Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Creative collisions: Crossing the art-science divide

News Feed
Tuesday, March 19, 2024

MIT has a rich history of productive collaboration between the arts and the sciences, anchored by the conviction that these two conventionally opposed ways of thinking can form a deeply generative symbiosis that serves to advance and humanize new technologies.  This ethos was made tangible when the Bauhaus artist and educator György Kepes established the MIT Center for Advanced Visual Studies (CAVS) within the Department of Architecture in 1967. CAVS has since evolved into the Art, Culture, and Technology (ACT) program, which fosters close links to multiple other programs, centers, and labs at MIT. Class 4.373/4.374 (Creating Art, Thinking Science), open to undergraduates and master’s students of all disciplines as well as certain students from the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD), is one of the program’s most innovative offerings, proposing a model for how the relationship between art and science might play out at a time of exponential technological growth.  Now in its third year, the class is supported by an Interdisciplinary Class Development Grant from the MIT Center for Art, Science and Technology (CAST) and draws upon the unparalleled resources of MIT.nano; an artist’s high-tech toolbox for investigating the hidden structures and beauty of our material universe. High ambitions and critical thinking The class was initiated by Tobias Putrih, lecturer in ACT, and is taught with the assistance of Ardalan SadeghiKivi MArch ’23, and Aubrie James SM ’24. Central to the success of the class has been the collaboration with co-instructor Vladimir Bulović, the founding director of MIT.nano and Fariborz Maseeh Chair in Emerging Technology, who has positioned the facility as an open-access resource for the campus at large — including MIT’s community of artists. “Creating Art, Thinking Science” unfolds the 100,000 square feet of cleanroom and lab space within the Lisa T. Su Building, inviting participating students to take advantage of cutting-edge equipment for nanoscale visualization and fabrication; in the hands of artists, devices for discovering nanostructures and manipulating atoms become tools for rendering the invisible visible and deconstructing the dynamics of perception itself.  The expansive goals of the class are tempered by an in-built criticality. “ACT has a unique position as an art program nested within a huge scientific institute — and the challenges of that partnership should not be underestimated,” reflects Putrih. “Science and art are wholly different knowledge systems with distinct historical perspectives. So, how do we communicate? How do we locate that middle ground, that third space?” An evolving answer, tested and developed throughout the partnership between ACT and MIT.nano, involves a combination of attentive mentorship and sharing of artistic ideas, combined with access to advanced technological resources and hands-on practical training.  “MIT.nano currently accommodates more than 1,200 individuals to do their work, across 250 different research groups,” says Bulović. “The fact that we count artists among those is a matter of pride for us. We’ve found that the work of our scientists and technologists is enhanced by having access to the language of art as a form of expression — equally, the way that artists express themselves can be stretched beyond what could previously be imagined, simply by having access to the tools and instruments at MIT.nano.” A playground for experimentation True to the spirit of the scientific method and artistic iteration, the class is envisioned as a work in progress — a series of propositions and prototypes for how dialogue between scientists and artists might work in practice. The outcomes of those experiments can now be seen installed in the first and second floor galleries at MIT.nano. As part of the facility’s five-year anniversary celebration, the class premiered an exhibition showcasing works created during previous years of “Creating Art, Thinking Science.”  Visitors to the exhibition, “zero.zerozerozerozerozerozerozerozeroone” (named for the numerical notation for one nanometer), will encounter artworks ranging from a minimalist silicon wafer produced with two-photon polymerization (2PP) technology (“Obscured Invisibility,” 2021, Hyun Woo Park), to traces of an attempt to make vegetable soup in the cleanroom using equipment such as a cryostat, a fluorescing microscope, and a Micro-CT scanner (“May I Please Make You Some Soup?,” 2022, Simone Lasser).  These works set a precedent for the artworks produced during the fall 2023 iteration of the class. For Ryan Yang, in his senior year studying electrical engineering and computer science at MIT, the chance to engage in open discussion and experimental making has been a rare opportunity to “try something that might not work.” His project explores the possibilities of translating traditional block printing techniques to micron-scale 3D-printing in the MIT.nano labs. Yang has taken advantage of the arts curriculum at MIT at an early stage in his academic career as an engineer; meanwhile, Ameen Kaleem started out as a filmmaker in New Delhi and is now pursuing a master’s degree in design engineering at Harvard GSD, cross-registered at MIT.  Kaleem’s project models the process of abiogenesis (the evolution of living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances) by bringing living moss into the MIT.nano cleanroom facilities to be examined at an atomic scale. “I was interested in the idea that, as a human being in the cleanroom, you are both the most sanitized version of yourself and the dirtiest thing in that space,” she reflects. “Drawing attention to the presence of organic life in the cleanroom is comparable to bringing art into spaces where it might not otherwise exist — a way of humanizing scientific and technological endeavors.” Consciousness, immersion, and innovation The students draw upon the legacies of landmark art-science initiatives — including international exhibitions such as “Cybernetic Serendipity” (London ICA, 1968), the “New Tendencies” series (Zagreb, 1961-73), and “Laboratorium” (Antwerp, 1999) — and take inspiration from the instructors’ own creative investigations of the inner workings of different knowledge systems. “In contemporary life, and at MIT in particular, we’re immersed in technology,” says Putrih. “It’s the nature of art to reveal that to us, so that we might see the implications of what we are producing and its potential impact.” By fostering a mindset of imagination and criticality, combined with building the technical skills to address practical problems, “Creating Art, Thinking Science” seeks to create the conditions for a more expansive version of technological optimism; a culture of innovation in which social and environmental responsibility are seen as productive parameters for enriched creativity. The ripple effects of the class might be years in the making, but as Bulović observes while navigating the exhibition at MIT.nano, “The joy of the collaboration can be felt in the artworks.”

A collaboration between ACT and MIT.nano, the class 4.373/4.374 (Creating Art, Thinking Science) asks what it really takes to cultivate dialogue between disciplines.

MIT has a rich history of productive collaboration between the arts and the sciences, anchored by the conviction that these two conventionally opposed ways of thinking can form a deeply generative symbiosis that serves to advance and humanize new technologies. 

This ethos was made tangible when the Bauhaus artist and educator György Kepes established the MIT Center for Advanced Visual Studies (CAVS) within the Department of Architecture in 1967. CAVS has since evolved into the Art, Culture, and Technology (ACT) program, which fosters close links to multiple other programs, centers, and labs at MIT. Class 4.373/4.374 (Creating Art, Thinking Science), open to undergraduates and master’s students of all disciplines as well as certain students from the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD), is one of the program’s most innovative offerings, proposing a model for how the relationship between art and science might play out at a time of exponential technological growth. 

Now in its third year, the class is supported by an Interdisciplinary Class Development Grant from the MIT Center for Art, Science and Technology (CAST) and draws upon the unparalleled resources of MIT.nano; an artist’s high-tech toolbox for investigating the hidden structures and beauty of our material universe.

High ambitions and critical thinking

The class was initiated by Tobias Putrih, lecturer in ACT, and is taught with the assistance of Ardalan SadeghiKivi MArch ’23, and Aubrie James SM ’24. Central to the success of the class has been the collaboration with co-instructor Vladimir Bulović, the founding director of MIT.nano and Fariborz Maseeh Chair in Emerging Technology, who has positioned the facility as an open-access resource for the campus at large — including MIT’s community of artists. “Creating Art, Thinking Science” unfolds the 100,000 square feet of cleanroom and lab space within the Lisa T. Su Building, inviting participating students to take advantage of cutting-edge equipment for nanoscale visualization and fabrication; in the hands of artists, devices for discovering nanostructures and manipulating atoms become tools for rendering the invisible visible and deconstructing the dynamics of perception itself. 

The expansive goals of the class are tempered by an in-built criticality. “ACT has a unique position as an art program nested within a huge scientific institute — and the challenges of that partnership should not be underestimated,” reflects Putrih. “Science and art are wholly different knowledge systems with distinct historical perspectives. So, how do we communicate? How do we locate that middle ground, that third space?”

An evolving answer, tested and developed throughout the partnership between ACT and MIT.nano, involves a combination of attentive mentorship and sharing of artistic ideas, combined with access to advanced technological resources and hands-on practical training. 

“MIT.nano currently accommodates more than 1,200 individuals to do their work, across 250 different research groups,” says Bulović. “The fact that we count artists among those is a matter of pride for us. We’ve found that the work of our scientists and technologists is enhanced by having access to the language of art as a form of expression — equally, the way that artists express themselves can be stretched beyond what could previously be imagined, simply by having access to the tools and instruments at MIT.nano.”

A playground for experimentation

True to the spirit of the scientific method and artistic iteration, the class is envisioned as a work in progress — a series of propositions and prototypes for how dialogue between scientists and artists might work in practice. The outcomes of those experiments can now be seen installed in the first and second floor galleries at MIT.nano. As part of the facility’s five-year anniversary celebration, the class premiered an exhibition showcasing works created during previous years of “Creating Art, Thinking Science.” 

Visitors to the exhibition, “zero.zerozerozerozerozerozerozerozeroone” (named for the numerical notation for one nanometer), will encounter artworks ranging from a minimalist silicon wafer produced with two-photon polymerization (2PP) technology (“Obscured Invisibility,” 2021, Hyun Woo Park), to traces of an attempt to make vegetable soup in the cleanroom using equipment such as a cryostat, a fluorescing microscope, and a Micro-CT scanner (“May I Please Make You Some Soup?,” 2022, Simone Lasser). 

These works set a precedent for the artworks produced during the fall 2023 iteration of the class. For Ryan Yang, in his senior year studying electrical engineering and computer science at MIT, the chance to engage in open discussion and experimental making has been a rare opportunity to “try something that might not work.” His project explores the possibilities of translating traditional block printing techniques to micron-scale 3D-printing in the MIT.nano labs.

Yang has taken advantage of the arts curriculum at MIT at an early stage in his academic career as an engineer; meanwhile, Ameen Kaleem started out as a filmmaker in New Delhi and is now pursuing a master’s degree in design engineering at Harvard GSD, cross-registered at MIT. 

Kaleem’s project models the process of abiogenesis (the evolution of living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances) by bringing living moss into the MIT.nano cleanroom facilities to be examined at an atomic scale. “I was interested in the idea that, as a human being in the cleanroom, you are both the most sanitized version of yourself and the dirtiest thing in that space,” she reflects. “Drawing attention to the presence of organic life in the cleanroom is comparable to bringing art into spaces where it might not otherwise exist — a way of humanizing scientific and technological endeavors.”

Consciousness, immersion, and innovation

The students draw upon the legacies of landmark art-science initiatives — including international exhibitions such as “Cybernetic Serendipity” (London ICA, 1968), the “New Tendencies” series (Zagreb, 1961-73), and “Laboratorium” (Antwerp, 1999) — and take inspiration from the instructors’ own creative investigations of the inner workings of different knowledge systems. “In contemporary life, and at MIT in particular, we’re immersed in technology,” says Putrih. “It’s the nature of art to reveal that to us, so that we might see the implications of what we are producing and its potential impact.”

By fostering a mindset of imagination and criticality, combined with building the technical skills to address practical problems, “Creating Art, Thinking Science” seeks to create the conditions for a more expansive version of technological optimism; a culture of innovation in which social and environmental responsibility are seen as productive parameters for enriched creativity. The ripple effects of the class might be years in the making, but as Bulović observes while navigating the exhibition at MIT.nano, “The joy of the collaboration can be felt in the artworks.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The best space heaters in 2024

Get the best space heaters to keep you warm in any room of your home! Don't go another moment without these portable, personal heaters. The post The best space heaters in 2024 appeared first on Popular Science.

If you’re tired of stockpiling blankets, extra socks, and heated slippers to keep you warm, it might be time to consider getting a space heater. These powerful appliances are a great way to get cozy without installing a complicated heating system or commandeering the thermostat. If your radiator just isn’t cutting it or someone insists on keeping a window open to freshen the room up, a space heater could be the perfect solution. These hot machines are designed specifically to warm up spaces of all sizes and should be portable, effective, and fast-acting. Our best overall pick, the Lasko 5586 Electric 1500W Ceramic Space Heater Tower, ticks all these boxes. Buying a space heater is a worthwhile investment, but you want to look at all the information available about each product to determine which will be right for you and your space. To get you started, we’ve created this brief guide to help you learn more about these lean, mean, cold-fighting machines. Get ready to cozy up with your favorite books without reaching for your hat and gloves with the best space heaters. Best overall: Lasko 5586 Electric 1500W Ceramic Space Heater Tower Best portable: Dreo Atom One Best for large rooms: Dr. Infrared Portable Space Heater Best energy saving: De’Longhi Oil-Filled Radiator Space Heater Best electric: Dyson Pure Hot + Cool HP07 Best wall heater: Dreo Smart Wall Heater Best value: Lasko 1500W Ceramic Tower Space Heater How we chose the best space heaters To select the best space heaters that will stave off even the worst winter chills and frigid breezes, we compared over 50 products—looking at reviews, wattage, heat type, bonus features, and brands. From high-tech options like the Dyson Pure Hot + Cool to an energy-efficient oil-filled radiator, these space heaters can suit a variety of needs and spaces. Whether you have a massive room that needs high-wattage heating or are trying to warm up your apartment on a budget, we compared reviews and specs to choose only reliable and quality heaters. The best space heaters: Reviews & Recommendations The best space heaters can help you stay warm while you wait for your landlord to turn the radiators on. If you’re always cold, they provide an extra layer of warmth and comfort to your office, living room, bedroom, or garage. We’ve narrowed down some of the cozy space heaters on the market—at least one should melt your winter blues. Best overall: Lasko 5586 Electric 1500W Ceramic Space Heater Tower Lasko Why it made the cut: If you’re looking for a high-quality space heater on a budget, look no further than this tower heater from Lasko. Specs Watts: 1500 watts Dimensions: 10.5 x 8.8 x 29.5 inches Heating type: Convection Pros Easy to use Degree increments Remote control Cons Noisy compared to other heaters Space heaters can get pricey. Get something that’s budget-friendly—and high-quality—with this Lasko 5586 Electric 1500W Ceramic Space Heater Tower. Like more expensive options, this one is 1500W with low, high, and thermostat-controlled settings. Built-in safety precautions include cool-touch housing and overheat protection. Plus, an auto-off timer gives you peace of mind if you forget to turn this appliance off. It includes an easy-to-read selection pad, carry handle, and six-foot cord for easy transport from room to room. Even better, it comes with a remote control so you can turn up the heat without leaving your spot on the couch. Best portable: Dreo Atom One Why it made the cut: The lightweight design with a built-in handle makes it easy to move this space heater from room to room as needed.  Specs Watts: 900-1500 watts Dimensions: 6.7 x 5.5 x 10.3 inches Heating type: Convection Pros Heats very quickly Extremely quiet operation Automatic shut-off works well when knocked over Built-in handle makes it easier to move Cons Not efficient for large rooms The Dreo Atom One is a compact space heater with a handle that weighs only 3.8 pounds. It’s very easy to move around, which is ideal if you don’t want to buy a space heater for each room in your home but could use a little extra heat everywhere. It also offers some key safety features, such as tip-over protection. I accidentally knocked mine over and discovered this works brilliantly, instantly shutting off to prevent fires. The Atom One is very fast when it comes to warming up a room. It uses a ceramic heating element to heat up rapidly, making it very efficient for toasting up my small home office. It doesn’t emit any strange odors either, which can happen with some other space heaters I’ve used in the past. The digital thermostat, four modes (including a fan-only setting), and LED panel give you more control over the temperature so you can dial in your comfort level. It also comes with a remote control, meaning I can control the heat without having to get up from my desk chair. This portable space heater also operates quietly, and I almost forget it’s on. I can barely hear it with my headphones off and can’t hear it at all when I have them on—making it a best bedroom heater pick. Plus, a washable and reusable dust filter helps to reduce dust, pollens, and airborne particles to provide cleaner air in case your air purifier needs some backup. All in all, there’s not much to dislike about this little heater. Best for large rooms: Dr. Infrared Portable Space Heater With this heater, you should go big AND go home to stay nice and warm this winter. Why it made the cut: This pick is well-equipped to heat larger spaces like living rooms, large bedrooms, studios, or garages with its high wattage and high temp settings. Specs Wattage: 1,500 watts Dimensions: 13 x 12.5 x 17 inches Heating type: Radiant Pros 12-hour automatic shut-off 50 to 85-degree heat range Heats large spaces Cons Heavier and less portable This radiant, infrared heater (its big brother is our best overall pick in this category) heats up big spaces easily and efficiently. With 1,500 watts of power and a heat output temperature of up to 85 degrees, perfect for large rooms, you can stay warm without needing to get up close. It has a 12-hour automatic shut-off timer, remote control, tip-over protection, a 72-inch electric cord, and caster wheels for maximum mobility. Best energy saving: De’Longhi Oil-Filled Radiator Space Heater Raise the temperature, not your electricity bill. Why it made the cut: Unlike the other space heaters on this list, the De’Longhi pick uses oil to maintain its heat for an energy-efficient and quiet-running design. Specs Wattage: 1,500 watts Dimensions: 27.76 x 18.5 x 7.1 inches Heating type: Radiant Pros Portable design with wheels Energy-efficient Quiet heating Cons Pricier than some other models This energy-efficient space heater will stay hot even after turning it off, extending its heating power without sucking up electricity. Additionally, you can select eco-mode, optimizing power usage with a built-in thermostat for additional energy saving. It has 1,500 watts of power, automatic shutoff to prevent overheating, and thermal slots that funnel hot air while maintaining a low surface temperature so you won’t be at risk of burning yourself. Best electric: Dyson Pure Hot + Cool HP07 Winter, spring, summer, or fall, all you gotta do is plug in this tower. Why it made the cut: For those who want a multifunction device that can be used year-round, the Dyson Pure Hot + Cool does just that. It filters your air for allergens and dust with a HEPA-certified filter, heats in cooler months, and can act as a fan once the temperatures rise back up. Specs Watts: 1500 watts Dimensions: 9.76 x 8.07 x 30.08 inches Heating type: Convection Pros HEPA Filter Captures allergens Sleek and aesthetic design Cons Expensive for a “space heater” May be less effective than other models The Dyson Pure Hot + Cool Air Purifier is a dream with all the high-tech, special features needed to heat and purify an entire room simultaneously (that’s why another one of their models is our top overall pick for home air purifiers). This multifunction feat of engineering treats and projects air, cooling or heating it as needed. It offers 350-degree oscillation, a sealed HEPA filter to trap 99.7 percent of allergens, and voice-control compatibility with Alexa. Equipped with three intelligent sensors, this air purifier, cooling fan, and space heater will also monitor pollution events in real time, alerting you to any problematic airborne particles or gases via the Dyson app—one of the reasons it’s also one of our picks for best garage heaters. The heater/fan has 10 speed settings, Bluetooth connectivity, quiet operation, and multiple additional settings. Best wall heater: Dreo Smart Wall Heater Why it made the cut: DIY your own home heating system with this easy-to-install wall-mounted heater that can be controlled via a smart assistant or app. Specs Wattage: 1,500 watts Dimensions: 4 x 20 x 13 inches Heating type: Radiant Pros App and smart assistant connectivity Easy to install Quiet Cons Might not be the best at heating enclosed outdoor spaces If your current heating system isn’t cutting it, consider adding this heater, which looks just like an AC unit but is mounted to your wall instead of a window. 120-degree wide oscillation heating distributes warm air evenly from ceiling to floor to quickly heat the room. You can schedule room heating hours to match when you leave for work or return from walking the dog. Access heater settings via the Dreo app (for iOS and Android) or via your Alexa or Google Home device. Its LED panel automatically adjusts, so you don’t have to worry about the light messing with your sleep. Mounting the wall heater is just as easy as using it. Simply follow the included drilling guide and simple instructions, and you’re done. No more chilly nights worrying about causing a fire hazard. Best value: Lasko 1500W Ceramic Tower Space Heater Features a built-in carry handle for easy transport between rooms. Why it made the cut: This classic-design tower heater can fit in just about any space—and with an oscillating function and impressive wattage, it can heat up a room quickly and efficiently. Specs Wattage: 1,500 watts Dimensions: 21.63 x 7.1 x 7.9 inches Heating type: Convection Pros 8-hour auto-off timer Slim design High wattage Cons Only two heat settings This Lasko ceramic tower heater has a footprint of less than eight square inches but boasts 1,500 watts of heating power, making it ideal for warming up cold rooms in a hurry without taking up too much space. It includes a number of safety features like an 8-hour auto-shutoff timer, overheat protection, and a cool-touch exterior. Its widespread oscillation and adjustable thermostat make it a flexible choice that allows users to custom-tailor their heating experience. The heater’s cable is 72 inches in length, making this model a good choice for rooms with few outlets; plus, the unit includes a multifunction remote control for added convenience. What to consider when buying the best space heaters There are six things you should consider to find the best space heater for your needs. Think about what type of personal heater you want, how much space you’re trying to warm, how much power your heater will need, what the safety features are, and finally, what special features might be available. If you can get specific about your requirements, you won’t have any trouble finding a reliable, long-lasting unit you’re happy with. What type of space heater best fits your needs? There are three main types of heating, with a few subcategories you should know about. Convection heating is the most common and efficient type for single-room use. These space heaters work by circulating currents across an element, such as an electric coil or oil, which are often blown out and drawn back in using a fan. Some models don’t include a fan, relying on natural airflow; this method is quieter but takes longer to heat an entire room. Ceramic heaters borrow from this method, using an internal, self-regulating ceramic element and fan to heat a room quickly. Radiant heating is excellent for warming a targeted area like your bed or desk chair. They heat up almost instantaneously using quartz or other metals and a reflector to direct heat, though some will implement a fan. Infrared heaters are very similar, using infrared quartz bulbs to generate radiating heat. Unlike convection heating, this method will not warm up the air, making it better for targeted warmth. That said, it will heat a room if left on for a long time. Micathermic heating is an efficient combination of convection and radiant processes. A micathermic heater radiates warmth off of a panel that is then circulated naturally throughout the room. To do this, these space heaters need to be reasonably large, but most models can be mounted on the wall to save space if necessary. Because micathermic heaters don’t use a fan, they are quiet and clean; they don’t circulate dust or pet dander, which makes them great for those who are allergy-prone or have asthma. Portable radiator heaters use micathermic methods to generate heat via oil encased inside. How big of a room are you trying to heat? While it’s clear that radiant heaters are best for targeted use and convection or micathermic models might be best for larger areas, there’s more to understand when it comes to room size and heater specs. When it comes to heating, wattage is king. For space heaters, you want to have 10 watts of power per square foot; this is especially true if your portable heater is the primary source of warmth. If you have super tall ceilings, over 8 feet high, you’ll want to multiply your space’s total square footage by the ceiling height and 1.25. For rooms lacking insulation, add an extra 2 watts to the equation. If you just need a little extra blast of heat here and there, you can relax on the wattage rule, but only slightly. If you have a lot of ground to cover, it can be hard to find a supplementary heater that will keep you and any guests cozy for hours at a time. Infrared heaters are a bit more flexible because they warm up people and objects; while small models won’t do much, a large infrared heater can cover a larger room because it will target objects as well as people. Below you can find our favorite model. How much energy will your space heater use? Using a space heater regularly can suck up a lot of power, so it’s essential to look for energy-efficient models that won’t cause your electric bill to skyrocket. If you want to figure out how much your heater will cost you look up how much you currently pay for electricity per kilowatt-hour (this info is often listed on your monthly bill), determine the amount of time your space heater will be on, and calculate the kilowatts used per hour by dividing the maximum wattage by 1,000. Finally, multiply all three together, and that’s your average cost per day. Unfortunately, at this time, the United States Environmental Protection Agency hasn’t given any existing space heater an Energy Star rating, but that doesn’t mean you can’t look for models with energy-efficient features. First things first: Don’t buy a space heater that has more wattage than you need. Just because it’s powerful doesn’t mean it’s the best space heater for you. Oil-filled radiator heaters are a great option for energy-efficient heating in a tinier area because they remain hot for a time, even after they are turned off. Secondly, consider investing in a model that includes a built-in thermostat and multiple output settings. This will conserve energy over time because the heater won’t be overcompensating when the temperature in the room changes. Timed heat settings and automatic shutoff can also aid efficiency, especially if you tend to forget to shut off appliances. Some heaters will come with an auto-eco setting designed to monitor room temperature and suggest a lower output temperature to heat the room, keeping it warm but not hot. What extra features make the best space heater? Once you’ve figured out the size, specs, and safety settings you need to narrow down your selection, you can focus on the fun bonuses that make the best space heater. We’ve already mentioned a few helpful features, including a thermostat function, auto-eco mode, and timer settings. Another popular bonus feature is the inclusion of a remote for easy control. This is going to be a lifesaver for those times you get perfectly comfortable, all snuggled up in bed before remembering to turn the heater on. It gets better: Some space heaters are considered “smart,” which means they can connect via WiFi to your phone, providing a stream of information regarding your space’s air quality, humidity, and more. Some smart models come with a night-time mode to quiet noisy fans, HEPA filters for air purification, and dual-cooling systems that utilize the fan function, bypassing the heat generator. Of course, the more special features you tack on, the higher the price but depending on the frequency of use and overall efficiency of various models, you could end up saving money over time. Higher-quality products experience fewer breakdowns and don’t need to be replaced as often, plus who wouldn’t want to control their space heater using a voice assistant like Alexa? One step closer to building your fully equipped smart house. What safety features should you keep in mind? We cannot overstate how important safety features are when it comes to space heaters. These powerful appliances are one of the leading causes of house fires in America, and while we want you to be warm, we certainly don’t want you to be that warm. Luckily, newer models are frequently equipped with safety features that will keep you and your loved ones out of harm’s way. You need to select a model with a shutoff sensor triggered if the unit starts to overheat or tip over. This small but significant add-on is imperative to keep things safe. You should also consider purchasing a model with a long extension cord, even if you don’t think you’ll need it. Why? Space heaters need to be directly plugged into the wall; a long cord means you can easily resist the temptation to plug it into existing power strips or extension cords for “just a minute.” Consider a model that has a cool-to-the-touch outer layer or handle so you can avoid any accidental burns. Finally, look for certifications from the Underwriters Laboratory and Intertek Group for added reassurance that your model meets safety standards. While built-in features are important, there are also a few rules you’ll have to follow: as stated, never use power/extension cords to plug in your heater; never put one on a rug or elevated surface; unless specified otherwise, you won’t want to put a space heater near the kitchen or bathroom; and keep them out of reach/away from young kids or pets. What brand best suits your needs? There are some great brands out there dedicated to supplying safe space heaters worldwide, and we certainly have a few favorites. Vornado, Dyson, and De’Longhi are staples in the space heater game. Vornado has been around since 1930 and manufactures top-of-the-line space heaters, air purifiers, fans, humidifiers, and more. Likewise, Dyson was founded in 1991 by James Dyson and, today, not only manufactures high-end home staples—such as space heaters, washing machines, robot vacuums, and blowdryers—but also invests in research projects to improve medical equipment—such as ventilators, digital monitors, and electric vehicles. The Italian company De’Longhi was incorporated in 1950 and is known for excellence in design when it comes to small home appliances such as espresso machines, portable air conditioners, dehumidifiers, space heaters, and more. De’Longhi has been the recipient of multiple awards and certifications for its dedication to high-end engineering, design, and production. FAQs Q: How much do space heaters cost? Depending on size, wattage, type of heating, and various features, space heaters can start at $30 and go as high as $600. Q: What space heater gives off the most heat? The space heater that gives off the most heat is the Dr. Infrared Portable Space Heater, which has 1,500 watts to heat larger spaces and can crank up to 85 degrees for maximum power. Q: What is the safest type of space heater? The safest type of space heater is one with tip-over protection, a cool-touch case, and an automatic safety shut-off. Our safest pick is the Dreo Atom One—it has those features, and they really work, as our reviewer found out. Q: What kind of room heater is best? An oscillating, adjustable, remote-controlled option can suit a wide variety of spaces, so the best space heater overall is the Lasko 1500W Ceramic Tower Space Heater, which has a classic shape, over 500 rave reviews, and an affordable price tag. Final thoughts on the best space heaters Best overall: Lasko 5586 Electric 1500W Ceramic Space Heater Tower Best portable: Dreo Atom One Best for large rooms: Dr. Infrared Portable Space Heater Best energy saving: De’Longhi Oil-Filled Radiator Space Heater Best electric: Dyson Pure Hot + Cool HP07 Best wall heater: Dreo Smart Wall Heater Best value: Lasko 1500W Ceramic Tower Space Heater Space heaters are a great way to save space, stay warm, and snuggle up safely during cold times. Choose the best space heater for you by examining safety settings, power specs, heater type, and any additional features you find exciting. As long as you know what your space needs, we’re confident you can find the right tiny furnace to keep you from constantly re-wearing your favorite heated socks or heated slippers around the house. Give your puffy coat a break by taking it off indoors as you slowly sink into the warmth of your new space heater. The post The best space heaters in 2024 appeared first on Popular Science.

Graph-based AI model maps the future of innovation

An AI method developed by Professor Markus Buehler finds hidden links between science and art to suggest novel materials.

Imagine using artificial intelligence to compare two seemingly unrelated creations — biological tissue and Beethoven’s “Symphony No. 9.” At first glance, a living system and a musical masterpiece might appear to have no connection. However, a novel AI method developed by Markus J. Buehler, the McAfee Professor of Engineering and professor of civil and environmental engineering and mechanical engineering at MIT, bridges this gap, uncovering shared patterns of complexity and order.“By blending generative AI with graph-based computational tools, this approach reveals entirely new ideas, concepts, and designs that were previously unimaginable. We can accelerate scientific discovery by teaching generative AI to make novel predictions about never-before-seen ideas, concepts, and designs,” says Buehler.The open-access research, recently published in Machine Learning: Science and Technology, demonstrates an advanced AI method that integrates generative knowledge extraction, graph-based representation, and multimodal intelligent graph reasoning.The work uses graphs developed using methods inspired by category theory as a central mechanism to teach the model to understand symbolic relationships in science. Category theory, a branch of mathematics that deals with abstract structures and relationships between them, provides a framework for understanding and unifying diverse systems through a focus on objects and their interactions, rather than their specific content. In category theory, systems are viewed in terms of objects (which could be anything, from numbers to more abstract entities like structures or processes) and morphisms (arrows or functions that define the relationships between these objects). By using this approach, Buehler was able to teach the AI model to systematically reason over complex scientific concepts and behaviors. The symbolic relationships introduced through morphisms make it clear that the AI isn't simply drawing analogies, but is engaging in deeper reasoning that maps abstract structures across different domains.Buehler used this new method to analyze a collection of 1,000 scientific papers about biological materials and turned them into a knowledge map in the form of a graph. The graph revealed how different pieces of information are connected and was able to find groups of related ideas and key points that link many concepts together.“What’s really interesting is that the graph follows a scale-free nature, is highly connected, and can be used effectively for graph reasoning,” says Buehler. “In other words, we teach AI systems to think about graph-based data to help them build better world representations models and to enhance the ability to think and explore new ideas to enable discovery.”Researchers can use this framework to answer complex questions, find gaps in current knowledge, suggest new designs for materials, and predict how materials might behave, and link concepts that had never been connected before.The AI model found unexpected similarities between biological materials and “Symphony No. 9,” suggesting that both follow patterns of complexity. “Similar to how cells in biological materials interact in complex but organized ways to perform a function, Beethoven's 9th symphony arranges musical notes and themes to create a complex but coherent musical experience,” says Buehler.In another experiment, the graph-based AI model recommended creating a new biological material inspired by the abstract patterns found in Wassily Kandinsky’s painting, “Composition VII.” The AI suggested a new mycelium-based composite material. “The result of this material combines an innovative set of concepts that include a balance of chaos and order, adjustable property, porosity, mechanical strength, and complex patterned chemical functionality,” Buehler notes. By drawing inspiration from an abstract painting, the AI created a material that balances being strong and functional, while also being adaptable and capable of performing different roles. The application could lead to the development of innovative sustainable building materials, biodegradable alternatives to plastics, wearable technology, and even biomedical devices.With this advanced AI model, scientists can draw insights from music, art, and technology to analyze data from these fields to identify hidden patterns that could spark a world of innovative possibilities for material design, research, and even music or visual art.“Graph-based generative AI achieves a far higher degree of novelty, explorative of capacity and technical detail than conventional approaches, and establishes a widely useful framework for innovation by revealing hidden connections,” says Buehler. “This study not only contributes to the field of bio-inspired materials and mechanics, but also sets the stage for a future where interdisciplinary research powered by AI and knowledge graphs may become a tool of scientific and philosophical inquiry as we look to other future work.” 

MIT to lead expansion of regional innovation network

National Science Foundation grant expected to help New England researchers translate discoveries to commercial technology.

The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) has selected MIT to lead a new Innovation Corps (I-Corps) Hub to support a partnership of eight New England universities committed to expanding science and technology entrepreneurship across the region, accelerating the translation of discoveries into new solutions that benefit society. NSF announced the five-year cooperative agreement of up to $15 million today.The NSF I-Corps Hub: New England Region is expected to launch on Jan. 1, 2025. The seven institutions initially collaborating with MIT include Brown University, Harvard University, Northeastern University, Tufts University, University of Maine, University of Massachusetts Amherst, and the University of New Hampshire.Established by the NSF in 2011, the I-Corps program provides scientists and engineers from any discipline with hands-on educational experiences to advance their research from lab to impact.  There are more than 50,000 STEM researchers at the nearly 100 universities and medical schools in New England. Many of these institutions are located in underserved and rural areas of the region that face resource challenges in supporting deep-tech translational efforts. The eight institutions in the hub will offer I-Corps training while bringing unique strengths and resources to enhance a regional innovation ecosystem that broadens participation in deep-tech innovation.“Now more than ever we need the innovative solutions that emerge from this type of collaboration to solve society’s greatest and most intractable challenges. Our collective sights are set on bolstering our regional and national innovation networks to accelerate the translation of fundamental research into commercialized technologies. MIT is eager to build on our ongoing work with NSF to further cultivate New England’s innovation hub,” says MIT Provost Cynthia Barnhart, the Abraham J. Siegel Professor of Management Science and professor of operations research, who is the principal investigator on the award.The hub builds on 10 years of collaboration with other I-Corps Sites at institutions across the region and prior work from the MIT I-Corps Site program launched in 2014 and the I-Corps Node based at MIT established in 2018. More than 3,000 engineers and scientists in New England have participated in regional I-Corps programs. They have formed over 200 companies, which have raised $3.5 billion in grants and investments. “The goal of the I-Corps program is to deploy experiential education to help researchers reduce the time necessary to translate promising ideas from laboratory benches to widespread implementation that in turn impacts economic growth regionally and nationally,” said Erwin Gianchandani, NSF assistant director for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships, in NSF’s announcement. “Each regional NSF I-Corps Hub provides training essential in entrepreneurship and customer discovery, leading to new products, startups, and jobs. In effect, we are investing in the next generation of entrepreneurs for our nation.”One I-Corps success story comes from Shreya Dave PhD ’16, who participated in I-Corps training in 2016 with her colleagues to explore potential applications for a new graphene oxide filter technology developed through her research. Based on their learnings from the program and the evidence collected, they shifted from filters for desalination to applications in chemical processing and gained the confidence to launch Via Separations in 2017, focused on the tough tech challenge of industrial decarbonization. Via Separations, which was co-founded by Morton and Claire Goulder and Family Professor in Environmental Systems Professor of Materials Science and Engineering Jeffrey Grossman and Chief Technical Officer Brent Keller, has reached commercialization and is now delivering products to the pulp and paper industry.“NSF I-Corps helped us refine our vision, figure out if our technology could be used for different applications, and helped us figure out if we can manufacture our technology in a scalable fashion — taking it from an academic project to a real–scale commercial project,” says Dave, who is the CEO and co-founder of Via Separations. New England boasts a “highly developed ecosystem of startup resources, funders, founders, and talent,” says Roman Lubynsky, executive director of MIT’s current NSF I-Corps Node, who will serve as the director of the new hub. “However, innovation and entrepreneurship support has been unevenly distributed across the region. This new hub offers an exciting opportunity to collaborate with seven partner institutions to extend and further scale up this important work throughout the region.”The I-Corps Hubs across the country form the backbone of the NSF National Innovation Network. This network connects universities, NSF researchers, entrepreneurs, regional communities, and federal agencies to help researchers bring their discoveries to the marketplace. Together, the hubs work to create a more inclusive and diverse innovation ecosystem, supporting researchers nationwide in transforming their ideas into real-world solutions.

3 Questions: The past, present, and future of sustainability science

Professor Ronald Prinn reflects on how far sustainability has come as a discipline, and where it all began at MIT.

It was 1978, over a decade before the word “sustainable” would infiltrate environmental nomenclature, and Ronald Prinn, MIT professor of atmospheric science, had just founded the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment (AGAGE). Today, AGAGE provides real-time measurements for well over 50 environmentally harmful trace gases, enabling us to determine emissions at the country level, a key element in verifying national adherence to the Montreal Protocol and the Paris Accord. This, Prinn says, started him thinking about doing science that informed decision making.Much like global interest in sustainability, Prinn’s interest and involvement continued to grow into what would become three decades worth of achievements in sustainability science. The Center for Global Change Science (CGCS) and Joint Program on the Science and Policy Global Change, respectively founded and co-founded by Prinn, have recently joined forces to create the MIT School of Science’s new Center for Sustainability Science and Strategy (CS3), lead by former CGCS postdoc turned MIT professor, Noelle Selin.As he prepares to pass the torch, Prinn reflects on how far sustainability has come, and where it all began.Q: Tell us about the motivation for the MIT centers you helped to found around sustainability.A: In 1990 after I founded the Center for Global Change Science, I also co-founded the Joint Program on the Science and Policy Global Change with a very important partner, [Henry] “Jake” Jacoby. He’s now retired, but at that point he was a professor in the MIT Sloan School of Management. Together, we determined that in order to answer questions related to what we now call sustainability of human activities, you need to combine the natural and social sciences involved in these processes. Based on this, we decided to make a joint program between the CGCS and a center that he directed, the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research (CEEPR).It was called the “joint program” and was joint for two reasons — not only were two centers joining, but two disciplines were joining. It was not about simply doing the same science. It was about bringing a team of people together that could tackle these coupled issues of environment, human development and economy. We were the first group in the world to fully integrate these elements together.Q: What has been your most impactful contribution and what effect did it have on the greater public’s overall understanding?A: Our biggest contribution is the development, and more importantly, the application of the Integrated Global System Model [IGSM] framework, looking at human development in both developing countries and developed countries that had a significant impact on the way people thought about climate issues. With IGSM, we were able to look at the interactions among human and natural components, studying the feedbacks and impacts that climate change had on human systems; like how it would alter agriculture and other land activities, how it would alter things we derive from the ocean, and so on.Policies were being developed largely by economists or climate scientists working independently, and we started showing how the real answers and analysis required a coupling of all of these components. We showed, and I think convincingly, that what people used to study independently, must be coupled together, because the impacts of climate change and air pollution affected so many things.To address the value of policy, despite the uncertainty in climate projections, we ran multiple runs of the IGSM with and without policy, with different choices for uncertain IGSM variables. For public communication, around 2005, we introduced our signature Greenhouse Gamble interactive visualization tools; these have been renewed over time as science and policies evolved.Q: What can MIT provide now at this critical juncture in understanding climate change and its impact?A: We need to further push the boundaries of integrated global system modeling to ensure full sustainability of human activity and all of its beneficial dimensions, which is the exciting focus that the CS3 is designed to address. We need to focus on sustainability as a central core element and use it to not just analyze existing policies but to propose new ones. Sustainability is not just climate or air pollution, it's got to do with human impacts in general. Human health is central to sustainability, and equally important to equity. We need to expand the capability for credibly assessing what the impact policies have not just on developed countries, but on developing countries, taking into account that many places around the world are at artisanal levels of their economies. They cannot be blamed for anything that is changing climate and causing air pollution and other detrimental things that are currently going on. They need our help. That's what sustainability is in its full dimensions.Our capabilities are evolving toward a modeling system so detailed that we can find out detrimental things about policies even at local levels before investing in changing infrastructure. This is going to require collaboration among even more disciplines and creating a seamless connection between research and decision making; not just for policies enacted in the public sector, but also for decisions that are made in the private sector. 

Meet the 2024 tenured professors in the MIT School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences

Faculty members granted tenure in anthropology; comparative media studies/writing; philosophy; political science; and science, technology, and society.

In 2024, eight faculty were granted tenure in the MIT School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences. They include the following:Dwaipayan Banerjee is an associate professor in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society. His work foregrounds the intellectual labor of South Asian scientists, engineers and medical practitioners, challenging conventional understandings of science, technology, and medicine. Banerjee has published two books, “Enduring Cancer” and “Hematologies,” with a third, “Computing in the Time of Decolonization,” under review at Princeton University Press. His research spans the politics of health, pandemics, and computing, all through a lens that critically examines global inequalities in scientific and technological practice. Drawing upon his research, Banerjee's teaching philosophy emphasizes global perspectives and interdisciplinary inquiry, with courses like STS.012 (Science in Action) and 21A.504J/STS.086J/WGS.276J (Cultures of Computing) being highly popular at MIT. He has also played a pivotal role in various editorial boards, MIT committees, and advising PhD students, further solidifying his impact on both the academic and global community.Kevin Dorst PhD ‘19 is an associate professor in the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy. He works at the border between philosophy and the behavioral sciences, combining mathematical, computational, and empirical methods to study the causes of bias and polarization — and argues that people are more rational than you’d think. He earned his PhD from MIT in 2019, and then was a junior research fellow at Magdalen College at Oxford University and an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh, before returning to MIT in 2022. He currently holds a visiting Humboldt Research Fellowship at the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy.Paloma Duong is an associate professor in MIT Comparative Media Studies/Writing. At the intersection of cultural studies, media theory, and critical theory, she researches and teaches modern and contemporary Latin American culture. She works with social texts and emergent media cultures that speak to the exercise of cultural agencies and the formation of political subjectivity. Her most recent book is “Portable Postsocialisms: Cuban Mediascapes after the End of History,” a study of Cuba’s changing mediascape and an inquiry on the postsocialist condition and its contexts. Her articles have been published in the Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies, Art Margins, and Cuban Counterpoints: Public Scholarship about a Changing Cuba.Amy Moran-Thomas is an associate professor in MIT Anthropology. Her ethnographic research focuses on how health technologies and ecologies are designed and come to be materially embodied — often inequitably — by people in their ordinary lives. She received her PhD in Anthropology from Princeton University in 2012. Her first book, “Traveling with Sugar: Chronicles of a Global Epidemic (University of California Press, 2019),” offers an anthropological account of diabetes care technologies in use and the lives they shape in global perspective. The book received an award from the caregivers in Belize whose work it describes, alongside others. In 2024-26, she is co-leading a climate and health humanities project funded by an ACLS Digital Seed Grant, “Sugar Atlas: Counter-Mapping Diabetes from the Caribbean,” together with co-PIs Tonya Haynes and Nicole Charles. Also working on a book about embodied histories of energy, Moran-Thomas is interested in how social perspectives on design can contribute to producing fairer health technologies. More broadly, her research explores the material culture of chronic conditions; embodied aspects of planetary health; intergenerational dilemmas of responsibility; and writing public anthropology.Justin Reich is an associate professor in MIT Comparative Media Studies/Writing. He is an educational researcher interested in the future of learning in a networked world. He is the director of the MIT Teaching Systems Lab, which aspires to design, implement and research the future of teacher learning. He is the author of “Iterate: The Secret to Innovation in Schools” and “Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can't Transform Education” from Harvard University Press. He is the host of the TeachLab podcast, and five open online courses on EdX including 0.504x (Sorting Truth from Fiction: Civic Online Reasoning) and 0.503x (Becoming a More Equitable Educator: Mindsets and Practices). He is a former fellow and faculty associate of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University.Bettina Stoetzer is an associate professor in MIT Anthropology. She is a cultural anthropologist whose research focuses on the intersections of ecology, globalization, and social justice in Europe and the U.S. Bettina’s award-winning book, “Ruderal City: Ecologies of Migration, Race, and Urban Nature in Berlin (Duke University Press, 2022),” draws on fieldwork with immigrant and refugee communities, as well as ecologists, nature enthusiasts and other Berlin residents to illustrate how human-environment relations become a key register through which urban citizenship is articulated in Europe. She is also the author of a 2004 book on feminism and anti-racism, "InDifferenzen: Feministische Theorie in der Antirassistischen Kritik" (“InDifferences: Feminist Theory in Antiracist Criticism, argument"). She co-edited “Shock and Awe: War on Words” with Bregje van Eekelen, Jennifer Gonzalez, and Anna Tsing (New Pacific Press, 2004). She is currently working on a new project on wildlife mobility, climate change, and border politics in the U.S. and Germany. At MIT, she teaches classes on cities, race and migration, environmental justice, gender, and climate change. She received her MA in sociology, anthropology and media studies from the University of Goettingen and completed her PhD in anthropology at the University of California at Santa Cruz in 2011.Ariel White is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science. She studies voting and voting rights, race, the criminal legal system, and bureaucratic behavior. Her research uses large datasets to measure individual-level experiences, and to shed light on people's everyday interactions with government. Her recent work investigates how potential voters react to experiences with punitive government policies, such as incarceration and immigration enforcement, and how people can make their way back into political life after these experiences. In other projects, she and her co-authors have examined how local election officials treat constituents of different ethnicities, how media shapes public conversations, and whether parties face electoral penalties when nominating minority candidates. Her research has appeared in the American Political Science Review, the Journal of Politics, Science, and elsewhere.Bernardo Zacka is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science. He is a political theorist with an interest in ethnographic methods. His research focuses on how the state is experienced by those who interact with it and those who act in its name. His first book, “When the State Meets the Street (Harvard University Press, 2017),” probes the everyday moral life of street-level bureaucrats. His second book project, “Institutional Atmospherics,” looks at several episodes in the 20th century when welfare agencies turned to architecture and interior design to try to repair their relationship to citizens, and recovers from that history a more ambitious conception of what an interface between state and society can and should do. He received his PhD from the Department of Government at Harvard University. He has been a fellow of the Wissenschaftskolleg in Berlin and is currently on sabbatical at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.