Blog Page 980

A future made with 3D printing

Ryan Sephton
-
0
A future made with 3D printing

In the rapidly expanding playground of gadgets, gizmos, and all things tech, it’s sometimes hard to believe that some of the latest breakthroughs aren’t from the mind of an eccentric Hollywood director. We find ourselves in an age of self-driving cars and levitating trains—so why do so many care about printing flimsy toy models and fancy keyrings?

In my ten-month placement at a leading British engineering company, I saw the research and design that went into evolving 3D printing from plastic polymers to metals through direct metal laser sintering—the formal name given to the process of blasting metal with an extremely powerful laser to make structures, also know as metal 3D printing.

The inner workings are extraordinarily complicated: in essence, metal 3D printing works through a powder chute that dispenses a set amount of powdered metal beads, and a wiper blade not dissimilar to a car windscreen wiper that spreads the powder over the ‘bed’—a flat metal sheet. A programmable laser (or even multiple lasers nowadays) blast certain areas of the powder, selectively ‘welding’ parts of the current layer to the layer below. After this the bed drops down and a new layer is spread on top, and the process repeats.

Other than re-creating battle scenes from Star Wars, there are actually some extremely profound consequences of this method. In building the structure layer by layer, complexity in design comes with almost no extra time cost.

This is where the remarkable promise of metal 3D printing comes to hand—it turns out that nature itself has already put in a few million years’ worth of research and development for the industry, through the design of lattice structures—the idea of interweaving and convoluting thinner support structures to maximise strength whilst minimising the weight.

Think of a spider’s web: a dinner plate style web with no gaps would just as efficiently capture a fly, however this would cost the spider dearly in extra time and materials to spin such a dense web. Instead, the spider intuitively picks a low energy, low resource, and sparse design that’s just as functional in doing the job.

This is also applicable with metal 3D printing as these spacious and ‘low-cost’ designs check all the boxes of what we need in a good metal 3D printing design—they distribute the energy evenly, use less metal powder, and tend not to have as many ‘sharp edges’ or overhangs.

Lattices structures also avoid a ‘thermal gradient’ from arising. Think about trying to bake a cake using only a small Bunsen burner: the cake should come out semi-presentable providing you distribute the heat evenly and don’t heat any overhanging parts, or else they’ll sag and deform the cake.

Given that the laser is ignorant to the order of how you want to heat things, a spacious and spread-out structure would keep the thermal gradient at bay by distributing the energy evenly across the bed, whereas something like a block of metal would turn out horrendously, causing warps and deformation almost instantly.

So why can’t lattices be used in normal manufacturing outside of 3D printing? Theoretically they can: there just isn’t a machine yet that’s capable of building anything to that level of precision or complexity, bar 3D printers. But these lattice designs and 3D printing have unlimited potential in changing our world.

During my internship, the 3D printing division was contracted to print the steering wheel for the Bloodhound SSC, a car attempting to beat the world land-speed record with a projected top speed of 1000 miles per hour. The steering wheel was designed in-house and printed as a bespoke fit for the driver’s hands, something of phenomenal importance when every square inch of cockpit bites into your room for fuel.

With rising profit margins, we are getting ever closer to a future where a 3D printed titanium lattice structure could be inserted onto someone’s skull to reconstruct it after an accident—a future where weight minimisation yields phenomenal profit though fuel savings, from reducing the weight of seats, door hinges to maybe someday fuselages—all without losing any structural strength! It would be a radically different world: one defined by 3D printing.

C+: Student testimonials on free speech in Oxford

Cat Bean
-
0
C+: Student testimonials on free speech in Oxford

Comments verged wildly between polar op­posite opinions. Many views criticised the left in Oxford for dominating popular opinion, an observation that aligned with our findings that students identifying as right wing, or centre-right, were more likely to be concerned about a loss of freedom of speech in Oxford.

On the Union, and student protest, one student, identifying as centre-right, said that “some people don’t seem to realise the irony of their position: how can you stand for tolerance and equality yet violently protest speakers from expressing their views? If views are challenging to some, they can be shot down legitimately in debate, not barred from conversation. Branding and labelling have become far too important due to snippet news on social media, which makes it easier to propagate myths about some speakers and their views without engaging in their thought”.

Comments from those on the right also accused the left of suppressing conversations that disagreed with a left-wing point of view.

One right-wing student said: “Since the left won the culture war, there are certain things that it has become taboo to stand up for, and that incur ridicule or ostracism when said. Praising traditional family structures, being proud of British history, saying that perhaps who you want to be should not need to impact who I want to be: these are all things that on campus see one branded as a radical, as a sex­ist, as a racist.”

Some accusations were levelled at OUSU, and student-run groups like Rhodes Must Fall, for stifling opinions that were not perceived as left wing.

One student, identifying as a centrist, argued that “OUSU is motivated to oppose free speech, mitigated only by the fact that nobody takes them seriously”.

This wasn’t just a concern from the right-wing contingent of the student body. One left-wing commenter argued that “the left-wing is becoming what it has fought against for so long. I am about as liberal as you can possibly get, and I don’t think we should shut down Germaine Greer or Katie Hopkins or Corey Lewandowski or Marine Le Pen. Their right to speak their mind must not be banned—instead, their ideas should be allowed to rot and die from the arguments of those who opposite them.

“And yes, I do believe disinviting a speaker from a university is banning a right, even though universities are not parts of the government. This is because I think of univer­sities as beacons of free expression and free speech. Once you remove that, the destruction of expression follows easily.

“At Oxford, I feel like my college is par­ticularly toxic when it comes to this. Nobody would even ever publicly consider inviting someone who might not be an ultra-liberal. Nobody would ever speak out against a ridicu­lous, authoritarian, yet left-wing JCR motion because they would get eviscerated, both verbally and socially. So we just let everything pass. Well, it seems to me the left-wing is be­coming what it once fought against. We have students keeping silent pre-emptively so they don’t happen to say the wrong thing, offend someone, and end up being ostracised.”

Some students even reported being afraid to express their opinions, arguing that this constituted a lack of freedom of speech in Oxford.

One student, identifying as a centrist, said that “There is no longer free speech in Oxford, no debate can be had unless it supports a left-wing agenda. If it does not it is shut down by the minority who state that it is in all our interests that no other viewpoint is accept­able except their own.”

Some comments were careful to draw the line between a loss of freedom of speech, and a bias against certain viewpoints. One centre-left student commented: “I feel as though the censorship I have faced has been much more passive and coercive than an outright ‘ban’ on saying things. I wouldn’t feel comfortable expressing some of my views at university be­cause of the culture that has been created, but this does not necessarily mean that I am not free to say them, rather that I would choose not to in this context.”

Opinions on the left generally disagreed that freedom of speech was under threat in Oxford, and had strong opinions on no-platforming and student protest.

Some respondents were of the opinion that popular media outside of the university has a bias against right wing opinions. One left-wing student stated that “the idea that free speech is under threat in UK universities rests on a complete miscomprehension of the concept and a media commentariat willing to spin anything into yet another caricature of the student left (along with an audience that’s been made to believe this is a real issue and will accordingly eat up such stories).”

Similarly, another left-wing student said: “Most people who complain about lack of freedom of speech don’t seem to understand what freedom of speech is”.

Others disagreed with the assertion that freedom of speech could be infringed upon by students, the University or OUSU.

One left-wing student argued that “freedom of speech can only be infringed by the govern­ment”.

Some even disagreed with the premise that freedom of speech should be a high priority for students, another commenter going as far to argue that “free speech is the most over- hyped principle of our generation”.

Overall, the statements we received embodied the tension between the left and right view on freedom of speech, dividing our sample of the student body along ideological and political lines.

Victories for Keble and All Saints in Rugby Cuppers

Fraser Macdonald-Lister and Lucy Fenwick
-
0
Victories for Keble and All Saints in Rugby Cuppers

Keble and All Saints emerged victorious on Rugby Cuppers Finals Day, winning the Men’s and Women’s competitions respectively.

This was the third Men’s Cuppers final between Keble and Teddy Hall in five years, and Keble entered the tie as slight favourites after an unbeaten season. Despite a strong start from The Hall, Keble appeared the more threatening side. The set-pieces saw strong attacking ball retention, with Keble’s Oxbridge U23 James Calderwood facing Teddy Hall’s Oxford Blue Ed Hart in the front row.

The home side capitalised on this first—a dominant scrum saw Keble awarded the penalty try. As the first 40 minutes drew to a close, Teddy Hall made a fierce comeback. With brutal phase play dictated by scrum-half Seb Haddock, and cutting lines from centre Dan Barley, the Hall used long stints of possession to drive lock Charlie Allen over to score. Tom Dyer failed to convert: 7-5.

The Hall were notably energised by their score. Keble rucked ferociously to provide Oxford Blue Alex Hogg with quick ball, and lightning handling through centres Tommy Siman and Cameron Sellers saw winger Jake Cunningham sprint home to his fourth score against the Hall this season.

Leading 12-5, Keble built momentum, running hard against the Hall defence. A series of pick-and-go’s drove substitute Harry Donald over in the corner.

At 17-5, pressure mounted on the Hall. Keble shortly forced a penalty, and Will Wilson’s kick for goal sailed between the uprights. Teddy Hall made a valiant effort to recover, but despite Allen’s second try, the result was never in doubt: a 20-10 win meant Scott Geelan and Tom Hamilton lifted the cup and plaque respectively to the ecastic cheers of a raucous crowd.

The women’s final was an intensely fought match between All Saints and CLOMP. The first try was scored in the first half by All Saints captain, Jenny Smith, who risked getting concussion before her finals to play one last game at Oxford. She rose to the occasion of her last match to score her first try following Katarina Martinovic’s perfectly timed offload.

The scorer of the CLOMP try was Heather McDade who had an exceptional debut match. As neither try was converted, full-time brought a 5-5 tie and a sudden death finish.

An All Saints turnover saw their number nine, Isa Cooper, power through five CLOMP defenders to score an absolutely brilliant try: she justly won player of the match, and earned her side the trophy.

Trinity triumph in Handball Cuppers final

Moritz F. Adam
-
0
Trinity triumph in Handball Cuppers final

Trinity College left victorious from Sunday’s five-way handball final, having trounced their top four rivals.

Handball, a sport in which two teams attempt to score by throwing a ball into the opponents’ goal, is an Olympic discipline, which since 2012 has enjoyed growing popularity in Britain.

The sport has also grown exponentially in Oxford, with the University team reaching the national cup semi-final this year. Hence it was not surprising that this year’s Cuppers competition had the highest turnout in the history of the Handball Club, OUHaC.

During the preliminary matches especially, Trinity and Harris Manchester Colleges performed well. Trinity won three of their four matches, scoring seventeen goals while conceding only four, and Harris Manchester impressed with a particularly physical style of play. In the final match of the group stage, in which these two teams faced each other, Trinity took a 2-1 lead before Harris Manchester scored the equaliser 20 seconds before the end of the match.

These two sides qualified for the semi-finals in first and second position, with St. John’s and their unorthodox style of play pipping Oriel to third place, despite some misfortune with penalties. St. Hilda’s, perhaps nursing their post-college ball hangovers, did not proceed to the semi-finals, but put in some strong performances. Notably, they lost to Harris Manchester in harsh fashion, with a late goal resulting in a 2-1 defeat.

In the following round, Oriel surprised Trinity, and held the lead for long parts of the first semi-final. However, a rousing comeback saw Trinity win 4-3, despite trailing for long stretches. The second match was mostly dominated by Harris Manchester, who defeated St. John’s by a 3-1 margin, but in truth the scoreline flattered John’s—but for a host of missed chances, it could have been five or six.

Ultimately, the two strongest teams deservedly re-encountered each other in the final match, which showed, despite the fact that a majority of the players were beginners at handball, a high level of technical and tactical skill.

The match was a very tight affair, in which Trinity, after appealing a refereeing decision which saw an unusual Harris Manchester goal ruled out, prevailed 3-2 to deservedly win the competition.

They were awarded the Handball Cuppers Trophy by the president of the Oxford University Handball Club, Ciaran Hayes.

Reject the Tory attempt to build a surveillance state

Michael Shao
-
0
Reject the Tory attempt to build a surveillance state

The most extreme surveillance law passed in the history of history of western democracy, in the history of democracy in general, is about to get exponentially worse. Which beautiful nation has the pride to be the beholder of such a law? None other than the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland itself, where God evidently saves both the Queen and your browser history.

A draft of proposed new surveillance powers leaked last week hopes to push new conditions into the Investigatory Powers Act brought into law last year. The government is asking for Internet providers to introduce a backdoor on their networks to allow intelligence agencies to read private communications. The security issues regarding backdoors have already been debated to death and the conclusion is that they provide severe security issues and a complete end to guaranteed privacy. Apple CEO Tim Cook commented on this last year, warning of the “dire consequences” of backdoors. All communications companies, including phone networks and ISPs, will be required to provide real-time access to the full content of any single individual within one working day, as well as ambiguously phrased “secondary data” relating to that person.

As an American, such actions would at least create some semblance of uproar. Notably, following the SOPA and PIPA bills, stiff resistance from privacy advocacy groups, numbers of congressmen and senators, and huge pressure from individual citizens stopped the bill in its tracks and struck down the legislation. In the UK, crickets chirp. It does seem like there are notable differences in culture that at least contribute to the passivity of the British public. Throughout my time in the United Kingdom, both in London and Oxford, and even the suburbs, the number of CCTV cameras, everywhere, has been disturbing, and this is a notable stereotype in the United States regarding Britain. It is unheard of for such condensed university living spaces, such as individual colleges, in the United States, to have as many live camera feeds constantly operated by porters, as they do here in Oxford. In this regard, the failure of the American populous to embrace state-sponsored CCTV the way the United Kingdom has is admirable. None of this is to of course, downplay or ignore the attacks on Internet privacy that continue to happen in the United States. To that extent, I am marginally glad that Ron Paul exists, as I unfortunately fail to see a British equivalent.

I felt genuinely uncomfortable during the first few weeks, when a splattering of CCTV cameras covered places far away from generally monitored areas like entrances and exits, in St. Edmund Hall, my college. In fact, one of the cameras has a wide pan of all of the windows of one of the large residential areas in college: we are literally being recorded as we sleep. I was furthermore astounded that the sheer capacity of it happening is not disturbing to anyone here, and that my observations were met by pure indifference. “Just close the curtains, man.” This does scale up with a more general state of surveillance in the UK, such as the proliferation of traffic cameras, the existing widespread censorship of various websites, all met by little opposition from both the public and government (the lack of opposition from government, likely being due to the passivity of their constituents).

I don’t feel like it’s necessary to even waste time arguing the “if you’re not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about” or the “nobody cares about what you’re doing” condition, because I believe that if you’ve already stooped that low, that hope is lost. I’m also not going to bother citing more specific metaphors or comparisons to Orwellian works, because those too seem to be lost in translation, given the massive acceptance of public CCTV surveillance and the sad irony of Orwell’s English citizenship. The issue is not the success of surveillance in given sugar-laced instances, such as the role that surveillance played in allowing Special Forces to catch a man outside Westminster carrying a bag of knives (which, arguably, is no more of a crime than driving a car outside of Westminster). The issue is that if the threshold of abandoning all privacy rights is knife attacks, then you might want to reassess your outlook on life. Unless, of course, we include assault forks in the threshold as well. Then I’d happily let the IPA go into action.

There are also, of course, fundamental conflicts in the nature of public opinion on Internet privacy. In the name of supposedly preventing terrorism, many individuals are willing to give up the undying individual freedoms that they so cherish, or at least, claim to cherish. My synthesis of the commentary on Internet privacy issues from British politicians is a teaching to fear the boogeyman far more than to yearn for human rights and privacy, and to even promote the idea of a “British-specific notion of human rights”. There is a conditioning to truly make British citizens believe that terrorists will be caught in their droves, audio streams implanted wont be used for snooping, that the data they willingly and potentially, legally hand over to the surveillance state wont be sold, or hacked, or worse, due to the infinitely benevolent nature of the government.

Unfortunately, it’s not surprising that the incumbent government is pushing through as much controversial policy as possible while they retain such a high majority in parliament. Recently, sentiments surrounding the results of the French presidential election have been surrounded with optimism, on the positive state of affairs and the possibility of an avoidance of the previously cited domino effect: the “domino defect” of Brexit. I, am optimistic about their optimism, but not with increasing pessimism that this progress seems to be limited, for the time being, to Europe, the UK no longer being a part of it. The likely future of an even more powerful conservative majority following the general election, a full completion of Brexit conditions, and therefore an abandonment of CJEU rulings on Internet privacy, and even a possible leave from the EHCR, is depressing beyond belief. For this, I do not have much to say. I don’t know, instead of the Tory’s, give Tor a try?

Empty voices speak freely but not responsibly

Ethan Croft
-
0
Empty voices speak freely but not responsibly

When Bill Buckley met Gore Vidal in the summer of 1968, America’s conservative establishment came face-to-face with the counter culture. Over their many hours of courteous, if slightly heated, discussions, the exception was that moment when Buckley’s Cheshire cat grin gave way to an angry scowl and he threatened to punch Vidal in the face live on air. The point of the debates, well documented in the recent film Best of Enemies, was to take to two competing world views in late 1960s America and give them some breathing spaced through calm, televised conversation. But today, it seems the exception has become the rule. TV debates are now the realm of media provocateurs, whose aim is to provoke rather than consider. Yet, the presence of a mediator, who might point out a logical fallacy, or simply maintain some level of decency between the two ‘personalities’, is still too much for some. In short, speaking freely is more important than speaking responsibly.

Was there ever a better medium for the irresponsible voice than Twitter? Free from the constraints of moderation, 140 characters is the perfect platform for glib generalisations about something or someone we take a disliking to. It is defended regularly as the modern bastion of free speech. This is not the sophisticated freedom of expression, protecting the writer from censorship, or the protester from harm. It is rather the freedom to share misattributed quotations from presidential candidates, or the freedom to instigate hate campaigns against Hollywood actresses who have too much to say for themselves. It is no surprise that the King, or in his own words the Nero, of all irresponsible voices, Milo Yiannopoulos, was so outraged at his banning from the website. And he has now substituted the approval of a hundred thousand cheering egg profiles with a physical re-enactment of the Twitter dynamic, trotting around university campuses with a series of pre-prepared riffs on the usual topics (evil feminists, ‘social justice warriors’, and the new president) to the thunderous applause of his paying fans, who shout down any opposition. Only on campuses such as Berkeley, outside of cyberspace, can we appreciate the ugliness of much of Twitter, where people throw sticks and stones in place of the words that might have hurt online.

Twitter is often inaccurately termed an ‘echo chamber’. Though the institution of the retweet facilitates the bandying about of a single idea without nuance, there is still a palpable atmosphere of argument in the comments below many a viral tweet. In shrill rage, people talk over rather than with each other.

The problem, perhaps, lies in the fact that Twitter was not conceived as a forum for serious discussion. In his documentary, How Videogames Changed the World, Charlie Brooker called the website one of the most innovative games of our time, but a game all the same. If we take Brooker’s analysis further, it seems that Twitter is incompatible with meaningful discussion. Not so much because of the character limit, which can be evaded with threaded tweets, but rather due to the system of reward on which the entire medium is predicated. All users are engaged in a search for likes, retweets, and followers. This is particularly the case for those journalists and commentators who understand the advantage of a high Twitter following now brings to any job application, especially at publications with an increasing reliance on digital clicks. Generating content for an eagerly awaiting, but ultimately fickle, group of followers takes precedence over thoughtful analysis.

In one of its many infamous front page splashes, a few years ago the Daily Mail ran a headline titled ‘The Man Who Hates Britain’, in reference to the then Leader of the Opposition’s late father Ralph Miliband. The piece, which claimed the eminent Marxist writer opposed British values, was based on a diary extract from a 17 year old Miliband, where he angrily raged against English nationalism. Further to this, he thoughtlessly wished that Britain might lose the Second World War to the far more nationalist Axis powers. The fact that this misguided comment from an angry teenager might have done acute damage to his son’s career decades later is a testament to the power of the irresponsible voice. Many of us have said things that we would rather forget, and cringed at the memory of a past faux pas. Yet it was only by chance that the Mail stumbled across Miliband’s juvenile polemic. Now, the Twitter user actively records all of their fatuous comments and half-baked reactions in an easily navigable online database, often from a much earlier age than 17.

There doesn’t seem to be much chance of Twitter going away any time soon, and it seems likely that we will grow more accustomed to, and even involved in, the online shrieking contests that masquerade as debate. And it will soon become necessary to decide whether digging through the Twitter feeds of political candidates really passes as investigative journalism. If we choose to say yes, then we could possibly be faced in the next few decades with the most dull and sterile governing class ever. Or we can choose to accept the role of irresponsible online voices as an ever-growing part of our earliest engagements with discourse.

Spacecraft gets between Saturn and its rings

Cherwell
-
0
Spacecraft gets between Saturn and its rings

On 26 April, NASA’s Cassini spacecraft became the first man-made object to successfully travel through Saturn’s rings. Cassini is now in the process of sending images back, revealing the most detailed view of Saturn’s atmosphere ever seen.

Launched in 1997, Cassini has been spending the last 13 years orbiting Saturn and has found seven previously undiscovered moons, as well as accumulating vast amounts of information on the environments of these moons. One of the most exciting of these is Titan, a moon found to have liquid methane and ethane—the only place in our solar system other than Earth to sustain liquid on its surface.

Cassini was able to travel through Saturn’s rings by shielding itself with the dish used for communication to Earth, making it unable to communicate with scientists back at NASA’s HQ for a nervous 20 hours. With the craft travelling at 77,000 miles per hour, even the smallest dust particles predicted to lie in the region between Saturn and its rings could have catastrophic consequences if it were to hit a sensitive area of the spacecraft.

However, Cassini’s Radio and Plasma Wave Science (RPWS) instrument was kept outside of the protective antenna, allowing for Cassini to record the frequency and impact of the particles hitting it. This data was then converted into an audio format to create sounds that represent the collisions that occurred as Cassini navigated through the region between Saturn and its rings.

Through analysis of the data, it was found that Cassini did not encounter any particles bigger than particles of smoke. This came as a surprise to the RPWS team, who were expecting much more of a turbulent ride for the spacecraft.

“The region between the rings and Saturn is ‘the big empty,’ apparently,” said Cassini Project Manager Earl Maize, in a press release from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. “Cassini will stay the course, while the scientists work on the mystery of why the dust level is much lower than expected.”

By successfully navigating through Saturn’s rings and entering the region between Saturn and its rings, Cassini begins the final stage of its almost 20 year expedition—the Grand Finale. The Grand Finale brings with it the end of Cassini, with the spacecraft scheduled to dive into Saturn’s atmosphere on September 15th, 2017.

Source: NASA

View more images of Saturn taken by Cassini by visiting https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/

 

5 minute tute: Professor Joseph Conlon strings together string theory

Cherwell
-
0
5 minute tute: Professor Joseph Conlon strings together string theory

String theory is a term that brings with it an aura of mysticism. One of the most famous ideas in modern physics and also one of the most confusing, string theory’s reputation is infamous. Talking to Professor Joseph Conlon, a theoretical physicist at New College and author of Why String Theory?, we find out more.

C: What is string theory?

JC: That’s a big question. String theory started off as a proposed fundamental theory of physics—the idea that all particles are, at small enough scales, vibrating strings. It’s grown in practice to be much more than that, and it’s seen now as a whole complex of ideas that stretch across and between both physics and mathematics. While they’ve been aspired to, they’re not necessarily reliant on the idea that at the smallest possible scale what you’d see are vibrating strings.

C: What is a string?

JC: It’s actually the same thing as your conventional image of a string. It’s something that has tension, meaning as you pull it the energy increases with the tension. They’re quantum mechanical, relativistic strings—so they’re moving at the speed of light and you have to treat them with quantum mechanics rather than classical mechanics. But at heart, they are just strings, and if you were to pull them larger and larger, their behaviour would map onto your intuition of the classical behaviour of a string.

C: What sets string theory apart from other theories of quantum gravity? 

JC: Something like the standard model of particle physics, for example, is something that’s very much experimentally confirmed. String theory, as a theory of fundamental physics, sits in this class of ideas of what goes beyond what is currently confirmed. To return to the question of what sets string theory apart from other theories of quantum gravity—it’s the way string theory has connected to so many other questions of interest. So this is why far more people work on string theory than any other theory of quantum gravity. Most people who work on it, including myself, don’t do so because their main focus is quantum gravity—it’s because string theory gives them insights into, tools, or ways of thinking about other problems they’re interested in, because of this very rich mathematical structure that string theory contains.

C: Why does string theory require so many dimensions?

JC: There’s a technical answer which is that, if you look at the equations, you realize that if you have flat dimensions, something goes wrong. There’s what’s called an anomaly, the equations don’t work unless you have a specific number of spatial dimensions—not more and not less. Rather surprisingly, all the equations don’t work unless you have ten dimensions.

C: Is there any hope in the future of having evidence that suggest that these dimensions exist?

JC: There’s little hope in the immediate future of having something like a definite up or down test for string theory. There’s quite a lot of ideas where you can think about string inspired plausible chains of reasoning, which are ideas that, if you weren’t thinking about a theory as fundamentally higher dimensional, you wouldn’t be particularly led to thinking about these things, but they give you a very good motivation. One example is particles like axions—I think about how you might observe these using astrophysical observations—these arise very naturally in string theory, and in string theory you can get lots of axions.

It’s not a logical consistency requirement, but it’s something which string theory suggests should be naturally true about our universe: it motivates us to think about how we can observe them.

C: Have there been any results so far to suggest that string theory is the underlying theory of matter?

JC: Not experimentally, no.

C: Why are so many physicists excited by string theory?

JC: The reason is because it’s proved to be such a rich complex of ideas that stretch across things like particle physics, mathematics, quantum field theory, and cosmology—it provides ways of thinking, specific computational tools, and insights which draw things together. It can be many things to many people—even if you’re not that interested in quantum gravity you can still get things out of string theory that you can use for your own interest.

And this is why so many people work in string theory, because it provides something for them: it’s not necessarily because they have a deep fas- cination with solving the problems of quantum gravity.

To find out more about, visit whystringtheory.com and purchase Professor Conlon’s book, ‘Why String Theory?’, available now on Amazon UK.

Oxford University Hospitals “on alert” following global ransomware attack

Jack Hunter
-
0
Oxford University Hospitals “on alert” following global ransomware attack

Oxford University Hospitals are “on alert” following the global ransomware cyber attack that has infected tens of thousands of computers in almost 100 countries, a spokesperson has said.

“We were notified yesterday by NHS Digital about the cyber attacks on the NHS and we are on alert at present,” said Peter Knight, Chief Information and Digital Officer of Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

He added: “So far, our strong security measures are holding solid. We continue to closely monitor the situation and have asked staff to be vigilant. Protecting patient information is our top priority.”

Despite concerns that the University’s internal emailing system may have been affected by the breach, there have been “no reported issues” so far, a University source said.

Students at some colleges have been instructed to update computers and be “extra cautious” with email attachments. Computers running software older than the latest version of Windows and Apple OS X are susceptible to the threat.

In an email to Somerville students, the College IT Support officers said: “We are taking steps to double check that Somerville has the latest security patches installed on all the College servers and computers.”

The email recommended that students ensure their software is up to date and update anti-virus software. It told students to “update [your] computers and be extra cautious with email attachments.”

There are concerns that once installed on a network PC, the malware will spread to other computers connect to the University’s server. It is believed that the threat, which has caused a reported 45,000 attacks worldwide, is spread through spread initially via infected email attachments. 

A University spokesperson said: “The University takes a vigilant approach to  information security and has been monitoring for the threat of a similar attack since Friday afternoon.

“At this point there is no evidence of an attack against the University, nor is there any evidence of malware infections. However the University will continue to monitor the situation and is ready to respond if required.

“Guidance has been provided to IT staff to apply critical updates recently released by Microsoft, and to staff and students to remain vigilant and to be cautious of phishing and malicious emails.”
 

The attack has affected businesses and government offices from Mexico to Russia on Friday, with experts, including the European security organisation, Interpol, calling it the biggest ransomware outbreak ever.

Computers at NHS hospitals and GP surgeries were amongst those hit by the malware, which blocks access to any files on a PC until a ransom is paid.

Royal Society recognition for University academics

Katherine Pye
-
0
Royal Society recognition for University academics

Professor Tony Bell, Professor Yvonne Jones, Professor Alison Noble, Professor Yadvinder Malhi, Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt and Professor Hugh Watkins have become fellows at the Royal Society, following in the footsteps of the likes of Stephen Hawking and Isaac Newton.

Venki Ramakrishnan, President of the Royal Society, said: “The new Fellows of the Royal Society have already contributed much to science and it gives me great pleasure to welcome them into our ranks.”

Professor Tony Bell from the Department of Physics has undertaken pioneering work into astrophysical and laser-produced plasmas. He told Cherwell: “This recognition of my research gives me a warm sense of satisfaction. It’s more than I expected when I started out 40 years ago.”

Professor Yvonne Jones leads the Cancer Research UK Receptor Structure Research Group, which focuses on the structural biology of extracellular recognition and signalling complexes.

She is also Deputy Director at the Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics.

She said: “I am thrilled and honoured to be elected FRS.

“Since starting my laboratory in Oxford in 1991 I have been very fortunate to work with some wonderful graduate students, postdocs and colleagues. I am very glad that we have been able to add to the long history of Oxford structural biologists advancing biomedical research.”

Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt, Principal of Jesus College and Professorial Research Fellow in Computer Science, made significant contributions to Artificial Intelligence and is an international leader in the field of open data.

He told Cherwell: “It is a fantastic privilege to be elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. As a young student, I never dreamt of such a possibility. I have been fortunate, I have worked with great colleagues and have seen the areas of AI and computer science that I research grow dramatically.”

Professor Hugh Watkins is the Head of the Radcliffe Department of Medicine and Honorary Consultant in Cardiology and General Medicine, and has has a major impact in medicine using molecular genetic analysis of cardiovascular disease to identify disease mechanisms and therapeutic targets.

Warkins said: “I am excited and honoured to have been elected as a fellow of the Royal Society. Not many clinical academics achieve this and for me it has been possible because I am fortunate to work with many exceptional colleagues. Our work really has improved the way we look after patients with inherited heart disease, and that is a privilege.”

The two other professors awarded the fellowship are Professor Alison Noble and Professor Yadvinder Malhi. Professor Noble is the Technikos Professor of Biomedical Engineering at Oxford University, and is raising the profile of ultrasound imaging in biomedical image analysis. Professor Malhi, based in the School of Geography and the Environment, is a leader in promoting the conservation of forests through research collaboration and capacity building in tropical countries.

Both were contacted for comment.

1...979980981...2,612Page 980 of 2,612