Academics Andre's Research Biocuriosities Books Graduate School History of Science Hot off the Press Igor's Research Interdisciplinarity Molecule of the Month Open Access Philip's Research Philosophy of Science Physics Physicsworld.com
Backreaction Ceclia's Blog at PHD Comics Cocktail Party Physics Cosmic Variance The Daily Transcript Easternblot Everyday Scientist The Evilutionary Biologist Freelancing Science The Futile Cycle Good Math, Bad Math iMechanica in singulo Incoherently Scattered Ponderings Juniorprof Klara Stefflova Life of a Lab Rat The Loom Metadatta Mixed States Morning Coffee Physics Not Even Wrong Notes from the biomass Notional Slurry OpenScience Project Pharyngula PLoS Blog Ponderings of a fool Recombinants The Sandwalk SciAm Observations ScienceBlogs Scientific Clearing House Shtetl-Optimized Three-toed Sloth Uncertain Principles What's New by Bob Park
Hooray! Jorge Cham of PHD Comics fame is coming to Toronto to give a lecture in the Faculty of Medicine!
Wait, what’s that? It costs $10 to see Jorge Cham’s talk? The same Jorge Cham who has become grad-school famous for joking about the plight of graduate students, most of whom are pretty short on spare cash?
And his talk is in the Faculty of Medicine, a faculty known far and wide as being fairly flush with money?
You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t rush to buy a ticket.
Comment [2]
Jorge Cham started writing Piled Higher and Deeper as a grad student at Stanford and kept it up through his postdoc at Caltech. Finally though, in 2005 he decided to leave academia and pursue his career as a cartoonist and speaker full time. Needless to say, Phil and I are fans of his work and it’s great to see that he’s been so successful. Science has an extensive profile of Cham this week in the News Focus section. It’s also posted on Science Careers so maybe that copy is more likely to be available without a subscription.
Checking the PHD site I was also happy to see that he recently made it to our Alma Mater in the far east: Memorial University! That’s great to see. Newfoundland is a pretty unique place so I hope he got the chance to have a look around. Even better if it makes it into a “tales from the road” comic.
Comment [1]
The first SciBarCamp is going on this weekend at Hart House at the University of Toronto. The basic idea of SciBarCamp is that of “a gathering of scientists, artists, and technologists for a weekend of talks and discussions.” The kinds of things that have been discussed this weekend are the forefront of science (quantum gravity, synthetic biology, open access, scientific software), and the interactions with science and technology and art. There’s an extremely interesting mix of people here today, from quantum information theorists from the Perimeter Institute to social scientists from OCAD, grad students, science writers, musicians, etc. Quite the eclectic group.
The “un“conference opened up with what was perhaps the most interesting discussion for me. It was by Corie Lok from Nature Networks and John Dupuis from York University on “Science 2.0”, or basically how technology is changing first the way we do science, and then how we publish and track science. Things like Connotea and del.icio.us were discussed as ways to keep track of relevant journal articles, but the discussion was dominated by discussion about keeping track of your experiments, and how this is changing in laboratory environments.
Many labs are moving to an all-digital lab notebook. Gone are pens and paper as the primary means of keeping track of your experiments, and they are instead being replaced by digital equivalents, such as wikis or some other, commercial software (which I unfortunately didn’t catch any names, but a google search brings up all kinds of examples). The advantages of such a “notebook” are clear: entirely searchable, easily referenced with hyperlinks, the ability to keep digital images and snippets of code, etc. There is also an advantage which hadn’t been discussed, but is something I’ve long thought about: legibility! If you’ve ever looked in another scientists notebook, you will quickly find that their writing may be atrocious (guilty as charged), and it quickly becomes an exercise in frustrating trying to interpret what was written.
Perhaps not surprisingly, this is being embraced in a big way by the big pharma companies, where it is crucial to have detailed records, and to keep them for a long time (something like the lifetime of a drug being sold + ten years). But there’s an advantage to graduate students in academic laboratories that hadn’t been addressed in the discussion, that came to me as I was talking about this to another grad student friend. It’s that of the copies. I graduated from SFU with my Master’s less than a year ago, but I could tell you basically no specific details on some of the more mundane, day to day experiments that I carried out. I’m sure the same thing happens to those who graduate with a PhD, and leave their lab notebooks behind. I’ve decided I want to keep this kind of information, and I’m still early enough in my PhD that it won’t be too hard to change.
To the other scientists reading this blog: have you changed to a digital lab notebook? Have you tried the switch and failed, or have things gone smoothly? What software did you decide on? I’m leaning towards a wiki, and I’ve decided it will be necessary to keep a paper notebook as well, but to make it degenerate information which will, at the end of every day, always end up in the digital notebook as well.
Comment [14]
Physicists have a knack for thinking we know everything, or at least that everything else is easy enough to learn, since, well, everything else isn’t physics. I’ve had the sense to not give in to this delusion too often, even though I decided that I could hack it as a PhD student in a chemistry department despite not knowing any chemistry. In my defense, my PhD program is called Chemical Physics, so this shouldn’t be entirely out of my realm.
Prior to accepting the offer here at the University of Toronto, it was agreed that my background would preclude me from TAing a number of courses, particularly those with the words “organic” and “inorganic” in them. Not that I couldn’t learn these subjects, the physicist in me likes to tell myself, simply that they are different enough from my formal training that I can’t pick them up without a reasonable amount of time and effort.
TAships were handed out a couple of weeks ago. As it happens, I was given the computational laboratory section of Intro Organic Chemistry I. An organic chemist friend of mine cheekily asked, “So, how many bonds does Carbon form?” Yes, I do know the answer. No, I am definitely not who you want teaching students about organic chemistry.
Luckily for everyone (though mostly the undergrads in Intro Organic Chemistry I!), I’ve since been switched to a physical chemistry course. The first disaster of PhD-life averted.
Comment [2]
Biocurious is written by Andre Brown and Philip Johnson, since 2005. Content of the weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
