News Feeds

Researchers unveil a microstructure design guide to enhance the durability of lithium secondary batteries.

Could the universe's missing matter be hiding in a "dark" extra dimension? We now have simple ways to test this outlandish idea - and the existence of extra dimensions more generally

This new article from the Wall Street Journal describes in some detail the way the world is boycotting Israel since October 7, both because it’s defending itself and because it’s a Jewish state.

Such boycotts aren’t new, of course, as the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement has been in swing since about 2001, but the boycotts, and calls for them, have intensified since the war in Gaza.  I’m most concerned with the call for academic boycotts, in which non-Israeli universities swear that they won’t exchange scholars or knowledge with Israeli universities. Such boycotts violate the free exchange of ideas that is the lifeblood of academia. But there are also material boycotts as well: BDS was, I believe, mainly meant to impede the exchange of goods. The academic part began around 2014, and was very quiet—until recently. And that’s what this article documents:

Click below to read the article, though it’s not archived (pdf available with judicious inquiry). I’ll give some quotes (indented):

Some examples of boycotts or calls for them:

When an ethics committee at Ghent University in Belgium recommended terminating all research collaborations with Israeli institutions in late May, Israeli computational biologist Eran Segal didn’t see it coming.

The sciences had seen little impact from global boycott movements, even months into the war, and Segal’s work had nothing to do with the Israeli military effort. The university’s research collaborations, the Ghent committee noted, include research on autism, Alzheimer’s disease, water purification and sustainable agriculture.

. . . Israelis are finding they are no longer welcome at many European universities, including participating in scientific collaborations. Their participation in cultural institutions and defense trade shows is increasingly becoming taboo.

Ghent University is, of course, where my philosopher colleague Maarten Boudry works. He’s vehemently opposed to such boycotts, and has decried them in Belgian and Dutch magazines and newspapers.

Below is an example of Israel being booted out of international meetings, though this one has little to do with academia:

Lidor Madmoni, chief executive of a small Israeli defense startup, prepared for months for a June international weapons show in Paris. The conference, Eurosatory, would be a rare opportunity for his small staff to expand their business, he said. Then came an email informing him that, because of a French court decision, his company was prohibited from attending.

“We have the obligation to block your access to the exhibition starting tomorrow,” the organizers said on the eve of the event, citing court orders that followed a French defense ministry ban issued in response to Israeli military operations in Rafah, the Gaza city where more than one million people had sought refuge.

The French decisions “shocked the entire community” of Israeli defense technology companies, said Noemie Alliel, managing director in Israel for Starburst Aerospace, an international consulting firm that develops and invests in startups in aerospace and defense. Conference organizers said they had appealed to overturn the court decision and told Israeli companies in an email that they were doing all that they could to enable them to attend.

. . . The Israeli defense-exports sector—flourishing before the war, with a record $13 billion in sales in 2023—got wind in March that it could be a target, when Chile barred Israeli companies from taking part in Latin America’s biggest aerospace fair. The French ban followed in June.

Back to academics (my bolding):

When the war began, new boycotts began to trickle in, mainly from humanities and social-science departments, said Netta Barak-Corren, a law professor who heads an antiboycott task force formed during the war at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

The boycotts began to widen around two months ago, spreading to the hard sciences and to the university level—“universitywide movements and more importantly decisions to cut all ties with Israeli universities and Israeli academics,” she said.

More than 20 universities in Europe and Canada have adopted such bans, she said.

O Canada!  And from Europe:

An Israeli student who was preparing to study at the University of Helsinki said she was already looking for housing in Finland—until the school told her in May that it had suspended its exchange agreements with Israeli universities.

The University of Helsinki stopped sending students to Israel after Oct. 7 and decided to suspend exchanges in May to express its concern about the conflict, said Minna Koutaniemi, the head of the school’s international exchange services. The university doesn’t intend to restrict its researchers from collaborating with Israelis, she said.

From the U.S. (this “ban” may be rescinded):

Boycotts are gaining traction across the academic spectrum. Cultural Critique, a journal published by the University of Minnesota Press, told an Israeli sociologist in May that his essay was barred from consideration because, they believed, he was affiliated with an Israeli institution.

The journal told the scholar that it follows BDS guidelines, “which include ‘withdrawing support from Israel’s…cultural and academic institutions’.”

Cultural Critique subsequently apologized for excluding the article on the basis of the scholar’s academic affiliation and amended its website to say that submissions would be evaluated “without regard to the identity and affiliation of the author.” It invited the scholar to resubmit.

Authors participate as well:

. . . some creative artists abroad are cutting themselves off from Israel. Since the start of the war, a few dozen authors, most of them American, have refused to have their books translated into Hebrew and sold in Israel, said Efrat Lev, the foreign-rights director at the Deborah Harris Agency in Israel, a literary agency.

One author who had worked with the agency and wrote a young-adult book focusing on queer acceptance refused to publish a second book in Israel, although a contract had already been signed and a translation to Hebrew was under way, said Lev.

“I felt that it was an important book for Israeli kids who are experiencing similar experiences,” she said. “This broke my heart.”

Better to demonize Israel than to help gay Israeli kids!

Academic boycotts seem to me worthless; indeed, they’re counterproductive because they divide a worldwide academic community and impede the dissemination of knowledge.  The University of Chicago issued this statement when Bob Zimmer was President:

On December 22, 2013, the University of Chicago released the following statement on the subject of academic boycotts:

“The University of Chicago has from its founding held as its highest value the free and open pursuit of inquiry. Faculty and students must be free to pursue their research and education around the world and to form collaborations both inside and outside of the academy, encouraging engagement with the widest spectrum of views. For this reason, we oppose boycotts of academic institutions or scholars in any region of the world, and oppose recent actions by academic societies to boycott Israeli institutions.”

It’s not rocket science!  But people, including academics who should know better, are hell-bent on punishing Israel and, of course, those uppity Jews who defended themselves against Hamas.  As Dorian Abbot also pointed out, such boycotts violate the Mertonian Academic Norms:

Boycotting Israeli academics is an unacceptable violation of the Mertonian Scientific Norm of universalism.https://t.co/o83TlXF1jU

— Dorian Schuyler Abbot (@DorianAbbot) July 10, 2024

You can see those norms here, which were given by sociologist Thomas Merton as “the four norms of good scientific research. . . . These norms are communism, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism.”  The one Dorian refers to is the second:

• “universalism: scientific validity is independent of the sociopolitical status/personal attributes of its participants.”

Ergo the status of “being Israeli” has no bearing on whether science should be exchanged or impeded.  Academic boycotts are, to use the argot, stupid.

Researchers have discovered a hormone in mice that prevents bone loss during lactation and could one day be used to treat osteoporosis

DNA evidence from tombs in Sweden and Denmark suggests major plague outbreaks were responsible for the Neolithic decline in northern Europe

This brouhaha all started in 2021 when seven faculty members at the University of Auckland posted the “The Listener letter on science”, a call to prevent teaching indigenous “ways of knowing” as science.   The letter is archived here and here though the text isn’t online.  If you click to enlarge the screenshot below, you’ll see it’s not all that controversial in itself; but its call that indigenous knowledge  “falls far short of what we can define as science itself” got plenty of Kiwi hackles up.  (The authors are talking about the local indigenous “way of knowing”, Mātauranga Māori (MM), which the government and schools were pushing should be taught in science classes as coequal to modern science.)

The authors were widely demonized, two were investigated by New Zealand’s Royal Society (who insisted at first that MM was indeed science), and several were threatened with academic punishment. As I wrote in my post of Dec. 14, 2021, the Vice-Chancellor of Auckland Uni, who is the head of the institution, also criticized the letter and its arguments:

Earlier this summer, Vice-Chancellor Dawn Freshwater issued a statement explicitly criticizing The Listener letter and its seven signers, making their identities easy to find. Two of her statements from Freshwater’s official announcement of July 26:

A letter in this week’s issue of The Listener magazine from seven of our academic staff on the subject of whether mātauranga Māori can be called science has caused considerable hurt and dismay among our staff, students and alumni.

Note the “hurt and dismay claim”, which at the very outset puts her statement in a context of emotionality rather than reason. And there was more:

While the academics are free to express their views, I want to make it clear that they do not represent the views of the University of Auckland.

The University has deep respect for mātauranga Māori as a distinctive and valuable knowledge system. We believe that mātauranga Māori and Western empirical science are not at odds and do not need to compete. They are complementary and have much to learn from each other.

This view is at the heart of our new strategy and vision, Taumata Teitei, and the Waipapa Toitū framework, and is part of our wider commitment to Te Tiriti and te ao principles.

Now it’s not even clear if the University of Auckland even has an official view about science vs. mātauranga Māori, yet note that Freshwater characterizes the latter as “a distinctive and valuable knowledge system”, maintaining that “mātauranga Māori and Western empirical science are not at odds and do not need to compete.”  That is an arrant falsehood. For one thing, mātauranga Māori is creationist, which puts it squarely at odds with evolution. I won’t go on; you can find for yourself many other ways the two areas are “at odds” with each other.

Freshwater subsequently walked back her opposition after some pushback, and announced twice that year that the University of Auckland would host a series of discussions, debates, and panels on the relationship of local indigenous knowledge to modern science. All of us dealing with this issue from the “modern-science-is-not-equivalent-to-indigenous knowledge” side eagerly awaited this event.

It never happened. That of course is not surprising given that the climate in NZ sacralizes indigenous knowledge, and if you question it as a form of science you can be fired or deplatformed.  But of course I’m not a Kiwi, and I can say what I want. What I’ve wanted to do all these four years is to ask Dr. Freshwater what happened to the debates. So I wrote her this email last week:

Dear Vice-Chancellor Freshwater,

 

I’ve followed for some time the debates in New Zealand about the relationship between modern science and Mātauranga Māori.  Looking at my records,I see that on August 13 and December 14 of 2021, you sent out two notices that the University of Auckland would hold a series of lectures, panels, and debates on this issue.

This is from August 13, 2021:

In recent weeks we have witnessed a widespread public debate on the issue of mātauranga Māori and science. The debate has raised important questions about freedom of expression, respect for opposing views, academic freedom and the role of universities in Aotearoa New Zealand. On Tuesday the NZ Herald published an opinion piece on these issues, which you can read on our News pages here.

 

We will be setting up a series of VC lectures, panels and debating sessions, both within the University and externally, to address this and other topics. Universities like ours have an important thought-leadership role to play on these issues, which we embrace, while recognising that we need to foster an environment within which such debates can take place positively, respectfully and constructively.

And from December 14 of the same year:

I am calling for a return to a more respectful, open-minded, fact-based exchange of views on the relationship between mātauranga Māori and science, and I am committing the University to action on this.

In the first quarter of 2022 we will be holding a symposium in which the different viewpoints on this issue can be discussed and debated calmly, constructively and respectfully. I envisage a high-quality intellectual discourse with representation from all viewpoints: mātauranga Māori, science, the humanities, Pacific knowledge systems and others.

As far as I know, no symposia, discussions, or debates were ever held, though this was nearly three years ago. Was this idea discarded, or did I miss something?

Thanks for your attention.

Cordially, Jerry Coyne Professor Emeritus Dept. Ecology and Evolution The University of Chicago

I have had no reply.  Do you think I will get one? I’m not holding my breath.  I know, because Auckland Uni scours the internet for its mentions (I’ve received stern emails from them demanding corrections of my posts), that they’ll see this, even if Freshwater doesn’t read my email.

The upshot is that there’s never been ANY discussion or debate of this kind in New Zealand, although there have been articles written back and forth, most of them defending the scientific aspect of MM. But rumor has it that there will soon be some significant pushback soon on equating MM with science.

But the University of Auckland, the premier university in New Zealand, has failed abysmally in its promise to encourage free discussion of this important issue. It’s important because resolving whether indigenous knowledge should be taught as science will decide how the country and its students fare in competition with other first-world countries in scientific advances and education.  One of the purposes of a university is to find the truth, but that can’t be done if free discussion is banned.

I have about three batches left, so if you have wildlife photos, please send them in.

Today’s photos is the second installment of photos from Texas contributed by Damon Williford (part 1 is here).  Damon’s narrative and captions are indented, and you can enlarge his photos by clicking on them. Here’s his introduction to the set.

I took these photos at Brazos Bend State Park on June 23 of this year. Brazos Bend State Park is located about 45 miles south of central Houston and 45 miles north of Bay City where I live. The park contains a variety of habitats, including prairie, woodlands, marshes, swamps, and lakes. The Brazos River forms the eastern boundary of the park.

Eastern Cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus):

A juvenile American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) hanging out near a footbridge:

Blanchard’s Cricket Frog (Acris blanchardi):

A male Eastern Pondhawk (Erythemis simplicicollis):

A Question Mark Butterfly (Polygonia interrogationis) feeding on a severed crayfish claw. I was aware that some species of butterflies will feed on carrion, but this was the first time I have personally observed it:

Black-eyed Susan (Rudbeckia hirta):

Violet Ruellia (Ruellia nudiflora):

American Lotus (Nelumbo lutea):

American Lotus:

Water Hyacinth (Pontederia crassipes):

Mushrooms in the genus Chlorophyllum (maybe). That is the best I could do with the identification:

I used iNaturalist to help me identify the organisms in photos 14-22 because my ID skills become progressively worse as the list moves from amphibian (average) to plants (poor) to fungi (non-existent).

Camera information: I used a Canon EOS R7 mirrorless camera body for all photographs. I used the Canon RF800mm f/11 IS USM lens for photos 1-8, and the Canon RF100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM lens for the remaining photos.

The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is a global pandemic, with 39 million cases worldwide, and over 1 million new infections each year. While it rose to epidemic and then pandemic levels in the 1980s, the first case goes back to 1959. HIV is a retrovirus that inserts its genetic material into the DNA of host cells, and targets the immune system as […]

The post Science vs HIV first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.

A dead whale was tagged with satellite tracking equipment and monitored for more than a week as part of an effort to help authorities better deal with giant carcasses that get washed ashore

Studying the atmospheres of exoplanets is helpful for several reasons. Sometimes, it helps in understanding their formation. Sometimes, it helps define whether the planet might be habitable. And sometimes, you allow a press officer to write the headline “Stench of a gas giant? Nearby exoplanet reeks of rotten eggs.” That headline was released by John Hopkins University’s (JHU) press department after a study describing the atmosphere of one of the nearest known “hot Jupiters” was recently published in Nature.

The malodorous stench from rotten eggs is caused by a compound known as hydrogen sulfide. In the case of exoplanet HD 189733, the atmosphere has trace amounts of the molecule. Technically, even a tiny amount is enough to cause a rancid smell. Still, given all the other components of the planet’s atmosphere, it might not even be noticeable to a physical nose.

So, how did astronomers detect it? By using spectral analysis from the James Webb Space Telescope. It showed not only hydrogen sulfur in the planet’s atmosphere but also other types of sulfur, which is considered one of the building blocks of life as we know it and, therefore, a prime candidate for detection in the hunt for habitable worlds.

Fraser interviews exoplanet atmosphere expert Joanna Barstow.

HD 189733 is clearly not habitable. It is 13 times closer to its host star than Mercury and suffers from notoriously bad weather, including sideways raining glass, 8,000 kph winds, and temperatures above 900 C. However, it does pass in front of its parent star once every two Earth days, making it a baseline case for exoplanet atmospheric observations.

Discovering hydrogen sulfide in its atmosphere, which had not been previously detected, was only one of the atmospheric findings of the study by Guangwei Fu of JHU and his colleagues. Another important one was the lack of methane in the atmosphere. Despite physical conditions that would make it unlikely that methane could exist in the planet’s atmosphere, previous studies have found it. In contrast, Dr. Fu’s comprehensive study clearly did not see methane in HD 189733’s atmosphere.

It does have metals in its atmosphere, though. Just like stars, exoplanets can have a “metallicity” level. Metallicity can help determine how a star’s mass can vary with its metal content. In our own solar system, Neptune and Uranus have higher metal concentrations than Jupiter and Saturn despite having less mass. Scientists are still studying that correlation.

JWST is turning into a fine planet hunter and atmosphere discerner, as Fraser describes.

Overall, exoplanet creation is a hot research topic, and understanding the atmospheres of as many planets as possible will allow scientists to create better models of how exoplanets form. JWST is one of humanity’s most powerful tools to do that, and describing HD 189733’s atmosphere in such detail is a very good baseline to compare other exoplanet’s atmospheres.

And JWST is far from done collecting new primary data on those exoplanet atmospheres. As more data is collected and analyzed, HD 189733’s atmosphere will serve as a touchstone for comparing other gas giants in other solar systems. At least scientists won’t have to smell it to do so.

Learn More:
JHU – Stench of a gas giant? Nearby exoplanet reeks of rotten eggs. And that’s a good thing
Fu et al. – Hydrogen sulfide and metal-enriched atmosphere for a Jupiter-mass exoplanet
UT – Carbon Dioxide Detected on Exoplanet HD 189733b
UT – What’s the Weather Like on Extrasolar Planet HD 189733b?

Lead Image:
Artist’s depiction of HD 189733b with star.
Credit – ROBERTO MOLAR CANDANOSA/JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

The post Webb Detects the Smell of Rotten Eggs in an Exoplanet’s Atmosphere appeared first on Universe Today.

Trucks outfitted with weather sensors, lasers and balloons are mapping urban microclimates in the extreme heat of the US Southwest

Adding crushed basalt rocks and special fertilisers to soils could cut nitrous oxide emissions without harming the ozone layer, but these strategies will cost billions

Italian firm Energy Dome is building a "CO2 battery" in Sardinia that will store excess power from renewables and release it back to the grid when needed

A international team of astronomers has made an exciting discovery about the temperate exoplanet LHS 1140 b: it could be a promising 'super-Earth' covered in ice or water.

Experience from the deployment of blue hydrogen projects will be helpful in lowering future costs of hydrogen production and will remain cost competitive. Additionally, paired with extended tax incentives for carbon sequestration, costs could be significantly reduced further.

Researchers have developed an easy-to-use tool that enables someone to perform complicated statistical analyses on tabular data using just a few keystrokes. Their method combines probabilistic AI models with the programming language SQL to provide faster and more accurate results than other methods.

Awarded the 2023 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, quantum dots have a wide variety of applications ranging from displays and LED lights to chemical reaction catalysis and bioimaging. These semiconductor nanocrystals are so small -- on the order of nanometers -- that their properties, such as color, are size dependent, and they start to exhibit quantum properties. This technology has been really well developed, but only in the visible spectrum, leaving untapped opportunities for technologies in both the ultraviolet and infrared regions of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Awarded the 2023 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, quantum dots have a wide variety of applications ranging from displays and LED lights to chemical reaction catalysis and bioimaging. These semiconductor nanocrystals are so small -- on the order of nanometers -- that their properties, such as color, are size dependent, and they start to exhibit quantum properties. This technology has been really well developed, but only in the visible spectrum, leaving untapped opportunities for technologies in both the ultraviolet and infrared regions of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Certain types of light have proven to be an effective, minimally invasive treatment for cancers located on or near the skin when combined with a light-activated drug. But deep-seated cancers have been beyond the reach of light's therapeutic effects. To change this, engineers and scientists have devised a wireless LED device that can be implanted. This device, when combined with a light-sensitive dye, not only destroys cancer cells, but also mobilizes the immune system's cancer-targeting response.

Finding planets that already have, or have the ingredients for intelligent life is a real challenge. It is exciting that new telescopes and spacecraft are in development that will start to identify candidate planets. Undertaking these observations will take significant amounts of telescope time so we need to find some way to prioritise which ones to look at first. A new paper has been published that suggests we can study the host stars first for the necessary raw elements giving a more efficient way to hunt for similar worlds to Earth. 

Exoplanets are planets that orbit stars outside our solar system. They have been identified in the thousands since the first discovery in 1992, totalling currently 5,288. They vary widely in size, composition, and orbit, ranging from gas giants like Jupiter to rocky, potentially habitable planets similar to Earth. Advanced telescopes and detection methods like the transit and radial velocity techniques have enabled the discovery of Earth-sized exoplanets. Their study not only enhances our understanding of planetary formation and evolution but also the search for extraterrestrial life. 

This illustration shows what the hot rocky exoplanet TRAPPIST-1 b could look like. A new method can help determine what rocky exoplanets might have large reservoirs of subsurface water. Credits: NASA, ESA, CSA, J. Olmsted (STScI)

The search for extraterrestrial life is no easy feat. Looking for aliens or at least environments where extraterrestrial life could one day evolve means knowing what to look for. To star with we can assume life has three basic requirements; I) building block elements (i.e., CHNOPS – carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorous and sulphur,)  II) a solvent to life’s reactions (generally, liquid water) and III) a thermodynamic disequilibrium. It is assumed that similar requirements might be universal in the Cosmos. There is of course a chance of life based on a completely different set of needs but if we are going to start somewhere then we may as well start looking for life like that found on Earth, otherwise well, who knows what to look for!

Life on Earth can gain energy from a wide range of different thermodynamic disequilibria, a great example is life that thrives at the bottom of the ocean, taking energy and indeed nutrients from thermal vents. More widely it relies upon chemical reactions where the an electron is lost or gained changing its oxidation state. This is known as redox disequilibrium. Each reaction requires special proteins called oxidoreductases. The process requires metals as catalysts and without them, the process is unable to progress. 

A black smoker hydrothermal vent discovered in the Atlantic Ocean in 1979. It’s fueled from deep beneath the surface by magma that superheats the water. The plume carries minerals and other materials out to the sea. Courtesy USGS.

The distribution of these metals (which are more accurately known as transition metals) in the Universe varies significantly over time and space. Despite this wide ranging distribution across the cosmos, the role of these metals in enabling life has been largely overlooked in identifying astrobiological targets. The paper published by Giovanni Covone and Donato Giovannelli propose that the presence of certain elements is essential for habitability and should be prioritised as a primary factor when selecting exoplanetary targets in the search for life.

High resolution spectroscopy of rocky planets identified by missions like ESA’s PLATO mission will focus on hunting for CHNOPS elements in stars. This data, along with the exoplanet parameters will help hone the search. Identifying promising candidates will then enable follow up observations as telescope and observatories like the PLATO (PLAnetary Transits and Oscillations of stars) space telescope under development by the ESA and due for launch in 2026. Systems like PLATO and the James Webb Space Telescope are set to change the landscape of our search for extraterrestrial life.

Source : Stellar metallicity is a key parameter for the search of Life in the Universe

The post Do Planets Have the Raw Ingredients for Life? The Answer is in their Stars appeared first on Universe Today.