|
Everything Earth Science
|
|
Written by Everything Science
|
|
Feb 26, 2007 at 11:00 PM |
|
The leader of Sun-climate research at the Danish National Space Center, Henrik Svensmark, puts together the findings reported by him and his colleagues in a dozen scientific papers, to tell how the climate is governed by atomic particles coming from exploded stars. These cosmic rays help to make ordinary clouds. High levels of cosmic rays and cloudiness cool the world, while milder intervals occur when cosmic rays and cloud cover diminish.
 | | Cosmic radiation entering the Earth's atmosphere. Credit: Danish National Space Center |
The review paper entitled ‘Cosmoclimatology: a new theory emerges’ appears in the February issue of Astronomy & Geophysics. Here are some of its salient points.
For more than 20 years, satellite records of low-altitude clouds have closely followed variations in cosmic rays. Just how cosmic rays take part in cloud-making appeared in the SKY experiment, conducted in the basement of the Danish National Space Center. Electrons set free in the air by passing cosmic rays help to assemble the building blocks for cloud condensation nuclei on which water vapour condenses to make clouds.
Cosmic ray intensities – and therefore cloudiness – keep changing because the Sun’s magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays coming from the Galaxy, before they can reach the Earth. Radioactive carbon-14 and other unusual atoms made in the atmosphere by cosmic rays provide a record of how cosmic-ray intensities have varied in the past. They explain repeated alternations between cold and warm periods during the past 12,000 years. Whenever the Sun was feeble and cosmic-ray intensities were high, cold conditions ensued, most recently in the Little Ace Age that climaxed 300 years ago.
(5) Comments posted about this in the forum |
|
Last Updated ( Feb 27, 2007 at 11:26 AM )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Everything Archaeology
|
|
Written by Everything Science
|
|
Nov 17, 2006 at 11:00 PM |
Professor Timothy Darvill, Head of the Archaeology Group at Bournemouth University, has breathed new life into the controversy surrounding the origins of Stonehenge by publishing a theory which suggests that the ancient monument was a source and centre for healing and not a place for the dead as believed by many previous scholars.
 | | Professor Geoff Wainwright (left) and Professor Tim Darvill share the view that Stonehenge is a place of healing and not of death. |
After publication of his new book on the subject - Stonehenge: The Biography of a Landscape (Tempus Publishing) - Professor Darvill also makes a case for revellers who travel to be near the ancient monument for the summer solstice in June to reconsider. Instead, Professor Darvill believes that those seeking to tap into the monument’s powers at its most potent time of the year should do so in December during the winter solstice when our ancestors believed that the henge was ‘occupied’ by a prehistoric god - the equivalent of the Roman and Greek god of healing, Apollo – who ‘chose’ to reside in winter with the Hyborians, long believed to be the ancient Britons. The basis for Professor Darvill’s findings lies in the Preseli Mountains in west Wales where he and colleague Professor Geoffrey Wainwright have located an exact origin for the bluestones used in the construction of Stonehenge some 250 km away. “The questions most people ask when they consider Stonehenge is ‘why was it built?’ and ‘how was it was used?’” says Professor Darvill. “Our work has taken us to the Preseli Mountains to provide a robust context for the source of the bluestones and to explore various ideas about why those mountains were so special to prehistoric people”. (4) Comments posted about this in the forum |
|
Last Updated ( Nov 18, 2006 at 03:39 PM )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Everything Physical Science
|
|
Written by Everything Science
|
|
Nov 17, 2006 at 11:00 PM |
An international research team has taken the first, but nevertheless promising step towards a new form of radiotherapy for cancer. This team includes scientists at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, the University of Aarhus, as well as the Department of Medical Physics and the Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, the Aarhus University Hospital. In an experiment at CERN (the European Organization for Nuclear Research), located near Geneva, the scientists have demonstrated that a beam of antiprotons can destroy cancer cells considerably more effectively than the types of radiation used to date. In the long term, this can lead to a more effective and more gentle treatment for certain tumours.
 | | Pictured from right: Helge Knudsen and Niels Bassler from the University of Aarhus and the Aarhus University Hospital, respectively, with their American colleague Michael Holzscheiter at the apparatus where the irradiation of cancer cells using antiprotons takes place. The antiprotons come out of the curved metallic film at left, and penetrate the white plastic tube that contains the cancer cells. Following irradiation, the number of surviving cancer cells are observed. This apparatus is set up at the Antiproton Decelerator at CERN. |
The results have just been published in the renowned journal Radiotherapy and Oncology.
The mysterious antiparticles have been common knowledge for decades, but the scientists are the first to show the advantage of using antiprotons to destroy cancer cells. The new technique using antiparticles has a number of benefits:
A comparison of damage to the healthy tissue surrounding the tumour shows that antiproton beams destroy cancer cells much more effectively than the beams used to date. This is because the antiprotons have an effect that slightly resembles grenades. They cause most damage to the patient’s cells right at the target point – just as a grenade only explodes when it gets to the end of its trajectory. Each individual patient therefore requires significantly fewer treatments. Irradiating cancerous tissue can be carried out with a high degree of spatial precision because it is possible to hit a tumour within areas as small as one cubic millimetre. An added advantage of antiproton treatment is that it makes it possible to continuously monitor exactly where the irradiation takes place.
(0) Comments posted about this in the forum |
|
Last Updated ( Nov 18, 2006 at 08:39 PM )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Everything Biology
|
|
Written by Everything Science
|
|
Aug 20, 2006 at 11:00 PM |
Roses are red, violets are blue, but why aren't snapdragons orange? Norwich scientists from the John Innes Centre (JIC) and the University of East Anglia (UEA) in collaboration with the Universitïé Paul Sabatier (Toulouse, France) have developed a pioneering computer modelling technique that traces the evolutionary paths underlying flower colour variation in the model plant snapdragon (Antirrhinum).Their research, funded by the BBSRC and published today in the journal Science, shows how flower colour diversity has evolved in natural populations of these plants in the Pyrenees.
 | Bees that pollinate snapdragons prefer magenta or yellow coloured flowers to flower colours such as orange. (Photo taken by Annabel Whibley) |
In the wild, only the plants with the most attractive flower colours are able to reproduce and thrive because the insects that pollinate them prefer certain colours. The bees that pollinate snapdragon find magenta and yellow flowers the most attractive; they do not find colours such as orange attractive and so flowers of this colour would not flourish in the wild due to lack of pollination. Scientists already know that natural colour variation is controlled by three genes: ROSEA and ELUTA affect the intensity and pattern of the magenta pigment anthocyanin and thirdly SULFUREA affects the distribution of the yellow aurone pigment. The researchers in this study wanted to understand how plants producing magenta or yellow flowers could evolve from a common ancestor without producing in-between non-attractive flower colours such as orange.
"This is a totally different way of looking at evolution and could lead to a better understanding of the rules that govern biodiversity" explains Coen, "If we can comprehend how Antirrhinum genes interact in their natural habitat, it may help us in the future to better preserve genetic diversity".
(2) Comments posted about this in the forum |
|
Last Updated ( Oct 06, 2006 at 05:26 AM )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
| | << Start < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 9 - 16 of 146 |
|
|
|
|
|
Events Calendar |
|
May 2008
|
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
Your Complete Science Portal
|
|
|