Friday, February 29, 2008

naval war, steps towardds


Naval warships might look like all-powerful vessels but they are also highly vulnerable to being spotted by the enemy. That fear of being detected has led the military to develop new stealth technologies that allow ships to be virtually invisible to the human eye, to dodge roaming radars, put heat-seeking missiles off the scent, disguise their own sound vibrations and even reduce the way they distort the Earth’s magnetic field, as senior lecture in remote sensing and sensors technology at Britannia Royal Navy College, Chris Lavers, explains in March’s Physics World.


Wars throughout the twentieth century prompted advances in stealth technologies. Some of the earliest but most significant strides towards invisibility involved covering ships with flamboyant cubist patterns – a technique known as “dazzle painting”. During the Second World War, the US military even worked out a way of using lights to make the brightness of a ship match that of the background sea.


When British physicist Robert Watson Watt was charged with designing a ‘death ray’ to destroy entire towns and cities during the Second World War, he calculated it impossible. He did conclude however that radio waves could be used to detect ships and aircrafts too far way to be seen by the naked eye.


Radar was born. For ships to dodge radar, both a ship’s geometry and a ship’s coating have to be considered. Radars are particularly receptive to right angles, which is why modern battleships are often peculiarly shaped. Special paint and foam-coating have also been used to cover ships, which convert radio-waves into heat and stop radio waves being reflected, rendering the signals useless.


The “stealthiest” ship that currently exists is Sweden’s Visby Corvette. Apart from being painted in grey dazzle camouflage and made of low-radar reflectivity materials, it also does not use propellers, which are the noisiest part of a ship. The vessel also has the lowest “magnetic signature” of any current warship.


But the next generation of warships could be truly invisible by exploiting “metamaterials” – artificially engineered structures first dreamt up by physicist John Pendry at Imperial College, London. Metamaterials are tailored to have specific electromagnetic properties not found in nature. In particular, they can bend light around an object, making it appear to an observer as though the waves have passed through empty space.


About the research, Chris Lavers writes, “If optical and radar metamaterials could be developed, they might provide a way to make a ship invisible to both human observers and radar systems, although the challenges of building a cloak big enough to hide an entire ship are huge.”


On the net: http://physicsworld.com


Source: Institute of Physics

robot, The US military, Vecna Technologies
robot, The US military, Vecna Technologies




Vecna Technologies


The Bear is highly manoeuvrable
The US military is developing a robot with a teddy bear-style head to help carry injured soldiers away from the battlefield.


The Battlefield Extraction Assist Robot (BEAR) can scoop up even the heaviest of casualties and transport them over long distances over rough terrain.


New Scientist magazine reports that the "friendly appearance" of the robot is designed to put the wounded at ease.


It is expected to be ready for testing within five years.


While it is important to get medical attention for injured soldiers as soon as possible, it is often difficult and dangerous for their comrades to reach them and carry them back.


The 6ft tall Bear can cross bumpy ground without toppling thanks to a combination of gyroscopes and computer controlled motors to maintain balance.




BEAR FACTS
Robot carries dummy - annotated with details
1. Teddy bear face designed to be reassuring
2. Hydraulic upper body carries up to 227kgs (500lbs)
3. When kneeling tracked "legs" travel over rubble. Switches to wheels on smooth surfaces
4. Dynamic Balance Behaviour (DBB) technology allows the robot to stand and carry loads upright on its ankles, knees or hips for nearly an hour


It is also narrow enough to squeeze through doorways, but can lift 135kg with its hydraulic arms in a single smooth movement, to avoid causing pain to wounded soldiers.


While the existing prototype slides its arms under its burden like a forklift, future versions will be fitted with manoeuvrable hands to gently scoop up casualties.


The Bear is controlled remotely and has cameras and microphones through which an operator sees and hears.


It can even tackle stairs while carrying a human-sized dummy.


Daniel Theobald, the president of Vecna Technologies, which is developing the robot for the US Army, said: "We saw a need for a robot that can essentially go where a human can. The robot will be an integral part of a military team."


Gary Gilbert, from the US Army's Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Centre in Frederick, Maryland, said that the teddy bear appearance was deliberate.


"A really important thing when you're dealing with casualties is trying to maintain that human touch."


Vecna is working on other potential applications for the robot technology - including helping move heavy patients in hospital.

Study revisits bizarre theory,Alien cells in rain


A con­tro­ver­sial the­o­ry, that strange red rains in In­dia six years ago might have con­tained mi­crobes from out­er space, has­n’t died.


In fact, things might be get­ting even weirder.


A new study sug­gests the claimed con­nec­tion be­tween scar­let rain and ti­ny ce­les­tial vis­i­tors may be con­sist­ent with his­tor­i­cal ac­counts link­ing col­ored rain to me­te­or passings. These would seem to ech­o the In­dia case, in which or­gan­isms are pro­posed to have fall­en out of a break­ing me­te­or.


Yet the his­tor­i­cal anal­y­sis, he con­clud­ed, shows the ques­tion is “much more com­plex than one might have ex­pect­ed” and “should be in­ves­t­i­gated with eve­ry sci­en­tif­ic re­source” avail­a­ble.


The stu­dy, by doc­tor­al stu­dent Pat­rick Mc­Caf­ferty of Queen’s Un­ivers­ity Bel­fast, is pub­lished in the ad­vance on­line edi­tion of the In­terna­t­ional Jour­nal of As­tro­bi­ol­o­gy.


Mc­Caf­ferty an­a­lyzed, as he wrote, “80 ac­counts of red rain, an­oth­er 20 ref­er­ences to lakes and riv­ers turn­ing blood-red, and 68 ex­am­ples of oth­er phe­nom­e­na such as colored rain, black rain, milk, bricks, or hon­ey fall­ing from the sky.”


Six­ty of these events, or 36 per­cent, “were linked to me­te­oritic or com­et­ary ac­ti­vity,” he went on. But not al­ways strongly. Some­times, “the fall of red rain seems to have oc­curred af­ter an air­burst,” as from a me­te­or ex­plod­ing in air; oth­er times the odd rain­fall “is merely recorded in the same year as a stone-fall or the ap­pear­ance of a comet.”


The phe­nom­e­na were recorded in times and places as var­ied as Clas­si­cal Rome, me­di­e­val Ire­land, Nor­man Brit­ain and 19th cen­tu­ry Cal­i­for­nia, not­ed Mc­Caf­ferty, who has a mas­ter’s de­gree in ar­chae­o­lo­gy and stud­ies Irish myth and as­tron­o­my. Mc­Caf­ferty added that ta­les sug­ges­tive of red rain-me­te­or links al­so crop up in myth.


With wit­nesses to past events all long dead, Mc­Caf­ferty wrote that probably no his­tor­i­cal anal­y­sis will ev­er set­tle the de­bate over the 2001 rain­falls in In­dia.


Re­search claim­ing to con­nect these rains to ex­tra­ter­res­tri­al life pro­voked dis­be­lief when they were first re­ported wide­ly, in World Sci­ence. “I real­ly, really don’t think they are from a me­te­or!” wrote Har­vard Un­ivers­ity bi­ol­o­gist Jack Szos­tak, re­fer­ring to cell-like par­t­i­cles that had been re­ported to per­me­ate the col­lect­ed rain­wa­ter.


The cu­ri­ous events be­gan on July 25, 2001, when res­i­dents of Ker­a­la, a re­gion in south­west­ern In­dia, started see­ing scar­let rain in some ar­eas. It per­sisted on-and-off for some weeks, even two months. Sci­en­tists could­n’t iden­ti­fy the cell-like specks that gave the wa­ter its scar­let hue. Specula­t­ion of pos­si­ble ex­tra­ter­res­tri­al ori­gins be­gan.


Two In­di­an sci­en­tists lat­er pub­lished a chem­i­cal and bi­o­log­i­cal anal­y­sis sug­gest­ing, they said, that the specks might in­deed be lit­tle aliens. They “have much si­m­i­lar­ity with bi­o­log­i­cal cells” but with­out DNA, wrote the re­search­ers, God­frey Lou­is and A. San­thosh Ku­mar of In­di­a’s Ma­hat­ma Gan­dhi Un­ivers­ity. “Are these cell-like par­t­i­cles a kind of al­ter­nate life from space?”


They cit­ed news­pa­per re­ports that a me­te­or broke up in the at­mos­phere hours be­fore the red rain. Lou­is and Ku­mar’s re­search pa­per ap­peared in the April 4, 2006 on­line edi­tion of the re­search jour­nal As­t­ro­phys­ics and Space Sci­ence. In pre­vi­ous, un­pub­lished pa­pers, the pa­ir al­so claimed the par­t­i­cles could re­pro­duce in ex­treme heat.


Some re­search­ers, in­clud­ing Chan­dra Wick­ra­mas­inghe, di­rec­tor of the Cen­ter for As­tro­bi­ol­o­gy at Car­diff Un­ivers­ity, U.K., have said that Lou­is and Ku­mar’s idea may well be cor­rect. He and oth­er sup­port­ers point­ed to the con­sist­en­cy of the alien-cell hy­poth­e­sis with the pop­u­lar “pansper­mia” the­o­ry, which holds that me­te­ors and comets might have seeded life through­out many plan­ets.


But oth­er sci­en­tists have cit­ed prob­lems with the the­o­ry, in­clud­ing a lack of clear ev­i­dence for any me­te­or, and the knot­ty ques­tion of how mi­cro-aliens might have stayed aloft for months af­ter burst­ing out of a me­te­or.


“With­out con­clu­sive ev­i­dence such as me­te­oritic dust mixed with red rain, it is dif­fi­cult to say an­ything spe­cif­ic about Ker­a­la’s red rain,” Mc­Caf­ferty wrote. But in his­to­ry, he added, “there ap­pears to be a strong link be­tween some re­ported events [like it] and me­te­oritic ac­ti­vity. The re­ported airburst just be­fore the fall of red rain in Ker­a­la fits a fa­mil­iar pat­tern, and can­not be dis­missed so easily as an un­re­lat­ed co­in­ci­dence.”

air, airborne, airborne bacteria


The sky is not an ethereal, sterile realm. It's teeming with bacteria, and scientists say that the microbes play a powerful role in producing rain and snow.
While the idea that bacteria could prompt precipitation was previously known, a paper published this week in Science shows that they're more important than anyone expected.
Researchers led by Louisiana State University microbiologist Brent Christner analyzed snow samples from around the world, categorizing the content of their "nucleators" -- tiny particles that help water vapor coalesce and freeze.
All snow and most rain begins as ice. Though water is widely thought to have a freezing point of zero degrees Celsius, it's not so simple in the clouds, where pristine vapors only bind to form ice crystals at exceedingly cold temperatures. Nucleators let crystallization happen in the less extreme conditions that prevail in much of Earth's troposphere.
Christner found bacteria, technically known as "biological ice nucleators," in an atmospheric context. High levels of bacteria were present in nearly every sample.
"Atmospheric scientists haven't previously recognized that these particles are so widely distributed," he said.
The findings raise the question of how climate change and human activities will affect bacterial balances in the sky. More immediately, they're a starting point for research on bacterial contributions to cloud formation and precipitation.
In its latest report, the International Panel on Climate Change said that the impact of feedback loops involving clouds on global weather patterns are the "largest source of uncertainty" in current predictions of climate change.
Christner's findings won't overturn the IPCC's fundamental conclusions -- a high probability of dramatically rising global temperatures -- but they should spur research that will help scientists predict the changes in greater detail, said Princeton University climate scientist Leo Donner, who was not involved in the study.
Donner agreed that climate scientists had not appreciated the ubiquity of precipitation-causing bacteria in the atmosphere.
"One of the real uncertainties in the climate system is how cloud particles are nucleated," he said. "Climate models need information on nucleators. This is especially relevant for understanding how clouds change as atmospheric composition changes."
The fact that bacteria could cause snow and rain was discovered almost by accident in the 1970s by study co-author David Sands, a Montana State University plant pathologist, during his research on Pseudomonas syringae, a microbe that causes ice to form on leaves.
Unable to discover the source of repeatedly infected fields, Sands exasperatedly took to the skies. He did the scientific equivalent of dragging a cup through the clouds -- and lo and behold, there was P. syringae.
P. syringae is not the only biological ice nucleator, but it is the most common, and all varieties share a protein structure that provides a scaffold for free-floating water molecules. Once bound to the bacteria and to each other, the water vapors are able to freeze, and eventually fall back to Earth.
In a pure state, water vapors freeze at temperatures below -35 degrees Celsius. Nucleators allow this to happen in warmer conditions, and Christner's study found that bacteria are the most common warm-temperature nucleators of all.
Researchers never realized bacteria could be so widespread in the clouds, said Christner, because the technologies used to measure fine dust -- traditionally seen as the most important nucleator -- ignore microbe-sized particles.
"It's not that these atmospheric scientists are idiots -- they're not," he said. "But biological nucleators were not previously recognized as being that abundant or important. They're going to have to revise that."

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Amethysts!

It has been so long since I last posted that I've almost forgotten how. Valentine's Day and its aftermath have kept me busy, then the indescribable sickness that comes from having fibromyalgia stole most of this last week away from me, keeping me bedridden and much of the time in a deep sleep ( asleep I don't hurt though!). I haven't managed really to get anything new posted on the site, much less make new jewelry (still working on custom orders, too).
The two bracelets here are composed primarily of amethysts, the February birthstone, and I've done something I don't usually do: I've used the same lampwork beads for both bracelets. These lampwork beads are very different from most borosilicate beads; they have different colours and a strange opal-like quality as well without really being opalescent. The colours led to the mixture that you can see in the bracelet above. Large faceted rondelles of pretty blue aquamarine mix well with the amethysts with the addition of the lampwork. And I do love box clasps with stones set in them.
The next amethyst bracelet uses the lampwork beads and dark and light amethysts in faceted nuggets and rounds for a more homogeneous look. Bali and Karen Hill Tribes sterling silver accent the two. They will both be on the Amethyst Bracelets page of the Cluny Grey Jewelry website.
I'm still rushing to catch up, so if you want some information about the amethyst gemstone, where it gets its name, etc. see last year's February post.
Meanwhile, everyone pray for Spring!


Thursday, February 7, 2008

I'm still working busily on Valentine's Day jewelry and am just taking a moment to post a few things in the last minutes. I have a Valentine's Jewelry page that I am trying to complete (yes, I'm just as last minute as many of those men who wait and wait to buy their gifts although you would be surprised at how many will get in touch with me a month ahead of time: I've been impressed!). The first picture is of a gold ankle bracelet made with rubies and goldfilled charms and beads. It's called "Turtle Days and Starfish Nights" after the little sea themed charms hanging from the tube beads. Next is a pair of earrings made with heart-shaped freshwater coin pearls (I call them "Baroque" because they have little extra tabs of nacre on them so while they are definitely a recognizable heart shape, they are a little "off", too). The earrings have Karen Hill Tribes butterfly beads and rest on a cabochon freshwater pearl that is bezel-set in sterling silver. They hang from sterling posts with a swirling design and another bezel-set pearl on the front. They would look great with the pearl and Swarovski crystal bracelet below created from the same freshwater pearl hearts and Azores (my favorite very pale blue) crystals.


And of course, I have more red jewelry, a must for Valentine's Day jewelry since red symbolizes love and passion. The Swarovski crystal bracelet below features lampwork beads by Robin Weber, her fire opal beads that are a deep red laced with sterling silver for the ultimate in shine. I've mixed them with the darkest red Swarovski crystals, pretty Bali silver, and Karen Hill Tribes charms, including a garnet charm that hangs beside the heart-shaped Swarovski crystal in the middle of the bracelet. This bracelet can be found on the Swarovski Crystal Bracelets page as well as theValentine's Jewelry page. The bottom bracelet features red also, only a lighter tone this time. The sparkling silver-flecked lampwork beads are by Lynn Nurge of Laffinggull. These Swarovski beads are a lighter red tone to match with the lighter coloured lampwork beads, but they are still large (10mm) as are the ones in the bracelet before. This bracelet can also be found on the same pages.
Back to work I go! And if you've been reading about all the terrible weather and the storms, yes, those were in my part of the country, the worst in Jackson, Tennessee were just across the Mississippi River from us (we're 3 miles away from the Missouri line to the north and to the east about 3 miles is the Mississippi River). The terrible storms were also just an hour south of us as well, but luckily we escaped harm although the winds here were strong enough to turn over our heavy metal patio chairs.