Saturday, June 25, 2005
This Day:

We are all familiar with the three most common forms of matter that we see around us everyday: solid, liquid, gas. However, matter behaves in strange ways when exposed to high temperatures and pressures. For example, at high temperatures (typically tens of thousands of degrees), the gaseous state transforms into a state called plasma, where the atoms are shorn of some or all electrons. This is state that the solar corona is composed of. Similarly, at extremely low temperatures (millionth of degrees above Absolute Zero), matter takes on states dictated by Quantum Mechanics, viz. supersolid and superfluid (also known as Bose-Einstein Condensate).

Rotating ball of gas, punctured with vortices (Courtesy: MIT)
Now scientists from MIT have become the first to create a new type of matter, a gas of atoms that shows high-temperature superfluidity! The work, to be published in Nature, will solve lingering questions about superconductivity.
Superconductivity is a quantum mechanical phenomenon, seen (as of yet) only in certain materials at very close to Absolute Zero. In such a situation, the material loses all resistance to electric current! This is very exciting since if perfected, we can save huge amounts of energy, since most of the electrical transmission losses are due to resistance in the wires.
Similar to superconductivity, where electricity loses all resistance, a superfluid gas can flow without resistance (say through a pipe). When the pipe is rotated, an ordinary gas would rotate with it, thus creating vortices. But a superfluid can only rotate when it forms vortices similar to mini-tornadoes. This gives a rotating superfluid the appearance of Swiss cheese, where the holes are the cores of the mini-tornadoes, like the picture above. The gas was cooled down to 50 billionths of one degree abouve Absolute Zero!!
Interestingly, the gas can also serve as a model for studying properties of much denser forms of matter such as solid superconductors, neutron stars or the quark-gluon plasma that existed in the early universe :):).

(Hide) (Show)

6 Comments:

At June 27, 2005 2:27 AM, Blogger LEMNA said...
Misss u aloooottttt,u cann feel how much:(
Are u really sick pal???:(
 
At June 27, 2005 2:27 AM, Blogger LEMNA said...
Dalllly where r uuuuuu????
 
At June 27, 2005 8:06 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Yes dearr, I have a little fever :). Nothing to worry about :):)... miss u toooo >:D<>:D< :).
 
At June 28, 2005 10:48 AM, Blogger KL said...
Eh :P:P

So, does this mean that a suferfluid gas will not rotate even if the pipe is rotated? It will only rotate at a certain high velocity (when it form mini tornadoes)?

Also, it would be nice if you can explain how this supefluid gas can help in understanding neutron stars :-).
 
At June 28, 2005 11:00 AM, Blogger Sray said...
A superfluid has no friction. So there is no friction between the fluid, and the walls of the pipe! Only when there are small non-uniformities introduced that the gas forms vortices :):).

About Neutron Stars. Remember that neutron stars might have superfluid properties (as they have extremely low viscosity => really low friction). So if one could simulate a rotating ball of superfluid, and then introduce vortices (which might be caused due to magnetic fields, both in neutron stars and superfluids), one might be able to infer/prove properties for the neutron star matter :).
 
At October 11, 2005 4:09 AM, Blogger wise donkey said...
interesting. i did know about plasma but didnt know about the other states that u mention.

aware that urnt posting, but ur blog is addictive and can be read anytime:)

hope u come back soon
 

Post a Comment

Friday, June 24, 2005
This Day:

Brown Dwarfs are heavenly bodies, neither small enough to be planets, nor large enough to be stars. Typically 5-90 times the mass of Jupiter (∼ 0.01 of the mass of our Sun), Brown Dwarfs have a gaesous composition of Hydrogen and Helium (just like the Sun), but the fusion nuclear reactions (that power the Sun) have not happened due to the relatively low temperature and pressure at the core.
Now for the first time, astronomers have observed a jet of matter spewing from a Brown Dwarf. This suggests that they form in a similar manner as stars, and even large planets like Jupiter and Saturn might have once spewed such jets.

Brown Dwarf Jet Source (Courtesy: NewScientistSpace)
There are different theories to Brown Dwarf birth. Some think they condense from gas and dust clouds like other stars but are simply limited by the size of the clouds. Others say they are tossed out of their birth clouds prematurely by gravitational tussles with other growing stars in the cloud. Recent observations of large, dusty discs around brown dwarfs have bolstered the former theory, as only small - if any - discs are thought to be able to survive a violent ejection in the latter scenario.
Researchers led by Emma Whelan of Ireland's Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies (DIAS) have observed a jet stretching 1.5 billion kms (Earth to Sun distance, in comparison is 150 million kms!) from a young Brown Dwarf in a stellar nursery called Rho Ophiuchi. Similar jets have been detected around young, massive stars and are thought to form from material in the disc that swirls around them. The stars grow when matter falls on them from the disc, but the stars' magnetic fields funnel about a tenth of that matter back through the jets.
Jets can say a lot of things about the Brown Dwarfs. From the length and intensity of the jets, astronomers can detect the composition, mass, and magnetic properties of the Dwarf. In addition, such data can be used to determine if our Jupiter and Saturn sported such jets in the past, and if Saturnian Rings have anything to do with the creation of such jets.

(Hide) (Show)

3 Comments:

At June 27, 2005 5:55 PM, Blogger Sray said...
Wow this is crazy!!! Thanks a lot for this link :):). This, if successful, has huge implications for each of us, and the society at large.
 
At June 28, 2005 10:55 AM, Blogger KL said...
I thought jets are formed when the stars rorate at a very high speed and then the magentic fields throw those matter out. That's why not all stars emit jets. If that's true, then does this mean that brown dwarfs are rotating at very speed? And, then why should scientists think Jupiter/Saturn would also have given out jets (if they didn't rotate at high speed)?
 
At June 28, 2005 11:03 AM, Blogger Sray said...
That is one way jets are formed. Another way is when there is disk of gas surrounding the star. The disk loses energy due to friction, and slowly falls towards the star. Also, due to friction, the disk is often electrically charged (as the electrons are ejected out and the positively charged hydrogen ions/protons are left behind). If the star/brown dwarf has a magnetic field (which often is the case), the particles are then trapped in that field, and are fired out as jets from the two poles :).
 

Post a Comment

Thursday, June 23, 2005
This Day:

Microtubules are elongated protein structures found in cells. Polymers of tubulin, microtubules are hollow cylinder-like structures, consisting of 13 long strands of the tubulin polymer along the axis. They are part of the exoskeleton of our cells, and also provide the support-structure for nerve cells, and perform essential functions during cell division.
For the first time, scientists have unraveled the processes that take place when tubulin polymers combine to form a microtubule. Eva Nogales and Hong-Wei Wang of the Life Sciences Division of the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory report their findings in the 16 June 2005, issue of the journal Nature.

Microtubule (Courtesy: Wikipedia)
As the microtubules play a critical role during cell division, understanding the way it is created can pave the way to new anti-cancer drugs (Cancer is essentially cells multiplying without control, and thus an ability to control the microtubule growth can lead to a way to stop that). The research identifies the technique in which a GTP (Guanosine Triphosphate, a chemical composed of the nucleotide Guanine and a inorganic radical named triphosphate) combines with a single tubulin, which further enables other tubulins to latch onto it, and thus build the cylinder:):).
The new high-resolution models of tubulin transitional states will be used to understand how microtubules explore their cellular environment to find their goals — a process crucial to the accurate deployment of spindles during cell division, for example — and how drugs can be designed and targeted to put a monkey wrench into the growth of cancer cells:):).

(Hide) (Show)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Wednesday, June 22, 2005
This Day:

In certain fields, small is always beautiful. One such field is that of artificial satellites. The smaller a satellite is, less fuel it spends to get up in orbit or to navigate. Also it is harder to detect, and can perform intricate moves much more easily that its larger cousins.
With this in mind, NASA's Johnson Space Center has built a volley-ball sized satellite, called Miniature Autonomous Extravehicular Robotic Camera (Mini AERCam). Weighing about 10 pounds, the craft will be used for remote viewing and inspection on future human spaceflight missions.

AERCam (Courtesy: ScienceDaily)
The vehicle is designed with a central ring that houses the power and propulsion system. Batteries are lithium-ion with six hours of operational time. The propulsion system is designed for cold-gas xenon, which packs more densely than nitrogen, but is compatible with low-cost nitrogen in the current ground test configuration. Attitude and position control are achieved with the use of twelve thrusters, distributed across four thruster pods around the central ring. The batteries are rechargeable and a port is provided for refueling:).
Early development is funded by the Space Shuttle Program Office, which is considering using Mini AERCam to inspect the Shuttle's heat shield in space. The nanosatellite will not be used on the Return to Flight mission (STS-114), but holds long-term promise for future space operations.
The craft could be deployed and retrieved many times during a single space mission, with the use of a hangar-based docking system located on the exterior of the vehicle. Other features include custom avionics based on the PowerPC 740/750 microprocessor, "camera-on-a-chip" imagers with video compression, micro electromechanical system gyroscopes, precise relative GPS navigation, digital radio frequency communications, micro-patch antennas, digital instrumentation networking and compact mechanical packaging.
Hopefully, in-space inspection by such satellites will prevent tragedies such as the Columbia disaster.

(Hide) (Show)

1 Comments:

At June 24, 2005 1:12 PM, Blogger Sray said...
I think it will be sent up with a shuttle, and released in space.
 

Post a Comment

Tuesday, June 21, 2005
This Day:

Did anyone else have the same experience? A new study suggests that the brain has problems listening and looking at the same time! The parts of the brain that handle visual input are less effective when the mind is also processing audio input, and vice versa. According to Steven Yantis, a Johns Hopkins University psychologist, directing attention to listening effectively 'turns down the volume' on input to the visual parts of the brain.

The Brain (Courtesy: ScienceBob)
In the study, people aged 19 to 35 watched a rapidly changing display of letters and numbers while listening to three voices speak other letters and numbers. The scientists recorded brain activity. When the test subjects paid attention to the screen, activity decreased in the parts of their brain responsible for listening.
Surprisingly, when a subject was told to shift attention from vision to hearing, the brain's parietal cortex and the prefrontal cortex produced a burst of activity. The scientists assume it was a signal to initiate the shift of attention. Experts had previously thought those parts of the brain were only involved in processing visual information.
This has interesting implications. For example, talking on the phone while driving might reduce your awareness of your surroundings. But again, we do not find watching movies to be problematic just because there is a lot of dialogue. So, the scientists perhaps need to flesh this out a little bit more:).

(Hide) (Show)

8 Comments:

At June 23, 2005 5:24 AM, Blogger Onkroes said...
"For example, talking on the phone while driving might reduce your awareness of your surroundings"

Oooh contentious! Actually the same applies to talking to a passenger in the car, with the added distraction of looking at them (as some people seem to keep turning to look at their passengers while talking to them!)

I don't think it reduces awareness generally, so much as reduces your ability to concentrate (which I think is different).

It's a well known fact (which means it could be wrong, but does seem to be supported by this study) that if you're trying to listen carefully, closing your eyes helps you concentrate. I've found this myself (except it interferes with my driving sometimes;-))
 
At June 23, 2005 5:29 AM, Blogger Sray said...
True. But when u are talking with a passenger, he/she is also aware of the surroundings, and will stop talking (hopefully) if u are taking in a dangerous turn, or changing lanes, etc. That is not true for cellphone conversations, as the person on the other line might decide to scream right at that moment! And abt. closing eyes, I do it a lottt when I am listening to music :)... but it hasnt interfered in my driving, yet!
 
At June 23, 2005 7:34 AM, Blogger broomhilda said...
I sometimes have problems hearing what someone is saying or understanding their words and find myself lip reading while listening.
I also listen to music and talk on my cell phone (hands free) while driving and so far, it hasn't interfered with my ability to pay attention to what is going on around me.
 
At June 23, 2005 8:14 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Listening to music is a different process, I think. We dont listen to every word that is spoken, but just absorb the music. So we can concentrate on other things while listening to music. The lip reading part is interesting! Sometimes, it is easier to understand a different/unknown accent if we could see the person face-to-face and see his/her lips move.
 
At June 23, 2005 12:26 PM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
When you think about it, it's hardly a surprising finding, is it?

The sheer amount of data that thew brain has to deal with when processing vision when compared to hearing has to be huge.

You don't just see stuff, you're gauging depth, picking out patterns, assessing threat value, speed, motion .. on and on and on...
 
At June 23, 2005 3:10 PM, Blogger Sray said...
Seeing does involve a lot of data transfer between the eyes and the brain. But, the brain also interpolates and extrapolates what it sees, and makes our experience seem more 'real'. Our brain constantly fills in the blanks with our memories, and from what we just saw before the current scene.
 
At June 23, 2005 4:51 PM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
It's amazing how truly poor the source images are coming from the eyes and how must post-processing the brain has to do.

Among other things, the eyes see upside down! So that's the first thing that's sorted out...
 
At June 23, 2005 6:46 PM, Blogger Sray said...
Yup! First of all the image is inverted. The eye separates the color and the brightness information. The brain then processes motion, edges, patterns and depth, fills up hidden regions, extrapolates hidden motions, adjusts contrast, coordinates the input from both eyes with sound if any, corrects for any head or eye movements, and finally, uses memory to fill in hidden/unknown detail. Phew!!
 

Post a Comment

Monday, June 20, 2005
This Day:

Cosmos 1 is a privately-funded attempt to launch a Solar Sail into space. Dedicated to the enduring memory of Carl Sagan, the Solar Sail is to be launched from a submerged submarine in the Barents Sea (See my post on May 07, 2005 for more details on the solar sail).
Now in another few hours (at around 4:09PM New York Time), the rocket carrying the sail will be launched!! I am keeping my fingers crossed:).
Latest Update: The Russian space agency said the attempt to launch the solar sail space vehicle was not successful because the booster rocket's engine failed soon after it blasted into space. The booster failed 83 seconds after its launch from a Russian nuclear submarine in the Barents Sea, and the vehicle was lost :(.

Cosmos-1 (Courtesy: The Planetary Society)
Update: Hooraay! The launch went on flawlessly, and the first private solar sail mission is on the way:):).
Cosmos 1, the world's first solar sail spacecraft, launched in the tip of a converted Russian intercontinental ballistic missile from the Barents Sea for the start of a mission that cost just $4 million.
Mission operations personnel monitoring the spacecraft from the Planetary Society's three-story bungalow in Pasadena got word from mission operations in Moscow of the rocket's take off just after 3:45 p.m. EDT (1945 GMT).
Cosmos 1 will orbit for several days to acclimatize its instruments to the vacuum of space before its twin sails are deployed via inflatable booms. Mission controls now plan to deploy the sails late on Saturday.
Each sail is made up of eight triangular blades whose combined structure looks like a disk. The reflective Mylar sails are about 5 microns thick, or about one-quarter the thickness of a plastic trash bag. After it deploys its sails, Cosmos 1 will be visible as it circles the Earth about once every 100 minutes:):).

(Hide) (Show)

16 Comments:

At June 21, 2005 9:15 AM, Blogger Akruti said...
Why r u keeping ur fingures crossed?? now i am confused, "scratches her head and walks off":(
 
At June 21, 2005 4:42 PM, Blogger Sray said...
Fingers are crossed, as the launch might fail!
 
At June 21, 2005 11:26 PM, Blogger Akruti said...
what happened to the launch?? i am not much interested but would like to know)
 
At June 22, 2005 6:23 AM, Blogger Sray said...
It is lost in space :((. Something went wrong, and the mission might have failed :(.
 
At June 22, 2005 6:31 AM, Blogger Tupinambah said...
I was going to send you it to you ! Sounds interesting the idea of travelling in the Solar System but having said there is a nuclear weapon there I have concerns if we Humans are going to mess the Universe...
 
At June 22, 2005 8:52 AM, Blogger G said...
This is really too bad. Why is it so damned hard to get a reliable spacecraft launched? They put so much time, research, and money into these things, you'd think they'd be more successful.
 
At June 22, 2005 10:00 AM, Blogger LEMNA said...
This is not me sneaking again haaa!
 
At June 22, 2005 10:01 AM, Blogger LEMNA said...
So so?!U liedddd then:((Lier Lier Lier pants on fire fire fire!
 
At June 22, 2005 10:01 AM, Blogger LEMNA said...
Can I get lost like that too?!
 
At June 22, 2005 11:24 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Lucia: There are peaceful ways to harness nuclear power, for example, the Cassini mission near Saturn uses a nuclear-powered pack! And dont worry, we humans are too puny to mess up the universe in any near future :)).
 
At June 22, 2005 11:25 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Geoff: One word, Money :(. The scientists had to use a Russian rocket, and it seems that malfunctioned. So it is not the solar sail's fault, but the launch itself went wrong. If they had more money, or more support from the US government, perhaps they could have used a American rocket :(.
 
At June 22, 2005 11:27 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Lemna: :D:D:D... I couldnt see u sneaking in.. I was driving then! That is cheating :)). Wanna get lost like that? Just put on Eva Cassidy's music, and close your eyes.... :):):).
 
At June 22, 2005 6:54 PM, Blogger Sray said...
As far as I know, the main factor was money. This one was a privately funded effort, and they went for the cheapest launch provider :(.
 
At June 23, 2005 7:37 AM, Blogger broomhilda said...
I'll keep an eye out for it the next time I'm out sailing.
 
At June 23, 2005 8:15 AM, Blogger Sray said...
Dont think u can see it :(. It has fallen into the sea :((.
 
At June 23, 2005 3:11 PM, Blogger Sray said...
True. This is what happens when u dont have a big budget.
 

Post a Comment

Sunday, June 19, 2005
This Day:

Time is a strange thing. There is no law in physics that prohibits time from going backwards, but as we all know, it has a tendency to go always forward:)). Why is it so? We can all envisage the problems that time travel would create: people could go back in time and kill their grandparents, and give past generations modern technology or prevent some historic event from happening!
Physicists Daniel Greenberger of the City University of New York and Karl Svozil of the Vienna University of Technology in Austria have come up with a provocative idea:), but it suggests that time travel might not be possible at all:(.

Worm Hole (Courtesy: ThinkQuest)
Worm-Holes are hypothetical bridges (arising out of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity) that might join distant regions of the spacetime. Imagine a 2D surface, where two points are far apart. If it were possible to bend the surface, the two points would be much closer, and a hole could be constructed to stitch the two points together. A similar construct is perhaps possible in 3D space too. However, Kip Thorne showed that such a hole could be used for time travel: a person entering from one end of the hole might reach the other side before he/she entered the hole:D.
Then how are the time paradoxes resolved? According to the new proposal, such paradoxes may be ruled out by the weirdness inherent in laws of quantum physics. The constraint arises from a quantum object's ability to behave like a wave. Quantum objects split their existence into multiple component waves, each following a distinct path through space-time. Ultimately, an object is usually most likely to end up in places where its component waves recombine, or "interfere", constructively, with the peaks and troughs of the waves lined up, say. The object is unlikely to be in places where the components interfere destructively, and cancel each other out.
When Greenberger and Svozil analysed what happens when these component waves flow into the past, they found that the paradoxes implied by Einstein's equations never arise. Waves that travel back in time interfere destructively, thus preventing anything from happening differently from that which has already taken place:)).
So, it seems that even if matter could travel back in time, it will not be able to keep its cohesion, and therefore no information can be sent back in time to influence the past!

(Hide) (Show)

4 Comments:

At June 21, 2005 5:44 AM, Blogger Sray said...
:)). Even worse. You might come out as pure energy, with no similarity to you :):).
 
At June 21, 2005 7:13 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
Among other things, I've written a number of science fiction novels.

A consistent theme is that of time travel.

Since I've not always had access to theoretical physics discussing the theme, I've had to work most of the problems out for myself.

So things like retroactive suicide are an obvious no-no, as are making any physical contact with your former self, which is probably in line with the ideas put forward in your post.

But surely these quantum waves cannot permeate all of space-time?

I'd imagine time travel being possible, but requiring the traveller to move to more distant locations to avoid such conflicts...
 
At June 21, 2005 5:48 PM, Blogger Sray said...
Care to post some of your novels online?! Or at least some snippets? :).
The only thing that should not be possible is going back in time and changing the history, as that violates causality. Anothing else (like going to the future, and never coming back) should be possible (and is indeed theoretically possible, if one could find ways to travel close to speed of light).

Quantum waves are not waves in real space. So they might permeate space-time, but not actually be detectable unless they collapse. So in that sense, an uncollapsed quantum field is not detectable, as it is a theoretical construct that works, but scientists are not yet sure how or why!
 
At June 22, 2005 3:47 AM, Blogger Wayne Smallman said...
"Care to post some of your novels online?! Or at least some snippets? :)"

Actually .. No!

If I did that, they'd be public domain, and I've my work cut out making any money from them...
 

Post a Comment