In Harvard’s Pierce Hall, the surface of a small germanium-coated gold sheet shines vividly in crimson. A centimeter to the right, where the same metallic coating is literally only about 20 atoms thicker, the surface is a dark blue, almost black. The colors form the logo of the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS), where researchers have demonstrated a new way to customize the color of metal surfaces by exploiting a completely overlooked optical phenomenon.For centuries it was thought that thin-film interference effects, such as those that cause oily pavements to reflect a rainbow of swirling colors, could not occur in opaque materials. Harvard physicists have now discovered that even very “lossy” thin films, if atomically thin, can be tailored to reflect a particular range of dramatic and vivid colors.Published in the journal Nature Materials (online) on October 14, the finding opens up new possibilities for sophisticated optical devices, as well as consumer products such as jewelry and new techniques in the visual arts. Read Full Story
In a match that the Badgers looked to control after dominating the first set, the University of Wisconsin volleyball team lost its sense of focus and team chemistry as it crumbled in a four-set loss to the last place Indiana Hoosiers Friday night.After ending the first set on a 19-8 run, Wisconsin (15-8, 3-7 Big Ten) dropped three straight sets to the Big Ten bottom-feeders as unusual mental mistakes like lack of focus and miscommunication plagued UW.“There were more than normal, and I don’t have an answer for that,” head coach Pete Waite said. “Some people were just hesitating … normally they blend better together and they communicate a little bit better, but for some reason, it just wasn’t happening in a few points.”Although Indiana finds itself in last place in the conference, the team has won its last two matches against Big Ten opponents after losing its first eight league contests. The Hoosiers defeated the then-No. 17 Purdue Boilermakers in four sets Oct. 16 for their first conference victory.The Badgers’ lack of chemistry ruined their chances of finding an offensive flow. While Wisconsin had a .429 attack percentage in the first set with 16 kills, the team could only muster clips of .128 and .069 in the second and fourth sets, with a lower success rate on side-out plays.Both teams struggled to play clean offensively throughout the match, with the Badgers committing 22 errors and Indiana totaling 21.Senior middle blocker Alexis Mitchell said the team is at its best when individual players are loose. However, she said it is difficult to relax when playing from behind in sets.“I think we just put pressure on ourselves when we get in holes and then you do tense up normally when you’re putting pressure on yourselves,” Mitchell said. “We just have to find a way to let that pressure go and play our game even when we’re down … We have to work on getting a fast start so that pressure isn’t even existent.”The Badgers found themselves down by three points in the first, second and fourth sets before either team had even reached double-digit points.In recent matches, Wisconsin has been able to mount comebacks after falling behind early, but Waite said it’s challenging to pick up the momentum mid-set.“We seem to be starting from behind and then gaining momentum and getting going, but that’s draining,” Waite said. “It can be pretty exhausting doing that all the time.”The bright spot for Wisconsin on offense came in the play of sophomore outside hitter Ellen Chapman. The 6-foot-5 attacker set a new career-high with 24 kills on a .390 hitting percentage, adding 11 kills in the third set alone.Courtney Thomas also chipped in 51 assists and 10 digs in her 11th double-double of the season.Defense shows signs of improvement The Wisconsin defense wasn’t free of its fair share of mistakes, but showed flashes of effective play.Sophomore defensive specialist Deme Morales and junior outside hitter Julie Mikaelsen set career-highs in digs with 18 and 15, respectively. Mikaelsen also contributed 11 kills to record her first career double-double.However, there were a number of occasions in which the Badger back row let balls go that fell inbounds. Players also lost opportunities to pick up stray balls because of miscommunication.Junior libero Annemarie Hickey, who led the Badgers with 19 digs, said defensive players needed to be more assertive going after balls.“We just need to be aggressive,” Hickey said. “We can’t be looking at balls … one person needs to go for it … We’re doing a great job of working around together, it’s just those little spurts of where we are watching those balls that we need to fix.”Wisconsin allowed 11 aces on Indiana service attempts. The loss was the second straight UW gave up double-figure service aces. The Badgers’ receiving percentage was just .882 for the match with 11 errors, compared to their season average of just under five receiving errors per match.Waite said Wisconsin’s serve-receive has been something the team has worked on in practice, yet has struggled with come game day.“I think it was a case where they [Indiana] did a good job moving the ball around on the serve short [and] deep,” Waite said. “They were really hitting their lines on a lot of their shots, and I thought they covered really well [on our blocking] … [it was] definitely frustrating.”
Blunders without Number: The Fraud Problems and DarwinismOne of the most respected medical journals in the world, New England Journal of Medicine, recently “retracted and republished a landmark study on the Mediterranean diet, and issued an unprecedented five other corrections after an obscure report last year scrutinized thousands of articles in eight journals over more than a decade and questioned some methods.” At about the same time, Cornell University reported it was investigating “a wide range of allegations of research misconduct” raised against a prominent food marketing Cornell faculty member.The fact is, fraud is a major problem in scholarly publishing today. One evidence of this is that the retraction rate is definitely increasing. And, according to New York University health journalism professor Dr. Ivan Oransky, there are ten times as many corrections as retractions. Dr. Oransky is a co-founder of the website Retraction Watch, that tracks the thousands of errors in science journals that they have been able to identify since the website was founded. Given his data, of the about 1,350 papers that were retracted in 2016, about 13,000 “corrections” were required. This number tabulated only the errors and the cases that they managed to document. No doubt many more occurred but were not detected, something that is not very easy to do.Sources of ErrorMost academic-based research is done by graduate students and, if not supervised carefully, mistakes can occur, partly because they are students just learning their trade. When mistakes or errors happen during their training, a temptation exists to attempt to cover up the mistake by adjusting the data, throwing out values that they suspect are wrong, such as misreading a measurement, then estimating what must have been the correct value. A strong motivation exists to do this, namely to complete their work to receive their degree and enter the real world to become employed to pay off student loans and start their career and/or marry their sweetheartOne of the most common mistakes in science is confirmation bias, a tendency to search for, or interpret, information in such a way that conforms to one’s preconceptions, leading to incorrect conclusions and even statistical errors. This is an enormous problem in evolution which is described by critics as distorting the world through one’s evolution glasses.Worldview BiasSome behavior is observed, such as female preference for men taller than themselves, which causes curious researchers to look for an interpretation to help them understand why. An evolutionist will often interpret this difference in male and female average heights as due to females sexually selecting tall men due to the perception that they can better take care of them and any children they birth. Thus, its advocates claim that evolutionary sexual selection theory explains this physical trait.A biologist may explain the same physical difference as due to male hormonal differences, such as testosterone levels produced as a result of male chromosome regulation. A creationist would add that this biological difference existed as a result of design in the original creation of Adam and Eve. An evolutionist may also add that the hormone differences were due to sexual selection of the height trait which in turn resulted in the hormonal differences.How leading experts can be fooled.What science has documented is the biological connection between chromosomes and male traits such as height. Worldview then causes confirmational bias, in this case both by the creationist and evolutionist, thus both need to recognize this. Darwinists, though, often do not. They claim that ‘science’ has shown the cause of height differences, when actually evolutionists applied sexual selection theory as a result of their worldview, not science. Likewise, creationists view it as due to inherent design, a better explanation because it is based only on the observations. Inherent design is a fact both sides agree on.As one Indiana University Professor wrote, “whenever science meets some ideological barrier, scientists are accused of, at best, self-deception, and, at worst, deliberate fraud,” a fact that has been well documented by the 12 case histories in my book Evolution’s Blunders, Frauds and Forgeries. There is no shortage of examples of this self-deception. I am now working on a second volume that contains 12 more case histories of evolution’s blunders, frauds and forgeries.Why Darwinism Is Prone to ErrorConfirmation bias is especially a problem in evolution for several reasons. Intolerance of creationism in scientific institutions strongly opposes alternative theories, especially those that involve outside influence such as implied by Intelligent Design. I once wrote a well-documented paper on a major problem of evolution which was rejected by the editor. The reviewers noted “you did an excellent job explaining and documenting a major problem of evolution. Now solve it,” by which he meant deal with the problem within a naturalistic evolutionary framework so that the problem is explained in such a way that allows evolutionary naturalism to remain a viable theory.One last example illustrates that evolutionary bias can cost both lives and health. Darwin concluded that ‘descent with modification’ theory (the phrase he used for evolution), explained that “the existence of organs in a rudimentary, imperfect, and useless condition, or quite aborted, far from presenting a strange difficulty, as they assuredly do on the old doctrine of creation, might even have been anticipated in accordance with [evolution].”In 1911 a creationist medical doctor wrote the “Darwinian construction of ‘rudimentary organs’ is utterly untenable. There are no rudimentary organs, the function of the organs so called are gradually being discovered.” He added the “two rudimentary organs which are still being abused are the tonsils and the appendix. The tonsils have … a protective function.” It took us over a century to prove this German medical doctor correct. Why did it take so long? The reason is partly due to the blinders that belief in evolution puts on scientists. A leading anatomy textbook published in 1908 said that the use of the tonsils “is not known, and it is often removed by the doctor when it becomes enlarged, as is the case in many children.”Blunders Harm Real PeopleRecently the largest long-term study on tonsillectomy ever completed was published in JAMA. A total of 1.2 million subjects were in the study, including children born between 1979 and 1999. Of those, 17,460 underwent adenoidectomy and 11,830 a tonsillectomy within the first 9 years of life. Their health records were compared to the 1,157,684 who retained both their adenoids and tonsils.The 30-year research follow-up concluded the modest benefits of the operation mostly vanish by the age of 40. As many as one in five people who underwent a tonsillectomy suffered from serious diseases they would otherwise never be burdened with. The common childhood procedure more than tripled asthma risk, doubled the rate of chronic bronchitis and emphysema, upper respiratory tract diseases, and conjunctivitis. It also increased the risk of allergies, influenza, pneumonia, and infectious disease in general.One reason for these dramatic increased risks was that removing tonsils during the first decade of life interferes with proper immune system development and significantly reduces protection against future disease. Fortunately, the removal procedure rate has dropped from a high around 200,000 annually in the 1950s to under 50,000 today. This is in marked contrast to the trend a few years ago when a recurring sore throat alone prompted their removal.We now know that tonsils are the first line of the body’s defense system, thus the study director urged pediatricians to drastically limit or at least delay tonsillectomies and adenoidectomies as long as possible. How many people will end up sick and suffer from some disease or die early due to this past blunder of evolution can only be estimated, but the number is not by any means small. Worldwide it involves multiple millions of victims.Footnotes Marchione, Marilynn. 2018. Science Says: What happens when researchers make mistakes. June 13, PHYS.Org. https://phys.org/news/2018-06-science.html. Marchione, 2018. Kentrick, Douglas et al.,2018. Anti-Science thinking. Scientific America. 319(1): 36-41. July Chris Lee. 2010. Confirmation bias in science: how to avoid it http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/conf.bias.article.pdf Atlanta, GA: CMI Publishing. 2017. Darwin, Charles. 1859. The Origin of Species. London: John Murray. p. pp. 346-350 and 1871. The Descent of Man: And Selection in Relation to Sex. Rudiments pp 17-30. London: John Murray. Schultz, Alford. 1911. The End of Darwinism. New York: Schultz Publishing Co. p. 13 Davison, Alvin. 1908. The Human Body and Health. New York: American Book Company. p. 134. Emphasis added. Byars, Sean G.; Stephen C. Stearns and Jacobus J. Boomsma, 2018. Association of Long-Term Risk of Respiratory, Allergic, and Infectious Diseases With Removal of Adenoids and Tonsils in Childhood. JAMA Otolaryngology; Head and Neck Surgery. Published online June 7, 2018. E1-E13. Author Jerry Bergman, PhDDr Jerry Bergman, professor, author and speaker, is a frequent contributor to Creation-Evolution Headlines. He is currently a staff scientist at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). See his Author Profile for his previous articles and more information.(Visited 556 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
20 February 2013 South African President Jacob Zuma and International Relations Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane have held separate meetings this week with visiting Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi. Jiechi and his delegation are in the country to assist with preparations for the next BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) summit, which he is “certain will break new ground”. The summit takes place in Durban on 26 and 27 March, and preparations for it are at an advanced stage, according to Nkoana-Mashabane. “South Africa is a very important country in Africa and the world,” Jiechi said after his meeting with Nkoana-Mashabane in Cape Town on Monday, adding that China and South Africa had to work harder for the benefit of developing countries. Annual China-South Africa trade has reached almost $60-billion, and the two countries have economies that are “highly complementary” to one another, he said. Nkoana-Mashabane said South Africa’s relationship with China had moved to the highest level with the signing of a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement with China in 2010. “We are looking forward to not only signing agreements, but also building on the strong pillars that have been laid by this comprehensive strategic partnership treaty.” Nkoana-Mashabane also invited Chinese companies to take full opportunity of the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) project, which South Africa is co-hosting with Australia. China has also expanded by 200 the number of scholarships available to young South Africans to study in China, and Nkoana-Mashabane said the South African government would continue to assess the first batch of about 60 scholars sent to China. Jiechi said China would welcome more students from South Africa, and encouraged more Chinese students to also come to study in South Africa. Earlier this month, Nkoana-Mashabane celebrated 15 years of formal diplomatic relations between South Africa and China at a function hosted at the Chinese embassy in Pretoria. Source: SANews.gov.za
There are some very good quarterbacks returning to college football in 2015. Michigan State’s Connor Cook. TCU’s Trevone Boykin. Mississippi State’s Dak Prescott. USC’s Cody Kessler. And, of course, Ohio State’s three star quarterbacks – J.T. Barrett, Cardale Jones and Braxton Miller. The Buckeyes just aren’t sure who will be their starter, and that’s OK. ESPN is confident enough in Urban Meyer that they’ve tabbed the generic “QB For Ohio State” as one of the country’s top returning signal callers. Pretty hilarious graphic pic.twitter.com/wkwU7f88pp— Andrew Gaug (@AndrewGaug) January 23, 2015You’ve got it pretty good, Ohio State fans. Which quarterback do you want to see behind center for the Buckeyes come fall – Barrett, Jones or Miller?
colin cowherd says nebraska beats iowaFox Sports’ Colin Cowherd isn’t shy about voicing his opinion on many topics, including the College Football Playoff. Yesterday, Cowherd tweeted that he disagreed with one-loss Alabama getting into the playoff over one-loss Ohio State, due to what he perceives a difference in strength between the SEC and Big Ten. Tonight, Cowherd revealed his current CFP foursome, and he lived up to his opinion from yesterday. Alabama is nowhere to be found among the four teams, while Michigan State and Ohio State are in the group. Turned in my playoff top 4 to @FOXSports. 1.Clemson 2. Oklahoma 3. Michigan St 4. Ohio State. SEC is an overrated mess. Sorry Bama.— Colin Cowherd (@ColinCowherd) November 30, 2015Expect Cowherd’s email and Twitter mentions to be engulfed with angry Tide fans starting 20 minutes ago. As good as the Buckeyes are, Alabama’s resume is impressive. Yes, the Tide lost to 9-3 Ole Miss and have three “cupcake” wins, but their other eight victories are against teams with .500 records or better. Their defensive front seven is scary and Derrick Henry is a legit Heisman candidate. They belong in the CFP.