Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Lights, Camera, CELLS!

This article can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/16/science/16animate.html?_r=1&ref=science


            In this world, humans rely on sight. There must be some ancient detail of our brain that gives such great significance to sight in our perception of the world.
            Our reliance on sight is of special importance to members of academia. In education, how many times have you heard (or perhaps said yourself) the phrase “I need to see it!” Well a recent feature article by Erik Olsen of the New York Times discusses one new way in which biology professors are capitalizing on sight’s importance: molecular animation. The title, “Where Cinema and Biology Meet,” really says it all because the accurate, colorful and incredibly detailed animation of cells is truly a testament to science, the digital age, and our American love affair with Hollywood.

            In fact, Olsen uses this love affair to draw readers in, beginning with a reference to Star Wars: his first sentence, “When Robert A. Lue[, one of the pioneers of molecular animation,] considers the “Star Wars” Death Star, his first thought is not of outer space, but inner space.” Olsen includes a nice, brief explanation of what this innovative field is all about in the beginning of the story, after introducing Dr. Lue: “molecular animation [is] a rapidly growing field that seeks to bring the power of cinema to biology. Building on decades of research and mountains of data, scientists and animators are now recreating in vivid detail the complex inner machinery of living cells.” The story is written very well—it flows smoothly in between the work/quotes of scientists and the capabilities, history and future of these technologies; and Olsen even adds bits of humor/imagery here and there to pick up the reader (“If there is a Steven Spielberg of molecular animation, it is probably Drew Berry”). Olsen also does not take sides: he smartly includes some of the concerns and criticisms other scientists (not directly involved with the animation) have about this technology, saying they “are uncertain about the value of these animations for actual scientific research.” But he does end by discussing the one benefit of this animation that no one can argue with: education.

No comments:

Post a Comment