FTL – Finally a possibility in mainstream science

Every now and then, a piece of news begs you to stop, rise above the mundane world of everyday life and reach for the stars and this month… it literally made it possible to reach for the stars – well almost, at least in theory!

Finally two physicists at Baylor University, US, have stumbled upon an idea that may turn traveling at the speed of light from science fiction to real science, just like the warp speed at which spacecraft travel in the fictional TV and film series ‘Star Trek’

Dr. Gerald Cleaver, associate professor of physics at Baylor, and Dr. Richard Obousy, a Baylor post-doctoral student, theorize that by manipulating the space-time dimensions around the spaceship with a massive amount of energy, it would create a “bubble” that could push the ship faster than the speed of light.

To create this bubble, the Baylor physicists believe manipulating the 11-dimension would create dark energy. Cleaver said that positive dark energy is responsible for speeding up the universe as time moves on, just like it did after the Big Bang, when the universe expanded faster than the speed of light.

“Think of it like a surfer riding a wave,” said Cleaver, who co-authored a research paper with Obousy about the new method. “The ship would be pushed by the bubble and the bubble would be traveling faster than the speed of light,” he added.

The method is based on the Alcubierre drive, which proposes expanding the fabric of space behind a ship into a bubble and shrinking space-time in front of the ship.

According to Wikipedia - Alcubierre drive - also known as the Alcubierre drive or Warp Drive, is a speculative mathematical model of a space-time exhibiting features reminiscent of the fictional "warp drive" from Star Trek, which can travel "Faster-than-light".

In 1994, the Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre proposed a method of stretching space in a wave which would in theory cause the fabric of space ahead of a spacecraft to contract and the space behind it to expand. The ship would ride this wave inside a region known as a warp bubble of flat space. Since the ship is not moving within this bubble, but carried along as the region itself moves, conventional relativistic effects such as time dilation do not apply in the way they would in the case of a ship moving at high velocity through flat space-time. Also, this method of travel does not actually involve moving faster than light in a local sense, since a light beam within the bubble would still always move faster than the ship; it is only "faster than light" in the sense that, thanks to the contraction of the space in front of it, the ship could reach its destination faster than a light beam restricted to travelling outside the warp bubble. Thus, the Alcubierre drive does not contradict the conventional claim that relativity forbids a slower-than-light object to accelerate to faster-than-light speeds. However, there are no known methods to create such a warp bubble in a region that does not already contain one, or to leave the bubble once inside it, so the Alcubierre drive remains a theoretical concept at this time.

The ship would not actually move, rather the ship would sit in between the expanding and shrinking space-time dimensions. Since space would move around the ship, the theory does not violate Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, which states that it would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate an object faster than the speed of light.

String theory suggests the universe is made up of multiple dimensions. Height, width and length are three dimensions, and time is the fourth dimension. Scientists believe that there are a total of 10 dimensions, with six other dimensions that we cannot yet identify. A new theory, called M-theory, takes string theory one step farther and states that the “strings” actually vibrate in an 11-dimensional space. It is this 11th dimension that the Baylor researchers believe could help propel a ship faster than the speed of light.

Gee – the only thing left to invent now is “inertial dampening” and “shields” J I wonder what Zefram Cochrane would have thought of this…

So…the theory is there. Implementation waits the perception of our current technologies in higher dimension. Accelerating masses generate gravitational radiation in higher dimension. That side of the universe in completely dark for us as we cannot perceive anything beyond the three spatial dimensions and one forward moving time dimension.

The theory of relativity predicts that masses being accelerated should emit ``gravitational radiation’’ in the same way that charged particles (like electrons) emit electromagnetic radiation when they are accelerated.

Simply put use of gravitational wave in higher dimensions easily produce thousand time faster speed than light. The waves and radiations that we can perceive are designed to explicitly manifest themselves in 3-d spatial environments. Gravity radiation is what runs the chilled universe, the Hyperspaces and zillion universes held by the chilled platform universe.

I think this piece of theoretical work has important connotations for humanity and its future and I for one would closely follow any developments – theoretical or experimental in this field…

Life!

These have been the days of days for contemplation and meditation. Days when I found myself drowned in the materialistic pleasures that this civilization can throw onto us and yet I found myself asking some deeper inner questions amidst this state of plenty.

Most of us sleep walk through life.

Now some people may take offense at this statement, but if we look closely, then one does realize that most of our responses to life’s deeper questions have been “automatic”. We plan for business outcomes, projects and even money making schemes. We plan for annual priorities or goals at office, in essence we plan for everything - yet how many of us plan for life?

During younger days, the thirst for newer experiences takes us places and when we get a little older the fascination towards nature decreases in intensity and we turn towards the very real and practical problems of getting by both financially and otherwise – through the quagmire that is life…

I often remember the fascination I held for the celestial bodies (naw… I am not referring to those originating in Bollywood or Hollywood) – often looking at them through home made telescopes and wondering if there is anyone out there. Flights of imagination, fancy produced fantastic creatures which lived in oceans of Venus and of exotic creatures from Mars… Alas the illusion is broken when one gets older. The world of elders is much more practical

There are more practical things to worry about – the EMI for the house, buying things which we don’t need to impress people we don’t know or even if knew – wouldn’t like to be associated with… and the innocence is lost. We no longer question whether anyone lives on the moon or planets or if there is life “elsewhere”. We even stop planning long term.

I remember during my childhood – of dreams of becoming a scientist, an astronaut, explorer, writer – all at the same time. And now that 20 years have gone by… the dreams are no longer so vivid.

But as we age, our focus shifts. Planning for life is a tough thing. Have you ever asked yourself some really deep questions?

For example, I have tried to enumerate some of them…

• What is your deepest desire
• What would one like to accomplish in one’s life?
• What would one like to accomplish this year?
• Where would one like to be in 5 years?
• Where would one like to be in 20 years?
• What is one really good at?

Obviously there are deeper questions still, such as:

• What would one do if one had enough money not to work ever again?
• What were one’s dreams when one was younger?
• What does one think is impossible for one to do?
• What would one do if one won a million dollars?
• What would one do if this was the last day of one’s life?
• What would one do if one couldn't fail?
• What are one’s strengths and talents?
• Does one has a wish but doesn’t know how to fulfill it?
• What does one admire most about others?
• What would one’s ideal lifestyle look like?
• What does success mean for one?
• What makes one really happy?
• Is there anything that needs to be invented?
• What does a perfect day look like for one?
• What would one do if there were no restrictions?
• What really excites one?
• What would one be honored and recognized for?
• Where does one see one’s life in ten years?
• If one were immortal, what would one do with one’s life?
• What needs to change to make this a better world?
• What would one do if one were Superman?
• What is one proud of?
• What would one do if one were the President?
• What would one like to accomplish this year?
• What would one do differently if one could start over again?

To be able to answer such questions, one needs to do a lot more than spend an evening with oneself… it is a journey to one’s inner self… of self-discovery…

How many have undertaken it?

Quantum physics and consciousness

Today was the day of connecting with inner self. So I spent the afternoon going through some books on consciousness and its connection with quantum physics.

For more than two hundred years Newton’s ideas dictated our world view. Newton declared that everything operates mechanically and can be predicted like clockwork. Science in Newton’s view, being nothing more than the act of observing, meant that this world view was easily perpetuated by independent observers all over the world.

In the late 19th century, science entered into the era of subatomic physics, which changed everything. Scientists discovered that the so-called ‘subatomic particles’ were not particles at all. They behaved like particles when they were measured but they traveled like waves. Quantum theory has changed everything, because what was once a mechanical, external universe has now become a web of intelligence. Science finally admits that the simple act of observing changes the result of any experiment and by extension, that the observer and the observed are not separate.

Quantum physics started in the late nineteenth century and is associated with the work of German physicist Max Planck. In the 1890's Planck set out to explain the phenomenon of blackbody radiation; the observation that the color of light emitted from an object did not change in a linear fashion to its temperature. Planck provided an explanation for the phenomenon in 1900 by postulating that light is emitted or absorbed in packets of definite size, which he called a quanta. Thus light, once considered a wave, was now being described as a particle (photon) in order to solve the riddle of blackbody radiation.

Quantum theory is also generally regarded as one of the most successful scientific theories ever formulated. But while the mathematical description of the quantum world allows the probabilities of experimental results to be calculated with a high degree of accuracy, there is no consensus on what it means in conceptual terms. The issues involved with this apparent conceptual conundrum are discussed in this article by David Pratt - Consciousness, Causality, and Quantum Physics.

According to physicist Leon Lederman there are three qualities we know about quantum theory.

1. It is counterintuitive,
2. It works,
3. It has problems.

Lederman goes on to write, "In spite of the great practical and intellectual success of quantum theory, we cannot be sure we know what the theory means." It is this ambiguity within the "hard" science of physics that has helped initiate a crisis unlike science has ever encountered. Once concerned with the motion and trajectory of particles, physics is now considering questions which would have been labeled as blasphemy throughout academic circles a hundred years ago. Now, numerous physicists are speculating about the nature of reality, the existence of consciousness, even the existence of God.

According to Pratt - According to the conventional interpretation of quantum physics not only is it impossible for us to measure a particle's position and momentum simultaneously with equal precision, a particle does not possess well-defined properties when it is not interacting with a measuring instrument. Furthermore, the uncertainty principle implies that a particle can never be at rest, but is subject to constant fluctuations even when no measurement is taking place, and these fluctuations are assumed to have no causes at all.

Simply speaking, the quantum world is believed to be characterized by absolute indeterminism, intrinsic ambiguity, and irreducible lawlessness. Most physicists are content to accept the assumption of absolute chance. This has important implications in connection with free will.

As the late physicist David Bohm (1984, p. 87) put it: "it is assumed that in any particular experiment, the precise result that will be obtained is completely arbitrary in the sense that it has no relationship whatever to anything else that exists in the world or that ever has existed."

It is widely accepted that consciousness or, more generally, mental activity is in some way correlated to the behavior of the material brain. Since quantum theory is the most fundamental theory of matter that is currently available, it is a legitimate question to ask whether quantum theory can help us to understand consciousness. Several approaches answering this question affirmatively, proposed in recent decades, have been surveyed in this excellent article - Quantum Approaches to Consciousness.

According to Mark Bancroft in Quantum Physics & Consciousness - "Quantum physics has directly challenged the meaning of matter for more than fifty years. Being defined as, "Something that occupies space and can be perceived by one or more senses; a physical body, a physical substance, or the universe as a whole.” Thus, matter may also mean the entire universe; including "'not-real' stuff". The atom was considered to be the indivisible building block of the universe up until the discovery of the electron. Now, particle physicists postulate that there are sixty-one elementary particles which make up all matter in the universe."

On a side track - Professor of Mathematical Physics, Frank Tipler, confidently proclaims that physics can and will lead to the immortality of humankind. He shares on page three of his book - The Physics of Immortality.

According to Dream Manifesto - Reality is never experienced on an exclusively personal level. The 21st century has witnessed the introduction of new ideas about how we fundamentally view reality. However, all we can know of the world in an absolute sense comes from our own sensory perceptions and the mental constructions we build around them. Behind these perceptions lies pure consciousness. Quantum physicists have shown that consciousness itself - something you have in infinite supply - is the basic stuff of the entire universe.

Quantum physics is a branch of physics which concerns itself with the study (observation) of the subatomic realm. Physics is defined as, "The science of matter and energy and of interactions between the two. Physical properties, interactions, processes, or laws. The study of the natural or material world and phenomenon." Being a scientific endeavor the above definition appears to fit with the somewhat vague definition of science.

A rather beautiful representation of quantum mechanics and consciousness is given on this website…

And before I close this entry, I must mention Fred Alan Wolf who is a physicist, writer, and lecturer who earned his Ph.D. in theoretical physics at UCLA in 1963. He continues to write, lecture throughout the world, and conduct research on the relationship of quantum physics to consciousness. He is the National Book Award Winning author of taking the Quantum Leap. He is a member of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Collegium of Scholars. More can be found about him on this blog… of course he also has his own blog site J there are a thousand questions which clamor my mind and one day, I intend to ask Dr. Quantum…

What is time?

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I found it!) But 'That's funny ..." Isaac Asimov

As I sit on a Sunday morning, pondering about fast the weekend went by and how less the time seems to be when you are having fun… a thought struck me – what is time? Often the immediate concept that comes to mind is a clock, watch or a calendar, but what really is time?

According to John Sankey, to physicists, time is defined by quantum mechanics. A photon with energy h (Planck's constant) behaves as though it were oscillating once per second. Modern atomic clocks are based on this. Time direction is something else. It is based on information, which sits uneasily in the world of physics. But, any quantum system must have an arrow of time.

You often hear: “I have no time.”, “Time is money.”, “I need to be on time” and so on.

I have read through some scientific literature and what the scientific community considers as time if even more confusing than our everyday common sense notions about it, for example the Einstein theory of relativity makes the subject for ordinary people just even more confused.

What if time were to stop?

As L. Ron Hubbard (1951) had put it - The illusion called time is composed of altering of the particles position in space” and “Alteration is the basic manifestation of time. Well, he was much more of fantasy novel writer than actual scientist (some may dispute the fact).

Everything moves, all the time. Time is measured from instruments which from beginning come from natural movements such as the sun and the planet as well as the moon. When we think of time we tend to think of the ways in which we measure the passing of time, such as a clock or watch, or perhaps a measured interval of time such as an hour or minute, but not of time itself. So what is time? Exactly what is it that we are measuring?

We can begin to answer the question with the basic description that we are measuring the interval between events, using units that we have chosen for the purpose. We may say, for example, that the next train will be due in 5 minutes. While this information may be very useful for telling us how late the train is when it eventually arrives, it does nothing to describe just what it is that we are measuring. We want to know exactly what the 'interval' is.

Time can seem as solid as a rock. In fact, it's a lot more squishy. Our calendars are imperfect. We need a leap day to keep them in line with the seasons, and even so, time will eventually get away from us. "If you feel there aren't enough hours in a day, just wait," says Max Tegmark, a cosmologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "In a few hundred million years, tidal friction will have slowed Earth's rotation to make the day 25 hours long."

If that doesn't make your head spin, consider that in physics, motion alters time; in psychology, different stimuli alter our perception of time; and in philosophy, there's disagreement on whether time is even real. "In terms of our inner lives, no time exists except for what is happening in the present moment," says Joan Halifax Roshi, a Zen Buddhist teacher.

Whew!

And I thought time was such a simple matter to ponder about…

In physics and other sciences, time is considered one of the few fundamental quantities. Time is used to define other quantities – such as velocity – and defining time in terms of such quantities would result in circularity of definition. An operational definition of time, wherein one says that observing a certain number of repetitions of one or another standard cyclical event (such as the passage of a free-swinging pendulum) constitutes one standard unit such as the second, is highly useful in the conduct of both advanced experiments and everyday affairs of life. The operational definition leaves aside the question whether there is something called time, apart from the counting activity just mentioned, that flows and that can be measured. Investigations of a single continuum called space-time brings the nature of time into association with related questions into the nature of space, questions that have their roots in the works of early students of natural philosophy.

Among prominent philosophers, there are two distinct viewpoints on time.

One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Time travel, in this view, becomes a possibility as other "times" persist like frames of a film strip, spread out across the time line. Sir Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time.

The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz and Immanuel Kant, holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be traveled.

According to Lee Smolin, The debate between absolute and relational time echoes down the history of physics and philosophy, and confronts us now, at the end of the twentieth century, as we try to understand what notion of space and time is to replace Newton's. If there is no absolute time, then Newton's laws of motion don't make sense. What must replace them has to be a different kind of law that can make sense if one measures time by any clock. That is, what is required is a democratic rather than an autocratic law, in which any clock's time, imperfect as it may be, is as good as any other's. Leibniz was never able to invent such a law. But Einstein did, and it is indeed one of the great achievements of his theory of general relativity that a way was found to express the laws of motion so that they make sense whichever clock one uses to embody them with meaning. Paradoxically, this is done by eliminating any reference to time from the basic equations of the theory. The result is that time cannot be spoken about generally or abstractly; we can only describe how the universe changes in time if we first tell the theory exactly which real physical processes are to be used as clocks to measure the passage of time.

The problem is that general relativity is only half of the revolution of twentieth-century physics, for there is also the quantum theory. And quantum theory, which was originally developed to explain the properties of atoms and molecules, took over completely Newton's notion of an absolute ideal time.

So, in theoretical physics, we have at present not one theory of nature but two theories: relativity and quantum mechanics, and they are based on two different notions of time.

“In the theory of relativity, the concept of time begins with the Big Bang the same way as parallels of latitude begin at the North Pole. You cannot go further north than the North Pole,” says Kari Enqvist, Professor of Cosmology.

One of the most peculiar qualities of time is the fact that it is measured by motion and it also becomes evident through motion.

According to the general theory of relativity, the development of space may result in the collapse of the universe. All matter would shrink into a tiny dot again, which would end the concept of time as we know it.

No general agreements here, although the search for the grand unified theory is on the achievement does not appear to be any closer still.

There is of course, like anything else under the purview of human thought, an alternate, more human approach towards time…

Spiritual guide and alternative medicine expert Deepak Chopra, who warned of the dangers of a hectic lifestyle. "People who feel that they are 'running out of time' have speeded up their biological clocks," says Chopra. "They have faster heart rates and jittery platelets with high levels of adrenaline. When they drop dead from a premature heart attack, they have literally 'run out of time.'"

Perhaps the most surprising thing we heard about time came from a scientist and entrepreneur who studies aging. "Time has little impact on biology," says Michael West, a gerontologist who teaches at the University of California, Berkeley, and founded the biotech company Geron. That sounds reassuring at first--but it's only because we're pre-programmed to fall apart anyway. "From a gerontologist's standpoint, biological time is not wear-and-tear, it's a genetic program," says West. "It's sort of like a time bomb. The cells are programmed to last just long enough for us to rear children, and no longer."

If now is both now and forever, as C.S. Lewis suggested, then the religious view may not be so different than the scientific view. Physics tells us that all moments exist equally, at once--it's only our consciousness that distinguishes the present from the past or future.

According to The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Time has been studied by philosophers and scientists for 2,500 years, and thanks to this attention it is much better understood today. Nevertheless, many issues remain to be resolved. Here is a short list of the most important ones—what time actually is; whether time exists when nothing is changing; what kinds of time travel are possible; why time has an arrow; whether the future and past are real; how to analyze the metaphor of time's flow; whether the future will be infinite; whether there was time before the Big Bang; whether tensed or tenseless concepts are semantically basic; what is the proper formalism or logic for capturing the special role that time plays in reasoning; and what are the neural mechanisms that account for our experience of time”.

There are 3 competing theories:

--> Presentists argue that necessarily only present objects and present experiences are real, and we conscious beings recognize this in the special "vividness" of our present experience

--> According to the growing-universe or growing-block theory, the past and present are both real, but the future is not because the future is indeterminate or merely potential

--> The third and more popular theory is that there are no significant ontological differences among present, past and future because the differences are merely subjective. This view is called "the block universe theory" or "eternalism."

Although there are theories of how to solve a specific problem about time, it is always better to knit together solutions to several problems. Ideally, the goal is to produce a theory of time that will solve in a systematic way the constellation of problems involving time. What are those problems?

--> One is to clarify the relationship between time and the mind. Does time exist for beings that have no minds? It is easy to confuse time itself with the perception of time.

--> Another problem is to decide which of our intuitions about time should be retained. Some of these intuitions may reflect deep insights into the nature of time, and others may be faulty ideas inherited from our predecessors. It is not obvious which is which. For one example, if we have the intuition that time flows, but our science implies otherwise, then which view should get priority? Philosophers of time must solve the problem of how to treat our intuitions

--> A third problem for a philosophical theory of time is to clarify what physical science presupposes and implies about time. Most all philosophers of time claim that philosophical theories should be consistent with physical science, or, if not, then they must accept the heavy burden of proof to justify the inconsistency

A philosophical theory of time should describe the relationship between instants and events. Does the instant that we label as "11:01 A.M." for a certain date exist independently of the events that occur then? In other words, can time exist if no event is happening? This question or problem raises the thorny metaphysical issue of absolute vs. relational theories of time.

The article is profound in its depth and I strongly recommend reading, though not on a Sunday afternoon, when one is more attuned towards a lazy stroll through time rather than an activity which challenges the one’s intellect and imagination both.

Although we understand that Time is a component of a measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify the motions of objects, Time has been a major subject of religion, philosophy, and science, but defining time in a non-controversial manner applicable to all fields of study has consistently eluded the greatest scholars. Also, throughout my readings, the concept of time, which we all take for granted, is still far from being agreed upon by most of the branches of human thought from Physics to religion. It is profoundly disturbing and humbling to know that we know how to split an atom, reach the moon and gaze at the depth of cosmos, we are still not quite sure what time is… although we can experience its effects on everything we see around us…

Back to the moon…

India, with its launch of the unmanned moon probe entered the race of return to the moon – earth’s only and somewhat abnormally large – natural satellite.

Abnormal? What is so abnormal about our moon – which has inspired different emotions in humankind throughout the ages – from awe, superstition to much more tender emotions such as love, etc. well, as it happens, the Moon happens to quite large as compared to its capital body around which is revolves, in fact it is the fifth largest natural satellite in the entire SOL’s (sun) Solar System. Take for example other large moons of the solar system such as Triton, Titan, IO, Europa, Cheron (what!!! – you didn’t know that Pluto had a moon too?) – They are all huge, but pale when compared to their “parent” body. In fact, Jupiter and Saturn are so big (full of gas) that their moons or satellites are very small indeed when compared to their own mass or size. The earth’s moon, in comparison, is very large indeed – in terms of diameter - a little more than a quarter that of the Earth. This means that the Moon's volume is about 2 percent that of Earth and the pull of gravity at its surface about 17 percent that of the Earth. In fact, in astronomy, it is found quite astonishing to have such a large body orbiting a relatively small core planet. Indeed, sometimes, from galactic perspective, Earth-Moon system is often referred to as the double-planet system.

By the middle of the 17th century, Galileo and other early astronomers made telescopic observations, noting an almost endless overlapping of craters. It has also been known for more than a century that the Moon is less dense than the Earth. Although a certain amount of information was ascertained about the Moon before the space age, this new era has revealed many secrets barely imaginable before that time. Current knowledge of the Moon is greater than for any other solar system object except Earth.

Various facts, especially the NASA photographs of Apollo missions are lucidly presented in this article by Rosanna L. Hamilton.

But really, how much do we know about our own galactic backyard?

The Moon makes a complete orbit around the Earth every 27.3 days (the orbital period), and the periodic variations in the geometry of the Earth–Moon–Sun system are responsible for the lunar phases that repeat every 29.5 days (the synodic period). The Moon is in synchronous rotation, meaning that it keeps nearly the same face turned towards the Earth at all times. Early in the Moon's history, its rotation slowed and became locked in this configuration as a result of frictional effects associated with tidal deformations caused by the Earth. The far side had never been seen by any human until the launch of moon probes in the last 1950’s.

You can see the Virtual Reality Moon Phase Pictures here.

The Moon is the only celestial body to which humans have travelled and upon which humans have landed. The first artificial object to escape Earth's gravity and pass near the Moon was the Soviet Union's Luna 1, the first artificial object to impact the lunar surface was Luna 2, and the first photographs of the normally occluded far side of the Moon were made by Luna 3, all in 1959. The first spacecraft to perform a successful lunar soft landing was Luna 9, and the first unmanned vehicle to orbit the Moon was Luna 10, both in 1966. The United States (U.S.) Apollo program achieved the only manned missions to date, resulting in six landings between 1969 and 1972. Human exploration of the Moon ceased with the conclusion of the Apollo program, although several countries have announced plans to send people or robotic spacecraft to the Moon – well – India and China are amongst the nations now raring to literally reach for the moon!

Okay, back to moon J

One distinguishing feature of the far side is its almost complete lack of maria. The dark and relatively featureless lunar plains which can clearly be seen with the naked eye are called maria (singular mare), Latin for seas, since they were believed by ancient astronomers to be filled with water. These are now known to be vast solidified pools of ancient basaltic lava. The majority of these lavas erupted or flowed into the depressions associated with impact basins that formed by the collisions of meteors and comets with the lunar surface. Maria are found almost exclusively on the near side of the Moon, with the far side having only a few scattered patches covering only about 2% of its surface compared with about 31% on the near side.

The lighter-colored regions of the Moon are called terrae, or more commonly just highlands, since they are higher than most maria. Several prominent mountain ranges on the near side are found along the periphery of the giant impact basins, many of which have been filled by mare basalt. These are believed to be the surviving remnants of the impact basin's outer rims. In contrast to the Earth, no major lunar mountains are believed to have formed as a result of tectonic events.

The Moon's surface shows obvious evidence of having been affected by impact cratering. Impact craters form when asteroids and comets collide with the lunar surface, and globally about half a million craters with diameters greater than 1 km can be found. Since impact craters accumulate at a nearly constant rate, the number of craters per unit area superposed on a geologic unit can be used to estimate the age of the surface (see crater counting). The lack of an atmosphere, weather and recent geological processes ensures that many of these craters have remained relatively well preserved in comparison to those found on Earth. The largest crater on the Moon, which also has the distinction of being one of the largest known craters in the Solar System, is the South Pole-Aitken basin. This impact basin is located on the far side, between the South Pole and equator, and is some 2,240 km in diameter and 13 km in depth.

Blanketed atop the Moon's crust is a highly comminuted (broken into ever smaller particles) and "impact gardened" surface layer called regolith. Since the regolith forms by impact processes, the regolith of older surfaces is generally thicker than for younger surfaces. In particular, it has been estimated that the regolith varies in thickness from about 3–5 m in the maria, and by about 10–20 m in the highlands. In other words, the soil is thick and slick…

But why the rush of back to moon, why now?

India launched Chandrayaan-1 - in a historic feat, on October 22, 2008 from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre in Sriharikota. The successful launch of India's maiden unmanned moon mission Chandrayaan-1 has catapulted the country into the league of a select group of nations. One of the prime reasons is national pride and then the other is the possibilities it affords. With the western economy in decline and ascendency of India and China in this century, it was only a matter of time before these two nations realized the importance of breaking the bounds of earth’s puny gravity well and soar beyond.

But beyond the political hype and all the aspirations of becoming a superpower, there is a much more practical aspect to race towards the moon.

The Moon holds several minerals and elements not found or manufactured easily on earth. Helium-3 for example. Then there are spin-off benefits from the technology that must be developed to reach moon. The sophistication and cost effectiveness of the journey outwards ultimately holds the key to cheap and profitable exploration of outer space.

India's love fest with deep space has only just begun. It could well become a force to reckon with giving the established space agencies a run for their money as the Indian moon mission is the cheapest till date of all moon missions in this century, but one also which creates a world record of carrying the largest suite of scientific instruments ever to be carried to the moon till date.

And frankly, I would want to see a difference from NASA – whose every mission has to cost a billion dollars and then explode either while leaving or entering earth’s gravity well. I’ve got nothing against NASA – bunch of great guys (lot of Indians there in fact if I heard it right), but everything they do - why DOES IT HAVE TO COST SO MUCH?

If the technology wasn’t ready to allow human exploration of space in a safe way, why send humans? Robotic vehicles can also operate with certain amount of efficiency and the money could have been better utilized in developing technologies which would have ultimately resulted in cheaper access to outer space.

And now NASA’s mantra has indeed become – faster, cheaper and better (FCB) – evident in the Mars probes.

In fact, if the price tag wasn’t so high, space exploration would have proceeded at a much quicker pace than what happened in the aftermath of Apollo missions.

We keep on saying that man has landed on the moon and we are not exploring our own cosmic backyard. But, without the intention of belittling our (humankind’s) achievements so far, what we have done till now is slingshot a few missions to moon (with humans in it), put a space station in orbit (with the ever present danger of it falling down on our heads – e.g. MIR) and sent some probes to near by planets. Voyager I & II and the pioneer missions were an exception. They were real value for their money because of the wealth of information that they afforded to humanity about the outer side of our solar system.
I would closely watch India and humanity’s collective progress of back to the moon, mars and then ultimately the solar system.

Extra-terrestrial origins of life?

The concept of life being a cosmic phenomenon is rapidly gaining support, with new evidence from space science, geology and biology. In this picture life on Earth resulted from the introduction of bacteria from comets, and the subsequent evolution of life required the continuing input of genes from comets.

Fred Hoyle was an important scientist who worked at the frontiers of astronomy and theoretical physics. In 1983 he published a well-illustrated popular book for nonscientists in which he attacked the whole idea that life originated and evolved on Earth and replaced it by 'intelligent cosmic control'.

Although Hoyle has been accused to siding with creationism – I personally disagree with this assessment. He was in favor of cosmic connection and control of origin of life on earth and elsewhere in universe and was not particularly hinting at any divine control.

In an interview, N Chandra Wickramasinghe, one of the foremost authority on the idea of life from outer space a student and collaborator of Sir Fred Hoyle – in the frontline – mentions that two recent experiments in the United States have once again drawn the attention of scientists to the theory of panspermia.

Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe demonstrated correctly that interstellar clouds contain some organic molecules but their subsequent proposal for the extraterrestrial origin of life on earth and for the ability of microbes to survive in space are not substantiated by hardcore evidence. However, with the hard core evidence from other quarters coming in, this theory is gaining ground and acceptance in mainstream scientific thinking.

Panspermia - which literally means seeds everywhere, underlies the hypothesis that the (biological) stuff of life did not have its origins in terrestrial resources but in inter-stellar space.

The theory maintains that life on the earth was seeded from space and that life's evolution to higher forms depends on complex genes (including those of viruses and diseases) that the earth receives from space from time to time.)

The two experiments discussed included:

In one experiment reported in October, environmental biologists Russell H. Vreeland and William D. Rosenzweig claimed that they discovered the longest surviving (250 million years) bacterial spores locked inside a salt crystal formation in Mexico that could be revived. This was considered as evidence that life - even one-celled micro-organisms - could survive in suspended animation for eons and float on comets to far away planets

In another experiment reported, a team of scientists from the California Institute of Technology, Vanderbilt and McGill Universities discovered that small pieces of space rock could be transferred from Mars to earth without its interior get ting excessively heated up, thus enabling living organisms to ride in them

The renewed interest in panspermia also comes in the wake of space-based discoveries that include recent findings of some simple amino acids and sugars in inter-stellar space; the announcement by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in August 1996 of evidence of fossilized ancient life in a meteorite from Mars; evidence in the same year by geneticists that many genes are much older than what the fossil record would indicate; the discovery by a Russian microbiologist in 1998 of a micro-fossil in a meteorite was a previously unknown bacterium; and the announcement by NASA in April this year of the detection of very large organic molecules in space in its Stardust Mission launched in February and that the non-biological origins of such large molecules are not known


Early history of panspermia

Until the late 19th century panspermia meant the passage of organisms through Earth’s own atmosphere, not an incidence from outside Earth. In this form it seems to have been used first by the Abbee Lazzaro Spallanzoni (1729-99). But almost a century before that, Francesco Redi had carried out what can be seen as a classic experiment in the subject. He had shown that maggots appear in decaying meat only when the meat is exposed to air, inferring that whatever it was that gave rise to the maggots must have travelled to the meat through the air.

A very long wait until the 1860’s then ensued, until Louis Pasteur’s3 experiments on the souring of milk and the fermentation of wine showed that similar results occurred when the air-borne agents were bacteria, replicating as bacteria but not producing a visible organism like maggots. The world then permitted Pasteur to get away with a huge generalization, and honored him greatly both at the time and in history for it. Because by then the world was anxious to be done with the old Aristotelian concept of life emerging from the mixing of warm earth and morning dew. The same old concept was to arise again in the mid-twenties of the past century, however, but with a different name. Instead of Aristotle’s warm earth and morning dew it became “a warm organic soup.”

Pasteur’s far-ranging generalization implied that each generation of every plant or animal is preceded by a generation of the same plant or animal. This view was taken up enthusiastically by others, particularly by physicists, among them John Tyndall, who lectured frequently on the London scene. The editorial columns of the newly established Nature (e.g., issue of January 27, 1870) objected with some passion to Tyndall’s Friday evening discourse at the Royal Institution on January 21, 1870. Behind the objection was the realizations that were Pasteur’s paradigm taken to be strictly true, the origin of life would need to be external to Earth. For if life had no spontaneous origin, it would be possible to follow any animal generation-by-generation back to a time before Earth existed, the origin being therefore required outside Earth.

This was put in remarkably clear terms in 1874 by the German physicist Hermann von Helmholtz4:

“It appears to me to be a fully correct scientific procedure, if all our attempts fail to cause the production of organisms from non-living matter, to raise the question whether life has ever arisen, whether it is not just as old as matter itself, and whether seeds have not been carried from one planet to another and have developed everywhere where they have fallen on fertile soil….”

In his presidential address to the 1881 meeting of the British Association, Lord Kelvin drew a remarkable picture:

“When two great masses come into collision in space, it is certain that a large part of each is melted, but it seems also quite certain that in many cases a large quantity of debris must be shot forth in all directions, much of which may have experienced no greater violence than individual pieces of rock experience in a landslip or in blasting by gunpowder. Should the time when this earth comes into collision with another body, comparable in dimensions to itself, be when it is still clothed as at present with vegetation, many great and small fragments carrying seeds of living plants and animals would undoubtedly be scattered through space. Hence, and because we all confidently believe that there are at present, and have been from time immemorial, many worlds of life besides our own, we must regard it as probable in the highest degree that there are countless seed-bearing meteoric stones moving about through space. If at the present instant no life existed upon Earth, one such stone falling upon it might, by what we blindly call natural causes, lead to its becoming covered with vegetation.”

Essentially, what Kelvin was suggesting at that time was it is possible for seeds of life to be carried between planetary or cosmic bodies. Thus almost 120 years ago the ideas that have recently come to the forefront of scientific discussion were already well known. Unfortunately there was no way at that date, 1881, whereby observation or experiment could be brought seriously to bear on Kelvin’s formulation of panspermia and the world had to wait 120 year before some sort of concrete experimental and observational proof started trickling in.

It has been known for quite some time that bacteria and other microorganism are extremely hardy. Some have been found to be living in the most unlikely places where conventional thinking would attribute life’s survival – such as in the heavy water of nuclear reactors or the highly acidic and hot volcanic areas. These extremophiles, i.e. microbes that live in conditions that would kill other creatures. It was not until the 1970's that such creatures were recognized, but the more researchers look, the more they discover that most archaea; some bacteria and a few protists can survive in the harshest and strangest of environments.

There is scarcely any set of conditions prevailing on Earth, no matter how extreme that is incapable of harboring some type of microbial life. Under space conditions, microorganisms are very easily protected against ultraviolet damage.

One may find it very difficult to believe but there is evidence that some of bacteria actually survived almost 2 years on moon’s harsh environment. What has happened was that during the sealing of a camera which was supposed to be sent to moon, somebody might have sneezed and hence left microbes inside the camera body. The camera in turn was delivered to moon’s surface to find best locations for landing. 2 years later when the Apollo astronauts retrieved this camera and brought it back to earth – this fact was discovered. Moon has almost no atmosphere and the range of temperature is very high indeed. if microbes can survive 2 years of almost vacuum and the harsh differences in temperatures, is it really far fetched to think that it would be possible for them to travel intra-stellar or interstellar distances and seed life on earth as well?

Couple this with the fact that today an impressive array of interstellar molecules has been detected and among the list are a host of hydrocarbons, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, the amino acid glycine, vinegar and the sugar glycoaldehyde14. Such organic molecules that pervade interstellar clouds make up a considerable fraction of the available galactic carbon.

Actually, theories of how interstellar organic molecules might form via non-biological processes are still in their infancy and, in terms of explaining the available facts, they leave much to be desired.

N Chandra Wickramasinghe further speculates – “The overwhelming bulk of organic matter on Earth is indisputably derived from biology, much of it being degradation products of biology. Might not the same processes operate in the case of interstellar organic molecules? The polyaromatic hydrocarbons that are so abundant in the cosmos could have a similar origin to the organic pollutants that choke us in our major cities - products of degradation of biology, biologically generated fossil fuels in the urban case, cosmic microbiology in the interstellar clouds. The theory of cosmic panspermia that we have proposed leads us to argue that interstellar space could be a graveyard of cosmic life as well as its cradle. Only the minutest fraction (less than one part in a trillion) of the interstellar bacteria needs to retain viability, in dense shielded cloudlets of space, for panspermia to hold sway. Common sense dictates that this survival rate is unavoidable.”

So where does this leads us? Actually, to me this is a partial answer at best. While it may be indisputably established that life did not independently evolve here on earth and was in fact seeded from the stars – it still leaves us clueless about the origins of life itself, wherever it might have evolved or originated.

In this sense, we are all aliens on this planet. Something to ponder on…. I will be writing more on this topic in coming days.

Global Warming and its effects on Planetary Climate

There is a lot of buzz on the planet about global warming and its adverse effects on planet’s ecology, our society and civilization at large. But what is all this debate about?

Thanks to the media attention, many people are concerned about global warming, but they do not know what to do about it. The first thing is to understand the problem and its apparent root cause: increase in the amount of Carbon Dioxide in planet’s atmosphere or is it?

According to Victor Miguel Ponce – “The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere determines to a large extent the present world climate, with temperature being an important component. Through geologic time, carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere from natural sources such as volcanic eruptions and weathering of rocks, has been gradually used by vegetation, through the process of photosynthesis. In the past two-and-a-half billion years, carbon has been temporarily stored above the Earth's surface as standing biomass and litter. During this time, excess quantities of carbon were permanently stored below the surface as fossil deposits of coal, petroleum, and natural gas”.

However, it is an opinion which although backed with some facts, is not unanimous.

There is a somewhat informational site from Environmental Defense Fund which provides arguments against the common misunderstandings that people (in general) have about global warming. It can be accessed here à Global Warming Myths and Facts. There even a climate atlas available on this site.

Even the National Geographic has covered this topic of literally global concern. So it is happening? The answer is emphatic yes. There is more and more energy being pumped into global weather/ climate system causing ever more violent weather – hurricanes, stronger monsoons, etc. An upsurge in the amount of extreme weather events, such as wildfires, heat waves, and strong tropical storms, is also attributed in part to climate change by some experts. Tragedy on human life is increasing since humanity is more spread and numerous on the planet now than it ever was in the entire history of our species or the planet.

T J Nelson provides an insight into cold facts (contrary to mass hysteria) about global warming in this illuminating article. I strongly recommend a reading. In this article, Nelson attempts to provide a balanced and scientific view of facts related to global warming. His assertion is essentially this – current hysteria about global warming is largely a hype created by media and certain so called scientific papers.

According to him – “Although carbon dioxide is capable of raising the Earth's overall temperature, the IPCC's predictions of catastrophic temperature increases produced by carbon dioxide have been challenged by many scientists. In particular, the importance of water vapor is frequently overlooked by environmental activists and by the media. The above discussion shows that the large temperature increases predicted by many computer models are unphysical and inconsistent with results obtained by basic measurements. Skepticism is warranted when considering computer-generated projections of global warming that cannot even predict existing observations”.

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/ tries to debunk the entire mythology around global warming. This article (or set of it) actually tries to delink the “greenhouse effect” and global warming and the entire concept of climate change. It is very reassuring to the skeptic in me that there are people out there who are actually questioning blind following and mass hysteria being created by certain circles.

So is there no cause for worry? Have humans caused this global warming? The opinion though not unanimous, is overwhelmingly in favor of human causality. To know in a more coherent manner, one has to understand a few facts first:

• There is general agreement amongst scientists of this planet that our planet was “The Earth” was formed about 4,540,000,000 years ago – that’s 4.54 billion years.
• At the time of beginning and for quite sometime after that, the Earth's atmosphere contained very little oxygen (less than 1% oxygen pressure).
• Popular belief among the scientific community has it that early plants started to develop more than 2 billion years ago, probably about 2,700,000,000.
• It is an established fact that through photosynthesis, plants uptake carbon dioxide into the biosphere as organic matter, and release oxygen as a byproduct.
• Through geological ages, oxygen accumulated gradually in the atmosphere, reaching a value of about 21% of atmospheric gases at the present time. So our planet and its current atmosphere were terra-formed slowly over millions of years and concerted action of biological agents. It is not a “natural” occurrence, rather it would be safe to put it in these terms – life shaped earth’s climate and atmosphere to suit itself and brought about the present distribution of gases which we breathe.
• It is also believed that through geological ages, surplus organic matter has been sequestered in the lithosphere as fossil organic materials (coal, petroleum, and natural gas).
• Early animals (the first organisms with external shells) started to develop around 600,000,000 years ago
• Animals operate in the opposite way than plants: they take up oxygen, burn organic matter (food), and release carbon dioxide as a byproduct
• Early humans (Australopithecus anamensis) began to develop about 4,100,000 years ago
• Cool climatic conditions have prevailed during the past 1,000,000 years. The species Homo sapiens evolved under these climatic conditions
• Homo sapiens, that’s us, dates back to no more than 400,000 years.
• Estimates for the variety Homo sapiens sapiens, to which all humans belong, range from 130,000 to 195,000 years old
• The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was as low as 190 ppm during the last Ice Age, about 21,000 years ago.
• The last Ice Age began to recede about 20,000 years ago
• The agricultural revolution, where humans converted forests and rangelands into farms, began to develop about 10,000 years ago.
• The agricultural revolution caused a reduction in standing biomass in the biosphere and reduced the uptake of carbon dioxide in midlatitudinal regions, indirectly contributing, however so slightly, to global warming.
• The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased gradually from a low of 190 ppm 21,000 year ago, to about 290 ppm in the year 1900, i.e., at an average rate of 0.00478 ppm per year
• The industrial revolution, where humans developed machines (artificial animals, since they consume fuels, which are mostly organic matter), began in England about 240 years ago (1767).
• In October 1999, the world's population reached 6,000,000,000, which is double that of the year 1959 (the doubling occurred in 40 years)
• The global fleet of motor vehicles is estimated at 830,000,000 (2006).
• The global fleet of motor vehicles has been recently growing at the rate of 16,000,000 per year.
• Motor vehicles (cars, trucks, buses, and scooters) account for 80% of all transport-related energy use
• The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which was at 290 ppm in the year 1900, rose to 316 ppm in 1959, or at an average 0.44 ppm per year
• Measurements of the concentration of carbon dioxide since 1959 (316 ppm) have revealed an increase to 378 ppm in 2004, or at an average 1.38 ppm per year
• The concentration of carbon dioxide has increased an average of about 1.8 ppm per year over the past two decades
• The year 1998 was the warmest of record. The year 2002 was the second warmest (to that date). The year 2003 was the third warmest (to that date). The year 2004 was the fourth warmest (to that date). The year 2005 equaled 1998 as the warmest of record. The year 2007 equaled 1998 as the second warmest of record.
• About 75% of the annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is due to the burning of fossil fuels
• The remaining 25% is attributed to anthropogenic changes in land use, which have the effect of reducing the net uptake of carbon dioxide. Anthropogenic changes in land use occur when forests are converted to rangelands, rangelands to agriculture, and agriculture to urban areas.
• Other patterns of land degradation--deforestation, overgrazing, over-cultivation, desertification, and salinization--reduce the net uptake of carbon dioxide, indirectly contributing, however slightly, to global warming.
  

What's could Happen?

A follow-up report by the IPCC released in April 2007 warned that global warming could lead to large-scale food and water shortages and have catastrophic effects on wildlife.

• Sea level could rise between 7 and 23 inches (18 to 59 centimeters) by century's end, the IPCC's February 2007 report projects. Rises of just 4 inches (10 centimeters) could flood many South Seas islands and swamp large parts of Southeast Asia.
• Some hundred million people live within 3 feet (1 meter) of mean sea level, and much of the world's population is concentrated in vulnerable coastal cities. In the U.S., Louisiana and Florida are especially at risk.
• Glaciers around the world could melt, causing sea levels to rise while creating water shortages in regions dependent on runoff for fresh water.
• Strong hurricanes, droughts, heat waves, wildfires, and other natural disasters may become commonplace in many parts of the world. The growth of deserts may also cause food shortages in many places.
• More than a million species face extinction from disappearing habitat, changing ecosystems, and acidifying oceans.
• The ocean's circulation system, known as the ocean conveyor belt, could be permanently altered, causing a mini-ice age in Western Europe and other rapid changes.
• At some point in the future, warming could become uncontrollable by creating a so-called positive feedback effect. Rising temperatures could release additional greenhouse gases by unlocking methane in permafrost and undersea deposits, freeing carbon trapped in sea ice, and causing increased evaporation of water.
  

We need to remember, Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago – primarily due to climate change. It wasn’t only the asteroid which struck the earth and wiped out 99% species on land and oceans. It wasn’t just the impact – but the climate change induced by that impact which killed the species.

Can we do anything to stem this rising tide?

Sure! Just follow the tips on this wonderful blog. The Grinning planet provides some clues – which I would have anyway recommended even if our planet wasn’t threatened with global warming and so called catastrophic climate change!

Other resources:

• global-warming myths and facts at Undo-It.org
• climate change science at RealClimate.org
  

Problem solving. Keep it simple and move on

This is really simple and interesting. Very often we get carried away in problem solving. The general idea should be to keep it simple and move on.

For example, when NASA began the launch of astronauts into space, they found out that the pens wouldn't work at zero gravity.

In order to solve this problem, they hired Andersen Consulting (Accenture - today).

It took them one decade and 12 million dollars. They developed a pen that worked at zero gravity, upside down, Under water, on practically any surface including crystal and in a temperature range from below freezing to over 300 degrees C.

The Russians used a pencil.

Moral of the story: Complex and elaborate solution are not always the best fit, reality can be simple and it should be our Endeavour to keep it simple!