Stargazing Into The Future of Biological Meccano.

...but for how long?

With geek chic the new black, thanks in part to television shows such as The Big Bang Theory and The IT Crowd, "science", in its many guises, can only blame itself if it doesn't surf the current wave of popularity and hang 10 in the public psyche. However, the way in which it is presented may well be the barrier to its continued coolness.

The proliferation of scientist - presenters is a slightly puzzling and probably unnecessary. The family in Braintree or the man on the Clapham omnibus (obviously watching on iPlayer for mobile), doing their best to understand what an event horizon is, are unlikely to ask for the proofs or want the protocol for the experiment. However, it seems de rigueur for programmes to be fronted by Dr. Stare intently down a microscope or Professor Show insincere surprise at something I've seen a 1000 times before. Surprising as non-professional-scientist presenters of the past, such as David Attenborough, Johnny Ball and Patrick Moore, sit pride of place in the vault of British treasures. The knowledgeable amateur, even if they are a celebrity such as Dara O'Briain, James May or Kate Humble, is a sounder choice as host. Capable of a sufficient level of scientific scrutiny and able to convey the information for general consumption.

Eye candy with a PhD

Getting on the telly is an ambition scientists, like the rest of the country, are not immune from. The clamor for their 15 minutes of fame has led to petty infighting epitomized by articles such as "TV science has to shift out of Top Gear" written by Sue Nelson in the Telegraph. Her portrayal of science broadcasting as a the new lads' mag, monopolized by loud mouth blokes with women reduced to the role of intelligent eye candy is packed with David Cameron for Boris Johnson levels of resentment. The supposition that Top Gear-esque shows are a little low brow fails to acknowledge the fact that science broadcasting is for the masses and not for the already engaged few. As long as accuracy is maintained, and hyperbole kept in check, scientific broadcasting is safer in the hands of the interested professional rather than the diva scientist presenter.

Protecting your share of the limelight

That comedians and TV personalities are supposedly muscling in on scientists' territory is nothing unusual in today's attention obsessed media. While the Lib Dem conference passed with little fanfare, apart from the debate as to whose whipping boys they would prefer to be after the next election, price freeze Ed and hardworking Dave had their spotlight stolen by no holds barred exposés written by engaged non-politicians. While Damian McBride's Power Trip has the hallmarks of a deprecating but ultimately self serving, Kerry Katona bankruptcy buster, Matthew d'Ancona's more journalistic In It Together reveals the problems of compiling wholes in an artificial construct comprised of known parts which have previously not interacted in a common goal.

Bio-circuits to make something useful

The challenge of constructing functional units from disparate parts is one faced by coaches in every team sport. A dying breed choose the more passionate fly by seat of your pants and storming out of press conferences approach, whereas the majority adhere to Billy Beane's emotionless, stats led Moneyball philosophy. Evidence based decision making, rather than relying on your gut instinct after three double brandys, has recently become the mantra from banker to beaurocrat but has long been the guiding principle of scientific research. However, scientists' ineffective communication of the evidence behind their choices led to, among others, the GM - Frankenstein food -  furore of the 90s and could threaten the rapidly emerging field of synthetic biology. Synthetic biology concerns the design and construction of biological devices, systems and circuits, unequivocably following Moneyball principles, from DNA parts, derived from a spectrum of flora and fauna, of known individual function but of only predicted action when combined as a whole. A biological Meccano based GM kerfuffle for the 21st century? Most probably if scientists are left to their own devices; so it may be time for researchers to exude influence from behind the lens and let James, Kate and Dara do the explaining.  

Why Physics Is Top Of The Science Pops.

The Polymath, a rare species.

The history of science, from the Ancient Greeks and Egyptians through the Renaissance and Age of Enlightenment in Europe to the modern science of the last century and this, has been filled with remarkable people and great minds. The full list spans millenia and continents. The scientists of those early days were polymaths of the highest calibre. For example Aristotle wrote on subjects as diverse as physics, metaphysics, poetry, theatre, music, logic, rhetoric, linguistics, politics, government, ethics, biology, and zoology. Even in the 18th century Newton was an authority on, mathematics, astronomy, natural philosophy, alchemy, and theology. Those days of Jack of all trades scientists are, sadly, no more.

The logical supposition may be that scientists aren't as brainy as they once were. While clearly those names that have lived on through the ages were people of astonishing intellect, there are still plenty of erudite researchers around today. The real issue is that scientific knowledge has expanded so rapidly it is now impossible to be an expert on everything. In fact you realise that the more you become an expert on a subject, the less you know about it.

Initially science was divided into Natural and Social science. Natural science then split into Biology, Chemistry and Physics, with the era of real scientific specialisation dating to the beginning of the 19th century when research became professionalised and institutionalised.  Areas from each of these three disciplines have been in vogue at different times throughout recent history.

The Bazalgette's latest sewer offering.

The industrial revolution of the 18th century was a time remembered for astonishing engineering feats such as Brunel's Great Eastern and Bazalgette's London sewers. However, these endeavours were underpinned by advances in chemistry including the understanding of combustion, advances in building materials, the production of new synthetic dyes and detergents for the textile industry as well as mass production of fertilisers and drugs to keep the millions of workers living in urban squalor alive. Coupled with fantastical public chemistry demonstrations, this enabled chemists, such as Humphrey Davy, to rise to the top of scientific and social celebrity status in London.

Due to our fascination with the human condition and the fact that these people can make us live longer, there have, throughout history, been well know practitioners of medicine. For example, the elephant man Joseph Merrick's physician Dr. Frederick Treves and modern day TV personalities such as Prof. Robert Winston. The biological sciences only really captured the public imagination in the latter half of the 20th century, coinciding with global travel and the advent of television. Darwin's studies or even the elucidation of the structure of DNA by Crick & Watson were discoveries which were quite esoteric in their nature. Natural history on the other hand was striking and generally accessible making presenters such as David Attenborough household names.

Prof. Cox's default middle distance gaze.

Physics has had an image of unfathomable people carrying out incomprehensible work. This has all changed recently with still incomprehensible but sufficiently mind-blowing work, such as the search for the Higgs Boson in the Large Hadron Collider and Neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light, being presented by the entertaining and, in some people's eyes, photogenic Prof. Brian Cox. Physics is now cool with the general public genuinely interested in trying to understand how it works. It is too early to tell whether physics will go the way of flared trousers or hyper-colour t-shirts, but it would certainly be the Christmas No.1 of science this year. More importantly, this interest offers an opportunity for public engagement in all areas of science and means that even researchers in lab coats and safety specs working in windowless labs can D:ream that things can only get better for their chosen career.

Renewing, Renewable Fuels and Chemicals

Batteries don't grow on trees, do they?

Since troglodytes roamed the planet hundreds of thousands of years ago we've been fascinated by burning "stuff"; a technique which has served us very nicely over the subsequent millennia. On the time scale of man-made fire, our obsession with combustion has only recently become a burning topic of debate with alternative technologies developed in the last half century. While solar, wind, wave and a plethora of other renewables will have a role to play in the future of local and global energy production, mankind will, for the foreseeable future at least, still be looking for something to pour into their internal combustion engines and a source for the chemicals from which to construct the world around them.

Monks, further ahead of the curve than BP.

One may imagine that renewable transportation fuels and the methods used to produce them are at the cutting edge of science; not so. Quite simply, production of bioethanol, perhaps the best known biofuel, is brewing, just on a massive scale. It has been suggested that alcohol was instrumental in establishing modern civilization as we know it. However, if we keep making it the same way as 9,000 years ago it may play a part in its downfall.

The basic premise that the CO2 released when plants are harvested is balanced out by the CO2 absorbed by the new ones planted to replace them holds true, to a certain extent. Conflict arises as the plants used in commercial biofuels factories such as; corn, sugar cane, oil seed rape and palm are either themselves food crops, compete for land with food crops or their planting leads to deforestation. The edible part of crop is used as the sugars, which ultimately end up as biofuel, are more accessible than in the rest of the plant; the equivalent of sucking on boiled sweet or chewing celery. The scientific advances in this field have focused around, higher yielding crops as well as more efficient, and therefore cheaper, processing. Despite the controversial production methods, Merrill Lynch calculate that without biofuels crude oil would be trading 15% higher and gasoline would be as much as 25% more expensive.

Rather depressing so far, however, all is not lost. Research is focusing on making biofuels from the non-edible parts of food crops or designated bioenergy crops that can be grown on land unsuitable for food production. These are known as lignocellulosic biofuels. Approximately 75% of these plants are made of sugar but locked away in a largely inaccessible form. The processes required to unlock these sugars mean that, currently, lignocellulosic biofuel production is more expensive than that from food crop sources. However, should science be able to overcome these problems the calculated green house gas savings are considerable. Maybe more importantly lignocellulosic biofuel production can grow within an ethical framework that considers protection of human rights and the environment. A future with Fairtrade biofuels?

Thinking Up Solutions Is Tough, Even With Two Brains.

Keep reading, this is not a David Willetts fan blog but some ramblings about sport, politics and science, and usually a mish-mash of all three.

The Porsche Fruit Machine

As Rooney's apologies fall on deaf ears and the faceless corporates clamour, like interns when the boss needs their dry-cleaning picking up, to stick another dagger in the back of the zombie that is England's undying rugby world cup experience, John Terry, to the surprise of nobody, looks to tick every box on his rap sheet. To top it all, the spread betters from the sub-continent fix the market with ease; much to the envy of many financial institutions, Porsche's puts apart.

Sports reporters these days, like the youth of Britain, balance on the brink of Rickets; deprived of their usual outdoor vitamin D rich lifestyles, they are now more accustomed to the interior of court rooms and police stations. That jail acts as a deterrent is often trotted out when those in power look to protect those who vote for them from the feral youth that have inhabited this isle for centuries. Now prison is to act in the same way against would be sports cheats. Whether clan Rooney, Terry, or Tuilagi qualify as one of the 120,000 "very dysfunctional, very troubled" British families the government will mentor, takes one to know one, is unclear. It is, however, certain that Feltham Young Offenders Institution is praying that Mohammad Amir remains within its gates for all of his six month sentence. It might just coincide with the 1st XIs opening cricket fixtures of 2012 and, if he oversteps the line while inside, he may be there for the entire summer.

With the clocks back on GMT and daylight struggling to impart its influence in a stunningly Merkozy selling unbreakable austerity plates to a Greek taverna sort of way, it may be early to start thinking of long summer evenings on the village green powering our lives. Not so the media savvy folk at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and G24 Innovations, based in Cardiff, who chose the ever shortening northern hemisphere days to promote their deeply floored 20 year old solar panels.

Engage two brains! Oh...

Good British science, and there is plenty of it about, is part of Willetts's plan for future econimic growth. Didn't need both brains for that one. However, his inter-cranial neurons will need to be firing if the Ponzi scheme of science careers is to be unwound before the requests for redemptions come rolling in. With the generally left leaning academic community currently placated by having their funding kept intact at the last spending review, let's hope they don't get any ideas from The Daily Mash who note: "When the right is in power, the left goes on strike. When the left is in power the right keeps turning up for work." Concentrating on coordinating left and right may well prevent the masses marching on Westminster and help Messrs Tuilagi and Terry keep reports about them to the back pages.

Should you have little else to do, you can follow me on Twitter @jbartosi and listen to Science and Universities Minister David Willetts deliver the 2011 Roberts lecture on Science Policy here.