Science Ain't So Bad

WHAT WALL?

 TOO OLD TO DRIVE?

Passenger: Could you pick up the pace a LITTLE?

Me: Are you NUTS? This is a safe speed.

Passenger: You’re driving like you’re a hundred (instead of just 71.)

Here’s the thing. You get older, you get more cautious. Sometimes you actually OBEY the speed laws. Which means extracting some tailgaters from your rear bumper after you arrive. I’m not braggin’ or nothin’ but when you get older.. okay .. it’s p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e your eyesight and hearing aren’t as good. Maybe. Even your reflexes aren’t..uh.. THAT sharp.

But screw you. I drive just fine. And you ain’t gettin’ MY keys!

Well.

In fact – and contrary to what you probably think – statistics favor geezers who, while doing everything wrong and forcing YOU off the road, tend to compensate for their degraded skills by not taking so many gee-whiz chances. And – yeah – after a hundred years behind the wheel, they DO recognize black ice better than a teenager does.

Wisdom, see?

Doesn’t mean geezering around in a vehicle’s perfect. The risks are real. Some older drivers are b-a-d! And I MEAN bad! Some oldsters could take you out  as you’re leaving the church with your top hat on. At the TOP of the steps.

What to do?

Senior drivers have, obviously, earned the right to a little consideration. It means a lot to be able to drive.

Independence and self respect.

For some, it doesn’t feel like a choice. They don’t have anybody in their lives to take the wheel.

HEAR THE SIREN? I DIDN’T EVEN SEE THE FLASHING LIGHTS, OFFICER

So.

The Intelligent Transport team  (Newcastle University) with Dr. Amy Guo at the head, has created a duded up car. It’s a mobile lab with sensors and monitors to figure out if customized aids such as night vision systems, specialized navigation systems, adaptive speed management, and various other innovations can keep older drivers behind the wheel longer and, hence, keep them healthier and more independent overall. The work is to be presented to the Aging, Mobility and Quality of Life conference in Michigan.

For those who are too far gone for Guo’s technology, autonomous (self driving) vehicles should offer another option before long.

- – - – - – - – - – - -

Credits for the car plowing through the stone wall to Martin Addison  
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License.

A NEW ERA IN POWER COOPERATION?

RAGTAG LAB CREATES BOUNDLESS, SAFE , CHEAP ENERGY

You’ve read about fusion energy.

Energy that is plentiful and cheap.

It uses water as fuel. No pollution. No global warming. No uranium. No meltdowns.

Energy like it’s made in the stars where the nuclei of atoms are fused together.

Sadly, discussions about energy these days tend to describe fusion power as too “out there”, too “not in your lifetime”.

But what if..

IS THIS FOR REAL?

Eric Lerner is the head of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics in new Jersey. It’s a small private lab.

Lerner put out a press release about how his company has advanced the “containment problem”.

Fusion reactions – think stars and hydrogen bombs – are  rough on any devices you try to put them in so they have to be contained in electromagnetic “bottles” to keep the incredibly corrosive plasma out of contact with the walls of the machine. Lerner says his lab has succeeded with containment at the highest temperature ever.

And not mere containment. Lawrenceville Plasma wasn’t happy with just beating mainstream scientists at their own game. Lerner’s team beat them with a technology that has been written off as impractical – a type of fusion that doesn’t produce any dangerous neutrons  - aneutronic fusion.  The process is safe as yogurt.

But safe doesn’t necessarily light  lamps.

I checked the nightly news: NBC, ABC, FOX? They missed Lerner’s announcement. There’s been an incredible lack of coverage. Nothing in the New York Times.  Nothing,  even  in The Good 5-Cent Cigar, the student newspaper at the University of Rhode Island.

Fishy? You’re thinking this was some self promotional deal that MisterScienceAintSoBad fell for?

Google it. Go ahead, I dare you. There’s nothing but praise for Lerner’s accomplishment. Online, this seems as solid as the theory of gravity. (In fact, the gravity thing  has some detractors on the far right and the far left).

Isn’t that TOO much praise for Lawrenceville Plasma Physics? Shouldn’t we worry? Normally, everybody’s a critic. The President may have been born in Kenya. The Queen of England’s a commie. Where did Lerner get HIS teflon? Shouldn’t there be some doubters asking how this small private lab, with a trickle of funding,  made an end run around the big players? Shouldn’t some be  questioning the authenticity of the report?

MisterScienceAintSoBad has seen this type of thing before. Remember the Mysterious Case of Chloe Sohl? As with the Chloe Sohl case, something didn’t sound right. If there’s a big breakthrough in fusion energy, it’s hot news, right?  Why is the mainstream press missing in action? Why does this breakthrough only show up  when I Google (or Bing or whatever)?

What gives?

GOTTA WATCH YOURSELF ON THE INTERNET

The Internet is an open place. Information can be manipulated.

How? Maybe scam artists plant phony praise for certain “events”. So much so that it overwhelms everything else. Maybe they screw with Wikipedia articles.  Maybe they forge authoritative  recommendations. It would be nice to understand how this all works so you could know when you’re being played. For now, let me just remind you that if it seems too good to be true it probably is too good to be true.

HINTS

In this case, there were hints.

Lerner had written a book about the big bang - The Big Bang Never Happened. In his book, he says that the physics world is wrong about the “big bang”.

Here’s the thing.

It could be Lerner, with his bachelors degree in physics, who’s wrong. And the entire community of scientists from Einstein to Hubble might possibly be right.

You never know.

Another hint. Lerner, in his press release, speaks matter of factly about cooperating with Iran in this vital area.

Iran?

Was that a misprint? Did he mean Uranus? Isn’t Iran our mortal enemy? The future of energy now lies with a hands-across-the-ocean project between Iranian and US scientists?

Lerner says Iranian and American scientists want an alternative to the current conflict.

.. a scientific and engineering collaboration between the two countries that could, if successful, make uranium enrichment obsolete, block proliferation everywhere, liberate the world from oil, and open up a new source of cheap, clean unlimited energy. 

And, unbelievably, the New York Times missed THAT one?

Now Lerner has caught out the rest of the science guys again. The billions  that are being spent on nuclear fusion? What a waste! His company’s Focus Fusion 1 research instrument has achieved the highest temperature magnetic containment ever recorded. And on a shoestring. One more (giant) step to go for Lerner’s group. Then, ITER, the world’s most advanced nuclear fusion project, will become a useless relic.

Lerner’s achievement has met with silence from the establishment. And fist bumps from an easily impressed crowd on the Internet. Eric Lerner’s “All those A-holes who think they know so much just don’t get it” approach seems evidence enough.

If you want to believe.

Aneutronic fusion, as far as I can tell, is more akin to cold fusion (you remember Pons and Fleischmann, right?)  in that it shares the term “fusion” with the intense release of energy that happens in stars but not the potential for lighting up cities.

I’m going to say that the effort at Lawrenceville Plasma is more impossible dream than robust science. But, look, I could be wrong. I don’t have a Phd either.

Here’s some interesting back-and-forth on this event from ars technica (a site for tech geeks).

THE MAINSTREAM FUSION EFFORT

In the meantime, it’s fair to ask if we’ve given up too easily on the main fusion effort, the deuterium-tritium cycle that Lerner’s group disdains.

Well.

It HAS been a long time. And it may be yet another 20 years until commercialization of fusion power. But, you know what? The Joint European Torus has produced 16 megawatts of power-  not nothing - and demonstrated that the deuterium tritium cycle is technically feasible. A commercial scale power plant (that’s ITER) is where the remaining bugs get worked out. If all goes well – and I grant you that’s a lot of all’s to go well – we’re on our way to curbing global warming and a whole of other impossible stuff.

A new era.

For those who can wait.

- – - – - – - – -

Image attribution:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License.

THE MAN!

This story is about science and technology.

And pets.

PET TECH

Your dog would die for you.

No “Um die for THAT one? He just yelled at me for shredding the toilet paper!”

Not at all.

Your dog would just throw his Golden Retrieverness at the robber, get iced, and float right up to the heavenly fenced in area.

Loyal and loving.

Are you as loyal as Biscuit is?

What if he got hurt? What if he couldn’t use his legs? Too much of Biscuit to tuck under your arm for a “walk”, right? How would you two manage? Would you ask the vet to put him down?

Biscuit loves you. How could you do that? Would he ever let YOU be put down?

You know he wouldn’t.

HARNESSING TECHNOLOGY, LITERALLY, FOR PETS

Let me ask you something science-y.  Is  cosmology intriguing? Is physics elegant?

Sure. Absolutely.

But that stuff doesn’t make you cry, does it? The great things? They’re  when we USE what we know to make things better, right? To repair the heart of a nine year old girl.

To help a family with a very sick dog.

MARK ROBINSON

I was trying to keep up with Mark Robinson  at his new headquarters (handicappedpets.com). Mark was explaining about his decision to make wheelchairs for dogs and cats.

“I was already selling the darn things for a company that made custom stuff. I could see there was a need . But they were SO expensive. People couldn’t afford them. Pets were being put down just because their owners couldn’t afford one”

Mark explained how, in 1992, he had no choice but to arrange a peaceful end for his family’s much loved but sick keeshond, Mercedes. The experience changed him. He couldn’t stop thinking about other pets. And other families. How many pets had seizure disorders like Mercedes? What about pets that can’t walk? Pets that can’t stand? Paralysis, nerve damage, or blindness? What are their options?

A KID

A graduate of Lewis Wadhams School (inspired by A. S. Neil’s Summerhill School movement) , Mark had learned to think for himself. By seventh grade, he was gobbling up advanced courses, It was pretty obvious that he was going to be a thinker and doer.

And a little hyperactive.

When he finished his MBA, Mark “hit the deck” just as desktop computers were exploding. (Not literally!!!)

This was his wave. Mark was to be  swept up in the “innovation revolution”. He divided his interests between computing and energy systems. Still does (Nextek Power Systems, Advanced Energy, The Energy Grid). He had an affinity for the klunky computers that were starting to appear in hobby magazines. He coauthored books about the, then new, IBM PC and MAC as well as  Radio Shack’s popular TRS-80 (“Trash 80″) computer.

“Those were the DOS prompt days. Green screens, portable lunch boxes, and no Internet. I knew I was part of something. I wasn’t real sure what it was.”

WHAT THIS LED TO

That’s the background, okay? Smart guy, green screens,and DOS prompts.

As Microsoft Windows began to dominate, and the thrill of early adoption disappeared, Mark branched out. One thing and another and, motivated by his loss of Mercedes, Mark found himself selling customized wheelchairs and, eventually, creating and selling his own which was out-of-the box adjustable.

Today, Mark’s fast growing firm ships the majority of pet wheel chairs world wide.

Tech-O-Dog Lives Good Life

His handicappedpets.com sells “chairs” that readily adjust for dogs and cats of all sizes with lots of different mobility problems. It has “drag bags” for keeping the little guy comfortable around the house, “Walkin’ Boots” to let his.her feet get into the action while rolling along,  ”No cone” collars which seem INSANELY more comfortable than the Queen Elizabeth lampshades the vet sends you home with after a minor procedure, and a raft of other stuff – all innovative and all aimed at alleviating the awfulness of dealing with a disabled or sick pet.

Mark Robinson gets the ScienceAintSoBad innovation award for using technology to do the right stuff – the stuff other’s just wouldn’t have thought about.
It makes a difference.

- – - – - – - – -

LOTTA SHIP!

TOO TALL?

You know the Costa Concordia? The gorgeous cruise ship that sunk off the coast of Giglio?

Normally (when it’s not turned over on its side) 26 feet of the ship is underwater. The rest sticks straight up for thirteen stories.

Top heavy, right?  No WONDER it flopped over!

Modern cruise ships are very high tech. The architecture says “Physics be damned! I look impossible because I AM impossible!” So is this a bad way to design a ship? Did top marine architects not notice that their leviathans aren’t stable in the water? Did the insurance companies insure half billion dollar sinkers because they were foolish? Were the insurance agents too busy to drive out to the dock and actually take a look at the the mess they were insuring?

To answer these oh-so-great questions, MISTER ScienceAintSoBad, did a little research. An article  in the New Scientist by Paul Marks helped. These “ships of the future” are “engineering intense”. In spite of their Towering Inferno look, they’ve got plenty of “ballast” down below – enough to pass tough, tough stability tests where the ship is pulled from vertical with weights and released. It’s part of routine shipyard testing and it’s a tough exam. The ship has to recover from a vicious lean and right itself  fast enough or nobody’s going anywhere.  There are watertight compartments too which are designed for water ballast to be pumped around. This is to provide stability and compensate for forces that might tip the ship. And the lifeboats aren’t old days, either. They’re self-righting covered pods. If you can get yours down to the heaving seas, you can sail twice around the world. Guaranteed.

Engineering marvels.

But here’s the thing. With science we like to test our theories. We like evidence.

What’s the evidence that the Costa Concordia was a safe ship? Did it fail safe? You’re thinking “no”, aren’t you? And you’re saying this because it was over on its side and would have sunk if it hadn’t had the good luck/bad luck to have found itself a rock!

Okay. Maybe NOT so accident resistant. I’ll give you that one.

These ships aren’t perfect. Their huge profiles can make them hard to handle in strong winds. And they’re “tender”. If they turn  too fast, bad things happen. They roll like crazy. The steering limit system is supposed to prevent this. You can’t turn too sharply if your life depends on it. (I realize that it does. Thank you for that comment.)

For the moment, most of the attention seems to be on the way the crew handled things and that makes sense. But that ship’s going to get a good look over too. Maybe 13 stories is one too many.

- – - – - -

Thanks to Robert Lender for the photo:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Scary!

THOSE BIG PHONES

“ Zoey” asked about screen size for smartphones. They’re getting so big. Why?

I said:

Phones started out small.

Apple made a big thing about how dainty the IPhone was. But, as people have come to expect more from their phones, small has become less cute and more aggravating. How are you going to read a book, watch a movie, or edit a document? With a magnifying glass?

So  there’s been some “size drift”.

It’s true you can add a tablet to your electronics collection – something like the very nice IPad.  But some people don’t want to have a permanent forward lean like a school kid with a backpack full of gadgets. Maybe bigger phones will  take pressure off of your need for multiple electronics, multiple accounts, and multiple charging technologies .

Saves money too, right?

We don’t know what is the best size for a smartphone yet. This is an experiment. We’re figuring this out together.

I thought you should know.

—————
Thanks to David Baldinger for the cartoon figure used in the above image. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.