illuminating science

This is actually old news (and so, really, not “news”, but I digres), but Digg today featured a BBC documentary video from the year 2000 about the discovery of 250 million year old bacteria encased inside a salt crystal. These bacteria were cultured and found to still be alive and viable. The story is actually pretty cool - the scientist, Dr. Russell Vreeland from West Chester University, didn’t really expect to find anything - and indeed out of the 60 or so crystals they looked at, most contained no signs of life. Then, one day, one of the other researchers brought in a vial which clearly had something growing in it. What they’d found were bacteria that existed in “cryptobiotic” state for 250 million years - far older than the dinosaurs! - where they neither feed nor reproduce, instead existing as spores. When exposed to the appropriate conditions, however, they just pick up where they left off.

Interestingly, the bacteria don’t seem to be all that different from today’s, with a similar DNA structure and no fundamental changes, suggesting that although life has evolved, no dramatic changes have occurred. In the video, Dr. Vreeland mentions the obligatory Jurassic Park reference, where dinosaur DNA is obtained from mosquitos embedded in amber after sucking some dino blood (Mmm!). And although the bacteria are believed to be harmless, they still treated them as potential pathogens - just in case.

Because the work is relatively old (6 years) if there were any problems with lab contamination etc I would have expected it to surface by now, but I haven’t found anything. So, it looks like the bar for the oldest living organism on the planet is a lot different to what a little quiz book I’ve got says (either a tortoise or a tree, depending on semantics!)

So, I have a friend who is very strongly into astrology - the idea that based on the alignments of stars and planets, one can make predictions about someone’s personality, career and even future. Unfortunately, astrology is one thing I absolutely don’t believe in. For example, I would be willing to consider the possibility that palmistry has some basis - that your palms reflect your the plan you set yourself for this life. Although highly unlikely, it could at least be made to make logical sense in a “science fantasy” style book. I actually learned some palmistry many years ago, and have done some palm readings - but I think it’s more the Forer effect (which I’ll come back to tomorrow) plus some basic genetics that’s at play.

Anyway, I can’t see any logical basis for astrology. First up, why should the planets and stars have any affect on us? Scientifically, there are a few possibilities. Let’s first consider possible physical effects they could have on our genes or our minds.

The most measurable effect is the light reaching us, including radio waves, infrared, etc. But this light negligible compared to that reaching us from the sun, or from lightbulbs for that matter, so seems unlikely to have any physical effect.

Another option is gravity - perhaps the subtle pull of the universe can cause astrological effects. However, some high school physics comes into play. The gravitational force between two objects is measured in Newtons, and is given by the product of the two masses divided by the square of their distance, and scaled by the gravitational constant G = 6.67300 × 10^-11 m³ kg^-1 s^-2. It’s a very small effect, but it’s cumulative - so the force between two apples might be tiny, but put enough apples together (e.g., a planet!) and you have something significant. Let’s consider the force on a 70kg person due to the nearest start, Alpha Centauri (yes, I know it’s really Proxima Centauri that’s closest Its mass is roughly comparable to the sun’s, and is a distance of four light years away. Using Google, we quickly see that the force from this star is about 6×10^-12 Newtons - one trillionth of a Newton. For comparison, the force on that person from Earth’s gravity is about 700 Newtons - we’re talking about a change in force of a trillionth of a percent! Hardly noticeable, one would think.

What about the planets? They’re closer, though lighter, and so should have a bigger effect. Let’s take Jupiter - it’s at a distance of about 588 million kilometres, and weighs in at 2×10²⁷ kilograms. This gives us a force of 2 x 10^-5 Newtons. Much larger, but still much smaller than the 700N from Earth! But maybe it’s enough to make a difference? Well let’s try something. Let’s consider the force from a standard, 5000L water tank. Let’s imagine it’s got a diameter of 2m, so when you’re right beside it, you’re standing about 1m from its centre (strictly, oh learned physicists, it’s not a point source, but for the purposes of this calculation…!) 1L of water weight 1kg, so calculating the force on our person, we find it’s again 2×10^-5 Newtons. (I swear, this was only chance - I honestly didn’t choose special numbers!!!) That means your water tank is causing as much effect on you when you stand beside it as Jupiter does - and far more than all the stars in Taurus! Now, imagine standing beside a house - or a skyscraper - or a big rock. If gravity were responsible, as is sometimes claimed, these should also be included!

Obviously, the gravity argument is relatively simple - more complex arguments include subtle effects on our sun, in turn producing subtle magnetic field effects on Earth, etc. But I suspect that similar calculation would show that the time and space variation of these fields isn’t anywhere like as strong as the corresponding variation in someone’s astrological chart would be. I also suspect that local deposits of iron ore etc would produce comparable changes, if indeed these changes occur at all.

Therefore, I think we’re running out of options for a physical effect from these stars on us. Yes, together all these stars do have an effect - they hold us in our orbit around the galaxy, for one. But we need something that is so specific that it can distinguish between the minute, longitude and latitude of your birth. Therefore if anything’s going on, it’s got to be either spiritual or psychological - which I’ll come to tomorrow, as I think this is enough for one post! In particular, I’ll point out some of the studies for and against - and provide some useful links!

So I’ve found a few things recently which don’t quite justify posting about on their own, but by their powers combined…! They’re all roughly science related - or at least appeal to my physics brain So:

• First up, the importance of using secure enryption. Sicilian Mafia “boss of bosses” Bernardo Provenzano was captured recently after notes he wrote in code were intercepted and decoded. While it was a good idea writing the notes in code, using a 2000 year old method known as the Caesar Cipher wasn’t. In this code, each letter is shifted a number of spaces to the right - e.g., A->C, B->D, etc. In that example, the key is a shift of 2, so that “CAT” -> “ECV”. In fact, Provenzano used a key of 3, but wrote the corresponding number rather than letter. So, CAT became 060423 (Actually, the Italian alphabet is slightly different, so that may not be strictly true, but you get the idea.) Either way, the notes lead to the capture of several key mafia associates, ultimately resulting in the arrest of the Big Boss. Next time, better try quantum cryptography!
• I saw a girl carrying a shopping bag that had a great slogan on the side: “Wearing high heels puts you closer to heaven!” Although it probably wasn’t their intent, I couldn’t help but think of all the health problems that stem from wearing high heels…
• Google has expanded their online applications with a Calendar that’s pretty darn awesome. It doesn’t have 2-way sync with Apple iCal yet, so it’s not quite ready for my personal prime-time usage, but you can import and export from it. There’s the option to share your calendar with other people, either with all details are just when you’re free or not. If everyone had one of these, life could be a lot easier for organising meetings! (Or stalking…depends on what you’re into, I guess. :)) Definitely worth a look.
• Finally, if you’re after some recreation - check out the 10 Levels of Unicycling, as defined by the International Unicycling Foundation with videos of every move! I’m currently (unofficially) Level 2, and I’m working on Level 3. Also, check out some amazing performances - pretty awesome!

So, you might have noticed that I’ve been a little quiet over the last week (or not - it depends on how meticulously you’re taking notes here…) It all comes down to that pesky little thing at the end of every postgrad’s life - my PhD submission date is approaching rapidly. Well, rather, the date that my money runs out is approaching, which is nearly the same thing!

In Australia, most (but not all) PhD students are on scholarships from the government - Australian Postgraduate Awards, or APAs, which provide a not insubstantial living allowance. The scholarships are for three years, but almost without exception, PhD students apply for, and recieve, a 6 month extension. After that, Universities get pretty uptight if you don’t finish within 4 years, as their funding is tied to you completing within that time.

My 3.5 years approaches rapidly, with Thursday September the 14th being my cut off date. Ideally (by which I mean, it’s essential) I need to find another source of income which starts pretty soon after that date (by which, I mean the next day) so as to support my extravagant lifestyle of pasta and bread. As such, I’ve been rather busy the last week trying to incorporate the journal papers I’ve written into my thesis, as well as searching around for jobs which might be of interest. I’ll relay some of those endeavours in subsequent posts, but for now, if I disappear for a day or two, it probably reflects some particularly stressful deadline (e.g., a meeting with my supervisor!) Anyway, 4 months 28 days. But who’s counting?

The next BrisScience talk, on the 24th of April, will be from Professor John Drennan and comes with a twist - they’re going to be crossing live to a real electron microscope, which will be used to image everything from minerals to biological cells at magnifications of around 100,000 times zoom! (I don’t know exactly what method they’re using on the night, but it’s going to be impressive!)

Although we call it a microscope it works on a very different principle to your regular variety - instead of shining light on the sample, we measure the electrons (current) that come from the sample when we apply a voltage in a certain way. It might sound strange, but this lets us reach resolutions far better than any conventional method! There are several different methods which are all referred to “electron microscopes” - ranging from Transmission Electron Microscopes where a beam of electrons are passed through a thin sample of the material, to Scanning Tunneling Microscopes where we actual measure the quantum tunneling of electrons off the surface of the material onto a tiny probe whose tip is only one atom wide!

This will be a great opportunity to see an electron microscope in action (possibly with some audience based interaction too, I’m not sure!) so if you’re in Brisbane, definitely try and check it out. For some idea of what you might be seeing, check out this amazing gallery of nanoscale images - my favourite has got to be the cockroache antenna. Just downright creepy…Feel free to post links to other good images!

Here’s the details of the talk:

Date: Monday, April 24
Time: 6:30pm to 7:30pm (doors open at 6:00pm); complimentary wine, soft
drinks, and nibblies follow
Venue: Judith Wright Centre of Contemporary Arts (420 Brunswick St,
Fortitude Valley; www.jwcoca.qld.gov.au)

The talk is open to all and there is no need to book.

Please forward this announcement on to friends or colleagues. I can also
send you a poster for your workplace - just let me know whether you’d prefer
an electronic or paper copy. Don’t hesitate to contact Jennifer Dodd (0408 796 357, jdodd@physics.uq.edu.au) with any questions. Looking forward to seeing you on the night!

One more quick post to say that I’ve put up another physics song which might be of interest - Yesterday as sung by a poor explorer venturing into a black hole.

In other very cool news, I’ve discovered that one of the education lecturers on campus has been regularly giving out copies of my Pi Song on Pi Day each year - I contacted her and she was “honoured” to meet the author! Hehehe…ain’t fame wonderful!

Have a good weekend, all!

Okay, it sounds like a line straight out of the Simpsons, but good buddy Michael passed on this little gem from Channel 10’s 9am news/talk show featuring host David Reyne. It follows from a recent drug trial gone wrong in the UK (absolutely, simply, terrifying to read about…), where for no apparent reason two people became very seriously ill after taking the test drug, while those given the placebo suffered no ill effects. However, there’s some confusion:

David Reyne (host): Some of these guys were given a placebo.

Dr. David Ritchie (guest): Correct

David Reyne: I don’t really understand what a placebo is, but it seems to have, to have saved them! And wouldn’t it make sense that every time a trial like this takes place, that there’s a placebo on hand.

Blink. Say again? The doctor quickly saves the host:

Dr. David Ritchie: A placebo is just an inactive agent! So it’s a…

Kim Watkins (other host): It’s a pretend drug.

Dr. David Ritchie: It’s a pretend drug – it could be sterile saline for example with no active agent in it.

David Reyne: I was thinking it was a cure of some sort.

Dr. David Ritchie: No.

I would have thought that placebo would be a fairly well known term, even amongst non-medical people! Heck, even just watching TV you should pick up that terminology, just by context, pretty quickly! And people wonder about the importance of science education…?! This is a truly fantastic line - bravo Michael for passing it on! Suffice to say, I’m sure our TV hosts will be doing their research before their next interviews. Or, maybe not.

Oh, and as long as we’re quoting placebo jokes, here’s a couple of my favourites. I had thought about putting all three up (two real jokes, one real quote) and getting people to pick which was real, but I didn’t think anyone would be able to tell…

An angry crowd has gathered outside the Hibbert Medical Clinic…

Crowd: We need a cure! We need a cure!
Hibbert: Ho ho ho. Why, the only cure is bedrest. Anything I give you would be a placebo.

Woman: [frantic] Where can we get these placebos?

The crowd overturn a truck in search of placebos, but alas the only thing inside is a crate of killer bees.

Man seizes bee, puts it in mouth. “I’m cured! OW!!”

Or this one from the comic (cartoon) strip, Crock, which is scarily accurate, I fear:

Doctor: I’ve got to give you a shot. Do you have private health insurance?
Patient: No.
Doctor: Nurse, fetch the placebo.

Some people will go to any lengths to get a drink, but roughly 6000 light years to a giant cloud of alcohol
might be a little more than even the most avid drinker can manage. This cloud of methyl alchol is 463 billion kilometres across, but is unfortunately not suitable for human consumption, as the article is careful to point out, lest people get any ideas and nipping out after work.

Despite the great publicity, this work is actually quite serious - by detecting the emissions from clouds of hydrocarbons like this, astronomers have been able to get good estimates for distances in our galaxy. Furthermore, these kind of chemicals - carbons and hydrogens in molecules - are part of the basic building blocks of biology as we know it, and previously it wasn’t believed that such molecules could form or survive in space, due to the hard radiation out there. So this raises some interesting questions about life on Earth, and other planets - could life have been seeded by molecules such as these from the interstellar medium (the gas from which stars form)?

That, and it just makes for a really cool story!

Just a quickie from Digg, another example of cybernetics - a blind woman who has a camera connected to her brain and has regained very basic sight. I’ve already touched on this briefly in the past, although not directly, but the basic idea is that a camera (mounted on a pair of glasses) takes images which are converted by a 5 kilogram computer around the the subject’s waist into signals which are sent into electrodes implanted in the person’s brain at the back of the skull.

There are many improvements to be made - at present, the technology can only be used for a short time each day, and the computer is extremely heavy (why?) and more resolution would be desirable. But it’s the first step towards some truly amazing advancements that are probably only just around the corner.

No, I’m not saying to Google a potential romantic interest (although almost certainly you can learn very interesting factoids about someone that way!) What I really mean is that for those of us seeking true love, Google Romance may be the answer.

I, for one, am constant amazed at how accurately Google produces the sites I need from just a few search words, and continues to assist in more and more details of my life. It seems only natural they should turn their phenomenal power to that most complicated of issues - the dating game. Google Romance will use “psychographic matchmaking software” to match your personality profile to your perfect match, then send you on a free date - all the while serving relevant, Contextual Dating advertisements to assist in your love life.

Unfortunately, at present their server is returning a “Romance not found” error, but I’m sure I’m just doing something wrong…Better check it out yourselves!

Alternatively, you could try out one of the more elaborate dating systems I’ve heard of, you could check out Regina Lynn’s look at the digital dating trail (part of the Sex Drive column at Wired magazine, an interesting albeit sometimes disconcerting read!), a piece about the mathematics of dating (or moving house, for that matter) or indeed my (hopefully) humorous piece on Numeric Dating.

Beyond that, I hope you had a good April 1st!