Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Catherine Barbour, Assistant Professor in Hispanic Studies, Trinity College Dublin

The Spanish film industry has historically been dominated by men and, perhaps unsurprisingly, by the Spanish language. The country doesn’t have a great track record for valuing minority languages, or the cultural outputs made in them.

Pioneering female directors including Icíar Bollaín and Isabel Coixet have paved the way for a new generation of female film-makers. Thanks to the influence of organisations such as CIMA (the Association of Women Filmmakers and Audiovisual Media in Spain), there is now increased support for women working across the industry.

In 2025, for the first time in the history of the Malaga Film Festival, there were more female than male directors nominated in the Official Selection. And many are bringing feminist themes and linguistic diversity to the big screen.

In building on the rich cinematic traditions of their homelands, these women have made some of the most exciting films in recent years in Basque, Catalan and Galician. Despite challenges such as limited financial support for cinema in non-state languages, their productions have achieved commercial and critical success.

International Women’s Day in Spain is known as 8M, in reference to the date of March 8, when many Spanish women take to the streets in purple, on strike from work and domestic labour. In the spirit of that defiant collective stance, here are five female film directors whose work is pushing boundaries.

Carla Simón

The Catalan film director Carla Simón is one of the most well-known film-makers working in Spain today – a leading light of what pundits have dubbed Catalonia’s New Wave. She has earned worldwide acclaim for her trilogy filmed mostly in Catalan. Estiu 1993 (Summer 1993), in 2017, was about a young girl orphaned by Aids. Alcarràs, in 2022, told the story of a family of peach farmers losing their traditional way of life. And in 2025, Simón released Romería, about a young Barcelona woman’s visit to her late father’s family in Vigo.

Simón’s auto-fictional works are characterised by strong female characters, intimate camerawork filmed as though through the eyes of a child, and non-professional actors bringing authenticity to the exploration of complex social issues.

Jaione Camborda

A director of Basque origin, Jaione Camborda has lived in Galicia for many years. She belongs to the wave of Novo Cinema Galego (New Galician Cinema), a group of film-makers creating experimental film that is rooted in the characteristic Atlantic landscape of Spain’s most north-westerly region.

Camborda’s second feature O Corno (The Rye Horn, released in 2023) was filmed in the Galician language with some dialogue in Portuguese. It tackles the timely issue of reproductive justice, following a healer’s clandestine journey to escape her tightknit community on the Galician island of Arousa after she is exposed for engaging in the local practice of using ergot (a fungus that grows on rye) to induce abortions.

With O Corno, Camborda was the first female Spanish director in the history of the San Sebastián Film Festival to win the festival’s top prize, the Golden Shell for Best Film.

Sonia Méndez

In her first feature film, a 2024 thriller titled As Neves, Vigo-born director Sonia Méndez worked with non-professional actors, shooting entirely in the Galician language. Set in a remote village engulfed in a snowstorm, the film is a frank exposé of the potentially disastrous effects of social media on young people, as a group of teenagers try to come to terms with the disappearance of their friend after an intimate video of her circulated online.

A key player in Galician cinema, Méndez’s is a varied filmography. A poeta analfabeta, released in 2020, is a docu-film about the emblematic Galician poet and activist Luz Fandiño. Méndez has directed several short films, including Perversa Lola from 2007 and Conversa cunha muller morta from 2012.

Mar Coll

A graduate of Catalonia’s prestigious film school ESCAC, Mar Coll broke new ground in 2009 with the Catalan-language family drama, Tres dies amb la família (Three Days With the Family), which won her Goya and Gaudí Awards. She delved into a woman’s journey to self-realisation following a car accident in the 2013 feature, Tots volem el millor per a ella (We All Want What’s Best for Her). Coll’s latest feature, Salve Maria, was released in 2024. It is a complex exploration of motherhood based on a Basque-language novel by Katixa Agirre.

Sara Fantova

The youngest of the lot, Sara Fantova, born in Bilbao, is a rising star with a number of productions to her name. Her debut feature film, Jone, batzuetan (Jone, Sometimes), which was released in 2025, only secured funding after shooting was completed. Set in the director’s hometown during its iconic summer festival, it is an evocative coming-of-age queer romance in Basque and Spanish. It tells the story of Jone, a young woman who is navigating the impact of her father’s rapidly deteriorating health when she falls in love with Olga.

Elena Martín

Barcelona-born director Elena Martín Gimeno also shoots primarily in the Catalan language. She is also an actor and screenwriter who has starred in her own films. Júlia Ist (from 2017) is a semi-autobiographical production about the experiences of a student from Barcelona who embarks on a journey of self-discovery while studying abroad in Berlin.

This was followed by Creatura (in 2023), which won multiple accolades: Best European Film at Directors’ Fortnight, three nominations for the Goya Awards and six Gaudí Awards. It documents a woman’s reckoning with her upbringing marked by sexual repression.

Martín has spoken about the strong sense of community she has felt among her peers: “I am so close to so many directors who were coming on to the scene around the same time as I was,” she told journalist Rafa Sales Ross in 2025. “Isabel Coixet and Icíar Bollaín might have a different view of this and maybe they have felt alone when they were starting, but I hope they feel less lonely now with all of us here.”

Catherine Barbour does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Six female film directors celebrating Spain’s linguistic diversity on screen – https://theconversation.com/six-female-film-directors-celebrating-spains-linguistic-diversity-on-screen-276434

Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Tollerton, Associate Professor, Memory Studies, University of Exeter

A couple of years ago I dug up an artefact buried under soil, grass and leaves in a park close to my home in Exeter. It was not some ancient object but rather a granite memorial plaque laid down by the local city council only three years before. Dedicated to regional victims of the COVID pandemic, it had been created, forgotten and swallowed by the ground in swift succession.

This illustrates our conflicted relationship with remembering the pandemic in Britain. The urge to memorialise sits awkwardly alongside forces of forgetting and indifference. COVID killed over 230,000 people in the UK and had profound effects on health, wellbeing, child development and economic stability. Yet many people treat it with the ambivalence of waking from a strange dream.

Following its official response to the UK Commission on Covid Commemoration late last year, the British government is now formally stepping into this slippery space of remembering and forgetting. March 8 has been designated as a day of reflection on the pandemic, with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport taking the lead.

And yet how much difference will this day make? What media coverage will it receive? How much public appetite is there for it? In my own work on British remembering and forgetting of the pandemic, I have found much evidence of uncertainty about what should be remembered, who should be centred and when commemoration ought to begin.

Despite the death toll and social consequences, public memory of the COVID pandemic has been marked by hesitancy about what should be remembered, when commemoration should happen, who it should involve and how it should be enacted.

A key challenge is the absence of a unified narrative. Pandemic experiences ranged from bereavement, illness and profound suffering in lockdown to mild inconvenience or even a welcome respite from normal life. Depending on luck and the situation with which you entered into the pandemic, it was anything from deeply traumatic to something people are quietly nostalgic about.

When I asked for short public recollections of the period, I received stories of loss, disrupted lives and exhausted health workers, but was also inundated with descriptions of birdsong and country walks. The responses were later compiled into an online audiobook. Public memory of the pandemic has to find a way of holding these incongruities together.

The day of reflection also has a disorientating relationship with time. COVID had no neat end point, no convenient armistice day around which to orient ourselves. The question of when public remembrance should begin was therefore unclear. Some informal memorials were created not long after the pandemic started, but when the government launched the UK Commission on Covid Commemoration in 2022, it was criticised for being too soon. In reality there is probably no perfect moment for public memorialisation, with the time always feeling either too early or too late for different people.

The question of who should organise remembrance is equally fraught. The state’s slow response to recommendations from the UK Commission on Covid Commemoration has been shaped in part by an awareness that this is politically sensitive terrain. Perhaps remembrance should not be led by the state at all. The grassroots activist group COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK created the National Covid Memorial Wall in London, and the bereavement charity Marie Curie oversaw earlier versions of the day of reflection.

Focusing collective recollection solely around loss of life nonetheless leaves major gaps in terms of the variety of people’s experiences. But there are also risks in wholly levelling the playing field. The loss of a loved one is not equivalent to Zoom quizzes and sourdough baking. Nor should collective memory erase the extent to which the pandemic’s impacts were systemically uneven, with higher mortality rates in some ethnic minority communities.

Remembering through the lens of war

The day of reflection also sits awkwardly alongside existing patterns of how British people remember. These habits are most prominently shaped by rituals of war memory. The various memorial spaces associated with fundraiser and veteran Captain Sir Tom Moore emerged partly because he so neatly fused thoughts of COVID and the second world war.

But the pandemic was not much like a military conflict. While there were praiseworthy instances of public service, most deaths did not fit a narrative of heroic sacrifice, the virus was not an ideological or national enemy, and comparisons between prime ministers Boris Johnson and Winston Churchill have not endured.

Despite the difficulties of what is remembered, when it should happen, who should lead it and what form it should take, there has been an abundance of memorial creation since 2020.

When researching a book on the topic, I visited one built high up a Welsh mountain. I saw one constructed elaborately from wood and later ceremonially set ablaze. Another was framed as a defiant celebration of working-class heroism. One depicts exhausted medical staff cast in bronze. There were many others. Their narratives, forms and origins vary considerably, but what they share is a tenuous grasp on public consciousness. Generally they are little known and, in some cases, their long-term survival is uncertain, dependent on funding, maintenance or continued public interest.

The March 8 day of reflection will not settle the question of how Britain remembers or forgets COVID, but it will reveal how willing we are to try. Any national act of remembrance will only feel meaningful if it can hold together grief, inequality and ambivalence without pretending they are the same.

During 2021-2022 David Tollerton received funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council to research this topic.

– ref. What the UK’s ‘day of reflection’ reveals about COVID memory – https://theconversation.com/what-the-uks-day-of-reflection-reveals-about-covid-memory-276918

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Fiona Newberry, Postdodctoral Research Associate, Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester

The gut microbiome plays an important role in many aspects of health, from digestion and immune function to metabolic balance and neurological processes.

Several diseases have even been associated with changes in the microbiome’s composition, including inflammatory bowel disease, colorectal cancer, obesity and mental health disorders. As links between gut microbes and disease grow stronger, scientists are now looking at the emerging connection between the gut and the heart.

Heart disease remains the leading cause of death globally. Factors such as smoking, high blood pressure, obesity and diabetes are known to be risk factors. But researchers are increasingly finding that the balance of microbes in our gut may shape how these risks develop, and how heart disease progresses.

This newly recognised association, termed the “gut-heart axis”, has gained traction in recent years. It may help explain why diet and heart disease are so closely intertwined.

Large studies show that people with cardiovascular disease have distinct gut microbiome profiles compared with healthy people.

While no single “heart disease microbe” has been discovered, cardiovascular disease is consistently associated with a few key factors. These include reduced microbial diversity, loss of beneficial bacteria and an overgrowth of microbes linked to inflammation.

Microbial diversity refers to the variety and balance of different microbes living within the gut. Growing evidence suggests that a reduction in microbial diversity reflects deteriorating microbiome health, and may signal the onset of disease.

One recent paper examined the results from 67 studies that explored the gut microbiome in several cardiovascular diseases, comparing over 6,000 patients with acute coronary syndrome, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, heart failure or stroke with healthy people. It showed that people with cardiovascular disease consistently had lower levels of the beneficial fibre-fermenting bacteria Faecalibacterium.

Microbial fingerprints of heart disease

Your gut microbes act as miniature factories that break down food components. In doing so, they produce hundreds of small molecules called metabolites, which can be taken up by other microbes or absorbed through the intestine into the blood stream. While some of these metabolites are beneficial to the body, others can be harmful in excess.

So, alongside studying what microbes are present in patients with cardiovascular disease, scientists are also looking at metabolites to understand what effect these can have on health.

One of the strongest links between the gut microbiome and heart disease involves a metabolite called TMAO (trimethylamine N-oxide). Certain gut bacteria convert nutrients found in red meat, eggs and dairy into a metabolite called trimethylamine (TMA). The metabolite is then processed by the liver and turned into TMAO.

High levels of TMAO in the blood have been associated with increased risk of heart attack, stroke and death from cardiovascular disease. Importantly, TMAO production varies between people depending on the type of microbe. This means two people can eat the same food but produce different amounts of this potentially harmful compound.

But not all gut-derived metabolites are harmful. Some may actually protect the heart.

A growing body of research is investigating indoles – compounds made when gut bacteria break down tryptophan. Tryptophan is an essential amino acid found in protein-rich foods such as poultry, eggs, dairy and nuts. It plays an important role in mood, sleep patterns and appetite.

The majority of tryptophan is absorbed by the body. But a small fraction of this amino acid is also broken down by gut bacteria and transformed into indole-derivatives. While some of these can contribute to inflammation under certain conditions, others appear to have powerful cardioprotective benefits.

One of the most promising is indole-3-propionate (IPA), which is thought to be produced mainly by the bacteria Clostridium sporogenes. Several studies have shown that people with higher blood levels of IPA have lower rates of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

IPA also strengthens the gut barrier. This prevents harmful microbial products from leaking into the bloodstream. Research is ongoing to fully understand how and why tryptophan is broken down into beneficial or harmful metabolites.

Prevention and treatment

The discovery that our gut microbes help shape cardiovascular risk is transforming how scientists think about prevention and treatment. Researchers are now exploring how microbial “fingerprints” could one day be used in combination with known risk factors to identify people at risk, long before symptoms appear.

In the future, beneficial gut microbes (probiotics) could be used therapeutically to slow cardiovascular disease progression or eliminate microbes known to contribute to disease onset.

While this science is still emerging, it’s clear that the gut microbiome should be viewed as part of the whole body system that shapes our overall health. It points towards a powerful idea: caring for your heart may start not just with what you eat, but with how your gut microbes process it.

Fiona Newberry receives funding from British Heart Foundation.

– ref. Why your gut microbiome and heart are closer than you think – https://theconversation.com/why-your-gut-microbiome-and-heart-are-closer-than-you-think-276293

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gabriele Albertini, Assistant Professor in Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Nottingham

The unofficial soundtrack of every basketball, squash or hard-court tennis match is the constant high-pitched squeak or shreak of the players’ shoes. But can this squeak be designed out of them while retaining the grip?

That’s the question an international team of engineers and applied physicists, including me, have been investigating. It sounds like a small design tweak. In fact, it cuts to a deep physics problem: how a soft body slides against a rigid one.

Perhaps surprisingly, the mechanism that produces sound when a soft solid slides against a stiffer one has long been the subject of scientific debate. Most theories are linked to the concept of “stick-slip”: when, instead of sliding smoothly, the sliding object rapidly alternates between sticking and slipping.

While it sticks, the soft body (such as a rubber sole) deforms and stores elastic energy. Then it suddenly slips, turning much of that energy into heat through friction – while also releasing rapid vibrations that radiate out as sound.

But this is not exactly what we observed in our experiments.

After Leonardo da Vinci

Our recently published study took inspiration from the simple-but-effective setup used by Leonardo da Vinci in his studies of friction from the late 15th century.

Leonardo used a wooden block resting on a flat surface. The block was subjected to two forces: a normal force (its own weight) and a tangential force which was applied using an additional weight attached to a cable.

By stacking and combining multiple blocks, Leonardo discovered the two fundamental laws of friction: that friction is proportional with how hard the surfaces are pressed together, and largely independent of the size of the contact area.

But Leonardo never published these findings, which were finally rediscovered and made public in the 19th century in notebooks scattered throughout Europe. In the meantime, the laws of friction had only been formally enunciated by French physicist Guillaume Amontons in 1699 – two centuries after Leonardo’s studies.

Furthermore, these laws are empirical rather than fundamental, and in extreme cases they break down. This led us to the question of what makes a shoe squeak.

---

Read more:
Leonardo da Vinci’s early work on friction founded the modern science of tribology

---

A surprising result

One of the biggest difficulties in friction studies is that the interface being tested (where a shoe sole meets a hardwood floor, for example) is hard to get at, and comes under a lot of pressure while slipping at high speed. Placing sensors at the interface is almost impossible – and even if it were, this would probably alter the frictional response.

Our solution was to use an optical trick: we replaced the hardwood floor with a transparent acrylic plate and mounted an array of LED lights along its sides. When each test object – including multiple rubber blocks – made contact with the plate, light would leak into the contact region, brightening up this area alone. That allowed us to visualise exactly which parts of the soft-rigid interface were in contact.

We used a high-speed camera, capable of capturing up to 1 million frames per second, to film how the contact patches evolved while the “sole” was skidding, and recorded the sounds being emitted with a microphone.

We found that at the point of contact, tiny wrinkles in the surface of the rubber block – known as “opening slip pulses” – were created, which then raced along the interface at nearly 100 metres per second. While most of the block remained stuck in place, these rapidly moving wrinkles created the sound in each friction test.

Surprisingly, even tiny geometrical features at the frictional interface had profound effects on the sound generated. When it was perfectly flat and smooth, the pulses were messy and generated a scratch-like noise of many different frequencies – closer to the sound of peeling adhesive tape than a clean squeak.

But when ridges were present, like those on the soles of sport shoes, the pulses were confined by the width of these ridges, making them very regular (not messy any more). This turned the sound into a more musical tone akin to the squeaks heard on a basketball court.

We were also able to determine what decides the precise pitch of a shoe squeak. In each test, it was largely unaffected by either the speed of sliding or magnitude of the force applied (which relates to the weight of a player).

Rather, the clearest link was with the height of the rubber block – or the thickness of a shoe’s sole. Using this knowledge, we created a series of blocks of different heights in order to play a familiar melody, as shown in this video.

Our research lays the groundwork for controlling or suppressing squeaking in many mechanical systems involving soft-on-rigid friction. These range from brakes and tyres to hip and knee replacements, where polymer liners slide against polished metal or ceramic heads.

And yes, it could even lead to the development of squeakless sneakers. Designing intricate patterns that keep plenty of rubber in contact (so the grip stays high) but break the sliding into lots of tiny, out-of-sync microevents could kill the clean note of the squeak, and leave only a soft hush.

Table-top earthquakes

Beyond the realm of sports, this work also relates to much larger geophysical questions. Similar experimental approaches to ours have served as table-top models for studying earthquakes, during which ruptures and slip pulses spread along tectonic faults at extremely high speed.

If we can reproduce earthquake-like slip pulses in the lab, the next challenge is scaling – working out how those centimetre-scale measurements translate to what happens inside real faults in the Earth.

Achieving this could help interpret seismic signals more confidently: using waves recorded far from a fault to infer what has actually happened at the source. Better physics-based models could improve seismic hazard estimates and lead to more reliable hazard maps.

Meanwhile, we’ll keep thinking about squeakless sneakers too.

Gabriele Albertini received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), and the University of Nottingham.

– ref. Can we design sports shoes that don’t squeak? Here’s what the science says – https://theconversation.com/can-we-design-sports-shoes-that-dont-squeak-heres-what-the-science-says-277518

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor, The Conversation

This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

---

Before the first airstrike hit Iran on Saturday morning, analysts were warning that a war against Tehran would be a highly risky business. The regime has been in place for nearly 50 years, has a huge, well-trained and loyal military, proxies throughout the region and a huge stockpile of ballistic missiles and drones – plenty to wreak havoc across the region and beyond.

And so it has proved. While Israeli and American forces have been pounding targets across the country, Iran has responded by attacking Israel as well as US military targets in neighbouring Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Attacks have also been reported from Cyprus, Iraq and Jordan.

There is a fresh round of fighting in southern Lebanon after Hezbollah joined Iran in targeting Israel. Beirut is being bombarded.

The economic damage to the region has been enormous. Oil refineries have been shut down, the vital strait of Hormuz – through which 20% of the world’s oil cargo passes – is effectively closed, evacuation flights are leaving the Gulf states around the clock and people are cancelling their travel plans in droves.

And within days of the assassination of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, in a targeted airstrike that also killed a number of his top advisers, a new leader is set to be picked. The smart money appears to be on his son, Mojtaba, known to be cut from very much the same authoritarian clerical cloth as his father. So the notion that with Iran you kill the figurehead and the regime collapses appears to be flawed, to say the least.

Just one week ago, American and Iranian negotiators were engaged in talks in Geneva, which were reported to be making “significant progress”. Now there’s no knowing how this conflict could escalate. On Wednesday, the downing of an Iranian missile over Turkish airspace prompted speculation that Nato would be pulled into a war it clearly doesn’t want. A US submarine sank an Iranian warship in international waters off the coast of Sri Lanka.

There are so many moving parts to this conflict that the sense of jeopardy is at times overwhelming. My email inbox this morning contained a message from Robert Reich, who was Bill Clinton’s secretary of labour between 1993 and 1997 and is a trenchant and energetic critic of the US president, headed: “World War III?
Trump’s and Netanyahu’s illegal war turns global”.

Let’s not second-guess Armageddon just yet. But there’s no denying how dangerous the situation is becoming as the conflict continues to spread. Scott Lucas, an expert in US and Middle East politics at the Clinton Institute, University College Dublin, answers some of the key questions about this fast-developing situation.

---

Read more:
How dangerous has the conflict in Iran become? Expert Q&A

---

This has gone beyond what the US president, Donald Trump, referred to as “major combat operations in Iran”. What it might become is anyone’s guess.

What we don’t have to guess is whether Trump is managing to take the American people with him on his foreign adventure. A poll taken on March 2 and published by YouGov/Economist found that US respondents oppose the war by a margin of 45% against to 32% in favour. Predictably, there’s a hugely partisan divide: most Republicans back their president, while Democrats are overwhelmingly anti war.

Significantly, writes Paul Whiteley of the University of Essex, an expert pollster with an interest in UK and US politics, Independents are also against the war by a significant margin. Looking ahead to November’s mid-term elections, as the US president’s advisers undoubtedly are, things do not look good for Republicans’ chances of holding either the House or the Senate.

---

Read more:
What Americans think of the war in Iran

---

And the war looks as if it will not end anytime soon. NBC News was reporting this afternoon that the Trump administration may invoke the Defense Production Act to accelerate the production of munitions, which would effectively move the US economy further on to a war footing.

This would seem to hint at something that analysts have speculated about, namely that a lengthy conflict could exhaust America’s stockpile of munitions. The US and its allies — including Israel and the Gulf states — are most acutely exposed to this shortage of defensive interceptors. It’s only been ten months since the US and Israel waged the 12-day war against Iran and that depleted an enormous number of both countries’ defensive missiles, according to Andrew Gawthorpe, an expert in modern American history at Leiden University.

This inevitably means that Washington will have to pull munitions away from other theatres, including those earmarked for South Korea. It’s also fair to say there will be fewer available for Kyiv’s European allies to purchase for the defence of Ukraine, which will please Vladimir Putin no end.

---

Read more:
How prepared are the US and its allies for a protracted conflict in Iran?

---

And whether an air campaign will be enough to achieve regime change – if that is indeed the purpose of this conflict – is debatable, writes Matthew Powell, an expert in air power at the University of Portsmouth. Air campaigns rarely work as intended – they often make matters worse, as the world saw after the Nato air campaign that led to the toppling of the country’s ruler, Muammar Gaddafi. With no coherent ground strategy to follow, things fell apart rapidly, with the terrible results that are with us to this day.

---

Read more:
Iran conflict: air campaigns rarely work as intended – they often make matters worse

---

‘Special relationship’ under strain

Keir Starmer certainly doesn’t believe in regime change “from the skies”, or so he told the House of Commons this week when fending off criticism of the UK government’s position on whether and how the UK should be involved in this conflict. As the US-Israeli attacks began, Starmer said that the UK would have none of it (due, in large part apparently, to his assessment of a lack of lawful basis for the campaign) and he was not prepared to allow America to use the UK’s bases in any capacity either.

He has since softened his stance, allowing the US to use some British bases, but purely for defensive purposes, to target Iranian ballistic launch sites that could threaten British interests in the region.

But Donald Trump remains unimpressed and there’s no doubt that this episode has put severe pressure on the so-called “special relationship” between Britain and America. Matt Bar, of Nottingham Trent University, walks us through some of the ups and downs of this relationship over the decades and concludes that it has survived worse setbacks in its time.

---

Read more:
Iran is putting pressure on the US-UK ‘special relationship’ – but it has survived worse over the years

---

If this all wasn’t so serious, the US president’s reaction to not immediately getting his way from Starmer would be amusing. In fact it drew an involuntary bark of laughter when I read that, in a press session after a meeting with the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, on March 3, the US president threw a few barbs Starmer’s way, concluding that: “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with.”

Indeed. Historian Richard Toye of Exeter University explores that unlikely comparison.

---

Read more:
What would Winston Churchill make of war with Iran?

---

The view from Moscow and Beijing

As you’d expect, Beijing was quick to condemn the strikes. China has been heavily dependent on its imports of oil from Iran, and regime change there would threaten this and force it to look elsewhere.

China is linked to Iran in a number of ways, including – significantly – via Tehran’s use of China’s satellite navigation system, BeiDou , which Beijing is touting as a possible replacement for the western Global Positioning System (GPS).

China-watcher Tom Harper, of the University of East London, assesses how this conflict will affect China and concludes that while it will cause turmoil in the short-term, a protracted conflict will play to its benefit in the long term.

---

Read more:
China set to suffer from turmoil in the Middle East, but it stands to benefit long term

---

The assassination hit a raw nerve in Moscow. Putin, whose fear of assassination borders on the pathological, watched the killing of a fellow autocrat with undisguised alarm.

Iran is a close ally of Russia. Tehran provided huge numbers of its Shahed drones to Putin to help him wage his illegal war in Ukraine, and Iran has also helped Moscow circumvent the west’s sanctions regime.

Stefan Wolff, an expert in international security at the University of Birmingham, believes that the conflict will play to Moscow’s advantage in the short term at least, as the US diverts munitions earmarked for purchase by Kyiv’s European allies. But he thinks the war is “unlikely to shift the dial significantly towards Russian victory in the long term”.

---

Read more:
What the conflict in Iran means for Putin and Ukraine

---

---

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

---

– ref. Will the Iran war go global? – https://theconversation.com/will-the-iran-war-go-global-277680

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gabriele Albertini, Assistant Professor in Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Nottingham

The unofficial soundtrack of every basketball, squash or hard-court tennis match is the constant high-pitched squeak or shreak of the players’ shoes. But can this squeak be designed out of them while retaining the grip?

That’s the question an international team of engineers and applied physicists, including me, have been investigating. It sounds like a small design tweak. In fact, it cuts to a deep physics problem: how a soft body slides against a rigid one.

Perhaps surprisingly, the mechanism that produces sound when a soft solid slides against a stiffer one has long been the subject of scientific debate. Most theories are linked to the concept of “stick-slip”: when, instead of sliding smoothly, the sliding object rapidly alternates between sticking and slipping.

While it sticks, the soft body (such as a rubber sole) deforms and stores elastic energy. Then it suddenly slips, turning much of that energy into heat through friction – while also releasing rapid vibrations that radiate out as sound.

But this is not exactly what we observed in our experiments.

After Leonardo da Vinci

Our recently published study took inspiration from the simple-but-effective setup used by Leonardo da Vinci in his studies of friction from the late 15th century.

Leonardo used a wooden block resting on a flat surface. The block was subjected to two forces: a normal force (its own weight) and a tangential force which was applied using an additional weight attached to a cable.

By stacking and combining multiple blocks, Leonardo discovered the two fundamental laws of friction: that friction is proportional with how hard the surfaces are pressed together, and largely independent of the size of the contact area.

But Leonardo never published these findings, which were finally rediscovered and made public in the 19th century in notebooks scattered throughout Europe. In the meantime, the laws of friction had only been formally enunciated by French physicist Guillaume Amontons in 1699 – two centuries after Leonardo’s studies.

Furthermore, these laws are empirical rather than fundamental, and in extreme cases they break down. This led us to the question of what makes a shoe squeak.

---

Read more:
Leonardo da Vinci’s early work on friction founded the modern science of tribology

---

A surprising result

One of the biggest difficulties in friction studies is that the interface being tested (where a shoe sole meets a hardwood floor, for example) is hard to get at, and comes under a lot of pressure while slipping at high speed. Placing sensors at the interface is almost impossible – and even if it were, this would probably alter the frictional response.

Our solution was to use an optical trick: we replaced the hardwood floor with a transparent acrylic plate and mounted an array of LED lights along its sides. When each test object – including multiple rubber blocks – made contact with the plate, light would leak into the contact region, brightening up this area alone. That allowed us to visualise exactly which parts of the soft-rigid interface were in contact.

We used a high-speed camera, capable of capturing up to 1 million frames per second, to film how the contact patches evolved while the “sole” was skidding, and recorded the sounds being emitted with a microphone.

We found that at the point of contact, tiny wrinkles in the surface of the rubber block – known as “opening slip pulses” – were created, which then raced along the interface at nearly 100 metres per second. While most of the block remained stuck in place, these rapidly moving wrinkles created the sound in each friction test.

Surprisingly, even tiny geometrical features at the frictional interface had profound effects on the sound generated. When it was perfectly flat and smooth, the pulses were messy and generated a scratch-like noise of many different frequencies – closer to the sound of peeling adhesive tape than a clean squeak.

But when ridges were present, like those on the soles of sport shoes, the pulses were confined by the width of these ridges, making them very regular (not messy any more). This turned the sound into a more musical tone akin to the squeaks heard on a basketball court.

We were also able to determine what decides the precise pitch of a shoe squeak. In each test, it was largely unaffected by either the speed of sliding or magnitude of the force applied (which relates to the weight of a player).

Rather, the clearest link was with the height of the rubber block – or the thickness of a shoe’s sole. Using this knowledge, we created a series of blocks of different heights in order to play a familiar melody, as shown in this video.

Our research lays the groundwork for controlling or suppressing squeaking in many mechanical systems involving soft-on-rigid friction. These range from brakes and tyres to hip and knee replacements, where polymer liners slide against polished metal or ceramic heads.

And yes, it could even lead to the development of squeakless sneakers. Designing intricate patterns that keep plenty of rubber in contact (so the grip stays high) but break the sliding into lots of tiny, out-of-sync microevents could kill the clean note of the squeak, and leave only a soft hush.

Table-top earthquakes

Beyond the realm of sports, this work also relates to much larger geophysical questions. Similar experimental approaches to ours have served as table-top models for studying earthquakes, during which ruptures and slip pulses spread along tectonic faults at extremely high speed.

If we can reproduce earthquake-like slip pulses in the lab, the next challenge is scaling – working out how those centimetre-scale measurements translate to what happens inside real faults in the Earth.

Achieving this could help interpret seismic signals more confidently: using waves recorded far from a fault to infer what has actually happened at the source. Better physics-based models could improve seismic hazard estimates and lead to more reliable hazard maps.

Meanwhile, we’ll keep thinking about squeakless sneakers too.

Gabriele Albertini received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), and the University of Nottingham.

– ref. Why do sports shoes squeak? Here’s what our research reveals – https://theconversation.com/why-do-sports-shoes-squeak-heres-what-our-research-reveals-277518

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paolo Heywood, Associate Professor, Social Anthropology, Durham University

Everyone’s been in a debate when someone says: “You’re taking that out of context.” But what does it actually mean to understand something “in context”?

Appeals to context feel irrefutable. Of course we need context. But “context” is one of those ideas that seems obvious until you actually try to define it. What counts as context? Where does context end and the thing itself begin? And whose context matters?

Take a typical example: a quote from a politician surfaces that seems damning. Condemnation ensues. But a defence is mounted: the quote has been taken out of context – the politician was being sarcastic, as you’ll see when you look at what else they said at the same time.

But the assault continues when it’s pointed out that the quote fits with other remarks the politician has made. Meanwhile, still further defences are mounted on the basis of the wider political debates around the subject of the quote. Everyone’s invoking context, but nobody’s agreeing.

“Context” isn’t one thing, though the way we use the word often suggests it is. It’s dozens of different things we’ve given different names to over centuries. Social context. Historical context. Cultural context. Political context. Economic context. Linguistic context. Biographical context. Institutional context. Each of these emerged as distinct ways of thinking about how to situate meaning, and each implies a different kind of explanation.

We haven’t always been as concerned about context as we are now – and we haven’t always understood it in the same way. The historian Peter Burke dates “context” in roughly its current (and quite capacious) senses to the counter-enlightenment romanticism of the 19th century.

This same counter-enlightenment romanticism is partly the context in which my own discipline of anthropology emerged – and people started insisting we understand human practices “in their total social context”. They meant something specific: that you can’t understand a ritual or belief by isolating it, and you have to see how it fits into an entire way of life.

When historians talk about “historical context”, they often mean the sequence of events and conditions that preceded something – the causal chain. When literary critics invoke “textual context”, they often mean the surrounding words that shape meaning. These are all genuinely different intellectual operations, and they often pull in opposite directions.

The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein spent much of his life thinking about this problem. In his early work, he thought meaning depended on logical context – how a statement fits into a formal structure.

Later, he abandoned this for something messier: meaning depends on what he called “form of life” – the shared practices and assumptions that make our words intelligible to one other. There’s no algorithm for context, there’s just the hard work of making explicit what we normally take for granted. This helps to explain why political arguments can sometimes be so frustrating. We think we’re disagreeing about facts when we’re actually disagreeing about which kind of context is relevant.

Take recent debates about crime statistics. In 2024, the then Conservative government of the UK argued that crime had fallen by 56% since 2010, yet it also claimed that knife crime had risen dramatically in London since the arrival of Labour mayor Sadiq Khan.

More recently, meanwhile, Reform’s Nigel Farage argues that crime has skyrocketed since the 1990s in ways that records fail to make clear because people aren’t reporting crimes. Still others point to the economic context of austerity and cuts to policing that have hit deprived areas the hardest.

Who’s right? They all might be, in a sense. But they’re playing different games with context. The Conservative government used temporal context (crime down since 2010) and regional context (but up in London). Farage invokes methodological context (the problem of unreported crime skewing the data). Critics of austerity point to economic and structural context (resource distribution and its effects). Each context tells you to look at different things, weigh different factors, draw different conclusions.

There’s no neutral context, no view from nowhere. Every context is itself a choice: a decision about what matters, what explains what, which background is relevant. When we invoke context, we’re not just adding information, we’re making a claim about what kind of thing the world is. These aren’t just different amounts of context, they’re different ideas about what makes things meaningful.

What do we do with this?

Choosing a context is itself an argumentative move. When you invoke historical context, you’re claiming – probably – that temporal sequence and precedent matter most. When you invoke social context, you’re claiming that group membership or structural position matter most. These are substantial commitments, not neutral framings.

It’s also helpful to recognise that contexts can conflict. The immediate linguistic context (x was being ironic) might point one way, while the historical context (but x voted for similar measures) points to another. Both can be “true” while supporting opposite conclusions.

None of this means context doesn’t matter. It means it’s helpful to be honest about what we’re doing when we invoke it. We’re not just adding background information. We’re making claims about what kind of background matters, which in turn depend on deeper assumptions about how the world works.

It’s helpful to be explicit about which context we’re operating in, and why we think it’s the relevant one. That certainly won’t resolve all arguments. But it might help us see that we’re not always arguing about the same thing.

Understanding context isn’t an invitation to add more and more information until everyone agrees. It’s an acknowledgement that meaning is situated, and that different situations generate different meanings. The hard part is figuring out which situation we’re actually in.

This article contains references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and this may include links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

Paolo Heywood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How to spot the use and abuse of the word ‘context’ – https://theconversation.com/how-to-spot-the-use-and-abuse-of-the-word-context-275875

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Taylor, Professor of Anatomy, Lancaster University

One of the most bothersome things about being sick or having seasonal allergies is that it makes your nose stuffy and blocked. This makes breathing in through your nostrils frustrating – if not altogether impossible.

But even when you aren’t sick, perhaps you’ve noticed that when you take a deep breath, only one of your nostrils seems to be allowing the air in. Before you panic and wonder if you’re coming down with something, what you’re experiencing is actually a normal bodily process.

Multiple times a day, without us even noticing, the nostrils naturally switch between a dominant nostril for airflow. This process is called the nasal cycle and it plays an important role in the health of our nose.

The body actually switches the dominant nostril as frequently as every two hours while we’re awake. This switch is less frequent when we’re sleeping as our breathing rate slows and the volume of air entering and leaving the body lowers.

There are two key aspects to the nasal cycle: congestion and decongestion.

During the congestion phase, one nostril will experience reduced airflow, while the opposite nostril will be open, or decongested – allowing for more air to pass through it. The decongested phase actually fatigues the open nostril, as air dries it out and brings pathogens into contact with it. This is why it’s important for the dominant nostril to swap.

This alternating cycle is automatic, regulated subconsciously by the hypothalamus in the brain. However, some people have no nasal cycle (such as those who have a hypothalamic disorder). There’s also evidence that the left nostril may be more dominant – particularly in right handed people.

Studies looking at nasal breathing even suggest that when the right nostril is dominant, the body is in a more alert or stressed state. But when the left nostril takes over, the body is in a more relaxed state.

The nasal cycle is important for a number of reasons.

First, it protects the lining of the nose and respiratory system. At least 12,000 litres of air pass through it each day, making it a key front-line defence from pathogens. Having the dominant nostril alternate reduces the risk of damage and also makes it easier for the nasal passage to protect against pathogens.

The nose also has to rest and repair. Air exposure dries it out – so without time to recuperate, this could make it easier for pathogens and inflammation to cause damage.

Part of the congestion process also sees increased blood flow to the nose’s vessels. This ensures the nostrils are moistened properly for both the repair and recovery processes, and so that air is warmed and moistened as it passes through the nostril.

Nasal cycle function

A number of things can affect the nasal cycle’s normal function. Respiratory conditions such as colds and flu result in an increase in mucous production. This restricts how easily the nasal passages are able to alternate.

Allergens such as pollen or dust mites can cause severe inflammation of the nasal tissues – again impeding proper function of the nasal cycle.

Certain medications, such as those for high blood pressure, can cause irritation of the nasal lining, too. This is because these drugs effect the blood vessels throughout the body – including those in the nose.

Overuse of nasal decongestants (for more than five days at a time) can cause rhinitis medicamentosa – a form of congestion that occurs when you overuse these drugs. The sudden swelling of the nostril tissues affects the nasal cycle.

For others, structural issues interfere with their nasal cycle. Nasal polyps, which are found in up to 4% of people, are an outgrowth of the nasal lining that usually occurs in both nostrils. These limit how easily air can pass through the nostrils, making the nasal cycle ineffective and leaving both nostrils constantly feeling blocked.

A deviated nasal septum – where the cartilage and bone plate between the nostrils is off-centre – can also make the nostrils feel constantly congested or blocked. This often requires surgery to improve breathing and sleep quality.

Even factors as simple as lying in bed or slouching over can affect the nasal cycle. When you lay down, blood pools in the tissues of the nose. Gravity also causes the contents of the sinuses to move into the nostril closest to the pillow. This can block one of the nostrils, making it harder to breathe and preventing the nasal cycle from working as normal.

If you’re struggling with blocked nostrils, infections such as colds and the flu are usually the most common culprit. It can take up to two weeks to clear the congestion. Sinusitis, where the sinuses become infected, can last for four weeks.

Pollen allergies can also be a common culprit of a abnormal nasal cycle. This symptom can last for weeks depending on the specific allergen you’re allergic to. Regularly taking antihistamines during hay fever season may help to reduce symptoms and clear any congestion.

But if you find one nostril is persistently blocked for more than two weeks, it’s usually a good idea to get it checked out – particularly if there’s mucus coming from your nose, or a discharge that doesn’t look normal for you.

Adam Taylor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. This is why you only breathe out of one nostril at a time – https://theconversation.com/this-is-why-you-only-breathe-out-of-one-nostril-at-a-time-276407

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Peter Howley, Professor of Economics and Behavioural Science, University of Leeds

The outlook for job seekers in the UK appears to be taking a turn for the worse. Weak economic growth and continued uncertainty for employers have led to forecasts that unemployment will hit 5.3% this year.

In politics, the debate typically follows a familiar pattern: creating jobs, tackling unemployment and making sure welfare benefits are fair. But this economic framing captures only part of what is at stake. Work is not simply a source of income. It is about much more than a paycheck.

When people lose work or cannot find a job, the damage is often psychological as much as financial. With official estimates suggesting that UK unemployment will climb higher this year than previously forecast, that leaves problems for the government beyond just the numbers.

Economists estimate that in terms of life satisfaction the non-financial costs of unemployment are several times larger than the loss of income itself. Unemployment can also leave long-term scarring effects – fears about becoming unemployed again, for example – even after people have found a new job.

One reason is that employment fulfils important psychological needs. Just as vitamins are essential for human bodies, certain aspects of work – autonomy, variety, recognition – are essential for the mind.

When work disappears, people lose not only financial security but often routine and social connection as well. Days can become less structured, social networks might shrink and confidence can erode. In most societies, work is also closely tied to self-worth, meaning unemployment can bring feelings of guilt, shame or personal failure even when job loss is beyond a person’s control.

A good illustration of how powerful these social meanings can be comes from a study of people’s happiness as they transitioned into retirement. People who move directly from employment into life as a pensioner typically experienced little change in their overall satisfaction.

In contrast, those who had been unemployed before retiring reported a marked improvement in wellbeing once they reached retirement age. The difference was not due to changes in financial circumstances. Rather, retirement removed the stigma attached to not working. During working life, being unemployed carries a heavy social stigma. But no one looks down on a pensioner for not working.

Psychological pain

To illustrate further these non-financial costs of not working, research my colleagues and I conducted also looked at how unhappy people feel when they are out of work depending on the overall unemployment rate in their neighbourhood. If unemployment were purely an economic issue, then living in an area with high joblessness should make things worse. It means fewer jobs and tougher competition for those roles, after all.

But what actually happens is the opposite: although the psychological pain of being unemployed is always substantial, this pain reduces as more people around you lose their jobs. Now, it is clearly not the case that people are just cruel and taking pleasure in others’ misfortune. But when job loss becomes more common, the stigma eases and people no longer feel as alone or to blame for their situation.

---

Read more:
Why unemployment can feel worse when there is less of it around

---

The current challenge is not limited to outright job loss. Globalisation and technological change have expanded economic opportunities overall, with things like new industries, cheaper goods and services, and greater access to global markets. But they have also contributed to the growth of insecure and lower-quality work. For many people, stable and meaningful employment has become harder to find.

These changes are unevenly distributed: communities that have historically been reliant on manufacturing have suffered lasting declines. These include higher unemployment, lower wages and wider social problems following exposure to competition from cheaper manufacturing bases. In this sense, economic change has created a new geography of disadvantage.

The consequences extend beyond individual happiness. Rising job insecurity and dissatisfaction with work can reshape how people view government institutions and politics more broadly. They are associated with falling trust and growing frustration: conditions that have been linked to stronger support for populist and anti-establishment movements across advanced economies.

When large groups feel economically marginalised or socially undervalued, political discontent often follows. Labour market policy, therefore, is not only about employment rates or economic growth. The right decisions can help to sustain social cohesion and democratic stability during periods of economic change.

The rapid advance of AI in the workplace brings these questions into sharper focus. It promises extraordinary gains in productivity, but also raises an uncomfortable question for the future. What happens when large numbers of people are no longer needed for the work that once defined economic life?

The challenge posed by AI is not simply how to distribute income, but how to sustain human flourishing in a world where work plays a smaller role. Financial compensation alone may prevent poverty, but it cannot guarantee satisfaction with life. And if citizens do not feel that their lives have value or direction, the political consequences may prove as significant as the economic ones. The future of work is not just an economic question, but a social one.

Peter Howley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why unemployment – and bad jobs – carry hidden social and political costs – https://theconversation.com/why-unemployment-and-bad-jobs-carry-hidden-social-and-political-costs-277559

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marrisa Joseph, Associate Professor of Organisation Studies & Business History, University of Reading

Netflix’s plan to buy the Hollywood studio Warner Bros Discovery is over. The streaming giant was eventually outbid by rival company Paramount Skydance, which is willing to pay around US$111 billion (£82.2 billion) for the company.

It’s not a done deal yet. There will be regulatory hoops that Paramount needs to get through.

But after a tense few months of negotiations, Warner Bros, which put itself up for sale last year, said Paramount’s latest bid was “superior” to the one from Netflix, which then refused to raise its offer.

And if things go according to Paramount’s plan, the company will soon become the new owners of a vast library of content. It will own the likes of Casablanca, Friends, Superman, Harry Potter and Game of Thrones. Plus it will have the Sopranos, Sex and the City and Succession.

Media companies like Paramount and Netflix appear to see high quality back catalogues as valuable strategic assets. The theory is that control over legacy content can provide financial stability and a durable competitive advantage.

And it’s a strategy with a long history. Back in the 18th century for example, Longman, the UK’s oldest commercial publishing house, built up its business by acquiring the catalogues of other firms.

Founded by Thomas Longman in 1724, the company steadily and deliberately expanded its portfolio of titles. One of the most famous and lucrative of these was Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe.

In addition to acquiring catalogues from publishers (who were often retiring or leaving the trade) Longman was also a keen trader of shares in consortiums known as “congers”. This was where publishers collaborated to finance new literary works as a way of spreading the risk of potentially costly publishing ventures. In 1755, for example, Longman joined a consortium with five other publishers to produce and publish Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language.

By the time Longman reached its centenary in 1824, the firm was regarded as one of the most distinguished publishing houses of the age. Its fortunes were built on the substantial capital generated through the acquisition of lucrative copyrights, a strategy that successive generations continued.

It was the third generation of Longman publishers for example, who, in 1863, acquired the business of John William Parker & Son, publishers of Gray’s Anatomy. First issued in 1858, the work had already become pivotal to medical education, making it a highly valuable addition to Longman’s catalogue. It has never been out of print, and still sells well to medical students and doctors around the world today.

Longman continued to grow, and was considered one of the major players in British publishing in the 19th century. A steady commitment to purchasing reference and instructional works helped cement the firm’s reputation as a leading educational publisher, a position strengthened by its overseas trade and broad catalogue of school textbooks.

Content is always king

This would become their enduring legacy well into the 20th century, as Longman’s reference works came to define standards in English language educational publishing.

As successive generations of Longman had pursued this strategy of acquiring established firms with profitable lists, new media companies entered the market seeking to expand their portfolios. Longman’s reputation and extensive back catalogue eventually made the firm an attractive target for a take over.

In 1968 Longman was acquired by Pearson, bringing an end to a publishing dynasty that had lasted for centuries. And although no longer family-owned, the Longman imprint has endured as a strong brand in educational publishing.

Similarly, by absorbing Warner Bros. Discovery’s extensive archive, Paramount will gain control over a vast catalogue of cultural content, influencing which stories persist and how future entertainment landscapes may be shaped.

The deal, if it happens, demonstrates how legacy assets remain powerful tools for shaping markets and culture. It will also show that for media companies in the 21st century, as with publishing companies 300 years ago, ownership of a profitable back catalogue continues to be a cornerstone of growth and innovation.

Marrisa Joseph works for the University of Reading.

– ref. Netflix and Paramount bidding for a potentially lucrative back catalogue mirrors 18th-century publishing deals – https://theconversation.com/netflix-and-paramount-bidding-for-a-potentially-lucrative-back-catalogue-mirrors-18th-century-publishing-deals-275955