Katharine M. J. Osborne's Blog
Posted by Katharine M. J. Osborne
I recently found this video of a spoon and fork resting incredibly on the end of a toothpick which in turn was resting on the rim of a drinking glass. The free end of the toothpick was then burned until it reached the edge of the glass, and it looked as if the the utensils should have dropped, considering the counterweight of the toothpick had been removed. This one was actually new to me, and it was quite intriguing.
Well, it took me a few minutes to figure why the fork and spoon didn't fall. I replicated the set-up, and realized that the toothpick couldn't of its own accord supply enough weight to counterbalance the the utensils. But I did see that it is was in fact stiction (static friction) that counter-acted the weight of the utensils (and to be fair, the utensils were turned towards the glass altering the center of mass of the system). The end of the toothpick was "stuck" to the rim of the glass, and it helped that the rim was curved upward (most all drinking glasses have this feature so you don't cut your mouth when you drink).
I also filmed a response video.
Posted by Katharine M. J. Osborne
Yesterday, the Phoenix, a robotic lander mission to the Martian arctic region, launched successfully. The lander is scheduled to reach Mars in May of 2008.
When deployed, the lander will probe the arctic looking for enviroments that might be suitable for microbes. The lander was re-engineered from parts of a previously canceled Mars mission from 2001. Still, the price tag was $325 million for the spacecraft - cheaper than many previous missions. NASA has replaced expensive missions with "cheaper, better, faster" Scout missions. The project was multinational, but headed up by the University of Arizona Lunar and Planetary Sciences Laboratory in Tuscon Arizona.
Included on the lander is a DVD produced by the Planetary Society, containing multimedia files about Mars (like Orson Welles' panic inducing radio broadcast of 'War of the Worlds') and names of Mars supporters gathered from the internet. The DVD is made out of silica to withstand Martian weather for thousands of years and is intended to be a historical artifact of interest to any future human colonizers (if/when we get there, I bet we will no longer have the right codecs or equipment to play it).
Posted by Katharine M. J. Osborne
The Simpsons' have always been slightly surreal, and since the series is animated, the creators can get away with pretty much anything, in the sense that they depict many violations of physics. This is normal and expected of this artform (yeah, I said it - I have high regard for sequential art).
What is still sometimes surprising, is how aware the writers are of actual physics. In seasons past, Homer explored the 3rd dimension (in a bizarre cross-over of Flatland and Poltergeist), Stephen Hawking made a guest appearance, and Bart observed a (rather doomsday) comet.
In the movie, there is a scene where Homer is stuck to a wrecking ball, being swung between a large rock and a "Hard Place". The segment plays with our commonsense knowledge of physics. The ball slowly stop swinging, then suddenly swings again! This is funny precisely because it is unexpected - pendulums in motion slowly come to rest, and cannot, of their own accord start swinging again.
In another segment, Lisa advises her father to gun the engine of a motorbike he is trying to ride around inside a small spherical cage. Lisa knows that increasing his forward speed will help him drive upside in the cage. The same trick is attempted later in the film (don't want to spoil it too much if you haven't gone to see it yet), but seems rather ludicrous. As an audience we can forgive this, because it wasn't the action that was important, but rather, where that brought the characters in the story.
Posted by Katharine M. J. Osborne
Iran hosted this year's 38th annual International Physics Olympiad (IPhO), running from July 13th through the 22nd. A total of 73 countries participated, with 327 competitors. The absolute winner (the one with the highest score) this year was Youngjoon Choi from the Republic of Korea.
Originating in 1967 in Poland, the first Olympiad hosted teams from 5 Eastern Bloc countries. Now it is a truly global competition, and countries vie to host it (which isn't anywhere near as expensive as many other competitions).
The competition is held on two separate days with a period of rest. There are three theoretical questions, and one experimental. Teams consist of five students and two supervisors. First place can be gained with a score of 90% or more, second place a score of 78% or higher, third place is 65% or higher, and an honorable mention is gained with 50% or higher.
These are extremely difficult problems, especially for high school students. When I was in high school, I participated in a similar test (in a nationwide search for team candidates). I had no previous preparation, and scored 33% - the highest score ever achieved at that school. It was all the more remarkable to my teachers because I had a low C in my physics class, while the A students scored in the teens or less, so I guess they couldn't figure me out (I knew I was smart, I was just bored with the instruction and hated doing rote problems from the textbook).
Posted by Katharine M. J. Osborne
I've never been a fan of fireworks, or holidays associated with them. Hawaiians typically go nuts when they have the opportunity to set them off - it's tradition here. I'm not a fan of the noise or the smell, but it is better than in many states where people shoot their guns in the air. Apparently, these individuals are not aware of the fact that bullets are subject to gravity, and what goes up, must come down. Many people have been injured or killed by bullets fired in celebration.
Anyway, I spent the day with a friend at a Borders bookstore near where I live. It was very quiet, and we plunked down in the physics section, both of us with large iced lattes - fuel for the intellect. We browsed the physics books, and she pulled one out written by Richard Feynman.
"I've heard of this name before," she said.
"Yeah. I think Einstein is a little overrated. Feynman was probably the greatest 20th century physicist. I wish more people knew about him." That may be entirely subjective, but Feynman was inarguably a great teacher of physics. I proceeded to tell her lots of interesting Feynman facts, hoping to win a convert.
She also spotted a book on parallel universes, and her eyes lit up. Like many people, especially those not familiar with physics, she thinks the concept of parallel universes is incredibly intriguing. Indeed, the theories surrounding parallel universes are the current rock stars of science - edgy and weird, and threatening to turn our comfortable relationship with reality inside out. I told her about branes and what physicists now think happened before the big bang to make our universe, and how they think they might be able to produce a universe in the lab (if only for a short period of time before it pinches off to be in it's own spacetime - that would really put the last nail in the coffin for literal creationists). Our conversation ran heavily on the philosophical and speculative sides, but it did make me realize just how fertile a time this is for physics. Gosh, I can't wait to see what wondrous things unravel in the next fifty years!
