Skip to main content

Geek Weekend (Paris Edition), Day 1: The Curie Museum

So, it was off to Paris for the weekend via Eurotunnel and I managed to fit in four places from The Geek Atlas in four days. I was staying in a hotel in the Latin Quarter which is a stone's throw from... The Curie Museum.

Here's Marie Curie's laboratory:


The museum covers the lives and works of two Nobel Prize-winning couples: Pierre and Marie Curie (they discovered Radium and Polonium) and their daughter Irene and her husband Frederic Joliot (they discovered artificial radioactivity: you could make a substance radioactive by bombarding it with alpha particles).

Their Nobel Prizes are on display as is the equipment that they used (including the apparatus for measuring radiation by measuring ionization of air---which itself had been discovered by Becquerel).

Here are the Nobel Prizes:


Although I love the science section of the museum (including the laboratory where they worked with a piece of paper from one of their notebooks with its radioactive thumb print---they weren't too careful about handling radioactive elements), the best bit is the section on the craze for radium products in the 1920s and 1930s.

Here's an ad for a beauty cream that contains radium and thorium. Gives you that special glow!


Here you'll find make up that contains thorium and radium, special radium wool to keep babies warm, a radium dispenser so you could have a radioactive soak in the bath and more...


Seems stupid now, but back then the dangers were either ignored or unknown, and radioactivity seemed like a wondrous thing (especially since it was discovered early on that it would kill or reduce tumors). I wonder what products we are feeding ourselves that in 70 years we'll consider down right dangerous.

There's a nice web site of radioactive quack cures which make my skin crawl. Yes, I'm going to take a radioactive suppository to boost my sex life tonight! Move over Viagra, here's Vita Radium.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to write a successful blog post

First, a quick clarification of 'successful'. In this instance, I mean a blog post that receives a large number of page views. For my, little blog the most successful post ever got almost 57,000 page views. Not a lot by some other standards, but I was pretty happy about it. Looking at the top 10 blog posts (by page views) on my site, I've tried to distill some wisdom about what made them successful. Your blog posting mileage may vary. 1. Avoid using the passive voice The Microsoft Word grammar checker has probably been telling you this for years, but the passive voice excludes the people involved in your blog post. And that includes you, the author, and the reader. By using personal pronouns like I, you and we, you will include the reader in your blog post. When I first started this blog I avoid using "I" because I thought I was being narcissistic. But we all like to read about other people, people help anchor a story in reality. Without people your bl

Your last name contains invalid characters

My last name is "Graham-Cumming". But here's a typical form response when I enter it: Does the web site have any idea how rude it is to claim that my last name contains invalid characters? Clearly not. What they actually meant is: our web site will not accept that hyphen in your last name. But do they say that? No, of course not. They decide to shove in my face the claim that there's something wrong with my name. There's nothing wrong with my name, just as there's nothing wrong with someone whose first name is Jean-Marie, or someone whose last name is O'Reilly. What is wrong is that way this is being handled. If the system can't cope with non-letters and spaces it needs to say that. How about the following error message: Our system is unable to process last names that contain non-letters, please replace them with spaces. Don't blame me for having a last name that your system doesn't like, whose fault is that? Saying "Your

The Elevator Button Problem

User interface design is hard. It's hard because people perceive apparently simple things very differently. For example, take a look at this interface to an elevator: From flickr Now imagine the following situation. You are on the third floor of this building and you wish to go to the tenth. The elevator is on the fifth floor and there's an indicator that tells you where it is. Which button do you press? Most people probably say: "press up" since they want to go up. Not long ago I watched someone do the opposite and questioned them about their behavior. They said: "well the elevator is on the fifth floor and I am on the third, so I want it to come down to me". Much can be learnt about the design of user interfaces by considering this, apparently, simple interface. If you think about the elevator button problem you'll find that something so simple has hidden depths. How do people learn about elevator calling? What's the right amount of