Search Results

< Back to Issue 2 The Evolution of Science Communication In the current age of social media, users hold far more autonomy over the posts and information which they share online. However, this was not always the case, with the media once being far more regulated, and restricted for only certain individuals. With users now having far more power over content posted online, how does this impact the information which others receive about the COVID-19 pandemic? by Monica Blasioli 10 December 2021 Edited by Khoa-Anh Tran & Yen Sim Illustrated by Rachel Ko Trigger warning: This article mentions illness, and death or dying. Since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, science communication has started to evolve in ways never before seen across the globe. There appears to be an endless amount of infographics, Facebook posts, and YouTube and TikTok videos… including some with dancing doctors. Information not only about the COVID-19 virus, but countless diseases and scientific concepts, is available in more casual, accessible language at only the touch of a button. Any questions which you might have about science or your body can be answered through a quick Google search. In this sense, science communication is now far more rapid, as well as more accessible than in research papers (which always seem like they are written in a foreign language at times). However, the downside of having vast amounts of information available is that it can create challenges in determining the validity of what is being presented. In previous years, science communication was typically limited to the more typical forms of media, such as in a newspaper or a magazine, or even through a television interview. These were typically completed by professionals in the field, such as a research scientist or a medical doctor. When looking at the 1920 Influenza outbreak, many citizens at that time would have received their information from printed newspapers and posters on bulletin boards, as seen below. Image 1, [1] Somewhat similar to today's age, there were signs displaying the importance of mask-wearing, and newspapers explaining the closures of schools and shops, the distribution of vaccines, and reports of death rates. These messages were, and still are, created and approved by larger institutions, governments and medical professionals, particularly doctors. As seen on the (left / right / below / above), doctors are urging people to not become complacent, despite a recent drop in influenza cases. This is rather similar to current newspaper or television news reports - only in reference to COVID-19, instead of influenza. Image 2, [2] There were, of course, still groups which were uncertain about the scientific evidence being provided by journalists, doctors and government officials at this time. In November of 1918, it was declared that “the epidemic of [influenza] disease is practically over,” with mask laws being relaxed. However, only a few days later, the previous mask laws were reintroduced with a spike in Influenza cases. As unpacked in Dr Dolan’s research [3], the “Anti-Mask League” formed and protested in response to this back track, claiming that masks were unsanitary, unnecessary, and stifling their freedom. As this was during the early 20th century, the league advertised their protests in local newspapers, with reports that hundreds of San Francisco residents were fined for not abiding by mask rules, often due to their alliance with the Anti-Mask League. The San Francisco Anti-Mask League is one of the most renowned and infamous groups of its time, with smaller-scale groups also questioning the science being communicated. This type of conflicting information surrounding mask issues, and the opinion that they restrict personal freedoms, have incited similar responses throughout history. However, resistance by anti-mask groups has not existed on such an influential and global scale, as it has during the current COVID-19 pandemic. With the rise of the age of “new media,” including platforms such as Instagram and Facebook, individuals now have far more autonomy over their role in the media, meaning that they yield a lot more power over the information others are receiving. Almost anybody can interpret scientific material online and upload it in a video of them dancing to some music on TikTok, spreading information to potentially hundreds of thousands of viewers across the globe. In many ways this new found autonomy and power can be quite beneficial. Australian Doctor Imogen Hines uses her platform on TikTok, alongside her medical education and current scientific research, to break down medical treatments and mistruths, particularly surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. These videos use simple language and straight-forward analogies, “humanising” the often intimidating figures in the medical field, and allowing the general public to be well-informed about scientific concepts. For example, Dr Imogen breaks down the research surrounding long term side effects of vaccines using a milkshake analogy! https://www.tiktok.com/@imi_imogen1/video/7027448207823211777?is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1&lang=en On the other hand, this phenomenon can have pretty serious ramifications, with many individuals feeling rightfully confused about what the truth really is, when there appears to be so many versions of it posted across the internet. Following a rather controversial study on Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19, the internet was soon buzzing with excitement about the prospect of a drug that many believed could replace the need for a vaccine. Despite numerous gaps in the original study, and countless further studies refuting Invermectin’s ability to treat COVID-19, many social media users are continuing to spread this myth online. Both governments and hospitals alike have been accused of hiding a seemingly “good” cure from their citizens. In Texas, a group of doctors won a legal case which allowed Texas Huguley Hospital to refuse administering Ivermectin to a COVID-19 infected Deputy Sheriff. This sparked outrage on Facebook, with users and the Sheriff’s wife demanding greater freedoms over their medical treatments, instead of just relying on the judgement of doctors and hospital staff. In this instance, the misinformation surrounding Ivermectin is not only influencing individuals to seek out futile treatments, but it is also spreading mistrust with the science and medical communities, who work incredibly hard to protect the world, particularly over the past two years. Despite Ivermectin being used in a clinical setting to treat parasitic (not viral) infections in humans for a number of years now, it can be extremely dangerous for individuals to have complete power over their medical treatments. The dosage and timing of treatment is crucial in ensuring success. Just like with everyday medications such as paracetamol, taking Ivermectin in high doses is risky. A COVID-19 infected woman from Sydney who read about Ivermectin on social media took a very high dosage of the drug after purchasing it from an online seller, which resulted in severe diarrhea and vomiting. In order to combat some of this misinformation, a number of social media platforms are “fact checking” posts or providing warnings on posts with keywords, such as ‘COVID-19’ or ‘vaccination.’ On Instagram, each post with these keywords will contain a banner at the bottom inviting users to visit their “COVID-19 Information Centre,” which provides a list of information supported by WHO and UNICEF about how vaccines are of high-standard, well-researched, and generally resulting in mild side effects. In addition, on Facebook, posts identified to be spreading mistruths will provide users with websites explaining the truth, before they can access the original posts. However, these warnings and fact-checks can only go so far. Posts blindly supporting the use of Ivermectin, falsely reporting side effects of vaccines, and arguing that masks cannot block virus particles still circulate the internet. Often those most vulnerable in the community are at risk of being led astray with misinformation. In principle, evidence-based, concise, easy-to-understand science communication is essential to break down the barrier between research and the general public, ensuring that citizens are well-informed and more comfortable about the world around them. In the situation of a public health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic, this communication is crucial in ensuring that all citizens can remain well-informed, safe and healthy. Misinformation and dodgy studies can not only lead people astray, but also cost them their health and wellbeing. References: 1. Kathleen McGarvey, “Historian John Barry compares COVID-19 to the 1918 flu pandemic,” University of Rochester, October 6, 2020. https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/historian-john-barry-compares-covid-19-to-1918-flu-pandemic-454732/ 2. Kathleen McGarvey, “Historian John Barry compares COVID-19 to the 1918 flu pandemic,” University of Rochester, October 6, 2020. https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/historian-john-barry-compares-covid-19-to-1918-flu-pandemic-454732/ 3. Brian Dolan, Unmasking History: Who Was Behind the Anti-Mask League Protests During the 1918 Influenza Epidemic in San Francisco? Perspectives in Medical Humanities (San Francisco: UC Medical Humanities Consortium, 2020) Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

By Andrew Lim < Back to Issue 3 Hope, Humanity and the Starry Night Sky By Andrew Lim 10 September 2022 Edited by Manfred Cain and Yvette Marris Illustrated by Ravon Chew Next Image 1: The Arecibo Observatory looms large over the forests of Puerto Rico The eerie signal reverberates out over the Caribbean skies, amplified by the telescope below. It oscillates between two odd resonating tones for little more than a couple of minutes, then shuts off. Eminent scholars, government administrators and elected representatives watch in wonderment, their eyes glued open. The forest birds and critters chirp and sing. It is November 16, 1974 – from a little spot in Arecibo, Puerto Rico, Earth is about to pop its head out the door to say ‘hello’. Those sing-song tunes, beamed out into space on modulated radio waves, are a binary message designed for some alien civilisation– a snapshot of humanity in 1679 bits. It sounds like the beginning of a bad sci-fi flick: the kind that ends with little green men coming down in UFOs for a cheap-CGI first contact. But it isn’t, and it doesn’t. Instead, the legacy of those telescope-amplified sounds – that ‘Arecibo Message’ – has a place in history as a symbol of human cooperation, here on Earth rather than in the stars. The message’s unifying vision imbued the famous ‘pale blue dot’ monologue of its co-creator Carl Sagan; and led to the launch of a multi-year international programme designing its successor message 45 years on, presenting extra-terrestrial communication as a mirror of our earth-bound relations. A unified message symbolizing a unified humanity. The previous feature in this series (Discovery, Blue Skies…and Partisan Bickering?) ended with a declaration of nuance: that science in politics matters solely because it transcends partisan bounds with clear analysis. Yet, looking at stories like Arecibo’s, so imbued with human optimism, maybe this cold, logical formulation isn’t enough. Perhaps for all its focus on appropriations bills, initiative funding and flawed infrastructure, that perspective lends insufficient weight to science’s ability to inspire, to cut through the fog of day-to-day policy battles with a beacon of what could yet be. But is this talk of hope just ideological posturing – a triumphant humanism gone mad? Or could there be some merit to its romantic vision of humanity speaking with one voice to the stars? Might it possibly be that science really is the key to bridging our divisions? COOPERATION AMIDST CHAOS Well, why not begin in the times of Arecibo? After all, the interstellar message came at a key moment in the Cold War. Just a few months before, US President Richard Nixon had made his way to Moscow to meet with General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, leader of the USSR. The signing of a new arms treaty, a decade-long economic agreement and a friendly state dinner at the Kremlin all seemed to indicate a world inching away from the edge of nuclear apocalypse. Such pacifist optimism is found readily in the message’s surrounding documents, with its research proposal speaking glowingly of future messages designed and informed by “international scientific consultations…[similar to] the first Soviet-American conference on communication with extraterrestrial [sic] intelligence.” Indeed, it seems the spirit of the age. Soon after the Arecibo message’s transmission, the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project would see an American Apollo spacecraft docking with a Soviet Soyuz module. Mission commanders Thomas Stafford and Alexei Leonov conducted experiments, exchanged gifts, and even engaged in the world’s first international space handshake – a symbol of shared peace and prosperity for both superpowers. Image 2: Thomas Stafford and Alexei Leonov shake hands on the Apollo-Soyuz mission Apollo-Soyuz marked an effective end to the US-USSR ‘Space Race’ (discussed in Part I of this series), and would lead to successor programmes, including a series of missions where American space shuttles would send astronauts to the Russian space station Mir, and eventually the building of the 21st-century International Space Station (ISS). Science seemed capable of forging cooperation amidst the greatest of disagreements, transcending our human borders and divides. Frank Drake, the designer of the Arecibo Message, was filled with optimism, hoping that his message might herald the beginning of a new age, marked by united scientific discovery and unparalleled human growth. He triumphantly declared to the Cornell Chronicle on the day of its transmission that “the sense that something in the universe is much more clever than we are has preceded almost every important advance in applied technology. SCIENTIFIC SPHERES OF INTEREST Yet this rose-tinted vision of science as the great mediator perhaps has a few more cracks in it than its advocates like to admit. Even at the height of Nixon’s Cold War détente, science was not pure intellectual collaboration. Henry Kissinger, Nixon’s National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State, pioneered ‘triangular diplomacy’, the art of playing adversaries off against one another with alternating threats and incentives. In later years, he would declare that “it was always better for [the US] to be closer to either Moscow or Peking than either was to the other”. And as he opened channels of communication with China, it was science that would pave the way for a stronger relationship. In the Shanghai Communique negotiated on Nixon’s 1972 trip to China, both sides “discussed specific areas in such fields as science [and] technology…in which people-to-people contacts and exchanges would be mutually beneficial [and] undert[ook] to facilitate the further development of [them].” Scientific collaboration (often manipulated by spy agencies from the CIA to the KGB) was the carrot beside the military stick – a central part of building alliances in a world of realpolitik. To Kissinger and his colleagues, the world was to be divided into Image 3: US President Richard Nixon shakes hands with CCP Chairman Mao Zedong in China in 1972 spheres of influence, even in times of peace – and science was best used as a way of strengthening and shoring up your own prosperity. It is a realist view of science diplomacy that continues to this day, with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noting in Image 4: Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi meets with his Cambodian counterpart Prak Sokhonn in September 2021, pledging additional aid and vaccine doses. 2014 that “educational exchanges, cultural tours and scientific collaboration…may garner few headlines, but… [can] influence the next generation of U.S. and [foreign] leaders in a way no other initiative can match”. To both Clinton and Kissinger, science is an instrument of foreign policy, whether deployed overtly in winning over current governments or more subtly in shaping the views of future ones. For them, amidst competing interests and simmering tensions, we ignore science’s soft power at our own peril. Just look at China’s distribution over Sinovac COVID-19 vaccines in the pandemic. In October 2020, January 2021 and September 2021, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi went on tours of Southeast Asia, promising vaccine aid while pushing closer connections between China and the rest of Asia. Last year, it was estimated that China had promised a total of over 255 million vaccine doses – a key step in building stronger economic and military ties in an increasingly tense region. Indeed, in mid-2021, just as concerns about Chinese vaccine efficacy grew, US President Joe Biden announced “half [a] billion doses with no strings attached…[no] pressure for favours, or potential concessions” from the sidelines of a G7 Summit. Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin travelled across Southeast Asia. In the the Philippines he renewed a military deal just as a new shipment of vaccines was announced – a clear indicator of the linkage between medical and military diplomacy, something reinforced when Vice President Kamala Harris landed in Singapore later that year to declare the US “an arsenal of safe and effective vaccines for our entire world.” Australia is key to vaccine diplomacy too. On his visit here earlier this year, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a point of visiting the University of Melbourne’s Biomedical Precinct to talk about COVID-19, declaring on Australian television that our nation was central to “looking Image 5: United States Secretary of State Lloyd J Austin III meets with Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte in July 2021 for negotiations on renewing the Visiting Forces Agreement at the problems that afflict our people as well as the opportunities…dealing with COVID…[in] new coalitions [and] new partnerships.” These views are backed up locally too. Sitting down for an exclusive interview with OmniSci Magazine last year, Dr Amanda Caples, Lead Scientist of Victoria, was keen to characterise her work in terms of these developments, reminding us that Victoria had been key to “improving the understanding of the immunology and epidemiology of the virus, developing vaccines and treatments and leading research into the social impact of the pandemic”, and emphasising Australia’s national interest, declaring that “global policymakers understand that a high performing science and research system benefits the broader economy…science and research contribute to jobs and prosperity for all rather than just the few.” Science, it seems, whether in vaccines, trade or exchanges, just like fifty years ago, is again to be a key tool for grand strategy and national interests. Image 6: Dr Amanda Caples, Lead Scientist of Victoria ARGUMENTS AND ARMS But perhaps even this might be too optimistic an outlook – for that simmering balance of power occasionally boils over. We need only to look at what happened when the détente of Nixon and Brezhnev was dashed to pieces with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The policy was roundly condemned as sheer naïveté in the face of wily adversaries, with President Ronald Reagan later describing détente in a radio address as “what a farmer has with his turkey – until Thanksgiving Day”. Science was the first target for diplomatic attacks. After the invasion, Senator Robert Dole (R-KS) launched legislation barring the National Science Foundation from funding trips to the USSR. And the push seemed bipartisan, with Representative George Brown Jr. (D-CA-36) proposing a House Joint Resolution enacting an immediate “halt [to] official travel related to scientific and technical cooperation with the Soviet Union”. Image 7: Russia’s cosmonauts board the ISS on 18th March 2022, shortly before Russia ends its participation in the program Now, as we face war on the European continent, even the ISS – the descendant of Apollo-Soyuz’s seemingly-apolitical scientific endeavours – seems to be falling apart spectacularly. On April 2 this year, Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, announced that it would be ending its participation in the ISS program, demanding a “full and unconditional removal of…sanctions” imposed over the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Earlier in the year, Roscosmos’ Director General Dmitry Rogozin openly suggested on Twitter that the ISS being without Russian involvement would lead to “an uncontrolled deorbit and fall [of the station] into the United States or Europe”, alluding to “the option of dropping a 500-ton structure [on] India and China.” Rogozin’s threats became even more pronounced as the war continued, with Roscosmos producing a video depicting Russia’s two astronauts on the station not bringing NASA astronaut Mark Vande Hei back to Earth with them (American astronauts primarily go to and return from space via Russian Soyuz capsules). Shared by Russian state news, its chilling final scenes show the Russian segment of the ISS detaching too, with Vande Hei presumably left to die in space aboard the station. Such attacks need not remain rhetorical, either. Scientific advancements have long been tied to weaponry and defence systems, with mathematicians and physicists from John Littlewood to Richard Feynman involved in making bombs and ballistics in times of war. Even Arecibo, that bastion of a united humanity, began life as a Department of Defence initiative detecting Soviet ballistic missiles. Today, the AUKUS defence partnership – one of the most significant Indo-Pacific defence developments in recent memory – centres on sharing nuclear submarine science and technology, promising scientific cooperation regarding “cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and additional undersea capabilities”. Even if induced by factors beyond our control, such weapons-based science is a far cry from the pacifist ideals of the Arecibo message. Thus, perhaps this messy reality is more central to our science than we like to admit. From the ISS to Australia’s waters, science still is intertwined with conflict and frequently co-opted by geopolitical actors in times of renewed aggression. Science at its worst is mere weaponry. But at its best, it speaks to something greater. HOPE IN THE DARKNESS In June 1977, the world was far from diplomatically stagnant. From the rumblings of Middle Eastern peace (what became the Camp David Accords) to new hopes of nuclear arms reduction, US President Jimmy Carter had quite the array of diplomatic dilemmas to consider. But amidst all that cold politics, he penned a letter to be sent on board the spacecraft Voyager, now the furthest manmade object from our solar system, declaring “We are attempting to survive our time so we may live into yours…This record represents our hope and our determination, and our good will in a vast and awesome universe.” And if this magazine has purported to speak to the ‘alien’ – far removed from our human lives - then perhaps we have discovered quite the opposite: that looking out up there is so much about looking in down here. Science presents a way we can look out at the alien and see ourselves – “survive our time…into yours”, finding a path ahead reflected in the inky blackness above. We are often constrained by time and circumstance, forced in the face of nefarious actors to compromise our idealism and use science as a mere weapon or tool. Discovery for discovery’s sake is frequently the first casualty when battle lines are drawn and aggression begun, and too often the political pessimism of the scientist can seem overpowering. But if the stories of broken détentes, diplomatic realpolitik and weaponised technology have made it all feel inevitable, then perhaps it is worth considering the story we began with, looking up into the night sky and remembering that somewhere amidst the stars is a tiny warble in the electromagnetic spectrum. Long after the funds and papers that forged it have faded away, after the people who wrote it have perished, it will continue. In its odd combination of ones and zeroes, it will represent humanity: our contradictions and our fears, our constant foibles and infighting, but also our occasional glimpses of a future beyond them. A signal…a reminder that when the times, the people Image 8: President Jimmy Carter’s message, sent aboard Voyager, the furthest man-made probe from Earth and the ideas line up just right, science can be the torchbearer for something greater. Something so rare that amidst all the ills of the world, it often seems non-existent, and so powerful that over two millennia ago, Aeschylus himself deemed it the very thing given to humanity by Prometheus to save us from destruction – the ideal that transformed us from mortals fixated on ourselves and our deaths to a civilisation capable of great things. “τυφλὰς…ἐλπίδας”, he called it: blind hope. A handshake in a capsule. A life-saving jab on board a ship. A binary message in a bottle, out among the stars. Fleeting images – not of what we are, but of what we can be: visions of blind hope, that sheer belief that we can grow past our worst violent impulses and reach out into the great beyond. Maybe it’s foolish. Maybe it’s naïve. But, on a brisk fall evening, looking out at a sky full of stars, each one more twinkling than the last, it’s easy to stop and imagine…maybe it’s the only thing that matters. Andrew Lim is an Editor and Feature Writer with OmniSci Magazine and led the team behind the Australian Finalist Submission to the New Arecibo Message Challenge. Image Credits (in order): National Atmospheric and Ionosphere Centre; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Archives Nixon White House Photo Office Collection; Kith Serey/Pool via Reuters; Malacanang Presidential Photo via Reuters; The Office of the Lead Scientist of Victoria; AP; National Aeronautics and Space Administration Previous article Next article alien back to

By Juulke Castelijn < Back to Issue 3 Believing in aliens... A science? By Juulke Castelijn 10 September 2022 Edited by Tanya Kovacevic and Ashleigh Hallinan Illustrated by Quynh Anh Nguyen Next The question of the existence of ‘intelligent life forms’ on a planet other than ours has always been one of belief. And I did not believe. It was probably the image of a green blob with multiple arms and eyes squelching across the ground and emitting noises unidentifiable as any form of language which turned me off the whole idea. But a book I read one day completely changed my mind; it wasn’t about space at all, but about evolution. ‘Science in the Soul’ is a collection of works written by the inimitable Richard Dawkins, a man who has argued on behalf of evolutionary theory for decades. Within its pages, you will find essays, articles and speeches from throughout his career, all with the target of inspiring deep rational thought in the field of science. A single essay gives enough food for thought to last the mind many days, but the ease and magnificence of Dawkin’s prose encourages the devourment of many pages in a single sitting. The reader becomes engulfed in scientific argument, quickly and completely. Dawkins shows the fundamental importance of the proper understanding of evolution as not just critical to biology, but society at large. Take, for instance, ‘Speaking up for science: An open letter to Prince Charles,’ in which he argues against the modelling of agricultural practices on natural processes as a way of combating climate change. Even if agriculture could be in itself a natural practice (it can’t), nature, Dawkins argues, is a terrible model for longevity. Instead, nature is ‘a short-term Darwinian profiteer’. Here he refers to the mechanism of natural selection, where offspring have an increased likelihood of carrying the traits which favoured their parents’ survival. Natural selection is a reflective process. At a population level, it highlights those genetic traits that increased chances of survival in the past. There is no guarantee those traits will benefit the current generation at all, let alone future generations. Instead, Dawkins argues, science is the method by which new solutions to climate change are found. Whilst we cannot see the future, a rational application of a wealth of knowledge gives us a far more sensitive approach than crude nature. Well, perhaps not crude per se. If anyone is an advocate for the beauty and complexity of natural life, it is surely Dawkins. But a true representation of nature, he argues, rests on the appreciation of evolution as a blinded process, with no aim or ambition, and certainly no pre-planned design. With this stance, Dawkins directly opposes Creationism as an explanation of how the world emerged, a battle from which he does not shy away. Evolution is often painted as a theory in which things develop by chance, randomly. When you consider the complexity of a thing such as the eye, no wonder people prefer to believe in an intelligent designer, like a god, instead. But evolution is not dependent on chance at all, a fact Dawkins argues many times throughout his collection. There is nothing random about the body parts that make up modern humans, or any other living thing - they have been passed down from generation to generation because they enhanced our ancestors’ survival. The underlying logic is unrivalled, including by religion. But that doesn’t mean Dawkins is not a man of belief. Dawkins believes in the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life, and for one reason above all: given the billions upon billions of planets in our universe, the chance of our own evolution would have to be exceedingly small if there was no other life out there. In other words, we believe there is life out there because we do not believe our own evolution to be so rare as to only occur once. Admittedly, it is not a new argument but it had not clicked for me before. Perhaps it was Dawkins’ poetic phrasing. At this stage it is a belief, underlined by a big ‘if’. How could we ever know if there are intelligent life forms on a planet other than Earth? Dawkins provides an answer here too. You probably won’t be surprised that the answer is science, specifically a knowledge of evolution. We do not have to discover life itself, only a sign of something that marks intelligence - a machine or language, say. Evolution remains our only plausible theory of how such a thing could be created, because it can explain the formation of an intelligent being capable of designing such things. We become the supporting evidence of life somewhere else in the universe. That’s satisfying enough for me. Previous article Next article alien back to

< Back to Issue 7 Interstellar Overdrive: Secrets of our Distant Universe by Sarah Ibrahimi 22 October 2024 edited by Hendrick Lin illustrated by Amanda Agustinus “Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known” - Carl Sagan Humanity's innate curiosity and desire of uncovering the unknown has been the spark for mankind's explorations since the beginning of time. From Columbus' expedition across the Atlantic to discover the New World, to Armstrong's first steps on the Moon's surface, we have experienced technological advancement at a lightning pace over the course of human history. Perhaps the most enthralling of these advances has been the scientific quest to unveil the true nature of our universe - the stars, the planets and the beings that exist within it and far beyond. And now, a novel and revolutionary tool has been developed to deepen our understanding of the cosmos. The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) developed by NASA is the largest of its kind to ever be placed in space. Launched on Christmas Day in 2021 on board the Ariane 5 rocket, it travelled 1.5 million kilometres equipped with various high-resolution and high-sensitivity instruments, allowing scientists the ability to capture detailed infrared astronomical images of our old and distant universe (NASA, 2022a). In a matter of less than a year, the deepest infrared image known to mankind was produced. Named Webb's First Deep Field, it was unveiled by U.S. President Joe Biden on June 11th, 2022 at the White House, encapsulating never-before-seen perspectives of our universe. With this revelation, a new gateway has been opened into answering the countless questions of the early universe pondered by astrophysicists and the public alike. Confronting viewers with an array of contrasting colours and eccentric shapes, Webb’s First Deep Field can be hard to interpret ( figure 1 ). Figure 1. Webb’s First Deep Field: SMACS 07223 Note. From/Adapted from Webb’s First Deep Field: SMACS 07223 [photo] by James Webb Space Telescope. NASA, 2022b. https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/035/01G7DCWB7137MYJ05CSH1Q5Z1Z?page=1&keyword=smac Copyright 2022, NASA. But with a careful eye and some clever detective work, we can begin to decipher the secrets contained within. For example, the bright lights depicting what appear to be stars are rather entire galaxies, each a gateway to billions of stars. In addition, Webb’s Near-Infrared Camera (NIRCam) is able to capture distant galaxies with the sharpest focus to date, unravelling important features from their faint complexities. Appreciation for this image increases exponentially once we begin to comprehend the magnitude of its importance - it depicts the galaxy cluster, SMACS 0723, exactly as it looked 4.6 billion years ago! In other words, this image is a glimpse back to a time well before humans or any life forms existed. Amongst the myriad of initial images produced by JWST, one particular point of interest would be the Southern Ring Nebula illustrating the dying NGC 3132 star ( figure 2 ). This can be seen through the expulsion of its gases and outer layers, producing striking imagery through Webb’s NIRCam. Viewers may also notice the bright lights representing individual galaxies in the nebula's background - again, not to be mistaken as stars. JWST’s ability to capture such a pivotal point in the trajectory of a star's life is crucial in assisting scientists to calculate the volumes of gas and dust present, as well as their unique molecular compositions. Figure 2. Southern Ring Nebula captured by JWST Note. From/Adapted from Southern Ring Nebula [photo] by James Webb Space Telescope. NASA, 2022c. https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/033/01G70BGTSYBHS69T7K3N3ASSEB Copyright 2022, NASA. The efforts to produce such groundbreaking images and insights into the universe did not happen overnight. The Hubble Space Telescope, launched in 1990, was an important predecessor to the JWST. Whether it was confirming the existence of black holes, or the Nobel Prize winning discovery demonstrating the accelerating rate of expansion of the universe, the Hubble Space Telescope laid the foundations for the JWST to flourish. These marvellations revealed by the JWST would also not be possible without the efforts of countless scientists to improve the technological potential of the Hubble Telescope. As a result of these developments, JWST contains a larger primary mirror, deeper infrared vision, and is optimised for longer ultraviolet and visible wavelengths, all with the aim to increase the telescope’s ability to capture profound images of our universe. Nonetheless, a number of hypotheses relevant to matters such as dark energy, exoplanets, and infrared astrophysics remain unanswered. As a next step forward, the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is set to launch in 2027 with the capacity to produce a panoramic view two hundred times greater than the infrared view generated by Hubble and JWST. The questions that continue to itch our minds remain limitless. As Einstein once lamented, "the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know”. There is still so much that remains to be discovered. However, the JWST illustrates that through collaborative scientific efforts, humankind can begin to unravel the many mysteries that govern our universe, one galaxy at a time. References NASAa. (2022, July 12). NASA’s Webb Delivers Deepest Infrared Image of Universe yet. https://www.nasa.gov/image-article/nasas-webb-delivers-deepest-infrared-image-of-universe-yet/ NASAb. (2022, July 11). Webb’s First Deep Field . Webb Space Telescope. https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/035/01G7DCWB7137MYJ05CSH1Q5Z1Z?page=1&keyword=smac NASAc. (2022, July 11). Southern Ring Nebula. Webb Space Telescope. https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/033/01G70BGTSYBHS69T7K3N3ASSEB Previous article Next article apex back to

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.

< Back to Issue 2 Hiccups Evolution might be a theory, but if it’s evidence you’re after, there’s no need to look further than your own body. The human form is full of fascinating parts and functions that hold hidden histories - from the column that brought you a deep-dive into ear wiggling in Issue 1, here’s an exploration of why we hiccup! by Rachel Ko 10 December 2021 Edited by Katherine Tweedie and Ashleigh Hallinan Illustrated by Gemma Van der Hurk Hiccups bring a special brand of chaos to a day. It’s one that lingers, rendering us helpless and in suspense; a subtle, internal chaos of quiet frustration that forces us to drop what we’re doing to monitor each breath – in and out, in and out – until the moment they abruptly decide to stop. It’s an experience we’ve all had – one that can hit anyone at any time – and for most of us, hiccups are a concentrated episode of inconvenience; best ignored, and overcome. Yet, despite our haste to get rid of them when they interrupt our day, hiccups seem to have mystified humans for generations. Historically, the phenomenon has been the source of many superstitions, both good and bad. A range of cultures associate them with the concept of remembrance: in Russia, hiccups mean someone is missing you (1), while an Indian myth suggests that someone is remembering you negatively for the evils you have committed (2). Likewise, in Ancient Greece, hiccups were a sign that you were being complained about (3), while in Hungary, they mean you are currently the subject of gossip. On a darker note, a Japanese superstition prophesises death to one who hiccups 100 times. (4) Clearly, the need to justify everything, even things as trivial as hiccups, has always been an inherent human characteristic, transcending culture and time. As such, science has more recently made its attempt at objectively identifying a reason behind the strange phenomenon of hiccups. After all, if you take a step back and think about it, hiccups are indeed quite strange. Anatomically, hiccups (known scientifically as singultus) are involuntary spasms of the diaphragm (5): the dome-like sheet of muscle separating the chest and abdominal cavities. (6) The inspiratory muscles, including the intercostal and neck muscles, also spasm, while the expiratory muscles are inhibited. (7) These sudden contractions cause a rapid intake of air (“hic”), followed by the immediate closure of the glottis or vocal cords (“up”). (8) As many of us have probably experienced, a range of stimuli can cause these involuntary contractions. The physical stimuli include anything that stretches and bloats the stomach, (9) such as overeating, rapid food consumption and gulping, especially of carbonated drinks. (10) Emotionally, intense feelings and our responses to them, such as laughing, sobbing, anxiety and excitement, can also be triggers. (11) This list is not at all exhaustive; in fact, the range of stimuli is so large that hiccups might be considered the common thread between a drunk man, a Parkinson’s disease patient and anyone who watches The Notebook. The one thing that alcohol, (12) some neurological drugs (13) and intense sobbing (14) do have in common is that they exogenously stimulate the hiccup reflex arc. (15) This arc involves the vagal and phrenic nerves that stretch from the brainstem to the abdomen which cause the diaphragm to contract involuntarily. (16) According to Professor Georg Petroianu from the Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, (17) many familiar home remedies for hiccupping – being scared, swallowing ice, drinking water upside down – interrupt this reflex arc, actually giving these solutions a somewhat scientific rationale. While modern research has successfully mapped out the process of hiccups, their purpose is still unclear. As of now, the hiccup reflex arc and the resulting diaphragmatic spasms seem to be effectively useless. Of the existing theories for the function of hiccups, the most prominent seems to be that they are a remnant of our evolutionary development, (18) essentially ‘vestigial’; in this case, a feature that once served our amphibian ancestors millions of years ago, but now retain little of their original function. (19) In particular, hiccups are believed to be a relic of the ancient transition of organisms from water to land. (20) When early fish lived in stagnant waters with little oxygen, they developed lungs to take advantage of the air overhead, in addition to using gills while underwater. (21) In this system, inhalation would allow water to move over the gills, during which a rapid closure of the glottis – which we see now in hiccupping – would prevent water from entering the lungs. It is theorised that when descendants of these fish moved onto land, gills were lost, but the neural circuit for this glottis closing mechanism was retained. (22) This neural circuit is indeed observable in human beings today, in the form of the hiccup central pattern generator (CPG). (23) CPGs exist for other oscillating actions like breathing and walking, (24) but a particular cross-species CPG stands out as a link to human hiccupping: the neural CPG that is also used by tadpoles for gill ventilation. Tadpoles “breathe” in a recurring, rhythmic pattern that shares a fundamental characteristic feature with hiccups: both involve inspiration with closing of the glottis. (25) This phenomenon strengthens the idea that the hiccup CPG may be left over from a previous stage in evolution and has been retained in both humans and frogs. However, the CPG in frogs is still used for ventilation, while in humans, the evolution of lungs to replace gills has rendered it useless. (26) Based on this information, it seems hiccupping lost its function with time and the development of the human lungs, remaining as nothing more than an evolutionary remnant. However, we cannot discredit hiccupping as having become entirely useless as soon as gills were lost. Interestingly, hiccupping has only been observed in mammals – not in birds, lizards or other air-breathing animals. (27) This suggests that there must have been some evolutionary advantage to hiccupping at some point, at least in mammals. A popular theory for this function stems from the uniquely mammalian trait of nursing. (28) Considering the fact that human babies hiccup in the womb even before birth, this theory considers hiccupping to be almost a glorified burp, intended to remove air from the stomach. This becomes particularly advantageous when closing the glottis prevents milk from entering the lungs, aiding the act of nursing. (29) Today, we reduce hiccups to the disorder and disarray they bring to our day. But, next time you are hit with a bout of hiccups, take a second to find some calm amidst the chaos and appreciate yet another fascinating evolutionary fossil, before you hurry to dismiss them. After that, feel free to eat those lemons or gargle that salty water to your diaphragm’s content. References Sonya Vatomsky, "7 Cures For Hiccups From World Folklore," Mentalfloss.Com, 2017, https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/500937/7-cures-hiccups-world-folklore. Derek Lue, "Indian Superstition: Hiccups | Dartmouth Folklore Archive," Journeys.Dartmouth.Edu, 2018, https://journeys.dartmouth.edu/folklorearchive/2018/11/14/indian-superstition-hiccups/. Vatomsky, "7 Cures For Hiccups From World Folklore". James Mundy, "10 Most Interesting Superstitions In Japanese Culture | Insidejapan Tours," Insidejapan Blog, 2013, https://www.insidejapantours.com/blog/2013/07/08/10-most-interesting-superstitions-in-japanese-culture/. Paul Rousseau, "Hiccups," Southern Medical Journal, no. 88, 2 (1995): 175-181, doi:10.1097/00007611-199502000-00002. Bruno Bordoni and Emiliano Zanier, "Anatomic Connections Of The Diaphragm Influence Of Respiration On The Body System," Journal Of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, no. 6 (2013): 281, doi:10.2147/jmdh.s45443. Christian Straus et al., "A Phylogenetic Hypothesis For The Origin Of Hiccough," Bioessays no. 25, 2 (2003): 182-188, doi:10.1002/bies.10224. Straus et al., "A Phylogenetic Hypothesis For The Origin Of Hiccough," 182-188. John Cameron, “Why Do We Hiccup?,” filmed for TedEd, 2016, TED Video, https://ed.ted.com/lessons/why-do-we-hiccup-john-cameron#watch. Monika Steger, Markus Schneemann, and Mark Fox, "Systemic Review: The Pathogenesis And Pharmacological Treatment Of Hiccups," Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 42, no. 9 (. 2015): 1037-1050, doi:10.1111/apt.13374. Lien-Fu Lin, and Pi-Teh Huang, "An Uncommon Cause Of Hiccups: Sarcoidosis Presenting Solely As Hiccups," Journal Of The Chinese Medical Association 73, no. 12 (2010): 647-650, doi:10.1016/s1726-4901(10)70141-6. Steger, Schneemann and Fox, "Systemic Review: The Pathogenesis And Pharmacological Treatment Of Hiccups," 1037-1050. Unax Lertxundi et al., "Hiccups In Parkinson’s Disease: An Analysis Of Cases Reported In The European Pharmacovigilance Database And A Review Of The Literature," European Journal Of Clinical Pharmacology 73, no. 9 (2017): 1159-1164, doi:10.1007/s00228-017-2275-6. Lin and Huang, "An Uncommon Cause Of Hiccups: Sarcoidosis Presenting Solely As Hiccups," 647-650. Peter J. Kahrilas and Guoxiang Shi, "Why Do We Hiccup?" Gut 41, no. 5 (1997): 712-713, doi:10.1136/gut.41.5.712. Steger, Schneemann and Fox, "Systemic Review: The Pathogenesis And Pharmacological Treatment Of Hiccups," 1037-1050. Georg A. Petroianu, "Treatment Of Hiccup By Vagal Maneuvers," Journal Of The History Of The Neurosciences 24, no. 2 (2014): 123-136, doi:10.1080/0964704x.2014.897133. Straus et al., "A Phylogenetic Hypothesis For The Origin Of Hiccough," 182-188. Cameron, “Why Do We Hiccup?” Michael Mosley, "Anatomical Clues To Human Evolution From Fish," BBC News, published 2011, https://www.bbc.com/news/health-13278255. Michael Hedrick and Stephen Katz, "Control Of Breathing In Primitive Fishes," Phylogeny, Anatomy And Physiology Of Ancient Fishes (2015): 179-200, doi:10.1201/b18798-9. Straus et al., "A Phylogenetic Hypothesis For The Origin Of Hiccough," 182-188. Straus et al., "A Phylogenetic Hypothesis For The Origin Of Hiccough," 182-188. Pierre A. Guertin, "Central Pattern Generator For Locomotion: Anatomical, Physiological, And Pathophysiological Considerations," Frontiers In Neurology 3 (2013), doi:10.3389/fneur.2012.00183. Hedrick and Katz, "Control Of Breathing In Primitive Fishes," 179-200. Straus et al., "A Phylogenetic Hypothesis For The Origin Of Hiccough," 182-188. Daniel Howes, "Hiccups: A New Explanation For The Mysterious Reflex," Bioessays 34, no. 6 (2012): 451-453, doi:10.1002/bies.201100194. Howes, "Hiccups: A New Explanation For The Mysterious Reflex," 451-453. [1] Howes, "Hiccups: A New Explanation For The Mysterious Reflex," 451-453. Previous article back to DISORDER Next article

< Back to Issue 5 Wicked Invaders of the Wild Serenie Tsai 24 October 2023 Edited by Krisha Darji Illustrated by Jennifer Nguyen Since the beginning of time, there has been a continuous flow of species in and out of regions that establishes a foundation for ecosystems. When species are introduced into new environments and replicate excessively to interfere with native species, they become invasive. Invasive species refer to those that spread into new areas and pose a threat to other species. Factors contributing to their menacing status include overfeeding native species, lack of predators, and outcompeting native species (Sakai et al., 2001). Invasive species shouldn’t be confused with feral species which are domestic animals that have reverted to their wild state, or pests which are organisms harmful to human activity (Contrera-Abarca et al., 2022; Hill, 1987). Furthermore, not all introduced species are invasive; crops such as wheat, tomato and rice have been integrated with native agriculture successfully. Many species were introduced accidentally and turned invasive; however, some were intentionally introduced to manage other species, and a lack of foresight resulted in detrimental ecological impacts. Each year, invasive species cost the global economy over a trillion dollars in damages (Roth, 2019). Claimed ecological benefits of invasive species Contrary to the name, invasive species could potentially benefit the invaded ecosystem. Herbivores can reap the benefits of the introduced biodiversity, and native plants can increase their tolerance (Brändle et al., 2008; Mullerscharer, 2004). Deer and goats aid in suppressing introduced grasses and inhibit wildfires (Fornoni, 2010). Likewise, species such as foxes and cats have the capacity to regulate the number of rats and rabbits. Furthermore, megafaunal extinction has opened opportunities to fill empty niches, for example, camels could fill the ecological niche of a now-extinct giant marsupial (Chew et al., 1965; Weber, 2017). Thus, studies indicate the possibility of species evolving to fill vacant niches (Meachen et al., 2014). Below, I’ll explore the rise and downfall of invasive species in Australia. Cane toad Cane toads are notorious for their unforeseen invasion. Originally introduced as a biological control for cane beetles in 1935, their rookie status was advantageous to their proliferation and dominance over native species (Freeland & Martin, 1985). Several native predators were overthrown and native fauna in Australia lacked resistance to the cane toad’s poison used as a defence mechanism (Smith & Philips, 2006). However, research suggests an evolutionary adaptation to such poison (Philips &Shine, 2006). There isn't a universal method to regulate cane toads, so efforts to completely eradicate cane toads are futile. However, populations are kept low by continuously monitoring areas and targeting cane toad eggs or their adult form. Common Myna The origins of Common Myna introduced into New South Wales and Victoria are uncertain; however, it was introduced into Northern Queensland as a mechanism to predate on grasshoppers and cane beetles(Neville & Liindsay, 2011) and introduced into Mauritius to control locust plagues (Bauer, 2023). The Common Myna poses an alarming threat to ecosystems and mankind, its severity is elucidated by its position in the world’s top 100 invasive species list (Lowe et al., 2000). It has spurred human health concerns including the spread of mites and acting as a vector for diseases destructive to human and farm stock (Tidemann, 1998). Myna also has a vicious habit of fostering competition with cavity-nesting native birds, forcing them and their eggs from their nest, however, the extent of this is unclear, and the influence of habitat destruction needs to be considered (Grarock et al., 2013). The impact of this bird lacks empirical evidence, so appropriate management is undecided (Grarock et al., 2012). However, modification of habitats could be advantageous as the Myna impact urban areas more, whereas intervening in their food resources would be rendered useless with their highly variable diet (Brochier et al., 2012). Zebra mussels Zebra mussels accidentally invaded Australia's aquatic locality when introduced by the ballast water of cargo ships. From an ecological perspective, Zebra Mussels overgrow the shells of native molluscs and create an imbalance within the ecosystem (Dzierżyńska-Białończyk et al., 2018). From a societal perspective, it colonizes docks, ship hulls, and water pipes and damages power plants (Lovell et al., 2006) Controlling the spread of Zebra Mussels includes manual removal, chlorine, thermal treatment and more. Control methods It is crucial to deploy preventative methods to mitigate the spread of invasive species before it becomes irreversible. Few known control methods are employed for certain types of animals but with no guarantee of success. Some places place bounties on catching the animals, however, the results of this technique are conflicting. In 1893, foxes were the target of financial incentives, but the scheme was deemed ineffective (Saunders et al., 2010). However, government bounties were introduced for Tasmanian tigers in 1888, which drastically caused a population decline and their eventual extinction (National Museum of Australia, 2019). Similarly, the prevalence of Cane Toads became unbearable, and in response, armies were deployed, and fences in rural communities were funded. Moreover, in 2007, inspired by a local pub’s scheme to hand out beers in exchange for cane toads, the government staged a “Toad Day Out” to establish a bounty for cane toads (Williams, 2011). Invasive species are detrimental to ecosystems, whether introduced intentionally or by accident, management of species is still a work in progress. References Lowe S., Browne M., Boudjelas S., & De Poorter M. (2000) 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species: A selection from the Global Invasive Species Database . The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG). Bauer, I. L. (2023). T he oral repellent–science fiction or common sense? Insects, vector- borne diseases, failing strategies, and a bold proposition. Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines, 9(1), 7. Brändle, M., Kühn, I., Klotz, S., Belle, C., & Brandl, R. (2008). Species richness of herbivores on exotic host plants increases with time since introduction of the host. Diversity and Distributions, 14(6), 905–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00511.x Brochier, B., Vangeluwe, D., & Van den Berg, T. (2010). Alien invasive birds. Revue scientifique et technique, 29(2), 217. Chicago. Cayley, N. W., & Lindsey, T. What bird is that?: a completely revised and updated edition of the classic Australian ornithological work . Chew, R. M., & Chew, A. E. (1965). The Primary Productivity of a Desert-Shrub ( Larrea tridentata ) Community . Ecological Monographs, 35(4), 355–375. https://doi.org/10.2307/1942146 Contreras-Abarca, R., Crespin, S. J., Moreira-Arce, D., & Simonetti, J. A. (2022). Redefining feral dogs in biodiversity conservation . Biological Conservation, 265, 109434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109434 Fornoni, J. (2010). Ecological and evolutionary implications of plant tolerance to herbivory. Functional Ecology, 25(2), 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01805.x Freeland, W. J., & Martin, K. C. (1985). The rate of range expansion by Bufo marinus in Northern Australia , 1980-84 . Wildlife Research, 12(3), 555-559. Grarock, K., Lindenmayer, D. B., Wood, J. T., & Tidemann, C. R. (2013). Does human- induced habitat modification influence the impact of introduced species? A case study on cavity-nesting by the introduced common myna ( Acridotheres tristis ) and two Australian native parrots. Environmental Management, 52, 958-970. G. Smith, J., & L. Phillips, B. (2006). Toxic tucker: the potential impact of Cane Toads on Australian reptiles . Pacific Conservation Biology, 12(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.1071/pc060040 G. Smith J, L. Phillips B. Toxic tucker: the potential impact of Cane Toads on Australian reptiles. Pacific Conservation Biology [Internet]. 2006;12(1):40. Available from: http://www.publish.csiro.au/pc/PC060040 Hill, D. S. (1987). Agricultural Insect Pests of Temperate Regions and Their Control . In Google Books. CUP Archive. https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=3-w8AAAAIAAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA27&dq=pests+definition&ots=90_-WiF_MZ&sig=pKxuVjDJ_bZ3iNMb5TpfXA16ENI#v=onepage&q=pests%20definition&f=false Lovell, S. J., Stone, S. F., & Fernandez, L. (2006). The Economic Impacts of Aquatic Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 35(1), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1068280500010157 Meachen, J. A., Janowicz, A. C., Avery, J. E., & Sadleir, R. W. (2014). Ecological Changes in Coyotes ( Canis latrans ) in Response to the Ice Age Megafaunal Extinctions . PLoS ONE, 9(12), e116041. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116041 Mullerscharer, H. (2004). Evolution in invasive plants: implications for biological control . Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19(8), 417–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.05.010 ANU. Myna problems. (n.d.). Fennerschool-Associated.anu.edu.au . http://fennerschool- associated.anu.edu.au//myna/problem.html National Museum of Australia. (2019). Extinction of thylacine | National Museum of Australia . Nma.gov.au . https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/extinction-of-thylacine Cayley, N. W. & Lindsey T. (2011) What bird is that?: a completely revised and updated edition of the classic Australian ornithological work . Walsh Bay, N.S.W.: Australia’s Heritage Publishing. Phillips, B. L., & Shine, R. (2006). An invasive species induces rapid adaptive change in a native predator: cane toads and black snakes in Australia . Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273(1593), 1545–1550. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3479 Roth, A. (2019, July 3). Why you should never release exotic pets into the wild. Animals. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/exotic-pets-become-invasive-species Sakai, A. K., Allendorf, F. W., Holt, J. S., Lodge, D. M., Molofsky, J., With, K. A., Baughman, S., Cabin, R. J., Cohen, J. E., Ellstrand, N. C., McCauley, D. E., O’Neil, P., Parker, I. M., Thompson, J. N., & Weller, S. G. (2001). The Population Biology of Invasive Species. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics , 32(1), 305–332. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114037 Saunders, G. R., Gentle, M. N., & Dickman, C. R. (2010). The impacts and management of foxes ( Vulpes vulpes ) in Australia . Mammal review, 40(3), 181-211. Weber, L. (2013). Plants that miss the megafauna. Wildlife Australia, 50(3), 22–25. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.555395530308043 Williams, G. (2011). 100 Alien Invaders . In Google Books. Bradt Travel Guides. https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=qtS9TksHmOUC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=invasive+species+australia+bounty+ Wicked back to

< Back to Issue 9 Knot Theory and Its Applications. Why Knot? by Ryan Rud 28 October 2025 Illustrated by Saraf Ishmam Edited by Elijah McEvoy Knot theory is a theoretical study in mathematics, where your brain thinks of an imaginary knot, and manipulates it to your heart’s desire. Yes, the kind of knot you are probably thinking of now, it might be a shoelace, a knot in a piece of string or some utility knot. Good job, but it’s missing one detail: the knot needs to be tied at its ends. Think of this as a string with both ends tied together so that it can’t come undone when you play with it. Now you can pull at and twist this knot, as long as you don’t break it. Congratulations, you now understand the basics of knot theory. (1) So why should we care about a niche field of maths that you will probably never use in your everyday life? Well, the first answer to that is simply ‘for the love of the game’. For some people problem-solving is an endless endeavour that satisfies an urge to understand and be intellectually stimulated. But that’s not for everyone. So then we remember all the times when random elements of pure mathematics became essential when applied to seemingly unrelated topics. Such as how number theory became applied to information transmission, cryptography and computing. (2) How quaternions made for more efficient digital transformations in computer science. (3) Or how graph theory was used to strongly conjecture that any two people have 6 degrees of separation between each other. (4) Although we may not routinely ponder these discoveries, it is because of the works of pure mathematicians that we can admire certain facts that we could not prove otherwise or appreciate how they silently helped to make all the digital devices in your homes. But before we get into the applications, it is good to be familiar with some general terminology. That knot which you pictured earlier with its ends tied is called a standard knot. In 1867 Lord Kelvin thought of the revolutionary idea that what we know as elements - the ones made of protons and neutrons - are actually types of standard knots. (5) He wasn’t right, but it inspired his assistant Peter Guthrie Tait to begin the rigorous study of knots and we have been trying to find applications ever since. Here are the first knots in the greater sequence of the periodic table of knots (see cover image for more!): Figure 1. An ordered table of the first 15 prime knots. (6) There are knots made from one piece of string (prime knots) and knots made from multiple knots joined end-to-end (composite knots) (Fig.2b). There are also links, where two closed knots are combined without gluing the string (Fig.2a). Understanding any further implications of this terminology is not necessary here, but it may help to have a visual understanding of them for the next part. Figure 2. a) Showcasing types of mathematical links; unlink on the left, Hopf link in the centre and whitehead link on the left. b) Demonstrating how two prime knots are combined into a composite knot. c) Demonstrating chirality in trefoil knots, notice the overlapping pattern. Lastly, like many things in mathematics we need a way to systematically and efficiently describe how we manipulate the knots. Luckily, Kurt Reidemeister had the pleasure of providing us with a knot-manipulating moveset in the 1930s through rigorous proofs.These are the legal set of moves that can be done to a knot without changing the knot structure. If we were to cut the knot, twist or untwist the string and then reattach the ends, this is called a crossing switch and it changes the knot. Again, this is not an extensive course but it helps to know of the terminology and visualise it. Feel free to do more research into the details of these topics using the references below! Figure 3. A depiction of the Reidemeister moves. DNA and knot theory Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the most important and relevant knotting molecule. Each cell nucleus contains (on the millionth order) DNA that is regularly knotting, coiling and compressing to fit into this tight space. However, the best application of knot theory is to the closed end, circular DNA in bacteria. During DNA replication, the unwinding of DNA at one end creates immense torsional strain on the other side of the loop, which is enough supercoiling that prevents replication and leads to cell death.To counter this, bacteria utilise an enzyme known as type II topoisomerase which makes double-stranded cuts in the DNA, followed by a rearrangement of the tangle and reconnecting of the strands, a crossing switch! Without this adaptation, all cellular life would have evolved differently. If you gave this DNA to a mathematician and asked which position in the DNA would be best for this enzyme to cut with the intent of untangling, they could spend a lifetime performing Reidemeister moves and contemplating, never knowing where or how many cuts to make. In contrast to our world’s best mathematicians, topoisomerase is incredibly efficient in where it cuts. We have yet to understand what mechanism allows for such accurate cuts, but practical research into topoisomerase could potentially help knot theorists solve the immensely inscrutable question of the minimum number of crossing switches to simplify any knot. Furthermore, if an understanding of the mechanisms for topoisomerases in bacteria and humans is possible, then humanity can access a new form of control over DNA. It has been speculated that there are possible uses of topoisomerases to inhibit cancer growth, or as a revolutionary way to treat bacterial disease. While we do not have this intel right now, this is one of the ways knot theory could be integral to applied sciences and given time and research funding, it can prove itself useful. (7-8) Knots in chemistry So what other molecules can form knots? Chemists have been creating molecules which involve the basic knots and links since the 1960s (see Fig 4), when topological isomerism was discovered and characterised. Topological isomers are chemicals that are similar in many properties, but differ in spatial arrangement. We can think of it like chirality for knots (see Fig 2c). Chirality is the property of an object not being the same as its mirror image, like a right and left hand. Subsequently, these molecules were made through a technique called ‘templating’, where a metal ion or some template structure was used to produce a desired product, based on how the template interacts with the reactants. There is also another category of knot called a ravel (Fig 4h), where a knot has multiple strings connected at vertices. Altogether, the study of topological isomerism and templating techniques have been advanced by the experimental desire to produce these beautiful molecules. This then indirectly contributes to the production of new molecules and drugs that can go on to have real world impacts. (9) Figure 4. a) The first molecular trefoil knot produced in 1989. c) The first molecule pentafoil knot produced in 2011. d) First molecular Borromean rings, a type of link produced in 2004. f) The first molecule solomon link produced in 2013. h) The first molecular ravel produced in 2011. (9) The recent breakthrough in knot theory I admit, progress in knot theory is slow and perhaps you did not find the scientific revelation of knot theory here that you were hoping for. But that does not mean that current research is ineffective. As recent as June of this year, there was a groundbreaking proof. Think back to the prime and composite knots (scroll up if you have to). Prime knots have an unknotting number, which is the number of crossing changes needed to simplify it to the unknot, similar to what the topoisomerase does. If we merge two prime knots into a composite knot, it can be easily seen that it takes as many crossing switches to simplify the composite, as it does the crossing switches for the sum of the primes. In other words, to untangle a composite knot, you cut and reglue it as many times as the prime knots that make it up. Now, the breakthrough was a proof that it is possible to untangle some composite knots through less crossing switches than the sum of its prime knots. This may seem bleak, but it disproves a widely believed conjecture and now theorists are one step closer to solving the question of the minimum number of crossing switches needed to simplify a knot. (10) Conclusion I will end this with a quote from Dr Arunima Ray, a mathematician that specialises in knot theory and low-dimensional topology at the University of Melbourne, and a dear professor of mine. Hopefully this is just more proof (pun intended) that the work us mathematicians do is tangible: “I had never imagined that mathematics could be used to describe something so abstract as knot theory, but to me the appeal was its tangibility. No matter who you are, there really is something in mathematics for you.” References Pencovitch M. What’s not to love? [Internet] Mathematics Today . 2021. Available from: https://ima.org.uk/17434/whats-knot-to-love/ Koblitz N. A course in number theory and cryptography . 2nd ed. Springer Science & Business Media; 1994. Jeremiah. Understanding quaternions. 3D Game Engine Programming [Internet]. June 25, 2012. Available from: https://www.3dgep.com/understanding-quaternions/ Zhang L, Tu W. Six degrees of separation in online society [Internet]. Research Gate. 2009. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255614427_Six_Degrees_of_Separation_in_Online_Society Wilson RM. Holograms tie optical vortices in knots. Physics Today. 2010. https://doi.org/ 10.1063/1.3366639 Li M, Wang T, Kau A, George W, Petrenko A. Knots. Brilliant. 2025 [Internet]. Available from: https://brilliant.org/wiki/knots/ Catherine. All tangled up: an introduction to knot theory [Internet]. Gleammath. April 28, 2021. Available from: https://www.gleammath.com/post/all-tangled-up-an-introduction-to-knot-theory Skjeltorp AT, Clausen S, Helgesen G, Pieranski P. Knots and applications to biology, chemistry and physics. In: Riste T, Sherrington D, editors. Physics of Biomaterials: Fluctuations, Selfassembly and Evolution. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 1996. p.187–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1722-4_8 Horner KE, Miller MA, Steed JW, Sutcliffe PM. Knot theory in modern chemistry [Internet]. Chemical Society Reviews. 2016;45(23). Available from: https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1394834 Brittenham M, Hermiller S. Unknotting number is not additive under connected sum [Internet]. Arxiv . 2025. Available from: https://arxiv.org/html/2506.24088v1 Previous article Next article Entwined back to

< Back to Issue 5 Why Do We Gossip? Lily McCann 24 October 2023 Edited by Celina Kumala Illustrated by Rachel Ko Have you ever heard of ‘Scold’s bridle’? A metal restraint, fitted with a gag, that was strapped about the face as a medieval punishment for excessive chatter; gossip, it seems, was not received too fondly in the Middle Ages. While the bridle may have gone out of fashion long ago, today the word gossip still carries negative connotations. The Oxford Dictionary, for instance, defines gossip as “informal talk or stories about other people’s private lives, that may be unkind or not true” (Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, 2023). Entries in the Urban Dictionary use yet stronger terms, going so far as to describe gossip as the “garbage of stupid silly ignorant people” (Lorenzo, 2006). Is this too harsh? Cruz et al. (2021) propose a much more neutral definition in their analysis of frameworks to study gossip, concluding that gossip is “a sender communicating to a receiver about a target who is absent or unaware of the content”. Whether the gossip conveys positive or negative content — otherwise known as its valence — is not a requirement of the definition itself. Gossip, then, is not always “unkind” (Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, 2023) or “garbage” (Lorenzo, 2006). In fact, with a bit of further reading, we can see that this “informal talk” has played an important part in our evolution and even serves positive purposes in society. In the first sense, gossip is an important facilitator of safety. It allows dangerous situations to be identified: spreading the knowledge that a certain individual is prone to violence, for instance, ensures the rest of a community takes care of their own safety with regards to that individual. On a different note, passing about the fact that another individual is skilled in certain aspects of resource procurement allows wider access to these resources. It is easy to see in these examples how gossip could give a selective advantage in the survival of societies. But the influence of gossip goes further than this. It has been shown that gossip in fact encourages cooperation and generosity (Wu et al., 2015). How? The crucial mediator is reputation (Nowak, 2006). Reputation is incredibly important - see Taylor Swift’s 2017 album for more. A poor reputation leads to ostracisation, and for an individual in prehistoric societies, this could be fatal. Cultivating a good reputation among peers thousands of years ago, as today, improves the chances of success in life by increasing access to resources and the willingness of others to help you. Positive gossip can facilitate all this. So, how do we foster positive gossip? What will encourage someone to put in a good word for us? The most effective approach is to act in a way that benefits that individual. It predisposes them to spread the word of our generosity, helping to build a reputation for goodness that will in turn have positive outcomes for ourselves. Thus, it’s easy to see how behaviours that foster good gossip are incentivised in our everyday lives. This propensity to spread the knowledge of how certain individuals interact with others has been incredibly impactful in the development of human societies. The fact that our species can flourish and sustain itself in such immense populations requires a high level of cooperation - which enables us to share resources and productivity - even with people we do not know. Otherwise known as indirect reciprocity, this ability to work with strangers is enabled by reputation (Nowak, 2006). How else do we know that it is safe to interact with a stranger, other than through the means of gossip, which informs us of their reliability and trustworthiness? But what about when gossip is incorrect? The Oxford definition hints at the possibility that information spread through gossip “may be…not true”. Can untrue gossip hinder our progress, by limiting interactions with individuals who may have the potential to help us, or promoting those interactions that would better have been avoided? And if gossip can be incorrect, does that not render reputation meaningless? What is the incentive to be good, if gossip could label you as a bad egg, regardless (Nieper et al., 2022)? Incorrectly negative gossip can be extremely impactful for the subject of that gossip. Studies have shown that it decreases productivity and prosocial behaviour - not to mention burdening victims with the psychological effects of ostracisation, injustice and loneliness (Kong, 2018; Martinescu et al., 2021). Through gossip, we can exert immense power over other beings. It is understandable, then, that we fear gossip, and try to discount it by painting it as “garbage” (Lorenzo, 2006), “unkind” or “not true” (Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries, 2023). And yet, whilst negative gossip can be a detriment, positive gossip can yield great benefits, reinforcing prosocial behaviour, fostering cooperation and promoting generosity. So, rather than fearing gossip, perhaps we ought to acknowledge its benefits and harness it for good. Perhaps it's worth considering how we can each use gossip to exert a bit of good upon our world. References Dores Cruz, T. D., Nieper, A. S., Testori, M., Martinescu, E., & Beersma, B. (2021). An Integrative Definition and Framework to Study Gossip. Group & Organization Management, 46(2), 252-285. http://doi.org/10.1177/1059601121992887 Kong, M. (2018). Effect of Perceived Negative Workplace Gossip on Employees’ Behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology , 9(2728). http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01112 Lorenzo, A. (2006). Gossip . Urban Dictionary. Accessed October 10, 2023. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gossip Martinescu, E., Jansen, W., & Beersma, B. (2021). Negative Gossip Decreases Targets’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior by Decreasing Social Inclusion: A Multi-Method Approach. Group and Organization Management, 46(3), 463-497. http://doi.org/10.1177/1059601120986876 Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries. (2023). Gossip - definition . Accessed October 10, 2023. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/gossip_1#:~:text=gossip-,noun,all%20the%20gossip%20you%20hear . Nieper, A. S., Beersma, B., Dijkstra, M. T. M., & van Kleef, G. A. (2022). When and why does gossip increase prosocial behavior? Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 315-320. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.10.009 Nowak, M. A. (2006). Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation . Science, 314(5805), 1560-1563. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133755 Wu, J., Balliet, D., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2015). When does gossip promote generosity? Indirect reciprocity under the shadow of the future. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(8), 923-930. http://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615595272 Wicked back to

< Back to Issue 7 A Coral’s Story: From thriving reef to desolation by Nicola Zuzek-Mayer 22 October 2024 edited by Arwen Nguyen-Ngo illustrated by Amanda Agustinus The sun is shining. Shoals of fish are zooming past me, leaving their nests where I let them stay for protection from bigger fish. I look to my right and the usual fish have come to dine from me, filling their bellies with vital nutrients. I feel proud of our coexistence: I feed the big fish and provide shelter to small fish, whilst they clean algae off of me. I am the foundation of the reef. I am the architect of the reef. Without me, there would be nothing. I can’t help but think that the reef is looking vibrant today. A wide variety of different coloured corals surround me in the reef, with some of my closest friends a stone’s throw away. We’ve all known each other for our entire lives, and it’s such a close knit community of diverse corals. Life is sprawling in this underwater metropolis, and it reminds me of how much I love my home. But recently, I’ve heard some gossip amongst the city’s inhabitants that this paradise may change soon – and for the worse. Something about the land giants destroying our home. I refuse to believe such rumours – why would they want to destroy us? Our home is so beautiful, and we have done nothing to hurt them. Our beauty attracts many of them to come visit us, and most never hurt us. But sometimes I feel pain when they visit on a particularly sunny day, when I see white particles drop down to the reef and pierce my branches, polluting the city. My friends have told me that these giants wear something called ‘sunscreen’ to protect themselves from the sun, but their ‘protection’ is actually poisoning us. I hope that they realise that soon. Another thing that I’ve noticed recently is that the ocean is feeling slightly warmer than before, and my growth is slowing more. Yes, I’m concerned, but I don’t think that the issue will get worse. 30 years later… The sun is blisteringly hot. I feel sick and the water around me is scorching hot. The vibrant colours of the reef are disappearing, and there are fewer organisms around. We used to be so diverse, but so many species of fish have died out. It’s eerie to see the area so desolate. My body is deteriorating and I feel so much more fragile than before. I feel tired all the time, after using so much energy to repair my body in the acidic water. I sense myself becoming paler, losing all colour in my body. I struggle to breathe. My coral friends and family are long gone, perished from the acidity of the ocean. I am the last one remaining. In my last moments, I can only wish to go and relive the past. I wish that the land giants had done more to help not only my city, but other reef cities around the world. All the other cities are empty now, and all ecosystems are long gone. If only someone had helped our dying world. Previous article Next article apex back to

< Back to Issue 9 Enter . . . the Anthropocene? by Rita Fortune 28 October 2025 Illustrated by Zara Burk Edited by Kylie Wang We live in a time where humanity’s impact on the world around us is clearly visible. From the neverending barrage of information about climate change, to extinction and habitat loss, the consequences of our actions are impossible to avoid. There’s no denying that the world around us is changing, but what if there are deeper implications? What if our impact on the planet will be apparent thousands, even millions of years into the future? Have we changed our planet’s system to such an extent that the birth of our species defined a new geological epoch? The geological timescale is how we understand the relative timing of past events. From the advent of life, to mass extinctions, all of it is documented in the rock record. Our geological past is divided into formalised time periods: eons, eras, periods, epochs and ages. These time periods are generally divided by major changes visible in the rock record, such as mass extinctions, major climate shifts, or changes in magnetic polarity, with absolute ages determined by radioactive dating (1). Currently, we are formally sitting in the Holocene Epoch, which began around 11.7 thousand years ago, with the end of the last glacial maximum and beginning of the subsequent warmer interglacial phase (2). However, due to the enormity of impact on earth systems that humanity has had, especially since the dawn of the industrial revolution, some scientists are pushing for the formalisation of a new epoch: the Anthropocene. The concept of the Anthropocene was first officially coined by Paul Crutzen and Eugene Stoermer in 2002 (3). Initially, it was used to recognise the exploitation of earth’s resources by humankind, including the emission of greenhouse gases, urbanisation of land, and increase in species extinction rates. Crutzen and Stoermer suggested the beginning of the Anthropocene to be in the late 18th century, as, in the last 200 years, the “global effects of human activities have become clearly noticeable” (3). The concept, at its core, has remained the same since then, but there have been some changes and debate around formal definitions and informal uses of the term. The Anthropocene has been adopted in popular culture, with its broad use encompassing humanity’s interactions with the earth, but there is ongoing debate about its formal use. Furthermore, although the theory traces its origins to earth system science, efforts to formalise the Anthropocene have been multidisciplinary, involving not only stratigraphers and palaeontologists, but also experts from various scientific backgrounds (4). Formalising the Anthropocene as an epoch distinct from the Holocene relies on being able to find stratal evidence in the rock record for where this transition took place (4). There are countless pieces of evidence for our impact on Earth’s systems.Yet, there is still debate around which ones can be used to define the Anthropocene. The Anthropocene Working Group identified as potential evidence for the beginning of the Anthropocene: the increase in sedimentation and erosion rates; changes to carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus cycles; climate change and increase in sea level, and; biotic changes such as unprecedented spread of species across Earth (4). Many of these impacts will leave permanent evidence in the geological record, indicating our existence long after our civilisations have crumbled. There are many potential ways to define the beginning of the Anthropocene. Crutzen suggested this crucial moment to be the invention of the steam engine, which led to the industrial revolution, often used as a baseline to compare our current climate to (3). However, evidence of industrialisation from this time is really only visible in Europe, with sediments from the Southern Hemisphere showing no change (5). More recently, it has been posited that the detonation of the first atomic bomb in 1945 should be the official marker of the Anthropocene, as it deposited a thin stratal layer of radionuclides, which do not naturally occur in the environment (6). While it’s clear that humans are a major source of change on Earth, some say that it does not necessarily mean we’ve entered a new epoch. Although geological time periods are often delineated based on environmental change, not every environmental change necessitates the creation of a new epoch. There have been past periods of (relatively) rapid climate change that are not associated with new time periods. An example of this is the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). During this time, there was significant global warming, change in habitats, and migration in species. This warm period lasted for approximately 100,000 years, but there were no mass extinctions. Once temperatures returned to normal, ecosystems essentially returned to how they were before the event (7). Geologically speaking, the proposed Anthropocene is a minuscule amount of time. Although the effects are extreme, if we stopped all emissions right now, it is possible that within 5000 years the climate could return to pre-industrial levels (8). Another argument presented by some authors is that the stratigraphic basis for the Anthropocene doesn’t exist yet, and is merely expected to exist in the future. Many structures which have an anthropogenic origin, such as excavation, boreholes and mine dumps, are not yet geological strata. Additionally, in strata that have recorded anthropogenic change, such as speleothems, marshes, lake and ocean floor sediments, the layers representing the Anthropocene would be so thin as to be difficult to distinguish from the underlying Holocene sediments (6). Without the gift of hindsight that has allowed scientists to examine previous epochs, it is difficult to say whether or not the change we currently see will be significant enough on a geological scale to officially move us into a new epoch. There has been suggestion that instead of a new epoch, the Anthropocene could be a Sub-Age, or an Age within the Holocene Epoch (4); acknowledging our profound impact on the earth, but believing that the earth’s system will eventually return to pre-industrial levels. Further complicating the matter, there are suggestions that humans have been altering the earth’s climate since long before the industrial revolution. Evidence shows that a rise in CO2 occurred with the advent of farming by early humans, 7000 years ago. Around the same time, there was also a rise in atmospheric methane, which has been attributed to rice paddies and livestock (9). With the increase in human population happening at this time, there was likewise an increase in land clearance, both to accommodate dwellings and farming. Even though these emissions and land clearing are tiny by today’s standards, they may have been enough to push our climate away from heading into its next glacial period, priming the warmer conditions we experience today. Some arguments have even been made that irreversible impact by humans stretches back even further, to the Pleistocene extinctions of megafauna across multiple continents (10). There is no doubt that humans have had, and are having, a massive impact on the environment. The atmosphere and oceans will take thousands of years to recover from their current level of warming. However, these massive changes do not necessarily mean that we have entered a new epoch. Although it appears there will be ample stratigraphic records of our impacts on this planet, without hindsight, it is difficult to see just how much change we have created. In the context of geological time, humans have been around for a minutely short period. Although what’s happening today might seem dramatic to us, it is possible that millions of years in the future all we will have left behind is a few centimetres of ocean floor sediment. Either way, the Anthropocene as an informal term for our current time period is valuable for acknowledging the consequences of our actions, and a reminder of the permanence of our record. References 1.University of Calgary. Geologic time scale. Energy Education. 2024. Accessed October 21, 2025. https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Geologic_time_scale#cite_note-GTS-3 2. Walker M, Johnsen S, Rasmussen SO, Popp T, Steffensen JP, Gibbard P, et al. Formal definition and dating of the GSSP (Global Stratotype Section and Point) for the base of the Holocene using the Greenland NGRIP ice core, and selected auxiliary records. J. Quaternary Sci. 2009;24(1):3–17. doi: 10.1002/jqs.1227 3. Crutzen PJ, Stoermer EF. The ‘Anthropocene’ (2000) [Internet]. Benner S, Lax G, Crutzen PJ, Pöschl U, Lelieveld J, Brauch HG, editors. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2021. 3 p. (Paul J. Crutzen and the Anthropocene: A New Epoch in Earth’s History). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82202-6_2 4. Zalasiewicz J, Waters CN, Summerhayes CP, Wolfe AP, Barnosky AD, Cearreta A, et al. The Working Group on the Anthropocene: Summary of evidence and interim recommendations. Anthropocene. 2017;19:55–60. doi: 10.1016/j.ancene.2017.09.001 5. Pare S. Nuclear bombs set off new geological epoch in the 1950s, scientists say. Live Science. 2023. Accessed October 21, 2025. https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/nuclear-bombs-set-off-new-geological-epoch-in-the-1950s-scientists-say 6. Finney S, Edwards L. The “Anthropocene” epoch: Scientific decision or political statement? GSA Today. 2016;26:4–10. doi: 10.1130/GSATG270A.1 7. The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). Britannica. 2023. Accessed October 21, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/science/Paleocene-Eocene-Thermal-Maximum 8. The Royal Society. If emissions of greenhouse gases were stopped, would the climate return to the conditions of 200 years ago? The Royal Society. 2020. Accessed October 21, 2025. https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/question-20/ 9. Ruddiman WF, He F, Vavrus SJ, Kutzbach JE. The early anthropogenic hypothesis: A review. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2020;240:106386. doi: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106386 10. Doughty CE, Wolf A, Field CB. Biophysical feedbacks between the Pleistocene megafauna extinction and climate: The first human-induced global warming? Geophys. Res. Lett. 2010;37(15). doi:10.1029/2010GL043985 Previous article Next article Entwined back to

< Back to Issue 9 Unravelling the Threads: From the Editors-in-Chief & Cover Illustrator by Ingrid Sefton, Aisyah Mohammad Sulhanuddin & Anabelle Dewi Saraswati 28 October 2025 Illustrated by Anabelle Dewi Saraswati Edited by the Editor-in-Chiefs Innovation evolves, and perhaps what once made headlines becomes embodied in ourselves and in our universe. The science that we once saw is no longer visible, yet no less integral in the ways in which it governs our world. Like the strings of a puppet, scientific principles guide us and coordinate the patterns and movements which shape our daily lives. Yet equally, science encourages us to look behind the curtain in order to unravel the forces which pull on the strings of our universe. Following these rich threads of knowledge, so often taken for granted, this issue brings to the fore and celebrates the science that keeps our world running. An introspective chat with the brain, a journey along the production line that creates our much-loved daily cup of matcha, fundamental questions about how we seek and create knowledge: Entwined seeks to make explanations explicit and start conversations about the scientific mechanisms embedded in our lives. When we take the time to focus our gaze, encourage awe at the everyday and seek reflection over reaction – that’s when we start to disentangle the science that binds us; that which keeps us Entwined . Begin your immersion in the world of Entwined with Issue 9’s Cover Illustrator, Anabelle Dewi Saraswati , as she explains the vision and rationale behind her work. “I found myself drawn to the world of Art Nouveau for these cover illustrations, captivated by the way forms seem to grow into each other, sharing meaning and life, much like the theme of ‘Entwined’ itself. There is something magical about that moment in history, where art, architecture, and science all seemed to bleed into one another, each discipline borrowing and lending, rooted in the emphasis on the beauty of nature after the coldness created by the Industrial Revolution. That sense of crossover felt like the perfect encapsulation for this issue, derived from pictorial history. The way feminine figures and flowing hair seem to melt into vines and leaves, everything tangled together in a quiet conversation. The motion and sense of growth, but also its hidden mathematical precision required to produce such beautiful curving forms. Art Nouveau captured how the artificial and natural worlds are always weaving into each other, inseparable. I wanted to draw from that imagery in a way that acknowledges its history I return to my architectural roots in structure, composition and line with my approach in building these pieces. The signage piece is fully hand-drawn and deliberate – reflecting the craft and typographic precision of the era. The collage is a layering of textures and fragments, letting ideas overlap and bleed into each other, much like memories and histories do. A way to begin the issue visually to trace the growth of worlds as they intertwine. Paying homage to the harmony between the natural and the human-made, to reflect on how we are shaped by the places we inhabit, the histories we inherit, and the stories we choose to keep alive.” Previous article Next article Entwined back to