Nice story, Patrick. Although unplanned, it was neat to get the story both from the flight deck AND the cabin. The best flying experiences I've had were when airline employees were flexible and resourceful enough to go that extra mile to help. It's nice to see that spirit alive in an off-the-beaten-track place like Ghana.

Hmm...the dog-hair question is interesting, but I think the X-ray machines are probably not the answer. If those machines were using THAT much ionizing radiation, you would have a serious ozone problem on your hands.

Instead, I think it has to do with the long journey your luggage takes. At the beginning and end of the trip it is travelling on conveyor bands made of heavy rubber. These could easily build up a nice static charge, that could attract the hairs. In the middle of the trip, the luggage is rubbing against all kinds of other bags, probably transferring the hair to its neighbors.

So my guess is that the hair ends up on or around the luggage bands, and on fellow passenger's bags.

Any other ideas?

JIM3CH...

Interesting article you posted, nice summary of static electricity. But I point out to you that in the article it says that the easiest way to create static charge is to rub two non-conducting materials together (i.e. luggage-luggage or luggage-conveyor band).

It is true that there is cosmic radiation coming in, but it is not that much. Indeed, if there was enough ionizing cosmic radiation to remove dog hairs from luggage during your flight, you would be dead.

Just to assure readers here who may have some fears of radiation while in the air, it IS true that you get hit by more cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere than you do on the ground, but the levels are still so low that the health risks are negligible, even for pilots and cabin crew.

You don't need to use all that much silicon in a photovoltaic system. For example a Swedish company, Arontis, is working on a system that uses parabolic mirrors to concentrate sunlight onto a much smaller, cheaper photovoltaic array. Of course this means that the array has to be cooled, but this is done with a simple water-cooling system, and useful heat can also be extracted from the cooling water. Win-win.

I'm not advocating putting all our eggs in the photovoltaic basket, but the costs CAN be reduced with simple, clever solutions.

Cary,

I am sorry, but you dropped the ball here. I was brought up with a religious education and am well-versed in the biblical creation stories. And while I no longer believe in them as "true" stories, I recognize their value as a mythology that has survived thousands of years, linking succcessive generations and cultures around the world. In the context of religion and society, your points on tolerance and respect are well grounded.

But "Young Earth" creationism taught in the context of a so-called "science" setting is something quite different. In today's world, to argue that the world was created in accordance with the bible only 6000 years ago requres one to willfully ignore vast quantities of evidence and data, and distort or lie about established and successful theories in many branches of science. Without any alternative viewpoints to refer to, young minds are taught to ignore and distort ideas and evidence that do not fit their preconceptions.

In short, "creation science" is not just some harmless myth that enriches our societal diversity. It is a calculated, strategy to lock young minds into a narrow worldview that encourages them to ignore evidence and ideas that are at odds with what they already believe. While the LW's reactions may be overly strong, he owes it to his friend (who IS asking for his advice, so may himself have reservations of his own), to advise him to seek out the truth for himself with open eyes and brutal honesty, and to never tell a child something that he couldn't say to himself with a straight face.

It is the way I have chosen to teach my own students, and my own children.

(incidentally, and conveniently, avoiding both terms of the Bush Administration :-)

While I would not paint Scandanavia with Bayard's (or Zuckerman's) broad, utopian brushstrokes (no society is absolutely perfect), I find myself agreeing with much of this article.

After growing up in the US, I find non-religous Sweden a refreshingly pleasant environment. I don't have to battle school boards that are trying to force prayer and creationism into my childrens' curriculum, same-sex marriage isn't used as a cudgel to manipulate people at the polls, abortion and contraception are health issues, not political ones.

In the US I heard time and again that religion is an essential part of society...that without God there is greed, selfishness and anarchy. I have spent over twelve years living among so many practical, helpful, tolerant, fundamentally good people.

While religion binds people to deeply-held opinions that are resistant to contrary evidence, the Swede's agnosticism makes them more open to new ideas. Sweden actually has a functioning press and an active system of politics where voters meet and interact with candidates, and where people actually listen to and respond to deep, involved debates over important issues. And they vote in very high numbers, because it is important for a functioning society.

Oh, and the language isn't so big a barrier. I know lots of Americans who have immigrated and picked up Swedish pretty quickly. And so many people speak very good English here that the transition is smooth.