featured – Australian Science

What do Mars and Australia have in common?

Markus — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 00:29:45 +0000

If you’re expecting a punchline to that title, then guess again. It’s no joke. Surprisingly, Australia shares some remarkably similar geology to our neighbouring planet. Specifically the Red Centre, the arid heart of Australia, is the most Mars-like place on Earth!

It’s possible that people may have mused on the similarities already. After all, with its strikingly rich colours, the Red Centre (more often known as the Outback) certainly looks like few other places on Earth. Without any vegetation, the colour of the soil and rocks in the region could easily resemble Mars in places. But evidently, this resemblance is more than just skin deep. The clue that lead to this fascinating realisation? Another of Australia’s most beautiful and iconic of things – opals.

A view from the top of Uluru, showing it’s distinctive red colour. Credit: Binarysequence/Wikimedia Commons

Patrice Rey at the University of Sydney’s School of Geosciences was investigating how opals formed. It may be surprising to learn that opals are found in few other places on Earth, with roughly 90% of all opals worldwide having originated in Australian mines. Beautiful and sought after, there’s been a lot of mystery behind opals for a long time – specifically about how they form, why they’re found at such shallow depths under the Australian soil, and why they’re found nearly nowhere else on Earth.

The story of these beautiful sparkly gemstones, it turns out, began around 100 million years ago. At the time, most of central Australia was covered by the Eromanga Sea. In times past, this huge epicontinental (inland) sea covered what is now known as the Eromanga Basin – spanning an area of one million square kilometres and reaching into much of what is now Queensland, the Northern territories, South Australia and New South Wales.

During the Cretaceous period, when dinosaurs still ruled our planet, this sea would have been teeming with prehistoric life. But much like the dinosaurs, the Eromanga Sea was doomed. Around 100 million years ago, the climate of Earth began to change and the sea began to dry out. The sea dried out rapidly on geological timescales, to cover a much smaller area. The result was that the chemistry of the surrounding rocks began to change.

As the Eromanga Sea dried out, pyrite minerals in the surrounding rocks began to release sulfuric acid, causing acid weathering on a huge scale – quite possibly the largest Earth has ever seen. The opaline silica which was created in the Australian rocks during this process would later go on to form into opals. But the big clue is the acid weathering – we only know of one other place in the Solar System where this has happened in the past. Planet Mars.

While the predicament of prehistoric Australia is, as far as we know, unique on Earth, Mars actually shares a lot in common with this event. Except on Mars, we believe that the drying out of seas happened on a global scale. Hints of this were detected in 2008, when NASA’s twin Mars rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, detected several telltale clues in the Martian soil.

The surface of Mars was found to hold opaline silica, iron oxides, and certain types of clay. All of these clues led areologists* to conclude that the surface of Mars had been subject to huge amounts of acid weathering. The exact same type of acid weathering which Rey and his fellow researchers have now discovered to have happened in Australia!

An opal doublet from Andamooka, South Australia. Credit: CRPeters/Wikimedia Commons

If you’re thinking that this means that there may be Martian opals waiting to be discovered somewhere on the planet next door, it’s hard to say. But it’s certainly a possibility! There is, however, one final step in the formation of opals. The opaline silica which was found on Mars is not yet true opal. In Australia, the surrounding rock has an impressive capability to neutralise acid. This means that after the ground in Australia became riddled with opaline silica, the surrounding conditions quickly went from acid to alkaline. When this happens before the silica trapped in rock cavities dehydrates and solidifies – voila! Opals! Of course, there’s a good chance that Mars may be home to some kinds of rock which can also neutralise acid the same way.

So only time will tell. Perhaps someday in the future, Martian colonists may be using Mars opals to create the first ever jewellery made elsewhere in the Solar System!

*An areologist studies the geology of Mars, seeing as technically the “geo” in geology refers to planet Earth.

Could there be opals hiding under the Martian soil? Credit: NASA/JPL

Cite this article:
Hammonds M (2013-06-11 00:29:45). What do Mars and Australia have in common?. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/geology/what-do-mars-and-australia-have-in-common/

test

The post What do Mars and Australia have in common? appeared first on Australian Science.

The Highlights of 2012

Danica Radovanovic — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 23:56:50 +0000

As 2012 draws to a close and the new year begins, now is a good time to wrap things up and recapitulate the year just passed. It’s been an exciting year with plenty of interesting happenings in science, technology, and education. Despite the fact that we aren’t especially keen on top 10 lists (because all of our authors are fantastic and inspirational), here are a few of the highlights from the past year. We hope you enjoy them!

Mr Boson, I presume…? / A Brand New Boson

The news that CERN had detected a signature matching the much sought after Higgs boson was the biggest news this year in physics. While physicists at the LHC still aren’t 100% certain what they’ve found, one thing is for certain – they’ve definitely discovered something never before seen, and it definitely seems to match what’s expected for the Higgs boson. Now it’s up to the theorists to work out if this will confirm existing theories, or if it will require brand new physics to be devised to explain it!

“It’s a bit like spotting a familiar face from afar,

test
The post The Highlights of 2012 appeared first on Australian Science.

Is India a nation of geeks?

Kevin Orrman-Rossiter — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 00:30:15 +0000

Angela Saini, in her book Geek Nation: how Indian science is taking over the world, wants to convince us that Indian science is taking over the world. Now any well read student of the physical and mathematical sciences will be able to provide you with notable scientific contributions. Even the Indian constitution abjures: “It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to develop the scientific temper”. Does “Indian science” exist, and if so what makes it special?

First, pause and contemplate the following statistics. India is the world’s largest democracy: with a population over 1.23 billion (more than 1 in 6 of the world’s 7.14 billion total population are Indian). India has 415 living languages, with 22 having more that 1 million native speakers – 41% of the population speak Standard Hindi – India’s official language. Some states have their own language as the sole language; Maharashtra (capital Mumbai) has 72 million native Marathi speakers. There are 28 Indian states, the smallest Arunachal Pradesh has 1.3 million people, while the largest, the Hindi speaking Uttar Pradesh, has 199.6 million people, and includes the growing cities of of Lucknow and Kanpur. India is also birthplace to four of the world’s major religions, of which Hinduism has 80.5% of the Indian population as followers. India has a large Muslim following at 13.4% of its population, the third largest Muslim population in the world. Despite so many languages the 2010 adult literacy is 63%, with 8% internet users and a staggering 61 mobile phones per 100 of population. With an improved 88% having satisfactory water facilities only 31% of the population has satisfactory sanitation facilities.

These statistics underlie what a competent revelation Saini’s book is. The diversity of topics is to be applauded. Saini has a breezy, almost whimsical style in introducing topics and providing Indian settings for an perspective of each topic.

In particular I liked her mature handling of two hot-button topics: nuclear power and genetically modified foods. To many in the developed world energy and food security are lifestyle discussions – in India they are of life-and-death importance for many millions of the population, both now and the future.

Saini manages a well-reasoned discussion of the energy option for India – looking in detail at one important option. A visit to the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre provides a first hand glimpse of India’s nuclear aspirations, and reasoning behind it. The ensuing discussion on the indigenous development of thorium based nuclear technologies was both fascinating and compelling. From an economic point of view this development would seem to be a necessity if India is to manage its growth and not burn coal and become a major polluter such as the USA or China. They see this as a crucial intermediate step to a solar energy future. My caution is that India is yet to sign either nuclear ratification or nuclear weapons non-proliferation treaties, a point the author fails to mention.

Similarly a trip around the markets provides a great introduction into genetically modifies crops. India is by both legislation and custom a country of small rural-family run farms. These rural communities are poor and very much at the mercy of the elements. Saini presents a reasoned and sensitive discussion on the development of genetically modified crops (such as a long-life banana) that are relevant to ordinary Indians. There is a greater acceptance of these crops amongst the rural farmers than you first might imagine – provided they are cheap and preferably developed in India.

In addition Saini provides a fascinating look at the development of tuberculosis drugs, the use of electronic documents to speed up the notoriously slow bureaucratic and legal systems of India, as well as electronics and information systems companies. We are taken to the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre to get a first-hand update on the Indian space program and aspirations. Saini comments, “There’s something unimaginably ambitious about the speed and scale of India’s space programme, as if it’s no longer content fulfilling its early goals of sending up satellites so ordinary people could have colour television and cheaper mobile phone connections. Now it seems India has something else to prove.” With a successful first moon-shot India has established itself as a space power – only lacking a manned mission.

In amongst all of this excellent investigation and examination there was one discordant section. “The mindreading machine” discusses a the use of an Indian lie-detector test based on brain wave measurements. The test has been used as legal evidence in cases, including one of murder, in Indian courts. Saini voices disquiet at this ‘science’ yet at no stage does she state the obvious – that this is not science. There are no theories supporting its claims, no peer review nor double-blind tests to give any credence to the claims. I expect that a science writer would point this out, explicitly; Saini doesn’t.

Including this item in the book highlights a very fascinating aspect of what Saini sees as quintessential Indian science. Indian science nurtures the nutty, allowing questions to be asked and curiosity to be followed before they are shouted down by a conservative mainstream view of what is appropriate science. Interesting scientific and technological achievements aside this for me, is the book’s the defining point – India is having an impact far beyond the scientific statistics and measures. Saini’s book is a welcome and worthwhile look at the the idiosyncrasies and successes of the scientific and technological side of India. I’m not convinced it will take over the world, it will certainly influence and impact the direction of science and technology – that will be interesting to participate in.

test
The post Is India a nation of geeks? appeared first on Australian Science.

Does my science look big in this? The astrobiology edition

Kevin Orrman-Rossiter — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 00:07:51 +0000

During the 20th century a powerful new idea gradually entered our consciousness and culture: cosmic evolution. We are all par of a huge narrative: a cosmos billions of years old and billions of light years in extent. It is this idea that caught my attention this month via the proceedings of the Sao Paulo Advanced School of Astrobiology SPASA 2011, published in the October International Journal of Astrobiology.

Although the question of extraterrestrial life is very old, the concept of full-blown cosmic evolution – the connected evolution of planets, stars galaxies and life on Earth and beyond – is much younger. In a rather breathtaking paper, Steven Dick formerly of the Aerospace History at the National Air & Space Museum places his arguments for cosmic evolution. Dick traces the idea from its roots in the 19th century theories of Pierre-Simon Laplace and Robert Chambers through its philosophical, astronomical, and biological upbringing to the present day. He examines evolution, the worldview that it had become in the 1950s and 1960s and how it had permeated culture in numerous ways and different cultures in diverse ways. Dick cautions us though noting “we need to remember that ‘culture’ is not monolithic and that ‘impact’ is a notoriously vague term.”

Cosmic evolution. Image credit: Harvard University.

In addition to the impact of our new understanding on culture, cosmic evolution also provides a window on long-term human destiny, asserts Dick. He presents this idea via three scenarios, the: the physical , biological, and postbiological universe. Life is unique to earth in the physical universe scenario, and the options flow from this situation – think of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series. We will certainly interact with extraterrestrials in the biological universe – here cosmic evolution commonly ends in life, mind and intelligence. Cultural evolution in a biological universe may replace biologicals with artificial intelligence creating what Dick calls a postbiological universe. We do not know yet, which of these is our reality, that is one of the challenges of astrobiology, maintains Dick.

In a second ‘big-picture’ paper Marcelo Gleiser presents his four ages of astrobiology. For Gleiser the influx of astrophysical data, particularly on the prevalence of exoplanets “indicates that there are plenty of potentially life-bearing platforms within our galaxy.” He then presents the ‘history’ of life in the universe in terms of the steps needed for matter to have sequentially self-organised into more and more complex structures. His sequence is best viewed as a prelude to the physical or biological universe scenarios of Dick. Gleiser’s fourth age, the Cognitive Age (the age of thinking biomolecules), really addresses whether we are unique or not i.e. which of Dick’s two scenarios, the physical or biological are reality. Gleiser’s first three ages: physical, the creation of stars and planets from atomic nuclei; chemical, in which elements organise into biomolecules; and thirdly biological, in which living creatures of growing complexity form from biomolecules. the papers by Dick and Gleiser are both papers heady and exhilarating conceptual reads.

Jorge Horvath and Douglas Galante accept the premiss that life exists, and then argue we need to take high-energy astrophysical events seriously. Scientists and the public account for meteor impacts in both academic studies, science-fiction writing and film – not so for events such as supernovae, gamma-ray bursts and flares. They show that these events are more frequent than asteroid strikes and that the effects are non-negligible (academic speak for potentially fatal to planet based species). They conclude that just because we have not yet been wiped out by such events can be seen as either a measure of earthlife’s resilience or a threat we are statistically yet to encounter.

My attention was captured by two other papers from the proceedings. Martin Brasier and David Wacey address the problem of studying life in deep space – comparing it to study of life remote in time. This view is pertinent, as it is non-trivial for scientists to determine what is a viable signal of extinct life. The authors develop a set of protocols and then apply these to earth samples, of varying ages. They do this to show how we could interpret similar samples, where much of the desirable information (the context) has been filtered out during the process of transmission (either physical or data) across vast distances of space, or time or both (as is likely on Mars). Even 10 years ago these questions were moot, but we have learned much over the recent past about metabolic pathways and living microbial systems. Brasier and Wacey conclude that there is still work required on pseudo-fossils, structures that arise naturally within complex physico-chemical systems, so that we can confidently agree on signs of life that are remote in space and time.

The Dry Valleys in Antarctica. Photo credit: NASA

My final pick is an experimental paper that looks at the ExoMars mission. The European Space Agency and (initially NASA ) ExoMars mission is scheduled for launch in 2018 – specifically to detect life signatures on the surface and subsurface of Mars. This probe will carry, for the first time, a Raman spectrometer, a technique with proven ability to determine the spectral signals of key biochemicals. The authors support these assertions by assessing samples acquired from Arctic and Antarctic cold deserts and a meteorite crater. These terrestrial environments are similar to those found on Mars. The experimental results presented in this paper demonstrate that it will be possible using this technique to assess and detect spectral signals of extra-terrestrial (Mars in this case) extremophilic life signatures.

Cite this article:
Orrman-Rossiter K (2012-11-09 00:07:51). Does my science look big in this? The astrobiology edition. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/biology/does-my-science-look-big-in-this-the-astrobiology-edition/
test
The post Does my science look big in this? The astrobiology edition appeared first on Australian Science.

Sandy’s aftermath

Charles Ebikeme — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:16:32 +0000

Before hurricane Sandy touched down on the east coast of America, it passed through the Caribbean, causing around 80 fatalities — 60 of them occurred in Haiti, 11 in Cuba, two in the Bahamas, two in the Dominican Republic and one in Jamaica.

Hurricane Sandy started life out over central America, nonchalantly, as a collection of winds that would eventually gather momentum, speed and energy. It began its non-discriminating path through the Caribbean, eventually to hit Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic as well. As it hit Jamaica it was a category 1, destroying around 1500 hectares of farmland. In Cuba the next day it was a category 2, destroying banana, coffee, bean and sugar crops. Sandy destroyed roughly 30% of the nation’s coffee farms. Add to that the 200,000 damaged homes. The Bahamas archipelago was next, before it would set it sights on America’s eastern seaboard.

While most of the focus of western media centred on the damage Sandy caused in America, especially this close to a Presidential election; there were few news outlets that reported what had passed in the Caribbean — outside the death tolls and damaged infrastructure. Indeed, as it is becoming more and more apparent, it is always the blogosphere that provides an adequate source of information. Hurricane Sandy’s progression was followed by bloggers on the ground, giving another side of the story we don’t often get to see.

But it is in Haiti, a country that has yet to recover from tropical storm Isaac that hit in August of this year, as well as the earthquake of 2010, that felt the worst of Sandy’s wrath. 1.8 million people in Haiti are affected by the storm, according to the United Nations relief agency.

With everyone concerned with the numbers, damage, and brute destruction, there is the underlying problem that any disaster hit area has to deal with. Namely, the aftermath. It is the aftermath of the Caribbean region we must now think about. There will be the inevitable worry about food prices from this point on. Huge crop losses in southern Haiti raise famine worries.

Prime Minister Laurent Lamothe, after assessing the damage, said “Most of the agricultural crops that were left from Hurricane Isaac were destroyed during Sandy, so food security will be an issue.”

Rainfall totals for the seven-day period Oct 18-25, 2012. Image courtesy of SSAI/NASA, Hal Pierce

Three days of constant rain caused rivers to overflow and the floodwaters to rise. Most of southern Haiti is underwater. In the whole Caribbean region rainfall amounts as high as 250 millimeters were measured over eastern Cuba and some extreme southern areas of Hispaniola. Haiti experienced 20 inches. Port-au-Prince receives an average annual rainfall of 54 inches.

As the rains stopped the damage is only made worse to the tune of infectious diseases such as cholera. Haiti has been fighting a cholera epidemic since 2010. A cholera outbreak that has killed over 7400 people and left up to 600 000 sick across the country.

According to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and the WHO, there is an increase in cholera cases in the south and south-east, where 49 cases and 9 deaths have been recorded.

The list of infectious disease outbreaks following natural disasters is long. Although, usually there are some that are more common than others. Diarrheal diseases, acute respiratory infections, malaria, leptospirosis, measles, dengue fever, viral hepatitis, typhoid fever, meningitis, as well as tetanus and cutaneous mucormycosis have all been documented as the incidence and magnitude of natural disasters increase.

Natural disasters and infectious diseases outbreaks represent a significant challenge. But they do not necessarily go hand in hand. Disasters do not transmit infectious diseases. But the risk of infectious disease is multiplied by the change in situation — populations displaced, overcrowding, limited access to food and water, and public health breakdown.

Haiti’s Prime Minister, Laurent Lamothe said “I am launching an appeal to international solidarity to come and help the population, to help support the completion of our efforts towards saving lives and property,”

Flood disasters are the most common natural disasters throughout the world, and diarrheal diseases are the leading cause of death from displaced populations living in camps. France has promised to rebuild seven destroyed bridges and Mexico has offered food. How Haiti deals with the aftermath of Sandy will be one to follow closely.

Image — source, source

test
The post Sandy’s aftermath appeared first on Australian Science.

The astronauts who put the USA on the moon

Kevin Orrman-Rossiter — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 00:19:52 +0000

The Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1 into an elliptical low Earth orbit on October 4, 1957. This surprise precipitated the space age and triggered the space race. The success ushered in new technological, political, military, and scientific developments.

On April 12, 1961, Yuri Gagarin became the first person in history to leave the Earth’s atmosphere and venture into space. His flight aboard a Soviet Vostok rocket lasted 108 minutes, at the end of it he had ignited the manned space race.

Who were men who responded to these Soviet firsts, launching America into space and then onto the moon?

NASA selected the first US astronauts, the Original Seven (also referred to as the Mercury Seven and Astronaut Group 1), on April 9, 1959. This was the only astronaut group with members who flew on all classes of NASA manned orbital spacecraft of the 20th century — Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and the Space Shuttle.

The Mercury Seven stand in front of a F-106 Delta Dart. Photo credit NASA.

The original seven were Alan B Shepard Jr, Virgil I “Gus” Grissom, John Herschel Glenn Jr, M Scott Carpenter, Walter M “Wally” Schirra, Leroy Gordon Cooper Jr, and Donald K “Deke” Slayton.

The first American launched into space was Alan Shepard, followed by Gus Grissom. Their ballistic flights were followed by orbital flights by John Glenn then Scott Carpenter, each managing three orbits. Wally Schirra made six orbits and Gordon Cooper completed the Mercury project with 22 orbits. Cooper was the first American travelling in space for over a day and the last American to be launched solo into Earth orbit. Deke Slayton, was grounded in 1962 due to a heart arrhythmia, but reinstated in 1972 and flew on the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975.

The New Nine. Back row: See, McDivitt, Lovell, White, & Stafford. Front row: Conrad, Borman, Armstrong, & Young. Photo credit NASA.

With the announcement of the Gemini program and planning of the Apollo program a second group of astronauts were selected by NASA and announced on September 17, 1962. The New Nine augmented the original Mercury 7. While the original seven had been selected to accomplish the simpler task of orbital flight, the new challenges of rendezvous and lunar landing led to the selection of candidates with advanced engineering degrees (for four of the New Nine) as well as test pilot experience.

This illustrious group became the first group with civilian test pilots in the group; Neil A Armstrong, first man on the moon and Elliott M See Jr, killed in a plane crash four months before he was due to pilot Gemini 9. Two of this group, Charles Conrad Jr and James A Lovell Jr, had been candidates for the original seven, but were not selected then for medical reasons. In addition, the group was Frank F Borman Jr, James A McDivitt, Thomas P Stafford, Edward H White II, and John W Young.

NASA announced the third group of astronauts, the “Apollo fourteen” in October 1963. Four (Charles A Bassett II, Roger B Chaffee, Theodore C Freeman, and Clifton C Williams Jr) died in training accidents before they could fly in space. Chaffee was killed along with Grissom and White in the Apollo 1 fire. All of the surviving ten (Edwin E “Buzz” Aldrin Jr, William A Anders, Alan A Bean, Eugene A Cernan, Michael Collins, R Walter Cunningham, Donn F Eisele, Richard F Gordon Jr, Russell “Rusty” L Schwiekart, and David R Scott) flew in the Apollo program; five (Aldrin, Cernan, Collins, Gordon, and Scott) also flew Gemini missions. Aldrin, Bean, Cernan and Scott walked on the Moon.

The Fourteen (seated, left to right) Aldrin, Anders, Bassett, Bean, Cernan, and Chaffee. Standing (left to right) are Collins, Cunninham, Eisele, Freeman, Gordon, Schweickart, Scott and Williams. Photo credit NASA.

Group 3 was the first group to include candidates with no test pilot background. They are the only ones of the first 19 NASA astronaut groups to have no members at all fly on the Space Shuttle.

The fourth group of astronauts, the Scientists, selected by NASA in June 1965, came as a rude shock to the existing astronauts. While the astronauts of the previous three groups were required to have college and some advanced degrees, they were chosen for their test pilot expertise. The six members of this group, on the other hand, were chosen for their research and academic backgrounds. Doctorate degrees were required and minimum flight time requirements were waived for this group.

Scientist-Astronauts: Front row, L-R: Michel, Schmitt, and Kerwin. Back row, L-R: Garriot, and Gibson. Photo credit NASA.

This group included the science poster boy, Harrison H Schmitt, a geologist, the only scientist to walk on the Moon. Owen K Garriott, Edward G Gibson and Joseph P Kerwin all flew to Skylab. Garriott also flew on the Space Shuttle. While Duane E Graveline and F Curtis Michel left NASA without flying in space.

John Young labelled the next astronaut group, selected by NASA in April 1966, the “Original Nineteen” in parody of the original seven Mercury astronauts. Of the six Lunar Module Pilots that walked on the Moon, three came from this group (Charles M Duke Jr, James B Irwin, and Edward D Mitchell). This group is also distinctive in being the only time when NASA hired a person into the astronaut corps who had already earned astronaut wings, X-15 pilot Joseph “Joe” H Engle.

The Original Nineteen. Photo credit NASA.

The group as a whole is roughly split between the half who flew Apollo (Duke, Ronald E Evans Jr, Fred W Haise Jr, Irwin, T Kenneth Mattingly II, Mitchell, Stuart A Roosa, John Swigert Jr, and Alfred M Worden) and the other half who flew Skylab and Shuttle (Vance D Brand, Gerald P Carr, Engle, Don L Lind, Jack R Lousma, Bruce McCandless II, William R Pogue, and Paul J Weitz) providing the core of Shuttle Commanders early in that program. John S Bull resigned from the program for medical reasons, whilst Edward G Givens Jr died in a car crash after being support crew for Apollo 7.

The final group of this era, the second group of scientist-astronauts, were appointed by NASA on August 11, 1967. They were labelled the “excess Eleven” with only five, including the first Australian born astronaut Philip Chapman, given formal assignments in the Apollo Program, and these were all non-flying. These were: Joseph P Allen, Chapman, Anthony W England, Karl G Henize, and Robert A R Parker. Chapman resigned from NASA in July 1972 due to lack of space-flight opportunities. Three others, Donald L Holmquest, Anthony A Llewellyn, and Brian T O’Leary resigned earlier from the group for various reasons.

The Excess Eleven civilian scientists. Seated at the table, L to R: Chapman, Parker, Thornton, and Llewellyn. Standing, L to R: Allen, Henize, England, Holmquest, Musgrave, Lenoir, and O'Leary. Photo credit NASA.

Assignments for the group were delayed by the requirement to spend a full year to become qualified as jet pilots (as were the Group 4 scientists before them). This requirement for scientists to be trained as jet pilots was eventually lifted with the creation of the Mission Specialist position in the Shuttle Program. The seven members (Allan, England, Henize, William “Bill” Lenoir, Story Musgrave, Parker, and William E Thornton) of Group 6 who stayed with the program after Apollo went on to form the core of Shuttle Mission Specialists, accomplishing a total of 15 flights.

This chart organizes each NASA astronaut group by order of their assignment to fly. Codes as explained in the legend illustrate each person's skills and accomplishments. Image credit: Tdadamemd

In all 66 men became NASA astronauts during this first era of manned space exploration. No women were included – although there was an unofficial group called the First Lady Astronaut Trainees– not being jet test pilots there were ineligible to become astronauts.

Was this a “boys’ own adventure”? Was this a period of great social upheaval in the USA? Did this era cement in the US politicians and public the image of supremacy and isolationism in space endeavors? Yes, is the answer to all three questions.

There are a myriad of stories from these groups’ exploits. These stories have a contemporary relevance as we reach an era of: new commercial space opportunities (leisure, exploration and mining), new entrants (China and India), and find the US and Europe hampered by self-imposed budget challenges and hurdles.

Cite this article:
Orrman-Rossiter K (2012-10-31 00:19:52). The astronauts who put the USA on the moon. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/history/the-astronauts-who-put-the-usa-on-the-moon/
test
The post The astronauts who put the USA on the moon appeared first on Australian Science.

Breaking plates

Markus — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:09:21 +0000

What do Australia and India have in common? The answer is that they both share one of Earth’s tectonic plates – the drifting eggshell-like pieces of Earth’s crust, on which all of our planet’s continents sit. However, the Indo-Australian Plate is a slightly unusual one, and the two countries may not share it for much longer. Recent Earthquakes beneath the Indian Ocean suggest that this plate may be in the process of breaking in two.

We generally think of the surface of our planet as being fixed and unchanging. The reality though, is that this isn’t true. Earth’s continents and the tectonic plates which make them up are not fixed at all, drifting slowly across the planet’s surface. For instance, as you’re reading this, most of Africa is moving slowly to the North West and quietly tearing the beginnings of a new ocean into Earth’s surface. Meanwhile, Hawaii is moving at a speed of about 7cm per year which is about as fast as your fingernails are growing.

Of course, these movements are tiny, compared to the size of the Earth and its continents, but they still cause pressure to build up in Earth’s surface. Sometimes, seemingly without warning, that pressure continues to build up and– SNAP! Something in Earth’s crust cracks or ruptures. This jostles the plates and can cause earthquakes which rattle entire countries. Any places situated at the edges of tectonic plates are particularly prone to earthquake activity, with California and Japan being high profile examples. With enough quakes, however, dramatic changes can happen in Earth’s crust. On rare occasions, larger tectonic plates can sometimes break apart into smaller ones – and that’s exactly what’s happening somewhere beneath the Indian Ocean right now.

Breaking point – where the Indo-Australian plate is starting to rupture and split

April 11 this year saw two massive earthquakes strike west of Indonesia in quick succession, measuring 8.7 and 8.2 on the Richter scale. The result was a dramatic quadruple fault rupture in Earth’s crust (a rare event which is more or less exactly what it sounds like!) which caused shockwaves to reverberate around the whole planet. Around a week later quakes occurred across the world as the whole planet shivered in response.

Geologists, alarmed by what could have caused such a major event, took to analysing the quake. What they found was remarkable. Within roughly 160 seconds, four fault lines (existing fractures in the rock) tore apart under pressure. Remarkably though, this wasn’t at a plate boundary where this kind of activity is expected. It was right in the middle of the Indo-Australian plate. To the geologists looking at this data, this was like a smoking gun. A telltale sign that, as many had suspected, this particular tectonic plate is starting to fracture and split into two.

The Indo-Australian tectonic plate is already a bit of an oddity, being a rather thin and unusual shape compared with the others. The reason being that it was formed some 43 million years ago when two smaller plates (carrying the landmasses which would eventually become India and Australia) fused together. Since then though, it’s collided with the much more massive Eurasian plate. That collision has already caused enough pressure in Earth’s crust to create the Himalayas, one of the world’s most impressively tall mountain ranges. However, the Indo-Australian plate is still trying to move northwards. The western part of the plate is still pushing against the Himalayas, moving at about 3.7 centimetres per year, but the eastern part, including the entire continent of Australia, is moving at a much faster speed of around 5.6 centimetres per year. This is causing the whole tectonic plate to quite literally buckle, which is the root cause behind all of the quakes in the region over the past decade.

So what does this mean for anyone who happens to be living on that plate? Well, there are not going to be any sudden apocalyptic changes. After all, according to theories, this is not actually a new event – the Indo-Australian plate began to deform around 10 million years ago! Over millions of years, a new tectonic plate boundary will start to form under what is currently the Indian Ocean. This will cause thousands of similarly large earthquakes, but over such a length of time that they won’t be much more regular than they already are for those living around South-East Asia. All the same, planetary scientists are likely to continue watching this region with interest over the coming years.

Satellite view of the Himalayan mountain range – perhaps the most dramatic example of the force with which the Indo-Australian plate is pushing into the Eurasian plate!

Image credits:
Top – NASA Goddard
Middle – Keith Koper/Uni. Utah Seismograph Stations
Bottom – NASA World Wind

Cite this article:
Hammonds M (2012-10-24 00:09:21). Breaking plates. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/news/breaking-plates/
test
The post Breaking plates appeared first on Australian Science.

Pioneer anomaly explained?

Kevin Orrman-Rossiter — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 00:34:26 +0000

Pioneer 10 and 11 unveiled the solar system during the golden-age of robotic exploration. Their missions were a success; Pioneer 10 threading the asteroid belt to provide our first close view of Jupiter and its moons, Pioneer 11 catapulting past Jupiter and foraying through the plane of Saturn’s rings.

Saturn and its moon Titan imaged by Pioneer 11 in 1979. Photo credit NASA/JPL.

The Pioneers, true to their name, kept travelling – out of the solar system – into space legend. We lost communication with Pioneer 11 in 1995, and with Pioneer 10 in 2003 when it had reached a distance 80 times further than the Earth from the Sun. Some years prior to this, when the probes had traveled only one quarter of this distance, scientists realized both were thousands of kilometres closer to the Sun than expected.

Pioneer 10, articts conception. Image credit NASA/JPL.

Space exploration depends on precise measurements of every factor involved in the mission – particularly distance. Beams of radio waves were sent and bounced off the Pioneer spacecraft to measure the probes’ movement. The distance to the spacecraft and its speed were calculated from the photons’ round trip time and their Doppler shift (the frequency change you hear as an ambulance siren approaches and then recedes from you).

Gas leakage, measurement error or other mundane reasons might explain the Pioneer anomaly. Heat, unevenly radiating off the probes, slowing their voyage, is proposed by Jet Propulsion Lab scientists, in a new Physical Review Letters article, to account for the anomaly. After constructing a finite-element thermal model of the two spacecraft, the authors modeled the effects of thermal recoil forces on Pioneer 10 at various distances from the Sun.

Finite element analysis of thermal radiation from Pioneer 10. Image credit JPL.

A second paper in a sister journal, Physical Review D, proposes a totally different cause and conclusion. Flat (neither expanding nor contracting) background spacetime with a solar system gravitationally isolated from the rest of the Universe is the cornerstone of current theory. The new study extends this theoretical concept, formalizing the description of particles and photons moving in the gravitational field of a localized astronomical system now embedded in an expanding universe.

The proposed changes to the astrophysics theory are mathematically complex, the paper is densely populated with “post-Newtonian cosmological field equations” – the conclusions though are emphatically clear. Terms, proportional to the local expansion of the universe, are missing from the equations of light propagation currently used by space navigation centres for fitting distance and speed observations of satellites and celestial bodies. With this correction the Pioneer anomaly disappears; the photons were moving faster than expected from the theory, the spacecraft were actually travelling the correct speed.

NASA New Horizons space probe. Image credit NASA/JPL.

So which of these two competing papers explains the Pioneer anomaly? Which will solve this nagging problem and be of benefit to future interstellar travel? We may need to wait beyond 2015 to find an answer. With no new Pioneer data, proof will rely on measurement from NASA’s New Horizons mission, launched in 2006 and set to reach Pluto in 2015.

Cite this article:
Orrman-Rossiter K (2012-10-22 00:34:26). Pioneer anomaly explained?. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/space/pioneer-anomaly-explained/
test
The post Pioneer anomaly explained? appeared first on Australian Science.

For sale: One world class infrared telescope

Markus — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 07:49:04 +0000

Image © Tom Kerr/A Pacific View

The world’s largest and most productive dedicated infrared observatory just went on the market in an unprecedented attempt to try and prevent it from being shut down and dismantled. In a bold move, the directors of the United Kingdom InfraRed Telescope (UKIRT), based on Mauna Kea in Hawaii, have just released a prospectus detailing the telescope’s impressive achievements and capabilities in the hopes that they can find sponsorship and save the observatory from certain doom. That may sound melodramatic, but doom genuinely is the most fitting description.

The Anglo-Australian Telescope, also abandoned by the UK, but still safe in the care of the Australian government. (Image Credit: Ahilan Parameswaran/Wikimedia Commons)

UKIRT’s death knell has, in fact, already been tolled. At the start of Summer, the UK’s Science and Technology Facilities Council announced that it would be terminating funding and that all telescope operations were to cease by September 2013. The UKIRT board released an official statement explaining their grim disappointment over the decision, and morale has been low for everyone involved with the telescope ever since.

Unfortunately, since their formation in 2007, the STFC have seemingly been determined to rid the UK of its telescope access. Another casualty was the Anglo-Australian Telescope (AAT). Constructed at Siding Spring Observatory in New South Wales, the AAT was originally built and operated in partnership between Australia and the UK, but since it’s 36th birthday in 2010 it has been owned and funded solely by Australia. The AAT is still the largest optical telescope in Australia and it continues to the crown jewel of the Australian Astronomical Observatory. Sadly, the future for UKIRT looks rather more bleak.

Should they fail to find funding to continue it’s operation, then in September 2013 UKIRT will have to be dismantled and erased from Mauna Kea. Under the agreement originally made with the Hawaiian government, any telescope no longer in operation must be removed, and the mountain must be returned to its natural state. This once proud telescope will simply be no more – a heartbreaking prospect in the eyes of a great many astronomers worldwide.

The most tragic part is that UKIRT is actually at its most productive right now. After being the world’s largest dedicated infrared observatory for over three decades, UKIRT is currently boasting a record level of productivity. Being as it’s exceptionally cheap to run and maintain (compared to other world-leading telescopes, it costs little more than pocket change), it’s easily one of the most productive telescopes in the world. And the directors are quite literally offering it to anyone in the world who may have the money to finance it. A dramatic move – no world class telescope has ever been simply offered up for sale on the global market before. Now, all the astronomical community can do is to hope that someone is willing to buy it.

Whether you happen to be a billionaire playboy philanthropist interested in owning a telescope, or just curious to know more about UKIRT, their prospectus is online for all to see.

Image © Tom Kerr/A Pacific View

Cite this article:
Hammonds M (2012-10-04 07:49:04). For sale: One world class infrared telescope. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/news/for-sale-one-world-class-infrared-telescope/
test
The post For sale: One world class infrared telescope appeared first on Australian Science.

Does my Science look big in this? October edition

Kevin Orrman-Rossiter — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 06:54:20 +0000

Science this month tackled many of the big questions: Where did life on Earth originate? How do we learn? How can we live healthy lives? and, What is it with scientists and sticky-tape?

Lithopanspermia is the idea that basic life forms are distributed throughout the universe via meteorite-like planetary fragments. Eventually, another planetary system’s gravity traps these roaming rocks, which can result in a transfer of any living cargo.

Researchers reported that under certain conditions there is a high probability that life came to Earth — or spread from Earth to other planets — during the solar system’s infancy when Earth and its planetary neighbors orbiting other stars would have been close enough to each other to exchange lots of solid material.

Image Credit: Shutterstock

Previous research suggests that the speed with which solid matter hurtles through the cosmos makes the chances of being snagged by another object highly unlikely. This research reconsidered lithopanspermia under a low-velocity process called weak transfer in which solid materials meander out of the orbit of one large object and happen into the orbit of another. In this case, the researchers factored in velocities 50 times slower than previous estimates, or about 100 meters per second.

Using the star cluster in which our sun was born as a model, the team conducted simulations showing that at these lower speeds the transfer of solid material from one star’s planetary system to another could have been far more likely than previously thought.

The researchers suggest that ideal conditions for lithopanspermia in the sun's birth cluster, in the solar system and on Earth overlapped for several hundred million years (blue shaded area). Rock evidence suggests that the Earth (bottom line) contained surface water during a period when the relative velocities between the sun and its closest cluster neighbors (top line) were small enough to allow weak transfer to other planetary systems, and when the solar system (middle line) experienced high meteorite activity within the sun's weak gravitational boundary. If life arose on Earth shortly after surface water was available, life could have journeyed from Earth to another habitable world during this time, or vice versa if life had an early start in another planetary system. Image credit: Amaya Moro-Martín

The researchers suggest that of all the boulders cast off from our solar system and its closest neighbor, five to 12 out of 10,000 could have been captured by the other. Earlier simulations had suggested chances as slim as one in a million.

This research highlights that life could have originated away from earth. The theory that it did is yet to be demonstrated.

Research has again shown that you can indeed “teach old dogs new tricks.” The brain you have at any stage of your life is not necessarily the brain you are always going to have. It can still change, even for the better. This time however the researchers observed changes in the brain’s white matter.

Most people equate “gray matter” with the brain and its higher functions, such as sensation and perception, but this is only one part of the anatomical puzzle inside our heads. Another cerebral component is the white matter, which makes up about half the brain by volume and serves as the communications network.

The gray matter, with its densely packed nerve cell bodies, does the thinking, the computing, the decision-making. Projecting from these cell bodies are the axons – the network cables. They constitute the white matter. Its color derives from myelin – a fat that wraps around the axons, acting like insulation.

Human brain right dissected lateral view, showing grey matter (the darker outer parts), and white matter (the inner and prominently whiter parts). Photo credit: John A Beal, Dep't. of Cellular Biology & Anatomy, Louisiana State University

This study looked at a really complex, long-term learning process over time, actually looking at changes in individuals as they learn a language. The work demonstrates that significant changes in the mylenation were observed in adults as they were learning. This research demonstrates how learning is a many step process in our brain.

The flip-side of learning is the persistence of misinformation. Why does that kind of ‘learning’ stick? A new report explores this phenomenon. According to the researchers rejecting information actually requires cognitive effort. Weighing the plausibility and the source of a message is cognitively more difficult than simply accepting that the message is true. If the topic isn’t very important to you or you have other things on your mind, misinformation is more likely to take hold.

Misinformation is especially sticky when it conforms to our preexisting political, religious, or social point of view. Because of this, ideology and personal worldviews can be especially difficult obstacles to overcome.

Even worse, efforts to retract misinformation often backfire, paradoxically amplifying the effect of the erroneous belief.

Though misinformation may be difficult to correct, all is not lost. According to the report, these strategies can set the record straight.

Provide people with a narrative that replaces the gap left by false information

Focus on the facts you want to highlight, rather than the myths

Make sure that the information you want people to take away is simple and brief

Consider your audience and the beliefs they are likely to hold

Strengthen your message through repetition

Research has shown that attempts at “debiasing

Cite this article:
Orrman-Rossiter K (2012-10-01 06:54:20). Does my Science look big in this? October edition. Australian Science. Retrieved: May 01, 2024, from http://australianscience.com.au/science-2/does-my-science-look-big-in-this-october-edition/
test
The post Does my Science look big in this? October edition appeared first on Australian Science.