Old wives' tales: win a few, lose a few

kw: book reviews, nonfiction, science, myths, anthologies

Want to know if you really should "Feed a cold and starve a fever"? Anahad O'Connor can tell you; just e-mail him at scitimes@nytimes.com . You may also find an answer you need in his collected articles at NY Times.

Or, you can read his new book Always Follow the Elephants: More Surprising Facts and Misleading Myths About Our Health and the World We Live In. There, in the first segment of Chapter 7, he writes that food helps both colds and fevers, particularly when the "fever" in question is influenza: Eating revs up the immune system, particularly against viruses. He doesn't mention the case when "fever" refers to malaria, and it may be malaria that the proverb refers to. I learned long ago that those who are overweight suffer more from malarial attacks than their more slender peers, which is the probable source of the saying.

Also, according to the title, if your friendly neighborhood elephant suddenly wants to head for the hills, it is a good idea to follow. Elephants can hear or feel low-frequency sounds we cannot detect, and strong "infrasound" typically precedes large storms, tsunamis and earthquakes. The many reports of animals of all kinds "going crazy" just before earthquakes indicates that most of our furry friends have low-frequency senses we don't have or don't use.

O'Connor writes the "Really?" column for the New York Times, in which he either confirms or debunks all kinds of "old wives' tales" and other myths. In the book there were a few that tickled me:

• For a burn, use honey instead of aloe. The sap of Aloe vera will help smooth your skin, but it doesn't soothe.
• Less stress = less acne, so tell your teenagers to chill out.
• Also offer them a cup of tea: it is found to reduce stress, whether black, green or Oolong.
• We know that daily aspirin in small doses (one baby size, or 80mg) is good for the heart; it turns out that a larger dose (perhaps one adult size, or 250mg) is good for the brain, making it more resistant to Alzheimer's dementia.

On the other hand, there are a few old myths that are spectacularly wrong, such as "urine on a jellyfish sting". Aside from the grossness, it just doesn't work. It make things worse. Vinegar works much better.

This book and its precursor, Never Shower in a Thunderstorm are good reference books to put alongside all those Book Club and Readers' Digest "hint" books, which contain some of the very myths O'Connor debunks.

What are we doing to the ocean floor?

kw: oceanography, myths, seismology

The supposed Atlantis on the ocean floor off the coast of Africa isn't the only set of odd markings down there. I also reported markings of a seismic survey in the Gulf of Mexico. Below is a short gallery of other seafloor markings that are probably all made by us. All images were made to a common scale, a 400x400 pixel image with a width of about 350 km (220 mi). The altitude of virtual view was 528 miles (850 km).


Off Bergen, Norway, at 64°N 3°E, at 2km depth and more, this large area of markings is not quite as regular as "Atlantis", but is the closest in appearance of these examples.


West of Ireland, at 54°N 17°W and 4km depth, we find these deep furrows spaced about 10km apart.


The markings here are hard to discern, even with some added contrast added to the image. It looks like traces of a 3D seismic survey running roughly parallel to the coast. There is a distinct kink near the center of this image. You may find it easier to go to the coordinates noted and look from a closer elevation. This image is off North Carolina, but the whole survey stretches north to Cape Cod: 33°N 75°W to 38°N 68°W. That is hundreds of kilometers.


Off Los Angeles, 32°N 122°W, at a depth of 5km: The image is a portion of a large area with furrows spaced 25-30 km apart. These differ in appearance and orientation from a regular set of geological faults further to the north.


South of the Aleutian Islands, 46°N 158°W to 50°N 176°W, from the edge of the continental shelf to 6km depth, these markings are spaced 15-20 km apart, over a huge area.

It may be that one or more of these formations has a natural cause, but certainly not all do. Such artifacts, over areas larger than many nations on land, are difficult to conceive. Interestingly, areas where I expected to find lots of markings, such as the southern North Sea, the South China Sea, and the Newfoundland Banks, appear to have none. I haven't even looked south of the Equator. What these show is that our impact on the ocean floor, seemingly out of reach several kilometers down, is widespread and profound.

Seismic Survey

kw: speculation, myths, legends

In posts on 2/20/09 and 2/26/09 I speculated about what is the real nature of a grid on the seafloor that some think is Atlantis. Since then I have taken just a little time to snoop around looking for other seafloor artifacts that may be related.

This image shows the traces of seismic surveying located on the floor of the Gulf of Mexico, one of the most thoroughly surveyed regions of the sea floor. (click to see a larger image with more clear traces showing.) The survey was "3D Seismic", which records low-frequency sonic reflections from sub-seafloor rocks. The sonic data can then be used to calculate a three-dimensional model of the configuration of the rocks to a depth of several miles. It is a powerful exploration technique, and as you can see, it chews up the ocean floor rather thoroughly.

The location of this area is 28°45'N, 88°30'W, at a depth of 7,160 ft, or 2,180 m (By contrast, the "Atlantis" pattern is found at a depth of about 17,900 ft, or 5,460 m). Considering that the area shown is about 50 miles wide by 30 miles north-south, the traces are about a half mile apart.

If the "Atlantis" pattern is a sonic survey of some kind, it is much looser, and the source was quite a bit more energetic. Possibly whoever did it was looking for much deeper targets than what is shown here in the Gulf.

Sinking Atlantis, again

kw: legends, myths, lost worlds

Remember this image? Similar images, purported to be Atlantis, are everywhere now. I posted about it a few days ago, asking, If it isn't Atlantis, what is it? My own speculation is that it is the trace of a seismic or sonar survey, or perhaps trawling. That is the position taken by most commentators. The Bits Blog at the N.Y. Times reports on Google's debunking of the Atlantis idea.

Two things come to mind, however. There are many sonar and seismic surveys done, often over equally large areas. The ocean floor ought to be marked up like the wall of a house inhabited by artistic toddlers. I've done some looking around, and so far I haven't found anything similar.

But it is hard to get an idea of the scale of this thing. It is 120x120 km, or 75x75 miles. I clipped an image of the Los Angeles area at the same scale for comparison.

It takes a couple hours, or more if there is traffic, to drive from Oxnard to Oceanside or San Bernardino. A 120x120 km square takes in from Lancaster to Irvine and Santa Monica to Riverside. That's a lot of territory. Though the "Atlantis" image looks like a city laid out in blocks, the blocks are big. Each one is about the size of Anaheim or Pasadena.

It's worth while looking for more traces on the ocean floor. I don't know why this one formation off Africa should be unique. I am pretty sure the formation was caused by something towed behind (and below) a ship.

If it isn't Atlantis, what is it?

kw: legends, myths, lost worlds

I heard about this on "Late Night" early this morning. This image, from Google Earth, is located on the sea floor at coordinates 31°20'N, 24°22'W. It is thought by some to be the remains of Atlantis.

Note: I have enhanced this image, by stretching the contrast and lightening, to make the formation easier to see (though it is quite evident without the processing).

Whatever this is, it is large, about 120x120 km (75x75 mi). The "blocks" are thus about ten km wide (E-W), ranging down to half that, and several km in the N-S direction. The width of the lines that look so much like streets is actually greater than the width of most city blocks.

Could there really be an Atlantis? Atlantis was called a Continent by Plato, though the word was not so precisely defined then as it is today. He compared it in size to Asia, by which he meant the peninsula occupied by modern Turkey, AKA Asia Minor. Asia Minor is about 600x2000 km (370x1200 mi). The feature pictured here could represent a major metropolitan area, as it is larger than the Los Angeles metro area. But let us note that the sea floor here, in the abyssal plain, is composed of oceanic crust. It has been sitting right where it is now for millions of years.

It'll be interesting to follow this story…

Those ain't love bites

kw: book reviews, nonfiction, vampires, history, legends, myths

It is with good reason that I eschew vampire stories and films. Rationalist I may be, and a Christian mystic as well, yet there is an irrational core in all of us; I find myself much too easily influenced by the sexual-occult realms of the undead.

Wayne Bartlett and Flavia Idriceanu, two researchers working in Romania, waded through a great mass of folklore, literature, and filmography to produce Legends of Blood: The Vampire in History and Myth, which chronicles he bloody archetype and its enduring allure. Vampire stories touch some of the deepest chords in our psyche. The idea of a vampire ignites images of the most intimate predation, something a huge step worse than mere rape.

Fairy tales and ghost stories all have archetypical messages: what would I do if I were the abused stepchild, or the damsel in distress, or a demon's prey; what would I do if I were a giant, a dragon, a stepmother, or a ghoul? Would I abuse power in the same way (probably); would I be as resourceful—or as lucky—as these victims (probably not)?

Every culture has its blood-sucking monster, from the Babylonian labartu to the ghoulish kasha of Japan and the seductive lamiae of the Romans. "The blood is the life" is not only a biblical pronouncement; it has its corollary in every language. For all animals, at least, from mosquitos to whales, when the blood is removed, the life ends. Whatever attacks our blood, by analogy, attacks our soul (this accounts for the particular resonance of AIDS, which gradually corrupts the blood within the body).

I read through the book as quickly as I could. I wished minimal influence, but to gain insight nonetheless. In thirteen (of course) chapters, the authors discuss the vampire history and its connections with other magical creatures, particularly the way a vampire combines aspects of the ghoul, the seducer, and the magus. We may have many folkloric monsters – the list of legendary creatures from any culture numbers a hundred or more – but the vampire brings elements of all the worst ones together, to become our most fearful adversary and predator.

While vampires appear in some ancient literature, it is just in the past 130 years that a vampire genre has appeared. The creature that Bram Stoker conjured with his novel Dracula partakes of the entire history of the European subconscious, mining psychogical depths common to us all, and either thrilling or terrifying us all. Nearly forty films (dramas, comedies, spoofs, deep horror, and a bit of porn) are based just on this one book; many, many more are based on about forty distinct vampiric traditions.

The second-largest vampire tradition after Stoker's is Anne Rice's "Vampire Chronicles" books (12 to date) and films. Compared to Dracula, Rice's Lestat is even smoother, more cosmopolitan, and much more terrifyingly evil...and he is not the worst of them. In more modern stories, vampires don't inhabit gloomy castles in far-off forests. As Dracula felt he'd find better hunting in London, so more modern vampires flood to the cities, and in some story series, such as the Buffy the Vampire Slayer TV series, they are taking over the world.

The vampire is the ultimate bogeyman.

In his eyes, there's a big red target on Everything

kw: book reviews, nonfiction, debunking, polemics, myths

Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel—Why Everything You Know is Wrong...what a title! In twelve chapters containing 150 connected essays, John Stossel tackles—and usually hogties—150 myths many of us believe, or are persuaded by various "authorities" to believe. Given the large number, I'll do the random thing (I'm running the RAND function on my calculator as I write): OK, numbers I get are (sorted) 13, 46, 76, 106, and 128. The text below in the "Bottom Line" section is my paraphrase, not quoted from Stossel. And by the way, Stossel doesn't number the items; I am a numbering kind of guy, so I numbered my own copy.

#13 (from Chapter 1)
MYTH: We are running out of oil fast
TRUTH: Not so fast
Bottom Line: As prices rise, new resources become profitable; at current prices, we can afford to exploit oil and tar resources that will last 50-100 years, and some "alternative energy" technologies are getting competitive.

#46 (from Chapter 4)
MYTH: You know what taxes you pay
TRUTH: You don't have a clue
Bottom Line: Huge amounts of taxes are levied against corporations, which then must raise prices to stay afloat, so no matter what kind of tax there is, remember, only consumers actually pay all taxes. (Some fellow-students and I once tracked down all the ingredients in a loaf of bread, and all the taxes on their production and distribution. We found more than 120 taxes on bread...in 1978! Who pays them? The person who purchases the bread. Every penny).

#76 (from Chapter 6)
MYTH: Brand name gas is better
TRUTH: Brand name gas costs more
Bottom Line: The gas sold at Wal-Mart, 7-11, and all "non-brand" stations like Merit is refined by Chevron, Exxon, Conoco, or another brand. (I've been in the oil business, with Conoco. Jobbers buy oil from any refinery that will sell it to them, and the larger refiners, that is, brands, usually have the lowest prices to jobbers).

#108 (from Chapter 9)
MYTH: Red cars attract police attention and cost more to insure
TRUTH: It's an urban myth
Bottom Line: Try this. Call your insurance company (or one at random) and tell them you are looking at two cars, identically equipped, but you and your spouse are arguing over whether to get the red one or the white one. See what they say about pricing! They'll want to know about YOU and your record, not about the car's color.

#128 (from Chapter 10)
MYTH: Revenge is sweet
TRUTH: Forgiveness is sweeter
Bottom Line: Remember the "live by the sword, die by the sword" adage? People who hold grudges simply don't live as long or as well as those who forgive and get on with life.

John Stossel, of 20/20 on ABC, began his journalistic career as a "modern liberal", and was transformed by years of myth-busting into a "classical liberal". Nobody understands historical liberalism any more, so he calls himself, a bit reluctantly, a Libertarian, as his concluding chapter explains.

There is plenty in the book for both liberals and conservatives (both excruciatingly mis-named these days) to hate. But as Bernard Baruch said, "Every man has a right to his opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts." In nearly all 150 cases, Stossel has his facts right. The political extremes, and the masses of people who complacently follow one or the other, seldom have facts at their disposal.

So, there is plenty of hay to be made. A few "myths" turn out to be true. For example, prosperous people really are more happy than very poor people, as most of us would guess. However, the really rich aren't happier than the "middle class." It was Jackie Gleason who said, "People who say money doesn't buy happiness just don't know where to shop." His persistent sadness of-stage revealed this as empty bravado. It turns out that gradually rising prosperity is better at producing happiness than any constant state of wealth that doesn't change. Reduced circumstances erode happiness. The billionaires want another billion, and are unhappy if they drop back to "half-billionaire" status.

I'm going to add a fact or two to #16, the last in Chapter 1 (MYTH: The world is too crowded/TRUTH: That's garbage too). Is the world too crowded? The question is better restated, "Does the world have more people than it can comfortably support?" Many folks say it does, John Stossel says it doesn't, and he buttresses the argument by comparing starving Niger, with 9 people per square mile, to America (28/sq mi), the Netherlands (484) and other prosperous countries. He states, rightly, that famine and other shortagles are primarily political. However, I take issue with the Netherlands, which imports some of its food, and Japan which imports about half, as counter-examples.

Were the kleptocratic government of Niger miraculously replaced with the most benevolent of republics, they couldn't wrest sufficient food out of their land to feed their people. The CIA World Factbook entry for Niger states of the geography:

"landlocked; one of the hottest countries in the world; northern four-fifths is desert, southern one-fifth is savanna, suitable for livestock and limited agriculture"

The country has 12.5 million residents, the same as Illinois. Its land area is 14 times as great. 11.4% of Niger is arable, and most of that poorly, compared to 50% of Illinois, which is 20 degrees cooler and has much more total water. The U.S. as a whole has 15% of the land under cultivation; another 10% could be farmed. Worldwide, 20-25% of land is arable to varying degrees. The political situation in Niger accounts for the fact that less than 1% of its land is actually being farmed at present, but if all 11.4% were farmed, it would be a poor country still, as it has little groundwater.

However, we were talking about the whole earth. With 6.4 billions, is Earth too crowded? At the moment there is room for debate. At what point would everyone agree that "Enough is enough!"? Ten billion, twenty, a trillion? World population growth is currently two percent. If the death rate doesn't increase (that would be a political miracle), we'll have ten billion in 2029, twenty billion in 2064, and a trillion humans (surely that is crowded!) on Earth in 255 years, in 2262 or thereabouts.

OK, if that's my only quibble with Stossel, I'd say he has a very good book here, and he does! Read and learn!!

History of the Imagined Universe

kw: book reviews, history, myths

Subject of the times: The history of everything. Now, a history of what people think about the universe: David Park's The Grand Contraption: The World as Myth, Number, and Chance., published by Princeton University Press. The author is Emeritus Professor of Physics at Williams College. I guess it takes a scientist to cover the subject. Stephen Hawking gave us A Short History of Time. This is a short history of cosmology—or at least cosmological speculation for the most part.

Dr. Park has a lot of ground to cover, 4,000 years of speculative and scientific literature, in 300 pages. He has to do a lot of "we need not follow this further"-ing, to avoid producing a 3,000 or 30,000 page tome.

The historical threads begin with the origin of writing, including an illustration of the world according to ancient Babylon, about the time that Gilgamesh was written down.

The greatest impression I received was of the scale of the universe. When Park writes "world," at least in the latter half of the book "universe" is really what is meant...or perhaps "observable universe."

Observable is the key here. Parallax was discovered very early, but the eye is too crude to measure even the Moon's distance with any accuracy. The earliest attempts placed both Moon and Sun within a few times the earth's size, and the "fixed" stars not much farther away. The spherical earth was known to at least some as early as 500 BC, but the initial estimate of its size was quite large: 40,000 miles in circumference. Eratosthenes, a couple centuries later, came as close as anyone prior to the 1800s, with about 23,000 (may be more; we aren't sure how long his stade was) miles.

It took the Copernican Revolution to push the planets farther away than a few tens of thousands of miles. Kepler, using Brahe's data, used oppositions and quadratures of Earth with Mars to determine its distance to be some tens of millions of miles. The invention of the telescope gave observers at least the uneasy feeling that there were distant stars many times farther yet.

Human understanding of the scale of the universe has steadily increased. The "observable universe" is currently thought to have a radius of about 13 billion light-years. However, if you work the math backwards, using current assumptions about the Big Bang and cosmic expansion since, quasars near "the edge", whose 13-billion-year-old light is just reaching us, would today be more like 75 billion light-years away. Park doesn't mention that. He doesn't need to. A discussion of the implications of Alan Guth's "inflation" hypothesis indicate that the size of the inflated bubble was perhaps a billion light-years, at a time when light had only traveled a trillionth of a trillionth of a meter. So we're not seeing much of what's really out there!

In the early part of the book, he necessarily focuses on religious texts. Only they had origin stories. I found it interesting that all of them, with one exception, imagined the world's creation as an act of sexual procreation, usually an act of incest. The exception? The book of Genesis. (someone is asking, "Does that mean you think Genesis is scientifically accurate?" I means that Genesis does not record ridiculous fantasies. As to science, while that isn't the intent of the Hebrew scriptures, another biblical book contains the earliest description of a spherical Earth, with the division between day and night traveling around it as a rotating circle. The terminator, as seen from elsewhere, perhaps... Hang in there, I may get into Bible stuff someday, though that's not the intent of THIS blog).

Resurfacing: the author emphasizes the continuing sense of wonder on the part of discoverer after discoverer. We also see the continuing, negative reaction by insecure traditionalists. Discoveries remain. Tradition loses its power and becomes irrelevant. Real faith needs no tradition. Real science is delighted at each new unveiling of reality.

No matter how big our universe—and remember, for most people, it is no bigger than that of the Babylonians—we all benefit from the chance to look farther, to see more, and to imagine.