News
News from the Digital Communication, Web & Web Gis 2.0 World
07 Apr 2026
Specialized introduces Vado 3 EVO, combining robust motor performance with advanced rider convenience and comfort - Popular Science
Specialized has long understood that a commuter bike shouldn’t feel like a compromise. A good experience should turn a dreary slog into the best slice of your day, which is why the Turbo Vado has been highlighted in PopSci electric commuter bike coverage: it’s an ebike that means less grind, more glide. The new Turbo Vado 3 EVO takes that city bike and upgrades it for when the road gets patchy, the errand list gets ambitious, and you might want to blow off some post-work steam with a dirt detour. Just add safety accessories.
Specialized
See It
The core upgrade is that the Vado 3 EVO gets the full-power Specialized 3.1 motor system from the Turbo Levo eMTB: 810 watts of peak power, 105 Nm of torque, and an 840 Wh battery. That means the foundational experience doesn’t change by trim. Specialized claims 0 to 25 kph in three seconds, but the more useful translation is cleaner launches at lights, less strain on loaded climbs, and “SuperNatural” assist that feels pressed into your pedaling instead of dropped on top of it. The motor has also been tuned for quieter, smoother operation (which can be tweaked via app), and the vibration-conscious construction should feel more hushed than hectic.
The EVO-specific IP67 chassis, informed by Body Geometry and Ride Dynamics experts to reduce body pressure and increase rider confidence, is what gives the bike its wider comfort zone. A 120 mm suspension fork, 27.5-inch wheels front and rear, and 2.6-inch all-terrain tires offer a planted stance that should take the sting out of cratered streets, rough shoulders, and gravel shortcuts. [A base 4.0 model with Shimano CUES 9-Speed drivetrain plus Shimano BR-MT200 180mm hydraulic disc brakes weighs 63 lbs.] At the 5.0/6.0 trim levels, a lowerable seatpost with 40 mm of built-in suspension at the touch of a button makes for easier feet-flat stops in traffic, then a quick return to a more efficient pedaling height once you’re rolling. Add a MIK-HD-compatible rated for 27 kg rear rack with integrated brake light, optional 10 kg front rack capacity, child-seat approval, trailer compatibility, and multiple mounting points, and the Vado 3 EVO starts to look less like a commuter bike and more like a full-power platform for Monday’s laptop-and-lunch crawl to a Saturday farmer’s market haul, with a school dropoff and/or long ramble in between.
Specialized says the 840 Wh battery is good for up to five hours of ride-anywhere range, and the optional 280 Wh Range Extender pushes total capacity to 1,120 Wh. Charging also sounds unusually painless: the standard 5-amp charger gets the bike full in less than four hours, while the optional Smart Charger can take it from 0 to 80 percent in under an hour. That’s less “overnight recovery,” more “coffee stop with benefits.”
The trim story is refreshingly straightforward. The ride quality, motor output, and battery range stay the same across the line, so the lowest trim still gets the full-fat Vado 3 EVO experience. Move up the ladder to the 5.0 build and you add Shimano 11-Speed RAPIDFIRE PLUS drivetrain, TEKTRO HD-T5040 4-Piston Caliper brakes, plus more of a premium convenience layer: the integrated 2.2-inch touchscreen MasterMind display, low- and high-beam lighting, a manual wheel lock system, optional Quad Lock phone mounting with wireless charging, and Apple Find My. On the 6.0 model, Specialized makes all that stock and piles on even more goodies with a digital lock system, upgraded Rock Shox Psylo suspension fork, SRAM Eagle AXS wireless shifting, a front rack, Garmin radar, custom SRAM DB DB6 brakes, and a more polished metallic finish. [In total, those additions bring the 6.0’s weight up to 68 lbs.]
With the Vado 3 EVO, commuting is more purr, less grrrr, and just the beginning of this bike’s daily-life integration.
The post Specialized introduces Vado 3 EVO, combining robust motor performance with advanced rider convenience and comfort appeared first on Popular Science.
Is ‘lab-grown’ meat actually safe? - Popular Science
In 2023, the U.S. government approved the sale of “lab-grown” chicken after it passed food safety tests.
Lab-grown meat, also called “cultivated” or “cultured” meat, is meat grown in a lab instead of on a farm. Scientists take a few cells from an animal and put them in a tank called a bioreactor with nutrients like vitamins, minerals, and amino acids. The cells grow and multiply until they form muscle tissue—the same stuff that makes up the meat people eat.
Because no animal has to be killed, cultivated meat is better for animal welfare. The environmental impact is still debated: cultivated meat could be better or worse for the planet depending on the type of energy used to power the factories that make it.
But what about the big question: Is it actually healthy to eat?
Lab-grown meat is nutritionally similar—but not identical—to conventional meatLab-grown meat is designed to be as close to the real thing as possible in terms of look, taste, and nutrition, but it’s not a perfect copy.
Conventional meat contains all nine essential amino acids (protein building blocks), which the human body cannot produce on its own, as well as various non-essential amino acids. It is also a source of B vitamins and several mineral nutrients, including iron and zinc.
According to Dr. Tim Spector, an epidemiologist at King’s College London and co-founder of the nutrition science company ZOE, “the protein quality and amino acid profile of cultivated meat is generally similar to conventional meat, with all essential amino acids present but with varying ratios.”
And what about the vitamin and mineral content? “There is still limited published data on how closely real-world cultivated meat products match conventional meat for these micronutrients,” Spector says.
Early research suggests that some nutrients may be lower in lab-grown meat, while others could be equal—or even higher, says Noah Praamsma, a registered dietitian nutritionist and a nutrition education coordinator with the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
At an agricultural expo in Hangzhou in east China’s Zhejiang province, a piece of lab-grown rainbow trout meat is displayed in November 2024. Image: Feature China / Contributor / Getty ImagesOne study found that, compared with regular chicken meat, lab-grown chicken had less protein, lower amounts of most essential amino acids, less magnesium, and less vitamin B3. However, it had more total fat, more saturated fat, more cholesterol, and higher levels of vitamins B5, B6, and A. Lab-grown chicken also contained higher amounts of several minerals, including calcium, copper, iron, potassium, manganese, sodium, phosphorus, selenium, and zinc.
In conventional meat, nutrients build up in animal tissues over the animal’s lifetime through diet, microbes in the animal’s gut, and normal metabolism, explains Spector. Replicating that complex process in a lab environment is difficult, although technology is making great strides.
Lab-grown meat could be healthier than conventional meatOne of the biggest promises of lab-grown meat is that, unlike conventional meat, its nutritional content can potentially be fine-tuned during production.
“In practice, this might mean aiming for less saturated fat and more unsaturated fat and enriching the product with beneficial fatty acids such as omega-3,” says Spector. This may come with a few trade-offs, as fat plays a major role in how meat tastes and feels, he says.
Another benefit of cultivated meat comes from the way it’s produced—in a sterile lab environment. This contrasts with traditional meat farming where manure is present and can—potentially—come into contact with meat. Lab-grown meat might improve the food safety concerns associated with large-scale animal farming, Praamsma says.
Lab-grown meat falls under the ‘ultra-processed food’ umbrellaBecause of how lab-grown meat is made—through an industrial process, and with added ingredients—it would probably count as an ultra-processed food, says Spector.
“But ‘processed’ doesn’t automatically mean unhealthy,” he says. “What matters is the quality of the final product, what’s added, how it affects the gut microbiome, and what it replaces in the diet.”
Nutritionally, lab-grown meat is much like regular meat: low in fiber and high in saturated fat. “But in theory, it could be designed to have an improved nutrient profile,” Spector says, for instance with more iron or vitamin B12 and less saturated fat.
Still, tweaking the nutrient mix doesn’t erase the health concerns linked to eating meat. “Decades of research shows that diets emphasizing whole plant foods are consistently associated with better long-term health outcomes than diets high in meat, whether conventional or novel,” says Praamsma. Simply swapping conventional meat for lab-grown versions isn’t likely to deliver the same benefits as adding more fruits, vegetables, and legumes to your plate, he points out.
Related 'Ask Us Anything' StoriesShould you eat invasive species? We asked an ecologist.
Can one big meal really make you gain weight?
What are ultra-processed foods and are they bad for me?
Is raw milk safe? Science has a clear answer.
Should you keep eggs in the fridge? Short answer: Yes.
Its long-term impact on health is unknownAt the moment, we don’t yet know how eating lab-grown meat affects health in the long run.
“Studies evaluating its long-term health outcomes relative to traditional meat do not yet exist,” says Praamsma.
Spector agrees. “No clinical trials have been conducted to date, which means we don’t have data on its impact on any health conditions or allergies. This includes the impact on our gut microbiome.”
The bottom lineNutritionally, lab-grown meat is much like regular meat, though it isn’t an exact copy. On the upside, it could be designed to be healthier, and because it’s made in a clean lab, it may lower the risk of contamination compared with farm-raised meat.
But we still don’t know how eating lab-grown meat affects our health long-term. Based on what we know now, diets rich in whole plant foods are still the best way to improve overall health.
In Ask Us Anything, Popular Science answers your most outlandish, mind-burning questions, from the everyday things you’ve always wondered to the bizarre things you never thought to ask. Have something you’ve always wanted to know? Ask us.
The post Is ‘lab-grown’ meat actually safe? appeared first on Popular Science.
THIEAUDIO Hype 4 MKII IEMs & Cypher headphones review: Happy to meet audiophiles in the middle - Popular Science
THIEAUDIO has spent years building trust and a following by packing serious tuning obsessions into attainable gear. Since launching under Linsoul and rising fast on the strength of models like the Monarch line, the Chinese brand has not been subtle in its ambitions to offer boutique-level configurations without boutique-level pricing. While THIEAUDIO has launched compelling kilobuck+ flagships, the sweet spot has been mid-fi products for obsessives on a budget. And the Hype 4 MKII IEM and Cypher semi-open headphones feel like a sharper extension of that focus. At $399 each, they arrive in very different shapes but chase similar ends: sound with more poise and precision, but with just enough mischief left in it.
The buildAn update to a 2023 forums favorite, the Hype 4 MK II is a six-driver hybrid in-ear monitor rebuilt from the ground up in an enclosure machined from durable anodized aluminum. Underneath an iridescent inlay are the brand’s latest IMPACT2 dual-8mm sub-bass system paired with four updated Knowles balanced armatures. The Cypher, meanwhile, is a new 50mm dynamic-driver wired headphone built from aerospace-grade aluminum, stainless steel, lambskin, and enough confidence to debut at a CanJam and act like it belongs there.
Tony Ware
See ItThe Hype 4 MKII’s IMPACT2 low-end system features composite-diaphragm dynamic drivers in a proprietary pneumatic acoustic chamber, then hands the rest of the spectrum to a stack that’s pure modern hybrid maximalism: two RAB-series drivers for the lower mids, an ED-33465 handling upper mids and lower treble, and a RAD-33518 ultra-tweeter pushed up near the nozzle for extra extension. On paper, that adds up to a four-way crossover, six total drivers, an 18-ohm load, 101dB sensitivity at 1 kHz, and a quoted 5 Hz to 22 kHz frequency response. In practice, it’s easy to drive from ordinary sources, but tuned with the kind of fixated care that makes every sonic edge feel just as filed and fitted as the physical casing.
Accompanying the IEMs in the small rectangular hard case, you’ll find a detachable modular cable made with 6N ultra-pure monocrystalline copper and accompanied by easily swappable 4.4mm balanced and 3.5mm unbalanced plugs. Additionally, there’s a selection of silicone and memory foam ear tips, though I ended up swapping to a pair of Divinus Velvet Wide Bore and doing most of my listening from FiiO M27 and iBasso DX340 [AMP15] DAPs.
Tony War
See ItThe Cypher uses a newly developed 50mm dynamic driver built around a 20-core N45 magnetic array, a semi-crystalline polymer-and-rubber composite diaphragm, and a high-tension copper-aluminum composite voice coil. The shell is equally intentional: swiveling CNC-machined single-block aerospace-grade aluminum earcups, a stainless-steel headband with a carbon-fiber-like surface treatment, a supple suspended lambskin strap with fabric-covered segmented padding on the underbelly, velour-and-memory-foam magnetically mounted pads, and a final weight of 411 grams.
The grille’s geometric weave has a fabric-like appearance with an almost Meze Audio-lite industrial elegance. The Cypher is rated at 32 ohms, 96dB sensitivity, and 20 Hz to 20 kHz—easy enough to run off a laptop, though clearly happier when given a little dignity upstream, which is why I tried them with the TEAC UD-507/HA-507 stack and a Schiit Audio Jotunheim 3.
Included in the surprisingly low-profile leatherette carrying bag [the Cypher pivots flat] is a detachable 1.5-meter (4.9 ft.) braided cable with a nylon-braided exterior and 3.5mm/6.3mm gold-plated connectors. And if you want to upgrade to a balanced option, the Cypher’s dual mono inputs are aftermarket-friendly.
The soundThe Hype 4 MKII is an extroverted IEM, but not a messy one. For many familiar with the fun-tilted original, it will be surprisingly clean and controlled. In the low end, adrenaline’s sparks have been exchanged for dopamine’s slow burn. Bass still hits with a tight, piston-like punch that gives kick drums a beveled edge and synth lines real body. But it’s not bloated.
The stated tuning profile takes inspiration from studio monitors paired with a subwoofer, and the sharp 150Hz bass shelf supports that. There’s also a gentle nudge around 400Hz that brings warmth to the lower midrange, pushing it closer to a more Meta tuning. Compared to the original’s woozier woofer, however, it’s more disciplined than indulgent. Up top and across the stage, the Hype 4 MKII sounds more separated and sorted than before, so even busy mixes stay tidy rather than slumped together.
The psychedelic flourishes of an album like Beck’s Sea Change float through with a kind of narcotic clarity, all shimmer, sigh, and negative space. There is, admittedly, some heat on top, a little treble flare, but that quicksilver snap contributes to a sense of speed and keeps haloed layers of phosphorescence detail neatly banked instead of throwing the whole balance off. This V-shaped incisive approach might be excessive for heavily compressed, high-octane genres except in moderation, but this heightened imaging is perfectly suited for more organically unfurling selections.
The Cypher takes the opposite approach, with a warm-neutral, mids-forward response that’s less about attention or extension and more about staying power. This is the kind of headphone you can listen to for hours because it would rather reveal than dazzle.
The Cypher’s bass is more planted than punishing, but it’s got grip for an open-back. It’s not thin and keeps low-end info intact, yet it’s defiantly uninterested in showing off. And the upper register has an anchoring, almost uncanny natural timbre, even if it’s not the most expansive. Treble is smooth, not spotlight-hungry, offering presence without glare. There are microdynamics, but they don’t chase spray-on sparkle so much as help coax pressure shifts from recordings.
Much like its closest spiritual cousins, the Sennheiser HD 600/650, rich, realistic vocal presence is the Cypher’s ultimate strength. But with more sub-bass staging. That same Beck album goes from prismatic reflection to lysergic confession. It’s laid out in a well-lit theater that’s wider than it is deep, spacious enough to sort every element’s honest intent but always kept to an intimate scale. If you’re monitoring for emotional weight, the Cypher lets it settle in your lap. Compared to the romantic voicing of similarly positioned Meze Audio headphones, the Cypher shows a mature restraint. The headphone is no longer demanding you constantly shift your attention; it’s keeping you company, handing you orange slices and telling you to relax.
The verdictIf the Hype 4 MKII is all velocity and contour, the Cypher is texture and tact. If the Hype 4 MKII reveals the foundation and framing of a track, the Cypher is the fixtures and fittings. Which is right for you comes down to whether you vibe more with a nervy display or deliberate composure. THIEAUDIO’s latest mid-fi one-two punch at $399 not only broadens the lineup, but it also clarifies the brand. One product says THIEAUDIO can still do spectacle; the other says it may finally know when not to.
The post THIEAUDIO Hype 4 MKII IEMs & Cypher headphones review: Happy to meet audiophiles in the middle appeared first on Popular Science.
Giant Jell-O measures crowd volume in wobbles - Popular Science
Sports arenas across the United States could soon have a new, jiggly way to measure the excitement of a game. Jell-O, the company most known for its physics-defying gelatin dessert, is introducing a device it says can calculate fan intensity in a stadium and then visually represent that data in real time as a jiggling mass of Jell-O. The rowdier the crowd gets, the more the Jell-O jiggles. The company is calling its bizarre invention the JELL-OMETER. It’s already been used at a professional hockey game in New York and is expected to be on its way to other stadiums soon.
Anyone who has been to a sporting event has likely seen messages on the jumbotron urging fans to “Get Loud” and cheer. Those systems typically use decibel readers to measure sound.
The JELL-OMETER takes a different approach and tries to measure fan energy instead. The company claims the device uses “proprietary plate-sensing” technology to capture sound pressure from the crowd’s cheers. That sound pressure is then converted into mechanical motion and presented as a shaking mold of Jell-O.
The energy is measured in “jiggles”on a scale of one to 10. One jiggle is roughly equivalent to a microwave, while 10 is supposedly the same as a small earthquake rumble. No word yet on how many the small earthquakes generated at Taylor Swift concerts would be.
Related: [What a Jell-O brain tells us about the future of human-machine interaction]
The company says that their goal is to create an “interactive way to experience crowd intensity.” Priming fans to get up and buy a packet of the jiggly substance probably doesn’t hurt either.
“As the inventors of the jiggle more than 125 years ago, we knew we had a unique opportunity to visually measure sound in a way no one else could,” Kathryn O’Brien, the Kraft Heinz Company’s head of marketing for desserts, said in a statement.
“With the JELL-OMETER, we’re bringing the iconic Jell-O jiggle to sports to give the fans something they’ve long waited for—the opportunity to secure bragging rights on who has the most passionate fanbase.”
The JELL-OMETER has already seen some action. On Friday, the device was trialed at a professional hockey game between the New York Islanders and the Philadelphia Flyers. This clip posted on Instagram shows the device registering “5.8” jiggles.
View this post on Instagram Loud crowds can win gamesSports fans aren’t shy about getting loud. In 2014, Kansas City Chiefs fans broke the Guinness World Record for loudest crowd roar at a sports stadium, belting out an ear-blistering 142.2 decibels—roughly equivalent to the sound of a jet taking off. That record beat the one set by Chiefs fans in 2013.
And while the rowdy fans certainly played a role, the stadium has also earned a reputation for being particularly loud, something reportedly attributed to a pair of canopies that cover a large portion of the seats. That coverage protects fans from rain, but it also serves a secondary purpose of amplifying sound.
Some particularly crafty sports teams have also been known to use a stadium’s loudness to their advantage. The Houston Astros famously opted to keep their roof closed during the 2017 World Series, even when the weather was fine, in a deliberate attempt to amplify the crowd noise bouncing back down from the roof. They ended up winning that series four to three.
The science behind the JELL-OMETER. Image: JELL-OJell-O makes it clear they aren’t pulling for any one team in particular. The company said it is looking to introduce its device to more stadiums and is gathering feedback from fans to see which cities might be prime candidates.
“The JELL-OMETER doesn’t take sides,” O’Brien said. “It just measures the madness.”
The post Giant Jell-O measures crowd volume in wobbles appeared first on Popular Science.
Geotermia, in arrivo regole più semplici per gli impianti negli edifici - Edilportale
Come scegliere una porta blindata: sicurezza, design e qualità dei materiali - Edilportale
Skechers just dropped prices on its best walking shoes for National Walking Month - Popular Science
May is National Walking Month, and if you’ve been meaning to upgrade your walking form, decent shoes make a big difference. Skechers is running a sitewide Buy One, Get One 50% off sale right now (or 20 percent off a single pair). That includes the GO WALK line, which has a name that doubles as good advice. This line of kicks was built specifically for putting in miles on foot, with arch support, firm-but-cushioned midsoles, and that Slip-ins heel design that lets you step in without reaching down. Here are the deals to check out before your next stroll.
Skechers GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Venus (Women’s) $79.99 (was $100.00) The robust cushioning has benefits all the way up your leg.,Skechers
See It
The Venus is the best straightforward deal in the GO WALK lineup right now. It’s already marked down 20 percent to $79.99 without a promo code. It’s a laceless knit slip-on with Skechers’ Hands Free Slip-ins heel, so you step in and go. If you’re looking to build a walking habit this spring, this is a low-commitment entry point that won’t wreck your feet or your wallet. Note: this particular shoe is excluded from the BOGO promo, so the $79.99 is your final price.
Skechers
See It
The Jesper is the top-of-the-line men’s option here, and the one most worth pairing in the BOGO deal. It’s $120 at full price, but buy it alongside any other pair and that second shoe drops to half off. That’s two pairs of GO WALK shoes for $180 total. What sets this one apart from the cheaper Glide-Steps is the Arch Fit insole (removable, podiatrist-designed) and the APMA Seal of Acceptance, which means the American Podiatric Medical Association actually reviewed it.
Skechers
See It
The Areena is essentially the women’s counterpart to the Jesper above. It has the same APMA certification, same Arch Fit insole, same Max Cushioning midsole stack. Some colorways are already marked down to $94.99 from $120, and it’s BOGO-eligible on top of that. The real move here is pairing it with the Jesper for the BOGO deal. That’s $120 for the first pair, $60 for the second, so you and a walking partner can both upgrade for $180 total heading into the warmer months.
The men’s side of the GO WALK lineup is heavy on Slip-ins models in the $95–$120 range. The Jonah is the budget pick if you still want Arch Fit support without the Slip-ins heel, and the Pelayo and Day are solid entry-level options under $100.
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Zac (Men’s) $105.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Maser (Men’s) $105.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Cozy Fit Walker (Men’s) $105.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Arch Fit 2.0 – Percy (Men’s) $105.00
- GO WALK Max Cushioning Arch Fit – Jonah (Men’s) $100.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK 8 – Pelayo (Men’s) $95.00
- GO Walk 8 – Day (Men’s) $85.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Flex – Hands Up (Men’s) $85.00
- GO WALK Max Cushioning Flex – Raf (Men’s) $80.00
The women’s selection is bigger and has a wider price spread. The GO WALK Joy – Vela is marked down to $59.99, making it the cheapest Slip-ins walking shoe in the sale, and the Max Cushioning Flex starts at just $64.99 depending on color. Most of these are BOGO-eligible.
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Cozy Fit Walker (Women’s) $105.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Nessa (Women’s) $105.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Elektra (Women’s) $105.00
- GO WALK Max Cushioning Arch Fit – Roslyn (Women’s) $100.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Max Cushioning Flex – Remi (Women’s) $100.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK 8 – Mikayla (Women’s) $100.00
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK 8 – Nova (Women’s) $95.00
- GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Chelsea (Women’s) $90.00
- GO WALK Air 3.0 – Ree (Women’s) $90.00
- GO WALK Arch Fit 2.0 – Cassy (Women’s) $85.00
- GO WALK Glide-Step 2.0 – Kristee (Women’s) $85.00
- GO WALK 8 – Julietta (Women’s) $75.00
- GO WALK Max Cushioning Flex – Stormi (Women’s) $75.00
- GO WALK Max Cushioning Flex (Women’s) from $64.99
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Now – Khloe (Women’s) from $62.99 (was $90.00)
- Skechers Slip-ins: GO WALK Joy – Vela (Women’s) $59.99 (was $85.00)
The above sale is part of Skechers’ sitewide event: Buy One, Get One 50% off (or 20% off a single pair), applied at cart. Some sale items are excluded from the BOGO promo. Shop the full GO WALK lineup here.
The post Skechers just dropped prices on its best walking shoes for National Walking Month appeared first on Popular Science.
06 Apr 2026
How to rescue an old laptop by installing Linux on it - Popular Science
No matter how sprightly and speedy your laptop was when you first bought it, it will inevitably slow down to a sluggish pace eventually. And it’s when you reach this point that you can’t really put off an upgrade any longer.
However, there is an alternative way forward: Install Linux. While it’s not as well known as Windows or macOS, Linux has been around since the early 1990s and is comfortable running on laptops and desktop computers. It’s capable, well maintained and regularly updated, and completely free to use.
Importantly for our purposes here, Linux is also lightweight. Its demands on your system can be much lower than software from Microsoft and Apple, and that means your old laptop components can be given a new lease of life.
Due to the proprietary way Apple fuses its hardware and software together, this is really only something to attempt on Windows laptops (you can install Linux on a Mac, but it’s complicated—especially on newer models). So, if you have a creaking Windows laptop that needs a Linux refresh, here’s how to go about it.
What is Linux? Linux Lite is one of the options available to you. Screenshot: Linux LiteLinux is actually a collective name for a whole host of different-but-related operating systems known as distros. You don’t actually install Linux, you install one of the distros in the Linux family: Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Debian, and Fedora are some of the most popular, though there are dozens to pick from.
Linux isn’t as widely used as either Windows or macOS, and so generally, you’ll find less software available for it. There’s no Photoshop for Linux, for example, though there are some very capable (and free) alternatives. That said, several big name apps are available on the Linux platform, including Google Chrome and Spotify.
Some Linux distros focus particularly on being as lightweight and as minimal as possible, and these are the ones to look for if you’re wanting to save an old laptop. They’ll go easy on the aging components in your system, and you should see snappier performance than you do with Microsoft Windows.
Your options here include Puppy Linux, Lubuntu, and the appropriately named Linux Lite—and you’ll be able to find several other lightweight options if you search around on the web. There’s no right or wrong answer when it comes to which one to pick. Have a look at the screenshots and documentation and decide which one fits your current needs.
We’d recommend all three mentioned above, but whichever Linux distro you go for, you should find plenty of help along the way. Generally speaking, Linux users (and distro developers) are generous and community-spirited, and if you need assistance with anything, there are multiple resources to turn to online.
How to install Linux Rufus will take care of putting your Linux image on a USB drive. Screenshot: RufusWhatever flavor of Linux you’re installing, first you need to back up everything currently on your Windows laptop: A Linux install will wipe everything currently on your hard drive. Thankfully, backing up is easier than it used to be, and we’ve got a full guide here. If you use something like OneDrive, Dropbox, or Google Drive, you might already be covered.
With all your data safely copied elsewhere, there are a few different ways to install Linux over the top of Windows, but the most straightforward is to grab a spare USB drive and put all the Linux installation files on it. Exactly how you go about this will depend on the distro you’re using, but the steps are broadly similar, and each distro will usually come with extensive instructions for installing it.
Let’s take Lubuntu as an example, as the installation process here is fairly typical. The first step is downloading an image (or ISO) of the distro to your computer (it can be the one you’re upgrading or a different one). This image is simply the Linux software itself (and it will be quite a hefty download), though it’s not yet in a form you can run an installation program from.
Next, you need an app to put the image on your USB drive. The Windows tool usually recommended for this is Rufus, which is free to download and use. Once it’s up and running, you can simply point it towards the Linux distro image you downloaded earlier, and your connected USB drive, and it will take care of the rest.
The final step is booting your laptop from the USB drive rather than its hard drive, which will then present you with the Linux setup program, which you can follow step by step. How you switch to booting from USB will depend on your laptop, but typically you press a key like F2 or Del while the laptop is starting up—look for a message on screen right after turning your computer on, or check online for further instructions.
The post How to rescue an old laptop by installing Linux on it appeared first on Popular Science.
Mathematicians figured out the perfect espresso - Popular Science
People love a good cup of coffee, but how do you get a perfect brew? Barring philosophical deep dives into the nature of perfection, an international team of mathematicians and environmental scientists believe that it’s entirely possible to calculate the ideal espresso. Not only that, but they now have the formulas to back it up. The math detailed in their study published in the journal Royal Society Open Science is dense. But the short answer is that’s all about puck size.
Picture the typical espresso machine at your favorite cafe. The small dish into which your friendly barista tamps coffee grounds is called the puck. After inserting it into the machine, hot water flows through the receptacle and molecularly absorbs the beans’ flavor, hue, and (most importantly) caffeine.
The quality of the final espresso depends on many aspects, including how the grounds are packed, how long water passes through the coffee, and the size of the grounds themselves. It’s always been difficult to accurately predict how a cup of espresso changes based on these variabilities.
To get a better sense of how these different factors interact, researchers ground Tumba beans from Rwanda and Guayacán beans from Colombia into 11 sizes ranging from extremely fine to coarse. They then placed each variant into tubes before using a visualization technology called X-ray computed micro-tomography (XCT). The technique generated 3D maps of each sample’s internal structures, complete with passageways between grains, known as pore spaces, that are impossible to see with the human eye.
Here is where the experiments began to percolate—literally. Using digital flow tests, the team simulated water flow through each sample based on percolation theory, a subset of physics focused on fluid movement between connected spaces. Researchers were particularly interested in understanding how well each sample’s pore space facilitated uninterrupted water routes through the puck. Basically, they brewed a lot of coffee on a computer.
After comparing the results from different coffee grounds, the study’s authors could finally design an equation that calculates how easily water permeates coffee grounds. They also concluded they found the formulas are in “excellent agreement” with their percolation theory, offering a practical way to express coffee ground size and packing as they relate to saturation.
The main factors are pore space connectivity, grain size, and surface area, as well as how they are packed. All these variables influence how much time water remains in physical contact with the coffee, thereby taking on its flavor profile. More time and contact typically means stronger flavors, and the best way to maximize that is to get as much of the water to flow over the surface area of coffee grounds.
The study’s conclusions are less about altering your personal approach to espresso-making, and more about introducing methods for improving industry equipment. Integrating their formulations into machine settings will allow for more customized grinds, improved filtration, and even better brews.
In the meantime, go with your gut. If it’s a perfect espresso to you, then that’s all that matters.
The post Mathematicians figured out the perfect espresso appeared first on Popular Science.
Rome unleashed an ancient ‘machine gun’ on Pompeii - Popular Science
Battlescars etched into the stone walls of Pompeii may offer the first known evidence of a mechanical weapon that was thousands of years ahead of its time. Archaeologists at Italy’s University of Campania believe Roman soldiers utilized a polybolos—a machine designed to fire multiple metal-tipped bolt projectiles in quick succession. Essentially, an ancient machine gun. Their argument is detailed in a recent study published in the journal Heritage.
Pompeii is most famous for its destruction in the wake of the Mount Vesuvius eruption in 79 CE. Nearly 170 years earlier, however, its residents weathered another cataclysm.
In 89 BCE, Rome dispatched forces under the command of general Lucius Cornelius Sulla to lay siege to the city. It was one of multiple campaigns amid the Social Wars (91–87 BCE), a conflict that saw multiple autonomous allies in Italy pushing back against Roman rule.
In the battle, Sulla directed troops to specifically target Pompeii’s northern walls near the Herculaneum and Vesuvio gates, where they proceeded to inundate the city’s resistance with heavy artillery fire.
Scale comparison of two detailed textured mesh models: on the left, (A) ballistic impact of a spherical stone projectile; on the right, (B) fan-shaped groups of smaller quadrangular impacts. Credit: Rossi, et al.The city ultimately surrendered and was annexed under Roman rule, but evidence of the battery is still visible in some of the remaining stone walls. Ballistae—large machines resembling oversized crossbows—provided most of the force. Aside from human casualties, ballistae projectiles also left behind circular dents and chips in the damaged fortifications.
But some areas of the walls tell a different story. Instead of ballistae markings, certain sections feature small, four-sided pits grouped near one another. Researchers recognized these as the telltale signs of a wholly different type of weapon: the polybolos.
Invented by the Greek engineer Dionysius of Alexandria during the 3rd century BCE, writings describe the polybolos as vastly different from other contemporary siege tools. Instead of the torque-power used by ballistrae, the polybolos relied on mechanical chains and gears. Operators could then load a magazine with multiple bolts and fire them in quick succession. Philo of Byzantium even described the weapon as a “repeating catapult,” a precursor to machine gun technology not seen for another 2,000 years.
Unfortunately, the polybolos has always posed a problem for archaeologists—there was no physical evidence of its existence, only textual accounts.
However, researchers at the University of Campania now believe they finally identified direct effects of the weapons at Pompeii. They reached their conclusions after employing high-resolution laser scans, detailed imaging analysis, and 3D modeling to examine the stone wall impact clusters. Next, they used this information to determine the ammunition’s size, shape, and force of firing.
In most cases, the damage was only a few centimeters deep. This indicates that metal-tipped bolts, not stone ballistics, caused the indentations.
The regular, close-spacing, and fan-shaped distribution further indicates the use of a repeating weapon instead of individual shots. So while archaeologists don’t have the polybolos itself, they can point to evidence of its destructive capabilities.
If true, the discovery helps recontextualize not only the siege at Pompeii, but the history of military technology. The first mentions of the polybolos trace back to the Greek city of Rhodes, which predated Rome by more than 300 years.
Meanwhile, the general Sulla is known to have studied advanced technological breakthroughs from the eastern Mediterranean. Taken together, it seems that Roman forces likely incorporated these mechanical Greek designs into their own military campaigns—designs that would not reemerge in warfare for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.
The post Rome unleashed an ancient ‘machine gun’ on Pompeii appeared first on Popular Science.
Xtracycle Swoop ASM review: The family cargo electric bike that adapts to your day - Popular Science
Cargo bikes are supposed to solve problems. School drop-offs. Grocery runs. The “we forgot one thing” trips that somehow turn into a bag full of impulse buys. The Xtracycle Swoop ASM shows up ready for all of it, but the surprise is that it never really stops feeling like a bike.
Somewhere between getting used to the weight and realizing how quickly you can adjust it for a different rider, it clicks: this isn’t just about replacing a car. It’s about having one bike that can flex with everything your day throws at it.
Heather Kuldell-Ware
See It Pros- Flexible longtail design works well for kids, cargo, and daily errands
- Excellent fit range—ideal for households with multiple riders
- Still rides like a bike, even when fully loaded
- Strong car-replacement potential for short trips
- Comes well-equipped with accessories that would otherwise cost hundreds
- Large footprint requires dedicated storage space
- Tough to manage in tight indoor areas or crowded bike racks
- Not ideal for walk-ups or apartments without easy access
- Long wheelbase makes tight turns and maneuvering in small spaces tricky
For families hauling kids and swapping riders, the Swoop ASM from Priority Bicycles‘ sister brand Xtracycle hits the sweet spot—capable enough to replace car trips, but still feels like, well, a bike.
How we tested the Xtracycle Swoop ASMI’m a pretty average-height mom rider at 5’4”, which means I care a lot about how approachable a bike feels, especially when it’s loaded with kids. Most of my riding happens on a mix of neighborhood streets, bike lanes, and multi-use paths around a dense D.C.-area suburb. To test the Swoop ASM, I leaned into exactly what it’s built for: hauling a rotating trio of my elementary school-aged extended family on stop-and-go rides.
I also used it for grocery runs and random errands, most of which happened in less-than-ideal conditions thanks to a surprisingly snowy winter and an especially wet spring. In other words, it was a perfect testing ground to see how the Swoop ASM holds up when it’s part of the daily routine.
Design and features: Built to carry more and fit more peopleIf you’re shopping for a cargo e-bike, start with one question: What are you carrying—and how often? Kids, groceries, gear, or some chaotic mix of all three?
If kids are involved (especially more than one), you’re likely choosing between front-loaders and longtails. Front-loaders (with the big box up front) are great for heavy loads and keeping an eye on passengers, but they’re big. Very big. Longtails are the do-it-all option—great for kids and errands—and easier to ride solo once everyone’s been dropped off.
The Swoop ASM lands firmly in the longtail camp, which, for most families, is the sweet spot. It’s built to carry multiple kids and a solid amount of cargo without making you feel like you’re suddenly a pedicab driver.
At its core is Xtracycle’s “mullet” wheel setup—a 24-inch front wheel for smoother rolling and a smaller 20-inch rear wheel that lowers the center of gravity and reduces any tippy feeling during turns. It pairs that with a Shimano EP6 mid-drive motor, a front suspension fork, and big 203mm four-piston brakes—so it’s well-equipped for hills, stops, and fully loaded rides.
But what really makes it work for families is the fit. The Swoop ASM accommodates riders from 4’10” to 6’5″, with a low-step-through 4130 Chromoly steel frame, a dropper post for quick adjustments, and an adjustable stem to dial things in. The shortest partner—usually but not always a mom—often falls into the trap of dealing with a cargo bike that’s a little too big, partly because manufacturers tend to underserve the inseam-challenged. Don’t do this. If a family is buying a bike for multiple adults to ride, it must comfortably fit both of them.
The Swoop ASM also shows up surprisingly ready to go. The included front rack, passenger bars, footrests, wheel skirts, and MIK [Mounting Is Key] HD-compatible rear deck cover what most families end up buying anyway—saving both setup time and a few hundred dollars in add-ons.
Performance and ride feel: Still feels like a bike“This might be a terrible idea” is probably the first thought when you push off with two kids on the back of any bike. They’re talking, shifting, maybe leaning at exactly the wrong moment.
About five minutes in, you settle in. You stop overthinking every turn as the bike starts to feel steady and predictable.
Riding with kids quickly becomes cooperative. You give them a heads-up—“we’re turning,” “lean with me,” “hill coming”—and they respond. They’re more engaged than they’d be in a car, and it all gels faster than you’d expect. Yes, they wiggle. Yes, they reach for crosswalk buttons. But it’s manageable.
That’s what makes the Swoop ASM stand out. For a bike designed to carry this much, it rides surprisingly like a normal bike—and a big part of that is how little you have to think about it while you’re moving.
The Shimano Di2 automatic shifting plays into that. You’ve got three assist levels on the left and simple button shifting on the right. I found the first assist level worked well for groceries, while the second felt better with a full load of kids.
There’s a tendency to rely on assist instead of shifting, but you really need to use both. If you forget to downshift before a stop, you feel it—and you have to work a lot harder to get moving again.
You notice the weight most at starts and on steeper hills, where the long tail reminds you there’s more bike behind you. But once you’re rolling, it fades. Even loaded up with groceries—I did a beverage run for sparking waters one time—it stays balanced, especially if you keep the weight low and centered.
On a range test, with lights on and max assist, I still managed about 25 miles on a windy spring day. The bike wasn’t loaded, but I did have my husband on his road bike chasing me—and he was putting in a lot more effort than he expected when I said I’d be on a cargo bike.
So, who should buy the Xtracycle Swoop ASM?The Swoop ASM is a standout choice for families who want one bike to do a lot—especially if it needs to work for multiple riders and a mix of passengers and cargo.
The longtail design makes it especially well-suited for families with elementary school-aged kids and up. If you’ve got younger kids—or riders prone to falling asleep—adding a child seat is a smart move for peace of mind. That said, the MIK-compatible rear deck adds real flexibility because you’re not locked into Xtracycle’s accessories. There are plenty of third-party options.
It’s also a better value than it first appears. The included accessories—especially the front rack, which quickly became a favorite—along with footrests and wheel guards to keep little feet out of spokes, cover a lot of what families typically end up buying anyway. Outfitting another cargo bike like this can easily add a few hundred dollars, so it’s nice not to start from zero. Like most cargo bikes, the Xtracycle Swoop ASM is big with a 54-inch wheelbase. It can fit through a standard doorway, but tight turns and small indoor spaces are a challenge, and locking it up at crowded bike racks can be awkward. It’s best suited for someone with a garage or generous storage space. Apartment living isn’t impossible, but it’s more challenging than a typical commuter or folding ebike, so ground-floor access or a roomy elevator will make a big difference.
Tech Specs SpecDetailMotorShimano mid-drive motor with Di2 automatic shiftingBattery630WhRemoveable BatteryYesRiding RangeN/AClassClass 3ThrottleNoTop Speed28 MPHBike Weight68.4 pounds without included accessoriesCarrying capacity400 lbs. (including rider)Frame SizesOne size (fits 4’10” to 6’5″)ColorsPacific Blue [model tested] and Tiburon [white/gray]Price$4,499.95The post Xtracycle Swoop ASM review: The family cargo electric bike that adapts to your day appeared first on Popular Science.
Beware, bees! This wildflower will trap you in a floral escape room. - Popular Science
What’s fragrant, floral, and perfectly devious? If you’re confused, imagine what it must be like for the bees ensnared in the colorful clutches of a pink lady’s slipper (Cypripedium acaule). This large species of wildflower has ingenious pollinating tactics that were highlighted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service on April Fools’ day. But this is no joke.
Pink lady’s slippers are members of the roughly 28,000 member orchid family, and their bulbous flowers are generally pink. They grow throughout a significant part of the eastern U.S., usually blooming between May and July. Like many flowers, they draw bees in with their color and fragrance. But what happens next is more dramatic than one might expect. The bee enters the slipper-shaped flower pouch expecting to find nectar, but there is none.
“Instead, the bee is now inside a floral escape room with no exits… except one very specific exit,” the federal agency noted. “The entrance closes behind it, and the only way out is to squeeze through a tight opening near the top of the flower.”
The pink lady’s slipper blooms between May and July. Image: Keith Ramos/USFWS.Squeezing through this opening means the pollinator emerges dusted with pollen, which is rather convenient for the flower.
“It flies off, a little confused, a little betrayed, and immediately falls for the same trick again at another pink lady’s slipper. The bee has been tricked into pollinating the next generation,” the U.S.F.W.S continued.
It’s simply a native orchid pulling off one of the most elaborate pollination scams on the continent.
Pink lady’s slippers are also known as the Moccasin flower. Other members of this colorful genus include the White lady’s slipper (Cypripedium candidum), Yellow lady’s slipper (Cypripedium parviflorum), Spotted lady’s slipper (Cypripedium guttatum), and Ram’s-head lady’s slipper (Cypripedium arietinum), as well as other lady’s slippers.
A note to the bees—better to be a bee scammed by a pink lady’s slipper than a fly gobbled up by a venus fly trap (Dionaea muscipula).
The post Beware, bees! This wildflower will trap you in a floral escape room. appeared first on Popular Science.
7 captivating photos of train travel’s first century - Popular Science
In 1804, a British man named Richard Trevithick invented the first steam-powered locomotive. But it was Americans who truly ran with Trevithick’s invention in the decades that followed. In 1830, the 13-mile, horse-powered Baltimore and Ohio Railroad became the first railroad in North America. Just a few decades later, the United States had more railroad tracks for steam-powered engines than the rest of the world combined—more than 9,000 miles.
The 19th century became a heyday of American railroads, as business magnate Cornelius Vanderbilt built an empire on the backs of train travel, consolidating much of the Northeast’s railroads. In 1902, the U.S. had built over 200,000 miles of railroad track connecting the country like never before. The United States would never be the same.
Train travel today looks quite different from it did in the 1800s. These seven fascinating images act as a window into a time gone by—when trains, not cars, ruled and shaped America. (Click to expand images to full screen.)
The three-mile-long Granite Railway in Quincy, Massachusetts, was the first commercial railway in the United States. Incorporated in 1826, the railway used horses instead of steam locomotives to move cars along the tracks. It was mainly used to transport granite from Quincy to build the Bunker Hill Monument, a war memorial commemorating the 1775 Revolutionary War battle completed in 1843. Image: Public Domain Library of Congress The DeWitt Clinton was one of the earliest steam locomotives ever used in the United States and one of the first to regularly offer passenger service in New York. The DeWitt Clinton pulled a unique style of stagecoach converted into passenger cars. The locomotive only ran between 1831 and 1833. Image: Library of Congress / Contributor / Getty Images Library of Congress By the 1860s, railroads were king in the United States. In 1833, only around 380 miles of railroad tracks were in operation across the country. By 1860, more than 30,000 miles of tracks were in operation. This illustration, completed around 1860, shows off the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad’s four lane track, run by Cornelius “Commodore” Vanderbilt. Image: Bettmann / Contributor / Getty Images Bettmann In 1869, a “Golden Spike” connected the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads in Promontory, Utah, marking the completion of the first transcontinental railroad in the United States. Image: Universal History Archive / Contributor / Getty Images Universal History Archive By 1875, the era of luxury train travel was upon us. Along the transcontinental railroad, Pullman Palace Railway Cars offered travelers specialty sleeping, dining, and even parlor cars. This illustration is from a Spanish-language travel book full of illustrated engravings called El Mundo En La Mano. Image: Universal History Archive / Contributor / Getty Images Universal History Archive On May 10, 1893, a steam locomotive traveling between Batavia and Buffalo, New York, hit 112.5 miles per hour—marking the first time a train ever exceeded 100 mph. The speedy locomotive was No. 999 of the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad. Image: Museum of the City of New York/Byron Collection / Contributor / Getty Images Museum of the City of New York George Pullman, the founder of the Pullman Palace Car Company, introduced the first dining cars on railroads. Black men, known as Pullman porters, usually staffed these luxury dining cars, often working 20-hour shifts back-to-back for little pay. In 1925, the porters founded the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, one of the first all-Black labor unions in the country. Image: Universal History Archive / Contributor / Getty ImagesThe post 7 captivating photos of train travel’s first century appeared first on Popular Science.
LG’s spring sale at Home Depot Cuts up to 43% off stoves, refrigerators, washers, and more - Popular Science
Home Depot is running a major LG appliance sale right now with more than 200 products marked down. The biggest cuts include $1,800 off a smart wall oven, $1,500 off a French door refrigerator, and $1,200 off a slide-in range. Percentage-wise, several models are 40 percent or more off their regular prices. If you’ve been waiting for the right moment to replace a major appliance, this the time to do it. The deals span washers, dryers, refrigerators, ranges, cooktops, dishwashers, and even LG’s Styler steam closet. It’ll give you even more reason to stay home, which is always a plus for me.
Best LG appliance deals at Home Depot LG 6.4 Cu. Ft. Smart Combi Wall Oven with InstaView and Air Fry $2,799.00 (was $4,599.00) If there’s something you can’t cook with this thing, it has to be a skill issue.LG
See It
This is the largest dollar savings in the entire sale — $1,800 off a wall oven is rare at any time of year. The LG 6.4 cu. ft. Combi Wall Oven packs an arsenal of useful features with marketing names, including True Convection, InstaView (so you can check on food without opening the door), Air Fry, Steam, and Sous Vide modes. It’s a versatile wall oven that covers nearly every cooking method you’d want, and at 39 percent off, it’s about as close to a deal-of-a-decade price as you’re likely to find on a premium LG wall oven.
LG
See It
At 43 percent off, this is the highest percentage discount in the entire LG sale. The slide-in design means no gap between the range and your countertop and the 6.3 cu. ft. capacity is large enough to cook multiple dishes at once. ProBake Convection uses a rear heating element for more even heat distribution, and the Air Sous Vide mode is the kind of feature you’d normally only see on much pricier appliances. At $1,599, this model competes with similar units that cost three times as much.
LG
See It
The InstaView panel lets you knock twice to see inside without opening the door. Is it necessary? Probably not, but it’s cool. The MyColor feature lets you change the door accent lighting through the ThinQ app. The core specs are solid: 29 cubic feet of storage, a standard-depth footprint that’s unusually large for a non-counter-depth model, and a four-door layout with a wide bottom freezer drawer.
LG
See It
Counter-depth refrigerators are more expensive than standard models because they sit flush with your cabinets rather than sticking out into the kitchen. This particular model adds a Full Convert Drawer, which lets you switch a middle section between fridge and freezer temperatures depending on what you need to store.
LG
See It
The WM4000HBA is one of LG’s most popular washers, with more than 3,700 reviews and a 4.5-star average. At $899, it’s $400 off its regular price — and it pairs directly with the matching electric dryer (also $899, details below), making this a good moment to replace both at once. The standout features are TurboWash360, which uses multiple spray nozzles to saturate clothes faster, and Steam, which helps loosen stains and reduce allergens without extra detergent. It’s stackable if space is tight, and the LG ThinQ app lets you start, stop, and monitor cycles remotely.
LG 7.4 Cu. Ft. Stackable SMART Electric Dryer in Black Steel $899.00 (was $1,299.00)
The matching dryer to the washer above, also $400 off. TurboSteam reduces wrinkles in 10 minutes without re-washing, and Sensor Dry automatically stops the cycle when clothes are done to prevent over-drying. If you’re buying both together, Home Depot is also offering a bundle discount — worth checking the “Buy the Pair and Save” pricing on-site at checkout.
The sale extends well beyond the headline picks above. Here’s a rundown of the other notable discounts across every category, from ranges and cooktops to dishwashers and laundry pedestals.
Ranges and ovens- LG 6.3 Cu. Ft. Smart 4-Element Induction Slide-In Range with Air Fry $1,199.00 (was $2,099.00) — Save $900 (43% off)
- LG 4.7 Cu. Ft. Smart Single Electric Wall Oven with Air Fry $1,299.00 (was $2,199.00) — Save $900 (41% off)
- LG 30 in. 4-Burner Induction Cooktop with SmoothTouch Controls $999.00 (was $1,599.00) — Save $600 (38% off)
- LG 33 in. 21 Cu. Ft. SMART Counter Depth MAX French Door Refrigerator $1,499.00 (was $2,188.00) — Save $689 (31% off)
- LG 7.4 Cu. Ft. SMART Stackable Gas Dryer in Black Steel with TurboSteam $999.00 (was $1,399.00) — Save $400 (29% off)
- LG 7.3 Cu. Ft. SMART Electric Dryer in Matte Black with EasyLoad Door $1,099.00 (was $1,599.00) — Save $500 (31% off)
- LG 7.4 Cu. Ft. Vented SMART Gas Dryer with AI Sensor Dry in Black Steel $1,349.00 (was $1,799.00) — Save $450 (25% off)
- LG STUDIO 24 in. Top Control SMART Dishwasher with TrueSteam (Panel Ready) $1,099.00 (was $1,399.00) — Save $300 (21% off)
- LG Styler SMART Steam Closet in Mirror Black with Dual TrueSteam $2,299.00 (was $2,699.00) — Save $400 (15% off)
The post LG’s spring sale at Home Depot Cuts up to 43% off stoves, refrigerators, washers, and more appeared first on Popular Science.
05 Apr 2026
What did Pompeii smell like before it burned? - Popular Science
In 79 CE, one of the most infamous tragedies of antiquity rocked the coast of the Tyrrhenian Sea. Mount Vesuvius erupted, burying Pompeii beneath ash and pumice, preserving the ancient Roman city’s final moments in astounding detail.
The plaster casts of the victims are arguably the most famous Pompeiian remains, but the volcanic debris also preserved another revealing element—ash residues from incense burners in domestic altars.
In a paper recently published in the journal Antiquity, scientists analyzed ash from two incense burners from Pompeii and a nearby villa. Ancient Romans used these burners to present sacrifices to their pantheon of divinities. Inside, they found traces of more than just native plants.
Pompeian incense burner with the investigated ash residues. Image: Parco Archeologico di Pompeii / Photo by Johannes Eber“We can now pinpoint which fragrances were actually burned in Pompeian domestic cult practices,” Johannes Eber, lead author of the study and an archaeologist at the University of Zurich, said in a statement. “Alongside regional plants, we found traces of imported resins – an indicator of Pompeii’s far-reaching trade connections.”
The findings include residues from a tree resin that likely originates from tropical African or Asian countries, suggesting that Pompeii participated in an extensive international trade network. The study represents the first scientific investigation of the contents that were burned in Pompeiian Roman incense burners. It also comes around the same time as a new permanent exhibition at the Pompeii Archeological Park, hosting a significant amount of organic remains, like wooden artifacts, foods, and plant residues.
Pompeian street altar with painted images of gods and ash residues from the last sacrifice performed there. Photo from 1915. Image: Parco Archeologico di Pompeii. Archivio Fotografico Inv. C756.“Molecular analyses also point to a grape product in one of the incense burners,” added Maxime Rageot, a biomolecular archaeologist at Switzerland’s University of Bon. “This would be consistent with the use of wine in rituals as portrayed in Roman imagery and described in texts. At the same time, it demonstrates the importance of supplementing archaeological studies with scientific analyses.”
The smell of ancient Egyptian mummies has already been made available to the public. Maybe one day we’ll be able to smell the fragrance of a Pompeiian domus—an ancient Roman house.
The post What did Pompeii smell like before it burned? appeared first on Popular Science.
What to do with clothes you can’t donate - Popular Science
Most of us know the best way to repurpose gently used clothing is to donate it. But what about undergarments or items that are a little too worn? Sadly, tons of clothing end up in landfills because they’re damaged, stained, or unsellable. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, discarded clothing makes up the largest share of textiles in municipal solid waste. Is there an easy way to dispose of clothing sustainably? There isn’t an easy answer, but there are better options. Even clothes that seem destined for the trash still have value; you just need to know where to send them.
Why some clothes can’t de donatedMost donation centers resell items for a profit or give them to those in need. They are not recycling centers. Donation centers will reject or discard any clothing that has stains, odor, damage, or, in some cases, is outdated. As a result, not everything you drop off will find a second life through donation. So, what should be done with items that don’t make the cut?
RepairBefore discarding worn clothing, consider repairing it to extend its lifespan. There are many ways to repair clothing: You can patch small holes, replace missing buttons or broken zippers, or use fabric dye to refresh items with stains or fading. These efforts can make clothes wearable again without much cost or effort. Repairing even one item reduces the demand for new clothing production, which in turn lowers resource use and environmental impact. In many cases, fixing what you already own is the most sustainable choice. There are decorative methods, such as sashiko stitching, a type of visible mending, that transform repairs into wearable art. This DIY is easy, and kits are available to make the process even easier.
A sample embroidery using the Japanese sashiko technique. Image: Hendrik Schmidt/picture alliance via Getty Images picture alliance UpcycleOne practical and immediate way to use old clothes is to transform them into household cleaning supplies. This idea is similar to the Japanese zokin—simple, reusable cleaning cloths traditionally made from worn fabric and used for everyday cleaning. Clothes made from natural materials, such as cotton and denim, can be repurposed as useful cleaning tools.
Old cotton T-shirts and towels can be cut into durable cleaning rags, while softer fabrics work well as dusting cloths or even DIY mop pads. Heavier materials can be repurposed into garage or shop rags for oil or paint projects. Even worn textiles can serve in pet care, such as bedding or towels for muddy paws. Natural fibers like cotton and linen offer the best absorbency, while synthetic blends are less effective for these uses and are better suited for other solutions.
Making shorts from old jeans is a simple way to upcycle old clothes. Image: Getty Images Elena Medoks Recycling programsWhen clothing is too worn to donate or reuse, textile recycling programs are the best option. These systems break down old fabrics into raw fibers, which are then repurposed into products like insulation, industrial wiping cloths, or carpet padding.
To get started, always check locally first. Many municipalities offer textile recycling programs or designated drop-off locations. Some retailers also run take-back initiatives; for example, REI and Patagonia accept used gear and clothing, and some Nike stores accept used sneakers. Your local animal shelter may accept clean, gently used blankets, sheets, and towels. Mail-in services like Retold Recycling and Trashie are also options, though they typically require purchasing a bag and may include shipping costs. Even heavily worn clothing is often accepted, making recycling a reliable option for those items that are truly not reusable.
When throwing away is the only optionIn some cases, disposal is unavoidable. For example, clothing that is heavily contaminated, such as items exposed to chemicals, mold, or hazardous substances, cannot be safely donated or recycled. In these situations, the landfill becomes the last resort. Shifting how we think about disposal can make a measurable difference. Even the smallest changes help reduce textile waste over time.
The post What to do with clothes you can’t donate appeared first on Popular Science.
10 wild photos of bird eggs - Popular Science
Colorful dyed eggs typically grab the spotlight on Easter, but the world of bird eggs is so much bigger than chickens. There are as many colors and sizes as there are bird species. According to conservation writer Paul Baicich, the co-author of Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds, there is a reason some eggs are white and some are colored.
White eggs in the wild mostly belong to the birds that nest in deep holes in trees or terrain. These birds are called cavity nesters and the contrast between the white egg and dark spaces help them see their eggs. Some cavity nesters include woodpeckers, owls, and kestrels.
Wild colored eggs—not the ones the Easter Bunny hides—generally belong to birds that nest in more open areas on the ground. This color makes them more difficult to find. Because eggs in ground nests have color, they are harder for predators to find. Plovers, gulls, and most ducks are considered ground nesters.
Take a peek into this exciting world in the gallery below. (Click to expand images to full screen.)
Spotted sandpipers (Actitis macularia) actually reverse roles when it comes to watching over eggs. The females will migrate early to arrive at a potential nesting site before the male. She is also the one that establishes the territory by driving out the other females. After mating and laying her eggs, the female abandons the male who then takes on all of the parental duties. Image: NPS/John Good.A sora (Porzana carolina) nest lying in a shallow marsh at Morris Wetland Management District in Minnesota. Soras are small marsh birds. They typically lay 10 to 12 eggs in one clutch, but can sometimes lay up to 18. Image: Sara Vacek/USFWS.
Many eggs have some color, which helps camouflage them from predators. This is a black skimmer (Rynchops niger) egg at Breton National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana. Egg incubation takes 21 to 23 days. It is performed by both sexes, and the male may do more. Image: Greg Thompson/USFWS.
Ostriches are the largest birds on Earth, but can’t fly like most other avians. Both living ostrich species, the common ostrich (Struthio camelus) and the Somali ostrich (Struthio molybdophanes), are found in Africa. Their eggs are famous for their size, averaging six inches long, five inches across, and weigh about three pounds. Female ostriches lay seven to 10 eggs at a time, in communal nests to benefit the entire flock. These eggs belong to a common ostrich in the Ngorongoro conservation area in Tanzania. Image: André Gilden via Getty Images. An eared grebe (Podiceps nigricollis) egg resting in a nest in a marsh at Lake Andes National Wildlife Refuge in South Dakota. Right after this photo was taken, an adult eared grebe returned to the nest. These long-necked waterbirds are known for their bright red eyes. Image: Kelly Preheim.
The common murre (Uria aalge) lays colorful, speckled eggs. They are also pyriform, or pear-shaped and pointed. The photo of this egg was in Selawik National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which is home to several species of waterfowl, songbirds, shorebirds, and fish. Image: Brandon Saito/USFWS.
Wisdom is a Laysan albatross (Phoebastria immutabilis) and the oldest known bird in the wild. At the estimated age of 75, has raised as many as 40 chicks in her lifetime. She tends to her eggs at Midway Atoll National Wildlife Refuge in the Pacific Ocean. Image: Kristina McOmber/Kupu Conservation Leadership Development Program and USFWS.
An early-blooming plant called skunk cabbage and brown coloring provides cover for these eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) eggs. These birds that are more typically associated with Thanksgiving, mate in the spring and lay an average of 11 to 12 eggs (often one a day) in a clutch. Image: Chesapeake Bay Program.
Tundra swan (Cygnus columbianus columbianus) eggs sit in a relatively open nest at Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. They breed in remote areas of the North American arctic, and must defend their eggs and hatchlings against several predators, including foxes, weasels, wolves, and bears, as well as other birds. Image: Nathan Graff/USFWS.
Perhaps the prettiest of all, the American robin’s (Turdus migratorius) eggs have a signature blue-green hue thanks to an egg-citing evolutionary adaptation. The color may help protect them from sun exposure by filtering out the amount of UV light that penetrates the eggshell. It comes from a pigment called biliverdin that the mother deposits onto the eggshell when she lays the egg. This particular clutch was photographed in Moorestown, New Jersey in 2013. Image: John Greim/LightRocket via Getty Images.
The post 10 wild photos of bird eggs appeared first on Popular Science.
Is it okay to eat standing up? A doctor weighs in. - Popular Science
You’re busy. Somewhere along the way, the chair disappeared from meals. Breakfast over the sink, lunch at the counter. Sometimes, you can still hear your parents chiding you about how it’s “better” to sit down while eating. But is that really true? Is it bad to eat standing up?
Digestion is about gravityWhen it comes to habits for good digestion, experts say the goal is to work with—not against— gravity. Whether you’re sitting down or standing up, a good guideline is to simply make sure you’re eating upright. The biggest no-no is eating lying down, or lying down right after you eat.
“A really common way to trigger heartburn symptoms is to eat and then lie down immediately,” Dr. Carolyn Newberry, gastroenterologist and Associate Professor of Medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College, tells Popular Science. “As stomach acid gets secreted and it’s digesting food and mixing it up in your stomach, that can regurgitate back up if you’re not using gravity to help it go down properly.”
Ancient Romans often laid down while they ate—that doesn’t mean you should. Image: Public DomainIt typically takes about two hours or more for food to move from the stomach to the intestines, which is why eating right before bed is discouraged.
With gravity in mind, eating standing up might not be that different from eating sitting down. Experts say the major drawback to standing and eating is mainly that people tend to do it because they’re in a hurry, and that’s where the trouble lies.
The trouble with eating in a hurryIf you’re experiencing indigestion and changes in diet aren’t helping, experts suggest examining the pace of your meals. Eating in a rush can cause bloating, upset stomach, and overeating. Unintentionally swallowing excess air and not chewing sufficiently as you scarf down your lunch can be rough on the gut.
Our digestive system does its best work when we’re in a leisurely state. Newberry says people should take their time while eating meals.
She encourages taking smaller bites and making sure to chew completely. “The digestion process starts in the mouth,” she says, “even with the salivary enzymes that break down some of your macronutrients.”
Pumping the breaks can also help you to know how much food you actually need. “You want to eat at a pace that you can feel when you’re full,” Newberry says. Satiety hormones kick in at a bit of a delay. It takes about 20 minutes from the time you start eating for your brain to start sending you the “Hey, I’m almost full now” signals. When you eat slowly, you give it a chance to get that message across, which helps you to avoid overeating.
If you must eat quickly, however, Newberry recommends eating smaller, more frequent, protein-rich, snack-sized meals.
Related 'Ask Us Anything' StoriesCan one big meal really make you gain weight?
Is drinking cold water bad for you? We asked a dietitian.
Should you eat invasive species? We asked an ecologist.
The best chocolate chip cookie recipe, according to science
Does eating spicy food help you lose weight? Science has a clear answer.
Think “rest and digest”Another drawback to dining in a rush is the potential for moving around more than you should while eating. Eating while walking or running is generally discouraged, as it carries many of the same risks as hurried eating does, not to mention a heightened risk for choking.
But even just lunching in haste may mean you need to get up very suddenly, change position, or run off to do something. Abrupt position changes during or right after eating aren’t good either.
“If you were to eat a big meal and then get up really quickly, you may feel dizzy or lightheaded just from those fluctuations in blood flow and the different hormone changes that happen,” says Newberry.
Blood flow is important for digestion and diverting it to other muscles may make it harder to digest well. We’ve all heard the rule about not swimming right after eating. But this applies to other vigorous activities too. A gentle walk shortly after a meal is fine, and even good for you, but you should wait 30 minutes following a snack and two hours after a big meal to engage in strenuous exercise. Simply put, our bodies are wired to digest while in a state of calm.
“‘Rest and digest’ is parasympathetic,” Newberry says, referring to the network of nerves in your body responsible for periods of tranquility. “It’s the opposite of adrenaline. It’s a different type of hormone that’s released, and it allows your body to relax. Blood flow can go to your intestines, and you can digest and metabolize your food.”
In Ask Us Anything, Popular Science answers your most outlandish, mind-burning questions, from the everyday things you’ve always wondered to the bizarre things you never thought to ask. Have something you’ve always wanted to know? Ask us.
The post Is it okay to eat standing up? A doctor weighs in. appeared first on Popular Science.
04 Apr 2026
Humans can still beat AI at video games - Popular Science
Ask someone to chart the progression of artificial intelligence (AI) models over the past few decades and you’ll likely hear some reference to how good they are at playing games. IBM shocked the world in 1997 when its Deep Blue model vanquished chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov at his own domain. Nearly two decades later, Google’s AlphaGo model trounced a human champion of the game Go, a feat some thought impossible at the time.
Since then, increasingly data rich AI models have graduated from board games to video games. Various models have used a training method called reinforcement learning—a technique that also plays a key role in training AI chatbots like ChatGPT—to teach machines how to learn and outperform humans at a range of Atari games.More recently, reinforcement learning has taught machines how to master incredibly complex strategy games including Dota 2 and Starcraft II.
But there’s one area of gaming remaining—at least for now—where computers still can’t hold a candle to flesh and bone humans. They are still not great at learning different kinds of more open-ended games quickly. When it comes to picking up a random title from a game store that they haven’t seen before and getting the gist, human gamers still learn the ropes much quicker than even the most advanced AI models.
That’s the key argument made in a recent paper authored by New York University computer science professor Julian Togelius and his colleagues. They note this distinction isn’t just a pat on the back for Homo sapiens. It may also shed light on a key element of what makes human intelligence so unique and why AI still has a long way to go before it can truly claim human-level intelligence—let alone surpass it.
“If you pit an LLM [large language model] against a game it has not seen before, the result is almost certain failure,” the authors write.
AI has been hooked on games from the beginningGames have been useful testbeds for AI models for decades because they typically have predictable rules, defined goals, and varying mechanics. Those basic tenets track particularly well for reinforcement learning, where a model plays a game in simulation over and over again—sometimes millions of times—using trial and error to gradually improve until it reaches proficiency. This, in a basic sense, was how DeepMind was able to master Atari games in 2015. That same logic influences today’s popular large language models, albeit with the entire internet serving as training data.
And yet, that method runs into problems when asked to generalize. AI models crush humans at board games and certain video games because the constraints are clear and the goals are relatively straightforward. At the end of the day, Togelius and his colleagues argue that those models, impressive as they may seem, are still getting exceptionally good at a very specific task—and not much more. Even small variations to a game’s overall design can cause the whole thing to break down. A model might be superhuman when playing a specific game, but prove pretty incompetent when asked to improvise.
That distinction becomes even clearer considering the broader trend in modern gaming toward more open-ended and abstract titles. Take chess versus a high-budget third person adventure game like the open-world western “Red Dead Redemption.” While both are games in the basic sense, what it means to succeed or win in each are wildly different. “Red Dead Redemption” has many missions with clearly defined resolutions—shoot the bad guy, steal the horse. However, the overarching goal of the game is far less straightforward. What does it mean to win when the central drive is to embody a morally troubled Western outlaw?
Related StoriesHow video game tech, AI, and computer vision help decode animal pain and behavior
Chess or video games—which actually makes you smarter? The answer may surprise you.
The surprising benefits of video games
Human gamers can intuit that; machines, not so much. Even in simpler games like “Minecraft,” the researchers note, an AI model may know to jump from one block to another while having absolutely no concept of what it actually means to jump.
“In sum, all well-designed games are expertly tailored to human capabilities, intuition, and common sense,” the authors write.
Lived experience appears to be our greatest advantage when playing against machines. The average gamer downloading a new release may not have been scrupulously trained by an office full of well-paid, Patagonia-clad engineers, but they do have years of interacting with and understanding objects and more abstract concepts that they will then encounter in the game. The authors note that human babies learn to recognize and identify individual objects somewhere around 18 to 24 months, simply by existing in the world. Machines need more hand-holding.
All of this translates to humans learning new games faster. Past studies show that a game-playing AI model using a curiosity-based reinforcement learning may require four million keyboard interactions to finish a game. That translates to around 37 hours of continuous play. The average human gamer, by contrast, will usually figure out even totally new mechanics in under 10 hours.
That said, game-playing AI is definitely still improving, even in more general settings. Just last year, Google DeepMind unveiled a model called SIMA 2, which the company describes as a significant step forward in AI learning to play 3D games in ways more similar to humans, including games it wasn’t specifically trained on. The key breakthrough involved taking an existing model and integrating reasoning capabilities from Google’s Gemini large language model. That combination helped it better understand and interact with new environments.
Togelius and his colleagues say those models still have real ground to cover before they can be considered on par with a human gamer. Their proposed benchmark involves taking a model and having it play and win the top 100 games on Steam or the iOS App Store, without having been previously trained on any of them—and doing so in roughly the same time it would take a human. That’s a tall order.
“General video game playing, in the sense of being able to play any game of the top 100 on Steam or iOS App Store after only the same amount of playing time that a human would need, is a very hard challenge that we are nowhere near solving and not even seriously attempting,” the authors write. “It is not at all clear that current methods and models are suited to this problem.”
Beating that challenge isn’t just of interest to the gaming world. Togelius argues that a machine capable of generalizing in that way would likely need to excel at true creativity, forward planning, and abstract thinking, all qualities that feel far more distinctly human than what current AI models possess.
In other words, the true test of how well AI can achieve “human-level intelligence” might not come from generating deepfakes or writing trite novels, but from playing a whole lot of games.
The post Humans can still beat AI at video games appeared first on Popular Science.
Baby chicks like gentle pets—like really gentle - Popular Science
Around this time of the year, your social media doom scrolling might be peppered with images of adorable children holding disgruntled yellow chicks. While the sight of puggy little hands wrapped a little too tightly around the Easter and spring icon might make you cringe, new research suggests that a different sort of human interaction is beneficial for the chicks.
To investigate, a team of researchers used a conditioned place preference test. This assessment is based on the principle that animals should learn to prefer places associated with good/better feelings. They tested 20 domestic laying hen chicks and two chambers. One chamber featured gentle human handling, soft speech, and slow stroking. The other had a neutral human presence, that was silent and still. The chicks were conditioned to these associations.
“To our knowledge, no studies have explored whether chickens can develop conditioned preferences in the context of gentle human handling, such as stroking,” the authors write in a study recently published in the journal Animal Welfare. “Hence, this study aimed to determine whether laying hen chicks display a learned preference for environments where they experience gentle handling treatment compared to those with a neutral presence treatment.”
A laying hen chick sitting on a person’s hand. Image: University of Bristol.After the conditioning, the chicks continually spent more time in the chamber previously linked with the tender handling. This shows that the experience has a positive association for the chicks, who also did not keep away from the other more quiet chamber, the researchers highlighted. Importantly, this suggests that the chicks were attracted to the gentle handling and not staying away from the neutral human chamber.
“Our findings show that gentle human contact can trigger positive emotions in young chicks,” Ben Lecorps, an animal welfare scientist at the University of Bristol and co-author of the paper, said in a statement. “The study demonstrates how simple, calm handling has the potential to shape the human-animal relationship from fear-inducing to positive and consequently improve the chicks’ welfare.”
These findings could impact animal welfare assessment and husbandry practices in the future. According to the Angell Animal Medical Center-Angell, laying hens are among farming’s most abused animals, with most chickens living in less space than a sheet of paper.
Moral of the story, it could be a good idea to pet chicks, but gently!
The post Baby chicks like gentle pets—like really gentle appeared first on Popular Science.
3 myths about keeping ants out of your house - Popular Science
It’s that time again: soon our gardens will be full of flowers and our kitchens full of ants. Only one of these developments is welcome.
Ants are, in some ways, the dominant creatures on the planet. There are, by one estimate, 20 quadrillion ants on planet earth. That’s 12 megatons of biomass, weighing more than every wild bird and mammal combined. So it probably shouldn’t be surprising when ants show up in our homes—but that doesn’t make it any more pleasant.
And we have all kinds of weird ideas about ants in our home. Some people think an ant showing up means your house is dirty (not necessarily), while others think it’s a good idea to break out the bug spray (it’s not). Let’s explore a few common ant myths, and see what research has to say about them.
Ants don’t (necessarily) mean your house is dirty.The most common advice, when it comes to ants, is keeping things clean. And it’s true that leaving food out will attract ants, but even the cleanest houses get ants sometimes.
“Finding a few ants in your home doesn’t mean your house is dirty.” Tanya Latty, a professor at the University of Sydney, wrote in an article for The Conversation. “We simply live on a planet that is absolutely teeming with ants.”
This isn’t to say that cleanliness isn’t useful when it comes to fighting infestations—,just that it’s not a guarantee. So yes, it’s a good idea to store food in airtight containers, regularly clean in hard-to-reach places like under the fridge and stove, and generally do everything you can to make sure there’s not a lot of ant food available in your house, according to Latty. But even the slightest amount of food is going to attract ants: “Ants have tiny stomachs, so even small crumbs or the residue from spilled sugary drinks can be enough to entice them back,” Latty wrote.
And food isn’t the only reason ants might find their way into your house. They may be looking for water, especially in the summer, meaning even the smallest plumbing leaks could attract them. Or, if it’s been raining a lot outside, they may come into your house in search of somewhere dry to live. Basically, cleanliness is only one factor when it comes to ants (if an important one). Another thing you can do to decrease the likelihood of seeing an ant, according to Latty, is sealing any small cracks or other potential entrances used by ants.
Bug spray isn’t the best ideaYou might, after seeing a line of ants in your house, reach for a can of bug spray. And it will kill the ants you can see, granted, but the ants you can see aren’t the problem.
“Ant poison may make you feel like you’re accomplishing something, but you’re not,” Michael Hansen, PhD, a biologist and ecologist, wrote in an article published by Consumer Reports. “Unless you solve the problem of what’s attracting them to your house—and how they’re getting in—you should remember that there are thousands of ants in every colony, and you’ll just keep seeing them.”
Not only does bug spray not work, according to Hansen, it also has a bunch of downsides. “Some of these sprays contain chemicals that are endocrine-disrupting compounds, which can alter our hormones,” said Hansen. “Similar compounds have been linked to neurobehavioral effects in children, including reduced IQ and increased rates of ADHD, even at the low levels you’d be exposed to when spraying your house.”
The article suggests instead relying on purpose-made ant baits, which are readily available. Unlike spray, which only affects the ants you can see, bait is designed to be brought back to colonies by worker ants, and then eaten by the rest of the colony. This kills the colony at the source. Keep in mind that different species of ants are attracted to different kinds of bait, so you may need to try a few different ones.
Pepper and cinnamon can deter ants, but not for longSo bug sprays are out, but what about natural remedies? The internet is full of natural alternatives to bug spray—cinnamon or pepper, for example. The idea is that you can disrupt a trail of ants by putting something that smells strongly in their way. And there is research that suggests this works—a study by Universiti Teknologi MARA researchers in Malaysia suggests that ethanol-based extracts with chilli pepper, black pepper, and cinnamon all deter ants.
So you could, in theory, use any of these or other remedies to break up the chemical trail ants are using to find their way into your house, without having to worry about the health concerns associated with bug spray. You might even notice they work for a while. The problem is, if ants are determined to get into your house, they will eventually find another way in. Research from Stanford University published in American Nationalist suggests that ant colonies are extremely good at finding workarounds to broken trails, meaning it’s only a short-term solution.
Again, you’re probably better off sealing any entrances ants may be using, ensuring there’s not food or water laying around, and setting out ant bait.
The post 3 myths about keeping ants out of your house appeared first on Popular Science.
03 Apr 2026
Ancient humans didn’t need braces. So why do we? - Popular Science
Today braces are something of a rite of passage. But for hundreds of thousands of years, our ancient ancestors didn’t need them. So what gives? Why do we need braces?
On a new episode of the Ask Us Anything podcast, we explore just that. So, buckle up: The answer has actually nothing to do with teeth—and everything to do with what we eat.
Popular Science’s Ask Us Anything podcast answers your most outlandish, mind-burning questions—from the everyday things you’ve always wondered to the bizarre things you never thought to ask. So, yes, pregnancy changes your body forever and no, water picks won’t damage tooth enamel. If you have a question for us, send us a note. We love answering weird questions.
This episode is based on the Popular Science article “Why our ancestors had straight teeth without braces.”
Subscribe to Ask Us AnythingListen and follow Ask Us Anything on your favorite podcast platform:
Spotify | Apple Podcasts | YouTube | Or wherever you get your podcasts.
Full Episode TranscriptSarah Durn: What was it like having braces on your teeth?
Amanda Meier: A memory that I have of having braces is getting to pick the colors of the little brackets that go on your teeth. And I remember stressing out that they wouldn’t match my clothing, which is silly now, but that was a big deal.
J. Edwards: So one specific memory about my braces: I was within the first three weeks, I woke up one morning and realized that the teeth at the top part of my gum and my upper lip had actually started to move down into where people normally have the row of teeth.
Lindsey Ramsey: For me, having braces was a very traumatic time. You’re a preteen and already riddled with anxiety. Then add on braces plus headgear that I’d also have to wear at sleepovers. It was so embarrassing.
Edith Colbert-Haburchak: I have braces right now and I like them. I’m glad that I have them, or else I would need to remove my teeth.
SD: Welcome to Ask Us Anything from the editors of Popular Science, where we answer your questions about our weird world from “Why aren’t there insects in the ocean,” to, “How come only some people get motion sickness?” No question is too offbeat or seemingly simple. I’m Sarah Durn, an editor of Popular Science.
AC: And hello, I’m editor-in-chief Annie Colbert.
SD: Hello, Annie! Here at PopSci, we can’t resist a head-scratching question.
AC: And this week we’re wondering: Why do modern humans need braces on their teeth?
Sarah, you’re familiar with this, so please tell us: What’s up with our mouths. What went wrong during evolution that now we have to install metal brackets on our teeth?
SD: Yeah, so I just edited a story on this, so the short answer is nothing went wrong exactly. It’s more like a mismatch. Our teeth are basically the same size they’ve always been, but our jaws, they’ve gotten smaller.
AC: Wait, our mouths shrank, but our teeth didn’t get the memo?
SD: Exactly. Thousands of years ago, humans were chewing really tough, fibrous foods all the time, and that constant workout actually helped our jaws grow bigger and stronger.
AC: So ancient humans were basically doing like jaw exercises?
SD: Yeah, pretty much.
But once we started eating softer, processed foods—think applesauce, peanut butter, especially as kids—our jaws just didn’t grow as much. Less chewing, less stimulation equals smaller jaws.
AC: And suddenly there’s not enough room for all your teeth.
SD: Right. So they crowd, overlap, twist. Then enter braces.
AC: Hmm. So this isn’t just about straight teeth, it’s about how modern life has reshaped our entire faces.
SD: Yeah. And it turns out that shift might be causing more than just crooked smiles.
AC: Woo. Okay. So being a person who had braces, not once, but twice, I’m officially intrigued.
SD: Oh no. Twice.
AC: Twice.
SD: So before we dig into how applesauce may have ruined our jaws, we want to know what questions are keeping you up at night.
If there’s something you’ve always wanted to know, submit your question by clicking the “Ask Us” link at popsci.com/ask. Again, that’s popsci.com/ask, and click the “Ask Us” link.
AC: We want your questions!
SD: We want them. And with that, we’ll be back after a quick break with all the delectable details about why our ancestors didn’t ever need braces.
AC: Wait, ever?
SD: Ancient humans had surprisingly straight chompers.
AC: The story just gets more and more interesting.
SD: Welcome back. So Annie, tell us about your braces experience.
AC: Uh, reluctantly, yes, I will share. As I mentioned up top, um, I had braces twice. The first time I had them was as a teen, and my jaw was so tiny that they actually pulled four of my adult teeth, so I have fewer teeth than many people.
And then, of course, I failed to wear my retainer in my twenties, as many of us do. I probably lost it four or five times and I didn’t have the money to pay for a new one. So then I needed Invisalign in my late twenties…
SD: Oh no.
AC: …in order to fix my teeth again. How about you?
SD: Yeah, I actually had like a cute little gap between my teeth when I was little. I remember the dentist saying I could either keep it or get rid of it with braces.
AC: So I’m looking at you so I can guess what you chose, but please confirm.
SD: Yes. For those who can’t see me, I ended up deciding to close my gap, but I think if I went back now, I probably would’ve kept it.
AC: Yes.
SD: But you know, it was like middle school and I think I wanted to fit in.
AC: Yes. Very relatable. Now, before we get into why so many of us ended up needing braces, like Sarah and I. I want to take a quick step back because humans have been fixing tooth problems for a very long time.
SD: How long are we talking?
AC: Like prehistoric long. Dentistry actually dates back to about 7,000 BC in the Indus Valley civilization.
SD: Wait, so people were going to the dentist before the invention of the wheel?
AC: Yes, exactly. The wheel wasn’t invented for another couple more millennia.
SD: That’s so wild to think about.
AC: Yes. But I will say “dentist” might be a generous term for what was happening. Early on, people thought tooth decay was caused by tiny worms in your teeth.
SD: Oh, yikes. Don’t like that.
AC: Yeah, right. Yuck. But that idea stuck around for thousands of years, all the way into the 1700s.
SD: Wow. That’s a commitment to a theory.
AC: Yep. But over time, people started getting more scientific about it.
SD: Probably a good approach.
AC: Yes. We always support more science. So ancient Greek physicians like Hippocrates and Aristotle wrote about treating tooth decay.
And by the 1500s, we finally got the first book entirely devoted to dentistry.
SD: Okay, so when does all of this start to look like modern dentistry?
AC: Yeah, so dentistry as we know it really kicks off in the 1700s with a French surgeon named Pierre Fauchard. He’s often called the father of modern dentistry.
SD: Hmmm. Are teeth thank you, Dr. Fauchard.
AC: He wrote this massive book. It was laying out how to care for teeth. It identified sugar as a cause of decay, and, this is key for our story, he also invented one of the earliest orthodontic devices.
SD: Oh, okay. Thank you very much, doctor.
AC: Yes, it was called the Bandeau, and it was basically a horseshoe-shaped piece of metal that you’d put in your mouth to help expand your palate and straighten your teeth.
SD: Ooh, that sounds so uncomfortable.
AC: Yeah, it sounds a little bit like a torture device. And I will say, expanders still aren’t terribly comfortable. My eight-year-old is just about to get one, and she is not excited at all. So sorry. Tangent. But yes, early dentistry was not exactly a spa experience.
SD: Yeah, no laughing gas. No tiny TV.
AC: No. But from there, things start to snowball. By the 1800s, dentistry becomes a real profession. There are dental schools, regulations, toothbrushes, toothpaste.
SD: Ooh, toothbrushes. So when do people actually start brushing their teeth?
AC: Eh, eventually. Fun fact: Most Americans didn’t adopt regular brushing habits until after World War II.
SD: No.
AC: Yeah.
SD: As someone who really likes dental hygiene, that is not good.
AC: I know. But around the late 1800s and into the early 1900s, we also start seeing braces that we’d recognize today.
SD: So goodbye Fauchard’s metal horseshoe. Hello, metal brackets.
AC: Exactly. A guy named Edward Angle developed a system for classifying different types of crooked teeth, and he helped standardized orthodontics.
So by the early 1900s, dentists were using brackets and wires to actually move teeth into place.
SD: Okay, so braces, as we know them, are actually pretty recent.
AC: Very recent. Which raises a big question: If humans have had teeth for, you know, hundreds of thousands of years, why did we suddenly need all this hardware to fix them? What changed?
SD: Yeah, and so here’s the twist. For most of human history, people didn’t need braces.
AC: Which is wild.
SD: So wild. It’s not that ancient humans had better dentists or just, you know, put up with crooked weird teeth, it’s that their mouths were actually built differently.
AC: How so?
SD: So back in the early days of human history, we actually had bigger jaws.
AC: Okay, but why?
SD: So it all comes down to what early humans were eating, as we said in the intro, and how hard they had to work to eat it.
AC: How hard are we talking?
SD: So imagine you’re a human living tens of thousands of years ago. There’s no processed foods, no smoothies, no mashed potatoes. Everything you eat—plants, meat, roots—is tough and fibrous and requires serious chewing.
AC: So every meal is a jaw workout.
SD: Exactly. And that constant chewing actually stimulates your jaw to grow bigger and stronger. The bones respond to that stress by expanding in all directions.
AC: So it’s like going to the gym, but for your face.
SD: Yeah, pretty much.
But here’s the key. Your teeth don’t do that.
AC: Mm.
SD: Their size is basically set by genetics.
AC: So your jaw can grow bigger, but your teeth stay the same size?
SD: Right. So in ancient humans, you have these big, well-developed jaws with plenty of room for all your teeth to come in nice and straight.
AC: No crowding, no overlaps, no gaps.
SD: Exactly. Wisdom teeth had plenty of space. No impacted teeth. Everything just fit.
AC: Meanwhile, us modern humans…
SD: Yeah, modern humans are eating way softer foods, especially as kids when your jaw is still developing. So think purees, toast, pasta, applesauce.
AC: I mean delicious but terrible for jaw growth.
SD: So without that constant chewing stress, our jaws don’t grow as large.
AC: But our teeth are still the same size as our ancestors.
SD: Exactly. So when our teeth come in, they’re basically trying to fit into a space that’s too small.
AC: Cue the crowding.
SD: Crowding, twisting, overlapping: All the things braces are designed to fix. Scientists actually have a name for this: It’s an evolutionary mismatch. Our bodies evolved for one set of conditions—tough diets, lots of chewing—but we’re living in a totally different environment now.
AC: And our mouths, they didn’t keep up.
SD: Right.
It’s not just about crooked teeth either. Smaller jaws are also linked to things like impacted wisdom teeth, and even issues like sleep apnea.
AC: Oh, yes.
SD: And because there’s less room in your mouth overall, including for your tongue and airway structures, sleep apnea is way more common today than it likely was for our, you know, ancient ancestors.
AC: That’s a lot riding on jaw size,
SD: It really is. So braces, you know, they aren’t just cosmetic. They’re often solving a structural problem that didn’t really exist for our ancestors.
AC: All right. That makes me feel a little bit better about my high school braces era.
SD: Yeah, same. Applesauce: I mean, it’s cursed us all.
AC: That especially sucks because I love applesauce.
SD: Oh, applesauce plus peanut butter: It’s one of my favorite snacks.
AC: Oof. Love it. All right, well, I’ve learned a lot about braces today and feel better about my braces experience.
But when we come back, Sarah’s going to be chatting about another facet of early dental discoveries with epidemiologists Erin Welsh and Erin Allmann Updyke, hosts of the fascinating science podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You.
SD: Stay with us. We’ll be right back after this quick break.
And we’re back with epidemiologist Dr. Erin Welsh and Dr. Erin Allmann Updyke. Together, they host the popular science podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You. Welsh is a full-time science communicator, and Updyke is a board certified family medicine physician.
The pair met as grad students studying disease ecology, and since launching their podcast in 2017, the show has been an Apple chart-topper and been featured in The New York Times, The Today Show, and even on the CDC’s website.
Welcome Erin and Erin!
Erin Allen Updyke: Hello.
Erin Welsh: Thank you. Thanks for that really lovely introduction. Wow.
EAU: Yeah, we’re excited to be here.
EW: Yeah.
SD: Excited to have you guys! So not super long ago you guys delved into all things fluoride from its natural origins to all its benefits in modern dentistry. So what was the most surprising thing you learned while doing your research for those episodes?
EW: I think for me, just like John Green says, everything is tuberculosis. So the dentist who discovered fluoride and started to go down this rabbit hole, moved from the northeast to Colorado Springs where it was drier and warmer to treat his tuberculosis.
And it was there that he noticed in Colorado Springs, a Colorado stain or this brown teeth mottling and it happened to be in people who were living in areas with heavily fluoridated water.
But with these stains, he noticed that they had no cavities. And so that’s sort of what set him off to understand what’s causing the stain that’s also preventing cavities.
SD: Yeah. I had no idea that fluoride was naturally occurring.
EAU: I had no idea either before we started researching this episode, and especially to know just how high the levels of fluoride can be in naturally occurring sources, compared to the level that we artificially fluoridate the water in communities where we do water fluoridation for for dental prevention. We fluoridate the water to like 0.7 parts per million. But in some places, like in Colorado Springs, it was like over 4, over 5, like really, really high concentrations.
EW: There was one place that was 12 that he discovered, which is like very high fluoridation.
EAU: And we do sometimes see negative health consequences at really high fluoridation levels, but we don’t see negative health consequences at the levels of fluoridation that we fluoridate water at.
Which I think is one of the big things that I took away from the research on that episode because there’s so much misinformation out there about fluoridation and the potential for negative health impacts as opposed to the incredible public health impact that it has had.
SD: Well, Erin and Erin, thank you so much for making the time to chat with us. Where can listeners hear more about what you’re up to?
EW: Ah, well, we’ve got a website: thispodcastwillkillyou.com, but you can also find us wherever you get your podcast: Spotify, Apple Podcast. And we have some of our, most of our newest episodes on YouTube, so you can check us out there through the Exactly Right Media YouTube channel.
SD: Amazing. You guys, thank you so much for making the time to chat with us.
EAU: Thank you. We’re thrilled. This is fun.
EW: Thanks so much for having us. Yeah, this is great.
AC: Oh, they’re so cool.
SD: Yeah, I love them. They were fun.
AC: It all really does come back to tuberculosis. All right, that’s it for this episode. And now I’m feeling pressure to wear my retainer tonight. And if you also have a retainer, definitely wear it. Anyway, we’ve got more episodes of Ask Us Anything live in our feed right now!
Follow or subscribe to Ask Us Anything by Popular Science wherever you enjoy your podcasts, and if you like our show, leave a rating and review.
SD: Did you also have to suffer through braces? You know, let us know in the comments.
Our theme music is from Kenneth Michael Reagan, and our producer is Alan Haburchak.
This week’s episode was based on an article written for Popular Science by Sara Kylie Watson.
AC: Thank you team for the great episode. Thank you braces for the straight teeth. And thank you everyone for listening.
SD: And one more time, if you want something you’ve always wondered about explained on a future episode, go to popsci.com/ask and click the “Ask Us” link.
Until next time, keep the questions coming!
The post Ancient humans didn’t need braces. So why do we? appeared first on Popular Science.
Watch The Weather Channel like its 1999 with the official RetroCast - Popular Science
The people have spoken. The Weather Channel has officially announced a new look rolling out across both its website and on its app—one with a distinctly nostalgic, Y2K-esque vibe to it.
“This is not an April Fool’s joke. You’ve asked (a lot) and we’ve listened,” the meteorological source wrote in a social media post.
View this post on InstagramRetroCast Now gives viewers the current local conditions and upcoming forecasts a throwback look nearly identical to what viewers saw on The Weather Channel during the late-90s and early 2000s. And yes, that even includes a relaxing smooth jazz soundtrack to accompany the experience.
Similar to previous fan-sourced projects, RetroCast Now harkens back to a much more pixelated time and technology. In 1982, the Weather Channel debuted WeatherStar to boost its forecasting abilities. “Star” is short for Satellite Transponder Addressable Receiver, and consists of a computer attachment known as a headend installed in a cable system’s central broadcasting facility. This lets The Weather Channel receive and send out localized weather info, as well as potentially lifesaving alerts if severe storms are nearby.
Although the visual aesthetics have changed, the broadcast technology is largely similar to early incarnations. But according to The Weather Channel, people have also been clamoring for the matching artwork.
“The idea came from listening to our users. In an era where on-demand weather data is at everyone’s fingertips, we want to celebrate the nostalgia and the innovation of the 90’s,” Mark Fredo, executive creative director at The Weather Channel digital properties, explains to Popular Science. “This was the moment local weather storytelling was first delivered at scale, transforming a simple forecast into a communal experience.”
Inspired by this history, Fredo’s team redesigned the overall look in a way to fit today’s screens—both big and small. It’s not a passing fad, either. Fredo confirmed that RetroCast Now will be available for the foreseeable future. An option to toggle between website vibes will soon become available on The Weather Channel’s homepage. There are also plans for additional thematic projects down the line, although that forecast (pun intended is a bit murky.
“While we have more surprises in development, our focus remains on delivering the most engaging and intuitive weather storytelling in the world,” says Fredo.
The post Watch The Weather Channel like its 1999 with the official RetroCast appeared first on Popular Science.
The Waterdrop G3P800 water filter system provides clean, filtered water without a wait - Popular Science
If you’ve ever Googled “what’s actually in my tap water,” you’ve probably scared yourself into at least considering a filtration system. The Waterdrop G3P800 is a tankless reverse osmosis system that promises to strip out PFAS and other contaminants while delivering filtered water fast enough that you won’t notice a difference from your regular faucet. After spending a month with it installed under my kitchen sink, I can say it largely delivers on those promises, while allowing a relatively simple DIY installation.
G3P800 RO System The compact form factor makes it easy to hide away.Waterdrop
See It Pros- 800 GPD flow rate fills a cup in roughly 5 seconds—no waiting around
- Tankless design saves significant under-sink space compared to traditional RO systems
- NSF/ANSI 42, 53, 58, and 372 certified with independent lab-verified PFAS removal
- Smart faucet with built-in TDS meter lets you see water quality in real time
- UV LED sterilization adds a layer of protection against bacteria and viruses
- 3:1 pure-to-drain ratio is significantly more efficient than older RO systems
- DIY installation is genuinely manageable—no plumber required
- No built-in remineralization—filtered water can taste flat without the optional add-on
- Replacement filters add ongoing cost
- Smart faucet requires a hole in your countertop or sink if you don’t have a spare
- Filtration type: Tankless reverse osmosis
- Flow rate: 800 GPD (roughly 0.63 GPM)
- Filtration stages: 10 stages across 3 filter cartridges + UV sterilization
- Pure-to-drain ratio: 3:1
- Certifications: NSF/ANSI 42, 53, 58, 372 (IAPMO certified)
- Dimensions: 18.11" x 5.67" x 17.72"
- UV sterilization: LED UV light, 99.9% sterilization rate
- TDS monitoring: Built-in smart faucet with real-time TDS display
- RO membrane pore size: 0.0001 µm (16-layer composite)
- Installation: DIY under-sink, approximately 30 minutes
Verdict: The Waterdrop G3P800 is a compelling modern alternative to the traditional tank-based reverse osmosis systems that have dominated the under-sink market for decades. Its 800 GPD flow rate effectively eliminates the biggest historical complaint about RO systems—waiting around for water—and its compact footprint means you won’t sacrifice all of your under-sink storage. The NSF certifications and third-party lab testing back up its filtration claims. It’s not cheap, and the ongoing filter costs are worth factoring in, but if clean drinking water is a priority, this system punches well above what most pitcher filters and faucet attachments can offer.
What reverse osmosis actually doesBefore we get into the specifics of the Waterdrop G3P800, it’s worth understanding what reverse osmosis actually is, because it’s a fundamentally different approach from the carbon filters you’ll find in pitchers and fridge dispensers. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through a semi-permeable membrane with pores so small—0.0001 micrometers in the G3P800’s case—that most dissolved contaminants simply can’t pass through. For context, that’s roughly 1/10,000th the diameter of a human hair. Standard carbon filters are great at catching chlorine and improving taste, but they can’t touch dissolved heavy metals, fluoride, or the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that have become a growing concern in municipal water supplies.
The trade-off with RO has always been waste water. The filtration process sends some water down the drain, carrying the rejected contaminants with it. Older systems often wasted 3 or 4 gallons for every gallon of purified water they produced. The G3P800’s 3:1 pure-to-drain ratio flips that dynamic—you get three gallons of clean water for every one that goes to waste, which is a significant efficiency improvement and something to consider if you’re water-conscious.
Design and buildThe most immediately striking thing about the G3P800 is its lack of a tank. Traditional RO systems store filtered water in a pressurized bladder tank that typically takes up a significant chunk of under-sink real estate. Waterdrop ditches the tank entirely, opting instead for on-demand filtration that purifies water in real time as you turn on the faucet. The result is a unit that measures 18.11 x 5.67 x 17.72 inches. Picture a thick textbook stood on its side. Waterdrop claims it saves about 70 percent of the under-sink space a traditional RO system would occupy, and in practice, that tracks.
The housing itself is a white plastic shell with a clean, minimalist look. Most people will never see it when they visit your house since it’s under the sink, but design still matters.. The three filter cartridges are accessible from the front panel, which is a thoughtful design choice since you don’t need to disconnect or move the unit when it’s time to swap filters. The whole thing has a distinctly modern, almost appliance-like quality that sets it apart from the jumble of tubes and canisters you’d associate with older RO systems.
InstallationWaterdrop says you can install the G3P800 in about 30 minutes without calling a plumber. The system connects to your cold water supply line via a quick-connect fitting and routes waste water to your drain via a saddle valve. I’m generally overcautious when it comes to DIY plumbing projects, so it took me closer to an hour to triple check everything.
The trickiest part of the installation is the faucet. The G3P800 comes with its own dedicated smart faucet, which means you’ll need either a pre-existing hole in your sink or countertop (like from a sprayer or soap dispenser you’re not using) or you’ll need to drill one. That’s probably the one step that could give a true DIY novice pause.
The included instructions are useful and there are online video resources to outline the process. Like most people, I’m spoiled by video walkthroughs at this point, so that’s a welcome bit of help. Once the physical connections are made, you run water through the system for a few minutes to flush the filters before the water is ready to drink.
Filtration: what it removes The 10-stage breakdownWaterdrop markets the G3P800 as a 10-stage filtration process. The system uses three physical filter cartridges—a CF (composite filter), a reverse osmosis membrane, and a CB (carbon block) post-filter—plus a UV LED sterilizer. Those 10 “stages” refer to the multiple layers of filtration media within each cartridge rather than 10 separate filters you’d need to individually maintain and replace. Here’s what each does:
The CF filter is a composite cartridge that handles sediment, chlorine, and organic compounds, which affect taste and protects the more delicate RO membrane downstream from getting clogged prematurely. Think of it as the bouncer that catches the obvious troublemakers before they get inside. This filter needs replacing every 6 months.
The RO membrane is the workhorse. This is a 16-layer composite membrane with pore openings of 0.0001 micrometers—small enough to reject dissolved heavy metals (lead, arsenic, chromium), fluoride, nitrates, and those now-infamous PFAS compounds that the EPA has been tightening regulations around. Independent testing by third-party labs has verified the system’s PFAS removal claims—dedicated 14-analyte PFAS panels returned every compound as “not detected” in filtered water. The RO membrane lasts about 2 years before replacement.
The CB post-filter is a carbon block that polishes the water after it passes through the membrane, catching any residual taste or odor compounds. It also serves as a final safeguard to ensure the water that reaches your glass tastes clean. This one lasts about a year.
Finally, a UV LED sterilizer hits the water with ultraviolet light just before it exits the system. UV treatment is well-established as a method for neutralizing bacteria, viruses, and other microorganisms, and Waterdrop claims a 99.9 percent sterilization rate. This is a nice additional layer, particularly if you’re on well water or have concerns about microbial contamination.
Certifications and testingThe G3P800 carries certifications from IAPMO R&T against four NSF/ANSI standards. NSF 42 covers aesthetic effects like chlorine taste and odor. NSF 53 addresses health-related contaminants including lead and specific volatile organic compounds. NSF 58 is the one specific to reverse osmosis systems and covers TDS reduction—basically a measure of how thoroughly the membrane strips out dissolved solids. And NSF 372 certifies the system uses lead-free materials in its construction. Having all four is a strong credential—some competitors skip one or more of these certifications, particularly NSF 53.
Flow rate and daily useThe 800 GPD rating is the headline spec, and it translates to filling a standard drinking glass in roughly five seconds. For context, many competing RO systems produce 50 to 100 GPD and rely on the storage tank to deliver water at a reasonable flow rate. Once that tank is depleted, you’re waiting. The G3P800’s tankless design means you’re getting filtered water on demand at a consistent flow rate.
That said, 800 GPD is the system’s maximum capacity under ideal conditions (typically rated at 77°F water temperature and 60 PSI pressure). If your incoming water is cold as is typical with northern climates, the membrane’s efficiency drops. This is true of all RO systems, not a Waterdrop-specific issue, but it’s worth noting that your real-world flow rate may be somewhat lower than the marketed number.
The smart faucetThe included faucet has a small LED ring at its base that displays the TDS (total dissolved solids) level of your filtered water in real time. TDS is measured in parts per million (ppm) and serves as a rough proxy for water purity—the lower the number, the fewer dissolved substances remain. Tap water in the US typically registers somewhere between 50 and 500 ppm depending on your municipal supply. A healthy RO system should push that down into the single digits or low teens.
The faucet uses a color-coded system: blue indicates the water quality is in the ideal range, while other colors signal that something may need attention, like a filter approaching the end of its life. It’s a genuinely useful feature, not just a gimmick, because it gives you a real-time indicator that the system is performing as expected. My tap water is particularly loaded with solids, so the filter has to work harder than normal. Still, the speed managed to keep up for the most part.
Water tasteThis is where things get subjective, and it’s also where RO systems in general have a known quirk. They often strip out nearly everything dissolved in the water—including minerals like calcium and magnesium that contribute to what we perceive as “good” water taste. RO water can taste noticeably flat or even slightly acidic to some palates. This isn’t a flaw in the G3P800 specifically; it’s just how thorough reverse osmosis works. I prefer to use this kind of filtered water in my coffee machine and when adding flavored powders, so it doesn’t matter that much to me anyway. I also often take electrolyte supplements, whcih have soem of the same minerals.
Waterdrop sells an optional remineralization filter (the ALK16) for about $30 that adds calcium, magnesium, and other minerals back into the filtered water, raising the pH and giving it a more “natural” mineral water taste. Whether you need it comes down to personal preference.
Filter replacement and ongoing costsNo water filtration system is a one-time purchase, and the G3P800’s filter replacement schedule is something to budget for. Here’s the breakdown:
The CF filter needs replacing every 6 months (or after roughly 550 gallons). The CB post-filter lasts about 12 months (or 1,100 gallons). The RO membrane is the longest-lasting cartridge at approximately 24 months (or 2,900 gallons). The product linked here is the 1-year combo kit, which bundles two CF filters and one CB filter—essentially a year’s worth of the consumables you’ll go through most frequently. The RO membrane isn’t included in the combo since it lasts two years.
Who should buy the Waterdrop G3P800?The G3P800 makes the strongest case for itself if you fall into a few specific categories. If you’ve checked your local water quality report (the Environmental Working Group’s Tap Water Database is a sobering place to start) and found elevated levels of PFAS, lead, or other contaminants that a basic carbon filter can’t handle, a reverse osmosis system is one of the most effective solutions available to consumers. The G3P800 is among the best-performing tankless options in this category.
It’s also a solid pick for anyone who’s been put off by the traditional downsides of RO systems. The tankless design eliminates the space problem, the 800 GPD flow rate eliminates the wait-time problem, and the 3:1 pure-to-drain ratio significantly reduces the water waste problem. If you tried an older-generation RO system years ago and gave up on it, the G3P800 represents how far the technology has come.
If your municipal water is already clean and you’re just looking for better-tasting water, a simpler (and cheaper) carbon filter setup might be all you need. And if you’re on a tight budget, keep in mind that the G3P800 system plus the ongoing filter costs adds up. But for the water quality-conscious household that wants serious filtration without serious compromises, this system hits a compelling sweet spot.
The post The Waterdrop G3P800 water filter system provides clean, filtered water without a wait appeared first on Popular Science.
The first gamblers were Ice Age women on the Great Plains - Popular Science
Humans have gambled and gamed for millennia. However, new evidence suggests the odds are good that our relationship with…well, odds probably dates back much further than many experts believed. Based on evidence recently detailed in the journal American Antiquity, Ice Age hunter-gatherers living on the western Great Plains toyed with dice and other probability tools over 12,000 years ago. For those keeping score, that’s more than 6,000 years earlier than similar artifacts found among the Bronze Age societies of present-day Europe, Africa, and Asia. What’s more, the people who most often played these games of chance likely aren’t who you imagine.
For decades, most archaeologists considered it a safe bet to assume humans first explored probability and randomness around 5,500 years ago. This theory primarily stems from the discovery of multisided dice and other similar objects at sites across the Middle East, India, Asia, and other locations in the so-called Old World, a.k.a. the world as Europeans understood it prior to their arrival in the Americas. While it’s nearly impossible to know their initial uses, activities like gambling and divination certainly paved the way for probabilistic thinking and other crucial mathematical theories.
“Historians have traditionally treated dice and probability as Old World innovations,” Colorado State University archaeologist and study co-author Robert Madden said in a statement.
Madden and colleagues are now confident that significant timeline revisions are required—and the reasons have remained hidden in plain sight for over a century. In 1907, the ethnographer Stewart Culin published Games of the North American Indians, a major work analyzing 293 sets of historic Indigenous dice gathered throughout the continent. Using a newly designed systematic analysis of measurable physical characteristics, Madden’s team re-examined these and other artifacts previously given the broad designation of “gaming pieces.” In the end, the researchers flagged more than 600 dice items from 57 sites in 12 states across North America. These objects date as far back as the Late Pleistocene, all the way up to post-European contact.
“In most cases, these objects had already been excavated and published. What was missing wasn’t the evidence, it was a clear, continent-wide standard for recognizing what we were looking at,” explained Madden.
The earliest identifiable dice were crafted 12,800–12,200 years ago at sites in present-day Wyoming, New Mexico, and Colorado. Instead of today’s popular cubic dice, the items were flat, two-sided tools carved from small bones called binary lots. Each side of a lot featured visible modifications like markings or dye so that clear results could be determined from tossing groups of them onto a surface.
“They’re simple, elegant tools. But they’re also unmistakably purposeful,” said Madden. “These are not casual byproducts of bone working. They were made to generate random outcomes.”
Given the geographical scope of the finds, archaeologists argue that these and other probability tools were immensely important to multiple Indigenous cultures as long ago as the Late Pleistocene era. They were also used in far more instances than an idle way to pass the time.
“Games of chance and gambling created neutral, rule-governed spaces,” Madden said. “They allowed people from different groups to interact, exchange goods and information, form alliances, and manage uncertainty. In that sense, they functioned as powerful social technologies.”
The study’s authors also note that past ethnographic analysis suggests a much different demographic makeup than most of today’s gamblers. A review of 131 gaming accounts documenting gender dynamics revealed 81 percent were played solely by women, 12 percent played by both sexes, and only seven percent played by men alone.
“Additional research could shed light on whether this historical pattern extends into the prehistoric past, suggesting the possibility that women may have been leaders in the social and intellectual innovations associated with ancient Native American dice, games of chance, and gambling,” the latest study’s authors wrote.
The post The first gamblers were Ice Age women on the Great Plains appeared first on Popular Science.
View my Linkedin profile