Category: A Little BIC of Science with Katherine Estep

Stumbling upon a number of articles published in the last two weeks on Supernova 1987A, a phenomenon observed unsurprisingly in the year 1987, I had two questions. First, why were people so excited to talk about it on its 30^th anniversary? Second, what is a supernova? They look pretty darn cool in all of the pictures.

 

Supernovas are exploding stars. The last explosion within our own galaxy is thought to have been around a hundred years ago. In a binary star system, a white dwarf star builds up matter that it takes from its companion star until it becomes, in a sense, overloaded. These are called Type I supernovae. They are actually used as a standard measurement of light throughout the universe because they are considered to all produce approximately the same amount of energy. Type II supernovae are from single stars. The supernova is somewhat like its final grand breath. As the star runs out of fuel, matter flows into its core until it is overloaded and the core collapses in on itself. Its own gravity pulls it inwards. If you forgot just how small our sun really is, one of these explosions releases more energy than our sun will throughout its entire lifetime. (Don’t worry. Our sun isn’t big enough to create a supernova. Its death will be much less impressive.) These explosions carry debris containing incredibly important elements vast distances. This allows the birth of new stars and the birth of elements (the laws you learned in chemistry do not apply in the explosion of stars).

 

On February 23, 1987, Ian Shelton spotted 1987A while in the Atacama Desert in Chile. It was just a new star that appeared when he developed one of his photographs from the night in the observatory. It was in fact so bright that it could be viewed without a telescope. The supernova itself was not rare. It was it proximity that made it the sort of rare event astronomers live for. Over the next few months, and the next few decades, information gained from the supernova progressed alongside scientific advancements. There was a five-hour difference between detections of neutrinos in Europe and Japan. There were many questions about the phenomenon. Was it the explosion of Sanduleak or a companion star? Did the neutrino particles (rare and still little-understood particles that play an important role in these explosions) detected actually have mass? Questions like this led to new discoveries about supernovas that have been applied to the other ones we observed afterward. They are still studying 1987A today. Since, you know, the universe is mind-blowing and this phenomenon is STILL GOING ON.

 

If you are more confused than you were five minutes ago, that is okay. Studying these things always reminds how little I really know, how littler we all know. I think often we try to understand the world as if we created it. We did not. It doesn’t matter what you believe about the origin of the universe, of universes. None of it says that a human being created the laws of the universe. We are all attempting to understand laws and ideas that do not necessarily fit within the parameters of own minds. That doesn’t need to scare us, though. There is a freedom in knowing that the limits we put on ourselves do not apply to the rest of the world.

 

Katherine Estep is a junior majoring in neuroscience. 

 

Sources

https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-a-supernova.html

http://www.space.com/6638-supernova.html – Check out Supernova SN 2008D

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/supernova-story-continues-just-science-journalism

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/30-year-anniversary-supernova-1987a

 

 

I think there is a certain bravery scientists must internalize as they take on a new research project. There is no promise that there are answers for them to find, no promise that the answer they find will be the one they wanted. Years and millions of dollars of research can turn into a failure. However, this makes the success all the more amazing. There are certain problems that haunt society, leaving their mark, as blazing signs that we have yet to find an answer.

HIV/AIDS is an example of a problem into which an unimaginable amount of effort has been put into curing. However, as of yet, there is no cure. HIV, or human immunodeficiency virus, is a virus that attacks CD4 T-Cells (a vital part of the immune system that attacks invading organisms). Instead of killing the host directly, the virus weakens the immune system until the person can no longer fight off simple infections such as colds or the flu.

AIDS, or acquired immune deficiency syndrome, refers to the later stages of HIV, when the immune system has been severely compromised. At the end of 2015, there were an estimated 36.7 million people living with HIV/AIDS across the world. Most of these people live in third world countries, where a lack of access to education, medicine, and birth control has left populations ravaged by this disease and millions orphaned as they lose their parents at incredibly young ages.

In the US, I do not think we see the real effect of this disease. There are treatments: ARV drugs can suppress the virus enough to give a person with HIV a relatively healthy life, but only if you have enough money to take an expensive and intense regimen of drugs for your entire life. For many though, that is not an option. The drugs can also lead to a long list of severe side effects.  Researchers have fought effortlessly for a cure, a cure that will allow people to live without drugs and free from the burden of this disease. There has been great defeat.

There is a hint of change in the air though. Just a few days ago, findings in a study on monkeys were published that left people amazed and hopeful. A group of immunologists at Emory University infected a group of monkeys with SIV (the primate version of HIV) and then attempted to treat them with Alpha4Beta7, an antibody that is found on the surface of CD4 cells. The findings were unexpected and gave no clear-cut answers. However, the monkeys treated with antibiotics had noticeably lower levels of SIV 8 months out, in comparison with the monkeys treated with a placebo. Already, they have been able to start human trials. I cannot tell you much about how this works because they know very little. There is not yet a clear understanding of exactly what mechanistic changes occurred.

In reality, this may all amount to nothing, or it could be a moment we will etch into the pages of history. In science, we rarely know exactly what the outcome will be. Perhaps we will fail. Perhaps we will change the world. If you have the bravery to follow through and commit, you may change the world.

 

Katherine Estep is a junior majoring in neuroscience. 

 

Sources

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/10/antibody-treatment-surprisingly-cures-monkeys-hiv-infection

https://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids-101/global-statistics/

https://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids-101/what-is-hiv-aids/

Recently, an environmental issue in Texas has hit national headlines. An increase in earthquakes in the North Texas area sparked the interest of researchers a while ago. Now, findings from an SMU research group and the EPA point to certain practices of oil drilling companies as the reason behind this seismic activity. In fact, the increase in seismic activity since 2008 has been quite notable. In the past 8 years, the North Texas area has seen about 130 small to medium sized earthquakes. One couple in Irving Texas describes experiencing numerous earthquakes that left their paintings and pictures askew on the wall.

Much of this seismic activity is thought to be due to the water disposal system many companies use after the fracking process. (Fracking is a process used to drill for oil and gas, in which high-pressure water is directed at rock deep underground in order to release the gas that has collected in the shale rock. It has long been a source of controversy due to its numerous possible ecologically damaging effects.)

The leftover water must be removed. However, to leave it above ground runs the risk of polluting any of the areas water sources. Therefore, often the water is injected into the ground. This increases the pore pressure in the area, as the space between the small rocks that make up the soil fill with water. Scientists have also noted a rise in the general elevation of the earth around these wastewater injection sites. The EPA and Texas Railroad Commission are now exploring possible avenues for changing the rule regarding wastewater and injection and general drilling practices.

This problem is another in a long string of environmental issues that oil and gas companies have faced over the past few decades, even the past century. For our generation, the biggest example is likely the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill of 2010. An oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico caught fire and sank into the water, killing eleven people and releasing a previously unimaginable amount of oil (around 5 million barrels) into the surrounding water. BP spent approximately $14 billion cleaning up and became the face of a horrible tragedy. Many people and environmental groups were left furious. Should we be feeling the same anger now? The damage seems less at face value, but again the effects of these massive projects on our environment haunt us.

The question we must ask ourselves is: Where do we draw the line? On one side of the line are the belief in Laissez-faire economy and the need for oil that permeates through every inch of our current economy. On the other side is the need to protect our environment and the lives of people and wildlife making a home here. How much time, money, and energy should be spent finding new ways to keep the environment safe? At times like these, many point to alternative energy resources, ones that would have a lesser impact on the environment. The thing we must remember, however, is that oil drilling is not the only thing leaving these cracks in our earth. Many of the choices we make as a society and the practices that drive our economy and world leave their mark on our environment. In a way, there is something simply human about leaving our mark on the world. However, on the other hand, it is naïve to think that we will never face the effects of our actions. We have to be careful. We must approach with caution. The earth is often far more delicate than one would think a spinning ball of rock would be.

Katherine Estep is a junior majoring in neuroscience. 

Sources

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/09/series-texas-quakes-likely-triggered-oil-and-gas-industry-activity

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/08/22/epa-north-takes-quakes-likely-linked-oil-and-gas-a/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/09/us/texas-earthquakes-fracking-studies/

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-14432401

http://www.bp.com/en_us/bp-us/commitment-to-the-gulf-of-mexico/deepwater-horizon-accident.html

https://www.britannica.com/event/Deepwater-Horizon-oil-spill-of-2010

 

A recent discovery in diabetes care has the chance to make millions of lives a little bit easier. Most of us, at some point in our life, have had to get our blood sugar tested. Perhaps it was for giving blood or a physical. It is not the worst thing in the world, but it also is not fun. Imagine having to do that every day, multiple times a day.

For those with diabetes, the reality of the disease is that every day is a constant marathon of pricking your finger, testing blood sugar, tracking carbohydrate intake, administering insulin, and simply trying to keep the body balanced.

When my uncle was diagnosed with diabetes out of the blue, it took him and his wife years to really figure out how to take care of him. It was a constant struggle for him to stay healthy. For kids with Type I Diabetes, this struggle begins when they are young and continues for the rest of their lives. Many of us take for granted only having to worry about our health when we are sick. For some, it simply is not that easy. So of course, my uncle was delighted when he heard of a discovery made by a group of Korean scientists.

Diabetes is an insulin-related disorder. Insulin is a hormone released by beta cells in the pancreas. Insulin is released after we eat, and works to facilitate the build-up of energy stores. With insulin present, GLUT-4 transporters move in and allow glucose molecules to enter the cell. There, glucose can be stored in the form of glycogen. Without insulin, glucose will build up to dangerous levels in the blood.

In Type I Diabetes, the beta cells do not produce adequate levels of insulin. This causes glucose to build up in the blood. Type II Diabetics produce insulin, but their bodies have become resistant to it. Diabetics must closely monitor what they eat and often administer insulin shots. They must consistently track their blood sugar. If it becomes too high or at low, their lives could be at risk.

This new method of blood sugar detection is a wearable graphene patch. It monitors glucose levels in the sweat. “Graphene” sounds like “graphite” because they are both made of carbon atoms. Graphene is carbon atoms attached in a honeycomb pattern. This unique structure allows it to be incredible thin and incredibly strong (1).

This specific sensor is a patch of graphene lined with gold and with added computer chips. It is capable of monitoring pH, temperature, humidity, and of course glucose (2). The device is also theoretically capable of delivering doses of insulin in a nearly painless manner. The rest gets extremely technical, but basically an uptake layer brings sweat into the device, where certain things, such as glucose presence, can be determined. Then, microneedles deliver a determined dose of insulin into the skin. Due to the nature of graphene, the device is very thin and flexible, so it sits on the wearer’s skin with relative comfort (2). In other words, as far as I can tell, it may just be the best thing to happen in diabetes technology in a long time.

It is easy to say that research should only be focused on “the big stuff”. We want the big wins. Those in the sciences often dream of curing cancer or discovering the answer to the biggest question in science. Those things are important, but that are not the only point of research. This may not have been a cure for diabetes, but it is still a win. It was enough for my uncle to excitedly tell me about it on the phone. It makes lives easier, and for that, it is still incredibly applicable and impactful research.

Katherine Estep is a sophomore BIC student majoring in neuroscience. 

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene

(2) http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nnano.2016.38.html

Memory storage and retrieval has long been one of the main puzzles of psychology and neuroscience. Who we are and how we think is deeply influenced by the memories of our experiences and sensations. Memory is far from perfect, however. We all struggle with corrupted memories and blockages that stop us from retrieving information. For many people, however, especially those of an older age, memory is much more complicated and problematic. For decades, medical researches have tirelessly looked for answers to Alzheimer’s, brain degeneration that causes severe memory loss. It is a devastating disease that eventually renders loved ones unaware of even the simplest facts of their existence. They slip further and further from reality as their memory becomes more and more distorted. Alzheimer’s, as with many things in the brain, has proved very difficult to truly understand.

Recently, however, a group of researchers have made a breakthrough working with mice. They have engineered these mice to develop a form of Alzheimer’s. Using a flash of blue light, they were able to help the mice recall memories that had become distorted (1).

Before I explain how they pulled that off, I should explain some of what we know about how memory works. Memories first enter the short-term memory, which can hold around seven items. These items can then be specially encoded and stored in the long-term memory, where they await retrieval. When we recall a memory, it is taken out of long-term memory for a period of time. Whenever this occurs, however, we tend to modify that memory with what we are experiencing at the current moment. Thus, the reason all those lovely memories you have of your ex are now soured. There is a lot more to the psychology of information which I encourage you to look into if you want to improve your studying.

There is also another neural level of memory. One possible and fascinating explanation of memory is long-term potentiation. This is thought to happen in the hippocampus. Basically, memories are created by strengthening connections between neurons. Two neurons communicate with each other by releasing neurotransmitters across the synapse upon stimulation by an action potential (a change in charge). If strong enough, a summation of these action potentials can create a conformational change in the neurons. A greater number of receptors can build up and more neurotransmitters are released upon excitation in the future. This makes the connection between the neurons stronger and more easily to excite (2).

If you are struggling to make the connection between this explanation and the psychological explanation, you can join me. It is complicated, but that is why I find neuroscience so fascinating. We take our ability to think and experience for granted, but it is actually allowed by many incredibly complicated and sensitive processes.

Unfortunately, that is what makes a disease like Alzheimer’s so difficult to understand. The cause of the memory degeneration is the buildup of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles (3). These developments are build-ups of potentially toxic substances intracellularly and extracellularly. These are thought to cause damage and death of brain cells (3).

Over time, these patients lose episodic memory and eventually many more memories, and then face a continuing loss of cognitive function, which often leads to death (4).

This group of scientists set out to discover exactly what part of the memory process AD affects. The scientists first “marked the memory” by tagging specific neurons related to each memory (1). They used a virus to implant a gene into these neurons that associated with flashes of light. This blue light was fired through an implanted optic fiber. The scientists marked the memory of the fear the mice felt when shocked in a cage. It was not until stimulated with blue light that the mice recalled the fear they had originally felt (1). To relate to earlier ideas, they are optogenetically stimulating the process of long-term potentiation at specific pathways (4).

So, why do people looking for a cure for Alzheimer’s care about mice with optic fibers in their brain? What these researchers have been able to determine is that Alzheimer’s is a problem with the retrieval of information, not with the storage and maintenance of that information (1). This gives the scientific community a better understanding of what they are facing. Think of it as a maze, and they have finally found where to start on a new level of research.

It is easy to believe that our memories are permanent. We treasure some, but take many for granted. The brain is, however, in certain ways, quite fragile. There are currently more than 5.4 million people in American alone with AD. The number is thought to triple in the next few decades (5).

Imagine being unable to access your memories. Imagine being unable to remember your name or your children. As a human society, we put great import on such details. We are defined by our names, our past, and the people who surround us. As they lose their details, they lose their identity. It is terrifying and isolating, both for those suffering from the disease and their caregivers.

There are answers, hiding with in our own brains. We just have to find a way to understand those mysteries.

Katherie Estep is a sophomore BIC student majoring in neuroscience. 

 

Sources:

(1) https://www.sciencenews.org/article/lost-memories-retrieved-mice-signs-alzheimers?tgt=nrhttp://neuroscience.uth.tmc.edu/s4/chapter07.html

(2) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673610613499

(3) http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v531/n7595/full/nature17172.html

(4) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-laclair/how-alzheimers-caregivers_b_9460712.html?utm_hp_ref=science&ir=Science

 

Image courtesy of Mirror.co.uk

 

A Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) near Livingston, Louisiana:

 

A laser sends out two perpendicular beams about 4 km long. These two beams should cancel each other out. However, if hit by a gravitational wave, one is squeezed and one is stretched leading to a detectable change.

 

In 1905, Albert Einstein came up with a physical theory called the “Special Theory of Relativity.” In 1915, he finished an expansion upon his theory and created the “General Theory of Relativity.” For now, I will put these ideas into layman’s terms. Normally, relativity works like this: if I am judging the speed of a moving car, the speed will appear differently based on whether I am standing still or moving. However, things change when we are talking about light. Light moves at speed “c” (3.00×10⁸ m/s). If I were looking at a beam of light while standing still, it would appear to be moving at speed “c.” Special relativity says that if I started running and then looked at the beam of light again, it would still be moving at “c.” However, for this relationship to hold true, space and time must bend. Distorting space and time? That may sound like a line from Dr. Who, but it is a very legitimate physical phenomenon. Einstein said that an object could dent the fabric of the universe. If the object were big enough, the dent would pull objects towards it. As objects move, they could create gravitational waves, ripples in space itself (3). Theoretically, if these ripples were big enough, the right machine would be able to detect them. However, he struggled with this aspect of his theory for a long time, at one point even revoking it (1).

 

That was over 100 years ago. For decades, scientists were looking for these waves. The math said they were there, but no instrument had been able to record them (5). If someone could find these waves, it would open up a whole new section of science. Gravitational waves could be used to recorded data in a similar manner to light, but they are unimpeded by gas, dust, and even black holes (3). This reduces anomalies in data. At times, researchers such as Joseph Weber believed that they had found the waves, but the scientific community always disregarded such claims (5). In the 1990s, Congress approved a budget of two hundred million dollars to build two gravitational wave detectors in Washington and Louisiana (5). There was an entire discipline for studying the mathematics of gravitational waves. All the evidence suggested that they existed. Someone just had to find one.

 

On September 14, 2015 at 4:50 AM, everything changed. Two LIGO observatories, the ones Congress had approved many years before, recorded a small blip (1). This small blip was the first legitimate detection of these gravitational waves that Einstein had spoken of one hundred years prior. That blip was infinitesimally small in comparison to the humongous machines that detected it. The event this blip signified, however, was no small feat. At some point in the distant past, around 1.3 billion light years away, two humongous black holes collided. One black hole had the mass of twenty-nine of our suns and the other of about thirty-six suns. If that does not seem more powerful than the human mind could every really comprehend, keep in mind that the mass of one single sun is 1.989×10³⁰ kg (6). When these two black holes collided, they combined and released energy equivalent to ~3 suns. I don’t have words to describe how big of a cosmic event that was, so I will let the science speak for itself. Energy was released in the form of gravitational waves, which traveled all the way across the universe to those LIGO detectors in Washington and Louisiana. The data directly matched Einstein’s predictions of relativity (7). A century later, there was finally data to back his ideas.

 

The science is amazing, awe-inspiring. I cannot help but go back to a quote from journalist Tom Siegfried. He said, “There’s a deeper sense in which both discoveries have something in common that reflects an even more outstanding realization: the power of the human mind to discern deeply hidden features of physical reality” (1). He goes on to say that, “Gravity waves will forever stand as a sign that the math conceived in the human mind coexists in some sense in the fabric of reality” (1). For a century, gravitational waves had never been detected. They were an idea thought up in someone’s mind and understood in the minds of others. However, no piece of technology had ever been found. There was no direct observation. Gravitational waves were  just an idea. That idea was right, however.

 

I believe our greatest scientific tool is our own minds. There is nothing more powerful than a human’s ability to make connections and to turn numbers into ideas, which drive hundreds of millions of dollars of research. Einstein once doubted himself, just as we are likely to doubt ourselves. The human mind is an amazing thing with the immense power to persevere. Let your ideas be heard. Who is to say that the next Einstein, the next person who will change the world, is not here at Baylor University, sitting quietly on an amazing idea?

 

Katherine Estep is a sophomore BIC student majoring in neuroscience

 

Resources

1. https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/gravity-waves-exemplify-power-intelligent-equations
2. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/black-hole-heavyweights-triggered-gravity-wave-event?tgt=more
3. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/gravity-waves-black-holes-verify-einsteins-prediction
4. www.space.com/17661-theory-general-relativity.html
5. Gravity’s Shadow: The Search for Gravitational Waves by Harry Collins
6. http://www.space.com/17001-how-big-is-the-sun-size-of-the-sun.html
7. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger by B.P. Abbott
8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s06_jRK939I
9. Potarf, Jordan. Personal interview. 18 Feb. 2016.