Sunday, 22 October 2017

Talk : Exoplanets

Café Sci returns after its summer hiatus with Michael Merrifield talking all about exoplanets.

@Gav Squires was there and has kindly written this guest post summarising the event, with some linkage added by NSB.

Exoplanets are defined as those planets that are outside our solar system and we now know of around 3,500 of them that are orbiting various stars.

In the middle of the 18th century, Immanuel Kant gave us the modern view of how the galaxy works based on observations of the solar system. We'd extrapolated our understanding out and applied it to the whole universe and we thought that we knew how everything worked. For example, in the solar system, all of the big planets are outside the ice line whereas those planets inside are smaller. Using ice is one of the easiest ways to make things stick together and we assumed that we would see the same big/small planet split in other star systems.

Prof Merrifield, via Gav Squires

The first exoplanet, the catchily titled HD114762b, was discovered in 1989 by David Latham. It was detected by measuring the Doppler shift as the star was effected by the gravity of the planet. Since it was thought that large planets (HD114762b is about 5-10 times the size of Jupiter) wouldn't be that close to a star and so it was originally misidentified as a brown dwarf star. A pulsar is the end state of a star - as they spin around, they can be used like a clock and are actually more accurate than atomic clocks here on Earth. In 1992, three planets were discovered orbiting a pulsar.

A quarter of the exoplanets that have been discovered have been found using this Doppler shift method, looking for the effect of the planet's gravity on the star that it orbits. Most exoplanets are discovered using the occultation method though. As a planet passes between us and its star it blocks out light from the star. We need a fair bit of luck for this method to work though as the orbit needs to be edge on for us to notice the planet's transit. This technique will give the radius of the planet and the radial velocity will give the mass and so we can calculate the density (as an side, Saturn is less dense than water). It is also possible to tell about the atmosphere of exoplanets and how much light is reflected from their surface.

Kepler6B photometry - showing light from star being blocked as planet passes in front

Occultation can even help to discover moons around exoplanets. In the summer, Kepler-1625b1 was tentatively announced as the first ever exomoon - it seems to be a Neptune-sized moon orbiting a Jupiter-sized planet. Another technique for discovering exoplanets is micro lensing - a star with a planet produces a different effect compared to a star without one. This is better at detecting planets that are further away from the star but it is a one-shot deal as it won’t line-up again.[a list of exoplanet detection methods can be found here]

Exoplanet systems are incredibly common, even our nearest star, Proxima Centauri, which is 4 light years away, has an Earth-sized planet orbiting it. The planet is at 0.05AU from Proxima Centauri and orbits once every 11 days and it could be tidally locked - the same side faces the star in the same way that one side of the moon always faces Earth. Proxima Centauri is a weak star but the planet still gets around 70% of the sunlight that Earth gets. This means that it is around -39oC but there could still be liquid water there if there is a greenhouse effect. However, there is unlikely to be any life as Proxima Centauri is a flare star - it regularly emits massive x-ray stellar flares, irradiating the planet.

Professor Stephen Hawking is involved with a project called Star Shot that would like to send a satellite to visit the planet around Proxima Centauri. By firing a powerful laser at a spacecraft, the size of a postage stamp it would be possible to speed it up to 20% the speed of light so it would arrive in just 20 years. Of course, there is still the issue of creating a satellite that small and many such satellites would need to be sent to cover the possibility that they could crash or fail. Once fired off, it wouldn't be possible to slow them down either so each satellite would only be able to make one fly past of the planet.

Based on existing technology, a more realistic idea may be using a solar sail - a satellite the size of a bar of soap would require a sail the size of 10 football fields. Light from the sun would speed it up, although it would take 80 years to get there. We are already able to make a satellite around that size and we would be able to use Alpha Centauri to slow it down in order to actually take some photographs.

NASA illustration of the unlit side of a half-kilometre solar sail
TRAPPIST is the really contrived acronym for a pair of Belgian telescopes that discovered the TRAPPIST-1 system, which features 7 exoplanets. The star is the size of Jupiter and the planets are orbiting at the same distance as the moons of Jupiter. 3 of the planets are in the so-called habitable zone and all 7 of them are in resonance with each other, which is what has actually led to the stability of the system. The SETI people have been focussing on this system but haven't heard anything yet.

Artist Impression of TRAPPIST -1 System

The term "Hot Jupiter" was coined to describe these massive planets that are close to their stars and their discovery has meant that we have had to rethink what we know about the creation of stellar systems. We are now starting to see the discs around stars - planets from in the gaps in these discs so if we can see these gaps, it implies that planets are starting to form and we can hopefully start to learn more about how planetary systems form.

The European Extremely Large Telescope is currently being built in Chile and is set to be completed in 2025. Its main mirror is 39 metres in diameter and it is proof that we can now do things on the ground that we couldn't even conceive of 10-15 years ago - not all telescopes need to be in space. The EELT will have such sharp images that we'll actually be able to see the planets themselves. We will even be able to tell which wavelengths are absorbed by their atmospheres - if we detect ozone, it would be proof that there is life on a planet.

There is a huge bias in the planets that we have been detecting since it is easier to find big planets - we've just been discovering the easy ones. We are starting to discover some oddities though - it seemed like one start, Tabby's Star, might even have a Dyson Sphere around it. While the changes in brightness emanating from it were relatively consistent with what was expected from a Dyson Sphere but the latest results show that UV & IR absorptions are different, meaning that it looks like it’s just naturally occurring dust.

Café Sci will return to The Vat & Fiddle on the 13th of November at 20:00 where David Nicholson-Cole from the University of Nottingham will talk on The Skyscraper - From mid-20th century to 2030. For more information check out the Café Sci MeetUp page: https://www.meetup.com/nottingham-culture-cafe-sci/

Related Content:
Fee- An Autobiography
Curiosity, Twitter and the British Connection
Interview with Prof Aragon-Salamanca
Interview with Prof Chris Lintott
Some background to the Space Shuttle
Lecture by Chris Lintott on 2011 Astronomy highlights

Image Sources:
Kepler6b Transiting light level, TRAPPIST-1 system Solar Sail

Sunday, 17 September 2017

Pseudoscience on Social Media

Some examples of Pseudoscience on Social Media.

********************************

Glyphosate meme

This meme is not quite in the lunatic vein as the other posts on this page, because concern about herbicides is legitimate and they do cause significant issues. However, is the specific claim correct?

The quick way to find out is to google "oreos glyphosate snopes" which returns this link describing the claim as "False"

But lets assume that information was not available and we only have the meme to go on. what questions could one ask to determine whether it is correct or not:

Is it a reputable site or one that is full of misinformation?
Does it reference the original data?
Does this claim fit with what you know about the world?
What are they actually claiming, and what are they being careful to omit?
Do they start with a legitimate piece of research (in a bit to establish credibility) and then drift off into conspiracy theory and wild claims?

A bit of googling reveals the original source of the data in a report by Food Democracy Now.

And a factcheck of it, which comments:

"In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the cancer agency of WHO located in Lyon, France, did classify glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans...but in May 2016, a group of pesticide residue experts at WHO and the United Nations also concluded that glyphosate is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans” through their diets."

Factcheck describes how these two claims are not contradictory :

"The 2015 IARC conclusion aimed to identify any potential cancer hazard glyphosate may pose to humans at some level of exposure, WHO explains. But in 2016, the pesticide residue experts at WHO and the U.N. assessed the actual cancer risk the herbicide poses to consumers at a specific level of exposure, namely the level commonly found in foods....IARC and the pesticide residue experts also looked at different sets of data to make their conclusions. For example, IARC only took into consideration published research when making its conclusions, while the pesticide residue researchers also considered unpublished data."

"Looking at the actual numbers, the US Environmental Protection Agency sets glyphosate’s chronic reference dose at a maximum of 1.75 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day. However, it’s important to point out that the agency didn’t set this amount specifically for cancer, but health effects in general."

So, for a 10kg child, that is an allowance of 17.5mg per day

An Oreo weighs around 3g, or 3000mg, and with Glyphosate at 289ppb(=0.289ppm) we have one Oreo ccontaining 0.000000289 x 3000mg = 0.0009mg of glyphosate which is far, far below allowed US level of 17.5mg/day (and EU tolerances are even lower).

Food Democracy Now go to claim that the existing safe limits are too high, quoting data in a way that may or may not be appropriate.

As ever, the Wikipedia page on Glyphosate based herbicides and on Glyphosate the chemical are a good place to start to find out more.

********************************


********************************

Seen Autumn 2018

2018

********************************

Seen Summer 2018


********************************

An article by Robert Walker on "Science 2.0" describes the fear that fake doomesday stories on Google News (and other sites) are causing to children and your adults :

"This is a serious problem. It's not just the misinformation and people growing up with this totally fake astronomy education. These stories are also scary, especially for young children, or young parents with babies, because they usually also tell them that the world is about to end in the next week or month or some other short timescale."

********************************

Via Twitter

US Senator Jim Inhofe sets what may be the gold standard for denialism, back in Feb 2015.

********************************

Via Twitter

The above was Tweeted by East Mids UKIP MEP @RogerHelmer.

Snopes has looked into this article, which originated on Breitbart News, and comments that :

"We reached out to many of the authors of the studies included on this list via email to see if they agreed with Breitbart and No Tricks Zone’s analysis. While not everyone we reached out to responded, not a single researcher that we spoke to agreed with Breitbart’s assessment, and most were shocked when we told them that their work was presented as evidence for that claim."

********************************

Via Facebook

(Post first seen by NSB in 2017).A Facebook post poking fun at pseudoscience conspiracy theories.

********************************



(Post first seen by NSB in 2017.). Does Fluoridation cause cancer? Answer is that there are so few of the most likely cancers (even before fluoridation) that it is difficult to tell. More information in this article by the American Cancer Society.

********************************

Cannabis does not cure cancers
"Dangerous pseudo-science that could get people killed if they use cannabis oil instead of medical advice. In contrast to the claims in the article, there are MANY studies on the effects of cannabisits effects - for example at CancerResearchUK page".

********************************

Anti-Vaccine attitudes get children killed.

This post actively causes harm by discouraging people from getting their children vaccinated. If you want to see what DOCTORS say about flu vaccine, visit this CDC page.

********************************

CERN is not making an anti-matter bomb

Very sensible video until about 6mins in then it starts to fixate on anti-matter, repeatedly saying (accurately) that 1g of antimatter has the energy potential of a nuclear weapon and (also accurately) that CERN has been trying to contain antimatter.

But what is not mentioned (although NSB did not listed to the entire audio) is that the current state of the art is only able to hold about 40 anti-protons, which is 0.000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 1 g and according to the IOP it would take around 100 billion years to produce 1 gram of antimatter. ********************************

Microwaves are not particles

Lots of errors and misinformation here. To take one example,the article says "They use electrically generated electromagnetic energy to make super-fast particles". But microwaves aren't particles. The clue is in the name. Here is a paper that talks quite comprehensively about microwave oven leakage and safety

********************************

Jun 2013
NSB recently read an article in MailOnine by TV motoring correspondent Emma Parker Bowles on her experience using a leeches to cure migraines.

The article (entitled "Gruesome, medieval and utterly bizarre... but leeches freed me from awful migraines") had a number of characteristics consistent with being "psuedoscience". In particular, the following points caught NSB's attention:

a) Evidence presented does not relate to the condition at hand (migraines)
"In the 1980s, leeches began to be used by reconstructive plastic surgeons needing to remove stagnant blood from reattached limbs, to stave off gangrene. But now there are numerous studies into medical uses for leeches. One found that a single session of leeching – the medical application of bloodsucking leeches – can significantly reduce knee pain caused by arthritis for at least two months. Researchers from the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany claimed improvement levels were comparable to those achieved with daily moderate doses of painkillers such as ibuprofen... The secret is in the leeches’ saliva: it apparently contains a large number of analgesic, anaesthetic, and blood-thinning compounds that tackle pain and inflammation, say the researchers."
But these are differnet applications to those that Bowles was using the leeches for (i.e. to stop migraines). Whereas the clinical uses mentioned relate to the use of leeches directly on the area affected, the procedure Bowles was undertaking involved the placement of leeches on the side of the head where they were separated from the brain by the skull. And, in any case, it is unlikely that Bowles was experiencing a migraine at the time the leeches were applied, so it seems unclear to BFTF exatly what the "analgesic, anaesthetic, and blood-thinning compounds" were supposed to be acting on.

Incidentally, the article does not provide references so BFTF cannot check the cited papers themselves, but the German study may be a follow up to this 2003 investigation and another study points out that investigations in to leech therapy are difficult to perform as the patients inevitably know whether they are being treated by leeches or by another method :

"Leech therapy can reduce symptoms caused by osteoarthritis. Repeated use of the leeches appears to improve the long-term results. We have not determined whether the positive outcome of the leech therapy is caused by active substances released during the leeching, the placebo effect, or the high expectations placed on this unusual treatment form"

NSB can find no reference in the online medical database PubMed for the use of leeches to cure migraines. In fact, internet references seem to largely relate to the MainOnline article itself.

So, in summary, there seems to be no evidence for the efficacy of leeches to treat migraines, not is any plausible explanation for their mechanism of action offered.

b) Wide ranging claims are made
It always makes NSB suspicious when wide ranging claims are made with no evidence for their efficacy. In this case, Bowles comments that :

"Google led me to Alicja, a Russian/Polish hirudotherapist [leech therapist] with ten years’ experience. She is based in Las Vegas and New York but she has clients from all around the world. She says the secretions from leeches’ saliva can be used to treat the entire spectrum of physiology: blood-clotting, digestion, connective tissue, disease, pain, inhibition of enzymes, and as a treatment for inflammation."

c) No evidence that the procedure worked even in this case
Bowles states that

"I could go for six months without suffering [a migraine], then there would be a whole week of agony"


and that she has not had a migraine since the leech therapy. As the leech therapy appears to have been performed this year (2013) and that the date of the article is 1st June, it is not clear that the frequency of migraines has changed for Bowles.

********************