Current Event

Pasta-Shaped Radio Waves Beamed Across Venice
Science Daily Article Published March 2, 2012

Scientists have a possible solution to the limited amount information in each frequency band. They have worked out a way to manipulate the waves so that they can transfer more information. They are now able to have 11 channels per frequency band, and are working still on the matter.
Wow, that is amazing! I had no clue that they could manipulate the way the waves work to solve the congestion caused by the unchanged waves, they said that the problem they are working to fix can be experienced by sending a text on a holiday. If they could fix this problem there are other significant things they can accomplish.

Institute of Physics (IOP). "Pasta-shaped radio waves beamed across Venice." ScienceDaily, 2 Mar. 2012. Web. 4 Jun. 2012.

Tuning Fork and Different Amplifiers

Hanna Rhoads
7a Science
5/23/12

Tuning Fork and Different Amplifiers

Guiding Question: Does the Material Used to Amplify a Tuning Fork Influence the Amount of Sound Made?

Hypothesis: The best materials will be hollow for the sound to amplify the best.

Variable: Amplifier

Materials:

• tuning fork (G note)
• notebook
• pencil or something to write with
• decibel meter
• desk
• soup can
• box intended to amplify tuning fork
• whiteboard

Procedure:

1. Get the materials ready - lay them out.
2. Take the tuning fork, and strike it against something.
3. Press it against one of the objects laid out.
4. While holding it there, check the decibel meter and record the information.
5. Repeat with the same object, to record accurately - if they are completely different, record again.
6. Move on to the next object, recording every strike.

Data Table and Analysis:

Decibels Recorded From Each Material

Material	Trial	Average Decibels	Peak Decibels
box (hollow)	1	52	78
box (hollow)	2	52	87
whiteboard (solid)	1	46	62
whiteboard (solid)	2	51	63
soup can (hollow)	1	50	87
soup can (hollow)	2	50	74
desk (solid)	1	47	59
desk (solid)	2	49	69

Analysis:   My hypothesis was correct, hollow objects were better for amplifying the sound.The box made to amplify the sound was the best, that makes sense because it was made for that purpose, but the soup can worked pretty well too. The table was better possibly because there was empty space under it, and the whiteboard had a solid wall behind it, which would absorb and muffle the sound waves.

Conclusion: The sound level in the room may have affected how the decibel meter worked, but because we tested it several times and results were similar I think the data is accurate for the purpose of this lab. It may have been better to do it in the halls where it was quieter though. Sound travels through different things it is interesting how some amplify it and some muffle it. So based on this I conclude that different materials conduct sound differently like heat and electricity are conducted. I wonder what other forms of energy behave like this.

Further Inquiry: I would like to see if doing this lab in a quieter room, with more materials would leave our results intact and show if my hypothesis is correct. Which materials conduct sound the best, what would work better than the box intended to amplify the tuning forks.

Buoy Observation

In Duluth MN, the wind was harsh and the water was rough on Lake Superior, there were waves that would make being on a small boat unpleasant, but not far away Port Wing WI, the wind was calm and Lake Superior was calm and water was beautifully smooth. The location of Port Wing may be the cause of the still water, the little peninsula that juts out on the Western edge of WI shelters a small area creating a bay of sorts that blocks the waves and wind. Duluth on the other hand is exposed and gets larger wave and more wind.

I wanted to see if this also applied on a larger scale, I looked at Chesapeake Bay and out side of it, the waves were strong outside of the bay, the water was rough, but even at the mouth of the bay, there was no significant wave height.

Earthquake Warning Systems Research Essay

Hanna Rhoads
Mrs. Medenica
7a Science
6/2/12

Earthquake Warning Systems Research Essay

Earthquakes occur when the tectonic plates shift and draw back or push against each other. Earthquakes are seismic waves that travel on Earth’s surface away from the disturbance. There are foreshocks and aftershocks to all earthquakes, sometimes the aftershocks are stronger than the actual quake. So how do we know when an earthquake will occur and where? Every day there are many, many earthquakes, some days there are nearly 50 or more. Most are smaller ones and not much of a threat, but there are ways for scientists to monitor and predict where big earthquakes will occur. Earthquakes can cause faults and change in elevation, movement of the plates cause Mnt. Everest’s peak to rise by the year. Earthquakes can be very destructive destroying both manmade and natural creations. Scientists have developed different scales and ways of measuring the strength of an earthquake, some measure based on activity of the plates and others measure based on damage caused by it. Scientists have many ways of predicting, studying, and measuring earthquakes and the seismic waves that cause them.

Most earthquakes occur around the borders of the plates, the movement of the plates causes them. Depending on the type of boundaries between the plates, and how active they are; there is more chance of earthquakes and seismic activity in some places than in others. Scientists still cannot be completely accurate when predicting large quakes, especially when all some have to work with is the history of quakes in the past. Scientists have to understand how the plates are moving, movement of one plate can cause another neighboring plate to move so with the plates always moving and knocking into each other, scientists need to take into account past activity as well as recent activity. For example, the plates are moving in a certain way, the different boundaries show which way the plates are shifting. The movement of the plates causes earthquakes so along the borders of the most active plates, there will be the biggest and most frequent quakes. Although scientists can’t tell exactly when an earthquake will occur, some claim that before an earthquake a combination of things occur: gas seeping out of cracks in Earth’s crust, animals having weird behavior, also changes in magnetic fields are said to occur before an earthquake.

Scientists study earthquakes to be able to know why, when, where, and how strong they will be when they happen. One way of studying quakes is a seismograph, it is used to measure the movement and strength of an earthquake by measuring the tremors caused by the seismic waves. This allows scientists to measure the duration of the earthquake as well as they simply note when tremors start and stop. By knowing the difference of time between the primary and secondary waves, you can find the distance to the epicenter; by knowing the distance, you can use that from 3 locations to find the relative area where the epicenter of the quake is. Scientist know from studying the quakes that, the elevation and shape of landforms and whole land masses are changing. In these areas there is more frequent seismic activity, the movement of the plates is causing some mountains to grow yearly (Everest and the Himalayas), moving land masses make oceans and seas change size (Pacific, Atlantic, and Mediterranean), and land masses to split (Great Rift Valley, Iceland, etc.). The changes are very slow, but knowing they are happening also allows scientists the opportunity to study how movement of the plates like this will cause seismic activity.

There are many scales to measure earthquakes, one for instance is the Richter Scale. The Richter Scale is used to compare earthquakes. For example one earthquake could be a 1.0 and another a 4.9, each number is 10x larger than the one before it (1=10,2=100, etc.). A 1 on the scale is a relatively small earthquake but a 5 or 6 can cause minor damage and injury and is accompanied with decent shakes. Another way of measuring quakes is a ShakeMap, ShakeMaps are used to show where the shaking was felt and where it was most intense. By creating ShakeMaps you can estimate where help and repair will be needed most and work out from that. A ShakeMap uses the numbers 1(not felt) to above 10(extreme)  to represent potential damage, strength of tremors, and estimated injuries/fatalities.

My findings, were that there are many ways that scientists can study, attempt to predict, and measure earthquakes. Earthquakes are hard to predict but scientists can get a general idea, seismographs and the tectonic plates are used to research seismic activity, and the Richter Scale and ShakeMaps are some of many ways to measure and show earthquakes affects. Scientists learn more and more about earthquakes, the tectonic, plates, and seismic activity every year. Their findings allow people to be prepared for the worst and strengthen our defenses.


Sources:
- HowStuffWorks.com/nature/natural-disasters/earthquake7
- science.HowStuffWorks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question142

Making Waves Lab

Guiding Questions:
When water is dropped from a pipette into a pan of water, how does the wave behave?
What properties does a mechanical wave have?
How do waves interact with each other and with solid objects in their paths.

Hypothesis: Waves can be constructive and destructive to each other, so parallel waves will increase each others' strength but when not in sync they will colide and stop the energy. The waves will ripple out from the drop of water, they will reflect off of solid materials but will have some of their energy absorbed.

Materials:
Water
Modeling Clay
Ripple Tank
2 Pipettes
Paper Towels
Cork

Procedure:

1.  Fill ripple tank with water.
2. Fill dropper with water and drop in various places of the pan. 
3. Record observations for each place you drop the water and the various obstacles are placed.
4. Repeat steps 2 and 3.
5.  Repeat 2-4 with cork for each time you changed the position but this time add cork.

Data Analysis:

(I will scan the tables at school, my scanner is broken)

As I suspected the solid objects reflected and slightly absorbed the waves, the cork acted in some ways like the paper towel and in some the clay, it absorbed the energy but because it was solid it reflected it as well, the paper towel absorbed and moved with the energy of the waves. After bouncing around for a bit, the energy of the wave slowly diminished.

Conclusion: 

The waves were somewhat predictable, for one thing they always moved away in ripples from the spot where the water was dropped and for another, they Would always reflect off of the objects or be absorbed, the objects when arranged in a certain way can contain the wave's energy and keep it strong and concentrated like what I did when I arranged the clan and cork around the place where the water was dropped.

How much is space exploration really worth to human society? Does it outweigh the costs? What are the benefits and what are our limitations?

Questions to be answered in paragraph form:

1.  In your own words, discuss the various costs and benefits of space exploration.

2.  Make suggestions for three different approaches to space exploration:  sending humans to the moon or another planet, doing only Earth-based research, and one other opinion/suggestion for possible space exploration.

3.  What are the benefits and drawbacks of each of these approaches.

4.  Imagine that you are a member of Congress (government), who has to vote on a new budget (money to be spent).  There is a fixed amount of money to spend, so you have to decide which needs to your country is the most important.  Discuss the top five to ten priority areas (such as medical research, health, transportation systems, roadways, education, science studies, etc...).  Give back-up or your reasonings for your decision. Which would get the most funding (money)?  Where do you think space exploration should be in your prioritized list? 

                    Space exploration is expensive. It is also dangerous. It puts the lives of those who attempt it at stake. Is space exploration really worth the cost? Imagine, you're going to be the first teacher to leave our planet, you've spent immense time training, it’s the day of your launch, you are blasting out of our atmosphere, and because of the weather, condensation forms on the main fuel tank by the rocket boosters. The boosters are about to detach, you are so close to your dream! As the rocket boosters detach.... BANG! The shuttle goes up in flames killing everyone inside in an instant. This might be how it felt to be in the challenger disaster. This is an example of the cost of space exploration. Expensive, dangerous, and risky, I don't know that it’s worth it.

            First, consider how expensive space exploration is. Even if the first things that pop into mind are fuel, construction, etc. You also have to consider research. Launching a rocket takes a ton of cash; you have to consider materials, construction, and fuel. Think about how much fuel it must take to launch a huge hunk of metal up against gravity out of our atmosphere. Research is expensive too, to run tests and experiment to find the best technology needs funding. You also need money for supplies. NASA spent a ton of money making the Hubble space telescope. After launch they realized that Hubble’s primary mirror was incorrectly made, the shape was not correct and as a result everything observed by it was blurry and out of focus. Thus the first servicing mission was born, meaning that a crew had to fly up and replace the mirror. One wrong move and the telescope would be crippled.        

            Imagine, you are returning from a successful mission. When reentering the atmosphere, some of the tiles on the bottom of the shuttle burn off, in a matter of seconds heat flares into the main cabin incinerating everyone and everything in the cabin. The danger of going up in space is known, all astronauts are aware of it. The problem with going up in space is you can only hope to come back. If you think about it, soooooooo many things could go wrong. Even with a lot of training, there are some things that cannot be prevented from happening, in the end you have to ask yourself if it’s really worth the risk. Think about this for a moment, if going into space is risking your life, how your friends and family would feel like if something happened to you. I’d bet that some of the family of those who get to go up into space are thinking only of the amazing pros and not about the serious cons. Maybe it would be better if we finished learning about our planet before trying to find another like it. Maybe we would be better off if we just worked with what we had.

            Funding for programs like NASA is hard, not everyone will agree on a set budget. Some feel that the dangers of space exploration make it not worth putting a ton of money into; others want nothing more than more discoveries and exploration to be done. It is especially hard now specially now, when in terms of economical status, the whole world isn’t doing too hot. The budget for America’s space program NASA is being cut further and further back. When building something like the Hubble space telescope for example, it takes a ton of money and time, and the product itself is delicate, it could; be broken when repairing or when they make a trip for maintenance, just not work, or a part could be defunct rendering it useless.

            In conclusion, space exploration may not be worth the cost. This is because of expense, danger, and financial risk. It seems even the most governments aren’t sure about it. Things to take into consideration are expense, hazard to health and safety, and funding being no help to defective equipment when deciding if space exploration is worth the cost. So the next time someone asks you if you would be an astronaut, maybe you should think it over very carefully. 

Bibliography (APA format)

Challenger Shuttle Disaster- Raw Uncut Footage [Video file]. (n.d.). Retrieved from 
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd7dxmBLg48&feature=related 






Cockpit Last moments Shuttle Columbia Accident + Cockpit Communication [Video file]. (n.d.). 
     Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIJiW8d_c68&feature=related 

Mars Express Radar Yields Strong Evidence of Ocean That Once Covered Part of Red Planet

Feb. 7, 2013

 It is believed that a large ocean once covered with 2 large oceans. The evidence was sea floor like sediments, and ice. That was likely about 4 billion years ago. The oceans were likely not in existence long enough to support life. Scientists continue to look for older bodies of water and or life.

The conditions on mars must have been different to allow the existence of the 2 oceans, I wonder if it would be capable of supporting life. The possibility of life on mars is interesting. It is amazing the technology we have, we know some things that happened billions of years ago.



European Space Agency. "Mars Express radar yields strong evidence of ocean that once covered part of Red Planet." ScienceDaily, 7 Feb. 2012. Web. 5 Mar. 2012.