Happy Friday, everyone, and welcome (or welcome back) to SemperViernes, the place where I get to nerd out at an advanced-beginner level about the intellectual rabbit holes I explore each week. I'd like to extend a special welcome to everyone I met at yesterday's Bloomberg Technology Summit in San Francisco. Thank you for the wonderful conversations; it's always exciting to be surrounded by folks who know more than I do on so many topics, so I left feeling very energized. Next week, I'll be putting together a special edition of SemperViernes that exclusively discusses my major takeaways from the conference. In the meantime, before I jump into the main trio of topics, did you know that photosynthesis could be initiated by a single photon? I learned that this week and found it rather poetic. Apparently it's long been assumed that this is the case, but research published last week in Nature (one of my favorite journals) confirmed that photon-absorbing structures called light-harvesting 2 complexes (their friends call them "LH2") only need one photon to get the whole CO2-to-O2 conversion process going. I should've known that an article with the word 'photon' in it would bring me back, yet again, to physics; today I learned what "coincidence counting" is and that photosynthesis involves some quantum physics. I also clarified for myself the difference between a femtosecond and a picosecond (hint: it involves dividing a second into a trillion parts, and then also involves lasers). In case you're wondering, this particular rabbit hole ended on a magnanimous webpage that invited me to "find out which laser is right for you" (another time, thanks). I do have to say: one little brave solitary photon initiating a crucial life-sustaining process in nature? There's gotta be an inspirational metaphor in there somewhere about how one person can effect major social change by starting small. I trust one of you to find it. :)
First
As a former choir nerd, lifelong student of languages, child of a hard-of-hearing parent, and current generalist nerd, I find sound, noise, quiet (one of my favorite books linked there), hearing, and related topics really interesting. I loved, then, a recent New York Times article (with great dynamic scrolling action) on the effects of noise pollution on human well-being (they call it a 12-min read). Not only was it enjoyable; it's also been helpful in a couple practical ways for me the past couple days. First, I used a map they shared that allows you to look up the noise levels of any area in the US, and looked up most places I've lived and many places I've visited. Check out your hometown and where you live now, if you feel like it! Second, I actually installed the NIOSH decibel meter app that's shared in a link within the "map" link a couple sentences back, and used the app yesterday and today to determine that my friends' neighborhood is quiet (30 dB), an airplane cabin is loud (80 dB), and that an airplane is especially loud (90 dB) during the announcements (my favorite part of any flight). Go figure. I guess I've always felt intuitively that noise pollution was rough on us, but it was interesting to learn that loud noises actually activate our brain's amygdala, activating stress responses in the body, and that there have been several studies and warnings about the risks that noise pollution brings. All of this made me wonder: will we care about this going forward as the world's population grows and migrates? Could the EIU Global Liveability Index methodology, released this week, be expanded to include "level of noise pollution" as a factor (perhaps in Category 3, top of page 10, under Culture & Environment)? Seems like it should. Maybe the Swedes have the right idea to build using quieter materials with their wooden city plans; okay, yes, I did just want to find a way to include that one this week. But isn't it cool?
Second
I didn't always appreciate fashion, and I very much embrace my advanced-beginner status here of all places; I can honestly say that the movie The Devil Wears Prada (and later, Tan France) helped me see that—to paraphrase Stanley Tucci's character Nigel—fashion is, or at least can be, art we live our lives in. From my perspective as a college counselor advising students about the future of the job market, in terms of industries that will likely be around for a while, I think it's safe to say that clothes will remain relevant for quite some time, no matter how automated things get. I've worked with students pursuing costuming, sneaker artwork, footwear reselling, jewelry making, fashion design, and other related passions, so not only is it clear to me that fashion still matters to Gen Z; it's also therefore helpful when I advise students for me to be paying attention to the future of the fashion industry itself (and also to the future of fashion trends). This trend, for one, feels pretty close to home for the Bay Area; along these same lines I'm relieved to know that I'm not the only one wondering why I am seeing so much Carhartt everywhere these days (I first learned about it from my friend who grew up in rural Iowa). I'm especially fascinated by the branding certain companies go with; my father will be thrilled to learn that, like the Age of Men in Lord of the Rings, the era of the large luxury brand logo on apparel and accessories is fading. Personally, I'm not convinced that the trend toward understatement (which I guess is being labeled quiet luxury) isn't just a Eurofication of US style, but again I'm not the expert here. On the garment-naming front, if you thought companies pandered during Pride month, this isn't new, but check out the Los Gatos pullover from Patagonia! They know their audience so well they named a jacket after the place they knew it'd be worn. Has always made me smile. In terms of haute couture, I always kind of thought "Drop It Like It's Hot" and "Happy" were a little overrated, but I'm still intrigued by most things Pharrell Williams does, including his launch of a new Instagram account for fashion house Louis Vuitton (for whom he now serves as Creative Director) simply called "skateboard". It already has 128,000 followers since it launched earlier this week. Wonder where he'll take them. Nike even recently partnered with the video game Fortnite to award players a digital version of a Nike shoe (with no monetary value; it's not an NFT) if they keep their character on a certain island within the game for ten minutes.
Third
I've mentioned before that I love Quanta for many reasons, not least of which is their particular brand of subtle flex, which is to discuss new scientific research and then mention how they initially broke the story several years ago. Go them. This week, I rediscovered an article I'd saved back in January that (I would say) explores the question, "are non-ideal serotonin levels in the brain and body really the main root cause of depression?". I want to be clear that I'm not a mental health professional whatsoever, and I'm not sharing any info here as advice, or expertise, or guidance, or anything of the sort. I just find it fascinating. The article discusses the multifaceted nature of depression, and how scientists could perhaps develop more effective treatment by allowing for more complexity in the conception of depression's causes. This tolerance of—really, preference for—paradox resonated with me; I agree with psychologist Dr. Lisa Damour that sometimes "the conversation that is the most accurate is probably also going to be the most detailed and nuanced and hard to pin down at times." So, here we go into the vague, amorphous fray! In reading this article, I got to learn a bit more basic chemistry, as in addition to serotonin it mentions GABA (inhibits cells from talking to each other), glutamate (helps with memory formation), and tryptophan (yep, the turkey-makes-you-sleepy one) as players in the are-people-happy game. The article also talks about genetic causes of depression, epigenetics (genes being influenced by environmental factors), differences in neural wiring, deficits in neuroplasticity, and even inflammation as potential influencing factors. I also read earlier this week about the concept of interoception, which is our ability to recognize our internal body states, and that led me to read about myelination (not a perfect analogy, but think WD-40 for neural synapses) and little non-neuron parts of the nervous system like glial cells and oligodendrocyte precursor cells. After attempting to remember the word oligodendrocyte from memory without looking, my brain gave up for the day. In a world where it's recommended that all adults be screened for anxiety, I think it'll continue to be relevant to seek to understand the causes of conditions like depression that people encounter when they are struggling. It's heartening and inspiring, too, to learn not only about new treatment methods being researched (not an endorsement, just interesting), but also about the more intricate, AI-enabled ways in which treatment methods are being developed and tailored for individuals. Anytime someone tells me they're foregoing a one-size-fits-all solution, I'm all ears.
