Water and cornstarch make a non-Newtonian fluid when mixed: messy but great fun!Sixth grade was a big year for science fair projects in my hometown. I was fascinated by sound and decided to test whether high or low pitches traveled more easily. In principle this could have been a great idea, but I soon discovered that having family members lie down on the living room floor trying to listen while a beige plastic Fisher Price cassette player honked various toots and tweets from the adjacent room just wasn't going to work out as well as I had hoped.

Fast-forward fifteen years to the beginning of the present school year and the Internet has given us all a huge leg-up in finding hands-on ways to learn science. These are demonstrations rather than experiments–an important difference for those entering a fair. Nevertheless, I have included two of my favorites below.

Homemade Oobleck:

Pay tribute to Dr. Seuss's book Bartholomew and the Oobleck by whipping up this mixture that is both solid and liquid at the same time! The simplest version is listed below, but adding a few more bells and whistles can increase the demonstration's awe-factor a bunch.

What to do: You need a mixing bowl, water, and cornstarch. Fill the mixing bowl with about 1 cup of cornstarch, and add roughly an equal volume of water. Mix, incrementally adding cornstarch or water until the mixture attains an appropriate blend of goopiness and firmness. Enjoy the fluid's bizarre properties by squishing and kneading it with your hands.

What's going on? Nearly all fluids have some intrinsic flow resistance. This property, called viscosity, is the reason water flows more easily than honey and at least partly why Usain Bolt can run 100 meters in under 10 seconds while it takes Michael Phelps well over a minute to swim the same distance. Our water/cornstarch mixture has a very special viscosity, making it easy to dip your hand into the mixture slowly, but quite hard to push it in quickly. (Technically, this is an example of a non-Newtonian fluid.) Science class will teach you that almost all matter can be classified into either a solid, liquid, or gas, but this is at least one example where the distinctions blur.

Bernoulli's Hair Dryer:

In 1738 the mathematician Daniel Bernoulli (pronounced Ber-NEW-lee) published a theory of fluids that has influenced the designs of airplane wings and sailboats ever since. Exploit this concept to suspend a balloon or ping-pong ball precariously in mid-air with a hair dryer.

What to do: You need a hair dryer and a small round balloon (or a ping-pong ball, depending on the hair dryer's strength). Turn the hair dryer on, point it upward, and place the balloon in the vertical column of air. If the ceiling is not too high, you should be able to balance the balloon in mid-air this way. Now begin to tilt the hair dryer and watch the balloon stay suspended almost magically.

What's going on? Everyday experience helps us understand why the balloon or ball stays suspended when the hair dryer is pointed vertically: air blowing upward pushes on the balloon, and this in turn counteracts gravity. But why doesn't the balloon fall off to the side when we begin to tilt the hair dryer? The answer lies in Bernoulli's principle, which states that, all other things being equal, a fluid loses pressure as it picks up speed. The air coming out of the hair dryer is moving faster than the room's air so its pressure is lower. This pressure difference helps keep the balloon suspended, even when you tilt the hair dryer.

Water and cornstarch make a non-Newtonian fluid when mixed: messy but great fun!

Kids will want to keep learning science when they see how fun it is.The economy is in the tank and so the cuts at schools begin. And of course one of the first things on the chopping block is anything that can keep kids interested in science.

These programs tend to be more expensive than other programs and so are natural targets for the axe.  For example, at my kids' school, they are cutting 5^th grade science camp.

Kids go off for a 5 day trip to a place out in the woods to study nature.  The kids have a blast and can see that science is more than memorizing phyla or sedimentary, igneous and metamorphic rocks.  Instead they get to explore nature and use books to figure out what they're seeing.

And if history is any guide, there will be a big fall off in field trips to zoos and museums too.  These are more places where kids can see that science is actually a lot of fun.

Some might argue that if money is limited these programs should be cut.  This is true only if we want a workforce that can't do the jobs that are becoming available in our information based economy.

To do well in the future job market, people are going to need a good basic understanding of science and/or engineering.  Think about what an auto mechanic does these days.  Or a nurse or a radiologist.

We need to keep people studying science for their own good.  And frankly, for the good of the U.S. as well.

One of the keys to getting more people to take the science they need is to show them how fun and exciting it is.  We need to let them see that science is actually about studying the mysteries of the natural world and applying them to make that world a better place.

This is what the programs that are going to be cut do.  Without them, schools will continue to turn kids away from science.  And the U.S. will fall behind other countries.

I have no idea what programs should be cut instead and I am sure that other people see higher priorities than science camp.  But I think it is time that public schools recognized that science is as important to a student's future as are the three R's.  Someone needs to come up with a way to make science into an R so we can have the four R's.  Any ideas?

Credit: Deutsches Bundesarchiv (German Federal Archive)
A storm of protest broke out a month or so ago when a fertility clinic in Los Angeles announced it would start helping women choose what their babies might look like. The ruckus was loud enough that the clinic has since backed off on this service.

And this is probably a good thing. I am not sure this is a road we want to go down– it smacks a bit too much of Hitler and a perfect race.

Of course, we've started down this road a ways already. We aren't able to shape anyone's DNA yet. We don't have the technology to do this in any safe or reliable way and frankly, it'll probably be a long time before we can.

But we can take a peek at an embryo's DNA if the egg has been fertilized outside of the body. The process is called preimplantation genetic diagnosis or PGD. Using PGD, scientists can look through a number of embryos' DNA and pick the one(s) the parents want.

Right now we can't scan all of an embryo's DNA. We have to pick and choose what part of the DNA to look at.

For example, PGD is often used to make sure that an embryo has all 46 chromosomes. This service increases the chances for a successful birth for women who are going through repeated miscarriages.

Of course, if we can look at the chromosomes, we can also tell whether the embryo is a boy or a girl. Often this is done to select for girls in families that carry male specific genetic diseases like Duchenne muscular dystrophy. But it is also done for the less life threatening goal of an even number of boys and girls in a family (gender balancing).

PGD can also be used to make sure an embryo did not inherit specific diseases like cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia that might run in the parents' families. These diseases can be screened for by looking for specific DNA differences in certain genes. Which is what this fertility clinic wanted to do for hair, skin and eye color genes.

Let's say a parent wants a redhead with brown eyes. The clinic would screen for certain versions of the HERC2 gene that mean brown eyes and certain versions of the MC1R gene that indicate red hair. When they found an embryo with the right combination of traits, then that embryo would be selected for implantation.

Remember, the people at the clinic can't change the DNA of the embryo. They can only sort through the genes that are already in the pool. So if one parent doesn't carry a red hair version of MC1R, then the parents can't have a red haired child.

Even without this ability, the furor over the fertility clinic's service raises a very important discussion point– where do we draw the line with PGD? And who should draw that line?

Obviously eye color is going too far (or is it?) and preventing an early death from a genetic disease is OK. But is it OK to look at gender for family balancing? This is allowed in the U.S. right now but is not permitted in most other countries.

What about conditions like high cholesterol? Or diseases that kill later in life like Huntington’s disease? Or traits like height, weight, or intelligence? Who gets to decide?

Soon after Barack Obama is sworn in as President next week, he is expected to reverse George Bush’s executive order limiting embryonic stem cell research. Scientists say their research has been stifled by restricting them to existing stem cell lines. The resulting boom in this cutting-edge medical technology will benefit California's research institutes in a big way.

Researchers call stem cell technology a "revolution" in medicine, along the lines of the development of antibiotics in the 1940s, or the manufacturing of insulin and other therapies from recombinant DNA breakthroughs.

But why do stem cells offer such promise?

Robert Klein, chair of the governing board for the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine (the state stem-cell agency created by Proposition 71), says that the recombinant DNA revolution in the 1970s saved the life of his son, and that the potential for saving lives is even greater with stem cell work.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Stem cell technology has only existed for a decade. And despite the Presidential ban on use of new lines of embryonic stem cells, the advances in research have happened quickly. And, according to Deepak Srivastava, Director of Cardiovascular Research at the UCSF Gladstone Institute, the many possible applications of stem cell work will be seen in the short term (over the next few years) and long term (regeneration of damaged organs could happen in 7 to 10 years, he says).

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Dr. Srivastava says, in the case of one of his patients, five-month-old Ryder Ortiz, stem cell technology could have been a godsend. And it might still BE a godsend, he adds. Ryder was born without a left ventricle, the heart chamber that shoots blood into the body. With stem cell technology, it may become possible to grow a new ventricle, and that would’ve been a huge boon to the infant Ryder.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

But here's the thing: Doctors jerry-rigged Ryder's circulatory system, and it's a process that works – until the patient hits his teen years. In many cases, that’s when the re-worked circulatory system fails. Now, if Dr. Srivastava's estimate is correct, and the technology develops in the next 7 to 10 years, that will be just in time for Ryder Ortiz, who will be inching nearer to adolescence at that time.

Listen to the New Life for Embryonic Stem Cell Research radio report online.

'Candy Tuft' by Hannah Polleck, Age 11I am always amazed at the pace of technology and curious how the next generation relates to the ever-increasing pace. I am a gadget girl – CNET is one of my favorite websites and I get a kick out of reading all the reviews and comparing before I settle on buying something. However, I can remember, albeit vaguely, life without internet or cell phones. This is giving away my age but in my 20's I lived in England and cell phones and texting broke there before coming to the states. I remember the plethora of people on cell phones being so foreign to me. It was if this was a new species, communicating in a technological way. That and I thought one out of five people were crazy because they were talking to themselves, or they seemed to be, while briskly walking towards Oxford Circus.

For the next generation, cell phones, computers, and digital cameras are something they have always known. While I had to get to know how to use the technology as it was developed, they have been introduced to it already molded and they are incredibly comfortable using it. This became readily clear to me coordinating the California in Your Backyard Youth Photo Contest. The creators of this contest and subsequent exhibit designers decided to only take digital entries. Thus only digital cameras were used and it was less of a deterrent that I surmised. We were even able to get a donation of digital cameras to a classroom of students in the area. Not only are permanent digital cameras readily accessible, now disposable cameras come with the option for digital images rather than film. For the class, we were able to get children-friendly digital cameras they could re-use.

The work of all those who entered the contest was impressive. The judges were blown away by the level of detail and sharpness of the pictures. Some entries rivaled the quality of professionals shooting with film. Half of the equation of this high quality was of course the digital medium but I believe the other part children's innate ability to immerse themselves in a state of wonder and curiosity. Images were up close and imaginative. There was a great sense of play in the 150 submissions that were received.

Only twenty-five of the images were chosen to be displayed in the Children's Gallery of California Academy of Sciences. Winners were announced on August 1^st, 2008 and they received cash prizes as an award. However, the judges were so impressed by the level of work, the decision was made that all the submissions should have a chance to be displayed. So through the grace of technology, an online gallery was created, housing all the work submitted in the contest. You can browse through the images at www.calacademy.org/gallery.

Working on this project has given me a new sense of wonder about technology. As the museum is being built, multi-media and technology is being incorporated into the space to better relate relevant material to the public. It is an ever-changing medium but one that can bring up to the minute data. I am very curious how the next generation will take this information and technology and run with it and what they will create for future generations.

The camera has long been an invaluable tool of field researchers. For example, the initial identification of a new mammal species was initiated by a camera trap set up by Francesco Rovero of the Trento Museum of Natural Sciences in the Ndundulu Forest in Tanzania's Udzungwa Mountains. Both Francesco Rovero and Galen Rathbun of the California Academy of Sciences followed this photographic proof toward the discovery of a new species of Giant Elephant Shrew – the grey-faced Sengi. Photographs allow researchers to view their surroundings in a more intimate way and extrapolate meaningful data. It can even lead to incredible discoveries.

The California Academy of Sciences is asking youth to get behind the camera to find discoveries in their backyard. On April 15, 2008, the Academy launched a photo contest for youth between the ages of 8 & 12 – "Through the Lens: California in your backyard". Future photographers, researchers and scientists are right in our own backyard and the Academy is curious about what they are seeing in their surroundings. This contest will give youth a chance to have a researcher's eye – to "get up close" and document what they observe.

The photographers with the "best eye" will have their work hung in a museum. The work of winning photographers will be exhibited as part of the Children's Gallery at the Grand Re-opening of the California Academy of Sciences on September 27, 2008 and throughout the inaugural year. Winning photographers will also be awarded cash prizes.

It is up to the photographer how to convey the theme of this contest – "California in your backyard" and the Academy's mission – to explore, explain and protect the natural world. All photographers entering the contest are encouraged to have lots of fun and be as creative as possible.

The deadline to submit photographs is May 26, 2008. Contest rules and submission instructions can be found at www.calacademy.org/contest. Aspiring and curious youth photographers are encouraged to submit work. It might be the catalyst to another great discovery!

Cat Aboudara is the Special Projects Manager at California Academy of Sciences and works in the public programs division. The Academy is a wonderful fit for her because of her curiosity about the natural world and her experience in working with native California wildlife.

Many people spend their holiday seasons inside shopping malls. More and more, kids, in particular, are passing up the opportunity to play outdoors during the rest of the year too. The trend could be contributing to serious health risks such as obesity. And so a movement of parents, teachers and lawmakers is trying to get young people back into nature.

You may listen to the "Nature Deficit" radio report online, as well as find additional links and resources. Also see Photos from the kids' "Camping at the Presidio" trip on flickr.com.

Gabriela Quirós is a Segment Producer for KQED-TV, and is the producer for this radio report.

latitude: 37.797, longitude: -121.638157