EN World scientists...

[LightPhoenix]

I'm a PhD student in Bioengineering, with a BS in biochemistry. Right now my research is in the area of controlling bacterial biofilms via non-antibiotic methods. I also do a little biomaterials work, since that's what my department primarily does.

 

[Psionicist]

I'm a professor of biology (PhD in Neuroscience) at a small liberal arts college now. My work has focused mostly on the theraputic and neuroregenerative use of stem cells to repair the brain and spinal cord, but I also recently started working on a project involving the use of batrachotoxin (made by poison dart frogs) as an anesthetic. I teach quite a few undergrad courses, run my lab supervising and coordinating student research, and I'm working on establishing a neuroscience interdisciplinary department.

Hi Gothmog. Can you recommend a good undergraduate-level text about neuroscience? I don't have much biology or chemistry under my belt, but I'm interested in learning the basics and I know plenty mathematics and computer science. What I'm really looking for is a well written and engaging text about any neuroscience-related subdiscipline (not necessarily computational), to see if it's for me. Thanks.

 

[freyar]

oh and discussion String Theory really should be banned under ENworlds no religion rule

I've been sitting on this comment for a while, trying to decide if I should respond. I just want to point out that string theory is on very solid theoretical (ie, formal) ground and has made a number of contributions to other fields within physics (and mathematics), including theories closely related to those that describe the Standard Model of particle physics. Believing in string theory is no more religious than thinking that it is the best candidate.

String theory has gotten some bad press recently, largely due to a trio of anti-string-theory books. All I'll say about that is that the authors (L. Krauss, L. Smolin, and P. Woit) are not experts on string theory and have not shown much evidence of being up-to-date and in at least one instance appear to have distorted information given them by string theorists. (I can probably dig up some references if I need to.)

This isn't something I take personally, and I hope you don't either. I just think it's part of my job to educate the public, especially when there are people around mis-educating.

 

[Gothmog]

Hi Gothmog. Can you recommend a good undergraduate-level text about neuroscience? I don't have much biology or chemistry under my belt, but I'm interested in learning the basics and I know plenty mathematics and computer science. What I'm really looking for is a well written and engaging text about any neuroscience-related subdiscipline (not necessarily computational), to see if it's for me. Thanks.

Sure Psionicist, there are a couple of good books I could recommend for you:

Foundations of Neuroscience by Fred Delcomyn is probably one of the best and most easily understood Neuro texts out there. Its a little older (1999 I think), but his writing style is very clear, and I've used the text in classes with some non-science majors, and they seemed to pick up on it well.

The bible of Neuro has to be Principles of Neural Science by Kandel, Jessel, and Schwartz, due out for a 5th edition this summer. Its a mammoth book, but it is probably the best overview of neuroscience out there. Warning though, its not for the faint of heart- a basic understanding of cell biology, physiology and anatomy is needed for this 1200 page beast. I still find myself going back to reference it pretty often, even after 10 years as a neuro grad student and now professor.

 

[Achan hiArusa]

I've been sitting on this comment for a while, trying to decide if I should respond. I just want to point out that string theory is on very solid theoretical (ie, formal) ground and has made a number of contributions to other fields within physics (and mathematics), including theories closely related to those that describe the Standard Model of particle physics. Believing in string theory is no more religious than thinking that it is the best candidate.

String theory has gotten some bad press recently, largely due to a trio of anti-string-theory books. All I'll say about that is that the authors (L. Krauss, L. Smolin, and P. Woit) are not experts on string theory and have not shown much evidence of being up-to-date and in at least one instance appear to have distorted information given them by string theorists. (I can probably dig up some references if I need to.)

This isn't something I take personally, and I hope you don't either. I just think it's part of my job to educate the public, especially when there are people around mis-educating.

Could you talk about it? I had a QM professor at the University of Arkansas (Dr. William Harter) who spent a lot of time trashing string theory.

 

[freyar]

Could you talk about it? I had a QM professor at the University of Arkansas (Dr. William Harter) who spent a lot of time trashing string theory.

Well, depends what you want to know about. I also had undergrad profs who weren't too fond of string theory, but they also didn't know much about it (no offense to Dr. Harter, but from his homepage at the UA physics department, it doesn't seem he does, either). In terms of the books, I can point you to a book review of Smolin's and Woit's books from American Scientist magazine, which also appeared as a guest blog post on Cosmic Variance. (Truth in advertising: the person who wrote the book review was by my PhD advisor as well as being a major string theorist.) Anything else you're interested in?

 

[Achan hiArusa]

It would be me basically conning you into a course on string theory. I've had some relativity (derived Gamma from the Galilean transforms) and I have a good solid background on undergraduate QM and I've had EM up to the graduate level, but stopped before I got into relativity. I would like to know where first of all standard QM and Relativity start to go wrong when wedded. I have the math for it, though I do need to take some time and look over relativity again.

 

[Shemeska]

Been out of grad school for a little under two years now, and currently working as a Cell Biologist for a small subsidiary of Invitrogen.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Been out of grad school for a little under two years now, and currently working as a Cell Biologist for a small subsidiary of Invitrogen.

So... hook me up with some Live/Dead stain.

 

[fuindordm]

Ex-cosmologist here. My problem was that I started getting bored with the field about halfway through my second postdoc, when it became clear that the cosmic microwave background would tell us what kind of universe we lived in.

Now I'm working as a freelance science editor (see my sig). If anyone knows a disgruntled postdoc with a talent for writing, feel free to point them my way! I could use some help.