I know that four posts in a single day is entirely unprecedented on my part, but I guess I’m trying to make up for a lack of posts over the last week. None the less, this time I’m offering a simple and kind of quirky link for your enjoyment.

I’m sure many of you have seen the previous NASA offers to send your name to Mars or into space and yes, this is essentially another one of those. I know that these things are really very silly and pointless, but somehow the idea of having my name sent into space is at least a bit appealing.

On that note, why not join me in sending our names to space aboard MIT’s research spacecraft, set to launch in 2010!

Heck, with Christmas less than two months away, why not send your son or daughter, niece or nephew’s name into space and print them out the certificate as a quick, easy, and cheap stocking stuffer?

Link:
YourNameInSpace.com

Again, I realize that this is a bit of a turn from my usual content, but I found this story interesting.

News:
A team of researchers from Russia?s Joint Institute for Nuclear Research and the United States? Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory announced today that they have discovered (produced) the controversial element 118.

For those of you who don?t know, there is actually quite a story behind element 118, unofficially known as ?ununoctium?. In 1999, researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California claimed to have discovered the element.

Trouble began brewing, however, as other teams of scientists were unable to replicate the data. By June of 2002, it was shown that the lead researcher, Victor Ninov, had falsified data and that the team had not discovered the element.

According to reports, the team bombarded Californium and Calcium together in a particle accelerator to create the element, which remained for less than one one-thousandth of a second.

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Element_118 and http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061016/D8KQ0G780.html

Views:
First I?d like to congratulate the scientists on their amazing accomplishment. In terms of real commonsense, I guess I?d have to wonder if it?s really worth it go through all the trouble of producing an element that is gone in less than the blink of an eye.

I understand the discovery behind in and all, but it seems to me that it would be better to focus on elements that are likely to be fairly long-lived. That is, ones with favorable electron configurations which are atomically stable.

More than anything, I suppose, this discovery reaffirms that the United States (in this case working with Russia) is still a world leader in Physics research. It will be very interesting to see if this holds up when CERN opens up it?s LHC in 2007.

Common Sense:
Always check your facts before making claims of new discoveries (apparently the folks at Berkley didn?t in 1999) and don?t make anything too dangerous or unstable (I?d hate to see what potential element 119 does with water).

I know this is a departure from the usual content here at News. Views. Common Sense. and it?s likely you?ve already heard it, but I couldn?t resist.

News:
It?s official ? Pluto is no longer a traditional planet. During the voting near the end of the 2006 meeting of the International Astronomical Union, a formal definition of planet was adopted ? clearing up years of confusion and leading to Pluto?s demotion.

The object must orbit the sun, have the gravity needed to form into a fairly round shape, and have removed nearby debris from its orbit. With this new definition of planet, a new class have been made official ? the dwarf planet. The definition cites dwarf planets as those which orbit the sun, has the gravity and round shape, but have not cleared their orbits of debris. A dwarf planet also excludes natural satellites, such as moons.

With Pluto?s reclassification, our solar system is left with eight traditional planets ? Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune ? and three of these new dwarf planets ? Pluto, Ceres (previously an asteroid but considered a planet when first discovered), and 2003 UB313 (a Pluto-like body far beyond Pluto?s orbit).

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_redefinition_of_planet

Views:
I found it interesting that there had not been a readily agreed upon definition of a planet ? that it really depended on which astronomer you asked ? and the fact that things had been that way for years. I recognize that the elimination of Pluto as a traditional planet will cause some strife, but in time people will adjust.

The new classification of dwarf planet, however, may pose more problems. It is believed that there are dozens of Pluto-like objects beyond Pluto and 2003 UB313, which begs the question: will we have to learn 20 or 30 planets in the future? Then again, that could be kind of fun.

On very much a different note, what does this mean for astrologers and others who depend on the planets for there ?psychic abilities?? My guess it that this will show ? once and for all ? that astrology and horoscopes are (thank goodness) total nonsense and fraud.

Common Sense:
Time to update those textbooks! After more than 80 years of teaching that our solar system consists of nine planets ? Pluto among them ? this change will take a while to get used to. My guess is that there will be resistance to this from some organizations, but it time all will accept.

News:
By now, everyone knows of last week?s thwarted terrorist plot to detonate liquid explosives on trans-Atlantic flights from Great Britain to the United States. Most people also recall the claims of Homeland Security officials that there is not feasible technology for detecting liquid explosives and that those which do exist are plagued with false alarms. Apparently these DHS officials were not aware of work going on elsewhere in our government. Read the rest of this entry »