Our Lopsided Universe - Part 1

February 13, 2009

CHICAGO -- I'm at the biggest science nerd convention in the USA. Er, I mean... the American Association for the Advancement of Science's (AAAS) annual meeting.

I'll be blogging as often as I can this weekend about the mind-bending scientific talks, fascinating people, and peculiarities, so be sure to check back often (and/or just subscribe to this RSS feed).

Let's start with this little number: Why is the universe lopsided?
NOTE: You might want to put on your thinking caps to prevent mind-blowage.

I hear you asking, "What? That doesn't sound right... I'm standing up straight."

Well, thanks to our lopsided universe you exist. And that gives you the ability to stand up straight. Duh.

Let me explain:
In an instant, everything in the universe popped into existence; all of the cool kids call this the Big Bang. Half of the "stuff" that condensed out of the unfathomable sea of energy -- kind of like the steam from your shower condenses on the mirror -- was regular matter, and the other half was antimatter. Problem is, when the two meet...

POW!

Total annihilation.

So if matter and antimatter were made in equal amounts -- and annihilate one another -- why are we all made of just regular matter? That, dear blogees, is one of the biggest mysteries in the universe!

We can get through this, though. Let's start with "why half matter, half anti-matter?"

When physicists zoom particles (electrons, protons, etc.) toward the speed of light and aim them at unsuspecting atoms, you'll get particles and their anti-particles in even amounts -- positrons out of electrons, for example, and anti-protons out of protons. (Yes, the universe is a strange place.)

So the universe clearly has an intense zeal for symmetry/evenness. We might as well call it obsessive-compulsive. And because the stuff of the cosmos was created at high energies, an equal amount of matter and antimatter must have popped into existence.

While it's a big mystery, there are some crazy ideas out there to explain the lopsided universe. Particle physicist Boris Kayser chatted about one at the AAAS meeting called leptogenesis. Er... what?

• Lepton literally means "thin" but refers to super-lightweight particles. Enter the neutrino. Every moment, the sun spews unfathomable numbers of these almost massless particles, most of which travel through the Earth without even making so much as a peep. In fact, every second trillions and trillions of them zip through your body.
• Genesis means creation, so the creation of super-light particles. These light particles aren't what you and I think of as matter -- e.g. "baryons" such as protons and neutrons -- but if the idea is correct, it could extend to familiar matter and solve this big cosmic conundrum.

Now back to leptogenesis: The whole idea hinges on what Kayser called the see-saw effect -- basically, every super-light particle in existence has a super-fat buddy particle to compensate for it. The zealous even universe at work again.

At right is my version of the see-saw effect.

Clearly the "big N" is really, really heavy compared to its neutrino buddy, "little n."

Seems counter-intuitive, but the more massive a particle, the harder you have to work to produce and detect it. Look at the Large Hadron Collider -- it needs to be seven times more powerful than the world's presently most powerful particle accelerator (Fermilab's Tevatron) to recreate never-before-seen fat-boy particles of the early universe.

While big N may be impossible to create/detect, physicists think it would ultimately decay into more regular matter than anti-matter. Bingo! We might have something to explain the lopsided universe.

I've got to head to another meeting, but when I get back I'll explain how scientists plan to actually test this idea. So stay tuned for part two!

Fat Milky Way, 3-D Supernova, Wearable Space Toilets and More

January 12, 2009

What happened in space last week, and what's coming up on Discovery Space:

The Great Planet Debate: Live Blogging

August 14, 2008

Note: I updated this post every few minutes or so with highlights during August 14th's "Great Planet Debate" between Mark Sykes, director of the Planetary Science Institute, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, director of the AMNH Hayden Planetarium. NPR's own Ira Flatow moderated the event.

A summary of my thoughts on the whole thing is at the end of this post.

5:44 p.m. ET - It's over -- and from Ira Flatow: "I'm sure this is not the last word!"
I think everyone would agree with that.

5:42 p.m. ET - Tyson: The more we learn about new things, the more we need to tune our vocabulary and way of thinking, otherwise we shut ourselves off from new discoveries. He says to schoolteachers: "Get the notion of counting things out of your system!" Just explore all the amazing things in the Solar System.

5:40 p.m. ET - Time for summary statements!
Sykes: Science in the classroom needs to get away from learning "promulgations of truth by an authority" and move toward understanding how science is a process, a debate, a conversation.
Tyson agrees.

5:37 p.m. ET - They asked my question (fromt he Internet): When you're not duking it out over planets, do you get along?
Tyson summarizes their friendly rivalry, including a storming of Tyson's office by the New York Times -- and Sykes, of course, with a faux strangulation photo.
Jokes aside, it looks like they do get along outside of the planet issue. Hmm.

5:34 p.m. ET - Tyson: Let's just use the words we want in scientific papers. The IAU will pick it up once the terms are used often enough.
Sykes: Science isn't done by vote.

5:31 p.m. ET - From the audience: "I'm David Morrison and I think you're both wrong!" Morrison, a senior scientist at the NASA Astrobiology Institute, sez there is no consensus about anything, so we shouldn't be defining anything at all.

5:27 p.m. ET - Sykes: Mostly planetary scientists, a.k.a. geologists, made the famous IAU vote -- not astronomers. Astronomers would go against the IAU vote.
Tyson: You overrate how many people support you.
Question (actually more of a statement) from the audience: 96% of the IAU wasn't present for the vote. No absentee voting was allowed... so the IAU changes just caused more confusion. What's better?

5:25 p.m. ET - Tyson and Sykes BOTH agree that the IAU definitions are inadequate. Interesting!
They both just diverge on what's best for change.
Tyson: "The IAU is not some pope up on high" - they comb the scientific community to find prevailing trends, then define it.

5:23 p.m. ET - Tyson: "What pissed off the American public:" we just learned this mnemonic device with nine planets, "Now what am I gonna do?"

5:20 p.m. ET - Ok, Ira Flatow has cut off the heated exchanges between Tyson and Sykes -- it's question-and-answer time.
Question from the Internet: What qualifies as "round"?
Sykes: "The Captain Kirk Test" -- it's pretty obvious, he says. Tyson agrees.

5:17 p.m. ET - Tyson: Let's classify objects by group - they're more similar to each other than they are to anything else.
Sykes: "Wrong astronomy breath!" Ouch. Now he's talking about how Ceres, in the Asteroid Belt, is very dissimilar. It may be covered in clay and water (which is very unlike asteroids).

5:13 p.m. ET - Tyson: "I look forward to the day when (the lexicon lets me) talk about Earth and Titan in the same sentence."

5:10 p.m. ET - The debate is now shifting toward education.
Tyson: Memorizing planets isn't science. We need to revamp this whole educational approach.
Chemists don't worry about confusing the public - says their terms are like (demonstrates hand going into orifice) to the public, but no one complains. (Hehe.)

5:06 p.m. ET - Tyson: "I have peeps who were all together to help me figure this out," he says of the planet issue and his committee at the American Museum of Natural History to rework the Solar System exhibit. Grouped objects by type, not by planet.
Sykes: Wait, wasn't it called The Walk of the Planets?!
Tyson tries to duck, but Flatow says Sykes is correct. Ouch.

5:03 p.m. ET - Tyson accidentally punches Flatow while describing the origin of Pluto "really" being a planet -- oops! Never a good idea to slug a 'ref.
Tyson says it has a moon (Charon). But now we know, he says, that asteroids can have little moons, too...

4:58 p.m. ET - Sykes finally gets to jump back in and respond.
I am distracted at home by thunderstorms and a cat that is freaking out, so I miss the response. Damn.

4:56 p.m. ET - Tyson: The term "planet" was an obstruction to figuring out asteroids and the Asteroid Belt, but scientists got around it in 1801. Discovering Pluto is "deja vu!" Terms can give you "tunnel vision" and prevent discoveries. Calls this "one of the great tragedies of science."

4:53 p.m. ET - Tyson: "I've been polite up until now." Uh oh.

4:51 p.m. ET - Flatow asks "what about exoplanets?"
Tyson: We need to not be so darned Earth-centric. We should be able to apply our terms to bodies outside the Solar System.
Sykes: Agrees, but we need a generalizable set of terms. Like, um... planet. Major planet, minor planet...

4:45 p.m. ET - Tyson: Europeans really don't care too much about Pluto. Come to America? "It's my favorite planet!" Also jokes that Disney's Pluto the dog and the actual rocky/icy body discovered by Clyde Tombaugh have the same authority/importance to Americans.

4:43 p.m. ET - Another scuffle, and Sykes jokingly refers to the International Astronomical Union as "holy mother church IAU." Tyson says let's get rid of the word planet - it's not really useful anymore. Sykes responds: "That's why God invented subcategories."
Many chuckles heard.

4:39 p.m. ET - There's a bit of a back-and-forth with plenty of interruptions. Pretty funny. Sykes responds to IAU definition: "You have to get bigger, and bigger, and bigger" to be a planet the more toward the edge of the Solar System.

4:37 p.m. ET - Tyson: "We're in desperate need of a new lexicon" to describe the Solar System.

4:35 p.m. ET - Neil Tyson reveals to Ira Flatow the fact that Mark Sykes has a law degree. Wonder how handy that will come in at a time like this...

4:33 p.m. ET - Ira Flatow is introducing the reason for the debate. Just introduced Tyson and Sykes. Looks like Tyson got a haircut and shave since I met him Tuesday.
Mark Sykes still sporting a mighty beard.

4:25 p.m. ET - I'm listening to the Great Planet Debate via a live video Web stream. Some lady named Margaret is telling everyone to turn off their cell phones -- or she'll take them.
Scary. Glad I'm not there.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Now that this bad boy is over, I'm feeling the itch to respond:

As a member of the public you don't often get to see, hear, or be a part of the intense conversations that actually lead to science. Don't get me wrong -- I highly doubt this one will result in a published paper or anything like that, but watching two well-informed scientists go at it (plus those from the audience) was fascinating.

Each and every person's argument sounded reasonable, logical, well-thought. In other words, they all sounded right. So what the heck are you supposed to think?

Aye, there's the rub of science -- it's a process!

At the end of the matchup, Ira Flatow said he doubted this would be the final world and, unless a rogue gamma ray burst vaporizes our planet's surface (and all the scientists chewing on the issue along with it) tomorrow, I'll have to agree.

I said in my previous post that I was leaning toward agreeing with Tyson's view of how the Solar System should be organized -- into classes of bodies and throwing out "planet" altogether. But after watching the Great Planet Debate, I have to say that I'm right back where I started: Uncertain.

So, my vote is to leave it up to the astronomers and planetary scientists on this one. What about you?

P.S. Ok, I'm still leaning towards Tyson's view just a little bit. Sorry Dr. Sykes!

Photos: Associated Press/American Museum of Natural History/Planetary Science Institute; Dave Mosher, Discovery Space

Tyson: Sykes "Going Down" at Great Planet Debate

I can see it already at today's Great Planet Debate...

Ladies and gentlemen, in the red corner we have Neil DeGrasse Tyson, famous astrophysicist and reigning champion over Pluto's status as a non-planet.

In the blue corner is Mark V. Sykes, the underdog who wishes to muster the scientific community toward consensus on Pluto remaining a planet.

Gentlemen, let's have a nice clean fight!

Ok, a bit of a stretch on my part -- especially the image -- and I suppose I did lead Tyson into saying that Sykes is "going down."

But a lot really is at stake in the name of science here.

Tyson put the magnitude of the event to me half-jokingly during our chat on Tuesday in City Hall Park. (If you want to listen to our entire conversation, check out the end of this post for an MP3.) Here's what he said:

"It puts great pressure on Mark Sykes and me to solve all the problems of the universe."

Perhaps. If I were to pick two guys to help solve the problems of the universe, though, Sykes and Tyson would be in my top ten. Both are extremely well-informed and in great positions to communicate the issues, both as professional scientists and directors of various institutions. Most importantly, each has a great sense of humor.

Back to what's at stake, though.

I asked Tyson about why anyone should care if people use the word "planet" or some other term to describe celestial bodies. His response:

1. Words can influence how you think about a problem
2. Agreeing on terminologies enables scientists to speak the same language (so they can make more frequent, better and thorough discoveries)

He offered up the analogy of a person from 100 years ago seeing a car today: it's a horse-drawn carriage without the horses to that person. That makes sense to me.

In fact, it reminds me of 9th grade trigonometry...

I couldn't figure out how to simplify one of those wicked, tortuous, evil sin/cos/tan problems for the life of me. At least not the way my teacher taught the class. Seeing me struggle, a smarty-pants sitting behind me (who, in my rose-colored glasses, I imagine she had a crush on me) revealed a shortcut to solve the problem. And the floodgates of understanding opened up.

So I suppose what I'm saying is this: I might be giving up my "belief" that Pluto should remain a planet.(Wouldn't be the first of my beliefs to go by the wayside.) It seems to make more scientific sense.

The Bad Astronomer Phil Plait appears to be in the same boat as me after his chat with Alan Stern. Phil offers some first-hand perspective as a former professional astronomer on the planet/no-planet issue in a recent post (see here).

It's good to know I'm not alone on the "dark side" of possibly supporting the reclassification of the Solar System -- but I'm still very, very curious to see how Sykes defends himself today at 4:30 pm ET, live on the Web.

The registration page for picking up the video feed has closed, but there may be  away I can supply you with the goods to watch :) if you find yourself in this cold, lonely place of not having a way to watch, shoot an e-mail over to DiscoverySpace@Discovery.com.

As promised, here's the MP3 of my interview with Tyson: I'm a 10.7MB file, so download me with care. The quality is intentionally crummy, but you can still hear everything perfectly. Including weed-wackers, crazy New Yorkers, and irate cab drivers.

Photos: Associated Press/American Museum of Natural History/Planetary Science Institute; Dave Mosher, Discovery Space

Calling All Pluto Protestors!

August 12, 2008

In case you haven't heard, the Great Planet Debate is going down this week in Laurel, Maryland at Johns Hopkins University. It's at their Applied Physics Laboratory, which is just about smack-dab between Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, MD.

A ton of planetary scientists should be there to wrestle with the definition of a planet, among other geeky matters, but at the center is a Thursday night throw-down between Tyson and Sykes.

Not good ol' Mike Tyson, but Neil DeGrasse Tyson -- a major popularizer of science and an astrophysicist at the American Museum of Natural History, here in New York City.

Sykes = Mark Sykes, director for the Planetary Society Institute, whom I've chatted with a few times. (Here's one of our conversations on the Dawn mission to the Asteroid Belt.)

As you can tell from the photo at left, they look really mean. At any rate, the whole point of this post:

I might be there I won't be there -- but will you? Discovery Space blogger and Hubble Space Telescope guy "Cosmic" Ray Villard will definitely be ringside to bring you the minute-by-minute shenanigans, so be sure to say "hi" to him, if not to both of us.

***IMPORTANT! CALLING ALL PLUTO PROTESTERS!*** If you're going to be protesting about Pluto (for or against it being a planet), please, please, please let me know right away. I would love to chat with you about doing something special!

You can drop me a line in the comments of this post, or if you'd like e-mail me at DiscoverySpace@Discovery.com.

Photos: NASA/Planetary Society Institute

Why Solar Eclipses #@%$ Me Off

July 18, 2008

May 21, 1993. Dayton, Ohio.

I'm in gradeschool. And I'm a space dork.

It was going to be the coolest thing I would ever see, they said.
"Don't miss this one!" they said.
"You won't see one again for a billion years!" they said.

"They" were talking about the solar eclipse, of course, and I couldn't wait to catch the astronomical rarity after recess.

Math class was the only thing standing between me and the eclipse (no pun intended), so I had to convince Mrs. Namewithheld that it was worthwhile to skip out on Holey Card math exercises.

Like any good teacher, she was afraid I'd go blind by staring at the sun. No worries, I explained -- I have one of those pinhole boxes that let me see the eclipse projected on paper. (I think I first heard about this on Mr. Wizard?)

You know what happened... The Holey Cards won. I protested by folding my arms and leaving the test blank, and watched the playground grow dim for a few moments through the windows.

Later that day, my parents were watching the 7 o'clock news. Low and behold, it featured a story about other kids at other schools outside with their pinholed shoeboxes, watching the eclipse...

And so, that is why hearing the words "solar eclipse" %$#@&* me off. Up until about two weeks ago, that is.

I found out that the folks at Polar Flug, who book flyover tours of the Arctic, were putting me on their flight over the Northern Arctic on August 1st -- when the total solar eclipse will cut across China, Siberia, Greenland and Canada. Oh, sweet redemption.

You might remember Alan Dyer's post about such "extreme astronomy" over at the What's Up? blog (see here), which is a great primer on eclipse chasing.

Unfortunately I'll be stuck in aisle seat 19H -- which means wrestling with another journalist for the coveted window (the darkness of totality lasts about 2 minutes and 27 seconds). Know this, mystery journalist: I'll be eating plenty of garlic and other breath-fouling foods before the flight.

Can't catch the eclipse yourself? No worries! You can enjoy my first-ever solar eclipse experience vicariously from July 30 through August 2 right here -- I'll be chronicling the adventure pace-by-pace, so be sure to tune in. And keep a tab open for Alan's blog, as he will also be blogging the eclipse yet from his Canadian vantage point. Along with some polar bears and Arctic foxes.

If you have any advice/suggestions/special requests for this eclipse newbie, feel free to leave it in a comment below!

Oh, and one last tidbit: I used Microsoft Research's WorldWide Telescope program (FREE) to get an approximation of what the solar eclipse would have looked like that day in gradeschool -- see left (try and ignore the stars -- the sky is too bright to see them during an eclipse).

Doesn't look like much, so I'm really glad I didn't resort to violent protest with Mrs. Namewithheld.

Photos, top to bottom: NASA, Sky & Telescope, NASA, Microsoft Research

Discovery Space = Your Space

July 03, 2008

As the producer for Discovery Space, I'm willing to risk death by spam e-mail to make myself as accessible as possible to you, a.k.a. the reader person.

Why? I think this site should belong to you as much as it belongs to anyone else. That might sound strange, but I mean it.

Know of any spacey events, shows, parties, gatherings or other happenings? Or maybe you have some ideas you're just dying to share? Whatever is picking your brain, in the name of space please do give me a shout!

You can do it the old-fashioned way by shooting an e-mail over to DiscoverySpace@discovery.com.

Or, to follow Irene Klotz' lead over at the Free Space blog, you can find me on Twitter as Disco_Dave. I'll give you the latest updates on the site as well as chronicle my adventures in spaceland, real-time.

And if Twitter doesn't make you tweet with joy, I'm a few other places, too; Facebook, LinkedIn, and Second Life as a spacesuit-toting dork called SpaceDisco Landar, to name a few. I'm also on AOL Instant Messenger as DaveOnEarth once in a lunar eclipse.

So, don't be shy! You now have an open invitation to make Discovery Space your space. And stalk me.