Annual Catalogue 2017
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Stephen Hawking (1942–2018) World-Renowned Physicist Who Defied the Odds
COMMENT OBITUARY Stephen Hawking (1942–2018) World-renowned physicist who defied the odds. hen Stephen Hawking was speech synthesizer processed his words and diagnosed with motor-neuron generated the androidal accent that became disease at the age of 21, it wasn’t his trademark. In this way, he completed his Wclear that he would finish his PhD. Against best-selling book A Brief History of Time all expectations, he lived on for 55 years, (Bantam, 1988), which propelled him to becoming one of the world’s most celebrated celebrity status. IAN BERRY/MAGNUM scientists. Had Hawking achieved equal distinction Hawking, who died on 14 March 2018, was in any other branch of science besides cos- born in Oxford, UK, in 1942 to a medical- mology, it probably would not have had the researcher father and a philosophy-graduate same resonance with a worldwide public. As mother. After attending St Albans School I put it in The Telegraph newspaper in 2007, near London, he earned a first-class degree “the concept of an imprisoned mind roaming in physics from the University of Oxford. He the cosmos” grabbed people’s imagination. began his research career in 1962, enrolling In 1965, Stephen married Jane Wilde. as a graduate student in a group at the Uni- After 25 years of marriage, and three versity of Cambridge led by one of the fathers children, the strain of Stephen’s illness of modern cosmology, Dennis Sciama. and of sharing their home with a team of The general theory of relativity was at that nurses became too much and they sepa- time undergoing a renaissance, initiated in rated, divorcing in 1995. -
Attachment 1
Appendix 1 Chemico-Biological Interactions 301 (2019) 2–5 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Chemico-Biological Interactions journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/chembioint An examination of the linear no-threshold hypothesis of cancer risk T assessment: Introduction to a series of reviews documenting the lack of biological plausibility of LNT R. Goldena,*, J. Busb, E. Calabresec a ToxLogic, Gaithersburg, MD, USA b Exponent, Midland, MI, USA c University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA The linear no-threshold (LNT) single-hit dose response model for evolution and the prominence of co-author Gilbert Lewis, who would be mutagenicity and carcinogenicity has dominated the field of regulatory nominated for the Nobel Prize some 42 times, this idea generated much risk assessment of carcinogenic agents since 1956 for radiation [8] and heat but little light. This hypothesis was soon found to be unable to 1977 for chemicals [11]. The fundamental biological assumptions upon account for spontaneous mutation rates, underestimating such events which the LNT model relied at its early adoption at best reflected a by a factor of greater than 1000-fold [19]. primitive understanding of key biological processes controlling muta- Despite this rather inauspicious start for the LNT model, Muller tion and development of cancer. However, breakthrough advancements would rescue it from obscurity, giving it vast public health and medical contributed by modern molecular biology over the last several decades implications, even proclaiming it a scientific principle by calling it the have provided experimental tools and evidence challenging the LNT Proportionality Rule [20]. While initially conceived as a driving force model for use in risk assessment of radiation or chemicals. -
Clear Thinking and the Forces of Unreason
COMMENTARY Clear Thinking and the Forces of Unreason KENDRICK FRAZIER here is a new need for rational- still a dangerous world out there, but about. We no longer can indulge such ity and reason—as well as their warnings had fallen on mostly distractions. courage and resoluteness—in deaf ears. We were too distracted with I think in the short term at least we T living the good life. Now, suddenly, no are going to see less nonsense. Psychic defense of freedom and democracy and the highest values of civilization. Since one is distracted. abilities failed to warn us of the September 11 the world has changed, Much the same could be said for rJiose September 11 attacks, and now it and a previous pop culture of superfi- of us toiling on behalf of science and rea- should be clear to all but the most com- ciality, self-absorption, self-indulgence, son and scientific skepticism. Paul Kurtz mitted or muddle-headed that such and self-satisfaction has gone out the and CSICOP and many others in the powers just don't exist. The attacks were window with it. A several-decades skeptical movement have regularly been soon followed by bogus Nostradamus period of relative innocence and chided over die years for even raising the "predictions" and other inevitable clap- naivete' has ended. Things are serious possibility that forces of unreason could trap, but those were quickly countered now, and we need all our wits about us. actually threaten our modern democratic by anti-hoax, urban legend Web sites Intelligence and wisdom are called for. -
Moore Noller
2002 Ada Doisy Lectures Ada Doisy Lecturers 2003 in BIOCHEMISTRY Sponsored by the Department of Biochemistry • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Dr. Peter B. 1970-71 Charles Huggins* and Elwood V. Jensen A76 1972-73 Paul Berg* and Walter Gilbert* Moore 1973-74 Saul Roseman and Bruce Ames Department of Molecular carbonyl Biophysics & Biochemistry Phe 1974-75 Arthur Kornberg* and Osamu Hayaishi Yale University C75 1976-77 Luis F. Leloir* New Haven, Connecticutt 1977-78 Albert L. Lehninger and Efraim Racker 2' OH attacking 1978-79 Donald D. Brown and Herbert Boyer amino N3 Tyr 1979-80 Charles Yanofsky A76 4:00 p.m. A2486 1980-81 Leroy E. Hood Thursday, May 1, 2003 (2491) 1983-84 Joseph L. Goldstein* and Michael S. Brown* Medical Sciences Auditorium 1984-85 Joan Steitz and Phillip Sharp* Structure and Function in 1985-86 Stephen J. Benkovic and Jeremy R. Knowles the Large Ribosomal Subunit 1986-87 Tom Maniatis and Mark Ptashne 1988-89 J. Michael Bishop* and Harold E. Varmus* 1989-90 Kurt Wüthrich Dr. Harry F. 1990-91 Edmond H. Fischer* and Edwin G. Krebs* 1993-94 Bert W. O’Malley Noller 1994-95 Earl W. Davie and John W. Suttie Director, Center for Molecular Biology of RNA 1995-96 Richard J. Roberts* University of California, Santa Cruz 1996-97 Ronald M. Evans Santa Cruz, California 1998-99 Elizabeth H. Blackburn 1999-2000 Carl R. Woese and Norman R. Pace 2000-01 Willem P. C. Stemmer and Ronald W. Davis 2001-02 Janos K. Lanyi and Sir John E. Walker* 12:00 noon 2002-03 Peter B. -
MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo
Cracking the Genetic Code MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) Frederick Griffith The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) Oswald Avery Alfred Hershey Martha Chase The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) Linus Carl Pauling The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) • The structure of DNA (1953) James Watson and Francis Crick The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) • The structure of DNA (1953) How is DNA (4 nucleotides) the genetic material while proteins (20 amino acids) are the building blocks? ? DNA Protein ? The Coding Craze ? DNA Protein What was already known? • DNA resides inside the nucleus - DNA is not the carrier • Protein synthesis occur in the cytoplasm through ribosomes {• Only RNA is associated with ribosomes (no DNA) - rRNA is not the carrier { • Ribosomal RNA (rRNA) was a homogeneous population The “messenger RNA” hypothesis François Jacob Jacques Monod The Coding Craze ? DNA RNA Protein RNA Tie Club Table from Wikipedia The Coding Craze Who won the race Marshall Nirenberg J. -
Black Holes and Qubits
Subnuclear Physics: Past, Present and Future Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Scripta Varia 119, Vatican City 2014 www.pas.va/content/dam/accademia/pdf/sv119/sv119-duff.pdf Black Holes and Qubits MICHAEL J. D UFF Blackett Labo ratory, Imperial C ollege London Abstract Quantum entanglement lies at the heart of quantum information theory, with applications to quantum computing, teleportation, cryptography and communication. In the apparently separate world of quantum gravity, the Hawking effect of radiating black holes has also occupied centre stage. Despite their apparent differences, it turns out that there is a correspondence between the two. Introduction Whenever two very different areas of theoretical physics are found to share the same mathematics, it frequently leads to new insights on both sides. Here we describe how knowledge of string theory and M-theory leads to new discoveries about Quantum Information Theory (QIT) and vice-versa (Duff 2007; Kallosh and Linde 2006; Levay 2006). Bekenstein-Hawking entropy Every object, such as a star, has a critical size determined by its mass, which is called the Schwarzschild radius. A black hole is any object smaller than this. Once something falls inside the Schwarzschild radius, it can never escape. This boundary in spacetime is called the event horizon. So the classical picture of a black hole is that of a compact object whose gravitational field is so strong that nothing, not even light, can escape. Yet in 1974 Stephen Hawking showed that quantum black holes are not entirely black but may radiate energy, due to quantum mechanical effects in curved spacetime. In that case, they must possess the thermodynamic quantity called entropy. -
Arxiv:1410.1486V2 [Gr-Qc] 26 Aug 2015
October 2014 Black Hole Thermodynamics S. Carlip∗ Department of Physics University of California Davis, CA 95616 USA Abstract The discovery in the early 1970s that black holes radiate as black bodies has radically affected our understanding of general relativity, and offered us some early hints about the nature of quantum gravity. In this chapter I will review the discovery of black hole thermodynamics and summarize the many indepen- dent ways of obtaining the thermodynamic and (perhaps) statistical mechanical properties of black holes. I will then describe some of the remaining puzzles, including the nature of the quantum microstates, the problem of universality, and the information loss paradox. arXiv:1410.1486v2 [gr-qc] 26 Aug 2015 ∗email: [email protected] 1 Introduction The surprising discovery that black holes behave as thermodynamic objects has radically affected our understanding of general relativity and its relationship to quantum field theory. In the early 1970s, Bekenstein [1, 2] and Hawking [3, 4] showed that black holes radiate as black bodies, with characteristic temperatures and entropies ~κ Ahor kTH = ;SBH = ; (1.1) 2π 4~G where κ is the surface gravity and Ahor is the area of the horizon. These quantities appear to be inherently quantum gravitational, in the sense that they depend on both Planck's constant ~ and Newton's constant G. The resulting black body radiation, Hawking radiation, has not yet been directly observed: the temperature of an astrophysical black hole is on the order of a microkelvin, far lower than the cosmic microwave background temperature. But the Hawking temperature and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy have been derived in so many independent ways, in different settings and with different assumptions, that it seems extraordinarily unlikely that they are not real. -
Arxiv:1202.4545V2 [Physics.Hist-Ph] 23 Aug 2012
The Relativity of Existence Stuart B. Heinrich [email protected] October 31, 2018 Abstract Despite the success of modern physics in formulating mathematical theories that can predict the outcome of experiments, we have made remarkably little progress towards answering the most fundamental question of: why is there a universe at all, as opposed to nothingness? In this paper, it is shown that this seemingly mind-boggling question has a simple logical answer if we accept that existence in the universe is nothing more than mathematical existence relative to the axioms of our universe. This premise is not baseless; it is shown here that there are indeed several independent strong logical arguments for why we should believe that mathematical existence is the only kind of existence. Moreover, it is shown that, under this premise, the answers to many other puzzling questions about our universe come almost immediately. Among these questions are: why is the universe apparently fine-tuned to be able to support life? Why are the laws of physics so elegant? Why do we have three dimensions of space and one of time, with approximate locality and causality at macroscopic scales? How can the universe be non-local and non-causal at the quantum scale? How can the laws of quantum mechanics rely on true randomness? 1 Introduction can seem astonishing that anything exists” [73, p.24]. Most physicists and cosmologists are equally perplexed. Over the course of modern history, we have seen advances in Richard Dawkins has called it a “searching question that biology, chemistry, physics and cosmology that have painted rightly calls for an explanatory answer” [26, p.155], and Sam an ever-clearer picture of how we came to exist in this uni- Harris says that “any intellectually honest person will admit verse. -
New and Forthcoming Books in 2020 Now Available on Worldscinet
View this flyer online at http://bit.ly/ws-newmathematics2020 New and Forthcoming books in 2020 Now available on WorldSciNet Essential Textbooks in Physics How to Derive a Formula Volume 1: Basic Analytical Skills and Methods for Physical Scientists by Alexei A Kornyshev & Dominic O’Lee (Imperial College London, UK) “In this book, the authors teach the art of physical applied mathematics at the advanced undergraduate level. In contrast to traditional mathematics books, formal derivations and theorems are replaced by worked examples with intuitive solutions and approximations, given some familiarity with physics and chemistry. In this way, the book covers an Fundamental Concepts in A Course in Game Theory ambitious range of topics, such as vector calculus, differential and integral equations, Modern Analysis by Thomas S Ferguson (University of California, Los Angeles, USA) linear algebra, probability and statistics, An Introduction to Nonlinear Analysis functions of complex variables, scaling and 2nd Edition This book presents various mathematical models dimensional analysis. Systematic methods by Vagn Lundsgaard Hansen of games and study the phenomena that arise. of asymptotic approximation are presented (Technical University of Denmark, Denmark) In some cases, we will be able to suggest in simple, practical terms, showing the With: Poul G Hjorth what courses of action should be taken by the value of analyzing ‘limiting cases’. Unlike players. In others, we hope simply to be able to most science or engineering textbooks, the In this book, students from both pure and understand what is happening in order to make physical examples span an equally broad applied subjects are offered an opportunity to better predictions about the future. -
Cornell Alumni Magazine
c1-c4CAMja11 6/16/11 1:25 PM Page c1 July | August 2011 $6.00 Alumni Magazine Well-Spoken Screenwriter (and former stutterer) David Seidler ’59 wins an Oscar for The King’s Speech cornellalumnimagazine.com c1-c4CAMja11 6/16/11 1:25 PM Page c2 01-01CAMja11toc 6/20/11 1:19 PM Page 1 July / August 2011 Volume 114 Number 1 In This Issue Alumni Magazine 34 Corne 2 From David Skorton Farewell, Mr. Vanneman 4 The Big Picture Card sharp 6 Correspondence DVM debate 8 Letter from Ithaca Justice league 10 From the Hill Capped and gowned 14 Sports Top teams, too 16 Authors Eyewitness 32 Wines of the Finger Lakes Ports of New York “Meleau” White 18 10 52 Classifieds & 34 Urban Cowboys Cornellians in Business 53 Alma Matters BRAD HERZOG ’90 56 Class Notes Last October, the Texas Rangers won baseball’s American League pennant—and played in their first-ever World Series. Two of the primary architects of that long-sought vic- 91 Alumni Deaths tory were Big Red alums from (of all places) the Big Apple. General manager Jon 96 Cornelliana Daniels ’99 and senior director of player personnel A. J. Preller ’99 are old friends and Little house in the big woods lifelong baseball nuts who brought fresh energy to an underperforming franchise. And while they didn’t take home the championship trophy . there’s always next season. Legacies To see the Legacies listing for under- graduates who entered the University in fall 40 Training Day 2010, go to cornellalumnimagazine.com. JIM AXELROD ’85 Currents CBS News reporter Jim Axelrod has covered everything from wars to presidential cam- paigns to White House politics. -
15/5/40 Liberal Arts and Sciences Chemistry Irwin C. Gunsalus Papers, 1877-1993 BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Irwin C
15/5/40 Liberal Arts and Sciences Chemistry Irwin C. Gunsalus Papers, 1877-1993 BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Irwin C. Gunsalus 1912 Born in South Dakota, son of Irwin Clyde and Anna Shea Gunsalus 1935 B.S. in Bacteriology, Cornell University 1937 M.S. in Bacteriology, Cornell University 1940 Ph.D. in Bacteriology, Cornell University 1940-44 Assistant Professor of Bacteriology, Cornell University 1944-46 Associate Professor of Bacteriology, Cornell University 1946-47 Professor of Bacteriology, Cornell University 1947-50 Professor of Bacteriology, Indiana University 1949 John Simon Guggenheim Fellow 1950-55 Professor of Microbiology, University of Illinois 1955-82 Professor of Biochemistry, University of Illinois 1955-66 Head of Division of Biochemistry, University of Illinois 1959 John Simon Guggenheim Fellow 1959-60 Research sabbatical, Institut Edmund de Rothchild, Paris 1962 Patent granted for lipoic acid 1965- Member of National Academy of Sciences 1968 John Simon Guggenheim Fellow 1972-76 Member Levis Faculty Center Board of Directors 1977-78 Research sabbatical, Institut Edmund de Rothchild, Paris 1973-75 President of Levis Faculty Center Board of Directors 1978-81 Chairman of National Academy of Sciences, Section of Biochemistry 1982- Professor of Biochemistry, Emeritus, University of Illinois 1984 Honorary Doctorate, Indiana University 15/5/40 2 Box Contents List Box Contents Box Number Biographical and Personal Biographical Materials, 1967-1995 1 Personal Finances, 1961-65 1-2 Publications, Studies and Reports Journals and Reports, 1955-68 -
Quantum Gravity: a Primer for Philosophers∗
Quantum Gravity: A Primer for Philosophers∗ Dean Rickles ‘Quantum Gravity’ does not denote any existing theory: the field of quantum gravity is very much a ‘work in progress’. As you will see in this chapter, there are multiple lines of attack each with the same core goal: to find a theory that unifies, in some sense, general relativity (Einstein’s classical field theory of gravitation) and quantum field theory (the theoretical framework through which we understand the behaviour of particles in non-gravitational fields). Quantum field theory and general relativity seem to be like oil and water, they don’t like to mix—it is fair to say that combining them to produce a theory of quantum gravity constitutes the greatest unresolved puzzle in physics. Our goal in this chapter is to give the reader an impression of what the problem of quantum gravity is; why it is an important problem; the ways that have been suggested to resolve it; and what philosophical issues these approaches, and the problem itself, generate. This review is extremely selective, as it has to be to remain a manageable size: generally, rather than going into great detail in some area, we highlight the key features and the options, in the hope that readers may take up the problem for themselves—however, some of the basic formalism will be introduced so that the reader is able to enter the physics and (what little there is of) the philosophy of physics literature prepared.1 I have also supplied references for those cases where I have omitted some important facts.