It’s visible. It’s bright. We can see it move from one place to another and entirely consume or transform an object. We can feel it, and we can feel its effects, but we can’t touch it. Even if we were immune to any sense (specifically temperature and heat), we still wouldn’t be able to touch it tangibly. It’s a paradox, and a burning one at that. But most people call it fire. Few wonder or stop to ask what it actually is- why one actually starts, what state of matter fire is classified as, what it consists of, and why it looks the way it does.

Fire, by definition, is defined as “combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.” But this definition offers us little by the way of answers. It does not tell us what flames actually are- how they start, what they consist of, or what type of matter they are.

So to put it simply: the main cause of fire is an increase in friction; say, for example, one piece of wood rubbing over another. In the case of this wood, when the material reaches three hundred degrees farenheit, the intense heat begins to decompose some of the cellulose material within the wood. This material promptly becomes a gas, immediately above the object.

Some of these gases, though, are volatile. And when the volatile gases become hot enough, or around five hundred degrees in the case of wood…the molecules making up the gases break apart. These free atoms now recombine with others, whether it be oxygen to form water, or carbon dioxide, or anything else of the sort. And as we know from our high school chemistry class, a resulting effect is inherently light, or heat.

So now we know (or are reminded) how a fire begins. But still, we’re left with the question of what state a fire exists in. Is it a solid? Or a liquid? Or is it a gas? Well, sadly, even the engineers at MIT don’t have a solidified answer. A vast amount of unknowns are present in the absence of this information.

But what do flames consist of? Mostly, they are made of either carbon dioxide, water vapor, oxygen, and nitrogen- even if their state of matter isn’t fully understood. The reason they appear the way they do, through the bright flame, is said to be because of the rapid speed in which the atoms are moving.

And as for what dictates the color of flame? Not just the temperature, but the chemical content of what’s burning: different chlorides, or borates, or sulfates, for example, all make for a different colored flame. Cupric chloride burns blue. Strontium chloride burns red. Cupric sulfate burns green. Borax, or sodium borate, burns orange. Potassium chloride burns purple, and so on. Many of these chemicals allow for beautiful displays of fireworks.

So the next time a question about flame is sparked, hopefully this blog has done enough to illuminate the answer.

Things happen nearly everyday. We wake up. We breathe. We eat. We walk. We learn. We make friends. We talk. And everyday, science continues to advance our understanding of these daily human occurrences further and further. We know why we wake up. We know why we breathe. We know why we eat, why we walk, why we learn, and why we make friends. But almost everyday, one thing happens that few of us understand, that few of us even bother to actually question… Our headphones tangle in our pockets. But why? What’s the scientific reasoning for why our headphones tangle despite no serious movement or handling? Why does this happen nearly every…single…time they’re stored in our pockets?

Bill Murray is reported to have summed up this issue best for readers. “What’s the best way to tie the strongest knot ever?” he asked, then answered, “Put headphones in your pocket and wait a minute.”

According to James Vincent, scientists have been curious to find out the reasoning as well. Promptly, as scientists do, they moved to experiment- the individuals placed all different pieces of wire, like headphones, into a cardboard box and shook them…3,415 times. The result? Tangled wire. But more than that, the scientists discovered that there are two important factors involved in the formation of these difficult-to-untangle knots: “critical string length” and “agitation time”. The chart from the study can be seen below.

It was also discovered that the probability of your headphones getting tangled (if they’re approximately 139 centimeters in length) is very close to…1 in 2. 50%. This experiment, and many others similar, are monumentally more complex (and were certainly difficult for me, as a nonscientist, to easily wrap my head around). More details can be found within the hyperlinks. But some may still be wondering why exactly headphones tangle?

Put simply for further explanation, logic speaks plenty regarding the all-to-common tangling of wires. “There is one way for a cable to be straight, but a massive number of ways it can get tangled”. The two involved scientists, Dorion Raymer and Douglas Smith, also mentioned that the shape of the headphones, with the split into two separate wires, adds to the likelihood of entanglement greatly. In addition, it’s been discovered that even the slightest bit of movement and slightest variation in temperature can lead to these wires shifting and reshuffling in your pocket, or backpack.

However, the most important question to the reader is perhaps, “Can I stop my ear buds from getting tangled?” To which, sadly, the answer is that there’s no proven, easy, definite fix. If you’re up for a “gamble” or more complex solutions though, these scientists have a few methods to offer (of course).

A loop can be formed with the wire. Scientific experiments have tested the loop method in nearly 12,000 trials. The result? Less tangling and less knots…by nearly 10x.

The other simpler, less tested strategies are to keep the individual earphone and wires separated, make the chord thicker, or simply…prevent movement at all (good luck with that obvious, but difficult strategy).

Despite the amount of research and studies done, it seems that this issue may just be one for humans to remain tangled in handling. The only 100% effective method of keeping these headphones unknotted seems to leave us with two choices:

1.) We can use our headphones, and they’ll tangle. Or 2.) We can’t use our headphones, and they won’t tangle.

Sad song

Some are small. Some are tall. Some lap at our feet. Some knock us over. Some destroy entire cities…towns…islands…and cultures. If we’ve ever seen the ocean-or any other relatively large body of water- we’ve seen wave as well. We see all different kinds, with all different velocities and looks and heights. And oftentimes, we’re more inclined to play in or surf them, rather than ask ourselves…what makes waves? What even are waves?

            In high school physics class, most of us learned about energy (or definitely should have, at least). When we learned about energy, we learned that it moves in waves. All energy possessed different wavelengths, with different heights or crests, but regardless, we learned that all energy moves in this pattern of a wave.

            Energy is everywhere. It’s in the air, on the ground, in the plants, the animals, ourselves, and anything around us. It’s constantly moving. This holds true to water in the ocean. Given that the Earth is made up of 71% water, whether it be in oceans or lakes, it’s only logical that this constantly moving energy must logically move through the seas as well.

So it does, and we see it through this perfectly visible medium that is ocean water. Regarding this type of water though, out in the ocean, the waves aren’t typically, actually moving anything- the water remains relatively stationary. What is seen then isn’t necessarily the water moving…but rather, the energy moving. So where does this energy even come from?

Most of the time, it simply originates from the wind. As this wind blows, it collaterally disturbs the surface of the water. And as it continues to blow, more friction is manifested, more continual disturbance is created, and the wave crests continue to rise and rise until the water is higher and waves are effectively created. These types of ocean waves, transferring energy along the water’s surface, is inherently known as surface waves, or wind-driven waves.

            However, as we’ve all probably heard at some point in our lives, the gravitational pull of the moon and the sun cause waves as well. These waves, caused by this gravitational pull and the rotation of the Earth, are generally refereed to as tidal waves.

            With all of this information combined, it only makes sense that tsunamis (which are, despite common belief, not the same as tidal waves) are the same as this typically transferring energy. However, when something such as a landslide or an earthquake contributes an unexpected mass amount of energy to the ocean water, it largely contributes to the waves that are already moving, therefore…simply…creating one massive wave.

What causes waves to break along the shore though? Well, this energy wave does not only move along the surface of the water. It also moves along the ocean bottom. As the sea gets shallower and shallower toward the shore, “the drag on the wave’s bottom becomes stronger”, and in turn, “the upper part of the wave begins to tilt forward,” as it continues to move at its regular, faster speed. And therefore, the wave as we know it, and the wave as we enjoy it, is created.

As for those waves that are so common to Beaver Stadium? They’re instigated by energy as well- however, it’s main source is often reported to be the pride of Nittany Nation.

Somehow, unexpectedly, I achieved the 100-dollar challenge in class! Incredibly, in a great show of his character, Andrew stayed true to his bet and stuck to his word, happily delivering the $100 despite any potential minor discrepancies in my case (Thanks again, professor, you’re a great guy). Then he proceeded to dismiss class early.

Merrily, as I transferred the dollars from my pocket to my wallet, it hit me: money has a distinct smell. I’d try to describe it here, but it’s nearly impossible. It smells like nothing else. It’s similar to nothing else. It’s got its own, unique smell. And after asking a few of my friends, they agreed. It also came to our attention that it’s not just dollar bills that possess their own unique smell, but coins as well. So, naturally, the next question unanimously raised was “Why do both dollar bills and coins smell?”

            Because it’s noticed most often, and perhaps most apparent to all, it’s probably best to begin examining the smell behind dollar bills. What about the “paper” money causes it to exhibit such an odor (or aroma, depending on the preference)?

One would naturally assume that it’s what’s within the dollar that causes it to exhibit the smell. After all, it only seems logical that the contents of the bill are what make it produce the odor/aroma that it does. This “paper” money, to the surprise of many…isn’t actually made of paper. Instead, it consists of a combination of both linen and cotton. Obviously, in addition to that, there’s the ink and other chemicals to infuse it with that green color. But we all know cotton and linen don’t have such a powerful smell…so it must be the ink. However, this ink smells nothing like the ink we know of; so what is it in the ink, or the chemicals, that exhibits this odor?

It’s reported that most of this odor can be contributed to chemicals such as aldehydes, furans, and other organic acids. There are a numerous array of others…. But these are classified to prevent counterfeit dollars and for other national security risks. So the public may never know precisely what combination of chemicals make American dollar bills smell the way they do.

In addition, as we’ve all probably noticed, new money doesn’t smell the same as old money. Then what’s the explanation for this? Is it still those chemicals?

The answer is no. The cotton/linen combination that makes up U.S. dollar bills has come to be known to be monumentally absorbent. Their fibers contract many of the materials that the dollar may come in contact with…unfortunately, this isn’t always a good thing. These fibers, according to the Argonne National Laboratories in Chicago, may contain particles of cocaine…fecal matter…bacteria…sweat…and more. So the smell of those glorious dollar bills may not be so glorious after all.

As for why coins smell, the matter is monumentally more complex. The smell doesn’t actually resonate from the coins, but rather from ourselves and our own body odor. Scientists state that this smell is “created by the breakdown of oils in skin after touching objects that contain the element” such as iron. So again, it’s actually not the coin’s metal itself that produces the odor. This was determined through a relatively complex experiment.

In a randomized control trial, individuals (the study failed to state how many) were given coins to handle with their bare hands. Afterwards, seven “subjects” stated that they noticed an odor after touching the coins. Researchers promptly took gas samples from the fingers of these seven individuals. Here, a moderately surprising realization was discovered: The smell was emanating from 1-octen-2-one, a molecule that forms when oils in the skin decompose. So now scientists were left with the question, “What part of the coins made this oil decompose?”

Although it’s not set in stone, scientists believe that when fingers come into contact with the iron in coins, perspiration causes these iron atoms to gain two electrons. Livescience states that, “The doubly negative iron atoms react with oil in skin, causing them to decompose, forming 1-octen-2-one.” The scientists believe that this happens because our very own blood contains iron. And when blood is rubbed over skin, a metallic smell is also produced, which is resoundingly similar to coins (and vice versa).

In a short critique of the study, I don’t believe the size matters too much. The interaction between iron and perspiration would likely be consistent whether it be between two individuals, or one thousand. However, the confounding variable issue presents itself as it does so often. The reasonable, sensible mechanism discovered proves that this was not a resounding problem though. The study wasn’t anything absolutely perfected to every last detail- but I don’t believe it needed to be.

            So in the end, as stated before…the smell of money may not be as glorious as it’s made out to be. Many will state “money is the smell of success”.

But scientists have discovered it’s a little less than successful… and more of our own body odor, cocaine, fecal matter, and chemicals.

As a broke college student though, I’ll gladly cherish that smell of $100.

Thanks again Andrew- it means a lot.

They say, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” They say everyone sees the world from their own unique view. They say everything is a matter of perspective. They say two people may view the same exact object but not see exactly the same thing, as they may ultimately develop their own opinions and their own likes or dislikes, in their own specifically shaped memories to that vision. However, generally, everyone sees colors the same: Red is red. Blue is blue. Green is green. Yellow is yellow, and so on. Colors are consistent between everyone, standing as the natural pallet for which visions are universally derived…

But are they really? What about the colorblind? Are their colors consistent with others? What do they see… if not the same thing? And what’s caused them to become colorblind?

Well, for the colorblind, their red is not necessarily red, nor is their blue necessarily blue, or their green necessarily green, and so on. And their colors, in relation to ours, are obviously not the same. So then what are they?

What do the colorblind see? How do they experience the vibrant colors of the world?

With approximately 8% of the male population effected, and .05% of the female population, a relatively large amount of the world is affected. Of all those effected however, not all are effected the same. So the answer really depends on the type of colorblindness an individual possesses. Most commonly, there are three types of colorblindness: deuteranopia, protanopia, and tritanopia.

 This is normal vision.

This is deuteranopia.

This is protanopia.

And this is tritanopia.

The first, deuteranopia, is often considered to be the most prevalent in individuals who are colorblind. Their red isn’t red…but rather grey. Their reds are entirely gone. Purple is gone. Their green also appears slightly grey. And bright colors or “derivatives” of red, like pink, turn grey as well. There are no “green cones” as optometrists would state.

As for the second, also relatively common, protanopia, these individuals experience relatively the same sight. However, their reds and brighter colors appear much darker. From the general perspective, there is not an astounding difference. The eyes of protanopes are said to be missing their “red cones”.

Tritanopia is the rarest of these three kinds- it’s also probably the most unique. The view for individuals with tritanopia can almost be considered surreal, or even hallucinogenic; the color yellow is not yellow, but rather pink. Orange ceases to exist. From the general perspective, almost everything in sight transforms into what can be considered…mostly shades of pink and blue. Certainly, with billions of people in the world, there are all different forms of colorblindness and all different sights and all different experiences (some even report only being able to see the world through black, white, and grey) These three were simply the most common. But what is it that makes the colorblind…blind?

Typically, colorblindness is an inherited trait carried through the X-chromosome (promptly explaining why millions more of men have the issue, while women are less frequently effected). However, it isn’t always a chromosomal abnormality- it’s also common for colorblindness to develop throughout one’s lifetime. While inherited colorblindness typically does not worsen with, the contrary can be true when it’s “contracted”. A surprisingly large number of diseases can lead to one losing their ability to see certain colors: such as glaucoma, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, leukemia, or alcoholism. Causes for developed colorblindness don’t end here though. Drugs such as digitalis and chloroquine have also proved to prompt such a side effect. Various industrial chemicals do the same alongside other eye injuries. And…unfortunately…old age can be another platform for colorblindness. Yet one is still left wondering what makes these individuals unable to see certain colors. So what is it exactly that makes their eyes different from others? The answer simply deals with the rods, cones, and abnormal photopigments within our eyes.

So for all these colorblind, all these unfortunately deprived of experiencing the world’s beauty in its thousands upon thousands of colors… is there hope to see the broad expanse of the world’s colors as others do? Is there a cure for colorblindness?

The generally accepted answer, sadly, is no. There is no treatment or cure for colorblindness, whether it be deuteranopia, protanopia, tritanopia, or anything in between or far beyond. However, in one ongoing study, two University of Washington scientists believe they may be onto something. It is estimated that these scientists will even be able to begin testing their medicine on humans within the next two years.

These two individuals- the Neitzes- have studied the disorder for years. In 2009, they discovered that they could utilize gene therapy to inject a human gene behind the retinas of monkeys. Placed in an experiment where these monkeys had to locate color on a screen for a grape juice reward, they initially could not detect the certain necessary colors. However, after the injection behind their retinas, the monkeys were able to detect the correct color… nearly every single time.

Sadly, the technique requires surgery. And with surgery- especially eye surgery- comes a large amount of risk.

So the Neitzes acted as scientists do and were quick to find an alternative mode of inserting the necessary gene. This time, they discovered it could be transfused through a “safe vector’ known as an “adeno-associated virus”. Thomas W. Chalberg Jr., an executive working on the project, described it best by stating, “It’s a protein shell, kind of like a Trojan horse, that gets you entry into the cell. Once you’re there, the DNA gets to set up shop and produce the photo pigment of interest.” This could possibly lead to the curing of colorblindness.

All in all, colorblindness is a relatively common disease effecting many people- plenty of whom don’t even realize. However, as science constantly progresses and moves mankind further and further away from debilitating disorders and diseases, the 21st century will likely progress toward discovering a cure. But amongst the causes of the disorder, the symptoms, the types, and so on, it’s likely rather to be sooner…rather than later.

We just can’t allow ourselves to become blind to colorblindness as time moves on.

By: Isaac Will

The definition of magic is said to be “the power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious forces”. As a verb, magic means to “move, change, or create as if by magic.” By these definitions, all of us should think we experience magic nearly every single day. We sometimes experience it as a force moving our hair. We sometimes experience it as a force to sting our cheeks or give us the goosebumps. We sometimes experience it in a more severe way, through damaged houses, fallen telephone poles, or missing objects…however, we’ve come not to call it magic. Instead, we call it wind. To most of us, it would probably make sense if it was still referred to as magic though. It’s literally an invisible force…coming from nowhere…from all sorts of different directions…with a temperature slightly divergent from the immediate climate. So one is reasonably left to wonder, what is wind? What causes it? Where does it come from and why is it so strong?

Explaining wind isn’t quite as simple as one may immediately expect. Obviously, wind is blowing air…but what exactly is the invisible, magical force blowing that air throughout the atmosphere? The answer can be summarized with one word: pressure. Atmospheric pressure is defined as the weight (or the mass) of air pressing down onto any given area. Ergo, the greater mass above a certain area… the greater that area’s atmospheric pressure. As intelligent individuals, it’s a given to assume that no area on Earth is exactly identical. And, in turn, it’s also a given to assume that the world does not have one uniform atmospheric pressure. But what’s this got to do with wind?

As college-level, intelligent individuals, it’s important to think back to our high school science education. Here, the natural phenomenon of homeostasis was perhaps stressed more than anything else. Put simply for the sake of refreshing memory, this is the constant quest of nature to reach ultimate equilibrium amongst everything- everything becoming the same temperature, everything becoming the same speed, or, in the case of the atmosphere, everything becoming the same pressure. Therefore, the Earth’s goal of reaching this equilibrium is what creates wind.

Just as equilibrium causes a drop of dye in a clear cup of water to spread and move evenly throughout the glass, equilibrium causes air to spread and move evenly throughout the globe. High-pressured air blows toward low pressure. Lower-pressured air replaces that high pressure. A perfect example is sea breeze. The sun (a confounding variable stimulating/altering the process) logically heats the Earth. By the ocean, it logically heats the ground more. This heated ground logically heats the air directly above it. This heated air is less dense and therefore, this heated air rises. This creates a lower atmospheric pressure immediately above the land. Meanwhile, however, the air above the ocean logically does not heat as fast. As a result, the density of the air above the ocean does not change. But since the density of the air above the land has, the colder, denser air blows toward the land to maintain equilibrium. This is why many of us feel breeze from the sea. As air moves from one area to another to equal out, over objects and through objects, and past us, we feel its movement. This is wind.

But high atmospheric pressure and low atmospheric pressure areas aren’t always as nearby as the land and the sea. And wind isn’t always as simple as a breeze. Winds (shifts in atmospheric pressure) occur on a much larger and much more complex scale. Entire hemispheres and whole portions of the globe consist of different pressures. Here too, the pressures are on quest to become equal and shifting air is its steed. Mass amounts of wind develop and move (so much so that some even have become named, predictable patterns). These winds move on such a massive scale that even the Earth’s rotation bids them affect- this is referred to as the Coriolis Effect, where air often flows clockwise in high pressure areas, but counter-clockwise in low pressure areas. It also tilts moving air in the Northern Hemisphere to the right, but moving air to the left in the Southern Hemisphere.

Also, as one intelligent individual would logically expect, the greater the pressure difference, the greater the speed/force of the wind. Unfortunately, as we’ve all seen on different forms of media but hopefully rarely in person, these quickly shifting winds can lead to the development of destructive tornadoes. However, thankfully, it’s beneficial to transfer the lessons of Andrew from the classroom into real life. The risk of any of us being killed here by a tornado is relatively minimal; despite a moderate hazard, the exposure is reasonably low.

Overall, wind isn’t considered magic once it’s understood- it’s merely the Earth trying to maintain equal atmospheric pressure. As air with different pressures moves to balance out, one feels it as wind. Temperatures and the rotation of the globe are all factors that come into play. And the greater the pressure difference, the stronger the wind.However, comprehending everything in this blog isn’t exactly a breeze.

But if you’re still feeling the pressure to understand, it’d be best to think twice before throwing it to the wind.

By: Isaac Will

We cry when we feel sad. We cry when we feel happy. We cry when we feel scared, and we cry when we feel guilty. We cry when we feel a variety of emotions, ranging from one end of the spectrum to the absolute next and opposite; some of us more, and some of us less, but the fact remains common between us all. All of us cry for some reason or another in some sort of varying quantity- it’s just human nature, and we’ve done it since the very moment we entered this world. The one thing all of us don’t do, however, is ask why. After all, how do feelings prompted from circumstances instigate water falling out of organs that we use to see?

In addressing what makes people cry, we must first address the three types of tears that exist: basal, reflex, and emotional. This blog will only be examining the third, as the first two occur for quite logical reasons. Basal tears are produced to lubricate our eyes when they dry. Reflex tears are produced in response to external stimuli for the sake of protection, deployed to fend off foreign particles like dust or pollen. These two types of tears, basal and reflex, consist of 98% water- monumentally simplistic. However, emotional tears are produced for reasons much more elaborate, much more complicated that are examined below.

We all cry tears (other than basal or reflex) for a multitude of different reasons. Many scientists agree that humans have predominantly utilized shedding tears as a survival mechanism. This theory is supported by a neuropsychologist from Florida, who states crying means “We have to address something,” or that we need something we are otherwise incapable of receiving ourselves. It’s why babies cry-they need their mother’s attention. It’s also why we cry sometimes- our body needs our attention to do something.

Another accepted reason, in addition, states that we purely cry as a social function. For some of us, hopefully the small minority, this may hold true. Crying means attention. If the mind wants attention, it both consciously and subconsciously knows that crying is a sure-fire way to obtain it.

            The main reason we cry emotionally: tears act as release valves for stress hormones and a variety of unpleasant toxins. While basal and reflex tears consist 98% of water, it’s a different story for these emotionally induced droplets- they instead contain adrenocorticotrophic hormones and enkephalin. The former is a hormone commonly associated with high stress levels, while the ladder is an endorphin, killing pain and improving moods. When these hormones build up in the cerebrum (induced by sadness) they quite literally overflow into ocular areas. Here, needless to say, the body pushes them out as tears after an excessive buildup. This flushing of tears loses a few things: first…regrettably…a little bit of manliness. Second, however: depression. Then anxiety, stress, and all sorts of other malicious feelings.

            So the next time you feel like you need a good cry? Let it out. Let those tears flow. Being salty isn’t always a bad thing.

In the summer, when the sun is shining and the weather is warm, we get dirty. We do yard work. We play outside, and we sweat. We tromp through the forest and we swim in ponds, in lakes, in oceans, and in pools with others. We go to parks, we go to barbeques, we ride amusement rides, and we socialize in a variety of settings- most below average by our standards of “cleanly”…yet, as a general population exceeding millions, we don’t get the influenza virus during summer, despite all the mediums a virus could thrive in. In winter, we stay clean. With the exception of an atypical hour or two outside, we stay inside. We go from place to place, all of which value sanitization at a level much higher than the outdoors. Yet, despite this, millions more come down with the flu during winter, catching a common yet potentially fatal virus that seems to only surface during cold months. But before the basics of a cure for the flu can even be pondered, scientists must answer one question- the same we’ll explore in this blog: why is the flu only prevalent in winter months and cold weather?

Unfortunately, similar to a variety of other scientific questions, there is no widely known or widely accepted answer to this. Scientists -like Andrew Read- have been unable to positively identify the cause of the flu and why it thrives only in the cold. Centuries of research have gone by without a solidified answer. However, despite a blanket of mystery as thick as…a blanket of snow… a few theories have risen to become the most widely accepted, concerning why the flu snowballs and thrives in cold weather.

The first theory is concurrently the most simple. Winter (and the cold weather it entails) causes more people to stay indoors. There is obviously less room indoors than outdoors. What this leaves us with is the degradation of space and the accumulation of people. Logically, one could assume that this is what enables the flu to spread- more bodies in a more confined environment during winter. But sadly, this first theory is concurrently the most unapproved, also. If this were the case, after all, why wouldn’t people in populated cities come down with the flu in warm weather, crammed on trains, buses, streets, planes, and subways?

The second theory is also the second most accepted. In winter, we are exposed to the sun less often. In winter, our bodies therefore generate less Vitamin D and less melatonin, as well as less of other important aspects to our immune system. In winter, ultimately, our immune system is weaker, making us more susceptible to the influenza virus.

The third theory is the most accepted and proven, in addition to being the most complicated. Put simply, the virus thrives in cold weather. Its very name is derived from the French “Influenca di Freggo” which literally means “Influence of Cold”. Even guinea pigs (the sole animal to contract the flu like humans) only receive and transmit the flu in temperatures colder than fifty degrees- clearly signifying the disease prospers in frigid air. Why? When we breathe, we breathe out the virus in moist particles. The air is drier in winter. The drier the air, the more moistness there is that evaporates from the particles. And the more moistness that evaporates away from the virus…the lighter the virus gets. And the lighter the virus is, the more capable it is of floating through the air, making it monumentally more infectious. With the weaker immune systems mentioned in the second theory, a “sick” combination arises alongside a more infectious disease.

However, the theories don’t end and the studies haven’t either. Those theories mentioned above are but the most notable amidst many others, such as changing air currents or the behavioral and biological patterns of children. Since they’ve began operating through mass media, infectious experts and doctors and scientists all over tell us repeatedly we should stay calm during an outbreak of disease. Panic only makes things worse. Panic leads to more breakdown than necessary. However…infectious experts have offered alternative advice in response to the developing studies: regarding the flu, the last thing we should do is chill out.

When we cut brown wood from a tree, the wood intrinsically remains brown in our hands. When we pull a red petal from a rose, the petal intrinsically remains red in our hands. When we pour white milk from a pitcher, the milk intrinsically remains white in our glass. If the paradigms were continued, we would continually, time after time, find that these elements around us are simply…the color we see them to be. Here we find that empiricism holds true time and time again in every basic characteristic of our surroundings from day to day life- except for two of the most basic, the two we see every day- water and air. The healthy individual sees these basic elements on a regular basis. And every day that we see them, in the ocean or in the sky, the two elements are blue. But every day we touch them, or isolate a sample from the rest…they are not. Why is the sky, and why is water mostly blue in appearance? And why does a sky change colors during sunset?

The answer is not as simple as one might expect. In fact, it actually took scientists an extremely long time to actually determine why the sky is blue. After all…the sun is yellow, and casts white light, and space is black, and the clouds are white, and the ground is any color but blue. So where does this blue even come from?

Light from the sun appears white when directly beneath it. But, as taught to most in high school, white light actually consists of a mass variety of colors all combined: red, orange, green, yellow, blue, indigo, and violet (ROYGBIV). Another lesson we learned in high school is that these colors travel in different types of waves with varying wavelengths. Some more frequent, some less. Some more choppy, some less. These colors, all together, travel in a straight line, headed in just one direction…unless something is present to disrupt this path, disperse, and separate the colors.

In the sky surrounding earth, one would assume there is nothing to disrupt that path of white light but clouds and airplanes. Assuming this would be assuming wrong. In the sky are a variety of objects to disrupt the path of white light, ranging from pollen to dust to salt to a massive variety of gases, all of which disperse the light, absorbing it and reemitting it, or reflecting it. And because the color blue travels in more choppy waves, it is more widely dispersed and spread across the sky. Hence, when we look up around that sun and beside those white clouds, we see the color blue. However the light coming from the sun that is directly above us has less distance to travel, and collaterally, has less distance to run into obstacles such as gas or pollen. For this reason, the sun appears white when directly above us.

As for why the sky turns all sorts of different colors during sunset? The lower the sun descends in the sky, the more distance that white light has to travel over the Earth to meet our eyes. Different obstacles closer to the ground are then present to obstruct the path of light. Different colors are then more widely dispersed than blue. And in turn, these different colors and different strengths of the sun’s rays meet us. Most often, it happens to be the color orange or the color red.

Now, we’re left with the pending question, why is water blue? After all, in a glass or jar, it is clear. Sadly, again, we’re left with the unsettling answer that nobody really knows. One theory is that the ocean dominantly reflects the sky’s blue; its water particles acting as a massive network of miniature mirrors to continuously pass the color around. The other theory suggests that it’s the same reason the sky is blue- particles of the ocean easily reflect and disperse blue light and its short, choppy wavelength. To those wondering why the ocean is sometimes green…well there’s no accepted answer either. Many assume it’s the yellow pigment from plants mixing with the color blue. As for the validity of the claim, time will have to tell with increasing scientific observations, as learned in class. There will always be mixed theories, accepted and then disproved later, as learned in class.

One final theory suggests that the ocean is blue from all the waving it does…and receiving nothing in response.

The luckiest thing that’s every occurred is said to be our very existence. We’re in the perfect solar system. We’re the perfect distance away from the sun. We’re in a habitat with the perfect surroundings, both inanimate and animate. We’ve been created through the perfect series of evolutions, formed by a phenomenal combination of stardust. That’s said to be the luckiest thing ever to occur. But it’s not. The luckiest thing ever to occur is me, as a first year student, inherited an air-conditioned suite. Others must cool their rooms with simple box fans…and that led me to thinking, how, actually, does a fan even cool a room?

Box fans (and every fan in general) are said to cool off rooms. That’s why we keep them turned on when the air temperature is hot. To cool rooms, the fans complete a simple task: spinning. Moving the air. And the room gets colder. Simple…right? That’s what I’d figured upon thinking about it all.

Heat is defined as being a measure of the average kinetic energy of particles. The more movement matter has, in unison with this definition, the more kinetic energy the matter has. Utilizing logic, we can then arrive at the widely accepted statement that heat is caused by movement. Makes sense, righ-

Wait.

Fans…that cool things off…cause movement…in the air. But we  just established movement causes heat. So…how do fans, by causing more kinetic energy, cool things down? The simple answer comes from a physicist in Houston: they don’t.

Fans, if left in an unattended room, do not decrease the temperature. Instead, they actually raise it (just minutely, by less than a degree or two). But regardless, if fans raise the temperature, why do we use them and how do they cool us off?

The answer, actually, is much more simple than one would assume. Of course, even as non-scientists, we should know by now that nature’s unwavering fetish is to obtain equilibrium. One’s body is naturally trying to make the surrounding air the same temperature. One’s body does this by sweating. Whether discrete or in bucket loads, the sweat continues to pour from pores until the immediate, surrounding air reaches 100% humidity and collaterally becomes the same temperature as the body.

This is where fans become effective through two terms- the wind chill effect, which leads to convective heat loss. This wind chill effect is the exact same phenomenon weathermen talk about in regards to blowing wind. The fan moves air over you, and in that process, it takes the air your body heated away, too. This causes convective heat loss. This causes your body to feel colder in the absence of surrounding heated air. This causes more evaporation to the moving air. This causes your body to be colder…and is why fans are effective. They don’t create cold- they just move warm air away from the skin. After all, cold doesn’t even exist. The absence of heat does.

In lending advice to those less-fortunate than I (freshmen without A/C), scientific research has proven leaving fans running in an unventilated, unattended room, to be futile. In your absence, it’ll only heat the room for your return. The only exception is if the fan is running for the purposes of mixing nearby cooler air, in which case, it would be effective to leave the fan running by a door or by a window. Otherwise, the fan is useless if you aren’t around and if it isn’t blowing on you.

At this point, it’s likely you’ve realized fans will be the most two-faced interaction you have all year; they’ll be cooling air when you’re around and heating it when you aren’t.

-By Isaac Will

As freshmen, we don’t drive cars to get around campus, we don’t fly in planes, we certainly don’t ride in boats, and we definitely don’t take trains. No, instead, as freshmen, we either walk or ride bicycles to get around University Park (which I have quickly learned to be more the size of a small nation, rather than a campus). Decisively, this prompted me into choosing the latter method of transportation: riding a bike. So as I rode from one place to another, whether it be my dorm to the HUB or the HUB to class or class to my dorm, or from whichever Point A to whatever Point B, I began thinking more and more about my bicycle. I realized it toppled over only when it was still…not when it was in motion, whether there was a rider atop or not(accidents excluded). This didn’t make sense to me. Why does it fall when motionless? Why does it stay upright when moving? After all…more people fall when moving than standing still. More cars crash driving than when sitting motionless. It’s also more easily to balance something, or stay balanced, when motionless. So, in a question sparked by my source of campus transportation: Why do bicycles fall when standing still, but not when moving?

To address and analyze the question, we should first examine why a bicycle is able to stay upright while in motion. We can then assume that what makes a bike fall, at the very least, is the simple lack of what keeps it standing. However, in every source utilized, no common consensus between researchers or scientists could be reached. The very fact of the matter is that, despite extensive research, no single deciding factor causes a bike to stay upright, and no single deciding factor causes a bike to fall over when motionless. No scientist, no researcher, no student or professor, none of those who endeavor into the study of great mysteries, can offer a solidified explanation. Literally, as unreasonable as it may sound…why a bike stays upright can actually be added to the list of great mysteries with evidence to both support and demote theories, alongside “What killed the dinosaurs?” and “What is the single event that created life?”

The first theory on why a bike stays upright when turning is because of, simply, well, friction. It’s also the most widely accepted and generally correct. Falling or leaning to a side doesn’t mean crashing. It means the bike turning in that direction. It means the bike curving in that path. It means friction is acting alongside the bike, deflecting that path onto the necessary curve it must take to avoid toppling over. It’s all about the transferring of momentum.

After all, this theory seems to be the most sensible when we think about it. Like our lesson in which we tried to figure out if wormy kids are stupid, we should remove a variable applicable to this bicycle theory. Friction. When a bike falls to its side on ice or gravel and friction vanishes, the bike no longer stays upright. Therefore, that could be a possibility of why bikes don’t stay upright without moving- the absence of friction caused by movement.

The second theory states that what keeps a bike upright is the gyroscopic motion it possesses. Put basically, if a handlebar turns and the bike starts to tilt, the front wheel simply hurries back underneath the frame. With this counteraction, it makes sense a bike seldomly falls while in motion. As for why it falls when motionless then? These gyroscopic parts aren’t moving quickly enough to counteract when the bike is motionless. Therefore, they are far too slow and far too futile in stopping the bike’s stationary fall.

Another theory, one of the final reputable ones I was able to locate, is that the bike only stays upright when it moves for the same reason a top does. When the momentum of the bike falls below a certain number, the bike is then at the will of gravity and will quite frequently plummet to the ground. That’s why bikes begin to fall when they even slow down way before they come to a complete stop.

Some other less exciting theories on why a stationary bike falls over are listed on Physics Stack Exchange. One such example is that the bike is not on its “convex hull”. Basically, to roughly explain, think of a bike as a pyramid. Standing it up on its wheels would be like trying to balance a pyramid on a tip. The theories go on, and on, and on, but surprisingly there is no accepted reason why bikes stay upright when moving and fall when stationary.

Perhaps the reason bikes don’t stay standing is because they’re too tired.

-By Isaac Will

I don’t excel in math. I don’t excel in theatre. I don’t excel in business, and I don’t excel in science. Numerically, I find ideal grounds to struggle, and in the deep crevices of the specific but varying facts and formulas where learning becomes more monotonous and tedious than prying at my curiosity, I find the same grounds to struggle in science classes. Although science classes, like chemistry or biology, are said to be “exploration” and “experimentation”, I’ve found this only to hold true after studying and memorizing and calculating already known facts over…and over…and over again. In simpler terms, the enjoyable aspects of science classes don’t come until the end. The enjoyable aspects of science classes don’t come until after the lackluster facets. Unfortunately, I don’t (and have never possessed) the capacity for this patience. However, as many in this course are aware, a general science credit is required for Penn State. This is why I enrolled in the Controversy of Science class. It skips right over those tedious, monotonous details and dives right into “the good stuff”- controversy. Arguments. The questions that pry in our curious minds as we toss and turn in our beds, the questions that bring life and passion to discussions at the dinner table or in late night car rides. This science class is a wormhole of the university- we’re given the privilege to skip formulas, equations, experiments, factual memorizations, and our own personal scientific failure, right to the interesting discussions, previous discoveries, and the final results.

Here is a link to the closest science related thing that I enjoy- a wikipedia article of my favorite author.

At this point, I’ve collaterally touched on a few reasons why I have chosen not to major in science. Mainly, I can narrow it all down to two: the first being my skillset and the second being future opportunities. Careers in science would not exemplify skills I believe myself to posses such as writing, reading, or speaking to the extent careers elsewhere could. This seamlessly leads into my next point- opportunities. I’ve got too large and too idealistic goals of becoming wealthy, and for me, science isn’t the method of reaching my objective. My technique of handling repeated failure after failure would not be up to the par of science careers. Law school and politics have always appeared more ideal to me, a more ideal occupation to enhance and maximize my abilities. So, in short, I chose something other than a science major not because of my dislike for the actual study, but rather for more optimal and ideal opportunities elsewhere.

Above is a picture of some high school friends and I.