Koyal Info Group Mag
3 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Romulos McKenley

The Koyal Group InfoMag Tokyo News: Jord-størrelse planet discovery

The Koyal Group InfoMag Tokyo News: Jord-størrelse planet discovery | Koyal Info Group Mag | Scoop.it
NASA's Kepler space telescope discovered another Earth-like planet that is in the
Romulos McKenley's insight:

Jord-størrelse planet discovery: 5 ting at vide: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/04/17/earth-like-planet-kepler-5-things/7833521/


NASA'S Kepler rumteleskopet opdaget( http://koyal-info-mag.livejournal.com/ ) en anden jord-størrelse planet, der er i den "beboelige zone," en planet afstand fra sin stjerne hvor forholdene er ideel til flydende vand.


Denne planet--kaldet Kepler-186f--er tættest på jorden i størrelse af alle de tidligere opdagelser( https://plus.google.com/104367194723827265861/posts ) af planeter i dette Guldlok zone, sagde Elisa Quintana af NASAs Ames Research Center og SETI Institute, ledende forfatter af undersøgelsen rapporteret i tidsskriftet Science( http://www.scribd.com/margaret9koyal/ ).


Opdagelsen af Kepler-186f er "et stort skridt hen imod at finde denne hellige gral planet", der både tæt i størrelse til jorden og kredser omkring en stjerne svarer til jordens sol, Quintana sagde. I stedet for at kalde det en jordens tvilling, finder NASA Kepler-186f en jorden fætter.


MORE: The Koyal Group Info Mag - Facebook( https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Koyal-Group-Info-Mag/369705673155113 )


Her er fem ting at vide:


1. planeten er 1,1 gange på størrelse med jorden. Seneste opdagelser har været 1,4 gange størrelsen af jorden eller større, Quintana sagde.


2. Kepler-186f har en kortere orbital mønster: 130 dage at kredsen sin stjerne, versus 365 dage til jorden.


3. stjernen Kepler-186f kredsløb er "mindre, køler, lysdæmper" end Jordens sol, sagde J.D. Harrington, NASA talsmand.


4. den masse og sammensætning af Kepler-186f er ukendt. Men baseret på planeter af samme størrelse, er det sandsynligt, planeten er sammensat af en rocky materiale, Quintana sagde.


5. planeten er 500 lysår fra jorden.


Follow @koyalgroup( https://twitter.com/koyalgroup ) on Twitter

No comment yet.
Scooped by Romulos McKenley

The Koyal Group Info Mag Articles - Dozens of University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa (UHM) scientists and student researchers will present new research findings at the 2014 Ocean Sciences Meeting at the Ha...

The Koyal Group Info Mag Articles - Dozens of University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa (UHM) scientists and student researchers will present new research findings at the 2014 Ocean Sciences Meeting at the Ha... | Koyal Info Group Mag | Scoop.it

For a full list of sessions and presentations, visit: http://www.sgmeet.com/osm2014/. ; Conference registration is complimentary for members of the news media.

A selection of School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST) highlights includes the following:


Science Research Sessions and Presentations:

Celebrating 25 years of sustained marine observations, scientists working at the open ocean field site Station ALOHA will share biological, chemical and physical oceanography discoveries deriving from Hawai‘i’s own unique ocean science field programs.  Station ALOHA was established by the Hawaiʻi Ocean Time-series (HOT) program in 1988, and has been visited on a monthly basis since that time.  The emerging data comprise one of the only existing records of decadal-scale ecosystem change in the North Pacific Ocean. "Time series research is more important than ever before; understanding planetary change requires high quality observations and measurements,” said Matthew Church, UHM Oceanography Professor and HOT Program Principle Investigator.  “Humans are influencing the oceans in many ways, and measurements made at Station ALOHA are helping us understand and document how ocean ecosystems are responding to these changes."  This session includes more than 25 presentations drawing from observations from present day back to 1988, including long-term changes and trends observed in ocean biology, chemistry, and physics.  Among the notable topics highlighted in this session include documenting ocean acidification, studies on time-varying changes in biodiversity, and the influence of local and regional climate on ocean ecosystem behavior around Hawai‘i. [See http://koyalgroupinfomag.com/blog/ ]


Chip Fletcher, UHM Geology Professor and his team will describe their effort to monitor and evaluate beach erosion rates at the Royal Hawaiian Beach in Waikīkī. One year after a major sand replenishment program, the beach width appears to vary by location and by season, resulting in net erosion in eastern and western portions of beach.

In the “Story of Marine Debris from the 2011 Tsunami in Japan,” UHM International Pacific Research Center scientists Jan Hafner and Nikolai Maximenko will present the latest synthesis of modeling and observations over the 3 years tracking the debris. This synthesis [See https://twitter.com/koyalgroup ] has resulted in understanding the pathways of the drift from the debris. The improved ocean drift model can help locate marine debris, marine animals, and people lost at sea.

Other research presentations will focus on ocean acidification, sea-level rise and inundation, and climate change including extreme sea level variability due to El Nino events, among many other topics.



Education and Engagement:

UH Mānoa’s Center for Microbial Oceanography: Research and Education (C-MORE) and the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute are hosting a Youth Science Symposium on Tuesday, February 25, from 4-6 p.m. Nearly 20 middle and high school youth scientists will present posters of their research.


SOEST will share several programs aimed at recruiting Native Hawaiian students into ocean and earth science.  Funded by C-MORE and NSF, the Ocean TECH program engages middle school, high school and community college students in the ocean and earth sciences through technology, career pathways and interaction with career professionals.  Funded by the UHM Sea Grant College Program and offered in partnership with Kapiʻolani and Leeward Community Colleges, the SOEST Maile Mentoring Bridge supports Native Hawaiian students throughout their undergraduate years through mentoring relationships that offer encouragement and the sharing of academic and non-academic knowledge.


“Marine Microbiological Mysteries” is a new UHM Outreach College program designed for grades 9-12 to help foster interest in pursuing STEM careers. The hands-on learning opportunity at the Waikīkī Aquarium places microbiology in a real-world context.  This presentation is part of an OSM session titled "Sea-ing connections: Ocean science as a catalyst to inspire the next wave of young (preK-16) scientists and keep students engaged within and outside the classroom."

No comment yet.
Scooped by Romulos McKenley

The Koyal Group InfoMag on Rising Japanese scientist faked heralded stem cell research

The Koyal Group InfoMag on Rising Japanese scientist faked heralded stem cell research | Koyal Info Group Mag | Scoop.it

Rising Japanese scientist faked heralded stem cell research, lab says


In her short scientific career, the trajectory of Haruko Obokata was meteoric. Before the 30-year-old was 20, she was accepted into the science department ( http://koyalgroupinfomag.com/blog/ ) at Tokyo's Waseda University where the admittance board placed great importance on a candidate's aspirations.


Then she studied at Harvard University in what was supposed to be a half-year program, but advisers were so impressed with her research, they asked her stay longer.


It was there that she would come up with an idea that would come to define her – in ways good and bad. The research was called STAP – "stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency" – which unveiled a new way to grow tissue. "I think about my research all day long, including when I am taking a bath and when I am on a date with my boyfriend," Obokata told the Asahi Shimbun.


Last January, just three years after Obokata earned her PhD, she published what appeared to be her groundbreaking research in the scientific journal Nature.


It purported to establish a new way to grow tissue and treat complicated illnesses like diabetes and Parkinson's disease with an uncomplicated lab procedure.


Many called it the third most significant breakthrough in stem cell research.


"There were many days when I wanted to give up on my research and cried all night long," she said at news conference. "But I encouraged myself to hold on just for one more day."


The headlines were thunderous. "Stem cell 'major discovery' claimed," BBC bellowed. "STAP cell pioneer nearly gave up on her research," reported the Asahi Shimbun. "Scientist triumphed over setbacks," crooned the Japan News( http://www.scribd.com/margaret9koyal ).


On Tuesday morning, Obokata's research institute, Riken, which is almost entirely funded by the government, announced that the 30-year-old had purposely fabricated the data to produce the findings.


Institute director Ryoji Noyori said he'll "rigorously punish relevant people after procedures in a disciplinary committee," according to AFP.


The investigation's head said the paper "amounts to phony research or fabrication." He added: "The manipulation was used to improve the appearance of the results."


Obokata, for her part, denied the month-long investigation's allegations. "I will file a complaint against Riken as it's absolutely impossible for me to accept this," AFP reports her saying in a statement.


Whispers began soon after the paper hit print. No one was able to successfully reproduce the experiment.


According to Riken's preliminary report, the institute received its first hint that not everything was as it seemed with Obokata's research on February 13, and eventually conceded there were "serious errors."


Riken said it launched its probe of the research that day "given the seriousness of the issue."


In early March one of the paper's co-authors, Teruhiko Wakayama, jumped ship, calling for a retraction of the findings. "It's unlikely that it was a careless mistake," he wrote the Wall Street Journal in an email.


"There is no more credibility when there are such crucial mistakes," he added.


At issue, investigators say, are images of DNA fragments submitted into Obokata's work. They say they weren't the result of "errors," as previously theorised. The images were either doctored or entirely fabricated.


Try visit our facebook page:




No comment yet.
Scooped by Romulos McKenley

Koyal Info Group Mag: How to Better Interpret What you hear from Scientists

By Dr. E. Kirsten PetersWe live in an age shaped by scientific research. Medical practice, for example, changes a bit each year becau...
Romulos McKenley's insight:

We live in an age shaped by scientific research. Medical practice, for example, changes a bit each year because of new discoveries in the laboratory or in drug trials. We have come to expect progress in a variety of technical fields, and science often lives up to our hopes for it.


But science can also falter. One of the challenges for non-scientists - whom I call “normal people” - must address is how to interpret new scientific studies. Which ones contain valuable information that should influence our activities or government policies? Which can be put on the back burner of our minds, awaiting further evidence?


The matter is both important and sometimes quite practical. Scientific studies claim to address many things that truly matter. Should you be taking a statin drug? Is global climate warming? What is causing the deaths of so many honeybees? What’s the best way to try to lose weight?


Recently the prestigious journal Nature ran a piece about what non-scientists need to know when they hear about the results of scientific studies. The point isn’t to make everyone into a scientist, but to sketch some of the basic limits of scientific work so that the general public can better interpret the results of technical research.


The Nature piece featured 20 concepts to be borne in mind when hearing about the conclusions of scientific research. I can’t go through all 20 ideas here, but I’ll give you a sampling of some of those I think most important.


Chance can cause substantial variation. Scientists spend their days looking for patterns in data and in the natural world. We scientists are always trying to answer the basic question, what is the cause of patterns embedded in the world around us? But when we evaluate data, we must bear in mind that sometimes the world changes more due to chance than due to some specific cause. This means the general public sometimes needs to be patient and await confirmation of results from other studies.


Bigger sample size is generally better. It may cost more to have a large sample size in a study, but bigger is usually better in terms of the reliability of results. A drug trail involving only a dozen people is unlikely to be as valid as one involving 600 people. This is particularly important in fields like medicine where there are substantial variations between subjects.


Measurements are not exact. It’s common in science to report a measurement plus an estimate of the error involved in making that measurement. Thus, a scientist doesn’t say an object is 8.5 inches wide, but 8.5 inches wide, give-or-take an eighth of an inch. We do this because if the measurement being reported is a small value, it may be swamped by the error possible in the measurement. The example the Nature piece gave for this idea is the kind of report you may hear on the news, something like, “The economy grew by 0.13 percent last month.” That number is so small and the error involved in such matters is so substantial, there is a chance the economy may actually have shrunk.


Identifying two patterns doesn’t necessary mean one is caused by the other. It’s easy to ascribe meaning to patterns we see in the world around us. But just because we can see two patterns, it doesn’t mean one causes the other. It’s possible that both of the patterns identified in a study are caused by a third factor, sometimes called a confounding variable.


Scientists are human. Scientists are people. We do our best, but that doesn’t make us perfect. Scientists have several reasons to try to promote the work that’s been done, quite apart from whatever merit it may have. Scientists want to have successful careers and that means promoting results obtained in the lab or field. For some scientists, professional status really matters, and for most scientists today, further funding is an issue always kept in mind.


It’s important for the general public to bear in mind some of the limits of science. Technical research is still the best way we have of understanding the natural world, an approach that brings us astonishing advances every few years. But a scientist - and science itself - is not perfect.


Dr. E. Kirsten Peters, a native of the rural Northwest, was trained as a geologist at Princeton and Harvard. This column is a service of the College of Agricultural, Human, and Natural Resource Sciences at Washington State University.


Read This Article:



Check Koyal Info Group Mag blog:




See Post:


No comment yet.