Archive

Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

Discovery: STS-114

July 12th, 2005 3 comments

The Return to Flight

Tomorrow July 13, 2005 Shuttle Discovery will launch as STS-114 on mission “International Space Station Flight LF1” at 15:51 EDT from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. This is the first mission in over 2 years because of the disaster of the Columbia shuttle. It is great to see the shuttle back in action after such a traumatic prior experience. It’s time to fly again.

Here is launchpad 39b at Kennedy Space Center, Florida where the Discovery as STS-114 will launch tomorrow.

Launchpad 39b

Shalom

UPDATE: The Return to Flight has been postponed due to a malfunction on the external tank. The next launch attempt could be as early as July 16th. I will keep you posted!

Categories: Science

“Largest Demolition Derby on the Planet”

January 13th, 2005 No comments

This looks like it will be pretty interesting to see. NASA is predicting that an iceburg the size of Long Island is going to run into a massive glacier in Antarctica. Scientists are predicting that the event will be pretty impressive and will happen no later than the 15th. It will be pretty cool to see satellite images of the event.

If you want to see a quicktime clip of the most recent movement of the iceburg, click here.

Stay tuned! ;)

Also, all the tsunami satellite images I can collected can be found here with other posts here and here.

Shalom

UPDATE: The link that I gave (here) has some updated information – The “Antarctic Demolition” is underway! Here is an updated mpeg of satellite photos of the collision.

Categories: Science

Global Warming?

January 10th, 2005 No comments

I am back up in Vancouver, BC in my freezing cold apt (think the heater is either broken or just taking a long time to kick back in gear, either way, my gleutes are frozen). I will be starting classes again tomorrow (I will probably post later with what I have on my platter). Before I get too deep into classes I wanted to bring up something that is very interesting to me: Global Warming. I am nearly done with Michael Crichton’s book State of Fear and have really enjoyed it so far. He brings up quite a few enviromental issues in that book that I plan to write something more in-depth on later. Before I do that, I want to know what readers of this blog, passers by, BE users, or whomever happens to find themselves here think. That means YOU!!

What is your take on Global Warming?

I would like it if you stay away from statements like “It is a well known fact that…” or “It is commonly believed…” I don’t just want to know what you feel about this subject, but WHY you feel that way about the subject. What sources inform your opinion? Have you had to reject any information? What do you see your bias to be? All those types of questions, and more, I would love for you to ponder. So please, ponder away!

I have written two other posts relating to Michael Crichton and two lectures he gave. If you would like to see them and / or comment (although please try and keep the discussions separate.) please see: Aliens Cause Global Warming and The Religion of Environmentalism.

Thanks, Shalom

[UPDATE: The original post and comments are no longer available. :( Sorry!]

Categories: Science

MACHOs and WIMPs

November 24th, 2004 No comments

This is something I wrote a while back, if it is too long, thats ok, don’t read it. :)

When thinking of our universe, there are a few things that people normally think of: galaxies, planets, gas, nebulas, and maybe even black holes. All these objects seem pretty normal and complete. Astronomers were perfectly happy with trying to figure out how all the above-mentioned things worked and interacted together when a large kink came into all the theorizing. Why were the velocity curves of galaxies showing that there should be more mass than was seen in all the “normal” or baryonic matter? All the data did not make sense. To most people, it still does not. After analyzing data from velocity curves and studying the dynamics of how galaxies interact with each other, it was determined that approximately 90% of the mass of the entire universe can not be seen. What does that mean and how is that possible? This indicates that previous notions about what the universe was made of must be rethought. The only way for this to be possible is if there is some form of baryonic matter that we cannot see or some new from of exotic matter that has not been thought of before. A few of the current theories about what the missing matter is in the universe are MACHOs, WIMPs, neutrinos, and annihilating particles. Until final proof about what dark matter is virtually any of the theories could be right, wrong, or a mixture of both. As time progresses theories will change, fail, and new ones will arise. Current theories are very interesting and many astronomers feel very strongly about one theory or another. Evidence for and against should be looked at in a case-by-case matter in order to formulate new postulations that can in turn be tested and researched.

After realizing that the majority of the mass of the universe is unseen, it became the task of many astronomers to figure out what this missing mass is and where it resides. There has been much debate about what the mater really is between astronomers. Those supporting MACHOs, Massive Compact Halo Objects, and those supporting WIMPs, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, have strong ideas and both hold true to their theories and will continue to do so until they have been completely disproved. MACHOs are exactly what their name suggests, massive objects that reside in a galaxy’s halo. The halo is a spherical region centered at the middle of a galaxy’s bulge. Globular clusters (large groupings of up to hundreds of thousands of old stars within in a small volume of space) that are already seen in this region of a galaxy are letting astronomers know that matter can and does exist in that area. Velocity profiles suggest dark matter is present and lead astronomers to believe that there could be a large amount of mass in the halo region. Since the globular clusters in the halo, in addition to the stars and other visible material in the plane of the galaxy, are not enough mass to account for the velocity curves, there must be some other mass somewhere in the galaxy, including the halo. MACHOs are what astronomers have come up with to account for this matter.

What is needed is normal baryonic matter that could be very massive and reside in the halo. The first thing that comes up is a star that did not have enough mass to ignite. A brown dwarf is a star similar to the sun, but less massive, made of hydrogen but could not ever get the nuclear furnace going. If they aren’t brown dwarfs, MACHOs are most likely black holes. (Lewin 1997) A black hole is a star that has collapsed down from sizes larger than our sun to smaller than a small rock. A black hole is so dense that not even light can escape from it. Black holes have been theorized to exist in many places and there is a theory that suggests that there could be many so-called primordial black holes left over from the Big Bang. A black hole is a great example of what dark matter could be as no light can escape from it. As a result they are impossible to directly detect (but can be detected in other ways). So how do astronomers go about detecting objects that give off no or very little light? The first method is to just look into the sky. It is much harder because objects like brown dwarfs are very faint. With newer technologies such as adaptive optics and newer generation space telescopes it is easier to directly observe these objects. Data taken from the Hubble Space Telescope suggests that brown dwarfs only make up around 6% of the matter in the halo. This is a good start, but obviously not the 90% that should be there. Consequently astronomers must move on to another detection method. The primary method being used and studied currently is strong gravitational lensing. Sound like optics? It is actually a very good analogy to optics in that mass, and therefore an associated gravity, can bend light to a point, effectively lensing starlight. As seen in the image (Fig 1),
Fig 1
light from a very distant galaxy emits light in all directions, some straight at us, some away from us. Since matter causes gravity, very massive objects are able to bend light. The next image (Fig 2)Fig 2 shows the effects of this light bending. Instead of seeing one bluish galaxy in the center, a bluish (because of the color of the galaxy) light or smudge will show up in a ring pattern around the center. So what does this do for the search for dark matter? After studying the images of candidates for this lensing, density maps can be plotted. By studying how the light has been bent and by how much, these plots are created. When the mass distribution has come out of that it can be compared to what is actually seen visually. If there is a discrepancy between how much mass we physically see there and how much mass should be there to cause the lensing, dark matter has been found (in theory). From this lensing exact placement of the dark matter can be determined even if it is not known exactly what it is (i.e. a back hole, brown dwarf, etc.). In the pictures the dark matter of the central cluster outweighs all of the combined mass of the cluster’s galaxies by 250 times. Similar to strong gravitational lensing, weak lensing is another method to detect dark matter MACHOs. The presence of an unseen object can distort the light coming directly from a galaxy. The warping of a distant galaxy is a good indication that there is some gravitational force acting on the light between the galaxy and the earth. There are other methods for detecting MACHOs but the three mentioned above at current time are the most interesting and the most promising for actual detection and finding much of the missing mass. (Bell Labs 1999)

The next interesting possibility are new, exotic particles called WIMPS (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles). WIMP theory is currently the most popular among astronomers. To many it has the most promise to account for all the missing matter. Astronomers suggest that these new particles do not interact with matter like other particles do. However, if they have a slight amount of mass (on order of a few hydrogen atoms), because of suggested amounts, they could account for much of the missing mass in the universe. (Lewin 1997) The hard part, once again, of this theory is to figure out how to detect particles that very rarely interact with normal matter. Particle physicists now get involved to help astronomers determine what these particles are and how to detect them. Since WIMP interactions are very rare in normal matter the idea is to set up a very sensitive instrument that can detect the slightest interactions and also be able to get rid of data from cosmic rays that have slightly similar interactions. One such project involves cooling a crystal to near absolute zero (to reduce motion of the atoms) and registering interactions in the crystal by detecting a heat rise. (Miller 1995) So detection of WIMPS will come with updating and inventing newer and better detectors that can discriminate between the new, rarely interacting, particles and particles that we already know the physics for.

Astronomers have opened up a very popular and extremely interesting new area of study with advances in dark matter research. MACHOs and WIMPs are only two of the theories surrounding the enigma of where all the mass is. Even if it can’t be decided which theory is correct, the drive to figure it out will keep bettering theories and inspiring people to come up with new ones. Down the road it will probably be figured out that the dark matter in our universe is made up of many different things, probably incorporating aspects of many different theories. The striving for understanding about how our universe will ultimately lead to better and better theories that will hopefully bring us closer to the truth. It is now known that dark matter is out there, but now the task is to pinpoint what it is.

References

“Bell Laboratories Physical Science Research: Dark Matter” 1999. http://www.bell-labs.com/org/physicalsciences/projects/darkmatter/darkmatter1.html (29 Nov. 2000)

Lewin, J.D. “CLRC RAL Open Days 1998. Dark Matter.” April 1997. http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/ukdmc/pop/galactic-dm-exhibit.html (4 Dec. 2000)

Miller, Chris. “Cosmic Hide and Seek: the Search for the Missing Mass.” 1995. http://www.eclupse.net/~cmmiller/DM/ (4 Dec. 2000)

[UPDATE: The original post and comments are no longer available. :( Sorry!]

Categories: Science

Lunar Eclipse

November 4th, 2004 No comments

I finally remember that I took pictures of the lunary eclipse last week so I figured I would post a few of them. They were taken with an Olympus C-5060 Wide Zoom camera – 5.1 MegaPixels and 4x Optical zoom with a 1.7x telephoto lens attachment (along with some digital zoom and cropping). If you want to know any more details about the pics or see any others let me know.


Here is the Moon at totality. The red of the moon is caused by refraction of the sun’s light around the earth. Essentially looking at all the sunsets of the Earth all at once.


Here the Earth’s shadow is receding and the sun’s light can be seen again.


Most of the the sun’s light can now be seen reflected off the moon with a small portion of the Earth’s shadow remaining.


View of Stanley Park in Vancouver with North Vancouver in the background.

Hope you enjoy. If anyone needs a lesson about what is going on during an eclipse, let me know!

Shalom

[UPDATE: The original post and comments are no longer available. :( Sorry!]

Categories: Science

String Theory Primer

August 3rd, 2004 No comments

I am not completely sure how to write this blog as I am not really an authority on the subject. I have immensely enjoyed Brian Greene’s book “The Elegant Universe” and I highly recommend it to anyone (not just those savvy in the area of advanced physics). I do feel that I can talk about it some as I do have a degree in physics and astronomy and have dealt with it some both in and out of classes. I suppose I will try and give a “primer” on what String Theory is and tries to accomplish. If this entry ends up being too long, I am sorry, I really enjoy physics and it is fairly complicated and even more complicated to explain it on a somewhat non-technical level. I will apologized now for switching tenses throughout my writing, I tend to do that a lot and I don’t really plan on editing this very much for perfect grammar – sorry!

A large majority of physicists believe that there should be an ‘Ultimate Theory” or “Theory of Everything (ToE).”. This means that there would be a somewhat “simple” set of equations that would account for all the forces that we see in the universe. Progress in this area has been going on for many years with periods of great advancement and periods of sweeping it under the carpet. There are 5 forces that essentially hold the entire universe together: magnetic, electric, gravitational, weak and strong nuclear. As many of you are aware, the magnetic and electric forces have been successfully combined into the electromagnetic force. The four remaining forces are still waiting to be united into this ToE. The problem that arises is essentially scale. Gravity is EXTREMELY weak. For example, the gravitational attraction of two like charged particles is 10^42 times weaker than the electromagnetic repulsion. That is a HUGE difference in strength. Scale also comes into play in the physics used to describe different events. It had appeared that special relativity was incompatible with Newtonian gravity. Einstein was able to resolve the inconsistencies by showing that, as opposed to what Newton thought, gravity actually manifests itself at the speed of light and not instantaneously as previously believed. This was a great advancement because it brought Newtonian physics up to speed with the more modern experimental physics. It didn’t completely replace Newtonian physics, just modified it so it would not only describe classical physics but also relativistic physics. The next problem that arose was different in that it couldn’t be simply resolved with modification of an existing theory (like Einstein did with Newton’s gravity). General relativity is understood very well and predictions have held up in experiments but it seems to break down at the quantum level (quantum mechanics has also be very consistent with its predictions matching experiments). One thing string theory hopes to do is to resolve the incompatibilities between general relativity and quantum mechanics.

String theory essentially was born in order to describe how everything worked together, at both large and small scales and more importantly, incorporate gravity. Gravity has always been somewhat of a “black sheep” in the world of forces. It seemed like it was never really able to mesh well with any theory and any existing theory that it was added to seemed to break down.

Here is the basic idea of what a string is: every elementary particle is actually made up of a vibrating string, similar to that of a guitar or piano string. Each particle is a different note or different vibration. This helps support the merging of quantum mechanics and general relativity because string theory does not require events to occur at a single point as in particle physics.

Ok, there is MUCH more to this, I haven’t even really scratched the surface. This is already probably too long and I am kinda all over the place so I should stop now. I will hopefully get back to the subject and delve a little deeper into the elegance of string theory. I would recommend checking out PBS’ Elegant Universe page . It has a lot of Brian Greene’s stuff there from his NOVA series. Sorry if I was all over the place!

Shalom

[UPDATE: Original post and comments are no longer available. :( sorry!]

Categories: Science