Saturday, February 19, 2005
This Day:

Exciplexes (excited complex) are a special kind of molecules, that can only exist if one of the atoms in the molecule is in an excited state. The first ones observed were alkali-helium (molecules with helium and alkali metals, such as Lithium, Sodium, etc.) exciplexes in 1995. Since then, physicists have discovered exciplexes in liquid helium, cold helium gas, and on helium nanodroplets. Now physicists have found a new one, which contains one caesium atom, and seven helium atoms, and a simpler one with two helium atoms (D Nettels et al).

Dumbbell Caesium, surrounded by helium (Courtesy: PhysicsWeb)
Researchers (Peter Moroshkin and colleagues at the University of Fribourg) say that this molecule may only exist at very low temperature and high pressure. These molecules are good candidates for studying fundamental quantum physics and quantum chemistry. Similar exciplexes might exist for Rubidium-Helium as well.

(Hide) (Show)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Friday, February 18, 2005
This Day:

It is estimated that there are at least 1011 galaxies in the universe today. The current rate of expansion of the universe is increasing, which pushes galaxies away from each other. However, on an intermediate scale (millions of light years), galaxies tend to form clusters. For example, our Milky Way galaxy is part of the local group known as the Virgo Super-Cluster, and will collide with the Andromeda Galaxy (M31) in about 3 billion years.

Galaxy Cluster SXDF/FCC-A (Courtesy: NAOJ)
There is considerable uncertainty about the first appearance of the galaxies after the big bang. This birthday (of sorts) is continuously being pushed back. Recently, researchers from the University of Tokyo, the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan (NAOJ), and those using the Subaru Telescope have found that clusters of galaxies were already forming about 1 billion years after big bang. This pushes back the age of the earliest known clusters by a third, and shows that the largest structures in the universe had already started to form during the earliest epoch the astronomers have yet been able to observe.
The above image shows the characteristically red color of the (six) galaxies in the cluster. This corresponds to a red-shift of 5.7, and a distance of 12.7 billion years. The area in the image is approximately 1° square area of the sky, in the direction of the constellation Cetus.
The galaxies are concentrated in a volume only 6 million light years in diameter (the Virgo SuperCluster, in comparison, is over 200 million light years in diameter). The cluster is about 100 times less massive, and the member galaxies are producing stars at 100 times the rate of modern galaxies.
These results were published in the February 10, 2005, edition of the Astrophysical Journal (ApJ 620, L1-L4) and will be presented at the meeting The Future of cosmology with clusters of Galaxies beginning on February 26, 2005, in Waikoloa, Hawaii.

(Hide) (Show)

4 Comments:

At February 18, 2005 6:37 PM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
The universe is quite simply beyond comprehension.

And some would have us believe that out of the near infinitude of planets out there, we reside on the only one to bear life.

Now, you're the number genius, what are the chances of that?

I once read that the chances of the Earth being the only abode of life were statistically the same a flicking a one pound coin and having it land on its edge twenty times in a row.

I think one of the most staggering and frankly sobering facts that I once read was that if we were able to travel at the speed of light, it would still take 700,000 years to travel to centre of our own galaxy.

Truly mind-blowing...
 
At February 18, 2005 10:28 PM, Blogger Sray said...
There are so many factors involved, that it is very hard to get an exact probability for life. The Drake Equation gives an estimate as a function of some such factors. Also, it does not look like it should be too hard to get life started, especially when we talking in billions of years! Quite conservative estimates in the Drake Equation gives a value of 100-1000 civilizations in our galaxy. I am not so sure about intelligent life, though.

The milky way galaxy is 100,000 light years wide. We are two-thirds out from the center, so from us to the galactic center is about 33,000 light years. But that is puny compared to the radius of the universe, which is 156 billion light years!!!

Beyond that, we might have an infinite number of other universes, each embedded in a higher dimensional space, just like our universe might be. We are truly living in a wondrous time, when all these grand questions might be finally answered.
 
At February 19, 2005 8:36 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Lucretia: perhaps I misspoke there. Intelligence is an emergent phenomenon, and is very much in the eyes of the beholder. For example, to me, most of the animal world is intelligent. I should have used the word "Conscious" instead of "Intelligent", perhaps?

We have no idea what form an alien intelligence/consciousnes can take. But as a first approximation, perhaps we can assume they (or some of their ancestors at a certain point of their evolution) would be more or less the same like us in principle (intelligent beings, wondering about the nature around them, struggling to survive)?

You gave the example of "Ants". There is a lot in common betwen us and ants! We are both a) physical beings capable of dying, b) need energy, c) have an individual body/mind, d) evolve over millennia. Which of the above four can be violated by an alien intelligence?
 
At February 20, 2005 2:23 AM, Blogger Sray said...
"Why presume that we would be "violated" by an alien intelligence?"..

Oh no no, not us! I was talking about the four conditions I laid out that are unique to all lifeforms on earth. I was wondering which of these may not be true for any alien lifeform.

Conditions
a) physical beings capable of dying,
b) need energy
c) have an individual body/mind
d) evolve over millennia
 

Post a Comment

Thursday, February 17, 2005
This Day:

Traditionally, walking robots require a large degree of sophistication in design and software control. Despite all that, such robots (e.g. Honda's Asimo) can navigate only the easiest of environments, compared to what a three year old child could do. Now, researchers from three universities (Cornell, University of Michigan, and Delft University) have developed robots (designed on passive-dynamic principles) with comparatively simple design, that can walk naturally. The robots were displayed at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington DC, USA.

Walking Robots (Courtesy: NewScientist)
These robots use simple dynamics and motors/sensors/electronics to propel themselves. Their motion is self-correcting, not unlike how a human navigates the terrain. The robots perhaps walk a little like a drunkard, but manage to stay on their two feet, and the walking looks more natural. In that sense, their walking is more like how kids walk. Please click here for the research page, and here and here for two movies from that page.
In addition to more efficient, walking robots, this research can also lead to better prosthetics. The researchers were inspired by mechanical toys that automatically stroll down a slope under gravity. While Asimo uses ten times as energy as a human, these robots use about the same energy as an average person.
Personally, I think the first two robots look a lot like C-3PO and R2-D2 from the StarWars movies!

(Hide) (Show)

4 Comments:

At February 18, 2005 7:33 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
And in related news (go to: http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,66633,00.html?tw=wn_1techhead)

It really is only a matter of time before we see robots that match if not surpass our own abilities -- I'm thinking more physically rather than in an intellectual sense.

The simple reason being that there is a great need for such things.

For example: military, emergency services, search & rescue, construction, exploration .. the list goes on...
 
At February 18, 2005 7:34 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
By the way Lucretia, that's a fine pair of legs you have there sticking out of that corn field...
 
At February 18, 2005 7:47 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Lucretia: Thanks for the interesting link! Emergent behavior is a fascinating area of research. For example, the patterns in the "Game of Life" are emergent from its simple rules. Same is true in chaos theory. But it is debatable if consciousness itself is a emergent phenomenon?

Wayne: U.S. Military is pouring money in robotic research. The future soldier will have a robotic exoskleleton, which will enable the soldier to run/jump/fight like a superhuman. In future, the exoskeleton will not only provide physical support, but also vitamins/fluids/minerals etc. which will nourish the soldier automatically!

Another interesting class of robots is those that will be so miniaturized that they can help in surveillance/reconaissance/rescue. Not surprisingly, it is the military that is the major funder there.

This century is going to be the century of biotech/nanotech/robotech!

Lucretia: are those your legs, or did you bury someone else?
 
At February 18, 2005 11:43 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Lucretia (aka Spacarrot): Are you talking about the Pandora Chronicles?

Hey, you changed your picture! Not because of our pestering, I hope :-).
 

Post a Comment

Wednesday, February 16, 2005
This Day:

Two NASA researchers (Carol Stoker and Larry Lemke of Ames Research Center) are claiming that there is evidence of (microbial) life on Mars. Their research, which is under peer-review for publication in journal Nature in May, suggests that small pockets of life, sustained by underground water, might be found in Martian caves. Mars has a deep network of caves/ravines, which are nearly completely isolated from sunlight and duststorms that ravage the surface. High concentrations of methane gas have recently been detected by the martian rovers, and ESA's Mars Express orbiter. Methane on earth is produced through biological processes, and it is being suggested that the martian methane might also have a similar origin.

Martian Landscape (Courtesy: NASA)
Stoker, along with a joint U.S./Spanish team went to southwestern Spain in 2003 to look for subsurface life around the Rio Tinto river, where iron has dissolved in the higly acidic water, giving it a reddish tint. Since Martian soil has a lot of iron, it is reasonable to assume that any water on Mars must have a lot of iron dissolved in it, and any lifeform that lives in that water must have developed some unique strategies. By comparing the microbes near the Rio Tinto river to the chemical signatures obtained from Mars (such as methane concentration, and a mineral called jarosite), the scientists say they have a very strong case that the Martian underground has (at least) microbial form of life.
Move over Little Green Men! Here come the Littler Red Microbes :-):-).

(Hide) (Show)

13 Comments:

At February 17, 2005 5:36 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
There is the theory that Mars was once teaming with life, much like Earth, now.

But, at tens of thousands of years ago, Mars was impacted by two huge asteroids which created the Tharsis bulge on the opposing side of the planet.

There's also a great deal of evidence for a displacement of water with the equivalent volume of the Mediterranean sea, which was evacuated in an extraordinarily short period of time, probably by the impact of a large body.

At around the same geological time, the Earth was given a couple of jolts at 9,000 and 13,000 BC with many scientists thinking that the latter impact was so powerful, the entire lithosphere of the Earth was shifted 12 degrees in a southerly direction.

And believe it or not, this forms the basis of one of the theories for the last island of Atlantis...
 
At February 17, 2005 9:03 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Scientists are planning to seed Mars with genetically engineered cyano-bacteria, which would convert the CO2 in the atmosphere, and trigger a runaway greenhouse effect. Hopefully, in a few hundred years (when I will be have a verrry long white beard), Mars will (again?) be livable. And Mars was teeming with life, perhaps some fossils could be found?

The 9000BC and 11300BC impacts are both claimed to be linked to Atlantis. For example, see In straits of Gibraltar. This site also gives a nice breakdown of all cometary impacts.

Another theory is regarding the Black Sea. Robert Ballard is currently investigating the bottom of that sea. Theory is the sea was once a fresh-water lake. At the end of the ice-age, the Bosporus Strait on the south-west broke, letting in seawater, and submerging the population.

This is supposedly the origins of both Atlantis, and Noah (some people there could escape via boats and such).

Lucretia: I think the "Red Planet" team took a lot their pictures from NASA (they must have had technical advisor from NASA), so it is possible that this kind of image was used. Or perhaps they put a earth scene through a red filter!
 
At February 17, 2005 9:59 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"I realise that this is somewhat "off topic" but this photo reminds me of a scene from the movie "Red Planet", which is one of my faves in that genre."

That's actually slightly on-topic...
 
At February 17, 2005 10:18 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"The 9000BC and 11300BC impacts are both claimed to be linked to Atlantis. For example, see In straits of Gibraltar. This site also gives a nice breakdown of all cometary impacts."

For me the tie-in with the Earth crust movement places Antarctica right in the front seat.

One of the legends is of Atlantis: 'disappearing into the ocean.'

Now, wouldn't it also be correct to say a ship is disappearing into the ocean when it sails away?

Plus, a very old map of Antarctica was found by the Turkish naval Admiral Piri Reis in 1513 and was studied by the American air force for authenticity. Needless to say, the map passed.

In fact, in the words of Lt. Col. Harold Z. Ohlmeyer: "We have no idea how the data on this map can be reconciled with the supposed state of geographical knowledge in 1513."

Even more intriguing was the fact that the map was already ancient by the time it was discovered in 1513, and the map shows quite correctly and accurately the entire land mass of Antarctica as it is beneath the ice sheet.

When the map was examined july 1960, knowledge of the land beneath the snow and ice or Antarctica had only just been properly verified. Not until the advent of satellite technology would greater definition be brought to bare.

The interesting thing about this is, the map is as accurate as any we have today. But the last time Antarctica was free of ice was over 9,000 years ago .. long before many things had been discovered which would have been pivotal in mapping such a massive area, not least the ability to plot longitudinal measurements.

In fact, when the map was first discovered -- prior to longitudinal measurements being possible -- most believed the map to be wrong because contemporaneous measurements showed otherwise.

Strange then that 9,000 years ago, a 12 degree Earth crust displacement by a meteoroid / asteroid impact is exactly the measurement required to move a land mass the size of Antarctica from what we would call the mid Atlantic to the souther polar region...
 
At February 17, 2005 10:32 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Ancient man was good in making boats/sailing... Thor Heyardahl showed that beautifully. So it is plausible that man went to Antarctica long before anyone ever thought he would (even though no fossils have been found on that continent yet)..

However, I dont think Antarctica was ever in the Atlantic (at least not in the last 9000 years). 9000 years is too short a time. Such a large continent cannot move so fast, and stop moving so fast. A lot of heat would be generated if that were the case, which would partly melt the continent! No such evidence of melting has been found. Normally, contitnents move a few cm per year, and so has been the case with Antarctica.
 
At February 17, 2005 10:39 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"Such a large continent cannot move so fast, and stop moving so fast."

The idea is that entire lithosphere of the Earth moved: that's the sheet that all of the tectonic plates reside on...
 
At February 17, 2005 10:56 AM, Blogger Sray said...
You are talking about the Piri Reis Map. The suggestion is that antarctica moved around 2000 miles. Isnt that even worse? If the whole lithosphere moves, its stopping would generate huge amounts of heat, that might boil off the earth's oceans. And there is no evidence that antarctica moved.. even though the map could be real.
 
At February 17, 2005 11:13 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
The map is real.

In an Antarctic survey in the 1900's a frozen orange grove was found many metres below the ice and snow.

Not any naturally occurring orange grove, a cultivated, row-ordered orange grove.

The evidence is real.

Plus, I think you're thinking of the lithosphere shifting very quickly. The process was in geological time. So we're talking about thousands of years of gradual movement...
 
At February 17, 2005 11:43 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Can you give me some reference/links about the orange grove? Couldnt find it anywhere..

I a not talking about a suddent shift. But 2000 miles in 12000 years is about 250 meters/year! In comparison, tectonic movements today amount to about few cms a year. Is there any evidence of such fast movement?

Lets see:
a) Area of antarctica = 14 million sqkm
b) Avg. Depth to crust = 8 km
c) Volume of antarctica = Area*Depth = 112 million cubic km. = 1.12*10^8 km^3
d) Avg. Density of rock = 2.7 g/cm^3 = 2.7*10^12 kg/km^3
e) Mass of antarctica = Volume*Density = 3.024*10^20 kg.
f) Speed: 250 meters/year = 8*10^-6 m/s.
g) Energy Release if antarctica stops moving: 0.5m*v^2 = 9.67 Giga-Joules.
h) This is enough to boil off 30,845 kg of water.

Not much.. so it is certainly possible! But remember that a lot of friction should be generated in the waters, so the heat generated should be larger than calculated here.

By the way, earth's precession period is about 26,000 years (2*13,000). It seems likely that perhaps Antarctica did not move, but earth moved?
 
At February 17, 2005 1:18 PM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"By the way, earth's precession period is about 26,000 years (2*13,000). It seems likely that perhaps Antarctica did not move, but earth moved?"

Imagine the skin of an apple, and then the skin shifting around the inside. That's what's supposed to have happened.

It's not the kind of thing that happens all of the time, and there seems to be evidence that it's happened before, but you really do need something like a massive collision to get the thing going.

I don't have anything on the orange grove, I'm afraid.

Anyway, back on topic: do we think that there's life on Mars?
 
At February 17, 2005 2:21 PM, Blogger Sray said...
I do think it is certainly possible. I have a gut feeling life is not that hard to start up. Intelligent life, that's another thing. But some sort of simple life, if it could start here on earth, it could have started on mars as well. Perhaps the pace is very slow, so it hasnt reached multi-celullar complexity as of yet.
 
At February 18, 2005 7:28 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Personally, I don't know what to think.

Given life is such a powerful force, and factoring in your previous article on what appears to point the genesis of life being something that appear destined to happen, I sort of feel that either life is just beginning to take off or it's recently been dealt the kicking of its life...
 
At February 18, 2005 8:30 AM, Blogger Sray said...
True. But we might not find life at the hostile martian surface. But deep underground, where the circumstances are cosier, life might just be taking its first baby steps.

The future martian explorations have to ensure that no earth microbes/organisms pollute the pristine martian environment.
 

Post a Comment

Tuesday, February 15, 2005
This Day:

Can chase its tail...
Daimler-Chrysler recently unveiled its top-of-the-line Jeep prototype at Detroit Car Show. Named Jeep Hurricane, it is truly a concept car, with twin HEMI V8 engines, each with 335hp (horse power), and 370lb-ft of torque. The engines can operate independently of each other, and the jeep switches off cylinders when they are not required (cruising on a highway, for example). The jeep has a 14 inches (36 cm) of ground clearance and 20 inches (51 cm) of suspension travel, thus giving the rider a great off-road experience.

Jeep Hurricane (Courtesy: HowStuffWorks)
The twin engines ensure that the jeep can ride up slopes of 64º, and descend down slopes at 86.7º! The engines provide powers to the wheels through four independent driveshafts (unlike one driveshaft in most vehicles), each of which can operate independently of each other, and at different orientations. This allows the jeep to have a turning radius of zero, that is, the jeep can rotate at the same place. Four independent shafts also leads to better traction and stability. The Hurricane can also crab-steer, that is, move to the side without changing the direction it faces.

Split-axle design (Courtesy: HowStuffWorks)
There is only room for two passengers in the jeep. The body/chassis is made of carbon-fiber, and the engines/suspension are fused into the body. No doors/roof, and not much shock absorption; this leads to some rough riding!

(Hide) (Show)

10 Comments:

At February 16, 2005 10:11 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
How much does this look like the Warthog from Halo?

The twin engine set-up isn't entirely new. Can't remember where, but I've see it before.

More recently, Hyundai have used twin engines, but arranged so that one engine power each rear wheel.

So, two 1.3 litre engines are more productive than a single engine twice the size...
 
At February 16, 2005 10:15 AM, Blogger Sray said...
I have seen twin engines before.. but the interesting thing was the four independent shafts, which can rotate in both directions. I dont think anyone had that before? Also, really powerful engines, but that is a difference of a degree, not of a kind.
 
At February 16, 2005 10:16 AM, Blogger Sray said...
OH, yeah! The warthog from Halo :-D... lets mount the gunner, shall we?!
 
At February 16, 2005 10:18 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Seems overly complicated to me.

What happens if one of the drive shafts breaks?

Do you spin round in a circle?

I'm hoping not...
 
At February 16, 2005 10:20 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Seems complicated.. but I think the on-board computer (must be there) handles all that. The driver just selects the mode he wants the shafts to be in (normal, crab-steer, rotate, etc.). If a shaft breaks... hey this is just a prototype!
 
At February 16, 2005 10:44 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
I'm guessing that if one of drive shafts broke, then you'd function as normal -- with the obvious imbalance of torque ratio on either side of the car.

The only things you wouldn't be able to do is all of the weird spinning on a six-pence and the crab-fashion side-ways motion thing...
 
At February 16, 2005 10:47 AM, Blogger Sray said...
"... if one of drive shafts broke, then you'd function as normal..."

True. One thing Ilike about this jeep is its symmetry. I can almost imagine the driver sitting in a turnable turret at the center of the car, with full flexibility of wherever to go. Perhaps one should add spherical wheels instead, and then we would have a true concept car!!

And while we are at it, why not add hovercraft capabilities as well?!
 
At February 16, 2005 2:03 PM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Lucretia, I thought you were buying a Subaru Impreza?
 
At February 16, 2005 2:04 PM, Blogger Sray said...
Hi Lucretia,
thanks for the comment! About the Jeep thingie, Wayne (Smallman) is interested in one (look at all his comments), and he would buy it for you, but alas! It is still a prototype :-).
 
At February 17, 2005 2:23 PM, Blogger Sray said...
People who would buy this jeep wont do it for mileage, now will they? But it is a great jeep.. and since it can adjust its power output depending upon requirement, the mileage could be optimal.
 

Post a Comment

Monday, February 14, 2005
This Day:

The Dutch military has developed a new night vision system, that makes night-time images as clear and colorful as those shot in daylight. Normally, night-vision images lack color, since the infra-red emitted by the objects being photographed do not contain enough information to estimate the color. Since humans can at any one time distinguish only between 100s of gray levels (shades, also known as grayscales), but can easily separate thousands of colors, 'coloring' a night-vision image can lead to better visibility and depth-perception.

a) Night-Image b) Source-Image c) Colored-Image d) Daytime-Photo
Alexander Toet of the TNO Human Factors uses a day-time image (source) of similar surroundings to color the grayscale, night-vision image (target). The work is published in the January issue of the journal Displays (Pages 15-21). For example, if the night-vision image is of a tree and surroundings, the system requires that a secondary image of a tree be provided as the source image. The system analyzes the statistical distribution of grayscales and chromacity (amount of color) in the target (night-vision) and the source image respectively, and then correlates the two. This allows the system to color each pixel in the target using colors in the source image.
The fact that a secondary image is required, is not a big hindrance. Given the capacities of today's hard-drives, a light, mobile system can contain tens of thousands of images from all settings/scenarios. An intelligent pattern matching and image segmentation (with or without human help) algorithm can easily match a corresponding source image for each target image. The coloring can then proceed in real-time.
One issue is not really addressed in the paper, and that is of coloring a video stream. There has to be enough correlation between the coloring of the contiguous frames in the video stream, without which the user is most likely to see a kaleidoscope of colors. One way of doing this could be to use a source image for the first frame, and then use the first frame as the source for the second frame, and so on.
This is not really my line of research, but I would have loved to do this!

(Hide) (Show)

5 Comments:

At February 16, 2005 6:57 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"One issue is not really addressed in the paper, and that is of coloring a video stream. There has to be enough correlation between the coloring of the contiguous frames in the video stream, without which the user is most likely to see a kaleidoscope of colors."

It's not so much an issue of matching an image to what you're seeing, that really wouldn't be practical if you were effecting an insertion in a jungle environment that has probably never been photographed before, plus has changed since the last recon'.

The idea is to match a colour profile against a region based on geographical location and season using stuff like Global Positioning Systems.

It's a bit of fudge, but it's not really meant to be an accurate representation of the actual colours, it's more a case of adding in a generalized colour profile so that the human eye can gauge depth more accurately than would otherwise be possible with starlight imaging technology.

Think of all of those old black & white films that have been restored and colourized.

Much of that process is automated. When the colours go awry, then a human steps in a matches the correct colour profile to the surface: beit a cupboard door, a large chair, a field of grass .. or even a bare arse...
 
At February 16, 2005 7:14 AM, Blogger Sray said...
"Think of all of those old black & white films that have been restored and colourized."

The old B&W films had more information than a night-vision image. Even though B&W, the analog tapes would contain more gray levels, and since the pictures were of *actual* colors, and not heat (infra-red), coloring should be easier than say, coloring a warm tree on a cold night. Also, a warm wind flowing through a cold tree would distort the night-vision coloring, no such problem with B&W movies!

Since color of a scene changes much less rapidly than the temperature, it is harder to color a night-vision image.
 
At February 16, 2005 7:19 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"Since color of a scene changes much less rapidly than the temperature, it is harder to color a night-vision image."

I can't really see how you could do this with infra-red imaging.

Starlight imaging, yes but not infra-red imaging, surely?

There's two levels of false colour: first you're seeing heat signatures, which are unintelligible to all intents and purposes, given we don't see that way, then the colours added to denote heat won't ever match the actual objects in view...
 
At February 16, 2005 7:28 AM, Blogger Sray said...
"then the colours added to denote heat won't ever match the actual objects in view..."

True, night-vision images lack the color information. So, one has to use a secondary image to derive some color context. This image can be a daytime shot of the same area, or another image with similar information. To color B&W images, we can use the information inherent to the images (gray levels). This cannot be done for night-vision images.

So, coloring a night-vision video stream is much harder, since the color interpolation might not be uniform across all frames. For B&W streams, where each frame has its inherent information (which is already smoothly interpolated across frames), this is not a problem.

Never mind the false coloring, as long as it is consistent across frames, one can learn to adapt.
 
At February 16, 2005 10:07 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
When you look at the earlier black & white films, you see a lot of false, garish colouring.

I imagine that's as a result of the older, less detailed film stock not containing the same level of depth as more recent black & white films...
 

Post a Comment

Sunday, February 13, 2005
This Day:

Since the dawn of the industrial age, man has dumped millions of tons of toxic (as well as non-toxic) metals into the environment. Cleaning up this mess has been a herculean task, often creating more problems than solved. Now, scientists have been able to realize an old dream of using nature against nature, so to speak. Professor Norman Terry, a plant and microbial biologist with U. C. Berkeley has spearheaded a research to do just that, which was recently published in Environmental Science & Technology.

Indian Mustard Plant (Courtesy: Illinois Wild Flowers)
The group used genetically modified plants to soak up toxic contaminants (selenium) from the ground, by upwards of 430% than normal. This process, known as Phytoremediation has been used off and on for the last two decades. Mostly, those approaches used normal breeding processes to boost the plant's cleaning abilities. Now, with genetic engineering, researchers are ready to usher in a slew of super-plants.
For the above trial, the plant Indian Mustard was used, which already has some natural ability to clean up toxic soils. Genetic engineering boosted this ability, and also ensured that the plant does not die due to the extra toxicity that it soaked up. Plans are afoot to augment cottonwood trees (by Applied PhytoGenetics) with a bacterial gene, that would allow them to absorb mercury from the soil.
In future, these technologies would not only clean up the environment, but also perhaps provide a new paradigm in mining operations. Of course, we might have unleashed more than we can chew, and only time will tell if these super-plants cause more problems than they solve.

(Hide) (Show)

10 Comments:

At February 15, 2005 4:43 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Just read about that yesterday.

A few years ago, a few bacteria were found to thriving in the highly acid and toxic run-off from an old steel works in Chicago, America.

The water was so poisonous, it was due for treatment, but it was found to be seething with bacterial life, most of which was breaking down the toxins and fast as they were pouring into the pools...
 
At February 15, 2005 4:52 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Yep! Another interesting application is the processing of radioactive waste. Some bacteria can skim off such wastes, which can be helpful in large-scale cleanups of radioactive sites.
 
At February 15, 2005 5:01 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Didn't they find these things lining the cooling rods in some nuclear power station?

I'm actually reading Gaia by James Lovelock at the minute, and the more I read it, the more this kind of thing makes sense.

Think of it this way: a dog doesn't look for a chemical toilet when it needs to go .. the dog just goes.

Where's the ecological friendliness there?

All animals make a mess with little or no regard for their / our environment. Bacteria on a petri dish will ultimately choke on their own excrement or starve to death.

We humans aren't any different, we just happen to make a little more mess than most other animals...
 
At February 15, 2005 5:19 AM, Blogger Sray said...
This Gaia hypothesis is quite interesting.. Asimov used it in his foundation series to tie it in with the robot series.
Gaia suggests that life adapts and coexists with its environment, (like my post on coral reefs). But since the natural world proceeds at a certain pace, wouldnt the system become unstable and collapse if it is tinkered with a faster rate? Animals and plants have always modified their surroundings to their advantage, but I think we are changing our world a bit too faster than the world can cope with.
 
At February 15, 2005 7:14 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Not necessarily.

If you think of Gaia as a living organism, then like all organisms, there's a level of sophistication in terms of nervous system, organs and various others sensors.

So, with humans pumping the atmosphere full of shit, the mean temperature rises.

Snow melts in the Arctic and fresh water desalinates the north Atlantic.

The mid-Atlantic conveyer shuts down, the northern hemisphere cools and the rampant temperature rise is brought under control.

The elevated levels of carbon dioxide are caught in the excess rain and snow fall and the carbon cycle is reined in, also.

There's every reason to believe that the harder we push Gaia, the harder and faster she will react to us.

Right now, she's warning us. If we continue to mess things up, she will alter the conditions of our environment in such as way that it isn't conducive to life, thus culling the human race.

Once our numbers are reduced, and we no longer constitute a reasonable threat, then the conditions will be restored.

In geological terms, we're in an ice age right now, and these things are cyclic, typically connected to the processional movement of the orbit of the Earth, which has a half cycle of 15,000 years.

Let's not forget, we are part of the mechanism of life. As much as we might like to think we know better, or that we're somehow outside of it, we're not.

Right now, we're one wobbly cog in an otherwise near-faultless machine...
 
At February 15, 2005 7:30 AM, Blogger Sray said...
"There's every reason to believe that the harder we push Gaia, the harder and faster she will react to us."...

I am sure that will be the case. But can the push be so severe that it might lead to not only the eradication of mankind, but also the loss of a large portion of the rest of the species? Also, we have developed some things that are not found in nature (nukes). Once nature starts pushing back, there will be a terrible lack of resources. What if the fight over resources lead to nuclear war? I am not sure nature can recover from such a disaster.. at least not soon.
 
At February 15, 2005 8:59 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"I am sure that will be the case. But can the push be so severe that it might lead to not only the eradication of mankind, but also the loss of a large portion of the rest of the species?"

Whichever is most beneficial to the continuance of life as a whole.

If a short-term mass extinction is required, then so be it. It wouldn't be the first time.

As for nuclear war, there's been considerable amount of research in this area, specifically by the French and the Americans with regards to detonations on the various Pacific atolls.

Other than vitrification of surrounding coral, the general loss of flora and fora in the immediate area, there has been little or no impact in the deeper water courses or to surrounding areas from radioactive fall-out.

In fact, estimates made on the yield of existing nuclear arsenals have projected minimal global impact .. other than major urban human populations being all but wiped out.

For obvious reasons, much of this research gets buried because of various political agendas and the fear that such unfavorable data might otherwise dent reasonable and legitimate efforts for global disarmament.

Sometimes, nefarious political machinations are for the greater good...
 
At February 15, 2005 2:08 PM, Blogger Sray said...
I agree with most of what you said... but the past extinctions left a sizeable number (at least 10%?) of the species pool alive. The next mas extinction (if triggered by man) might not. I am cynically regarding man as the tumor on the world. Just as our body can correct small problems/disease by fighting back, but cannot cope with a major tumor, earth might not be able to recover from man's doings.

Abt. the nukes... one or two (heck, may be 10) might be recoverable. But man has 1000s in his arsenal. Unleashing of most of that might not be recoverable.

But never say never.. perhaps the earth will recover.. only that it will take a lot longer. Multicelullar land life might be destroyed in such a case, but bacteria, and deep marine life would survive. Life would go on.
 
At February 15, 2005 2:30 PM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
It's tempting to side with Agent Smith in the Matrix when he's interrogating Morpheus.

We do act like a virus, consuming all of our natural resources until there's nothing left and then moving on somewhere else.

Hey! It's pretty good having someone to waste quality brain cells with...
 
At February 15, 2005 2:46 PM, Blogger Sray said...
"We do act like a virus, consuming all of our natural resources until there's nothing left and then moving on somewhere else."...

LOL... but the problem is: unless we develop space travel soon, once we have consumed this planet, there wont be anywhere to move on to!

Brain cells are for spending :).. too many of them unused anyway...

Perhaps that will make us crankier as we grow older?!
 

Post a Comment