Huwebes, Enero 26, 2017

What Determines Sky's Colors At Sunrise And Sunset?

What Determines Sky's Colors At Sunrise And Sunset?


The colors of the sunset result from a phenomenon called scattering, says Steven Ackerman, professor of meteorology at UW-Madison. Molecules and small particles in the atmosphere change the direction of light rays, causing them to scatter.
Scattering affects the color of light coming from the sky, but the details are determined by the wavelength of the light and the size of the particle. The short-wavelength blue and violet are scattered by molecules in the air much more than other colors of the spectrum. This is why blue and violet light reaches our eyes from all directions on a clear day. But because we can't see violet very well, the sky appears blue.
Scattering also explains the colors of the sunrise and sunset, Ackerman says.
“Because the sun is low on the horizon, sunlight passes through more air at sunset and sunrise than during the day, when the sun is higher in the sky. More atmosphere means more molecules to scatter the violet and blue light away from your eyes. If the path is long enough, all of the blue and violet light scatters out of your line of sight. The other colors continue on their way to your eyes. This is why sunsets are often yellow, orange, and red.”
And because red has the longest wavelength of any visible light, the sun is red when it’s on the horizon, where its extremely long path through the atmosphere blocks all other colors.

The South Atlantic Anomaly Is The Bermuda Triangle Of Space.

The South Atlantic Anomaly Is The Bermuda Triangle Of Space


Outer space is a dangerous place—if the deep cold doesn't get you, the cosmic rays will. Luckily, Earth has its own pair of radiation belts that shield us from the kinds of high-energy particles that would wreak havoc on living things and delicate electronics the first time they had the chance. But there's an area of our planet where those protective belts turn on us. That area is known as the South Atlantic Anomaly.

The Van Allen Belts

In 1958, James Van Allen led a project to send the United States' first satellite into space with some simple equipment: a Geiger counter to detect radiation, and a tape recorder to, well, record sound. That project—and several after—led to the discovery that our planet is surrounded by two donut-shaped masses of high-energy particles. Those particles are leftovers of cosmic rays shooting in from outside our solar system that become trapped in that belt configuration because of the Earth's magnetic field (if you've ever seen iron filings sprinkled around a magnet, you know that a magnetic field follows a telltale pattern). Though the high-energy particles are dangerous on their own, when they're trapped in the Van Allen Belts they shield the Earth from any other dangerous particles that might elbow their way in.

Here's The Catch

Thanks for protecting us, Van Allen Belts! Well, don't be too grateful just yet. The poles of Earth's magnetic field don't line up perfectly with its poles of rotation; they're actually tilted by 11 degrees. That means the Van Allen Belts are tilted too. This leads the inner donut-shaped mass of deadly high-energy particles to dip dangerously low to the Earth's surface—as close as 124 miles (200 kilometers) at some points over the South Atlantic and Brazil. That's well below the path of many satellites, which are forced to pass through the belt and get pummeled by protons. And we're talking pummeled: every square centimeter is hit 3,000 times per second. That abuse can cause all sorts of problems, from data glitches to electronic damage. As a result, engineers tell their satellites to power down as they pass through the anomaly in hopes that their data will be protected.

Scientists can turn co2 into ethanol and they figure out it by accidentally.

Scientists can turn co2 into ethanol and they figure out it by accidentally.

In October 2016, scientists accidentally turned carbon dioxide (CO2) into ethanol, a fuel. Whoops! This unexpected result could be huge in combatting climate change caused by CO2 in the atmosphere.

How Did It Happen?

Things don't always go exactly according to plan. And sometimes, that can be a really good thing. Take, for instance, that time in October of 2016 when some scientists working at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee tried to turn carbon dioxide into methane. It didn't work. Instead, the scientists got ethanol, a renewable fuel. This was a surprise because, well, the CO2 converted to ethanolsurprisingly easily. The scientists didn't think the catalysts they were working with could produce ethanol from CO2 on its own. This catalyst produces a yield as high as 70 percent, meaning the process barely wastes much carbon dioxide or catalyst. What you get is all fuel, baby! Better yet, the process is cheap and scalable because it uses common materials and can be done at room temperature. The ethanol that comes from it is ready to be used as-is.

This Could Be A Really Big Deal

If you haven't put it together yet, this accidental discovery could mean big things for combating global warming. Carbon dioxide is one of the main greenhouse gases in our atmosphere contributing to climate change. Finding a way to cheaply, easily, and efficiently turn the bad stuff into renewable fuel seems kind of like a dream come true, doesn't it?

How does media estimate crowd size?

The number of people in attendance at an event may seem pretty uncontroversial on its face, but it can turn political—just take the comparison between the crowd sizes at Donald Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2017 and those at the Women's March protest the next day. How exactly do people estimate attendance based on pictures of crowds? There's actually a tried-and-true formula, and it's called the Jacobs Method. Watch the video below to learn more about it

Does Bamboo Conduct Electricity?

Does Bamboo Conduct Electricity? 

Less than a year after he developed the first practical light bulb (1880), Thomas Edison designed a new version that had all the essential features of a modern light bulb; an incandescent filament in an evacuated glass bulb with a screw base. The most critical factor was finding the right material for the filament, the part inside the light bulb that glows when an electric currant is passed through it. Edison tested more than 1,600 materials, including coconut fiber, fishing line, even hairs from a worker's beard.   Finally, Edison ended up using bamboo fiber for the filament. Edison and his team discovered that carbonized bamboo had the capacity to conduct electrical currant, and that it could last more than 1200 hours, more than any other material at the time. Researchers have built upon his work and now have discovered that bamboo charcoal is a natural “nano tube” that can conduct electricity as a very thin film disbursed on the surface of a glass or silicon substrate. 

How Did Water Come to Earth?

How Did Water Come to Earth?



Water is so vital to our survival, but strangely enough, we don’t know the first thing about it—literally the first. Where does water, a giver and taker of life on planet Earth, come from? When I was in junior high school, my science teacher taught us about the water cycle—evaporation from oceans and lakes, condensation forming clouds , rain refilling oceans and lakes—and it all made sense. Except for one thing: None of the details explained where the water came from to begin with. I asked, but my teacher looked as if I’d sought the sound of one hand clapping.
To be fair, the origin of our planet’s water is an intricate story stretching back some 13.8 billion years to the Big Bang. And a key part of the story, centering on two particular solar system denizens, has been hotly debated for decades.
Here’s the part we think we understand well: Just shy of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang, the energy that sparked the outward swelling of space transmuted into a hot, uniform bath of particles. During the next three minutes, these primordial constituents bumped and jostled, combined and recombined, yielding the first atomic nuclei. One of the great triumphs of modern cosmology is its mathematical description of these processes, which gives accurate predictions for the cosmic abundances of the simplest nuclei—a lot of hydrogen, less helium and trace amounts of lithium. Producing copious hydrogen is a propitious start en route to water, but what about the other essential ingredient, oxygen?
That’s where stars, already plentiful about a billion years after the Big Bang, enter the picture. Deep within their blisteringly hot interiors, stars are nuclear furnaces that fuse the Big Bang’s simple nuclei into more complex elements, including carbon, nitrogen and, yes, oxygen. Later in their lives, when stars go super­nova, the explosions spew these elements into space. Oxygen and hydrogen commingle to make H2O.
So are we done? Not quite. In fact, this is where things get a little murky. Water molecules were surely part of the dusty swirl that coalesced into the Sun and its planets beginning about nine billion years after the Big Bang. But Earth’s early history, including epochs with high ambient temperatures and no enveloping atmosphere, implies that surface water would have evaporated and drifted back into space. The water we encounter today, it seems, must have been delivered long after Earth formed.
Faced with this conundrum, astronomers realized that there are two ready-made sources: comets and asteroids, the solar system’s gravel strewn among planetary boulders. The primary difference between the two is that comets typically have a greater concentration of ingredients that vaporize when heated, accounting for their iconic gaseous tails. Both comets and asteroids can contain ice. And if, by colliding with Earth, they added the amount of material some scientists suspect, such bodies could easily have delivered oceans’ worth of water. Accordingly, each has been fingered as a suspect in the mystery.
Adjudicating between the two is a challenge, and over the years scientific judgment has swung from one to the other. Nevertheless, recent observations of their chemical makeups are tipping the scale toward asteroids. Researchers reported last year, for example, that the ratios of different forms of hydrogen in asteroids appear to better match what we find here on Earth. But the analyses are based on limited samples, meaning there’s a good chance we’ve not yet heard the final word.
Even so, the next time you turn on the tap, think of the flowing water’s long and wonderful journey. It certainly makes a bottle of Fiji seem a little less exotic.




Is anaconda considered venomous?

Is anaconda considered venomous?


These days no, Anacondas do not produce a venom. Well kinda. But there has been recent debate as to whether they (as well as other constrictors) once had venom. They do have what appears to be remnants of venom glands but they are for the purpose of saliva. Bryan Fry of the University of Queensland has found though that these glands still produce venom like proteins but they are in trace quantities and no longer used for killing and catching prey. He feels that in venomous animals if they stop relying on venom over generations these animals lose that ability over many thousands of years. So I guess it depends on your definition of venomous. They still produce minute amounts but can but it wont hurt us or any other animal really.   Many animals we once thought of as non venomous actually are such as iguanas and certain species of garter snakes. While not extremely toxic we now know these animals do have working venom systems. From what I understand it started with Fry looking into komodo dragons and the myth that they had super toxic saliva with various pathogens and bacteria. In reality they have venom. Anyone who wishes to learn more about venomous animals should really look into Bryan Fry. He has some books which I cant wait to read and he IMHO has revolutionized what we know about venomous animals. And my apologies to him if I misinterpreted anything I have read or seen in his lectures.