Search Results

2022: A YEAR IN SCIENCE 23 March 2023 Message from the Editors in Chief By Caitlin Kane, Rachel Ko, Patrick Grave, Yvette Marris A short message from the Editors in Chief Svante Pääbo: Talking to the Past By Lily McCann The world of today might seem completely alien to an archaic human, but 2022 Nobel Prize winner Svante Pääbo is pioneering work using archaeological DNA to decode genetic links to help us understand humans of the past. Meet the New Kid By Julia Lockerd Imagine a machine joins your art class, creating new art from an AI algorithm fed by original human creation. No need to imagine — AI has already refined art in 2022. From Fusion to Submarines: A Nuclear Year By Andrew Lim In 2022, nuclear science stood between old fears and new possibilities. What’s next for politicians, scientists and the public? Behind the Mask By Yvette Marris 2022 brought new stories of healthcare workers struggling in our post-pandemic world, but the big picture goes beyond the COVID wards.

< Back to Issue 10 Contingent Realities - the (Ph)ailure of a (Ph)act by Edmond Sim 2 June 2026 Illustrated by Eric Wang Edited by Rita Fortune "What is true for you is true for you, and what is true for me is true for me" – Protagoras sneered (1). “I cannot but agree” – Plato replied, terse and tight-lipped. They were bitter ideological enemies. Whilst Protagoras sold a world built entirely on human perception, Plato demanded absolute, unchanging facts: forms and realities that existed independently of human viewing (2). For millennia, the discipline of physics sided vehemently with him. The entire enterprise of the physical sciences was a crusade to banish the ‘will’ of anthropomorphic gods and heroes, to uncover the definitive and rational "facts" behind the universe. The pursuit of logos, rather than mythos. Eight years following Plato’s death, a student of his, Zeno of Citium, established the Stoic school, spreading the belief that the universe operated due to reason (logos), was monistic (i.e. one interconnected physical system governed by consistent laws), and operated on cause and effect (3). This belief in determinism (the idea that events in the future had been determined by a chain of past occurrences) reached its zenith in the Scientific Revolution of the 17/18th centuries. Fact: repeatable, reversible and reliable We will start with an easy question: what is a fact? I would argue that a statement is a fact if it: (i) stems from a pre-existing state of affairs in the world; and (ii) is singular, i.e. is restricted to reality, of which there is one. This is described in perhaps the most incomprehensible quotation of mankind by Aristotle (4). “To say that that which is, is not, and that which is not, is, is a falsehood; therefore, to say that which is, is, and that which is not, is not, is true” (4). ‘Pre-existing’ requires a past. For something to already be there, waiting for us to see it, it can't have just spawned from the void. Every 'is' requires a 'why'. This relentless search for the chain of cause and effect reached its extreme in the 18th century with the French polymath, Pierre-Simon Laplace. His proposal of a hypothetical entity, now famously known as Laplace’s Demon, served as the ultimate thought experiment for the deterministic worldview that dominated the Scientific Revolution. Imagine a massive, omnipresent intellect – a demon. If this intelligence knew the exact location and force of each single atom in the universe right now, it would know everything. Uncertainty would vanish. The past and the future would be simultaneously now (5). A rock does not "choose" to roll; rather it rolls because gravity acts upon its mass. Similarly, in a deterministic universe, you do not "choose" to act. Your current physical state was caused by the state of the universe one second ago. That state was caused by the state one year ago, which was caused by the state of the universe before you were born, stretching all the way back to the initial conditions of the Big Bang. We conclude: there only exists one unique solution that maps space to time. Two different pasts never merge into the exact same future. Two identical presents never split into different futures. ‘c’ is a constant (crisis): Classical mechanics, in all its beautiful and symmetrical mathematics, provides us this shocking revelation that reality may be deterministic, and that free will is an illusion, a fiction within the slow march of time (7). Occam’s razor (that is, that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one) is seemingly disproven through two fundamental flaws within the classical framework. Firstly, the speed of light (denoted as c) is unique because it stays the same regardless of how fast you are moving. James Clerk Maxwell discovered that electric and magnetic fields are perfectly synced; a ripple in an electric field creates a magnetic one, and that magnetic ripple in turn regenerates the electric field. This continuous loop creates an electromagnetic wave, which we see as light. The speed of this wave is determined by two fundamental properties of empty space: how easily it allows electric and magnetic fields to form and spread. As these properties of the vacuum itself never change, light always travels at the exact same speed, whether you are racing toward the light source or standing perfectly still. The immediate consequences of forcing light to travel at a constant value are rather disturbing. Consider the unfortunate events of a German salary worker in the early 20th century: It was another miserable, grey day in Germany. Albert was staring out the window of a Deutsche Bahn train that was currently four hours late, thinking that his day couldn’t get any worse. CRACK. Lightning strikes the metal frame of the train car, right at the front. Albert jumps, spilling his lukewarm coffee. But before he can even dry off his trousers, a second lightning bolt strikes the very back of the train. He spills his coffee over his shirt. Albert has to get off the train at the next stop, Bern, to get to his job working at the Swiss Patent office. As he dries off his clothes on the platform, he observes an express train that runs straight through the station. Lightning, particularly vicious today, strikes both the front and end of the train carriage at the exact same time. When he was sitting inside the moving carriage, the light from the front strike had reached his eyes first because he was moving toward it. Remember, the speed of light remains constant even in his moving carriage. But now, standing completely still on the damp Bern platform, the light from both strikes on this new express train reached him exactly simultaneously (9). The man on the platform and the passengers on the train would fundamentally argue on the chronological order of events in the universe. Yet the frightening fact was neither of them was wrong (10). (This assumes that the Deutsche-Bahn moves at speeds close to the speed of light, however due to strikes from the train worker union, it would be a challenge for the train to move at a non-zero speed at all.) Recall our first condition for the definition of fact – the existence of a pre-existing past. Yet, if two observers cannot even agree on "when” an event took place, this condition fails. Fact, it seems, depends entirely on how fast you go. Bohr-ing reality is fundamentally uncertain. The second deviation from naive Laplace was the discovery of the hollow atom. Rutherford used the analogy of planets (the electrons) orbiting a star (the nucleus) seemingly never straying from their tidy, well-defined and circular orbits. Electromagnetism prevented this model from being taken seriously. Any particle that possesses charge must release energy when accelerated. Now, imagine a satellite that constantly releases energy each orbit around Earth. Naturally, the satellite will fall into the Earth. The same would occur to the electron. It would spiral into the nucleus in less than a fraction of a picosecond. Every atom in the universe would instantly implode. Two independent theories then arose almost simultaneously following this discovery. In 1925-26, the landmark papers of Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics (which uses matrices to calculate important quantum properties) and Schrödinger’s wave mechanics (an equation that relates a quantum state to its energy) attempted to provide reasons as to why energy did not disappear from the electron’s orbit (11). Breaking with the tradition of presenting the quantum ‘ghost’ of randomness, quantum mechanics actually provides a more deterministic theory than one may realise. Akin to Laplace’s demon, Schrödinger’s equation describes the time evolution of a quantum system: given an initial quantum state, we can make a definite and certain prediction of what that quantum state will be at any later time (12). This is a very intangible concept and would likely be poorly understood, so let me demonstrate this by way of an example of a coin toss. Imagine a coin spinning rapidly on a table. If you try and guess whether it’s showing heads or tails at that specific microsecond, you probably can’t. It’d be too blurry. However, the blur itself is not random. The way the coin spins, its momentum, its wobble, the friction against the table is governed by strict, unbreakable rules. If you know exactly how the coin was flicked (the initial quantum state), Schrödinger’s formula can predict with 100% certainty exactly what that "blur" will look like five seconds from now, ten days from now, or one hundred years from now. The deterministic nature of quantum mechanics is that the blur itself evolves predictably. The infamous and rather misrepresented "quantum randomness" only applies at the very end, when you finally get fed up and slap your hand down on the coin, forcing it to be either heads or tails (the measurement) (13). The issue, therefore, with this notion of fact under a quantum lens is the lack of a singular outcome. Time evolution is a well-defined function, yet outcome can only be predicted probabilistically. Therefore, we fail yet again the second condition of fact. Fact is – the friends we made along the way? An ongoing unresolved issue in quantum theory is how to explain the two conflicting ways in which systems evolve. Unobserved states evolve smoothly, yet exhibit discontinuous jumps into an outcome when measured. The infamous “Wigner’s Friend” paradox provides an example (14). Suppose your friend is inside a sealed lab watching a spinning coin. In their perspective, when they stop the coin and read its face, its state collapses into a singular outcome. In the shivering cold, you curse that you had to be the one to stand outside. According to the rules of quantum mechanics, because you haven’t seen the coin face, the smooth, unbroken evolution is still happening. You get sick of suffering in the name of science, so you rush into the laboratory and ask your friend what the coin landed on. At that moment, the superposition abruptly collapses for you. Facts no longer appear grounded in an objective, observer-independent past. Instead, they become relational, contingent upon who is observing the system. Worse still, facts seem capable of multiplying: different observers may legitimately describe different realities. This forms the basis for Rovelli’s Relational Quantum Mechanics (15). In RQM, an object (like an electron, a coin, or a cat) does not inherently "possess" properties like position or momentum in isolation. Instead, those properties only exist when two physical systems interact. Asking "Where is the particle right now?" when nothing is looking at it is a grammatically incorrect question, equivalent to asking “What is the sound of one hand clapping?" The property of "position" only truly comes into meaning if there exists a detector for which the electron interacts with (16). Any interaction is essentially an exchange of information between two systems. Rovelli formalises this by proposing two foundational postulates. First, there is a finite limit to the relevant information one system can extract from another. Second, it is always possible to extract new information (17). At first glance, these seem at odds: how can you continually extract new data if the total capacity is capped? The consequence of this tension is what we traditionally call "collapse", but RQM reframes it simply as an update of relative information. If you have maxed out the information capacity of a system — for instance, by pinning down the spinning coin’s exact momentum — then asking a new question about its position forces the system to "forget" old information to make room for the new. This directly yields Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. If we wish to keep using the word "fact" in our theory of modern physics, we must redefine it. Facts are no longer global, pre-existing truths built into a singular reality. Instead, they are by nature local, inherently plural, and entirely dependent on the relationship between the watcher and the watched. Protagoras peers down, then looks up at Plato with a bright-eyed grin. "As I was saying,” References Plato. Theaetetus. Waterfield R, translator. London: Penguin Classics; 1987. Plato. The Republic. Lee D, translator. 2nd ed. London: Penguin Books; 2003. Sellars J. Stoicism. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2006. Aristotle. Metaphysics. Ross WD, translator. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1924. Laplace PS. A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities. Truscott FW, Emory FL, translators. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1902. University of Oxford. The Eddington Number. Oxford: University of Oxford. 2020. https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/about-us/life-oxford-mathematics/oxford-mathematics-alphabet/e-eddington-number Mastin L. Determinism. The Basics of Philosophy. 2008. https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_determinism.html Einstein A. Relativity: The Special and the General Theory. Lawson RW, translator. New York: Henry Holt and Company; 1920. Norton JD. The Relativity of Simultaneity. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh. 2022. https://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Special_relativity_rel_sim/ Norton JD. Einstein for Everyone. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh. 2022. https://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Special_relativity_clocks_rods/ Heisenberg W. Über quantentheoretische Umdeutung kinematischer und mechanischer Beziehungen. Z Phys. 1925;33(1):879-93. Nave R. Schrödinger Equation [Internet]. Atlanta: Georgia State University. 2017. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/schr.html Ismael J. Quantum Mechanics. Stanford: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2021. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm/ Wigner EP. Remarks on the mind-body question. In: Good IJ, editor. The Scientist Speculates. London: Heinemann; 1961. p. 284-302. Rovelli C. Relational quantum mechanics. Int J Theor Phys. 1996;35(8):1637-78. Laudisa F, Rovelli C. Relational Quantum Mechanics. Stanford: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2021. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-relational/ Rovelli C. Helgoland. Segre E, Carnell S, translators. New York: Riverhead Books; 2021. Previous article back to Fact & Fiction Next article

Curious what an OmniSci Editor-in-Chief actually does? We spoke to Rachel about drawing anatomy, interviewing a med student hero, and helping build the the science communication universe! Rachel is a writer and Editor-in-Chief at OmniSci, now in her first year of the Doctor of Medicine. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is writing an interview with science communicator, Dr Karen Freilich. Meet OmniSci Writer and Committee Member Rachel Ko Rachel is a writer and Editor-in-Chief at OmniSci, now in her first year of the Doctor of Medicine. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is writing an interview with science communicator, Dr Karen Freilich. interviewed by Caitlin Kane What are you studying? I am currently studying a Doctor of Medicine and I’m in my first year. Before that, I was studying a Bachelor of Biomed. What first got you interested in science? Exposure through education, stuff I’d studied in school. It sparked interests outside of school and I realised it was something that I wanted to pursue as a career. Something that really reinforced my love for science was doing a major in human structure and function, so anatomy. I really enjoyed that I could weave it in with my other passions in things like art and drawing and painting. I was able to look at science in a way that was really the artsy side of science. It's something I’ve tried to pursue with OmniSci as well. Do you have any advice for younger students? Don’t be afraid of trying all areas of science. Because I loved a specific area of science so much, I wanted to make sure that was what reeled me in as compared to other things. I tried a bunch of research projects, some of them I didn’t really love and I had to stick it out to the end, but then I could tick that off my list as having done that, and never have to do it again. But then I did another project which was 3D modelling a bone. It was just me sitting there for hours with a pen, drawing the bone in 3D space, which was very much up my alley. Don’t be afraid of trying everything, even if it feels like a waste of time in the moment. It isn't, it’s the process of filtering out and finding out what you love. And I’m still in that process. I have no idea what kind of medicine I want to go into, but I’m going by process of elimination and finding where I fit in the realm of science in that way. How did you get involved with OmniSci? Like I said, I like the artsy side of science. I actually sought out a few non-science related magazines at uni. I’ve always been into journalism and I love writing as well, so it made sense for me to look into that in my undergrad years. OmniSci emerged during those undergrad years and I thought, “Perfect!” I was a columnist first and I started doing some illustrations as well. Then I dropped my role at Farrago completely just to concentrate on this because I found it was a really nice intersection of what I love to do. My column was about vestigial features, like useless body parts, which I thought would be a fun, light column–I just wanted something cute and fun. So I started that, and now… I’m in the committee. What is your role at OmniSci? I am an Editor-in-Chief at the moment, and I have also written one of the pieces for Issue 4, purely because of my love for writing and contributing. I might step in as an illustrator at some point… I’m hoping in this break I can sit down and draw a little more than I used to. As Editors-in-Chief, we work with the committee to coordinate the things being published and try to envision what role OmniSci plays within the science communication universe. And whilst figuring out what we’re publishing and putting out to the world, we’re also trying to include the rest of the student community. We also have social events so that we can share our love for…whether it’s science or art or writing… any of the parts that OmniSci encompasses. We're there to keep everything chugging along!. What is your favourite thing about contributing at OmniSci so far? The people that you meet along the way. I do eventually want to pursue science communication myself, alongside medicine. I don’t know what that will look like, but I know that the people who will be involved in that space are the people you meet at the moment. Even with the committee, chatting about things and discussing interests has been super enlightening. When you expand that to the rest of the OmniSci community, I think it’s super super rewarding. Also seeing something tangible come out of it all… I just love seeing the magazine come together. When we printed it—though not ideal for the environment for every issue—to have the paper magazine in our hands from last year was super rewarding to see. Can you give us a sneak peak of what you're working on this issue? Well as Editor-in-Chief, the whole issue is kind of our collective baby! Personally I interviewed Dr Karen Freilich, a GP specialising in sexual health and working in education as well. I was lucky enough to have her as one of my sexual health elective tutors. She also started a podcast when she was in medical school called Humerus Hacks. It is basically super famous within the med student community. It sounds like such a simple thing, but just to hear her and the friend she started the podcast with talk things through and make things entertaining… it was such a fresh way of getting the information out. It’s kind of what we do at OmniSci: make science more accessible to people who might feel intimidated by those bigger, wider topics that they might never have ventured into. And the whole point of a magazine is to get information out to more people, and to spark interest, and show people that these things exist. As a med student, I kind of came across it as naturally as you could have. And as she was my tutor, I thought it was such an important opportunity to talk to her about why she did it and where she sees science communication going. What do you like doing in your spare time (when you're not contributing at OmniSci)? Well, there’s the anatomical art. I haven’t had a lot of time to do that… and I’ve been really wanting to try and incorporate it into my study but I spend a lot of time on one painting so it wouldn’t have been time efficient. But my plan for this break is to go to a bar, get myself a drink and just paint on my own… relax in that way. Otherwise, I play the violin, something I like to destress. It’s actually been a surprisingly big part of my life in med because there's a medical student orchestra. The rehearsals are quite long but it’s actually quite worth it to be sitting there not thinking about medicine. And yeah, just catching up with friends, going cafe hopping, bar hopping, that’s what I like to spend time doing. Which chemical element would you name your firstborn child (or pet) after? Let me pull up a visual aid. I actually don’t mind chemistry, but after year twelve I’ve kind of put a line between myself and it. Have you seen that trend online where people are pulling up words that would be really pretty baby names if they didn’t mean what they meant? Ooh, I’m going to go with Livermorium, Liv for short. Element 160. There’s some good ones—you could go Rutherfordium, Ruth for short. Read Rachel's articles Silent Conversations: How Trees Talk to One Another Wiggling Ears Our Microbial Frenemies Hiccups The Evolution of Science Communication Law and Disorder: Medically Supervised Injection Centres “Blink and you’ll miss it”: A Third Eyelid? Mighty Microscopic Warriors!

The Greenhouse Unpacking the Latest IPCC Report - What Climate Science is Telling Us By Sonia Truong The most comprehensive climate science report to date, this sixth assessment report reveals the reality of climate change and stresses that we need to take action urgently. Edited by Jessica Nguy & Yen Sim Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Jess Nguyen On the 9th of August 2021, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its first instalment of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report from Working Group I, Climate Change 2021 — The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change. The IPCC is one of the world’s leading authorities on climate change and its reports provide an important scientific framework for governments to develop climate policies. With the collaborative effort of 234 leading climate scientists and more than 1,000 contributors, the latest IPCC report provides the most up-to-date information about the scientific basis of climate change and the effects of human activity on Earth’s systems. The report can be found online — it features a ‘Summary for Policymakers’ document exploring key findings across four topic areas as well as a comprehensive ‘Full Report’ which assesses and compiles peer-reviewed literature on climate science from across the globe. The report also features the IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas which explores observed and projected regional climate changes across different emissions and warming scenarios. Three key takeaways from the IPCC report are described below. #1: Human activity has contributed to climate change It in unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Headline statement from the IPCC’s ‘Summary for Policymakers’, AR6 2021 Advancements in attribution studies have allowed scientists to better simulate Earth’s responses to natural and anthropogenic factors and estimate the extent of human influence on observed climate trends. For the first time, the IPCC report has been able to state with a very high level of certainty that anthropogenic factors have been the main driver of increasing temperature extremes since the mid-19th century. Figure SPM.1 shows that simulated natural factors do not come close to explaining the observed increase in global surface temperature since the mid-19th century. Figure SPM.1: A powerful comparison of changes in global surface temperature since 1850 with and without human factors. This figure shows that the effects of natural climate drivers on global warming have been negligible compared to human influence on the climate. IPCC AR6, ‘Summary for Policymakers’ Atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations are higher than what they have been in the last two millennia and have been increasing at an unprecedented rate, mainly due to human activities in greenhouse gas combustion and deforestation. According to the report, greenhouse gas emissions from human activities have caused warming of approximately 1.1°C above pre-industrial average. In fact, human activities have caused enough emissions for even greater warming, but this has been partially counteracted by the cooling effect of aerosols in the atmosphere. Some recent heat extremes would have been virtually impossible without the influence of human forcing factors. Siberia’s prolonged heatwaves of 2020, for example, would have occurred less than once every 80,000 years without human-induced climate change. Moreover, the onset of Siberia’s wildfire season saw record-high temperatures throughout 2020 and 2021 as well as the burning of over 16 million hectares of land. Even in today’s climate, such extreme weather events are unlikely, but have been predicted to become more frequent by the end of this century. #2: Every region will experience environmental changes due to climate change The IPCC report states that the “widespread, rapid and intensifying” effects of climate change will be experienced by every region in a multitude of ways. Since the release of the last IPCC report in 2018, the world has observed an increase in acute weather events such as widespread flooding, storms, drought, fire weather and heatwaves. These are predicted to increase in frequency and severity as a result of human-induced climate change. Many changes in the climate system become larger in direct relation to increasing global warming. They include increases in the frequency and intensity of hot extremes, marine heatwaves, and heavy precipitation, agricultural and ecological droughts in some regions, and proportion of intense tropical cyclones, as well as reductions in Arctic sea ice, snow cover and permafrost. B.2 from the IPCC’s ‘Summary for Policymakers’, AR6 2021 Several environmental changes due to climate change are already irreversible. Notably, global sea level rise and ocean acidification are set in long-term motion and will proceed at rates which will depend on future emissions. Glacial retreat is occurring synchronously across the world and glaciers will continue to melt for decades or centuries. All emission scenarios within the 21st century described in the report have revealed that global temperature changes will exceed a 1.5ºC increase, even in the lowest emissions scenario (SSP1-1.9). Thus, warming will reach a critical level regardless of actions that the world takes now. We can, however, prevent further temperature increases with deep reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions (especially carbon dioxide and methane). Figure SPM.5: All regions of the world (with one exception) will experience warming as a result of climate change, although not at an equal level. IPCC AR6, ‘Summary for policymakers’ Environmental changes at a 2ºC warming will be more pronounced and widespread, and extremes are likely to exceed critical tolerance thresholds in human health, ecological systems and agriculture. Australia, in particular, is vulnerable to experiencing scarce water resources in drought-prone areas and flooding and landslide events due to heavy rainfall events. Australia’s coastlines are also prone to erosion and flooding from rising sea levels and extreme meteorological events. The IPCC report examines evidence for climate ‘tipping points’ which, due to uncertainty about the Earth’s feedback systems, “cannot be ruled out” in climate projections. These tipping points are key thresholds that will lead to large-scale and irreversible damages to the Earth’s systems if breached. One of these tipping points is the loss of the Greenland ice sheet which is melting at an unprecedented rate. Surface melt of this major ice sheet involves a number of positive feedback loops which exacerbate the melting as the ice surface gets darker and less reflective of solar radiation. Scientists warn that, while highly unlikely, there is a possibility that we will reach a tipping point with current warming trends. #3: We need to make drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions immediately The Sixth Assessment Report tells us, with greater certainty than ever before, that human activities over the past six decades have caused global warming trends and affected climate extremes globally. These trends are likely to continue on a long-term scale. Most importantly, the report stresses that if we want any chance of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels, we must urgently make strong, sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions. The current global carbon budget to remain below 1.5ºC warming is estimated to be at an additional 500 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas. To remain within this budget, we need to achieve net zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will only be achieved with meaningful climate action. If we can drastically reduce emissions now, we will still have a chance of averting the climate crisis. The two succeeding instalments of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report will cover the impacts of climate change and mitigation of climate change and are planned to be released in 2022. References: IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [MassonDelmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.

Exciting technological leaps are being made in the futuristic field of visual prostheses. Australians suffering from visual impairment can be helped by emerging treatments including Bionic Eyes: a sight for sore eyes. This piece takes a look at the prevalent impairments and our ocular opportunities to treat them. Bionics: Seeing into the Future By Joshua Nicholls While the Bionic Eye might seem like a technology of the far future, exciting advancements are being made in the field of visual prostheses. This piece points a keen eye at emerging treatments for some of the most prominent diseases, along with their possible bionic treatments. Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Friday Kennedy Visual prostheses, colloquially known as bionic eyes, are a set of experimental devices designed to restore — or partially restore — vision to those with varying levels of blindness (1). While once viewed as “science fiction”, these technologies are becoming a reality for thousands of Australians with visual impairments. Since its inception in 1956 by the Australian inventor Graham Tassicker (2), the idea of restoring vision using electronics has undergone several developments, ranging from rudimentary cortical stimulation to modern advancements in state-of-the-art retinal implants. As of 2018, it was estimated that over 13 million Australians have some form of visual impairment. Of these 13 million, 411,000 have cataracts or the clouding of the lens; 244,00 have macular degeneration, which degrades fine detail vision; and 133,000 are either partially or entirely blind (3,4). The economic burden of blindness in Australia is substantial. In 2009, it was estimated that the total cost of vision loss per person aged 40 and over was $28,905 — a nationwide total of 16.6 billion AUD (5). Figure 1: Categorisation of Total Economic Cost of Vision Loss in 2009 (5) Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is one condition for which visual prosthetics may be applicable. AMD refers to the irreversible loss of high-acuity, colour-sensitive cone cells in the centre field of vision. This structure of the retina is responsible for reading, recognising faces, driving, and other visual tasks that require sharp focal vision. In fact, you are using these cells to read this article right now. Its typical onset is later in life, affecting 12% of people aged 80 or over (6). As the leading chronic eye condition for elderly Australians (7), it accounts for 48% of all cases of blindness nationwide (8). According to AIHW4, there is also a higher prevalence amongst females than in males — between 4.9%–6.8% and 3.6–5.1%, respectively. Macular degeneration exists in two forms: dry and wet. Dry macular degeneration is caused by thinning of the macula; it is the most common form of the disease and progresses slowly over many years. Wet macular degeneration is a potentially more severe variation of the disease which is caused by the sudden development of leaky blood vessels around the macula (9). With no known cure — and most treatments being directed towards prevention and delaying progression — interventions relying on prosthetics may be the best hope for the restoration of lost eyesight (10). Graham Tassicker was the first to realise the potential utility of cortical stimulation in restoring sight to those with vision loss. In 1956, Tassicker developed a photosensitive selenium cell which, when placed behind the retina, resulted in phosphene visualisation — the phenomenon of seeing light without light actually entering the eye (2). This was the first evidence of non-cortical stimulation to elicit visual experience. It was in the 1990s that visual prostheses took a radical development; sophisticated retinal surgeries and the creation of biomaterials led to a surge of novel inventions, including cortical implant miniaturisation and artificial retinas — the latter of which is the most advanced to date. There is currently a state-of-the-art retinal bionic system that has recently undergone clinical trial research: the Argus II Retinal Stimulation System. The Argus is an epiretinal (above the retina) implant which has been designed by SecondSight; as of 2013, it was FDA approved for retinitis pigmentosa (RP) but has potential utility for dry AMD. It consists of a device that is implanted in the patient’s eye and an external processing unit worn by the user. The system consists of sixty electrodes, each of which is two-hundred-micrometres in diameter. Images that have been captured by a small camera on glasses are converted into electrical impulses to stimulate surviving ganglion cells on the retina. It is currently the most widely used retinal prosthetic system in the world, with more than 350 RP patients being treated to date. The cost of this device is 150,000 USD — a price that excludes surgery and post-operative training (11). Figure 2: The design of the Argus II (12) In 2015, a case study was performed by the Argus II study group on the impact the implant would have on restoring visual function to subjects who had complete blindness from RP. The results from this study were quite promising; it showed that of the 30 patients who received the Argus II system, all significantly performed better on a white square test than they did without the prosthesis. (None of the subjects scored any points with the device absent.) The Argus also showed reliability for 29 subjects, all of whom still had functioning devices after three years (13). In 2020, a clinical trial of this device for dry AMD was completed. The study, which consisted of five patients, assessed the safety and feasibility of the device. According to Mills et al. (14), no patients reported confusion when operating the Argus alongside their healthy peripheral vision. Adverse events occurred in two patients who experienced proliferative vitreoretinopathy — or tractional retinal detachment. However, due to recent events surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, the company declared that they would be performing “an orderly wind-down of the company’s operations”. SecondSight is now focusing on a new device: The Orion. This device is designed to stimulate the visual cortex of the brain — a return to the original conception of visual prosthetics. The Orion is planned to expand the pool of patients who are eligible for visual prosthetics. It will essentially bypass the requirement for healthy ganglion cells and a functioning optic nerve, which retinal prosthetics require. The only forms of blindness not encompassed by this technique are congenital forms of blindness or people who are ‘cortically blind’ from suffering damage to the visual cortex area V1. The Orion is modelled after the Argus II with its 60 cortical-stimulating electrodes receiving input from a camera on the user’s glasses. Under the Breakthrough Device Pathway, the FDA approved Orion for an early feasibility study. Six human subjects have been fitted with the device — one woman and five men between the ages of 29 and 57. Of these six, one had endophthalmitis, two had glaucoma, and three suffered trauma. After one year of wearing the device, four of the patients could accurately discern the location of a palm-sized white square on a computer screen, and five could locate its movement in space. The Orion has shown a good safety profile after 12 months of use, and follow-ups on its progress will occur for five years (15). Visual prostheses have a promising and bright future of development ahead of them. While it is still in its infancy, the results of ongoing clinical trials show promise for sight restoration. With multiple models and modes of intervention available, artificial vision is slowly becoming a reality for the visually impaired, but further developments in the field are still required. It would be promising to see advancements from mere two-dimensional grey-scale images to the rich, three-dimensional, and full-colour experience that we take for granted as normal vision. For now, two essential factors need to be improved for the full realisation of artificial vision: cost and electrode density. The Argus costs 150,000 USD — an expense that excludes surgery and training. This figure may be unfeasible for the thousands of Australians who would benefit from such a device. If the current trend of Moore’s Law continues, electrode density will increase whilst the cost of the device will decrease — a trend analogous to the increase in power and improved price of computers in the last century. This pixel density will hopefully improve to the point of achieving near-normal visual acuity. The 60 pixels, while helpful in regaining some functionality, cannot compare to the some 96 million photoreceptor cells in the retina — 5 million of which are located in the cone-dense macula. Nevertheless, artificial vision is an exciting and innovative technology currently under development. While much research is still needed, further advancements in bionics will one day make visual prosthetics a ubiquitous and affordable technology to those in need. About the writer: Joshua Nicholls was the 2021 winner of the Let's Torque competition. Joshua : I am a 5th-year neuroscience and biochemistry student at the Swinburne University of Technology. I finished my Health Science degree a few years ago, majoring in neuroscience. I am now completing my final few subjects in my Bachelor of Science, with biochemistry as my major. For the state-wide Let’s torque competition, I changed my pitch to artificial vision, hence its title, Bionics: Seeing into the Future—a catchy pun, if I do say so myself. I made the rather complex topic of visual prosthetics approachable and understandable to the general audience by, as stated previously, conveying a story. I asked my audience to consider losing vision, if not completely, at least partially. Considering this, I then asked them to imagine what life must be like for the some 13 million Australians of whom suffer from some form of visual impairment. This exercise brought home the very real phenomenon of visual impairment, which many of us have—or will—be impacted. The solution for currently untreatable vision loss is already underway: The Bionic Eye, as it is colloquially known. While it may sound like science fiction, bionics (or prosthetics) are nothing new; artificial hearing through the cochlear implant and artificial limbs are becoming rather ubiquitous. I briefly detailed a few diseases for which visual prosthetics may be appropriate, such as age-related macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa, and spoke about past and current clinical trials demonstrating their efficacy. To end my pitch, I talked about the lasting impact these devices will have on people’s lives and the future developments required. In doing so, I relayed the past, present, and future of the bionic eye, which detailed a coherent and relatable story to my audience. I was successful in my pitch and won first place among the state! It was an absolute privilege even to have been a part of this competition; coming first place was an added honour and will remain one of the highlights of my life. I believe this experience will serve as a footstone toward my career in science and science communication. If anyone has any desires to get their foot in the door of this field, get your name and face out there and just go for it! References: Ong, J. M., & da Cruz, L. (2012). The bionic eye: a review. Clinical & experimental ophthalmology, 40(1), 6-17. Tassicker, G. (1956). Preliminary report on a retinal stimulator. The British journal of physiological optics, 13(2), 102-105. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2018). National Health Survey: First Results, 2017–18. Canberra: ABS Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/national-health-survey-first-results/latest-release Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2021). Eye health. Canberra: AIHW Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/eye-health/eye-health Taylor, P., Bilgrami, A., & Pezzullo, L. (2010). Clear focus: The economic impact of vision loss in Australia in 2009. Vision2020. Retrieved from https://www.vision2020australia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Access_Economics_Clear_Focus_Full_Report.pdf Mehta, S. (2015). Age-related macular degeneration. Primary Care: Clinics in Office Practice, 42(3), 377-391. Foreman, J., Xie, J., Keel, S., van Wijngaarden, P., Sandhu, S. S., Ang, G. S., . . . Taylor, H. R. (2017). The prevalence and causes of vision loss in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians: the National eye health survey. Ophthalmology, 124(12), 1743-1752. Taylor, H. R., Keeffe, J. E., Vu, H. T. V., Wang, J. J., Rochtchina, E., Mitchell, P., & Pezzullo, M. L. (2005). Vision loss in Australia. Med J Aust, 182(11), 565-568. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb06815.x Calabrese, A., Bernard, J.-B., Hoffart, L., Faure, G., Barouch, F., Conrath, J., & Castet, E. (2011). Wet versus dry age-related macular degeneration in patients with central field loss: different effects on maximum reading speed. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 52(5), 2417-2424. Cheung, L. K., & Eaton, A. (2013). Age‐related macular degeneration. Pharmacotherapy: The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy, 33(8), 838-855. Luo, Y. H.-L., & Da Cruz, L. (2016). The Argus® II retinal prosthesis system. Progress in retinal and eye research, 50, 89-107. SecondSight. (2021). SecondSight: Life in a New Light. Retrieved from https://secondsight.com/ Ho, A. C., Humayun, M. S., Dorn, J. D., Da Cruz, L., Dagnelie, G., Handa, J., . . . Hafezi, F. (2015). Long-term results from an epiretinal prosthesis to restore sight to the blind. Ophthalmology, 122(8), 1547-1554. Mills, J., Jalil, A., & Stanga, P. (2017). Electronic retinal implants and artificial vision: journey and present. Eye, 31(10), 1383-1398. Pouratian N., Yoshor D., & Greenberg R. (2019). Orion Visual Cortical Prosthesis System Early Feasibility Study: Interim Results. Paper presented at American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting.

Get in touch with the team at OmniSci Magazine! Leave a message for us, send an email, or contact us on our socials! Get in touch Want to get in touch? We'd love to hear from you! Our email is omniscimag@gmail.com . Or, just fill out the form below! Contact Us Thanks for submitting! Submit Subscribe to Our Issues Submit Thanks for submitting!

How should scientific research and political legislation interact, and what role should they play in public discourse? Climate Change, Vaccines & Lockdowns: How and Why Science Has Become a Polarising Political Debate By Mia Horsfall In light of the compounding climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, the discussion around how we implement scientific research into political realms is growing, and with it, the controversy. But perhaps the debate surrounding such contentious issues reveals more about how we communicate our science than the quality of the science itself. Edited by Yen Sim & Andrew Lim Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Janna Dingle The degree to which public rhetoric morphs and formulates enactment of scientific research in topics such as climate change, energy politics and vaccinations has become increasingly evident in recent years, as evidenced by polarising public debates surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and the ‘School Strike’ movements. The ‘apocalyptic narratives’ employed by climate protesters are often combated with condescension and intellectual elitism propagated by political figures, resulting in a remarkably detached exchange of dialogue and a good deal of reticence but an overwhelming lack of progress. Reluctance to accept COVID-19 vaccinations and lockdowns is indicative more of a dogmatic belief in exertion of liberty at all costs rather than a measured comprehension of the implications of such decisions. Likewise, discussions surrounding implementation of nuclear power showcase the disconnect between scientific research and economic policy making, resulting in conflict and frustration as the two struggle to reconcile. The role of science in political, legal and social spheres is contingent upon public discourses surrounding its relevance and remains largely subservient to public opinion. Scientific matters should increasingly, “be studied in relation to how they impact social structures,” (Holmberg & Alvinius, 2020) and it is in this way we can hope to understand the dimorphic nature of research and its intersection with political and social implications. To understand how scientific discourse shifts from a research-centric discussion to a tool to uphold political ideology, it is crucial to deconstruct the rhetoric utilised by opposing sides of the climate debate to advance support for their cause. Examination of the discourse on different sides of the ‘School Strike’ movement ironically reveals that both sides stem from the same source: an analysis of the authority of youth in political spheres. The succinct, punchy statements used to endorse student climate advocacy relish in the youth of the protesters – “you’ll die of old age, we’ll die of climate change”, “I’d be in school if the earth was cool”, “it’s getting hot in here so take off all your coals,'' (Kamarck, 2019). By focusing the targets of the movement on ‘abstract’ actors such as legal, political and economic ecosystems, the movement distances itself from the accepted scientific consensus and focuses on the issue of the mobilisation of policymakers in climate action. These ‘apocalyptic narratives’ do not question the authority of the science communicated, instead hinging their argument upon the challenge of inciting political change from a youth-driven movement. Their narrative relies on the distinct lack of political influence historically held by youth, and satirises the predicted response of politicians such as the then Federal Minister for Education Dan Tehan who asserted that the strikes were orchestrated by professional activists and children were missing valuable class time (Perinotto & Johnston, 2019). The difficulty then posed is that formulating the protester’s messages from a place of pathos drives the argument further away from the scientifically enforced urgency and enables politically interested individuals to divert the argument from one of scientific claim to one about challenging the authority of youth to speak with regards to politics. Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s suggestion to the school strikers to, “get a bit of context and perspective,” (Perinotto & Johnston, 2019), is saturated not only with elitism but an enforcement of the notion of political superiority, that some knowledge remains incomprehensible to the public sphere and is privy only to the select few. It remains, then, that the biggest obstacle in the school strikers’ position is the unification of scientific authorities, politicians and the emotionally driven and passionate youth. But perhaps the politicisation of climate change has more to do with political dichotomisation than the controversy of the science itself. Chinn, Hart and Soroka assert that, “beliefs about climate change have become a marker of partisan affiliation,” (Chinn, Hart, & Soroka 2020), and this is not the only realm of scientific contention to become politicised. Opposition to government-mandated lockdowns, vaccinations and regulations of genetic modification of food all stem from one crucial point of difference in belief; the degree to which the government should have the ability to regulate everyday happenings of our lives. This is not a new phenomenon. This key difference is at the heart of bipartisanship and is the central debate in almost every political issue. So perhaps the issue is not inherently the politicisation of scientific discourse, as implementation of policy in reference to new scientific findings will inevitably become politicised, but the monotonous rhetoric employed by the left and the right. As Kamarck upholds, “it is the lack of trust in government that may be one of the foundational barriers to effective environmental action,” (Kamarck, 2019). If we take the intent of science as being to seek a degree of objective insight about the nature of the world and its happenings, it will naturally lead to division in political climates saturated by individual motivation and greed. A 2020 American study utilised word frequency analysis software of articles from four major newspapers (New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post) to quantitatively determine the number of times scientists’ names were mentioned in regard to phrases such as ‘global warming’ or ‘fracking’, in comparison to politicians (see Figure 1 & 2). Whilst this understandably has to do with matters of climate policy making and does not in and of itself convey an image of the politicised nature of the debate, it does provide significant insight into the shifting obstacles faced in attaining climate action. What provides significantly greater insight is an analysis conducted of the language variance within the media of the parties across the years. From this data, we see that whilst the difference in rhetoric across the two major parties is significant, it is also largely unchanging. It is this divide in political narratives that fosters a sense of distrust and scepticism amongst individuals. Where more left-leaning parties emphasise the social inequalities that will be expounded upon as the consequences of climate change compound, conservatively leaning parties perpetuate the notion that climate action stipulates a greater control of the government on energy politics and enables less agency to the individual. In their narrative, the economic consequences outweigh the benefit of transition to renewable energy systems. From such polarised discourse, it becomes apparent that the way science operates within social spheres has more to do with pre-existing flaws in systemic structures than the quality of the science itself. Figure 1 (2) Figure 2 (2) Of course, a key consideration of how political and activist narratives impact the science that is upheld is through the medialisation of science. ‘Medialisation’ is the concept that science and media should engage in a reciprocal relationship, where scientists use media for broader impact and to advocate for more public funding while the media relies on interest to propagate scientific breakthroughs (Scheufele, 2014). The utility of science comes only from what is accepted and implemented in public opinion, hence scientific practice continues to grow into these frameworks, particularly in discussions around climate change or gene editing technologies. Ultimately, as Scheufele asserts, “the production of reliable knowledge about the natural world has always been a social and political endeavour,” (Scheufele, 2014), one that the media capitalises on to make as economical as possible. That is, it is in most media outlets’ interest to frame politics and science as being at odds with each other as, “coverage increases dramatically if and when issues become engulfed in political or societal controversy,” (Scheufele, 2014). Whilst science cannot and should never be removed from subjugation to moral scrutiny, discourse remains dominated by discussion surrounding the legitimacy of those advocating for one side or the other, rather than the quality of the science itself. Of course bias exists in media outlets , but is propagated by the bias of the consumers, as a consequence of ‘motivated reasoning’. That is, individuals subconsciously place more weight upon information that confirms pre-existing viewpoints and divert more energy into finding flawed reasoning for all that does not concur with preconceived perceptions. The result is a positive feedback loop that is hard to curtail. Individuals form opinions from information they are exposed to in the media, subconsciously seek further information to fortify their initial opinion, leading to opinion reinforcement. In this way, microcosmic ‘mediated realities’ form, each individual inhabiting a vastly different scientific landscape than those of the opposite opinion. In these realities, it is the implications of policy making rather than objective reasoning about the science itself that prevails, resulting in scientific breakthrough perpetually existing subserviently to the opinion of the people, irrespective of whether that opinion is informed. This consequently influences what scientific research is allocated what proportion of public funding, inadvertently providing a quantitative discriminator in what ‘sides’ are upheld in the media. So, what role should science play in political discourse? How do we ensure a mediation of scientific advice and democratic decision making? Darrin Durant of the University of Melbourne unpacks this question, deliberating on whether science should assume a ‘servant’ or ‘partner’ role when it exists within public discourse. Durant argues that if science were to assume the role of a servant (acting in an advisory position to politics), public perception would descend into a degree of populism, overrun by conspiracists and anti-pluralists. Rather, if it were to exist as a ‘partner’, legitimising the authority held by scientific figures, a degree of objectivity could be applied to an otherwise dynamic and transient political landscape. It is only by bridging the political dichotomy that prevails in media and social spheres that scientific discourse will cease to fall prey to political weaponization, existing as a level-ground for rational debate rather than morphing in accordance with ideology. References: Alvinius, A & Holmberg, A. (2020). Children’s protest in relation to the climate emergency: A qualitative study on a new form of resistance promoting political and social change. SAGE Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0907568219879970. Chinn, S., Hart, P., & Soroka, S. (2020). Politicization and Polarization in Climate Change News Content, 1985-2017. SAGE Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1075547019900290. Durant, D. (2018). Servant or partner? The role of expertise and knowledge in democracy. The Conversation.https://theconversation.com/servant-or-partner-the-role-of-expertise-and-knowledge-in-democracy-92026. Durant, D. (2021). Who are you calling 'anti-science'? How science serves social and political agendas. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/who-are-you-calling-anti-science-how-science-serves-social-and-political-agendas-74755 . Feldman, H. (2020). A rhetorical perspective on youth environmental activism. Jcom.sissa.it. Retrieved 11 September 2021, from https://jcom.sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/JCOM_1906_2020_C07.pdf . Kamarck, E. (2019). The challenging politics of climate change. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-challenging-politics-of-climate-change/ . Perinotto, T., & Johnston, P. (2019). What our leaders said about the school climate change strike. The Fifth Estate. https://thefifthestate.com.au/urbanism/climate-change-news/what-our-leaders-said-about-the-school-climate-change-strike/ . Scheufele, D. (2014). Science communication as political communication. Pnas.org. https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/111/Supplement_4/13585.full.pdf. The best climate strike signs from around the globe – in pictures. The Guardian. (2021). https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/gallery/2019/sep/20/the-best-climate-strike-signs-from-around-the-globe-in-pictures . Image reference - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1075547019900290

Where The Wild Things Were By Ashleigh Hallinan We may consider ourselves to be the most advanced species on the planet, but this has come at the cost of the natural world. Delve into this article to gain insight into how ecosystem restoration plays a role in nature-based solutions for biodiversity loss and climate change mitigation globally. Edited by Niesha Baker & Caitlin Kane Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Jess Nguyen The scale of threats posed to humanity and the natural world is confronting and difficult to grasp. The natural world is being pushed towards its brink, but it’s not too late to act. Ecosystem restoration plays an important role in nature-based solutions for biodiversity loss, food insecurity, and climate change. Global discourse and action also need to continue moving towards greater acknowledgement of Traditional Owners and local communities in biodiversity conservation efforts and climate change resilience. Ecosystem degradation is an accelerating calamity of our own making. A recent study from Frontier Forest and Global Change shows that humans have altered 97 per cent of the Earth's land, meaning a mere 3 per cent of land remains untouched, or ‘ecologically intact’ (1). ‘Ecosystem degradation’ refers to the loss of natural productivity from environments as a result of human activity. Many of the world’s ecosystems have been pushed beyond the point of unassisted self-recovery due to a mix of stressors, most of which are human-induced. Ecosystems are made up of interacting organisms and the physical environment in which they are found, so disturbing the balance of an ecosystem can be disastrous for all the living things relying on it, including humans. If trends of ecosystem degradation continue, 95 per cent of the Earth’s land could become degraded by 2050 (2). In this scenario, we would face irreversible damage. But how does this affect you and me? Beyond the role ecosystem degradation plays in accelerating climate change and the loss of countless species from our planet, its impact on ecosystem services is also of great significance. Ecosystem services are the benefits humans derive from the natural environment. These range from the oxygen we breathe to aesthetic appreciation of the natural environments around us. These services are necessary for life to exist on Earth, and without them, our quality of life would decline drastically. Luckily for us, humans are capable of learning from their mistakes, and efforts are being made to address these global concerns. Ecosystem restoration is the process of reversing ecosystem degradation to regain environmental health and sustainability. This often involves re-introducing plant and animal populations that may have been lost, as well as restoring their habitats. Abandoned farmland is one example of where this can be achieved. Farmlands are one of the most vital ecosystems in sustaining humankind. Not only do they provide us with food, but they are also home to a variety of organisms within and above the soil. Many of these organisms play a critical role in soil health, which is essential for agriculture. Agriculture has transformed human societies and fuelled a global population that has grown from one billion to almost eight billion people since around 1804 (3). This has had significant consequences on natural systems worldwide, particularly as farmland has continuously expanded into surrounding landscapes. Agroecosystems now cover around 40 per cent of Earth's terrestrial surface (4). However, despite a growing demand for food due to the world’s rapidly increasing population, the amount of farmland being abandoned outweighs the amount of land being converted to farmland (5). There are an estimated 950 million to 1.1 billion acres of deserted farmland globally (6). This unproductive farmland could be converted to meet conservation goals and mitigate the impacts of climate change. For example, farmland could be regenerated with carbon-capturing forests. These would contribute to sequestering large amounts of anthropogenic CO2, water retention, soil fertility, and providing habitats for a variety of organisms. Abandoned farmland could also be re-established with native vegetation to provide habitats for animals. This was the case at the Monjebup Nature Reserves, located in south-west Western Australia (WA) on Noongar Country, established by Bush Heritage Australia between 2007 and 2014 (7). Despite being a biodiversity hotspot, animals and plants in the Monjebup Nature Reserves have faced many threats. These were mainly in the form of introduced species and land clearing for agriculture. Decades of land clearing resulted in a transition from deep-rooted woody vegetation systems to shallow-rooted annual cropping systems across the south-western Australian landscape. This caused a decrease in natural habitats and accumulation of salt in soil and water, which contributed significantly to biodiversity loss. In 2007, Bush Heritage Australia secured the Monjebup Nature Reserves in a bid to establish important conservation areas. Since then, they have restored nearly 1,000 acres of cleared land in the north of the Reserve (8). An important contributor to the success of this project was Indigenous knowledge, which reflects a long history of close connection with the land. These unique human-land relationships provide opportunities for learning in environmental research, particularly regarding land management and sustainability. The Monjebup Nature Reserves now protect a significant patch of native bushland on the land of the Noongar-Minang and Koreng people. This has been critical in restoring the heavily cleared landscape between WA's Stirling Ranges and Fitzgerald River National Parks, reconnecting remnant bush in the south with that of the Corackerup Nature Reserve further north. It has also provided habitat for vulnerable animal species such as the Malleefowl, Western Whipbird, Carnaby's Cockatoo, and Tammar Wallaby. Local knowledge plays a critical role in re-introducing plants and animals by identifying species suitable to particular environments. In the Monjebup Nature Reserves, re-introduction of native plants involved research on local plant communities and soil conditions in immediately surrounding areas. This research also involved communication with Traditional Owners who had used the area for gathering raw materials, food processing, hunting, stone tool manufacturing, and seasonal movement over millennia (9). Seeds of suitable flora were then collected in and around the site for the restoration works. It is crucial that consultation with Traditional Owners, like that seen in the Monjebup Nature Reserves project, becomes a more common practice. An estimated 37 per cent of all remaining natural lands are under Indigenous management (10). These lands protect 80 per cent of global biodiversity and the majority of intact forests, highlighting the value of Indigenous knowledge (11). We have left ourselves a challenging yet attainable goal. Raising public awareness on the importance of ecosystems and improving our knowledge on the interconnectedness of the natural world will be key to decreasing our impacts on Earth's incredible ecosystems. In March 2019, the United Nations General Assembly announced 2021 to 2030 as the Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (12). El Salvador’s Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Lina Pohl, proposed the creation of the Decade in a speech to the General Assembly. More than 70 countries from all latitudes quickly jumped on board, committing to safeguarding and restoring ecosystems globally (13). 2030 also happens to be the deadline for the Sustainable Development Goals, which are a collection of 17 interlinked global goals designed to address the global challenges we face, and provide a ‘blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all’ (14). 2030 is also the year scientists have identified as the last chance to prevent catastrophic climate change (15). As part of the Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, the United Nations has called for countries to make the pledge to restore at least 2.5 billion acres of degraded land - an area larger than China (16). This will require international cooperation, led by the UN Environment Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organisation. Humans have an essential role in halting and reversing the damage that has been caused so far. Ecosystem restoration is not a quick or easy process. It requires deep, systematic changes to the economic, political, and social systems we currently have in place. But the natural world is finite, and it is important we continue taking steps towards a more sustainable future. References: 1. Plumptre, Andrew J., Daniele Baisero, R. Travis Belote, Ella Vázquez-Domínguez, Soren Faurby, Włodzimierz Jȩdrzejewski, Henry Kiara, Hjalmar Kühl, Ana Benítez-López, Carlos Luna-Aranguré, Maria Voigt, Serge Wich, William Wint, Juan Gallego-Zamorano, Charlotte Boyd . “Where Might We Find Ecologically Intact Communities?” Frontiers in Forests and Global Change 4 (15 April 2021): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2021.626635. 2, 4. Scholes, Robert, L Montanarella, Anastasia Brainich, Nichole Barger. “The Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration: Summary for Policymakers”. Bonn, Germany: Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), 2018. https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2018_ldr_full_report_book_v4_pages.pdf 3. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations,“FAOSTAT”, Accessed 8 September 2021, http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home . 5, 6. Yang, Yi, Sarah E. Hobbie, Rebecca R. Hernandez, Joseph Fargione, Steven M. Grodsky, David Tilman, Yong-Guan Zhu, Yu Luo, Timothy M. Smith, Jacob M. Jungers, Ming Yang, Wei-Qiang Chen. “Restoring Abandoned Farmland to Mitigate Climate Change on a Full Earth”. One Earth 3, no. 2 (August 2020): 176–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.07.019. 7, 8, 9. Bush Heritage Australia,“Monjebup Nature Reserves (WA),” Accessed 8 September 2021, https://www.bushheritage.org.au/places-we-protect/western-australia/monjebup . 10. Garnett, Stephen T., Neil D. Burgess, Julia E. Fa, Álvaro Fernández-Llamazares, Zsolt Molnár, Cathy J. Robinson, James E. M. Watson, Kerstin K.Zander, Beau Austin, Eduardo S. Brondizio, Neil French Collier, Tom Duncan, Erle Ellis, Hayley Geyle, Micha V. Jackson, Harry Jonas, Pernilla Malmer, Ben McGowan, Amphone Sivongxay, Ian Leiper. “A Spatial Overview of the Global Importance of Indigenous Lands for Conservation‘. Nature Sustainability 1, no. 7 (July 2018): 369–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0100-6 . 11. Ogar, Edwin, Gretta Pecl, and Tero Mustonen. ‘Science Must Embrace Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge to Solve Our Biodiversity Crisis’. One Earth 3, no. 2 (August 2020): 162–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.07.006. 12, 13, 14, 15. United Nations Environment Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, “About the UN Decade,” Accessed 8 September 2021, http://www.decadeonrestoration.org/about-un-decade . 16. United Nations Environment Management Group, “The UN Sustainable Development Goals – UN Environment Management Group”, Accessed 8 September 2021, https://unemg.org/our-work/supporting-the-sdgs/the-un-sustainable-development-goals/ .

Humans of UniMelb Research - Is it For Me? By Renee Papaluca Thinking about completing your Honours year or a PhD at UniMelb? This column has some advice for you, courtesy of current research students. Edited by Ruby Dempsey & Sam Williams Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Gemma Van der Hurk Science is everywhere, but how can we contribute to furthering our knowledge of science? I caught up with some current research students to learn more about the Honours-PhD pathway and their experience studying science at the University of Melbourne. Caitlin Kane Caitlin is a current Honours student at the Royal Melbourne Hospital. In her spare time, she likes to go on bike rides and read. What was the ‘lightbulb moment’ that prompted you to study science? “When I was five, I had all these books that covered basic topics like the human body and the ocean. I thought they were wild! I was just a really curious kid that loved learning things and being certain about things. For me, science was an approach to learning and understanding the world that [was] very investigative. I guess I was just curious about a lot of things and science just took that curiosity and said, ‘now you can do anything with it’". Why did you choose to study Honours? “Honours, at least for me, is a clarifying year.” “Doing a bachelor’s degree in science doesn’t [necessarily] make you a scientist … A lot of the skills you need as a scientist are practical ones; depending on your area [of study] ... Those skills are very different from what you actually learn in university.” “I wasn’t sure what I wanted to do with my degree as there are a lot of options, like doing a PhD or ... going into the workforce… I thought that Honours would really help me clarify what kinds of science I like and give me time to figure out what I wanted to do next.” What’s involved in your research? “There are many variants of HPV (human papillomavirus) circulating in Australia - some of those variants cause cancer, and some are covered by vaccination. To understand how well vaccination is working in Australia, I test for HPV in patient samples, note the patient’s vaccination status, and examine the data to see which HPV variants are prevalent right now. This involves lab skills like pipetting, running polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) and extracting DNA. When I say ‘I’ do all these steps, it’s really like 10 people ... There are a lot of different people who do different parts of the project to keep it running.” What advice would you give to prospective Honours students? “Be informed of your options, don’t be scared of talking to supervisors, and talk to older students. Everytime I would ask an older student … [’what do you wish you would have known?’] they would come out with killer advice. That’s the only trick!” “The best piece of advice I got was that ‘some supervisors only want an extra set of hands’… They just want the work to be done and that is not the kind of supervisor you want.” Alex Ritter Alex is currently completing his 2nd PhD year in the Department of Physics. In his spare time, he enjoys singing in choirs, doing crosswords, and doting over his housemate’s cat. What was the ‘lightbulb moment’ that prompted you to study science? “Going through school, there are always those things you [tend to] gravitate towards...I really liked maths and science... and wanted to do something to do with them. In high school, I also had some opportunities to do extension physics… [which] really got me interested [in tertiary study]... Luckily, it's still something I enjoy so it was the right choice.” Why did you choose to continue to a PhD following your Masters? “I did Masters of Science in Physics straight after undergrad. I really enjoyed it! I loved … really getting into the graduate subjects; diving into more detail” “[The thing] I found the most challenging was the transition into research and that whole different style of thinking. My experience was that your first year is still coursework and learning high level topics and your second year is largely research. So, I found in second year - especially towards the end - finishing the thesis was quite challenging but ultimately rewarding” What are you currently researching? “My general area of research is theoretical particle physics. This describes the tiny, subatomic particles that make us up. So, we look at electrons, inside neutrons and all the forces that hold them together. I work in dark matter ... It doesn’t give off light but it interacts gravitationally. My research generally is introducing new sub-atomic particles and forces to try and explain what dark matter might be.” Can you have a life outside of your PhD? “The thing with a PhD and research, especially in physics, is that you set your own schedule which has its pros and cons. During the pandemic, I found it difficult to keep myself motivated whilst being stuck inside all day. Due to the flexibility, it really depends on how you want to approach your PhD. I still wanted to have a life outside of my PhD. I don’t wake up and think about my PhD 24/7! I still do a fair bit of choral singing as a hobby.” “My advice is that you can balance things in a PhD but it comes down to what your personality is like and how well you can set boundaries. For example, are you someone who gets absolutely absorbed in tasks and spends hours on them? Do you overwork yourself or do you underwork yourself? How good are you at time management? I think the best thing to do is to be self-aware about how you are as a worker and researcher before you get started.” What advice would you give to prospective Masters or PhD students? “Be honest with yourself and be honest with your supervisor. Know who you are and know what your limits are and try to build everything around that.” “I think the hardest part for me was knowing what to do at the start of the process. There isn’t a lot of information [available]... In terms of picking a supervisor, I think the best advice is to try and chat to them as honestly as you can about the things they do and what kinds of students they like.. For example, try and see how busy your supervisor is. Sometimes, a supervisor can be great, their research is great and can be super interesting... But, often they’ll be in high demand with very little time … to be a hands-on supervisor. I think also trying to get an understanding of what the working relationship will be like is also important.”

< Back to Issue 5 Black Holes: Defying Reality and Challenging Perception Mahsa Nabizada 24 October 2023 Edited by Arwen Nguyen-Ngo Illustrated by Louise Cen Black Holes: Portals to the Unknown Black holes are among the most mysterious and fascinating objects in the vast universe. Often portrayed as portals to the unknown, they distort space and time such that it challenges our understanding of reality (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2018). In this article, I want to take you on a journey through the mysteries of black holes, exploring some philosophical questions, debunking myths, and shedding light on their profound significance in the universe. What is a Black Hole? A black hole is a place in space where gravity exerts an extraordinarily powerful force, to the extent that not even light can escape it. This intense gravitational pull results from the compression of matter into an incredibly compact region (NASA, 2018). When a massive star reaches the end of its life and exhausts its internal thermonuclear fuels, its core becomes unstable, gravitationally collapsing inward upon itself. The star's outer layers are blown away, giving rise to the formation of a black hole. Other methods of black hole formation may exist, but are yet to be understood. As a star nears the end of its life, it enters this pivotal phase that results in the formation of a black hole. For this transformation to occur, the star must possess sufficient mass, a condition that even our own Sun does not meet. When the gravitational collapse of the star’s core begins, what is known as a singularity is created—a point where the conventional laws of physics cease to apply. This singularity is characterized by an immense density, a consequence of the continuous collapse that occurs within. Black holes are invisible to the human eye. In order to detect and study them, astronomers rely on space telescopes equipped with specialized tools capable of discerning the distinctive behaviors of stars in close proximity to these gravitational phenomena. These observations provide invaluable insights into the presence and nature of black holes in the universe. Philosophy Meets Relativism: Challenging Reality and Perception Black holes challenge our understanding of reality and perception, particularly through the lens of relativism. As objects approach a black hole, space and time are distorted, creating a gravitational lensing effect. This phenomenon, predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity, is akin to looking through a cosmic funhouse mirror, where the very fabric of the universe appears twisted and surreal. Imagine standing at the event horizon of a black hole, the point of no return. To escape its gravitational pull, you would need to travel faster than the speed of light - an impossibility according to our current understanding of physics. However, a black hole isn't a vacuum. Rather, it warps space around it so profoundly that even light is trapped. This raises profound questions about the limits of our knowledge and the nature of reality itself. The Cosmic Duets: Black Hole Pairs and Gravitational Waves Beyond philosophy, black holes engage in cosmic duets, forming pairs of black holes that orbit each other in the dark expanse of space. As they draw nearer, they merge, releasing powerful gravitational waves that ripple through the universe. This phenomenon, observed by instruments like the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO), provides an unprecedented chance to directly observe and study cosmic events (LIGO Caltech, 2019). By recording the motion of these gravitational waves, scientists can deduce the size and characteristics of the merging black holes, providing insight into their properties. These observations also challenge our perceptions of the universe, as they remind us that even the most elusive cosmic entities are within the reach of human exploration. Types of Black Holes: From Stellar to Supermassive Black holes come in various types, each with its own characteristics. Stellar black holes, relatively small in size, originate from the remnants of massive stars and may number in the hundreds of millions within our Milky Way galaxy alone. On the other end of the spectrum, we find supermassive black holes situated at the center of galaxies, including our own Milky Way (Volonteri, 2012). These giant astronomical objects, with masses millions or billions of times that of our Sun, play a crucial role in the formation and evolution of galaxies. The Cosmic Life Cycle: Birth, Existence, and Beyond A black hole's existence is not static. It evolves through various phases, influenced by variables like mass, rotation, and charge. Schwarzschild black holes are static, while Kerr black holes rotate, adding complexity to their behaviour. These defining characteristics, alongside their mass and spin, contribute to the diverse array of black holes in the cosmos. Inside a black hole, the laws of physics reach their limits, and we encounter the mysterious concept of the singularity, where space and time cease to exist as we know them. What occurs beyond this point remains a mystery, a subject of ongoing scientific inquiry and philosophical speculation. The Inscrutable Massiveness: Philosophical Reflections As we ponder the immense mass and gravity of black holes, we confront our own limitations as observers of the cosmos. These objects challenge us to question whether true understanding is attainable, considering the profound mysteries they represent. They beckon us to consider the nature of our universe and our place within it, inspiring philosophical contemplation about the boundaries of knowledge. Recent scientific discoveries have unveiled alternative pathways to black hole formation, expanding our understanding beyond the conventional route of star collapse and revealing novel mechanisms. This encourages ongoing research and theory that redefines our perception of these cosmic entities, demonstrating that they may not solely be life-takers. Instead, they may potentially play a role as essential components in the intricate fabric of the universe. Black holes, distorting space and time, challenge our understanding of reality and serve as profound philosophical enigmas, pushing the boundaries of human knowledge and imagination. As we continue to unravel their mysteries, black holes stand as a testament to the boundless curiosity and spirit of exploration that define the human quest to understand the universe. References The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. (2018). Black hole | Definition, Formation, & Facts . Encyclopædia Britannica. [Internet]. Available from: https://www.britannica.com/science/black-hole LIGO Caltech. (2019). What are Gravitational Waves? [Internet]. LIGO Lab | Caltech. Available from: https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/what-are-gw NASA. (2018). Black Holes | Science Mission Directorate . [Internet]. Nasa.gov . Available from: https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/black-holes/ Volonteri, M. (2012). The Formation and Evolution of Massive Black Holes. Science, 337(6094), 544–547. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1208.1106 Wicked back to

The body, et cetera Wiggling Ears By Rachel Ko Ever wondered why we have a tailbone but no tail, or wisdom teeth with nothing to chew with them? This column delves into our useless body parts that make us living evidence for evolution- this issue, ear wiggling. Edited by Irene Lee, Ethan Newnham & Jessica Nguy Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Quynh Anh Nguyen Human beings fancy ourselves to be quite an intelligent species. With our relatively enormous brains and intricate handling of the five senses, we like to believe that the things we see, touch, smell, taste, and hear, define the boundaries of our universe. Yet, evidence of our shortcomings exists in plain sight on our own bodies. This becomes even more prominent when compared to the furry companions we often assume we are superior to. After living together for almost a decade, my dog is rather sick of me. While she is educated enough to know her name, I no longer even get a turn of a head when I call her. Often, the only response I receive is a wiggle of the ears as she turns them towards me. I, the source of sound, must wait as she considers whether my call for attention is worthy of her time. In this scenario, my dog’s ego might not be the only thing giving her superiority - in the realm of ear wiggling, her abilities are anatomically unattainable to us mere humans. The muscles responsible for this skill are the auriculares, with the anterior controlling upwards and forwards movement, the superior controlling the upwards and downwards movement, and finally the posterior pulling them backwards (1). In other species such as dogs, cats and horses, these muscles have evolved to become intricate over generations, with dogs manoeuvring their ears using 18 muscles, and cats using more than 30 (2). In most human beings, voluntary control of the ears has been almost entirely lost. For the 15 percent (3) of us who can wiggle our ears, the trait is vestigial – effectively useless, except for perhaps readjusting your glasses without using your hands. Despite this, ear wiggling was once a useful functional trait in our ancestral Homo species. Tracing back more than 150 million years (4), a common ancestor of mammals learnt to pivot and curl their ears for evolutionary advantage. It is theorised that before we walked upright, our own primate predecessors directed their ears in response to sound (5). This allowed them to pinpoint sources of danger that were hard to locate while moving on all fours. It was a mechanism comparable to when big cats, like those often featured in Attenborough documentaries, perk up their ears as they prowl through the grasslands. In fact, most of our mammalian relatives (6), other than our closest ape family, have preserved some level of ear wiggling ability, from foxes and wolves to lemurs and koalas. The deterioration of human ear-wiggling began with the emergence of bipedalism. As our ancestors lifted upright, off their knuckles and onto two feet, their entire centre of gravity shifted. This awarded them a wider scope of vision and diurnal activity (7), meaning they began to primarily operate during the day, so humans began relying on vision for many important things: hunting, protecting and surviving. Ear-wiggling's role in showing emotional expressions, such as anger or fear (8), was also replaced with gestures of the hands that were now free to be swung about. With no need for the sophisticated ear machinery that evolution had equipped us with, human beings’ ability to move our ears diminished, while our eyesight drastically improved. It seems that over time, the ear-orienting ability in humans simply died out with evolution. We have not let go of it completely, though. Interestingly, Homo sapiens have retained the neural circuits that were once responsible for ear movement. In the journal Psychophysiology by Steve Hackley (9), a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of Missouri, remnants of this neural circuitry were observed in clinical studies. When stimulated by an unexpected sound, the muscles behind the corresponding ears twitched and curled. Similarly, distraction with sounds of bird songs while attempting a set task kick-started bursts of ear muscle activity. While ear wiggling is no longer required for our survival, we exist as evolutionary fossils. As humans, we now have other options in well-established senses while hearing remains a dominant form of sensory input in other species – a very well-refined one too, if my dog’s ability to recognise the sound of her treat packet opening is anything to go by. While the only thing human ear-wigglers have is a cool party trick, our furry friends have mastered intricate ear control, giving them a paw up on us at least in this race. References: 1. "Auricularis Superior Anatomy, Function & Diagram | Body Maps". 2021. Healthline. https://www.healthline.com/human-body-maps/auricularis-superior#1. 2. "10 Things You Didn’T Know About Cats And Dogs". 2021. Vetsource. https://vetsource.com/news/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-cats-and-dogs/. 3. "Why Can Some People Wiggle Their Ears?". 2021. Livescience.Com. https://www.livescience.com/33809-wiggle-ears.html. 4, 7, 8. Gross, Rachel. 2021. "Your Vestigial Muscles Try To Pivot Your Ears Just Like A Dog’S". Slate Magazine. 5. "Understanding Genetics". 2021. Genetics.Thetech.Org. https://genetics.thetech.org/ask-a-geneticist/wiggling-your-ears. 6. Saarland University. "Our animal inheritance: Humans perk up their ears, too, when they hear interesting sounds." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200707113337.htm. 9. Hackley, Steven A. 2015. "Evidence For A Vestigial Pinna-Orienting System In Humans". Psychophysiology 52 (10): 1263-1270. doi:10.1111/psyp.12501.

< Back to Issue 5 Griefbots: A New Way to Grieve (or Not) Akanksha Agarwal 24 October 2023 Edited by Celina Kumala Illustrated by Louise Cen Trigger warning: This article mentions themes of death or dying. If at any point the content is distressing, please reach out for support via Griefline or refer to the services listed at the end of this article. Rumi once wrote, ‘Anything you lose comes round in another form.’ (Goodreads, n.d., p. 1). There are many ritualistic ways to memorialise the death of a loved one, but what if they had never “died”? Over the past decade, the intersection of technology and mental health has given rise to innovative solutions for various psychological conditions. From virtual reality therapy for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (Kothgassner et al., 2019) to prescription video games aimed at helping children manage Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Tiitto & Lodder, 2017), the mental health technology industry has expanded significantly. Enter, a recent addition to this landscape - the grief bot. In 2015, Roman Mazurenko, an entrepreneur and prominent figure in Moscow’s night-life scene, suddenly passed away from a fatal car accident (Newton, 2016). His close friend, Eugenia Kuyda, proceeded to create a “digital monument” in his memory (Newton, 2016). While grieving, she found herself re-reading all his old messages, feeling nostalgic at Roman’s unique word choices, and spelling. Kuyda had previously founded a startup involving artificially intelligent chat bots. After the incident, she fed her bot with Roman’s text exchanges. The bot then adopted Roman’s speech pattern, enabling her to chat with a version of him. This marked the birth of the griefbots, or chat bots programmed using digital remains (emails, text messages, social media posts) of a deceased individual to support their grieving loved ones. In other words, using natural language processing, these bots are able to mimic conversational patterns using the data of the deceased. Are these conversational patterns accurate? How then, does this impact the way we grieve? Should we even be using griefbots? To answer these, we could attempt to understand grief. Grief is a complex emotion. You could be grieving the loss of a loved one, a relationship, an object, or even an abstract idea (e.g. familiarity). Grief can also manifest at different times for each individual. According to the Australian Psychological Society ‘grief is the natural response to loss and can influence the physical, emotional, cognitive, behavioural and spiritual aspects of our lives.’ (APS, n.d, p. 1). In their book, Elizabeth Kubler-Ross and David Kessel (2014) coined ‘The Five Stages of Grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. Essentially, the model suggests an initial reaction of symbolic denial or shock. Following this is typically a phase of emotional support through vocalising the experience or making meaning. The final stage being acceptance, or moving forward. “Are they really gone?” Denial is viewed as a protective mechanism to meet the psyche where it is. “Why me?” Anger is interestingly framed as an anchor to connect you to someone you’ve lost. “What if they suddenly return?” Bargaining shifts from the past to the future, until the truth sinks in. “What’s the point?” Depression is protecting the nervous system from overload, and is arguably natural to grief, when not clinical. “I lost them, but I am going to be okay.” Acceptance as you start to move forward, with some stability. Now, each of these questions might manifest in different ways, and require different coping mechanisms. However, they do give us an indication of generic phases across unique manifestations of grief. In other words, these are not linear, clear-cut stages, rather, there is an element of individuality in the way we experience each stage. We might experience one stage before another, or circle back, or take a completely new route. In any case, this is one way to make sense of grief. Other theories around grief include Bowlby’s attachment theory (1980) which suggests that our response to losing someone is coded in the way our attachments develop. Silverman and Klass (1996) put forth the idea of continuing bonds, where the meaning of loss changes with the deceased living on in memory. On the other hand, Strobe and Schut (1999) posit a dual process with individuals constantly switching from avoidance or confrontation of loss. Regardless of your theoretical inclinations, chances are that one might seek closure, a sense of reconciliation or even self-fulfilment after experiencing loss. What, then, would be the wellbeing impacts of artificial chat bots, that are designed to adopt the language patterns of those we have lost, on the grieving process? Grief can result in cognitive changes, such as confusion, identity disturbances, dysphoria, and yearning among others (Bonnano & Kaltman, 2001). Norlock (2016) proposes that imaginal relationships with the deceased can reflect relational value, ethical behaviour (such as forgiveness), and relationship maintenance. Furthermore, it is argued that continued internal representations of people who have passed away might also add value to future relationships. In contrast, some may argue that interacting with an artificial grief bot might engender para-social relationships where the user is investing time into a relationship (Vost & Kamp, 2022); however, the receipt is unaware (similar to celebrities and their fans). Furthermore, anthropomorphising a non-living chatbot, and conflating this for a person might distort reality, take wrongful advice, delay grief, or fabricate new false memories (Vost & Kamp, 2022). It leads one to wonder, just what are the potential ethical issues surrounding griefbots? Data is impermanent, with the ability to be wiped (Grandinetti et al., 2020). Data is deeply contextual, contingent, and unstable (Grandinetti et al., 2020). In order to understand how the bot is responding, ensuring no advice is given, and also preserving the griever’s best interest, is a complex task. Moreover, viewing griefbots as permanent or true representations of the dead is another issue. There are also ethical questions around consent and whether the deceased are capable of giving consent to the usage of their data, along with users. Whether companies can be transparent about how the data is being handled, and the algorithms generated, remains unclear. Would knowing how the responses were generated changed the way people viewed grief bots, and would that defeat the purpose? Yet, there are broader challenges. If users disclose private information to profit-driven companies based on the trust with the person they have lost, the data could be misused. The role of protection plans in the event of deep fakers or hackers, becomes paramount. The large amount of data used also raises questions about the sustainability of such bots. Additionally, the high cost of sophisticated bots might create greater disparities in access to support. While autonomy may improve with access to immediate technology, the addictive interaction patterns could lead to dependence, overuse, and potentially social withdrawal. Furthermore, gender, age, sensitive content, changing political landscapes, might potentially bias the bot inherently. Griefbots remain a hotly contested topic, with widespread caution surrounding potential impacts. There have been attempts to design similar bots with ethical features in mind, and even suggestions to medically regulate or test such devices. However, this use for AI bots opens up a multitude of questions. By 2025, Vorst and Kamp (2022) speculate that holographic avatars could be generated through photographs, physical and digital remnants, even voice recordings. Ultimately, the impact of griefbots on our perception of mortality and memory challenges us to reconsider the boundaries of life, death, and the enduring essence of human connection in a digital age. Support resources If you are experiencing prolonged symptoms of grief or depression, please seek support via the following resources with different options for support: Grief Australia: counselling services, support groups, app https://www.grief.org.au/ga/ga/Get-Support.aspx?hkey=2876868e-8666-4ed2-a6a5-3d0ee6e86c30 Griefline: free telephone support, community forum and support groups https://griefline.org.au/ Better Health Channel: coping strategies, list of support services, education on grief https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/servicesandsupport/grief Beyond Blue: understanding grief, resources, support, counselling https://www.beyondblue.org.au/mental-health/grief-and-loss Lifeline: real stories, techniques & strategies, apps & tools, support guides, interactive https://toolkit.lifeline.org.au/topics/grief-loss/what-is-grief?gclid=CjwKCAjw-KipBhBtEiwAWjgwrE1pJaaBabh3pT_UR0PlVBZTFMEA26NVJe2ue8sqCF0BLg2rMI4i2xoCp5IQAvD_BwE Reach Out Australia: coping strategies https://au.reachout.com/articles/working-through-grief?gclid=CjwKCAjw-KipBhBtEiwAWjgwrKXLb9w-wXXVLIbhZDkPumIF6ebe-0Pk77Hv7-cK4dLDrHJxCRkyRBoC2B4QAvD_BwE Find a Helpline: for international/country-specific helplines https://findahelpline.com/ This list is not exhaustive, please refer to your area’s specific services for additional support. References Albert, S., & Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Sadness and depression . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 44(1), 248. https://doi.org/10.2307/351282 APS. (n.d.). Grief | APS . Australian Psychological Society | APS. https://psychology.org.au/for-the-public/psychology-topics/grief Basom, J. (2021, May 19). The ethical, social, and political implications of “Griefbots”. Medium . https://jonathanb108.medium.com/the-ethical-social-and-political-implications-of-griefbots-48780fd1d1c2 Bonanno, G. A., & Kaltman, S. (2001). The varieties of grief experience . Clinical Psychology Review , 21(5), 705-734. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-7358(00)00062-3 Craytor, J. K., & Kubler-Ross, E. (1969). On death and dying. The American Journal of Nursing , 69(12), 2710. https://doi.org/10.2307/3421124 Elder, A. (2019). Conversation from beyond the grave? A Neo‐confucian ethics of chatbots of the dead. Journal of Applied Philosophy , 37(1), 73-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12369 Goodreads. (n.d.). A quote by Rumi . Goodreads | Meet your next favorite book. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/32062-don-t-grieve-anything-you-lose-comes-round-in-another-form Grandinetti, J., DeAtley, T., & Bruinsma, J. (2020). The dead speak: Big data and digitally mediated death . AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research . https://doi.org/10.5210/spir.v2020i0.11122 Jiménez-Alonso, B., & De Luna, I. B. (2022). Correction to: Griefbots. A new way of communicating with the dead? Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science . https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-022-09687-3 Klass, D. (2021). The sociology of continuing bonds. Culture, Consolation, and Continuing Bonds in Bereavement, 113-128. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003243564-11 Kothgassner, O. D., Goreis, A., Kafka, J. X., Van Eickels, R. L., Plener, P. L., & Felnhofer, A. (2019). Virtual reality exposure therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): A meta-analysis. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2019.1654782 Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2014). On grief and grieving: Finding the meaning of grief through the five stages of loss. Simon & Schuster. https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=0TltiT8Y9CYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=grief+&ots=S1j1XyF91N&sig=pDnxX-bJQIJIFeX074oGrHRD0Ms&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=grief&f=false Lindemann, N. F. (2022). The ethics of ‘Deathbots’ . Science and Engineering Ethics , 28(6). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00417-x Newton, C. (2016, October 6). When her best friend died, she used artificial intelligence to keep talking to him . TheVerge.com . https://www.theverge.com/a/luka-artificial-intelligence-memorial-roman-mazurenko-bot Norlock, K. J. (2016). Real (and) imaginal relationships with the dead. The Journal of Value Inquiry , 51(2), 341-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-016-9573-6 Santa Clara University. (n.d.). AI, death, and mourning . https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/internet-ethics/resources/ai-death-and-mourning/ Schut, M. S. (1999). The dual process model of coping with bereavement: Rationale and description. Death Studies , 23(3), 197-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/074811899201046 Shardlow, J. (2022). Temporal perspectives and the phenomenology of grief. Review of Philosophy and Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-022-00659-5 Tiitto, M. V., & Lodder, R. A. (2017). Therapeutic Video Games for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) . WebmedCentral , 8(11). https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.26.355990 Van der Vorst, R., & Kamp, J. M. (2022). 12. Designing a griefbot-for-good . Moral design and technology, 215-241. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-922-0_12 Wicked back to