If you’re lazy like me then putting the washing away is like the Geiger-Marsden experiment.
If it amused you – hit LIKE!
If you loved it, hit SHARE
If you’re lazy like me then putting the washing away is like the Geiger-Marsden experiment.
If it amused you – hit LIKE!
If you loved it, hit SHARE
It’s not like we planned this out very well…
TFW the silliest stories go better than you want…
Every and then you strike gold at a garage sale. When I found a lazy susan, I knew it was flame tornado time! So good to have a mate like Eduardo to help me build it.
The benefits of satellites are far-reaching and versatile. They can improve productivity on farms, locate people stranded in disaster zones, and even track sports performance.
Naohiko Kohtake’s research area of space once seemed among the least practical realms. But his work solves real-world problems for everyday people working on the land, looking for safety, or scoring their next try.
Kohtake is a system design scientist at Keio University, who thinks big about how satellites can collect, analyze, and even send out data. “The key is a holistic view,” says Kohtake, who is also an adjunct associate professor at the School of Engineering, Asian Institute of Technology. “Many people focus on specific areas, but we focus on optimization, system thinking, and modeling to design a sophisticated, merged system.”
A striking example of this is Kohtake’s disaster management systems. He has used location data collected from mobile phones and taxi GPS to analyze how people behave during disasters across Asia, such as the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and resulting tsunami. “Data is useful for finding social issues,” he says. “We can understand the program underneath — the human mind.”
While developing these systems, Kohtake realized that satellites could also help with communication in the confusion of a natural catastrophe. “After a disaster it is difficult to maintain contact and communicate messages to people,” he says.
Taking advantage of the fact that Japanese navigation satellites can broadcast messages directly to the GPS receiver built into mobile phones, Kohtake and students designed an app to get location information about designated meeting points or safe routes to people in disaster zones. Already, the system has been successfully trialed for bushfires in Australia and for tsunami warnings in several Asian countries.
This example, like many of Kohtake’s diverse research areas, grew out of his passion to broaden the uses of satellite data.
“Nearly every university has a program on how to build rockets and satellites, but few have courses on how to use satellite technology,” he says. To address this, Kohtake leads the Geospatial and Space Technology Consortium for Innovative Social Services (GESTISS), a collaboration set up in 2012 between several universities in Asia, including Keio University’s Graduate School of System Design and Management. Every year, GESTISS organizes tutorials, seminars and summer camps for 100 students across Asia and inspires them to think about how to employ satellites for social good.
Kohtake’s GESTISS students, in collaboration with Malaysian researchers, traveled to palm plantations in Malaysia, where they revolutionized the labor-intensive planting practices. Using satellite and drone data to create three-dimensional maps, they developed an app that enables a single person to calculate the optimal planting position — far more efficient than the traditional team method using long wires.
As well as rural settings, Kohtake is working in the most densely populated areas of the world. The obstacle of tall buildings can cause errors in navigation systems of several meters, which could lead to disaster for driverless cars. Kohtake’s solution is to develop a navigation app that uses data from multiple satellite networks — the Japanese Quasi-Zenith Satellite System, the Chinese BeiDou and the United States Global Positioning System (GPS) — and is accurate to within a meter.
Kohtake’s positioning system is so precise that he is now using it to benefit his favorite pastime, rugby. Each player is equipped with a small tracking device, enabling them to download a record of their every movement on the field, to analyze and improve their performance.
This revolution in sport science, believes Kohtake, who is an adviser at the Japan Sport Council, will also give professionals a career path when they retire from sport.
“Top athletes interested in their performance data develop analytical skills, which are good not only for sport but also can help them move to other domains.”
Just realised I have never posted the Exploding Yoghurt video, back where it all began. Such nice camera work David Wong!
Seems physicists are inventing particles faster’n I can write about em. Who ever knew you could call a twisted magnetic field a particle?
First published here: http://www.research.a-star.edu.sg/research/7691/a-new-spin-on-data-storage, 8 May 2017.
Tiny spirals of magnetism called skyrmions could be used as ultrahigh density energy-efficient data carriers.
Jarvis Loh, Gan Chee Kwan and Khoo Khoong Hong from the A*STAR Institute of High Performance Computing have modeled these minute spin spirals in nanoscopic crystal layers. They found that alternating layers of manganese silicide (MnSi) and cobalt silicide (CoSi) forms a promising material architecture.
“Skyrmions are nanosized entities, only tens of nanometers, so they hold the promise of higher storage density than the current technology,” said Gan.
Storage based on skyrmions would represent binary data such as ‘1’s and ‘0’s as clockwise and anticlockwise spin spirals, respectively. Skyrmions can improve energy efficiency as they can be created and manipulated with currents significantly smaller than those required for conventional magnetic hard disk technology.
Skyrmions had been experimentally observed in manganese silicide, prompting the team to explore simulations of manganese silicide in its pristine form and in combination with similar materials.
The team selected cobalt silicide because cobalt sits close to manganese in the periodic table, and its similar lattice characteristics mean it should combine well with manganese silicide. Cobalt also has strong magnetic properties — it is ferromagnetic.
The team’s simulations showed that coupling cobalt silicide to manganese silicide enables the spin spirals in manganese silicide to be engineered. “What’s interesting is that we can now vary the size of skyrmions in an easy and elegant way,” Loh said.
In the skyrmion’s center the magnetic spin of the atoms is flipped 180 degrees relative to the spin on its outside edge; between the edge and the center the spins progressively tilt between the two extremes. Critical in the size of skyrmions is the ability of the material to support high relative tilt between neighboring atoms in the lattice, which enables the skyrmion to be packed into a smaller spiral.
The team found that adding cobalt silicide layers to the manganese silicide layers increased the possible relative tilt. However there is an upper limit — for cobalt silicide layers double the thickness of the manganese silicide, the material ceased to support skyrmions and transitioned to a more conventional ferromagnetic behavior.
One of the attractions of skyrmions as a data storage medium is their robustness, says Loh. “Unlike current magnetic storage, skyrmions are resistant to defects in the lattice. They are topologically protected.”
The team plans to apply their successful approach to other potential architectures, such as nanowires.
The A*STAR-affiliated researchers contributing to this research are from the Institute of High Performance Computing.
News from the UK today that new tokamak ST-40 has been turned on, so I thought I’d post a little explainer about how fusion works.
The editor thought Harry Potter was so last decade, so this Cosmos article got majorly changed. Thought the original wasn’t bad though…
Harry Potter’ invisibility cloak might just have been trumped by a French team, who aim to make entire buildings invisible. Scientists from the Institut Fresnel in Marseilles are teaming up with geo-engineering company Ménard for an experiment in the shape of a circle, two hundred metres across – enough to protect the whole of Hogwarts School (or more realistically a sensitive site such as a nuclear plant).
The team are not striving for invisibility to human eyes: instead of light waves they will divert the waves that travel through the surface of the earth during earthquakes and other seismic disturbances. As they reported in last month’s Physics Review Letters they have already succeeded with an area the size of Harry Potter’s Gryffindor common room.
“We managed to stop the propagation of the waves,” says the leader of the team, physicist Sebastien Guenneau. “This is the first proof of concept of a seismic metamaterial, a structure which can scatter and deflect wave trajectories. You can build on this knowledge to create an invisibility cloak which will actually protect a specific site from seismic waves.”
Metamaterials were first developed in the optics domain. They are substances comprised of an array of small elements, whose regular pattern leads to unusual behaviour on a large scale. Guenneau studied at Imperial College London with the pioneer of metamaterials, Sir John Pendry; Pendry shook the optics world in the early 2000s when he proposed an invisibility cloak based on metamaterials, and then, in collaboration with David Smith from Duke University, built such a device that operated at microwave wavelengths.
The strange effects that metamaterials have on waves rely on geometric structures that are smaller than the waves they are influencing. For Pendry’s centimeter-scale microwaves the patterns were millimetres in size, but for Guenneau’s team, dealing with earthquake wavelengths of around a metre and a half, the structures were 30cm wide boreholes, spaced roughly a metre apart.
However, unlike metamaterials based on pure, man-made substances, the earth is much less homogeneous.
“Soil is a different story,” says Guenneau. “Its properties are difficult to characterise, and depend on different things, such as the weather! It makes the mathematical models much more difficult.”
Overcoming more than just mathematical hurdles – other scientists initially ridiculed the theory – Guenneau fortuitously met geo-engineer at Ménard, Stephane Brûlé, who was open minded and influential enough to persuade his company to collaborate on the idea – albeit during the summer holiday period.
So it was that the team of twenty people studied the weather forecasts carefully and chose three sunny days in August 2012, to take the measurements at a site near Grenoble.
Using a seismic source vibrating the ground at 50 times a second they first measured the propagation of the waves in the undisturbed soil. Then after carefully drilling three rows of five metre deep holes, they repeated the experiment. Sure enough, as the model predicted, most of the energy was reflected by the hole pattern; behind the array the detectors only measured one fifth of the energy that had reached the detector before the holes were drilled.
“It’s interesting because these are the first experimental results on this topic,” says University of Sydney physicist, Professor Boris Kuhlmey, who studies electromagnetic metamaterials that function at the nanometer wavelengths of light. “It’s the very beginning of the field: the modelling is quite extensive, but the experiment is quite limited in scope. The structure they have explored will only work over a narrow band of frequencies, but if your aim is to stop an earthquake you don’t get to choose the frequency.”
However Kuhlmey says Guenneau’s mathematical models offer the possibility of a phenomenon known as a zero stop band, which can cut out a wide range of earthquake waves. “These exist in electromagnetic metamaterials – the paper suggests that for seismic waves they are possible too. That would be really key to get it to work well. Maybe it’s possible, on the scale of a city, to diminish the impact of an earthquake considerably.”
Guenneau’s next experiment will certainly push back the boundaries. The team will inflict earthquakes measuring six on the Richter scale, with frequencies of between 2 and 12 vibrations per second on their test site, protected by a ring of boreholes 200 metres in diameter.
“It would be a dream for me to see this done for real one day, not just tests,” muses Guenneau. But he is not precious about his idea. “I am sure that the civil engineers will come up with better ways to make it work, I don’t have the expertise,” he says.
In the meantime he is already turning his considerable skills to other problems, such as tsunami control. “Imagine some columns of wood, 200 m from the sea shore, arranged in a similar fashion to the bore holes in the seismic experiments. The effect will be that you deflect or guide the tsunami to a nonsensitive coastal area.”
“Also, I’d like to do some work in biology…” he throws in.
Originally published in Cosmos Magazine 28/4/14
The best part of my job as a science writer is when scientists explain their work to me. I like it when they go into far too much detail, (which I then have to leave out of the story).
But I don’t think I am normal.
Throughout my physics studies, I loved to tutor students, take tours though the lab, which led me into a career in Science Communication. My first real job in Sci Comm was at University of Sydney, working with a lot of teenagers.
But I found not all the teenagers were as interested in physics as I was. (Who would have thought?) So I started explaining harder, with more creative analogies and more engaging presentations.
Which helped a little.
But I still remember a presentation at a school on the semi-rural outskirts of Sydney, when there were a posse of kids at the front lapping up my superconductivity and projectile motion demos. But three-quarters of the year eights were bored out of their brains. The back row were running in and out of the theatre playing chasies, despite their teacher’s best efforts. How could they not care about a levitating magnet at -196 degrees?
Around the same time I’d been reading Bill Bryson’s Short History of Nearly Everything. I actually usually prefer novels to non-fiction, but Bryson’s non-fiction completely sucked me in with its stories of how we learned about the world around us. Surprisingly it was his descriptions of the humans who made the discoveries that captivated me. No lecturer had ever told me Newton was mad (possibly mercury poisoning). No exam had ever asked whether Hubble was a compulsive liar.
Yet these characters were making this book such a page turner, even though I knew a fair percentage of the science facts he was relating.
The pieces started to fall into place when I went to my first ever non-physics conference – the Australian Science Communicators Conference. Here were people studying the very issues that were troubling me.
It was a lecture from a biophysicist turned social scientist that really rocked the boat. In a 15 minute talk Professor Joan Leach, then at University of Queensland, suggested there were other ways of presenting science to audiences, than just a series of facts in a logical order. Exploratory learning. Historical re-enactments. Human stories.
I couldn’t wait to get back to work and try these ideas out. Soon I was trying out things like a high school workshop in which the clues to a code were embedded in 15 experiments in the lab – inspired by the da Vinci code. My student feedback started climbing.
(Not all my experiments were successful – my tip, don’t ask shy, geeky teenagers to do dramatic re-enactments of famous experiments in front of their peers. Far too scary!)
There was one thing I still couldn’t come at. I had the good fortune to visit Princeton’s Institute for Materials, where they had an exhibition of science art. And I also saw Quark Park, a science sculpture garden. I’ll admit, some of it looked quite nice. Some of the sculptures were kinda cute, but what was I supposed to learn from it? It didn’t demonstrate deep scientific principles nearly as well as a graph or an equation did.
While I muttered about uselessness on the train home, worlds were clashing at a much grander scale.
The world’s climate was changing. Proving that it was actually possible to herd cats, researchers from all kinds of disciplines and countries came together to form the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and presented a united and terrifying view of the effect humans were having on the whole planet.
People began to listen. Al Gore took the bull by the horns and people began to think about how to change. But then it all went wrong.
People started popping up and disagreeing with the research. The scientists were gobsmacked. They’d managed to come to a consensus, surely no one would believe people with no scientific credentials, sponsored by the fossil fuel industry?
But sure enough, public opinion turned around. Seeds of distrust were sown, the truth became inconvenient, and no matter how hard scientists explained their research, the number of climate change deniers grew and grew.
The arc continues today, with the election of Donald Trump. It’s now a post-fact world. It’s so clear that the adversarial approach of presenting facts to back up your argument doesn’t convert your opposition. In fact, it entrenches their views (after all, who likes to be proven wrong?)
Again, a social scientist, engineer-turned-science communication researcher, Professor Will Rivkin, then at UNSW, rattled my cage, with a 5 minute talk about trust. About how people need to know not only that someone is competent, but also has their best interests at heart before they trust them.
A wonderful blog post in Scientific American by Bora Zivkovic went into it more deeply. In short, the things that we humans have traditionally used to judge people, to form our first impressions, are very subjective. We decide whether someone is a danger to us from cultural clues: whether they look, speak and behave like us. Do they share our emotions, our vulnerabilities, our humanity?
But of course good science goes out of its way to remove all those cultural influences. As objective as possible.
And when science is presented in that way, people don’t naturally trust it. It seems robotic. Who’s saying this? Do they have my best interests at heart? I don’t know because it’s all written in the passive voice!
So when scientists ask me how to communicate I tell them to use their emotions. Sure, facts are facts, but your reaction to them is your own. I say, “the evidence shows a clear rise in global temperatures, and that terrifies me!”
People without a scientific background will connect with that emotion, it tells a much more compelling story for them than the hockey stick graph that terrifies me.
But still people will turn away if they don’t want to hear. They didn’t come here to learn something, especially not something uncomfortable, threatening, and with no easy answer.
It clicked for me as I listened to a marketing pitch from the editor of the Australian science magazine Cosmos, trying to persuade my University to buy advertising. He talked about the space his readers were in – not a busy newsy space like New Scientist readers, but a broader, slower more absorbed space.
That weekend, as I sat listening to my economist father-in-law explaining the intricacies of the free market’s spread into former eastern bloc countries, I thought, I’m not in this space. This is a BBQ; for once I didn’t come here to learn anything.
Suddenly I got the art park. It was hard for me to swallow, but maybe people didn’t always want science explained to them. They just wanted to look at something nice. Engage with something on an aesthetic level, without battling challenging concepts or non-intuitive quantum contradictions.
My journalism teacher had told me, entertain first, then inform. Because if you don’t entertain, no one will read it and so there’ll be no informing at all.
So it was in the art park. People would walk away with a good feeling about science. An emotional connection that helped them to not feel alienated. To trust science, even.
It didn’t actually matter whether they could now pass a test about Schrodinger’s equation, and the shapes of S, P and D orbitals. If they decided to find out more, Professor Google would help them, when they were in a learning mood.
So I started incorporating songs into my science presentations. I can’t help myself but explain stuff first – but then I take a song everyone knows, change the words to be about the science I’ve been discussing and get the audience to sing along. The Beatles’ Hey Jude becomes Hey Plute.
Australian audiences are a little unsure about this, but after a beer or two they usually get into it, and end up loving it. There’s something magical about singing together (plus it breaks up the quietly-listening audience paradigm, but that’s a whole other discussion.)
It feels almost underhand, like Hitler manipulating crowds with stirring marches. But that’s what science is up against. Well-orchestrated marketing campaigns use all the arts and social sciences to woo their audience at an emotional level, and that will trump facts every time (pun intended).
I came across a little story from my Anglican childhood recently, about a man at the pearly gates, looking back at his life as a walk along a beach. Noticing a second pair of footsteps, the man asks Jesus whose they are. Jesus says they are his, he walked beside him his whole life. But the man sees the dark parts of his life, and only one set of footsteps – why did you abandon me? No, I didn’t Jesus says; I carried you.
Now, that didn’t happen. Someone made it up. It’s a lovely story, and it made a big impact on me as an eight-year old, but it’s just not real.
Can science ever prevail when made up stories are so powerful? Time will tell. But in the meantime I decided to make some stuff up too. I wrote a science fairytale, about a prince searching for love, who is courted by scientist would-be princesses. There’s blackbody radiation, mars exploration, genetic modification, solar spectra, Rayleigh scattering, love and a happy ever after.
It doesn’t matter that it never happened – human brains are hard-wired to remember stories. And if people want to find out more about why photosynthesis is so terribly inefficient that there is no way an intelligent designer would have made it that way, the internet is there.
This is my challenge to the scientific community. Don’t be afraid to be a human, a scientist with emotions. Of course, keep your research as objective as possible, but when you’re out of the ivory tower, embrace the arts. Give them a science flavour, tell your own story as a human.
Just don’t explain it.
The author would like to acknowledge Rebecca Blackburn and David Harris.