Number 873, September 25, 2008 by Phillip F. Schewe, James Dawson, and Jason S. Bardi
Furthest Seeable Thing
For the first time in history you could
have looked half way back to the origin of the universe with your
naked eye. On the night of March 19, 2008 a telescope mounted in
space observed a flash from a gamma ray burst, an extremely
explosive celestial object, which set several records. First, if
you’d been looking in that direction you would have been able to
see, with your own unaided eyes, something at a distance
further-seven billion light years---than anything a human being has
ever seen in history. Second, since looking out into space is
equivalent to looking back in time (it takes the light from distant
objects many years to reach the Earth), you would have been
witnessing the earliest thing ever seeable by the naked eye.
A new report describes observations made of the explosion by an
orbiting telescope called Swift and by some of ground-based
telescopes that got in on the action once they were notified by
Swift. Swift has three onboard detectors which look not at ordinary
visible light but at much more energetic light in the form of x rays
and gamma rays. One feature of Swift’s mission is that as soon as
it sees something interesting it alerts controllers on the ground so
that other telescopes can be turned in that direction. In this way
the explosive outburst, whose official name is GRB 080319B, could be
tracked by telescopes sensitive to other kinds of light, such as
infrared and even radio waves.
The March 19 event is an example of a gamma ray burst. This comes
about when certain heavy old stars have used up all their internal
fuel. When a star has no more fuel, the force of gravity causes it
to contract. If this process is violent enough, the star can blow
apart as a supernova. In some special cases, what is left behind is
a black hole, and outward going shock waves which, when they
criss-cross, can create a brilliant flash of light. For a short
time this light is more powerful than that coming from an entire
galaxy of stars.
The cone of energy flying away from the explosion can be quite
narrow, so to be observed from far away, as this object was, it had
to be aligned just right to be seen by Swift.
This gamma burst was not the furthest ever observed with a
telescope, but it was the brightest in terms of the energy
released. So bright, in fact, that it could have been seen unaided
in areas of North and South America the night of March 19, if only
for about 40 seconds.
The splash of light arriving at Swift’s place
in orbit that two of Swift’s three detectors were temporarily
blinded.
Fortunately several telescopes quickly maneuvered into position and
could study the stellar explosion as it unfolded. By then the gamma
rays, the most energetic part of the light blast, would have died
down. But other types of light continued to issue from the scene.
According to Swift scientist Judith Racusin, an astronomer at Penn
State, this has become the best-observed gamma ray burst, and the
observations have already changed the way we think about bursts
work.
When you look out at the night sky about 3000 stars are visible.
Everything you can see at night is either a planet in our home solar
system or one of those stars, all of which are located in our home
galaxy, the Milky Way. The furthest thing you can normally see with
the naked eye, and with some difficulty, is the Andromeda Galaxy,
about 2.5 million light years away. Only about once a century is a
supernova visible from any further galaxy. And by now it’s been 400
years since we’ve seen one of those.
That makes GRB 080319B all the more impressive. It breaks the
record of most distant seeable-with-the-naked-eye thing by a factor
of a thousand. Located in the Bootes Constellation, the gamma burst
is at a distance of 7 billion light years, which means that it took
light seven billion years to come from the blast to Earth. That
means that a person seeing the visible portion of the blast would
have been looking halfway back toward the time of the big bang,
when, according to modern cosmology, the universe began. When the
blast occurred the sun hadn’t even appeared yet, much less the
Earth, much less the human species. (The results appeared Nature
magazine, 11 September 2008.)
Predicting The Presidential Election, Sort of
Two mathematicians
have devised what they say is a “surprisingly effective” means to
predict the outcome of the U.S. presidential election using median
statistics based on voter polling. In a paper in the journal
Mathematical and Computer Modeling, Wes Colley, of the University of
Alabama, Huntsville, and J. Richard Gott III, at Princeton
University, said they have developed a system that uses the margins
of victory for each candidate in each of the many polls taken during
the past month.
Those margins are then ranked from the largest
margin to the smallest, and the middle number, or the median, is
used as the candidate’s score for the individual states. Colley is
nationally known for his computer modeling system used in
determining college football rankings by the NCAA, and his new
system has Barack Obama ahead of John McCain."John McCain needs several swing states to break his way, whereas
Obama can afford to lose a couple and still win the election,"
Colley said.
Before the Obama supporters start breaking out the
champagne, however, they should be aware of new research from the
Maryland-based Institute for Operations Research and the Management
Sciences (INFORMS), the world's largest society for operations
research professionals. Using a methodology that "applies a
mathematical model of state polling data, using a dynamic
programming algorithm to forecast electoral results," INFORMS has
McCain ahead by as many as 27 electoral votes (282.8 votes for
McCain, 255.2 for Obama).
Then there is University of New Hampshire
Survey Center founder and former Gallup Poll managing editor David
Moore, who is revealing in a new book that "media polls are not used
to uncover the 'will' or thoughts of the public, but rather to
manufacture a public 'opinion' that grabs the attention of
journalists and can be used to fill media news holes." The
methodology used by the major national polls, he says, "give false
readings of which candidates voters prefer and what the public
wants."
Multi-Lingual Ads
In the increasingly competitive world of global
marketing, how does a multinational company based in the United
States, Belgium or Japan decide what language to use in television
advertisements aimed at selling products in India? Is it best to
advertise in Hindi, the native language of India, or English, the
language that most urban people in India also speak and understand?
Researchers from the Universities of Minnesota and Michigan have
discovered that the answer depends a lot on the product being sold.
Luxury products, like high-end chocolate, sell better in bilingual
countries if English is used, but necessities such as detergent sell
better if advertised in a country's native language, the researchers
found. But the best choice may be a blend of the languages.
"The
issue of bilingual consumers is increasingly crucial for
multinational corporations," said Rohini Ahluwalia, a marketing
researcher at Minnesota's Carlson School of Management. "To someone
in Spain, an advertisement for a luxury item from a foreign firm
could have a more positive impact if delivered in English or
'Spanglish' than if it were delivered only in Spanish," Ahluwalia
said. "Conversely, if the advertised product was a necessity, the
native language may be more persuasive."
A study Ahluwalia and
University of Michigan marketing researcher Aradhna Krishna
conducted in India revealed that language choice is loaded with
symbolism and sorting out what works is difficult. The Hindi
language was associated with "belongingness," while English was
associated with "sophistication," the researchers said. The
implications for those multi-million dollar advertising budgets can
be serious. English-only ads by foreign companies work better than
local language ads, which "may backfire, invoking skepticism in the
consumer" Ahluwalia said. But "the safest bet is to use
mixed-language ads."