Can We Make An Artificial Sun on Earth?

  We all know how important the Sun is for our species’ survival. It’s not just some celestial body in outer space; it’s a tremendous fireball and an incredible source of energy, ensuring that life, as we know it, can exist and thrive. 

You likely understand that the Sun is a long way off from Earth, which is actually a good thing. We lie, fortunately for us, at the safest possible distance from the Sun, in an area astronomers affectionately call the “Goldilocks Zone”, where it’s not too hot and not too cold. Despite the distance, it would be incredible if we could harness some, if not all, of the tremendous energy that the Sun contains. This is precisely what Dr. Octavius was trying to achieve: harnessing the energy of the Sun.

However, is it even possible? Can we have an artificial sun on Earth?

It’s Definitely Possible!

As it turns out, we can have an artificial sun on Earth, but as you might expect, creating an artificial sun takes a bit more than conducting a small experiment with regular equipment in a typical laboratory. It’s an incredibly daunting task to undertake and thus, quite justifiably, will take many years before it becomes a reality.

Einstein’s Energy-Mass Equivalence

The equation that has helped push this seemingly bizarre idea into the realm of feasibility is Energy-Mass equivalence, which was postulated by Albert Einstein in 1905. According to the equation, it is believed that fusing a number of atoms together can release massive amounts of energy. To put it in perspective, if this equation is successfully put into practical use, the energy locked up in one gram of matter can power 28,500 100-watt lightbulbs for an entire year!

Researchers at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) in Livermore (California, US) are considering the use of a high-powered laser beam that would bombard a target in a 32-foot wide reaction chamber. An explosion would follow, and in theory, the total energy released would be 10 times greater than the energy consumed during the experiment.

How Can An Artificial Star Be Born?

Since we’re talking about creating an artificial star, of sorts, it goes without saying that the conditions in which the experiment must be carried out will be highly optimized. The area needed for the experiment will be equivalent to the area of three football pitches combined. A single infrared laser beam will strike the target after passing through many lenses, amplifiers, and mirrors over the length of an entire mile!

This laser beam will then be split into 192 different beams, which will be converted into ultraviolet light. This UV light will be focused onto the center of a capsule. The inside of this capsule is where the aluminum and concrete-coated target chamber will be housed.

When the beam strikes the inner walls, high-energy X-rays will be produced in a very, very short span of time (a billionth of a second!). This will subsequently create a fuel pellet inside the capsule until the outer shell of the capsule blows off. As a result of this explosion, a nuclear fusion reaction will be triggered, thereby releasing tremendous amounts of energy. 

 

Lo and behold! You’ve just created an artificial sun!

Where Do We Stand Now?

This matter-of-fact explanation may lead you to believe that it’s not all that difficult, but in fact, it is incredibly complex. The proper arrangement of lenses and mirrors alone will take more than a year. Then you would have to ensure that the chamber is absolutely free of impurities and factor in dozens of other crucial elements before you could actually make an artificial sun for humankind.

That being said, the good news is that creating an artificial sun is possible, regardless of the difficulties the task may pose. In the future, saying “My entire house is powered by the artificial sun at 26 Avenue, Livermore, USA,” won’t actually make you sound like a crazy person
!

Science Behind Iron Man: What Makes The Iron Man Suit So Powerful?

 We’ve seen him in action plenty of times now (five times, to be precise), but we never cease to admire and relish how incredible he really is. If you’re into superhero stuff, then you know precisely what I’m talking about.
Iron Man.
 
But being a fan means digging past the everyday information and finding something truly fascinating. Now, let’s see some of the science behind what makes Tony Stark seemingly invincible when he dons the famous Iron Man suit.

The Enviable Armor

Image Credit: Marvel Studios

When you talk about, or even think about Iron Man, the first image that pops into your head (if you’re in the know of the superhero world, that is) is the legendary red and gold suit of armor. It’s undeniably the defining aspect of the character; after all, he’s name “Iron” Man.

It’s Not Actually Iron! 

 

You may have always believed that the Iron Man suit is made of iron, as the name ‘Iron Man’ may imply, but that’s not even close to being true. The Iron Man suit that Tony Stark wears in the movies couldn’t possibly be made of iron. There are a few reasons behind that, namely the fact that iron is an extremely heavy and dense metal. It also rusts very easily, and is not as strong as some of its own alloys, such as steel.

It’s true that the inception of the Iron Man suit in a dingy cave (in the first Iron Man movie) was in the form of a crude-looking suit that may have contained pieces of iron. However, as stylish and ‘efficiency-centered’ as Tony is, he quickly discarded the idea of using iron to make his suit and instead used something else. The question is, which metal could he use?

Alternatives

Well, he likely had a number of metals to choose from, or rather, a clever combination of a number of metals. His options could include nickel-titanium (nitinol), which is an alloy of titanium. This could be used due to it being a fairly strong metal that is relatively resistant to heat and impressively light. Also, it is capable of ‘healing’, so to speak. It can deform at certain temperatures, true, but it can also regain its original shape once heated beyond the ‘transformation temperature’. That being said, they haven’t explicitly explored this property of the armor in the movies. 

Another alternative is ‘single-crystal titanium’, which is a customized variety titanium that is extremely hard, resists corrosion and withstands significant levels of heat. It is becoming increasingly popular in the aviation industry for the construction of jet engines to withstand bird strikes.

That brings up a weird question; have you noticed that they’ve never shown Iron Man smashing into a bird in any of the movies? It seems like it would be bound to happen at some point…

Heavy-Duty Exoskeletons

An exoskeleton, or ‘external skeleton’, is basically an extension of your own skeleton, and a pretty neat one at that. In other words, it is an external framework of metallic bones and muscles that not only protect your body, but also enhance your physical power exponentially! 

Popular culture, especially sci-fi action movies, can’t seem to get enough of exoskeletons. The one that Iron Man sports is widely adored by Marvel fans all over the world. It is, as mentioned, is a framework of rods, pads and pipes (akin to bones and muscles) that is worn by Tony to survive and eventually (so far, at least) emerge on top of all the electronic and superhuman threats that he finds himself surrounded by. But can that type of exoskeleton really exist?

Oh yes, it sure can. In fact, a few prototypes with Iron Man similarities are already making headlines around the world!

The HULC is a hydraulic-powered exoskeleton that provides users with the ability to carry loads of up to 200 pounds for extended periods of time (Image Source: Lockheed Martin)

What we’re talking about here are called ‘powered exoskeletons’, which are exoskeletons that are electrically powered and boost the endurance and strength of the wearer.

The FORTIS exoskeleton transfers loads through the suit to the ground in either a standing or kneeling position. It creates a feeling of weightlessness when wearers are carrying or maneuvering heavy objects (Image Source: Lockheed Martin)

Some exoskeletons that already have been made (but are not out in the field yet) include the famous HULC (yes, pronounced exactly like ‘Hulk’), which was devised by Lockheed Martin, as well as XOS, designed by Sarcos. Both these prototypes, obviously, have been designed for military purposes.

Flying power

What makes Iron Man infallible in the face of impending disaster is not only his clever wit, but also his ability to zoom out of danger and quickly cross massive distances through the air (like flying to a foreign country to salvage people from a terrorist outfit after watching the horrific scenes of destruction on TV!). 

   

This aspect is pretty much in the purview of exoskeletons; an exoskeleton that can fly is essentially Iron Man’s suit. Given how cool it is, it comes as no surprise that there have been several attempts to make this type of exoskeleton. One such device, called Rocketbelt, could lift the wearer up to 2500 meters in the air. Efforts are ongoing to make the flight last longer and make the whole tech more safe for humans to pilot.

The Circle of Light

Now, let’s get to the center of the matter… literally, the ‘center’ of Iron Man.

The small circle of light that sits in the center of Iron Man’s chest is not there just to look cool (although it does); it actually serves a much greater purpose.

We’re talking about the famous ‘ARC reactor’…

The thing that powers the entire Iron Man suit (Image Credit: www.instructables.com)

The Iron Man suit is clearly a remarkable invention with its hardened exoskeleton and seemingly impenetrable armor, but all of that would be useless if there wasn’t a power source that actually made it all work! That’s where the ‘light circle’ comes into play.

The ‘thing’ that Tony has jammed in his chest is basically an ARC reactor miniaturized into a small electromagnet with an energy output of 8 gigajoules per second. Given the fact that such a humongous source of energy is resting comfortably in his chest, we have to assume that there must be a remarkable network of cooling tubes ensuring that our beloved Tony isn’t roasted alive. Also, it must be extremely small and immaculately concealed, as we never see any tubes or pipes sticking out of the armor.

  

Simply put, the thing in the center of Iron Man’s suit provides power that is roughly equivalent to the combined power output of three nuclear power plants, yet it is no bigger than a hockey puck. All these things combined place the whole idea of a miniaturized ARC reactor in the realm of pure fantasy.

It comes as no surprise that we call Iron Man a ‘cool’ superhero!

Efforts are in full swing to make real Iron Man suits (or something like them) for military purposes; in fact, the prototypes we talked about above are pretty close to what we’ve been dreaming of for real-life superheroes. It’s only a matter of time before we see Iron Men patrolling the skies in our world, and who knows, maybe we’ll even get a suit like that for ourselves! 

source: www.scienceabc.com

Mars methane mission lifts off

  Europe and Russia have launched a joint mission to the Red Planet.

The satellite, called the ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO), lifted off from Baikonur in Kazakhstan at 09:31 GMT.

The probe will investigate whether the methane in the world's atmosphere is coming from a geological source or is being produced by microbes.

If all goes well, the two space powers expect to follow up this venture with a rover, to be assembled in the UK, which will drill into the surface.

That could launch in 2018, or, as seems increasingly likely, in 2020.

It will take the carrier rocket more than 10 hours to put the satellite on the right trajectory to go to Mars.

This involves a series of engine burns on the Proton's Breeze upper-stage that should eventually fling the TGO away from Earth with a relative velocity of 33,000km/h.

The flight sequence is sure to strain the nerves of space agency officials.

For Russia especially, the Red Planet represents a destination of wretched fortune.

It has previously launched 19 missions to the fourth planet from the Sun, and most of those have been outright failures.

Many could not get off the pad cleanly; others simply stalled above the Earth and fell back down; a few crashed and burned at Mars or sailed straight past.

Assuming everything works out this time, controllers at the European Space Agency's operations centre in Darmstadt, Germany, can expect a signal from the TGO after it has been released on its way by the Breeze boost stage.

This should come through at 21:28 GMT. It is then a seven-month cruise to Mars.

  

Three days out from arrival, on 16 October, the satellite will eject a small landing module known as Schiaparelli.

Once on the surface, on 19 October, its aim is to operate a few science instruments, but engineers are primarily interested to see how the module performs during the entry, descent and touchdown.

In particular, Schiaparelli will showcase a suite of technologies - radar, computers and their algorithms - that will be needed to put a later, British-built rover safely on the planet.

This second step in the joint European-Russian ExoMars project is supposed to leave Earth in 2018, although this is now looking increasingly doubtful because of funding and scheduling issues. Many connected with ExoMars are now talking about 2020 as being a more realistic launch date.

Schiaparelli's demonstration landing on 19 October 

 

Schiaparelli will probably work for a couple of days - if it survives the landing 

• Schiaparelli will be released by the TGO close to Mars, on 16 October
• The probe will hit the top of the Martian atmosphere at a speed of 21,000km/h
• It will use a heatshield, parachute and rockets to slow its descent
• The final touchdown will be cushioned by crushable material on its belly
• The probe will take pictures on the way down, but it has no surface camera
• Schiaparelli will make environmental observations until its battery dies
• The main goal is to demonstrate its descent radar, computers and algorithms
• These will be used in the mechanism that lands the future ExoMars rover

---

None of this affects the TGO mission, however.

After it has dropped off Schiaparelli, the satellite will spend the better part of a year manoeuvring itself into a 400km-high circular orbit above Mars.

From this vantage point, the orbiter's state-of-the-art instruments will then make a detailed inventory of Mars' atmospheric gases.

Methane is the key interest. Previous observations - by satellite, Earth-based telescopes and America's Curiosity rover on the surface of the planet - found the hydrocarbon to be present in very low concentrations, at just a few parts per billion by volume.

That it is there at all is surprising. Ultraviolet light should remove the gas from the atmosphere within a few hundred years, which suggests it must be replenished somehow. 

 

The American Curiosity rover has detected very low concentrations of methane at Mars' surface 

One possible active source involves geological activity at depth, where water could be reacting with rock minerals to produce hydrogen, which is then further processed into methane.

Another tantalising prospect is that the source is biological in origin.

Most of the methane in Earth's atmosphere comes from microbes, like those in the stomachs of ruminants.

There are no cows on Mars, but simple organisms could conceivably be operating just below the surface of the planet.

The TGO's measurements should throw some light on these competing ideas.

---

Russia's torrid history of Mars missions

• Marsnik 1 (1960): Mars flyby - did not reach Earth orbit
• Marsnik 2 (1960): Mars flyby - did not reach Earth orbit
• Sputnik 22 (1962): Mars flyby - achieved Earth orbit only
• Mars 1 (1962): Mars flyby - radio failed at 106 million km
• Sputnik 24 (1962): Mars flyby - achieved Earth orbit only
• Zond 2 (1964): Mars flyby - passed Mars but radio failed, returned no planetary data
• Mars 1969A (1969): Mars orbiter - did not reach Earth orbit
• Mars 1969B (1969): Mars orbiter - failed during launch
• Kosmos 419 (1971): Mars lander - achieved Earth orbit only
• Mars 2 (1971): Mars orbiter/lander - arrived but limited data return; lander burned up due to steep entry
• Mars 3 (1971): Mars orbiter/lander - arrived but limited data return; lander operated on surface for 20 seconds before failing
• Mars 4 (1973): Mars orbiter - flew past Mars
• Mars 5 (1973): Mars orbiter - arrived, lasted a few days
• Mars 6 (1973): Mars flyby module and lander - arrived but lander failed due to fast impact
• Mars 7 (1973): Mars flyby module and lander - arrived but lander missed the planet
• Phobos 1 (1988): Mars orbiter and Phobos lander - lost en route to Mars
• Phobos 2 (1988): Mars orbiter and Phobos lander - lost near Phobos
• Mars 96 (1996): Mars orbiter/two landers/two penetrators - launch vehicle failed

Phobos-Grunt (2011): Phobos lander and sample return - achieved Earth orbit only 

source:www.bbc.com

Do You Really Need To Drink Milk As You Age?

The notion that ‘Drinking milk only does good things to your body’ has been around for ages. Millions of parents give their young ones a hard time in this regard, practically chasing them around with a glass of milk. Due to this general positive perception about milk, many children and teenagers are urged to drink milk more than once a day. The question remains, however… is milk really that good or is all of this just a parental hyperbole?

General Perceptions of Milk

Credits: Stokette/Shutterstock

Milk has been widely popular as one of ‘nature’s best foods’ for hundreds of years, and people around the world generally believe milk to be a healthy food. This perception is not only held in developed countries, but also in underdeveloped countries where the availability of milk is limited to a particular strata of society. From the time a child is born, it is fed milk, as this is the easiest food to digest by infants, and also contains a host of vital nutrients that are crucial for a baby’s growth in those early days.

Even after a baby is weaned off of breast milk, most parents continue providing milk to their children, as they think it is good for bone development and is an important component of an ideal diet for kids.

Milk: The Good Part

Credits: Sea Wave/Shutterstock

It’s true that milk does provide a host of important nutrients to those who choose to drink it. First of all, milk contains calcium, which is good for bone development in children, and is also vital for maintaining the strength and flexibility of bones in adults. Milk also contains Vitamin D, which is very important, albeit less commonly referred to than the calcium content. A deficiency of Vitamin D can lead to bent and weakened bones and cause rickets and other muscle-related disorders.

Milk is also a good source of calories and proteins that are essential for children, as their growing bodies demand more nutrition. Kids need to have a wholesome diet, but children commonly throw tantrums about consuming certain things that will provide them with all those vital nutrients. Fortunately, milk proves to be an easy to access and complete package of nutrients.

But do we really need to drink milk all the time?

Image credits: Shutterstock

Milk is definitely a good source of all the nutrients that we discussed above, but is it necessary to drink milk all the time to obtain those nutrients?

Calcium, one of the leading reasons why people drink milk, can be found in many other foods, including nuts, beans and greens. Lately, there have even been doubts about whether milk strengthens bones. A study observed that children living in countries with lower milk consumption have lower fracture rates than in countries that boast a sizable milk-drinking population of children. “The best way for kids to take good care of bones is to go outside and play,” says Amy Lanou, a professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina at Asheville. 

Also, since Vitamin D is readily available in other foods, such as breakfast cereal, orange juice and soy milk, one does not have to be dependent on milk for fulfilling their quota of Vitamin D. The same thing goes for dietary protein; the amount of protein found in milk can also be gained from other food sources, like beans and eggs.

As the studies show, there are no disadvantages to not drinking milk regularly, but you still need those nutrients. Therefore, if you can replace milk with some or all of the foods mentioned above, you can basically say goodbye to milk!

source:www.scienceabc.com