerds than the same effects on the web weaving of spiders [starsacademy.com], or cocoon spinning of silkworms [starsacademy.com], or the growth of crystalline filaments [starsacademy.com], or the eggs, development and taxis of Medaka fish [starsacademy.com], or the tunneling habits of carpenter bees [starsacademy.com]?

    Kids from 6 countries participate with 6 projects in this. WTF is so special with ants that hasn't been done before [fas.org]? Is it because "Fowler Highschool" is more easily pronounced than "Liechtenstein Gymnasium" for some people, or what?

    • Re:Ants? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by nentwined ( 626268 )
      I have to say, I think the israeli chemical garden (as scary as that title may be) is by FAR the best thought out of the bunch. Most of them are "gee, let's see if this creature turns out or acts any different, just because, well, they might". The chemical garden is nifty in that it actually gives scientific explanations as to what might change, and why -- multiple hypotheses, even. la la la.
      • I didn't mean to say that in-vivo biological studies in space are meaningless (they're necessary if we ever plan on ever leaving this planet ourselves and go anywhere far, far away...). It's of course a matter of discussion if a bunch of kids putting their show-and-tell aquaria/terraria on a space shuttle will give any significant scientific results.

        My post was more meant as an observation on CNN reporting (and Slashdot regurgitating) on The American Project and not even mentioning the other at least as interesting projects. The myopic way this is reported in is appropriate for a local newspaper in Syracuse, NY, USA, or the Fowler High Pupils' Magazine. You know, so the parents can collect newspaper clippings about their kids and their damn ants.
        • Agreed. I was simply segueing off of your commentary. I said a lot more (in this post) and decided I was being stupid. la la la. :)
    • I actually did submit the general experiments: 2003-01-22 08:39:35 Animal Experiments in STS-107 (NASA) (articles,space) (accepted)

      However, I never saw it posted unless I overlooked it. :(
      • 2003-01-22 08:39:35 Animal Experiments in STS-107 (NASA) (articles,space) (accepted)

        However, I never saw it posted unless I overlooked it. :(

        WTF? I looked on your user page, and this story is a dupe [slashdot.org] (surprise! ;) ), but as you say I don't remember seeing your first story, and it's only got 8 comments. Personally I much preferred your first version. Was it removed after a couple of seconds?

        Michael, what are you doing?
        • Nice find, Seehund. How did you manage to find it? I didn't see it when I searched. :(
          • I just clicked on your username and followed the link from your accepted stories. A search for "sts-107" will make it pop up as the first hit.

            Oh well. Maybe we should be happy that the janitors here don't search for dupes before posting stories, if the old stories never actually have been published... :)

            Does anyone remember seeing "Animal Experiments in STS-107 (NASA)" [slashdot.org] on 23/1?
            • ... on 23/1?

              Or 22/1 (Wednesday), if you live East of CET...
              • ... East of CET...

                Doh. West. I'll shut up now.

                Slow Down Cowboy!

                Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.
    • Some action helps attract kids attention. Not to mention that ant farms have been kids toys for generations.

    • Easy: If you check out the movies, only the ants can be seen doing something. All the other xperiments show just... errr ... empty containers, or unintelligible noise; guess that's due to the severe compression used. (Or are those ants really huge, compared to the bees et.c.?) Goes to show how visually oriented we folks are, these days... No pretty pics/movies= no news

    • Re:Ants? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by BFaucet ( 635036 )
      I think the fish experiment could offer quite a lot of insight into how fish judge direction. Also I'm wondering if the fish will learn to use their air bladders when they get back to earth.

  • antquarium (Score:2, Informative)

    by sPaKr ( 116314 )
    I have done some reading on this experiment. The ants are going to be living in a agar based colliodal suspension. The agar (red sweed) will be mixed with sucrose (sugar), and some antifungals and of course water. You can buy the similar habitat at http://www.beachworld.it/eng/antquarium.html [beachworld.it] Or you can mix your own.. agar.. sometimes (agar-agar) is used as a gelatin replacement.. and is often used in asian cooking..
  • So, NASA brings ants into space. They do not notice that a couple of them get lost in the shuttle, and later manages to get to the ISS.

    This will be the start of the mutated ant race that will attach earth in a couple of years from now.

    I have warned you all.

  • I have a thread/discussion about this space ants experiment here [ezboard.com] (my message board on ants) if anyone is interested.
  • And succeeding generations, absent the influence of gravity, will probably grow to a larger and larger maximum adult size.

    What we are seeing, ladies and gentlemen, is the birth of a new race of giant space ant. I strongly advise that they are destroyed or at least kept under very strict quarantine on the station. I mean, what if they get out? Wait, what's that noise? Oh NO THEY'RE BREAKING THROUGH! OMYGOD THEY'RE...AAAARGHBLBLBL !!! sadfgW^W$£^GR;;;;
  • Of course, the ants could mutate, grow hideously ugly faces, take over and land the shuttle and decide to make a break for it before we are forced to kill them...

    "There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission..."

    Chris
  • Last audio clip recorded near ant experiment:

    - Protect the Queen! - Which one's the Queen? - I'm the Queen. - No you're not. - Freedom! - Horrible, horrible freedom!

  • well... (Score:1)

    by C21 ( 643569 )
    the worker ants can crawl away, even the drones can leave, the queen is their prisoner...
  • Ants are MICRO-ALIEN SPACECRAFT. defeating lameness filter blah blah blah.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Close