Anniversary Post: Magellan

MagellanOn this day in 1990, the Magellan spacecraft achieved orbit around Venus. It had two primary goals: map the surface and gravitational field of the toxic cloud covered planet. Venus is in many way like Earth. It is almost exactly the same size and density. They both seem to have a similar internal structures. They are both losing heat at the same rate. Yet, as Carl Sagan put it: earth is like heaven and Venus is like hell.

Venus’ surface pressure is almost a hundred times the surface pressure here on earth. Standing on the surface of Venus would be like being a half mile under the ocean. You know: deadly. But it’s worse than that, because it is also incredibly hot. It is 860°F, which is, you know, hotter than any regular kitchen oven. In fact, it is even hotter than the hottest pizza ovens. Venus is very, very hot. In fact, it is hotter than Mercury at noon, even though Venus only gets 25% as much energy from the sun.

The reason for this is because almost 97% of Venus’ atmosphere is composed of carbon-dioxide. This creates the mother of all greenhouse effects. Or it would, if the greenhouse effect weren’t a myth created by a conspiracy of Al Gore and James Hansen. Moving on. This fact (or myth) combines with two other aspects of Venus to create a very constant temperature: almost no axial tilt (just 3° compared to 23.5° for Earth) and almost a circular orbit around the sun (eccentricity of 0.007 compared to 0.017 for the Earth). So day, night, pole, or equator, Venus is just too hot even for cooking pizzas. But the temperature does decrease with altitude. So on top of Maxwell Montes — the highest point on Venus at 7 miles — it is only about 700°F. And you know what that means: great pizza oven temperature! (Fun fact: there may be lead sulfide “snow” on top of Maxwell Montes!)

The Magellan mission made a number of discoveries about Venus. For example, it found that the surface was young. It is covered with volcanic material. It appears to have river-like lava flows. It is also geologically active, but doesn’t seem to have plate tectonics. And there is little evidence of wind erosion. Now this is actually something I know a little bit about. First, Venus rotates very slowly (and in the wrong direction), so not much in the way of Coriolis effect. And there are no temperature gradients, so not much mixing due to that. So the atmosphere is very static.

Anyway, when all the world gets you down, NASA is there to cheer you up: humans are good at doing positive things. And that’s true, even if we ultimately learn that it is nasty out there!

Pluto’s Glacier and Atmosphere

PlutoIt is a bit weird to go to the Wikipedia Pluto page. Just a month ago, the best image that we had was a fuzzy ball. Now we have a shockingly clear picture of it. It is as though we are, for the first time, seeing Pluto. And what does it look like? Well, kind of like the moon. We expected that. But there is that huge smooth section there in the south. That’s called Sputnik Planum. It is the western half of the Tombaugh Regio — Pluto’s “heart.” And it appears to be a glacier made of frozen nitrogen — with notable amounts of carbon monoxide and methane.

We also see on the edges of Sputnik Planum craters that have been filled in with this frozen ice. There is some speculation that below the surface (where it is warmer), there may be a layer of liquid nitrogen. The temperature on the surface of Pluto is -390°F — 39 K. Clearly, Nitrogen is solid there. At Earth’s surface pressure (which is fairly low), it becomes liquid at a balmy -346°F — 63 K. So we might be seeing actual geological activity, but instead of molten rock, it would be molten Nitrogen. It’s very cool — and bizarre to imagine.

Pluto HazeThe frozen nitrogen is constantly sublimating (turning directly from solid to gaseous form) into Pluto’s atmosphere. But it is in equilibrium, so the atmosphere is depositing onto the surface at the same rate. The atmosphere is made up of the same three compounds found in the ice: Nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane. Of course, there isn’t much atmosphere: just 0.001% as much as we have here on the earth. But still: notable. Plus: because of the effect of methane, the atmosphere gets warmer as you go up in the atmosphere (like in the Earth’s stratosphere), so that 6 miles up, it is 65°F warmer.

In addition to this, Pluto’s atmosphere has two distinct haze layers. One is about 30 miles from the surface, and the other at 50 miles. This is what we see in the image on the right. This was shot just seven hours after the close approach to Pluto. The sun is behind Pluto, so we are seeing the atmosphere back lit. What’s happening in the atmosphere is similar to what goes on in our own. Methane is broken down by ultraviolet light. It’s parts are then combined into more complex hydrocarbons like ethylene and acetylene. As they sink, they become solids and create the haze.

We will be learning more and more as time goes on. Every few days, I find myself checking on what new information is available. That’s a bit obsessive. But I’m sure as the years go by, we will continue to be surprised. I never liked the mystery of Pluto. Just knowing that there was some space rock flying around out there didn’t inspire me. But now that we are learning what’s really going on with the little world, it’s very exciting.

Inflategate and Measurement Standards

InflategateAs regular readers know, I don’t like football. I’m not that keen on professional sports, anyway; but football really does operate at a whole different level of boringness. If it weren’t for the fact that it is so explicitly violent, it never would have become America’s game. (Although I have noticed that Americans haven’t gotten into rugby — a game that makes American football players look like the masculine pretenders they are.) As a result, I’ve met the whole “deflategate” controversy with nothing but derision.

One thing about it is that it is like the whole steroid hysteria. How is it that people can live in a world where people are born into poverty, lead joyless lives, and die young, and yet they get upset because a form of entertainment isn’t “fair”? It makes no sense. And these sports have had rules handcrafted for specific kinds of bodies. In the 1960s, NFL linemen were smaller than most quarterbacks today. What’s more, “Of the 170 players that have started at least one game as an offensive lineman this season, only 28 weigh less than 300 pounds.” Today, Fran Tarkenton would be a baseball player.

But I found an interesting article on the “deflategate” controversy, Pressure Gauge Discrepancies Undermine Wells Report. It doesn’t directly deal with the question, but it answered something I wondered about: just how under inflated where these footballs? Well, not much: less than 3%. Is this a big deal? I don’t know. It might give a player a slight advantage. But I do know this: no normal person would be able to tell the difference between a ball filled to 12.5 PSI and 12.2 PSI. But okay, if true, it is something — it is an advantage. You have to wonder why anyone would cheat to get such a small advantage. But okay: an advantage.

The most important issue is that it isn’t at all clear that any of the balls were deflated. The officials had two pressure gauges at the game. One of them read 0.3 to 0.45 PSI higher than the other gauge. The alleged deflation was — What a surprise! — between 0.3 and 0.45 PSI. And the official who measured the balls cannot remember which gauge he used for the first measurements. This really should be the end of it. But of course it won’t be. There are too many people who think this is very very important. Above all, it is an opportunity for the NFL to make a big deal about the fact that it takes the sanctity of the game very seriously.

But clearly, the NFL does not take the sanctity of the game seriously. For many hundreds of years, the accuracy of weights and measures have been critically important to people all over the world. People understand that if you are buying a hundred pounds of tomatoes, you want it to be a hundred pounds — not a hundred ounces. But the NFL apparently doesn’t care about the pressure of the footballs in their games. If there is such variability with pressure games at one game, imagine what it is across the league.

Again, I don’t care from a sports standpoint — except that the people who get worked up about this stuff are fools. And I don’t feel bad for the players. Just the same, what we are seeing here is something I’m very familiar with from politics. A particular team, and player, and assistant are being used as a way for a bigger, more powerful, group to make itself look good. It’s pathetic. On the other hand, if everyone decided that football is corrupt and stopped watching it, I’d be on board.

Meghan Trainor, Fat Shaming, and the Health Myth

Meghan Trainor

I often think of something Fabienne says in Pulp Fiction, “It’s unfortunate what we find pleasing to the touch and pleasing to the eye is seldom the same.” It doesn’t especially mean anything other than that our ideas about beauty are arbitrary. And I’m fine with that. But what most bothers me about the modern world is that we have convinced ourselves that what is pleasing to the eye is healthy.

And it turns out that it really isn’t. What’s more, there was never any reason to think that it was. It seems too obvious that what’s really gone on is that society decided to shame the ugly people because the biggest prejudice in society is against the ugly — and especially the fat.

One of the problems with the constant concern trolling about obesity is that it actually is bad to be very overweight. But regardless of how we ought to try to help people with body mass indexes (BMI) over 40, our societal focus seems to be on “helping” people that are far less overweight.

Meghan Trainor Is Fat?!

Consider, for example, Meghan Trainor — she’s that young woman who does that “All About the Bass” song. I had lunch with Will the other day and he mentioned that people were talking about how fat she is, even though her dress size is 12. I replied, “You mean less than the average dress size of American women.” Yep. That’s what passes for fat in modern America!

I found some statistics on Ms Trainor. She is supposedly 150 pounds and five foot two. That makes her BMI around 27. This is considered “overweight.” It’s weird, right? She is thinner than the average American woman.

But that’s not all. French women have the lowest BMI in all of Europe: 23. And that is distinctly on the high side of “normal.” English women are on average about where Trainor is. Maybe it is time to reconsider what is normal.

Unhealthy Weight?

I can hear the outraged responses to this, “But that weight is unhealthy!” Well, let’s just start by noting that this belief is not based upon data. This is Madison Avenue defining what is healthy.

Recent research has found that being modestly overweight is not bad for people. In fact, a two-decade-long study involving a million people found that people in the “overweight” category (BMI 25-30), were actually 6% less likely to die during the study period. So this isn’t about being healthy. And in my experience, people don’t get a lot of positive feedback for making positive changes in their lifestyles if it doesn’t lead to weight loss.

New Data

Well, we have another study. Aaron Carroll provided the overview, What Are the Healthcare Costs of Obesity? And what it found is that, as expected, obese people consume a lot more of our healthcare dollars. But it isn’t about the “overweight” (BMI: 25-30) or even the class 1 “obese” (30-35). The study found no significant increase in healthcare costs for them. But the costs go up exponentially from there.

Now I don’t especially care about healthcare costs. We already pay far too much for healthcare in this country — for purely political reasons. Trying to blame it on the fat or the old or whatever seems a pretty vile approach.

But I am interested in the way that people will use a study like this to go on shaming fat people — Like Meghan Trainor! — because they’ve decided that fat starts at a 25 BMI. It’s ridiculous.

If people want to hate fat people, have at it! I’ll just write them off as I do with all the other bigots of the world. But let’s not pretend that this bigotry is about concern for the health of our heavier friends.


Meghan Trainor by Ashley Graham under CC BY 3.0.

Anniversary Post: Svetlana Savitskaya Space Walk

Svetlana SavitskayaOn this day in 1984, Svetlana Savitskaya became the first woman to perform a space walk. She was also the second woman in space. The first was also a Russian, Valentina Tereshkova. That always kind of shocks me: here in the land of the free, we certainly are conventional. I’ve seen that with the press, which I now firmly believe is only free because it absolutely will never push against the power elite in this country. We have free speech in this country only so long as it isn’t used or is powerless.

I’ve often wondered about Sally Ride — the first American woman to go in space. Even to this day, she has the record for the youngest American to ever go into space. Did the US push her along out of a sense of embarrassment? I hope so! That’s not to take anything away from Ride. She undoubtedly was hurt far more by the politics of her gender than she was helped. I would like to think that the example of Svetlana Savitskaya helped our government get over itself about women in space.

Regardless, Svetlana Savitskaya is still around. She retired from the Russian Air Force in 1993. Currently, she is a member of the Federal Assembly of Russia, where she is a member of the Communist Party. That’s another thing. I don’t think of Russia as being a terribly free country. But there are serious libertarian and communist political parties in Russia. Here in the United States, everything is clustered to the right and to the extreme right. Things are so screwed up that most Americans think of the Democratic Party as leftist.

Anyway, we mark this day 31 years ago when the first woman walked in space.

Apes and the Power of Spin

ChimpThe susceptibility to positive framing is what scientists call an irrational bias, and it is very powerful. To better understand why our psyche responds so deeply, Christopher Krupenye, a Duke University graduate student in evolutionary anthropology, and his colleagues Alexandra Rosati of Yale University and Brian Hare of Duke gathered 40 of our closest living relatives — 23 chimpanzees and 17 bonobos — and offered them options for choosing food: either one or two fruits versus a constant number of peanuts. Sometimes the apes were shown one piece of fruit each time they made the selection, but half the time they were given two: positive framing. In other trials, the apes were initially presented two pieces of fruit, but half the time they got only one: negative framing. Regardless of the framing, the apes ended up with an identical quantity of fruit. Yet they were more likely to choose fruit when they were offered the single fruit with its frequent “bonus” than the double fruit with its frequent “loss.”

—Francine Russo
Like Humans, Apes Are Susceptible to Spin

A Shark Swimming By Doesn’t Mean It’s Attacking

Two People and a Great White SharkI always like it when I nail a story straight out. And that is certainly true of my article on Monday, Mick Fanning and the Curious Shark. At that point, there hadn’t been any reporting about what experts were saying. But looking at the video and the results, it seemed clear to me that Fanning’s close encourage with the shark was not an attack. Just because a shark swims past a human does not mean that it is attacking. And that was clearly the case on Sunday — although it is not to say that it wouldn’t have been a very frightening experience.

Over at Vox, Zack Beauchamp wrote, That Viral Shark Attack Video Is Everything We Get Wrong About Sharks. As with most things wrong with our ideas about sharks, this seems to go back to Jaws (which is still a great film). That film really pushed this idea of sharks as killing machines. Hooper says, “All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks, and that’s all.” I suppose we could say the same thing about humans. But it does a great disservice to all creatures — humans and sharks alike.

My perception of Fanning’s interaction with the shark was no doubt affected by my long fascination with sharks. They are amazing animals — and quite smart. I find it especially interesting that great white sharks hunt in different ways depending upon where they are and what the prey is like. That doesn’t describe a killing machine. That describes at least a fair amount of intelligence — adaptability. But above all, my thinking has been shaped by all the very brave people who swim with sharks. For example, the following video is from Planet Earth. These two cameramen are swimming with three oceanic whitetip sharks. They are probably responsible for more human deaths than any other shark. But look at them — they are not mindless at all:

This is why I speculated that the shark who interacted with Mick Fanning might have been checking him out to see if he was something worth eating. But it was clear that the shark was doing just that: checking him out. It wasn’t an attack. But there is another possibility mentioned in Beauchamp’s article: maybe it was just a chance encounter. Marine biologist Alison Kock mentioned, “Based on the footage we’ve seen, we don’t know its intentions. It looks like the shark was trying to get out of the situation as fast as [Fanning] was.” Very possibly! Remember: there are always threats — regardless of how big and dangerous you are.

The down side of all this discussion about this “attack” and the general hysteria we see after any shark encounter is that it makes sharks more at risk. For all the power of the whitetips and great whites, they are classified as vulnerable. In fact, whitetip populations have plummeted. And that would be because of… us. Some scientists now question the whole idea of referring to shark “attacks.” It tends to turn sharks into villains when this isn’t called for at all. In one paper, Christopher Neff and Robert Hueter noted, “Under current labels, listings of shark attack may even include instances where there is no physical contact between shark and human.” Of course, that wasn’t true of the interaction between Fanning and the shark on Sunday. In that case, Fanning punched the shark. Human attack!

Anniversary Post: Comet Hale–Bopp

Comet Hale–BoppOn this day 20 years ago, Comet Hale–Bopp was discovered independently by Alan Hale and Thomas Bopp. Not much of a rock: roughly 40 miles across. It orbits the sun every 2,500 years in a plane that is almost perfectly perpendicular to the orbital plane of the major planets. But there are lots of comets making their way into our solar system. It isn’t the science that has made Comet Hale–Bopp famous.

The comet became very famous less than two years later when most of the membership of the Heaven’s Gate cult killed themselves. There was supposedly a spacecraft following the comet and the members of the cult were going to get new bodies and relocate there. But clearly, this had nothing to do with Comet Hale-Bopp. They had all been searching for something for a long time and they were going to find it. It’s like what Lou Reed said, “You know, some people got no choice, and they can never find a voice, to talk with that they can even call their own. So the first thing that they see that allows them the right to be, why they follow it. You know, it’s called bad luck.”

But happy anniversary Comet Hale-Bopp discovery!

Anniversary Post: Air Conditioning

Willis CarrierIt was 100°F Sunday — with very high humidity. So I really need to talk about Willis Carrier who built the first modern air conditioner on this day in 1902. He actually wrote down the plans four days earlier. His main innovation was to include humility control. That’s the thing: most of the heat in the air is contained in the water vapor. You get rid of that, and it gets cool — fast. In fact, if you want to defog your windows, put the hot air through the air conditioner, and the windows will clear shockingly fast.

This all reminds me of a trip I took to southern China in the summer of 1992. I’m not much good with languages. But it was so hot and muggy, I made people teach me three phrases. The first was “air conditioning.” The phrase for this means literally “cold air.” And the Chinese words are, “Lěng kōngqì” or “冷空气.” The way I remember pronouncing this was, “Lung chee.”

The second phrase was, “Cold beer.” This is, “Lěng píjiǔ” or “冷啤酒.” The way I pronounced it was, “Lung pee-gee-oh.” But I don’t think anyone was ever happy with my pronunciation. The last phrase was simply, “Thank you.” That’s “Xièxiè” or “谢谢.” Most people know how to pronounce this, “Shea Shea.”

So I would walk around Guangzhou repeating over and over, “Lěng píjiǔ. Lěng kōngqì. Xièxiè.” Yes, I put beer first. Priorities are important.

Mick Fanning and the Curious Shark

Mick Fanning and SharkMick Fanning is a professional surfer. He’s a triple world champion. And I have to admit, I think surfing is cool. I love watching people surf — whether on television or when I’m down at the beach. It’s beautiful to watch. And also, it’s impressive that people do it. Also: good God, don’t they realize there are sharks in the ocean! Well, Fanning knows, and so do all the people watching the J-Bay Open, the most recent leg of the World Surf League Championship Tour. It’s being reported like this, Shark Attacks Australian Surfer Mick Fanning During Live Competition. I’m not so sure.

If you look at the video, it’s not at all clear that the shark was attacking. It seems to be simply investigating the odd object it found in the water. That’s not to say that it was not trying to figure out if Fanning might be a tasty treat. But sharks, like most predators, are suspicious of things they don’t commonly eat. And if the shark was interested in anything, it seems to have been Fanning’s surfboard, not his body. Take a look at the video. It certainly seems that if the shark had been ready to eat, there would have been some damage.

Another interesting aspect of this is that Fanning is dressed in blue. A study published a few years ago found that of 17 shark species studied, 10 were totally color blind and the other 7 saw only grey and green — making them effectively color blind. This indicates that sharks may not see very well when it comes to light blue objects in the ocean. So it is quite likely that the shark was attracted to Fanning’s bright white surfboard. But again: the board didn’t seem to even have any bite marks on it. So I don’t see this as an attack.

What I’m really interested in is what the species of the shark is. At some points, it looks like it has a really long dorsal fin, but that is just the shark on its side — its pectoral fin coming out of the water as if waving to the television audience. We see the dorsal fin for just an instant at the beginning. I know there must be biologists out there who know what this magnificent creature is. It might explain more about its behavior as well. I’ll watch the news for a few days to see if anyone has any insights.

By saying all this, I don’t mean to say that Mick Fanning didn’t go through an amazing and deeply frightening experience. He tussled with a really big shark that was clearly interested in him. Apparently, Julian Wilson, the guy who was surfing with him, was as freaked out about the episode as Fanning was. Understandably. These people have got to normally suppress the idea that they make their living literally swimming with the sharks. And yesterday, they couldn’t. They are braver men than I!

Update (20 July 2015 9:10 pm)

Speculation is that it was a great white shark. I want to add to this discussion that by the time Fanning even noticed the shark, it’s mouth was way past him. I think I was wrong above when I said we see the pectoral fin; I think it is actually the caudal or tail fin.

Anniversary Post: Apollo 11 Landing

Apollo 11On this date in 1969, Apollo 11 landed on the moon. It would be six hours later — technically the day after — that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin actually walked on the moon. With the recent New Horizons flyby of Pluto, I has been thinking of the lunar program. I keep thinking about James Burke. He was the chief reporter on the Apollo missions for the BBC. And he made the point much later that the BBC was committed to reporting on what was actually being done on those missions — the science. The US media did not cover these missions this way.

When I was growing up, the Apollo missions were about Tang, moon rocks (for what purpose I could not have told you), and most of all, the very fact of landing on the moon. As Burke noted, it wasn’t surprising that the American public quickly lost interest in the Apollo program: how many times are you going to get excited about landing on the moon when each time is pretty much the same thing? It turns out the answer that is: once.

I saw the same thing in the coverage of the Pluto mission. The best coverage was found on the BBC and the Guardian. The US media generally did a worse job. There were exceptions. I thought that Time did quite a good job of covering it. But the television coverage — both local and national — was pathetic. I don’t think that Discovery Channel could stop airing reruns of Mermaids: The Body Found long enough to cover what was happening near Pluto.

Americans don’t seem to get as interested in unmanned space exploration. It’s all about science — there is no “adventure.” Or maybe it is just the media. If the media got excited about it, the people would probably follow. For me, it’s much nicer to have unmanned probes. If I were watching manned space exploration, much of my enjoyment would be ruined by my concern for the safety of the people involved. Plus: I’m not sure it is necessary to send people out. Couldn’t we now send a robot to the Moon, pick up some rocks, and fly back to Earth? Maybe manned space travel was just a necessary crutch until we learned how to do this properly.

Regardless, to me it is all about what we learn, not the process by which we learn it. But landing on the moon was important — one small step in our continuing exploration of the cosmos.

Geological Activity on Pluto and Charon

Pluto Close-Up - 14 July 2015Before New Horizon’s flyby of Pluto, I noted that the dwarf planet might have geological activity. But I was unprepared for the reality. The scientists studying the little bugger have not found a single impact crater. You can see this in the image on the right. According to their calculations, this means that there must have been geological activity on Pluto within the last hundred million years — a very small amount of time in the 4.5 billion year history of the solar system. But it could be that there is geological activity going on right now.

John Spencer, a New Horizons mission scientist, explained that this is an important finding. The only place where we’ve found geologically active on cold worlds have been in moons that experience tidal heating. This is where the planet’s gravitational field constantly deforms different parts of the moon, causing the interior to heat. This is what happens on Jupiter’s closest large moon, Io. And as a result, Io is the most volcanically active place in the solar system. But there is no large object near Pluto. So where is the heat coming from that at least very recently was being expelled? We don’t know, but then we didn’t even know it was possible a couple of days ago. Spencer cheekily said at a press conference, “You do not need tidal heating to power geological activity on icy worlds. That’s a really important discovery we just made this morning.”

Charon - 14 July 2015Another interesting aspect of the whole thing is that Pluto has more nitrogen in its atmosphere than it ought to, because the gas should reach escape velocity. Before this recent flyby, New Horizon’s chief scientist Alan Stern and a colleague predicted that if they saw steep water-ice mountains with a thin volatile gas veneer, it would indicate that there is some kind of geological process that is dredging up nitrogen from the interior. Well, as you can see in the image above, Pluto has very high (two mile), very steep ice mountains. And they have a “thin frosting of nitrogen and other volatiles.” They haven’t found any “geysers” or “cryovolcanoes.” But they only just started looking.

Also interesting is that Pluto’s biggest moon, Charon, shows signs of recent geological activity. It does have very clear craters. But it is nothing like our Moon. And the whole thing is amazing. Of course, the scientists have lots of theories as to why this might be. Stern mentioned the possibility of the liquid layer under both objects that are slowly solidifying and thus giving off heat. Personally, I think that sounds far fetched for Charon, but maybe works for Pluto.

What is so cool about this is that for hundreds of years, humans have been trying to figure out the cosmos in a very systematic and rigorous way. Yet each time we get another close look at some part of the cosmos, we have major rethinking to do. As Stern noted, this new information will “send a lot of geophysicists back to the drawing boards.” And that’s wonderful! That’s the way science works: you have a theory and you stick with it until reality shows that it is wrong. But it highlights the fact that we have so much to learn, so many more spacecraft to launch, so many more theories to explode!

Afterword

I found this same thing just in terms of trying to explain how our very own planet’s magnetic field works. And I’m still researching that, trying to figure out what the hell is actually going on. It is possible to see Hamlet talking about science and not metaphysics, when he said, “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”