Posted on | November 8, 2010 | No Comments
…or, then again, is it? To completely different topics bring back to mind this ever-recurring question which has been tormenting humanity for centuries: does size really matter?
First off, astronomers rekindled the good old debate about Pluto’s actual status as a planet (or not) last week. Some time ago, after the discovery of celestial objects further away from the sun, of considerable size or even, in one instance, bigger than the ninth planet, the definition of the word « planet » had been overhauled to exclude Pluto.
These astronomers however were later able to measure a bit more precisely the size of this celestial object, a dwarf planet named Eris, and concluded that it actually wasn’t much bigger than the former planet. On the other hand, it would be considerably heavier, which brings about a host of other questions.
The second interesting bit of news is about our Neanderthal ancestors. Given that their cranium size was on par with that of their Cro-Magnon cousins, it was believed that both species held comparable intellectual capacities. The France-Presse news agency reveals though that German scientists were able to determine that the brain circuits developed much more rapidly in Cro-Magnon, presumably bringing about some advantages.
So here are two arguments to reassure those who’d rather believe that size isn’t everything, and that content can sometimes make a very important difference…