A Catholic Citizen in America: comets

Showing posts with label comets. Show all posts

Friday, August 7, 2015

Organics on a Comet, and Earth's Early Magnetism

Scientists found evidence that Earth's magnetic field is more than a half-billion years older than we'd thought. As usual, that raises more questions.

The European Space Agency's Philae lander detected a "rich array" of organic compounds on Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko 67P, including hydrogen cyanide (HCN). This is a big deal, since much of Earth's water came from comets: and HCN may have helped life begin on our world.

Churyumov-Gerasimenko 67P's closest approach to the sun comes later this week:

(© ESA, from ESA, used w/o permission.)
("The orbit of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko and its approximate location around perihelion, the closest the comet gets to the Sun. The positions of the planets are correct for 13 August 2015."
(rosetta, esa (July 13, 2015; updated August 7, 2015)))

My look at a comet, Earth's youth, and all that, comes after yet another 'why I prefer reality' review. It's pretty much what I've said before, so go ahead: skip down to Earth's Magnetic Field: 4,000,000,000 Years Old? or Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko 67P: A "Rich Array" of Organics, sort your socks, do whatever you like.

Beyond Anaximander's Cosmology

Someone asked me why I talk about "gods" and science in A Catholic Citizen in America. The person may have been puzzled at my interest in both spiritual and visible facets of reality.

That's understandable. Ever since the mid-19th century, a remarkable number folks seem convinced that a person can either be a Christian or be interested in science.

"Bible science," warping science trivia around Bible verses and vice versa, is as odd as the either/or position. My opinion. (July 5, 2011)

Some of my country's louder Christians seem determined to maintain the perception that faith and reason, religion and science, get along about as well as mongoose and cobra.

I think, and for their sakes hope, they're sincere: but I'm quite sure they're wrong.

I could follow Our Lord and believe that we live on a flat plate that's only a few millennia old, or in the middle of nested celestial spheres.

But my faith doesn't depend on ignorance of what we've learned since Plato fine-tuned Anaximander's cosmology. (July 31, 2015; September 26, 2014)

Last week's "Pluto, Earth 2.0, and Life in the Universe" prompted that question.My reply was brief: necessarily, since it appeared on my Twitter account. (@Aluwir)

The '25 words or less' version is that I like living in the real world. I kept thinking about the question, though, and how I could explain my interest in creation and in the Creator.

God, Faith, and Accepting Reality

My parents were nice, normal, mainstream Protestant folks; but I grew up in a town where a particularly virulent strain of anti-Catholicism was endemic.

I don't see the point in believing something's true and not acting as if it matters. I also don't see a point in believing something that makes sense Sunday morning, but not the rest of the week.

Radio rants against the 'whore of Babylon,' commies, and rock music, were punctuated by the latest End Times Bible Prophecy and vehement attacks on Satanic evils like evolution and long hair.

Venom-spitting radio preachers unintentionally helped me learn to love rock-n-roll, and left me with unanswered questions about religion, Christianity, and the Catholic Church.

Eventually I decided that religion wasn't necessarily a personality disorder, and that Christianity made sense.

Much later I became a Catholic.

As a Catholic, I must believe that faith isn't reason, and that faith is not against reason. I can know a few things about God by using human reason: but there's more to reality than that. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 35, 50)

Faced with reality, I must decide whether or not I accept it. Acknowledging a newly-discovered facet of reality isn't always easy: but I think it's worth the effort.

"...Truth Cannot Contradict Truth..." — or — God's not a Schlemiel

(From John Martin, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Detail from John Martin's "Pandemonium," 1841.)

Seeking truth and seeking God are compatible — and turning my brain off isn't part of the process. (Catechism, 154, 274, 1706)

Well-intentioned folks occasionally warn me that I'll burn in everlasting hellfire because I don't agree with them about something. Generally the topic is the Catholic Church, or evolution. (July 25, 2014; March 15, 2015)

I'll be talking about a comet, organic molecules, and life's beginning; and don't want to clutter that up with an explanation of why reality doesn't offend me. I went over most of this last week. (July 31, 2015)

Truth is very important. (Catechism, Prologue, 27, 74, more under Truth in the index)

I believe that God creates everything: the physical realities that science studies; and the spiritual realities that faith pursues. Believing this, believing that God is is Truth, and fearing knowledge of God's world would be — illogical.

Pope Leo XIII discussed truth, faith, and getting a grip, more than a century ago. "Providentissimus Deus" means "Provident God," more or less, a hot topic in the late 19th century. Then as now, it looks like some folks were profoundly upset that the Bible isn't a science textbook, or that God's creation doesn't conform to their preferences.

Pope Leo carefully pointed out that since we believe that God creates everything, and isn't a schlemiel, if a newly-found facet of reality doesn't match our preconceived notions of what's true: that's our problem, not God's.

If we keep looking at the facts, use our brains, and don't assume that our preconceived notions are the only possible explanation, sooner or later we'll understand:

"...God, the Creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the Scriptures - and that therefore nothing can be proved either by physical science or archaeology which can really contradict the Scriptures. ... Even if the difficulty is after all not cleared up and the discrepancy seems to remain, the contest must not be abandoned; truth cannot contradict truth...."
("Providentissimus Deus,"¹ Pope Leo XIII (November 18, 1893) [emphasis mine])

That didn't stop some folks from insisting that God is offended when we use our brains, and others from asserting that God can't exist because we are learning about God's creation.

We have brains and free will. Each of us decides how we act and what we believe: or do not believe. Responsibilities come with that freedom, and that's another topic. (Catechism, 1731-1742)

Living in a Big World

Studying this astounding universe, and using that knowledge, is part of being human. Scientific discoveries are invitations "...to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator...." (Catechism, 159, 283, 341, 2293-2295)

What we learn occasionally demands that we re-think old assumptions.

That's been happening quite a bit over the last few centuries.

Ussher's tidy little cosmology has been replaced by a view of reality that's literally cosmic in scale. I don't mind: and although I enjoy flights of fancy, I prefer living in the real world.

As for my interest in science and my faith — We've known that the universe is vast and ancient for thousands of years.

"⁴ Indeed, before you the whole universe is as a grain from a balance, or a drop of morning dew come down upon the earth.

"But you have mercy on all, because you can do all things; and you overlook the sins of men that they may repent.

"For you love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made; for what you hated, you would not have fashioned.

"And how could a thing remain, unless you willed it; or be preserved, had it not been called forth by you? "
(Wisdom 11:22-25)

Learning that it's a whole lot bigger and older that we thought a few generations back doesn't bother me. At all. (July 15, 2014)

Adam and Eve Aren't German

The small Minnesota town I live in isn't as exclusively German and Irish as it was a century ago, but a good many folks around here look like the couple in Albrecht Dürer's 1504 engraving. We wear more clothes, of course.

Scientists have learned a great deal about humanity's long story since Dürer's day: much of it in the last century.

Along the way many folks and most scientists dropped the assumption that looking European and being intelligent are pretty much the same thing.

I don't miss the 'good old days,' particularly since I'm nearly half-Irish, and that's another topic. (December 12, 2014; September 5, 2014)

As a Catholic, I must take Sacred Scripture seriously. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 101-133)

But that emphatically does not mean I must believe a long-dead Calvinist was right about the moment of creation being nightfall before October 23, 4004 BC. (July 24, 2015)

As I keep saying, I think the universe is billions, not thousands, of years old; Earth isn't flat; Adam and Eve weren't German; poetry isn't science; and thinking is not a sin.

Believing that we are created in the image of God, male and female, means that each of us is a person: not something, but someone. We are made from the stuff of this world, and filled with God's 'breath:' matter and spirit, body and soul. (Genesis 2:7; Catechism, 355, 357, 362-368)

I read Genesis 1:1-2:4 and 2:4-25 as an explanation of God's role in our existence: among other things.

As far as I'm concerned, all that's changed in the last few centuries is how much we know about the "clay" God used. (July 24, 2015; December 5, 2014)

Now, finally, what we're learning about this planet we call home, and the universe.

1. Earth's Magnetic Field: 4,000,000,000 Years Old?

(From Michael Osadciw/University of Rochester, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("The Earth's magnetic field deflects high energy protons from the Sun, as depicted in this artist's impression. Note that the relative sizes of the Earth and Sun, as well as the distances between the two bodies, are not to scale"
(BBC News))

"Earth magnetic shield is older than previously thought"
Yasmin Ali, BBC News (July 31, 2015)

"The Earth's magnetic field, which shields the atmosphere from harmful radiation, is at least four billion years old, according to scientists.

"This is 550 million years older than it was previously believed to be.

"Scientists at Rochester University in New York analysed crystals found in Western Australia.

"Data on our planet's magnetic field was found to be preserved in ancient crystals embedded in rock formations in the region...."

That's according to some scientists, with reservations. The Rochester University team studied one set of very old crystals. I'm pretty sure they're right, that Earth had a measurable magnetic field 4,000,000,000 years back.

But we'll need more data before being certain that the field endured for the following 550,000,000 years. My guess is that it did: but that's just a guess.

Yasmin Ali's article discusses how the scientists analyzed the crystals, and what sort of follow-up research the new findings encourage.

Instead of repeating that, I'll take a quick look at what we've learned about Earth's magnetic field since Shakespeare's day.

A few centuries after natural philosophers like Roger Bacon and Albertus Magnus studied natural phenomena, William Gilbert made a terrella: a spherical magnet, simulating Earth's magnetic properties. (Merriam-Webster)

Gilbert's terrella showed that his idea, that Earth acts like a giant magnet, was probably right. A magnetic compass, placed over Gilbert's terrella, pointed more-or-less north: just like a magnetic compass would at corresponding places on Earth.

Gilbert apparently was the first to say that Earth's core is iron. This may be why Georges-Louis Leclerc used iron as his test substance in the 1700s, but I haven't confirmed that. I talked about Leclerc, Earth's age, and getting a grip about beliefs, last week. (July 31, 2015)

His "De Magnete, Magneticisque Corporibus, et de Magno Magnete Tellur," published in 1600, wasn't spot-on accurate about everything.

We've learned since then that the angle of the ecliptic and precession of the equinoxes aren't caused by magnetism, for example; and that electricity and magnetism aren't separate phenomena.

Hans Christian Ørsted noticed that electric currents create magnetic fields in 1820, which brings me back to Earth's magnetosphere.

Magnetospheres: There's a Lot Left to Learn

Earth's magnetic field keeps the solar wind, mostly electrons, protons and alpha particles streaming from our star, away from our atmosphere.

For the most part, at least. Auroroa in polar regions happen when particles from the sun turn parts of our atmosphere into a sort of glow stick — which are more like lightning bugs/fireflies, actually, and that's another topic.

Having a magnetic field may be why Earth supports life and Venus doesn't. At least, if something's living on Venus: it's not "life as we know it." Surface conditions there make the hot spots in Dante's Inferno seem like air conditioned comfort.

Then again, although Venus is losing its atmosphere to the solar wind, its mostly-carbon-dioxide blanket is a good deal thicker than our nitrogen-oxygen mix.

Air pressure at the Venusian surface is about 92 times Earth's sea level pressure, and doesn't drop to Earth-normal pressure and temperature until you get about 50 kilometers up.

I'm quite sure that Earth won't turn into another Venus when Earth's magnetic poles switch places. That happens every 100,000 to 1,000,000 years, more or less: and the last big shift happened long after our ancestors showed up.

We didn't have communications satellites then, but we've probably got a few millennia to get ready for the next big switch. Then again, maybe not. As I keep saying, we still have a lot left to learn. (October 24, 2014)

(From UC Berkeley, used w/o permission.)
("...This map shows how, starting about 789,000 years ago, the north pole wandered around Antarctica for several thousand years before flipping 786,000 years ago to the orientation we know today, with the pole somewhere in the Arctic."
(UC Berkeley))

2. Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko 67P: A "Rich Array" of Organics

(From ESA/Rosetta/NavCam, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
(Churyumov-Gerasimenko 67P on July 14, 2015, an image from the Rosetta spacecraft's NavCam.)

"Comet yields 'rich array' of organics"
David Shukman, BBC News (July 30, 2015)

"The spacecraft which made a spectacular landing on a comet last year has discovered a rich array of carbon compounds.

"One leading scientist has even described the chemicals as 'a frozen primordial soup'.

"This supports the theory that comets may have seeded the early Earth with the ingredients for life.

"The findings came after the lander, known as Philae, touched down on comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko 67P in November....

"...Prof Ian Wright of the Open University, who leads another instrument, Ptolemy, said the results were 'really interesting'.

" 'I see this cometary material that we're analysing as frozen primordial soup. It's the kind of stuff that if you had it, and warmed it up somehow, and put it in the right environment, with the right conditions, you may eventually get life forming out of it.

" 'What we may be looking at here is our abiological ancestral material - this is stuff that went into the mix to produce life.

" 'In many ways it's quite a humbling thing to be working on, because this is life before life happened.'..."

The Ptolemy experiment found polyoxymethylene — don't bother trying to remember these names, there will not be a pop quiz — a polymer of formaldehyde. It's organic, in the sense that the compound contains carbon.

Finding polyoxymethylene on a comet is a big deal, since carbohydrates like glucose, sucrose, and fructose are biologically important, and made from the same atoms.

Folks put sucrose on the kitchen table and formaldehyde in factories because the atoms are arranged differently, and don't affect living critters the same way.

COSAC (Cometary Sampling and Composition experiment), another instrument on the Philae lander, detected 16 compounds: including what BBC News calls methanenitrile.

In my dialect of English, that's hydrogen cyanide. Other names for HCN are formic anammonide, hydrocyanic acid, and prussic acid. It's derived from Prussian blue, which probably dates back to Berlin in the early 1700s, and that's another topic.

"...More Like a Hardware Shop..."

(From ESA.Risetta.NPS for Osiris Team/MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("The mission has revealed an intriguing landscape on Comet 67P"
(BBC News))

"...Prof Mark McCaughrean, the European Space Agency's senior science advisor, told BBC News: 'Imagine you want to build a house and you go to a forest, where there are trees, mud and rocks. You could make a house out of that, but it would be hard work.

" 'Well, we've now discovered the comet is more like a hardware shop - lots of pre-made building blocks, like door frames, bricks etc. It gives you a head start.

" 'One of the big questions, though, is this material made on the comet? Or is it made first in space and then incorporated into the comet? We don't know the answer to that yet.'..."
(David Shukman, BBC News)

We also don't know life began on Earth. Not yet.

Earth's changed quite a lot over the last 4,540,000,000 or so years, and critters have been recycling just about anything organic on our planet for at least 3,600,000,000 years. We've learned a great deal about Earth's story in the last few centuries: and have a great deal left to learn, including how life started.

Finding hydrogen cyanide on a comet is a very big deal, since the compound might be a precursor to amino acids and nucleic acids. Then again, it might not.

We've learned that up to half of Earth's water comes from interstellar space, where we've found surprisingly complex organic compounds. (December 5, 2014; October 3, 2014; July 11, 2014; October 18, 2013)

"Organic" doesn't mean "alive." I've talked about life, chemistry, and space vampires, before. (January 2, 2015; September 5, 2014)

More than you need to know:

From Wikipedia - - -
- - - and other sources
- ESA (European Space Agency)
  - rosetta / rendezvous with a comet
  - "Science on the surface of a comet"
    (July 30, 2015)
  - "Rosetta preparing for perihelion"
    (July 13, 2015)
- "Cosac, The Cometary Sampling and Composition Experiment on Philae"
  Fred Goesmann, Helmut Rosenbauer, Reinhard Roll, Cyril Szopa, et al.; Abstract; ResearchGate (August 5, 2015)

Clay and Secondary Causes

Folks didn't know about magnetospheres and Ediacara biota when Genesis was first written, more than two dozen centuries ago. Two-dozen-plus centuries from now, I'd be astounded if we haven't discovered a few new facts about this universe.

Believing that God creates, and knowing that a fire's light and heat involve electron transitions, doesn't plunge me into a crisis of faith, plagued by doubts over Deuteronomy 5:4 and Acts 2:3.

I haven't heard of anyone insisting that salvation depends on belief in Johann Joachim Becher's teachings regarding Phlogiston, and that's another topic. (April 10, 2015)

Scientists are pretty sure that life on Earth started very roughly 1,000,000,000 years after this planet formed. What we don't know is how that happened, the physical processes involved. (Abiogenesis, Wikipedia)

From my viewpoint, the panspermia hypothesis, that life originated elsewhere and fell to Earth, isn't much of an explanation. If we got solid proof today that life on Earth started on Mars — that still wouldn't tell us how life itself started. (December 5, 2014)

Scientists have learned quite a bit, but the 'origin' question is still pretty much where it was in the 1920s, when Alexander Oparin and J. B. S. Haldane pointed out that chemical reactions probably led to the first critters. There's been a bit of progress, of course: including discussions of protocells.

Finally; about faith, science, and all that —

I don't have to believe that physical realities exist or that God exists.

Everything we observe reflects some facet of the Creator's truth, according to its nature. (Catechism, 300-310)

Fire, gravity, all natural processes, involve secondary causes: creatures changing in knowable ways, following laws woven into this creation. (Catechism, 301-308, 339)

Since I believe that God creates everything, and that God is not a liar: nothing we learn about this universe can threaten an informed faith.

More, mostly about:

"Pluto's 'Whale,' Comet 67P's Sinkholes"
(July 10, 2015)
Particularly
"DNA Test Hype; and Studying Life's Origins"
(December 5, 2014)
Particularly
" 'Organic,' 'Wow!' — and Double Planets"
(November 28, 2014)
Particularly
- Philae: Rich Data from a Bouncing Lander
  - "A Lot of Peaks"
  - "Organic," "Alive," and "Wow!
"Earth's Wandering Poles, A Comet, a Wobbling Moon"
(October 24, 2014)
Particularly
"Sagittarius B2, Water, and Asteroid Mining"
(October 3, 2014)
Particularly

¹ A longer excerpt, and a link to Leo XIII's encyclical:

"...God, the Creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the Scriptures - and that therefore nothing can be proved either by physical science or archaeology which can really contradict the Scriptures. If, then, apparent contradiction be met with, every effort should be made to remove it. Judicious theologians and commentators should be consulted as to what is the true or most probable meaning of the passage in discussion, and the hostile arguments should be carefully weighed. Even if the difficulty is after all not cleared up and the discrepancy seems to remain, the contest must not be abandoned; truth cannot contradict truth...."
("Providentissimus Deus," Pope Leo XIII)

Full text, English translation:

"Providentissimus Deus"
On the Study of Holy Scripture
Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII (November 18, 1893)
(From www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html (December 18, 2014))

Friday, July 10, 2015

Pluto's 'Whale,' Comet 67P's Sinkholes

New Horizons is closer to Pluto than it was when I started writing this post, and should send back about 5,000 times as much data as Mariner did in its Mars flyby, 50 years ago. (BBC News)

The ESA's Philae lander 'woke up' last month, but the big news from the Rosetta mission are Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko's sinkholes: and the jets of gas and dust coming from at least some of them.

Pulp Science Fiction and Pluto

(From Frank R. Paul, via Fabio Feminò and David S. Zondy, used w/o permission.)
(Frank R. Paul's very-imaginary people on Pluto, 1930s.)

I think these Frank R. Paul illustrations are from Fantastic Adventures, around 1939. (Robbie Gonzalez, io9.com)

This series of pictures is long on imagination — and humor — with a cheerful disregard for what scientists knew about the planets around the time of the Second Sino-Japanese War.

Pluto had been discovered by Clyde Tombaugh in 1930. At the time, the discovery of "Planet X" may have been as exciting as as the growing roster of exoplanets is today.

Turns out that Pluto isn't "Planet X;" it had been observed but not identified as early as 1909; and it isn't, quite, a planet. I'll get back to that.

Science Goes "Gra-"

In comics and movies, a mad scientist whose hubris leads him — odd, how the mad scientist was "he" — to commit crimes against man and nature, can be entertaining. His real-life counterparts, not so much. (December 12, 2014)

Thinking is not — I say this a lot, so feel free to click down to Mapping Pluto, go get a cup of coffee, take a walk, whatever — a sin.

My faith doesn't demand an interest in what we're discovering about this universe: but it's not threatened by knowledge, either. Scientific discoveries are invitations "...to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator...." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 283)

I've encountered fervently religious folks who seem dedicated to the notion that faith and reason are at war, but I'm a Catholic — so I'm expected to think. For one thing, "Conscience is a judgment of reason ... a law of the mind...." (Catechism, 1778)

It isn't faith or reason: it's faith and reason. ("Fides et Ratio," John Paul II (September 14, 1998); Catechism of the Catholic Church, 35)

We are rational creatures, and expected to think. (Catechism, 32, 154-159, 299)

Then there's the question of life in the universe. That came up in recent news, when some journalists got hold of speculation about life on comets. And I'm getting ahead of myself.

Enough of this. The New Horizons spacecraft has been sending back increasingly-clear images of Pluto. I'm looking forward to seeing what we learn about that cold world.

1. Mapping Pluto

(From NASA/JHU-APL/Southwest Research Institute, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("The map combines images takes between 27 June and 3 July"
(BBC News))

"New Horizons: Pluto map shows 'whale' of a feature"
Jonathan Amos, BBC News (July 8, 2015)

"Scientists have released their latest map of Pluto, using images from the inbound New Horizons spacecraft.

"It unwraps the visible parts of the sphere on to a flat projection, giving another view of the features that have started to emerge in recent days.

"Evident are the light and dark patches at the equator, including one long dark band being dubbed 'the whale'...."

Pluto was discovered in 1930, and called the Solar System's ninth planet until about 10 years ago. Astronomers had started wondering about Pluto back in 1977, when Charles T. Kowal discovered 2060 Chiron: or identified, more accurately.

Chiron started showing up in observations as far back as 1895, at least, but wasn't tagged as a planet/minor planet/dwarf planet/whatever until 1977.

Astronomers call Chiron 2060 when they think it's an ~~asteroid~~ minor planet, 95P/Chiron when they think it's a comet. I figure Pluto, Chiron, Eris, and other assorted stuff that orbits will get satisfactorily labeled — eventually.

Meanwhile, I keep reading the occasionally-heated debate about the differences between dwarf planets, minor planets, comets, and asteroids. Which reminds me of Planetoid comics, and that's another topic.

One more thing: Pluto is also a trans-Neptunian object, AKA TNO, transneptunian object; and a Kuiper belt object. (December 29, 2013)

Until very recently, we didn't know much about Pluto: mainly because it's so far away. It's cold, with a very thin atmosphere: mostly nitrogen (N₂), methane (CH₄), and carbon monoxide (CO).

"Cold" is a relative term. Minnesota's winter is "cold," compared to our summer. Average monthly temperature in Minneapolis runs from January's −11 °C (13 °F) to July's 23 °C (73 °F). Pluto's average surface temperature runs from about 33 K 44 Kelvin (−229 °C) to 55 K (-218.15 °C).

That's really cold. At Earth's sea level pressure, and those temperatures, methane is a solid. Even if Pluto had an atmosphere as thick as ours, though, hydrogen would be a has. That stuff starts boiling at 20.28 K (−423.17 °F/−252.87°C).

I doubt that anybody seriously thinks there's life on Pluto; but a larger, colder, planet might support 'life as we don't know it.' (March 7, 2014)

New Horizons: Science, Technology, and Fear

(From NASA/APL/Southwest Research Institute, used w/o permission.)
(New Horizons position at 1700 UTC/1200 Central Daylight Time. (CDT) (July 8, 2015) )

New Horizons was 7,479,894 kilometers/4,647,790 miles away from Pluto at noon Wednesday, July 8, 2015. At that distance, light — and radio signals — take nearly nine hours to travel from the spacecraft to Earth.

It's scheduled to send the last pre-flyby data to Earth Sunday and Monday, and send the first post-flyby data on Wednesday. Tuesday, July 14, 2015, New Horizon will be passing Pluto: about nine and a half years after its January 19, 2006, launch.

Like most real spaceships, New Horizons doesn't look much like its science fiction counterparts. Patrick Moore, in "The Sky at Night," described it as being about the size and shape of a cocktail table glued to a grand piano. (Wikipedia)

That dark bit, sticking out from New Horizons' main body, is a radioisotope thermoelectric generator: a sort of atomic battery that's providing about 200 watts now.

As usual, some folks protested before the launch. They've got a point.

The generator holds about 24 pounds of plutonium: radioactive stuff you wouldn't want to be around. Not without shielding. The Cassini-Huygens got protested for the same reason.

I'm glad that NASA has the U.S. DOE do a risk assessment before launching dangerous stuff. There was a low (1 in 350) chance that some radioactive material might get loose during launch. Then there's the worst-case scenario, where every ounce of on-board plutonium got spread as far as possible.

If that had happened, everyone up to 105 kilometers of the release would be exposed: to 80% above the North America's average background radiation.

More:

New Horizons
NASA's Mission to Pluto, JPL/APL

Fukushima Daiichi, Chernobyl, and the Manure Crisis of 1894

Before you run to that 1950s fallout shelter in the back yard: remember that radioactive stuff permeates the universe, including Earth. The stuff's responsible for background radiation coming from air, water, food, soil, rocks, and the depths of space.

Now that I think about it, that fallout shelter might a low-level radiation hazard. Remember those 'radon' headlines, several years back?

There's a little bit of radioactive stuff in rocks. As it breaks down, it releases radon gas. Normally, it's not a problem: unless you're living in a cave.

During the 1970s 'energy crisis,' folks started insulating their homes: a lot. Good news: we're using energy much more efficiently now.

Not-so-good news: we discovered that toxic stuff had been getting ventilated away, and now was trapped inside our efficiently-heated homes, like formaldehyde.

Radon, too. Some parts of the United States — including Minnesota — have more radon underfoot than others. And that's yet another topic. ("Radon in the Home," Radiation and Your Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

Worldwide, the natural background radiation is about four times more than what we get from our tech. A lot of that's from medical imaging: also stuff like radioactive building materials, coal-powered generating stations, and cigarettes. (Wikipedia)

Then there are nuclear accidents, like the Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi disasters.

I'm not upset that we use dangerous technologies; like nuclear power, steam engines, and fire.

We've learned to safely use fire and flint tools, and developed an alternative to horse-drawn wagons before burying London in manure. (May 9, 2014; July 9, 2011)

- - - and we still sometimes get careless with fire.

But I have yet to run into a 'NO MORE FIRES/BAN FIRES' protest.

Studying this world and developing new tools is part of being human. What we do with them is where ethics comes in. (Catechism, 2293, 2493-2499)

Also using our brains, and that's yet again another topic. (March 29, 2015; June 15, 2014)

2. Pluto Probe Hiccups

(From NASA/JHU-APL/SWRI, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("The spots are part of a dark band that wraps around much of Pluto's equatorial region"
(BBC News))

"New Horizons: Pluto probe 'on course' for flyby"
Jonathan Amos, BBC News (July 6, 2015)

"New Horizons lost very little science data when it went into 'safe mode' at the weekend, the mission team says.

"Nasa's Pluto probe experienced a fault on Saturday that put it temporarily out of contact with the Earth, as it speeds towards a flyby next week.

"Principal investigator Alan Stern said that about 30 observations of the dwarf planet were missed as a consequence of the hiccup.

"This represents 'far less than 1%' of the top science about to come back...."

This "hiccup" happened after engineers sent the command sequence for New Horizons' Pluto flyby. The onboard computer was trying to write the instructions to its flash memory while compressing data from its observations.

That was too much data moving around at the same time. The computer couldn't handle both tasks, dropped both, and did what it's programmed to do: shifted to a safe mode. A backup computer took over, and the main computer 'woke up' just over an hour later.

There isn't another 'burn to flash' process scheduled for the next few days, or the Pluto flyby: so that particular issue won't keep scientists from getting New Horizons' reports.

3. Alien Life on a Comet??

"Rosetta comet 'may be home to alien life' "
The Week (July 6, 2015)

"Astronomers say data sent back by Rosetta point to the presence of microbial life on Comet 67P

"he Rosetta spacecraft's Philae lander has sent back information that could point to the existence of microbial alien life on Comet 67P, astronomers from the University of Cardiff have said....

"...According to astronomer and astrobiologist Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe, the comet's black hydrocarbon crust could be home to microbes not dissimilar to the 'extremophiles' found in some of the most inhospitable places on Earth, such as those that live deep in Antarctic ice or in the Mariana Trench....

"...He and colleague Dr Max Wallis from the University of Cardiff argue that comets could have helped bring life to Earth, and to other planets in our solar system, including Mars...."

I've glanced over a few slightly-snarky responses to this bit of news. I'll agree that some of the reporting has been a bit on the silly side: and exaggerated the "scientists say" angle.

Granted, University of Buckingham's Chandra Wickramasinghe and University of Cardiff's Max Wallis add up to more than one scientist. But they're by no means an overwhelming majority, or even a significant minority, of the Anglo-European science community.

On the other hand, they just might be right. Over the last few decades, we've been finding critters living in very unexpected places: like alkali lakes, hot springs, and radioactive waste. (December 5, 2014; March 7, 2014)

My guess is that comets like Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko don't support life. The things are probably too small, and nowhere near stable enough, for critters to live. That didn't keep me from enjoying Lifeforce, a yarn about vampires hiding in Halley's Comet.

Finally, a quick quot from the Wikipedia page about The Week. "...This weekly news magazine is known for a wide focus that incorporates current events, news, health, media, science, arts, and more into an easily digestible format...."

4. Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko's Sinkholes

(From ESA/Rosetta/MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA, used w/o permission.)
("Pits on the surface of Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko's northern hemisphere...."
(Reuters))

"Rosetta spacecraft finds massive sinkholes on comet's surface"
Irene Klotz, Reuters (July 1, 2015)

"The comet being studied by Europe's Rosetta spacecraft has massive sinkholes in its surface that are nearly wide enough to swallow Egypt's Great Pyramid of Giza, research published on Wednesday shows.

"Scientists suspect the pits formed when material on the comet's surface collapsed, similar to sinkholes on Earth, a study published in the journal Nature said.

"The cavities on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, which Rosetta has been orbiting since August, are enormous, stretching some 656 feet (200 meters) in diameter and 590 feet (180 meters) in depth.

"In comparison, the Great Pyramid is 756 feet (230 meters) across and currently 455 feet (139 meters) tall...."

Three centuries back, Isaac Newton observed vapors coming from comets.

Around the mid-20th century, scientists realized that comets released so much gas and dust that they must be mostly ice or other volatile stuff. Robot spacecraft sent to Halley's Comet in the mid-1980s gave us our first look at comet jets.

ESA's Rosetta orbiter is much closer, 10 to 30 kilometers, roughly six to 18 miles, from comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. The Philae lander 'woke up' June 13, and that's still another topic.

Images from the orbiter show 18 roughly-circular pits on Churyumov-Gerasimenko's northern hemisphere. Stuff is visibly jetting out of some of them.

"... The pits are a few tens to a few hundreds of metres in diameter and extend up to 210 m below the surface to a smooth dust-covered floor. Material is seen to be streaming from the most active pits.

" 'We see jets arising from the fractured areas of the walls inside the pits. These fractures mean that volatiles trapped under the surface can be warmed more easily and subsequently escape into space,' says Jean-Baptiste Vincent from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, lead author of the study. ..."
(ESA)

These scientists think the pits are like sinkholes on Earth: previously-underground cavities with collapsed roofs. Water and limestone getting together make many of earth's sinkholes, like Mammoth Cave National Park's Cedar Sink.

We may eventually find karst landscapes on other planets: but comets aren't made of limestone. Something else forms them.

The scientists figure the comet's interior voids might be left over from when the comet formed: results of very low-speed collisions between building-size chunks of cometary stuff.

Or maybe frozen carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and other 'ices,' sublimated — evaporated directly from solid to gas. That could be triggered when sunlight heats the comet's surface, which in turn warm up deeper layers.

Or it could happen when water ice changes from an amorphous to a crystaline state, releasing heat and starting sublimation in carbon monoxide and dioxide ice.

Either way, the second two processes would happen when the comet comes closer to our sun.

Meanwhile, Somewhere on the Surface - - -

The Roestta mission's Philae lander detached from Rosetta at 08:35 UTC, November 12, 2014. At 15:34:04 UTC,¹ it touched down on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: and bounced. Back on Earth, 28 minutes later, engineers and scientists got the 'I have landed' signal: and started wondering what had gone wrong.

Data sent back from Philae looked — odd — because the lander was slowly rising from the comet's surface. After reaching an altitude of about one kilometer, it fell back; bounced again, at 17:25:26 UTC; and finally came to rest after a third impact at 17:31:17 UTC.

Philae's 'brain,' the Central data management system, weighs about 2.9 kilograms/6.4 pounds. That's more that twice as heavy as an adult human's brain, but we're still not making computers as compact as biological neurocircuitry: and certainly weren't over a decade back, when Philae was built. (August 15, 2014)

A 6.4-pound early-21st-century computer can only do so much: and certainly wasn't up to dealing with an unexpectedly gentle landing — and failure of the mooring harpoons.

Philae's onboard computer did what it was programed to do at touchdown: turned off the lander's reaction wheel, which transferred momentum to the now-'airborn' lander, which started rotating every 13 seconds.

Something — probably hitting something jutting out from the comet's surface, slowed the spin to once every 24 seconds — and sent the craft tumbling.

In a way, it's remarkable that Philae was still working when it finally fetched up against a cliff or crater wall — and kept sending data for about 60 hours before using up its reserve power and switching to hibernation mode.

67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is closer to the sun now, and Philae 'woke up.' The probe has been sending back data it stored during its first active period: slowly, since the orbiter isn't 'overhead' all that often. And that's — what else? — another topic.

More:

Philae (spacecraft)
Wikipedia
ESA Science: Rosetta
- "Comet Sinkholes Generate Jets"
  (July 1, 2015)
ESA Science and Technology: Rosetta
- "Philae wake-up kicks off intense planning"
  (June 15, 2015)
- "Rosetta's lander Philae wakes up from hibernation"
  (June 14, 2015)

Asteroids, planets, a comet, and life in the universe, from my viewpoint:

"Dawn's Arrival at Ceres; Sims and 'Chaos'"
(March 13, 2015)
Particularly
"DNA Test Hype; and Studying Life's Origins"
(December 5, 2014)
Particularly
- Astrobiology: Seriously
" 'Organic,' 'Wow!' — and Double Planets"
(November 28, 2014)
Particularly
- Life in the Universe and Using Our Brains
- Philae: Rich Data from a Bouncing Lander
" 'Philae ... Headed for History' "
(November 14, 2014)
Particularly
"Harpooning the 'Rubber Duck' Comet; Public Safety — and Space Aliens"
(November 7, 2014)
Particularly

¹ "UTC" stands for Coordinated Universal Time, temps universel coordonné in French. It's abbreviated as UTC, instead of TUC or CUT, because English speakers originally proposed CUT, while French speakers said it should be TUC. Folks finally settled on UTC, an acronym which would be equally acceptable — or disliked — by both parties.

My opinion is that we should call it "ET," for Earth Time, but it's probably too early for that. Quite a few folks probably still remember that movie and there's that long-running television show.

Astronomers use Terrestrial Time, which I think is a step in the right direction.

UTC is based on International Atomic Time: a time standard set by the weighted average of over 400 atomic clocks in more than 50 laboratories at various spots at or near Earth's surface — coordinated by GPS and two-way satellite time and frequency transfer.

The International Telecommunication Union, a United Nations agency involved with information and communication technologies, recommended today's UTC setup.

We're still using leap seconds to keep UT1, the most commonly-used version of UTC, within 0.9 seconds of Solar time at a virtual point on Earth's surface.

Eventually, Earth Time may be defined as something other than where the sun is, relative to a spot on an island off the European coast — or maybe not. Our current setup puts the International Date Line near the middle of this planet's largest body of water: which is convenient.

Friday, December 5, 2014

DNA Test Hype; and Studying Life's Origins

A company whose DNA test was banned by the FDA is back: in the United Kingdom.

Meanwhile, scientists are learning that complex organic compounds may be forming in Titan's atmosphere: another piece to the puzzle of how life began. Another team found that up to half of Earth's water came from interstellar space.

Finally, a quick look at astrobiology and assumptions about intelligent life in the universe.

Applied Genetics: Technology is Technology

We've known that traits are inherited for a thousand generations, maybe more, and applied that knowledge. (November 22, 2013; August 8, 2013)

The deal Jacob made with Laban in Genesis 30:27-3:13 at least hints that Jacob knew how to make sure many dark sheep and spotted or speckled goats were born.

"...it was thousands of years after people had started breeding animals. Jacob and Laban (who doesn't come across as the brightest bulb in the bin) lived in a society that had been breeding sheep for a very long time...."
(Drifting at the edge of Time and Space (October 29, 2009))

We've been breeding plants and animals for so long that it seems as 'natural' as fire and string. I've said it before — "Just because we've been using it since time out of mind, technology is technology."

More of my take on genetics, technology, and getting a grip:

"Hard Science Fiction, Cultural Blinders and Laban's Sheep"
Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (October 29, 2009)
Particularly
"Habitable Worlds, Homer, and Haldane — or — Ganymede's Oceans, and Imagining Kepler-186f's Sunsets"
(May 9, 2014)
Particularly
- Fire, String, and Other Dangerous Technology

Genetics: Hippocrates and Old Family Photos

Aristotle, Hippocrates, and folks who practiced Ayurveda, thought about why offspring look like their parents — but not quite. They came up with pretty good explanations, particularly considering that statistical science and X-ray fiber diffraction hadn't been invented yet.

More recently, Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi and Judah Halevi noticed and recorded how specific traits were inherited.

The pace picked up in the 18th and 19th centuries, with research by Karl Friedrich von Gaertner, Gregor Mendel, Joseph Gottlieb Kölreuter, and Charles_Victor_Naudin.

Darwin's theory of evolution made sense, but his pangenesis hereditary theory didn't.

Jean-Baptiste Lamarck's theories of evolution and heredity weren't a particularly good match with reality either.

Scientists realized that evolution, changing inherited traits, wasn't 'magic.' Some mechanism was at work. But in Darwin's day, nobody had come up with a good explanation for how heredity works.

Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton, and Karl Pearson helped get biometrics started. Pearson also helped introduce social Darwinism and eugenics. I'll get back to that.

An obscure scientific journal had published Mendel's work: which was eventually rediscovered in the 20th century.

The Avery–MacLeod–McCarty experiment isolated DNA in the 1940s, Walter Fiers's team completely sequenced the Bacteriophage MS2 genome in 1976, and scientists analyzing DNA are uncovering previously-unknown chapters of humanity's story. (October 31, 2014; July 11, 2014)

That upsets some folks, but not me. I've mentioned old family photos and change before. (July 15, 2014)

Social Darwinism, Eugenics, and Me

Some wealthy Europeans and Americans of the 1870s decided that they were richer than most because they were stronger than anyone else.

I'll grant that they were better at accumulating wealth: but think that 'social Darwinism' is an ethical minefield.

Besides, wealth and political power isn't much good if you don't have kids. Being the richest man in the graveyard never appealed to me much, and that's another topic.

The 'we're better than others' Victorians didn't call themselves social Darwinists. That term didn't get traction until about 1944, when the Allies were interfering with an effort to apply social Darwinism and eugenics on a continental scale.

Despite the catchy name, I think social Darwinism can be credited to folks like Herbert Spencer, Thomas Hobbes, and Thomas Robert Malthus. Oddly enough, tomfoolery seems to come from another Thomas, and that's yet another topic.

The notion being part of a 'superior race' was more appealing before the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei started purging Europe of Lebensunwertes Leben (life unworthy of life) around the middle of the 20th century. Das herrenvolk's policies gave eugenics supporters a serious public relations problem. (August 24, 2012)

Odd notions aren't limited to one nation or era. One of my college professors claimed that 'races' don't exist because traits like skin tone and hair curliness overlap. I sympathize with him, a little, since back then we were still very close to the 'good old days' of 'whites only' signs.

My ancestors looked Anglo: with a haircut, new clothes, and some practice, we could pass for 'regular Americans.' Getting a job wasn't always easy, though.

A substantial fraction of my forebears are the 'inferior' "Irish Iberians" pictured in Harpers Weekly. (1899)

"No Irish need apply" notices were before my day, but that sort of thing leaves a lasting impression.

Getting back to eugenics, the idea of killing defective people doesn't appeal to me: even if the motive is 'compassionate:' because they wouldn't enjoy a "quality lifestyle," as the argument went in my youth.

I was born with defective hips, and probably inherited by glitchy neurochemistry, too. Even in my early teens, I realized that I'd probably have been removed in the second or third sweep: and I prefer being alive to the alternative.

Being Human

So, why aren't I calling for outlawing genetic studies, and denouncing scientists as Godless advocates of iniquity?

Simple answer: I'm Catholic, and understand my faith.

Science and technology, learning about the universe and using that knowledge to develop new tools, is part of being human. We're expected to use our brains: wisely. (Wisdom 7:17; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 307, 1730, 2292-2295, 2415-2418)

Like anything else humans do, ethics apply to science. No matter how 'scientific' someone's curiosity is, experiments like the ones performed at Auschwitz, Dachau, Tuskegee, and Willowbrook are wrong.

The problem isn't science. Experimentation on humans is okay unless it involves "disproportionate or avoidable risks," or experiments are done without informed consent. We're supposed to treat animals humanely, by the way: but animal experimentation is okay, within reason. (Catechism, 2295, 2416-2418)

Our view of human life won't let us kill people because they're defective: and genocide is not acceptable behavior either, no matter what the motive. (Catechism, 2268, 2313)

God, Clay, and Getting a Grip

We are created in the image of God, male and female. Each of us is a person: not something, but someone; made from the stuff of this world, and filled with God's 'breath:' matter and spirit, body and soul. (Genesis 2:7; Catechism, 355, 357, 362-368)

That doesn't mean that the first of us looked pretty much like Albrecht Dürer's 1504 engraving. I've said it before: trying to believe Adam and Eve were German is daft.

I read Genesis 1:1-2:4 and 2:4-25 as an explanation of God's role in our existence: among other things. As far as I'm concerned, all that's changed in the last few centuries is how much we know about the "clay" God used. (February 23, 2014; December 13, 2013)

That reminds me: we're made in the image of God, "little less than a god," as Psalms 8:6 says. We're pretty hot stuff: but we're not God.

I've used this story before:

God was walking along a riverbank with some man. They were talking about how much humanity had learned recently. The man was particularly impressed with developments in molecular biology. "I can make life, just like you did in Genesis," he said.

God asked, "could you make a man?" The man thought a minute, then said, "yes."

"Okay," said the Almighty. "Let's see you do that." They had come to a spot on the riverbank where a small landslide had exposed fresh clay. The man bent down and scooped up a lump of clay.

"Wait," God said. "If you're going to do this on your own, you have to create your own clay."

My father told that short tale when we were discussing humanity's capacities and limitations: and I've used it before. (February 10, 2013; January 25, 2012)

Our first parents were masters of themselves and in harmony with the world, with the perfect job.

Then we decided we wanted to be "like gods," on our own terms; at which point Adam tried blaming his wife — and God.

That did not end well. (Genesis 1:27, 31, 2:15; Catechism, 371-379)

If we lived in an unchanging world, Genesis 3:1-19 would leave us with no hope. We'd be stuck in a broken world.

Happily, change happens. This universe is in a state of journeying toward an ultimate perfection. (Catechism, 302)

Over the last few generations, we've started realizing just how long the universe has been on that journey: 13,798,000,000 years. Earth formed 4,540,000,000 years back: give or take 4,540,000 or so

Some folks don't approve: and insist that Ussher, a steadfast Calvinist, has to be right. Ussher decided that creation started on the nightfall preceding October 23, 4004 BC: based on what he read in the Old Testament. That was pretty good British scholarship back in the 1650s.

Me? I prefer taking reality 'as is,' and see what we're learning about the scale of creation as opportunities for "greater admiration" of God's work. (October 10, 2014; July 15, 2014)

Folks who ardently defended 'Bible truths' against "Reason, empty with the fumes of that same flattery by which we originally fell" predate Darwin.

"...Such is the Basis of Scripture, and such also is the legitimate deduction of History. ... Reason, empty with the fumes of that same flattery by which we originally fell, cometh of the unhallowed embrace, and finding in the crust of the Earth certain animal Types which ascend in the progress of Time, from the more simple to the complex, ... avers that Matter, like 'the Nilotic Mud,' generated Creatures with the mere dawn of life, which improving upon themselves, at last elicited a man, a man like to all previous existences, imperfect, rudimental, savage. We care not how much the offensive Thesis is laughed at in the person of grotesque Lamark...."
("The Book of the Great Sea-Dragons, Ichthyosauri and Plesiosauri," Thomas Hawkins, Thomas; p. 1 (1840))

Since I believe that God created, and is creating, everything: studying things of the world and things of faith can not get in the way of faith. (Catechism, 159, 279, 301)

Being curious is okay, and scientific discoveries should be cause for "even greater admiration" for God's greatness. (Psalms 19:2; Catechism, 282-289)

1. DNA Test: Science, Technology, Marketing, and the FDA

(From Science Photo Library, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("The personal DNA test detects a range of gene variants"
(BBC News))

"Controversial DNA test comes to UK"
Michelle Roberts, Paul Rincon, BBC News (December 2, 2014)

"A personal DNA test that has sparked controversy in the US has launched in the UK.

"The UK's Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) says the 23andMe spit test, which is designed to give details about a person's health risks based on their DNA, can be used with caution.

"But critics say it may not be accurate enough to base health decisions on.

"The company, California-based 23andMe, stands by its test.

"Backed by Google, the firm offered US customers details of health risks based on gene variants they carry.

"But in November 2013, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned the company from marketing its service in the US, claiming 23andMe had failed to provide adequate information to support the claims it made about results...."

There's quite a bit going on here. 23andMe probably wants to sell more of their services, and government regulators on both sides of the Atlantic have their own issues. Doctors presumably want reliable diagnostic tools, and folks have varying sorts of health issues.

I'll get to 23andMe's troubles, genetics, and patent medicines: after making obvious, or maybe not-so-obvious, points about health, faith, and ethics.

If you've been to this blog before, feel free to skip to the next heading — or take a coffee break, go for a walk, whatever.

Being healthy, or not being healthy, is okay. Health, wealth, or their lack, doesn't mean we're being punished or rewarded. (Matthew 5:45; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2448)

Health is a 'precious gift.' I'm expected to take care of my health: within reason. (Catechism, 2274-2279, 2288-2289)

Obsessing over good health, putting anything besides God at the top of my priorities, is called idolatry: and is a very bad idea. (Catechism, 2112-2114)

Genetic testing can, I think, be a valuable tool. But like any other tool, it can be misused. I see no problem with using DNA tests to spot health risks: if the doctor and patient use that knowledge to maintain the patient's health.

Checking someone's DNA to see if the individual has the 'right' or 'wrong' traits: that's a bad idea that gets worse if folks see to it that only the 'right' genes get passed along.

"...'...Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity'⁸⁵ which are unique and unrepeatable."
(Catechism, 2275)

Enough of that. Let's look at why 23andMe got in trouble with the FDA.

"A List that has Grown Over Time"

"...For example, your company’s website at www.23andme.com/health (most recently viewed on November 6, 2013) markets the PGS for providing 'health reports on 254 diseases and conditions,' including categories such as 'carrier status,' 'health risks,' and 'drug response,' and specifically as a 'first step in prevention' that enables users to 'take steps toward mitigating serious diseases' such as diabetes, coronary heart disease, and breast cancer. Most of the intended uses for PGS listed on your website, a list that has grown over time, are medical device uses under section 201(h) of the FD&C Act. Most of these uses have not been classified and thus require premarket approval or de novo classification, as FDA has explained to you on numerous occasions....

"...In your letter dated January 9, 2013, you stated that the firm is 'completing the additional analytical and clinical validations for the tests that have been submitted' and is 'planning extensive labeling studies that will take several months to complete.' Thus, months after you submitted your 510(k)s and more than 5 years after you began marketing, you still had not completed some of the studies and had not even started other studies necessary to support a marketing submission for the PGS. It is now eleven months later, and you have yet to provide FDA with any new information about these tests...."
(Food and Drug Administration's warning letter to the CEO of 23andMe, Inc. (November 22, 2013)) [emphasis mine]

I don't know what led up to that letter.

If 23andMe's website had an expanding list of nifty uses for their test kits, before they'd completed evaluating their product, my guess is that the company's marketing department had more influence than its lawyers.

There's nothing wrong with marketing, at least I hope not: since I spent two decades working in that field. Like anything else humans do, though, marketing and advertising can be ethical: or not.

We've come a long way since the 'good old days,' when advertisements for products like Bonnore's Electro Magnetic Bathing Fluid "greatly exaggerated the curative powers of their remedies," as the Smithsonian's page puts it:

"Balm of America: Patent Medicine Collection | History"
The National Museum of American History, Smithsonian

Wacky claims and snake oil salesmen didn't disappear when America's Food and Drug Administration started in 1906: but the heyday of patent medicines was over in my country. My opinion.

After 1906, American drug makers had to label their products if they contained alcohol, morphine, opium, cocaine, heroin, eucaine, chloroform, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, or acetanilide. ("Balm of America: Patent Medicine Collection | History")

More than a century later, we're still sorting out what's legal, what's not, and that's yet again another topic.

Experts and Viewpoints

"...Dr Marcy Darnovsky, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society in California, said the UK and Canadian launches could be a way of placing pressure on the FDA by demonstrating that regulators in other countries found no fault with their product.

" 'Genetic testing is an important medical tool in certain situations, but for healthy people as a way to predict common complex diseases, it's pretty useless,' she told BBC News.

" 'Most complex diseases and almost all the common ones - with some exceptions such as the BRCA 1 and 2 genes (implicated in breast cancer) - are multi-factorial with many genes and other biological, social and environmental causes.'..."
(Michelle Roberts, Paul Rincon, BBC News)

Wikipedia identifies the Center for Genetics and Society as "politically progressive:" which doesn't make them always right; or wrong. (November 3, 2008)

Dr. Darnovsky's claim that genetic testing is "pretty useless" for predicting "common complex diseases" in healthy folks may be right: to a point. We're very complex creatures. Our genes are just one factor influencing our health.

But I also think that getting data about one of many factors is useful: as long as we remember that it's just one piece of the puzzle, not the whole picture.

Stanford University's director of the Center for Law and the Biosciences, Professor Hank Greely, made an astute observation:

" 'They may also want to make it clear to the public, to their investors, to their employees that they're alive and kicking.' "
(Michelle Roberts, Paul Rincon, BBC News)

Would I get my genes tested by 23andMe's product?

That's two questions:

Would I have my genetic code tested?
- Probably not
Would I prefer having a doctor use 23andMe's product?
- No

My household's budget doesn't have much room for 'extras.' We know family history for quite a few generations, and so have a reasonably good picture of inherited glitches we should look for. I'd be fascinated with results of a detailed genetic profile: but that's a luxury we can't afford.

From what I've seen, 23andMe's testing product may or may not give accurate results.

The company's marketing decisions make trusting the technology they sell difficult. That won't matter to 23andMe, though, since I'm not one of the folks who decides which medical tech gets used.

Looking Ahead

My kids may live long enough to have genetic screening, 3D imaging, and diagnostic nanobots, used as routinely as thermometers and stethoscopes are today.

The odds are that they won't be as enthusiastic about the new tech as I am. The one who's an artist seems to prefer old-school drawing to digital graphics, and that's still another topic.

More about what's coming:

"Medical nanorobot architecture based on nanobioelectronics."
Cavalcanti, Shirinzadeh, Freitas, Kretly; Abstract; US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health (2007)

2. Titan and Life's Origins

(From NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute, via Space.com, used w/o permission.)
("Saturn's moon Titan appears as a hazy ball from a distance in this photo taken by NASA's Cassini spacecraft."
(Space.com))

"Saturn's Hazy Moon Titan Holds Clues About Life's Origins"
Elizabeth Howell, Astrobiology Magazine, via Space.com (November 27, 2014)

" Where did life on Earth come from? There are several theories as to what might have happened. Maybe comets came bearing organic material, or life was transported from another planet such as Mars, or something happened in the chemistry of our planet that made life possible.

"Luckily for researchers, there is a possible laboratory in our solar system to help us better understand the conditions on Earth before life arose — a situation sometimes referred to as a 'prebiotic' environment. That location is Titan, the largest moon of Saturn.

"Titan has fascinated researchers for decades, particularly after NASA's Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecraft flew by Saturn in the 1980s. The missions revealed a moon completely socked in with haze, which is a different experience to those used to gazing at Earth's airless, cratered moon...."

Panspermia, the idea that life on Earth arrived from somewhere else, goes back at least to Anaxagoras, more than two dozen centuries back. Some 19th century scientists suggested that life could spread on meteors or comets, which restarted the idea in our era.

A few years ago, scientists found evidence that microorganisms could spread from one planet to another, in rock blasted into space by meteor, comet, or asteroid impacts. Organic material from Earth got trapped inside spatter from a meteor impact.

Darwin glass fell back to Earth, but embedded organics could be thrown out of Earth's atmosphere: or arrive on Earth from a Martian impact. It's possible that life on Earth started on Mars. (January 17, 2014; October 25, 2013)

Panspermia may describe how life can travel from planet to planet: but not how life starts.

Scientists have found several explanations for how life started that cover at least some of the facts, including:

A primordial soup of water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen; zapped by lightning
Molecules deposited on minerals embedded in clay
Complex molecules
- Stirred and heated near hydrothermal vents
- Preserved in ice
Metabolic chemistry coming first, then genes
(LiveScience)

The 'struck by lightning' theory could work: but we've since learned that Earth probably didn't have enough hydrogen when life began.

Thinking that metabolic chemistry could start before living critters had genes isn't as crazy as it may seem. Terrence W. Deacon showed that heating a molecular brew produces short-lived "autocells:" microscopic capsules which could, in principle, trap organics long enough to start the chemical reactions we call "life." (October 18, 2013)

Background on Professor Deacon's autocells:

"Reciprocal Linkage between Self-organizing Processes is Sufficient for Self-reproduction and Evolvability"
Terrence W. Deacon, abstract, ResearchGate (2006)

An intriguing possibility is that early organic molecules may have formed on diamond crystals: and that's — another topic. (June 27, 2014; Apathetic Lemming of the North; July 28, 2008)

How can I claim that God exists: and not be horrified that we're learning how life began? It has to do with secondary causes.

Tholins, Faith, and Knowledge

"...'The study of organic chemistry on Titan's surface would extend our understanding of the diversity of prebiotic chemistry, and perhaps life's origin on Earth,' said Dr. Chao He, a chemist at the University of Houston (now moved to Johns Hopkins University), who led the study...."
(Elizabeth Howell, Astrobiology Magazine, via Space.com)

Dr. He's team formed tholins, simple organic molecules, in a close approximation of Titan's atmosphere.

Similar processes probably happen on Titan, so the question now is how stable tholins are in Titan's atmosphere and on its surface: and if Titan's tholins include chemical precursors of life.

I'm not shocked that scientists are learning how life works: and knowing something of the process doesn't threaten my belief that God exists, and sustains this universe.

Fearing knowledge is irrational. As Leo XIII wrote, "truth cannot contradict truth." (Catechism, 159, 214-217; "Providentissimus Deus")

Knowing that a fire's light and heat involve electron transitions doesn't cause a crisis of faith, forcing me to decide whether I'll believe that physical realities exist or that God exists. (July 15, 2014)

Everything we observe reflects a facet of the Creator's truth, according to its nature. (Catechism, 301-308)

All natural processes involve secondary causes: creatures acting in knowable ways, following laws woven into this creation. Since I believe that God creates everything, and that God is not a liar: learning about this universe gives me more reasons to praise God.

3. The Ocean that Fell to Earth?

"Up to half of Earth's water is older than the sun"
Aviva Rutkin, New Scientist (September 25, 2014)

"...Much of the water on our planet and around the solar system started out as tiny grains of ice floating in interstellar space. The discovery provides important clues about not only the make-up of our solar system, but also what planets around other stars might be like....

"...All water in the solar system – whether on planets, in comets or meteorites, or icy moons like Europa – contains a certain amount of deuterium – an isotope of hydrogen that has an extra neutron attached....

"...Ice found between stars is even more deuterium-rich, so it was long suspected that it was the source of our solar system's heavy water. But the young solar system was so violent and full of radiation that any incoming ice should have been ripped apart, recombining later into water – according to this picture.

"But when (University of Michigan in Ann Arbor's Ilsedore) Cleeves and her collaborators built a model of the early sun, they found that this explanation didn't stand up. After their model scrapped all of the interstellar ice, they found that oxygen was being locked up in frozen carbon monoxide. And there wasn't enough ionised, deuterium-rich hydrogen being produced either. In short, the nascent solar system wouldn't have had the ingredients for water with the high levels of deuterium we see...."

This isn't a new idea. Deuterium levels in Earth's ocean is very similar to what we've found in comets, which suggests that water in both comes from the same place. Comets probably come from the Oort cloud, debris on the borderlands of Sol left over from the Solar system's formation. (November 14, 2014; October 24, 2014)

Cleeves' research is important, though, since it confirms what scientists expected. If the new numbers are accurate, as much as half of Earth's water came from interstellar space.

University of Chicago planetary scientist Fred Ciesla points out that water ice isn't the only stuff found between stars. Scientists have found organic molecules too, like formic acid, benzine, and iso-propyl cyanide.

"Organic" doesn't mean "living," but it looks like life's chemical components are spread throughout this galaxy. (November 28, 2014; October 3, 2014)

If Earth's water fell from interstellar space, the odds are pretty good that many Earth-size planets circling other stars have oceans too.

4. Astrobiology: Seriously

"Introduction: Astrobiology"
Stephen Battersby, New Scientist (September 4, 2006)

"Nobody has yet seen an extraterrestrial, which may sound like a problem in establishing a science of astrobiology. But in the past 20 years or so, scientists have found clues that life may be quite common in the universe, and many are hopeful that they will soon find hard evidence of life beyond Earth.

"Some hints come from terrestrial life. Biologists have discovered many species of extremophile - micro-organisms that thrive in extreme environments, such as alkali lakes and rock fissures deep underground. Life may have originated on the ocean floor around thermal vents or black smokers, which may be common features of other planets and moons.

"And chemical traces of metabolism appear in Earth's rocks shortly after the planet's ferocious Late Heavy Bombardment by meteorites, implying that life might be able to get started quickly and easily...."

Life may be unique to Earth: or we may find life in the oceans of Europa and Enceladus, and on thousands of Earth-size planets in our part of the Milky Way galaxy. Right now, we don't know.

Since we live on a planet circling a mid-size star, roughly halfway out from the center of our galaxy: I think it's likely that life may be a fairly common phenomenon.

Either way, my faith wouldn't be shaken. God's God, I'm not, and I'm okay with that. My job is praising God and admiring the Creator's work: not telling the Almighty how to run the universe.

Stephen Battersby's article ends with the Fermi paradox: if civilizations are common, why haven't we seen seen them?

Conventional pessimism says that we haven't met space aliens because people destroy themselves as soon as they get as tech-savvy as we are. I think the 'tech kills' attitude is as silly as the older 'tech solves all our problems' one.

Maybe we are the only people in the entire universe. Or not. Like I said: we don't know.

If we do have neighbors, I think it's safe to assume that they're not human: and that's — what else? — another topic. (June 27, 2014; May 9, 2014)

Still more about life, the universe, and being human:

" 'Organic,' 'Wow!' — and Double Planets"
(November 28, 2014)
Particularly
- Life in the Universe and Using Our Brains
"Harpooning the 'Rubber Duck' Comet; Public Safety — and Space Aliens"
(November 7, 2014)
Particularly
- 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: 4,500,000,000 years in cold storage
- Faith, Philosophy, and Space Aliens
  - Fear and Hope
  - "...It's a Mighty Sobering Thought"
"Regeneration: Getting Closer to Growing Lost Organs"
(August 29, 2014)
Particularly
"Oxygen, Life, and Autocells"
(October 18, 2013)
Particularly
" 'Think Nice Thoughts About Eugenics,' and Good News"
(August 24, 2012)
Particularly
- Eugenics: 'It Can't Happen Here?'

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:

• "Worthy of belief" Diocese of Green Bay, Wisconsin
• "Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy. Principles and Guidelines," 15; Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Vatican City (December 2001)
• "Basic Information on Apparitions, Diocese of Green Bay
- (Archived from (www.gbdioc.org/images/stories/Evangelization_Worship/Shrine/Documents/Basic-Information-on-Apparitions.pdf on December 8, 2010)
Catechism of the Catholic Church on:
- • Life as a pilgrimage, 1013
- • Pilgrimages and prayer, 2691

Posts in this blog:

• "Apparition of Mary, Champion, Wisconsin: A Pilgrimage? Not for Me" (April 10, 2011)
• "Wisconsin Apparitions Okay: Champion, Wisconsin: Not Necedah" (December 8, 2010)

In the news:

• "Wisconsin chapel approved as first US Marian apparition site" Benjamin Mann, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (December 9, 2010)

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.

Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle	• Find a Retailer • Spiral Light Candle Store

A Catholic Citizen in America's Pages