??Quakeeee??

Yes, quake...but not the kind you are thinking. Geologists think they may be able to tell when an icequake is coming, meaning they may be one step closer to predicting avalanches. Scientists find that avalanches are much easier to learn about than other earthquakes because the seismic waves only travel through the ice, raher than several layers of earth. Scientists, however, do maintain that it is impossible to predict an earthquake, or icequake for that matter, with any certainty far in advance.

Despite the impossibility of prediction, geologists believe that they may be able to make accurate predictions of avalanches within 15 days. This new information may be able to save skiers as well as villages and towns. Although all glaciers make a lot of sound due to the gravitational pull on the ice, those on a slope are particularly susceptible to avalanches and tend to make even more creaks and moans. Geologists have shown this prediction ability in Switzerland on the peak of Weisshorn. In order for scientists to get an accurate prediction, they place reflectors on different places atop the glaciers. They then ingeniously froze a microphone into the ice to record the sounds of the mountain. There was an increased amount of sound that occurred around the time before the glacier began to slide down the mountain in an avalanche.

This simple technology shows one the power of logic. If scientists simply apply what they know,  sometimes incredibly high tech equipment isn't necessary. This simple use of a microphone fascinates me; it is as though the mountain is talking to the geologists, warning them to protect the people below. This new information could save many from tragedy and definitely prevent avalanche stories from being presented on Discovery Channel...

??What Are We Going to do for Energy??

Alternative Energy Sources

With all the hype about becoming a greener world with more energy efficient alternatives, one much ask: What can I use for energy? One very important place to start is motor vehicles. As Americans we do a lot of driving. This is due to the layout of most American cities, where it takes people anywhere from ten minutes to an hour to drive to work. It would be ideal to go Euro-style and have everyone walk to work, pick up their baguette on the way, but that is simply not feasible in the United States. We are all about big: big roads, big houses, big neighborhoods, big distances between places and of course, big cars.

   

A friend of mine  bought his new car with a diesel engine (even if the stuff from the gas station is tons more expensive) for the sole reason that he could use biodiesel. In fact, diesel gasoline is actually much more energy efficient because there is more energy packed into the molecules. They are generally 20-40% more efficient than gasoline engines. For a time in the United States, diesel engines were incredibly popular because the diesel was cheaper; then people realized they were smelly and loud. Today, researchers are attempting to come up with more efficient and popular forms of diesel. One of these, as already mentioned, is biodiesel. Instead of smelling bad, drivers can spread the joy of French Fries as they drive along highways. This should be an incredibly cheap alternative, and helps eliminate other wastes from the restaurant industry. Restaurants  would likely be more than happy to give away their used oil to be refined, rather than have to pay to dispose of it.

         

A new technology in the diesel world is the topic of a recent ABC News article. The article discusses using a diesel fuel cell much like a hydrogen fuel cell. The benefit of diesel in this case is that it is much more efficiently stored than hydrogen (which requires huge containers held at dangerous pressures) and takes advantage of the high energy storage of diesel molecules. When the hydrogen atoms are attached to the carbons of diesel molecules is much larger.

So... I urge you to consider a diesel engine. It may end up being cheaper in the long run, and until diesel fuel cells are massively produced, everybody loves the smell of fries right?

??Microscopy??

Microscopy has a long and intriguing history. In 1590 the predecessor to the compound microscope was created by a pair of eyeglass makers. Then, in 1665, Robert Hooke observed the first cell structures in a piece of cork. Later, in 1674 von Leeuwenhoek built the first simple microscope, mainly for examining biological specimens. It wasn't until the 1930s, however that we had the ability to see atoms with the electron microscope. This microscope has changed many of the ideas formulated in the scientific world and has shaped much of the knowledge of today.

This microscope is in stark contrast to the microscopes of today used by scientists. They have developed in opposition to computers. The better the microscope, the larger the size, whereas computers have shrunk with computing power. It is also ironic that the smaller the object to be viewed, the larger the microscope must be.

The only problem with scanning electron microscopes and transmission electron microscopes is that the specimen must be dead in order to view it. In one case, the specimen is coated with gold and the other requires a slice of the specimen. This is incredibly unfortunate, however, the scientific discoveries since their invention have been fascinating. One very interesting subject is that of human biology. With electron microscopes we have been able to view different cells of the body. We can know say with certainty that the human nerve cell has an axon and body. We know about the organelles within our cells. Microscopic evolution has led to many advancements in the study of disease as well.

During the anthrax scares after 9/11, scientists from the CDC used powerful microscopes to study the bacteria. Without these microscopes, the world would have never known that these bacteria had been scientifically manipulated to contain silicone and be especially resilient. We also would have never known the true maliciousness behind the attacks, the attacker was truly using bioweapons to their fullest.

Besides their ability to detect vicious diseases, microscopes hold a bright future in the world of science. Their improvements in the future may help to lay the path for the next generation of scientific textbooks. I am personally thrilled to hear about a new discovery resulting from microscopic images, because it is those discoveries over the past few hundreds of years that have fueled the science of biology. And who in their right mind wouldn't want to learn some bio? :)