Could be we colonizing the Moon come 2020? | Photo courtesy of NASA/Dennis M. Davidson

GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich stirred up an odd controversy last week after announcing his plans for a lunar base. “By the end of my second term we will have the first permanent base on the Moon,” he said to an audience in Florida shortly before the primary.

This latest scientific proposal, between his casual insistence that he would serve two terms and the sheer grandiosity of suggesting a Moon colony in such a rough economy, outshines even Gingrich’s previous scientific plans in media radar. Every critic, from fellow candidate Mitt Romney to comedians Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, have jumped on the opportunity to ridicule Gingrich’s plans.

It certainly sounds crazy, but there might be a hint of possibility to Gingrich’s plan. Returning to the Moon is closer to reality than fantasy. In fact, building an outpost on the Moon was a U.S. plan until about three years ago. At its center, the idea is possible, but expensive.

The problem isn’t the technology, it’s the cost. The Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) estimates that developing a small, four-person lunar base would cost $35 billion, not including the rocket needed to transport the lunar lander. After the station were established, the CSIS estimates another $7.35 billion a year for maintenance, which is over a third of NASA’s current budget. Especially with NASA’s recent budget cuts, no one is sure whether they will be able to afford these costs years down the road.

Gingrich is full of grand ideas, but are they realistic? | Photo courtesy of Gage Skidmore via Wikimedia Commons.

Cost aside, having people permanently stationed on the Moon isn’t complete science fiction. While 2020 might be a stretch, NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) program could be ready to take people to space by the mid 2020s. After all, six crew members, three of them American, are currently on the now-finished International Space Station. With the help of international cooperation, the six trained astronauts and engineers are conducting groundbreaking research and experiments on the station.

There’s a far stretch, however, between a four-to-six person outpost and what Gingrich is proposing. He isn’t aiming for something modest. He’s talking of a permanent colony, where people could live and travel. Once the Moon reaches 13,000 people, he said, it could apply for statehood. This is where Gingrich’s idea becomes most unrealistic. If the cost of a four-person Moon base is unattainable, it’s completely unlikely that we could sustain anything close to a colony. A Moon base is a long term commitment that will need constant funding and attention, regardless of the political environment on Earth. Especially with the economy in a tumultuous state, it’s hard to believe that the US could continually devote their attention towards the Moon while people on Earth are less than happy.

In the end, it’s not the technology that’s at issue. Funded by private companies or by multinational efforts, we could have people stationed on the moon by sometime in the 2020s (or even on their way to Mars if the SLS program is a success). A 13,000 person moon colony, though, is currently out of the question. NASA’s budget cuts have left many less than hopeful about the United States’ stake in space, so it’s refreshing to see Gingrich pushing for exploration. He’ll have to think of another way to get people excited about space, however, because this Moon plan is simply too grandiose to become a reality within his two term limit.

Before 2011 comes to an end, it’s worthwhile to look back on this year’s most important discoveries and what they mean for the future of astronomy. There have been too many discoveries to cover them all, but here’s a look at some of the more interesting (and comprehensible):

This vein of gypsum on Mars could be evidence that water once ran there. | Photo courtesy of NASA/JPL-Caltech/Cornell/ASU

Water on Mars

Was there ever liquid water on Mars? This is a hotly contested question in the popular science world. In December, the mystery was one step closer to being solved: the Opportunity Rover uncovered what Steve Squyres, the lead researcher for the rover, says is the most “bullet-proof evidence” from the rover’s mission thus far.

Previous potential evidence was found in surface particles that could have been blown in from anywhere. This time, the rover found a line of gypsum in the red planet’s bedrock, suggesting the mineral was created there on Mars. Gypsum, a mineral created when water flows through rock, doesn’t require a highly acidic environment like previously found minerals do, suggesting the water on Mars could have been much more gentle than scientists thought.

If the mineral is confirmed to be gypsum, it would be “the single most powerful evidence for liquid water” on the planet. The Opportunity Rover has been traveling years longer than its original 90 day mission, and scientists eagerly wait for the confirmation of the mineral’s origin in hopes of finally knowing if there was once liquid water on Mars.

Giant Alien Worlds

Earlier this month, eighteen new super-massive gas giants were found orbiting stars even bigger than our own Sun. Scientists at the California Institute of Technology have been searching the sky looking for stars more than one and a half times the size of the sun and picking out the ones that wobble, a phenomenon often caused by the pull of orbiting planets. In their search, they found eighteen new Jupiter-sized planets, increasing the number of known planets orbiting supermassive stars by 50%.

According to current theories of planetary formation, planets are the product of small particles in the dusty disk around a newly-formed star. More and more tiny particles clump together until the planet is formed, like how a snowball is made. If this theory is correct, then larger stars with larger disks should result in larger planets—something that this discovery seems t0 support.

As John Johnson from the discovery team at Cal Tech said, scientists are thrilled to “see all these converging lines of evidence pointing toward one class of formation mechanisms.” A better understanding of general planet formation thanks to planets like these can help scientists move towards an understanding of how our own solar system formed. Scientists are puzzled, however, about why these new planets travel in circular orbits, rather than the usually found elliptical ones.

While their discovery was a success for the current theory of planet formation, there are still unresolved questions to be answered before scientists can determine how this and other solar systems were formed.

Birth of a New Planet

An artist rendition of the dusty ring around the star T Cha. | Image courtesy of ESO/L. Calçada.

Kepler Program and Discovering New Exoplanets

An artist's rendition of the potentially habitable exoplanet, Kepler 22b. | Image courtesy of NASA/Ames/JPL-Caltech.

The Kepler Program is possibly one of the most exciting programs in recent history. NASA’s Kepler Space Telescope, launched in March 2009, is on a mission to find Earth-like planets in the habitable area, or “Goldilocks Zone,” of stars they orbit. Before Kepler’s more recent finds, there were only  a few known and possibly-habitable exoplanets.

But as of this month, the telescope has found over 2,000 new candidates! First studied in 2009, Gliese 581d was thought to be the first potentially habitable exoplanet. It was recently concluded that the exoplanet could support liquid water, but its 5.6-times-Earth size makes habitability unlikely.

Then, in August of this year, HD 85512b was found and concluded to be another enticing possibility, especially because it is only 36 light years from Earth despite being super-Earth size. Thanks to the Kepler program,  the number of known exoplanets is growing rapidly. Of the thousands of potential candidates, 48 seem to be in the habitable zone of the stars they orbit.

The most exciting of these finds is Kepler 22b.

According to NASA scientists, Kepler 22b is “a major milestone on the road to finding Earth’s twin.” The planet’s surface temperature is a comfortable 72 degrees, its 290-day year is similar in length to our own and it is about the same distance from its star as Earth is from the Sun. At 2.4 times the size of Earth, it is possible that Kepler 22b is a little too massive to support life at its surface, but scientists are still hopeful. Until further investigation, scientists can only speculate about what the surface might look like. And at 600 light years away, it is still far beyond our reach. Even though it’s not perfect, the discovery of something that looks so promising is bringing scientists one small step closer to understanding if there’s life anywhere else in the Universe.

In addition to these major discoveries, there are many more that are just as important for the future of astronomy that aren’t mentioned here. Whole books could be written about just the discoveries made by NASA this month, let alone other scientists throughout the year. Here’s a few more of the more interesting ones that are changing the way we perceive our Universe.

Super Massive Black Holes

Astronomers at UC Berkeley have found a black hole that is 9.7 billion times the mass of our Sun and another that is as big, if not bigger. They are unsure how these black holes, far into old age, got so big, and hope to understand more about black hole formation as they continue their research.

Hanny’s Voorwerp

The orange spot within the green cloud shows evidence of star birth. | Photo courtesy of NASA, ESA, W. Keel (U. of Alabama) and the Galaxy Zoo Team.

The mystery of the giant odd-looking cloud discovered in 2007 has finally begun to unravel. Named Hanny’s voorwerp (“voorwerp” is Dutch for “object”), this cloud is bigger than the entire Milky Way galaxy and was called “one of the strangest space objects ever seen” by the American Astronomical Society.

In January of this year, when the Hubble Telescope sent back the clearest picture yet, scientists discovered that the cloud isn’t just inactive gas. Rather, the side of the cloud closest to the neighboring galaxy shows evidence of ongoing star formation. The new pictures not only help to solve one of the most recent great mysteries of the Universe; they also allow a rare look into the birth of stars.

The Coldest Star Yet

Scientists at the University of Hawaii have found a small star with surface temperatures of around 206 degrees Fahrenheit (97 °C), much colder than any star seen before. They also have their eyes on another star that might have temperatures as low as 86 degrees Fahrenheit. Both stars are brown dwarfs and are blurring the distinction between stars and planets. As gas-giant planets are found with temperatures much higher than these cool stars, scientists are being pushed to understand just where to draw the line between brown dwarf stars and massive gas-giant planets.

This galaxy gives a good idea of what our own galaxy might look like from the outside. | Photo courtesy of NASA/JPL-Caltech/UCLA.

Milky Way Twin

Scientists have discovered a galaxy 30 million light years away from Earth, NGC 6744, looking quite a bit like our own. The view of this galaxy, says ESO press officer Richard Hook, “is close to the one we could see … if we had the technology to escape the Milky Way.” Although twice the size of the Milky Way, this galaxy gives scientists and casual observers alike an idea of what our galaxy might look like if we could see it from outside.

Spring Break Preview: Space! by Nee-Sa Lossing

‘Planet Formation in Dusty Disks Around Young Stars:’ An Astrophysics Lecture from Catherine Espaillat by Liishi Durbin

Spring 2011 Semester in Review by Amalie Steidley

Throughout the years, research on cell therapies has rarely found success. Experiments using stem cell therapy to treat spinal injuries as well as some trials involving fetal cell therapy for Parkinson’s disease have yielded no positive results. Only until recent years has it been proven that the human brain produces new neurons throughout the lifetime. Some evidence has shown that these new neurons are occasionally integrated into existing neural circuits and actually enhance brain function. This evidence led scientists to postulate that this could be done using transplanted cells as well.

Obesity prone mice were used to test a special fetal stem cell therapy. | Photo courtesy of Bigplankton via Wikimedia Commons

The Harvard University scientists extracted healthy neurons from mouse embryos (the hypothalamus to be exact) and transplanted those neurons into the same region of the brain in obesity prone mice.  These mice lack the receptor for leptin, a hormone that regulates metabolism and body weight, and therefore they are prone to being diabetic and obese. The transplanted neurons were labeled with a green fluorescent protein to track them in the neural circuit. The results were quite promising, as the transplanted neurons were able to integrate efficiently into the existing neural circuit and develop into mature neurons that responded to leptin. At the end of the experiment, the treated mice weighed 30% less than mice that had not received a transplant. This suggested that the transplanted neurons actually fixed the damaged neural circuit.

Though the experiment was not directed towards treating human obesity, the success of the experiment gave scientists a light at the end of the tunnel in terms of cell therapies. These results further prove the possibility that key areas of the mammalian brain can be repaired using transplanted neurons to treat nervous system diseases like amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Parkinson’s disease, and other nervous system diseases. In response to the question of reconstructing the entire circuitry of the brain itself, one of the scientists responded, “In these cases, can we rebuild circuitry in the mammalian brain? I suspect that we can.”

Zombies…to the Rescue?? by Camilo Pardo

Over 15,000 African children in 7 African countries are participating in the trial. Among 6,000 children ages 5-17 months old, it reported a 47% reduction in malarial cases within a year. While this marks a great public health achievement, other vaccine researchers have identified several concerns on the results that, they point out, are still preliminary.

Annual malaria mortality rates in the past century. | Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that malaria infects 191-311 million people and kills 708,000-1,003,000 of them, the majority of which are African children. Children suffer the burden of the disease because their immune systems are still developing.

The vaccine has been in development for over 30 years because of the disease’s complexities: the malaria species are multi-stage parasites capable of evolutionary change, which makes it difficult for scientists to develop an effective vaccine. These multiple stages mean that a vaccine would only induce immune responses specific to each stage, so any one parasite that eludes the response would be enough to avoid the vaccine-induced protection.

Also, complete immunity from malaria is rare. Vaccines for many bacterial and viral infections only need one natural infection to induce long-lasting immunity. But even after several malaria infections, a vaccine is unable to mimic immunity that should be obtained from natural infection. These difficulties have not stopped malaria experts from trying to find treatments for malaria cases around the world.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) does list preventative measures such as insecticide-treated nets, vector control, and indoor residual spraying proven to be highly effective in many parts of the world. Unfortunately, malaria-ridden Sub-Saharan Africa would not respond to precautionary tools because of the high transmission rates. Additionally, there has been massive resistance efforts to the practical use of DDT and other insecticides to control malaria, prompting alternative non-insecticide-based mosquito control measures. These led to the need for the development of a vaccine that would work in conjunction with existing treatments to eradicate malaria.

An ad about malaria protection using incesticide during the WWII era. | Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

The production of effective malaria vaccines has lacked progress in the past, but the new pilot vaccine reveals positive results. RTS,S would be given to children at the same time as other routine immunizations. This would make distribution more accessible.

The vaccine acts more by reducing the rate of new infections, rather than combating current infection. And as mentioned, it was somewhat effective in the trials: the total number of clinical episodes of malaria was reduced to 55%. But despite this, the clinical trial has undergone much scrutiny.

By the end of 2014, the trial will be completed and all results may be assessed. But the decision to publish partial data attracted criticism from leading vaccine researchers. Interim data is usually only reported to regulatory authorities, and the premature publishing brings into question the results’ validity especially with “less than half the efficacy results available,” writes Nicholas White, a malaria researcher in Bangkok.

Also, Stephen Hoffman, chief executive of a rival vaccine effort based in Maryland, mentions that the publication fails to report data on children aged 6-12 weeks, which was the stated target group of the trial. The 47% reduction in severe malaria, combined with available data on the younger age group, brings the new efficacy down to 35%. This low efficacy rate would represent a negligible benefit to the younger age group and fall short of the 50% protective efficacy rate mandated by the WHO in 2006 to win approval.

A third issue lies in the vaccine’s long-term protection. The 47% reduction was reported in just a year’s time span. Researchers will not be able to identify the length of time in which the vaccine protects against malaria until all data has been compiled.

In a live chat with two leading malaria experts–Laurence Slutsker and Vasee Moorthy from WHO– the question of the vaccine’s partial protection was brought up. They said that the vaccine should work in tandem with current control measures to bring morbidity and mortality rates to zero.

In response to a question about potential side-effects, they responded that, “to date, the vaccine has had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile.” A higher rate of meningitis in vaccinated children compared to controls did not arouse serious concern because it was statistically insignificant. The length of time between vaccination and disease onset also suggested no relation between the two events. However, the vaccine will continue to be monitored for adverse effects over the rest of the trial.

Regardless of the trial’s criticisms, the global implications of the first-generation vaccine are remarkable and provides a stepping-stone not only for malaria control, but global health as well. RTS,S marks the first vaccine to consistently provide a significant protective effect against a parasite on a large-scale setting.GSK promises to provide the vaccine at an affordable price, just 5% above the cost of production. Excess profit would be reinvested into developing  the next malaria vaccine.

While researchers did hope for a higher malarial reduction rate than 50%, the vaccine alone has the potential to prevent millions of malaria cases in children. With the powerful combination of the vaccine and current malaria control measures, there is hope. Controlling malaria would help many developing nations’ economies for which the disease accounts for 40% of medical costs.

The RTS,S vaccine is not perfect, but it shows much promise as a first step. If given regulatory approval, this would be the first human vaccine against a parasitic disease. With full results expected in 2014, public health authorities patiently await the announcement of what could be the first effective vaccine against malaria, the second leading cause of death from infectious diseases in Africa.

Catherine Espaillat stands beside a slide of the various phases of dust disks. | Photo courtesy of Liishi Durbin

This Monday, the Institute for Astrophysical Research welcomed Catherine Espaillat, a member of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. She presented a lecture in room 502 in the College of Arts and Sciences, open to students and researchers alike. Her talk delved into some of the facets of her research in the field of protoplanetary disks of gas and dust, which form during the collapse of a star’s natal, molecular cloud.

Espaillat is young, but carries a bagful of accreditations. She graduated from Columbia University in 2003 with a Bachelor of Arts in Astronomy. She then went on to the University of Michigan where she received her Master of Science in Astronomy in 2005 and her Ph.D. in Astronomy & Astrophysics in 2009. The Boston University professor who presented a short introductory speech rapped out an extended list of honors. Among them is the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation’s Mellon Mays University Fellow and the Honors Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoctorial Fellowship from the National Science Foundation. She speaks clearly, quickly, with fierce conviction. Her introducer described her perfectly with the way he ended his introduction: she is a member of his “Badass List.”

Digital rendition of UX Tau A, a star system that is one million years old and about 450 light-years from Earth. | Image courtesy of NASA/JPL-Caltech

Her lecture revolved around the primordial protoplanetary disk of a star and its planets. These disks are composed of dust and gas, which evolve as time passes. The research she conducts focuses on what she referred to as “transitional disks” and “pre-transitional disks,” which are dust disks that have gaps and holes, possibly created by newborn planets accreting and stirring what is around them.

This lecture was definitely not your run-of-the-mill astronomy talk. As someone who hasn’t taken an astronomy class since the planetary unit of middle school science, I was completely overwhelmed by the detail, power, and enormity of her research. Her PowerPoint slides seemed to be in another language of large, complicated symbols and words; she drew conclusions from an array of diagrams and found meaning in small irregularities in intricate, multifarious graphs. Professors and researchers seemed to make up the majority of the attendees. They sat back, nodding along with her presentation, sometimes interrupting with a question. But as lost as I was, I felt the gravity of her research: she ended a section of her lecture by saying, “This will affect the way that researchers look at planet formation.”

Professor Wiesel’s (Potential) Last Lecture: What a Treat by Allan Lasser

Lecture on Minority Politics Focuses on the Importance of Individual Identity by Bethany Reynolds

Barney’s Radioactive Cousin: A Lecture on Godzilla by Jon Erik Christianson

Upon chewing the miracle berry, formally known as Richardella dulfica, students found that apparent sour and spicy foods that touched their tongues were suddenly sweet.

The Miracle Berry. | Photo courtesy of user Hamale via Wikimedia Commons

“[The miracle berry] contains a protein called miraculin that binds to taste receptors and makes bitter things taste sweet,” Macayla Donegan, a member of MBS, said.

Students were instructed to bite down on the berry, swirl it around in their mouths for 3-4 minutes, and then taste the variety of savory and sour foods available. The palatal experience lasted different lengths of time for different people, although the typical bout of flavor confusion ended within an hour.

The miracle berry grows in West Africa, Puerto Rico, and other areas with tropical climates. Berries typically sell for 2-3 dollars each, and are available from various online suppliers. MBS members ordered over 300 berries for the “tastravaganza” event and distributed them to curious BU students.

The MBS has hosted miracle-berry centered events in the past: their first one took place in the fall of 2010. Members have also hosted brain food events to provide students with helpful nutritional tips during common times of stress.

The Mind and Brain Society serves as an intellectual outlet for students interested in all things neuroscience: members host student-lead discussions, take trips to New York City, publish “The Nerve” blog and teach topics of neuroscience at other schools.

To learn more about BU’s Mind and Brain Society, visit their blog at http://blogs.bu.edu/ombs/. 

‘Carnage’ Review: Short, Satisfying, And Not So Sweet by Ruth Chan

Sunscreen, Swimsuits and Sweet Sounds: Summer 2011 Music Festival Preview by Tara Jayakar

Earlier this month Dr. Ray Baughman and other researchers devised an experiment to hide objects from view using nanotechnology and photo-thermal deflection. More commonly termed the “mirage effect”, the idea behind this phenomenon is simple. A drastic change in temperature over a small distance bends light rays towards your eye as opposed to bouncing off the surface.

Size doesn't matter with these nanotubes. They're as strong as steel and as light as air. | Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

An example of this effect: when looking down a road on a hot summer day, a puddle of water can be seen in the distance. That puddle doesn’t actually exist; it is merely an illusion created by the deflected light photons, and you are actually seeing an image of the blue sky being redirected from the ground.

Researchers’ first step involved finding a material that would be able to facilitate the “mirage effect”, which they discovered with carbon nanotubes. These are microscopic cylindrical molecules that are 1/10,000 the thickness of a strand of hair, light as air, stronger than steel, and most importantly, they transmit heat quickly.

Dr. Baughman presented the irony of these carbon nanotubes when he stated that their original purpose was to see how they would work as speakers. Sheets of these nanotubes were aligned in an underwater container and heated to elevated temperatures through electrical stimulation. The heat that’s transferred to the surrounding areas generates a temperature gradient, which then causes light rays to bend away from the concealed object. Ta-da! The object has now disappeared to the naked eye.

Soon, we could all be as cool as Harry Potter! (Disclaimer: Invisibility cloak does not include wand. Or magic.) | Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

As of now, scientists have only managed to create this “invisibility cloak” in an underwater setting. Yet this success has prompted an array of possibilities that include military use. The cloaking device could be used to disguise military submarines, assuming that enemy subs don’t have heat-seeking torpedoes…

Although no practical use for humans has yet been found for this cloaking device (because of the whole constantly-applied-heat thing), this experiment may lead to future technological innovations in the field of nanotechnology. The mysticism surrounding invisibility will no longer be only a part of science fiction novels, but reality. Take that, Harry Potter.

Although construction started in 2006 and ended in 2008, the “BioLab,” as its come to be known, has not opened its facilities yet due to controversy regarding the BSL-4 lab.

According to the National Emerging Infectious Disease Laboratory’s (NEIDL) website, there are four levels of increasing containment labeled Biosafety levels 1-4 (BSL-1 to BSL-4) within the facility. BSL-1 and BSL-2 labs are considered low-level research since the agents involved are not easily transmittable through the air, yet may cause disease. BSL-3 research involves the use of biological agents indigenous to the U.S. that have proven to be fatal but have treatments.

Biosafety Level-4 Laboratory | Photograph courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

But this BSL-4 space, which makes up 16% of the facility, requires research performed on or with “dangerous/exotic agents” that have a high “individual risk” of aerosol-transmitted laboratory infections that are “frequently fatal,” and which have “no vaccines or treatment,” as reported by the Center for Disease Control website.

Groups such as the Roxbury Safety Net and the STOP the BU-Bio-Terror Lab Coalition have become the leading community voices opposing the facility, which they believe would set a bad precedent. BU students and alumni have also joined the coalition. Monica Spicher (CAS’ 11), a recent graduate, created a Facebook group protesting with the coalition. “In 2005, BU students started organizing a group against the Biolab and I heard that there was a big fight against it so I made this group in conjunction with other community groups,” Monica stated. The community’s grievances include moral concerns, health concerns and distrust of the overlooking organizations—namely, BU and NIAID.

Immediately after the BioLab’s inception, neighboring communities questioned the morality of BU’s actions. The university’s decision to build the lab in a residential neighborhood raised concerns. BUMC is surrounded by South End/Roxbury, a low-income neighborhood. The community argues that BU will jeopardize the health of people who are already unable to afford healthcare. The elderly and disabled, they say, are not taken into account; moreover, a large population and transit systems could be negatively affected. For this reason, the opposition strongly rejects the presence of the BSL-4 lab, the only one located in Massachusetts. Although the morality of the BSL-4 lab is one point of contention, but it is compounded by another–the community’s distrust of the biolab’s supervising organizations, BU and NIAID.

According to the NEIDL site, there are hundreds of BSL-2 labs and about 30 BSL-3 labs in operation around Massachusetts. Normally, low-level research facilities don’t raise much public concern; however, past incidents that were unpublicized by the NEIDL caused distrust of BU and NIAID.

Last year, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights in Boston released a document outlining the milestones of the BU BioLab saga. In 2004, BU violated state regulations by failing to disclose that three lab workers were infected with Tularemia. This occurred after BU was granted approval to build the BioLab from the City of Boston and the State of Massachusetts. During a meeting last year between the community and the BioLab officials, a community member cited another incident that occurred in September 2010. A Northeastern University lab technician used a vial of cyanide she had taken out of the lab to commit suicide. These incidents were not the only issues to arouse suspicion from the community.

But the BioLab’s development has hit roadblocks and red tape without help from the protesters. The Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (MEOEEA) requires BU to prepare a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) in accordance with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). These are integral for the permitting process. The FEIR’s approval was voided in 2006 on the grounds that BU did not account for “worst case scenarios” and whether or not location played into the magnitude of catastrophe that could occur. And the university’s failed risk assessment gave the community ammunition against the BioLab’s opening.

Is the BioLab cause for concern? | Illustration by Evan Caughey

This past August, BU requested a waiver to undergo lower level research (BSL-1 and BSL-2), which was received with immediate disdain. Members of the community opposed to the lab concluded that there should be no reason to surpass the risk assessment if the facility maintains efficient safety regulations. They hold their contention that the risk assessment should go on.

In an phone interview with Steven Burgay, Senior Vice President of External Relations at Boston University, he stated that there is a task force managing the process that they are going through to open the BU BioLab. The National Institute of Health (NIH)—the head organization of NIAID—created the Blue Ribbon Panel, made up of experts on infectious diseases and public health to manage the risk assessment process. Burgay reinforces NIAID’s statements that the BSL-4 lab maintains the strictest safety regulations when transporting and experimenting with these infectious agents. He says that BU completely supports the risk assessment for the BSL-4 lab, yet they want to begin work with lower-level research, as the facility has been empty since construction ended in 2008. Burgay articulates the validity of NIAID, and the opening of the BSL-1 and BSL-2 labs, which will be regulated by the Boston Public Health Commission.

For nine long years, legal battles and community opposition have postponed the opening of NEIDL. Monica Spicher and others have joined the campaign to get the Boston city council to join them. There have been several attempts at contacting Mayor Menino for an open discussion as well as several petitions sent to President Brown to which he has responded. The most recent risk assessment has been ongoing for three years, but BU is set on opening their facility as soon as possible. The opinions of BU and community opposition are set. In light of the current progress being made, there is a real possibility that the facility’s opening will become a reality. With all the difficulties that the BU BioLab has faced, the Boston community will make sure that BU and NIAID will hear about their concerns at each step of the way.

For more information, see:  http://www.bu.edu/neidl/about/. 

Following Disaster In Japan, BU Community Shows Support by Heather Vandenengel

Community: Please Tell Your Friends About This Show by Adrian Burke

BU Occupies Boston: A Community Reacts by Kelly Dickinson

Don't be frightened; they could teach you a thing or two. | Photograph courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

The study of necro-diagnostics first surfaced thanks to Dr. Steven C. Schlozman, a Harvard psychiatrist who has gained fame as the leading authority on the living dead. Dr. Schlozman was invited to speak at a science lecture series in Brookline, MA after stirring up curiosity among both scientists and sci-fi fans.

During this lecture, he introduced the manner in which the zombie virus, Ataxic Neurodegenerative Satiety Deficiency Syndrome, or ANSD, would attack the brain.
During these lectures, he described the manner in which the zombie virus, Ataxic Neurodegenerative Satiety Deficiency Syndrome (ANSD) would attack the brain.  Dr. Schlozman concluded that the zombie virus would destroy four crucial structures in the brain: the ventromedial hypothalamus, cerebellum, frontal lobe, and amygdala. Once the virus ate away at the ventromedial hypothalamus, which controls hunger, the zombie would feel an insatiable hunger for human flesh. The virus would then continue to destroy the cerebellum, which controls coordination; thus, zombies would walk with a certain open-legged gait.  The frontal lobe, responsible for problem solving, would be the virus’ next victim; therefore, zombies would lack the ability to make complex decisions. The brain would be eaten down to the amygdala, the almond-shaped section of the brain reserved for base emotions. Zombies would only express rage and nothing more.

After taking an in-depth look at Dr. Schlozman’s analysis of zombie neurobiology, certain revelations about science education came to light.  Learning about zombies actually made science interesting all of a sudden. People have always been fascinated with zombie lore. Tapping into this zombie obsession could help initiate interest and motivation to learn about science. An idea as simple as studying zombies allows the normally science-phobic student to connect pop culture insights with the science behind those ideas. Students can maintain interest in science without being held down by the monotony of a textbook or dry topics.

In addition, the study of zombies can help scientists understand how real infectious diseases work. The zombie virus that Dr. Schlozman describes in his lecture parallels real brain-eating viruses that lead to neurodegenerative diseases. By studying the way in which a virus would cause one to “become a zombie”, scientists can discover ways to combat this “brain-eating virus” and prevent world-wide outspread from occurring.

Studying zombies presents an unorthodox model that can be used by both educators and scientists. Enticing kids with unique approaches to science could directly correlate with higher science scores and more interest in science, which would lead to more scientists. If students are taught to look at science through pop culture, they will once again think that science is an intriguing field to explore. Kids can watch zombie movies to learn about the brain or watch baseball in class to explore the way muscles work. Alternative approaches such as these could lead the scientific field to greater innovations than ever before. They could inspire curiosity and breed the next generation of scientists, who may discover brand new ways to view diseases – all thanks to the lovable living dead that we have come to appreciate.

Neuron Transplant Reduces Obesity In Mice by Camilo Pardo

5 Apps You Need to Know About Now by Briana Seftel

Characters in a Zombie Apocalypse: AMC’s The Walking Dead by Adrian Burke

The particles, called neutrinos, were generated at the Super Proton Synchrotron particle accelerator at the CERN Large Hadron Collider Complex in Geneva. They were then accelerated to Italy, a distance of 732 km (approximately 455 miles), to the Gran Sasso National Laboratory and buried up to 11.4 km (a little over 7 miles) into the earth.

Linear accelerator at CERN laboratories in Geneva. | Photograph courtesy of Wikimedia commons.

These neutrinos are neutral particles that have little to no mass and can pass through matter without being absorbed. Because of this, they are able to pass through the earth without their velocity changing. According to an article in WIRED, there are three different kinds of neutrinos: electron, tau and muon neutrinos. With this experiment, CERN intended to look at the possibility of muon neutrinos transforming into tau neutrinos during a phenomenon known as neutrino oscillation. Instead, they discovered neutrinos arriving at the Grand Sasso much faster than expected.

Researchers at the Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus (OPERA) in Italy recorded the time it took for 16,000 particles to travel from Geneva to Italy over three years. On average, as reported by an article in Science, the neutrinos arrived sixty nanoseconds sooner than if they’d been traveling at the speed of light.

According to Boston University Professor Andy Cohen, who specializes in cosmology, specifically relativity, anti-matter and dark matter, there are a few ways to interpret this result. The experiment could be right. If that’s true, it could usher in a new era of exploration of relativity physics, specifically Einstein’s theory of relativity. The theory of relativity allows comparisons between the dimensions of space and time, which normally cannot be compared in pre-relativity physics. It’s based on the idea of a universal maximum velocity, and that velocity is currently the speed of light. If something can travel faster than the speed of light, his theory is unfounded. The relationship between mass, energy and the speed of light, represented by the equation E=mc², would be wrong. Nuclear weapons, radioactive dating and nuclear medicine are just a few examples of what would have to be reevaluated.  

There could also be an unknown problem within the experiment, known as a systematic uncertainty, that was not taken into account. However, the measurements in this experiment are recorded as precisely as possible. Time is recorded with GPS timing signals. The signals take into account probability distribution functions that could affect the path of the neutrinos. The distance between the CERN LHC Complex and the Gran Sasso National Laboratory is known within 20 cm. The final option is the possibility of a completely overlooked systematic error, something unknown that CERN and OPERA aren’t aware of. Researchers brought their result to the public’s attention in order to fact-check, not to claim it as correct. The CERN press release addresses this, stating that “given the potential far-reaching consequences of such a result, independent measurements are needed before the effect can either be refuted or firmly established. This is why the OPERA collaboration has decided to open the result to broader scrutiny.” Relativity and the idea of a universal maximal velocity has been challenged before, as a Wall Street Journal article points out. This experiment needs to be investigated heavily before big claims can be made. Fermi National Laboratory in Chicago has already begun looking into CERN and OPERA’s claim.

Andy Cohen praises the press release for its discretion. He said in an email, “The OPERA experimenters are being appropriately cautious in presenting their results without making exaggerated claims. They have looked at their data carefully and have performed a careful analysis of the uncertainties involved. They are now encouraging other physicists, especially other neutrino experimenters, to examine the issue to either confirm or refute their interpretation of the data.” One result won’t change everything at once, and the affects of this experiment have yet to truly be determined.

“Winnebago Man” Filmmaker Makes BU Laugh Out Loud by Noah Eberhart

Not Just Tofu: Sargent Choice Makes Healthy Food Accessible by Joel Kahn

A Take on Tribeca 2011: ‘L.A. Noire’ Makes History, Wows Crowd at Tribeca by Paul Squire

The perfect way to implant music into your brain. Photo via wikimedia commons user Pertsaboy.

This is the first in a weekly series with Synapse—BU’s undergraduate science magazine. Article written by Emma Burns.

A new parasite has embedded itself within society, taking over our minds, actions, and conversations. Chances are, if you’ve recently listened to the radio or your iPod, you’ve already been infected with what researchers have termed “the earworm.” This new parasite is closely related to diseases known as “melodymania” or “repetunitis,” sufferers of which are commonly heard to complain of having songs stuck in their heads.

An earworm, a term derived from the German “ohrwurm,” is defined as a “cognitive itch[i]” or “the inability to dislodge a song and prevent it from repeating itself in one’s head[ii].” This phenomenon has recently become a burgeoning area of neurological study. Several major universities, including Dartmouth College and the University of Cincinnati, have undertaken studies that examine the earworm experience. Dartmouth graduate student David Kraemer and his team have used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to locate the neural substrates that support “unprompted auditory imagery[iii].” Kraemer describes the unprompted auditory imagery as any verbal cue, from a phone number to a song. The study found that when a song or portion of a song was played, it activated the subjects’ left primary auditory cortex, an area of the brain responsible for hearingⁱⁱⁱ. Interestingly, he also found that the same area was activated when the subjects were asked to imagine the song or fill in portions that were removed, suggesting that the earworm feeds off of the memory system of the auditory cortexⁱⁱⁱ.

One such memory system that the earworm may be relying on is the “phonological loop,” a short-term memory system in the auditory cortex[iv]. The auditory cortex is located in the temporal lobe, an area of the brain affiliated with short-term memory, specifically verbal short-term memory[v]. The phonological loop is best described as a “short loop of recording tape that continuously stores a small amount of auditory information^iv,” such as the chorus of a song. While most information is processed and then forgotten or stored as long term memory, songs appear to remain in the short-term memory for a longer period of time. Dr. James Kellaris of the University of Cincinnati believes a cause for the earworms’ endurance may be that “certain pieces of music may have properties that excite an abnormal reaction in the brain[vi].” These extraordinary qualities compel the attention of the brain, forcing it to repeat the song in the phonological loop. Similarly, Kellaris has found that the repetition does not remove the song from the phonological loop, but increases the length of its presence, thus creating the cognitive itch.

Although much about earworms is still unknown, they do present a unique way in which to study the temporal capacities of memory systems. Music, as Kraemer describes it, is a “pervasive and spontaneous form of imagery that punctuate[s] everyday lifeⁱⁱⁱ,” thus it is a convenient medium through which to study memory. Music is a constant presence in today’s society, and it even seems that songs are designed to be stuck in our heads. The catchy choruses and hypnotic melodies color our daily activities. Have Justin Beiber, Kanye West, and Lady Gaga unearthed a science to reel us in with their hooks; or are our brains’ memory systems simply easy prey for music? The continued study of earworms and audiological memory systems will hopefully answer these questions.

Athlete’s Tough Attitudes, Soft Brains: Analyzing Head Injuries After Sidney Crosby’s Latest Hit by Caitlin Clancy

Graphic by Allan Lasser, adapted from a photo by Liz West

For humans, our language faculty is our most impressive and complex behavior. No single species comes close to matching the breadth of our expressive domains; it is estimated that there are nearly 7,000 linguistically distinct languages spoken in the world today (1), and inconceivably more still undiscovered. To give an idea, researchers recently collecting linguistic data in several villages contained in 100,000-square-kilometer area of Yunnan Province found 18 previously uncatalogued languages. In the Yunnan Province alone, it is speculated that nearly 150 linguistically distinct languages are spoken, many of which are still undocumented (2). This figure represents only a small portion of what remains unknown globally.

The emergence of language as an exact point in our evolution remains a contentious question among researchers in the field. Some argue that for us to have such sophisticated and diverse languages today, spoken language must have arisen some 100,000 years ago (3). However, this figure is highly controversial. Communication was originally gesture-based, and with time (and our increasing social demands, cognitive capacity, and improved vocal anatomy), spoken language emerged tens of thousands of years later. Still, we developed a written language system, and finally, modern language has evolved, grown and branched into the hundreds of different language families that we’ve categorized today. In the brain, the primary language areas include Broca’s and Wernicke’s. Their roles in speech production and language comprehension, respectively, were originally determined via lesion case studies (4,5). Language is not entirely hardwired, however, and requires exposure early in life during a critical period before age 5 for its proper acquisition.

A representation of the major brain areas involved in language. Orange = angular gyrus, yellow = supramarginal gyrus, blue = Broca's area, green = Wernicke's area, and pink = primary auditory cortex. | Photo courtesy of Wikicommons.

So, what makes our language system so unique compared to the rest of the animal kingdom? Well, simply the fact that with a finite set elements we can produce an infinite array of utterances, of which are dictated by systematized, socially- and culturally- (to the specific language used), inherited grammatical rules. No other form of communication has such boundless expressive capacity, interpretive demands, and rule governed formation. Animals, on the other hand, have more limited communicative means, needing only to express simpler, more isolated information (food is here, predator is there, etc.). Their capacity is largely genetically, not culturally or socially, inherited, as it is with us (6, 7). But without taking for granted this exquisite tongue of ours, let’s not neglect some of the communicative properties that we share with animals, or fail to note the unique modalities employed by animals to communicate to one another. Even though animals’ communicative methods are mostly pre-programmed, many require environmental exposure during a sensitive period just like us. This is the case with several song bird species, who cannot normally develop their mating calls unless they’ve heard other adults’ mature songs and practice their own during a specifically-timed sensorimotor period (8).

Moreover, some birds (such as the White Crowned Sparrow) demonstrate geographical dialectal variation in their song calling within their own species, like we have in American-English (9). Many animals use means or even senses that we do not– elephants, for example, can use seismic sensing to direct information to other herds miles away. Elephants create low-frequency vocalizations at such high amplitudes that the vibrations couple with the ground and travel along the Earth’s surface with a distinct velocity from their airborne counterparts. These signals are detected by a combination of mechanoreceptors (vibration sensitive receptors, much like in our own skin), bone conduction, and acoustic fat (similar to that in the heads of many porpoises using echolocation) in their foot pads (10). Bees perform an elaborate dance known as the waggle dance to advise the colony on prime foraging areas. The bee actually incorporates the angle between the sun, food source and hive to give other bees directionality, vibrates in proportion to the quality of the food source, distributes samples of the nectar to hive mates, and even encodes the distance between the hive and food source in the dance run durations, at a rate of 75 milliseconds per 100 meters (11). They can even warn their colony if danger, such as a predator, lurks in a food patch (11). Other social insects like ants, as well as a number of other animals, communicate almost exclusively with chemical cues called pheromones… Imagine if the bulk of your sensory experience is perceived in odors, and not primarily vision and hearing, as it is for us humans!

A visualization of how a bee conveys the direction of a food source to its colony | Photo courtesy of Wikicommons

Like so many living things in this world, even our languages are endangered. Despite efforts made by language conservationists, thousands of languages have been dying, at a rate of one per every two weeks (13). For some languages, especially isolated tribal languages, there may be issue of an entire tribes’ population dying out, leaving no one left to speak it. In some countries trying to standardize and unify to one or a few national languages, people are discouraged or even persecuted for speaking their natural, minority tongue. It is no longer taught in schools or in the household, and generations beyond leave it behind.

Of course, these are only a few reasons behind language extinction. But facing this reality is tragic, because a language tells us everything about that culture. And knowing how a people has developed and adapted a language to their specific needs and environment reflects so much more than just their own lives– it’s another piece to our evolutionary puzzle on how and why language emerged for humanity. For instance, some of these disappearing languages have remained intact for tens of thousands of years, and could be a potential clue in what man’s earlier language was like. Without a comprehensive classification of the known languages, we have an enormous hole in our linguistic evolution. Similarly, it is important to study how animals communicate, to better realize their evolutionary progress and cognitive development. It’s truly remarkable to see the ways in which they interact and express information to their species and others, as it is for ourselves… And this is our richest and most crucial product to celebrate.

_____________________________________________________________________________

References

Language Conference at BU: Linguistics Is a Bigger Deal Than You Think by Ashley Hansberry

An American in Paris: Behind the Language Barrier by Annie White

Op-Ed: Davide Nardi on Training to Become an English Language Teacher by The Quad