Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo is a Step Closer to Operational Commercial Spaceflights from Spaceport America

Aeronautical, All Posts, Spacecraft and Missions, , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

In my 13 April 2015 post, I provided an introduction to three U.S. commercial, suborbital human spaceflight programs. You may recall that Virgin Galactic’s first SpaceShipTwo was destroyed in an in-flight accident on 31 October 2014. The in-flight breakup of SpaceShipTwo resulted from the premature unlocking of the wing, which allowed the wing to move to the high-drag “feathered” position while the ship was accelerating through the transonic region (i.e., not yet supersonic). The pilot was seriously injured and the copilot was killed in this accident. You can find the Executive Summary of the National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB’s) accident report at the following link:

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AAR1502.aspx

More information from the 28 July 2015 NTSB Board meeting is available at the following link:

http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Pages/2015_spaceship2_BMG.aspx

Today, Virgin Galactic unveiled the second SpaceShipTwo at the Mojave Air and Space Port in California. The ship was named, Virgin Spaceship (VSS) Unity by Professor Stephen Hawking, who said in a recorded speech, “I would be very proud to fly on this spaceship.”

VSS_Unity_Reveal Source: Virgin Galactic

The second SpaceShipTwo, which was under construction before the crash of its predecessor, is very similar to the first article, but with the following significant changes:

  • Feathering system: Virgin Galactic reports, “With regard to the accident specifically, we have made one structural change to the vehicle, which is to add a mechanical inhibit to the featherlock system that would prevent that from ever being inadvertently opened at the wrong time in flight.”
  • Rocket fuel: Virgin Galactic switched from a hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTBP) rubber-based solid fuel to a polyamide (plastic)-based fuel for the rocket motor on the first SpaceShipTwo. For the second SpaceShipTwo, Virgin Galactic announced in October 2015 that it was switching back to HTBP-based fuel.

Virgin Galactic has not yet announced other design and/or operational changes.

Like the first SpaceShipTwo, VSS Unity will go through an extensive test program that starts with “captive carry” flights on the WhiteKnightTwo aircraft.

SpaceShipTwo carriedWhiteKnightTwo carrying SpaceShipTwo; source: Virgin Galactic

The next series of tests include unpowered (gliding) flights after being dropped from WhiteKnightTwo, and finally, powered tests that will validate the flight envelope of SpaceShipTwo. At the conclusion of this testing program, VSS Unity may become the first commercial space vehicle to make regular, suborbital flights with paying passengers.

You can keep track of the progress being made at the Virgin Galactic website at the following link:

http://www.virgingalactic.com

The commercial flights will be conducted from Spaceport America, which is located in the desert east of Truth of Consequences, NM. You can find information of the Spaceport and make arrangements for a tour at the following website.

http://spaceportamerica.com

I visited Spaceport America in October 2015 and found it to be an impressive, but lonely facility, just waiting for the start of regular commercial space missions. The main hanger, shown below, housed only a SpaceShipTwo mockup and the enormous runway was silent.

All that will change after VSS Unity completes its test program and begins the operational phase of commercial human spaceflight in the desert of southern New Mexico. These are exciting times!

Spaceport pic 1

Spaceport pic 2

Spaceport pic 3Source, three photos: Author

New From The National Academies Press

All Posts, Document and Data Sources, Engineering, Global Climate, National Security, , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

My 14 March 2015 post provided an introduction to The National Academies Press (NAP), which is a very good source for reports and other documents on the following topics:

  • Agriculture
  • Behavioral & social sciences
  • Biographies & autobiographies
  • Biology & life sciences
  • Computers & information technology
  • Conflict & security issues
  • Earth sciences
  • Education
  • Energy & energy conservation
  • Engineering & technology
  • Environment & environmental studies
  • Food & nutrition
  • Health & medicine
  • Industry & labor
  • Mathematics, chemistry & physics
  • Policy for science & technology
  • Space & aeronautics
  • Transportation

Most of the NAP reports can be downloaded for free as pdf files if you establish a MyNAP account. If you haven’t set up such an account, you can do so at the following link:

http://www.nap.edu/content/using-mynap

With this account, you also can get e-mail notifications of new NAP reports.

For those of you who have not set up a MyNAP account, here are several new NAP reports that I found to be interesting.

Infusing Ethics into the Development of Engineers (2016)

Ethical practice in engineering is critical for ensuring public trust in the field and in its practitioners, especially as engineers increasingly tackle international and socially complex problems that combine technical and ethical challenges. This report aims to raise awareness of the variety of exceptional programs and strategies for improving engineers’ understanding of ethical and social issues and provides a resource for those who seek to improve ethical development of engineers at their own institutions.

NAP-infuse engineers  Source: NAP

Reducing the Use of Highly Enriched Uranium in Civilian Research Reactors (2016)

Today, 74 civilian research reactors around the world, including 8 in the U.S., use or are planning to use HEU fuel. In the past decades, many civilian reactors around the world have been either shut down or converted from HEU to low enriched uranium fuel. Despite this progress, the large number of remaining HEU-fueled reactors demonstrates that further progress is needed on a worldwide scale.

Print  Source: NAP

Enhancing Participation in the U.S. Global Change Research Program (2016)

The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) is a collection of 13 Federal entities charged by law to assist the U.S. and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change. As the understanding of global change has evolved over the past decades and as demand for scientific information on global change has increased, the USGCRP has increasingly focused on research that can inform decisions to cope with current climate variability and change, to reduce the magnitude of future changes, and to prepare for changes projected over the coming decades.

NAP-global change  Source: NAP

Frontiers of Engineering – Reports on Leading-Edge Engineering from the 2015 Symposium (2016)

This volume presents papers on the following topics covered at the National Academy of Engineering’s 2015 U.S. Frontiers of Engineering Symposium:

  • Cyber security and privacy
  • Engineering the search for Earth-like exoplanets
  • Optical and mechanical metamaterials
  • Forecasting natural disasters

NAP-frontiers of engg 2015  Source: NAP

There are many other annual reports in the NAP “Frontiers of Engineering” series, dating back to at least 1997, and covering many other engineering topics.

I hope you’ll take some time and browse the NAP library for documents that are of interest to you. You can start your browsing, without a MyNAP account, at the following link:

http://www.nap.edu

China’s Five Hundred Meter Aperture Spherical Telescope (FAST) will be the World’s Largest Radio Telescope

All Posts, Astronomy, , , ,

Peter Lobner

Updated 20 October 2019

FAST is being built in a remote region of China, in the southwestern province of Guizhou. Completion is planned for September 2016, at which time FAST will replace the similar 305 meter (1,000 ft) Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico as the world’s largest radio telescope.

China builds World's Largest Radio Telescope

FAST pic 2Source: FAST

Main features of FAST are:

  • The telescope is built in a natural karst depression
  • The 500 meter (1,640 ft) active main reflector is comprised of 4,600 triangular panels
    • directly corrects for spherical aberration
    • allows the telescope to be steered to view the sky within 40 degrees from zenith
  • The focus cabin suspended above the main reflector houses nine feeds for receivers covering a frequency range of 70MHz – 3 GHz
  • In comparison to Arecibo, FAST is expected to have the following performance parameters:
    • 2 times greater sensitivity
    • 5 – 10 times faster surveying speed
    • 2 – 3 times greater sky coverage due to the steering capability of the active main reflector

Observation programs are expected to include the following:

  • Large scale neutral hydrogen survey
    • Will support studies such as dark matter and dark galaxies, large scale structures and dark energy, and galaxy formation and evolution
  • Detect interstellar molecules
    • The receiver bands of FAST are designed to cover OH (hydroxyl radical), CH3OH (methanol) and 12 other molecular lines
  • Survey the transient sky, including pulsar observations
  • Operate as part of the international very long baseline interferometry (VLBI) network

All residents within 3 miles of the new telescope (more than 9,000 people) are being relocated to create an electromagnetic “quiet zone” around the telescope.

You can download a fact sheet on the telescope at the following link:

http://www.cospa.ntu.edu.tw/aappsbulletin/data/19-2/33FAST.pdf

You can download a more detailed paper entitled, “The Five Hundred Meter Aperture Spherical Telescope (FAST) Project,” which provides details on the telescope design, at the following link:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.3794.pdf

An English language version of the FAST project website appears not to have been maintained since 2010, but can be accessed at the following link:

http://fast.bao.ac.cn/en/FAST.html

 5 July 2016 Update:  FAST construction complete

The Chinese government announced completion of FAST on 4 July 2016.  The project took roughly five years to complete and cost about $180 million.

 22 October 2019 Update:  FAST is operational

FAST Chief Engineer, JIANG Peng, announced that FAST has been open to Chinese astronomers since April 2019. After the National Construction Acceptance in September 2019, it is expected that FAST will be available for use by astronomers from other nations.   You can read more here:

https://www.universetoday.com/143346/chinas-fast-telescope-the-worlds-largest-single-radio-dish-telescope-is-now-fully-operational/

and here:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02790-3

NSF and LIGO Team Announce First Detection of Gravitational Waves

All Posts, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Cosmology, Physics, , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

Today, 11 February 2016, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) project team announced that the first detection of gravitational waves occurred on 14 September 2015. You can view a video of this announcement at the following link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_582rU6neLc

The first paper on this milestone event, “Observation of Gravitational Waves From a Binary Black Hole Merger,” is reported in Physical Review Letters, at the following link:

http://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102

The recorded signals from the two LIGO sites, Livingston, LA and Hanford, WA, are shown below, with the Hanford data time shifted to account for the slightly later arrival time of the gravitational wave signal at that detector location. The magnitude of the gravitational wave signal was characterized as being just below the detection threshold of LIGO before installation of the new advanced detectors, which improve LIGO sensitivity by a factor of 3 to 10.

LIGO signals

Source: NSF/LIGO

This milestone occurred during the engineering testing phase of the advanced LIGO detectors, before the start of their first official “observing run” on 18 September 2015.

Analysis and simulations conducted on the data indicate that the observed gravitational wave signals were generated when two orbiting black holes coalesced into a single black hole of smaller total mass and ejected about three solar masses of energy as gravitational waves.

In the Physical Review Letters paper, the authors provide the following diagram, which gives a physical interpretation of the observed gravitational wave signals.

Binary black holes merge

Note the very short timescale of this extraordinarily dynamic process. The recorded gravitational wave signals yielded an audible “chirp” when the two black holes merged.

With only two LIGO detectors, the source of the observed gravitational waves could not be localized, but the LIGO team reported that the source was in the southern sky, most likely in the vicinity of the Magellanic Clouds.

Localization of black hole merger Source: NSF/LIGO

The ability to localize gravitational wave signals will improve when additional gravitational wave detectors become operational later in this decade.

For more information on the current status of LIGO and other new-generation gravitational wave detectors, see my 16 December 2015 post: “100th Anniversary of Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity and the Advent of a New Generation of Gravity Wave Detectors.”

Update: 3 October 2017

 Congratulations to Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish, and Kip S. Thorne, all members of the LIGO / VIRGO Collaboration, for their award of the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics for the first direct observation of gravitational waves. You can read the press release from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences here:

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2017/press.html

You also can read the scientific background on this award on the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences website at the following link:

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2017/advanced-physicsprize2017.pdf

Anyone Can Quantum

All Posts, Gaming, Physics, Quantum Mechanics, , , , , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

Nobel Laureate Dr. Richard Feynman is famously quoted as saying, “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.” University of Southern California (USC) graduate student Chris Cantwell, the inventor of Quantum Chess, is seeking to change that view by demonstrating that, in the right framework, anyone can grapple with some of the basic concepts of quantum mechanics. In particular, Chris Cantwell views Quantum Chess as a means of “demystifying the quantum world through play.” In Quantum Chess, all of the conventional chess moves are allowed as well as certain quantum moves for all pieces except pawns.

Quantum Chess isn’t a game you can purchase right now, but the short video, “Anyone Can Quantum,” provides an entertaining demonstration of what quantum gameplay will be like in the near future. This video was created by Caltech’s Institute for Quantum Information and Matter (IQIM) (‪http://iqim.caltech.edu) in association with Trouper Productions (‪http://trouper.net). In the video, actor Paul Rudd (Ant Man) challenges Stephen Hawking to a game of Quantum Chess for the right to give the keynote address at Caltech’s 26 – 27 January 2016 special event, “One Entangled Evening: A Celebration of Richard Feynman’s Quantum Legacy.”

You can view the almost 12 minute video at the following link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi0BzqV_b44

Here are a few of screenshots from the video.

Quantum chess match announcement

Quantum chess players

Quantum superposition is demonstrated by “Schrodinger’s king”, which could be in two places at one time.

Without superposition                                                      With superposition

Without superposition             With superposition

Quantum entanglement of the king & bishop enabled a bishop to move through a king.

Without entanglement                                                  With entanglement

Without entanglement           With entangelement

Resolution of the game required a quantum measurement to determine the winner.

For those of you who can’t wait to play a real game of Quantum Chess, Chris Cantwell has launched a Kickstarter funding program. Find out details at the following link:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/507726696/quantum-chess

You can find out more about the 26 – 27 January 2016 Caltech event, “One Entangled Evening: A Celebration of Richard Feynman’s Quantum Legacy,” at the following link:

https://www.caltech.edu/content/one-entangled-evening-celebration-richard-feynmans-quantum-legacy

The Doomsday Clock, the Iraq War and the War Scare of 1983

All Posts, National Security, Nuclear Arms & Arms Control, , , , , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

The Doomsday Clock

On 26 January 2016, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board announced that the minute hand of its Doomsday Clock will remain at three minutes to midnight in spite of recent progress with the Iran nuclear agreement and the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris (COP 21).

Three minutes to midnight

The Science and Security Board gave the following rationale:

“Last year, the Science and Security Board moved the Doomsday Clock forward to three minutes to midnight, noting: ‘The probability of global catastrophe is very high, and the actions needed to reduce the risks of disaster must be taken very soon.’ That probability has not been reduced. The Clock ticks. Global danger looms. Wise leaders should act—immediately.”

You can read their complete announcement at the following link:

http://thebulletin.org/press-release/doomsday-clock-hands-remain-unchanged-despite-iran-deal-and-paris-talks9122

Also on this website, you will find a detailed chronology of the changes in the Doomsday Clock since its inception in 1947. The following link will take you directly to this timeline:

http://thebulletin.org/timeline

From the beginning, the Doomsday Clock has been a measure of the perceived risk to civilization of nuclear annihilation. In 2007, the Science and Security Board added climate change because of its perceived significant risk to civilization.

Another view of the Doomsday Clock timeline is available in Wikipedia at the following link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock

Here you will find the following timeline chart and a compact tabulation of the changes over the years.

Doomsday_Clock_graph

The Iraq War

On 25 January 2016, Stephen Colbert interviewed former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, focusing on the Iraq War and the state of knowledge leading up to the decision to go to war. Donald Rumsfeld had previously addressed the state of U.S. intelligence on Iraq in terms of “known knowns” (i.e., things on which we believe we have adequate intelligence), “known unknowns” (i.e., things on which we believe we do not have adequate, or any, intelligence), and “unknown unknowns” (i.e., things we don’t even know we should be concerned about). Stephen Colbert then asked about “unknown knowns”, which he defined as, “things we know, but choose not to let other people know.” The implication was that our leaders in the military and the Executive Branch had important information that they knew had a bearing on the decision to go to war with Iraq, but this information was unknown to other stakeholders in that decision; namely, most members of Congress and the American people. Then the U.S. went to war with Iraq on 20 March 2003. The Doomsday Clock remained at 7 minutes before midnight, even though the U.S. had just saved the world from Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.

You can view Stephen Colbert’s interview with Donald Rumsfeld at the following link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z3z7DvoA-M

The War Scare of 1983

I need to expand on Donald Rumsfeld’s and Stephen Colbert’s categories for the state of U.S. intelligence by adding the following: “unknown, should have known better.” I define this as a serious, but avoidable, blunder known only at the highest levels and withheld from the public.

As an example of an “unknown, should have known better,” I present the “War Scare of 1983”. Remember that? I’d be quite surprised if you were even remotely aware of it when it occurred.

NATO forces conducted regular military exercises intended to improve their ability to execute war plans designed to counter a Soviet invasion of Europe. It now appears that only a few high-ranking people in the West knew that some of the Soviet leadership had misinterpreted NATO exercises conducted in the fall of 1983 as a prelude to an actual attack.

To set the stage, note in the timeline chart above that the Doomsday Clock had been reset from 7 minutes to 4 minutes before midnight in early 1981. This was a time of generally heightened tensions between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Perhaps as a consequence, the Soviets appear to have overreacted when they shot down Korean Airlines flight 007 in August 1983 after it strayed into Russian airspace near Sakhalin Island in the Russian Far East. Some believe that Soviet air defense forces had mistaken this civilian flight for a USAF RC-135 surveillance aircraft that previously had flown a similar route.

In the fall of 1983, the annual NATO exercise was known as Autumn Forge 83, consisting of at least six exercises. The final exercise, Able Archer 83, was a nuclear command and control exercise intended to simulate an escalating conflict with the Soviet Union leading to the simulated use of nuclear weapons by NATO. Overall, Autumn Forge 83 was a larger exercise than those conducted in previous years and Able Archer 83 was using new nuclear weapons command and control procedures.

In a 21 May 2013 article posted on The National Security Archives website entitled, “The 1983 War Scare: “The Last Paroxysm” of the Cold War Part II”, Nate Jones includes the following diagram from an unclassified 9 September 1983 briefing showing the large scale of the Autumn Forge 83 exercise.

Autumn Forge Map

You can read the complete article at the following link:

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB427/

A declassified After Action Report issued by the Strategic Air Command (SAC) Seventh Air Division Headquarters on 1 December 1983 addressed the NATO activities conducted as part of Able Archer 83, but presented no information on Soviet reactions during or following the exercise. This After Action Report is available at the following link:

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB427/docs/7.%20Exercise%20Able%20Archer%2083%20After%20Action%20Report%201%20December%201983.pdf

I first became aware of the significance of Able Archer 83 via John Prados’ article, “The War Scare of 1983,” in The Quarterly Journal of Military History, Spring 1997 (Vol. 9, Issue 3).

In a 2007 article entitled, “A Cold War Conundrum: The 1983 Soviet War Scare,” author Benjamin Fischer attributed the following statement to Oleg Gordievsky, a KGB colonel who defected to the UK in 1985:

“In the tense atmosphere generated by the crises and rhetoric of the past few months, the KGB concluded that American forces had been placed on alert–and might even have begun the countdown to war…. The world did not quite reach the edge of the nuclear abyss during Operation RYAN. But during ABLE ARCHER 83 it had, without realizing it, come frighteningly close–certainly closer than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis of 1962.”

You can read the complete article in the CIA online library at the following link:

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/a-cold-war-conundrum/source.htm#HEADING1-12

A Special National Intelligence Estimate entitled, “Implications of Recent Soviet Military – Political Activities,” dated 18 May 1984 and declassified in 2010, provides insights into the Soviet reactions to Able Archer 83. You can read / download this redacted document at the following link:

http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/17/19840518.pdf

A much more readable overview is available in the 21 May 2013 article entitled, “The Able Archer 83 War Scare: ‘NATO requested initial limited use of nuclear weapons,’” by Nate Jones, in which he states that:

“According to a declassified National Security Agency history…. the ‘period 1982-1984 marked the most dangerous Soviet-American confrontation since the Cuban Missile Crisis.’ The secret history recounts that ‘Cold War hysteria reached its peak’ in the autumn of 1983 with a NATO nuclear-release exercise named Able Archer 83, which…. caused ‘Soviet air units in Germany and Poland [to assume] high alert status with readying of nuclear strike forces.’”

You can read the complete article posted on The National Security Archives website at the following link:

https://nsarchive.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/war-scare-the-real-life-war-game-that-almost-led-to-nuclear-armageddon/

On 24 October 2015, David E. Hoffman, writing for The Washington Post, reported that:

“A nuclear weapons command exercise by NATO in November 1983 prompted fear in the leadership of the Soviet Union that the maneuvers were a cover for a nuclear surprise attack by the United States, triggering a series of unparalleled Soviet military responses…”

The Kremlin, uncertain about U.S. intentions, ordered a series of military measures that appeared to be actual preparations for war. A recently declassified 1990 assessment entitled, “The Soviet ‘War Scare,’” by the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board concluded:

“In 1983, we may have inadvertently placed our relations with the Soviet Union on a hair trigger…”

The Washington Post obtained a copy of this formerly highly classified (Top Secret – Cover Word – Code Word) assessment, which you can read / download (with modest redactions) at the following link:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/read-the-us-assessment-that-concluded-the-soviet-leadership-feared-an-american-nuclear-strike-in-1983/1779/

Obviously, we all survived the War Scare of 1983. Maybe it was better for the public not to know. The Doomsday Clock was adjusted in January 1984 to three minutes before midnight, but not because of Able Archer 83. You can read the rationale for the clock setting on the editorial page in the January 1984 edition of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which you will find at the following link:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=zAUAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA2&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false

If the Science and Security Board had known the details that have surfaced in the past several years about Able Archer 83, I suspect the clock might have been a tick or two closer to midnight for a brief time.

The Doomsday Clock currently is set at three minutes to midnight.

Rise of the Babel Fish

All Posts, Computer Technology, Science Fiction, , , , , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

In Douglas Adams’ 1978 BBC radio series and 1979 novel, “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” we were introduced to the small, yellow, leach-like Babel fish, which feeds on brain wave energy.

Babel fishSource: http://imgur.com/CZgjO

Adams stated that, “The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything in any form of language.”

In Gene Roddenberry’s original Star Trek series, a less compact, but, thankfully, inorganic, universal translator served Captain Kirk and the Enterprise crew well in their many encounters with alien life forms in the mid 2260s. You can see a hand-held version (looking a bit like a light saber) in the following photo from the 1967 episode, “Metamorphosis.”

Universal translatorSource: http://visiblesuns.blogspot.com/2014/01/star-trek-metamorphosis.html

A miniaturized universal translator built into each crewmember’s personal communicator soon replaced this version of the universal translator.

At the rate that machine translation technology is advancing here on Earth, its clear that we won’t have to wait very long for our own consumer-grade, portable, “semi-universal” translator that can deliver real-time audio translations of conversations in different languages.

Following is a brief overview of current machine translation tools:

BabelFish

If you just want a free on-line machine translation service, check out my old favorite, BabelFish, originally from SYSTRAN (1999), then Alta Vista (2003), then Yahoo (2003 – 2008), and today at the following link:

https://www.babelfish.com

With this tool, you can do the following:

  • Translate any language into any one of 75 supported languages
  • Translate entire web pages and blogs
  • Translate full document formats such as Word, PDF and text

When I first was using BabelFish more than a decade ago, I often was surprised by the results of a reverse translation of the text I had just translated into Russian or French.

While BabelFish doesn’t support real-time, bilingual voice translations, it was an important, early machine translation engine that has evolved into a more capable, modern translation tool.

Google Translate

This is a machine translation service / application that you can access at the following link:

https://translate.google.com

Google Translate also is available as an IPhone or Android app and currently can translate text back and forth between any two of 92 languages.

Google Translate has several other very useful modes of operation, including, translating text appearing in an image, translating speech, and translating bilingual conversations.

  • Translate image: You can translate text in images—either in a picture you’ve taken or imported, or just by pointing your camera.
  • Translate speech: You can translate words or phrases by speaking. In some languages, you’ll also hear your translation spoken back to you.
  • Translate bilingual conversation: You can use the app to talk with someone in a different language. You can designate the language or the Translate app will recognize which language is being spoken, thereby allowing you have a (more-or-less) natural conversation.

In a May 2014 paper by Haiying Li, Arthur C. Graesser and Zhiqiang Cai, entitled, “Comparison of Google Translation with Human Translation,” the authors investigated the accuracy of Google Chinese-to-English translations from the perspectives of formality and cohesion. The authors offered the following findings:

“…..it is possible to make a conclusion that Google translation is close to human translation at the semantic and pragmatic levels. However, at the syntactic level or the grammatical level, it needs improving. In other words, Google translation yields a decipherable and readable translation even if grammatical errors occur. Google translation provides a means for people who need a quick translation to acquire information. Thus, computers provide a fairly good performance at translating individual words and phrases, as well as more global cohesion, but not at translating complex sentences. “

You can read the complete paper at the following link:

https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/FLAIRS/FLAIRS14/paper/viewFile/7864/7823

A December 2014 article by Sumant Patil and Patrick Davies, entitled, “Use of Google Translate in Medical Communication: Evaluation of Accuracy,” also pointed to current limitations in using machine translations. The authors examined the accuracy of translating 10 common medical phrases into 26 languages (8 Western European, 5 Eastern European, 11 Asian, and 2 African) and reported the following:

“Google Translate has only 57.7% accuracy when used for medical phrase translations and should not be trusted for important medical communications. However, it still remains the most easily available and free initial mode of communication between a doctor and patient when language is a barrier. Although caution is needed when life saving or legal communications are necessary, it can be a useful adjunct to human translation services when these are not available.”

The authors noted that translation accuracy depended on the language, with Swahili scoring lowest with only 10% correct, and Portuguese scoring highest at 90%.

You can read this article at the following link:

http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g7392

ImTranslator

ImTranslator, by Smart Link Corporation, is another machine translation service / tool, which you can find at the following link:

http://imtranslator.net

ImTranslator uses several machine translation engines, including Google Translate, Microsoft Translator, and Babylon Translator. One mode of ImTranslator operation is called, “Translate and Speak”, which delivers the following functionality:

“….translates texts from 52 languages into 10 voice-supported languages. This … tool is smart enough to detect the language of the text submitted for translation, translate into voice, modify the speed of the voice, and even create an audio link to send a voiced message.”

I’ve done a few basic tests with Translate and Speak and found that it works well with simple sentences.

In conclusion

Machine translation has advanced tremendously over the past decade and improved translation engines are the key for making a universal translator a reality. Coupled with cloud-based resources and powerful smart phone apps, Google Translate is able to deliver an “initial operating capability” (IOC) for a consumer-grade, real-time, bilingual voice translator.

This technology is out of the lab, rapidly improving based on broad experience from performing billions of translations, and seeking commercial applications. Surely in the next decade, we’ll be listening through our ear buds and understanding spoken foreign languages with good accuracy in multi-lingual environments. Making this capability “universal” (at least on Earth) will be a challenge for the developers, but a decade is a long time in this type of technology business.

There may be a downside to the widespread use of real-time universal translation devices. In “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” Douglas Adams noted:

“…..the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.”

Perhaps foreseeing this possibility, Google Translate includes an “offensive word filter” that doesn’t allow you to translate offensive words by speaking. As you might guess, the app has a menu setting that allows the user to turn off the offensive word filter. Trusting that people always will think before speaking into their unfiltered universal translators may be wishful thinking.

19 May 2016 Update:

Thanks to Teresa Marshall  for bringing to my attention the in-ear, real-time translation device named Pilot, which was developed by the U.S. firm Waverly Labs. For all appearances, Pilot is almost an electronic incarnation of the organic Babel Fish. The initial version of Pilot uses two Bluetooth earbuds (one for you, and one for the person you’re talking to in a different language) and an app that runs locally on your smartphone without requiring web access. The app mediates the conversation in real-time (with a slight processing delay), enabling each user to hear the conversation in their chosen language.

real-time-translator-ear-waverly-labs-3Photo credit: Waverly Labs

As you might guess, the initial version of Pilot will work with the popular Romance languages (i.e., French, Spanish, etc.), with a broader language handling capability coming in later releases.

Check out the short video from Waverly Labs at the following link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO-naxKNuzQ

I can imagine that Waverly Labs will develop the capability for the Pilot app to listen to a nearby conversation and provide a translation to one or more users on paired Bluetooth earbuds. This would be a useful tool for international travelers (i.e., on a museum tour in a foreign language) and spies.

You can find more information on Waverly Labs at the following link:

http://www.waverlylabs.com

Developing the more advanced technology to provide real-time translations in a noisy crowd with multiple, overlapping speakers will take more time, but at the rate that real-time translation technology is developing, we may be surprised by how quickly advanced translation products enter the market.

Where in the Periodic Table Will We Put Element 119?

All Posts, Chemistry, Nuclear physics, Physics, , , , , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

The first periodic table of elements

In 1869, Russian chemist Dimitri Mendeleev proposed the first modern periodic table of elements, in which he arranged the 60 known elements in order of their increasing atomic masses (average mass, considering relative abundance of isotopes in naturally-occurring elements), with elements organized into groups based their similar properties. Mendeleev observed that certain properties recur at regular intervals in the periodic table, thereby defining the groupings of elements.

Mendeleev stamp Source: http://we-are-star-stuff.tumblr.com

This first version of the periodic table is compared to the modern periodic table in the following diagram prepared by SIPSAWIYA.COM. Mendeleev’s periodic table consisted of Groups I to VIII in the modern periodic table.

Mendeleev_sipsawiyagif

The gaps represent undiscovered elements predicted by Mendeleev’s periodic table, for example, Gallium (atomic mass 69.7) and Germanium (atomic mass 72.6) . You can read more about Mendeleev’s periodic table at the following link:

http://www.sipsawiya.com/2015/07/history-of-periodic-table.html

German chemist Lothar Meyer was competing with Mendeleev to publish the first periodic table. The general consensus is that Mendeleev, not Meyer, was the true inventor of the periodic table because of the accuracy and detail of Mendeleev’s work.

Element mendelevium (101) was named in honor of Dimitri Mendeleev.

Evolution of the Modern Periodic Table of Elements

The modern periodic table organizes elements according to their atomic numbers (number of protons in the nucleus) into 7 periods (vertical) and 18 groups (horizontal). The version shown below, in the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) format, accounts for elements up to atomic number 118 and color-codes 10 different chemical series.

PeriodicTableMeltingPoint

Source: http://sciencenotes.org/printable-periodic-table/

Hundreds of versions of the periodic table of elements have existed since Mendeleev’s first version. You can view a great many of these at The Internet Database of Periodic Tables curated by Dr. Mark R. Leach and presented at the following link:

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt_database.php?Button=All

Glenn T. Seaborg (1912 – 1999) is well known for his role in defining the structure of the modern periodic table. His key contributions to periodic table structure include:

  • In 1944, Seaborg formulated the ‘actinide concept’ of heavy element electron structure, which predicted that the actinides, including the first 11 transuranium elements, would form a transition series analogous to the rare earth series of lanthanide elements. The actinide concept showed how the transuranium elements fit into the periodic table.
  • Between 1944 and 1958, Seaborg identified eight transuranium elements: americium (95), curium (96), berkelium (97), californium (98), einsteinium (99), fermium (100), mendelevium (101), and nobelium (102).

Element seaborgium (106) was named in honor of Glenn T. Seaborg.  Check out details Glenn T. Seaborg’s work on transuranium elements at the following link:

http://www.osti.gov/accomplishments/seaborg.html

Four newly-discovered and verified elements

On 30 December 2015, IUPAC announced the verification of the discoveries of the following four new elements: 113, 115, 117 and 118.

  • Credit for the discovery of element 113  was given to a team of scientists from the Riken institute in Japan.
  • Credit for discovery of elements 115 , 117 and 118 was given to a Russian-American team of scientists at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.

These four elements complete the 7th period of the periodic table of elements. The current table is now full.

You can read this IUPAC announcement at the following link:

http://www.iupac.org/news/news-detail/article/discovery-and-assignment-of-elements-with-atomic-numbers-113-115-117-and-118.html

On 28 November 2016, the IUPAC approved the names and symbols for these four new elements: nihonium (Nh), moscovium (Mc), tennessine (Ts), and oganesson (Og), respectively for element 113, 115, 117, and 118.  Nihonium was the first element named in Asia.

Dealing with super-heavy elements beyond element 118

The number of physically possible elements is unknown.

In 1969, Glenn T. Seaborg proposed the following extended periodic table to account for undiscovered elements from atomic number 110 to 173, including the  “super-actinide” series of elements (atomic numbers 121 to 155).

Glenn Seaborg 1969 extended periodic table copy R1Source: W. Nebergal, et al., General Chemistry, 4th ed., pp 668 – 670, D.C. heath Co, Massachusetts, 1972

In 2010, Finnish chemist Pekka Pyykkö at the University of Helsinki proposed an extended periodic table with 54 predicted elements. The extension, shown below, is based on a computational model that predicts the order in which the electron orbital shells will fill up, and, therefore, the periodic table positions of elements up to atomic number 172. Pekka Pyykkö says that the value of the work is in showing, “how the rules of quantum mechanics and relativity function in determining chemical properties.”

Pyyko 2010 periodic tableSource: Royal Society of Chemistry

You can read more on Pekka Pyykkö’s extended periodic table at the following link:

http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/ChemScience/Volume/2010/11/Extended_elements.asp

You can read more general information on the extended periodic table on Wikipedia at the following link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_periodic_table

So where will we place element 119 in the periodic table of elements?

Based on both the Seaborg and Pyykkö extended periodic tables described above, element 119 will be the start of period 8 and it will be an alkali metal. Element 120 will be an alkaline earth. With element 121, we’ll enter the new chemical series of the “super-actinides”.

These are exciting times for scientists attempting to discover new super-heavy elements.

Where does neutronium fit in the periodic table?

Neutronium is a name coined in 1926 by scientist Andreas von Antropoff for a proposed “element of atomic number zero” (i.e., because it has no protons) that he placed at the head of the periodic table. In modern usage, the extremely dense core of a neutron star is referred to as “degenerate neutronium”.

Neutronium also finds many hypothetical applications in modern science fiction. For example, in the 1967 Star Trek episode, The Doomsday Machine, neutronium formed the hull of a giant, autonomous “planet killer”, and was portrayed as being invulnerable to all manner of scans and weapons. Since free neutrons at standard temperature and pressure undergo β– decay with a half-life of 10 minutes, 11 seconds, a very small quantity of neutronium could be quite hazardous to your health.

14 January 2019 Update:  2019 marks the 150th anniversary of Dimitri Mendeleev’s periodic table

You’ll find a very good article, “150 years on, the periodic table has more stories than it has elements,” by Elizabeth Quill on the Science News website.  Here’s the link:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/periodic-table-elements-chemistry-fun-facts-history

18 January 2019 Update:  Possibly the oldest copy of Mendeleev’s periodic table was found at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland

On 17 January 2019, the University of St. Andrews posted a news article stating that a periodic table of the elements dating from 1885 recently was found at the university and is thought to be the oldest in the world.

The 1885 periodic table.  Source: University of St. Andrews

You can read the University of St. Andrews news posting here:

https://news.st-andrews.ac.uk/archive/worlds-oldest-periodic-table-chart-found-in-st-andrews/

Another Record-setting Year for Global Temperature

All Posts, Global Climate, Remote Sensing, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) released the results of an analysis by NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that showed that globally-averaged temperature in 2015 was the highest since modern record keeping began in 1880. You can read the NOAA / NASA press release at the following link:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20160120/

You can download a copy of the more detailed NOAA / NASA briefing at the following link:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20160120/noaa_nasa_global_analysis_2015.pdf

The analysis shows that globally-averaged temperature in 2015 exceeded the previous mark set in 2014 by 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit (0.13 degrees Celsius) and continued a warming trend, as shown in the following graph.

gistemp_graph_2015Source: NASA Goddard

In this graph, the zero on the y-axis is the average temperature for a 30-year period from 1951 to 1980. The trend lines show results for El Niño years (orange), La Niña years (blue), and all years (dashed line). The 2015 globally-averaged temperature was:

  • 57° F (0.87° C) above the 1951 to 1980 30-year (baseline) average, and
  • 62° F (0.90° C) above the 1901 to 2000 100-year (20th century) average

The distribution of global temperatures relative to the 1951 – 80 baseline is shown in the following charts.

NOAA:NASA briefing_1_Jan2016

NOAA:NASA briefing_2_Jan2016Source, both graphics: NOAA / NASA Annual Global Analysis for 2015

The NOAA / NASA press release cited above includes an animation that helps visualize Earth’s long-term warming trend based on data from 1880 to 2015. NOAA / NASA note that phenomena such as El Niño or La Niña, which warm or cool the tropical Pacific Ocean, can contribute to short-term variations in global average temperature. A warming El Niño was in effect for most of 2015

The full 2015 surface temperature data set and the complete methodology used by NOAA / NASA in their analysis are available to the public on the GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP) webpage at the following link:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

The availability of the data and the analytical methodology allows the NOAA / NASA results to be subject to independent scrutiny. I commend NOAA and NASA for their openness in this matter, which will aid in reaching scientific consensus on the NOAA / NASA results.

This behavior by NOAA / NASA is a stark contrast to the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has failed to provide full public access to their underlying data and analytical methodologies and has been criticized for failing to rigorously apply the scientific method in their work. To help understand why the IPCC claim of “scientific consensus” is without merit, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) published the book, “Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming,” on 30 November 2015. You can download this document for free at the following link:

https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/why-scientists-disagree-about-global-warming

To help put this in perspective, I thank cartoonist Wiley Miller for the following timely and insightful cartoon published on 20 January 2016. I challenge you to apply this cartoon to your understanding of the climate change debate.

Cartoon Science_Jan2016Source: San Diego Union Tribune

Relax, the Planetary Defense Officer has the Watch

All Posts, Astronomy, National Security, Spacecraft and Missions, , , , , , , , , , ,

Peter Lobner

On 7 January 2016, NASA formalized its ongoing program for detecting and tracking Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) by establishing the Planetary Defense Coordination Office (PDCO). You can read the NASA announcement at the following link:

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-office-to-coordinate-asteroid-detection-hazard-mitigation

PDCO is responsible for supervision of all NASA-funded projects to find and characterize asteroids and comets that pass near Earth’s orbit around the sun. PDCO also will take a leading role in coordinating interagency and intergovernmental efforts in response to any potential impact threats. Specific assigned responsibilities are:

  • Ensuring the early detection of potentially hazardous objects (PHOs), which are defined as asteroids and comets whose orbits are predicted to bring them within 0.05 Astronomical Units (AUs) of Earth (7.48 million km, 4.65 million miles); and of a size large enough to reach Earth’s surface – that is, greater than 30 to 50 meters (98.4 to 164.0 feet);
  • Tracking and characterizing PHOs and issuing warnings about potential impacts;
  • Providing timely and accurate communications about PHOs; and
  • Performing as a lead coordination node in U.S. Government planning for response to an actual impact threat.

As you can see in the following organization chart, PDCO is part of NASA’s Planetary Science Division, in the agency’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington D.C.  PDCO is led by Lindley Johnson, longtime NEO program executive, who now has the very impressive title of “Planetary Defense Officer”.

Planetary Defense Coordination OfficeSource: NASA PDCO

You can find out more at the PDCO website at the following link:

https://www.nasa.gov/planetarydefense

The PDCO includes the Near Earth Object (NEO) Observation Program, which was established in 1998 in response to a request from the House Committee on Science that NASA find at least 90% of 1 km (0.62 mile) and larger NEOs. That goal was achieved by end of 2010.

The NASA Authorization Act of 2005 increased the scope of NEO objectives by amending the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (“NASA Charter”) by adding the following new functional requirement:

 ‘‘The Congress declares that the general welfare and security of the United States require that the unique competence of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration be directed to detecting, tracking, cataloging, and characterizing near-Earth asteroids and comets in order to provide warning and mitigation of the potential hazard of such near-Earth objects to the Earth.’’

 This was further clarified by stating that NASA will:

“…plan, develop, and implement a Near-Earth Object Survey program to detect, track, catalogue, and characterize the physical characteristics of near-Earth objects equal to or greater than 140 meters (459 feet) in diameter in order to assess the threat of such near-Earth objects to the Earth. It shall be the goal of the Survey program to achieve 90 percent completion of its near-Earth object catalog within fifteen years (by 2020)”

The contractors supporting the NASA NEO Observation Program are Jet propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) / Lincoln laboratory, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, University Space Research Association, University of Arizona, and University of Hawaii / Institute of Astronomy.

Once detected, NEO orbits are precisely predicted and monitored by the Center for NEO Studies (CNEOS) at JPL. Their website is at the following link:

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/neo/

The catalog of known NEOs as of 3 November 2015 included 13,206 objects. NASA reports that new NEOs are being identified at a rate of about 1,500 per year. Roughly half of the known NEOs – about 6,800 – are objects larger than 140 meters (459 feet) in diameter. The estimated population of NEOs of this size is about 25,000. Current surveys are finding NEOs of this size at a rate of about 500 per year.  Recent encounters with NEOs include:

  • Asteroid 2015 TB145, the “Halloween Pumpkin”
    • Roughly spherical, about 610 meters (2,000 feet) in diameter
    • Detected 10 October 2015, approaching from the outer solar system, 21 days before closest approach
    • Closest approach occurred on 31 October 2015 at a distance of 310,000 miles (1.3 times the distance to the Moon) at a speed of about 78,000 miles an hour.
  • Asteroid airburst near Chelyabinsk, Russia
    • Airburst occurred 15 February 2013
    • Object estimated to be about 19 meters in diameter
    • Approached from the inner solar system; not detected before airburst
    • Peter Brown at the University of Western Ontario, estimated the energy of the Chelyabinsk airbust at 400 to 600 kilotons of TNT.  You can read this analysis in at the following link:

http://www.nature.com/articles/nature12741.epdf?referrer_access_token=OvLha95ujqCh0k4maNPuFNRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PyqszVJsMboh07BaZDfmONEget5lbJtDTXTwE2VvrDWIEgk5iXkd1EFvngsntJFeC1wOg4ASyku1lPPrkWlAPvoRMkxnjovQe0UYqFmFkZ6v9qqq9DL9_3CwYPmTWA6e-sweRQPIyrDHMUaAQYWA9H4TNSsZGN662UcGxlW5d1GA%3D%3D&tracking_referrer=www.theguardian.com

Another result of the NEO Observation Program is the following map of data gathered from 1994-2013 on small asteroids impacting Earth’s atmosphere and disintegrating to create very bright meteors, technically called “bolides” and commonly referred to as “fireballs”.  Sizes of orange dots (daytime impacts) and blue dots (nighttime impacts) are proportional to the optical radiated energy of impacts measured in billions of Joules (GJ) of energy, and show the location of impacts from objects about 1 meter (3 feet) to almost 20 meters (60 feet) in size.  You can see a rather uniform distribution of these fireballs over the surface of the Earth.

bolide_events_1994-2013 Source: NASA NEO Observation Program

In September 2014, the NASA Inspector General published the report, “NASA’s Efforts to Identify Near-Earth Objects and Mitigate Hazards,” which you can download for free at the following link:

https://oig.nasa.gov/audits/reports/FY14/IG-14-030.pdf

Key findings were the following:

  • Even though the Program has discovered, categorized, and plotted the orbits of more than 11,000 NEOs since 1998, NASA will fall short of meeting the 2005 Authorization Act goal of finding 90 percent of NEOs larger than 140 meters (459 feet) in diameter by 2020.
  • ….we believe the Program would be more efficient, effective, and transparent were it organized and managed in accordance with standard NASA research program requirements

You will find an NEO Program update, including a reference to the new Planetary Defense Coordination Office, presented by Lindley Johnson on 8 November 2915 at the following link:

http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/IAWN/2015_national_harbor/NEO_Program_update.pdf

So, what will we see in the years ahead as technology is explored and techniques are developed to defend Earth against a significant NEO impact? There have been many movies that have tried to answer that question, but none offered a particularly good answer.

Asteroid movies 2Asteroid movies 1 Source: Google

In 1968, Star Trek explored this issue in Season 3, Episode 3, “The Paradise Syndrome”. Ancient aliens had left a planetary defense device to protect a primitive civilization against their equivalent of NEOs. Only the intervention of Capt. James T. Kirk restored the device to operation in time to deflect an incoming asteroid and save the indigenous civilization.

Star Trek - The Paradise Syndrome 1 Source: memory-alpha.wiki.comStar Trek - The Paradise Syndrome 2 Source: technovelgy.com

Our new Planetary Defense Officer has a comparable responsibility on Earth, but without the benefits of special effects.

In 2010, National Academies Press published, “Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies.” This report explores civil defense mitigation action and three basic defense techniques:

  • Slow push-pull methods
  • Kinetic impact methods
  • Nuclear methods

If you have a MyNAP account, you can download this report for free at the following link:

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12842/defending-planet-earth-near-earth-object-surveys-and-hazard-mitigation

NAP Defending Planet Earth Source: NAP