Letters archive
Join the conversation in New Scientist's Letters section, where readers can share their thoughts and opinions on articles and see responses from experts and enthusiasts across a range of science topics. To submit a letter, please see our terms and email letters@newscientist.com
4 November 2020
From Phil Stracchino, Gilford, New Hampshire, US
In your article on the chances of finding intelligent life beyond Earth, you suggest that the error bars on estimates of this produced by the Drake equation are huge, that we are essentially plugging best guesses into the equation and have been doing so for decades ( 3 October, p 36 ). This is a …
4 November 2020
From John Spivey, Thorverton, Devon, UK
You write about complex electric circuits used to represent a fourth physical dimension ( 17 October, p 40 ). For a lighter take on a fourth dimension, read "–And He Built a Crooked House–" by Robert A. Heinlein. It is a story about a house built in the shape of a 4D cube, or a …
4 November 2020
From Alan Baratz, CEO of D-Wave,Bellevue, Washington, US
There are several points that I would like to address in your coverage, both in your magazine and online, of D-Wave's claim that it has the world's most powerful quantum computer ( 10 October, p 17 ). It is wrong to characterise quantum annealing as being limited to optimisation. With more than 250 early applications, …
4 November 2020
From John Humble, Taroona, Tasmania, Australia
You report that humans are the only species that uses bipedalism as its primary mode of transport ( 10 October, p 34 ). This must be worrying news to ostriches and their ilk.
11 November 2020
From Robert Cluck, Reston, Virginia, US
In critiquing the Great Barrington Declaration – described as a call for a let-it-rip, herd-immunity approach to the pandemic – Graham Lawton notes that mainstream scientists see curbs on freedom as the only way to keep a lid on the virus for now ( 24 October, p 23 ). A democratic, civilised nation needs to …
11 November 2020
From Sam Shuster, Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
While Lawton is right to question herd immunity, it is irrelevant to the strategy of targeted isolation of the susceptible, the purpose of which is to avoid overloading the health service and allow normal social and economic life to continue. That idea was taken up in The Lancet and more recently in the Great Barrington …
11 November 2020
From Robert Peck, York, UK
Even in the worst-case scenario if the coronavirus were allowed to "let rip", the overall harm is likely to be less than that of lockdowns. While covid-19 deaths may rise, those due to cancelled surgery, undiagnosed cancer, job loss and suicide will be averted. I have yet to hear an explanation as to why lives …
11 November 2020
From Andy Connell, Bristol, UK
An important point behind the call to ease lockdowns is that, unless the scientific advice is tempered by consideration of social and economic impact, it risks being labelled as myopic and self-serving. If, at the end of this pandemic, the excess death rates turn out to be minimal and the economic and social costs extreme, …
11 November 2020
From Penelope Sucharitkul, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK
As a medical student and an avid martial artist, I found your article on balance fascinating ( 10 October, p 34 ). Karate is all about stability. For more than 10 years, I have trained in this martial art barefoot, honing my balance and mental focus. After training, my body feels more in tune with …
11 November 2020
From David Cannon, Exeter, UK
The most impressive book I have read this year is The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton. It gives a brilliant exposition of an idea largely dismissed in your article, modern monetary theory. The essence of its argument isn't that nations should spend their way out of trouble, but that balanced budgets shouldn't be the primary …