Monthly Archives: February 2014

Game design for scientific participation

Leave a reply

Thanks to David Bruggeman for his Feb. 13, 2014 post (on the Pasco Phronesis blog) about a US National Science Foundation (NSF) webinar on designing scientific games and where he has embedded a video of a mobile game from Cancer Research UK. (His blog is well worth checking out for the information on science entertainment, as well as, his main topic, science policy.)

The upcoming NSF webinar is titled, From World of Warcraft to Fold.it and Beyond; The Opportunities & Challenges to Designing Games for Scientific Participation and will be held on Friday, Feb. 21, 2014 (1 hr.),

February 21, 2014 12:00 PM  to  February 21, 2014 1:00 PM
NSF Room 110

Designing Disruptive Learning Technologies Webinar Series

Kurt Squire – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Abstract:

Digital games like World of Warcraft and Fold.it are compelling examples of how technology can engage thousands of learners in solving complex problems — even in making scientific discoveries. But what does it take to foster learning in the midst of such enthusiastic engagement? In this presentation, I will draw from a decade of research in how people learn and interact in online gaming environments and present findings from our work designing online environments for science learning. I will present pedagogical models for integrating gaming technologies into classrooms and research exploring how these games work for learning. Both the potential of games for science learning and challenges for leveraging gaming technologies at scale will be presented, as well as implications for further research on how people learn.

Bio:

Kurt Squire is a Romnes Professor in Digital Media in Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Director of the Games+Learning+Society Theme at the Wisconsin Institute for Discovery. Squire is also a co-founder and Vice President of Research for the Learning Games Network, a non-profit network expanding the role of games and learning. Squire is an internationally recognized leader in digital media in technology and has delivered dozens of invited addresses across Europe, Asia, and North America and written over 75 scholarly articles on digital media and education. Squire’s research investigates the potential of digital game-based technologies for learning, and has resulted in several software projects including ARIS, Virulent, Citizen Science, among others. Squire is the recipient of an NSF CAREER grant, and grants from the NSF, Gates Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, AMD Foundation, Microsoft, Data Recognition Corporation and others. Squire was also a co-founder of Joystick101.org, and for several years wrote a column with Henry Jenkins for Computer Games magazine.

Webinar

The Webinar will be held from 12:00pm to 1:00pm Eastern Time on Friday, Feburary 21, 2014.

Please register at https://nsf.webex.com/nsf/j.php?ED=239652927&RG=1&UID=0&RT=MiMxMQ%3D%3D  by 11:59pm Eastern Time on Thursday, February 20, 2014.

After your registration is accepted, you will receive an email with a URL to join the meeting. Please be sure to join a few minutes before the start of the webinar. This system does not establish a voice connection on your computer; instead, your acceptance message will have a toll-free phone number that you will be prompted to call after joining. In the event the number of requests exceeds the capacity, some requests may have to be denied.

This event is part of Webinars/Webcasts.

Meeting Type
Webcast

Contacts
Natalie Harr, (703) 292-8930, nharr@nsf.gov

Good luck with your registration.  This webinar does seem to be open internationally although I imagine priority will be given to registrants located in the US.

ARPICO offers scholarship for Canadian grad. students and young postdocs at Italy’s School on Neutron Scattering (SoNS)

Leave a reply

ARPICO (Society of Italian Researchers and Professionals in Western Canada) is offering a scholarship (deadline Mar. 31, 2014) for Canadian students according to its Feb. 14, 2014 announcement,

ARPICO is pleased to announce the 2014 ARPICO Scholarship to attend the 12th School on Neutron Scattering Francesco Paolo Ricci:

http://www.sonsfpricci.org/
Erice (Italy) from 30 April to 9 May 2014

ARPICO invites graduate students and post-doctoral researchers
at Canadian Universities and Laboratories to apply.

How to apply:

* Graduate students and post-doctoral researchers at Canadian
Universities/Laboratories are eligible
* Please, send a cover letter and your CV to info@arpico.ca (.pdf format)

Deadline for application: March 31st, 2014

Scholarship covers for return-airfare from home institution to Italy,
school registration fee, lodging, and meals. The winner will be notified
by email by April 3rd, 2014.

For more information, please contact us at info@arpico.org

For anyone curious about Erice’s location in Italy, that would be the west coast of Sicily,

Erice (Vagabonda, May 2008) [downloaded from http://www.tripadvisor.ca/Tourism-g194757-Erice_Province_of_Trapani_Sicily-Vacations.html#17970260]

Erice (Vagabonda, May 2008) [downloaded from http://www.tripadvisor.ca/Tourism-g194757-Erice_Province_of_Trapani_Sicily-Vacations.html#17970260]

Good luck!

Advice on marketing nano from a process engineering perspective

Leave a reply

Robert Ferris, PhD, is writing a series of posts about the ‘Process Engineering of Nanotechnology’ on the Emerson Process Experts blog. Before getting to his marketing post, I’m going to briefly discuss his Jan. 4, 2014 posting (the first in this business-oriented series) which offers a good primer on the topic of nanotechnology although I do have a proviso, Ferris’ posts should be read with some caution,

I contribute [sic]  the knowledge gap to the fact that most of the writing out there is written by science-brains and first-adopters. Previous authors focus on the technology and potentials of bench-top scale innovation. This is great for the fellow science-brain but useless to the general population. I can say this because I am one of those science-brains.

The unfortunate truth is that most people do not understand nanotechnology nor care about the science behind it. They only care if the new product is better than the last. Nanotechnology is not a value proposition. So, the articles written do not focus on what the general population cares about. Instead, people are confused by nanotechnology and as a result are unsure of how it can be used.

I think Ferris means ‘attribute’ rather than ‘contribute’ and I infer from the evidence provided by the error that he (in common with me) does not have a copy editor. BTW, my worst was finding three errors in one of my sentences (sigh) weeks after after I’d published. At any rate, I’m suggesting caution not due to this error but to passages such as this (Note: Links have been removed),

Nanotechnology is not new; in fact, it was used as far back as the 16th century in stain glass windows. Also, nanotechnology is already being used in products today, ranging from consumer goods to food processing. Don’t be surprised if you didn’t know, a lot of companies do not publicize the fact that they use nanotechnology.

Strictly speaking the first sentence is problematic since Ferris is describing ‘accidental’ nanotechnology. The artisans weren’t purposefully creating gold nanoparticles to get that particular shade of red in the glass as opposed to what we’re doing today and I think that’s a significant difference. (Dexter Johnson on his Nanoclast blog for the IEEE [Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers] has been very clear that these previous forays (Damascus steel, the Lycurgus Cup) cannot be described as nanotechnology since they were unintended.) As for the rest of the excerpt, it’s all quite true.

Ferris’ Feb. 11, 2014 post tackles marketing,

… While companies and products can miss growth targets for any number of reasons, one of the more common failures for nanotechnology-enabled products is improper marketing. Most would agree that marketing is as much art as science but marketing of nanotechnology-enabled products can be particularly tricky.

True again and he’s about to focus on one aspect of marketing,

Companies that develop nanotechnology-enabled products tend to fall into two camps—those that use nanotechnology as a differentiator in their marketing materials and those that do not. In the 5 P’s of marketing (Product, Place, Price, Promotion, and People), we are contrasting how each company approaches product marketing.

Product marketing focuses on communicating how that product meets a customer need. To do this, the marketing material must differentiate from other potential solutions. The question is, does nanotechnology serves as a differentiating value proposition for the customer?

As I understand it, communicating about the product and value propositions would fall under Promotion while decisions about what features to offer, physical design elements, etc. would fall under Product. Still, Ferris goes on to make some good points with his example of selling a nano-manufactured valve,

A local salesperson calls you up to see what you think. As a customer, you ask a simple question, “Why should we buy this new valve over the one we have been using for years?” What will you think if the sales-person answers, “Because it is based on nanotechnology!”? Answering this way does not address your pain points or satisfy your concerns over the risks of purchasing a new product.

My main difficulty with Ferris’ marketing post is a lack of clarity. He never distinguishes between business-to-business (B2B) marketing and business to consumer (B2C) marketing. There are differences, for example, consumers may not have the scientific or technical training to understand the more involved aspects of the product but a business may have someone on staff who can and could respond negatively to a lack of technical/scientific information.

I agree with Ferris on many points but I do feel he might address the issue of selling technology. He uses L’Oréal as an example of a company selling nanotechnology-enabled products  which they do but their product is beauty. The company’s  nanotechnology-enabled products are simply a means of doing that. By contrast a company like IBM sells technology and a component or product that’s nanotechnology-enabled may require a little or a lot of education depending on the component/product and the customer.

For anyone who’s interested in marketing nanotechnology-enabled and products based on other emerging technologies, I recommend reading Geoffrey A. Moore’s book, Crossing the Chasm. His examples are dated as this written about the ‘computer revolution’ but I think the basis principles still hold. As for Ferris’ postings, there’s good information but you may want to check out other sources and I recommend Dexter Johnson’s Nanoclast blog and Cientifica, an emerging technologies consultancy. (Dexter works for Cientifica, in addition to writing for the IEEE, but most of the publications on that site are by Tim Harper). Oh, and you can check here too, although the business side of things is not my main focus, I still manage to write the odd piece about marketing (promotion usually).

For the smell of it

Leave a reply

Having had a tussle with a fellow student some years ago about what constituted multimedia, I wanted to discuss smell as a possible means of communication and he adamantly disagreed (he won),  these  two items that feature the sense of smell  are of particular interest, especially (tongue firmly in cheek) as one of these items may indicate I was* ahead of my time.

The first is about about a phone-like device that sends scent (from a Feb. 11, 2014 news item on ScienceDaily),

A Paris laboratory under the direction of David Edwards, Michigan Technological University alumnus, has created the oPhone, which will allow odors — oNotes — to be sent, via Bluetooth and smartphone attachments, to oPhones across the state, country or ocean, where the recipient can enjoy American Beauties or any other variety of rose.

It can be sent via email, tweet, or text.

Edwards says the idea started with student designers in his class at Harvard, where he is a professor.

“We invite young students to bring their design dreams,” he says. “We have a different theme each year, and that year it was virtual worlds.”

The all-female team came up with virtual aromas, and he brought two of the students to Paris to work on the project. Normally, he says, there’s a clear end in sight, but with their project no one had a clue who was going to pay for the research or if there was even a market.

A Feb. 11, 2014 Michigan Technological University news release by Dennis Walikainen, which originated the news item, provides more details about the project development and goals,

“We create unique aromatic profiles,” says Blake Armstrong, director of business communications at Vapor Communications, an organization operating out of Le Laboratorie (Le Lab) in Paris. “We put that into the oChip that faithfully renders that smell.”

Edwards said that the initial four chips that will come with the first oPhones can be combined into thousands different odors—produced for 20 to 30 seconds—creating what he calls “an evolution of odor.”

The secret is in accurate scent reproduction, locked in those chips plugged into the devices. Odors are first captured in wax after they are perfected using “The Nose”– an aroma expert at Le Lab, Marlène Staiger — who deconstructs the scents.

For example, with coffee, “the most universally recognized aroma,” she replaces words like “citrus” or “berry” with actual scents that will be created by ordering molecules and combining them in different percentages.

In fact, Le Lab is working with Café Coutume, the premier coffee shop in Paris, housing baristas in their building and using oPhones to create full sensory experiences.

“Imagine you are online and want to know what a particular brand of coffee would smell like,” Edwards says. “Or, you are in an actual long line waiting to order. You just tap on the oNote and get the experience.”

The result for Coutume, and all oPhone recipients, is a pure cloud of scent close to the device. Perhaps six inches in diameter, it is released and then disappears, retaining its personal and subtle aura.

And there other sectors that could benefit, Edwards says.

“Fragrance houses, of course, culinary, travel, but also healthcare.”

He cites an example at an exhibition last fall in London when someone with brain damage came forward. He had lost memory, and with it his sense of taste and smell.  The oPhone can help bring that memory back, Edwards says.

“We think there could be help for Alzheimer’s patients, related to the decline and loss of memory and olfactory sensation,” he says.

There is an image accompanying the news release which I believe are variations of the oPhone device,

Sending scents is closer than you think. [downloaded from http://www.mtu.edu/news/stories/2014/february/story102876.html]

Sending scents is closer than you think. [downloaded from http://www.mtu.edu/news/stories/2014/february/story102876.html]

You can find David Edwards’ Paris lab, Le Laboratoire (Le Lab), ici. From Le Lab’s homepage,

Opened since 2007, Le Laboratoire is a contemporary art and design center in central Paris, where artists and designers experiment at frontiers of science. Exhibition of works-in-progress from these experiments are frequently first steps toward larger scale cultural humanitarian and commercial works of art and design.

 

Le Laboratoire was founded in 2007 by David Edwards as the core-cultural lab of the international network, Artscience Labs.

Le Lab also offers a Mar. ?, 2013 news release describing the project then known as The Olfactive Project Or, The Third Dimension Global Communication (English language version ou en français).

The second item is concerned with some research from l’Université de Montréal as a Feb. 11, 2014 news item on ScienceDaily notes,

According to Simona Manescu and Johannes Frasnelli of the University of Montreal’s Department of Psychology, an odour is judged differently depending on whether it is accompanied by a positive or negative description when it is smelled. When associated with a pleasant label, we enjoy the odour more than when it is presented with a negative label. To put it another way, we also smell with our eyes!

This was demonstrated by researchers in a study recently published in the journal Chemical Senses.

A Feb. 11, 2014 Université de Montréal news release, which originated the news item, offers details about the research methodology and the conclusions,

For their study, they recruited 50 participants who were asked to smell the odours of four odorants (essential oil of pine, geraniol, cumin, as well as parmesan cheese). Each odour (administered through a mask) was randomly presented with a positive or negative label displayed on a computer screen. In this way, pine oil was presented either with the label “Pine Needles” or the label “Old Solvent”; geraniol was presented with the label “Fresh Flowers” or “Cheap Perfume”; cumin was presented with the label “Indian Food” or “Dirty Clothes; and finally, parmesan cheese was presented with the label of either the cheese or dried vomit.

The result was that all participants rated the four odours more positively when they were presented with positive labels than when presented with negative labels. Specifically, participants described the odours as pleasant and edible (even those associated with non-food items) when associated with positive labels. Conversely, the same odours were considered unpleasant and inedible when associated with negative labels – even the food odours. “It shows that odour perception is not objective: it is affected by the cognitive interpretation that occurs when one looks at a label,” says Manescu. “Moreover, this is the first time we have been able to influence the edibility perception of an odour, even though the positive and negative labels accompanying the odours showed non-food words,” adds Frasnelli.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Now You Like Me, Now You Don’t: Impact of Labels on Odor Perception by  Simona Manescu, Johannes Frasnelli, Franco Lepore, and Jelena Djordjevic. Chem. Senses (2013) doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjt066 First published online: December 13, 2013

This paper is behind a paywall.

* Added ‘I was’ to sentence June 18, 2014. (sigh) Maybe I should spend less time with my tongue in cheek and give more time to my grammar.

Nanotips *(the company)* makes your gloves touchscreen-sensitive

Leave a reply

Nanotips is both the name of Tony Yu’s company and of the product. According to a Feb. 13, 2014 news item on Nanowerk, it’s a Kickstarter project, too (Note: Links have been removed),

A Kickstarter project to produce a nanoparticle liquid to transform all gloves into a touchscreen glove is already oversubscribed.

Nanotips is a conductive polyamide liquid solution that can transform your ordinary gloves into touchscreen ones. Formulated using nanotechnology, Nanotips mimics the touch of human skin. It was designed with functionality and durability in mind making it great for all lifestyles.

You can find out more on the Nanotips Kickstarter campaign page or on the Nanotips company website. From the Kickstarter campaign page (where I found more detail than I could on the company website),

NANOTIPS is for everyone. From the cold winter months to the hot summer days, Nanotips is functional in every season.  Military gloves, running gloves, biking gloves, construction gloves, golfing gloves and even the thickest snowboarding and skiing gloves can now all be made touchscreen compatible.

…

With simplicity and functionality in mind, we set out to create the quickest and most effective universal touchscreen upgrade ever. This formula has been created to last in any condition and takes less than 2 minutes to apply.

…

Nanotips BlueFor use on fabrics ONLY. Nanotips Blue is designed specifically for fabrics.  This solution dries to a transparent blue which makes it practically invisible on colored fabrics. This formula soaks into the fabric creating a conductive bridge between your finger and the touchscreen device. Treats up to 15 fingers per bottle depending on material.

Nanotips Black

Nanotips Black is specifically tailored for leathers, rubbers, and other thicker materials. This formula works for all materials, however it may alter the texture of your fabric gloves. This formula can work in two ways. A) It creates a conductive layer on the surface of your glove B) It soaks into the fabric and creates a conductive bridge between the finger and the touchscreen device. Treats up to 30 fingers per bottle depending on material.

There is some technical information on the Kickstarter campaign page but it is very general,

Nanotips Black. Quite a bit of work has been done in the development of this product. Comprised of evenly dispersed ultra-fine conductive nanoparticles, each particle is carefully prepped and made to interlink with one another; this helps to form a conductive grid-like film on the surface of the material. Because your glove undergoes constant flex, abrasion, creasing, and natural elements, our formula allows the materials to remain in grid formation even under extreme conditions. This helps to create an evenly distributed conductive channel on the surface of your glove.

Nanotips Blue. Comprised of evenly dispersed ultra-fine conductive nanoparticles, each particle is carefully prepped and made to interlink with one another.  These particles are suspended in a solution which allows the nanoparticles to remain chained to one another even under extreme physical stressors. When applied to fabrics, Nanotips Blue soaks into the material and effectively creates a conductive chain, bridging the gap between your finger and the touchscreen device. The sacrifice for transparency over conductivity was made for Nanotips Blue which is the reason why this solution only functions for fabrics.

Bottles. Our bottles are made from glass. We chose glass over other materials because it allows the liquid to achieve a longer shelf life as it remains sealed in the bottle. The brush is a Dupont nylon brush. Using the brush method of application means that each individual would be able to precisely apply the solution to the targeted area.

I think the future goal on the campaign page is quite intriguing,

PROSTHETIC HANDS.  During the creation of Nanotips, we had discovered that many prosthetic limbs are unable to interact with capacitive touchscreen devices. Because touchscreen technology is such an integral part of our society, daily interactions for anyone with prosthetic hands becomes a challenge. We would like to expand in this field by testing Nanotips on a variety of prosthetics; our goal is to give them the ability to easily interact with touchscreen devices.

Here’s the company’s Kickstarter video pitch,

Nanotips is an active Kickstarter campaign with 11 days to go (as of Feb. 13, 2014) and it has surpassed its initial campaign goal of $10,500 with supporters having pledged $55,776 CAD to date. It seems redundant to wish the company good luck but I will anyway as they deal with a project of a different scale than they’d originally planned.

Two final notes:  (1) the company is located in Richmond, BC, Canada or, as I’ve taken to saying, it’s a Vancouver area company and (2) there is no mention of any environmental testing.

* Added (the company) to head for grammatical purposes on Feb. 14, 2014 .

Integran’s 2013 SERDP Award and its hockey sticks

Leave a reply

Integran, a company based in Mississauga (sometimes identified as Toronto), Ontario, has received an award for its nanostructured alloy, a replacement for poisonous copper-beryllium, according to a Feb. 13, 2014 news item on Azonano,

Toronto-based Integran Technologies Inc. (Integran) today announced that it has received the 2013 SERDP (Strategic Environmental Research and Defense Program) Project-of-the-Year Award for Weapons Systems and Platforms for the development of a nanostructured alloy for copper-beryllium replacement.

For decades, essential parts in fixed and rotary wing military platforms have been made with copper-beryllium alloys. Beryllium is particularly useful for this purpose because it is both lightweight and strong, a rare combination not found in most other metals. The problem is beryllium is a toxic material that can be harmful to workers who handle it during assembly and repair. Working with beryllium, which requires donning protective gear and taking extensive precautions, is costly and time-consuming.

The Feb. 12, 2014 Integran news release found on MarketWire but oddly not on the company’s website at this time (Feb. 13, 2014) and which originated the news item, describes the process in general terms,

With support from US DoD’s SERDP program and Industry Canada’s Strategic Aerospace and Defense Initiative (SADI) program, Integran developed and validated an electroforming process that produces a nanostructured alloy that matches the desirable properties of copper-beryllium, particularly for use as high load bushings. This pulsed electroplating process goes beyond merely coating a metal object. Rather, near-net-shape components are created that require little to no machining to achieve final dimensions, resulting in very little material waste. The work also showed this innovative process can be used successfully for large metal sheets and high conductivity wires, both of which are used in multiple military applications.

Integran’s Aerospace and Defense R&D Unit Manager Brandon Bouwhuis states, “The validation testing performed in this project demonstrates that these nanostructured alloys can meet or exceed the performance of copper beryllium in many applications, and could result in substantial cost savings for the US DoD and Canadian Military through the decreased use of toxic substances.”

There is no mention in this news release as to whether Integran’s replacement alloy might itself be poisonous or toxic in some form.

I checked the Integran website and found that it lists one product, Nanovate. I was not able to find any information about environmental testing but there is this on the company’s  Why Nanovate™? webpage (Note: Links have been removed),

Integran is a world leader in development and manufacturing of revolutionary electrodeposited (plated) nanocrystalline “Nanovate™” metals. Our nanotechnology enabled metals take advantage of the fine crystalline grain structure to achieve superior performance at reduced weight vs conventional material solutions. Our technology platform consists primarily of Nickel, Iron, Cobalt and Copper alloys that we use to create high performance parts that are:

  • Lighter, stronger, harder and cheaper than Aluminum
  • Corrosion and wear resistant
  • Shielded against low frequency magnetic interference
  • Efficiently absorb energy and noise

In addition to manufacturing products, we also provide services such as:

  • Plating on plastics, including polymers like polyamides (Nylon), PEEK and ABS

I have previously posted about Integran and its alloy many times including this April 16, 2012 posting referencing a Canadian government investment in the company’s technology.

As I was browsing the Integran website I found this on the company’s homepage,

[downloaded from http://www.integran.com/default.aspx]

[downloaded from http://www.integran.com/default.aspx]

The quintessential Canadian enterpreneur’s dream, creating an ‘unbreakable’ hockey stick that never gets ‘tired’. According to a Nov. 7, 2013 posting on the Integran News Blog, the hockey stick was a Kickstarter project,

Congratulations to our partners, Colt Hockey, for meeting and exceeding their goal on Kickstarter to develop a higher performance and more durable composite hockey stick with PowerMetal Technologies.  The project exceeded expectations with over $100,000 raised from almost 500 supporters.

…

This news item seemed particularly à propos during the 2014 Olympics. Good luck to the Canadian women’s and men’s teams!

3D television is resurrected by way of a nanocomposite

Leave a reply

A Feb. 10, 2014 University of Central Florida news release by Barbara Abney (also on EurekAlert) tells the tale of a researcher working on the development of 3D images on television,

Gone are the goofy glasses required of existing sets. Instead, assistant professor Jayan Thomas is working on creating the materials necessary to create a 3-D image that could be seen from 360 degrees with no extra equipment.

“The TV screen should be like a table top,” Thomas said. “People would sit around and watch the TV from all angles like sitting around a table. Therefore, the images should be like real-world objects. If you watch a football game on this 3-D TV, you would feel like it is happening right in front of you. A holographic 3-D TV is a feasible direction to accomplish this without the need of glasses.”

His work is so far along that the National Science Foundation has given him a $400,000 grant over five years to develop the materials needed to produce display screens.

Here’s an image of Thomas sitting mimicking the experience of his 3D television at a tabletop,

UCF Researcher Jaden Thomas uses nantechnology to bring 3-D television back to life.

UCF [University of Central Florida] Researcher Jaden Thomas uses nantechnology to bring 3-D television back to life.

Thomas’ work comes at a very interesting juncture for the industry (from the news release),

When 3-D TVs first came on the market in 2010, there was a lot of hype and the market expected the new sets would take off. Several broadcasters even pledged to create special channels for 3-D programming, such as ESPN and the BBC.

But in the past year, those broadcasters have canceled plans because sales have lagged and the general public hasn’t adopted the sets as hoped. Some say that’s because the television sets are expensive and require bulky equipment and glasses.

Here’s how Thomas’ approach differs, in very general terms (from the news release),

Thomas’ approach would use new plastic composites made with nanotechnology to make the 3-D image recording process multitudes faster than currently possible. This would eliminate the need for glasses.

Thomas and his colleagues have developed the specific plastic composite needed to create the display screens necessary for effectively showing the 3-D images. That work has been published in the journals Nature and Advanced Materials.

There’s more about Dr. Thomas along with listings of his publications on his NanoScience Technology Center faculty page.

ETA Feb. 14, 2014: You may want to read Dexter Johnson’s Feb. 14, 2014 posting on his Nanoclast blog (on the IEEE [Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers]) concerning 3D televisions and Thomas’ work (Note: A link has been removed),

 At this year’s Consumer Electronics Show (CES), it became clear that the much-ballyhooed age of 3-D TV was coming to a quiet and uncelebrated end. One of the suggested causes of its demise was the cost of the 3D glasses. If you wanted to invite a group over to watch the big sporting event, you had better have a lot of extra pairs on hand, which might cost you a small fortune.

Eliminating the glasses from the experience has been proposed from the first moment 3-D TVs were introduced to the marketplace.

Dexter goes on to provide technical context for Thomas’ work as he expands on his theme.

Two jobs (paid internships) at Sense about Science

Leave a reply

I got this notice today (Feb.  12, 2014) and given the organization’s time frame (deadline: Feb. 20, 2014) for these competitions, I advise haste, From the Sense about 2014 announcement,

We want to recruit two people to join us for one year, a person to support campaigns work and a project support officer. If you know any people who would be interested, would you forward them this note?

Campaigns support:
Our main campaigns are AllTrials and Ask for Evidence. Since the Defamation Act 2013, we also continue to collaborate on extending libel reform to other jurisdictions. The campaigns team coordinates Sense About Science’s daily responsive work. This supporting role will include experience across all the work of the campaigns team but will be predominantly supporting the AllTrials campaign. It includes developing the campaign websites; monitoring social media, publicity and policy issues related to the campaigns; and organising meetings, supporter communications and policy activities. Responsive work will include being the first line of response to phone and email enquiries, initiating responses to new issues and linking our body of work to new discussions.

Project support:
The project team works with researchers and the public to address recurring themes, improve the communication of evidence and draw out underlying assumptions on difficult issues. This role will support the projects team and will involve research, writing, coordinating meetings with many different kinds of people, and dissemination. Upcoming projects include allergies, nuclear energy and forensic genetics. We also coordinate Sense About Science events and help other organisations, such as running workshops to develop ways to help people make sense of evidence. Our events programme includes the Peer Review Matters and Voice of Young Science (VoYS) media workshops, our annual lecture and reception.

At Sense About Science, no two days are the same and the post holders are likely to be involved in plenty of other activities going on in the busy office: representing Sense About Science at meetings, giving talks and writing blogs and articles. These two opportunities are ideal for graduates with a research PhD but would suit very different personalities and interests. The posts were initially conceived as paid internships, reflecting the funds available (£15k pa for each). However, the opportunities for extensive experience, taking a lead and responsibility (something we encourage at all levels) will leave the post holders well equipped for an entry into a good level post in related areas. We will also be reviewing the possibility of longer term posts as our organisation develops over 2014. They are therefore being offered as a fixed term employment. We can be a little bit flexible with hours, if the person is finishing writing up their thesis for example. There will be an interview late February, with a start date ideally in March. We want the people who join us to know about our work already so prior involvement in our activities is a bonus and familiarity with our website and campaigns is essential.

Please send a CV and cover letter to Síle Lane for the campaigns role slane@senseaboutscience.org or Emily Jesper for the project support role ejesper@senseaboutscience.org by 9am Thursday 20th February or give Síle or Emily a call at 020 7490 9590 [someone calling from outside the UK may want to check if adjustments are needed for that telephone number].

I could not find these job postings on the Sense about Science website but if you’re not familiar with the organization and wish to apply, you may want to check the site. I’m guessing that applicants need to be based in the UK but you may want to ask about that as the organization does have a presence in the US according to the website’s International webpage.

Competition for funds (feasibility studies about accelerating commercial applications of graphene in the UK)

Leave a reply

The UK’s Technology Strategy Board and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) have given notice of their funding competition for feasibility studies on commercialising graphene  (registration opens April 7, 2014) according to a Feb. 11, 2014 news item on Nanowerk,

The Technology Strategy Board and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) are investing up to £2.5m in feasibility studies to accelerate commercial applications in the novel material, graphene. It will include related carbon-based, two-dimensional nanotechnologies that have recently emerged from the science base.

This competition will invest in projects that explore the realistic potential of graphene to yield new products that could disrupt markets. We expect them to stimulate development of a robust and competitive supply base to support the nascent graphene-using industry.

Proposals must be collaborative and business-led. We are looking to attract consortia drawn from small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs) and/or large companies.

Universities and other research organisations can be partners in consortia where their high-end academic knowledge and innovation expertise is needed to deliver the project.

The Technology Strategy Board’s competition (Realising the graphene revolution) webpage contains more information such as this,

We expect to fund feasibility studies (mainly pre-industrial research projects) in which a business partner will generally attract up to 65% public funding for their project costs (75% for SMEs). Research organisations can attract funding of up to 100% of their costs.

We expect projects to last up to 12 months and to range in size up to total costs of £200k.

This competition opens on 7 April 2014 and the deadline for receipt of applications is noon on 4 June 2014. A briefing for potential applicants will be held on 24 April 2014. Consortium building events will be run by the Graphene Special Interest Group between 27 February 2014 and 18 March 2014. We strongly advise potential applicants to attend at least one of these events.

There is a deadline for registration (May 28, 2014 noon UK time) and you must register before submitting your proposal.

The Technology Strategy Board offers a competition brief (PDF) and more details on its Realising the graphene revolution webpage.

ETA Feb. 12, 2014 11:15 am PST: I forgot to include this  graphene image from the website which is quite pretty,

[downloaded from https://www.innovateuk.org/competition-display-page/-/asset_publisher/RqEt2AKmEBhi/content/realising-the-graphene-revolution]

[downloaded from https://www.innovateuk.org/competition-display-page/-/asset_publisher/RqEt2AKmEBhi/content/realising-the-graphene-revolution]