Black Hole Theories

Behaviors proposed by black holes could possibly disprove Einstein’s framework of relativity or even prove as to why quantum mechanics is just wrong. The Large Hadron Collider, a machine based in Geneva, Switzerland, happens to be the highest energy collider in existence. It has proposed possible behaviors for black holes that conflict with the laws of physics, a fact quite alarming to scientists. These behaviors proposed are all speculations from tiny black holes created by the Large Hadron Collider, but are nonetheless important. But there are people who still disagree with these proposed theories, and have formulated some of their own unique ideas.

3833725623_029f8ee073_o.jpg

So what exactly is a black hole, and how do they form? A black hole is a place in space where gravity pulls so hard that light cannot get out. Black holes range in size from one as small as an atom to some as large as multiple suns combined. Black holes are formed when a star collapses upon itself, leaving a black hole to have formed. There are also many other ways to form them and many different theories as to what would happen if something or someone was sent through a black hole. As of now, no one knows what would happen if, somehow, somebody or something was sent through a black hole.

What does the Large Hadron Collider do, and who uses it? The Large Hadron Collider is a device that gives scientists the ability to test different theories of particle physics, which is a branch of physics that studies the nature of particles. The Large Hadron Collider is located inside the European lab CERN. CERN (or European Organization for Nuclear Research) is a group of scientists who are dedicated to studying the fundamental structures of the universe. It was originally formed in 1952 to study nuclear development, but now that we know more about that, CERN is able to dive even deeper into science. CERN is able to put its main focus of study in particle physics - a way of studying the nature of particles and mainly matter and radiation.

2046228644_daab5255bd_o.jpg

The Nature editorial I read about black holes discusses the possibility that black holes formed by the Large Hadron Collider will interfere with the laws of physics. These hypotheses were formed by black holes created by the Large Hadron Collider. Each hypothesis is just as mind blowing as the next: either Einstein was incorrect with his framework of relativity or the whole basis of quantum mechanics is wrong. However, many other scientists have their own theories as to how these things are formed and what would happen if a black hole were to form.

Two scientists, Feng and Shapere, who study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, claim that though black holes can form through tiny collisions, they can also form through cosmic rays. Cosmic rays are high energy particles which mainly originate outside the solar system.Their evidence shows that with extra dimensions and TeV-scale gravity, black holes can be formed by the cosmic rays. The Large Hadron Collider will begin operating with several energies of TeV-scale energy. This is a positive thing for these scientists because the Large Hadron Collider will now be able to shed more light on this hypothesis.

Another scientist has made claims that suggest both prompt and delayed collapse due to fallback can create black holes. Their main evidence for this claim is that massive progenitors (M) more than 20 M and 40 M can form black holes. Progenitors are cells that are capable of forming in black holes. Although it is very unlikely for these progenitors to form into black holes, these are still possible. Progenitors more than 40 M are capable of forming black holes directly without any supernova explosion, while for progenitors only greater than 20 M, fallback is the reason for the formation of the black holes because it causes a compact object to collapse creating the black hole.

Another way of black hole production is through hard leptons and photons. A hard lepton is a particle that does not undergo strong interactions, the most common of which being an electron. A photon is an elementary particle and the force carrier for electromagnetic force. The author claims that these things assist in TeV-scale quantum gravity, which is a field of theoretical physics that seeks to describe the source of gravity. These leptons and photons go hand-in-hand with TeV-scales because TeV-scales are a part of quantum gravity, and black holes are within the field of quantum gravity.

Whether these hypotheses are correct or not, more research is clearly needed. These are some high stake claims that could potentially rock the scientific world and dispute foundations that have been around for centuries. The other possible hypotheses I’ve discussed are nonetheless important, however they do not possess such enormous ramifications as the other hypotheses do. Despite the need for more research, the hypotheses proposed by my Nature article are almost unfathomable, potentially negating the findings of some of the worlds most intelligent people of all time.

Works Cited

Nature. “Against The Law.” Nature Publishing Group, April 3, 2013. Web. 12 February 2014.

Feng, Johnathan and Shapere, Alfred. “Black Hole Production by Cosmic Rays.” Physical Review Letters 88.2 (2002): Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Web. 16 February 2014.

Fryer, Chris. “Mass Limits for Black Hole Formation.” The Astrophysical Journal (1999): Lick Observatory, University of California Observatories. Web. 20 February 2014.

Hydraulic Fracturing is Not the Solution

What the frack? Photo by: Toban Black

The hydraulic fracturing process utilizes a chemical solution containing known carcinogens such as lead, radium, uranium, mercury and formaldehyde. These harmful waste products threaten public safety. The government must institute regulatory measures in order to prevent the dissemination of toxins into the public drinking water. Shale gas is natural gas produced from hydraulic fracturing. Due to lack of governmental regulation the chemicals employed in shale gas extraction currently leaves dangerous amounts of carcinogens and toxins in public drinking water. Current shale gas benefits are outweighed by their costs due to the world’s reliance on fossil fuels and developing cleaner alternative energies.

Hydraulic fracturing is the process of drilling and injecting fluid into the ground at a high pressure in to break shale rocks to emit and capture the natural gas inside. Each hydraulic fracturing consumes approximately 400,000 gallons of carcinogenic, or cancer-causing, chemicals. That is 400,000 gallons of chemicals that if ingested by the average human would cause health problems in the vein of cancer and respiratory issues.I am all for finding alternative forms of energy because at the rate we are going, there won’t be much environment to preserve, but this rapid degradation of our water supply just can’t be justified.

Take a look at this article by Penn Live. It refers to instances in Pennsylvania of water contamination via fracturing being outright denied by construction companies or explained away because “the problem was there before they began operations”. That child-like “it wasn’t me” response is just a blatant disregard for the safety of others born of apathy. Pennsylvania’s Act 13 calls for testing of water supplies within 2,500 feet prior to drilling. This practice may deter from the “it was like that when I got there” excuse but a stipulation included in Act 13 gives more cause for concern than may have been expected. When evidence of water contamination is indisputable victims are eligible for a settlement but are given a gag order as part of their “compensation”. This practice is concerning because it points to a much bigger problem in the shale gas industry.

It is clear that there is a need for extreme measures of caution when hydraulic fracturing, but instances of contamination are hushed by government that should be regulating the practice and energy companies that should be held to a high standard because of the potential health implications. These gag orders also serve to quiet potential activism in the wake of contamination. Victims of water contamination via fracturing need permittance to voice their concerns and stories involving fracking because the public is the society’s watchdog; they make sure the government takes care of its responsibilities and pressures private companies to provide the quality safety and service demanded by the people.

A fear of needles... Photo by: Campact

Even more concerning than the drinking water fracturing contaminates is the amount of water that is used to create fracturing fluid. Again, there are 400,000 gallons of chemicals poured into water to make fracturing fluid. That water mixed with fracturing chemicals must go through a likely expensive purification process for reuse at some point. The pollution of aquifers following hydraulic fracturing is worrisome on its own, but add to this the amount of water that is polluted simply to make the liquid, and that is cause enough to question whether the benefits are worth the contamination of one of Earth’s most valuable resource.

This is not to say that shale gas deserves complete abandonment. I think it can be of great value if the proper regulations are instituted. This informational site on the facts behind shale gas mentions that shale gas reserves in the United States “may be sustainable for decades”. That fact coupled with the need to move away from pollutant-generating fossil fuels places shale gas in a position to fill the vacuum left by wasteful resources. But it is important to remember that shale gas is only a temporary solution, akin to a temp in the office working until a suitable employee is found to do the job properly.

The notion that shale gas is “cleaner” than other gas produced from fossils comes from the erroneous assumption that producing less carbon indicates cleanliness. Shale gas emits methane gas when it is burned. Methane is a much more potent pollutant than carbon. Shale gas is consequently much more destructive in its production due to the water it contaminates through the hydraulic fracturing process and the methane it emits in its burning.

The flippant disregard of the above information in regards to the cleanliness of the public’s water supply is egregious. Hydraulic fracturing is a chemical process that involves forcibly injecting 400,000 gallons of toxic chemicals into geological structures that house the aquifers in which drinking water is derived from. If the government or energy companies that regulate and supply energy produced from hydraulic fracturing can’t be trusted to investigate the possibility that perhaps even a miniscule amount of of the 400,000 gallons of harmful chemicals that are used per fracturing, then maybe we should stop considering shale gas a viable form of alternative energy in advent of some sort of deus ex machina-esque “clean energy”.

However, shale gas can be of considerable benefit society. There just needs to be strict hydraulic fracturing regulations and accountability on the part of energy companies. After all, if the public drinking water becomes tainted, producing cleaner energy will be the least of the world’s concerns.

Works Cited

“Shale gas drilling: blameless bonanza or scorched-earth operation?” Patriot News Web. 09 January 2014
“Facts about Shale Gas” American Petroleum Institute Web. 18 February 2014

Latching on to a Remedy

Patients’ reluctance to allow leeches to suck their blood is justifiable when you consider the parasite’s three jaws and 300 teeth (“Medicinal”). Leech therapy brings about nightmarish scenes from the Middle Ages, when doctors would prescribe the blood-sucking creatures for almost any ailment and encourage the annelids to extract a large amount of the patient’s blood, the good and the bad. As a potential patient, I am personally very happy to say that the medical field has come a long way in the past few hundred years, and leeches now offer aid to patients (in a legitimate, regulated, scientifically-proven sort of way) and even more hope for medicinal benefits in the future. Now the main issues facing the widespread use of leeches in the medical world are a bad reputation and a scary history, but patients and medical providers alike need to look at new research and practices that are saving lives and easing pain in patients suffering from an array of ailments, from facial reconstructive surgery to osteoarthritis in a bum knee. Leeches have not always played a positive role in medicine but should once again be a topic of research and treatment, as they can save lives with their combination of physical abilities and chemical properties.

Photo from Wikimedia Commons
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leeching-large.jpeg

Leeches have ridden a roller coaster of popularity with humans throughout history, at least dating back to the time of pharaohs and pyramids, with drawings of leeches in an ancient Egyptian tomb as evidence. Hippocrates advocated the use of leeches in balancing the four humors in Classical Greece, and we have reason to believe that the doctor of Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius also supported the practice of bloodletting in the 2nd century. Fast-forward some centuries to medieval times when hirudotherapy, the medicinal use of leeches, once again experienced a resurgence. Except by the late 1800s, people were catching onto the fact that the bloodletting of the time was not actually helping the patients but making them sicker; as you can imagine, this proved to be a serious blow to the leech industry, which struggled until the mid-20th century (“Suckers”). Luckily for all of us as potential hosts to these helpful parasites, the past half-century has proved to be a good one in the world of hirudotherapy, as leeches are growing in popularity and use across the world.

The first and better-known advantage of leeches is their vampire-esque talent of bloodsucking. While this sounds to me an unpleasant process, bloodletting is finding success with many plastic surgeries because leeches are considered to help the reattachment of digits by preventing clotting of the veins. In fact, in a survey of over 50 plastic surgery units in the UK and Ireland conducted in 2002, 80% of the units had used leeches (“Suckers”). Also, Ed Susman cites in his article 15 cases in which leeches were successfully used to save free flap reconstructions and preserve blood flow in the tissues. While surgery or therapy would have been unable to remove the obstructions, leeches were able to save the patient from another surgery and salvage the flap.

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sucking_leech.jpg

Besides their obvious bloodsucking tendencies, leeches also have some very special saliva. Hirudotherapy is prescribed to lessen the pain from osteoarthritis because, as the Nature article explains, “Among the 30 or so biologically active substances in their saliva are molecules that stop inflammation and blood clotting, both of which are involved in arthritis” (“Suckers”). Gustav Dobos of the University of Essen in Germany had successfully treated osteoarthritis in the knee with hirudotherapy, and then moved to testing the leeches’ success on thumb arthritis. Dobos conducted a study of 32 women with arthritis in the thumb and found that leeches led to a greater decrease in pain and kept the pain away for longer than a painkilling ointment. Leeches lessen the pain of osteoarthritis by “inject[ing] a blood-thinning chemical called hirudin and several substances that fight inflammation.” While typical painkilling injections or pills have not proved very effective in arthritis treatment, leeches’ natural chemical hirudin has proved to work wonders.

While leech therapy has not rebounded to its 19th century status, hirudotherapy is definitely on the rise, and rightfully so. Biopharm leeches, Britain’s largest supplier of medicinal leeches, based in Hendy, Wales, ships a staggering 50,000 leeches a year. The market for leeches is not just in Europe, with Ricarimpex in Eysines, a firm in France, allowed clearance in 2004 from the United States Food and Drug Administration to sell its leeches in America as medical devices (“Suckers”). Some doctors warn against the possible side effects of hirudotherapy, especially regarding the risk of infection after leech use. While this is a threat that needs to be taken into consideration, if patients use leeches in the proper way with adequate supervision, the risk should not cause serious problems. Also, knowing of the chance of infection allows doctors to be ready to prescribe antibiotics; no one wants to be on antibiotics, but if one round of medicine is the price of no more osteoarthritis, I’d say it is a price I’m willing to pay. Leeches have proven that they are determined to stick around the medical world, so we should embrace the bloodsuckers as a valuable resource and continue to research their impressive bloodletting and chemical substances.

Works Cited 

Aeromonas Meningitis Complicating Medicinal Leech Therapy by John P. Ouderkirk et. Al., Clinical Infectious Diseases

“Leech Therapy Proves Successful in Long‐Term Follow‐Up for Head & Neck Cancer Surgery Reconstruction” by Ed Susman, Oncology Times

“Medicinal Leeches: Stuck on You.” Nature. 432.7013 (2004): n. page. Web. 5 Feb. 2014.

"Suckers for Success." Nature. 484.7395 (2012): n. page. Web. 3 Feb. 2014.

“Thumbs up for Leech Therapy,” ScienceNOW

The Importance of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Embryonic stem cells actually originate from organic structures derivative of embryos developed via eggs created “in vitro” (sperm and egg joined in a laboratory) contrary to the popular belief that they are born of fertilized eggs in a woman’s body. Though stem cell research aids in the cure of many medical diseases - to name a few, leukemia, arthritis, breast cancer, and sickle cell, controversy has inhibited it with misconceptions of ethical and embryonic moral standards as well as its status as a living human being or a cell. The need for stem cell research, particularly embryonic stem cell research, outweighs the ethical concerns and is necessary to advance regenerative science-based medicine to build more tissue for organ repair.

Since the 1960’s, the controversial claims surrounding stem cell science dominated scientific debates. However, it was not only until the emergence of Dolly the Sheep in 1996, the first cloned animal from stem cells, that cloning and the research surrounding embryonic stem cells became more recognizable to the public, with evidence from a BBC article. Many presidents throughout the years have continuously been going back and forth on stem cell research with its own series of laws and mandates leading to the majority of the population becoming ill-informed about the topic. Stem cell research’s hopes are as follows: are the dead cells of a diseased person’s organ replaceable for better health and likelihood of combating disease? The sheer purpose of the specialization and the ideology behind stem cell research is largely an argument itself. Stem cells divide for long periods of time unspecialized, but develop into a specialized cell later on. Pluripotency makes the stem cell special as opposed to a regular cell, which means that they have the ability to give rise to all of the various cell types of the body and replicate tremendously.

A variety of stem cells exist in the scientific world, but embryonic stem cells have been the most controversial, due to the religious morality proposed by many intellectuals. They also happen to be the most important. Some common arguments include that the embryo is a human being and that embryonic stem cell research promotes the damage of human life in regards to incompatibility of Catholic principles. According to Richard Doerflinger from the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, these moral principles view human life as a “continuum and sees human individuals of every age and condition as meriting the same respect for their fundamental right to life.” He raises counterarguments to people’s beliefs, such as the common belief that an embryo cannot be a person because it does not have mental or physical abilities. Additionally, he argues that by this certain logic, that people in a coma or Alzheimer’s disease can be excluded from personhood.

As previously stated, a common misconception states that well-developed embryos are taken directly from the mother, whereas in fact, embryos are either made in the lab or through cloning in which a cell is taken from the patient’s body and merged with a donated egg. Though a false claim, the truth lies not too far ahead. Scientists do need to destroy that self-made embryo to obtain usable stem cells. Due to this fact, religious leaders promptly dismiss advocation for embryonic stem cells.

The use of embryonic stem cells need not to be dismissed just because it collides with the principles of just one religious group in our multi-faceted world. Embryonic stem cells provide the scientific world with breakthroughs in research, technology, and a holistic understanding of the human genome and health. The legendary era of Dolly the Sheep brought about more animal cloning, in which Dolly was used to clone four more sheep. Since Dolly’s emergence, a lot has been learned about the cloning process and further information heeds way into improving ways of technology.

Furthermore, some scientists and researchers alike refute the use of embryonic stem cells by advocating the use of other types of stem cells - induced pluripotent stem cells and adult stem cells. Although induced pluripotent cells have a similar function, embryonic stem cells have been proven to be more effective and take a shorter time to develop into a proper cell. Let’s look at one scenario presented by Jerome Zack of UCLA’s Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research: A patient who needs a tissue replacement has the cell reprogrammed into a stem cell in which the cell that is damaged is regenerated in a process that takes several weeks. It also takes several genes and unfortunately, these genes use some of the same cells that tend to cause cancer. An area of new research, as referenced by Nature on Obokota’s experiments, contains a new, easier process of obtaining induced pluripotent stem cells. Obokota states that just by putting external stress, like exposure to low pH (acid bath), physical squeezing, and toxins, an induced pluripotent stem cell can arise. Though radical and optimistic, much research still needs to be done in terms of these cells showing their pluripotency. The other type of stem cells - adult stem cells, do not require the destruction of an embryo and contain pluripotency, but they are restricted to certain lineages.

As one can see, the development of stem cell research greatly expanded worldwide and is becoming more accepted. For example, in Ireland, stem cells can now be manufactured for human use to take diseases such as arthritis and diabetes in order to advance regenerative medicine, since stem cells serve as the repair mechanism for the body. The 1990 Human Fertilization and Embryology Act (HFEA) in the United Kingdom and the 2001 Human Reproductive Cloning Act permit the destruction of embryos for human embryonic stem cells. In China, one cultural attitude states that one begins life at birth; therefore, stem cell usage has really unfolded through in vitro fertilization with embryonic stem cells. Aside from China, other Asian countries have truly contributed to the stem cell research, such as Singapore, Japan, and South Korea. A notable researcher is Haruko Obokota, a stem cell biologist from RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology in Kobe, Japan, recently just contributed to the new easier process of obtaining induced pluripotent stem cells just by putting external stress. In March 2005, the Brazilian government passed legislation allowing the use of in vitro fertilization embryos that have been frozen for more than three years. However, The Brazilian Catholic Church then challenged the law, and argued that embryonic stem cell research violates the right to life. The Brazilian Supreme Court rejected the petition and permitted embryonic stem cell research.

The hindrance of embryonic stem cell research may very well halt medical discovery. Not everyone followed Brazil’s example to permit embryonic stem cell research. Stem cell research holds promise for treatment and cures of various current untreatable injuries and diseases, and not to mention it promotes the alleviation of suffering of those with incurable diseases. Split by the fundamental views of the duty to prevent further suffering or the duty to respect the value of human life, stem cell research prevents to make an impactful influence on the community as a whole.

The religious leaders who strive and promote for the recognition of the embryo’s status as a human being and the scientists who are immersed in stem cell research remain at the differing ends of the spectrum. In order to move forward with stem cell research and discovering new medical treatments, reaching both moral principles is impossible and it’s either one principle or the latter. On a wider, holistic view, the destruction of embryos seems of a small scale compared to the various opportunities of better health, with talks of even considering the possibility of finding a cure for one of these diseases that have plagued so many individuals and led to death and despair.

Aforementioned, stem cells can give rise to any particular tissue - think about the limitless potential for the variety of medical applications contributing to the human body. Multiple people can benefit from not just adult stem cell and induced pluripotent stem cell research, but also from the lines of embryonic stem cell research as it provides a much better stepping stool to many avenues in the healthcare world. People need not divert their attention away from embryonic stem cells because of the ethical and religious concerns that cloud the subject. The shunning of embryonic stem cell research cannot remain justifiable as it has been known to consistently provide a better understanding of stem cell research itself. Instead of ignoring an existing methodology due to various concerns, there needs to be focus on the efficacy of the method, especially when combined with the newer methods of adult stem cell research and induced pluripotent stem cell research. Perhaps a better way to deal with all this is to continue groundbreaking research on all stem cell research for a united community of combating disease. I believe that garnering attention on the stem cell research instead of nitpicking and criticizing the invalidity of embryonic stem cell research would greatly improve individuals’ chances for better health. Just from the application of a stem cell that comes from an embryo produced in a laboratory, a child can be saved from leukemia, or a mother can have better hopes in defeating breast cancer. Continuing the research on embryonic stem cell research would vastly strengthen the foundation of public health.

The big debate
Flickr: Photo by Mario Pieperni

Works Cited:

Doerflinger, R. M. (1999). The Ethics of Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Catholic Viewpoint. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 9(2), 137–150. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/kennedy_institute_of_ethics_journal/v009/9.2doerflinger.html

Cyranoski, David. "News – Obokata Stem Cells." Nature 505.7485 (2014): 596. 29 Jan. 2014. Web.

Dhar D, Hsi-En Ho J. Stem cell research policies around the world. Yale J Biol Med. 2009;82:113–115.

"Frequently Asked Questions." What Are Embryonic Stem Cells? [Stem Cell Information]. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2014.

BBC News. BBC, 24 Nov. 2010. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.

Murnaghan, Ian. "Pluripotent Stem Cells." Pluripotent Stem Cells. Explore Stem Cells, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.

"Myths and Misconceptions About Stem Cell Research." California's Stem Cell Agency. California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.

"Jerome Zack: Creating IPS Cells." YouTube. YouTube, 16 Jan. 2009. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.

"Adult Stem Cell." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.