Space: the final frontier-of-the-year quiz

by Ananya Sen

The year 2018 saw several unusual discoveries that were made in our solar system and beyond. The findings ranged from explaining historical artifacts to confirming predictions that were made by science fiction enthusiasts. If you consider yourself a space trivia enthusiast or you want a summary of the exciting discoveries that have been made this year, this quiz is exactly what you’re looking for.

A note on how the quiz works: You choose the answer you prefer, and then carry on reading through the questions and check the answers at the end against your choices. There's no automated scoring, but we hope you enjoy the quiz! Please share how well you did!

1. Images taken by NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft during its flyby of Pluto showed the presence of dunes on Pluto’s surface. This discovery was surprising because there is not much of an atmosphere on Pluto’s surface. What were the dunes made of?

 Frozen methane
 Ice
 Sand

2. This year scientists were carrying out studies on the black hole that is at the center of our universe. What serendipitous discovery did they make?

 The collapse of a planet into the black hole
 Visual images of the black hole that show light bending away from it on all sides
 Bright flares from a superheated gas racing around the black hole

3. The Dark Energy Survey, an international research effort is a five-year project that ended in 2018. In August 2016 they detected something interesting as seen in the animation below. What does it show?

 The birth of a new star
 A supernova
 A distant planet that resembles Earth

4. Astronomers have discovered a planet revolving around 40 Eridani A, an orange dwarf star 16 light years from Earth. Which fictitious planet was predicted to be associated with this star?

 Tatooine
 Krypton
 Vulcan

5. Scientists believe they have finally discovered

 Hydrogen sulfide (farts)
 Methane (marshy land)
 Methanethiol (rotting vegetables)

6. How many new moons were discovered around Jupiter in 2018?

 5
 10
 15

7. In 1922 Howard Carter, a British archeologist, discovered King Tut’s tomb. Inside the tomb he found a breast plate which contained a winged scarab, made from a yellow, translucent gemstone. How was this gemstone formed?

 A comet exploded over the Libyan Desert and the resultant heat melted the sand glass forming bits of the gemstone
 It was formed when hot magma was expelled from deep inside the earth’s crust and cooled rapidly in the desert
 The gemstones were formed deep inside the earth and were encased in rocks. These rocks then made their way to the surface and the weathering process released the underlying gemstone

8. For the past three years two radio telescopes in Tasmania and continental Australia have been arranged to track the Vela pulsar, a neutron star associated with the constellation of Vela. What were the telescopes trying to detect?

 Radio emissions
 A glitch in its normal behavior
 Magnetic fields

9.Which satellite was launched in 2018 to detect rocky planets around nearby stars?

 TESS
 Horizons-3e
 Skylab

10. Where on Mars did NASA’s Curiosity rover find organic material in 2018? 

 In the debris of the Hellas Planitia crater
 The soil on the Olympus Mons volcano
 Mudstones on the slopes of Mount Sharp

The answers:

Question 1: Pluto's sand dunes are made of frozen methane.

Question 2: The scientists discovered bright flares from a superheated gas racing around the black hole.
Question 3: The Dark Energy Survey observed a supernova in 2016.
Question 4: Vulcan was predicted to be associated with 40 Eridani A.
Question 5: Uranus smells of hydrogen sulfide (farts).

Question 6: 10 new moons were discovered around Jupiter in 2018. 

Question 7: A comet exploded over the Libyan Desert and the resultant heat melted the sand glass forming bits of the gemstone.

Question 8: The telescopes were trying to detect a glitch in the Vela pulsar. 

Question 9: TESS (Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite) was launched in 2018

Question 10: The Curiosity rover discovered organic matter in the mudstones on the slopes of Mount Sharp.

Ananya Sen is a grad student in microbiology at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. She spends 80% of her time working on oxidative stress in the Imlay lab and the remaining 20% of her time blogging about science, exploring food, taking care of her dog.

Global warming is not a distant nightmare anymore

by Ananya Sen

Climate change has been hotly debated in the past couple of decades, and while the evidence is clear that it’s a big problem, sometimes it’s hard to picture that in your head. But the visual evidence that scientists have gathered can be even more compelling than the climate change projections – take a look for yourself. Click on and move the big circle to slide the line dividing these two overlaid pictures of a glacier in 1909 and 2018, and compare and contrast:

Image credit: Eduard Spelterini/Kieran Baxter/University of Dundee

In October 2018 a team of photographers recreated a 1909 expedition that took stunning pictures of the Mer de Glace glacier in the French Alps. Eduard Spelterini, a Swiss aviation pioneer, took the original pictures during his voyage in a gas-filled balloon. The 2018 team embarked on the same trip to document the changes the past century has brought. What used to be an impressive glacier has now largely been replaced by an empty valley and debris.

That illustrates what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released in its report on climate change and its predictions for the next few decades in October 2018. The report is sobering to say the least. Several land and ocean ecosystems have already changed due to global warming. For example, for an increase in 1.5 °C 6% of insects, 8% of plants, and 4% of vertebrates are projected to lose over half of the area they identify as home. A direr situation awaits coral reefs, which are projected to die out almost completely for the same temperature change. ScienceSeeker’s picks for 2018 include many articles that highlight such consequences of climate change.

Climate change has obviously changed marine ecosystems. Some reef fish have evolved to depend on coral reefs for food and protection. These fish are smaller and have less defensive spines, enabling them to live among the corals instead of the sea bed. Many reef-dwelling fish have vanished with the decline in reef ecosystems. Sea turtles represent another group of animals that have been adversely affected due to climate change. Although their ancestors survived the extinction event that wiped out dinosaurs, the modern descendants are among the most threatened groups of vertebrates in the world. Currently 61% of the population is threatened or extinct, which can have ominous consequences for their diverse ecosystems. 

Even land inhabitants that have been flourished for centuries are now struggling. For example, more than half of Africa’s giant baobabs, some of which are 1,500-2,000 years old, have died between 2006 and 2017. Other organisms have displayed the effects of climate change in a different way. Birds sing to attract mates and establish territories. The timing of the bird songs depends on the breeding season. Recent recordings by scientists have shown that the timing has been moving up four days per decade. This can result in a mismatch for migratory birds whose breeding and feeding patterns might become out of sync with their surroundings, leading to a population loss.

The effects of climate change will also have adverse effects on humans. It has been predicted that global warming will increase the number and intensity of tropical storms. For example, in New York City the return period will be reduced from 25 years today to five years in the next three decades. Analysis of the tropical cyclone data from 1980 to 2016 has shown a significant global increase in the number of storms with maximum speeds of 175 km/h. More troubling is the observation that the number of storms with speeds of 200 km/h has doubled, and of those of 250 km/h has tripled. Climate change is also shifting the location of the storms and expanding the affected areas. Regions near the poles that have been historically less threatened by these storms are going to be at risk.

Although the outlook is grim, all is not lost. The Paris agreement has made countries aware of the steps that need to be taken to reduce global warming, prompting efforts to reduce carbon emissions. To that end, California is seeking to create a blueprint for others to follow. In September 2018 the California Governor issued an executive order calling for the California economy to become carbon neutral by 2045. The measures include transitioning to clean energy, using electric cars for transportation, increasing carbon sequestration by farming, and changing livestock feeds to reduce methane emissions from cattle.

The most important step for all of us is to recognize that the reality of climate change is going to affect our generation. It is easy to feel resignation and remain idle but we need to take active measures, no matter how small. It has been estimated that only 100 companies are responsible for 75% of the global emissions. Together we can pressure these companies into making environmentally conscious decisions. We can also aim to reduce our own carbon footprints and adjust our living standards. It has been said that necessity is the mother of all invention. By reminding ourselves that the fate of the Earth and its future rests on our shoulders, humans can drive the changes required to bring our planet back from the brink of collapse.

Ananya Sen is a grad student in microbiology at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. She spends 80% of her time working on oxidative stress in the Imlay lab and the remaining 20% of her time blogging about science, exploring food, taking care of her dog. 

The Science of Star Wars

Photo credit: JD Howell

Is it possible to create a lightsaber? Could the Force ever be a reality? ScienceSeeker editor and McMaster University PhD student Thanassis Psaltis explores the real science behind the fictional Star Wars universe.

Since the first Star Wars movie opened in 1977, children the world over have been channelling their inner Obi Wan Kenobi – trying in vain to move objects using the mystical power of the Force.

While it may not be possible to levitate the TV remote using Jedi powers, science tells us that, in fact, there are forces that bind the galaxy together, planets that resemble those found in the Star Wars universe, and that it may – theoretically at least – be possible to build a lightsaber.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. According to Thanassis Psaltis, a first-year PhD student in experimental nuclear astrophysics, Star Wars is full of interesting science.

To mark this week’s release of the latest installment of the Star Wars saga, Psaltis who is supervised by Alan Chen, a professor in McMaster’s Department of Physics and Astronomy, recently explored the science of Star Wars in a unique show he created and presented at McMaster’s W.J. McCallion Planetarium:

Ten science talk tips for the holidays

by Gaia Cantelli, PhD

Credit: Dennis Crowley, used via Creative Commons licence

The holidays are upon us, with people everywhere beginning their annual migrations to be with family for a few days of eating, drinking, exchanging presents and catching up. However, most people will also have relatives whose views are radically different from theirs – and seem to bring them up at the most embarrassing time possible. If you are a scientist yourself, or simply a science enthusiast, one of the most challenging breeds of embarrassing relative is undoubtedly the science-denier. You want to help them, while at the same time you probably don't want to argue under the Christmas tree. Here are some of my best-tested top-tips for dealing with your festive nightmare.

When scientists disagree: 5 (or 6) steps to understanding scientific controversy

With real scientists, the gloves are off. Credit: Ryan McGuire/StockSnap

by Gaia Cantelli, PhD

US scientists’ research on how to promote healthy eating in schools is deeply flawed, watchdog researchers have found. The original studies gained much media attention, secured millions of dollars in funding and are being implemented in thousands in schools. But independent scientists have found that they are filled with problems, including mathematical impossibilities and duplications. 

If you ever look up scientific theories online, it won’t be long until you encounter at least one story like this. Because science is a living subject and constantly evolving, scientists will inevitably disagree and controversy will arise. Choosing who to believe when you are not a subject expert yourself is tricky and confusing, especially if you are trying to use science to make an important decision. Here are 5 (or maybe 6) steps you might want to consider to make up your mind.

Five tips on using science to live a better, healthier life

Image credit Thomas_H_photo, used via Flickr CC BY-ND 2.0 licence

by Gaia Cantelli, PhD

You have just woken up. You check your phone and have a look at the news. What do you see? Most days, a key headline will have something to do with science – and with good reason. We live in what many consider a golden age of discovery. Science is making advances we never thought possible and is helping us work out problems we never thought could be solved. We can look for water in outer space, use light-activated nanoparticles to kill antibiotic-resistant bacteria and use drugs to correct errors in our DNA to fend off deadly genetic diseases.

However, that’s only one side of the coin. At least half of the science news seems to be urgently pointing at a new problem. Just over the past few weeks, even the most casual news-readers could have found themselves worrying about involuntarily increasing their risk of getting breast or lung cancer by doing apparently healthy things like going outside and taking vitamins. You may have been stressing about compromising your heart’s health by sitting too much or being too tall. And that’s before you’ve even gotten out of bed!

So how can you use science to make more informed decisions? Here are a few pointers to empower you to make a change.

Do your research! Six ways to find science you can trust online

by Gaia Cantelli, PhD

Credit: Tim Abbott, used via CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 License

If you wanted to know more about a medical condition would you take a trip to the library and pore over medical textbooks? Of course not, you’d look it up on your phone while you’re still in your doctor’s waiting room.

Looking up things online is essentially second nature for most of us – but do you ever worry if you can trust what you find? Most of us get all our information from the Internet – and science and medicine have been made far more accessible by the Internet and mobile phones. It’s incredibly convenient, but it is also a minefield of potential misinformation, misunderstanding and, even worse, fraud. How can we know if we can trust what we see online? Here are some of my best pointers to use this amazing resource to obtain reliable and relevant information – especially when it comes to science and medicine.

On the evolution of the science blogosphere

By Andy Extance, ScienceSeeker Editor-in-Chief

In recent months, ScienceSeeker has exorcised many of the dead blogs haunting its list of science sites. Consequently, the number of sites we aggregate has decreased from 2170 when I became editor-in-chief in January 2016 to 2065 now, in May 2017. But rather than finding that decline worrying, I think this exercise has shown how science sites are adapting to a changing blogging environment.

When my predecessor Jordan Gaines Lewis handed the reins over to me, she and fellow editor Jessica Perry Hekman had just completely rebuilt ScienceSeeker. The site had been born in the whirlwind, heat and flash of the ScienceOnline movement, supported, I understand, in part by the revenues from its conferences. That had enabled a professional-looking, highly functional site that cost $40 a month to run.

The ScienceOnline money inevitably ran out, and to start with our editors took turns in paying. Jordan and Jessica then switched to our now almost-free format, hosted on Blogger and powered by the RSS feed reader Inoreader. Not only is this more frugal, Inoreader kindly informs us which feeds are no longer active. Therefore over the last 17 months I have been going through that list, seeking the new homes of blogs that have moved and removing those that have expired. And the experience has provided some interesting insights into trends in the science blogosphere at various levels. The headlines are as follows:

Introducing ScienceSeeker

We're pleased to announce the unveiling of the product of six months of planning and work by some very dedicated volunteers. ScienceSeeker (at, naturally, Scienceseeker.org) is a beta-level site; a work in progress, but we think it's a very useful work even as it now stands. The project began as an extension of Science Blogging Aggregated, but quickly grew into an independent site.

The basic concept is simple: Find as many sources of regularly-updated science information as possible, and collect them all in one place. We believe that science blogs are currently the most robust and diverse source of science news, discussion, and commentary. They can offer a measured response to the myriads of self-promotional press releases that clutter newspapers and inboxes. Unfortunately, they are spread all about the internet, in dozens of blogging networks and hundreds, if not thousands, of independent science blogs. These blogs and networks aren't organized by topic, which makes it difficult for someone looking for latest posts on, say, chemistry.

ScienceSeeker already catalogs over 400 blogs, and is set up so that anyone can add more blogs. Our editors will review any submission to make sure it's really about science (and not spam), then approve it within 24 hours. Our aim is to be the most comprehensive and useful aggregator of science news, discussion, and commentary anywhere.

Take a look at the site and put it through its paces. We think you'll agree that it's one of the most useful and engaging science sites you've ever seen.

Click here to visit ScienceSeeker.

ScienceSeeker is an all-volunteer effort, and we intend to make it a formal, open-source project, allowing anyone to contribute enhancements. We have lots of ideas of what to do next, but we want to hear yours too. Feel free to offer suggestions in the comments.

Some thoughts about science blog aggregation

(Adapted from two posts on Word Munger)

After the summer's "PepsiGate" affair and the subsequent departure of 20 or so bloggers from ScienceBlogs, I suggested that if the departing bloggers want to continue to have the kind of influence they used to have at ScienceBlogs, they need to do something more than just start or restart their old, independent blogs. They need to form a new network -- perhaps built around different principles, but a network nonetheless. They might choose to have a central site based on RSS feeds or some other aggregation system, but there needs to be a systematic way to connect their conversations. Otherwise, most readers will tune out. It's simply too much work for most readers to follow a diverse set of disconnected blogs. Social networking sites like Twitter can bring important individual posts to light, but are less effective at sharing the extended conversations that go on between blogs.

Sure, there are some other burgeoning science blog networks, but none seem to be prepared to assume the ScienceBlogs mantle (which ScienceBlogs itself hasn't actually yet ceded). There are also some lists of all the bloggers who've left ScienceBlogs, but they don't capture all the other science bloggers who were never a part of ScienceBlogs, or the many excellent bloggers who chose to stay.

To me, the obvious next step would be to find some way of collecting all these disparate voices in one place. Sure, ResearchBlogging does some of that, but it only captures posts specifically about peer-reviewed research, which is probably less than ten percent of what scientists and science communicators actually blog about.

One idea that shows promise, at least as a stopgap, is to use an existing social network to do the task. There's already discussion over at Friendfeed about doing just that. The advantages of such a system is that Friendfeed already has tools in place to help people "like" and "dislike" posts, discuss them, and so on.

To see how this might work, I created a FriendFeed group for Anthropology, based on blogs registered with ResearchBlogging.org. You can check it out here. But this isn't all Anthropology blogs, or even all Anthro blogs registered with ResearchBlogging -- I cheated a bit because my default report of regisered blogs doesn't include RSS addresses. I only used blogs from Blogger and Wordpress since their RSS URLs are easily reproduced based on the blog URL. And there are other problems. Many blogs cover multiple topics. How would you decide how which list(s) to put them on? What if someone started posting pseudoscience, or moved their blog? Who would be in charge of monitoring the list to make sure it remains useful? And how many people would actually register with FriendFeed just to follow blogs? The beauty of a site like ScienceBlogs is it stands on its own -- you go there to read blogs about science. Someone who's only interested in science (and not social networking) is less likely to hang around a site like FriendFeed just to read science blogs. I'm unconvinced that a set of feeds could have the same influence as a dedicated science blog aggregator.

In the wake of these thoughts, Bora, Anton and I came up with something we think is at least a little better. This site is sort of an aggregator of aggregators. We're letting others do the work of collecting blogs into bundles; we're just sharing all those bundles. If other bundles are promising, we'll add them to the aggregator here, with a minimum of fuss. It's not ideal -- I think the ideal aggregator would have more active curators, and a way to sort through all the posts by topic -- but it's certainly a good start. Let us know what you think.