Geology professor Qing-zhu Yin holds a fragment of the meteorite that exploded over the Sierra foothills this past spring. (Credit: Gregory Urquiaga/UC Davis photo)

A meteorite that exploded as a fireball over California's Sierra foothills this past spring was among the fastest, rarest meteorites known to have hit Earth, and it traveled a highly eccentric orbital route to get here.

The researchers found that the meteorite that fell over Northern California on April 22 was the rarest type known to have hit Earth -- a carbonaceous chondrite. It is composed of cosmic dust and presolar materials that helped form the planets of the solar system.An international team of scientists presents these and other findings in a study published Dec. 21, in the journal Science. The 70-member team included nine researchers from UC Davis, along with scientists from the SETI Institute, NASA and other institutions.

The scientists learned that the meteorite formed about 4.5 billion years ago. It was knocked off its parent body, which may have been an asteroid or a Jupiter-family comet, roughly 50,000 years ago. That began its journey to Sutter's Mill, the gold discovery site that sparked the California Gold Rush.

As it flew toward Earth, it traveled an eccentric course through the solar system, flying from an orbit close to Jupiter toward the sun, passing by Mercury and Venus, and then flying out to hit Earth.

The high-speed, minivan-sized meteorite entered the atmosphere at about 64,000 miles per hour. The study said it was the fastest, "most energetic" reported meteorite that's fallen since 2008, when an asteroid fell over Sudan.

"If this were a much bigger object, it could have been a disaster," said co-author and UC Davis geology professor Qing-zhu Yin. "This is a happy story in this case. "

Before entering Earth's atmosphere, the meteorite is estimated to have weighed roughly 100,000 pounds. Most of that mass burned away when the meteorite exploded. Scientists and private collectors have recovered about 2 pounds remaining.

UC Davis is 60 miles west of the El Dorado county towns of Coloma and Lotus, where pieces of the meteorite were found on residents' driveways and in local forests and parks.

When the meteorite fell, Yin, whose lab contains some of the country's most specialized equipment to measure the age and composition of meteorites, searched for and collected pieces of the fallen meteorite with students and volunteers. He also led a 35-member subgroup of international researchers to study and share information about the meteorite's mineralogy, internal textures, chemical and isotopic compositions and magnetic properties.

Meteorites like Sutter's Mill are thought to have delivered oceans of water to Earth early in its history. Using neutron-computed tomography, UC Davis researchers helped identify where hydrogen, and therefore water-rich fragments, resides in the meteorite without breaking it open.

For the first time, the Doppler weather radar network helped track the falling carbonaceous chondrite meteorite pieces, aiding scientists in the quick recovery of them, the study reports. Yin expects that the weather radar data in the public domain could greatly enhance and benefit future meteorite recoveries on land.

"For me, the fun of this scientific gold rush is really just beginning," said Yin. "This first report based on the initial findings provides a platform to propel us into more detailed research. Scientists are still finding new and exciting things in Murchison, a similar type of meteorite to Sutter's Mill, which fell in Victoria, Australia, in 1969, the same year Apollo astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin returned the first lunar samples to the Earth. We will learn a lot more with Sutter's Mill."

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided byUniversity of California - Davis.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

Journal Reference:

P. Jenniskens, M. D. Fries, Q.-Z. Yin, M. Zolensky, A. N. Krot, S. A. Sandford, D. Sears, R. Beauford, D. S. Ebel, J. M. Friedrich, K. Nagashima, J. Wimpenny, A. Yamakawa, K. Nishiizumi, Y. Hamajima, M. W. Caffee, K. C. Welten, M. Laubenstein, A. M. Davis, S. B. Simon, P. R. Heck, E. D. Young, I. E. Kohl, M. H. Thiemens, M. H. Nunn, T. Mikouchi, K. Hagiya, K. Ohsumi, T. A. Cahill, J. A. Lawton, D. Barnes, A. Steele, P. Rochette, K. L. Verosub, J. Gattacceca, G. Cooper, D. P. Glavin, A. S. Burton, J. P. Dworkin, J. E. Elsila, S. Pizzarello, R. Ogliore, P. Schmitt-Kopplin, M. Harir, N. Hertkorn, A. Verchovsky, M. Grady, K. Nagao, R. Okazaki, H. Takechi, T. Hiroi, K. Smith, E. A. Silber, P. G. Brown, J. Albers, D. Klotz, M. Hankey, R. Matson, J. A. Fries, R. J. Walker, I. Puchtel, C.-T. A. Lee, M. E. Erdman, G. R. Eppich, S. Roeske, Z. Gabelica, M. Lerche, M. Nuevo, B. Girten, S. P. Worden. Radar-Enabled Recovery of the Sutter's Mill Meteorite, a Carbonaceous Chondrite Regolith Breccia. Science, 2012; 338 (6114): 1583 DOI: 10.1126/science.1227163

The climate after the largest mass extinction so far 252 million years ago was cool, later very warm and then cool again. Thanks to the cooler temperatures, the diversity of marine fauna ballooned, as paleontologists from the University of Zurich have reconstructed. The warmer climate, coupled with a high CO₂ level in the atmosphere, initially gave rise to new, short-lived species. In the longer term, however, this climate change had an adverse effect on biodiversity and caused species to become extinct.

Amonoids peaked earlier after the vast mass extinction. (Credit: Image courtesy of University of Zurich)

The scientists chart the temperature curves in detail in Nature Geoscience, demonstrating that the climate and the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere fluctuated greatly during the Early Triassic and what impact this had on marine biodiversity and terrestrial plants. Until now, it was always assumed that it took flora and fauna a long time to recover from the vast mass extinction at the end of the Permian geological period 252 million years ago. According to the scientific consensus, complex ecological communities only began to reappear in the Middle Triassic, so 247 million years ago. Now, however, a Swiss team headed by paleontologist Hugo Bucher from the University of Zurich reveals that marine animal groups such as ammonoids and conodonts (microfossils) already peaked three or four million years earlier, namely still during the Early Triassic.

Alternate cooler and very warm phases

For their climate reconstruction, Bucher and his colleagues analyzed the composition of the oxygen isotopes in conodonts, the remains of chordates that once lived in the sea. According to the study, the climate at the beginning of the Triassic 249 million years ago was cool. This cooler phase was followed by a brief very warm climate phase. At the end of the Early Triassic, namely between 247.9 and 245.9 million years ago, cooler conditions resumed.

Climate and carbon cycle influence biodiversity

The scientists then examined the impact of the climate on the development of flora and fauna. “Biodiversity increased most in the cooler phases,” explains paleontologist Bucher. “The subsequent extremely warm phase, however, led to great changes in the marine fauna and a major ecological shift in the flora.” Bucher and his team can reveal that this decline in biodiversity in the warm phases correlates with strong fluctuations in the carbon isotope composition of the atmosphere. These, in turn, were directly related to carbon dioxide gases, which stemmed from volcanic eruptions in the Siberian Large Igneous Province.

Species emerge and die out

Through the climatic changes, conodont and ammonoid faunae were initially able to recover very quickly during the Early Triassic as unusually short-lived species emerged. However, the removal of excess CO2 by primary producers such as algae and terrestrial plants had adverse effects in the long run: The removal of these vast amounts of organic matter used up the majority of the oxygen in the water. Due to the lack of oxygen in the oceans, many marine species died out. “Our studies reveal that greater climatic changes can lead to both the emergence and extinction of species. Thus, it is important to consider both extinction rates and the rate at which new species emerged,” says Bucher.

Bucher and his colleagues are convinced that climate changes and the emission of volcanic gases were key drivers of biotic recovery in the oceans during the Early Triassic: Cooler climate phases encourage biological diversification. Warmer climate phases and very high CO2 levels in the atmosphere, however, can have a harmful impact on biodiversity.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google

Hot flushes are not "in the head," but new research suggests they may start there. A UA research team has identified a region in the brain that may trigger the uncomfortable surges of heat most women experience in the first few years of menopause.

An important switchboard between the brain and the body's hormonal system, the hypothalamus (shown in center of above image) is where the KNDy neurons -- the potential triggers of hot flushes -- reside. (Credit: © Karen Roach / Fotolia)

Now a team of researchers around Dr. Naomi Rance, a professor in the department of pathology at the UA College of Medicine, has come closer to understanding the mechanism of hot flushes, a necessary step for potential treatment options down the road. This research was published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.Hot flushes -- also called hot flashes -- affect millions of people, and not just women. Yet, it is still unclear what causes the episodes of temperature discomfort, often accompanied by profuse sweating.

The team identified a group of brain cells known as KNDy neurons as a likely control switch of hot flushes. KNDy neurons (pronounced "candy") are located in the hypothalamus, a portion of the brain controlling vital functions that also serves as the switchboard between the central nervous system and hormone signals.

"Although the KNDy neurons are a very small population of cells, our research reveals that they play extremely important roles in how the body controls its energy resources, reproduction and temperature," said Melinda Mittelman-Smith, who led the study as part of her doctoral thesis. "They are true multitaskers."

By studying KNDy neurons in rats, the research team created an animal model of menopause to elucidate the biological mechanisms of temperature control in response to withdrawal of the hormone estrogen, the main trigger of the changes that go along with menopause.

They discovered that tail skin temperature was consistently lower in rats whose KNDy neurons were inactivated, suggesting the neurons control a process known as vasodilation, or widening of the blood vessels to increase blood flow through the skin.

"The hallmark of hot flushes is vasodilation," explained Rance, who also is a neuropathologist at The University of Arizona Medical Center. "When you flush, your skin gets hot and you can see the redness of the skin. It is an attempt of the body to get rid of heat, just like sweating. Except that if you were to measure core temperature at that point, you would find it is not even elevated."

Although the results are not yet directly applicable in helping individuals affected by hot flushes, they mark a necessary first step, Rance said.

"Obviously we can't do these studies in women, and only if we understand the mechanism is there a chance of developing therapies. All that is known so far is that dwindling estrogen levels have something to do with it but anything after that is a black box."

"Right now the only effective way of treating flushes is estrogen-replacement therapy. If we could figure out what is causing those flushes, we could try to develop a better, more targeted therapy."

Rance said hot flushes usually last for four or five years and occur in up to 80 percent of women but also in men undergoing certain hormone treatments for prostate cancer.

"For some people it's not too bad, but it can be very severe in other individuals; they loose sleep et cetera. So the question I have been asking myself is, 'How come we haven't figured this out?'"

Together with her coworkers, Rance has studied KNDy neurons and their functions for two decades.

"KNDy neurons respond to circulating estrogens," Mittelman-Smith explained. "When these hormones are at very low levels, as is the case in menopause, these neurons go haywire if you will. They grow very large and manufacture several times more neurotransmitter than they did with estrogens present."

"Because the neurons talk to known thermoregulatory centers of the brain, we think this increased signaling activity may inappropriately tell the body, 'I'm hot, release heat.' This triggers heat loss mechanisms like sweating and opening up of blood vessels in the skin."

Analogous to women going through menopause, the tail skin temperature goes up in rats after removal of the ovaries, where estrogen is produced.

"Rats regulate heat dissipation with their tail because the rest is covered by fur," Rance explained. "In rats without ovaries, the lack of estrogen causes vasodilation, which we can measure as increased tail skin temperature."

"Once we knew that estrogen really does control tail skin temperature in a rat, we wanted to know what role, if any, the KNDy neurons play in this."

When Rance and her team compared the tail skin temperatures of rats with intact KNDy neurons to those with inactivated KNDy neurons, they discovered that while tail skin temperatures still followed the same ups and downs over the course of the day and night cycle, they were lower in the absence of KNDy activity.

"They have lower levels of vasodilation," Rance said. "It is very consistent. Their tail skin temperature is lower than rats with normal KNDy neurons and stays low. It doesn't matter if they have estrogen or not; it doesn't matter if it's night or if it's day."

"The rats didn't seem unhappy at all," she added. "You'd think they'd be curling up and shivering, but no. There was no difference in the core temperature, so they weren't internally cold. We did all the activity measurements and found them to be completely normal. We couldn't tell a difference other than lower vasodilatation."

Rance said she is not surprised that the same neuronal switches that are important for reproduction also control thermoregulation.

"Being able to regulate body temperature is very important for the species and also for reproduction because it is important for a pregnant woman to avoid extreme hyperthermia. Hot flushes are a symptom of hyperactivity of these neurons."

The researchers caution that while KNDy neurons are critical for normal thermoregulation, they are by no means the sole center for managing body temperature.

"These animals would be in much more trouble if that were the case," Mittelman-Smith said. "In fact, I don't view KNDy neurons as a thermoregulatory center at all, but rather a group of cells that has the ability to influence thermoregulatory centers."

Rance added: "I wouldn't say we solved the problem, but we have a good clue about what could be causing the flushes."

The other members of the research team and authors of the study are: Hemalini Williams, a master's student in the UA's physiology program; Sally Krajewski-Hall, a research associate in Rance's lab; and Nathaniel McMullen, a professor emeritus in the UA's department of cellular and molecular medicine.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Dec. 23, 2012 — In a discovery that raises further concerns about the future contribution of Antarctica to sea level rise, a new study finds that the western part of the ice sheet is experiencing nearly twice as much warming as previously thought.

Researchers have determined that the central region of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is experiencing twice as much warming as previously thought. Their analysis focuses on the temperature record from Byrd Station (indicated by a star), which provides the only long-term temperature observations in the region. Other permanent research stations with long-term temperature records (indicated by black circles) are scattered around the continent. On this map, the color intensity indicates the extent of warming around Antarctica. (Credit: Image by Julien Nicolas, courtesy of Ohio State University)

This temperature increase is nearly double what previous research has suggested, and reveals -- for the first time -- warming trends during the summer months of the Southern Hemisphere (December through February), said David Bromwich, professor of geography at Ohio State University and senior research scientist at the Byrd Polar Research Center.The temperature record from Byrd Station, a scientific outpost in the center of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), demonstrates a marked increase of 4.3 degrees Fahrenheit (2.4 degrees Celsius) in average annual temperature since 1958 -- that is, three times faster than the average temperature rise around the globe.

The findings were published online this week in the journal Nature Geoscience.

"Our record suggests that continued summer warming in West Antarctica could upset the surface mass balance of the ice sheet, so that the region could make an even bigger contribution to sea level rise than it already does," said Bromwich.

"Even without generating significant mass loss directly, surface melting on the WAIS could contribute to sea level indirectly, by weakening the West Antarctic ice shelves that restrain the region's natural ice flow into the ocean."

Andrew Monaghan, study co-author and scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), said that these findings place West Antarctica among the fastest-warming regions on Earth.

"We've already seen enhanced surface melting contribute to the breakup of the Antarctic's Larsen B Ice Shelf, where glaciers at the edge discharged massive sections of ice into the ocean that contributed to sea level rise," Monaghan said. "The stakes would be much higher if a similar event occurred to an ice shelf restraining one of the enormous WAIS glaciers."

Researchers consider the WAIS especially sensitive to climate change, explained Ohio State University doctoral student Julien Nicolas. Since the base of the ice sheet rests below sea level, it is vulnerable to direct contact with warm ocean water. Its melting currently contributes 0.3 mm to sea level rise each year -- second to Greenland, whose contribution to sea level rise has been estimated as high as 0.7 mm per year.

Due to its location some 700 miles from the South Pole and near the center of the WAIS, Byrd Station is an important indicator of climate change throughout the region.

In the past, researchers haven't been able to make much use of the Byrd Station measurements because the data was incomplete; nearly one third of the temperature observations were missing for the time period of the study. Since its establishment in 1957, the station hasn't always been occupied. A year-round automated station was installed in 1980, but it has experienced frequent power outages, especially during the long polar night, when its solar panels can't recharge.

Bromwich and two of his graduate students, along with colleagues from NCAR and the University of Wisconsin-Madison, corrected the past Byrd temperature measurements and used corrected data from a computer atmospheric model and a numerical analysis method to fill in the missing observations.

Aside from offering a more complete picture of warming in West Antarctica, the study suggests that if this warming trend continues, melting will become more extensive in the region in the future, Bromwich said.

While the researchers work to fully understand the cause of the summer warming at Byrd Station, the next step is clear, he added.

"West Antarctica is one of the most rapidly changing regions on Earth, but it is also one of the least known," he said. "Our study underscores the need for a reliable network of meteorological observations throughout West Antarctica, so that we can know what is happening -- and why -- with more certainty."

This research was funded by the National Science Foundation.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Dec. 23, 2012 — A research team led by biogeochemists at the University of California, Riverside has tested a popular hypothesis in paleo-ocean chemistry, and proved it false.

Organic-rich shale samples, such as these from the 2.5-billion-year-old Mount McRae Shale from Western Australia, were analyzed for their zinc contents. The results confirm that the early ocean was not Zn-lean and that other controls must be invoked to explain the protracted appearance and proliferation of eukaryotic life. (Credit: Arizona State University)

As it is for humans, zinc is essential for a wide range of basic cellular processes. Zinc-binding proteins, primarily located in the cell nucleus, are involved in the regulation of gene transcription.The fossil record indicates that eukaryotes -- single-celled and multicellular organisms with more complex cellular structures compared to prokaryotes, such as bacteria -- show limited morphological and functional diversity before 800-600 million years ago. Many researchers attribute the delayed diversification and proliferation of eukaryotes, which culminated in the appearance of complex animals about 600 million years ago, to very low levels of the trace metal zinc in seawater.

Eukaryotes have increasingly incorporated zinc-binding structures during the last third of their evolutionary history and still employ both early- and late-evolving zinc-binding protein structures. Zinc is, therefore, of particular importance to eukaryotic organisms. And so it is not a stretch to blame the 1-2-billion-year delay in the diversification of eukaryotes on low bioavailability of this trace metal.

But after analyzing marine black shale samples from North America, Africa, Australia, Asia and Europe, ranging in age from 2.7 billion years to 580 million years old, the researchers found that the shales reflect high seawater zinc availability and that zinc concentrations during the Proterozoic (2.5 billion to 542 million years ago) were similar to modern concentrations. Zinc, the researchers posit, was never biolimiting.

Study results appear online Dec. 23 in Nature Geoscience.

"We argue that the concentration of zinc in ancient marine black shales is directly related to the concentrations of zinc in seawater and show that zinc is abundant in these rocks throughout Earth's history," said Clint Scott, the first author of the research paper and a former UC Riverside graduate student. "We found no evidence for zinc biolimitation in seawater."

Scott, now a research geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, explained that the connection between zinc limitation and the evolution of eukaryotes was based largely on the hypothesis that Proterozoic oceans were broadly sulfidic. Under broadly sulfidic conditions, zinc should have been scarce because it would have rapidly precipitated in the oceans, he explained.

"However, a 2011 research paper in Nature also published by our group at UCR demonstrated that Proterozoic oceans were more likely broadly ferruginous -- that is, low in oxygen and iron-rich -- and that sulfidic conditions were more restricted than previously thought," said Scott, who performed the research in the lab of Timothy Lyons, a professor of biogeochemistry and the principal investigator of the research project.

The research team argues that ferruginous deep oceans, combined with large hydrothermal fluxes of zinc via volcanic activity on the seafloor, maintained high levels of dissolved zinc throughout the oceans and provided a relatively stable marine reservoir of the trace metal over the past 2.7 billion years.

"The key challenge in understanding the early evolution of life is recognizing the environmental conditions under which that life first appeared and diversified," Lyons said. "We have taken a very direct approach that specifically tracks the availability of essential micronutrients, and, to our surprise, zinc supplies in ancient seawater were much higher and less variable than previously imagined.

"We can imagine for the first time," he quipped, "that zinc supplements were not on the shopping lists of our early eukaryotic ancestors, and so we better find another reason to explain the mysterious delay in their rise in the ocean."

Scott, who graduated with a doctoral degree in geological sciences from UCR in 2009, and Lyons were joined in the study by Noah J. Planavsky, a former UCR graduate student in Lyons' lab; Chris L. Dupont at the J. Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, Calif.; Brian Kendall and Ariel D. Anbar at Arizona State University; Benjamin C. Gill at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and also a former member of the Lyons lab; Leslie J. Robbins and Kurt O. Konhauser at the University of Alberta, Canada; Kathryn F. Husband and Simon W. Poulton at the University of Leeds, United Kingdom; Gail L. Arnold at the Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, Germany; Boswell A. Wing at McGill University, Canada; and Andrey Bekker at the University of Manitoba, Canada.

The idea for the study was a direct consequence of the 2011Nature paper by Planavsky, Scott, Lyons and others that challenged the hypothesis of broadly sulfidic oceans.

The international collaboration received funding for the study from numerous sources. In the U.S., funding came from the National Science Foundation, the NASA Astrobiology Institute and the Agouron Institute.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Dec. 23, 2012 — The mysterious inner workings of Chang Shan -- a Chinese herbal medicine used for thousands of years to treat fevers associated with malaria -- have been uncovered thanks to a high-resolution structure solved at The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI).

Scripps Research Institute scientists have determined a molecular structure that helps explain how the Chinese herbal medicine Chang Shan works. (Credit: Image courtesy of the Schimmel lab.)

The new structure shows that, like a wrench in the works, halofuginone jams the gears of a molecular machine that carries out "aminoacylation," a crucial biological process that allows organisms to synthesize the proteins they need to live. Chang Shan, also known asDichroa febrifuga Lour, probably helps with malarial fevers because traces of a halofuginone-like chemical in the herb interfere with this same process in malaria parasites, killing them in an infected person's bloodstream.Described in the journal Nature this week, the structure shows in atomic detail how a two-headed compound derived from the active ingredient in Chang Shan works. Scientists have known that this compound, called halofuginone (a derivative of the febrifugine), can suppress parts of the immune system -- but nobody knew exactly how.

"Our new results solved a mystery that has puzzled people about the mechanism of action of a medicine that has been used to treat fever from a malaria infection going back probably 2,000 years or more," said Paul Schimmel, PhD, the Ernest and Jean Hahn Professor and Chair of Molecular Biology and Chemistry and member of The Skaggs Institute for Chemical Biology at TSRI. Schimmel led the research with TSRI postdoctoral fellow Huihao Zhou, PhD.

Halofuginone has been in clinical trials for cancer, but the high-resolution picture of the molecule suggests it has a modularity that would make it useful as a template to create new drugs for numerous other diseases.

The Process of Aminoacylation and its Importance to Life

Aminoacylation is a crucial step in the synthesis of proteins, the end products of gene expression. When genes are expressed, their DNA sequence is first read and transcribed into RNA, a similar molecule. The RNA is then translated into proteins, which are chemically very different from DNA and RNA but are composed of chains of amino acid molecules strung together in the order called for in the DNA.

Necessary for this translation process are a set of molecules known as transfer RNAs (tRNAs), which shuttle amino acids to the growing protein chain where they are added like pearls on a string. But before the tRNAs can move the pearls in place, they must first grab hold of them.

Aminoacylation is the biological process whereby the amino acid's pearls are attached to these tRNA shuttles. A class of enzymes known as aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases is responsible for attaching the amino acids to the tRNAs, and Schimmel and his colleagues have been examining the molecular details of this process for years. Their work has given scientists insight into everything from early evolution to possible targets for future drug development.

Over time what has emerged as the picture of this process basically involves three molecular players: a tRNA, an amino acid and the aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase enzyme that brings them together. A fourth molecule called ATP is a microscopic form of fuel that gets consumed in the process.

The new work shows that halofuginone gets its potency by interfering with the tRNA synthetase enzyme that attaches the amino acid proline to the appropriate tRNA. It does this by blocking the active site of the enzyme where both the tRNA and the amino acid come together, with each half of the halofuginone blocking one side or the other.

Interestingly, said Schimmel, ATP is also needed for the halofuginone to bind. Nothing like that has ever been seen in biochemistry before.

"This is a remarkable example where a substrate of an enzyme (ATP) captures an inhibitor of the same enzyme, so that you have an enzyme-substrate-inhibitor complex," said Schimmel.

The article, "ATP-Directed Capture of Bioactive Herbal-Based Medicine on Human tRNA Synthetase," by Huihao Zhou, Litao Sun, Xiang-Lei Yang and Paul Schimmel was published in the journal Nature on Dec. 23, 2012.

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health through grants #GM15539, #23562 and #88278 and by a fellowship from the National Foundation for Cancer Research.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Dec. 20, 2012 — The black piranha and the extinct giant piranha, or megapiranha, have the most powerful bites of carnivorous fishes, living or extinct, once body size is taken into account, find researchers in a paper recently published inScientific Reports. The research paper, "Mega-Bites: Extreme jaw forces of living and extinct piranhas," highlights the piranhas' specialized jaw morphology, which allows them to attack and bite chunks out of much larger prey.

New research finds that the black piranha (shown above) and the extinct giant piranha, or megapiranha, have the most powerful bites of carnivorous fishes, living or extinct, once body size is taken into account. (Credit: Courtesy of Guillermo Orti)

Piranhas' aggressive nature, relatively small size and accessible populations make them a suitable group of predatory vertebrates in which to study the evolution of extreme biting capabilities. Even at their small body sizes, diet studies indicate that piranhas will attack and bite chunks of bony fins and flesh from prey many times larger than themselves.Guillermo Ortí, the George Washington University Louis Weintraub Professor of Biology in the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, is one of the authors of the paper. His research focuses on the evolution of fishes in general, but specializes on Amazonian fishes, to unravel evolutionary relationships based on DNA sequence data. In 2010, Dr. Orti along with other researchers participated in an expedition to the Xingu and Iriri rivers in Amazonia to collect the data on the fish.

In spite of their reputation, no quantitative data or empirical estimates regarding the piranhas biting abilities were available.

The paper reports the first bite-force measurements taken from wild specimens of the largest species of carnivorous piranha in the Amazon, the black piranha, and describes the underlying functional morphology of the jaws that allows this creature to bite with a force more than 30 times greater than its weight. The powerful bite is achieved primarily due to the large muscle mass of the black piranha's jaw and the efficient transmission of its large contractile forces through a highly modified jaw-closing lever.

The expedition was organized and filmed by National Geographic. A subsequent program called Megapiranha aired on the National Geographic Channel featured the expedition and focused on the creature that existed millions of years ago.

"It was very exciting to participate in this project, travel one more time to the Amazon to be able to directly measure bite forces in the wild," said Dr. Orti. "I learned a lot of biomechanics from my colleagues while collecting valuable specimens for my own research."

The authors also reconstructed the bite force of the megapiranha, showing that for its relatively diminutive body size, the bite of this fossil piranha dwarfed that of other extinct mega-predators, including the whale-eating shark and the Devonian placoderm. Research at the Ortí lab at GW continues to focus on reconstructing the genealogical tree of fishes including piranhas based on genomic data.

Scientific Reports is a primary research publication from the publishers of Nature, covering all areas of the natural sciences.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

The 7000-year-old well of Altscherbitz near Leipzig during the excavation. (Credit: Sächsisches Landesamt für Archäologie, Dresden)

Dec. 20, 2012 — A research team led by Willy Tegel and Dr. Dietrich Hakelberg from the Institute of Forest Growth of the University of Freiburg has succeeded in precisely dating four water wells built by the first Central European agricultural civilization with the help of dendrochronology or growth ring dating. The wells were excavated at settlements in the Greater Leipzig region and are the oldest known timber constructions in the world. They were built by the Linear Pottery culture, which existed from roughly 5600 to 4900 BC.

The team's findings, which have been published in the international scientific journal PLoS ONE, afford new insight into prehistoric technology. The study was conducted by archaeologists and dendrochronologists from the Institute of Forest Growth in Freiburg, the Archaeological Heritage Office of Saxony in Dresden, and the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL in Birmensdorf, Switzerland.

The four early Neolithic wells were constructed from oak wood. In addition to the timber, many other waterlogged organic materials, such as plant remains, wooden artifacts, bark vessels, and bast fiber cords, as well as an array of richly decorated ceramic vessels, have survived for millennia hermetically sealed below groundwater level. With the help of dendrochronology, the scientists were able to determine the exact felling years of the trees and thus also the approximate time at which the wells were constructed.

The tests revealed that the wood comes from massive old oak trees felled by early Neolithic farmers with stone adzes between the years of 5206 and 5098 BC. The farmers cleaved the trunks into boards, assembling them to make chest-like well linings with complex corner joints. Using state-of-the-art laser scanning technology, the scientists collected data on the timbers and tool marks and documented the highly developed woodworking skills of the early Neolithic settlers. The very well-preserved tool marks and timber joints testify to unexpectedly sophisticated timber construction techniques.

In the course of the sixth millennium BC, the nomadic hunting and gathering lifestyle gave way to a sedentary lifestyle with agriculture and stock breeding in Central Europe. This break in the history of humankind has been termed the "Neolithic Revolution." A sedentary lifestyle required permanent housing, and houses are inconceivable without a developed woodworking technology -- in other words, the first farmers were also the first carpenters. Until now, however, archaeologists have only succeeded in unearthing the soil marks left by their houses.

The precisely dated wells will enable scientists to conduct more detailed studies on the important role of timber construction techniques for humankind's adoption of a sedentary lifestyle.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

The 1st way that you can increase your child's love of science is to take interest in science yourself. Your child will want to learn more about science if they know that you are interested in science too. You are your child's best teacher. Your child looks up to you. You child wants to be able to communicate with you on your level and not feel like they are below you. So showing a love of science will help increase your child's love of science.

If you love to read science magazines, feel happy doing research on fascinating plants and animals and have a degree in science then there are several science teaching jobs available for you. Teaching science allows you to share your knowledge with others and improve your own knowledge of the subject.
Science Teaching Jobs - Description

Science is a subject in which one studies nature. Science teachers teach the subject to their students and help them find answers for their questions. Science education courses falls under several categories. Some of these are: botany, zoology, physics, chemistry, fire science education and investigatory courses.
To teach science effectively, you have to incorporate lab experiments, field trips, mixed media resources and e-learning into the curriculum. This helps the students gain practical knowledge of the world around them. You also have to take full advantage of the science toys for kids available in your work place. If you feel that the number of these toys is not enough, you have to make the management aware so that they can ensure ready availability of science school supplies.

How To Become A Science Teacher?
If you have passion for the subject and hold a valid degree then you are the right candidate for science teaching jobs. As an graduate, you could opt to teach in middle or high school setting. If you have a post-graduate degree or doctorate, you can teach college students.
As a science tutor, you are expected to break up the teaching sessions between classroom teaching and lab activities. Occasionally, you may also be required to arrange for a field trip.
There is an increase in the demand for science teachers today, So, science teaching jobs are ready to offer them a competitive salary. The greatest advantage of being a teacher is that he can get a seasonal vacation. Also, the government sponsors pension plans and healthcare packages for teachers.
To become a science teacher, you need to complete a certification program in teaching. This is additional to the science degree you hold. Once you complete a science degree, you are eligible for an alternative licensure program that focuses on effective classroom teaching.
Most of these alternative programs end up in getting you a master's degree that adds credit to your career. The certification requirements vary depending on the state where your educational institution is located. There are states that require you to take up supplemental education courses to get a teaching license. Teachers that start their career with a primary school don't require a teaching license.
Nowadays, many science teaching jobs are available. You are eligible to apply for those jobs, if you are a passionate science learner and hold a valid science degree and certification in teaching. Once you become a science teacher, you have to implement a natural learning environment by arranging lab sessions, field trips and outdoor science activities for the students in addition to teaching them in a classroom setting.

There are several science teaching jobs available for science graduates. To become a science teacher, one has had a degree and completes a certification in teaching.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/4369231

Science and mathematics are not cool subjects, say students. Consequently, if these subjects are compulsory, students opt for an easier stream in secondary school and are less likely to transition to university science programs. In addition, female students are under-represented in areas such as mathematics, physics and astronomy. Around the world, the STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) are in grave trouble in secondary and tertiary institutions. But worse, STEM university graduates may not work in a field of their expertise, leaving STEM agencies and organizations to hire from a shrinking pool.
In 1995, 14 percent of Year 12 secondary school mathematics students studied advanced mathematics, while 37 percent studied elementary mathematics, according to the Australian Mathematical Science Institute. Fifteen years later, in 2010, 10 percent were studying advanced mathematics and 50 percent took the easier option of elementary mathematics. The Australian Mathematical Science Institute revealed that basic mathematics was growing in popularity among secondary students to the detriment of intermediate or advanced studies. This has resulted in fewer universities offering higher mathematics courses, and subsequently there are reduced graduates in mathematics. There have also been reduced intakes in teacher training colleges and university teacher education departments in mathematics programs, which have resulted in many low-income or remote secondary schools without higher level mathematics teachers, which further resulted in fewer science courses or the elimination of specific topics from courses. For some mathematics courses, this is producing a continuous cycle of low supply, low demand, and low supply.

But is it actually a dire problem? The first question is one of supply. Are universities producing enough quality scientists, technology experts, engineers, and mathematicians? Harold Salzman of Rutgers University and his research colleague, B. Lindsay Lowell of Georgetown University in Washington D.C., revealed in a 2009 study that, contrary to widespread perception, the United States continued to produce science and engineering graduates. However, fewer than half actually accepted jobs in their field of expertise. They are moving into sales, marketing, and health care jobs.

The second question is one of demand. Is there a continuing demand for STEM graduates? An October 2011 report from the Georgetown University's Centre on Education and the Workforce confirmed the high demand for science graduates, and that STEM graduates were paid a greater starting salary than non-science graduates. The Australian Mathematical Science Institute said the demand for doctorate graduates in mathematics and statistics will rise by 55 percent by 2020 (on 2008 levels). In the United Kingdom, the Department for Engineering and Science report, The Supply and Demand for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematical Skills in the UK Economy (Research Report RR775, 2004) projected the stock of STEM graduates to rise by 62 percent from 2004 to 2014 with the highest growth in subjects allied to medicine at 113 percent, biological science at 77 percent, mathematical science at 77 percent, computing at 77 percent, engineering at 36 percent, and physical science at 32 percent.
Fields of particular growth are predicted to be agricultural science (food production, disease prevention, biodiversity, and arid-lands research), biotechnology (vaccinations and pathogen science, medicine, genetics, cell biology, pharmagenomics, embryology, bio-robotics, and anti-ageing research), energy (hydrocarbon, mining, metallurgical, and renewable energy sectors), computing (such as video games, IT security, robotics, nanotechnologies, and space technology), engineering (hybrid-electric automotive technologies), geology (mining and hydro-seismology), and environmental science (water, land use, marine science, meteorology, early warning systems, air pollution, and zoology).

So why aren't graduates undertaking science careers? The reason is because it's just not cool -- not at secondary school, nor at university, nor in the workforce. Georgetown University's CEW reported that American science graduates viewed traditional science careers as "too socially isolating." In addition, a liberal-arts or business education was often regarded as more flexible in a fast-changing job market.
How can governments make science cool? The challenge, says Professor Ian Chubb, head of Australia's Office of the Chief Scientist, is to make STEM subjects more attractive for students, particularly females -- without dumbing down the content. Chubb, in his Health of Australian Science report (May 2012), indicated that, at research level, Australia has a relatively high scholarly output in science, producing more than 3 percent of world scientific publications yet accounting for only about 0.3 percent of the world's population. Australian-published scholarly outputs, including fields other than science, grew at a rate of about 5 percent per year between 1999 and 2008. This was considerably higher than the global growth rate of 2.6 percent. But why isn't this scholarly output translating into public knowledge, interest, and participation in science?
Chubb promotes a two-pronged approach to the dilemma: 1. science education: enhancing the quality and engagement of science teaching in schools and universities; and 2. science workforce: the infusion of science communication into mainstream consciousness to promote the advantages of scientific work.

Specifically, Chubb calls for creative and inspirational teachers and lecturers, as well as an increase in female academics, for positive role modeling, and to set science in a modern context. Instead of restructuring and changing the curriculum, he advocates training teachers to create ways to make mathematics and science more relevant to students' lives. Communicating about science in a more mainstream manner is also critical to imparting the value of scientific innovation. Chubb is a fan of social media to bring science into the mainstream and to change people's perception of science careers and scientists. Social media can also bring immediacy to the rigor, analysis, observation and practical components of science.

In practical terms, the recent findings on student attitudes to STEM subjects, their perception of scientific work, and the flow of STEM graduates to their field of expertise, may be improved by positively changing the way governments, scientists, and educators communicate science on a day-to-day level.
Contextual, situational, relevant science education is more likely to establish links between theory and practical application. This can be demonstrated through real-world applications, including science visits and explorations in the local environment, at all levels of education. Even university students should avoid being cloistered in study rooms, and be exposed to real world, real environment situations. Furthermore, science educators advocate the use of spring-boarding student queries, interests, and motivation into extra-curriculum themes that capture their imagination and innovation. Therefore, enabling students to expand core curricula requirements to include optional themes, projects, competitions, and activities chosen by individual students, groups, or school clusters lead to increased student (and teacher) motivation and participation. In addition, integrating and cross-fertilizing science with non-science subjects and day-to-day activities (e.g. the science of chocolate, sport science, technical drawings, artistic design, and clothing design) can powerfully place STEM subjects firmly into practical applications. "Scientists in residence" programs, in which local scientists work periodically in school and university settings, can inspire students and provide two-way communication opportunities. In addition, international collaborations between schools of different regions or countries through a range of technologies demonstrate and reinforce collaboration in the scientific workplace -- as a way to build a cadre of experts, exchange ideas, network, cooperate, economize, and create culturally diverse outcomes of excellence.

These approaches can provide a more realistic concept of the work scientists perform from a local to a global perspective.

Dr. Martina Nicolls has 25 years of experience as a humanitarian aid development evaluator and advisor for international governments on education, child labor, peace, science, community development, gender, and management. In addition to numerous academic articles, she is the author of The Sudan Curse; Kashmir on a Knife-Edge; and Bardot's Comet.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7165267

By Shakti Singh Rathore

Science is the study of theory, its verification through observation and experimentation to verify those observations in the context of the theory. If the theory is verifiable through an experiment and a meticulous observation then it is successful otherwise not. Science includes various areas of study like physics, chemistry, mathematics etc. Science is passion of west but the reality is that it has its roots in India also. It would not be wrong to analyze the reasons about why India lagged behind while the west progressed ahead to left India behind in Science.

Why Indian science lagged behind the western science and why Western science is more advanced and genuine? Indian Science progresses like anything else through the early years of first century to eleventh century especially astronomy. While Europe was still living in the dark ages under pope and Christianity, Indians had already made progress in the mathematics and astronomical sciences to name a few. An Indian scientist was the first person to cite the idea that the earth revolved round the sun and not the other way round which was a remarkable achievement made thousand years before Copernicus proposed his heliocentric theory. Another Indian scientist proposed theorems on several geometrical figures and other mathematical proofs which seemed several years advanced. It was India which gave the world the idea of zero and numbers.The numbers concept was given by India which was later transferred to Arab World by Arab Scholar which later passed on to Europe. After having achieved so much remarkable scientific discoveries why Indian Science lagged behind?

Indian Science never saw the same trajectory of development as seen by western science during the renaissance period. The progress of Science in west began by Newton and other scientists. Indian society was Caste-ridden.Society had strata of castes where every Caste had its own hereditary profession. There were hard lines drawn between the castes and out of these boundaries no one could jump so if a merchant class worker do the work of art he has to do that work only even if he proposed some noble thoughts out of his mouth some heyday was a thorough nonsense as it was not considered his profession. Brahmans were the only privileged class to have some say in intellectual matters while others classes were left devoid of any such privilege. So in a way there was not such development of science was possible in ancient India where there was no freedom of exchange of thoughts and ideas. Once scientific development got broke in eleventh century A.D. it could not had been kept up in the later years.

Invention of printing press happened only in 13th century not in India but in China. It was certainly a misfortune for India that it was not invented earlier. Paper is more powerful medium of storing knowledge and passing on this knowledge to future generations, thereby building on the past knowledge. The Indian ancient scientists (as before mentioned names) could not have been able to do so. The knowledge once created could have been lost forever and could not be stored in a reliable and compact book. In contrast western science when in its nascent stages in the fourteenth century could have capitalized on the opportunity as paper was already invented. So a scientist like Newton or Copernicus or Galileo could have passed such knowledge in the form of books. What would have happened if newton could not have passed his knowledge in form of book called the Principia of mathematics or Copernicus would not have published his work of heliocentric theory? Certainly western science could not have progressed as it did. This knowledge in form of books could be then be used by future scientists to further the progress of the western science. Invention of paper cannot be cited as the sole reason for Indian science to not to have progressed. There are some more reasons which needs investigation as what was the real reason for Indian Scientific thought that originated around fourth century B.C. could not carry on to do what western science has achieved.

The Chinese traveler Hun-Tseng while visiting India saw well-established universities in modern Bihar. The University had well laid down monasteries and renowned teachers called gurus. The students lived in monasteries and taught in areas of literature, history, science etc. There was a proper medium of teaching and communication between the guru and the student. Many scholars visited University from various countries to learn higher education. There were some well-known teachers. Another University in modern Pakistan was also a great center of learning in north-western part of India. These were great institutes of learning and could have been great harbinger for cultivation of modern scientific thought for Indian in the coming time and could have placed the country on top of the pile in terms of scientific achievements and other knowledge frontiers. But what happened to such well-established centers of learning. The answer to this curious question is India was a hunting ground for plunderers. India was a rich country at that time with large wealth in form of gold and other precious ornaments. Many plunderers from North West invaded India and destroyed its well established establishments including the universities. There were invasions which created new rulers especially of barbaric nature who wanted to destroy such established learning systems and wanted to lay their own method of administration of the state. The ruins of great Indian Universities suggest how they got destroyed by these invasions of loot and destruction. Once destroyed these systems of learning could not be established on large-scale but prevailed on small-scale. Although these centers of leaning were not like the modern university system of west but they do had the potential to become great centers of learning. Western Science progressed with the aid of the universities system. These were the temples of higher learning where scholars could do research and publish their works. This system of universities could be considered as backbone of western science without which progress of science could not had been possible. Indian science could not have flourished without this education system which is obvious and sensible thought. So in a sense absence of such centers of learning was one of the determining factors for Western science having been triumphed while the Indian science which started so early could not had seen the bright day.

The broken string of the scientific thought after the eleventh century A.D. could be seen in the reigns of famous rulers like Akbar. There were experts for literature, music and other arts but not even a single expert on science. Besides that there was not any significant work on science written which can suggest that scientific temper prevailed at that time. Although there were enough works of arts like music, literature that could be cited easily. The rulers in the west had experts like Leonardo Da Vinci in Italy and Tyco Brahe was people whose works changed western science. Presence of such geniuses in the courts of rulers suggests how western scientific thought was given respect by rulers at that time when western science was just flourishing. So in a way ruling aristocracy played a great role in progress of western science in an indirect way by encouraging the scholars of such calibers to continue their work by providing the financial support. In India the situation was entirely different and thus one can consider that Science was entirely forgotten and the though of its progress in such a situation was out of question.

Science requires inventions like the steam engine or any other work of technology. The Indian climate is not so harsh and severe as compared to the western countries where cold and harsh weather demanded invention of technology. Requirement for clothes demanded invention of machines and other devices. Indian whether being good did not demanded any invention of technology. So climatic conditions were also had role to play. The demand to go long distances in harsh British winter led to the Invention of steam engine. The demand for clothes and other articles of use led to the establishments of factories. While in India the domestic demand of clothes, utensils and other items got fulfilled by small groups of private artists and workers who specialized in a particular work of art.

The scientific discoveries happened in form of patches of scientific discoveries but there was no clear trajectory of the progress of Indian science. The trajectory could had continued and completed but it broke in between by the factors as already cited like castes, the breakup of university system, royal patronage, climate, printing invention. In a way these factors suggest that Indian science could not have progressed as western science progressed. So in the end social, political and economic structural differences certainly made Indian science lagged behind the Western Science.

By Philip Mereton

The hallmark of science is its willingness to discard outmoded theories when a better, more explanatory model comes along. But today, science practices this principle only within the paradigm of materialism. By this term I mean a model of the universe based upon the assumption that matter came before mind, that the universe and all living things are nothing but particles in motion, and that the world we see, from the tips of our fingers to the farthest galaxy, exists independently of the mind and operates beyond its control.
This materialistic model brings us the Big Bang theory, dark matter, dark energy, reductive materialism, and the search for the "God" particle in atom smashers and for the origin of life in test tubes.
Modern scientists use the model of materialism because they believe it is necessary to practice science. For example, in a classic article on quantum physics, entitled, "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?" the authors, Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, write, "Any serious consideration of a physical theory must take into account the distinction between the objective reality, which is independent of any theory, and the physical concepts with which the theory operates."
The late Ernst Mayr, one of history's leading biologists, expressed the subject this way:
"Despite the openness of science to new facts and hypotheses, it must be said that virtually all scientists-somewhat like theologians-bring a set of what we call "first principles" with them to the study of the natural world. One of these axiomatic assumptions is that there is real world independent of human perceptions. This might be called the principle of objectivity (as opposed to subjectivity) or common-sense realism. This does not mean that individual scientists are always "objective" or even that objectivity among human beings is possible in any absolute sense. What it does mean is that an objective world exists outside of the influence of subjective perception. Most scientists-though not all-believe in this axiom."
Even though the objective-world model is a popular viewpoint -- since everyone wants there to be a "real world independent of human perceptions" -- it does suffer from one notable flaw: no one has ever shown it is either true or necessary. Indeed, no one has shown that science cannot be practiced within a different conceptual model. If there is one criticism modern scientists deserve is that they have convinced the public at large that only within the materialistic model is the practice of science possible; using any other approach, they announce, veers off the road into unscientific religious dogma and new-age hocus-pocus.
Another drawback of the materialistic model is that it has forced modern science down a series of dead-end streets as it attempts to piece together a complete theory of the cosmos while being shackled by its own model. Here is a short list of the conundrums material science now faces:

The origin of the matter and energy that exploded in the Big Bang
The mechanism for inflation
The source of the laws of nature
The character and existence of dark matter and dark energy
The difficulty of reconciling the particle/wave duality of quantum physics with objective reality
The incompatibility between quantum physics and gravity
The origin of life and the DNA molecule
The origin of consciousness
The manner in which nature's laws appear fine-tuned just so life can exist.

Despite these deep quandaries, modern theorists give no thought to the notion that the source of the problem might not be their incomplete understanding of a mind-independent material world, but rather the very model of materialism.
Would scientists be willing to try a new model of the universe if it explained more but made them discard many of their materialistic-based theories? Or, are modern scientists so wedded to the model of materialism that they would rather practice science within this comforting -- but ultimately false -- model rather than try something different that might ultimately explain more and lead to a better theoretical framework?
Suppose we took the view that matter emerged from mind rather than the other way around? If this alternative viewpoint is in fact true, should we ignore the world's make-up and go on practicing science only within the materialist model, or should we at least determine whether science can be practiced in this mind-generated, dream world and see where that leads us?

What is Science?
Science is commonly defined as "any system of knowledge that is concerned with the physical world and its phenomena and that entails unbiased observations and systematic experimentation. In general, a science involves a "pursuit of knowledge covering general truths or the operations of fundamental laws." Empirical science,
"seeks to explore, to describe, to explain, and to predict the occurrences in the world we live in. [Scientific] statements, therefore, must be checked against the facts of our experience, and they are acceptable only if they are properly supported by empirical evidence. Such evidence is obtained in many different ways: by experimentation, by systematic observations, by interviews, surveys, by psychological or clinical testing, by careful examination of documents, inscriptions, coins, archeological relics, and so forth."
Another feature of science is that seeks to furnish natural explanations for physical phenomena, as opposed to supernatural or immeasurable, untestable, or unverifiable explanations. This feature helps explain why scientists generally prefer Darwin over Genesis for accounting for the variety of life-forms present on the Earth: Darwin offered an explanation verifiable by observation; Genesis simply says God did it, without explaining how. As we will, we will not need to discard any of these features of science if we change to a mind-created or dream model of the cosmos.

Why the Independent World Assumption is False
There are several critical problems with materialism's assumption of a mind-independent world. But while modern scientists show no hesitation in questioning theories and ideas framed within the materialist model (such as string theory, multi-universes, or the many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics), they never once question the underlying assumption of their own materialistic model. This is the critical error of modern science.
The materialistic model is implausible for three fundamental reasons:
First, the history of philosophy teaches us a threshold fact about the mind that most people either ignore or have never thought about. This fact is that the mind is only capable of knowing about itself. Even under the tenets of modern science images of the (assumed) external world ultimately form in the mind; since we can only know the mind, we must assume that an independent world exists outside of the mind that is the cause of the mental ideas and images that form in the mind. Some view this question as a matter of sanity: how can someone actually question whether a world outside the brain exists? But this framing of the question mis-states the issue: We may not be able to tell the difference if the mind, instead of passively receiving images of an external world as in Locke's famous blank tablet, actively projects the external world like a grand, 3-D movie projector.
This particular question -- can the mind know anything other than itself -- was the subject of one of the great philosophical debates of all time, starting with the British empiricist John Locke and ending with the metaphysics of David Hume, Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich W.J. Schelling, and others. Even though the analytical inquiry ended with virtually all of these thinkers concluding that the mind can only know itself, the project ended with either solipsism (the world is all in my head) or some form of mysticism. Idealism was unable to solve the problem of the multiple dreamers: if the world is a dream, then do we each live in our own dream world?
If our entire scientific worldview is based upon knowing about a mind-independent world, when it is also true we cannot in fact know that world, then should not scientists at least exhibit a bit more humility when pronouncing their latest versions of the "theory of everything?" If, indeed, it is unalterably true that the mind can only know itself, then we might want to develop a science -- a methodological system of thought -- that accepts this principle as given?j
The second reason we should doubt materialism is a matter of common sense and leads many people to believe in a supernatural power: where did all this supposed "mind-independent" stuff come from? This very basic question is most directly presented in the Big Bang theory, materialism's version of a creation story. Under that theory, what we now perceive as the universe of stars began in a fiery blast of matter, space, and time roughly 14 billion years ago. To account for the trillions upon trillions of stars in the sky, scientists assume that at one time all of this matter was condensed into a primordial seed, also known as a "singularity. " To ask where all the stuff that makes up the universe comes from is the same as asking where the primordial seed came from since both contain the same amount of matter and energy.
Material scientists have done an impressive job of avoiding this critical weakness to the very foundation of the scientific enterprise. When pushed, some scientists talk about "quantum fluctuations" -- "vacuum energy"-- but these theories themselves also assume some sort of energy field, and most likely an observing mind. Some scientists, such as Nobel prize-winning physicist, Leon Lederman, are more candid on the topic:
"A story logically begins at the beginning. But this story is about the universe, and unfortunately there are no data for the Very Beginning. None, zero. We don't know anything about the universe until it reaches the mature age of a billionth of a trillionth of a second, that is, some very short time after creation in the Big Bang. When you read or hear anything abut the birth of the universe, someone is making it up. We are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the Very Beginning[.]"
Coming up with a logical, credible explanation for how enough matter to decorate the heavens sprang from the dark void is no simple task, and close enough to impossible to in fact be impossible. And again, that material scientists have no explanation for how this miracle happened should create more humility on their part than it has.
The third reason to doubt seriously the independent-world assumption of material science concerns the laws of nature. The material world, as we know, follows precise and predictable laws, such as gravity, the laws of motion, electricity, gases, and chemistry, which are describable in the language of mathematics, constant and regular. But once science disconnects mind from matter, this mind, the only intelligent force in the universe over which we have direct knowledge, can give matter no help in arranging itself into the laws of nature. The quest for the source to the laws of nature -- or the source of mathematical constancy -- remains one of science's greatest challenges.

The Independent World Assumption Leads Scientists Astray
It can be seen that many of science's more bizarre theories result from its adherence to a materialistic conception of reality. It is as if any twist or contortion to a theory is permissible so long as it is framed within the material science worldview. This practice simply perpetuates a foundational error.
In some theories, such as the Big Bang theory, material scientists simply assume the necessary (near-infinite) amount of matter and energy to fill out the theory. But other theories show how scientists encounter multi-layered puzzles when, after having made the independent-world assumption, they then use it to explain other phenomena. For example, one outcome of the standard Big Bang model is that scientists have no credible explanation -- other than plain coincidence -- for why the wildly chaotic Big Bang led to a universe that is almost completely flat; specifically a universe in which the repulsive force from the Big Bang precisely cancels out the attractive force of the exploding stellar debris (the "flatness problem"). Nor does the standard Big Bang model explain why vastly separate regions of outer space have exactly the same temperature, when there is no physical means for the separate regions to have shared information. (the "horizon problem.") Rather than view these two critical problems in their theories as rooted in the unnecessary independent-world assumption, material scientists use them as reasons to devise more complicated theories requiring more ad-hoc assumptions.
Thus, their solution to the critical problems in the standard Big Bang model is the inflationary Big Bang theory. With this convenient modification, the universe just so happened to inflate by a factor of 10E51(the number 10 with 51 zeros after it) in 10E-36 seconds -- and then paused to track the normal expansion of the universe predicted by the Big Bang. This wild expansion occurred in an unimaginably brief time -- one-billionth of the time it takes light to cross the distance of an atomic nucleus. Inflation allows scientists to maintain the materialist model by using a wildly speculative, ad hoc concept as the solution for the flatness and horizon problems.
Of course if scientists did not make the independent world assumption in the first place they would have no need to make matters worse by resorting to the unrestrained speculation of the inflationary universe model.
A remarkable feature of nature is that its laws appear finely tuned just so life can exist. This observation, known generally as the anthropic principle, strongly suggests that "something is going on:" the deeper scientists delve into the fundamental constants of the physical world, the more it appears as if some force turned the dials to the precise settings just so life can exist.
To escape the mystical overtones of the anthropic principle, some scientists (most notably Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their book, The Grand Design) have advanced theories which predict that inflation caused not one but 10E500 universes to spring from the void. (Of, course, so far we have found firm evidence for only one of these many universes, which seems to be enough.) In one of these multiple universes, the authors explain, the laws of nature would have turned out just so life can exist. But, again, if the one universe we see is in fact mind-created, we would have no need to postulate the existence of 10E500 other ones to explain the odd fit between humans and the universe.
Another example of how the independent-world assumption creates untold difficulties for material science theory comes from the field of biology and concerns the origin of life. Having disconnected mind from matter in their theories, material scientists are left to speculate how mindless residue from the Big Bang arranged itself into intricate workings of living cell, including the codes of the DNA molecule.
According to Occam's razor, the fewer assumptions in a theory the better the theory. Would not then a theory that explained the world without making the independent world assumption be a better theory than one which does make the assumption?
Science is supposed to be the emotionally detached search for truth. If a better theory came along that managed to explain the physical phenomena of the world without the independent world assumption of material science, would not this theory at least deserve a look? In different words, if the metaphysical assumption of material science is not true, it would be necessary to re-work many of its theories, but it would not eliminate the field of science. Instead it would re-orient science upon a stronger footing, while also joining the field of science with philosophy and religion.
Material science is like an extremely slow, diligent portrait artist who insists that his model remain perfectly still throughout the lengthy session; to capture the moment, the artist, like material science, must assume the model is independent of the artist's creative powers; he is painting a figure of the natural world; fixed, self-sustaining; independent. In the same way, scientists objectify the physical world because they believe doing so is necessary to study it.
In summary, material scientists assume the independence and objectivity of the natural world (e.g., stars, planets, living bodies) to study its composition, movements, and history, and their test results indeed show the unchanging nature of the physical world.

Science Remains the Best Approach for Finding Truth in a Mind-Generated World.
But both of these elements of scientific knowledge remain in place if the source of the external world is the united mind as opposed to some mysterious, energy-generating external force (whatever caused the Big Bang per the creation theory of material science.) Scientists can still assume the independent existence of external objects in order to study them. They can still calculate the regularity of the planetary orbits; falling projectiles; spiraling galaxies; electrical forces; gas pressures; chemical reactions; quantum mechanics; and virtually every other physical force or life process. But in the end the picture they draw is a self-portrait. What changes is simply our perspective and the depth of our understanding.
Of course, viewing the world as a dream or mind-created will alter certain theories of modern science but it will not change the fundamental purpose of science which is to describe the workings of the physical world according to coherent theories. In the end, explanations of the existence and regularity of the external world lead to the mind as the ultimate cause, but it does not change the fundamental task of cataloguing the regularities of nature.
Science in a Dream
If the universe we live in is indeed a dream, then there is no doubt that some theories of modern science will need to be overturned, and others overhauled, while some remain unchanged.
Among the theories that must be overturned completely are those dealing with what might be called quasi-creative processes, such as the Big Bang theory (including the inflationary theory), galaxy formation, dark matter and dark energy. Why each of these theories will need to be overturned outright may be self-explanatory.
For example, the Big Bang would be false because the universe of stars would not have originated from a mind-independent force, but as a projection of the mind. Accordingly, science would have no need to resort to the radical inflationary Big Bang theory in order to account for the present universe of stars. Note here, by the way, that science does not end by simply saying "well it's all in the mind, so who cares about anything else?" Rather, we look at the stars and wonder how this particular arrangement appeared in the form it did: why did the Mind create this particular universe, rather than another one?
Dark matter, another peculiar theory, also goes by the wayside. Dark matter is an add-on assumption used to account for the observed lack of the necessary gravitational mass to hold galaxies -- and thus the universe -- together. Dark energy, another unobservable force, would also be unnecessary. This mysterious force has been presented as a means to account for the observed accelerated expansion of the universe. The problem with dark energy, like dark matter, is that scientists cannot observe a physical source for the repulsive force. But again, if the universe is mind-created, the fact that far-away galaxies appear to be drifting away at an accelerated speed may show, among other things, the mind in a constant state of creation, or in fact nothing at all.
Now the point here, it must be remembered, is not (yet) to prove that in fact the world is a dream, but to remove any resistance against "dream-theory" based on a fear that science can no longer be practiced. No such thing happens. Instead, viewing the world as a dream simply eliminates many of the unnecessary assumptions of modern science and dispenses with its most bizarre theories.
In addition to eliminating materialism's beginning-of-the-world theories, dream-theory also eliminates materialism's end-of-the world theories. These theories are based upon the sun running out of fuel and dying, the universe reversing its expansion and retracting into a Big Crunch, or some other theory modeled after an aging machine. Now, if the world is instead mind-created, the "out-of-fuel" scenario is no longer valid because the sun and other stars in the sky are ultimately fueled by the mind's desire to live and dream, not by the quantity of hydrogen in the star's core.
Medical science is another field of material science that will have to undergo dramatic modification if the world turns out to be a dream. This one we should rejoice over. As noted, the underlying assumption of material science is that the physical world exists outside of the mind and operates beyond its control. This supposed independent physical world includes the human body. As most of us know, medical science, contrary to quite a lot of evidence, assumes that the human body operates on its own accord and is unaffected by any positive or negative thought in the mind. This is why science tells us that no matter how much we believe otherwise, we are doomed to wrinkle and die; and, of course, if the human body is a machine independent of the mind, this thinking is likely true.
But if the world is a dream, then the entire physical world, including the human body, would be a projection of the mind, and therefore controlled ultimately by the mind. This simple fact would explain the workings of the "powerful placebo," and the long history -- though mostly anecdotal -- of how strong belief heals.
Now on this point, one would need to question why a material scientist, and for that matter anyone, would at least not consider the truth of dream theory. Like Pascal's famous wager that it is better to believe in God than not, just in case one really exists, so one might want to place a few chips on the space marked "dream theory" just in case the world really is a dream. Upon further thought, it might even be wiser to go "all in" on dream theory, as the rewards may very well be limited only by the imagination.
So science can indeed still be practiced if the world is really a dream. Therefore, if the main (perhaps unspoken) reason you have rejected the thought that this world may be a dream is because science would cease to exist, then some reconsideration is necessary. It seems better to build a worldview upon the correct metaphysics and then carry out science, rather than to assume one must believe in an erroneous world model as the price for carrying out a logical, systematic, objective study of the world.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/5142081

Older Posts Home

Fact of the day!

Today’s science fact is about the Texan Horned Lizard.

Today's Video

Featured slider

Recent Entries

Recent Comments

Photo Gallery

Categories

Fact of the day!

Today’s science fact is about the Texan Horned Lizard.

Today's Video

Featured slider

Recent Entries

Recent Comments

Photo Gallery

Categories

Receive all updates via Facebook. Just Click the Like Button Below?

You Can also Receive Free Email Updates:

Receive all updates via Facebook. Just Click the Like Button Below
?