(Originally published in The Peak on June 13, 2011)
It sounds like the stuff of Star Trek and Dan Brown novels, but a team of Canadian researchers, including SFU physics PhD student Mohammad Dehghani Ashkezari and his supervisor Mike Hayden have arrested atomic antimatter, and managed to keep it for an entire 16 minutes.
“Even though scientists have now been producing antihydrogen atoms for about 15 years, no one has ever managed to hang on to them. Within a tiny fraction of a second, the newly produced antimatter atoms collide with some ordinary matter and disappear in a flash,” Hayden explained. “We’ve managed to create a complicated magnetic bottle in which the antimatter can be stored, without ever touching the walls.”
Ashkezari and Hayden are part of a team that includes collaboration from three other Canadian universities — UBC, the University of Calgary, and York University — as well as the Canadian research laboratory TRIUMF. These institutions are the Canadian component, which make up about one third of the ALPHA collaboration, which is based at CERN, in Geneva, Switzerland. Other countries that contribute to the team are Brazil, Denmark, Israel, Japan, and the U.K.
Antihydrogen is artificially produced by combining antiprotons and positrons, the antimatter counterparts of protons and electrons, respectively. The ALPHA team came up with a way to mix and trap these antiparticles much more efficiently.
Although the team had previously figured out a way to trap antihydrogen atoms in November of last year, the longest they were able to contain them was approximately 200 milliseconds, or less than a fifth of a second. They have now managed to lengthen that time to more than 1,000 seconds.
“This remarkable step forward will open the doors to a very precise and confident comparison of antihydrogens and hydrogens, as a comparison between antimatter and matter,” Ashkezari told The Peak.
“I call it a game changer,” said, Makoto Fujiwara, lead author of the study. He explained that the difficulty lies in keeping the antimatter in existence; the moment it touches matter, both are destroyed, creating pure energy in the process. With that obstacle out of the way, researchers are that much closer to being able to study the properties of antimatter.
“SFU has the leading role in microwave spectroscopy of trapped antihydrogens, which is one of the main goals of the ALPHA collaboration,” said Ashkezari.
Although the research may not provide any science fiction weapons technologies or large scale energy manufacturing, the researchers assert that studying the properties of antihydrogen and comparisons between antihydrogen and hydrogen could potentially provide answers to some of the most fundamental and difficult questions in the field of physics.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Obama's true stance on war
(Originally published in The Peak on April 04, 2011)
During the Democratic primary elections in 2008, Barack Obama made withdrawal from Iraq a large part of his platform. “I’m not opposed to all wars,” he famously stated, “I’m opposed to dumb wars.”
Now, of course, he’s got American troops dropping bombs on Libya — so does this war fall under the category of “not dumb”? It’s too early to see what the fallout will be, but Arab countries have a pretty poor track record when it comes to accommodating dictators, even democratically elected ones. Hoping against hope that the terrorist-affiliated rebels in Libya will restore some semblance of order seems like a long-shot at best, regardless of their motives. That’s the pessimist in me talking, though.
Here’s what the optimist says will happen in Libya: the rebels, aided by U.S.-led UN forces, will blast into town with shouts of democracy. Gadhafi’s forces will see the overwhelming resistance and take up the cause, ousting the Evil Dictator and restoring order. Of course, there will be an uphill battle to get the country back on its feet, but anything is possible now that they have democracy! And the terrorist-affiliated rebels? Well, let’s hope they aren’t totally on board with the terrorist rhetoric. Maybe they’re more like freedom fighters with slightly unsettling ideals, or perhaps the American aid they received will make them a little friendlier to the West.
The Obama administration has certainly taken the optimist’s side on this one. (Hope! Change!) They yearn for the aforementioned situation so strongly that they’ve backed a rebel movement that they know almost nothing about, except that it has questionable ties to Al Qaeda. This may not quite be a dumb war, but it certainly isn’t a smart one.
Given how few assurances they’ve had while deciding to attack the current Libyan government, I have a hard time believing that if Obama had been in Bush’s shoes after 9/11, he wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, as well.
The reason he was so critical of the Iraq invasion during the primaries was to differentiate himself from Hillary, who had voted in favour of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Now, it’s Secretary of State Clinton who’s pulling the U.S. interventionist strings in Libya, and Obama is right there with her.
The irony is that while he does this, his approval ratings are on the mend. Does this make him a good leader? No, it makes him a good politician.
During the Democratic primary elections in 2008, Barack Obama made withdrawal from Iraq a large part of his platform. “I’m not opposed to all wars,” he famously stated, “I’m opposed to dumb wars.”
Now, of course, he’s got American troops dropping bombs on Libya — so does this war fall under the category of “not dumb”? It’s too early to see what the fallout will be, but Arab countries have a pretty poor track record when it comes to accommodating dictators, even democratically elected ones. Hoping against hope that the terrorist-affiliated rebels in Libya will restore some semblance of order seems like a long-shot at best, regardless of their motives. That’s the pessimist in me talking, though.
Here’s what the optimist says will happen in Libya: the rebels, aided by U.S.-led UN forces, will blast into town with shouts of democracy. Gadhafi’s forces will see the overwhelming resistance and take up the cause, ousting the Evil Dictator and restoring order. Of course, there will be an uphill battle to get the country back on its feet, but anything is possible now that they have democracy! And the terrorist-affiliated rebels? Well, let’s hope they aren’t totally on board with the terrorist rhetoric. Maybe they’re more like freedom fighters with slightly unsettling ideals, or perhaps the American aid they received will make them a little friendlier to the West.
The Obama administration has certainly taken the optimist’s side on this one. (Hope! Change!) They yearn for the aforementioned situation so strongly that they’ve backed a rebel movement that they know almost nothing about, except that it has questionable ties to Al Qaeda. This may not quite be a dumb war, but it certainly isn’t a smart one.
Given how few assurances they’ve had while deciding to attack the current Libyan government, I have a hard time believing that if Obama had been in Bush’s shoes after 9/11, he wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, as well.
The reason he was so critical of the Iraq invasion during the primaries was to differentiate himself from Hillary, who had voted in favour of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Now, it’s Secretary of State Clinton who’s pulling the U.S. interventionist strings in Libya, and Obama is right there with her.
The irony is that while he does this, his approval ratings are on the mend. Does this make him a good leader? No, it makes him a good politician.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Zebras: More Dangerous than Cars?
(In response to "An Open Letter to the Minister of Transportation" by Stacey McLachlan)
On a sunny Zimbabwean day in October of last year, a crime occurred. The victim: Anne Mhidza, aged 40. The perpetrator: an equestrian mammal marked with alternating white and black markings, of the genus Equus, which you probably know as the zebra. The zebra? That friendly, beautiful creature which represents idyllic African landscapes and the letter 'Z' since kindergarten? Well, you can just do yourself a favour and forget everything you think you know about zebras. They are not "Nature's Referees," because if they were, they would be using their official-looking stripes to break up fights. Instead, they're starting them.
I know what you're thinking: surely Anna was antagonizing the animal. It's a wild beast, of course it will protect it's wildly adorable little self. Well, that wasn't the case at all. Anna's family raised it since it was a little baby zebra, who had no one to protect it from the harsh African wilderness. They raised it as their own and loved it and nurtured it, and it always appeared peaceful and docile; a page out of Stacey's idyllic imagination. Everything changed that tragic sunny African afternoon. Anne witnessed it attacking their livestock, and when she intervened, it ripped off part of her chest and a finger, like a serial killer.
My friend Stacey would have you believe that zebras are cuddly and adorable. She thinks you can ride them like so many striped segways, but at what cost? A boob and a digit, that's what cost.
You're confused now. It looks like a horse, it walks like a horse, it probably smells like a horse, so why can't you just slap a saddle on that guy and ride off into the sunset? Let me explain with Science. Unlike horses, zebras have no sense of hierarchy within the harem. Basically, zebras are the anarchists of the animal kingdom, leading their quiet revolution by appearing adorable and quiet and harmless, and then taking bites out of you when your back is turned. According to someone with Science Credentials who probably was bitten by an old zebra, they "become more and more vicious and likely to bite as they age."
So it won't respect you. It won't be your friend. You can forget about riding it. You can't even saddle them because their skin is too loose. If you really want to keep a zebra, my suggestion is in airtight bags in your freezer. Mmmmm!
On a sunny Zimbabwean day in October of last year, a crime occurred. The victim: Anne Mhidza, aged 40. The perpetrator: an equestrian mammal marked with alternating white and black markings, of the genus Equus, which you probably know as the zebra. The zebra? That friendly, beautiful creature which represents idyllic African landscapes and the letter 'Z' since kindergarten? Well, you can just do yourself a favour and forget everything you think you know about zebras. They are not "Nature's Referees," because if they were, they would be using their official-looking stripes to break up fights. Instead, they're starting them.
I know what you're thinking: surely Anna was antagonizing the animal. It's a wild beast, of course it will protect it's wildly adorable little self. Well, that wasn't the case at all. Anna's family raised it since it was a little baby zebra, who had no one to protect it from the harsh African wilderness. They raised it as their own and loved it and nurtured it, and it always appeared peaceful and docile; a page out of Stacey's idyllic imagination. Everything changed that tragic sunny African afternoon. Anne witnessed it attacking their livestock, and when she intervened, it ripped off part of her chest and a finger, like a serial killer.
My friend Stacey would have you believe that zebras are cuddly and adorable. She thinks you can ride them like so many striped segways, but at what cost? A boob and a digit, that's what cost.
You're confused now. It looks like a horse, it walks like a horse, it probably smells like a horse, so why can't you just slap a saddle on that guy and ride off into the sunset? Let me explain with Science. Unlike horses, zebras have no sense of hierarchy within the harem. Basically, zebras are the anarchists of the animal kingdom, leading their quiet revolution by appearing adorable and quiet and harmless, and then taking bites out of you when your back is turned. According to someone with Science Credentials who probably was bitten by an old zebra, they "become more and more vicious and likely to bite as they age."
So it won't respect you. It won't be your friend. You can forget about riding it. You can't even saddle them because their skin is too loose. If you really want to keep a zebra, my suggestion is in airtight bags in your freezer. Mmmmm!
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Don't let victims be talking points
(Originally published in The Peak on January 17, 2011)
On January 8, U.S. democratic congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head at a public gathering in Tucson, Arizona. Her attacker then turned on the rest of the crowd, shooting haphazardly until he ran out of ammunition. Although Giffords herself miraculously survived, a state judge and a nine-year-old girl were among the six others slain.
The logical reaction would be to assume that Sarah Palin was behind this, right? Not directly, maybe, but through what was described as her “violent political rhetoric”.
Of course the shooter was a right-wing hillbilly; of course he was inspired by Sarah Palin and the far-right Tea Party movement. Hours after the news broke, before anything was known about the identity of the gunman, it was claimed that Palin’s website had an image of Giffords with a cross-hair superimposed.
A Vancouver blogger summed it up on Twitter: “the dangers a large uneducated population of armed rednecks & a right wing [Palin], [Beck], [Limbaugh] hate machine urging them on . . .” Comments like this betray a misguided, reflexive spite that seeks to demonize before it seeks to answer.
The killer, as it turns out, is neither a radical Christian nor a right wing ideologue. His politics appear to be those of a paranoid lunatic, more concerned with the government’s secret mind control agenda than partial birth abortions. He was paradoxically a fan of both Marx’s Communist Manifesto and Hitler’s Mein Kampf. In fact, he was described by peers as “far left”.
The reaction of the press to this tragedy stands in stark contrast to the rational reaction to the Fort Hood shootings in November of 2009. In that case, which appeared to be a clear-cut case of Islamic extremism which resulted in 13 deaths, CNN repeatedly warned against “jumping to conclusions.” With all of the PR implications around such an event, it’s reasonable to be cautious about such matters. Get the facts right, and make sure to keep the speculation to a minimum.
But there was a very different attitude towards the Giffords shooting, where CNN’s Wolf Blitzer first pointed out that there was no evidence linking Palin to the shooter, and then continued to engage in discussion which speculated about ways in which there might be a connection, anyway. Ironically, the discussion has since spun into the power of rhetoric and the responsibility that politicians have for what they say and how they say it, the finger being not so subtly pointed at Palin and the GOP.
Whether this is true or not is irrelevant; this isn’t a message to be preached using the coffins of the victims as a makeshift soapbox.
On January 8, U.S. democratic congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head at a public gathering in Tucson, Arizona. Her attacker then turned on the rest of the crowd, shooting haphazardly until he ran out of ammunition. Although Giffords herself miraculously survived, a state judge and a nine-year-old girl were among the six others slain.
The logical reaction would be to assume that Sarah Palin was behind this, right? Not directly, maybe, but through what was described as her “violent political rhetoric”.
Of course the shooter was a right-wing hillbilly; of course he was inspired by Sarah Palin and the far-right Tea Party movement. Hours after the news broke, before anything was known about the identity of the gunman, it was claimed that Palin’s website had an image of Giffords with a cross-hair superimposed.
A Vancouver blogger summed it up on Twitter: “the dangers a large uneducated population of armed rednecks & a right wing [Palin], [Beck], [Limbaugh] hate machine urging them on . . .” Comments like this betray a misguided, reflexive spite that seeks to demonize before it seeks to answer.
The killer, as it turns out, is neither a radical Christian nor a right wing ideologue. His politics appear to be those of a paranoid lunatic, more concerned with the government’s secret mind control agenda than partial birth abortions. He was paradoxically a fan of both Marx’s Communist Manifesto and Hitler’s Mein Kampf. In fact, he was described by peers as “far left”.
The reaction of the press to this tragedy stands in stark contrast to the rational reaction to the Fort Hood shootings in November of 2009. In that case, which appeared to be a clear-cut case of Islamic extremism which resulted in 13 deaths, CNN repeatedly warned against “jumping to conclusions.” With all of the PR implications around such an event, it’s reasonable to be cautious about such matters. Get the facts right, and make sure to keep the speculation to a minimum.
But there was a very different attitude towards the Giffords shooting, where CNN’s Wolf Blitzer first pointed out that there was no evidence linking Palin to the shooter, and then continued to engage in discussion which speculated about ways in which there might be a connection, anyway. Ironically, the discussion has since spun into the power of rhetoric and the responsibility that politicians have for what they say and how they say it, the finger being not so subtly pointed at Palin and the GOP.
Whether this is true or not is irrelevant; this isn’t a message to be preached using the coffins of the victims as a makeshift soapbox.
Who owns the Gift Shop?
(Originally published in The Peak on January 17, 2011)
The rumors around street artist Banksy’s documentary Exit Through the Gift Shop aren’t stopping. First it was a question of the film’s authenticity. Now it has become a question of ownership.
Released as a documentary, the elusive Banksy appears on camera in a mask and voice modifier to tell the story of Thierry Guetta, a street art documentarian turned artist himself. Thierry climbed his way to the top of the street art ladder, beginning with Space Invader in France, then Shepard Fairy in California, eventually making his way to Banksy’s inner circle. He had his camera on the entire time. When it came time for Thierry to produce the documentary he’d been promising, the result was a film called Life Remote Control, which was, for all intents and purposes, 90 minutes of complete nonsense. Banksy took the thousands of hours of Guetta’s footage and decided to make a documentary of his own. Exit Through the Gift Shop is the result.
Banksy insists that the Gift Shop material is authentic.
“If I’d written it myself there would have been a car chase and lasers. Unfortunately there’s neither,” he said in an (anonymous) interview. Critics didn’t care much; they said the intrigue added to the film.
Rumors persist about an impending Oscar nomination. A wanted street artist, the most famous anonymous person in the world, who seems to spend most of his time thinking up ways to poke fun at the establishment, could be nominated for an Oscar. Will the irony never cease?
Now Jaques Levy, the filmmaker who helped Guetta put together Life Remote Control, wants credit for his work, which only adds to the discussion. If Exit is a ruse, then it only becomes more elaborate. If it’s authentic, then it’s just getting more complicated.
If the film truly is about challenging the artistic values that we hold, I find a deeper sense of irony that Banksy, and everyone else involved, still rides the monetary wave of success that his fame has brought him.
“Graffiti isn’t meant to last forever. I’d prefer someone draw a moustache and glasses on one of my pieces than encase it in Perspex,” he says. Of course, that’s easy enough when no one knows who you are, and with Levy looking for his pound of flesh, this philosophy might have to take a back seat to more practical considerations.
The film sits in the public eye like everything else Banksy does: half beautiful, half shocking, and with just a dash of hypocrisy.
The rumors around street artist Banksy’s documentary Exit Through the Gift Shop aren’t stopping. First it was a question of the film’s authenticity. Now it has become a question of ownership.
Released as a documentary, the elusive Banksy appears on camera in a mask and voice modifier to tell the story of Thierry Guetta, a street art documentarian turned artist himself. Thierry climbed his way to the top of the street art ladder, beginning with Space Invader in France, then Shepard Fairy in California, eventually making his way to Banksy’s inner circle. He had his camera on the entire time. When it came time for Thierry to produce the documentary he’d been promising, the result was a film called Life Remote Control, which was, for all intents and purposes, 90 minutes of complete nonsense. Banksy took the thousands of hours of Guetta’s footage and decided to make a documentary of his own. Exit Through the Gift Shop is the result.
Banksy insists that the Gift Shop material is authentic.
“If I’d written it myself there would have been a car chase and lasers. Unfortunately there’s neither,” he said in an (anonymous) interview. Critics didn’t care much; they said the intrigue added to the film.
Rumors persist about an impending Oscar nomination. A wanted street artist, the most famous anonymous person in the world, who seems to spend most of his time thinking up ways to poke fun at the establishment, could be nominated for an Oscar. Will the irony never cease?
Now Jaques Levy, the filmmaker who helped Guetta put together Life Remote Control, wants credit for his work, which only adds to the discussion. If Exit is a ruse, then it only becomes more elaborate. If it’s authentic, then it’s just getting more complicated.
If the film truly is about challenging the artistic values that we hold, I find a deeper sense of irony that Banksy, and everyone else involved, still rides the monetary wave of success that his fame has brought him.
“Graffiti isn’t meant to last forever. I’d prefer someone draw a moustache and glasses on one of my pieces than encase it in Perspex,” he says. Of course, that’s easy enough when no one knows who you are, and with Levy looking for his pound of flesh, this philosophy might have to take a back seat to more practical considerations.
The film sits in the public eye like everything else Banksy does: half beautiful, half shocking, and with just a dash of hypocrisy.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Top 10 Top 10 Lists of 2010
To commemorate the year of our Lord 2010, I've compiled the very best top 10 lists of 2010. These lists are typically popular culture and such, but the internet is a big place, and people love lists, so I've gone a little rogue. Don't be fooled by top 10 top 10 lists like this one, which has stuff like "Top 10 controversial movies of all time". Bush League.
Enjoy, and happy 2011.
1. Top 10 Weirdest New Animals of 2010
I thought that this would be mostly amoebas and AIDS vaccines or whatever, but it turns out there's an actual monkey that they didn't know existed! And then the locals killed and ate the last one, but that's still pretty cool. Also note the self-cloning lizard that is only female.
2. Top 10 Albums of 2010
No top 10 of top 10 lists would be complete without the top albums. Of all the top 10 album lists this year, this is the one I come the closest to agreeing with. Minus the Kanye of course, but I defy you to find a top album listing that does not have that album as number 1. I defy you.
3. Top 10 Al Jazeera News Stories of 2010
What can I say? The Arabs really bring it journalistically. Wikileaks at the top, and Europe's failing economy at the bottom, with Chilean miners and the oil spill somewhere in the middle.
4. The World's Top 10 Airlines of 2010
The cream really rises to the top with this one; both practical and informative. More than anything though, it really makes me want to go this annual "World Airline Awards" show, which previously I did not know existed.
5. Top 10 YouTube Videos of 2010
This one may be a little more quantitative than the others, since this is based purely on popularity, but still pretty important. Although you've probably seen them all before anyways. Yeah, you might as well skip this one entirely.
6. The 10 Most Disappointing Games of 2010
I'm not a huge gamer, but I did play Alan Wake, and that's the first one on their list. I was really excited for that game. It wasn't that good. Let's commemorate that.
7. The Top 10 Movies of 2010
This is probably the worst movie ranking list ever, because a legitimate one is just too boring. Gaze upon how Hereafter is number 8, and True Grit is number 5.
8. Top 10 Photos of 2010
I know what you're thinking: "Woah, photography! this will be cool!" but you would be wrong. This isn't the top 10 photographs of 2010, this is the top 10 photos, which means that they're of celebrities. As well as an alarming number of celebrities' children (three).
9. Top 10 Party Schools of 2010
Because you will never, ever, have this, SFU students.
10. The Top 10 Strategic Technologies of 2010
This is by far the most boring top 10 list. Some examples of strategic technologies are "Virtualization for Availability" and "Cloud Computing". Yeah.
Enjoy, and happy 2011.
1. Top 10 Weirdest New Animals of 2010
I thought that this would be mostly amoebas and AIDS vaccines or whatever, but it turns out there's an actual monkey that they didn't know existed! And then the locals killed and ate the last one, but that's still pretty cool. Also note the self-cloning lizard that is only female.
2. Top 10 Albums of 2010
No top 10 of top 10 lists would be complete without the top albums. Of all the top 10 album lists this year, this is the one I come the closest to agreeing with. Minus the Kanye of course, but I defy you to find a top album listing that does not have that album as number 1. I defy you.
3. Top 10 Al Jazeera News Stories of 2010
What can I say? The Arabs really bring it journalistically. Wikileaks at the top, and Europe's failing economy at the bottom, with Chilean miners and the oil spill somewhere in the middle.
4. The World's Top 10 Airlines of 2010
The cream really rises to the top with this one; both practical and informative. More than anything though, it really makes me want to go this annual "World Airline Awards" show, which previously I did not know existed.
5. Top 10 YouTube Videos of 2010
This one may be a little more quantitative than the others, since this is based purely on popularity, but still pretty important. Although you've probably seen them all before anyways. Yeah, you might as well skip this one entirely.
6. The 10 Most Disappointing Games of 2010
I'm not a huge gamer, but I did play Alan Wake, and that's the first one on their list. I was really excited for that game. It wasn't that good. Let's commemorate that.
7. The Top 10 Movies of 2010
This is probably the worst movie ranking list ever, because a legitimate one is just too boring. Gaze upon how Hereafter is number 8, and True Grit is number 5.
8. Top 10 Photos of 2010
I know what you're thinking: "Woah, photography! this will be cool!" but you would be wrong. This isn't the top 10 photographs of 2010, this is the top 10 photos, which means that they're of celebrities. As well as an alarming number of celebrities' children (three).
9. Top 10 Party Schools of 2010
Because you will never, ever, have this, SFU students.
10. The Top 10 Strategic Technologies of 2010
This is by far the most boring top 10 list. Some examples of strategic technologies are "Virtualization for Availability" and "Cloud Computing". Yeah.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Literally True Grit
I should begin by saying that I haven't seen True Grit. I haven't read any reviews, although it's hard to avoid any chatter about it, as it has already been out for a few days now. I haven't seen it, but I already know I'll love it because this is Bridges in the role he has always meant to play, the role that he has always danced around, and he's finally fulfilling.
It's almost the reverse of typecasting, in the way that actors like Tom Cruise plays Some Dude from the Eighties, or how Daniel Radcliffe literally is Harry Potter.
Bridges has always played the part of the rogue cowboy. Take his seminal role in Lebowski. He is a sarcastic, laid back, devil-may-care fellow, with few material possessions and always ready for a drink. He loves his simple life of bowling and smoking pot, but he's got this thing about justice and restoration of balance. Still not convinced? Add to this his admiring narrator (literally is a cowboy) and you can see the point.
That's why I'm excited to see True Grit; Rooster Cogburn literally is Jeff Bridges.
It's almost the reverse of typecasting, in the way that actors like Tom Cruise plays Some Dude from the Eighties, or how Daniel Radcliffe literally is Harry Potter.
Bridges has always played the part of the rogue cowboy. Take his seminal role in Lebowski. He is a sarcastic, laid back, devil-may-care fellow, with few material possessions and always ready for a drink. He loves his simple life of bowling and smoking pot, but he's got this thing about justice and restoration of balance. Still not convinced? Add to this his admiring narrator (literally is a cowboy) and you can see the point.
That's why I'm excited to see True Grit; Rooster Cogburn literally is Jeff Bridges.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)