Catherine Faville

Mr. Ippolito

Current event 13

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0

For this current event, i read the article NASA’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-New and unexpected written by Kenneth Chang, the article described how Jupiter is not what we had originally thought. They have found that the interior core is bigger than it was originally thought to have been , also having a strong magnetic field around the planet. All this information was brought to scientist from Juno’s mission, a orbiter that has recently arrived at the planet in july. The orbiter is able to take pictures of the planet, as well as using instruments to look deep within the surface of the planet, scientist predict that they will find a rocky type core like Earth's within the center, or a hydrogen base core.

This article has a great effect on society, this is because this is just another example of how we don't know as much as we think we do about the planets. This new discovery of how the planet jupiter works, as well as the makeup of the planet. This new information will aid scientist in learning more about our own planet Earth by looking at other.

The article did a good job at identifying what scientist were looking for with these new discoveries, as well as giving more details with the science behind the new discoveries, giving the reader more vivid information on the article. However the writer could have added more background information on jupiter itself, so we could compare and contrast what we originally thought to what we now have discovered.  In addition if they added why they needed or wanted this new information on the planet.

Challenging Mainstream Thought About Beauty’s Big Hand in Evolution----->Marina Alfano

Marina Alfano

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 13

5/29/17

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/science/evolution-of-beauty-richard-prum-darwin-sexual-selection.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0

Gorman, James. "Challenging Mainstream Thought About Beauty’s Big Hand in Evolution."The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 May 2017. Web. 29 May 2017.

Manu Prakash, a physicist at Stanford proposed an interesting question that took many by surprise. “Why is there so much beauty?, and, “Why is there any beauty at all?”. These questions puzzled many and some began to wonder if their questions about beauty could be answered by science. Richard O. Prum, a Yale ornithologist (someone who studies birds) and evolutionary biologist offers a fragment of the answer in his book. However he only writes about one kind of beauty, whether or not the other gender is attractive kind of beauty. Yet he didn’t explain the appeal of how water moves when rocks are thrown into it or why the night sky is aesthetically pleasing. Dr. Prum is trying to revive something that Charles Darwin once studied, one that still sounds somewhat far reaching. The idea is that when the birds are choosing mates, they do so on a completely aesthetic driven level. Animals perceive a kind of beauty that Dr. Prum defines as “co-evolved attraction” meaning they desire a certain beauty such as bright feathers and their desires change the course of evolution. The mainstream view is often that animals choose mates because of their genes or health however in actuality mating is much more subjective than that. Dr. Prum wants evolutionary biologists to re evaluate their thinkings but he also wants to inform the public with a clear message about evolution. Wanting to pick your own mate, was not something that humans started in fact most animals practiced this long before humans existed. Darwin famously proposed one of the main factors of evolution to be natural selection more specifically, survival of the fittest. Even though the fittest of a species will live longer, they still must mate to produce further generations. So not only would you have to stay alive until you are able to mate, but you also have to choose a mate and that mate has to choose you. This process is called sexual selection and it plays a large role in evolution. If a female bird prefers males with long tails, then she will  mate with long tailed males and produce offspring with long tails and then those offspring will produce more long tailed birds. The author explained Darwin's thinkings saying “Darwin contended that selection-based mate choice was different from natural selection because the females were often making decisions based on what looked good — on beauty, as they perceived it — and not on survival or some objective quality like speed or strength.” Some evolutionary biologists believed that honest signaling, the determination of genetic fitness due to observing the phenotypes on an animal. “You can’t explain a peacock’s tale with honest signaling,” Dr. Hill said. Although some may say Dr. Prums book is scientifically disappointing, others argue that it is a revolutionary idea and it follows what Darwin believed.

Even though many people accept the theory of evolution, now people are trying to perfect it and it is still a topic that is widely debated. Most scientists believe that since we can see beauty creatures, that means it must be adaptive or a sign of qualities that are adaptive. Dr. Prum is doing what most scientists do, he is questioning what many believe and seeing if he can prove them wrong. He thinks that since animals have aesthetic preferences and they make choices based off those preferences, then beauty will inevitably appear. He is still searching for the full answer to his question, yet at least he knows a partial answer to the question, “Why are birds beautiful?”. He says “Birds are beautiful because they are beautiful to themselves.”

This article was well written, because it wasn’t bias towards one side. The author not only included Dr. Prums argument, but they also included a few of the opposing arguments and included quotes from both sides. Even though this piece proposes many unanswered questions, the author doesn’t overwhelm the reader and they leave the reader wondering just the right amount. Reading this made me want to research deeper into the subject, but it didn’t make me confused. I think that the article could have been slightly less lengthy because it took longer than most articles to read and sometimes it got repetitive. In order to appeal to people looking for a quick read, the author could have shortened the article by several paragraphs. Overall, I would recommend that you read this article because it is fascinating how something that seemed to be so concrete, like evolution, could still be argued today.

"NASA: Nearby Ocean Worlds Could Be Best Bet for Life beyond Earth."

Olivia Doyle

Mr. Ippolito

Core Biology

25 May 2017

Strickland, Ashley. "NASA: Nearby Ocean Worlds Could Be Best Bet for Life beyond

Earth."CNN. Cable News Network, 14 Apr. 2017. Web. 25 May 2017.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/us/nasa-europa-enceladus-ocean-worlds-announcement-trnd/index.html

This week, I read an article entitled “NASA: Nearby ocean worlds could be best bet for life beyond Earth” written by Ashley Strickland. The article discussed new evidence discovered by NASA that lead researchers to believe Jupiter’s moon Europa and Saturn’s moon Enceladus could be possible candidates for life beyond Earth. Through data collected by the Cassini spacecraft, researchers have found hydrogen molecules in water plumes on Enceladus, which could indicate the presence of hydrothermal activity inside its body, which could be a sign that there is life on this moon. Other evidence collected by the Hubble Space Telescope indicates that there was a water plume erupting on the surface of Europa. It is stated that this is the second time a plume has been observed in the exact spot, so it is highly likely that Europa has more of these to offer and support life. A cosmic dust analyzer on the Cassini satellite revealed silicon dioxide grains, indicating warm hydrothermal activity. Scientist Waite says, “This (molecular hydrogen) is just like the icing on the cake," Waite said. "Now, you see the chemical energy source that microbes could use”. From here, scientists are eager to collect more data from Enceladus and search for sulfur and phosphorus, which are other necessary ingredients for life. It is stated that, “The second step would be looking for signs of life by flying a spectrometer through the plume, searching for rations of amino and fatty acids, certain isotopic ratios indicative of life and other relationships in molecules that indicate energy for microbial life”. Additionally, the “Europa clipper” satellite is set to orbit Jupiter in 2020 to further investigate Europa’s crust for signs of life.

The discovery of water on Europa and Enceladus is a major scientific breakthrough. Thomas Zurbuchen says that it is the closest NASA has come so far to identifying habitable places in our solar system. “These results demonstrate the interconnected nature of NASA's science missions that are getting us closer to answering whether we are indeed alone or not." Another scientist, Schmidt, even believes that Europa is so similar to Earth that it could have been a place for life over the history of our solar system. This is not only revolutionary for scientists, but for ordinary communities like our own and humanity as a whole. To discover characteristics of life beyond our Earth suggests that in the future, humans could live other places in our solar system besides Earth. Waite says, “Understanding the diversity of our solar system is pretty important and the possibility of applying what we know here to exoplanets, it just opens up the range of possibilities for life beyond our previous expectations”.

In my opinion, the article was very well-written and did not lack any key components. The article addressed how the experiment was carried out and exactly how the data was collected, which gave the reader interesting information on NASA’s equipment and how it is used in scientific experiments. The author provided a solid analysis as to how this affects humanity as a whole and what life on these two moons could mean. She goes as far to explain where scientists will go next with these discoveries, which makes the reader interested in researching this topic further and seeing what happens with the next satellite. The author also provided different scientists’ opinions, which provided the reader with an understanding of experts’ differing views on the discoveries. She addressed past missions and why this one was so revolutionary. However, the author could have gone further in depth with explaining why each ingredient for life is necessary, and how we humans use each here on Earth. Overall, though, the article sparked my interest in the possibility of life beyond Earth and encouraged me to delve further into the topic of what makes a place habitable.

NASA's Jupiter Mission Reveals the "Brand-New and Unexpected"

Catie Burnell

Mr. Ippolito

Core Biology Honors

May 30, 2017

NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the “Brand-New and Unexpected”

I recently read the article “NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’” by Kenneth Chang of The New York Times. The article details NASA’s Juno mission on Jupiter, the largest planet in our solar system, that began in July of last year. The mission has yielded some impressive results - NASA found that “The planet’s interior core appears bigger than expected, and swirling electric currents are generating surprisingly strong magnetic fields. Auroral lights shining in Jupiter’s polar regions seem to operate in a reverse way to those on Earth… a belt of ammonia may be rising around the planet’s equator” (Chang 2017). Many photos taken in the mission have also been relayed back to Earth, further proving this new information. These findings come to the surprise of many NASA scientists, such as the principal investigator of the mission Dr. Scott J. Bolton, who said, “We’re seeing a lot of our ideas were incorrect and maybe naïve” (Chang 2017). A microwave instrument used in the mission detected a band of ammonia in the equatorial region of the planet, a feature that Dr. Bolton described as “startling… brand-new and unexpected.” The mission also studied the gravitational field of Jupiter in hopes of finding the composition of the core of the planet, a topic which had been largely debated. “Some predicted a rocky core… Others expected no rocky core, but hydrogen, the planet’s main constituent, all the way down. ‘Most scientists were in one camp or the other,’ Dr. Bolton said, ‘and what we found is neither is true.’ Instead, the data suggests a ‘fuzzy core,’ one that is larger than expected... perhaps partly dissolved” (Chang 2017). NASA has also found that the magnetic field of Jupiter is much more complex than scientists predicted, with some areas having a much stronger magnetic field than others. However, gaining these findings was no easy feat - “Juno takes 53 days to loop around Jupiter in a highly elliptical orbit, but most of the data gathering occurs in two-hour bursts when it accelerates to 129,000 miles an hour and dives to within about 2,600 miles of the cloud tops” (Chang 2017) Nevertheless, the discoveries made by the Juno mission have provided NASA and astronomical organizations globally with vital information about an important planet in our solar system.

This article is relevant to science today because of the push to learn more about planets in our solar system and beyond due to climate change, which is slowly turning Earth into an uninhabitable planet. Additionally, the information made by the Juno mission is vital to astronomers because not much was known previously about the planet and the findings detailed in this article show that many scientists were incorrect in their predictions about Jupiter.

Chang’s article was overall well-written. The quotes from Dr. Bolton were very helpful in receiving first-hand information from someone directly involved in the Juno mission, and the photos also included in the article were very interesting. However, I felt that the amount of information in the article was at times overwhelming and could have been simplified. On the other hand, Chang did have to detail findings from several journals, so having an article so full of information was inevitable. This article was very interesting and an enjoyable read.

Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 29 May 2017.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&_r=0&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=Science&action=keypress&region=FixedLeft&pgtype=article

Prosthetic Hand Restores Touch, Heals Phantom Pain

The article “Prosthetic Hand Restores Touch, Heals Phantom Pain” By Tanya Lewis was a well written article with a few down sides. The author of the article made a heading which catches the eye. As I, have a personal connection with amputations and prosthetics since my grandfather had an amputation and has a fake leg so I was tempted to see what was going on. Throughout the article, the research and reference to the subject was mainly referred to two test subjects, a group of surgeons, and one scientist. This information is from only one company, there is proof to announce to the world saying that you can bring back sense to the amputated arm and/or limb. The data collected was only about how good the product was and that according to the article, there was not a single mention about how there might be side effects or that something bad will happen. Throughout the whole article, there weren’t any step by step procedures of how they were able to make the product.

Basically this article was about the ability to have feeling when you add a prosthetic body part. When an amputation occurs, you lose all sensation in the area of the surgery. As of late, there has been new light that has showed that with special equipment you can bring back these feelings. For example, the new prosthetics gave the people feelings where if they held an item it would feel the same if they held it in the normal hand or the same for texture. One of the many things that really ruin a person is the knowledge that they lost the feeling in their arm to bring it back is a beautiful thing. After an amputation has occurred there have been reports of phantom pains. Phantom pains are pains that are felt after the surgery is done of the preexisting problem and any new ones around the area. With the development of these new prosthetics these scientists have found that the phantom pains go away.

The author of the article actually works for the company creating this project. She has been working for the company for a year now and specializes in writing stories about neuroscience. Lewis included one passage in the article where Tony says, “We don't believe the way we're stimulating the nerves is exactly natural, but if there's something close, the brain likes to interpret it as something it knows.” This shows that the scientists don’t know a 100% what's happening to the body and how it reacts to the new things that are getting attached. The author did a good job of answering most of the big questions to help readers, but she didn’t include some questions like how much it will cost, or how durable it is, or if it comes in contact with water, is your body in danger of getting a shock? These were some important questions that would ensure safety to people, and safety comes first. the author doesn’t explain the research that was put together in order for this to be successful. Going back to the quote in the previous paragraph, it may cause problems if the scientists don’t know what is happening when the complete the operation.

At the end of the article, the conclusion was mediocre. By the end of the article, the author describes how the subject said that there was almost no pain in his arm after the new change and the conclusion is in the category while wrapping up the sub-topic and the whole article. When the conclusion was written, I was convinced that the new advancement in prosthetics was going to help future people and that with only a few more years of finishing work, they can create a product that can sense many more textures and that too technology will help them cruise along. One main thing that convinced me that this was real was that there was a video showing a test subject name the certain texture against the amputated hand while it was wired to his arm.

3-D printed ovaries produce healthy offspring

Bailey Barton

Mr. Ippolito

Biology

May 17th, 2017

Samuelson, Kristin. "3-D Printed Ovaries Produce Healthy Offspring." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 16 May 2017. Web. 17 May 2017.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170516121650.htm

I read the article “3-D printed ovaries produce healthy offspring” by Kristin Samuelson. As of now, scientists all around the world are using 3-D printing to make huge medical advancements, more specifically, they have begun to produce artificial organs. In this article, Samuelson talk’s about a study by the Northwestern University Feinberg School of medicine. They are trying to create implanted ovary structures that can ovulate, in doing so, they use female mice. By removing a female mouse’s ovary and replacing it with their bioprosthetic ovary, the mouse had the ability to ovulate and give birth. These ovaries are made of 3D printed scaffolds that can house immature eggs and can boost hormone production and restoring fertility in mice, in other words the study was successful. Their study not only shows the immediate results of giving mice fertility but also shows the long term effect which is that these ovaries are durable and can withstand years of use. Scientist Teresa K. Woodruff explained that this is better than transplanting from a cadaver because the bioprosthetic ovary functions as the organ and restores the health of tissue.

This study is impactful for humans because the sole purpose of this study was to be beneficial to women who have either undergone cancer treatments as an adult or those who have survived childhood cancer and now face risks of infertility and hormone issues. These bioprosthetic ovaries restore fertility and hormone production.

I believe this article was very informative on how the study took place and gave a good explanation as to why. It was a very promising article and I hope that the study is successful in providing help to cancer survivors or others facing fertility difficulty.

Sickle Cell Anemia Patient ‘Cured’ By Gene Therapy

In the article, “Sickle Cell Anemia Patient ‘Cured’ By Gene Therapy,” Susan Scutti explains that doctors in a research facility in Paris, France have help to ‘cure’ a patient with sickle cell anemia through gene therapy. Sickle cell anemia is a blood disease transmitted through inheritance. This disease causes red blood cells to become misshapen and break down. Often, they have a difficult time carrying hemoglobin, which is essential for transporting oxygen to organs in the body. The boy started therapy at 13 years, and stopped after 15 months. Before getting treatment, the teenager had horrible pain and required blood transfusions, which required hospitalizations two times a year. This included problems with the necrosis of the hip, which required hip replacement surgery. To try and fix this disease, scientists removed bone marrow from the patient, took the stem cells and changed the hereditary instructions with the goal that they would make typical hemoglobin. Next, they treated the patient with chemotherapy for four days to take out his infected stem cells. Lastly, they gave back the treated stem cells by means of an IV into his bloodstream. "By then, the new cells that were modified outside the body started to make new blood cells, and we hope this will be stable for the life of the patient," Leboulch said. Scientists say it’s easier to help fix with younger kids and not older people with years of complications. Researchers are now repeating these studies in places like the US, Australia, and Thailand.

I chose to review this article because it is very relevant to what we’re doing in class. Sickle cell anemia is one of many genetic disorders that we have discussed in class, and I found this disease very interesting, but very concerning. I also think that since genetic disorders are very hard to treat, it is important that we follow up on updates on how to cure them.

Reading this article was very clear and easy to understand, but I do wish they added more to help create a better understanding. I first think that they should add some photos or diagrams of how to disease works, and what they did to fix it, to help visualize it better. I also wish they added some directs quotes from the study, instead of diluting the explanation on what they did to treat the study. However, there were no major issues with the article and was still very informative.

Scutti, Susan. "Sickle Cell Anemia Patient 'cured' by Gene Therapy, Doctors Say." CNN. Cable News Network, 03 Mar. 2017. Web. 10 May 2017

<http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/03/health/sickle-cell-anemia/.>

Watch: Fishermen Catch Venomous Sea Snakes

Nathan Revadigar

Charles Ippolito

Core Biology

5/10/17

"Watch: Fishermen Catch Venomous Sea Snakes." National Geographic. National Geographic

Society, 02 May 2017. Web. 10 May 2017.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/01/150108-sea-snake-gulf-thailand-harvest-animal-ocean-conservation/

Current Event 11

The article, “Fishermen Catch Huge Numbers of Live Venomous Sea Snakes” by Jane J. Lee is very well written with a few downsides. The author begins the article with a very interesting and shocking video about her topic and then starts with a good lead that hooks his readers into reading the article. A particular reason that this article caught my eye was because I have always had a great interest for snakes, especially snakes with special talents such as being able to live under water. Lee wrote this article about the capturing of sea snakes in Thailand, her main topics covered the main reason why they collect them and the risks of it. In order to help the readers of her article understand her topic better, Lee included many pictures and a video. These crucial visuals made the article easier to understand. Lee did a good job of providing her research resources. She made most of her article based off 6 or 7 sources who provided her with very rich and important details about her topic.

Although Lee provides her sources, there are a couple downsides. For example, when she began her article, she had a very good lead but immediately included a fact that kills the interest of her newly introduced article. “Some die from snake bites, according to a recent study that suggests the snake catch may be one of the biggest hauls of marine reptiles in the world.” This line makes the reader lose some interest in reading her article. The conclusion that Lee wrote for this article was mediocre, but it didn’t wrap up the entire article. Her conclusion was very abrupt as she was talking about using snake venom as medicine and an ending at that point doesn’t even seem possible yet there was one. It didn’t allow the readers to fully understand the article and it didn’t wrap up what she was talking about, it only summarized the second half of the article. The conclusion was ended with a quote that left the readers with a question in their mind. Throughout the article, Lee did a good job answering most of the main questions but if she had answered a couple more questions, the article would have been very informative. For example, what does the venom of the snake in medicines treat besides heart attacks? Also, what about the snake venom makes it a medicinal ingredient? If these questions were answered then people would have a better understanding of the properties for snake venom.

This informative article was well-written and had a lot of evidence to  b. The most impressive aspect of the article was the way in which Lee was able to explain the new research and the way that it can be used to cure certain problems.. Lee explained the research that was conducted very well and cited several scientists who were able to explain the work on a deeper level. The author had great detail that drew my attention to reading through the lengthy paragraphs. The detailed interviews added a much needed depth to such a difficult concept to grasp. This work will go on to inspire future scientists and hopefully, when there is a breakthrough and potential cure for diseases will be created. I have recently developed a liking toward articles that contain information on cures and remedies and this brought a new angle to what I have been recently reading. Most of the articles I have read have focused on the use of herbs but snakes of all animals is very fascinating.

We Might Soon Resurrect Extinct Species. Is It Worth the Cost?

Julian Thomet

Mr. Ippolito

Bio IH D135

11 May, 2017

Yin, Steph. "We Might Soon Resurrect Extinct Species. Is It Worth the Cost?" The New York

Times. The New York Times, 20 Mar. 2017. Web. 08 May 2017.

<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/science/revive-restore-extinct-species-dna-mamm

oth-passenger-pigeon.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fearth&action=click

&contentCollection=earth®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPla

cement=11&pgtype=sectionfront>.

Current Events 11

The article “We Might Soon Resurrect Extinct Species. Is Is Worth the Cost?” by Steph Yin, asks the important question: Now that we have the ability to bring back extinct creatures, should we do it? The article covers both sides of the debate, both of which make some valid points. On one side, there are those who argue that it is not worth it, and that with the money available for these projects, people should focus more on helping creatures that are still alive. Such a point is advocated by scientists like Dr. Joseph Bennett, of the Carleton University. He argues that, although it would be nice to have these creatures back, the effect could be detrimental to the animals who would have the DNA implanted in them. For example, it could be possible to create a new population of mammoths, but this could harm the Asian and African Elephants, which would get the DNA, and “ ‘In 50 years, we might not have those elephants,’ says Joseph Bennett” (Yin 8). Another issue to consider is that the money required to bring back a species from extinction could be used to save more animals. “If you have the millions of dollars it would take to resurrect a species and choose to do that, you are making an ethical decision to bring one species back and let several others go extinct,” Dr. Bennett said. “It would be one step forward, and three to eight steps back” (Yin 19-22). However, some argue that these arguments do not appreciate the more advanced technology that now exists. Groups like Revive & Restore, a group working to bring back extinct creatures, argue that they always consider the long term benefits and downsides in deciding whether to bring back a creature. They also argue that some animals, like the passenger pigeon, also have a positive impact on the environment around them. The passenger pigeon helps its habitat by breaking down trees and producing fertilizer that helps trees to continue to grow and reproduce. However, scientists like Dr. Joseph Bennett still argue that pursuits such as this one are only worthwhile for the sake of improving technology, but that it is not as worthwhile as conservation of endangered species.

This article bears some relevance on us and the world around us. More and more species are becoming extinct every day. In fact, the article estimates that 20 per cent of species are now endangered, and it estimates that by 2100, half of the world’s species could face endangerment of extinction. This is a trend that may soon become irreversible, if we do not start taking more action to reverse it. Ideally, there would be enough money for both conservation and bringing back animals, but for the time being, there is not enough money for either, and scientists and politicians are being forced to make extremely difficult choices about which animals to save, and which ones to allow to go extinct. If people do not attempt to stop the trend of animals becoming endangered, and extinct, there may come a time when this debate is moot, because we will be dealing only with creatures that have gone extinct.

In general, the article does a good job summarizing both sides of the argument. Both sides’ opinions are laid out in great detail. It includes a lot of relevant information about the topic, which also made it possible for the reader to make informed decisions on his/her own without the opinions provided in the piece. In spite of the article’s thoroughness, one gets the sense that the author was slightly in favor of Dr. Bennett’s point of view. This is because the piece was set up with his points at the beginning and end, with the counter-point seemingly put there so that it could be rebutted. The article was very well written, though. There was very little scientific terminology used, and any terminology that was used was explained in depth. This made it a lot easier to understand what the author was trying to communicate. This topic will become more relevant in the coming years as technology continues to improve.

"A New Mind-boggling Model Shows How Time Travel Is Mathematically Possible"

Kevin Leka

Mr. Ippolito

Core Bio H

2 May 2017

Osborne, Hannah. "A New Mind-boggling Model Shows How Time Travel Is Mathematically Possible." Newsweek. N.p., 02 May 2017. Web. 02 May 2017. <http://www.newsweek.com/time-travel-physics-einstein-spacetime-tardis-592908>.

For this weeks current event, I read,  "A New Mind-boggling Model Shows How Time Travel Is Mathematically Possible," written by Hannah Osborne and published on Newsweek today. Osborne explains how a David Tsang, an astrophysicist from the University of Maryland, and Ben Tippett at the University of British Columbia, Canada, believe that mathematically reverse time travel is possible by creating shortcuts in a spacetime. Ultimately, these scientists believe that these bubbles in time could be visited. The idea of time traveling has always amused scientists for decades yet to accurately model it mathematically and even create some design to travel in time is remarkable. They even describe the process that would occur during time travel. If you were inside time traveling, you would watch time reverse and all events be undone. People would act sporadically and while you are traveling, you would keep accelerating in time.

The idea behind this is genius but opens up many other issues. Possibly other scientists could theoretically build a time machine and use it for good or worse, to erase history they do not agree with. Like space travel and future space ventures, this has many unknowns and leaves the reader wanting to know more. Marika Taylor, professor of theoretical physics at the University of Southampton, commented on the study with, “In summary, while their work is interesting and adds to the existing literature, it doesn't really show that time travel is possible in our Universe.” Taylor does believe it is possible but just that we are missing that one significant thing that will allow us to travel in time, both forwards and backwards.

This informative article was very well-written and scientific. The most impressive aspect of the article was the way in which Osbourne was able to explain the new research and break down complicated mathematics down into a simpler explanation. Osborne explained the research conducted very well and cited several scientists who were able to explain the work on a deeper level. For example, when the article explains time travel, “However the main problems in all these models are that quantum effects that often destroy the spacetime shortcuts and that exotic forms of matter are required to create the shortcuts,” it is a little difficult to understand, yet still amazes and wills the reader to further research. If there were simpler words used in such a complex research, specifically this quote, than it would be easier for the reader to follow along. However, since this article was very recent and had a captivating topic it was definitely worth the read. The author had great detail that drew my attention to reading through the lengthy paragraphs. The detailed interviews added a much needed depth to such a difficult concept to grasp. Fortunately, we have geniuses around the world that can actually break down and design/model something that has never happened before. This work will go on to inspire future scientists and hopefully, when there is a breakthrough, there will be a set of guidelines along time travel as to never erase moments in history that should never be forgotten.

Cassini’s Grand Finale: A Dive Between Saturn and Its Rings

Zip Malley

Mr. Ippolito

Core Bio H / Current Event 10

3 May 2017

Overbye, Dennis. "Cassini’s Grand Finale: A Dive Between Saturn and Its Rings." The New York

Times. The New York Times, 21 Apr. 2017. Web. <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/science/cassini-nasa-saturn.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0>.

I read the New York Times article titled “Cassini’s Grand Finale: A Dive Between Saturn and Its Rings” by Dennis Overbye for this week’s current event. This article tells the reader what the spacecraft will do in its last four months and gives a topline overview of Cassini’s achievements. Cassini, launched in 1997, arrived at Saturn, its destination, in July of 2004. Cassini was sent to Saturn to take pictures of the gas giant. From now until its demise, Cassini will fly by Saturn within its innermost ring approximately 22 times, once a week, before voluntarily crashing into the gas planet. This article explained some of Cassini’s greatest accomplishments, one of which includes racking up a total of over 4,000,000,000 space miles.

This article brings to light the commitment that it takes to explore the full depths of space from a personal and financial perspective. Cassini really showed us how little we are, and how little we know. “It made us freer and bigger by showing how little we know and how much more room there is to expand our thoughts and dreams. How little of nature’s repertoire we have even guessed at” (Overbye, 4). Over the last 13 years, Cassini is responsible for some of the most important findings including “the credit for discovering what many astronomers think is the most likely place to find evidence of life beyond Earth” (Overbye, 2), and “bragging rights for exploring Titan, perhaps the strangest moon in the solar system” (Overbye, 3).

Even though this article was well written and explained, it would have been interesting if the author, Dennis Overbye, would have given background information on Cassini and its goals. This article was practically a retirement send off for Casini, stating all of its past accomplishments.

"No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt."

Luke Redman

Mr. Ippolito

Biology 10H

May 2nd

Kolata, Gina. "No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Apr. 2017. Web. 02 May 2017. <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/27/science/ancient-human-dna-cave-dirt.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=6&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0>.

For my current event, I decided to review Gina Kolata’s article, “No Bones About It: Scientists Recover Ancient DNA From Cave Dirt.” The article is about a team of German scientists that found isolate ancient human DNA. However, they did not use a single bone to get the DNA. Led by Matthias Meyer, the group of German scientists had been trying for years to develop a technique for finding ancient DNA in desolate areas where no bones were found.  Although the idea of finding DNA in sediment is not a new idea, these German scientists had advanced the new concept. The study that Meyer and his team conducted involved four caves where humans were known to have lived 550,000 years ago. They then used molecular hooks to retrieve genes from the mitochondria. They had also built a robotic system to analyze the samples, as doing it the traditional route would have been too time consuming. By the end of the study the scientists had gathered “between 5,000 and 2.8 million DNA fragments. The number of DNA fragments per sample that were from ancient humans was minuscule and ranged from 0 to 8,822, depending on the site in the cave.” These findings were important to the scientific community because it answered so many question which scientists could not address before. One scientist compared the study to, “discovering that you can extract gold dust from the air.” Scientists can now use the dirt in the area to determine if there was human remains, and they could excavate the earth with a much greater chance of success of finding bones and remains. Scientists can also start to look at open-air sites instead of being limited to just caves. These discoveries have given scientists an incredible amount of flexibility that was not possible before this study. Kolata’s writing style keep the reader engaged with the article, giving examples and numbers that draw the reader’s attention to how analyzing the sediments was more efficient than the traditional bone scavenging. An issue that I had with the article was the order in which the information was presented. The reviews of the study were placed before the actual summary of the study, which I found to be slightly confusing because usually, the author gives the details of the story first, then the reactions of the readers. The only thing that I would change about the article, other than the order of information, is to include more information on Meyer’s previous works, to further prove that the work done in the study is extremely influential, and not a fluke.