aads

Birds don’t avoid predators the way you might think [Greg Laden's Blog]

To paraphrase Walter Brooke playing Mr. McGuire, in his conversation with Dustin Hoffman’s character Ben in The Graduate, “Just one word … are you listening? … Plasticity. Its a great future. Enough said.”

Read about this interesting new research in my latest post at 10,000 Birds blog!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1P4PY9O

To paraphrase Walter Brooke playing Mr. McGuire, in his conversation with Dustin Hoffman’s character Ben in The Graduate, “Just one word … are you listening? … Plasticity. Its a great future. Enough said.”

Read about this interesting new research in my latest post at 10,000 Birds blog!



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1P4PY9O

Everything you need to know: December solstice 2015

Sunlight on Earth, on the day of the winter solstice. The north polar region of Earth is in 24-hour darkness, while the south polar region is in 24-hour daylight. Gif via Wikimedia Commons.

Late dawn. Early sunset. Short day. Long night. For us in the Northern Hemisphere, the December solstice marks the longest night and shortest day of the year. Meanwhile, on the day of the December solstice, the Southern Hemisphere has its longest day and shortest night. This special day is coming up on Tuesday, December 22 at 4:48 UTC (December 21 at 10:48 p.m. CST). No matter where you live on Earth’s globe, a solstice is your signal to celebrate. Follow the links below to learn more about the 2015 December solstice.

When is the solstice where I live?

What is a solstice?

Where should I look to see signs of the solstice in nature?

Why doesn’t the earliest sunset come on the shortest day?

Day and night sides of Earth on the December 2015 solstice

Day and night sides of Earth at the instant of the December 2015 solstice (2015 December 22 at 4:48 Universal Time). Note that the north polar region of Earth must endure 24 hours of night, while the south polar region gets to bask in 24 hours of daylight. Image credit: Earth and Moon Viewer

Day and night sides of Earth at the instant of the December 2015 solstice (2015 December 22 at 4:48 Universal Time). Note that the north polar region of Earth must endure 24 hours of night, while the south polar region gets to bask in 24 hours of daylight. Image credit: Earth and Moon Viewer

When is the solstice where I live? The solstice happens at the same instant for all of us, everywhere on Earth. In 2015, the December solstice comes on December 21 at 10:48 p.m. CST. That’s on December 22 at 4:48 Universal Time. It’s when the sun on our sky’s dome reaches its farthest southward point for the year. At this solstice, the Northern Hemisphere has its shortest day and longest night of the year.

To find the time in your location, you have to translate to your time zone. Click here to translate Universal Time to your local time.

Just remember: you’re translating from 4:48 UT on December 22. So for most of the world’s eastern hemisphere – Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia and New Zealand – the December solstice actually comes on December 22. For example, if you live in Perth, Australia, you need to add 8 hours to Universal Time to find out that the solstice happens on December 22, at 12:48 p.m. AWST (Australian Western Standard Time).

Earth has seasons because our world is tilted on its axis with respect to our orbit around the sun. Image via NASA.

What is a solstice? The earliest people on Earth knew that the sun’s path across the sky, the length of daylight, and the location of the sunrise and sunset all shifted in a regular way throughout the year. They built monuments such as Stonehenge in England – or, for example, at Machu Picchu in Peru – to follow the sun’s yearly progress.

But we today see the solstice differently. We can picture it from the vantage point of space. Today, we know that the solstice is an astronomical event, caused by Earth’s tilt on its axis, and its motion in orbit around the sun.

Because Earth doesn’t orbit upright, but is instead tilted on its axis by 23-and-a-half degrees, Earth’s Northern and Southern Hemispheres trade places in receiving the sun’s light and warmth most directly. The tilt of the Earth – not our distance from the sun – is what causes winter and summer. At the December solstice, the Northern Hemisphere is leaning most away from the sun for the year.

At the December solstice, Earth is positioned in its orbit so that the sun stays below the north pole horizon. As seen from 23-and-a-half degrees south of the equator, at the imaginary line encircling the globe known as the Tropic of Capricorn, the sun shines directly overhead at noon. This is as far south as the sun ever gets. All locations south of the equator have day lengths greater than 12 hours at the December solstice. Meanwhile, all locations north of the equator have day lengths less than 12 hours.

For us on the northern part of Earth, the shortest day comes at the solstice. After the winter solstice, the days get longer, and the nights shorter. It’s a seasonal shift that nearly everyone notices.

Around the time of the winter solstice, watch for late dawns, early sunsets, and the low arc of the sun across the sky each day. Notice your noontime shadow, the longest of the year. Photo via Serge Arsenie on Flickr.

Meanwhile, at the summer solstice, noontime shadows are short. Photo via the Slam Summer Beach Volleyball festival in Australia.

Where should I look to see signs of the solstice in nature? Everywhere.

For all of Earth’s creatures, nothing is so fundamental as the length of daylight. After all, the sun is the ultimate source of all light and warmth on Earth.

If you live in the northern hemisphere, you can notice the late dawns and early sunsets, and the low arc of the sun across the sky each day. You might notice how low the sun appears in the sky at local noon. And be sure to look at your noontime shadow. Around the time of the December solstice, it’s your longest noontime shadow of the year.

In the Southern Hemisphere, it’s opposite. Dawn comes early, and dusk comes late. The sun is high. It’s your shortest noontime shadow of the year.

EarthSky Facebook friend John Michael Mizzi saw this sunset from the island of Gozo (Malta), south of Italy. The earliest sunsets come a couple of weeks before the winter solstice.

Why doesn’t the earliest sunset come on the shortest day? The December solstice marks the shortest day of the year in the Northern Hemisphere and longest day in the Southern Hemisphere. But the earliest sunset – or earliest sunrise if you’re south of the equator – happens before the December solstice. Many people notice this, and ask about it.

The key to understanding the earliest sunset is not to focus on the time of sunset or sunrise. The key is to focus on what is called true solar noon – the time of day that the sun reaches its highest point, in its journey across your sky.

In early December, true solar noon comes nearly 10 minutes earlier by the clock than it does at the solstice around December 22. With true noon coming later on the solstice, so will the sunrise and sunset times.

It’s this discrepancy between clock time and sun time that causes the Northern Hemisphere’s earliest sunset and the Southern Hemisphere’s earliest sunrise to precede the December solstice.

The discrepancy occurs primarily because of the tilt of the Earth’s axis. A secondary but another contributing factor to this discrepancy between clock noon and sun noon comes from the Earth’s elliptical – oblong – orbit around the sun. The Earth’s orbit is not a perfect circle, and when we’re closest to the sun, our world moves fastest in orbit. Our closest point to the sun – or perihelion – comes in early January. So we are moving fastest in orbit around now, slightly faster than our average speed of about 30 kilometers (18.5 miles) per second. The discrepancy between sun time and clock time is greater around the December solstice than the June solstice because we’re nearer the sun at this time of year.

Solstice Pyrotechnics II by groovehouse on Flickr.

The precise date of the earliest sunset depends on your latitude. At mid-northern latitudes, it comes in early December each year. At northern temperate latitudes farther north – such as in Canada and Alaska – the year’s earliest sunset comes around mid-December. Close to the Arctic Circle, the earliest sunset and the December solstice occur on or near the same day.

By the way, the latest sunrise doesn’t come on the solstice either. From mid-northern latitudes, the latest sunrise comes in early January.

The exact dates vary, but the sequence is always the same: earliest sunset in early December, shortest day on the solstice around December 22, latest sunrise in early January.

And so the cycle continues.

Bottom line: In 2015, the December solstice comes on December 21 at 10:03 p.m. CST. That’s December 22 at 4:48 UT. It marks the Northern Hemisphere’s shortest day (first day of winter) and Southern Hemisphere’s longest day (first day of summer). Happy solstice, everyone!



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1bVFTFr

Sunlight on Earth, on the day of the winter solstice. The north polar region of Earth is in 24-hour darkness, while the south polar region is in 24-hour daylight. Gif via Wikimedia Commons.

Late dawn. Early sunset. Short day. Long night. For us in the Northern Hemisphere, the December solstice marks the longest night and shortest day of the year. Meanwhile, on the day of the December solstice, the Southern Hemisphere has its longest day and shortest night. This special day is coming up on Tuesday, December 22 at 4:48 UTC (December 21 at 10:48 p.m. CST). No matter where you live on Earth’s globe, a solstice is your signal to celebrate. Follow the links below to learn more about the 2015 December solstice.

When is the solstice where I live?

What is a solstice?

Where should I look to see signs of the solstice in nature?

Why doesn’t the earliest sunset come on the shortest day?

Day and night sides of Earth on the December 2015 solstice

Day and night sides of Earth at the instant of the December 2015 solstice (2015 December 22 at 4:48 Universal Time). Note that the north polar region of Earth must endure 24 hours of night, while the south polar region gets to bask in 24 hours of daylight. Image credit: Earth and Moon Viewer

Day and night sides of Earth at the instant of the December 2015 solstice (2015 December 22 at 4:48 Universal Time). Note that the north polar region of Earth must endure 24 hours of night, while the south polar region gets to bask in 24 hours of daylight. Image credit: Earth and Moon Viewer

When is the solstice where I live? The solstice happens at the same instant for all of us, everywhere on Earth. In 2015, the December solstice comes on December 21 at 10:48 p.m. CST. That’s on December 22 at 4:48 Universal Time. It’s when the sun on our sky’s dome reaches its farthest southward point for the year. At this solstice, the Northern Hemisphere has its shortest day and longest night of the year.

To find the time in your location, you have to translate to your time zone. Click here to translate Universal Time to your local time.

Just remember: you’re translating from 4:48 UT on December 22. So for most of the world’s eastern hemisphere – Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia and New Zealand – the December solstice actually comes on December 22. For example, if you live in Perth, Australia, you need to add 8 hours to Universal Time to find out that the solstice happens on December 22, at 12:48 p.m. AWST (Australian Western Standard Time).

Earth has seasons because our world is tilted on its axis with respect to our orbit around the sun. Image via NASA.

What is a solstice? The earliest people on Earth knew that the sun’s path across the sky, the length of daylight, and the location of the sunrise and sunset all shifted in a regular way throughout the year. They built monuments such as Stonehenge in England – or, for example, at Machu Picchu in Peru – to follow the sun’s yearly progress.

But we today see the solstice differently. We can picture it from the vantage point of space. Today, we know that the solstice is an astronomical event, caused by Earth’s tilt on its axis, and its motion in orbit around the sun.

Because Earth doesn’t orbit upright, but is instead tilted on its axis by 23-and-a-half degrees, Earth’s Northern and Southern Hemispheres trade places in receiving the sun’s light and warmth most directly. The tilt of the Earth – not our distance from the sun – is what causes winter and summer. At the December solstice, the Northern Hemisphere is leaning most away from the sun for the year.

At the December solstice, Earth is positioned in its orbit so that the sun stays below the north pole horizon. As seen from 23-and-a-half degrees south of the equator, at the imaginary line encircling the globe known as the Tropic of Capricorn, the sun shines directly overhead at noon. This is as far south as the sun ever gets. All locations south of the equator have day lengths greater than 12 hours at the December solstice. Meanwhile, all locations north of the equator have day lengths less than 12 hours.

For us on the northern part of Earth, the shortest day comes at the solstice. After the winter solstice, the days get longer, and the nights shorter. It’s a seasonal shift that nearly everyone notices.

Around the time of the winter solstice, watch for late dawns, early sunsets, and the low arc of the sun across the sky each day. Notice your noontime shadow, the longest of the year. Photo via Serge Arsenie on Flickr.

Meanwhile, at the summer solstice, noontime shadows are short. Photo via the Slam Summer Beach Volleyball festival in Australia.

Where should I look to see signs of the solstice in nature? Everywhere.

For all of Earth’s creatures, nothing is so fundamental as the length of daylight. After all, the sun is the ultimate source of all light and warmth on Earth.

If you live in the northern hemisphere, you can notice the late dawns and early sunsets, and the low arc of the sun across the sky each day. You might notice how low the sun appears in the sky at local noon. And be sure to look at your noontime shadow. Around the time of the December solstice, it’s your longest noontime shadow of the year.

In the Southern Hemisphere, it’s opposite. Dawn comes early, and dusk comes late. The sun is high. It’s your shortest noontime shadow of the year.

EarthSky Facebook friend John Michael Mizzi saw this sunset from the island of Gozo (Malta), south of Italy. The earliest sunsets come a couple of weeks before the winter solstice.

Why doesn’t the earliest sunset come on the shortest day? The December solstice marks the shortest day of the year in the Northern Hemisphere and longest day in the Southern Hemisphere. But the earliest sunset – or earliest sunrise if you’re south of the equator – happens before the December solstice. Many people notice this, and ask about it.

The key to understanding the earliest sunset is not to focus on the time of sunset or sunrise. The key is to focus on what is called true solar noon – the time of day that the sun reaches its highest point, in its journey across your sky.

In early December, true solar noon comes nearly 10 minutes earlier by the clock than it does at the solstice around December 22. With true noon coming later on the solstice, so will the sunrise and sunset times.

It’s this discrepancy between clock time and sun time that causes the Northern Hemisphere’s earliest sunset and the Southern Hemisphere’s earliest sunrise to precede the December solstice.

The discrepancy occurs primarily because of the tilt of the Earth’s axis. A secondary but another contributing factor to this discrepancy between clock noon and sun noon comes from the Earth’s elliptical – oblong – orbit around the sun. The Earth’s orbit is not a perfect circle, and when we’re closest to the sun, our world moves fastest in orbit. Our closest point to the sun – or perihelion – comes in early January. So we are moving fastest in orbit around now, slightly faster than our average speed of about 30 kilometers (18.5 miles) per second. The discrepancy between sun time and clock time is greater around the December solstice than the June solstice because we’re nearer the sun at this time of year.

Solstice Pyrotechnics II by groovehouse on Flickr.

The precise date of the earliest sunset depends on your latitude. At mid-northern latitudes, it comes in early December each year. At northern temperate latitudes farther north – such as in Canada and Alaska – the year’s earliest sunset comes around mid-December. Close to the Arctic Circle, the earliest sunset and the December solstice occur on or near the same day.

By the way, the latest sunrise doesn’t come on the solstice either. From mid-northern latitudes, the latest sunrise comes in early January.

The exact dates vary, but the sequence is always the same: earliest sunset in early December, shortest day on the solstice around December 22, latest sunrise in early January.

And so the cycle continues.

Bottom line: In 2015, the December solstice comes on December 21 at 10:03 p.m. CST. That’s December 22 at 4:48 UT. It marks the Northern Hemisphere’s shortest day (first day of winter) and Southern Hemisphere’s longest day (first day of summer). Happy solstice, everyone!



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1bVFTFr

Solstice tale of two cities

Around the time of the December solstice, the sun rises at the same time for both New York City, New York and St. Augustine, Florida. On December 22, 2015, the sun rises at 7:17 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) at both localities.

However, St. Augustine lodges about 7.5o of longitude to the west of New York City. (Our planet takes about 30 minutes to rotate this 7.5o.) Therefore, on any day of the year, the sun reaches its noontime position some 30 minutes later in St. Augustine than it does in New York City. For instance, on December 22, 2015, the noonday sun reaches its high point for the day at 11:54 a.m. EST in New York City – yet in St. Augustine, solar noon comes 30 minutes later, at 12:24 p.m. EST.

St. Augustine resides appreciably south of New York City, so St Augustine’s morning daylight (from sunrise to solar noon) lasts some 30 minutes longer than it does in New York City on the first day of winter. Thus, the longer period of daylight in St. Augustine cancels out the earlier noontime appearance of the sun in New York City, to give both localities the same sunrise time on the day of the December solstice.

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on December 22, 2015


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 7:17 a.m. 11:54 a.m. 4:31 p.m.
St. Augustine 7:17 a.m. 12:24 p.m. 5:31 p.m.

Source: US Naval Observatory

Although New York, NY, and St Augustine, FL, both reside in the Eastern Time Zone, the noonday sun comes 30 minutes later to St. Augustine because it resides 7.5o of longitude to the west of New York City.

Although New York, New York and St. Augustine, Florida, both reside in the U.S. Eastern timezone, the noonday sun comes 30 minutes later to St. Augustine because it resides 7.5o of longitude to the west of New York City.

In other words, from sunrise to sunset on the December solstice, St. Augustine has about an hour more daylight than does New York City. Although the sunrise occurs at the same time for both cities, the sunset happens an hour later in St. Augustine. (See the sunrise/solar noon/sunset table above.)

Simulation of the line of sunrise as it hits the Eastern Seaboard around the December solstice. Image credit: US Naval Observatory

Simulation of the line of sunrise as it hits the U.S. eastern seaboard around the December solstice. Image via U.S. Naval Observatory

Look above at the simulated view of Earth as the sun is rising over the Atlantic Seaboard of the United States around the time of the December winter solstice. Note that the terminator – the sunrise line – pretty much aligns with the U. S. East Coast, providing a similar sunrise time for coastal dwellers.

Enter the equinoxes

Some three – and nine – months after the December solstice, St. Augustine and New York City receive the same amount of daylight on the days of the March and September equinoxes. On the equinoxes, noontime as well as sunrise and sunset come 30 minutes later in St. Augustine than they do in New York City. The simulated view of Earth below shows the terminator – the sunrise line – running due north and south on the equinox. Neither the sunrise terminator nor sunset terminator comes anywhere close to aligning with the U.S. East Coast at either equinox.

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on March 20, 2016


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 6:58 a.m. 1:03 p.m. 7:08 p.m.
St. Augustine 7:28 a.m. 1:33 p.m. 7:37 p.m.
The terminator - sunrise line - runs due north and south on the equinoxes. The sunset line, though not shown, also runs north and south. Image credit: Earth and Moon Viewer

The terminator – sunrise line – runs due north and south on the equinoxes. The sunset line, though not shown, also runs north and south. Image via Earth and Moon Viewer

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on September 22, 2016


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 6:44 a.m. 12:48 p.m. 6:52 p.m.
St. Augustine 7:14 a.m. 1:18 p.m. 7:21 p.m.

Source: US Naval Observatory

Enter the June solstice

Six months after the December solstice, it’s the June summer solstice for the Northern Hemisphere, coming yearly on or near June 21. Now, the situation is reversed from the December solstice, with New York City receiving an hour more daylight.

Because New York City lies appreciably north of St. Augustine, New York City’s afternoon daylight (from solar noon to sunset) lasts 30 minutes longer than in St. Augustine on the day of the June summer solstice. Thus, the more daylight in New York City cancels out the later noontime in St. Augustine, to give both localities the same sunset time on the June solstice. (See sunrise/solar noon/sunset table below.)

The terminator - line of sunset - nearly parallels the Atlantic Seaboard on the day of the June solstice.

The terminator – line of sunset – nearly parallels the Atlantic Seaboard on the day of the June solstice.

Look above at the simulated view of Earth as the sun is setting over the Eastern Seaboard of the United States on the day of the summer solstice. Note that the terminator – the sunset line – pretty much coincides with the East Coast, giving a similar sunset time for residents along the Atlantic Seaboard.

From sunrise to sunset on the day of the June solstice, New York City residents enjoy about an hour more daylight than those in St. Augustine. Although the sunset occurs at about the same time for both cities, the sunrise happens an hour earlier in New York City on the day of the summer solstice.

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on June 21, 2016


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 5:25 a.m. 12:58 p.m. 8:30 p.m.
St. Augustine 6:25 a.m. 1:27 p.m. 8:29 p.m.

Source: US Naval Observatory

Bottom Line: On the day of the December winter solstice, the sun rises at the same time in both St. Augustine, Florida, and New York City, New York. However, St. Augustine enjoys an hour more daylight. Six months later, on the day of the June solstice, it’s the sunset that happens at the same time in both places, yet it’s then that New York City has an extra hour of sunshine.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1lLi4wP

Around the time of the December solstice, the sun rises at the same time for both New York City, New York and St. Augustine, Florida. On December 22, 2015, the sun rises at 7:17 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) at both localities.

However, St. Augustine lodges about 7.5o of longitude to the west of New York City. (Our planet takes about 30 minutes to rotate this 7.5o.) Therefore, on any day of the year, the sun reaches its noontime position some 30 minutes later in St. Augustine than it does in New York City. For instance, on December 22, 2015, the noonday sun reaches its high point for the day at 11:54 a.m. EST in New York City – yet in St. Augustine, solar noon comes 30 minutes later, at 12:24 p.m. EST.

St. Augustine resides appreciably south of New York City, so St Augustine’s morning daylight (from sunrise to solar noon) lasts some 30 minutes longer than it does in New York City on the first day of winter. Thus, the longer period of daylight in St. Augustine cancels out the earlier noontime appearance of the sun in New York City, to give both localities the same sunrise time on the day of the December solstice.

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on December 22, 2015


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 7:17 a.m. 11:54 a.m. 4:31 p.m.
St. Augustine 7:17 a.m. 12:24 p.m. 5:31 p.m.

Source: US Naval Observatory

Although New York, NY, and St Augustine, FL, both reside in the Eastern Time Zone, the noonday sun comes 30 minutes later to St. Augustine because it resides 7.5o of longitude to the west of New York City.

Although New York, New York and St. Augustine, Florida, both reside in the U.S. Eastern timezone, the noonday sun comes 30 minutes later to St. Augustine because it resides 7.5o of longitude to the west of New York City.

In other words, from sunrise to sunset on the December solstice, St. Augustine has about an hour more daylight than does New York City. Although the sunrise occurs at the same time for both cities, the sunset happens an hour later in St. Augustine. (See the sunrise/solar noon/sunset table above.)

Simulation of the line of sunrise as it hits the Eastern Seaboard around the December solstice. Image credit: US Naval Observatory

Simulation of the line of sunrise as it hits the U.S. eastern seaboard around the December solstice. Image via U.S. Naval Observatory

Look above at the simulated view of Earth as the sun is rising over the Atlantic Seaboard of the United States around the time of the December winter solstice. Note that the terminator – the sunrise line – pretty much aligns with the U. S. East Coast, providing a similar sunrise time for coastal dwellers.

Enter the equinoxes

Some three – and nine – months after the December solstice, St. Augustine and New York City receive the same amount of daylight on the days of the March and September equinoxes. On the equinoxes, noontime as well as sunrise and sunset come 30 minutes later in St. Augustine than they do in New York City. The simulated view of Earth below shows the terminator – the sunrise line – running due north and south on the equinox. Neither the sunrise terminator nor sunset terminator comes anywhere close to aligning with the U.S. East Coast at either equinox.

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on March 20, 2016


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 6:58 a.m. 1:03 p.m. 7:08 p.m.
St. Augustine 7:28 a.m. 1:33 p.m. 7:37 p.m.
The terminator - sunrise line - runs due north and south on the equinoxes. The sunset line, though not shown, also runs north and south. Image credit: Earth and Moon Viewer

The terminator – sunrise line – runs due north and south on the equinoxes. The sunset line, though not shown, also runs north and south. Image via Earth and Moon Viewer

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on September 22, 2016


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 6:44 a.m. 12:48 p.m. 6:52 p.m.
St. Augustine 7:14 a.m. 1:18 p.m. 7:21 p.m.

Source: US Naval Observatory

Enter the June solstice

Six months after the December solstice, it’s the June summer solstice for the Northern Hemisphere, coming yearly on or near June 21. Now, the situation is reversed from the December solstice, with New York City receiving an hour more daylight.

Because New York City lies appreciably north of St. Augustine, New York City’s afternoon daylight (from solar noon to sunset) lasts 30 minutes longer than in St. Augustine on the day of the June summer solstice. Thus, the more daylight in New York City cancels out the later noontime in St. Augustine, to give both localities the same sunset time on the June solstice. (See sunrise/solar noon/sunset table below.)

The terminator - line of sunset - nearly parallels the Atlantic Seaboard on the day of the June solstice.

The terminator – line of sunset – nearly parallels the Atlantic Seaboard on the day of the June solstice.

Look above at the simulated view of Earth as the sun is setting over the Eastern Seaboard of the United States on the day of the summer solstice. Note that the terminator – the sunset line – pretty much coincides with the East Coast, giving a similar sunset time for residents along the Atlantic Seaboard.

From sunrise to sunset on the day of the June solstice, New York City residents enjoy about an hour more daylight than those in St. Augustine. Although the sunset occurs at about the same time for both cities, the sunrise happens an hour earlier in New York City on the day of the summer solstice.

Sunrise/solar noon/sunset times on June 21, 2016


City Sunrise Solar Noon Sunset
New York 5:25 a.m. 12:58 p.m. 8:30 p.m.
St. Augustine 6:25 a.m. 1:27 p.m. 8:29 p.m.

Source: US Naval Observatory

Bottom Line: On the day of the December winter solstice, the sun rises at the same time in both St. Augustine, Florida, and New York City, New York. However, St. Augustine enjoys an hour more daylight. Six months later, on the day of the June solstice, it’s the sunset that happens at the same time in both places, yet it’s then that New York City has an extra hour of sunshine.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1lLi4wP

An Australian “energy healer” begs medicine to take him seriously [Respectful Insolence]

Even though I’ve taken on the ‘nym of a fictional computer in a 35-year-old British science fiction series whose key traits were an arrogant and condescending manner and the ability to tap into every computer of the galactic federation any time he wanted to, in reality I am just one person. That means, try as I might, I can’t keep up with everything that might interest me enough to blog, much less blog it all. What that means is that occasionally something catches my attention, even though it’s three months old. So it was with this article in—of all places—Elle magazine. It’s about a favorite topic of mine, a form of quackery so ridiculous that it competes fairly closely with The One Quackery To Rule Them All, homeopathy, for the title of Most Ridiculous Quackery. I’m referring, of course to so-called “energy healing,” which encompasses modalities such as reiki and so-called “healing touch.” The concept behind such therapies is that the practitioner can either somehow manipulate his patients “energy field” or (as in the case of reiki) channel “healing energy” from elsewhere (in the case of reiki, from something called the “universal source”) into the patient in order to heal. It’s all nonsense, of course. No one has ever been able to demonstrate that he can detect human energy fields, much less manipulate them. Yet it persists.

So what was this article that caught my eye? It was from September and written by someone named Chip Brown, and it was about as credulous an article as I’ve ever seen. Basically, you can tell how bad the article is just by its title, Energy Healing Works — Many Say. But How Do You Prove It? The article itself is about someone named Charlie Goldsmith, an Australian who claims to be an “energy healer” and who really, really, really wants to prove that he can really do what he says. Don’t believe me? Goldsmith is happy to tell you very early in the article:

In the 17 years since the bewildering day that Charlie Goldsmith discovered what he calls his “gift,” the 35-year-old energy healer from Melbourne, Australia, has been trying to get someone in the medical world to take him seriously. He has wanted to be of use, working with the formal sanction of doctors in hospitals. He has wanted to be recognized for what he knows he can do—not simply to justify the strange turn his life took when he was 18, but to shore up the credibility of a practice long plagued by fraud and religious superstition, and to make the experience of discovering and developing a healing gift like his less traumatic for other people. It’s one thing to be teased by friends; it’s another to be brushed off by the medical profession as a well-meaning but deluded screwball whose results probably have less to do with energy than with the placebo effects of his kind and empathetic manner, perhaps even his salubrious blue eyes and handsome surf-side looks. (When you Google Goldsmith, up pop Australian tabloid images of him and Miranda Kerr—let’s get to that later.)

In Melbourne, Goldsmith brought a sheaf of testimonials to a hospital for integrated medicine; no one was interested. Knowing he possibly sounded crazy, he e-mailed specialists in infectious disease, emphasizing his desire to participate in research. One of the few replies he got was from a prominent doctor at the University of Adelaide, who told him: “Even if you can do what you say you can do, no one will ever fund a study.” Goldsmith seldom drinks, but he tied one on that day.

These testimonials, we are informed, include:

  • A former professional basketball player who had had three knew surgeries and couldn’t walk downstairs claiming that Goldsmith had gotten rid of his knee pain and that he could now play pickup games without any NSAIDS.
  • A member of the Australian aerial ski team rehabbing a torn medial collateral ligament who claims she was able to bend her elbow, pain-free after a healing session. (Hey, wait. The medial collateral ligament is in the knee, but, no, the elbow has one too.)
  • A man named Andrew Waugh who claims that he couldn’t eat an undercooked egg without his throat constricting in 20 seconds and his face swelling reporting that he ate an egg after a treatment by Goldsmith and had no allergic reaction.

As I read this, the one thing that kept going through my mind is that that Chip Brown is sure one gullible bloke (keeping with the Australian theme). Hedoesn’t take long to prove it more by writing:

Today some 200 studies (published in peer-reviewed science journals but, for the most part, not in prominent medical ones) have detailed the apparent effects of energy healers on the physiology of humans, animals, plants, bacteria, and cells in culture, and even on the activity of enzymes. As pioneering medical researchers in the last two decades have explored how the mind can change the body—how objective physiological indices of health can be influenced by the subjective reality of emotions, thoughts, intentions, expectations, environmental conditions, beliefs, social relationships, and prayers—medical science has begun to appreciate the intricate reciprocity of psyche and soma. Standardized practices such as acupuncture, Therapeutic Touch, Healing Touch, and Reiki, which are based on the idea that positive changes can be promoted by balancing or adjusting the flow of energy in the body, are increasingly offered as complementary therapy for pain relief and other ailments in many hospitals and major medical centers, including Beth Israel Deaconess in Boston, the Cleveland Clinic, and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

Yes, and I can find 200 studies of homeopathy published in peer-reviewed scientific journals that claim that homeopathy works, too. That doesn’t mean homeopathy works, and those 200 studies cited by Brown don’t prove energy healing works, either. I’ve looked at a lot of them and I know. Most are either crappy studies in bottom feeding journals and, when taken in their totality, represent a combination of random noise in the clinical trial process that will produce a bare minimum of 5% of studies of nothing (homeopathy) appearing to be positive because we set our p-value for significance at 0.05. (The true number is actually likely to be considerably higher due to publication bias and various other problems with clinical trials.) I’ve also examined some of those studies of “energy healing” on cells and animals, and they are invariably risibly weak in their scientific design.

So is the “study” of Goldsmith’s alleged ability cited by Brown, who seems unduly impressed by the fact that Goldsmith doesn’t charge for his services because he is quite well off from his multiple businesses and because he’s so anxious to be tested. He’s also inordinately impressed by a study published in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine in June purporting to test Goldsmith’s ability. The study is described as a feasibility study and a prospective exploratory case series, which basically tells you that it’s an unblinded, uncontrolled study. Patients were selected by the research team based on their “clinical judgment,” which translated means that they picked whomever they felt with no defined inclusion criteria and only one exclusion criteria, namely the judgment that the patient might have some secondary gain. There was no long term followup to assess whether the pain relief persisted. True, a ten-point pain scale was used to assess pain before and after Goldsmith’s ministrations, with relief characterized as none, slight, moderate, and marked based on the change in pain scale rating. Changes in non-pain complaints were also rated none, slight, moderate, and marked, with no real definition of what constitutes these levels of relief.

The results were reported thusly:

Twenty-four of 32 patients requested relief from pain. Of 50 reports of pain, 5 (10%) showed no improvement; 4 (8%), slight improvement; 3 (6%), moderate improvement; and 38 (76%), marked improvement. Twenty-one patients had issues other than pain. Of 29 non–pain-related problems, 3 (10%) showed no, 2 (7%) showed slight, 1 (4%) showed moderate, and 23 (79%) showed marked improvement. Changes during EM sessions were usually immediate.

That’s it. Seriously. That’s all there is to it. Brown claims to argue that these results couldn’t be due to placebo effects, but they strike me as an almost classic description of what one would expect from placebo effects, particularly given that no assessment was made of whether the effects lasted. Particularly pseudoscientific was the fact that for some patients the practitioner “energized” water, which the patient would then drink. I mean, seriously again. Lead author Francois Dufresne, who’s interviewed in the story, ought to be ashamed of herself for publishing such a sorry excuse for a crap study and for being so gullible, so much so that her next “study” (not yet published) was described thusly by Brown:

In May, Goldsmith returned for a second round at NYU Lutheran and treated 19 patients. The data has not yet been published, but some of the doctors acknowledged to me that the healer’s batting average did not drop. There were new wrinkles; Goldsmith noticed that the doctors were careful not to present him as an “energy healer” but as an “energy medicine practitioner,” so as not to suggest a positive outcome. The second study was also qualitative; researchers were gathering data about patients’ perceptions, experiences, and beliefs.

I can’t help but note the contrast between this study, which will certainly just be more of the same, and co-author Kell Julliard’s excuses in the article that she had to do preliminary tests to see if it was feasible to have Goldsmith work in her hospital and to get an idea of the effect sizes that could be expected before she could design a randomized clinical trial. OK, she got that. Yet, instead of doing a randomized trial she apparently just did more of the same.

Meanwhile, Goldsmith’s reputation has led him to be besieged by requests for healing to the point where he’s doing the quackiest of quackery: Distance healing. Behold:

Among them was Judy Murphy. She used to work as a public information officer at the National Institutes of Health. Her husband, Donald, trained in biology, had been an NIH research administrator who became interested in healing when the agency opened what is now known as the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health in 1998. Judy, 66, had been traveling when she began to suffer debilitating back spasms. Donald had been trying to heal them long distance from their home in Olympia, Washington, without success. So he texted Goldsmith in New York.

“I was lying on the floor for a couple of hours,” Judy told me. “I crawled around on all fours. It was excruciating. The pain was a 10. Charlie called; he said, ‘Just a minute’ and did his thing, and then I could turn over. And then he did it again, and I could sit up, and after the third time, I was still in pain but I could walk.”

Truly, expectancy is a powerful thing. Sadly, it doesn’t really last long enough.

I was going to go into some of the individual anecdotes, but it was getting late and I was getting tired as I wrote this; so I decided to take a different tack. If Mr. Goldsmith really wants to prove that he’s the real deal, he’s totally going about it in the wrong way working with those advocates of quackademic medicine at NYU Lutheran Medical Center. They’re very credulous, and their results are guaranteed to be unconvincing based on just how credulous they are and how bad their first attempt to study Goldsmith was.

If Mr. Goldsmith is truly serious about proving himself, here’s what he should do. If this were a couple of years earlier, I’d have suggested that he contact the James Randi Educational Foundation to apply to undergo the JREF Million Dollar Challenge. However, with the Million Dollar Challenge somewhat up in the air right now, along with JREF itself—if it even really exists any more other than on paper—and the JREF no longer accepting applications from the public, I now have to suggest this alternate plan. I note that the JREF promises minimum required protocols early next year. Another, better possibility, would be for Goldsmith to contact the Australian Skeptics, who offer a $100,000 challenge similar to Randi’s Million Dollar Challenge. If he wants medical cred, he could also consider contacting a skeptical physician, like me or Steve Novella, with a background in medical academia to develop an appropriate randomized controlled clinical trial. The only problem then would be funding.

If Goldsmith really wants to prove his magical energy healing powers, that would be the way to go, not doing crappy uncontrolled, unblinded prospective studies. I predict he won’t do that, though, because he doesn’t really want to risk failing at such a test.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1SZ6Uzx

Even though I’ve taken on the ‘nym of a fictional computer in a 35-year-old British science fiction series whose key traits were an arrogant and condescending manner and the ability to tap into every computer of the galactic federation any time he wanted to, in reality I am just one person. That means, try as I might, I can’t keep up with everything that might interest me enough to blog, much less blog it all. What that means is that occasionally something catches my attention, even though it’s three months old. So it was with this article in—of all places—Elle magazine. It’s about a favorite topic of mine, a form of quackery so ridiculous that it competes fairly closely with The One Quackery To Rule Them All, homeopathy, for the title of Most Ridiculous Quackery. I’m referring, of course to so-called “energy healing,” which encompasses modalities such as reiki and so-called “healing touch.” The concept behind such therapies is that the practitioner can either somehow manipulate his patients “energy field” or (as in the case of reiki) channel “healing energy” from elsewhere (in the case of reiki, from something called the “universal source”) into the patient in order to heal. It’s all nonsense, of course. No one has ever been able to demonstrate that he can detect human energy fields, much less manipulate them. Yet it persists.

So what was this article that caught my eye? It was from September and written by someone named Chip Brown, and it was about as credulous an article as I’ve ever seen. Basically, you can tell how bad the article is just by its title, Energy Healing Works — Many Say. But How Do You Prove It? The article itself is about someone named Charlie Goldsmith, an Australian who claims to be an “energy healer” and who really, really, really wants to prove that he can really do what he says. Don’t believe me? Goldsmith is happy to tell you very early in the article:

In the 17 years since the bewildering day that Charlie Goldsmith discovered what he calls his “gift,” the 35-year-old energy healer from Melbourne, Australia, has been trying to get someone in the medical world to take him seriously. He has wanted to be of use, working with the formal sanction of doctors in hospitals. He has wanted to be recognized for what he knows he can do—not simply to justify the strange turn his life took when he was 18, but to shore up the credibility of a practice long plagued by fraud and religious superstition, and to make the experience of discovering and developing a healing gift like his less traumatic for other people. It’s one thing to be teased by friends; it’s another to be brushed off by the medical profession as a well-meaning but deluded screwball whose results probably have less to do with energy than with the placebo effects of his kind and empathetic manner, perhaps even his salubrious blue eyes and handsome surf-side looks. (When you Google Goldsmith, up pop Australian tabloid images of him and Miranda Kerr—let’s get to that later.)

In Melbourne, Goldsmith brought a sheaf of testimonials to a hospital for integrated medicine; no one was interested. Knowing he possibly sounded crazy, he e-mailed specialists in infectious disease, emphasizing his desire to participate in research. One of the few replies he got was from a prominent doctor at the University of Adelaide, who told him: “Even if you can do what you say you can do, no one will ever fund a study.” Goldsmith seldom drinks, but he tied one on that day.

These testimonials, we are informed, include:

  • A former professional basketball player who had had three knew surgeries and couldn’t walk downstairs claiming that Goldsmith had gotten rid of his knee pain and that he could now play pickup games without any NSAIDS.
  • A member of the Australian aerial ski team rehabbing a torn medial collateral ligament who claims she was able to bend her elbow, pain-free after a healing session. (Hey, wait. The medial collateral ligament is in the knee, but, no, the elbow has one too.)
  • A man named Andrew Waugh who claims that he couldn’t eat an undercooked egg without his throat constricting in 20 seconds and his face swelling reporting that he ate an egg after a treatment by Goldsmith and had no allergic reaction.

As I read this, the one thing that kept going through my mind is that that Chip Brown is sure one gullible bloke (keeping with the Australian theme). Hedoesn’t take long to prove it more by writing:

Today some 200 studies (published in peer-reviewed science journals but, for the most part, not in prominent medical ones) have detailed the apparent effects of energy healers on the physiology of humans, animals, plants, bacteria, and cells in culture, and even on the activity of enzymes. As pioneering medical researchers in the last two decades have explored how the mind can change the body—how objective physiological indices of health can be influenced by the subjective reality of emotions, thoughts, intentions, expectations, environmental conditions, beliefs, social relationships, and prayers—medical science has begun to appreciate the intricate reciprocity of psyche and soma. Standardized practices such as acupuncture, Therapeutic Touch, Healing Touch, and Reiki, which are based on the idea that positive changes can be promoted by balancing or adjusting the flow of energy in the body, are increasingly offered as complementary therapy for pain relief and other ailments in many hospitals and major medical centers, including Beth Israel Deaconess in Boston, the Cleveland Clinic, and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

Yes, and I can find 200 studies of homeopathy published in peer-reviewed scientific journals that claim that homeopathy works, too. That doesn’t mean homeopathy works, and those 200 studies cited by Brown don’t prove energy healing works, either. I’ve looked at a lot of them and I know. Most are either crappy studies in bottom feeding journals and, when taken in their totality, represent a combination of random noise in the clinical trial process that will produce a bare minimum of 5% of studies of nothing (homeopathy) appearing to be positive because we set our p-value for significance at 0.05. (The true number is actually likely to be considerably higher due to publication bias and various other problems with clinical trials.) I’ve also examined some of those studies of “energy healing” on cells and animals, and they are invariably risibly weak in their scientific design.

So is the “study” of Goldsmith’s alleged ability cited by Brown, who seems unduly impressed by the fact that Goldsmith doesn’t charge for his services because he is quite well off from his multiple businesses and because he’s so anxious to be tested. He’s also inordinately impressed by a study published in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine in June purporting to test Goldsmith’s ability. The study is described as a feasibility study and a prospective exploratory case series, which basically tells you that it’s an unblinded, uncontrolled study. Patients were selected by the research team based on their “clinical judgment,” which translated means that they picked whomever they felt with no defined inclusion criteria and only one exclusion criteria, namely the judgment that the patient might have some secondary gain. There was no long term followup to assess whether the pain relief persisted. True, a ten-point pain scale was used to assess pain before and after Goldsmith’s ministrations, with relief characterized as none, slight, moderate, and marked based on the change in pain scale rating. Changes in non-pain complaints were also rated none, slight, moderate, and marked, with no real definition of what constitutes these levels of relief.

The results were reported thusly:

Twenty-four of 32 patients requested relief from pain. Of 50 reports of pain, 5 (10%) showed no improvement; 4 (8%), slight improvement; 3 (6%), moderate improvement; and 38 (76%), marked improvement. Twenty-one patients had issues other than pain. Of 29 non–pain-related problems, 3 (10%) showed no, 2 (7%) showed slight, 1 (4%) showed moderate, and 23 (79%) showed marked improvement. Changes during EM sessions were usually immediate.

That’s it. Seriously. That’s all there is to it. Brown claims to argue that these results couldn’t be due to placebo effects, but they strike me as an almost classic description of what one would expect from placebo effects, particularly given that no assessment was made of whether the effects lasted. Particularly pseudoscientific was the fact that for some patients the practitioner “energized” water, which the patient would then drink. I mean, seriously again. Lead author Francois Dufresne, who’s interviewed in the story, ought to be ashamed of herself for publishing such a sorry excuse for a crap study and for being so gullible, so much so that her next “study” (not yet published) was described thusly by Brown:

In May, Goldsmith returned for a second round at NYU Lutheran and treated 19 patients. The data has not yet been published, but some of the doctors acknowledged to me that the healer’s batting average did not drop. There were new wrinkles; Goldsmith noticed that the doctors were careful not to present him as an “energy healer” but as an “energy medicine practitioner,” so as not to suggest a positive outcome. The second study was also qualitative; researchers were gathering data about patients’ perceptions, experiences, and beliefs.

I can’t help but note the contrast between this study, which will certainly just be more of the same, and co-author Kell Julliard’s excuses in the article that she had to do preliminary tests to see if it was feasible to have Goldsmith work in her hospital and to get an idea of the effect sizes that could be expected before she could design a randomized clinical trial. OK, she got that. Yet, instead of doing a randomized trial she apparently just did more of the same.

Meanwhile, Goldsmith’s reputation has led him to be besieged by requests for healing to the point where he’s doing the quackiest of quackery: Distance healing. Behold:

Among them was Judy Murphy. She used to work as a public information officer at the National Institutes of Health. Her husband, Donald, trained in biology, had been an NIH research administrator who became interested in healing when the agency opened what is now known as the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health in 1998. Judy, 66, had been traveling when she began to suffer debilitating back spasms. Donald had been trying to heal them long distance from their home in Olympia, Washington, without success. So he texted Goldsmith in New York.

“I was lying on the floor for a couple of hours,” Judy told me. “I crawled around on all fours. It was excruciating. The pain was a 10. Charlie called; he said, ‘Just a minute’ and did his thing, and then I could turn over. And then he did it again, and I could sit up, and after the third time, I was still in pain but I could walk.”

Truly, expectancy is a powerful thing. Sadly, it doesn’t really last long enough.

I was going to go into some of the individual anecdotes, but it was getting late and I was getting tired as I wrote this; so I decided to take a different tack. If Mr. Goldsmith really wants to prove that he’s the real deal, he’s totally going about it in the wrong way working with those advocates of quackademic medicine at NYU Lutheran Medical Center. They’re very credulous, and their results are guaranteed to be unconvincing based on just how credulous they are and how bad their first attempt to study Goldsmith was.

If Mr. Goldsmith is truly serious about proving himself, here’s what he should do. If this were a couple of years earlier, I’d have suggested that he contact the James Randi Educational Foundation to apply to undergo the JREF Million Dollar Challenge. However, with the Million Dollar Challenge somewhat up in the air right now, along with JREF itself—if it even really exists any more other than on paper—and the JREF no longer accepting applications from the public, I now have to suggest this alternate plan. I note that the JREF promises minimum required protocols early next year. Another, better possibility, would be for Goldsmith to contact the Australian Skeptics, who offer a $100,000 challenge similar to Randi’s Million Dollar Challenge. If he wants medical cred, he could also consider contacting a skeptical physician, like me or Steve Novella, with a background in medical academia to develop an appropriate randomized controlled clinical trial. The only problem then would be funding.

If Goldsmith really wants to prove his magical energy healing powers, that would be the way to go, not doing crappy uncontrolled, unblinded prospective studies. I predict he won’t do that, though, because he doesn’t really want to risk failing at such a test.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1SZ6Uzx

Hot Jupiters’ missing water mystery solved

Artist's concept of a 'hot Jupiter' - a Jupiter-sized exoplanet orbiting very close to its star.

Artist’s concept of a ‘hot Jupiter’ – a Jupiter-sized exoplanet orbiting very close to its star.

NASA said this week (December 14, 2015) that astronomers have solved a long-standing mystery of why some exoplanets – planets orbiting distant suns – have less water than expected. Turns out the water is there, but hidden by clouds in the planets’ atmospheres. These astronomers used the Hubble and Spitzer space telescopes to survey 10 hot, Jupiter-sized exoplanets. They found a correlation between hazy or cloudy atmospheres and faint water detection. They’re excited about these results, because it means they can rule out the idea of dry hot Jupiters, an idea that a study co-author – Jonathan Fortney of the University of California, Santa Cruz – said:

… would require us to completely rethink our current theories of how planets are born.

We’re talking here about the subset of known exoplanets that are gaseous like the planet Jupiter, largest planet in our solar system, but that orbit very close to their stars (Jupiter orbits at about 5 times Earth’s distance from our sun).

Their close proximity to their stars makes them blistering hot, and difficult to observe in the glare of starlight. In the past, the Hubble Space Telescope by itself has explored only a handful of hot Jupiters. These initial studies have found several planets to hold less water than predicted by atmospheric models.

The new survey of 10 hot Jupiters comprises, NASA said:

… the largest-ever spectroscopic catalogue of exoplanet atmospheres. All of the planets in the catalog follow orbits oriented so the planet passes in front of their parent star, as seen from Earth. During this so-called transit, some of the starlight travels through the planet’s outer atmosphere.

The atmosphere, said one astronomer in the study:

…leaves its unique fingerprint on the starlight, which we can study when the light reaches us.

The team combined data from the Hubble and Spitzer Space Telescopes to attain a broad spectrum of light covering wavelengths from the optical to infrared. NASA explained:

The difference in planetary radius as measured between visible and infrared wavelengths was used to indicate the type of planetary atmosphere being observed for each planet in the sample, whether hazy or clear. A cloudy planet will appear larger in visible light than at infrared wavelengths, which penetrate deeper into the atmosphere.

It was this comparison that allowed the team to find a correlation between hazy or cloudy atmospheres and faint water detection.

The astronomers said it’s first time they’ve had enough coverage across the range of wavelengths to compare multiple features from one planet to another.

They said they found the planetary atmospheres to be much more diverse than we expected.

The results are being published in the December 14, 2015 issue of the journal Nature.

hot_jupiter_exoplanets

Bottom line: Of the nearly 2,000 planets confirmed to be orbiting other stars, a subset are gaseous planets with characteristics similar to those of Jupiter but orbiting very close to their stars. They are blistering hot and difficult to observe. Initial observations with the Hubble Space Telescope suggested these planets were drier than expected. Now a new survey of 10 hot Jupiters shows a correlation between haze or clouds in the planets’ atmospheres and faint water detection. The astronomers conclude that the water is there, but hidden by clouds.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1I6jCfe
Artist's concept of a 'hot Jupiter' - a Jupiter-sized exoplanet orbiting very close to its star.

Artist’s concept of a ‘hot Jupiter’ – a Jupiter-sized exoplanet orbiting very close to its star.

NASA said this week (December 14, 2015) that astronomers have solved a long-standing mystery of why some exoplanets – planets orbiting distant suns – have less water than expected. Turns out the water is there, but hidden by clouds in the planets’ atmospheres. These astronomers used the Hubble and Spitzer space telescopes to survey 10 hot, Jupiter-sized exoplanets. They found a correlation between hazy or cloudy atmospheres and faint water detection. They’re excited about these results, because it means they can rule out the idea of dry hot Jupiters, an idea that a study co-author – Jonathan Fortney of the University of California, Santa Cruz – said:

… would require us to completely rethink our current theories of how planets are born.

We’re talking here about the subset of known exoplanets that are gaseous like the planet Jupiter, largest planet in our solar system, but that orbit very close to their stars (Jupiter orbits at about 5 times Earth’s distance from our sun).

Their close proximity to their stars makes them blistering hot, and difficult to observe in the glare of starlight. In the past, the Hubble Space Telescope by itself has explored only a handful of hot Jupiters. These initial studies have found several planets to hold less water than predicted by atmospheric models.

The new survey of 10 hot Jupiters comprises, NASA said:

… the largest-ever spectroscopic catalogue of exoplanet atmospheres. All of the planets in the catalog follow orbits oriented so the planet passes in front of their parent star, as seen from Earth. During this so-called transit, some of the starlight travels through the planet’s outer atmosphere.

The atmosphere, said one astronomer in the study:

…leaves its unique fingerprint on the starlight, which we can study when the light reaches us.

The team combined data from the Hubble and Spitzer Space Telescopes to attain a broad spectrum of light covering wavelengths from the optical to infrared. NASA explained:

The difference in planetary radius as measured between visible and infrared wavelengths was used to indicate the type of planetary atmosphere being observed for each planet in the sample, whether hazy or clear. A cloudy planet will appear larger in visible light than at infrared wavelengths, which penetrate deeper into the atmosphere.

It was this comparison that allowed the team to find a correlation between hazy or cloudy atmospheres and faint water detection.

The astronomers said it’s first time they’ve had enough coverage across the range of wavelengths to compare multiple features from one planet to another.

They said they found the planetary atmospheres to be much more diverse than we expected.

The results are being published in the December 14, 2015 issue of the journal Nature.

hot_jupiter_exoplanets

Bottom line: Of the nearly 2,000 planets confirmed to be orbiting other stars, a subset are gaseous planets with characteristics similar to those of Jupiter but orbiting very close to their stars. They are blistering hot and difficult to observe. Initial observations with the Hubble Space Telescope suggested these planets were drier than expected. Now a new survey of 10 hot Jupiters shows a correlation between haze or clouds in the planets’ atmospheres and faint water detection. The astronomers conclude that the water is there, but hidden by clouds.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1I6jCfe

Northern Cross upright in west in December

Tonight, look for the Northern Cross. It isn’t as famous as its counterpart – the Southern Cross – visible from the Southern Hemisphere or the northern tropics. But the Northern Cross also looks like a cross, and it’s pretty easy to spot. It’s a large, noticeable star pattern.

The star Deneb marks the top of the Northern Cross, and the star Albireo marks the bottom. Tonight you can find the Northern Cross shining fairly high in the west at nightfall, as seen from mid-northern latitudes. It sinks downward during the evening hours, and stands proudly over the west-northwest horizon around mid-evening.

Donate: Your support means the world to us

The Northern Cross, a clipped version of the constellation Cygnus the Swan. Photo credit: Janne

Here’s another look at the famous Northern Cross. It’s part of the constellation Cygnus the Swan. Photo via Flickr user Janne.

The Northern Cross is what’s known as an asterism. In other words, it’s not a constellation but simply a noticeable pattern of stars. It’s part of the constellation Cygnus the Swan.

As an added bonus, if you have a pair of binoculars, break them out this evening and point them toward the Northern Cross and its larger constellation Cygnus the Swan. In this direction, you’ll find a part of our Milky Way galaxy that is called the Cygnus Star Cloud. It is part of the spiral arm of our galaxy that also contains our sun, and you should be able to pick out stars from it if the night is clear in your area.

By the way, we get many questions from people in northern latitudes about if and when they can view the Southern Cross in their portion of the sky. The truth is that unless you live close to the tropics (Hawaii, or the southernmost parts of Texas or Florida for those of us in the U.S.), you will not be able to view the Southern Cross, also known as the constellation Crux. To find out how to locate Crux in Hawaii at this time of year, look here.

Bottom line: Learn to recognize a famous star pattern known as the Northern Cross, which stands upright over the west-northwest horizon in December.

Looking for a sky almanac? EarthSky recommends…

EarthSky lunar calendars make great gifts for astronomy-minded friends and family.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1wa3Jx2

Tonight, look for the Northern Cross. It isn’t as famous as its counterpart – the Southern Cross – visible from the Southern Hemisphere or the northern tropics. But the Northern Cross also looks like a cross, and it’s pretty easy to spot. It’s a large, noticeable star pattern.

The star Deneb marks the top of the Northern Cross, and the star Albireo marks the bottom. Tonight you can find the Northern Cross shining fairly high in the west at nightfall, as seen from mid-northern latitudes. It sinks downward during the evening hours, and stands proudly over the west-northwest horizon around mid-evening.

Donate: Your support means the world to us

The Northern Cross, a clipped version of the constellation Cygnus the Swan. Photo credit: Janne

Here’s another look at the famous Northern Cross. It’s part of the constellation Cygnus the Swan. Photo via Flickr user Janne.

The Northern Cross is what’s known as an asterism. In other words, it’s not a constellation but simply a noticeable pattern of stars. It’s part of the constellation Cygnus the Swan.

As an added bonus, if you have a pair of binoculars, break them out this evening and point them toward the Northern Cross and its larger constellation Cygnus the Swan. In this direction, you’ll find a part of our Milky Way galaxy that is called the Cygnus Star Cloud. It is part of the spiral arm of our galaxy that also contains our sun, and you should be able to pick out stars from it if the night is clear in your area.

By the way, we get many questions from people in northern latitudes about if and when they can view the Southern Cross in their portion of the sky. The truth is that unless you live close to the tropics (Hawaii, or the southernmost parts of Texas or Florida for those of us in the U.S.), you will not be able to view the Southern Cross, also known as the constellation Crux. To find out how to locate Crux in Hawaii at this time of year, look here.

Bottom line: Learn to recognize a famous star pattern known as the Northern Cross, which stands upright over the west-northwest horizon in December.

Looking for a sky almanac? EarthSky recommends…

EarthSky lunar calendars make great gifts for astronomy-minded friends and family.



from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1wa3Jx2

California poised to adopt violence prevention standard for health care workers: ‘Violence shouldn’t be part of the job’ [The Pump Handle]

In 2010, Donna Gross, a psychiatric technician at Napa State Hospital for more than a decade, was strangled to death at work by a mentally ill patient. While on-the-job violence in the health care sector was certainly nothing new at the time, the shocking and preventable circumstances surrounding Gross’ death helped ignite a new and coordinated movement for change. Now, just a handful of years later, California is set to become the only state with an enforceable occupational standard aimed at preventing workplace violence against health care workers.

“Honestly, this (proposed rule) wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for two things: the prevalence of the problem and the fact that our health care workers aren’t afraid to speak up any longer,” said Kathy Hughes, who’s been a registered nurse for 20 years and works as a labor specialist with Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 121RN, which represents about 8,000 nurses and health workers in southern California. “It really is a big deal. It’s one of those things where you think ‘I can’t believe I’m a part of this.’”

In early 2014, Hughes, along with fellow labor and professional nursing advocates, petitioned the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) to promulgate a comprehensive workplace violence prevention standard to protect health care workers. A few months later, the Cal/OSHA Standards Board unanimously voted to accept the petition and move forward. Today, public comments on the proposed standard, “Workplace Violence Prevention in Health Care,” are being accepted through Dec. 17, when the Standards Board will hold a public hearing on the rule. If the violence prevention rule is adopted, as is expected and required by state statute, it will join two other major health worker protections enforced by Cal/OSHA: a safe patient handling standard as well as a standard designed to protect workers from aerosol transmissible disease. With the three standards on the books, California will arguably have the most comprehensive framework of occupational protections for health care workers in the nation.

“A lot of the regulations have been spearheaded by nurses who are organized in California,” said Mark Catlin, health and safety director for SEIU. “Now, workers across the country can point to California and say ‘Look, they have these standards on the books, they haven’t destroyed the industry and they work.”

‘Violence shouldn’t be part of the job’

While Gross’ death represents the most horrific consequence of an employer’s failure to protect workers against known hazards, violence in the health care sector has become so common that many nurses simply see it as a part of the job, Hughes told me.

According to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), more than 70 percent of the thousands of violence-related workplace injuries that occur every year happen in health care and social service settings. In fact, health care workers are nearly four times as likely to be injured as a result of violence than the average private-sector worker. A study published earlier this year in CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report found that nurses and nurse assistants experienced higher rates of violence-related injuries at work than other health care workers. And another recent study published in the Journal of Emergency Nursing found that more than three-quarters of nurses surveyed experienced either physical or verbal abuse in the past year.

Currently, there is no federal occupational standard on workplace violence in health care, though federal OSHA recently released new guidelines and materials on the topic.

“It’s just so pervasive,” Hughes said. “One of our goals is to change that mindset and help all health workers recognize that violence shouldn’t be part of the job.”

In the wake of Gross’ death in 2010, Hughes and her colleagues, including Ingela Dahlgren, executive director of the SEIU Nurse Alliance of California, traveled to rallies organized in Gross’ memory and began talking with workers about conditions at Napa State Hospital. Dahlgren, herself a trauma and critical care nurse, said she couldn’t believe the circumstances under which Gross lost her life. For instance, the hospital staff wore personal alarms to call for help, but the alarms only worked inside the buildings, not between buildings where Gross was killed. Also, patients who had a history of aggressive behavior and stalking were allowed to freely roam about the facility. (Cal/OSHA ultimately fined Napa State Hospital more than $100,000 for failures to safeguard workers that were uncovered during an investigation following Gross’ murder.)

Hughes and Dahlgren soon expanded their inquiry throughout the state and even began talking to nurses across the country, collecting first-person stories of the violence that too often comes with caring for the sick and injured. Dahlgren told me she was “just flabbergasted” at the amount of violence that nurses were experiencing. And compounding the problem was a culture of silence around violence at work — “nurses were experiencing an enormous amount of violence that they never even spoke about,” Dahlgren said.

“We have hundreds of stories about violent incidents,” Dahlgren said. “But you can’t sit down and read all of them. It’s just too heart breaking.”

Catlin, at the national SEIU office, said health care workers are increasingly speaking up about violence and recognizing all forms of violence at work. For example, he said, when you ask a room of health care workers how many have experienced violence at work, about half raise their hands. But when you ask how many have been threatened, spit on, bit or hit, every hand in the room goes up.

“The public doesn’t see workplace violence as it sees other health and safety issues,” he told me. “And when you do hear about an incident, it’s usually something like a disgruntled person who walks in and shoots his co-workers. But that’s actually the least common form of workplace violence.”

In her own career as a nurse, Dahlgren told me the story of a John Doe patient who had been found in a trash bin, badly beaten and suffering from massive head injuries. Dahlgren was sitting at a desk working on the patient’s chart when a tall man walked in wearing a heavy coat in the middle of summer. He asked for the John Doe patient. Dahlgren could see a gun under his coat. All she could do was look him sternly in the eye, tell him to leave and hope that he would. Thankfully, the man left. But Dahlgren told me there was little she could have done had the armed man not heeded her instructions.

The proposed Cal/OSHA violence prevention rule certainly won’t prevent another person with dangerous intentions from attempting to enter a health care facility with a weapon. And it likely won’t change the behavior of patients and their families. But what it will do is put in place standards that require employers to establish a plan with the input of employees, regularly train workers, and assess the environmental factors that make workers more vulnerable to violence. For example, in Dahlgren’s experience, an electronic badging system could have prevented the armed man from entering the unit in the first place.

“There’s a lot of violence in this society and Cal/OSHA isn’t going to fix all the factors that cause violence,” said Deborah Gold, who recently retired as deputy chief for health and engineering services at Cal/OSHA and who was involved in the early development of the proposed violence standard. “But what Cal/OSHA can do is ask employers to take reasonable measures to protect employees and enable them to provide care without fearing for their lives. That’s what this regulation has the potential to do.”

‘This isn’t a patient problem. It’s a system problem.’

While the proposed Cal/OSHA rule will be a first for the nation, it’s not the state’s only attempt at violence prevention in health care settings.

In 2009, California passed a law requiring general acute care hospitals to develop a workplace violence prevention plan, but that requirement falls under the state’s licensing codes, not its labor protections. Similarly, many hospital and health care systems have their own violence prevention efforts in place. For example, some hospitals may use a certain color of blanket for patients with an aggressive history — the color is a signal to nurses to take protective actions around the patient, such as working in pairs. Other hospitals, especially those that regularly care for community victims of violence, provide employees with de-escalation training. And many large health care employers likely have some type of violence prevention program or plan. But nothing comes close to the scope and comprehensiveness of the proposed Cal/OSHA protections.

“There’s a whole workplace culture that contributes to this problem,” Hughes told me. “This isn’t a patient problem. It’s a system problem.”

The proposed Cal/OSHA rule standardizes violence prevention requirements across health care settings in California, but it’s in no way a “cookie cutter” approach, Hughes said. Instead of handing down step-by-step instructions, the rule recognizes that each employer has different needs — in other words, a 300-bed hospital will require a different plan than an outpatient clinic. But the rule does require that employers take certain actions, such as establishing a written workplace violence prevention plan with the input and involvement of employees. Employers will also be required to assess the workplace for environmental factors that heighten workers’ vulnerability, such as having employees work in isolated areas, poor lighting, cumbersome alarm systems, and a lack of escape routes. Other requirements include annual employee education and training; developing systems to respond to and investigate violent incidents; and correcting hazards related to workplace violence in a timely manner.

And not only will the proposed rule apply to every health care facility in the state, from general acute care and psychiatric hospitals to correctional treatment centers and hospice facilities, but it will protect all workers in such facilities, from doctors and nurses to custodial staff and temporary workers. The rule would also require covered facilities to report violent incidents to Cal/OSHA within specific time frames.

“We’ll be able to hold management accountable,” Dahlgren said. “That’s one of the most important parts — we can enforce the law and hold everyone accountable.”

Both Hughes and Dahlgren said the movement toward enforceable violence prevention standards wouldn’t have been possible without the help of nurses and other health care workers who decided to speak up about experiencing violence at work. Indeed, dozens of health workers have attended Cal/OSHA hearings to share their stories in person.

“It’s really become a grassroots member movement,” Hughes said. “We’re changing the dialogue and the culture. …Workers are taking ownership of this issue and becoming advocates in their own facilities around violence prevention.”

According to state statute, Cal/OSHA must adopt a health care worker violence prevention standard by July 2016. The rule would go into effect in October 2016. The public comment period on the proposed rule ends Dec. 17 — submit your comments to oshsb@dir.ca.gov. To learn more about violence in health care and the need for worker protections, visit California Health Care Workers’ Safe Care Standard.

Kim Krisberg is a freelance public health writer living in Austin, Texas, and has been writing about public health for nearly 15 years.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1IRakUC

In 2010, Donna Gross, a psychiatric technician at Napa State Hospital for more than a decade, was strangled to death at work by a mentally ill patient. While on-the-job violence in the health care sector was certainly nothing new at the time, the shocking and preventable circumstances surrounding Gross’ death helped ignite a new and coordinated movement for change. Now, just a handful of years later, California is set to become the only state with an enforceable occupational standard aimed at preventing workplace violence against health care workers.

“Honestly, this (proposed rule) wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for two things: the prevalence of the problem and the fact that our health care workers aren’t afraid to speak up any longer,” said Kathy Hughes, who’s been a registered nurse for 20 years and works as a labor specialist with Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 121RN, which represents about 8,000 nurses and health workers in southern California. “It really is a big deal. It’s one of those things where you think ‘I can’t believe I’m a part of this.’”

In early 2014, Hughes, along with fellow labor and professional nursing advocates, petitioned the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) to promulgate a comprehensive workplace violence prevention standard to protect health care workers. A few months later, the Cal/OSHA Standards Board unanimously voted to accept the petition and move forward. Today, public comments on the proposed standard, “Workplace Violence Prevention in Health Care,” are being accepted through Dec. 17, when the Standards Board will hold a public hearing on the rule. If the violence prevention rule is adopted, as is expected and required by state statute, it will join two other major health worker protections enforced by Cal/OSHA: a safe patient handling standard as well as a standard designed to protect workers from aerosol transmissible disease. With the three standards on the books, California will arguably have the most comprehensive framework of occupational protections for health care workers in the nation.

“A lot of the regulations have been spearheaded by nurses who are organized in California,” said Mark Catlin, health and safety director for SEIU. “Now, workers across the country can point to California and say ‘Look, they have these standards on the books, they haven’t destroyed the industry and they work.”

‘Violence shouldn’t be part of the job’

While Gross’ death represents the most horrific consequence of an employer’s failure to protect workers against known hazards, violence in the health care sector has become so common that many nurses simply see it as a part of the job, Hughes told me.

According to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), more than 70 percent of the thousands of violence-related workplace injuries that occur every year happen in health care and social service settings. In fact, health care workers are nearly four times as likely to be injured as a result of violence than the average private-sector worker. A study published earlier this year in CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report found that nurses and nurse assistants experienced higher rates of violence-related injuries at work than other health care workers. And another recent study published in the Journal of Emergency Nursing found that more than three-quarters of nurses surveyed experienced either physical or verbal abuse in the past year.

Currently, there is no federal occupational standard on workplace violence in health care, though federal OSHA recently released new guidelines and materials on the topic.

“It’s just so pervasive,” Hughes said. “One of our goals is to change that mindset and help all health workers recognize that violence shouldn’t be part of the job.”

In the wake of Gross’ death in 2010, Hughes and her colleagues, including Ingela Dahlgren, executive director of the SEIU Nurse Alliance of California, traveled to rallies organized in Gross’ memory and began talking with workers about conditions at Napa State Hospital. Dahlgren, herself a trauma and critical care nurse, said she couldn’t believe the circumstances under which Gross lost her life. For instance, the hospital staff wore personal alarms to call for help, but the alarms only worked inside the buildings, not between buildings where Gross was killed. Also, patients who had a history of aggressive behavior and stalking were allowed to freely roam about the facility. (Cal/OSHA ultimately fined Napa State Hospital more than $100,000 for failures to safeguard workers that were uncovered during an investigation following Gross’ murder.)

Hughes and Dahlgren soon expanded their inquiry throughout the state and even began talking to nurses across the country, collecting first-person stories of the violence that too often comes with caring for the sick and injured. Dahlgren told me she was “just flabbergasted” at the amount of violence that nurses were experiencing. And compounding the problem was a culture of silence around violence at work — “nurses were experiencing an enormous amount of violence that they never even spoke about,” Dahlgren said.

“We have hundreds of stories about violent incidents,” Dahlgren said. “But you can’t sit down and read all of them. It’s just too heart breaking.”

Catlin, at the national SEIU office, said health care workers are increasingly speaking up about violence and recognizing all forms of violence at work. For example, he said, when you ask a room of health care workers how many have experienced violence at work, about half raise their hands. But when you ask how many have been threatened, spit on, bit or hit, every hand in the room goes up.

“The public doesn’t see workplace violence as it sees other health and safety issues,” he told me. “And when you do hear about an incident, it’s usually something like a disgruntled person who walks in and shoots his co-workers. But that’s actually the least common form of workplace violence.”

In her own career as a nurse, Dahlgren told me the story of a John Doe patient who had been found in a trash bin, badly beaten and suffering from massive head injuries. Dahlgren was sitting at a desk working on the patient’s chart when a tall man walked in wearing a heavy coat in the middle of summer. He asked for the John Doe patient. Dahlgren could see a gun under his coat. All she could do was look him sternly in the eye, tell him to leave and hope that he would. Thankfully, the man left. But Dahlgren told me there was little she could have done had the armed man not heeded her instructions.

The proposed Cal/OSHA violence prevention rule certainly won’t prevent another person with dangerous intentions from attempting to enter a health care facility with a weapon. And it likely won’t change the behavior of patients and their families. But what it will do is put in place standards that require employers to establish a plan with the input of employees, regularly train workers, and assess the environmental factors that make workers more vulnerable to violence. For example, in Dahlgren’s experience, an electronic badging system could have prevented the armed man from entering the unit in the first place.

“There’s a lot of violence in this society and Cal/OSHA isn’t going to fix all the factors that cause violence,” said Deborah Gold, who recently retired as deputy chief for health and engineering services at Cal/OSHA and who was involved in the early development of the proposed violence standard. “But what Cal/OSHA can do is ask employers to take reasonable measures to protect employees and enable them to provide care without fearing for their lives. That’s what this regulation has the potential to do.”

‘This isn’t a patient problem. It’s a system problem.’

While the proposed Cal/OSHA rule will be a first for the nation, it’s not the state’s only attempt at violence prevention in health care settings.

In 2009, California passed a law requiring general acute care hospitals to develop a workplace violence prevention plan, but that requirement falls under the state’s licensing codes, not its labor protections. Similarly, many hospital and health care systems have their own violence prevention efforts in place. For example, some hospitals may use a certain color of blanket for patients with an aggressive history — the color is a signal to nurses to take protective actions around the patient, such as working in pairs. Other hospitals, especially those that regularly care for community victims of violence, provide employees with de-escalation training. And many large health care employers likely have some type of violence prevention program or plan. But nothing comes close to the scope and comprehensiveness of the proposed Cal/OSHA protections.

“There’s a whole workplace culture that contributes to this problem,” Hughes told me. “This isn’t a patient problem. It’s a system problem.”

The proposed Cal/OSHA rule standardizes violence prevention requirements across health care settings in California, but it’s in no way a “cookie cutter” approach, Hughes said. Instead of handing down step-by-step instructions, the rule recognizes that each employer has different needs — in other words, a 300-bed hospital will require a different plan than an outpatient clinic. But the rule does require that employers take certain actions, such as establishing a written workplace violence prevention plan with the input and involvement of employees. Employers will also be required to assess the workplace for environmental factors that heighten workers’ vulnerability, such as having employees work in isolated areas, poor lighting, cumbersome alarm systems, and a lack of escape routes. Other requirements include annual employee education and training; developing systems to respond to and investigate violent incidents; and correcting hazards related to workplace violence in a timely manner.

And not only will the proposed rule apply to every health care facility in the state, from general acute care and psychiatric hospitals to correctional treatment centers and hospice facilities, but it will protect all workers in such facilities, from doctors and nurses to custodial staff and temporary workers. The rule would also require covered facilities to report violent incidents to Cal/OSHA within specific time frames.

“We’ll be able to hold management accountable,” Dahlgren said. “That’s one of the most important parts — we can enforce the law and hold everyone accountable.”

Both Hughes and Dahlgren said the movement toward enforceable violence prevention standards wouldn’t have been possible without the help of nurses and other health care workers who decided to speak up about experiencing violence at work. Indeed, dozens of health workers have attended Cal/OSHA hearings to share their stories in person.

“It’s really become a grassroots member movement,” Hughes said. “We’re changing the dialogue and the culture. …Workers are taking ownership of this issue and becoming advocates in their own facilities around violence prevention.”

According to state statute, Cal/OSHA must adopt a health care worker violence prevention standard by July 2016. The rule would go into effect in October 2016. The public comment period on the proposed rule ends Dec. 17 — submit your comments to oshsb@dir.ca.gov. To learn more about violence in health care and the need for worker protections, visit California Health Care Workers’ Safe Care Standard.

Kim Krisberg is a freelance public health writer living in Austin, Texas, and has been writing about public health for nearly 15 years.



from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/1IRakUC

adds 2