Search Results

New to science? New to Melbourne? New to OmniSci? Yes, yes and yes! We spoke to Jolin about joining OmniSci with an art background, growing through challenges, and her best local exhibit recommendations. Jolin is a designer at OmniSci and an exchange student from Singapore studying Psychology and Arts & Culture Management. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is contributing to our website, and to two articles as an illustrator. Meet OmniSci Designer Jolin See Jolin is a designer at OmniSci and an exchange student from Singapore studying Psychology and Arts & Culture Management. For Issue 4: Mirage, she is contributing to our website, and to two articles as an illustrator. interviewed by Caitlin Kane What are you studying? I am an exchange student doing psychology and arts management. Do you have any highlights of your uni career so far? Recently my friend showed me around campus. Parkville in particular is really pretty so I guess it would be a nice thing to romanticise your student life. I think that was one of the highlights. She showed me the secret garden at the Bioscience Building, which was really nice. It’s fun to just explore and stuff. What is your role at OmniSci and how would you explain it to someone? I am an illustrator. I guess using visual cues and using design processes to communicate text, communicate ideas. That’s how I would describe my role, or describe what I want to do when I illustrate. What first got you interested in science? I don’t know, I think this is my attempt to reconcile both arts and science. I feel like a lot of artists try to stay in their own little circles. Like if you’re doing art you just do art. If you’re doing theatre you only know how to do theatre and you never branch out to visual art or music or even psychology… But I think it is good to have many disciplines under your belt. You don’t have to be super good at every single thing, but I guess it helps in every single thing that you do if you have knowledge about everything else. Like you can transfer skills or knowledge from one discipline to another. I think that's very valuable. That’s what got me interested in science, because I'm not doing science in school, except psychology. Back at the management university where I’m from we do more managerial psychology, like HR and marketing, we don’t really do clinical psychology. It has been interesting, because here in UniMelb I am doing a clinical psych mod, which is very very different from what I do back home. Like the topics they choose to uncover are very different. It is expanding my knowledge, my horizons. And what stage are you up to in the process now? Just reading the first drafts, so familiarising myself with them. Trying to grasp the ideas, because I think a lot of them are beyond what I’ve ever known, so trying to grasp that first. How did you get involved with OmniSci? I heard about it first at O-Week. I met you [Editor-in-Chief Caitlin] at Southbank campus, so then we talked. I was planning on joining clubs but I didn’t know what club I wanted to join. This is one of the two clubs that I joined—I also joined the Bubble Tea Society. I just wanted to do something meaningful and nice while I’m here, rather than just travelling and having fun and everything. I thought it would be nice to get to know people and talk about our ideas and see how our perspectives are different, especially because I’m so far away. And also reconciling art and science. We always highlight the differences between science and art, but I thought that OmniSci would be an amazing place to create a bridge between that. I’ve also had ideas of starting my own communications channel about psychology facts, because a lot of things that I’ve learnt at school have been very useful in my own personal life. Perhaps this way of making science accessible through art would be helpful for the general public. There are people out there who want to share and impart the knowledge that they have. I thought OmniSci might be a nice place to start doing that. What is your favourite thing about contributing at OmniSci so far? I think having the opportunity itself is the best part. It takes a lot to start a magazine on your own, so to have that platform is a big thing. The accessibility, the opportunity given to put your work out there, or have your ideas made concrete and shared with everyone. I think that’s the best thing. Low barriers of entry! Can you share something you're excited about working on this issue? Collaborating with the writers! It’s one thing to work alone and develop your ideas, and it’s another to develop them with someone else. I’m really looking forward to exploring how my style can adapt to newer themes. What do you like doing in your spare time when you're not contributing at OmniSci? I like to go to book stores, art galleries, theatre…just a bunch of arts stuff. Do you have any recommendations for theatre, anything that you’ve seen recently? I was at Malthouse Theatre a few months back, and it was really good. I really recommend Malthouse. There’s a State Library Exhibition on fringe festivals in Australia . I really believe in fringe stuff, so I think that’s a really thought-provoking exhibition to reflect on what we define as “good” and “bad” art. I also went to watch Patroclus and Achilles at the UniMelb Shakespeare company. It’s important to support student theatre because that’s where future artists start out! Which chemical element would you name your firstborn child (or pet) after? Oh my god, it’s so painful…I’m going to go with Potassium, so I can nickname them K. I’ll call them K all the time, except when I’m mad—then I’ll call them Potassium. See Jolin's designs PT PT Real Life Replicants

< Back to Issue 5 When Dark Matters Ingrid Sefton 24 October 2023 Edited by Celia Quinn Illustrated by Louise Cen To put it simply, the entire visible universe is huge. In the scheme of it, we really are just tiny dots on a floating rock, in a vast and constantly expanding cosmos. Yet, as it turns out, that’s not even close to the full story. All the visible objects, planets and galaxies contribute less than 15% of the mass in the universe. The other 85%? Nobody knows for certain, but it has a name. Dark matter. More can be said about what dark matter is not, than what it is. It isn’t the baryonic or “normal” matter such as protons, neutrons and electrons which comprise our visible world. It also isn’t antimatter, composed of subatomic particles with opposite charges to normal matter. Instead, dark matter interacts with normal matter in a manner entirely different to that of antimatter. It’s not a type of black hole, nor simply a form of radiation, or a type of massless particle. So, what can be conclusively said? Essentially, nothing. As the name suggests, dark matter emits no light and therefore is not visible in the way normal matter is, making it difficult to observe. In fact, dark matter has only been “observed” by way of its gravitational effects. Therefore, we know it must have mass in order to be able to interact with visible matter gravitationally. It’s also imperative for it to be big enough to cause the massive gravitational effects seen in galaxies (Lochner et al., 2005). Estimates place the mass-energy content of the cosmos as being composed of 26.8% dark matter, 68.3% dark energy and a relatively miniscule 4.9% normal matter (Greicius, 2013). The terms dark matter and dark energy are often thrown around somewhat interchangeably. However, they explain distinct aspects of observed gravitational and physical phenomena. Dark matter can be thought of as an invisible substance which is only seen through its effects on gravity - the unexplained gravitational forces that hold together rapidly rotating galaxies and stopping them from flying apart. Dark energy is then the force responsible for pushing these clusters of galaxies and the universe apart, accelerating the rate of expansion of the universe (NASA/WMAP Science Team, 2013). Given the lack of answers about what dark matter is, an interesting question to ponder is how its existence was even discovered. Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky was the first to propose the idea of “dark matter”. His observations of the Cloma galaxy cluster led him to suggest if individual galaxies within the cluster were only held together by the gravitational force of visible mass, the galaxies should fly apart due to their high velocity (American Museum of Natural History, 2000). He termed this mysterious force responsible for binding galaxy clusters together “dark matter”. It wasn’t until the 1970s that Vera Rubin became the first person to establish the existence of dark matter through her work with spiral galaxies. Spiral galaxies aren’t stationary. They rotate, with stars different distances from the centre moving in roughly circular orbits around this centre. The highest concentration of visible stars is found within the core region of a galaxy, leading to the assumption that the majority of mass, and therefore gravity, should also be concentrated there. An implication of this is the expectation that the farther a star is from this gravitational centre of a galaxy, the slower its projected orbital speed should be (American Museum of Natural History, 2000). However, alongside astronomer Kent Ford, Rubin made the puzzling observation that stars in both the centre and outer regions of any galaxy were moving at the same speed (American Museum of Natural History, 2000). Her calculations provided convincing observational evidence of Zwicky’s theory. The presence of a significant mass of invisible matter in the outer regions of a galaxy would create an even, spherical distribution of matter, gravitationally explaining the observed rotation of galaxies and their velocity distribution (NASA/WMAP Science Team, 2013). Fifty years later and experimental evidence still remains the only “proof” of dark matter we have, having been unable to directly detect dark matter. Despite this, a majority of scientists are confident in its existence. Rubin’s insight into the velocity distribution of galaxy rotation curves is amongst some of the most convincing observational evidence for the presence of dark matter. Also supporting its existence are the various discrepancies that arise in the process of gravitational lensing. Gravitational lensing occurs when an emitted source of light is deflected or distorted by the gravitational field of a large mass. Based upon the degree of deflection, the gravitational potential of the object can be calculated, alongside the amount of matter in the lensing object (Xenon Dark Matter Project, 2022). Yet, the strength of this gravitational lensing observed in many galaxy clusters is significantly greater than that calculated from visible matter alone. These inconsistencies point to the existence of unseen mass, or dark matter, as a convincing explanation for the observed lensing effects. It’s become clear that the standard model of physics, explaining the different particles and forces comprising the visible world, cannot be used in attempting to explain dark matter. In response, researchers are exploring a number of avenues to find hypothetical new particles. Amongst the most likely candidates for the composition of dark matter are two classes of particles: Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) and axions. WIMPs are distinguished as a class of particles created thermally in the early universe at very high temperatures, while axions originate predominantly from non-thermal mechanisms (Griest, 2002). Compared to WIMPS, or other known type of particles, axions would be thousands of times lighter but also significantly more abundant than WIMPs (Darling & Knight, 2022). Given the infinite potential to invent hypothetical substances that resolve the enigma of dark matter, experimentation to find these particles has significant challenges. Current research efforts are focused on the detection of such particles. More than a kilometre underground in Stawell, Victoria, the Stawell Gold Mine has been converted into an underground laboratory – one with no light, no noise, and no radioactivity to interfere with dark matter signals (Lippincott, 2023). Here, an experiment known as DAMA/Libra, which started in Italy in 1998, is being replicated. For two decades, what is suspected to be dark matter has been detected at the same time each year in Italy. The Stawell Lab is seeking to verify these results, operating below the equator to determine any potential effect of seasonal interference from the Earth (Darling & Knight, 2022). The research utilises the technology SABRE (Sodium iodide with Active Background REjection), which are sodium iodide crystals that emit flashes of light if a sub-atomic particle hits the nuclei of atoms within the crystals (Darling & Knight, 2022). Hence, if a particle of dark matter hits a nucleus, a tiny flash of light should be created. Simultaneously, researchers at the University of Western Australia have been working on the detection project ORGAN (Oscillating Resonant Group Axion), in order to determine the presence of axions (McAllister, 2022). Despite not having detected any dark matter signals thus far, such experimentation has still offered important insights. Not detecting dark matter within a certain mass range and level of sensitivity allows exclusion limits to be set around the possible characteristics of axions. This tells researchers where to stop looking and, instead, where they should be focusing their resources and efforts. Despite the disarray around “solving” the conundrum of dark matter, alongside its less than reassuring name, it’s not actually something that people should be scared about. The gravity that dark matter is responsible for enables our existence, with dark energy having allowed the expansion of the early universe to become what we see, and don’t see, today (Xenon Dark Matter Project, 2022). Detecting the presence of dark matter is about advancing our understanding of the size, structure, and future of the universe. Current research approaches may seem slightly haphazard, attempting to find something that has never been detected and may not even exist. But when pursuing strange cosmological phenomena beyond our understanding, taking a wild stab in the dark may be exactly what we need to do. References American Museum of Natural History (2000). Vera Rubin and Dark Matter . Retrieved September 1, 2023 from https://www.amnh.org/learn-teach/curriculum-collections/cosmic-horizons-book/vera-rubin-dark-matter Darling, A., & Knight, B. (August 20, 2022). The search for dark matter . ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-21/dark-matter-particle-physics-sabre-experiment-stawell-victoria/101113010 Greicius, T. (March 21, 2013). Planck Mission Brings Universe Into Sharp Focus. NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/planck/news/planck20130321.html Griest, K. (2002). WIMPs and MACHOs . In P. Murdin (Ed.), Encylopedia of Astronomy and Astrophysics: CRC Press. Lippincott, H. (August 9, 2023). Researchers dig deep underground in hopes of finally observing dark matter. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/researchers-dig-deep-underground-in-hopes-of-finally-observing-dark-matter-211075 Lochner, J. C., Williamson, L., & Fitzhugh, E. (2005). Possibilities for Dark Matter. Retrieved August 29, 2023 from https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/educators/galaxies/imagine/titlepage.html McAllister, B. (July 26, 2022). This Australian experiment is on the hunt for an elusive particle that could help unlock the mystery of dark matter. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/this-australian-experiment-is-on-the-hunt-for-an-elusive-particle-that-could-help-unlock-the-mystery-of-dark-matter-187014 NASA/WMAP Science Team. (2013). WMAP produces new results . Retrieved September 13, 2023 from https://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/ Xenon Dark Matter Project. (2022). Dark Matter . Retrieved August 25, 2023 from https://xenonexperiment.org/partners/ Wicked back to

Bored of that one topic you need to keep revising? Read our chat with Elijah McEvoy about getting inspired by all areas of science, his sci-fi movie recommendations, and hear about his upcoming article about artificial intelligence. Elijah is a writer and editor at OmniSci and a second-year Bachelor of Science student. For Issue 4: Mirage, he is writing about artificial intelligence that masquerades as human, and contributing to two articles as an editor. Mee t OmniSci Writer and Editor Elijah McEvoy Elijah is a writer and editor at OmniSci and a second-year Bachelor of Science student. For Issue 4: Mirage, he is writing about artificial intelligence that masquerades as human, and contributing to two articles as an editor. interviewed by Caitlin Kane What are you studying? Bachelor of Science, looking to major in infection and immunity. I still have some back ups, but that’s looking to be the path. I’m in second year, first semester. Do you have any advice for younger students interested in what you’re studying or more generally? The Bachelor of Science is really, really good. That’s my suggestion. If you’re someone like me who loves all areas of science and was a bit unsure about what path I wanted to go down, then science is really great to explore all those opportunities. What first got you interested in science? I would say probably science fiction movies. I saw Jurassic Park when I was really young and my parents bought it for me on DVD. I found all that science-y background to it very interesting and obviously those stories gets you engaged… What's the scientific backing behind that? That would probably be very early what got me interested in science. Did you always imagine that you would study science formally, or this kind of science? Not exactly. I’ve had the science pathway in mind for a long time, but there were a lot of things in high school that made me consider whether I did or didn’t want to do it. I found writing very interesting in high school, and I was considering whether I do science or I don’t do science… In the end, I’ve found everything that I’m learning so fascinating and I love the ability that I’m continuing to learn everyday in science and that my perspective continues to grow. And the final pathway… is something that’s relatively new. COVID got me interested in studying viruses and microbiology and the management of those situations as well. That is a bit more of a new thing, but all build off continuing to learn and do things in science. What would be your dream role as a scientist? Do you have a job in mind after your studies? I’m a bit undecided… A dream role of mine would definitely involve learning new things, where I can communicate and work in a position that’s not just in a lab or doing continuous research. Something where I can take the stuff learnt in a lab, figured out in a laboratory and apply it to society as a whole, whether working in government or with organisations in public health particularly infection and immunity. What is your role at OmniSci? I’m writing an article for the magazine… I’ve always loved writing and it’s given me an outlet to pursue a bit of writing in a scientific field, which is something very exciting that I’m passionate about. I would describe [editing] as a really great opportunity to work with someone else to hone their idea. I find it very interesting to see what other people's ideas about other aspects of science are and get informed through them, to encourage their opinions and ideas, and the way they express that. Are there other roles you would be interested in trying in the future? Or any other topics you are interested in writing about? Yes, there probably would be. I’ve always found… if you go back to Jurassic park, genetic engineering is always an interesting topic to cover. Particularly one that is growing and growing nowadays with greater access to it. I find all of this very interesting, the science behind genetic engineering… functional and ethical applications, all those questions. How did you get involved with OmniSci? I saw it on the initial club listing in first year, but I don't think anything came out of it… I was trying to figure my way around university as a whole. Then at the start of the year, I made a commitment to myself that I wanted to get involved a bit more. I saw it again in the club listing website and I checked out the website and saw how many people were involved and had different roles and came from different science backgrounds and I thought “oh this looks like a very accepting club and organisation to get involved with” and just signed up! I saw the welcome night that you guys were having and went along to that and decided I wanted to get involved. What is your favourite thing about contributing at OmniSci so far, or something that you’re looking forward to? Giving myself an outlet to learn new things. What I’m writing about isn’t really within my field of science particularly, but it’s a topic I’ve chosen because I find it interesting and it’s encouraged me to go on and learn a lot more about that. But not only that, it’s encouraged me to talk with other people at OmniSci that do know a bit more and can share their opinions. It’s really helped me guide what research I do and where I go from there. That’s probably my favourite thing: giving myself an excuse to learn a bit more about science through writing. Can you give us a sneak peak or pitch of what you're working on this issue? If there’s a lot to come, maybe just what stage you’re up to in the process? Within the theme of mirage, it’s specifically about artificial intelligence that is able to mimic human ability, whether that be human speech, human personality, how we look through deep fake photos and generative AI technology. And looking at how that could potentially impact different wings of life, and how that can be exploited. I mainly go into general discussion of those sort of things and the potential, but I do end on the idea of what needs to be done considering how fast this AI is progressing, and whether regulation is necessary in order to ensure that human work is protected and us as humans are not being exploited by some of the potential applications from this technology. What do you like doing in your spare time (when you're not contributing at OmniSci)? I’m a big movie person. I watch as many movies as possible and I discuss movies with friends… making the most of the student movie nights and cheap deals. Seeing as many movies as possible from a variety of backgrounds. I also like writing. I do a bit of writing in my spare time, but mostly movies. Do you have any movie recommendations? Big question. I love horror movies so if you’re looking for a horror movie I recommend ‘Hereditary’, it’s my favourite horror movie. I guess within the realm of scifi and even artificial intelligence, a really good one that I saw is Ex Machina. Which chemical element would you name your firstborn child (or pet) after? I should be able to think of one—I’m a biochemistry student! Fluorine sounds interesting. Fluora could be a nickname. Yeah, something that you can shorten down. Read Elijah's articles Real Life Replicants

The Rise of The Planet of AI By Ashley Mamuko When discussing AI, our minds instinctively fear of sentience and robotic uprising. However, is our focus misplaced on the “inevitable” humanoid future when AI has become ubiquitous and undetectable in our lives? Edited by Hamish Payne & Katherine Tweedie Issue 1: September 24, 2021 Illustration by Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin On August 19th 2021, Tesla announced a bold project on its AI Day. The company plans to introduce humanoid robots for consumer use. These machines are expected to perform basic, mundane household tasks and streamline easily into our everyday lives.With this new release, the future of AI seems to be closing in. No longer do we stand idle, expecting the inevitable humanoid-impacted future. By 2022, these prototypes are expected to launch. It seems inevitable that our future would include AI. We have already familiarised ourselves with this emerging technology in the media we continue to enjoy. Wall E, Blade Runner, The Terminator, and Ex Machina are only a few examples of the endless list of AI-related movies, spanning decades and detailing both our apprehension and acceptance through multiple decades. Most of these movies portray these machines as sentient yet intrinsically evil, as they pursue human destruction. But to further understand the growing field of study of AI, it’s important to first briefly introduce its history and procurement before noting the growing concerns played up in the Hollywood Blockbusters. The first fundamental interpretations of Artificial Intelligence span a vast period of time. Its first acknowledgement may be attributed to the 1308 Catalan poet and theologian Ramon Llull. His work Ars generalis ultima (The Ultimate General Art) advanced a paper-based mechanical process that creates new knowledge from a combination of concepts. Llull aimed to create a method of deducing logical religious and philosophical truths numerically. In 1642, French mathematician Blaise Pascal invented the first mechanical calculating machine; the first iteration of the modern calculator (1). The Pascaline, as it is now known, only had the ability to add or subtract values using a dial and spoke system (2). Though these two early ideas do not match our modern perceptions of what AI is, they lay the foundation of pushing logical processes to do more than just mechanical means. These two instances in history foreshadow the use of mechanical devices in performing human cognitive functions. Not till the 1940s and early 1950s did we finally obtain the necessary means of more complex data processing systems. With the introduction of computers, the novelty of algorithms created a more streamlined function of storing, computing, and producing. In 1943, Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts founded the idea of artificial neural networks in their paper “A Logical Calculus of Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity” (3). This presented the notion of computers behaving similar to a human mind and introduced the subsection of “deep learning”. Alan Turing proposed a test to assess a human’s ability to differentiate between human behaviour and robotic behaviour. In 1950, the Turing Test (later known as the Imitation Game) asked participants to identify if the dialogue they were engaging with was with another person or a machine (4). Despite the breakthroughs made in this expertise, the term Artificial Intelligence wasn’t finally coined till 1955 by John McCarthy of AI. Later on, McCarthy along with many other budding experts would hold the famous 1956 Dartmouth College Workshop (5). This meetup of a few scientists would later be pinpointed in history as the birth of the AI field. As the field continued to grow, more public concerns were raised alongside the boom of science fiction literature and movies cropping up. The notorious 1968 movie 2001: A Space Odyssey shaped such a role into the public perception of the field that by the 1960s and 1970s, an AI Winter occurred. Very little notable progress was made in the field due to the lack of funding based on fear (6). Finally after some time had passed and some more advancements were made with algorithm technology, the notable Deep Blue chess game against Gary Kasparov. The event occurring in May 1997 where the Deep Blue robot beat world champion chess superstar Gary Kasparov marked a silence ushering of perhaps a “decline in human society” at the fall of the machine. Fast forward to now, AI has traversed through leaps and bounds to achieve a much more sophisticated level of algorithms and machine learning techniques. To further understand the uses of AI, I interviewed Dr Liz Sonenberg, a professor in the School of Computing and Information Systems at The University of Melbourne and is a Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research Infrastructure and Systems) in Chancellery Research and Enterprise. She’s an expert in the field and has done a multitude of research. "Machine learning is simply a sophisticated algorithm to detect patterns in data sets that has a basis in statistics." With this algorithm, we have been able to implement it in a variety of our daily tech encounters. AI sits behind the driving force of Google Maps and navigation, as well as voice control. It can easily be found anywhere. “Just because these examples do not exhibit super intelligence, does not mean they are not useful,” Dr Sonenberg explains. Dr Sonenberg alludes that the real problem with AI lies within it’s fairness. These “pattern generating algorithms” at times “learn from training sets not representative of the whole population, which can end up with biased answers.” With a flawed training set, a flawed system is in place. This can be harmful to certain demographics and cause a sway on consumer habits. With AI-aided advice, the explanation behind outcomes and decisions are not supported either. Algorithms are only able to mechanically produce an output, but not explain them. With more high-stakes decisions untrusted upon the reliability of AI, the issue of flawed algorithms becomes more pronounced. With my interview with Dr Sonenberg, not one moment was the fear of super-intelligence, robot uprisings, and the likes brought up... With the new-found knowledge of AI’s current concerns I brought up with Dr Sonenberg, I conducted another interview with Dr Tim Miller, a Professor of Computer Science in the School of Computing and Information Systems at The University of Melbourne, and Dr Jeannie Paterson, a Professor teaching subjects in law and emerging technologies in the School of Law at The University of Melbourne. They both are also Co-Directors at The Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Ethics (CAIDE). As we began the interview, Dr Miller explained again that AI “is not magic” and implements the use of “math and statistics”. Dr Paterson was clear to bring up that anti-discrimination laws have been in place but as technology evolves and embeds itself more into public domain, it must be scrutinised. The deployment of AI can easily cause harm to people due to systems not being public, causing sources to be difficult to identify and causily attribute. With the prospect of biased algorithms, a fine dissonance occurs. Dr Miller elaborated on the use of AI in medical imaging used in private hospitals. As private hospitals tend to attract a certain echelon of society, the training set is not wholly representative of the greater population. “A dilemma occurs with racist algorithms… if it is not used [outcomes] could be worse.” When the idea of a potential super-intelligent robot emerging in the future was brought into conversation, the two didn’t seem to be very impressed. “Don’t attribute superhuman qualities [to it],” says Dr Paterson. Dr Miller states that the trajectory of AI’s future is difficult to map. Predictions in the past of how AI progresses with it’s abilities have occurred, but they occur much later than expected… easily decades later. The idea of super-intelligence also poses the question on how to define intelligence. “Intelligence is multidimensional, it has its limits,” says Dr Miller. In this mystical future world of AI, a distinction is placed not just on, “what will machines be able to do but what will not have them do,” states Dr Miller. “This regards anything that requires social interaction, creativity and leadership”; so the future is aided by AI, not dictated by it. However, in a more near future, some very real concerns are posed. Job security, influence on consumer habits, transparency, law approach, and accountability are only a few. With more and more jobs being replaced by machines, every industry is at stake. “Anything repetitive can be automated,” says Dr Miller. But this does not instinctively pose a negative, as more jobs will be created to further aid the use of AI. And not all functions of a job can be replaced by AI. Dr Paterson explains with the example of radiology that AI is able to diagnose and interpret scans, but a radiologist does more than just diagnose and interpret on a daily basis. “The AI is used to aid in the already existing profession, not simply overtake it.” Greater transparency is needed in showing how AI uses our data. “It shouldn’t be used to collect data unlimitedly,” says Dr Paterson, “is it doing what’s being promised, is it discriminating people, is it embedding inequality?” With this in mind, Dr Paterson suggests that more law authorities should be educated on how to approach topics regarding AI. “There needs [to be] better explanation… [We] need to educate judges and lawyers.” With the notorious Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal of 2018, the big question of accountability was raised. The scandal involved the unwarranted use of data from 87 million Facebook users by Cambridge Analytica which served to support the Trump campaign. This scandal brought to light how the data we used can be exploited nonconsensually and used to influence our behaviours, as this particular example seemed to sway the American presidential election. Simply put, our information can be easily exploited and sent off to data analytics to further influence our choices. This creates the defence that apps “ merely provide a [service], but people use [these services] in that way,” as said by Dr Miller. Simply put, the blame becomes falsely shifted onto the users for the spread of misinformation. The impetus, however, should lie with social networking sites disclosing to it’s users more transparency on their data usage and history as well as providing adequate protection on their data. To be frank, the future of robotic humanoid AI integrating seamlessly into human livelihoods will not occur within our lifetimes, or potentially even our grandchildren’s. The forecast seems at best, unpredictable; and at worst, unattainable due to the complexity of what constitutes full “sentience”. However, this does not indicate that AI lies dormant within our lives. The fundamental technology based in computing, statistics, and information systems lays most of the groundwork for most transactions we conduct online, whether monetary or social or otherwise. AI and it’s promises should not be shunted aside due to the misleading media surrounding it’s popularised definition and “robot uprisings” but rather taught more broadly to all audiences. So perhaps Elon Musk’s fantastical ideas of robotic integration will not occur by 2022 but the presence of AI in modern technologies should not go unnoticed. References: 1. "A Very Short History of Artificial Intelligence (AI)." 2016. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2016/12/30/a-very-short-history-of-artificial-intelligence-ai/?sh=38106456fba2. 2. “Blaise Pascal Invents a Calculator: The Pascaline.” n.d. Jeremy Norma's Historyofinformation.com. https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=382. 3, 4, 6. “History of Artificial Intelligence.” n.d. Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/artificial-intelligence/history-of-ai. 5. Smith, Chris, Brian McGuire, Ting Huang, and Gary Yang. 2006. “The History of Artificial Intelligence,” A file for a class called History of Computing offered at the University of Washington. https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/csep590/06au/projects/history-ai.pdf.

By Monica Blasioli < Back to Issue 3 The Ethics of Space Travel By Monica Blasioli 10 September 2022 Edited by Yvette Marris and Tanya Kovacevic Illustrated by Aisyah Md Sulhanuddin Next "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." Even without a hyphen next to that quote, people around the world will recognise it. The mere sentence can bring forth a flurry of emotions and thoughts - national pride, curiosity, nervousness, and even scepticism - but most will recognise them as the first words spoken by Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, in July of 1969. Despite this, there are deeper considerations that need to be taken when discussing space travel than what first meets the eye. Just like on Earth, there are a number of health and environmental implications that should not be ignored in the flurry of excitement to explore the wonders of space. Not only are passenger safety and climate change areas of concern, particularly with constant and normalised space travel, but so are the ethics of monetising from experiences that can inflict so much damage. First and foremost, space exploration can foster communication and cooperation between countries. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an independent branch of the US federal government, involves countries such as Australia, Italy, Russia, France and Germany. NASA prides themselves on their international cooperation, celebrating their achievements in bringing together a global community of scientists to collaborate on space research and communication. And this is truly the reality! For over 64 years, NASA has successfully commercialised off the excitement surrounding space exploration, creating jobs across the globe (and in space), and sparking interest in science internationally through captivating space images, educational programs and videos, and even a clothing range at H&M! In particular, collaborative work and research conducted at the International Space Station (ISS) has been a major benefit to humans. Despite not even being on Earth itself, it has deepened the understanding of our home planet. Research has revealed how the human body reacts to increased exposure to radiation and how plants grow in space, enabling a better awareness of how plants grow on Earth, as well as how chemicals and materials react to low-gravity environments. In fact, without space research, we wouldn’t be able to comprehend some things we take for granted on Earth. For example, how the moon impacts the tides and how long a day lasts (and also what your personality traits are, if you buy into that stuff). However, there is always a dark side to the moon. The normalisation of space travel through its commercialisation could have devastating environmental impacts. On July 20 2021, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos took off to space in his New Shepard rocket, built by his own company, Blue Origin. For ten minutes and ten seconds. Bezos and his company celebrated this moment as the beginning of their vision for a future where space travel, along with citizens living and working in space, is normalised - and, of course, commercialised by his company. While we congratulate Bezos and his team, can we really rejoice in Bezos’ vision for the future knowing that the impacts for those back at home could be deadly? A 2010 study using a global climate model found that 1000 launches of suborbital rockets each year would produce enough carbon to change polar ozones by 6%, increase the temperature over the poles by one degree Celsius, and reduce polar sea ice levels by 5%. (1). And of course, the rockets could contribute to climate change. The vast amount of soot produced by spaceships yields the potential to further break down the Earth’s atmosphere, and more worryingly, even begin to break down the current untouched outer layers (2). Once again, these impacts make it difficult to justify Bezos’ plans to make paying for space travel a ‘norm’ in our lives. The precise impacts of this may be unknown, however, Karen Rosenlof, senior scientist from the Chemical Sciences Laboratory in the U.S. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, warns that releasing pollutants into spaces they have never been before never has positive outcomes (2). There seems to be little concern by Bezos about these effects and too much concern on monopolising from the endeavours instead. And this is only the beginning - the potential health disasters could be even worse. Just like Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence in Passengers, we are not immune to a potential space-based disaster. For over 50 years, NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) has been researching the impacts of space travel on humans - and trying to decrease the impacts on their astronauts. Many space radiation particles are more deadly than those on Earth, and more difficult to be shielded from, increasing the chance of cancer and degenerative diseases, such as cataracts (3). The usual radiation protective measures do not hold up, particularly when travelling further distances from Earth, to a planet like Mars, where the radiation exists at higher, deadlier levels (3). In fact, on a trip to Mars, three different gravity fields would be encountered, and passengers would need to readjust to Earth’s gravity when returning (3). This damages spatial orientation, coordination and balance, as well as causing acute space motion sickness in travellers, which can lead to chronic conditions (3). All in all, this is still only the beginning of space travel and the research surrounding it. There are still - quite literally - galaxies of information that still need to be uncovered, meaning humans don’t have all the answers yet. This reach to the stars may blind us to issues later down the line which still lack research - long term exposure to radiation, prolonged consumption of dehydrated “space” food, the change in gravity, and how all of these cumulatively will interact in the long term… the list goes on and on. Are further endeavours into space worth the impacts on our world and fellow humans alike? And all to further line the pockets already filled with billions of dollars? References 1. Ross M, Mills M, Toohey D. Potential climate impact of black carbon emitted by rockets. Geophysical Research Letters. 2010 December 28;37(24):1-5. 2. Pultarova S. The rise of space tourism could affect Earth's climate in unforeseen ways, scientists worry [Internet]. 2021 July 26. Available from: https://www.space.com/environmental-impact-space-tourism-flights 3. Abadie L, Cranford N, Lloyd C, Shelhamer M, Turner J. The Human Body in Space; 2021 February 3 [updated 2022 February 24]. Available from: https://www.nasa.gov/hrp/bodyinspace/ Previous article Next article alien back to

< Back to Issue 2 Building the Lightsaber Some of the most iconic movie gadgets are the oldest ones. For this issue we look at how the lightsaber was brought to life. by Manthila Ranatunga 10 December 2021 Edited by Sam Williams and Tanya Kovacevic Illustrated by Rohith S Prabhu Star Wars : A New Hope was a massive success when it hit cinemas back in 1977. It was a groundbreaking sensation in the field of science fiction movies and computer generated imagery (CGI) in films. What really caught many fans’ eyes was, of course, the lightsaber. Also referred to as a “laser sword”, it is described as “an elegant weapon, for a more civilised age”. Now in our civilised age, we have decided to replicate this dangerous weapon. Lightsabers have already been built by a few enthusiasts. For this piece, we will be focusing on Hacksmith Industries’ lightsaber build from 2020 , as it is the closest to the real deal. Fig. 1. “Hacksmith Industries’ latest lightsaber build”, Hacksmith Industries, 4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD, 2020. Hacksmith Industries was founded by James Hobson, an engineer who builds real-life versions of film and video game gadgets. After multiple attempts, the team managed to fabricate a retractable, plasma-based lightsaber. However, this is not a real lightsaber, but more-so a protosaber in the Star Wars universe. We will get back to this point later on. How do they work? Let us first talk about how lightsabers work in the movies. A lightsaber consists of three parts: the hilt, the Kyber crystal and the blade itself. Similar to a traditional sword, the hilt is the handle and is made of a durable metal such as aluminium. It contains the Kyber crystal, which is a rare crystal found in the Star Wars universe and is the power source of the lightsaber. Moving onto the more interesting part, the blade is a beam of plasma. Often called “the fourth state of matter”, it is created by heating gas up to temperatures as high as 2,500 degrees celsius. A battery inside the hilt activates the crystal. The produced plasma is then focused through a lens and directed outwards. An electromagnetic field, essentially a force field, generated at the hilt contains the plasma in a defined beam and directs it back into the hilt. The crystal absorbs the energy and recycles it. Hence lightsabers are extremely energy-efficient, allowing Jedi Knights to use them for their whole lifetimes. Fig. 2. Robert W. Schönholz, Blue Lightsaber, c.2016. Of course, the lightsaber breaks the laws of physics. Electromagnetic fields do not work as they do on fictional planets like Coruscant. Energy-dense power sources such as Kyber crystals do not exist in real life, which leads us to the protosaber. In Star Wars lore, a protosaber is a lightsaber with an external power source. It was the predecessor to the lightsaber when Kyber crystals could not be contained inside the hilt. Since real-life high energy sources cannot be squished into the hilt, Hacksmith Industries' lightsaber build is reminiscent of the early protosaber. The build The engineers at Hacksmith Industries settled on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) as the power source, the same gas used for home heating systems and barbecues. This gas is fed through the brass and copper hilt, and is burnt continuously to keep producing plasma. To form the beam shape of the blade, they incorporated laminar flow of gas. Ever seen videos of “frozen” water coming out of taps like this ? Laminar flow occurs when layers of fluid molecules, in this case LPG, flow without mixing. In this instance, a smooth beam is created. Unlike actual lightsabers, the beam does not return to the hilt to be absorbed. Of course, to be a lightsaber, it has to function like one, too. The plasma is extremely hot, reaching up to 2,200 degrees celsius. Therefore, it can cut through metal and other objects much like we see in the movies. This also means contact with the blade can lead to serious or even fatal injuries. The external power supply is in the form of a backpack, with mounted LPG canisters and electronics for assistance. Overall, the build looks, feels and works like a real lightsaber, which makes it a pretty accurate replica. However, we do not have the Force or ancient Jedi wisdom, so there are some notable imperfections in the design. Fig. 3. “Finished lightsaber build”, Hacksmith Industries, 4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD, 2020. Colours Lightsabers come in a variety of colours, each reflecting the wielder's moral values in Star Wars canon. Blue, for example, represents justice and protection. Green, blue and red are the most commonly seen in the movies, but lightsabers also come in purple, orange, yellow, white and black. If you did high school science, you may remember mixing bunsen burner flames with salts to produce colours. The same principle applies here; salts can be mixed in with plasma to colour the blade. For example, Strontium Chloride gives a red colour, so you can finally live out your Sith fantasies. Fig. 4. “Lightsaber colours by mixing salts”, Hacksmith Industries, 4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD, 2020. Improvements The downside of using plasma is that we cannot fight with it. Blades would pass right through each other without clashing. To fix this, a metal rod that can withstand high temperatures, such as Tungsten, could form the blade with a beam of plasma around it. However, this means the lightsaber would not be retractable, which defeats the purpose. To keep the blade coloured, salts have to be continuously fed through the hilt. This can be done with another pressurised canister along with the LPG, although it requires extra space. Despite the imperfections, the protosaber by Hacksmith Industries is the closest prototype to a real-life lightsaber. With constantly evolving technology, we will be able to build a more compact model that more closely resembles those in the movies. Makers all around the world are building cool movie gadgets like the lightsaber, so keep a lookout for your favourite ones. You never know what the nerds may bring! References 1. Amy Tikkanen, “Star Wars”, Britannica, published April 10, 2008, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Star-Wars-film-series. 2, 4, 7. Hacksmith Industries, “4000° PLASMA PROTO-LIGHTSABER BUILD (RETRACTABLE BLADE!)”, October 2020, YouTube video, 18:15, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC6J4T_hUKg. 3. Joshua Sostrin, “Keeping it real with the Hacksmith”, YouTube Official Blog (blog), November 12, 2020, https://blog.youtube/creator-and-artist-stories/the-hacksmith-10-million-subscribers/. 5. Daniel Kolitz, “Are Lightsabers Theoretically Possible?”, Gizmodo, published August 10, 2021, https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2021/08/are-lightsabers-theoretically-possible/. 6. Richard Rogers, “Lightsaber Battery Analysis”, Arbin Instruments: News, published October 3, 2019, https://www.arbin.com/lightsaber-battery-analysis/. 8. Phil Edwards, “Star Wars lightsaber colors, explained”, Vox, published May 4, 2015, https://www.vox.com/2015/5/31/8689811/lightsaber-colors-star-wars. Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

< Back to Issue 2 Mastering Chaos with Pen and Paper The mathematical laws which govern our chaotic and complex universe have found special use in describing the rapidly changing global climate. The work of three research scientists, with backgrounds in physics and meteorology, offered crucial insight into models describing the chaotic processes of climate change, granting them the 2021 Physics Nobel Prize. by Xen Papailiadis 10 December 2021 Edited by Mia Horsfall & Katherine Tweedie Illustrated by Jess Nguyen The world in which we live is densely packed with randomness and disorder. From the stampede of pedestrians navigating a major intersection and meshing together at the zebra crossing, to a flock of blackbirds hovering above like a shapeless dark cloud. All seems random and without any sense of pattern. However, at a very fundamental level, all of these processes can be described by logic and equations; as once remarked by Galileo, “the order of the natural world is written in the language of mathematics”. Through the tireless efforts of natural scientists from across the world, over millennia we have developed a remarkable understanding of the nature of the physical world. At the atomic scale of quantum physics right up to the largest astronomical objects in our universe, physics can both describe the present and decisively predict the future and past of a system. This is all with a pinch of salt, of course, as we run into some serious issues where probability and uncertainty takes over at the quantum level (best saved for another feature article), however, by and large we are capable of determining how a rocket will launch into space and where it will land on dry land, thanks to this deterministic tool. This may seem like the end of the story, however, Mother Nature will not dispel all her secrets at once. In the past century, scientists studying random behaviour, such as how clouds move and disperse or how the small fluctuations in the stock market can be tracked, have been at a loss applying deterministic methods (i.e. methods where we can determine or predict the outcome from a few fixed starting conditions) to these systems. There seemed to be no way to accurately predict the evolution of the system through time. This began with the likes of Poincare fruitlessly predicting the future movement of the planets in our solar system at the request of a monarch, and later Lorenz with his breakthrough and accidental discovery of the mathematical field of chaos itself. “Chaos Theory” is the study of complex nonlinear dynamic systems. In other words, a reckoning with systems that display persistent randomness and a perceived lack of total predictability. There is a nuance to this, however, as a system can simultaneously appear ordered, yet harbour chaotic behaviour within (as Lorenz discovered). Alternatively the systems may seem entirely chaotic however it obeys certain patterns when looked at closely (such as the aforementioned flocking birds). Among all the far reaching applications of Chaos Theory in describing the natural and human-made world, the most recent development has also been deemed worthy of the Nobel Prize. On Tuesday 5th October of this year, three leading scientists in their respective fields were awarded the title of the Nobel Prize, including a share in a $1.53 AUD million reward, by the Royal Swedish Academy of the Sciences. The Nobel recipients are Syukuro Manabe of Princeton University, Klaus Hasselmann of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, and Giorgio Parisi of Sapienza University of Rome. The prize itself was awarded “for groundbreaking contributions to our understanding of complex physical systems”, including “the physical modelling of Earth’s climate… and reliably predicting global warming”. This is the first occasion a Nobel Prize in Physics has been attributed to the field of environmental science and studying the future of the world’s changing climate, and initiates an interesting chapter in the interplay between research in physics, mathematics, and the global climate in decades to come. Receiving one half of the total prize money, Professor Parisi was awarded for the discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems from atomic to planetary scales. Having been at the cutting edge of complex systems research since the 1980’s, Parisi observed hidden patterns in disordered complex materials. His discoveries in understanding and describing the behaviour of these seemingly random materials and phenomena has far reaching contributions into biology, neuroscience and machine learning. Parisi’s work provides a mathematical framework for studying the evolution of the global climate as an example of a complex system. The Earth’s climate is a complex system of vital importance to humankind. Professors Manabe and Hasselmann, two senior climate scientists, shared in the other half of the prize for their contributions in modelling the Earth’s climate system to reliably predict global warming and climate change. In the 1960’s, Professor Manabe led the development of physical modelling of the Earth’s climate, uniting previously separate models of the ocean and atmosphere to demonstrate how increased levels of carbon dioxide impact on temperature on the Earth’s surface. This has effectively laid the foundations of modern climate models used today. Professor Hasselmann followed this up with research of his own a decade later, finding a link between local weather and climate. Hasselmann and his colleagues produced a model which described why climate models can be reliable despite weather being changeable and chaotic, and his work has been used to prove that the increased temperature in the atmosphere is due to human emissions of carbon dioxide. The decades-long work of all three Nobel Laureates fundamentally shaped our understanding and ability to predict how the chaotic and interwoven behavior of the atmosphere, oceans and land will change over time, and strengthen our understanding of the changing climate on our planet. As put by the Nobel Committee for Physics, their discoveries demonstrate that our knowledge about the climate rests on a “solid scientific foundation”, one which can only grow with future generations of climate scientists, physicists and inquirers of the world under a scientific lens. The world in which we live is a random and chaotic one. Despite this sea of unpredictability, a deeper understanding of its mathematical nature can reveal patterns which have far reaching ramifications to our society and even our existence on planet Earth. The Nobel Prize in Physics is one significant step toward greater understanding of real-world complex systems which impact us, and a deeper recognition of the impact we have upon the Earth’s climate. Our ability to understand complex systems is one of a myriad of stepping stones into the great unknowns of science. To those turning away from studies in mathematics and physics for their seemingly abstract and complex nature, the future of our society is written in these laws and it is up to us to master them with pen and paper. References: Bradley, Larry. “Strange Attractors.” Chaos & Fractals, 2010. https://www.stsci.edu/~lbradley/seminar/attractors.html Gardini, L., Grebogi, C. & Lenci, S. “Chaos theory and applications: a retrospective on lessons learned and missed or new opportunities.” Nonlinear Dyn 102, 643–644 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-020-05903-0 Irfan, Umair. “Earth’s climate is chaotic. The winners of the 2021 Nobel Prize in physics found patterns in the noise.” Vox, October 5, 2021. https://www.vox.com/22710418/2021-physics-nobel-prize-climate-change-chaos-model Oestreicher, Christian. “A history of chaos theory.” Dialogues in clinical neuroscience vol. 9,3 (2007): 279-89. doi:10.31887/DCNS.2007.9.3/coestreicher Plus Magazine. “Maths in a minute: Poincaré and the beginnings of chaos.” Universtiy of Cambridge, February 28, 2017. https://plus.maths.org/content/maths-minute-beginnings-chaos Press release: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2021. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2021. Thu. 25 Nov 2021. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2021/press-release/ Randall, David. “Winners of 2021 Nobel Prize in Physics built mathematics of climate modeling, making predictions of global warming and modern weather forecasting possible.” The Conversation, October 6, 2021. https://theconversation.com/winners-of-2021-nobel-prize-in-physics-built-mathematics-of-climate-modeling-making-predictions-of-global-warming-and-modern-weather-forecasting-possible-169329 Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

By Clarisse Sawyer < Back to Issue 3 Death of the Scientific Hero By Clarisse Sawyer 10 September 2022 Edited by Ruby Dempsey Illustrated by Quynh Anh Nguyen Next Trigger warning: This article mentions racism, sexism and misogyny and death. As a kid I was obsessed, like most kids, with animals of any kind. I would spend hours at a time scouring the beach for shells, getting sunburnt watching lizards, and tentatively feeding the praying mantises I caught, watching with morbid fascination as they hunted and dismembered the unfortunate crickets. It was only natural that I soon became interested in science. The long days of summer holidays were spent pouring over children’s encyclopaedias and watching David Attenborough documentaries. Through David Attenborough, I discovered two incredibly influential scientists - the co-discoverers of evolution, Charles Darwin, and Alfred Wallace. I idolised them, in particular, Wallace. As a shy child, who avoided the limelight like the plague, I had a natural inclination to root for the underdog, and Wallace was presented as such. Wallace was, in contrast to Darwin, much poorer, much more humble, and received much less credit for the theory of evolution than his co-discoverer Darwin. In my developing brain, Wallace took on the status of hero. I would chatter incessantly about him. I developed an interest in insects and butterfly collecting because he was a lepidopterist. I am sure my parents found me insufferable, but they hid their frustrations well, through subtle eye rolls and conversation changes, because they were happy to see me interested in science. So for my 11th birthday, my Dad bought me a book of Wallace’s letters from his time spent as a butterfly collector in the Malay Archipelago. The book was a lot drier than an 11 year old would have hoped for. Most of it was just taxonomy, peppered with the odd personalised comment complaining about the heat. But there was one passage which stood out to me in particular. A passage in which he describes shooting a “wild woman”, upon mistaking her for an orangutan in the forest canopy. In this section he details taking the baby she carefully carried on her back, and raising it as his own “n-word baby”. He promptly taxidermied the mother, with the intention of selling her remains to a wealthy private collector in England7. It was at this point I stopped reading. At 11, there was no way I could tell this was just an incredibly bad taste joke, and that in reality Wallace had actually shot a peculiar subspecies of orangutan, and not a Malaysian woman carrying her child. At 11, I believed my hero would kill me, if I wasn’t half white, if I wasn’t so light skinned, if I didn’t wear clothes, if I didn’t speak English. I would wonder for years afterwards: how brown would I have to be? To be plastinised, taxidermied, sold to some rich collector to sit in a sterile glass cabinet, at the back of some ex nobleman’s mansion. The passage ruined Wallace for me, but not science. Sometimes I wonder, if my passion for science was only marginally less, would I still be in science? I don’t know. For every child who is only mildly deterred by the racism or sexism of their former heroes, surely there is one child whose passion slowly fades, until the only time it is mentioned is by anxious mothers pushing their children to study medicine. I lost my hero, a precedent for who a scientist should be, in addition to developing a paranoia. A paranoia that if I were to start idolising another white, male, historical, scientific figure, I would be met with the same realisation that he would’ve despised me. And I haven’t been able to find a new hero since. Despite there being numerous people of colour, and women in science for a millennia before me, they weren’t the ones promoted to me, or if they were, I found them unrelatable save for their gender or the colour of their skin. They were people who were, 99% of the time, hard working to a fault, such as Marie Curie. Often this diligence was presented as being a detriment to their happiness. So my decision to study science, like many other women and people of colour, was also a decision to be my own precedent for what a scientist should be. While this is empowering, it is difficult not to envy those, like the privileged archetype of a white man, who might be able to draw confidence and inspiration from the figures in the preliminary pages of scientific textbooks. Whilst the majority of them may prove unrelatable, the sheer quantity would ensure that at least one would be a sympathetic character, in stark contrast to the singular, tokenistic entries on historical non-white or female scientists in such text books. But does it really have to be this way? Why should anyone have to feel alienated by scientific history? Why are there not more diverse heroes for us to fall back on? At the crux of my alienation from Wallace, and scientific history more generally, was deceit, more specifically what I perceived as lying by omission. The initial presentation of scientific figures such as Wallace by media, institutions and the like is so sympathetic and devoid of grisly details, that upon discovering the multifaceted nature of these individuals, I experienced a kind of historical whiplash. A scientific education is often presented as being objective. What you are taught in a classroom, at least at a primary or secondary level, is not meant to be subject to much nuance or interpretation. Now, when this concerns science itself, it is a non-issue, because it is true, for instance, that chromosomes are made of DNA, or that the first electron shell of an atom contains 2 electrons. The issue is that the perception of objectivity carries over into the way science history is taught. Unfortunately, this teaching is unavoidably subjective. Teachers and institutions often present positive anecdotes about scientists' hobbies and personal lives. A teacher may share for instance, an endearing fact about the influential French palaeontologist, Georges Cuvier, that he became as knowledgeable in biology as university trained naturalists by the age of 126. However, said teacher may neglect to mention the fact that after her death, Georges Cuvier dissected and taxidermied Sarah Baartman , a South African woman of the Khoisan tribe, and paraded her as a freak for the English public5. Her plastinated body remained on display at the Museum of Manin Paris until 19744. In this example, it would be impossible to say that the teacher’s presentation of Cuvier was objective. Choosing to share the nicest facts about a scientist, to make them appealing to your audience, while neglecting the ugly truths,is at best, irresponsible, and at worst, lying by omission. .Abhorrent actions, such as Cuvier’s treatment of Baartman’s corpse, a woman with whom he had danced and conversed with before her death, are treated as unnecessary details in objective scientific history, as they do not pertain to Cuvier’s scientific discoveries. However, equally unnecessary details, such as Cuvier’s early aptitude for biology, are peppered into school curricula liberally. However, it would be unfair to say that the primary reason why natural history is taught in this way is because of conscious racism and sexism. There are a multitude of explanations for why educators teach like this. Educators may choose to include only the nicer traits of scientific figures, in part perhaps because they do not want to risk disengaging students with affronting subject matter. Further, the morbidity and the racism of scientific history is not exactly appropriate content to teach to younger children. Precedent also plays a role in the way in which natural history is taught. Teaching natural history in an unbiased and inclusive fashion would require rewriting a lot of material. Educators would also have to reevaluate their own personal perceptions of historical figures, which is a difficult task. For instance in Australia, the textbooks A Short History of Australia2 and The Story of Australia3, which were staples of Australian high school history classes for decades, are white-centric stories of Australian exploration, which gloss over perturbing historic details such as massacres of Indigenous peoples. While teaching scientific history in a fair, unbiased and age appropriate manner might seem like an impossible task, there are a variety of small steps educators can take towards this end goal. A strong start would be the following; if teachers decide to include personal details about famous scientific figures, they should seek to include both positive and negative anecdotes, which frame negative actions in a disapproving light. The negative anecdotes serve to ensure that students don’t get ‘whiplash’ as they pursue their education, and also serve to show that modern science does not condone or approve of these actions. In the case of younger students, it is best for teachers to avoid talking about triggering topics, so teachers should teach scientific history from an objective standpoint sans personal details. Teachers also should, as part of their responsibilities as an educator, seek out alternative historical perspectives which challenge their own preconceived notions. And educational institutions should offer professional development courses which provide educators with a more balanced view on scientific history. These actions would help eliminate any subliminal biases teachers might have whilst teaching scientific history. And why are there not more diverse heroes for us to fall back upon? Lack of equal opportunity for marginalised groups in Western society for most of history and the systemic erasure of their contributions is an obvious reason, however through relying on secondary, colonial sources for information, instead of delving deeper into primary sources, educators and institutions inadvertently gloss over scientific contributions by marginalised groups. For example, the contributions of Indigenous Australian scientists and explorers are often ignored by museums. Many famous white explorers of Australia, such as Thomas Mitchell, Charles Sturt and Alexander Forrest worked closely alongside Indigenous guides, who helped navigate territory, and point out items of scientific interest, and their names are actually often acknowledged in primary sources1. For instance, one of explorer Thomas Mitchell’s chief guides, Yuranigh, is mentioned extensively in Mitchell’s personal accounts of his expeditions, and was acknowledged posthumously by Mitchell with a grave and monument1. These people, who were explorers in their own right, have largely been relegated to the footnotes of history and museums, in particular after the publications such as the aforementioned textbooks A Short History of Australia, and The Story of Australia in the 1950’s, which deliberately omitted Indigenous contributions to white Australian exploration in order to sell the false narrative of terra nullius. Luckily, through researching primary sources further, historians, educators and curators will be able to change the narrative, and shed light on these marginalised scientists. But what of scientific heroes? How is it possible to keep students engaged without the more personal aspects of science, given that many scientific figures will have to be cut from curriculums, at least for younger students?My answer to that would be to find new heroes. History is littered with people who made significant contributions without committing atrocities. And who knows, maybe in the void left by problematic figures, space could be cleared for more diverse heroes, the kind removed from history textbooks, such as Yuranigh; an exciting prospect. And yet, there is an unavoidable anguish in throwing out the old in favour of the new. Coming to terms with the fact that the people we idolised were terrible people is no easy feat. But all we can endeavour to do is to portray scientific figures as they were. To portray all aspects of these figures, good and bad, or none at all, and hopefully develop a new history, a new tradition, one that is inclusive, one for which everyone can be proud of and take solace in. References 1. Watson T. Recognising Australia's Indigenous explorers [Internet]. researchgate.net. 2022 [cited 19 May 2022]. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321579451_Recognising_Australia's_indigenous_explorers 2. Scott E. Short History of Australia. Forgotten Books; 2019. 3. SHAW A. The story of Australia. London: Faber; 1975. 4. Parkinson J. The significance of Sarah Baartman [Internet]. BBC News. 2022 [cited 19 May 2022]. Available from: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35240987 5. Kelsey-Sugg A, Fennell M. Sarah Baartman was taken from her home in South Africa and sold as a 'freak show'. This is how she returned [Internet]. Abc.net.au. 2022 [cited 19 May 2022]. Available from: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-17/stuff-the-british-stole-sarah-baartman-south-africa-london/100568276 6. Georges Cuvier [Internet]. Britannica Kids. 2022 [cited 19 May 2022]. Available from: https://kids.britannica.com/students/article/Georges-Cuvier/273885 7. Wallace A, Van Wyhe J, Rookmaaker K. Letters from the Malay Archipelago. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press; 2013. Previous article Next article alien back to

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

< Back to Issue 2 What’s the forecast for smallholder farmers of Arabica coffee? For millions of smallholder farmers residing in the rural highlands of East Timor and Ethiopia, Arabica coffee is a major source of income. Yet, weather patterns are threatening their future livelihoods. With global coffee yields predicted to dramatically reduce in coming decades, how will this touch Melbourne’s privileged cafe culture? by Hannah Savage 10 December 2021 Edited by Ashleigh Hallinan & Irene Yonsuh Lee Illustrated by Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin The world loves its coffee. After crude oil, coffee is the most exported commodity in the world and global demands are projected to skyrocket alongside demographic growth (2). With a strong inclination by Australian citizens to participate in our bourgeois cafe culture, Australian demand can be expected to mimic this trend. However, as climate change continues to throw curveballs, pressures to satisfy these demands will be felt by all in the supply chain. There are many species of coffee beans, yet global consumption relies only on a narrow genetic selection. Coffea Arabica is the dominant coffee bean species in commercial production (approximately 70 percent), followed by Coffea Robusta (2). Agricultural research and breeding of these crops are not extensive, considering their high sensitivity to climate. If Arabica was a child, it would be the no-mash-touching-the-peas type. Though a laborious crop to farm, this fussy plant has low yield when too much shade deprives it of sunlight or too little shade shrinks soil moisture levels. It insists on altitudes 1000-2000m above sea level and 2000mm of rainfall per annum (2). Moreover, the optimal air temperature for Arabica is 18-21 degrees Celsius (3). With these environmental specifications, it is expected that half of the world’s optimal areas for growth of Arabica and Robusta are expected to be lost by 2050 due to climate change (13). After Hurricane Maria hurtled across Puerto Rico in 2017, 80 percent of coffee trees were destroyed and rural livelihoods were flattened overnight (4). Climate change does not pay sympathy towards poor and marginalized rural communities. Frequency and intensity of extreme weather is increasing in many developing nations. Changes in temperature, weather events and rainfall patterns are already challenging the ability of farmers to adapt. Rainfall distribution is becoming more erratic and unpredictable. This is a key concern to farmers as rain patterns correlate with timing of flowering and fruit production (2). Flowering is usually triggered by the first rains of the wet season, yet unpredictable rains during the year may cause flowering at undesirable times. Unsynchronized ripening requires additional harvesting cycles, costing farmers more money and labour. In addition, water scarcity and warmer air temperature also have profound impacts on harvests. Prolonged drought leads to misshapen or small beans with marks and imperfections (3). Low moisture and heat stress causes wilting, death of crops or acceleration of bean growth (3). At temperatures above 23 degrees, fruit ripens too fast for a rich, sweet coffee flavour to develop (2). What will thrive from these changing climatic conditions are pests, diseases and coffee rust fungus, which are becoming more prevalent in areas previously unfavourable for their survival (5). The insect Coffee berry borer has been a particular challenge to coffee producers globally, as it feeds on coffee beans and damages plantations. One to four generations of these critters are born each fruiting season (5). Climate change brings uncertainty to the future livelihoods of millions of smallholder coffee farmers around the world, who produce 70 percent of the world’s coffee (6). While world leaders dance around pretty statistical graphs of their carbon-cutting “achievements”, there is the underlying issue that global efforts to lower emissions will not have equal consequences across geographical locations. Poorer economies abundant in fossil fuel resources are pressured to implement policies that further increase their vulnerability and are left grappling to find quick coping strategies. Although it accounts for only a small percentage of global coffee production, East Timor is one of the most economically dependent on coffee. East Timor, the small-island nation 700km north-west of Darwin, has relied on its oil sector for economic development in recent decades, but now interest from foreign traders is depleting with global trends towards renewable energy. The coffee industry has been identified by the East Timor government as being a key opportunity for sustained economic growth and reduction of rural poverty. More than 18 percent of Timorese households rely on coffee production as their primary source of income (7). Coffee producers have a poverty rate of 47.9 percent, which is higher than the national rate of poverty, 40.3 percent (7). Many coffee-producing households are without electricity or access to clean water and regular meals. Figure 1: Distribution of coffee-selling households in Timor-Leste (7). Timorese Arabica coffee farmers today celebrate achieving yields their grandparents would have considered inadequate in the early 20th century during Portuguese occupation. This reflects how much the climate has changed across generations. Rain, once predictable to begin at the end of every November, is now inconsistent and reduced (1). Unfortunately, adaptive solutions often demand high investment and low reward in the initial implementation stages. Farmers may be reluctant to remove their aging, unproductive coffee trees and replant new ones for fear of losing a major source of income while waiting for financial output from the new growth (9). There is the temptation to instead plant new crops between existing ones, which exploits soil nutrients and harms coffee yields. Small short-term rewards also discourage poorer farmers from participating in collective reforestation projects (9). There is much work to be done to restore ecosystems devastated from rainforest clearances during Indonesian colonisation in 1975, which occurred mere months after independence from Portugal. Shade trees that characterise these tropical rainforests play important roles in supporting coffee growth. If farmers grow coffee crops amongst the rainforest, crops will benefit from wind shelter and rich soil nutrients (8). Shade reduces daytime air temperature and increases humidity. In the region of Baguia, the collaboration project WithOneSeed, (co-founded by Melbourne’s own ‘The Corner Store Cafe’ owners), actively alleviates poverty by restoring rainforests and granting farmers profits from carbon credit trades. Farmers plant an indigenous shade tree, carbon credits are purchased by foreign customers to offset fossil fuel emissions and a remuneration of 50cents per tree is given to farmers each year so long as the tree survives (10). WithOneSeed therefore provides rural coffee producers with income before trees mature and re-establishes tara bandu, customary resource management that sustained Timor Leste’s environment for centuries pre-colonisation. Organic beans are purchased from smallholder farms at a fair price by The Corner Store and roasted in Oakleigh. The supply chain is transparent and traceable and profits go towards funding WithOneSeed planting. Plus the coffee is good quality and grown without nasty chemicals! (11) Simple adaptive responses are also being made by coffee producers in the world’s fifth largest Arabica producer, Ethiopia (3). As Arabica has been said to originate here, it is perhaps unsurprising that 16 percent of the population rely on coffee for their livelihood. Figure 2: The main coffee growing areas of Ethiopia (3). In the case of a global temperature rise of 2.4 degrees Celsius, land areas suitable for coffee production in Ethiopia would be expected to decline by 21 percent (12). Resilience for smallholder Arabica producers now depends on creative solutions using limited technology and resources available to rural communities. Relocating farms to higher altitudes of Ethiopian highlands is one solution. But this transition comes at a cost for coffee producers in the form of social network losses. While climate conditions of higher land might be more suitable, other factors such as land tenureship rights and soil quality may pose new obstacles (13). As rain seasons shorten and dry seasons lengthen, Ethiopian coffee producers aim to boost irrigation by diverting nearby streams. This is an ancient and cost-effective solution that enables coffee to successfully be grown in areas classified unsuitable (3). Similarly, coffee producers are carrying out traditional techniques of mulching, where laying compost over soil conserves soil moisture (3). However, more government investment in supporting these adaptations is needed to keep ahead of global warming (3). Sustainable agriculture also needs to be met with fair prices. Many Ethiopian farmers do not have access to foreign traders who will pay premium prices that outweigh production costs. Coffee prices are determined by the international market, or “C price”, which is based on the theory that cost is proportional to global demand, with no consideration of quality or organic farming practices (14). This supports and encourages cheap, unsustainable agricultural practice because sustainable or not, farmers will receive the same revenue for their produce. To combat this, Ethiopian business CoQua, based in Addis Ababa city, facilitates opportunities for private producers to link with international clients and initiate direct lines of trade (14). Through CoQua, Melbourne’s Seven Seeds cafe were able to establish a trade relationship with private smallholder Ethiopian Arabica producers. Seven Seeds claim to pay 3.56 times the “C price” (14). Continue as we may to remain disconnected from the challenges of an environmentally fragile coffee industry, it is only a matter of time before global reduction makes noticeable impacts on Melbourne’s shielded society. What will happen when coffee stocks fail to meet Melbourne demand? Seven Seeds co-owner Mark Dundon told The Sydney Morning Herald that he predicts coffee prices will rise, despite general reluctance of consumers to spill more than one bank note from their wallets for a flat white (14). And why shouldn't we pay more for our hot beverages if producers vulnerable to food insecurity are paying more from the brunt of climate change? The following decades have a bitter outlook, but the recent pandemic outbreak enhanced our ability to envision rapid global disruptions where no corner of the world is excluded. Certainly a disruption to Melbourne coffee culture is a trivial issue in the grand scheme of things, but as consumers it is one worth considering now. The future for Melbourians to satisfy their cultural addiction balances dangerously on a series of environmental conditions being met in foreign highlands. While it’s true that being a “smart consumer” can feel like a matter of blind faith (how fair is fair trade?), favouring businesses that have ethical, direct lines of trade with smallholder producers is one small, immediate solution towards building a sustainable future for our treasured beans and those in the firing line of climate change. References: 1. Jack Board, “From crop to kopitiam, Asia's coffee is facing its biggest threat - climate change,” CNA, published 29 February 2020, https://www.channelnewsasia.com/asia/climate-change-coffee-prices-timor-leste-crops-1338741 2. Abaynesh Asegid, “Impact of Climate Change on production and Diversity of Coffee (Coffea Arabica L) in Ethiopia,” International Journal of Research Studies in Science, Engineering and Technology 7, 8 (2020): 31-38. 3. Kew Royal Botanic Garden, Coffee farming and climate change in Ethiopia, (London: The Strategic Climate Institutions Programme), 37, https://www.kew.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/Coffee%20Farming%20and%20Climate%20Change%20in%20Ethiopia.pdf 4. “How is Climate Change Impacting the Future of Coffee?,” TechnoServe Business Solutions to Poverty, published 16 September 2021, https://www.technoserve.org/blog/climate-change-impacting-future-coffee/ 5. Getachew Weldemichael and Demelash Teferi, “The Impact of Climate Change on Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Production and Genetic Resources,” International Journal of Research Studies in Agricultural Sciences (IJRSAS) 5, 11, (2019): 26-34, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2454-6224.0511004. 6. Michon Scott, “Climate and Coffee,” Science Information for a climate-smart nation, published 19 June 2015, https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-and/climate-coffee 7. Brett Inder and Nan Qu, Coffee in Timor-Leste : What do we know ? What can we do ?, (Australia: Monash University), 17. 8. Simon P.J Batterbury, Lisa R. Palmer, Thomas R. Reuter, Demetrio do Amaral de Carvalho, Balthasar Kehi and Alex Cullen, “Land access and livelihoods in post-conflict Timor-Leste: no magic bullets,” International Journal of the commons, 9, 2, (2015): 619-647. 9. Lisa Walker, Understanding Timor Leste, (Dili: Swinburne Press, 2013), 22-158. 10. Andrew Mahar, “Meet the farmers helping to reforest Timor-Leste,” World Economic Forum, published 26 January 2021, Meet the farmers helping to reforest Timor-Leste | World Economic Forum (weforum.org) 11. “The Roastery,” The Corner Store, accessed November 2021, https://cornerstorenetwork.org.au/the-roastery 12. Cheikh Mbow et al., Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems, (2019), https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/4/2021/02/08_Chapter-5_3.pdf 13. Yen Pham, Kathryn Reardon-Smith, Shahbaz Mushtaq and Geoff Cockfield, “The impact of climate change and variability on coffee production: a systematic review”, Climatic Change, 156, (2019): 609-630, The impact of climate change and variability on coffee production: a systematic review | SpringerLink 14. Dani Valent, “ 'The industry's at risk': the high price of cheap coffees,” published 31 May 2019, national/the-industry-s-at-risk-the-high-price-of-cheap-coffees-20190528-p51rti.html Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

By Ashleigh Hallinan < Back to Issue 3 Space exploration in Antartica By Ashleigh Hallinan 10 September 2022 Edited by Tanya Kovacevic and Breana Galea Illustrated by Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin Next The isolated southern expanse of the Earth is an alien realm, with vast expanses of white ice and blue sky that appear to stretch on infinitely. Despite its barren landscape, the Antarctic continent holds secrets to the origins of our Earth and the solar system in the form of meteorites. Meteorites are solid pieces of debris that originate in outer space, survive the journey through our atmosphere, and fall to the Earth’s surface.(1) Their unique components and pungent smells contain fascinating stories of cosmic clouds, condensing stardust and the fiery collisions of entire planets. These ‘space rocks’ can land anywhere on Earth, but the vast majority of meteorites are found in the cold deserts of Antarctica.(2) So, why Antarctica? Across the globe, meteorite abundance is dependent on two factors: the meteorites must be easy to spot, and their preservation must be guaranteed over long time periods.(3) It is the conditions of the Antarctic landscape that make all the difference when it comes to meteorite discovery. The cold, dry nature of Antarctica helps to preserve these extraterrestrial rocks, allowing for more pristine samples to be collected. In this way, we may think of Antarctica as a ‘natural freezer’. In fact, meteorites can be buried and preserved in the Antarctic ice for up to millions of years, allowing for a deep dive into the origins of the solar system upon analysis. Furthermore, meteorites are easier to find in Antarctica due to the stark contrast between the dark colours of meteorites and the white ice. And since so few rocks naturally form on ice sheets, you can be fairly certain the majority of rocks found in Antarctica are extraterrestrial. However, an expedition to Antarctica for meteorite hunting is no small feat. Thankfully, landscape processes occurring on the Antarctic continent create concentrated pockets of meteorites, making the hunt for meteorites less like trying to find a needle in a haystack. These meteorite hotspots are largely a result of the local geology and movement of ice across the Antarctic landscape.(4) As meteorites strike glaciers, they are buried and encased in the ice. These glaciers move across the landscape, acting as ‘conveyor belts’ that carry the meteorites until they reach a large barrier, such as the Transantarctic Mountains. The ice flow is blocked and builds up at the base of the mountain. Here, dry Antarctic winds slowly erode the ice, revealing a bounty of imprisoned meteorites. Traditionally, meteorites have been divided into three broad categories: stony, stony-iron, and iron.(5) While stony meteorites are made up of silicate minerals, iron meteorites are almost completely made of metal. Unsurprisingly, stony-iron meteorites are composed of nearly equal amounts of metal and silicate crystals. Alarmingly, warmer temperatures and melting ice associated with global warming may hinder our search for meteorites. This is particularly the case for iron meteorites, which conduct heat more efficiently than other meteorite types due to their higher metal content.(6) Consequently, meteorites can sink into the ice and out of sight. Despite Antarctica’s otherworldliness, it is not free of the impacts brought about by human activity occurring on landmasses separated by vast seas. However, with the help of artificial intelligence and machine-learning, the quest for meteorite discovery continues. Scientists recently estimated there are as many as 300,000 more meteorites to be discovered in Antarctica, their stories waiting to be uncovered in a never-ending game of hide-and-seek.(7) Using machine learning to combine satellite measurements of temperature, surface slope, speed of ice flow, and reflection of radar signals by ice, scientists have developed a ‘treasure map’ containing the predicted locations of concentrated meteorite zones.(7) The ’treasure map’ is accessible online,(8) so anyone can search the Antarctic continent for rocky remnants left over from the formation of the solar system. When we think of space exploration, we conjure up images of astronauts and spaceships. But Antarctica provides us with the opportunity to peer into the cosmos without ever leaving Earth, given we are brave enough to face the inhospitable conditions and pervasive alienness of the Earth’s southernmost continent. References 1. Sephton M, Bland P, Pillinger C, Gilmour I. The preservation state of organic matter in meteorites from Antarctica. Meteoritics & Planetary Science. 2004;39(5):747-54. 2. Corrigan C. Antarctica: The Best Place on Earth to Collect Meteorites. CosmoELEMENTS; 2011. p. 296. 3. Schlüter J, Schultz L, Thiedig F, Al‐Mahdi B, Aghreb AA. The Dar al Gani meteorite field (Libyan Sahara): Geological setting, pairing of meteorites, and recovery density. Meteoritics & Planetary Science. 2002;37(8):1079-93. 4. Steigerwald B. NASA Scientist Collects Bits of the Solar System from an Antarctic Glacier Greenbelt: NASA; 2018 [Available from: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/antarctic-meteorites. 5. Lotzof K. Types of meteorites [Internet]. Natural History Museum; [Available from: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/types-of-meteorites.html. 6. Evatt G, Coughlan M, Joy K, Smedley A, Connolly P, Abrahams I. A potential hidden layer of meteorites below the ice surface of Antarctica. Nature communications. 2016;7(1):1-8. 7. Tollenaar V, Zekollari H, Lhermitte S, Tax DM, Debaille V, Goderis S, et al. Unexplored Antarctic meteorite collection sites revealed through machine learning. Science Advances. 2022;8(4). 8. Tollenaar V, Zekollari H, Lhermitte S, Tax DM, Debaille V, S G. Antarctic Meteorite Stranding Zones [Internet]. [Available from: https://wheretocatchafallingstar.science/. Previous article Next article alien back to