A Chinese patient has suffered an irreparable damage to his nose caused by an infection after a car accident, so the doctors decided to grow him a new one... on his forehead:
Tissue expanders were placed under the skin and then cut to resemble a nose. According to local media, doctors expect to implant the new nose soon.
Dr. Patrick Byrne, the director of Facial, Plastic and Reconstruction Surgery at Johns Hopkins Medical Center, said forehead skin is used to help reform noses because it is the closest match to skin on the nose. However, usually the nose is reformed during surgery instead of on a patient’s forehead.
After going beyond the Ewww factor, it's interesting to note how the practice of using forehead tissue for rhino-plastic procedures, is much more ancient than most people would realize. As can be seen on this article, the art of nasal reconstructions known today as the 'Indian method', was practice by physicians since 1000. B.C.
Illustration from the celebrated 1794 “Letter to Editor” responsible for the western spread of the “Indian Method” for total nasal reconstruction. (From B. L.: Letter to Editor. Gentlemans Magazine, October, 891, 1794.)
Nothing new under the sun... or our nostrils.
"The Impact of Indian Methods for Total Nasal Reconstruction," by Larry S. Nichter, M.D., Raymond F. Morgan, M.D., and Mark A. Nichter, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Put a pillow on the floor for your jaw and feast your eyes on this 1.3 billion pixel panorama of the
Barsoom Martian surface. Taken by NASA's Mars rover Curiosity, you can zoom in on Mount Sharp on the horizon, or pan around in a full circle.
Does that vista look familiar? You might recall the 360-degree interactive panorama that was released last year. Unfortunately, there are no Martian rats or princesses of Helium to be seen.
Mars Panorama - Curiosity rover: Martian solar day 2 in Out of this World
And if you took my advice and used a cushion before gazing upon this jaw-dropping image, have a look for lost change when you put the cashion back on your couch -- we're still rattling the tin cup here at the Grail. We especially want to hear your ideas and input for the site's future; with your help, TDG can still be around when the first human lands on the red planet.
Eat your heart out Harry Potter: who needs CGI, when you can fight an opponent with *real* streams of lightning issuing from your hands.
And I for one welcome our new lightning-god overlords...
A downward lightning negative ground flash captured at 7,207 images per second. A negative stepped leader emerges from the cloud and connects with the ground forming a return stroke.
Or, in summary: Wow.
Here's an epic Rube Goldberg machine, designed to turn the page of the newspaper by taking a sip of coffee (via destroyed laptops and heated hamsters)...
You can read more about the creator, Joseph Hersher, and his obsession, at the New York Times.
How to horrify any person worried about the imminent rise of the machines: take one car seat with 5-point racing harness, attach to robot arm. Strap yourself in, and mind your head:
Now imagine the video if Skynet was self-aware...
What happens when a Boy Scout decides to get his "Atomic Energy" badge? Check out the story of David Hahn, the 'Radioactive Boy Scout', who in 1994 attempted to build a fast breeder nuclear reactor in his backyard shed in in Detroit.
As a postscript, in 2007 - four years after this documentary went to air - Hahn was charged with stealing smoke detectors, most likely to use as a source of radioactive materials for further experiments. His mug shot at that time showed his face pock-marked with open sores, probably caused by exposure to radiation.
Sure, he seems bat-poop crazy, but you can't argue with that can-do attitude...
Britain's Astronomer Royal Sir Martin Rees has been announced as the recipient of the 2011 Templeton Prize, an award that "honors a living person who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension, whether through insight, discovery, or practical works". The £1 million prize is the largest in science, and has often been the subject of scathing criticism by anti-religion campaigners and scientists.
The selection seems an odd one - Rees has, on a number of occasions, made clear that he is not religious, and that he doesn't see a place for dialogue between science and religion as they cover fundamentally different areas of life. Nevertheless, the Astronomer Royal is certainly not anti-religion - he has in the past been described by Richard Dawkins as a "compliant little quisling" for his moderate views on the subject, and one would suspect this award won't endear himself further to the "militant atheists" - and has a cosmological viewpoint that leads him to view with suspicion any person who believes "they've got anything more than an incomplete and metaphorical understanding of any deep aspect of reality".
According to the Templeton Prize website...
Martin J. Rees, a theoretical astrophysicist whose profound insights on the cosmos have provoked vital questions that speak to humanity’s highest hopes and worst fears, has won the 2011 Templeton Prize.
Rees, Master of Trinity College, one of Cambridge University’s top academic posts, and former president of the Royal Society, the highest leadership position within British science, has spent decades investigating the implications of the big bang, the nature of black holes, events during the so-called ‘dark age’ of the early universe, and the mysterious explosions from galaxy centers known as gamma ray bursters.
In turn, the “big questions” he raises – such as “How large is physical reality?” – are reshaping crucial philosophical and theological considerations that strike at the core of life, fostering the spiritual progress that the Templeton Prize has long sought to recognize.
This Guardian interview with Rees regarding the Templeton Prize hammers on the point about science vs religion, but Rees steadfastly refuses to become involved ("I try to avoid getting into these science and religion debates") - making the interview a rather awkward affair, until he opens up more when the topic turns to astronomy and cosmology. But there are a few pearls in there nevertheless, such as this quick riposte:
I think just as religion is separate from science, so is ethics separate from science. So is aesthetics separate from science. And so are many other things. There are lots of important things that are separate from science.
Personally I've always found Rees' thoughts to be cogent and thoughtful - and, coincidentally (or was it...?!), I had turned to him for my "quote of the day" for my news briefs last Monday and the Monday before.
Update: Quelle surprise! P.Z. Myers calls Martin Rees a mediocre "slice of soggy toast". Also, Richard Dawkins says it won't look very good on Rees's C.V., and Professor Sir Harry Kroto says accepting one million pounds will no doubt be "very bad for Martin", and he should donate it to the British Humanist Association. Meanwhile, Jerry Coyne labeled it a travesty, saying it continued the Templeton Foundation's "serious corruption of science". So there.
You might also like...
From the 'things that make you go hmmmm" department: behold the sand-grain house built by Difflugia coronata, a single-celled amoeba with no nervous system:
How does this single-celled creature build such an elegant house? Well, we don't really know. The only information we have at the moment is a description of what we can observe. An individual Difflugia flows around, carrying its case with it. While doing this, it not only engulfs food particles but also tiny sand grains that accumulate inside the amoeba as a large ball. When the time to reproduce arrives, the nucleus of the amoeba replicates its DNA to create two complete nuclei. The cytoplasm (the body material) then begins to divide, one nucleus going into each half, to form two independent organisms. One of these will inherit the existing house, but the other takes the ball of stones in its cytoplasm. As the two organisms are created, these stones move to the surface and arrange themselves as a new house.
That last sentence may sound pretty unsatisfactory. It is like a magic trick that leaves you wanting to know how it was done rather than simply enjoying the moment, but we simply don't have the information.
Funny thing is, I'm sure both IDers and Darwinists would see this organism as being supportive of their worldview.
I love these things...there's something about them that I relate to the "self-transforming" aspects of another strange space. Watch as a four-dimensional object cuts through our limited three-dimensional perception:
Admit it. You can’t take your eyes off this object. This is a tesseract and as such is a 4 dimensional shape. Wait, though. We only live in three dimensions, don’t we? So although this object is beautiful, hypnotising almost – what on earth is it and what is it doing here, confounding our lovely three dimensions with its impertinent fourth? Strictly speaking, what you can see above is a two dimensional projection of a three dimensional simulation of a four dimensional tesseract, that’s what
...Think of the space with which you are familiar. Put simply; think of the ways in which you can move. There is left to right, forwards and backwards. Finally there is up and down. Three ways, three dimensions. You can pinpoint your location by working out your coordinates in those three directions.
...When you go to the fourth dimension (cue Twilight Zone music) you have another direction. That direction is (wait for it) at right angles to each and every one of the three original directions. If your head just exploded, don’t worry. That is quite a normal reaction. Just take it from me that the math works.
Tesseract 101 at Kuriositas.
Previously on TDG: