One of the four pillars of good conversation is levity. You needn’t be a comedian, you can but have some funTetra Images, LLC/Alamy Conversation lies at the heart of our relationships – yet many of us find it surprisingly hard to talk to others. We may feel anxious at the thought of making small talk with strangers and struggle to connect with the people who are closest to us. If that sounds familiar, Alison Wood Brooks hopes to help. She is a professor at Harvard Business School, where she teaches an oversubscribed course called “TALK: How to talk gooder in business and life”, and the author of a new book, Talk: The science of conversation and the art of being ourselves. Both offer four key principles for more meaningful exchanges. Conversations are inherently unpredictable, says Wood Brooks, but they follow certain rules – and knowing their architecture makes us more comfortable with what is outside of our control. New Scientist asked her about the best ways to apply this research to our own chats. David Robson: Talking about talking feels quite meta. Do you ever find yourself critiquing your own performance? Alison Wood Brooks: There are so many levels of “meta-ness”. I have often felt like I’m floating over the room, watching conversations unfold, even as I’m involved in them myself. I teach a course at Harvard, and [my students] all get to experience this feeling as well. There can be an uncomfortable period of hypervigilance, but I hope that dissipates over time as they develop better habits. There is a famous quote from Charlie Parker, who was a jazz saxophonist. He said something like, “Practise, practise, practise, and then when you get on stage, let it all go and just wail.” I think that’s my approach to conversation. Even when you’re hyper-aware of conversation dynamics, you have to remember the true delight of being with another human mind, and never lose the magic of being together. Think ahead, but once you’re talking, let it all go and just wail. Reading your book, I learned that a good way to enliven a conversation is to ask someone why they are passionate about what they do. So, where does your passion for conversation come from? I have two answers to this question. One is professional. Early in my professorship at Harvard, I had been studying emotions by exploring how people talk about their feelings and the balance between what we feel inside and how we express that to others. And I realised I just had this deep, profound interest in figuring out how people talk to each other about everything, not just their feelings. We now have scientific tools that allow us to capture conversations and analyse them at large scale. Natural language processing, machine learning, the advent of AI – all this allows us to take huge swathes of transcript data and process it much more efficiently. Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. Sign up to newsletter The personal answer is that I’m an identical twin, and I spent my whole life, from the moment I opened my newborn eyes, existing next to a person who’s an exact copy of myself. It was like observing myself at very close range, interacting with the world, interacting with other people. I could see when she said and did things well, and I could try to do that myself. And I saw when her jokes failed, or she stumbled over her words – I tried to avoid those mistakes. It was a very fortunate form of feedback that not a lot of people get. And then, as a twin, you’ve got this person sharing a bedroom, sharing all your clothes, going to all the same parties and playing on the same sports teams, so we were just constantly in conversation with each other. You reached this level of shared reality that is so incredible, and I’ve spent the rest of my life trying to help other people get there in their relationships, too. “TALK” cleverly captures your framework for better conversations: topics, asking, levity and kindness. Let’s start at the beginning. How should we decide what to talk about? My first piece of advice is to prepare. Some people do this naturally. They already think about the things that they should talk about with somebody before they see them. They should lean into this habit. Some of my students, however, think it’s crazy. They think preparation will make the conversation seem rigid and forced and overly scripted. But just because you’ve thought ahead about what you might talk about doesn’t mean you have to talk about those things once the conversation is underway. It does mean, however, that you always have an idea waiting for you when you’re not sure what to talk about next. Having just one topic in your back pocket can help you in those anxiety-ridden moments. It makes things more fluent, which is important for establishing a connection. Choosing a topic is not only important at the start of a conversation. We’re constantly making decisions about whether we should stay on one subject, drift to something else or totally shift gears and go somewhere wildly different. Sometimes the topic of conversation is obvious. Even then, knowing when to switch to a new one can be trickyMartin Parr/Magnum Photos What’s your advice when making these decisions? There are three very clear signs that suggest that it’s time to switch topics. The first is longer mutual pauses. The second is more uncomfortable laughter, which we use to fill the space that we would usually fill excitedly with good content. And the third sign is redundancy. Once you start repeating things that have already been said on the topic, it’s a sign that you should move to something else. After an average conversation, most people feel like they’ve covered the right number of topics. But if you ask people after conversations that didn’t go well, they’ll more often say that they didn’t talk about enough things, rather than that they talked about too many things. This suggests that a common mistake is lingering too long on a topic after you’ve squeezed all the juice out of it. The second element of TALK is asking questions. I think a lot of us have heard the advice to ask more questions, yet many people don’t apply it. Why do you think that is? Many years of research have shown that the human mind is remarkably egocentric. Often, we are so focused on our own perspective that we forget to even ask someone else to share what’s in their mind. Another reason is fear. You’re interested in the other person, and you know you should ask them questions, but you’re afraid of being too intrusive, or that you will reveal your own incompetence, because you feel you should know the answer already. What kinds of questions should we be asking – and avoiding? In the book, I talk about the power of follow-up questions that build on anything that your partner has just said. It shows that you heard them, that you care and that you want to know more. Even one follow-up question can springboard us away from shallow talk into something deeper and more meaningful. There are, however, some bad patterns of question asking, such as “boomerasking”. Michael Yeomans [at Imperial College London] and I have a recent paper about this, and oh my gosh, it’s been such fun to study. It’s a play on the word boomerang: it comes back to the person who threw it. If I ask you what you had for breakfast, and you tell me you had Special K and banana, and then I say, “Well, let me tell you about my breakfast, because, boy, was it delicious” – that’s boomerasking. Sometimes it’s a thinly veiled way of bragging or complaining, but sometimes I think people are genuinely interested to hear from their partner, but then the partner’s answer reminds them so much of their own life that they can’t help but start sharing their perspective. In our research, we have found that this makes your partner feel like you weren’t interested in their perspective, so it seems very insincere. Sharing your own perspective is important. It’s okay at some point to bring the conversation back to yourself. But don’t do it so soon that it makes your partner feel like you didn’t hear their answer or care about it. Research by Alison Wood Brooks includes a recent study on “boomerasking”, a pitfall you should avoid to make conversations flowJanelle Bruno What are the benefits of levity? When we think of conversations that haven’t gone well, we often think of moments of hostility, anger or disagreement, but a quiet killer of conversation is boredom. Levity is the antidote. These small moments of sparkle or fizz can pull us back in and make us feel engaged with each other again. Our research has shown that we give status and respect to people who make us feel good, so much so that in a group of people, a person who can land even one appropriate joke is more likely to be voted as the leader. And the joke doesn’t even need to be very funny! It’s the fact that they were confident enough to try it and competent enough to read the room. Do you have any practical steps that people can apply to generate levity, even if they’re not a natural comedian? Levity is not just about being funny. In fact, aiming to be a comedian is not the right goal. When we watch stand-up on Netflix, comedians have rehearsed those jokes and honed them and practised them for a long time, and they’re delivering them in a monologue to an audience. It’s a completely different task from a live conversation. In real dialogue, what everybody is looking for is to feel engaged, and that doesn’t require particularly funny jokes or elaborate stories. When you see opportunities to make it fun or lighten the mood, that’s what you need to grab. It can come through a change to a new, fresh topic, or calling back to things that you talked about earlier in the conversation or earlier in your relationship. These callbacks – which sometimes do refer to something funny – are such a nice way of showing that you’ve listened and remembered. A levity move could also involve giving sincere compliments to other people. When you think nice things, when you admire someone, make sure you say it out loud. This brings us to the last element of TALK: kindness. Why do we so often fail to be as kind as we would like? Wobbles in kindness often come back to our egocentrism. Research shows that we underestimate how much other people’s perspectives differ from our own, and we forget that we have the tools to ask other people directly in conversation for their perspective. Being a kinder conversationalist is about trying to focus on your partner’s perspective and then figuring what they need and helping them to get it. Finally, what is your number one tip for readers to have a better conversation the next time they speak to someone? Every conversation is surprisingly tricky and complex. When things don’t go perfectly, give yourself and others more grace. There will be trips and stumbles and then a little grace can go very, very far. Topics:

Al Hajar Mountains in OmanL_B_Photography/Shutters​tock A section of Earth’s mantle beneath Oman appears to be unusually warm, in what researchers say may be the first known “ghost plume” – a column of hot rock emanating from the lower mantle without apparent volcanic activity on the surface. Mantle plumes are mysterious upwellings of molten rock believed to transmit heat from the core-mantle boundary to the Earth’s surface, far from the edges of tectonic plates. There are a dozen or so examples thought to occur underneath the middle of continental plates – for instance, beneath Yellowstone and the East African rift. “But these are all cases where you do have surface volcanism,” says Simone Pilia at the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia. Oman has no such volcanic clues. Pilia first came to suspect there was a plume beneath Oman “serendipitously” after he began analysing new seismic data from the region. He observed the velocity of waves generated by distant earthquakes slowed down in a cylindrical area beneath eastern Oman, indicating the rocks there were less rigid than the surrounding material due to high temperatures. Other independent seismic measurements showed key boundaries where minerals deep in the Earth change phases in a way consistent with a hot plume. These measurements suggest the plume extends more than 660 kilometres below the surface. The presence of a plume could also explain why the region has continued to rise in elevation long after tectonic compression – a geological process where the Earth’s crust is squeezed together – stopped. It also fits with models of what could have caused a shift in the movement of the Indian tectonic plate. “The more we gathered evidence, the more we were convinced that it is a plume,” says Pilia, who named the geologic feature the “Dani plume” after his son. Unmissable news about our planet delivered straight to your inbox every month. Sign up to newsletter “It’s plausible” that a plume indeed exists there, says Saskia Goes at Imperial College London, adding the study is “thorough”. However, she points out narrow plumes are notoriously difficult to detect. If it does exist, however, the presence of a “ghost plume” contained within the mantle by the relatively thick rocky layer beneath Oman would suggest there are others, says Pilia. “We’re convinced that the Dani plume is not alone.” If there are many other hidden plumes, it could mean more heat from the core is flowing directly through the mantle via plumes, rather than through slower convection, says Goes. “It has implications, potentially, for the evolution of the Earth if we get a different estimate of how much heat comes out of the mantle.” Journal referenceEarth and Planetary Science Letters DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2025.119467 Topics:

A dangerous strain of bird flu is spreading in US livestockMediaMedium/Alamy Since Donald Trump assumed office in January, the leading US public health agency has pulled back preparations for a potential bird flu pandemic. But as it steps back, another government agency is stepping up. While the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) previously held regular briefings on its efforts to prevent a wider outbreak of a deadly bird flu virus called H5N1 in people, it largely stopped once Trump took office. It has also cancelled funding for a vaccine that would have targeted the virus. In contrast, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has escalated its fight against H5N1’s spread in poultry flocks and dairy herds, including by funding the development of livestock vaccines. This particular virus – a strain of avian influenza called H5N1 – poses a significant threat to humans, having killed about half of the roughly 1000 people worldwide who tested positive for it since 2003. While the pathogen spreads rapidly in birds, it is poorly adapted to infecting humans and isn’t known to transmit between people. But that could change if it acquires mutations that allow it to spread more easily among mammals – a risk that increases with each mammalian infection. The possibility of H5N1 evolving to become more dangerous to people has grown significantly since March 2024, when the virus jumped from migratory birds to dairy cows in Texas. More than 1,070 herds across 17 states have been affected since then. H5N1 also infects poultry, placing the virus in closer proximity to people. Since 2022, nearly 175 million domestic birds have been culled in the US due to H5N1, and almost all of the 71 people who have tested positive for it had direct contact with livestock. Get the most essential health and fitness news in your inbox every Saturday. Sign up to newsletter “We need to take this seriously because when [H5N1] constantly is spreading, it’s constantly spilling over into humans,” says Seema Lakdawala at Emory University in Georgia. The virus has already killed a person in the US and a child in Mexico this year. Still, cases have declined under Trump. The last recorded human case was in February, and the number of affected poultry flocks fell 95 per cent between then and June. Outbreaks in dairy herds have also stabilised. It isn’t clear what is behind the decline. Lakdawala believes it is partly due to a lull in bird migration, which reduces opportunities for the virus to spread from wild birds to livestock. It may also reflect efforts by the USDA to contain outbreaks on farms. In February, the USDA unveiled a $1 billion plan for tackling H5N1, including strengthening farmers’ defences against the virus, such as through free biosecurity assessments. Of the 150 facilities that have undergone assessment, only one has experienced an H5N1 outbreak. Under Trump, the USDA also continued its National Milk Testing Strategy, which mandates farms provide raw milk samples for influenza testing. If a farm is positive for H5N1, it must allow the USDA to monitor livestock and implement measures to contain the virus. The USDA launched the programme in December and has since ramped up participation to 45 states. “The National Milk Testing Strategy is a fantastic system,” says Erin Sorrell at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland. Along with the USDA’s efforts to improve biosecurity measures on farms, milk testing is crucial for containing the outbreak, says Sorrell. But while the USDA has bolstered its efforts against H5N1, the HHS doesn’t appear to have followed suit. In fact, the recent drop in human cases may reflect decreased surveillance due to workforce cuts, says Sorrell. In April, the HHS laid off about 10,000 employees, including 90 per cent of staff at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, an office that helps investigate H5N1 outbreaks in farm workers. “There is an old saying that if you don’t test for something, you can’t find it,” says Sorrell. Yet a spokesperson for the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says its guidance and surveillance efforts have not changed. “State and local health departments continue to monitor for illness in persons exposed to sick animals,” they told New Scientist. “CDC remains committed to rapidly communicating information as needed about H5N1.” The USDA and HHS also diverge on vaccination. While the USDA has allocated $100 million toward developing vaccines and other solutions for preventing H5N1’s spread in livestock, the HHS cancelled $776 million in contracts for influenza vaccine development. The contracts – terminated on 28 May – were with the pharmaceutical company Moderna to develop vaccines targeting flu subtypes, including H5N1, that could cause future pandemics. The news came the same day Moderna reported nearly 98 per cent of the roughly 300 participants who received two doses of the H5 vaccine in a clinical trial had antibody levels believed to be protective against the virus. The US has about five million H5N1 vaccine doses stockpiled, but these are made using eggs and cultured cells, which take longer to produce than mRNA-based vaccines like Moderna’s. The Moderna vaccine would have modernised the stockpile and enabled the government to rapidly produce vaccines in the event of a pandemic, says Sorrell. “It seems like a very effective platform and would have positioned the US and others to be on good footing if and when we needed a vaccine for our general public,” she says. The HHS cancelled the contracts due to concerns about mRNA vaccines, which Robert F Kennedy Jr – the country’s highest-ranking public health official – has previously cast doubt on. “The reality is that mRNA technology remains under-tested, and we are not going to spend taxpayer dollars repeating the mistakes of the last administration,” said HHS communications director Andrew Nixon in a statement to New Scientist. However, mRNA technology isn’t new. It has been in development for more than half a century and numerous clinical trials have shown mRNA vaccines are safe. While they do carry the risk of side effects – the majority of which are mild – this is true of almost every medical treatment. In a press release, Moderna said it would explore alternative funding paths for the programme. “My stance is that we should not be looking to take anything off the table, and that includes any type of vaccine regimen,” says Lakdawala. “Vaccines are the most effective way to counter an infectious disease,” says Sorrell. “And so having that in your arsenal and ready to go just give you more options.” Topics:

US Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F Kennedy JrTasos Katopodis/Getty One of the top vaccine experts at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Lakshmi Panagiotakopoulos, resigned on 4 June – a week after Robert F Kennedy Jr announced that covid-19 vaccines would no longer be recommended for most children and pregnancies. The announcement set off several days of confusion around who will have access to covid-19 vaccines in the US going forward. In practice, there hasn’t been a drastic change to access, though there will probably be new obstacles for parents hoping to vaccinate their children. Still, Kennedy’s announcement signals a troubling circumvention of public health norms. “My career in public health and vaccinology started with a deep-seated desire to help the most vulnerable members of our population, and that is not something I am able to continue doing in this role,” said Panagiotakopoulos in an email to colleagues obtained by Reuters. Panagiotakopoulos supported the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which has advised the CDC on vaccine recommendations since 1964. But last week, Kennedy – the country’s highest-ranking public health official – upended this decades-long precedent. “I couldn’t be more pleased to announce that, as of today, the covid vaccine for healthy children and healthy pregnant woman has been removed from the CDC recommended immunisation schedule,” he said in a video posted to the social media platform X on 27 May. Despite his directive, the CDC has, so far, only made minor changes to its guidance on covid-19 vaccines. Instead of recommending them for children outright, it now recommends vaccination “based on shared clinical decision-making”. In other words, parents should talk with a doctor before deciding. It isn’t clear how this will affect access to these vaccines in every scenario, but it could make it more difficult for children to get a shot at pharmacies. Get the most essential health and fitness news in your inbox every Saturday. Sign up to newsletter The CDC’s guidance on vaccination in pregnancy is also ambiguous. While its website still recommends a covid-19 shot during pregnancy, a note at the top says, “this page will be updated to align with the updated immunization schedule.” Kennedy’s announcement contradicts the stances of major public health organisations, too. Both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (APP) have come out opposing it. “The CDC and HHS encourage individuals to talk with their healthcare provider about any personal medical decision,” an HHS spokesperson told New Scientist. “Under the leadership of Secretary Kennedy, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship.” However, Linda Eckert at the University of Washington in Seattle says the conflicting messages are confusing for people. “It opens up disinformation opportunities. It undermines confidence in vaccination in general,” she says. “I can’t imagine it won’t decrease immunisation rates overall.” Research has repeatedly shown covid-19 vaccination in adolescence and pregnancy is safe and effective. In fact, Martin Makary, the head of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), listed pregnancy as a risk factor for severe covid-19 a week before Kennedy’s announcement, further convoluting the government’s public health messaging. Kennedy’s announcement is in line with some other countries’ covid policies. For example, Australia and the UK don’t recommend covid-19 vaccines for children unless they are at risk of severe illness. They also don’t recommend covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy if someone is already vaccinated. Asma Khalil, a member of the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, says the UK’s decision was based on the reduced risk of the omicron variant, the cost-effectiveness of vaccination and high population immunity. However, these factors can vary across countries. The UK population also tends to have better access to healthcare than the US, says Eckert. “These decisions need to carefully consider the risks and benefits relative to the national population,” says Khalil. The HHS didn’t answer New Scientist’s questions about whether a similar analysis guided Kennedy’s decision-making. What is maybe most troubling, however, is the precedent Kennedy’s announcement sets. The ACIP – an independent group of public health experts – was expected to vote on proposed changes to covid-19 vaccine recommendations later this month. But Kennedy’s decision has bypassed this process. “This style of decision-making – by individuals versus going through experts who are carefully vetted for conflicts of interest, who carefully look at the data – this has never happened in our country,” says Eckert. “We’re in uncharted territory.” She worries the move could pave the way for Kennedy to chip away at other vaccine recommendations. “I know there are a lot of vaccines he has been actively against in his career,” she says. Kennedy has previously blamed vaccines for autism and falsely claimed that the polio vaccine caused more deaths than it averted. “What it speaks to is the fact that [Kennedy] does not see value in these vaccines and is going to do everything he can to try and devalue them in the minds of the public and make them harder to receive,” says Amesh Adalja at Johns Hopkins University. Topics:

Taurine supplements have been considered promising for delaying ageing, but that may not be the caseShutterstock / Eugeniusz Dudzinski The amino acid taurine was once thought to decline with age, and animal research suggested that taurine supplements could delay ageing. But a new study shows that the decline doesn’t happen consistently. In fact, taurine levels tend to increase in people over time, suggesting that low levels of the nutrient aren’t a driver of ageing. Previous research has shown that taurine concentrations decline in men as they age and that people with higher taurine levels at 60 years old tend to have better health outcomes. This, along with evidence that taurine supplements extend lifespan in mice and monkeys, suggested that low taurine contributes to ageing.Advertisement The trouble is that taurine fluctuates in response to other factors too, such as illness, stress and diet – therefore, declines in this key amino acid may not be due to ageing. Maria Emilia Fernandez at the National Institute on Aging in Maryland and her colleagues analysed taurine levels in 742 people between 26 and 100 years old. The participants, about half of whom were women, didn’t have underlying health conditions and provided three to five blood samples between January 2006 and October 2018. On average, taurine levels were almost 27 per cent higher in women at 100 years old than at 26 years old and rose about 6 per cent in men between the ages of 30 and 97. Similar results were seen in 32 monkeys that underwent three to seven blood draws between 3 and 32 years of age. Between 5 and 30 years of age, taurine levels rose 72 per cent in female monkeys and 27 per cent in male monkeys, on average. Together, these findings indicate that taurine levels are not a reliable indication of ageing. What’s more, taurine levels also varied widely between people and even within individuals over time, suggesting that other environmental factors influence them, says Fernandez. Get the most essential health and fitness news in your inbox every Saturday. Sign up to newsletter However, some people may still benefit from taurine supplementation, says Fernandez, pointing to studies that show it helps regulate blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes or obesity. But whether it can delay ageing in otherwise healthy people is an open question. Vijay Yadav at Rutgers University in New Jersey says he and his colleagues are currently conducting a clinical trial of taurine supplementation in middle-aged adults. “We hope to finish the trial by the end of 2025,” he says. “Hopefully it will generate sufficiently rigorous data to show whether or not taurine supplementation delays the pace of ageing in humans or increases health and fitness.” Journal reference:Science DOI: 10.1126/science.adl2116 Article amended on 5 June 2025We corrected Vijay Yadav's affiliationTopics:

The Isaiah Dead Sea Scroll is thought to date to around 100 BCZev Radovan/Alamy Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls may be up to a century older than previously thought, potentially revising our understanding of how these ancient texts were produced. This new assessment, based on AI analysis of handwriting and modern radiocarbon dating techniques, even suggests that a few scrolls – like those containing the biblical books Daniel and Ecclesiastes – may be copies made during the lifetimes of the books’ original authors, says Mladen Popović at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands.

There are concerns that more children are being diagnosed with ADHDImgorthand/Getty Images Is ADHD in children on the rise? An assessment of thousands of studies released since 2020 suggests, surprisingly, that the answer is no – but the researchers behind the work have expressed their frustration at the poor quality of data available, meaning that the true picture remains murky. “The best data we have suggests that there has been no meaningful increase in ADHD prevalence,” says Alex Martin at King’s College London, but that masks a larger problem, she says. “Most of the research is too biased to…

Satellite view of coral reefs in New CaledoniaShutterstock/BEST-BACKGR​OUNDS There might be an upside to the loss of coral reefs. Their decline would mean oceans can absorb up to 5 per cent more carbon dioxide by 2100, researchers estimate, slowing the build up of this greenhouse gas in Earth’s atmosphere. “It is a beneficial effect if you only care about the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere,” says Lester Kwiatkowski at Sorbonne University in Paris, France. But the decline of corals will also reduce biodiversity, harm fisheries and leave many coasts more exposed to rising seas, he says. Advertisement How much the world will warm depends mainly on the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. So far the land and oceans have been soaking up around half of the extra CO2 we have emitted. Any factors that increase or decrease these so-called land or ocean carbon sinks could therefore have a significant impact on future warming. It is often assumed that corals remove CO2 from seawater as they grow their calcium carbonate skeletons. In fact, the process, also known as calcification, is a net source of CO2. “You’re taking inorganic carbon in the ocean, generally in the form of carbonate and bicarbonate ions, turning it into calcium carbonate and that process releases CO2 into the seawater, some of which will be lost to the atmosphere,” says Kwiatkowski. Unmissable news about our planet delivered straight to your inbox every month. Sign up to newsletter This means that if reef formation around the world slows or even reverses, less CO2 will be released by reefs and the oceans will be able to absorb more of this greenhouse gas from the atmosphere – a factor not currently included in climate models. Observations suggest coral reef calcification is already declining as rising seawater temperatures cause mass coral bleaching and die-offs. The higher level of CO2 is also making oceans more acidic, which can make it harder to build carbonate skeletons and even lead to their dissolution. Kwiatkowski and his team took published estimates of how corals will be affected by warming and ocean acidification and used a computer model to work out how this might change the ocean sink in various emission scenarios. They conclude that the oceans could take up between 1 and 5 per cent more carbon by 2100, and up to 13 per cent more by 2300. This doesn’t take account of other factors that can cause reef decline such as overfishing and the spread of coral diseases, says Kwiatkowski, so might even be an underestimate. On the other hand, the work assumes that corals aren’t able to adapt or acclimatise, says Chris Jury at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa, who wasn’t involved in the study. “If the worst-case or even medium-case scenario in this study comes to pass, it means the near-total destruction of coral reefs globally,” says Jury. “I think that with consideration of realistic levels of adaptation and acclimatisation by corals and other reef organisms, the authors might come to different conclusions under a low to moderate level of climate change.” If Kwiatkowski’s team is correct, it means that the amount of emitted CO2 that will lead to a given level of warming – the so-called carbon budget – is a little larger than currently thought. “I think we would like our budgets to be as accurate as possible, even if we’re blowing through them,” says Kwiatkowski. Journal reference:PNAS DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2501562122 Topics:

Brett Ryder / Alamy First popularised by the bestselling New Age book The Secret, manifestation has remained a cultural phenomenon for decades, championed by people from Oprah Winfrey to Deepak Chopra. Advocates claim you can attract whatever you want — whether that’s a romantic partner, a new business opportunity or even a material object — by asking the universe for it and believing that it can deliver. Some practitioners propose physics-defying explanations that evoke mysterious vibrational forces to explain its effectiveness. This article is part of a special series exploring the radical potential of the human imagination. Read more here. This is clearly nonsense, but neuroscientist Sabina Brennan was nevertheless intrigued. What might be the real reason that the practices involved in manifesting can benefit people’s lives? She realised that there were several fascinating, evidence-based explanations for why such interventions can rewire the brain in ways that help you achieve what you desire. In her new book, The Neuroscience of Manifesting, Brennan unpacks some of the mechanisms behind this enduring practice. Helen Thomson: Can you start by telling me what manifestation is?  Sabina Brennan: Manifesting is the practice of transforming thought into reality by visualising your goal and then developing the discipline to stay focused on and take action to achieve that goal. You can’t magically make things happen — you can’t defy physics — but you can change your reality and your future through focused action. Manifestation is easy to disregard as unscientific nonsense – why did you think differently?  There are a few reasons why manifesting is dismissed by some academics. One is the misconception that manifesting is just wishful thinking rather than the…

Planting herbs with your tomatoes may lift yields and deter pestsShutterstock/Irina WS As an obsessive plant collector with little impulse control, I will take any excuse to cram a few more species into my tiny plot. So the concept of companion planting, an old belief that adding certain plants around existing crops can boost pest resistance, yields and even flavour, is one that has always appealed to me. But as a sceptical scientist, I’m curious about how well these claims actually stack up. Let’s dive in. The tricky thing with examining the science around companion planting is quite how…

Brett Ryder / Getty Because we live our lives entirely in our own heads, understanding the contents of someone else’s — and how radically their experience might differ from our own — is hard. New research, though, is revealing just how diverse the human imagination can be. Take the concept of a “mind’s eye”. You might take being able to conjure up mental images in your imagination as a given. But research from myself and others has shown that 1 to 4 per cent of the population have aphantasia, meaning they lack wakeful visual imagery – ask them to “see” a hippo floating down a river on a pink lilo, and nothing happens. (Most people with aphantasia experience visual imagery in their dreams, however.) This article is part of a special series exploring the radical potential of the human imagination. Read more here. Living with aphantasia Aphantasia is often associated with a “thinner” than usual memory for personal past or autobiographical events, and sometimes with autism and difficulties with face recognition. People with aphantasia are more likely than those with exceptionally vivid imagery to work in STEM areas. They often report that close relatives are also aphantasic, hinting at a genetic basis. Aphantasia may be protective in some ways, possibly offering some defence against medical conditions involving imagery, like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Fully understanding the brain signatures of aphantasia is a work in progress, but five papers published this year and last have begun to help us untangle what is going on. One brain-imaging study, for example, has shown how the regions associated with visual imagery do fire in those with aphantasia, but…

Murderbot (Alexander Skarsgård) just wants to be left aloneApple TV+ Apple TV+Friends and colleagues spent years trying to get me to read The Murderbot Diaries, a sci-fi series by Martha Wells about a cyborg security unit that gains free will. I resisted. They pitched it to me as quirky, which raised my hackles, or as comfort reading, which sent them skyrocketing. Not my sort of thing, I thought snootily. But once Apple TV+ said that it would be adapting All Systems Red, the first instalment, I knew I had to give it a read. It…

AI translation apps can help you connect with other people – but at what cost?Ventz/Getty Images I have long remembered a conversation I had 20 years ago with one of my professors, an expert in what we then called artificial intelligence, which, in many ways, is wildly different to what we now call AI. In this exchange, he confidently told me there was no point learning a second language. Computers would soon erase language barriers, he said. Not only by translating written text, but also in real time using audio, to make conversations flow smoothly even if everyone involved is…

If greenhouse gas emissions aren’t curbed, carbon dioxide removal won’t make a differenceYASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP via Getty Images The nascent carbon dioxide removal industry expects to hit a milestone this year: 1 million tonnes of planet-warming CO2 removed from the atmosphere. That certainly is progress, but things aren’t moving anywhere near quickly enough to remove the billions of tonnes of carbon researchers say we need to capture annually in coming decades. “It’s not scaling up as fast as it would need to if we are…

Technology for seeing around corners would be of use to the militaryMatthew Horwood/Getty Images An ordinary camera could soon take photos of things that are out of sight, thanks to algorithms that interpret how light bounces off a wall. “Normally, when light bounces off rough surfaces, like walls, it scrambles the scene into a messy blur,” says Wenwen Li at the University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei. “Our goal was to ‘unscramble’ that blur and recover the hidden scene. Think of it like turning a rough wall into a mirror.”

The Book Club gives their verdict on Larry Niven’s RingworldEugene Powers/Alamy It was quite an experience, moving from the technicolour magical realism of Michel Nieva’s wild dystopia, Dengue Boy, to Larry Niven’s slice of classic science fiction, Ringworld, first published in 1970 and very much redolent of the sci-fi writing of that era. Not a wholly bad experience, mind, but quite a jolting change of pace for the New Scientist Book Club. I was a teenager when I last read Ringworld, and a hugely uncritical sort of teenager at that, so I was keen to return to a novel I remembered fondly and see how it stood up to the test of time – and my somewhat more critical eye. The first thing to say is that many of the things I loved about Ringworld were very much still there. This is, for me, a novel that inspires awe – with the vastness of its imagination, the size of its megastructures, the distance it travels in space. I was reminded of that awe early on, when our protagonist Louis Wu (more on him later) recalls standing at the edge of Mount Lookitthat on a distant planet. “The Long Fall River, on that world, ends in the tallest waterfall in known space. Louis’s eyes had followed it down as far as they could penetrate the void mist. The featureless white of the void itself had grasped at his mind, and Louis Wu, half hypnotized, had sworn to live forever. How else could he see all there was to see?” Advertisement That hugeness, that desire for exploration and knowledge and discovery, is one of the main reasons why I love science fiction. What else is out there, and what can we find out about it? From that field of murderous sunflowers on the Ringworld – what a scene! – to Niven’s image of our crew in space, looking at the bottom of the Ringworld and the huge bulge of a deep ocean protruding towards them, Ringworld has this in spades, and I lapped it up. “A man can lose his soul among the white stars… They call it the far look. It is dangerous.” I also very much enjoyed how Niven makes us pick up the breadcrumbs of where we are in time and in technological developments; at one point, Freeman Dyson, he of the Dyson spheres that inspired the Ringworld, is described as “one of the ancient natural philosophers, pre-Belt, almost pre-atomic”. I find that sort of thing delightful, and I was also (largely) amused by Niven’s aliens, from the cowering terror of the Puppeteers to the brilliantly named Speaker-To-Animals (we, the aliens, are the animals). I pictured Speaker as a huge version of our large ginger cat, and rather liked him. As I wrote earlier, though, this is a piece of writing that feels very much of its time, in terms of the somewhat plodding prose and sexist overtones, even if it succeeds (for me) in the wonderful, star-spanning maths and physics of it all. Niven’s characters are pretty one-dimensional. Louis Wu is quite annoying. There could be so much more to Teela, our token woman. And once the crew are on the Ringworld, it all feels a bit “then they went here, then they went there”, rather than being tightly plotted. Join us in reading and discussing the best new science and science fiction books Sign up to newsletter There has been some intense discussion about this novel on our Facebook page, and many of you felt similarly. “While I enjoyed it very much, I kept getting pulled out of the interesting scientific aspects of the story as well as the rollicking adventure by the sexist, boys club aspects. It’s a little sad that Larry Niven’s view of the distant future didn’t involve any advancement in men’s views of women,” said Jennifer Marano. “It reminds me of early spy movies. Beautiful woman who hasn’t sense enough to not be enamored by less than interesting or intelligent male with pretty huge ego,” said Eliza Rose. Alan Perrett was even less impressed with Louis Wu’s behaviour: “I have to admit to finding Louis Wu absolutely creepy. He treats the woman that he professes to love with contempt. He laughs finding out that she’s the result of a eugenics experiment and then, when looking at her, sees her dismay and then keeps laughing. I hope when I’m 200 years old I’ve learned a little more empathy than that.” Gosia Furmanik grew up reading science fiction from Niven’s era because that was what was available – but “eventually, the sexism and lack of female/diverse protagonists put me off sci-fi for a good 15 years”. She only got back into sci-fi when she discovered “that nowadays it’s easy to find books of this genre written by non-white non-men that don’t have this pitfall”. “Ringworld brought me back, not in a good way,” Gosia writes. “While not as blatant as in some of its contemporaries, cringy sexism nevertheless seeps out of this book.” It’s definitely true that Teela’s character arc was the biggest issue for most of us with this book. “I loathed the ending of Teela’s story and the explanation of how her luck led her to come on the mission. It seems a woman can’t have a meaningful existence without a man!” wrote Samatha Lane. Samantha also makes a great point about how “the male human is the most perceptive creature in the universe” created by Niven. “This arrogance about the sheer cleverness of humans stems from traditional humanism which puts humans at the centre of everything – as rational, special, superior beings. Combine that with the recent conquest of space (man landed on the moon the year before) and it’s like a bonfire of the collective ego,” she writes. New Scientist book club Love reading? Come and join our friendly group of fellow book lovers. Every six weeks, we delve into an exciting new title, with members given free access to extracts from our books, articles from our authors and video interviews. Sign up Onto the positives, however: Niall Leighton “enjoyed the sheer scale of the novel” and thinks it hasn’t “dated as badly as much science fiction of this era”, while for Andy Feest, “the science was probably the most interesting thing” (he found the characters “unenjoyable” and the chauvinism “a bit jarring”). Some readers approved of Niven’s heavy hand with the maths – it “definitely added to my enjoyment”, wrote Linda Jones, while Darren Rumbold “especially liked” the Klemperer rosettes. It didn’t work for all of you, though: Phil Gurski “was excited to read this classic sci-fi novel and really, really wanted to enjoy it but the technobabble kept getting in the way. I found it hard to keep up.” Overall, I think the book club found it an interesting exercise to dig into this science fiction classic and hold it up to the light of today. I think we’ll do another classic soon enough, and I’m listening to suggestions from readers who have tipped books by Ursula K. Le Guin, N. K. Jemisin and Joanna Russ as possible palate cleansers. Next up, though, is something a little more modern: Kaliane Bradley’s bestselling time travel novel, The Ministry of Time. Yes, it has a woman as its protagonist, and yes, it passes the Bechdel test. You can read a piece by Kaliane here in which she explains why (and how) she wrote a novel about time travel, and you can check out this fun opener to the book here. Come and read along with us and tell us what you think on our Facebook page. Topics:

Hormonal birth control is effective in preventing pregnancy, but there may be some neurological trade-offs that we are only just learning about Oral contraceptives have been effectively preventing pregnancy for more than 65 years, but it has only been in the past 10 that scientists – many of them women – have started to seriously examine what effect they have on the brain. New research is showing that oral hormonal contraceptives may alter the risk of mood disorders such as depression and anxiety, affect the brain’s response to stress and change the structure of certain brain regions. Evidence presented at the European…

Starship’s ninth test flight took place on 27 MayJoe Marino/UPI/Shutterstock Another launch, another failure? With the ninth flight of SpaceX’s massive Starship rocket ending in the vehicle’s loss, questions are being asked about whether Elon Musk’s company can ever deliver on its promises to return people to the moon, launch new space stations and one day take astronauts to Mars. “I expected more progress from SpaceX by now,” says Laura Forczyk at space industry consultancy Astralytical. “It’s frustrating from an outsider’s perspective, because I’m rooting for them. So much of the space community is relying on…

A projectile point, made from the bone of a grey whale, from the Duruthy rock shelter in Landes, FranceAlexandre Lefebvre Hunter-gatherers living along the shores of the Bay of Biscay crafted hunting tools from the bones of at least five different whale species 20,000 years ago, marking the oldest evidence of manufacturing objects from whale remains. Although there is evidence of Neanderthals gathering and eating molluscs in what is now southern Spain around 150,000 years ago, current findings suggest that ancient humans didn’t regularly use coastal resources for food and raw materials until around 19,000 years ago…

Is it time to say goodbye to the multiverse?SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY/Getty Images An advanced version of the famous double-slit experiment has directly measured a single photon in two places at once – or at least, that’s the claim made by a team of physicists who say these results could destroy the concept of a multiverse. This interpretation remains highly contested, however, with other physicists arguing that the experiment can’t really tell us anything new about the nature of reality. The double-slit experiment, first performed in 1801, has played a key role in the development of quantum mechanics. It shows…