A few months ago I got a voicemail from my seven-year-old nephew informing me that he needed help building a satellite communication device. He had most of the necessary parts, he assured me, including aluminum foil, some wires and cables, and AA batteries. All we needed to get started was a radio or remote control.
Nothing came of our project, but the imaginative reach of his idea made me wonder: Where did this itch for invention come from? Was my sister sprinkling something in his cereal? Reading him Arthur C. Clarke at bedtime? When I got around to asking her, she attributed it to The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius, a cartoon about a 10-year-old kid who builds satellites out of toasters.
Hold on. Could television be boosting kids´ interest in science? Could cartoons be doing . . . good? Under the tutelage of my nieces and nephews and a certain editor-in-chief who watches far too many cartoons with his own seven-year-old, I decided to find out. Thus began a ´toon-watching binge that had me up at 7 a.m. on Saturday for the first time in 20 years.
What I found surprised me. The Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon are rampant with child scientists, miniature Edisons who run around exclaiming â€Holy Heisenberg!â€ and â€Einstein´s Ghost!â€ When children aren´t donning lab coats, they often have scientist parents, such as Mrs. Wakeman, the wild-eyed mother
of Jenny the android on My Life as a Teenage Robot, or Professor Utonium, who uses his science know-how to help his tiny crime-fighting daughters save the day on The Powerpuff Girls.
The pint-size hero of Dexter´s Laboratory cobbles together reactors and
asteroid-blasting robots; in his downtime he reads books like Quantum Science for Fun. Jimmy Neutron, meanwhile, has a tech solution to every problem, whether it´s striking out in baseball or getting beat up by a bully. In one episode he´s upset because his poem-â€Roses have low spectral wavelengths/ Violets have high/ Cindy is unable to express these values in angstrom units/ Cause she´s
not as smart as Iâ€-doesn´t measure
up to his rival´s, so he pops artificial-
intelligence chips into a pair of nanobots and tells them to correct his verse.
For children, so often subjected to the whims of adults, power is a compelling form of fantasy. In these shows, it´s science that provides that clout, to those who know how to manipulate it for their own ends. Sometimes, of course, schemes backfire. In one episode, Dexter makes a device that he plans to use as a microscope but agrees to let his sister sell it
as a hat after she tells him it will be a
moneymaker. Her customers grow gargantuan heads. And Jimmy´s nanobots misinterpret their poetry assignment and start, um, deleting all humanity. â€The lesson is that things can go wrong in the hands of a 10-year-old-or anyone with a very short attention span,â€ says John Davis, Jimmy Neutron´s creator.
Meanwhile, pseudoscience prevails in Danny Phantom, a show about a kid who accidentally turns himself into a ghost in his parents´ lab. But the tendency on TV for the paranormal to trump the rational (which had Oxford geneticist Richard Dawkins railing against The X-Files in its heyday) doesn´t always hold. When a lake monster starts terrorizing Jimmy´s town, Retroville, he insists on investigating and finds that his father has been dumping toxic sludge from Jimmy´s own lab, which caused a pet turtle to mutate into a beast. Realistic? Of course not. But Jimmy´s skeptical approach is a nod to the scientific method.
In any case, true accuracy isn´t the point. It´s not a cartoon´s job to teach kids that if Jimmy really did take his friends miniature golfing on Mercury they would, due to temperature swings of 500
The incredible innovations, like drone swarms and perpetual flight, bringing aviation into the world of tomorrow. Plus: today's greatest sci-fi writers predict the future, the science behind the summer's biggest blockbusters, a Doctor Who-themed DIY 'bot, the organs you can do without, and much more.