Sure, folks expected a nod for Avatar, but District 9 has also been nominated for Best Picture in this year’s Academy Awards.

Science fiction is rarely honoured, so that alone is worth noting, but this last year we were granted access to lots of sci-fi cinema for a change.

Let’s look at the top 3’s strengths and weaknesses as science fiction cinema.

Avatar
The Good: Fantastic cinema. Amazing effects with decent science components.
The Bad: Story is a re-tell, but it’s one worth re-telling, and it’s re-told well.

District 9
The Good: Gritty and close-to-home feel in an entirely compelling story.
The Bad: Some sketchy science and, for some sci-fi fans, an entirely boring setting… Earth.

Star Trek
The Good: Thoroughly enjoyable from beginning to end.
The Bad: Bad science inside — most importantly — a sorely lacking story.

It appears that their strengths and weaknesses are interrelated.

My vote for best sci-fi picture of 2009 ?  They’re in the correct order, above, in case you couldn’t guess.

Build a solid story, and then add some cinema and sci-fi and your movie will be on the right track.  Even better, start with great science and build it into the story.

Great sci-fi movies need to start with a decent story.  If “normal people” can relate to it too, there’s nothing wrong with that.

The original Star Wars film was a re-tell, too.

I’ve been on this world for 40 years, yet no one has been able to convince me that this needs to happen.

Shedding tears in a movie theater is always acceptable, but in the last decade we were told by world leaders not to dwell on dead soldiers.

In 2010 I pledge to remember who we really are and what we ultimately want from our lives here on Earth.

Canadians used to brag about our leading-edge prowess in digital communications technology.

My, how things sure have changed.

We now live in an era where Nortel is an investor’s punchline, and the Cable and Telco companies provide limited services with high prices and pushy contracts.

Canada has, in fact, become the laughing stock of the developed world.  Of all places, Harvard University has even released a detailed report criticizing Canadian broadband.

Just 50 days from now, the Federal Cabinet will decide on the appeal of the recent CRTC decision which basically granted still more monopoly powers to the cable companies and telcos.

Imagine my luck — I had just discovered that alternatives exist, like the enterprising and customer-focused Teksavvy Solutions, while I sadly also learned about this recent CRTC decision.

If you want Canada to once again become a healthy incubator for communications technology, visit this group’s site now and send a message to your representatives in Ottawa:

http://www.competitivebroadband.com/consumer/

If you don’t think it’s worth your time, well then just wait and see what Bell, Rogers and their ilk will do with rejuvenated monopoly powers.

The most popular story on BBC News right now asks, “What Happened to Global Warming ?”

It’s a great question.  The story explains that the last decade has been pretty chilly:

For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures… And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

People sure seem to have become wrapped-up in the idea that humans have dramatically changed the climate on the Earth (even though 98% of the Earth’s warmth comes from the Sun) and that the end of the world is nigh.

Even scientists who await more information (quite scientific of them, I might add) before fingering human-caused carbon dioxide release for any climate changes have faced castigation.  The common Man in common discussion hasn’t been allowed to even consider that the Earth and Sun have their own climate changes in mind, Humans be damned.

This stand against us being the cause for any climate changes, it turns out, might turn out to be George W. Bush’s greatest insight.

But there is a serious underlying problem.  Bush used this stance to maintain or even increase old fashioned industry.  Polluting industry.

Remember that word ?  Pollution is a very real problem that affects people and the planet.  There is no more scientific study needed: Pollution causes breathing problems in our kids, severely damages the planet, and kills wildlife.

It kills civilized life, too.

Should we be reducing CO2 ?  Of course, when it also involves particulate or other forms of pollution.  We should also remember the Apollo 13 mission, where excessive CO2 in itself became dangerous pollution.

Instead of a focused fight with this invisible gas molecule, we need to be fighting all pollution of our air, land, and water.  We need to fight old technologies that have more efficient, less polluting alternatives.

And we should be moving to non-polluting energy sources that already exist today like solar, geothermal, and wind  All we need is political will and the money that comes with it. 

And if you don’t think nuclear power pollutes, you have a lot of catching-up to do.  We don’t even know what to do with the poisonous waste products (other than make bombs with it), never mind the potential for wide-scale disasters like Three Mile Island, Japan’s let’s-mix-this-in-a-bucket incident, and Chernobyl.

With the real non-polluting technology solutions come a massive reduction in CO2 that will please the Sky is Falling climate crowd.

Talking about the weather is a captivating exercise that seems to have gone terribly awry.  Me, I just want to breathe fresh air, drink clean water, eat fish without mercury and trust the carrots grown in our soil.

It might have just started as a fun idea at Google HQ for a lazy Saturday, but the decision to run a masthead showing a UFO “abducting” one of the letters in Google has set-off heaps of speculation.  Will September 5th now be unversally proclaimed Unexplained Mystery day thanks to Google’s masthead?

Internet folk are quite puzzled as Google usually creates unique mastheads to signify special events, or celebrate anniversaries.

While there are a few interesting ideas floating around — ranging from a Google O/S tie-in to a mass experiment — the truth may not just be “out there” but could be much closer to home.

Google has become the front door to the internet, and the ‘net is a celebration of human knowledge.  Unexplained mysteries and the sharing of knowledge not considered “safe for mainstream consumption” are at the very core of the ‘net, perhaps as close to the heart of the internet as the internet’s back door:

Porn.

Can’t wait for that Google masthead.  There’s so much that can be done with those two o’s.  Let’s hope the visitors bring it back when they’re done probing it.

Have we already passed our window for a revolution in energy production ?  Some folks (like me) sure think we’re dangerously close.  While there is little most of us can do beyond climbing onto our soap boxes, there are people in this world ready to step-up and deliver that revolution before the window is forever sealed — along with humanity’s fate.

Canadian start-up General Fusion (love the name) has dug-up an “old” fusion idea and has generously applied today’s technology to the barriers that, at the time, made the idea unfeasible:

The prototype reactor will be composed of a metal sphere about three meters in diameter containing a liquid mixture of lithium and lead. The liquid is spun to create a vortex inside the sphere that forms a vertical cavity in the middle. At this point, two donut-shaped plasma rings held together by self-generated magnetic fields, called spheromaks, are injected into the cavity from the top and bottom of the sphere and come together to create a target in the center. “Think about it as blowing smoke rings at each other,” says Doug Richardson, chief executive of General Fusion.

On the outside of the metal sphere are 220 pneumatically controlled pistons, each programmed to simultaneously ram the surface of the sphere at 100 meters a second. The force of the pistons sends an acoustic wave through the lead-lithium mixture, and that accelerates into a shock wave as it reaches the plasma, which is made of the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium.

If everything works as planned, the plasma will compress instantly and the isotopes will fuse into helium, releasing a burst of energy-packed neutrons that are captured by the lead-lithium liquid. The rapid heat buildup in the liquid will be extracted through a heat exchanger, with half used to create steam that spins a turbine for power generation, and the rest used to recharge the pistons for the next “shot.”

http://www.technologyreview.com/business/23102/

While it’s not quite the convenient table-top design we’d all love to have in the trunk of our DeLorean, it sure sounds more promising than the almost mad level of effort, technology and brute force that will be needed to get the international ITER reactor running.

As these answers become massive technological undertakings, things seem to be able to go very wrong, perhaps even more often and more wrong than ever before in our technological undertakings.  Here’s hoping that the “simplicity” of multiple acoustic poundings are just what are needed to get nearly limitless energy production online.

Let’s not paint this window shut forever.

Spoiler alert: There’s big red goo that you really shouldn’t know about, and lots more below.  So there, you’ve been warned.

"How dare that whore touch my Spock !"

After seeing this flick in IMAX last night, I knew I felt uneasy (and it wasn’t just the random chunk of dirt being projected onto the huge screen) but I had to sleep on this one.

Many of the original Star Trek episodes were written by the leading science fiction authors of the time, and they dealt with issues like geopolitics, arms race, cultural divide, and, yes, even some science.

This film was brought to you by the guy who brought us that hopelessly lost TV show Lost.

During the movie, all I could see in my mind’s eye was the writers’ meetings.

“We need something that can blow-up a planet.  Trekkies know that Spock planet, right ?  Pon Far, I saw it last night on the old Trek DVDs they forced me to watch.  Let’s blow it up !”

“How about a black hole, boss…”

“Perfect.  Now we need something to make a black hole.”

“Well, scientists have speculated on something called Dark Matter…”

“Dark ?  We’re making a movie here.  Make it red !  A huge red ball of goo.”

Sure, it could be said that the Genesis Device in Wrath of Khan was a similar dramatic device, but at least they properly set that one up for those of us who aren’t so willing to suspend disbelief when watching sci-fi.

Later, my mind reeled back to the conference room when it seemed that Abrams was shoehorning Nimoy and the Scotty character into the kludgey red sludge of a movie:

“Ok how about Spock shoots Kirk onto an ice planet with big ice monsters, and old Spock happens to be in a cave waiting there to help him out.”

“Umm, ok boss…”

“And then they walk down the hill and there’s a Federation station, and they meet Scotty there.  Why is Scotty there…”

“How about he transported an Admiral’s dog into space doing an experiment ?”

“Perfect !  PETA won’t even notice.  Oh and throw an Ewok onto the station.”

“But boss that’s the wrong…”

“Do it !  Ok now onto Earth.  Great job guys, we’re almost done and we’ve left a pile of plot holes for the next movies to deal with, muhahaha !”

Was it worth watching ?  Maybe, I need to see it again in the comfort of my living room to figure that one out (my screen might not be 4 stories high but my projector doesn’t have any dead pixels or flecks of dirt to constantly distract).  But so far I think I’ve just witnessed Star Trek for Dummies meets those 80s albums where kids sang rock songs, and I’m pretty sure neither of those are up my alley.

While tea is rich in healthy compunds it also seems to bring with it a dramatic new risk: cancer. 

Compared with drinking warm or lukewarm tea (65C or less), drinking hot tea (65-69C) was associated with twice the risk of oesophageal cancer, and drinking very hot tea (70C or more) was associated with an eight-fold increased risk.

The speed with which people drank their tea was also important.

Drinking a cup of tea in under two minutes straight after it was poured was associated with a five-fold higher risk of cancer compared with drinking tea four or more minutes after being poured.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7965380.stm

I replaced the old coffee fix from the donut shop with a green tea with milk some time ago.  While I’ve come to really enjoy the mellow taste combination, I actually ordered the tea with milk thinking more about cooling-off the beverage, particularly as coffee shop hot water is wicked hot.

Even with the cold milk added, I take the lid off and put the tea aside for several minutes before I dare touch it.

If a group of coworkers are grabbing a quick break, I’ll take a smaller cup of coffee instead, and still add milk to it, as the tea takes too long to get to a tolerable temperature.

While this research may be suprising to some, it seemed to me that drinking an extremely hot beverage might not be the best idea.

Yet someone recently told me how they enjoyed drinking extremely hot tea.  I now only wish I could remember who it was.

Then again, plenty of people know the risks of cigarette smoking and continue to enjoy their smokes.

Alcohol is also linked to esophageal cancer, so perhaps a dose of harm reduction is enough for now.

The wireless world — and the electric cars that are expected sooner than later — arrive with one major drawback: long charge times.

There have been battery revolutions in the recent past.  While growing up with digital technology, NiMH and Lithium Ion rechargeable batteries began allowing my devices to run for longer than it took to charge them.

First generation rechargeable devices needed to be charged for 8 to 12 hours minimum and ran for minutes, or a couple of hours at most.  New technologies allowed a useful amount of charge to be infused in a reasonable amount of time.  I frequently grab a 10 minute cellphone charge to tide me over for a few hours of standby time with today’s technology.

Now, thanks to research conducted by the vaunted American Institute at MIT, the next generation of Lithium Ion batteries will last for hours and will charge in minutes or even seconds.  By studying the way lithium ions move in the cells, they were able to design a better battery.  A way better battery.

This is the kind of technlogy revolution that arguably comes along once in a lifetime.  Sure, it still relies on complex Lithium Ion cells, which are costly to build, implicated in a few dangerous incidents, and are almost impossible to recycle, but it addresses the exact issue that most people have with electric cars: charge times.

Once deployed, the final remaining “stumbling block” to electric vehicles will unfortunately become a more severe issue.  Hundreds of thousands of cars, once plugged into the grid, will require a good deal more power than is currently being generated.  While some places like Israel are preparing massive solar farms in the otherwise useless desert, places like Ontario, Canada are instead considering more nuclear fission capacity.  In fact, we’re still planning to generate over 50 percent of our power using dirty nuclear fission.

In the face of this possible revolution presented by the new MIT battery, you’d think we’d know better.

There’s a lot of excitement surrounding President Obama.  Will he buck the system and “fight the power” ?  Will he reveal top-secret “zero point” energy generator technology ?  Will he unveil details of cross-galactic meetings-of-the-minds ?

I’d bet that the answer about life on other worlds lies far closer to home.

Today researchers unleashed some dramatic new information about “extremophile” bacteria which live in salt water pockers inside of the Great Lakes.

How these extremophiles came to colonise Antarctica, the deep oceans and aquatic pockets at the bottom of the North American Great Lakes is something of a mystery, say the researchers.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16677-lost-world-of-extremophiles-hides-beneath-great-lakes.html

Either the bacteria on Earth get around far more than we may realize, or the basic lifeforms we already know about are just “what happens” when life can happen.

I am always perplexed when scientists imagine that life on other worlds “must” be completely different.  Perhaps life forms loosley follow a natual pattern — why wouldn’t bacteria evolving in similar environments be similar ?  Seems logical to me.

Of course this kind of thinking disturbs both “evolutionists” and “intelligent designers.”

I’m perfectly comfortable pondering ideas that fall somewhere in between.