Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 launch
http://lasp.colorado.edu/education/outerplanets/missions_voyagers.php

Recently, in the news all the focus has been on Voyager 1’s exit of our solar system. It is now flying on into unknown and unexplored space. It is the hero. A soaring symbol of humanity’s curiosity and accomplishment. What about Voyager 2? You do know Voyager 1 has a twin, right? In 1977, NASA launched both Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 into space with missions to explore the Jovian planets and the outer reaches of the Solar System.

Voyager 2 was the first spacecraft to explore Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. Voyager 1 did not discover volcanoes or the Great Red spot on Jupiter. Voyager 1 did not sample Saturn’s atmosphere, providing vital information regarding the gases that compose this great ringed planet, nor did Voyager 1 plunge on towards Uranus and Neptune to  discover the effects of Uranus’ drastic tilt on its magnetic field and it certainly did not photograph the Great Dark Spot on the surface of Neptune. That was all Voyager 2. Even though it may be the slower of the twin spacecraft, moving at 15.428 km/s, it has definitely provided more scientific observation and discovery than its speedier twin. While the attention is on Voyager 1 for leaving our solar system we must remember its better and slower half because Voyager 2 is not far behind.

The Great Red Spot on Jupiter
http://www.universetoday.com/15163/jupiters-great-red-spot/

Although it is fun to pit these spacecraft together as competitive twins, that is not the point. They may be two separate machines, but their goal and intent is the same. They were sent as a team to probe the unknown, to push the limits of human exploration far beyond anything attempted in history. They have accomplished this mission, as a team, and they will continue to soar out into interstellar space, one closely trailing the other, as loyal twins.

Sources

Voyager 2.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 17 Sept. 2013. Web. 18 Sept. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_2>.

“The Mission.” Voyager. Web. 18 Sept. 2013. <http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/index.html>.

California Mountain Ranges
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcommons.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ACalifornia_Coast_Ranges.png&h=0&w=0&sz=1&tbnid=hKI_7UxOk49ljM&tbnh=238&tbnw=212&zoom=1&docid=QDjdwkpsnbJLJM&ei=0pwyUpr4LNLtqQHEuoH4DA&ved=0CAEQsCU

I live in Mill Valley, California, a small suburb tucked away in the Coast Range fourteen miles north of San Francisco. Out of the valley and just behind downtown rises Mount Tamalpias. The wooded mountain shadows the quant municipality and soft wetlands below. It is the most prominent geographical feature in the northern Bay Area and on a clear day can be seen from miles away. Mount Tamalpias is one mountain in the 400 mile California Coast Range, that starts north of San Francisco in Humboldt County and runs south to Santa Barbara.

More than a hundred years ago, my maternal great grandparents settled under  Mount Tamalpias and every generation since has made their home in the shadow of this mountain. But, where my personal history with Mount Tamalpias and the greater California Coast Range ends is certainly not where its physical history ends. Approximately 250 million years ago, the North American Plate and the Pacific Plate collided sending the thinner crust of the Pacific Plate sliding under the more sturdy North American Plate. Around 150-140 million years ago, as the crust of the Pacific Plate melted, it became molten rock and pushed the American Plate upwards, forming the first peaks of the Coast Range.

Serpentine
http://geology.com/minerals/serpentine.shtml

Unlike the convergent boundary formed by the Nazca and South American Plates, that have formed the great Andes Mountains, the collision of the Pacific Plate and the North American changed direction, forming a transformational boundary. Meaning they began to slide north and south along the San Andreas Fault. Today, all land west of the fault slowly moves north, while land east of the fault slowly moves south. This movement creates  one of the most seismically active areas in the world. Evidence suggests that a massive earthquake occurs along the San Andreas Fault approximately every one hundred years.

Under the banks of fog and deep forests of Redwood is the solid core of the Coast Range. This core is composed of granite and serpentine, a unique type of metamorphic rock. The serpentine formed when sedimentary and shale rocks, from the Pacific Plate,  melted in the collision with the North American Plate. This amalgam was then heated by seawater giving it its distinctive greenish gray hue and earning it the name serpentine.

Redwood forest.
http://wallpaperweb.org/wallpaper/nature/webb-creek-and-redwoods-mount-tamalpais-state-park-california_21849.htm

These mountains and their geology produce the perfect wet coastal climate for a flora and fauna to thrive. Redwoods and manzanita are skirted by white tailed deer, bobcat and mountain lion. Canadian geese rest in the grassy meadows abutting these mountains during their migrations. The Coastal Miwok lived in harmony with this biodiversity for thousands of years. We can be grateful for he plate tectonics of the Pacific and North American plates that catalyzed the growth of such biodiversity along the California Coast. Only recently have Westerners realized the amazing place that is the northern Californian Coast and I hope we do not spoil the spectacular biodiversity that the geology here took so long too foster.

Personal photography from the summit of Mount Tamalpias facing south towards San Fransisco

References

Cannon, Marilyn. “Lilies of the Coast: The Coast Ranges.” N.p., 17 Nov. 2002. Web. 12 Sept. 2013. <http://www.sonoma.edu/users/c/canno/bio314chapter7coastranges.html>.

“Geology of North Coastal California.” Krisweb. N.p., 2011. Web. 12 Sept. 2013. <http://www.krisweb.com/hydrol/geology.htm>.

“California’s Coastal Mountains.” Http://ceres.ca.gov/ceres/calweb/coastal/mountains.html. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2013.

I posted the link for this video at the end of my previous post titled “Optimized What Already Exists”. I figured it would be more accessible if I just posted it right to my blog. Ludwick Marishane perfectly exemplifies someone who optimized the technology he had and solved a serious worldwide problem. Take a look.

This is a summary and personal comment about an article I read on astrobiology.com, titled Cyborg Astrobiologist Uses Phone-Cam to Search for Life by Europlanet. You can access it via this link: http://astrobiology.com/2013/09/cyborg-astrobiologist-uses-phone-cam-to-search-for-life.html

We use mobile phones everyday. We complain about mobile phones everyday groaning that  “They are too slow” and “They get spotty service” and “They won’t connect to the internet fast enough”. These are just a few of the many retorts we direct at our mobile phones daily. I do complain about such trivial inconveniences and agree that there is room for improvement in the mobile phone market. But Patrick McGuire and his Freie Universitaet, Berlin based team are not complaining about mobile phone technology. In collaboration with West Virginia University, the Centro de Astrobiologia de Madrid and the University of Malta, they created a “hybrid human robotic” imaging system out of a basic mobile phone camera. They call it the Cyborg Astrobiologist.

A cell phone camera removed from the device.

The “novelty detection system” used by the Cyborg Astrobiologist.

McGuire and his collaborators did not use the chip from a glamorous smartphone, like the iphone5 or a Samsung Galaxy 3. According the article, the Cyborg Astrobiologist works like this. They use the camera and its imaging chip from a basic mobile phone. Initially, a human takes pictures with the camera that they then compile as a database on a computer. The images are processed and scanned for “novelty colors”. Basically, colors and textures from the original photos are assigned specific “novelty colors” for the robot to reference. Under the control of automated control, the camera can take pictures of its surroundings and by comparing the real pictures to ones from the data base it will determine which areas of its immediate surroundings might be habitable.

The technology is not perfect, but “In [the] most recent tests at a former coal mine in West Virginia, the similarity-matching by the computer agreed with the judgment of [the] human geologists 91% of the time.” This technology could expedite space based research communication between technology in space and Earth because it will allow us to give more autonomy to robots we send into space.

An improvement like this is to be expected from the multibillion dollar space industry. It seems like simply another logical advancement in space technology. It is, but it is truly amazing that the technology this system is based on comes from a mobile phone. The “cell phone” camera is something we use incredibly frequently, yet we overlook its mighty potential. In general, drastically underestimate the potential of everyday technology to perform complex tasks. Instead of thinking about how we can optimize technology that already exists, we want it to do more. McGuire and his team did not invent a new method of image analysis, nor did they discover a new way of space based communication, alternatively they analyzed current technology and applied it in a spectacular new way. In doing so they optimized what they had instead of building  an entirely new system.

We should try to optimize current technology in inventive and new ways. Unfortunately, a common thought is that “we just don’t have the technology or resources to do ‘that’ yet”. Such a stagnant mindset does not lead to scientific innovation. Yes, we must dream about the great new technologies of the future and continue to invent new things. But, we seriously need to examine the technology we have now and realize its immense potential.

Today, we have access to a virtually infinite stream of information because of the internet. Most people have access to some sort of computing device, whether it be a mobile phone, a laptop, a desktop or a calculator. I implore you to use what you have to understand and solve our modern problems.

Right now, society is saturated with a lethargic mindset: a do-it-for-me thought process. The technology that exists today can provide the solutions to our most pressing issues, like the mobile camera innovated the imaging analysis and the search for life in space. Through careful thought and a reassessment of our collective mindset we can optimize what resources we have to create innovative solutions for our problems.

We should look for innovation from what is immediately surrounding us . This includes electronics and, more importantly, nature. Natural systems optimize resources to their full potential, they reuse all energy and, in doing so, they create abundance. Abundance that allows and has allowed plants and animals to thrive for thousands of years. Clearly, these systems work. They have stood the test of time. We can learn from nature to optimize what technology already exists, as McGuire and his team did with the cell phone camera, while we continue to create new technologies. Evolution has done this since the beginning of life with immense success. We should use nature as a model for optimizing technology we already have.

Here is an video of a perfect example of optimization of one’s resources and the amazing results that followed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpYrJs0rX84

Sources

http://astrobiology.com/2013/09/cyborg-astrobiologist-uses-phone-cam-to-search-for-life.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/13010094933

Ellie listening to radio waves.

On assignment, I watched the movie Contact (1997), directed Robert Zameckis. It is centered around the search for  and “contact” with extraterrestrial life. It could be considered an ‘alien’ movie if it was to be categorized in a specific genre. The protagonist is a women named Ellie, who has made it her life’s mission to discover signals and contact extraterrestrial life. After the director gives us a splash of all the most important moments of Ellie’s childhood: her love of radios, her father’s death etc., he flashes forward and we find Ellie as a struggling astronomer working for the underfunded program SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Life).SETI shuts down and Ellie, and her fellow SETI scientists, must seek private funding to continue their research. She finds a donor in Hadden Industries, and gets a lease to work on The Very Large Array. The stereotypical portrait of a struggling artist, is constantly emphasized and reemphasized. Nobody understands Ellie, or her passion especially not even a confident, handsome, religious writer named Palmer (Matthew McConaughey). But in true Hollywood form, opposites attract and Palmer and Ellie become close.

The director, Robert Zameckis, shows us the important experiences from her childhood: her love of radios, her wonder of the universeand her blaming herself for both of her parents deaths. Following the stereotypical Hollywood depiction of a troubled genius, they make it blatantly clear how the main character’s internal conflicts arise.

The transportation machine designed by the extraterrestrial life and built by the world.

Ellie discovers a coded instruction manual for a transportation machine from the star Vega.  The challenge seems hopeless, but of course an old wise guru, Mr. Hadden, discovers the answer: still standard Hollywood stuff. Eventually the world comes together to build the machine but a radical religious terrorist sabotages the machine. But, holding true to the a standard Hollywood story arc, there exists a second machine. All is well, Ellie gets to go visit vega, except for her odyssey is not finished yet. After Ellie visits Vega, she wakes up in the safety net at the bottom of the machine, to find that nobody believes she left Earth because there is no physical evidence. Bringing into question faith into conflict with science.

In general, the plot and characters are standard Hollywood. There is the troubled genius, the lover, the wise old guru, the two major plot twists, speaking with a dead loved one and the little factoid at the end to justify the protagonist. Nothing exceptionally interesting originates from the plot or the characters.

What interests me is the way the director presents the conflict between faith and science. The conflict is prevalent throughout the plot and characters, from Ellie’s and Palmer’s disagreement about religion, to the religious radicals belief that we are violating God’s will contacting extraterrestrial life. I do not agree that there should be any conflict between religious institutions and science because they are two completely different fields. Certainly, science is not a religion nor is it an alternative to religion.

Although throughout history science has disproved certain ideas religious institutions touted, like the geocentric model of the Universe, science does not exist solely to refute religious ideas and faith. These historical examples are a matter of circumstance, in which religious institutions unknowingly adopted wrongful scientific ideas. But when correct theories were discovered they simply refused to let believe them. They refused to take part in the testing and falsifying of hypotheses, they refused to obey the scientific method.

Classic synthesis of faith and nature.

At first, the director presents religion and science as opposites, but subtly he changes that. Reinforcing the idea that religion and science are completely different ideas, he disposes of the religion-science conflict and embraces faith as their commonality. Faith is required in all aspects of life, even in science, yet it takes an extreme situation to show this. Ellie must convince the world she visited is real, without any scientific proof, and ironically she strictly adheres to the scientific method. Unwaveringly, she refuses to compromise her beliefs and begs for faith from the world. Due to the lack of scientific evidence, the world must have faith to believe her story. But at the very end, a presidential aide discovers that her videocamera recorded eighteen hours of footage, the exact amount of time she claims she was gone for. This suggests that the director changed his mind: deciding faith has no place in science.

Unnecessarily the media catalyzes a conflict between religion and science. There should be no dispute, even the Papacy believes that their should be any conflict as is evidenced in their acceptance of Evolution and the Big Bang theories. Instead they take a perfectly acceptable position with regards to God, they believe God set the Universe into being action and let the laws of physics create what exists today. The director, Robert Zameckis, compounds the problem in this movie and does so in a indecisive but entertaining way.

This is a response to a 2003 New York Times article Does Science Matter? by William J. Broad and James Glanz. To read the article click this link. Does Science Matter?

The question is not “Does science matter?”, such a question is ludicrous. Science has always mattered, as the scientific method forms the crucibles of fact. It provides us with a system to discover the world around us. The systematic thinking and actions of this method allow all people to join in the investigation of questions about who we are and where we come from. Because of science’s inquisitive abilities, it enables us to create incredible technologies that better the health of society and the environment.

We have developed preventative care, like vaccines, but when that fails we also have treatments and medicines enabling us to live long prosperous lives. The list of scientific discoveries that further our understanding of the world and benefit us is extensive. The scientific method can be tested and built upon, making the accumulation of useful knowledge infinite.

The scientific method that furthers our understanding of ourselves, the world and the universe, the method. It improves personal and societal health and is therefore absolutely relevant. Unfortunately, the authors, William Broad and James Glanz base science’s supposed irrelevance in its implementation. The act of scientific research and observation, of executing the scientific method, is purely beneficial. Blaming science for health problems and environmental destruction is misdirected. In reality, industry has implemented scientific discoveries in destructive ways because they value one thing: their bottom line. Instead of building profit through sustainable practices and long term thinking, companies obsess over short term gain. However science is not always a speedy endeavor and frequently disproves itself. This process is crucial to obtain factual results, in turn these results provide the ideas and facts that industry can implement. But when companies do not allow the process to take place, they authorize harmful technologies based on incomplete science.

In addition, the privately funded research is recklessly applied especially when it benefits a company. The most crucial part of the scientific method, recreating and falsifying an experiment, is lacking due to misguided intentions. In the competition of a capitalist market, it is actually beneficial for a company to conceal research results if they can benefit the company. Shielding science can give a company a competitive advantage in the market. Therefore to preserve the relevancy of science to the public and the scientific method itself, science must be exposed from the secret laboratories of industry and thrust into the public. I do not underestimate the force of capitalism to determine success and failure. But when public and environmental health determine industrial success, government regulation and publicly funded science is absolutely necessary to enforce properly practiced scientific research.

There are no evil scientists, just wrongful application.  Science will always be relevant, it will always matter, as long as we preserve the integrity of the scientific method and implement it in ways that are relevant our society rather than private interest.

We Stopped Dreaming- Neil deGrasse Tyson (the link below)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldyoHaktv5U

Hello my name is Jack. I live in Mill Valley, California, a smug suburb just north of San Francisco. Staying inside was not an option in my house neither was watching television so I spent my childhood outdoors catching tadpoles and lizards, biking, playing tennis, surfing and skiing. The light pollution from San Francisco blocks out much of the night sky, as a result stargazing was limited to the constellations the Big Dipper and Orion. After freshman year I left home and went to Berkshire, a boarding school in western Massachusetts. The night sky above my school was far more brilliant than the one above my home in Mill Valley. I admired   the sky full of stars, galaxies and other celestial objects but frankly I had no idea what I was looking at.

I have been watching Neil deGrasse Tyson videos on YouTube (these are two of my favorites:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D05ej8u-gU, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxfJfv9tirU), which give me some sense of what is out there . But I am hoping this class will provide me with a solid understanding of the cosmos and thus further my understanding of life on Earth. During my junior year of high school I took a physics class and we learned about Newton’s Laws. I am excited to study these laws in the context of the entire universe rather than in mundane physics problems.

When I first learned about black holes, I was in 1st Grade and I freaked out thinking that we could, at any time, be sucked into one. The possibility for spontaneous obliteration kept me up some nights. Eventually my fears were quelled and  recently I read an article about black holes that peaked my interest in them again. I understand them at an incredibly basic level. They terrify me. They are completely abstract to me.  I want to learn about how they are formed and how they act on the universe around them. I know quantum mechanics is involved with black holes, which is another foreign topic to me but one that I also want to learn more about.