Daryle Lockhart

deal with that.

deal with that.

distant-traveller:

A Milky Way dawn

As dawn broke on March 27, the center of the Milky Way Galaxy stood almost directly above the European Southern Observatory’s Paranal Observatory. In the dry, clear sky of Chile’s Atacama desert, our galaxy’s dusty central bulge is flanked by Paranal’s four 8 meter Very Large Telescope units in this astronomical fisheye view. Along the top, Venus is close to the eastern horizon. The brilliant morning star shines very near a waning crescent Moon just at the edge of one of the telescope structures. Despite the bright pairing in the east, the Milky Way dominates the scene though. Cut by dust lanes and charged with clouds of stars and glowing nebulae, the center of our galaxy sprawls across the darker zenith even as the deep blue sky grows brighter and buildings still glint in moonlight.

Image credit & copyright: Babak Tafreshi (TWAN), ESO Ultra HD Expedition

distant-traveller:

A Milky Way dawn

As dawn broke on March 27, the center of the Milky Way Galaxy stood almost directly above the European Southern Observatory’s Paranal Observatory. In the dry, clear sky of Chile’s Atacama desert, our galaxy’s dusty central bulge is flanked by Paranal’s four 8 meter Very Large Telescope units in this astronomical fisheye view. Along the top, Venus is close to the eastern horizon. The brilliant morning star shines very near a waning crescent Moon just at the edge of one of the telescope structures. Despite the bright pairing in the east, the Milky Way dominates the scene though. Cut by dust lanes and charged with clouds of stars and glowing nebulae, the center of our galaxy sprawls across the darker zenith even as the deep blue sky grows brighter and buildings still glint in moonlight.

Image credit & copyright: Babak Tafreshi (TWAN), ESO Ultra HD Expedition

(Source: apod.nasa.gov)

neurosciencestuff:

Existence of new neuron repair pathway discovered
Most of your neurons can’t be replaced.
Other parts of your body – such as skin and bone – can be replaced by the body growing new cells, but when you injure your neurons, you can’t just grow new ones; instead, the existing cells have to repair themselves.
In the case of axon injury, the neuron is able to repair or sometimes even fully regenerate its axon. But neurons have two sides – the axon (which sends signals to other cells) and the dendrite (which receives signals from other cells).
Melissa Rolls, an associate professor of biochemistry and molecular biology at Penn State and director of the Huck Institutes’ Center for Cellular Dynamics, has done extensive comparisons of axons and dendrites – culminating recently in a paper published in Cell Reports.
“We know that the axon side can repair itself,” says Rolls, “and we know a bunch of the molecular players. But we really didn’t know whether neurons have the same capacity to regenerate their dendrites, and so that’s what we set out to find in this study.”
“Our lab uses a Drosophila model system, where the dendrites are very accessible to manipulation,” she says, “so we decided that we would start by removing all the dendrites from the neurons to see if they could regenerate. We didn’t start with anything subtle, like taking off just a few dendrites. We said ‘Let’s just push the system to its maximum and see if this is even possible.’ And we were surprised because we found that not only is it possible, it’s actually much faster than axon regeneration: at least in the cells that we’re using, axon regeneration takes a day or two to initiate, while dendrite regeneration typically initiates within four to six hours and it works really well. All the cells where we removed the dendrites grew new dendrites – none of them died; so it’s clear that these cells have a way to both detect dendrite injury and initiate regrowth of the injured part.”
Read more

neurosciencestuff:

Existence of new neuron repair pathway discovered

Most of your neurons can’t be replaced.

Other parts of your body – such as skin and bone – can be replaced by the body growing new cells, but when you injure your neurons, you can’t just grow new ones; instead, the existing cells have to repair themselves.

In the case of axon injury, the neuron is able to repair or sometimes even fully regenerate its axon. But neurons have two sides – the axon (which sends signals to other cells) and the dendrite (which receives signals from other cells).

Melissa Rolls, an associate professor of biochemistry and molecular biology at Penn State and director of the Huck Institutes’ Center for Cellular Dynamics, has done extensive comparisons of axons and dendrites – culminating recently in a paper published in Cell Reports.

“We know that the axon side can repair itself,” says Rolls, “and we know a bunch of the molecular players. But we really didn’t know whether neurons have the same capacity to regenerate their dendrites, and so that’s what we set out to find in this study.”

“Our lab uses a Drosophila model system, where the dendrites are very accessible to manipulation,” she says, “so we decided that we would start by removing all the dendrites from the neurons to see if they could regenerate. We didn’t start with anything subtle, like taking off just a few dendrites. We said ‘Let’s just push the system to its maximum and see if this is even possible.’ And we were surprised because we found that not only is it possible, it’s actually much faster than axon regeneration: at least in the cells that we’re using, axon regeneration takes a day or two to initiate, while dendrite regeneration typically initiates within four to six hours and it works really well. All the cells where we removed the dendrites grew new dendrites – none of them died; so it’s clear that these cells have a way to both detect dendrite injury and initiate regrowth of the injured part.”

Read more

thepoliticalfreakshow:


Obit of the Day: Gabriel García Márquez, Literary Pioneer, Dies At His Home in Mexico At Age 87
Gabriel García Márquez, the Colombian novelist whose “One Hundred Years of Solitude” established him as a giant of 20th-century literature, died on Thursday at his home in Mexico City. He was 87.
His death was confirmed by Cristobal Pera, his former editor at Random House.
Mr. García Márquez, who received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1982, wrote fiction rooted in a mythical Latin American landscape of his own creation, but his appeal was universal. His books were translated into dozens of languages. He was among a select roster of canonical writers — Dickens, Tolstoy and Hemingway among them — who were embraced both by critics and by a mass audience.
“Each new work of his is received by expectant critics and readers as an event of world importance,” the Swedish Academy of Letters said in awarding him the Nobel.
Mr. García Márquez was considered the supreme exponent, if not the creator, of the literary genre known as magic realism, in which the miraculous and the real converge. In his novels and stories, storms rage for years, flowers drift from the skies, tyrants survive for centuries, priests levitate, and corpses fail to decompose. And, more plausibly, lovers rekindle their passion after a half century apart.
Magic realism, he said, sprang from Latin America’s history of vicious dictators and romantic revolutionaries, of long years of hunger, illness and violence. In accepting his Nobel, Mr. García Márquez said: “Poets and beggars, musicians and prophets, warriors and scoundrels, all creatures of that unbridled reality, we have had to ask but little of imagination. For our crucial problem has been a lack of conventional means to render our lives believable.”
“One Hundred Years of Solitude” would sell more than 20 million copies. The Chilean poet Pablo Neruda called it “the greatest revelation in the Spanish language since ‘Don Quixote.’ ” The novelist William Kennedy hailed it as “the first piece of literature since the Book of Genesis that should be required reading for the entire human race.”
Mr. García Márquez made no claim to have invented magic realism; he pointed out that elements of it had appeared before in Latin American literature. But no one before him had used the style with such artistry, exuberance and power. Magic realism would soon inspire writers on both sides of the Atlantic, most notably Isabel Allende in Chile and Salman Rushdie in Britain.
Suffering from lymphatic cancer, which was diagnosed in 1999, Mr. García Márquez devoted most of his subsequent writing to his memoirs. One exception was the novel “Memories of My Melancholy Whores,” about the love affair between a 90-year-old man and a 14-year-old prostitute, published in 2004.
In July 2012, his brother, Jaime, was quoted as saying that Mr. García Márquez had senile dementia and had stopped writing. But Jaime Abello, director of the Gabriel García Márquez New Journalism Foundation in Cartagena, said that the condition had not been clinically diagnosed.
Mr. Pera, the author’s editor at Random House Mondadori, said at the time that Mr. García Márquez had been working on a novel, “We’ll See Each Other in August,” but that no publication date had been scheduled. The author seemed disinclined to have it published, Mr. Pera said: “He told me, ‘This far along I don’t need to publish more.’ ”
Besides his wife, Mercedes, he is survived by two sons, Rodrigo and Gonzalo.

thepoliticalfreakshow:

Obit of the Day: Gabriel García Márquez, Literary Pioneer, Dies At His Home in Mexico At Age 87

Gabriel García Márquez, the Colombian novelist whose “One Hundred Years of Solitude” established him as a giant of 20th-century literature, died on Thursday at his home in Mexico City. He was 87.

His death was confirmed by Cristobal Pera, his former editor at Random House.

Mr. García Márquez, who received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1982, wrote fiction rooted in a mythical Latin American landscape of his own creation, but his appeal was universal. His books were translated into dozens of languages. He was among a select roster of canonical writers — Dickens, Tolstoy and Hemingway among them — who were embraced both by critics and by a mass audience.

“Each new work of his is received by expectant critics and readers as an event of world importance,” the Swedish Academy of Letters said in awarding him the Nobel.

Mr. García Márquez was considered the supreme exponent, if not the creator, of the literary genre known as magic realism, in which the miraculous and the real converge. In his novels and stories, storms rage for years, flowers drift from the skies, tyrants survive for centuries, priests levitate, and corpses fail to decompose. And, more plausibly, lovers rekindle their passion after a half century apart.

Magic realism, he said, sprang from Latin America’s history of vicious dictators and romantic revolutionaries, of long years of hunger, illness and violence. In accepting his Nobel, Mr. García Márquez said: “Poets and beggars, musicians and prophets, warriors and scoundrels, all creatures of that unbridled reality, we have had to ask but little of imagination. For our crucial problem has been a lack of conventional means to render our lives believable.”

“One Hundred Years of Solitude” would sell more than 20 million copies. The Chilean poet Pablo Neruda called it “the greatest revelation in the Spanish language since ‘Don Quixote.’ ” The novelist William Kennedy hailed it as “the first piece of literature since the Book of Genesis that should be required reading for the entire human race.”

Mr. García Márquez made no claim to have invented magic realism; he pointed out that elements of it had appeared before in Latin American literature. But no one before him had used the style with such artistry, exuberance and power. Magic realism would soon inspire writers on both sides of the Atlantic, most notably Isabel Allende in Chile and Salman Rushdie in Britain.

Suffering from lymphatic cancer, which was diagnosed in 1999, Mr. García Márquez devoted most of his subsequent writing to his memoirs. One exception was the novel “Memories of My Melancholy Whores,” about the love affair between a 90-year-old man and a 14-year-old prostitute, published in 2004.

In July 2012, his brother, Jaime, was quoted as saying that Mr. García Márquez had senile dementia and had stopped writing. But Jaime Abello, director of the Gabriel García Márquez New Journalism Foundation in Cartagena, said that the condition had not been clinically diagnosed.

Mr. Pera, the author’s editor at Random House Mondadori, said at the time that Mr. García Márquez had been working on a novel, “We’ll See Each Other in August,” but that no publication date had been scheduled. The author seemed disinclined to have it published, Mr. Pera said: “He told me, ‘This far along I don’t need to publish more.’ ”

Besides his wife, Mercedes, he is survived by two sons, Rodrigo and Gonzalo.

"Her and Lost In Translation are connected to each other. They’re very much on the same wavelength. They explore a lot of the same ideas. This all makes sense since Spike Jonze and Sofia Coppola were married from 1999 to 2003 and had been together for many years before that. Sofia Coppola had already made her big personal statement in regards to love and marriage right when the couple was on the verge of divorce; Her would be Spike Jonze’s answer to those feelings. What makes it even more poignant is that Her never feels resentful or petty. It feels more like a legitimate apology. It’s an acknowledgement that, in the end, some people aren’t meant to be with each other in the long run. Some people do grow apart. Lost in Translation is about a couple on the verge of growing apart, Her is about finally letting go of the person you’ve grown apart with and moving on.”

(Source: scanis)

all day.

all day.

theatlantic:

Africa’s Tech Edge

How the continent’s many obstacles, from widespread poverty to failed states, allowed African entrepreneurs to beat the West at reinventing money for the mobile age
Read more. [Image: Mike McQuade]

theatlantic:

Africa’s Tech Edge

How the continent’s many obstacles, from widespread poverty to failed states, allowed African entrepreneurs to beat the West at reinventing money for the mobile age

Read more. [Image: Mike McQuade]

bobbycaputo:

MANUAL COFFEEMAKER
Electric coffeemakers make it far too easy to brew a cup of coffee — they remove you from the process, taking it out of your hands and resulting in coffee that tastes mass-produced — which is why pour-over brewing has become so popular among people who really care about their coffee. The Manual Coffeemaker puts the control back in your hands, letting you brew individual cups that perfectly suit your taste. The machine is handcrafted from double-wall sculpted glass, letting you view the process while holding in all the necessary heat. Just place a filter into the funnel at the top, pour water over the grounds, and let it fill the included carafe — it brews one cup at a time, making it perfect for small offices or individual use.

bobbycaputo:

MANUAL COFFEEMAKER

Electric coffeemakers make it far too easy to brew a cup of coffee — they remove you from the process, taking it out of your hands and resulting in coffee that tastes mass-produced — which is why pour-over brewing has become so popular among people who really care about their coffee. The Manual Coffeemaker puts the control back in your hands, letting you brew individual cups that perfectly suit your taste. The machine is handcrafted from double-wall sculpted glass, letting you view the process while holding in all the necessary heat. Just place a filter into the funnel at the top, pour water over the grounds, and let it fill the included carafe — it brews one cup at a time, making it perfect for small offices or individual use.

tacanderson:

I’ve always been really good at predicting digital and cultural trends. So much so that I’ve made my living doing it for most of the last decade. But even I have my biases. I was such a music snob and loved owning music that I couldn’t imagine not ever buying albums. 
I remember back in 2005 I read this book, The Future of Music: Manifesto for the Digital Music Revolution and thinking the authors were completely insane. They were talking about paying for streaming music like a utility, that we’d quit “owning” music and stop buying albums and would instead pay monthly fees to access unlimited music. I thought it was the stupidest thing I’d ever heard. It turned out to be the biggest trend I’ve ever completely missed.
Streaming, an interactive report from Pitchfork, tells the next phase of the story.  

From YouTube, to Pandora, to Spotify, streaming music is piloting our listening habits in fascinating new ways that both upend old hierarchies and recall innovations of previous eras. Eric Harvey explores how these developments are affecting ideas of taste, access, and ownership today—and what this shift means for fans and artists alike—in our latest Cover Story.

tacanderson:

I’ve always been really good at predicting digital and cultural trends. So much so that I’ve made my living doing it for most of the last decade. But even I have my biases. I was such a music snob and loved owning music that I couldn’t imagine not ever buying albums. 

I remember back in 2005 I read this book, The Future of Music: Manifesto for the Digital Music Revolution and thinking the authors were completely insane. They were talking about paying for streaming music like a utility, that we’d quit “owning” music and stop buying albums and would instead pay monthly fees to access unlimited music. I thought it was the stupidest thing I’d ever heard. It turned out to be the biggest trend I’ve ever completely missed.

Streaming, an interactive report from Pitchfork, tells the next phase of the story.  

From YouTube, to Pandora, to Spotify, streaming music is piloting our listening habits in fascinating new ways that both upend old hierarchies and recall innovations of previous eras. Eric Harvey explores how these developments are affecting ideas of taste, access, and ownership today—and what this shift means for fans and artists alike—in our latest Cover Story.

(Source: pitchfork)