Oculus Science Journal
Issue 8
FOCUS —Phosphine on Venus: Sign of Life or False Alarm? By JIWON LEE
Figure 1: A close-up view of Venus; the different gases present in its atmosphere are visible. Source Credit: MIT News(LINK) In the last issue, one of our writers, John, wrote about the possible existence of life on Titan, despite most of humanity’s extraterrestrial endeavors being focused on Mars. Having read his article and become interested, I delved into the topic and found another recent development in our planetary system; the discovery of phosphine in Venus’ atmosphere, pointing to the possibility of life existing on the planet. Before we move onto talking about the specifics of said discovery, let us examine why exactly investigating extraterrestrial life is so important. Looking for life outside of our planet is a somewhat odd endeavor — we cannot disprove the existence of other life, so as long as we do not stumble across another galactic civilization, the hypotheses that fuels much of space exploration cannot be supported nor revoked. Why then, are we so keen on looking for life beyond Earth? The answer may range from something simple, such as that we are merely curious, to more ominous answers such as the
future possibility of humans relocating to another planet. Perhaps it is a reflection of the rate of our technological growth — the small boundaries of Earth cannot satisfy our scientific yearnings, leading us to venture outside of its atmospheres into new areas. Whatever the reason, it is indisputable that space exploration is the forefront of modern human development and may help us cultivate new knowledge and abilities. Exploration, in fact, has always been responsible for the most drastic changes in human society, starting from the exploratory ventures of early mankind to the Age of Discovery in modern times. Our more recent infatuation with space exploration, in a sense, may be no different. We have merely evolved from exploring new lands on boats to sending satellites to space. It is with this understanding that we take a look at the discovery of phosphine on Venus and why this points toward the possibility of life on the planet. Light signatures associated with phosphine were first detected in Venus’ atmosphere by a team of scientists from MIT and Cardiff University. Phosphine, because of its chemical qualities, are impossible to create with abiotic processes that could possibly occur in Venus’ harsh conditions. This logic points to two possibilities: that either life does exist on Venus, or that this phosphine was created through processes that scientists did not expect that the temperature and chemical composition of Venus could recreate. On Earth, phosphine is created by industrial sources such as fumigants — toxic gases — or from biological sources such as microbes. Humanity has yet to find other chemical processes that could possibly result in the creation of phosphine, and the chances of doing so are very slim, given that humans have already found all naturally-occurring elements and have examined possible chemical reactions between them. Thus, the likelihood of the second possibility is near to none. Moreover, given that industrial sources do not exist on Venus, the discovery of phosphine unquestionably points toward the existence of life on the planet. However, there is a potential counterargument: that the very sighting of phosphine by scientists was incorrect. A new team of scientists have reasoned that the light signal may have come from sulfur dioxide (SO2), a common gas on Venus. They have also listed a number of other reasons why life forms existing on Venus is very unlikely, many of which discuss Venus’ uninhabitable environment. Although Venus is approximately the same size and mass as Earth, its soaring temperatures and lack of nutrients make it difficult for life forms to exist on the planet. The only possibility of life is in the planet’s atmosphere, which is also quite inhospitable as it contains thick clouds of sulfuric acid and liquid droplets that are billions of times more acidic than the most acidic environment on Earth.
However, there is a tiny strip of area with the right temperature and environment for life to potentially exist within Venus’ atmosphere. Located between 48 to 60 kilometers from the planet’s surface, temperatures are relatively lower at 30 to 200 degrees Fahrenheit. This, coincidentally, was where scientists located the phosphine light signals. Conclusively, it is somewhat unclear whether the phosphine sightings were truly correct and whether or not phosphine is absolute evidence of the existence of life. Nevertheless, this recent discovery is an exciting development in our continuing effort to find extraterrestrial organisms. It can also be argued that all space exploration is unclear; we are uncertain as to whether microbes inhabit Mars — or any other planet, for that matter. The purpose of exploration is not to reach a definite conclusion, but rather to strive to make new discoveries that will help us continue to modify our ever-changing perceptions of ourselves and the world around us. We did not know why apples fell before Newton discovered gravity; our works on Mars, Pluto, and Venus may just be efforts to find the right cosmic apple.
Works Cited: Chu, Jennifer. “Astronomers May Have Found a Signature of Life on Venus.” MIT News, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 14 Sept. 2020, news.mit.edu/2020/life-venus-phosphine-0914. Shostak, Seth. “Why Look for Extraterrestrial Life?” SETI Institute, SETI Institute, 30 June 2020, www.seti.org/why-look-extraterrestrial-life. Witze, Alexandra. “Life on Venus Claim Faces Strongest Challenge Yet.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 28 Jan. 2021, www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00249-y.
Just Add More: Tendencies with Problem Solving By ERIC YOON The novelties of solving a problem lie in the number of ways there are to approach the problem. In this infinite variety, it seems obvious that we as humans would approach problems in a myriad of ways—after all, we as individuals are the sum collection of different experiences, and how we approach issues likely differs to that extent as well. New research shows, however, that underlying patterns exist in the way we solve problems: when given the choice, individuals are likely to add elements to an existing problem rather than taking things away. A simple test led by a team of researchers at the University of Virginia introduces this phenomenon with Legos. When participants of their study were asked how they would change the structure of the building if a masonry block was placed on top of the roof, with a cost of 10 cents to add a Lego block, participants consistently opted to add blocks to the roof as opposed to removing the existing pillar support, though the solution of removing the block is both more elegant and cost-effective.
Figure 1: The Lego structure used in the test. Source: nature.com (LINK)
A few conclusions can be drawn from the results of the researchers: participants may have been primed by being given a cost for the blocks, nudging them to not consider the option of removing
a block from the first place. It also illustrates the main takeaway of this article, being that participants were inclined to promote additive rather than subtractive solutions. There are a wide range of implications of this phenomenon. For one, it illustrates how our brains are wired and why we fall into traps like the sunk-cost fallacy when trying to solve problems. This comes into play in fields such as marketing in business, where Overall, knowing the individual biases allows us to make better decisions that avoid falling into the fallacies that feel natural. The study of choices is a subject that has wide-ranging applications from politics to economics to medicine, and as such has great necessity to be better understood.
Works Cited: Adams, Gabrielle S et al. “People systematically overlook subtractive changes.” Nature vol. 592,7853 (2021): 258-261. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03380-y Fujino, Junya et al. “Neural mechanisms and personality correlates of the sunk cost effect.” Scientific reports vol. 6 33171. 9 Sep. 2016, doi:10.1038/srep33171
Releasing radioactive wastewater into the ocean: a safe solution for Fukushima? By XAVIER KIM
Figure 1: An aerial photograph of the hundreds of water-filled tanks crammed onto the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant site. Source Credit: Science Magazine (LINK) Last month marked the 10-year anniversary of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake that struck fear into the hearts of many. As the earthquake of the highest magnitude in Japan’s history, its tremors were felt all throughout the country: 19,000 lives were lost, and over 100,000 more were displaced, with some still not having returned to their homes to this day. Among the devastating legacy of the earthquake is the nuclear disaster that ensued at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, an environmental issue that made international headlines earlier this month when the Government of Japan finalized their plan to discharge an estimated 1.25 million tons of contaminated wastewater into the ocean. As soon as the 9.0 magnitude earthquake hit on March 11, 2011, the nuclear reactors at the power plant shut down immediately. At this point, however, the potential for a catastrophe was relatively limited. The real damage arrived when a massive tsunami, towering as high as 15
meters above sea level, disabled the cooling and power supply of three Fukushima Daiichi reactors. The reactor cores melted in the first three days following the earthquake. Ever since the nuclear meltdown, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the operators of the power plant, has continued the cleanup process to avoid further casualties. The operation includes pumping water through the reactors to cool melted fuel, then the gathering of the water at a decontamination facility. A filtration system is utilized at this stage, yet reports by TEPCO show that the technology is not perfect. The water runs through TEPCO’s Advanced Liquid Processing System, a complex, powerful chain of filters that effectively removes 62 types of radionuclides. However, some radioactive materials are exempt from this list, including tritium, an isotope of hydrogen. Scientists say this particular radionuclide is difficult to remove from water as the isotope replaces the hydrogen atoms from the water molecules. And with a half life of over 12 years, one point of concern is their potential to linger in the ocean long into the future. Fortunately, tritium is relatively harmless to both marine life and human health. In addition to this, the government has promised to release the radioactive material in trace amounts, diluting it to a mere fortieth of what national guidelines allow in drinking water. Some bigger areas of concern are the presence of other isotypes in the water: ruthenium, cobalt, strontium, and plutonium. These radionuclides exhibit more troublesome characteristics than tritium such as their tendency to accumulate in seafloor sediments. If this occurs, they can be consumed by marine biota, then be carried up to the food chain through biomagnification. With this in mind, it will be important to approach the discharge process with the utmost caution. Finally, after the filtration process, the wastewater is sent to storage. Currently, they fill up over 1,000 large steel tanks packed onto the plants site. The International Atomic Energy Agency predicted the capacity to be met by mid-2022, which pressured the government to launch action in the first place. While the Japanese government and TEPCO have been transparent with the whole issue, insisting that they are acting in accordance with international nuclear safety standards, this has not been enough to convince all activists. Greenpeace Japan has strongly opposed the notion, and criticized the government for opting for the cheapest option. Other environmental organizations agree, pushing to construct more steel tanks on land nearby the power plant, buying time to develop better solutions and also allowing the radioactive isotopes to naturally decay. The common people are not completely on board, either. A national survey conducted last year showed that 55 percent of respondents opposed the plan. Worries are largest among Fukushima locals, especially fishermen who are concerned that the decision’s effects will ripple across the
fishing industry. Demand for their products declined starting in 2011 over concerns of contamination, and they worry that public fears will revive following the dumping of the contaminated water. The International Atomic Energy Agency has backed up the government, stating that the plan does in fact respect safety regulations. The release of the water is expected to start in 2 years, and may take as long as 40 years to complete.
Works Cited: Greenpeace International. “The Japanese Government's Decision to Discharge Fukushima Contaminated Water Ignores Human Rights and International Maritime Law.” Greenpeace International, 13 Apr. 2021, www.greenpeace.org/international/press-release/47207/the-japanese-governments-decisio n-to-discharge-fukushima-contaminated-water-ignores-human-rights-and-international-m aritime-law/. Jett, Jennifer, and Ben Dooley. “Fukushima Wastewater Will Be Released Into the Ocean, Japan Says.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 12 Apr. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/world/asia/japan-fukushima-wastewater-ocean.html. Normille, Dennis. “Japan Plans to Release Fukushima's Wastewater into the Ocean.” Science, 13 Apr. 2021, www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/japan-plans-release-fukushima-s-contaminated-wate r-ocean. Rich, Motoko. “Struggling With Japan's Nuclear Waste, Six Years After Disaster.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 Mar. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/03/11/world/asia/struggling-with-japans-nuclear-waste-six-years -after-disaster.html?module=inline.
The resurrection of the woolly mammoth By HUGH KANG Big woolly mammoths are a thing of the past. Having gone extinct approximately 3,700 years ago, woolly mammoths were giant creatures that roamed the planet during the Ice Age. However, due to rising sea levels and temperatures, mammoths were trapped on an island called Wrangel Island, where they spent their final days as a species.
Figure 1: Realistic illustration of the woolly mammoth Source: Aunt_Spray Getty Images However, with the recent developments of biotechnological innovations, the idea of resurrecting the woolly mammoths became a thought that crossed the minds of many scientists around the world. Of course, this species that could possibly be brought back would not be the carbon copies of the creatures that roamed the earth 10,000 years ago. They would be considered “proxy species,” with traits and ecological roles that would imitate the original species. The reason why the woolly Mammoth became a frontrunning candidate for a potential resurrection project was because of their uncanny similarities with the current living species: the Asian elephant. Reportedly, the animals have not only demonstrated a similarity in the genomes, but the scientists working on the project also found that many of the traits of the woolly
mammoth could be coded into the genomes of the Asian elephant, resulting in a glimpse of scientific hope for resurrection. However, considering the massive changes that our planet has undergone in terms of temperature, environment, and landscape, the woolly mammoth revival project would place emphasis on simply creating an adaptation of the current Asian elephants that would be able to survive in the Arctic climate, rather than resurrecting the species for yada yada (make sure what you’re comparing the purpose of the project to a is made a little clearer). So, why would we need to bring back an ancient species? First and foremost, these species could be a tide-changing tool in our fight against climate change. With the presence of woolly mammoths, many of the insulation layers of snow would be compacted and cleared away from their simple movements, allowing the soil to not experience the harsh effects of the winter freeze. Without such a presence in addition to the warming summers, permafrost is melted at a significantly higher rate and previously contained greenhouse gases are released. Additionally, the work of Dr. Sergey Zimov, the director of Northeast Science Station, has even revealed that introducing such grazers to our current tundras could transform the ecosystem in a way that allows permafrost to maintain its levels during the winter. Moreover, studying such ancient DNA in its purest life form would also reveal new discoveries that could change modern medicine. Understanding the information that is hidden in the genomes of Asian elephants could allow us to discover new information about mammal hemoglobin, translating to new discoveries in human diseases. However, most importantly, this project will be a great step towards the conservation of large mammal species. Due to the growth of the ivory tusk black market, poaching is increasingly becoming an issue. Advancing the reproductive technologies of these elephants could finally bring this issue to an end, while simultaneously bring us new advancement in the medical and biological fields.
Works Cited: Schnebly, Risa. “The Embryo Project Encyclopedia.” Revive & Restore's Woolly Mammoth Revival Project | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia, Arizona State University. School of Life Sciences. Center for Biology and Society. Embryo Project Encyclopedia., 19 Aug. 2020, embryo.asu.edu/pages/revive-restores-woolly-mammoth-revival-project#:~:text=As of 2020, researchers have,method for reintroducing extinct species. “WOOLLY MAMMOTH REVIVAL.” Revive & Restore, reviverestore.org/projects/woolly-mammoth/.
Let’s put our heads into the clouds By SALLY LEE
Figure 1: An illustration representing the minds of individuals daydreaming Source Credit: Mental Health Today (Link) Our minds wander around all the time. After watching a fantasy movie, we daydream about being a queen with magical, icy hands or a wizard shouting “Expecto Patronum!” to our greatest enemy. A surprising number of us love to engage in pretend plays in our minds; in fact, in a study where approximately 2200 adults between ages 18 and 88 were asked to report their thoughts and actions regularly, the researchers were surprised to find that about 50 percent of the times, they were daydreaming of positive thoughts like being promoted, exploring a new island, or inventing a new space travel. However, daydreaming has long been considered a bad indication of mental health or academic performance, and we often hear others saying “get your heads out of the clouds!” whenever our minds are floating in our own fascinations. And they are not entirely wrong. Hypothesizing the worst scenarios and excessive daydreaming of intrusive thoughts may be symptoms of mental illnesses, such as anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and depression. In other words, daydreaming may be harmful to those whose minds struggle to concentrate or involuntarily fall into a loop of unwanted imaginary thoughts. Our minds are, in many cases, uncontrollable. We do not know where they are shifting to, and it is difficult to push them in a certain direction. The level of control we have over our minds depends on each individual, but those that find themselves helpless in most situations are often victims of rumination, otherwise known as having repeated negative thoughts. Some research even revealed that it is associated with low academic performance, poor reading comprehension skills, a bad mood and spotty memories.
Despite its negative consequences, not all daydreaming is a result of cognitive failure, as may be assumed by some. Some people can actually choose to daydream, engaging in another form of mind wandering called volitional daydreaming. Individuals who decide to decouple their attention and are fully conscious of an internal stream of imagination are engaged in this form of mind wandering, which sheds light on the positive effects and relates to what Jerome Singer, a former professor at Pennsylvania State University, has proposed: positive constructive daydreaming. Positive constructive daydreaming provides various advantages, such as enhanced social skills, happiness, and creativity. According to an article from National Geographic, our brain parts, even ones that have been inactive, are simulated during daydreaming, allowing us to think in a new direction with wisdom and creativity. Furthermore, daydreaming helps us rehearse and plan future goals, giving us an opportunity to reinforce, reflect, and digest thoughts and memories. Daydreaming is also useful in mental therapies as a tool to relieve anxiety. Abigail Nathanson, a trauma therapist, often utilizes daydreaming to help her patients heal painful memories. By letting them imagine their source of conflicts or emotions as something metaphoric, such as a wall or a brick, Dr. Nathanson provides them time to reflect and reevaluate their memories closely. She would ask them questions like, ‘what are you wearing in front of the brick wall?’ or ‘what is underneath your feet?’ and help them overcome their mental complications by suggesting them to take certain actions in their minds, such as breaking the brick or kicking the wall. Even though these actions are imaginary, they are more effective and powerful in mental therapies than we expect. All in all, daydreaming may contribute to our mental health and satisfaction if utilized positively. We often experience guilt after waking up from our numerous daydreams, feeling bad about ourselves for our low productivity and concentration. However, now that we are aware of the advantages of daydreaming in our daily lives as well as therapies, it now seems as if the punishment was unnecessary. Of course, extreme level of mind wandering is, as aforementioned, harmful, but engaging regularly in daydreaming poses enough benefits that fulfills our mental satisfaction and gratification. However, there seems to be a number of positive effects to keeping our heads in the clouds, if used correctly and purposefully.
Works Cited: Feldman, David B. “Why Daydreaming Is Good for Us.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 19 Dec. 2017, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/supersurvivors/201712/why-daydreaming-is-good-us. Ferguson, Sian. “Can Excessive Daydreaming Be a Symptom of Mental Illness?” Healthline, Healthline Media, 28 Oct. 2019, www.healthline.com/health/mental-health/excessive-daydreaming-symptom-of-mental-illn ess. McMillan, Rebecca L, et al. “Ode to Positive Constructive Daydreaming.” Frontiers in Psychology, Frontiers Media S.A., 23 Sept. 2013, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3779797/. Renner, Rebecca. “Don't Take Your Head Out of the Clouds!” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 Apr. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/04/10/at-home/daydreaming.html.
Fighting a disease spread by mosquitoes with mosquitoes By HANNAH KIM
Figure 1: Research of genetically modifying mosquitoes to prevent the spread of malaria is in the process of developing. Although there are some issues with gene drives, scientists are trying their best to bring the idea to real life. Source Credit: Flickr.com (LINK) Every year, more than one million people die of malaria, most of them being children under the age of five. In fact, one child dies every 30 seconds due to this disease, making the daily death count approximately 3000 children. If this is such a big problem, why is nothing being done to stop it? In fact, scientists have found an antimalarial drug called Chloroquine back in 1934; treatments have improved over the years, and the disease is eliminated in most developed countries today. However, malaria still remains a deadly threat in many developing countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. Why would this be if treatments for malaria already exist? For one, developing countries lack the resources and governmental support to build a malaria prevention program. The low-cost drugs that most people are using for malaria treatments are becoming more and more ineffective, as about 70 percent of malaria cases are resistant to cheap drugs, and most effective treatments often cost ten times more than traditional antimalarials. However, the biggest problem lies in mosquitoes since they are able to transmit malaria very efficiently. Even worse, warm and humid environments allow the mosquitoes, such as Anopheles
gambiae, and the malaria parasites to thrive. Thus, it is difficult to eliminate or even reduce the population of mosquitoes in many of these developing countries. However, a new ongoing research sparks a new possible way of preventing malaria. Recently, researchers have begun a study on genetically modifying mosquitoes to carry antimalarial genes and breeding them. This method––called gene drives––uses a gene-editing technology called CRISPR-Cas9 to insert a gene that codes for antimalarial protein into the mosquito’s genes. The mosquitoes are then released to breed with other mosquitoes, limiting their ability to spread the parasite. Another approach of gene drive aims to modify the genes of mosquitoes to create offspring that are mostly male, thus reducing the population. However, scientists are hesitant to take this approach because of the possibility that they could cause irreversible damage to the ecosystem. On the other hand, some say that gene drives would actually prevent damaging the ecosystem because of its ability to target specific species. Other mosquito species that don’t transmit malaria will not be affected by this modification. Furthermore, gene drives are believed to be more cost-effective than previous methods. Alekos Simoni, a researcher at Imperial College London working in the development of gene drives, stated that there was significant progress in reducing malaria for the past 15 to 20 years, but recently, the decline was stalled. The halt, he said, was due to a lack of investment. However, researchers hope that gene drives would be able to solve this problem. Unfortunately, gene drives are not perfect. It is impossible to predict the consequences of using gene drives on a wild population. In fact, more than 75 environmental organizations prompted the EU commission to impose a suspension on the use of gene drives since many believe that it would be more wise to discuss the issue in depth and run more tests indoors to ensure the safety of the experiment. To address the potential issue of gene drives causing long term harm on the ecosystem, Target Malaria, a non-profit research organization, is running a study in Ghana on the role of malaria-transmitting mosquitoes in the ecosystem. So far it seems that Anopheles mosquitoes do not play a major role in the ecosystem, although further research is being carried out. An additional concern is the potential of gene drive spreading uncontrollably beyond country borders, leading to environmental and legal issues. In response to those concerns, the scientists at the University of California San Diego developed two genetic systems that would stop or eliminate the gene drive. The first system, called e-CHACR, mutates and inactivates the Cas9 gene by using the enzyme Cas9 in the gene drive. e-CHACR can be inherited like a normal gene until it encounters a gene drive, where it would then cause the gene drive’s inactivation. The second system, called ERACR, entirely eliminates the gene drive by cutting the either sides of CAS9 and removing it. The gap is then filled up with a copy of the ERACR gene.
Whether this method will actually be used is still unknown. The scientists are continuing to run tests in an attempt to address all the concerns because if this technology could be perfected, there is little doubt that it would be a breakthrough in not only epidemiology, but also in genetic engineering. Until then, the only thing we can do is spread awareness of this issue so that more people would be more willing to help.
Works Cited: Albert, Helen. “Gene Drives: A Controversial Tool in the Fight Against Malaria.” Labiotech.eu, 2 Nov. 2020, www.labiotech.eu/in-depth/gene-drives-controversy/#:~:text=Researchers are introducing gene drives,to pass on the parasite.&text=So they can target many,just mosquitoes,” emphasizes Simoni. Biologists Create New Genetic Systems to Neutralize Gene Drives, 18 Sept. 2020, ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelease/biologists-create-new-genetic-systems-to-neutralize-genedrives. “CDC - Malaria - About Malaria - FAQs.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 26 Jan. 2021, www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/faqs.html#:~:text=eradicated years ago?-,No.,subtropical parts of the world. Scudellari, Megan. “Self-Destructing Mosquitoes and Sterilized Rodents: the Promise of Gene Drives.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 9 July 2019, www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02087-5. UNICEF. “The Reality of Malaria.” UNICEF, www.unicef.org/media/files/MALARIAFACTSHEETAFRICA.pdf.
The g-2 Experiment: Why a Fifth Fundamental Force is a Stretch of Reasoning By JOHN K. LEE
Figure 1: The 50-foot-wide G-2 detector that was used in Fermilab’s experiment. Source Credit: Fermilab News (LINK) What is everything made of? Surely, most people would have learnt in their chemistry classes that we are made up of atoms (originating from the Greek word atomos, meaning “indivisible”)—the so-called “fundamental units of matter.” This is, to some extent, true; however, its namesake indivisibility is incorrect. Ever since the advent of quantum mechanics in the early 1900s, scientists have built upon what is now called the standard model of particle physics. This model suggests that a small number of elementary particles not only constitute everything in the universe, but also mediate all the interactions between each particle. Each of these elementary particles are related to its quantum field, in that each particle is merely an excitation in their respective fields. The framework delineating the interactions between elementary particles within these fields is called quantum field theory.
Figure 2: The Standard Model of Particle Physics. Source Credit: Wikipedia User Cush, Individual Work (LINK) As can be seen in the diagram above, the elementary particles are mainly divided into the fermions and the bosons. The fermions are generally thought of as the constituents of matter, while the bosons are the mediators of force (the Higgs boson is a bit special, but more on that later). The fermions are further subdivided into the quarks and leptons. Quarks are the particles that constitute the nucleus of an atom and interact via the strong force, while leptons are those that reside outside the nucleus, and interact via only the electromagnetic and weak forces. The fermions can also be subdivided into different generations. Each subsequent generation is composed of elementary particles with relatively greater mass and shorter lifetimes. For example, the electron, a first generation lepton, has a mass of 0.511 MeV/c^2 and a lifetime of 6.6 × 10^28 years. The tau, a third generation lepton, has a mass of 1776.86 MeV/c^2 and a lifetime of 2.9 × 10^-13 years. There are five types of bosons— gluons, the mediators of the strong nuclear force; photons, the mediators of the electromagnetic force; and the z0 and w± bosons, which are the mediators of the weak nuclear force. The fourth fundamental force, gravity, is not yet accounted for by the standard model. If there were indeed a fifth fundamental force, it would imply that there is
another class of bosons mediating that force. The last boson—the Higgs—is very crucial to the model in that every particle is able to be imbued mass by interacting with the Higgs field. All the elementary particles have an antimatter counterpart (some bosons are antiparticles of themselves), but this discussion is mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand. What is relevant, though, is the second generation lepton, called the muon, denoted by the greek letter μ (mu). These particles are quite similar to the electron as they have the same charge of -1 and spin of ½. However, it has a greater mass, and much shorter mean lifetime of only 2.2 microseconds. After living its lifetime, a muon decays into an electron, an electron antineutrino, and a muon antineutrino. What the G-2 experiment at Fermilab was to measure the anomalous magnetic dipole moment of the muon. But what is an anomalous magnetic dipole moment? When an elementary particle displays quantum spin, it generates a dipole magnetic field (a magnetic field with a north and a south pole). When such a particle is thus placed into another magnetic field, it rotates in order to align with that magnetic field. This aligning torque (or rotating force) on the particle is what is known as its magnetic moment. Now, due to quantum effects, each elementary particle is imbued with a g-factor, which is a kind of constant of proportionality between its magnetic moment and another quantity required for calculation of the magnetic moment (more specifically, the charge of the particle multiplied by angular momentum and divided by 2 times its mass)and this g-factor can be precisely calculated with our theory of the standard model. The g-factor can be calculated in two ways: by using the Dirac equation (which only accounts for the simplest quantum interactions between a particle and a magnetic field) or by taking into account more diverse quantum interactions the particle may have with the field. The g-factor of the muon, calculated by the first method, turns out to be 2, and by the second method, 2.001159652181643. The difference between these two numbers is defined as the anomalous magnetic moment. However, it turns out that the anomalous magnetic moment measured by the recent Fermilab experiment deviates from the estimated anomalous magnetic moment. Furthermore, the results show a confidence level of about 4.1 sigma - that is, there is a “1/40000 chance that the result could be a statistical fluke”, according to BBC. This interesting result led scientists to believe that maybe our current standard model is incomplete. While some scientists believe that the results of the experiment may have been disturbed due to the chance of muons interacting with other, rarely-occurring virtual particles (a short-lived quantum fluctuation), others believe that the results may hint at the existence of a fifth fundamental force. However, there is currently no solid reason for which we should blame
this deviation on a fifth fundamental force. All we know through this experiment is that if its results are correct, then our standard model or our process of deriving a theoretical estimate for the anomalous magnetic moment of an elementary particle must be flawed in some way. In either case, the results of Fermilab’s g-2 experiment calls for more research into the anomalous magnetic moments of diverse elementary particles.
Works Cited: Ghosh, Pallab. “Muons: 'Strong' Evidence Found for a New Force of Nature.” BBC News, BBC, 7 Apr. 2021, www.bbc.com/news/56643677. Martin, B. R. Nuclear and Particle Physics an Introduction. John Wiley & Sons, 2009. Still, Dr Ben. Particle Physics Brick by Brick. Octopus Publishing Group, 2017. Martin, Bruno. Fermilab's Muon g-2 Experiment Officially Starts Up, news.fnal.gov/2018/02/fermilabs-muon-g-2-experiment-officially-starts-up/. “File:Standard Model of Elementary Particles Anti.svg.” Wikimedia Commons, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles_Anti.svg.
What exactly is ‘Sleep Paralysis’? By WOOSEOK KIM Every once in a while, you will notice posts on the internet complaining about strange, petrifying experiences involving all sorts of hallucinations and disturbances that take place during sleep. While some explain these as the intervention of supernatural beings, others simply regard it as another piece of nonsense floating on the internet. Scientists, however, refer to this peculiar phenomenon as sleep paralysis. Sleep paralysis, the sense of being conscious yet unable to physically move, most commonly takes place as people move between the states of being asleep and awake. The experience is unique for everyone, with symptoms ranging from mild noises and physical pressure to vivid hallucinations, and frequency ranging from never to daily. However, despite the multitude of sleep paralysis cases, most share the common belief that such an experience is often unpleasant, if not horrifying.
Figure 1: A representation of how most people commonly perceive sleep paralysis Source: Link Going back as far as the 1st century BC, humans started noticing the existence of sleep paralysis and were terrified since the mid-classical antiquity period. Back then, people mainly identified and interpreted these phenomenons from heavily religious perspectives, often involving devils and angels. Proper distinctions between a nightmare and sleep paralysis had not even been made until the late middle ages. As a result, multiple countries developed cultural understandings of
sleep paralysis as an event involving otherworldly figures that are relatively less religious, yet ones that are still far from realistic. For instance, Germany, Italy, Nigeria, and the Southern portions of the United States interpreted the experience as interactions with witches, while Egypt, Cambodia, Thailand, and China understood it as interactions with spirits. Modern day scientists explain sleep paralysis as a type of sleep disorder that simply comes with great disparity among individuals. Being one the most frequent types of REM Parasomnia, the potential causes range from genetic inheritance, excessive stress, illnesses, erratic or unnatural sleep cycles, and much more. Sleep paralysis is essentially ‘caused’ by a specific chemical released by the body during sleep that prevents the individual from making big movements. This mechanism was intended to stop potential injuries from the individual physically responding to dreams. Following this line of logic, sleep paralysis simply takes place when one’s body remains immobile due to this chemical, while the mind wakes up a bit too early. Thankfully, unlike its terrifying descriptions, sleep paralysis does not necessarily have consequences. Other than the fact that some sleeping disorders have connections with sleep paralysis, such as how frequent sleep paralysis is one of the symptoms for narcolepsy, sleep paralysis by itself usually does not have lasting effects on healthy individuals. The action of sleeping is arguably one of the longest and most crucial portions of our lives, yet is ironically also one of the most inactive, remote periods. As a result, sleep has been, and still remains to be, a mysterious field of study for scientists. While it is a well known fact that adequate amounts of sleep is crucial for humans to function properly both in terms of physical and mental aspects, scientists have yet to establish a complete understanding of the intricate and diverse causes and effects of sleep on humans.
Works Cited: Denis, Dan, et al. “A Systematic Review of Variables Associated with Sleep Paralysis.” Sleep Medicine Reviews, W.B. Saunders, 8 June 2017, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1087079217301120. Olunu, Esther, et al. “Sleep Paralysis, a Medical Condition with a Diverse Cultural Interpretation.” International Journal of Applied & Basic Medical Research, Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd, 2018, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6082011/.