Just how bad can a little nuclear war be?

Limited nuclear war would damage ozone layer

Pretty bad, it would seem:

Mills and colleagues found that a regional nuclear war in South Asia would deplete up to 40% of the ozone layer in the mid latitudes and up to 70% in the high northern latitudes.

"The models show this magnitude of ozone loss would persist for five years, and we would see substantial losses continuing for at least another five years," says Mills.

The scenario they looked at was for 100 Hiroshima size detonations between India and Pakistan. (Those two countries apparently have 110 warheads between them, so the figure is relatively realistic.)

On the other hand, it would cool global warming for quite a while. But those who sunbathe to get warm will all get skin cancer from no ozone.

On the whole, not a good idea. (Incidentally, what sort of early warning systems do both of these nations have? It wouldn't hurt to have international co-operation to make sure these countries can't launch by mistake.)

Screen your genes before lighting up?

Genetics and lung cancer | Smoking out the smoking gene | Economist.com

I'll step on Harry Clarke's territory now and link to an interesting article about genes and lung cancer. Two paragraphs give you the flavour:

Paul Brennan and Christopher Amos both agree that something significant is going on in the part of chromosome 15 studied by deCODE. But they have concluded that genetic variation there acts directly on a person's susceptibility to lung cancer, rather than acting indirectly by modifying his smoking behaviour. That does not mean the gene or genes in question actually cause lung cancer. Rather, it means that they amplify the effects of smoking instead of the amount of smoking....

DeCODE has already announced it will add rs1051730 to the standard screen it offers to those who wish to know their susceptibility to diseases. The day is not far off, therefore, when those who take the essentially irrational decision to start smoking tobacco will be able to find out in advance exactly how foolish they are being.

The Scientific American version of the story is here.

Hey, you! Pay attention!

On 3 April, I posted about an article in Nature which contained some strong criticism of the forecasts of the IPCC as being overly optimist in projections for the potential technological reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases. (Nature quotes someone as calling it a "bombshell".) Nature followed up with commentary from several global warming figures, some criticising, some agreeing with, the original commentary. (To get to the articles now, go to the John Tierney link below and follow his links. News@Nature's way of stuffing around with certain links only being available for 3 days irritates me no end.)

So why hasn't anyone in the Australian blogosphere picked up on this? I would've thought it was of great interest to many bloggers I read regularly: Catallaxy, Harry Clarke, Quiggin, even Robert Merkel at LP. One would have thought it might even be of interest to Tim Blair or Andrew Bolt from a greenhouse skeptic's point of view. (I even emailed to Bolt about it, as I thought it a story deserving publicity.)

So why have precisely none of the above (as far as I can see) noted the story? (Not my post; the story itself.)

For those of you interested (such tiny number that there seems to be!) there is more about the article in John Tierney's column in the New York Times of 3 April.

A Google news search indicates that no Australian media outlet has reported the story either. What's wrong with you all?

More "Uh-oh"

Iran Begins Installing More Centrifuges - New York Times

Back, and dreaming

Last night I slept the deep sleep of the just-returned-from-camping. Nothing makes you appreciate your own bed more than a couple of nights sleeping in a sleeping bag on inflatable mattress. The other thing about camping sleep that I could do without is the disruption caused by the 30 meter walk to go to the toilet at 2.30 am. Nice to see the stars at that time of morning, though.

I also had a very protracted (or so it seems) dream last night in which I was trying to find a building in the city, and realised suddenly that I was in Melbourne, not Brisbane, yet I had no idea how I had gotten there. I rang my office and tried to explain as best I could, I think coming up with the theory that I must have slept-walked onto a plane. But the other odd thing about the dream was that I kept thinking "well, if nothing else, this will make for a really interesting blog post."

Maybe that is a sign I have been blogging too much?

I think it also occurred to me in the me in the dream that it seemed like a dream, except I was sure it wasn't. Those dreams are usually good to wake up from, except for the series of "proof of flying" dreams" I had some years ago.

I will leave you all now to analyse my subconscious, while I catch up on a day's work and attempt to post something of interest tonight.

Some decent stuff about mini black holes

Before I go away for the weekend, I thought I would point out these developments.

At last, at least one physicists' blog goes into a lot of detail about what they think would happen if mini black holes from the LHC did not evaporate via Hawking Radiation. This is well worth reading, although my feeling is still that it a pretty complex question and may yet be the subject of some uncertainty.

It seems to me, for example, that Bee's explanation of a mini black hole passing through the earth and hitting a subatomic particle does not coincide exactly with Greg Landsberg's explanation in 2006:

They would each take about 100 hours to gobble up one proton. At that rate, even if one did not take into account the fact that each black hole would slow down every time it gobbled up a proton, and thus suck down matter at an even slower rate, "about 100 protons would be destroyed every year by such a black hole, so it would take much more than the age of universe to destroy even one milligram of Earth material....

Compare that to Backreaction:

Nobody knows exactly what will happen when a tiny black hole hits a nucleon. On the scale of the black hole, the nucleon is about 1000 times larger in diameter, and a very dilute cloud of a few quarks and gluons. It may be that the black hole hits one of these partons, as they are called, thus disrupting the nucleon and carrying away a fraction of its mass. There is no theory to describe this, and there are all kinds of problems involved, as to what happens to confinement, colour neutrality, and so on. But whatever happened, in the end, the black hole may have gained, in the most extreme case, the mass of a nucleon.

It may be that they are in complete agreement, if Landsberg's explanation was given in more detail. But it reads to me like there is some uncertainty.

That said, they both agree that very, very few mini black holes should have less than escape velocity. That's good, although again it appears to me that Backreaction's estimate and Landsberg are different.

Another physicist spends a lot of time pointing out that the very limited experience in physics of litigant Walter Wagner, and getting upset that the media does not report this clearly. But on the more important point of why Wagner is wrong (in detail), we haven't heard from Steinberg yet. (Maybe he will just agree with Backreaction's analysis.)

Really, if physicists are unhappy about Wagner getting publicity over this, why didn't they simply address the issue in detail when asked about it over the last couple of years by the likes of James Blodgett. Instead, the reaction was (by and large) very dismissive, especially once you asked "what if HR does not exist?" I know that Greg Landsberg did go into a fair amount of detail in answers to James Blodgett, but he was pretty much the exception, as far as I know. (And he eventually stopped taking questions anyway.)

Only now, it seems, are we getting the detail which indicates that it was never a completely stupid question.

Short holiday from saving the universe...

The longer Good King Kevin stays overseas, the more of a goose he looks. (The follow up video of how he reacted when questioned about it at a news conference suggested that he is simply not getting enough sleep.)

I'm not sure that any of his cabinet back here are a suitable Sheriff of Nottingham; perhaps Gillard could be the Sheriff of Altona, if she was actually game to say much without Kevin's minders' approval. (Gawd, can't she now afford a move down the road to Williamtown, at least.)

As I like to imagine that I look like a slightly older Jonas Armstrong (hahahahahaha), all of this Robin Hood talk is by way of explaining that my family (and another) is off to set up an outlaw campsite near the forests of Kilcoy over the weekend, from which we will seek to at least "rob" free wine from a few local wineries, and muck about in boats and tangle up fishing line, while figuring out ways to encourage Kevin to stay overseas.

I probably can't post until Monday. Come back here over the weekend anyway so my sitemeter doesn't get depressed.

Bob Ellis pines for low technology

Unleashed: The young and the restless

I don't know that Bob Ellis was being entirely serious in his latest "Unleashed" column. ("Unleashed", incidentally, seems to be a government run service where those ignored at their own websites can seek a larger audience.)

Anyhow, Bob thinks that youth today binge drink, do drugs and don't marry because - there jobs are all crap:

They have jobs that demean and shame them, jobs that offend their conscience and wound their pride, jobs out of which they have no clear hope in their lifetime of getting out of, into jobs that are any better.

Where once they might hope to get a university degree in Roman history or music composition or quantum physics and a job thereafter teaching it, they now find these things unavailable to them.

Well, I'm still waiting for Bob Ellis' definitive paper on quantum gravity to appear at Arxiv, but it has yet to appear. Too many red wine stains, I suspect.

When Bob was a youth:

....the jobs young people got in their teens were plentiful and most of them agreeable.

I would like to see people of Bob's age surveyed and see what they have to say about that. According to Bob:

Electronic robot slaves have taken over the nicer, unconflicted jobs, and all that are left for humans to do are the nasty, humiliating, shaming, lousy jobs.

Come on, I think Bob's having a lend of us, don't you think? How about this line:

And so it is and so it goes, with bad jobs everywhere, jobs from which you might be sacked at any point, and rents going through the roof and frequent foreign travel no longer an affordable option, that young people, yes, take drugs and hit the piss and go down on one another as if there's no tomorrow. I would too in their shoes.

Funny he should mention foreign travel: in Bob's youth that usually involved a one way sea trip to England to work and save up money for the return leg in 2 year's time. There was no way the average youth could afford return holiday travel to New Zealand, let alone the rest of the world.

Did Bob miss out on a seat at the 2020 Summit? What a pity!

The end of the earth, but at least there's less fermented shark

Melting ice caps may trigger more volcanic eruptions

The story is about Iceland. The speculation is that decreasing ice cover there will let some of the volcanoes on the island become more active. (The decreasing weight pressure of the ice cap lets more magna get closer to the surface is the idea.)

This may also happen in other parts of the world, including Antarctica.

As one of the comments following the story notes, this could arguably be somewhat of a mixed blessing. Just the right amount of extra volcanic activity would increase aerosols in the atmosphere which has a cooling effect that can last for years. On the other hand, too much volcanism and you can kill most life on earth.

If Iceland is at risk, at least it means less fermented shark in the world. While I am not a huge fan of his, I recently saw chef Anthony Bourdain's "No Reservations" episode in which he travelled to Iceland and described the food as the worst he has ever experienced: especially the fermented shark. Bourdain cannot be accused of not being adventurous in what he will eat on his travels. If he says fermented shark is vile, I would really take his word for it.

Someone has put the show up on Youtube. You can see the segment with the vilest Icelandic food here:

About the LHC

As I predicted, the great majority of commentary on the legal action concerning the Large Hadron Collider is snarky. Phil at Bad Astronomy, a prominient Skeptic, had an initial post which was fairly restrained, but then followed it with a post linking to others which definitely fall within the "snark" category. Daily Galaxy severely ridiculed the topic, but in the process misrepresented the case completely. Most of the "big" physics sites I visit regularly seem to have taken a view of "the less said the better". I suspect that they probably figure that the less publicity they to anything that could delay the start up, the better.

For a good natured humorous take on it, see Scott Adams' post about it at his Dilbert Blog.

One thing is perfectly clear: most of those who are ridiculing the issue, especially in comments sections, have not read the main websites which have been discussing the issue for the last couple of years.

As I said in my original post on this, I liked James Blodgett's work because he was willing to be shown that there clearly is no risk, taking into account all possibilities (including the failure of the never observed Hawking Radiation to actually exist.) It's true that very, very few physicists doubt Hawking Radiation, but a few reputable ones have speculated that maybe it doesn't. When the CERN risk assessment paper is based heavily on the assumption that it does exist, that's where a legitimate criticism lies.

Much is being made of the background of Walter Wagner, one of the litigants. To be honest, I have no idea about his general credibility; I note that he certainly does seem to have had a very varied career, and the fact that his website was inviting donations was always something that gave me some concern. However, in his posts on the web he generally has come across as pretty rational, and the ad hominem attacks do nothing to address the key issue.

In the New Scientist version of the story, the case is "complete nonsense" according to CERN spokesman James Gillies. He appears to be much more circumspect in the report of the New York Times. In fact, the NYT report emphasizes that CERN physicists have taken the question seriously, and have been looking at safety issues again since last year. One of the most curious parts of the report is that most of the members of the Safety Assessment Group are said to prefer to remain anonymous "for various reasons". I am curious as to why that would be. It doesn't fit entirely comfortably with their insistence that they are being completely open about all of the possibilities they are considering.

I expect that the revised safety assessment will still give the project a clean bill of health, and I hope it does it on the basis of a convincing explanation that under no foreseeable circumstances could thousands of non-evaporating mini black holes floating in and around the earth absorb atoms fast enough to ever be a problem.

I hope the strangelet issue can similarly be dealt with as well.

We will see.

As I suspected...

Climate challenge underestimated? : Nature News

This looks like a really important story on the economics of climate change. My suspicion has long been that the optimistic talk of countries being able to achieve huge changes in CO2 emissions with lots of "green" technologies and without too much economic pain was bunkum, and this report indicates my hunch may be right:

Climate policy expert Roger Pielke Jr, climatologist Tom Wigley, and economist Christopher Green lay out in a commentary article published in Nature ¹ today why they think that the emission scenarios the IPCC produced nearly a decade ago, which are still widely used, are overly optimistic. They note that most of the IPCC’s 'business as usual' emission scenarios assume a certain amount of 'spontaneous' technological change. The size of this assumed change is unrealistic, they argue, and deceives policy-makers and the public about the crucial role policy must have in encouraging the development of technologies to prevent dangerous climate change.

Such a large chunk of the needed energy-efficiency improvements is built in to these 'business as usual' scenarios that the degree of change requiring special effort seems artificially small, they argue. According to the authors' own calculations, IPCC scenarios make it seem as if the technical challenge of stabilizing greenhouse-gas emissions at around 500 parts per million — a concentration which scientists think will prevent average global temperatures from rising more than 2 °C — is a quarter of its true size.

Richard Tol, an energy and environmental economist at the Economic and Social Research Institute in Dublin, Ireland, also says that the IPCC has underestimated the cost of technology, and notes that the cost of mitigating against climate change increases as time goes on. If Pielke and colleagues are correct, the cost of controlling global warming could go up by a factor of 16, argues Tol.

I trust Professor Garnaut is reading this with interest.

A laugh a minute in Iraq

In Baghdad, Iraqis take their humor extra dark - International Herald Tribune

According to this story, Iraqis still enjoy a good April Fool's joke, but in current circumstances, most of the jokes are very black. For example:

Rawaa, 25, a manager's assistant, said that in 2004, when she was in college, a student persuaded the class on April Fools' Day that the poetry professor — a man they all disliked — had been assassinated.

"We felt sorry about him, but very happy at the same time, because there will be no more poetry lectures that day," Rawaa said. She would allow only her first name to be used, afraid of falling victim to the real violence in the capital, anything but a joke.

Actually, all of the jokes in the article just don't sound funny, which makes for a curious read.

Dangerous headline for humour

Kidney Extracted Through The Vagina, First Time In Europe, Second In World

Oh great...

BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | N Korea hits out at South leader

You can see more of the North's rant at the North Korean news agency here.

Meanwhile in China, they are probably tearing their hair out at the prospect of some sort of North Korean issue interfering with the Olympic Games.

Assud the Rabbit and the future of the Middle East

Hamas's harsh rhetoric against the Jews - International Herald Tribune

As this article notes, the outright incitement of young Palestinians against Jews is one of the biggest problems for finding a long term peace solution in the Middle East.

When you have prominent political parties (Hamas) still quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as true, there is very little hope for the future. Not to mention Imams who like to sermonise that the Jews are doomed because of what the Koran says.

Assud the Rabbit, by the way, replaced Nahoul the bee, and vows "to get rid of the Jews, Allah willing."

God help us.

And how about a bit of concentration on this brainwashing as a problem from the likes of Ant Loewenstein? I note he says of the short film Fitna: "it’s vital to understand that this virulent strain of Islam-hatred is alive and well in the West."

Funny, Antony, how it is not being broadcast on local Israel TV to influence the kids. I reckon children's shows designed to instil hatred from an early age are more harmful, even if they don't show dead bodies, than a short bloody film on the internet which can actually be the subject of serious discussion by adults.

Robert Spencer's take on it is well worth reading by the way.

The Nazi children

Paddy Hitler, Max Mosley and the dilemma of Nazi children

This is a fascinating summary of what various "Nazi children" went on to do with their lives.

Under the entry for Paddy Hitler, you should follow the link to a story from the Times in December which I had missed. Wikipedia has an entry on him too. His story had until now escaped my attention.

(By the way, the Wikipedia entry notes that there have been a couple of fictional works in which Adolf travels to Liverpool to visit his nephew. What a neat idea for a movie.)

More curious Indian journalism

Mall mania grips city-Patna-Cities-The Times of India

Maybe I am just easily amused, but here's the introductory paragraph from the above story:

Built over the ruins of ancient Pataliputra, the age-old bazaars of modern Patna betray a flavour of yesteryear in its din and bustle, the bellowing of beasts, the salty language of traders and cattlemen and their shocking racy stories.

I am very curious as to the nature of the "shocking racy stories" that Indian cattleman tell at the market. Is it about what their cows got up to last night?

A comparison of interest to few readers

Inside the mind of the Archbishop of Canterbury David Bentley Hart TLS

This is a review of a collection of theological essays by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams.

The reviewer notes that the Archbishop is undoubtedly smart: he apparently can read 7 languages other than English, and lecture in five. He has an impressively large bibliography, including 3 books of poetry.

Still, it is a common criticism that his use of language is simply too opaque to understand his actual position.

The point of this post is simply to note that it occurred to me that he is the Barry Jones of the ecclesiastic world: both highly intelligent and well intentioned, but their verbosity and circuitous approach to topics makes people actually avoid trying to understand them.

Even the Arabs don't like Syria

BBC NEWS | Middle East | No Lebanon breakthrough for Arabs

It's hard to keep up with all the convoluted politics of the Middle East, but this short report is worth noting.

Funny money

Windfall that wasn't | The Australian

Glenn Milne explains how reports about an extra $1 billion to be paid to Victoria were never true, and the Rudd government did not seek to clarify the misreporting.

This also reminds me, when it was first announced by John Howard, there was some criticism from those on the Left that it was all a rushed and ill-considered program. Funny how that has all dropped away now that it is a Labor deal.