22 | New Scientist | 25 July 2020
Editor’s pick
Nowhere responded
fast enough to covid-19
27 June, p 11
From Geoff Browne, Sydney, Australia
While New Zealand may claim some
credit for the relatively early closure
of its borders, it was still too slow.
Nearly a month passed between the
country’s first known infection and
lockdown. That isn’t good enough.
Scientists had been warning
of a covid-type pandemic for more
than a decade. Borders should have
been closed by the start of February
at the latest. If countries had acted
more courageously, most domestic
economies would have largely
continued to function. Now we see
Western leaders trying to absolve
themselves from responsibility for
their own failures by blaming China.Broadband for all will
help us travel less
4 July, p 36
From Martin Pitt,
Leeds, UK
Corinne Le Quéré misses an
important option in her advice to
the UK government on how to use
the economic stimulus required
after the lockdown to encourage
the shift to a net-zero society. As
well as the electric cars and bikes
that she mentions, lockdown has
shown that choosing not to travel
is possible. As such, some of the
investment might be better used
towards full-fibre broadband for
all homes and businesses.Many factors decide a
nation’s virus outcome
4 July, p 8
From Margaret Bridgman,
East Runton, Norfolk, UK
You report that Scotland could
eliminate the coronavirus if it
weren’t for England. There are
many reasons why the experience
of covid-19 has differed regionally
in the UK. To take just one example,
overcrowding has been shown to
be a big issue. Scotland has the
lowest population density of thecountries in the UK at about
70 people per square kilometre,
whereas England’s is about 430.
When you look at regional
figures for each region, it is clear
that rural areas have fared better
than cities throughout the UK,
irrespective of which government
they fell under and which set of
lockdown rules were in place.As we get closer, so the
queues will get shorter
Letters, 4 July
From Frank Boase,
Northchurch, Hertfordshire, UK
Peter Borrows wonders what will
happen with the move to 1-metre
social distancing as the lockdown
is lifted. Here is one simple answer:
the dole queues will get shorter.Our laws might not apply
in the next universe up
Letters, 4 July
From Richard Price,
Chipping Sodbury,
Gloucestershire, UK
It would be satisfying to be able to
dismiss the idea that we are living
in a simulation, as earlier letters
have, using the argument that it
would require unfeasible amounts
of energy to run. Yet I am not
entirely convinced. If our reality
is a simulation, then the laws of
physics that we perceive may well
be part of that simulation too.
We can’t know the laws that
apply in the “next universe up”,
so the inhabitants of that universe
could, for all we know, have ready
access to sufficient energy to run
the simulation – if energy is even
a meaningful concept there.From Hillary Shaw,
Newport, Shropshire, UK
The energy-related arguments
that we don’t live in a simulation
created by an advanced civilisationhold true if the simulating
entities are also in a three-
dimensional existence.
However, what about higher
dimensions? Up to 10 are
postulated under superstring
theory, for instance. Denizens of
higher dimensions could be free of
the energy constraints we face, so
could have the resources required
to simulate our 3D universe.Tangled family tree may
have other explanations
27 June, p 18
From Sylvia Barnard,
Albany, New York, US
You describe a Stone Age man
buried in Ireland whose parents
were either siblings or parent
and child, and hypothesise that
this might indicate the social
sanctioning of incestuous
marriages in this community.
Isn’t it far more likely, if
somewhat sadder, that this man’s
mother experienced sexual abuse
by her father or brother, resulting
in a baby that was then presumed
to be the child of her husband?
Such things are known to happen,
but the social sanctioning of
incest is extremely rare.To stop a hurricane, just
summon the US navy
Letters, 4 July
From Clive Saunders,
Stockport, Greater Manchester, UK
Michael Assuras suggests that
hurricanes could be stopped by
injecting cool air from an aircraft.
When I was studying thunderstorm
electrification, I was lucky enough
to spend time at New Mexico Tech,
where the institution’s president –
astrophysicist Stirling Colgate –
talked to me about hurricane
suppression.
Hurricanes gain energy from
the warm oceans they pass over.His idea was to overturn the ocean
in the path of the storm to bring
up cooler water. He calculated that
it was possible, but would need all
of the US navy’s ships to do it.Fusion needs to try many
different approaches
13 June, p 30
From David Pratt,
Bembridge, Isle of Wight, UK
I have watched the pursuit of
fusion power for more than
50 years. However, the current
approach begs a question. Half the
world’s population is funding one
giant fusion experiment – ITER –
that was designed decades ago.
It relies on just one proposed fuel
and is projected to cost about
€20 billion and rising, with the
aim to inspire a power plant that
will generate electricity by 2050.
Rather than putting all our eggs
in one basket, wouldn’t it be better
to fund 100 experiments with up
to €100 million each instead?Thanks for more than
60 years of inspiration
11 July, p 2
From John Spivey,
Thorverton, Devon, UK
Congratulations on New Scientist
winning Consumer Magazine
Brand of the Year at the
Professional Publishers
Association awards. I remember,
while still at school, reading the
issue in 1957 that had Sputnik on
the cover printed on a blue ink
background. Since then, I have
read many issues, often for free
after persuading physics students
to subscribe while I was a teacher. ❚For the record
❚ The estimated number of
people who have contracted
coronavirus in the UK according
to SeroTracker is 5.13 per cent
(20 June, p 10).
❚ The source of the cholera
outbreak that John Snow
identified wasn’t the water
pump handle, but the water
being pumped (6 June, p 54).Views You r le t te r s
Want to get in touch?
Send letters to [email protected];
see terms at newscientist.com/letters
Letters sent to New Scientist, 25 Bedford Street,
London WC2E 9ES will be delayed