0:01

BBC Sounds Music Radio

0:03

Podcasts You're listening to BBC

0:05

Inside Science, first broadcast on the

0:07

13th of March 2025. Hello, I'm

0:09

Professor Ben Garrett. This week, have

0:11

boys really jumped ahead of girls

0:13

in maths and science? And what

0:15

mind-blowing effect to spending a long

0:17

time in space have on the

0:20

human body? Science journalist Caroline Steele

0:22

is here with me to bring

0:24

her favourite stories of the week.

0:26

And she's also going to help

0:28

us with a bit of a

0:30

spinny space-themed studio experiment later on

0:32

to find out. Hi Caroline, nervous?

0:34

Yes, I get every kind of

0:36

travel sick, so anything involving spinning?

0:39

Yeah, not feeling great about that.

0:41

Can't see a problem there at all.

0:43

Can you give us a little taste

0:45

of what we've got this week lined

0:47

up? So I've got an update

0:50

on the Athena Lander. A chance

0:52

for us all to see something

0:54

very special in the sky tonight.

0:56

The latest on the environmental impact

0:58

of the collision involving an oil

1:00

tanker off the coast of Hull.

1:02

And here's a clue for my final

1:04

story. Who was the first electricity

1:07

detective? Okay, but first, there's

1:09

a big gender gap between

1:11

boys and girls in maths and

1:14

science. That's according to a new

1:16

report out this week. Boys in

1:18

England, in years five and nine,

1:20

that's ages nine and ten and

1:23

thirteen and thirteen, are now significantly

1:25

outperforming girls in both subjects. The

1:27

report trends in international mathematics and

1:29

science study suggests. And the researchers

1:32

say this gender gap is mirrored

1:34

in other similar countries like Australia

1:36

and the USA. To explore what

1:39

might be going on here, I'm

1:41

joined by physicist Dr. Jess Wade

1:43

from the Imperial College London and

1:46

math teacher and national numeracy ambassador

1:48

Bobby Siegel. Jess, before we get stuck

1:50

in, you have thoughts on how this

1:52

study was conducted which you feel may

1:54

have impacted the findings. Is that right? Yeah,

1:56

I do. This is a really interesting result,

1:59

but the way that... exam was actually taken

2:01

is that it's this kind of international

2:03

math and science assessment that actually this

2:05

year or this cohort for the first

2:07

time was performed digitally so that the

2:10

school groups did the tests on computers

2:12

in their classrooms rather than doing them

2:14

with kind of pencil paper like they

2:16

used to and there's quite a lot

2:18

of evidence actually that girls particularly find

2:21

that kind of transition to digital skills

2:23

quite challenging. they question their own ability,

2:25

they have kind of fear of making

2:27

guesses and particularly in things like multiple

2:29

choice. None of that is because of

2:32

their mathematical or scientific prowess, it's just

2:34

about how they approach that kind of

2:36

digital transition in the examination. So that's

2:38

why I think that we could be

2:40

seeing these kind of slightly bizarre results.

2:43

Okay, well we have a statement from

2:45

University College London who carried out the

2:47

study. They confirmed the way they present

2:49

the test has changed on screen instead

2:52

of on paper. They agree with you

2:54

Jess that there is evidence Boys and

2:56

Girls can react differently on screen compared

2:58

to on paper and this might mean

3:00

some differences in individual scoring but they

3:03

say not enough difference that they would

3:05

expect to see such a gap in

3:07

achievement between boys and girls. But back

3:09

onto that you've actually questioned whether there's

3:11

a gap at all. Is there actually

3:14

a problem do you think? I think

3:16

we've got a huge problem in how

3:18

we support young women from kind of

3:20

young ages into kind of throughout their

3:22

scientific careers. The interesting thing in this

3:25

data actually is that the students who

3:27

perform the exam will take the test

3:29

in year five. There's no big difference

3:31

in gender. So boys and girls perform

3:33

equally as well in maths and in

3:36

sciences. It's only when they get to

3:38

kind of teenage years towards year nine

3:40

that you start to see these differences

3:42

emerging. That indicates this isn't due to

3:44

their ability. It's not because boys are

3:47

different in math and sciences to girls.

3:49

It's actually to do with what happens

3:51

when they're growing up and the types

3:53

of stereotypes they experience or the way

3:55

that they're developed from a kind of

3:58

confidence perspective to pursue these types of

4:00

subjects. So if we're seeing that huge

4:02

shift from year five to year nine,

4:04

we know that we need to do

4:06

more to support young women in those

4:09

early ages. in those early years of

4:11

secondary school so they feel just as

4:13

confident in their mathematical and scientific ability

4:15

as their male counterparts. And Bobby are

4:17

you seeing the same sort of thing

4:20

in maths from your perspective? Yes as

4:22

a schoolteach and I've been in school

4:24

secondary and sixth form for more than

4:26

a decade and also working now as

4:28

a math specialist in a primary school.

4:31

Again a lot of it to do

4:33

with confidence and in fact... early this

4:35

week, national numeracy published a report on

4:37

numeracy for gender equality. And one of

4:39

the bits of data was about maths

4:42

anxiety. They found out that women in

4:44

the UK actually twice as likely as

4:46

men to feel anxious about using maths

4:48

and numbers, even if they've got strong

4:51

numeracy skills. And I think the data

4:53

was nearly one in four women, about

4:55

24% feel nervous about numbers, compared to

4:57

about 12% of men. So clearly we've

4:59

seen before, from the year five year

5:02

six, again, even as a 10. It's

5:04

not anything to do with innate ability,

5:06

but I think there's other complicated factors

5:08

to do with stereotyping, societal expectations and

5:10

culture that play a part in this.

5:13

So you both mentioned confidence now, and

5:15

Jesse mentioned this first. What do we

5:17

think might be going on? Why are

5:19

we seeing that disparity between the confidence

5:21

levels in boys and girls as they

5:24

age? I think it's about how much

5:26

support they get both from kind of

5:28

their teachers and also from their parents.

5:30

There's quite a lot of evidence that

5:32

parent influences young women's perceptions of a

5:35

subject. So if kind of your parents

5:37

continuously say, oh, matter is boring or

5:39

I found math really hard, girls who

5:41

are incredibly able can kind of internalize

5:43

that and start thinking, oh gosh, I

5:46

find math really hard. That's something that

5:48

I'm not really confident in. So there's

5:50

certainly that kind of grown up parental

5:52

parental influence. There's also the type of

5:54

careers advice. we give young people, you

5:57

know, are we telling these young people

5:59

there are going to be so many

6:01

extraordinary jobs in artificial intelligence and quantum

6:03

technologies and in semiconductors if you pursue

6:05

these types of subjects at school, and

6:08

that kind of advice is really really

6:10

critical to getting young people engaged with

6:12

a subject. and at the moment I

6:14

just don't think we're doing it well

6:16

enough. You mentioned engagement there so Bobby

6:19

you're obviously as a teacher you're at

6:21

the front line of this in the

6:23

classroom. Do you see differences in the

6:25

way the boys and girls actually do

6:27

engage with subjects like maths? So actually

6:30

there's one bit of research that I've

6:32

sort of seen echoed in my work

6:34

as well so Professor, two ways of

6:36

teaching mathematics. So one is like the

6:38

one that encourages freedom of thought and

6:41

lots of different approaches and methods and

6:43

this is not timed and students think

6:45

creatively about the subject they work collaboratively

6:47

and the alternate one is the one

6:50

which most people know and experience in

6:52

the school. It's called performance math. And

6:54

this is where a teacher put up

6:56

a method on the board, you know

6:58

maybe quadratic equations and then students will

7:01

memorize the method and then reproduce it

7:03

as quickly and as accurate. as possible

7:05

and this is known as performance mathematics

7:07

and in fact research. by Joe Bola

7:09

both in England in 2010 and in

7:12

American 2019 has found that actually girls

7:14

and women for some reason they dislike

7:16

the sort of performance element of mathematics

7:18

and that maybe ends up reflecting in

7:20

our test. And I guess that's really

7:23

important to incorporate here because although some

7:25

of the obviously there are universal laws

7:27

in math but it's not universally taught

7:29

in the same way so are there

7:31

other countries other examples where we teach

7:34

maths more effectively or better really? So

7:36

if we're looking globally, I think Singapore

7:38

is a method where teachers in the

7:40

UK have looked towards and sometimes Shanghai

7:42

as well, they use a method known

7:45

as mastery. And this in fact applies

7:47

to boys and girls equally, where they

7:49

spend more time on the foundational content,

7:51

understanding the building blocks of mass before

7:53

finally going to the abstract, where it's

7:56

England, we move quickly from one topic

7:58

onto the next, and even students haven't

8:00

understood the basics of number, they're suddenly

8:02

moving on to algebra, analysis of mathematics

8:04

and I think that impacts our education

8:07

significantly. And Jess you touched on this

8:09

earlier, what about the school environment itself?

8:11

Are kids, our students, or pupils in

8:13

the best environment within our schools to

8:15

learn the STEM subjects? I think they

8:18

could be in the best environments within

8:20

our schools. I think we just need

8:22

to be able to work with teachers

8:24

and particularly whole school kind of approaches

8:26

to try and eliminate some of these

8:29

stereotypes to give girls and boys, but

8:31

particularly girls, as the evidence shows, we

8:33

need to do more to support them,

8:35

to give them lots of different structured

8:37

ways to get excited about maths. Like

8:40

Bobby said, we teach maths in a

8:42

particular way, but actually I found that

8:44

when you're teaching physics or engineering, it's

8:46

when mathss, experience will be excited about

8:49

in the real world and that makes

8:51

them really really enthusiastic to learn the

8:53

kind of root maths of the challenge

8:55

that they're trying to solve. One thing

8:57

I think is really interesting will be

9:00

to track what happens to this cohort

9:02

of students as they go to take

9:04

their national exams. These international exams aren't

9:06

sat by many students across the UK,

9:08

but this cohort, this cohort that were

9:11

in year nine in 2023, will be

9:13

doing their GCSEs this year. So we'll

9:15

see in those kind of results where

9:17

there has been this big gendered shift.

9:19

And I really, really genuinely doubt we'll

9:22

see that we consistently see actually that

9:24

girls outperform boys in subjects like physics

9:26

at a level when they take it.

9:28

The numbers are fewer, but girls get

9:30

more A stars. So if we see

9:33

something big this year happening in our

9:35

national exams, then I think we'll have

9:37

a real cause for concern. Actually, can

9:39

I add to that on physics, so

9:41

the Institute of Physics has some research

9:44

in the past decade, but it showed

9:46

that girls at single sex schools are

9:48

almost like two and a half times

9:50

more likely to go on to do

9:52

A-level physics compared with mixed schools. And

9:55

this sort of suggests gender biases played

9:57

in schools. So almost like sometimes if

9:59

a girl is in a mixed environment,

10:01

they can be... unconscious bias by teachers

10:03

thinking No, boys should do math and

10:06

physics and maybe girls should do English

10:08

and the arts. Where in a girl-only

10:10

environment, whether it's state or private, girls

10:12

pick up physics and math at a

10:14

much higher level because you can be

10:17

anything in that environment. So I definitely

10:19

think the school environment needs to think

10:21

carefully about the language they use about

10:23

math and sciences and gender. Clearly we

10:25

need to address... any disparity that we

10:28

see within both STEM in terms of

10:30

employment and also uptake and this whole

10:32

leaky pipe thing of losing people engaging

10:34

with it throughout that system, how do

10:36

we address any disparities such as we

10:39

might be seeing here, do you think?

10:41

I definitely think a big part is

10:43

our sort of... cultural attitudes toward it

10:45

and the language. And I know a

10:48

lot of my students, they use social

10:50

media and they talk about the influences

10:52

and people they follow. I think there's

10:54

a big part to play actually in

10:56

putting out good role models of, in

10:59

fact, Jess is a great one out

11:01

there, but having great role models that

11:03

show actually women and girls can be

11:05

physicists, can be mathematicians and that definitely

11:07

can seep through to young people's attitudes.

11:10

I was reading about the, from the

11:12

X files, I think most of us

11:14

grew up in that generation, having Dana

11:16

Scully as a strong independent, effective role

11:18

model within STEM made a significant impact

11:21

on young women feeling they could engage.

11:23

Is that the answer, Jess, do we

11:25

need more stronger, better role models to

11:27

engage young people to get in and

11:29

to retain their engagement with sciences, do

11:32

you think? I think role models is

11:34

part of it. I mean beyond the

11:36

X-Files when the incredible movie Hidden Figures

11:38

came out and told the stories of

11:40

kind of Catherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and

11:43

Mary Jackson, that inspired a whole generation

11:45

of young women to think I could

11:47

be a mathematician, you know. But I

11:49

think alongside the role models, who can

11:51

work for some people, but for other

11:54

people can make them think, oh gosh,

11:56

I'm not that clever, you know, sometimes

11:58

role models are really hard to aspire

12:00

to. So alongside the role models, I'd

12:02

really like to science and math so

12:05

that we really get every everyone excited

12:07

about how phenomenal these opportunities are. Well,

12:09

thanks for joining me. Bobby Siegel and

12:11

Jess Wade. And we should just say

12:13

the school's minister, Catherine McKinnell, has said

12:16

the government will continue to promote science,

12:18

technology, engineering and math subjects, especially among

12:20

girls and through a range of initiatives.

12:22

Imagine this, you're trapped 250 miles above

12:24

the Earth, your sleeping space is the

12:27

size of a phone box, gravity doesn't

12:29

exist, and you get 16 sunrises and

12:31

sunsets every single day. Now my head's

12:33

spinning, just thinking about that, but it's

12:35

been a reality for Sunny Williams and

12:38

Butch Wilmore, the two NASA astronauts who

12:40

went to the international space station for

12:42

a little more than a week. but

12:44

are still there nine months on after

12:47

there were problems with their return capsule.

12:49

Help by Space X, they'll be shortly

12:51

on their way home. But what's it

12:53

like to spend the best part of

12:55

a year in space? What does it

12:58

do to your body? And what does

13:00

it do to your brain? Here with

13:02

me in the studio back on earth

13:04

is physiologist Professor Damien Bailey from the

13:06

University of South Wales. I'm sure we've

13:09

all seen footage of astronauts floating around

13:11

in space so we have this concept

13:13

of our bodies being weightless. but what's

13:15

actually happening inside our bodies when we're

13:17

up there? So space is by far

13:20

the most extreme environment that humans have

13:22

ever encountered and we've just not evolved

13:24

to handle the extreme conditions. So next

13:26

to perfect vacuum, ionizing radiation and it

13:28

really causes us to age much much

13:31

faster than we would... do on earth.

13:33

So up to two liters of blood

13:35

shifts up through the upper thoracic cavity

13:37

and into the brain. And this can

13:39

cause a variety of problems with the

13:42

astronauts. One in particular is the space

13:44

associated neurophthalmological syndrome. It causes blood vision

13:46

and irreversible eye damage as well. And

13:48

that's just one of the organs. There

13:50

are many other organ systems. Every organ

13:53

system is effect. effectively. So the other

13:55

fascinating thing about the brain in space

13:57

is that it floats astronauts that will

13:59

spend 180 days on the international space

14:01

station and you can image the brain

14:04

before and when they come back and

14:06

if you play those images back and

14:08

forth really quickly you can actually see

14:10

that positional shift in the brain it's

14:12

pushing up inside the skull and again

14:15

we think that this can cause pressure

14:17

changes in the brain and that's associated

14:19

with one of the syndromes that the

14:21

astronauts really really struggle with and it's

14:23

a red risk syndrome. Are there ways

14:26

that we can get around these problems

14:28

then? So one of the countermeasures to

14:30

prevent that upper shift of fluid into

14:32

the brain is to try to suck

14:34

some of that down into the legs.

14:37

So it's a bit like Wallace and

14:39

Gromit, Feathers McGraw, do you remember those

14:41

trousers? Numatic trousers, where you suck the

14:43

ear out and you pull the blood

14:46

away from the brain, that's a fabulous

14:48

countermeasure. And so the lower body negative

14:50

pressure, those feathers McGraw, trousers, are actually

14:52

being used in space, astronauts are using

14:54

them right now on the international space

14:57

station. For me, many of us I

14:59

guess, it's quite hard to conceptualize what

15:01

space is like. We see the floating

15:03

around. It looks quite, it's quite gente

15:05

or quite nice really, but you've got

15:08

a little demo for us, haven't you?

15:10

To mimic what those first few days

15:12

in space might feel like. Now, I

15:14

can't do this because I've got to

15:16

maintain my integrity here and my dignity,

15:19

but Caroline, if you wouldn't mind being

15:21

in our little project, is our guinea

15:23

pig. Damien, can you talk a through

15:25

what you like to what you like

15:27

to do what you like to do?

15:30

So when you go to space, it's

15:32

just such a peculiar sensation, when you

15:34

pull this fundamental vector, gravity away from

15:36

us, we've evolved over the last four

15:38

billion years to depend on 1G, you

15:41

pull that away, and one of the

15:43

organs that really struggles with this is

15:45

your brain, and you know, you've got

15:47

the best brain in the world, of

15:49

course, here on sea level, on earth,

15:52

you go up to space, you pull

15:54

the gravity away, and it causes all

15:56

sorts of problems with the neurovestibular apparatus.

15:58

There's no up, there's no down, there's

16:00

no sidewards, you're just floating around. So

16:03

what we're going to do is just

16:05

do a mini practical where we're going

16:07

to recreate the space brain in brackets,

16:09

watch out, you might feel a bit

16:11

sick, in order to cause that neurovestibular

16:14

perturbation if you like. So we're going

16:16

to get you on a chair, we're

16:18

going to pull a few G, we're

16:20

going to spin you around, we don't

16:22

want any visual input, so I want

16:25

your eyes closed, and then we're going

16:27

to do a cognitive function task. bit

16:29

of mental gymnastics and just think that

16:31

you're in charge of a multi-billion

16:33

dollar. craft. So you've got to

16:35

make the right decisions at the right

16:38

time. So no pressure, Caroline. Pressure is

16:40

on. Okay. We do have a spare

16:42

chair. We have tested. It is spinny.

16:44

So when you're ready. Okay, so you

16:46

could in theory, you should be able

16:48

to pull at the 3G. Now astronauts

16:50

are experiencing up to 5G. Now for

16:52

you to pull 3G in that chair,

16:54

I'm going to have to spin you

16:56

like crazy. So we're not going to

16:59

do 3G, okay. But we're going to

17:01

spin you. round and round and

17:03

round. Your eyes are going to

17:05

be closed and then you're going

17:07

to come rushing over to me

17:09

here and we've got a little

17:11

pegboard challenge. The aim of the

17:14

game is to try to get

17:16

the pegs in there as quickly

17:18

as possible. Now you should be

17:20

able to do this in under

17:22

60 seconds. Okay? Now we're going

17:24

to cause confusion for the

17:27

brain. So shut your eyes. Three,

17:29

two, one, spin. a few more

17:31

seconds I definitely feel dizzy and

17:33

I haven't even opened my eyes

17:35

yet okay now open your eyes oh

17:37

and then shuffle over to me oh

17:39

just come over a little bit how

17:41

are you feeling incredibly dizzy take a

17:43

seat and go for it you've got

17:45

to put the eggs in the holes

17:47

as quickly as you can and by

17:49

the way with just one hand so

17:51

no kidding Carolyn oh dear oh everything

17:54

is spinning so oh no this is

17:56

really not going well I'm going to

17:58

give you ten more seconds 10 more

18:00

seconds, I'm not even halfway then. That's

18:02

me being lenient. Okay. Okay. You're really

18:04

concentrating there. Ah, you've been there a

18:07

day, if not. David, how did all,

18:09

how did all, what do we ask

18:11

for not do? Thanks, Caroline. How did

18:13

you do? Carolyn, Carolyn did a fabulous

18:15

job. I mean, we obviously set her

18:18

up there for failure. There's no question

18:20

about that. But, so in space, Butch

18:22

and Sunny, for example, when they're coming

18:24

back to Earth after nine months, they

18:26

spent nine months, so about every month,

18:29

one percent of their... bones and muscles

18:31

are going to wither away, accelerated aging.

18:33

So they're exercising up to two and

18:35

a half hours a day just to

18:37

try to counteract that. So the brain

18:40

as you come in, you'll be pulling

18:42

up to 5G during reentry. You probably

18:44

pulled a couple of G at most

18:46

there on the spinning chair. So you

18:48

had what we call space legs. and

18:51

you had space brain. So what are

18:53

space legs and what space brain? Well,

18:55

as you're spinning there, the semicirculatory canals

18:57

in the years, there's a fluid there,

18:59

and that washes around, and it provides

19:02

information that the brain can then process.

19:04

As you're spinning there, when you stop

19:06

spinning, when you stop pulling G, effectively

19:08

you open your eyes, that fluid is

19:10

still swishing around, and it's giving conflicting

19:13

information to the brain. And that triggers

19:15

this feeling of being... sick. I don't

19:17

know if you felt a little bit

19:19

nauseous. So nauseous. I still feel a

19:21

tiny bit nauseous. Okay, so it takes

19:24

a couple of days. We call it

19:26

gravity sickness. So when Butch and Sunny,

19:28

you know, they hit 1G, don't forget

19:30

they've been up there for nine months,

19:32

a little bit longer, without any gravity.

19:35

So as they hit Earth, they're going

19:37

to suffer with what's called space brain.

19:39

They're going to feel a bit sick.

19:41

It's going to take... a few days

19:43

to recover, but they've also got space

19:46

legs. I'm sure you've seen when astronauts

19:48

come back to Earth, they're literally carried

19:50

out of that craft. Well, I think

19:52

if we didn't have a huge appreciation

19:54

for astronauts before, we definitely do now.

19:57

Thanks, Damien, and safe travels to Sunny

19:59

and Butch. Caroline,

20:01

how are you feeling? Has the room

20:04

stopped spinning? The room stopped spinning, but

20:06

I still feel a little bit sick.

20:08

Like I've just been on a long

20:11

windy car journey. I'll take that as

20:13

good news, fine. You've been looking into

20:15

the big science stories of the week.

20:17

What have you got this week for

20:20

me? So last week, Marni left listeners

20:22

waiting to hear if the Athena Lander

20:24

had successfully touched down on the moon.

20:27

So about half an hour after broadcast,

20:29

Athena did land, but on its side

20:31

and in a crater. And because it

20:34

landed on its side, its solar panels

20:36

are facing the wrong direction, so they

20:38

aren't picking up any sun and Athena

20:41

can't recharge. It was officially declared dead

20:43

on Friday. That's quite a sad story.

20:45

It's quite a sad story. So what

20:48

was Athena meant to do? So it

20:50

was going to spend 10 days exploring

20:52

the lunar surface and searching for evidence

20:55

of ice. It's part of NASA's longer

20:57

term goal to land the first woman

20:59

and the first person of colour on

21:02

the moon in 2027. I really hope

21:04

this is something that can... be pursued

21:06

and carried on. I've got a bright

21:09

ending. Go. So. Athena landing is still

21:11

a scientific first. It touched on further

21:13

south than any other lunar lander has

21:15

done before in an area that's known

21:18

to be incredibly difficult to land in.

21:20

And some of the instruments on board

21:22

did turn on briefly, so we might

21:25

get some valuable information about the chemistry

21:27

in the area, so it might not

21:29

all be lost. But the top line

21:32

is the Athena lander is dead and

21:34

can no longer see the moon. However,

21:36

we can see a special moon tonight.

21:39

Tonight. Well, the early hours of tomorrow.

21:41

I have to say that is a

21:43

stellar link there. Thank you. Stella took

21:46

me a second. I know, thanks. So

21:48

between the hours of 4 and 6

21:50

AM, there will be a partial lunar

21:53

eclipse here in the UK. So this

21:55

is Friday morning slash tonight. Okay. For

21:57

those of us, and I'm included in

22:00

that group, what happens during a lunar

22:02

eclipse? So we normally see the moon

22:04

because it... it's lit up by sunlight,

22:07

right? And a lunar eclipse happens when

22:09

the earth sits exactly between the sun

22:11

and the moon and it blocks sunlight

22:13

from reaching the moon's surface. And that

22:16

would make you think that the moon

22:18

would go dark, right? Because you've got

22:20

the earth sitting between the two blocking

22:23

light from the sun to the moon.

22:25

Yeah, so you can't see it. you'd

22:27

think, but actually the moon glows red.

22:30

Why and how does it glow red?

22:32

Interesting physics, basically not all the light

22:34

is completely blocked because some sunlight passes

22:37

through the Earth's atmosphere which scatters shorter

22:39

wavelengths of light so that's sort of

22:41

blues and green lights. but longer wavelengths

22:44

of light, light red, do reach the

22:46

moon, lighting it up red. It's the

22:48

same effect that makes sunsets red. So

22:51

how and where do we best see

22:53

this? So here in the UK you

22:55

want to be facing west. It's best

22:58

to be as far away from light

23:00

pollution as possible and obviously you have

23:02

to cross your fingers that there's no

23:05

clouds. So I'm going to be setting

23:07

myself a very early alarm for tomorrow

23:09

morning. Well if you're up at 4am

23:11

tomorrow morning, head to your nearest field

23:14

and look west. So as our listeners

23:16

have probably heard, on Monday there was

23:18

a collision between a cargo ship and

23:21

an oil tanker in the North Sea

23:23

off the coast of East Yorkshire, and

23:25

scientists are working very hard to minimise

23:28

the damage that this collision will cause

23:30

to the surrounding environment. You say oil

23:32

tanker there, but this wasn't carrying what

23:35

we typically imagine, so it wasn't crude

23:37

oil or diesel. No, interestingly it was

23:39

carrying 220,000 barrels of jet fuel. Unfortunately,

23:42

some of that has leaked as part

23:44

of the collision and jet fuel is

23:46

a toxic substance and it can be

23:49

lethal to marine life and birds if

23:51

it's ingested. There's been a bit of

23:53

confusion and controversy around the container ship.

23:56

Do we know what was in that

23:58

now? Yeah, so on Monday it was

24:00

said that it was carrying sodium cyanide,

24:02

which is a chemical that's used for

24:05

extracting gold and silver and like it

24:07

sounds, it can be... toxic for marine

24:09

life but on Tuesday, Ernst Russ, the

24:12

owners of the cargo ship, said that

24:14

the sodium cyanide containers were actually So

24:16

that's good news. And we don't yet

24:19

know what else the ship was carrying.

24:21

So that's a bit of a TBC.

24:23

The priority is to keep the vessels

24:26

afloat, to reduce further chemicals entering the

24:28

water, and as well as jet fuel

24:30

to worry, as well as jet fuel

24:33

to worry about, there's of course the

24:35

fuel that was powering the boat and

24:37

the oil tanker, so that could leak,

24:40

if not manage properly. And if that

24:42

happens, that could actually have worse environmental

24:44

impacts than the jet fuel as it

24:47

already leaked. there are a variety of

24:49

different methods that might be used. Options

24:51

include things like inflatable tubes called booms

24:54

which can be floated on the surface

24:56

of the water and they're hundreds of

24:58

meters long and they sort of literally

25:00

block the fuel from spreading further. Teams

25:03

might also use these mechanical devices called

25:05

skimmers which float on the surface and

25:07

pump oil into storage units. All of

25:10

this is... Of course, very important because

25:12

leaking oil can have huge environmental impacts.

25:14

Okay, I've got to admit, I want

25:17

to lighten the mood just a little

25:19

bit now, Caroline. Final story. Well, good

25:21

news is, I've got another science-themed joke

25:24

for you, Ben, you ready? Absolutely, crack

25:26

on. Okay, so, there are ten types

25:28

of people in this world, those who

25:31

understand binary, and those who don't. Ha-ha,

25:33

ha-ha, you've got to give me a

25:35

laugh, come on. I think it might

25:38

be that spinning. So Ben in your

25:40

work as an evolutionary biologist, do you

25:42

use jokes much? All the time, I'm

25:45

hilarious. Really? Yeah. Who knew? Well that's

25:47

interesting because from my experience scientists can

25:49

be a bit reluctant to use humor

25:52

when describing their work and I think

25:54

it might be because they worry jokes

25:56

can make you seem less authoritative. And

25:58

interestingly a new study from the University

26:01

of Georgia has looked into whether or

26:03

not this is actually true. So researchers

26:05

showed some participants tweets or posts on

26:08

X from a fictional scientist called Dr

26:10

James. So some posts used no humor,

26:12

some used satire or anthropomorphism, others used

26:15

a combination of those two. And after

26:17

seeing the posts, participants were asked how

26:19

funny they found the posts, how likable

26:22

they thought the scientist was, and how

26:24

legitimate they thought the content was. and

26:26

interestingly the research has found that the

26:29

funnier posts made the scientists more likable

26:31

and the content seem more legitimate but

26:33

it can have the opposite effect if

26:36

your joke is judged not to be

26:38

funny so no pressure noted be funny

26:40

tell good jokes I've been what's happening

26:43

a few of my co-scientists for their

26:45

favorite jokes so I'm going to leave

26:47

you with a few of my favourites

26:49

Two wind turbines are standing in a

26:52

field and one says, what's your favorite

26:54

kind of music? And the other says,

26:56

I'm a massive metal fan. Why do

26:59

squirrels swirl on their backs to keep

27:01

their nuts dry? So there you are,

27:03

Steve Baxhall, zoologist, comedian. I'm Professor Terry

27:06

King and I'm the director of the

27:08

Milner Center for Evolution at the University

27:10

of Bath and this is a Canadian

27:13

joke from my childhood. What is a

27:15

Canadian ghost's favorite food? Boutine. Sorry, complete

27:17

dad joke. My name is Jim Alcalili

27:20

and I'm an emeritus professor of physics

27:22

at the University of Surrey. Einstein tells

27:24

us that we can travel through time.

27:27

So here's my favorite time travel joke.

27:29

I time travel to the past and

27:31

killed my grandfather before he met my

27:34

grandmother. I didn't disappear. That's when I

27:36

learned I was adopted. I then did

27:38

it again. That's when I learned I

27:41

was a psychopath. I thank you. You've

27:43

been listening to BBC Inside Science with

27:45

me, Professor Ben Garrett, the producers worth

27:47

Sophie Olmaston and Jerry Holt. Technical production

27:50

was by Reese Morris. The show was

27:52

made in Cardiff by BBC Wales. and

27:54

West. To To discover

27:57

more fascinating science content,

27:59

head to to .co .uk,

28:01

search for Inside Science,

28:04

and follow the

28:06

links to the Open

28:08

University.