Breasts to the rescue?

Because we all know that the only excuse men need to think about women’s breasts is any excuse:

The idea of an energy-generating bra isn’t as crazy as it might sound. A company called Triumph International Japan recently unveiled a solar-powered bra that supposedly will generate enough energy to power an iPod. But I live in foggy San Francisco and prefer not to walk around in my underwear in public. Could someone design an iPod-powering bra for me?

I decided to run the question past some scientists. It turns out that the physics of breast motion have been studied closely for the last two decades by a gamut of researchers, most of them women. LaJean Lawson, a former professor of exercise science at Oregon State University, has studied breast motion since 1985 and now works as a consultant for companies like Nike to develop better sports bra designs. Lawson was enthusiastic about my idea but warned it would be tricky to pull off. You would need the right breast size and the right material, she explained, and the bra itself would have to be cleverly designed. “It’s just a matter of finding the sweet spot, between reducing motion to the point where it’s comfortable but still allowing enough motion to power your iPod,” she said.

Lawson explained that breasts move on three different axes: from side to side, front to back, and up and down. The most motion is generated on the vertical axis. Naturally, the bigger the breast, the more momentum it generates. “Let’s face it—if you’re a double-A marathoner, you’re probably not going to get that iPod up and running,” Lawson said. Measurements compiled by Lawson and her colleagues show that a D-cup in a low-support bra can travel as much as 35 inches up and down (35 inches!) during exercise, while a B-cup in a high-support bra barely moves an inch.

Wow, now you can save the Earth and think about tits? Make sure you thank Slate‘s Adrienne So for that one.

Oh, and get to work, all you horndog geniuses.

Good faith, and what the hell is going on here?

While some of our politically conservative neighbors in these United States might be mourning what they perceive as the death of marriage—a lament we should expect to hear many times in the future, wondering just how many times an idea can die—it seems almost ironic that we cannot say the same of the concept of good faith, largely because the patient’s condition is classified.

Michael Abramowitz last weekend brought us the front-page story of how the White House ignored legal advice that its detention policy for terror suspects was untenable. We should not be surprised that at least one lawyer would be willing to state the point clearly: “I can virtually guarantee you,” wrote John B. Bellinger III, in August, 2006, “without a legislative basis, federal courts are not going to be willing to uphold the indefinite detention of unlawful combatants”.