بازی انفجار حضرات : وبلاگ نویسی جمعه مرکب: صندوق های امداد COVID


انفجار حضرات
بازی انفجار حضرات بت

وبلاگ نویسی جمعه مرکب: صندوق های امداد COVID

شهری در ژاپن ماهی مرکب غول پیکر ساخت مجسمه با کمک هزینه COVID آن.

یکی از محلی ها به روزنامه Chunichi Shimbun اگرچه ممکن است مجسمه در طولانی مدت مثر باشد ، می توان از این پول برای “حمایت فوری” مانند کارکنان پزشکی و مراکز مراقبت طولانی مدت استفاده کرد.

اما سخنگوی این شهر به شبکه خبری فوجی گفت که این مجسمه یک جاذبه گردشگری و بخشی از یک استراتژی بلند مدت برای کمک به تبلیغ ماهی مرکب پرنده معروف Noto است.

احساس اولویت های شهر تحت تأثیر قرار می گیرم.

طبق معمول ، می توانید از این پست ماهی مرکب برای صحبت در مورد داستانهای امنیتی در اخباری که من آنها را پوشش نداده ام ، استفاده کنید.

رهنمودهای ارسال وبلاگ من را بخوانید اینجا.

ارسال شده در 7 مه 2021 در ساعت 16:13
9 نظر

عکس نوار کناری بروس اشنایر توسط جو مک ایننیس.


سایت انفجار پویان مختاری
انفجار شرطی نیلی حضرات

سایت انفجار : The Sky Phenomena That May Have Inspired Artist Georges Seurat


بازی بوم شرطی:بازی انفجار

To artists inspired by what they see in nature, volcanic sunsets are the holy grail of light and color. They transform placid sunsets and post-twilight glows into vibrant bloodbaths of spectral radiance. Yet I’m not writing this to hang on the wall another volcanically inspired sunset painting for us to ponder. Rather, I want to introduce to observers a subtle and little-known daytime phenomenon linked to volcanic activity. It may have, in part, inspired 19th-century Post-Impressionist French artist Georges Seurat (1859–1891) in his attempt to reform Impressionism and illuminate the world with a new form of art: his own version of optical blending of color, called Pointillism.

The Sky As Art

A number of 19th-century artists re-created volcanic sunsets in their paintings. Most touted are the works of English landscape pioneer William Turner, who spent a year painting the vibrant sunsets induced by the weather-altering 1815 eruption of Indonesia’s Mount Tambora — the most powerful volcanic event in recorded history.

William Ascroft of Chelsea, London, captured what are arguably the most faithful representations of sunset skies infused with aerosols from the 1883 eruption of Krakatau (aka Krakatoa; also in Indonesia). He made more than 500 crayon sketches of the changing hues, several of which appear as the frontispiece of the 1888 Royal Society publication, “The eruption of Krakatoa, and subsequent phenomena.” And in 2004, Don Olson of Texas State University added Norwegian artist Edvard Munch’s The Scream (1893) to the tally of paintings inspired by the sunsets observed in the three years following Krakatau’s historic blast.

These artists may not have been alone. In a 2014 paper in the scientific journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Christos Zerefos of the Academy of Athens in Greece tells how he and his team analyzed red-green ratios in more than 500 paintings from 181 artists, dating from between 1500 and 1900. They recognized the effects of volcanic aerosols (namely, a preponderance of warm hues) in sunset paintings created within a period of three years that followed each of 54 major volcanic events during that time period. These include works by Turner, John Singleton Copley, Edgar Degas and Gustav Klimt. The findings are not surprising. But topping the list is Seurat.

Georges Seurat painted Bathers at Asnières in 1884 at the age of 24. This giant work (118 by 79 inches) shows a riverside spot at the Seine just 4 miles from the center of Paris. Note how he colored the sky to reflect the pollution spewing from the factory smokestack in the distance.
(Credit: Wikimedia Commons)

Science on Canvas

Born in Paris to a wealthy family, Seurat studied drawing at night school before he entered the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris in 1878. During his two-year stay, he became disillusioned with the academic style of painting — the pedantic use of “hidden” brushstrokes and “licked” finishes to smooth the surface of a painting. At the same time, he was growing enamored of the large, separate brushstrokes in French Romantic artist Eugène Delacroix’s murals, and the radical new styles of Impressionist painters Claude Monet, Camille Pissarro and others. Their use of visible brushstrokes and experimental application of color, tone and texture worked together to create a vibrant visual impression of a fleeting moment in life.

More than an artist, Seurat had a keen aptitude for science. He spent hours scouring libraries for books on optics, scientific theories of color and principles of design. Specifically, he was keen on the visual effects of complementary colors and the science behind color perception. He probably learned about those subjects in Principles of Harmony and Contrast of Colours, and Their Applications to the Arts, a book written in 1835 by French chemist Michel-Eugène Chevreul.

Seurat left the academy in 1879 to spend a year of military service in Brest, where, according to biographer Daniel Catton Rich, “he opened his eyes to the luminous effects of sky and quiet water.” He then returned to Paris, where he began to apply his evolving principles of composition and color.

In his quest to discover a new approach to painting, Seurat turned to science, including Chevreul’s law of simultaneous contrast — how one color can change our perception of another color right next to it. Turning away from mixing paint on his palette, he ultimately began applying thousands of small dots of pure color in broken strokes — or small touches set side by side — directly to the canvas in a precise manner, so that the eye mixed the colors instead. His ever-evolving works achieved such an intensity of light that he believed he had discovered the science of painting.

Seurat had not perfected his Pointillist technique when he painted his first large-scale composition, Bathers at Asnières. Finished in 1884, it only flirted with his still-evolving Pointillist style. Still, one can see in the sky the smoggy effects of air pollution from the industrial chimneys in the distance, giving testament to his pursuit of capturing realistic atmospheric optical effects.

A turning point came in the summer of 1884, when Seurat showed the work at the first exhibition of the Group of Independent Artists, of which he was a founding member. That summer he met with younger Neo-Impressionist artist Paul Signac, who pointed out to Seurat that Bathers lacked the luminosity of other Impressionist paintings — the result of his use of muddy earth tones rather than colors of prismatic purity. As Catton Rich notes in his 1958 book, Seurat: Paintings and Drawings, Seurat’s next monumental work — A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte (1884) — “explore[s] to the fullest the new laws and principles which he and Signac were developing.”

Seurat preferred to call his new technique “color-luminism” (chromoluminarism), because it gives a painting not only a greater sense of vibrancy but also a shimmering effect, like one experiences on a hot summer’s day as heat rises from a roadway or sidewalk.

Volcanic Influences?

Seurat’s use of the technique of chromoluminarism coincided with the optical effects trailing the August 1883 eruption of Krakatau. It seems almost impossible that Seurat and his fellow optical science-oriented artists of the Neo-Impressionist movement would have ignored the profound post-Krakatau skies — especially because the resulting atmospheric optical effects created the most chromatically vibrant skies recorded for a century. And the vibrancy of light was key to the new artistic movement.

But the Krakatau aerosols also performed light magic in the daytime sky, generating diffuse aureoles of complementary light that radiated most effectively at high noon. Such a sight would have had the capacity to inspire Seurat, especially considering that the artist was keen on the science of diffraction and Rayleigh scattering. It would also be appropriate to suggest that the daytime sky, as painted by the Krakatau eruption, stood before the Neo-Impressionists like a visual muse, inspiring new insights into color and tone that perhaps only science-inspired artists could fully appreciate.

X-ray imaging of Bathers at Asnières reveals that Seurat modified parts of it in the mid-1880s, adding prismatic colors in a Pointillist manner that creates a more vibrant feel. Bathers had not quite been completed by the time Krakatau erupted in August 1883, and the volcano’s associated atmospheric effects only became vividly pronounced over Europe by November of that year. But its optical effects remained intense at least until 1887, and skywatchers continued to record volcanic atmospheric effects to a lesser degree into the early 1900s. Volcanic skies, then, were present throughout the brief heyday of the French Neo-Impressionist movement, which flourished principally from 1886 to 1906. To understand how these optically vibrant skies may have affected Neo-Impressionist thinking, let’s fast-forward 100 years to 1982, the year El Chichón erupted in Mexico.

American artist Frederic Edwin Church captured the 1862 eruption of Cotopaxi, which is about 30 miles south of Quito, Ecuador. Topping out at 19,393 feet, it’s one of the highest volcanoes on Earth.
(Credit: Detroit Institute of the Arts/Wikimedia Commons)

A Flecked Hawaiian Sky

On March 28, 1982, El Chichón, a dormant volcano in Chiapas, Mexico, awoke from 600 years of slumber, erupting violently three times in a week. One of the most important volcanic events of the 20th century, the unexpected blast released 7.5 million metric tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, warming it by 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit, and cooling the Northern Hemisphere by 0.72 F. The resultant cloud encircled the globe in 20 days and altered Earth’s climate for years afterward.

The stratospheric aerosol cloud initially moved from southern Mexico toward Hawaii, where I was living at the time. In a 1983 Applied Optics paper, Kinsell L. Coulson notes that “a considerable enhancement of intensity” occurred throughout the main part of the day, causing a “diffuse type of aureole” over a large portion of the sky. Mauna Loa Observatory lidar measurements over Hawaii in 1982 revealed a sixfold increase in scattering due to aerosols, and a 25 percent decrease in direct incident radiation.

In my studies of the El Chichón-influenced daytime sky, I noticed it had a “nervous” quality, caused by the interplay of minute flecks of complementary colors. This is why I refer to it in my Hawaiian diaries as an Impressionist’s sky. To a casual viewer, the El Chichón aerosols had buffed away the normally crystal-blue sky and replaced it with a frost-glass glare of Pointillist light — light predominantly infused with flecks of blue and orange, with dabs of yellow and white, that scintillated with subtle prismatic effects like tossed confetti. This description is reminiscent of one recorded one month after the Krakatau paroxysm by Captain Parson of the Earnock, who noticed the eastern sky before sunrise appeared “silver grey, changing to light blue, flecked with numerous small cirrus trimming, pink and rosy.”

Some of the color associated with the aerosol umbrella I witnessed was linked to the Bishop’s ring atmospheric phenomenon. This enormous diffraction corona (in this case created by the scattering effects of volcanic aerosols) covered half of the visible sky and displayed the color-contrast aureoles described by Chevreul, though in opposite order — namely, an enormous blue sphere of light surrounded by a vast orange aureole. The volcanic skies seemed to announce the general rule of Neo-Impressionism: “more opposition, more brilliance.”

One painting by Seurat moves me because it recalls the flecked complexity of the El Chichón sky: The Eiffel Tower, a montage of predominantly blue, red and yellow points of color painted from a vantage point that looked to the southeast across the Seine, where such atmospheric optical effects would be expected.

Seurat unveiled this painting in 1889. He began working on it around February 1887, before finalizing the painting in his studio just months ahead of the tower’s completion in 1889. During this period, the Bishop’s ring and other aerosol effects were still present in the atmosphere. As T.W. Backhouse reports in a March 1889 issue of Nature: “I am informed by Miss E. Brown, of Cirencester, that she saw Bishop’s ring in full day-time as recently as last month, not far from 12 o’clock one day.”

Adding to the lingering effects of the Krakatau aerosols were aerosols injected into the atmosphere by the 1886 eruption of Mount Tarawera in New Zealand and the 1888 eruption of Mount Bandai in Japan. So it’s possible that volcanic aerosols from three different eruptions contributed to the atmospheric effects we see in The Eiffel Tower, whose Pointillist style is more boldly laid down than in any previous work by Seurat.

The Point of the Matter?

In the nearly 40 years since the El Chichón eruption, I have witnessed similar large-scale Pointillist effects only rarely: after the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, and once during totality at the August 2017 total solar eclipse in Oregon, where the sky was affected by rippling waves of smoke from forest fires.

I have observed a similar effect multiple times on a microscale with another diffraction phenomenon: the pollen corona (about 3° in angular extent, compared with nearly 90° in the Bishop’s ring). In one case, I was able to photograph the Pointillist effect in the pollen corona, whereby a blue aureole and outer yellow and orange rings were splintered into a blend of juxtaposed prismatic colors, owing to scattering effects of the airborne particles.

This Pointillist image shows colors of complementary light scattered by pollen grains in a diminutive atmospheric corona. The bright glow is an edge effect from a roof used to block the sun, around which the colorful corona appeared. (Credit: Stephen James O’Meara)

Is it not reasonable, then, to at least consider the possibility that the flecked complementary colors in a volcanically infused daytime sky — which persisted in undulations throughout Seurat’s brief span as an artist — influenced his Pointillist technique?

Unfortunately, we know little about Seurat’s methods. He died tragically of an infection in 1891, at age 31. The artist left behind little in the way of personal letters and diaries; he also didn’t speak much about his technique.

His interest in color theory, however, is well documented. As Jo Kirby and colleagues explain in an article published in a 2003 National Gallery Technical Bulletin titled “Seurat’s Painting Practice: Theory, Development and Technology,” “It is important to realise that nothing in Seurat’s art seems to have been unconsidered.”


Stephen James O’Meara is a contributing editor of Astronomy magazine.

بازی انفجار شرطی
سایت انفجار
سایت شرط بندی انفجار
سایت بازی انفجار

بازی انفجار حضرات : Why Going to the Doctor Sucks — Wait But Why


انفجار حضرات
بازی انفجار حضرات بت

Disclaimer: This is a post about going to the doctor in America, why it sucks, and a way to make it better. It’s also a post about my wife’s startup. Which means I’m almost certainly biased on this topic. But also I really think these things. I wouldn’t say things on WBW if I didn’t really think them, because that would be a dick thing to do. But I’m also not exactly a neutral observer on this one. But still. K? K.

___________

There’s someone I’d like you to meet.

stick figure Tandice waving at you

This my wife, Tandice. We met back in 2011.

Tim and Tandice holding hands. Tim: I really like you. Tandice: You

It took a while but I eventually won her over, and we’ve been together ever since.

Tandice: Thanks for writing all those posts about the struggles of choosing a life partner while we were dating!

No problem.

Anyway, one of the things about Tandice is that she’s kind of Larry-David-esque, and she likes to complain about stuff.

Tandice on one knee proposing to Tim: Will you marry my complaints?

Her most impassioned complaints are reserved for one particular type of experience: the doctor’s office.

Tandice has a rare autoimmune disease that, without some very novel treatments, would cause her immune system to attack her eyes and destroy her vision. This, plus some general hypochondria, has made her somewhat of a regular at the doctor’s office.

The frustrations start with making the appointment.

On the phone. Office: Hello? Tandice: Hi I'd like to make an appointment.

Our next available appointment is three weeks from now, only on Tuesdays and Thursdays and only during the French work day. Nah nah.

Then comes the actual appointment.

Waiting room with labels: "not-that-friendly lady", "not-very-comfortable chairs", and "Monet" pointing to a painting on the wall.
Waiting room with stick figure walking through door
Tandice: Hi, I'm here for my 4:30 appointment.
Not-that-friendly lady: Here's your clipboard of forms that were created in 1967.
Tandice: The same forms I filled out the last 90 times I came here?
Not-that-friendly lady: That's right. Please have a set and the doctor will see you shortly.
20 minutes later
From off-panel: Tandice?
Tandice: Yay the doctor.
15 minutes later
Tandice sitting in a doctor's office, looking at her cell phone
Zoomed-in picture-in-picture of Tandice's phone screen. Her texts with Tim.
Minute 40 over here. Just watching my life tick by. Funny to break the wait into two different rooms. Funny stuff. Can hear the doctor small talking in another room. What are you doing
Tim: Trying to live my life
Tandice: Guess how many times I've told them my birthday so far
Doctor to Tandice: K you got five min cause I got a shit ton to do. Shoot.
Tandice: But I have so many questions
Doctor: sux to be u

Over the years, Tandice’s complaints have turned into curiosity. Why, in 2021, in the U.S., would going to the doctor be so shitty?

Why going to the doctor sucks

So you know how the free market looks kind of like this?

Chart depicting typical relationship between a customer and business: Money flows from the customer to the business, and the product/service flows from the business to the customer.

Well the U.S. healthcare industry looks more like this:1

The same chart, but for healthcare. Main components: Patient, employer, insurance, and doctor. The patient gets a lower salary from the employer. The insurance premium comes from both the employer and the patient, then insurance pays the doctor a reimbursement. Meanwhile, the patient pays the deductible / coinsurance to the doctor. The doctor provides care to the patient.

What the hell?

It definitely isn’t a single-payer system—but as investor Bill Gurley explains, it’s not a free market system either:

There is no price evaluation during the purchase. The person paying is not the person consuming the service, and the majority of choices are made without comparative options. In many ways, we have the worst of both worlds. Our system … has the illusion of a free market and the illusion of regulated market with the apparent benefit of neither.1

Car insurance makes sense, because a car accident can happen to anyone, anytime, and the resulting damages and liability could leave the driver on the hook for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, something very few people can afford. The same logic applies to catastrophic coverage in health. For bearing the cost of an unexpected ambulance, injury, cancer treatment, etc., insurance is a good system.

But if the auto industry were like the healthcare industry, your employer2 would be incentivized to swap out some of your salary with auto coverage of their choice. When it was time for an oil change, you’d have to look for “in-network” auto shops. I’m glad that’s not how the auto industry works.

I’m not sure what exactly I think the U.S. healthcare system should look like—but I’m pretty sure it shouldn’t look like this. Maybe one day the system will change, but rather than hold our breath for that, let’s talk about one aspect of the system we can do something about: going to the doctor.

The beauty of a basic free market interaction—at, say, a local barber—is that the business and customer incentives are entirely aligned. To get more of what it wants (revenue), the barbershop needs loyal customers—something that only happens when people have a good experience at the shop and leave with a haircut they like, at a price they think is reasonable.

But the convoluted U.S. healthcare system screws up that alignment. Sure, doctors get paid when patients choose to use their services, but there are two middlemen who distort that relationship, as a majority of the doctor’s actual payment comes from the insurer (who also negotiates the prices), and the insurer gets a majority of its payments from the employer.3 The patient is so far removed from the doctor, financially, that the various prices for the doctor’s services aren’t even available to the patient—they’re treated more like proprietary back-office info that’s none of the patient’s business. While there’s still some element of consumer choice and competition, the typical patient’s limited in-network options and the lack of transparency when comparing those options significantly dilutes this powerful motivator. Mostly, the system’s fee-for-service model incentivizes doctors to see a high volume of patients, even if it comes at the expense of quality.

American patients aren’t treated like customers because they’re not customers. Once you consider this, the typical4 American patient’s experience makes much more sense. The wait time for an appointment (24 days on average in the U.S.) and the inconvenient open hours. The lack of basic modern conveniences (I make my haircut appointments online but have to call the doctor’s office and listen to hold music). The stereotypically long waits on the day of the appointment (often because many doctors book two patients for every time slot). The lack of any follow-up after an appointment or any sophisticated way for patients to access their history and analyze trends.5

All of this feels a whole lot like the experience we have at places like the DMV or the post office—places where there’s little practical incentive to provide good customer service. It’s also probably why so many Americans put a doctor’s visit into the same bucket as a trip to the DMV or the post office: something to avoid if at all possible.

In a world where every decade raises our expectations for ease and convenience, it’s no surprise that people, especially young people,6 are going to the doctor less and less.

Count me among them. My last doctor’s appointment—a typical experience that was unpleasant and mostly unhelpful—was four years ago. I’ve since replaced the doctor with four things:

1) Ignoring my health and hoping for the best

2) Asking Google questions

3) Asking my doctor friends questions

4) Visiting urgent care clinics7

This is obviously not a great plan. Whether you’re a “me” kind of patient or a Tandice kind of patient, or somewhere in between, there’s a good chance you’re not getting what you need from the healthcare system.

And it was just as Tandice was starting to wonder if she might be able to do something about all this that she met Chloe.

stick figure Chloe

They were introduced through a mutual friend who thought they might have a lot to talk about. Chloe was a breast cancer survivor who, after having to navigate the system at such a young age, from treatment to specialist coordination to post-survivorship care, was also fixated on the problem of being a patient. They got together to discuss.

Tandice and Chloe sitting at a table with coffee. Both, simultaneously: It's so frustrating how bad the healthcare experience is and I can't stop thinking about all the ways I could make it better. Tandice and Chloe smiling at each other across the table. A giant pink heart floats between them.

Tandice came home electrified. She and Chloe were going to build the doctor’s office they wished they could go to. They decided to call it The Lanby.

The Lanby

Tandice and Chloe spent the next six months researching, brainstorming, planning, white boarding, flow charting, spreadsheeting, and generally organizing their list of patient complaints.

The first question they had to answer was, “Is there some good reason healthcare has to suck like this? There’s gotta be some reason it’s like this, right?” The answer turned out to be, “Actually, not really.”

The second question was, “Where do we start?” They knew they couldn’t overhaul the whole system, so they decided to focus on their own experience and what they wish they had most during their patient journeys: one centralized healthcare home base. This, they believed, should be the role of primary care.

From there, the natural third question: “What could great primary care look like if it were designed purely from the patient’s perspective? What would be our dream experience as a patient?”

Reasoning from first principles, they started to lay down what they believed should be the core features of great primary care:

Easy. Friction should be minimized at every step of the way.

Unlimited. A primary care physician isn’t just another specialist. Primary care should be both the patient’s first line of defense and their long-term partner. The exact kind of thing that’s best as a flat-fee, unlimited-use model—something patients are incentivized to interact with as often as they want to or need to.

Financially simple. A single annual membership fee and that’s it. No middlemen or extra costs. Likewise on the doctor’s side: a flat, annual salary that, unlike the fee-for-service model, incentivizes quality over volume.

Comprehensive. True primary care should focus on all facets of a patient’s health, not just medical health.

Continuous. To facilitate a long-term partnership, patients should be seen by the same practitioners every visit. Continuity should also extend to specialist referrals. Primary care should be the patient’s hub, making the referral, communicating with the specialist, and closing the loop after the treatment.

Common sense-y. When in doubt, go with common sense. Example: Some patients prefer to exclusively see the doctor in person. Some would like to go entirely virtual. But common sense suggests that most would like a mix, depending on the reason for the visit.

Patient-centric. Every single decision should be run through the “what would this be like for the patient?” lens.

With those as the building blocks, they designed something they believed could nail every important point: a primary care member’s club.

The basic framework: Members pay $2,400/year ($2,000 right now, more on that below) and have unlimited visits, both in person and virtually. It’s a no-insurance model, though members should still carry basic insurance (to cover catastrophic care, specialist visits, labwork, and prescriptions). This keeps insurance confined to the places where insurance makes sense and lets patients be actual customers where that makes sense.8

Tandice and Chloe imagined themselves joining this kind of members club, and brainstormed what it would have to be like to absolutely delight them. They concluded that there were really two realms to great primary care: the care itself, and everything about the patient experience surrounding that care (“delivery”). Here’s their plan for each:

1) Care

Thinking about primary care from first principles yielded an interesting insight: primary care should ideally be handled by three practitioners, not just a single doctor. If The Lanby was really going to live up to its promise and cover every aspect of a patient’s basic health, each member should be assigned to a three-person team that worked together to provide comprehensive, continuous, and coordinated care. Here’s how it looks:

Doctor, wellness advisor, and concierge coordinator forming a circle of bidirectional arrows to show they communicate with each other. Patient stands in the middle with arrows from each of the three.

The doctor is the kind they wish they had: Someone curious, patient, and empathetic. Someone with a wide breadth of knowledge and lifelong learner who’s always up on the latest research.

The wellness advisor takes on everything about your health that’s outside of the doctor’s direct purview: nutrition, exercise, sleep, etc. Is Whole 30 the right kind of diet for me? Do air purifiers actually do anything? Is a Fitbit the best health tracker? The wellness advisor’s got you.

The concierge manager is a registered nurse and your go-to contact—someone you can text anytime about anything health-related. Basically how you’d treat your parent if they happened to be a medical professional.

A Lanby member can know that somewhere out there, a group of pros is obsessed with their health and has it covered—in both a short- and long-term sense.

2) Delivery

Delivery is the hidden beast at the heart of good (or awful) healthcare. If we imagine the consumer experience as a spectrum, The Lanby’s goal is to take healthcare delivery from Point A to Point C.

Horizontal spectrum. From left to right: Point A (Unpleasant transaction): DMV, post office. Point B (Modern customer experience): Neighborhood coffee shop, Apple store. Point C (Hospitality): Nice restaurant, hotel.

Going from A to B is simple: treat the patient like a customer and bring the systems from the 1960s into the 2020s. At Point B, appointments are easy to make, for sometime soon, and they actually last long enough for all the patient’s questions. Patient data is collected and easy to access online, where patients can also order refills and chat with the team. Point B means making everything in the Tandice-at-the-doctor comic good/easy/modern/effective instead of bad/hard/archaic/useless. An analysis of 35,000 online reviews revealed that 96% of patient complaints are about customer service. Getting to Point B should take care of that.

Going from Point B to Point C takes things to the next level with a new concept: healthcare hospitality.

Healthcare hospitality means that everything is nice. The space looks great and smells great and the seats are super comfortable. When you walk in, you’re offered a cup of coffee. There’s a bookshelf full of health-related books you can check out, old school library-style. There will never be a clipboard of forms because handing a customer a clipboard is the opposite of hospitality. Cozy robes instead of paper gowns. Charmin instead of industrial one-ply toilet paper. The Aesop soap Tandice is obsessed with instead of pink gas station soap. Marginal costs for the business that do wonders for the patient experience.

On a deeper level, healthcare hospitality means that Lanby members get the distinct feeling that The Lanby gives an immense shit about them. It starts with the basics: reviewing patient charts before the appointment starts, making real eye contact during patient visits, and never asking a patient to repeat the same information twice. And then it’s about going the extra mile: If a member texts them after hours, they’ll probably respond anyway. If they know a member is interested in a particular new fitness movement, they’ll send the member an interesting article about it when they see it. They’ll host classes and events in the office to make The Lanby a fun community.

If all of this sounds a little over the top for a doctor’s office, we should consider whether maybe all of our expectations are in the wrong place for something as important as our health. Tandice and Chloe are convinced that American healthcare has a “tragedy of low expectations” problem. We’re outraged if a restaurant makes us wait for a meal, but not if the doctor makes us wait for our healthcare? We’re outraged if the person at a hotel front desk is unfriendly to us—but we shrug and take a seat when that happens at the doctor’s office? It makes no sense.

Which gets to the bigger point:

The big picture

The American healthcare system is full of problems. But our health also suffers from a human nature problem.

Humans tend to be highly irrational about long-term planning, no matter how important it is. Prioritizing our health seems frivolous when we’re healthy.

This kind of thinking makes The Lanby seem like a luxury service—because $2,400/year is luxurious when spent on something frivolous. But healthcare when you’re healthy is anything but frivolous. It’s critical preventive care—the kind that prolongs (and often saves9) our lives and drastically increases our chance of a happy future (and which ends up saving us money over the long run).

If humans were perfectly rational creatures, we’d all be highly attentive to our health and put the proper effort toward preventive care. But since we’re not, one fix is to hack the human system by sweetening the experience enough that our dumb short-term brains actually like going to the doctor.

If going to the doctor is an easy, lovely experience, we’ll go more often. When there’s an expert who always wants to talk to you about your diet, sleep, and exercise, we’ll live a healthier lifestyle. When it’s incredibly easy to send a text to ask a quick health question, we’ll ask more health questions. When preventive care is a way of life, we’ll have a healthier future.

Guy using traditional system vs Same guy using The Lanby. "Sees a doctor 4 times over the next 10 years" vs "Sees a doctor 32 times over the next 10 years". "Googles symptoms, feels despair" vs "Texts The Lanby a lot, gets actual answers". "Has chronic situation (IBS), doctor doesn't feel like getting to the bottom of it" vs "Doctor diagnoses IBS, wellness advisor manages long-term treatmeant, concierge manager checks in regularly about it". "Doesn't get prostate exam at age 50 because who knew you were supposed to do that" vs "Is reminded to get prostate exam at the right age, sent to the right specialist". "Gets conflicting nutrition advice from Joe Rogan and Tim Ferriss" vs "Gets care plan personalized to his body and his goals, actually stays on plan because of regular check-ins". "Takes the one body he is stuck living in for granted, regrets this a lot later" vs "Treats his body like it's his most important possession".

Tandice and Chloe are excited to run their dream doctor’s office—but they’re most excited about the burgeoning paradigm shift The Lanby could be a part of. A future industry could include lots of iterations on this model, at lots of different price points (some have already sprung up). Their long-term vision is to set a whole new standard for primary care. And once we get used to that new standard, I’m pretty sure the old model will look utterly archaic—and really bad for you.

Founding Memberships

The Lanby is launching in September 2021, starting with 300 “Founding Members”.

They think of Founding Members the way they’d think of a friend who offered to be an advisor—as part of their extended team. Founding Members can meet with the founders, offer early feedback, and help The Lanby be a service for patients, by patients. Ideal Founding Members are people who think a lot about health and would like to have a voice in the future of healthcare.

Brainstorming how they could give back to those critical first members, Tandice and Chloe settled on a lifelong discount. Founding Members will pay only $2,000/year (instead of $2,400/year) for life. When they move into a bigger space, the membership fee will likely go up, but advisory members stay at $2,000/year. When they open multiple locations and offer a higher-priced “all clubs” membership tier, advisory members are in that tier for the same $2,000/year. You get the point. And of course, the team plans to go above and beyond to make sure they have an extra special experience.

Founding Members, and only Founding Members, will also be given the opportunity to invest in the company and sit on an Advisory Member Board. By launching using only membership fees and member investor funds, The Lanby can ensure all incentives remain entirely patient-focused.

If you want to be a Founding Member, sign up here (available to the first 300 people who join). Members can be located anywhere in the U.S., as long as they can make it to Manhattan at least once a year for an in-person visit.

If you have questions about anything I’ve written or anything about the company, text Tandice at ‪(301) 541-8386.

I’m also doing a Clubhouse session with Tandice and Chloe this Wednesday at 8pm ET.

—————

If you like Wait But Why, sign up for our unannoying-I-promise email list and we’ll send you new posts when they come out.

To support Wait But Why, visit our Patreon page.

For my daily musings, follow WBW on Twitter and Instagram.

—————

Wait But Why on a totally different kind of healthcare




سایت انفجار پویان مختاری
انفجار شرطی نیلی حضرات

سایت انفجار : آنچه قدیمی ترین نقاشی شناخته شده غار درباره انسانهای اولیه نشان می دهد (و چه چیزی)


بازی بوم شرطی:بازی انفجار

در سال 2018 ، محقق ماکسیم اوبرت و خدمه اش در یک دره مخفی حدود یک ساعت پیاده روی از نزدیکترین جاده جزیره عنکبوتی مانند اندونزی سولاوسی فرو رفتند. آنها تازه در ایوان مزرعه برنج یک خانواده محلی بعد از چند لیوان بالو ، یک الکل نخل قند تخمیر شده که منطقه به آن معروف است ، خوابیده بودند.

درست در آن سوی دره ، اوبرت ، باستان شناس و زمین شناس در دانشگاه گریفیت در کوئینزلند ، استرالیا ، می تواند نگاهی اجمالی به غار Leang Tedongnge داشته باشد. این تیم پس از شنیدن گزارشات از بصران برهان ، باستان شناس اندونزیایی ، برای دیدن آن سفر کردند. اوبرت ، که هنر غار باستان را مطالعه می کند ، قبلاً آنچه را که احتمالاً قدیمی ترین نمونه های ساخته شده بشر در جهان است ، مطالعه کرده است تا 44000 سال پیش - اما ، همانطور که بعداً یاد گرفت ، هنر اینجا در Leang Tedongnge حتی بیشتر از این قدمت دارد.

اندکی بعد ، اوبرت و همکارانش وارد غار Leang Tedongnge شدند ، که توسط خانواده نزدیک برای ذخیره سازی تجهیزات مزرعه مورد استفاده قرار گرفت. درست بالای یک تاقچه کوچک داخل ، آنها نقاشی سه خوک را که با رنگ قرمز اخراش رنگ آمیزی شده بود ، پیدا کردند که با مقدار زیادی مو و زگیل نشان داده شده است. بالای خوکها دو استنسیل دست مردم ظاهر شد. اوبرت می گوید ، این تصویر ممکن است درگیری را به تصویر کشیده باشد.

ساکنان منطقه حتی از وجود آنها اطلاع نداشتند. در واقع ، آنها فکر می کردند کسی باید یک شبه خود را فرو برده و برخی از دیوار نویسی ها را ترک کرده باشد. او می گوید: "هنر راک درست در پشت شالیزار برنج کسی وجود دارد." "فقط چیزهای زیادی وجود دارد."

اوبرت دقیقاً همانند تصاویر جذاب ، کلسیتی را که روی یکی از پاهای خوک ها جمع شده بود از نزدیک مشاهده کرد. قدمت ایزوتوپ سری اورانیوم از کلسیت نشان داد که قدمت آن حداقل 45500 سال است - و آن را به قدیمی ترین هنر غار انسانی جهان که تاکنون کشف شده است تبدیل کرده است.

این کشف شگفت آور بود زیرا محققان قبلاً بیشترین هنر غارنوردی را در اروپا پیدا کرده بودند. سایتهایی مانند غار Chauvet 30،000 ساله فرانسه به دلیل همپوشانی اسبها ، گروه کرگدنها و دسته های دیگر حیوانات مشهور هستند. در سالهای اخیر ، اوبرت و سایر باستان شناسان با آغاز سالهای اخیر با کشف بسیاری از آثار برجسته در اندونزی ، ساعت آغاز هنر بشر را برگردانده اند.

اگرچه به محض یافتن ، تفسیر نقاشی های غار می تواند مشکل باشد زیرا ورود به ذهن هنرمندان اصلی غیرممکن است. اما محققان نظریه های توضیحی متعددی را ارائه داده اند ، از جمله همه چیز از توسعه داستان سرایی اولیه تا ریشه های معنویت. قدمت با این هنر همچنین می تواند یک جدول زمانی از توسعه فرهنگی اولیه اجداد ما را نشان دهد ، یکی از ویژگی های اصلی که بعداً به وجود آمد اجازه داد گونه های ما موفق شوند. اوبرت می گوید: "هنر راک دریچه ای صمیمانه به گذشته است."

دودل یا روایت باستان؟

تعیین اهمیت زودرس دشوار است هنر غار: ما نمی توانیم به سر افرادی که آن را ساخته اند وارد شویم ، و آنها در اینجا نیستند تا به ما بگویند.

برخی از شواهد نشان می دهد که نئاندرتال ها ممکن است از غارهای اسپانیایی استنسیل دستی گرفته اند حدود 65000 سال پیش، اگرچه اوبرت می گوید این قدمت بحث برانگیز است و ممکن است خیلی جوان تر باشد و اصلاً از نئاندرتال ها نباشد. و قدیمی ترین ابله شناخته شده به شکل زیگزاگ ممکن است از انسان های امروزی نبوده بلکه اجداد ما باشند ، انسان راست قامت، روی پوسته صدفی حدود 500000 سال پیش اما اینکه هنر دقیقاً چه چیزی را تشکیل می دهد همچنان یک سوال باز باقی مانده است.

ایین دیویدسون ، استاد بازنشسته باستان شناسی در دانشگاه نیوانگلند در استرالیا ، می گوید: "پاسخ احتمالاً در ابتدای هنر ، مردم نمی دانستند که چه می کنند؟"

بیشتر طرحهای باستانی در اروپا و اندونزی شامل پستانداران بزرگ یا شابلونهای دستی است. ممکن است گونه اول نمایانگر برخی از گونه هایی باشد که مردم شکار می کنند ، اما بسیاری دیگر از حیوانات طعمه ای که در ذخایر باستان شناسی یافت می شوند در این تصاویر گنجانده نشده است. اوبرت می گوید ، بنابراین این اشکال خاص ممکن است از نظر معنوی مهم بوده باشند. همچنین ، اثرات دستی می تواند راهی باشد که افراد زمانی خود را شناسایی می کردند.

حدود 20000 سال پیش ، در اوج آخرین حداکثر یخبندان ، بود که انسانها بیشتر در نقاشی ظاهر می شوند. اگرچه علت آن مشخص نیست ، اوبرت می گوید که حتماً یک عامل جهانی برای این امر وجود داشته است ، احتمالاً شامل تغییرات آب و هوایی است.

اولین صحنه روایت ممکن است با Leang Bulu 'Sipong 4 ، غاری که در سال 2017 کشف شده است و Aubert از آن زمان برخوردار است ، رسیده باشد. تحصیل کرده. این هنر که در سولاوسی نیز واقع شده است ، حداقل 43،900 سال قدمت دارد و مجموعه ای از چهره های ترکیبی حیوان و انسان را نشان می دهد که در حال شکار خوک هستند. اوبرت می گوید: "این اولین مدرک قصه گویی است." "صحنه روایت خاص بود زیرا من هرگز نظیر آن را ندیده ام."

او این را با دیگر چهره های اولیه انسان مانند مقایسه می کند مرد شیر شیر شکل تراش عاج قدمت آن بین 35000 و 40،000 سال پیش است که در غار هولنشتاین-استدل در آلمان پیدا شده است. این به ما نشان می دهد که هنرمندان در این زمان نه تنها قصه می گفتند ، بلکه چیزهایی را تصور می کردند که در واقع در دنیای واقعی وجود نداشت. اوبرت می گوید: "این ریشه تفکر دینی است."

برخی از محققان ادعا می کنند که این ارقام ترکیبی حیوان و انسان نمایانگر عقاید شامی است. اما دیویدسون معتقد است که هنگام بررسی نقاشی های انسان گرا نمی توانید از چنین قلم موی گسترده ای استفاده کنید و همه چیز نباید کاملاً کلی باشد. از نظر او ، چهره هایی مانند شیر کنده کاری می توانند تشریفات را نشان دهند ، مانند افرادی که هنگام شکار لباس حیوانات را می پوشند. هنوز هم ، او می گوید ، گفتن به طور قطعی دشوار است.

بیشتر برای کشف؟

به طور کلی ، در مورد گسترش هنر غار ، دو روش تفکر وجود دارد. یکی اینکه از یک منطقه واحد آغاز شده و به تدریج به قاره های دیگر گسترش یافته است. اگر اکتشافات فعلی نمایانگر قدیمی ترین نسخه ها باشد ، این بدان معناست که هنر غار حداقل 45000 سال پیش در اندونزی پدید آمده و در طی 10 هزار سال آینده به اروپا راه یافته است.

در مقابل ، برخی از باستان شناسان فکر می کنند که هنر غار ممکن است به طور مستقل در چندین منطقه به طور همزمان رشد کرده باشد. دیویدسون با اعتقاد به این عقیده ، پیشنهاد می کند که سنت های مختلف در اندونزی و فرانسه بدون هیچ گونه ارتباطی شکل گرفته است. او می گوید و احتمالاً چیزهای بیشتری برای کشف وجود دارد.

پس از کشف غار آلتامیرا در اسپانیا در اواخر دهه 1800 ، محققان به هنر غار اروپا پرداختند. در حدود یک قرن گذشته ، به طور خاص فرانسه مورد توجه زیادی قرار گرفته است. دیویدسون می گوید: "ما تمایل داریم بیش از حد بر غارهای فرانسه تأکید کنیم." "120 نفر وجود دارد - با توجه به مدتی که مردم به دنبال آنها بوده اند تعداد بسیار زیادی نیست."

غارهای اندونزی ، افشاگری های نسبتاً جدیدی بودند. از آنجا که اوبرت و همکارانش فقط از کلسیت استفاده می کردند که در بالای هنر به جای خود اوچر شکل گرفته است ، ممکن است خود نقاشی ها بسیار قدیمی تر باشند. ما می دانیم که انسانهای مدرن حدود 65000 سال پیش وارد استرالیا شده اند و احتمالاً آنها از طریق اندونزی (پس از گسترش از آفریقا از طریق خاورمیانه) آمده اند. این احتمال وجود دارد که هنر غار در طول مسیر پیشرفت کرده باشد ، یا نمونه های قبلی در آفریقا زنده نمانده باشند - یا هنوز یافت نشده اند.

تاکنون ، فقط چند حکاکی کشف نشده قدمت قابل توجهی در آفریقا دارد ، از جمله غار آپولو 11 در نامیبیا که شامل برخی از اسلب ها با نقاشی های حیوانی است. از 30،000 سال پیش. اما می تواند افراد زیادی در آنجا وجود داشته باشد. دیویدسون می گوید غارهای آفریقا را باید جدی گرفت.

بازی انفجار شرطی
سایت انفجار
سایت شرط بندی انفجار
سایت بازی انفجار

سایت انفجار : Deep-Space Ears, Interstellar Eyes, and Off-World Wings


بازی بوم شرطی:بازی انفجار

Every child grows up looking at the stars. After that, we follow a billion different paths through life. Some people push their sense of wonder into the background, focusing on pragmatic concerns. Some hold onto it as their constant life companion. And a dedicated few find a way to combine the two, weaving a sense of wonder into their income-earning, office-working career path.

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California — generally known as a NASA center, though it is managed by Caltech — is probably the world’s premier outpost of otherworldly engineering. It is a place where space dreamers go to translate those dreams into software and circuits and mechanical systems. MiMi Aung, the project manager for the Ingenuity helicopter that is about to take flight on Mars, is a quintessential example of that marvelous synthesis.

Aung grew up in Burma (Myanmar), equally fascinated by the mystery of the night sky and the beauty of numbers. (Bob Balaram, who originated the idea of the Mars Helicopter, is originally from India; Håvard Grip, the helicopter’s Chief Pilot, is from Norway. The dream knows no national boundaries.) She found her way to JPL and worked on the technical side of some of the most lyrical projects at the lab, including the Deep Space Network, which talks to interplanetary spacecraft, and the Terrestrial Planet Finder project, which pioneered the optics needed to study Earths around other stars.

Now the Ingenuity helicopter is prepared to add an entirely new dimension to planetary exploration by taking the first, tentative flights on Mars. For every headline-grabbing moment like that, there were years of agonizing and thrilling engineering work that came before. I spoke with Aung about the secret life of the space engineer. (For more about the Mars helicopter in particular, see my previous column.)

A lightly edited version of our conversation follows.


How does somebody grow up to become the systems engineer overseeing a helicopter on another planet?

I have to start with my parents really. They both came to the US [from Burma] and got their PhDs — my mother’s in math and my father’s in food science, which is a special branch of chemistry. I was actually born on the University of Illinois campus.

When they finished their PhDs, they went back to Burma and I grew up there from when I was 2 to 11. Then when I was 11 and a half, we moved to Malaysia. They’re professors in a university there. But when I was 16, my parents really wanted me to continue on the educational track in the US, so they sent me over.

You came to the United States all by yourself at age 16?

I was taken in by my parents’ American friends from graduate school. I got on a plane and flew to the other side of the world. I didn’t even have a picture of these people, because this is back in ’83. I asked, “How will I know you?” and they said, “Don’t worry, we’ll see you,” because I was flying into Decatur, Illinois, which is a tiny airport. There they were. They said, “Hi, MiMi, we’re Anne and Walt.”

It was about people helping people. Walt and Anne really took it seriously, so they talked me through my senior year in high school and helped me find my path.

MiMi Aung: “It’s all about finding your path and following the subject you love.” (Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

Were you fascinated by space travel when you were young? Did you ever imagine that your path would take you into space engineering?

When I was 16, all I knew was I loved math. I remember writing to somebody I was dating — you know how back then you used to write letters? I wrote a letter saying, “I have found true love.” What I meant was, “I love math.” It was head over heels.

But my parents said, “No, we want you to have an application.” Then in my junior year at the University of Illinois, I was taking a class on signal processing communications and the probability and statistics. My interests all coincided in that. It was just the happiest year. I knew what I wanted to do.

You had quite a journey from Burma to the University of Illinois. How did you end up at the Jet Propulsion Lab, JPL?

When I finished my master’s degree, one of my professors made a fortuitous comment: “You know, The Deep Space Network in NASA, JPL, they process signals.” [Note: The DSN is a global network of radio antennas that communicates with distant spacecraft.] I was young, I’d always thought I wanted to work in space. That comment triggered a reaction in me: “Wow, space signals!” I managed to get a job there modeling the signals.

I soon learned that there are equations, and then there’s a reality, right? There’s noise, or the filter didn’t work as well as you did in your beautiful simulation. The thing I love about fundamental engineering is that, at the end, there are no excuses. It has to work, so you find a way to make it work. The Mars Helicopter is the ultimate example of that idea.

Along the way, you also studied how to fly spacecraft in formation so that NASA could
build the Terrestrial Planet Finder – a hugely ambitious mission to find Earth-like planets around other stars.

You’re making me walk down memory lane. Oh my gosh. I get emotional.

My supervisor back then, Ernie Stone, was a fantastic mentor. He connected me with a project called StarLight [PDF link]. The concept was that you’d have two spacecraft that are a kilometer apart, and you’d combine the light from the two and cancel the light from a star so that you could find an Earth-like planet around it. [Note: This technique, known as long-baseline optical interferometry, is highly challenging on Earth and has never been attempted in space.]

StarLight needed a sensor to keep the two platforms in place, a kilometer apart but at centimeter-level accuracy that far apart. It’s done by transmitting and receiving and transmitting and receiving with multiple antennas. They needed an engineer who could manage the algorithms and really apply them, so they put me onto that spacecraft project. That’s how I got into the planet finding.

The Terrestrial Planet Finder concept would have sent mutliple telescope into space to link together and study Earth-like planets around other stars. (Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

Terrestrial Planet Finder got postponed in 2006, then formally canceled in 2011. That was disappointing to me, but it must have been deeply upsetting for you.

You know how life works, right? I loved the project because I was thrown into a totally different world. When you work on a space mission, you have to be so safe, because once you launch, you can’t fix things. You can’t just try stuff like you can on the ground.

And emotionally, one of the things that have always driven me is wondering, are we alone? Is there life out there? Well, here’s the ultimate thing. You’re studying the planets around
other stars, trying to see if they are inhabited. It was magic, right? Well, first StarLight was canceled. Then I got promoted to lead for all formation flying for Terrestrial Planet Finder, and it got canceled.

Larry Simmons, the director for astrophysics at the time, told me, “You’ll be okay over time. It will be okay.” I didn’t know what he meant at first. Then after six months or a year, I realized how heartbroken I was. I was broken-hearted for a long time.

It’s hard for most people to understand what it’s like to work on a project you love for
years, and then it just goes away. That’s not the way most of us operate.

StarLight gave me that fear of losing something that you’re really into. I have to tell you, though, something good that came out of it. It played a big part in the development of the Mars helicopter.

What do you mean by that? How did the failure of Terrestrial Planet Finder help inspire the success of the Ingenuity helicopter?

For the rest of my career, I never took anything for granted. I was careful every single second. I was the project manager with the helicopter, which started as a very uncertain project. Is it even possible? We had to prove our way to go forward.

In the team meetings, I’d say things like, “We can’t take it for granted. This looks good, but what’s the next thing? What’s the next thing after that?” And I knew we must communicate clearly. We can’t be like mumbo-jumbo. We have to talk to the Mars 2020 [Persevrance rover] folks who are going to accommodate the helicopter. [NASA] Headquarters has to know what we’re doing. Our management has to know. Our team has to know.

I did make lemonade out of lemons. It is something that drove me and I continue to be very careful. I really don’t take anything for granted, for any moment.

And the technology from StarLight and Terrestrial Planet Finder is still there if we find an Earth-like planet and want to get a better look, right?

Yeah! The knowledge of what we accomplished with StarLight and TPF stays in the organizations. Things like the autonomous formation flying sensor that I was in charge of. That technology doesn’t go away, so if the planet-finding starts to blossom, they would go back to the same line organization. The sensor we did, the knowledge is not lost.

When did you begin the work that would lead to the Ingenuity helicopter?

It was around 2012 or so. By then, I had moved on to the spacecraft side of the house [at JPL]. I was the head of the guidance and control section. Then I was promoted to be the deputy manager for the autonomous systems division, which does the spacecraft onboard avionics for flight computers and flight software and guidance and control, power, and robotics.

Charles Elachi was the director of JPL at the time. Regularly, he goes on these division tours. Since I was a deputy division manager for autonomous systems division, I was the host to him that one day. We showed him a lab where we were testing autonomous onboard navigation algorithms by using drones in a facility. And I remember that we came out of that lab and he asked, “Hey, why aren’t we flying at Mars?”

I’m a guidance and control geek. I was used to algorithms for jet power, engine power, landing. Those are the kinds of things I’m used to thinking about. I remember looking at him funny, going, “Fly, like a rotorcraft?”

That’s funny. You’re the project manager for Ingenuity, but originally you didn’t think flight on another planet was possible?

If I was going to apply my expertise, I wanted to fly propusively. I’m being brutally honest. But the conversation went on, and now I was getting pulled in. Charles’s question sent us to Bob Balaram, who had done research in rotocraft for Mars in the 1990s. JPL funded Bob to start dusting off the results from the 1990s.

At this point, Bob takes an initial look and says, “Hmm…with the advancement of technology, it could be possible now, because things have become lighter. If we’re smart, maybe we can do it.”

The world expert in Mars flight told you “maybe” it’s possible? I can see why you were skeptical at first.

Right. There was funding for some months, we did a review, and we saw it had become more feasible. Then he decision came to go onto the next level, where we build a one-third scale vehicle and see if we can actually fly it. We had lift experiments on rails: The blade’s spinning, but it’s going up on guided rails, to convince people.

There was still a significant population that thought [flying on Mars] was just was impossible. Crazy. Even the really hardcore, great engineering folks. There are a few who later admitted, “Hey, you guys were right. I was wrong.”

People thought the engineering challenge of flying on Mars was just too tough to solve?

Yes, yes, yes. And also the whole idea was counterintuitive. I think in that case, it went beyond the equations. People were going by intuition so much, and the intuition really dominated. It was really hard to overcome. So when [the JPL managers] went to the lift test, they said, “All right, we need a dedicated team to do tech demonstrations. Let’s start with the one-third scale vehicle.” To convince everyone.

I was assigned to start taking the lead on from that point. So I did my regular deputy division manager job as well as additional duty of doing this helicopter. That’s when I started to get wrapped up in the project – after I got into the leadership role, looking at the analysis that showed how we need to model the lift and the drag. It’s not just some cartoon anymore. You have to model in pieces and integrate them and think about sensors and the mass, like how do you build it light enough?

Was there a moment when you realized: This is not a crazy idea, this Mars helicopter is possible?

I remember the moment of clarity. I was in a conference room. We were preparing for the next major briefing to headquarters [about the Mars helicopter], and somebody in the room asked, “What do you think probability of this working and us being allowed to go forward to try it?” Somebody else said, “50 percent.”

Something snapped in my head and I remember going, “Nope, it’s not 50 percent anymore. It’s like 80 percent. It’s something high.” I knew at that moment, the project is ours to lose. It was one of those moments when you see the whole problem, and then you just start making sure that everyone works together to make it happen.

The Deep Space Network (highlighted in red) is part of a vast communication web needed to connect people with their space technology. (Credit: NASA)

That little helicopter required you to collaborate with the people who build wings and rotors. Was that difficult?

I’m very respectful because I come from the algorithmic side. I was able to get everybody to talk to me and then to make sure everybody talked to each other. That was the secret sauce to make the Mars helicopter work.

One time, there was a problem with something with the helicopter blade. There was a modeling issue that we couldn’t solve. We had all the conversation, and by the end of it, there was a software solution that took care of the problem. Everybody had to contribute. Every single subsystem [in Ingenuity] required an innovation to happen.

Was there another lightbulb moment when it became clear to you that, yes, this helicopter is ready to send to Mars?

It happened when we built the prototype system. After that little one third scale, we did a full-scale model. And there was a moment when it came in, even before we flew it. This is when we worked with AeroVironment, a company in Simi Valley who built the rotor system and the landing gear and the substrate for the solar panel. They showed up with a rotor system that was exactly the way we specified it.

That was one moment. The second moment was when we spun full speed for the first time. I think that’s when I really knew.

And at that point you really became the Mars-helicopter engineer?

I still had two jobs at the time, but you can’t ride two horses. I must’ve felt confident to leave my very nice job in spacecraft systems. Autonomous systems is something I love. It’s a vision of things I want to do for future. This is psychologically the moment when I said,
“This is it. And if it doesn’t work, I’ll have no regrets.”


For more space news and ideas, follow me on Twitter: @coreyspowell


بازی انفجار شرطی
سایت انفجار
سایت شرط بندی انفجار
سایت بازی انفجار

سایت انفجار : خداحافظ کشف | مجله کشف کنید


بازی بوم شرطی:بازی انفجار

همه چیزهای خوب باید به پایان برسند و بنابراین ، این آخرین پست من در مجله Discover خواهد بود.

من می خواهم از همه افراد در Discover برای میزبانی من تشکر کنم طی 8 سال گذشته. کشف کنید به من بگویید که آنها برای آینده قابل پیش بینی میزبانی این وبلاگ را در اینجا ادامه خواهند داد ، فقط به روز نمی شود.

من احساس می کنم نیازی به نوشتن خداحافظی طولانی یا گذشته نگر ندارم ، زیرا این مطلقا پایان نوروسکپتیک نیست.

این است پایان یک وبلاگ Neuroskeptic که مرتباً به روز می شود. اینترنت از زمان شروع بلاگ نویسی در سال 2008 بسیار تغییر کرده است و زندگی من نیز تغییر کرده است.

فکر نمی کنم وبلاگ نویسی منظم موثرترین راه برقراری ارتباط در سال 2021 باشد ، اما هنوز هم می توان من را پیدا کرد در توییتر، و من قصد دارم مکان های دیگری را برای نوشتن خودم جستجو کنم. به زودی می بینمت!


بازی انفجار شرطی
سایت انفجار
سایت شرط بندی انفجار
سایت بازی انفجار

بازی انفجار حضرات : وبلاگ نویسی جمعه مرکب: لکه های تخم مرغ ماهی مرکب در نزدیکی نروژ یافت می شود


انفجار حضرات
بازی انفجار حضرات بت

وبلاگ نویسی جمعه مرکب: لکه های تخم مرغ ماهی مرکب در نزدیکی نروژ یافت می شود

غواصان پیدا می کنند سه پا “حباب” – کیسه های تخم مرغ ماهی مرکب Illex coindetii – در ساحل نروژ.

طبق معمول ، می توانید از این پست ماهی مرکب برای صحبت در مورد داستانهای امنیتی در اخباری که من آنها را پوشش نداده ام ، استفاده کنید.

رهنمودهای ارسال وبلاگ من را بخوانید اینجا.

ارسال شده در 16 آوریل 2021 در ساعت 4:09 بعد از ظهر
30 نظر

عکس نوار کناری بروس اشنایر توسط جو مک ایننیس.


سایت انفجار پویان مختاری
انفجار شرطی نیلی حضرات

سایت انفجار : چگونه هوش مصنوعی با بازی StarCraft به طور تصادفی اکولوژی را یاد گرفت


بازی بوم شرطی:بازی انفجار

لو بارب خودش را گیمر مشتاق نمی نامد. وی به عنوان یک بوم شناس در دانشگاه رنس فرانسه بیشتر وقت خود را با گیاهان می گذراند. اما یک بازی تخیل او را از کودکی به خود جلب کرده است: StarCraft ، امتیاز محبوب استراتژی آنلاین که در آن بازیکنان منابع را به دست می آورند و ارتش جنگجویان بیگانه را برای جنگ با مناظر خارج از زمین می سازند. باربه می گوید: “من اصلاً بازیکن خیلی خوبی نیستم.” “اما من می فهمم چه خبر است.”

چند سال پیش ، هنگام بازی StarCraft II – آخرین نسخه بازی – ، باربی متوجه شد که در میان انفجارها و لیزرها ، اتفاق دیگری رخ می دهد. StarCraft رفتار زیادی مانند یک اکوسیستم داشت. باربه می گوید: “ما یک محیط داریم.” “ما منابع داریم. ما ارگانیسم هایی داریم که در این محیط رقابت می کنند. این تعریف یک اکوسیستم است. “

باربی این ایده را کنار گذاشت. سپس ، در سال 2019 ، DeepMind ، زیرمجموعه تحقیقات AI شرکت مادر گوگل ، Alphabet ، یک نماینده هوش مصنوعی به نام AlphaStar را در مقابل برخی از بهترین بازیکنان StarCraft II قرار داد. AlphaStar 99.8 درصد از بازیکنان انسان را آزار داد ، به تمایز مورد علاقه Grandmaster – بالاترین رتبه بازی – دست یافت و پیروزی دیگری برای رایانه ها در راهپیمایی به برتری هوش مصنوعی اضافه کرد.

تکنوتیم 1

(اعتبار: Blizzard Entertainment)

به نظر باربی رسید که ممکن است اختیارات AlphaStar محدود به دستکاری بیگانگان در یک سیاره مجازی نباشد. اگر عملکرد StarCraft بسیار شبیه به یک اکوسیستم باشد ، شاید الگوریتم های بازی بتوانند به مطالعه مشکلات زیست محیطی در زمین کمک کنند.

Barbe ، که در سال 2020 ، درمورد گرایش های بوم شناسی و تکامل می نویسد ، همراه با سایر بوم شناسان از دانشگاه Rennes و دانشگاه Brigham Young ، توضیح می دهد که چگونه توانایی های AlphaStar در مدیریت پویایی پیچیده و چند بعدی StarCraft برای آزمایش ایده های پویایی واقعی قابل استفاده است. اکوسیستم های جهانی که مدل های سنتی را از بین برده اند. به عنوان مثال ، محققان می توانند عوامل AlphaStar را بر روی نقشه های StarCraft که برای تقلید از توزیع منابع واقعی طراحی شده اند ، مستقر کنند تا مدل واکنش ارگانیسم های مختلف به اختلالات مانند گونه های مهاجم یا از بین رفتن زیستگاه را مدل کنند.

بارب می گوید ، الگوریتم AlphaStar به طور تصادفی به پیچیده ترین مدل زیست محیطی تبدیل شده است.

این ایده به جنبش گسترده تری در بوم شناسی برای استفاده از ابزارهای قدرتمند هوش مصنوعی برای تجزیه و تحلیل مشکلات زیست محیطی پیوست. اگرچه 15 تا 20 سال پیش نسبتاً غیرمعمول بود ، دانشمندان می گویند اخیراً در زمینه های مختلف انفجار مصنوعی رخ داده است ، از طبقه بندی گونه های حیات وحش تا پیش بینی شیوع سوسک در جنگل های کاج. بوم شناسان فکر می کنند ابزارهای هوش مصنوعی ، همراه با ظرفیت جدید برای جمع آوری مقدار زیادی داده در مورد زمین ، می توانند نحوه مطالعه اکوسیستم ها را تغییر دهند و توانایی ما را در پیش بینی تغییر آنها افزایش دهند. الگوریتم های پیچیده ای مانند AlphaStar – که غالباً برای اهدافی ساخته می شوند که هیچ ارتباطی با محیط زیست ندارند – می تواند به پیشرفت تحقیقات کمک کند.

تکنوتیم

(اعتبار: Blizzard Entertainment)

“[Most] مدل های زیست محیطی در مقایسه با پیچیدگی برخی از این سیستم های هوش مصنوعی بسیار ناچیز است. “، می گوید بن ابوت ، یک بوم شناس از دانشگاه بریگام یانگ و از نویسندگان مقاله AlphaStar. “ما واقعاً فقط در حال انجام کارهایی هستیم که این رویکردها می توانند انجام دهند.”

پرورش یک قهرمان

برای محققان هوش مصنوعی ، StarCraft II از زمان انتشار در سال 2010 چالش بزرگی را ارائه داده است. مانند شطرنج یا Go ، بازیکنان StarCraft واحدهای مختلف را کنترل می کنند تا به حریف خود حمله کنند ، اما آنها همچنین مکان و زمان را برای جمع آوری منابع ، زمان ساخت واحدهای جدید و کدام را انتخاب می کنند. واحدها برای ساخت ، در میان عوامل پیچیده دیگر. در حالی که یک چرخش معین در شطرنج حدود 35 حرکت ممکن دارد و بین 200 تا 250 حرکت کند ، StarCraft II 10 ^ 26 حرکت ممکن دارد. سپس ، برخلاف آنچه تئوری پردازان بازی “اطلاعات کامل” می نامند که همه بازیکنان می توانند کل فضای بازی را ببینند ، StarCraft از طریق یک نقشه بزرگ که بازیکنان فقط می توانند تا حدی مشاهده کنند بازی می شود. علاوه بر پیچیدگی ، بازیکنان به عنوان یکی از سه نژاد بیگانه – Terran ، Protoss یا Zerg – رقابت می کنند که هر یک از نقاط قوت و ضعف خاصی دارند.

برای ایجاد هوش مصنوعی که بتواند در برابر بهترین بازیکنان StarCraft II پیروز شود ، محققان DeepMind از روش های یادگیری ماشین برای آموزش الگوریتم AlphaStar استفاده کردند. در ابتدا ، محققان لیگی از عوامل هوش مصنوعی ایجاد کردند که با استفاده از داده های صدها هزار مسابقه StarCraft بین انسانها آموزش دیده اند. سپس ، آنها این لیگ نمایندگان مجازی را مقابل یکدیگر قرار دادند ، بهترین ها را انتخاب کردند و قبل از اعزام به لیگ ، آنها را از نو مخلوط کردند. آنها این روند را تکرار کردند تا زمانی که ژانگنات AlphaStar ظهور کرد. اوریول وینیالز ، که تیم DeepMind را که AlphaStar را ایجاد کرده است ، هدایت می کند ، لیگ خود را با نوعی اکوسیستم مرتبط با روند انتخاب طبیعی مقایسه می کند. وی می گوید: “الهام بسیاری برای طراحی لیگ AlphaStar از ادبیات تکاملی گرفته شده است.”

5

آهسته رشد Terran ، یکی از سه نژاد بیگانه در StarCraft II ، کمی شبیه کاکتوس های اکوسیستم بازی است. (اعتبار: Saran_Poroong / Shutterstock)

در حالی که محققان هوش مصنوعی از طبیعت الهام گرفته اند ، بارب و همکاران بوم شناس وی از این بازی الهام گرفته اند. آنها در مقاله 2020 خود ، توازن عمیق تری را بین نژادهای Terran ، Protoss و Zerg در StarCraft و استراتژی های رقابتی انواع خاصی از ارگانیسم ها شرح می دهند. به عنوان مثال واحدهای Zerg استعمارگران سریع اما جنگنده های ضعیفی هستند ، شبیه گونه های گیاهان خشن – کوچک و علف های هرز ، اما اولین واحدهایی که پس از برهم زدن اکوسیستم رشد می کنند. از طرف دیگر ، Protoss مانند سرخسهایی است که منابع زیادی را مصرف می کند و به بهترین شکل در گروه رشد می کند. تران مانند کاکتوس ها هستند: پرورش دهندگان کند ، اما در دفاع خوب. همانند یک اکوسیستم واقعی ، این “گونه ها” از استراتژی های مختلف خود برای رقابت در منابع برای الگوهای پیچیده تعامل استفاده می کنند.

اگرچه هنوز به طور رسمی آن را امتحان نکرده است ، اما بارب فکر می کند مشاهده این تعاملات بین عوامل AlphaStar در StarCraft می تواند راهی برای آزمایش فرضیه های مربوط به فرآیندهای اکولوژیکی و تکاملی باشد که مدل های آماری منظم قادر به گرفتن آن نیستند – به عنوان مثال ، پیش بینی اینکه یک تغییر کوچک در منابع موجود در یک گوشه نقشه در StarCraft برای تأثیر بر واحدهای Terran و Zerg که در گوشه مقابل قرار دارند ، موج می زند. Terran و Zerg را با درختان کاج و سوسک های پوست جایگزین کنید و خواهید دید که چگونه پیش بینی ای از این دست می تواند برای مدیران محیط زیست ارزشمند باشد. بارب می گوید: “این می تواند مانند یک ماسه بازی باشد” برای دانشمندان بازی با اکوسیستم ها.

آن تسن ، دانشمند داده دانشگاه ایالتی اورگان که به مقاله بوم شناسی StarCraft وابسته نیست ، می گوید: “این می تواند به یک مدل اسباب بازی بسیار جالب تبدیل شود که در آن شما می توانید این سیستم بسیار ساده را داشته باشید و این سوالات بسیار خاص را بپرسید.” “شما فقط باید به خاطر داشته باشید که این یک شبیه سازی است.”

فناوری مرسوم ، مد روز

در واقع ، StarCraft II – با وجود پیچیدگی های آن – بسیار ساده تر از یک اکوسیستم واقعی است. باربی خاطرنشان می کند که فرآیندهای اساسی طبیعی مانند چرخه نیتروژن در بازی اتفاق نمی افتد و همچنین روابط کلیدی بین ارگانیسم ها مانند انگلی نیست. و فقط سه گونه وجود دارد.

6

(اعتبار: Blizzard Entertainment)

ورنر رامر ، یک بوم شناس از دانشگاه فنی مونیخ ، می گوید: “به نظر من یک مشکل این است که مکانیک بازی ها – که برای سرگرمی هرچه بیشتر طراحی شده اند – فقط از لحاظ سطحی شبیه به دنیای واقعی فیزیک هستند.”

رامر می گوید که این امر تعمیم مشاهدات بازی AlphaStar ، هرچند پیچیده ، فراتر از پارامترهای بازی را به چالش می کشد.

این که آیا بوم شناسان هرگز از AlphaStar برای تحقیق استفاده نمی کنند یا نه ، ابزارهای پیشرفته و پیشرفته هوش مصنوعی برای مشکلات زیست محیطی و علوم محیطی به کار می روند.

تیسن می گوید ، ده سال پیش ، برنامه های کاربردی هوش مصنوعی در محیط زیست و علوم محیطی بیشتر به کارهای طبقه بندی محدود می شدند ، مانند شناسایی سریع گونه ها در ضبط آواز پرندگان یا انواع مناظر در تصاویر ماهواره ای. اکنون ، او می گوید ، هوش مصنوعی در محیط زیست فراتر از طبقه بندی است تا وظایف متنوع تر و جاه طلبانه تری را انجام دهد مانند پیش بینی بر اساس داده های نامرتب و بسیار ابعادی – نوع سازگار با محیط زیست.

نیکولاس لکومت ، رئیس تحقیق در بوم شناسی Polar and Boreal و یک بوم شناس در دانشگاه مونکتون در کانادا ، که از ابزار AI برای طبقه بندی تماس پرندگان در قطب شمال و پیش بینی الگوی مهاجرت آنها استفاده می کند ، می گوید: وی توضیح می دهد كه بوم شناسان می توانند با مهارت برنامه نویسی مورد نیاز برای آموزش الگوریتم های هوش مصنوعی مرعوب شوند. و جمع آوری داده های کافی برای آموزش الگوریتم ها ممکن است دشوار باشد ، ابوت تکرار می کند. دستیابی به برخی از داده ها مانند تصاویر ماهواره ای آسان است ، اما ممکن است جمع آوری برخی دیگر مانند نمونه های خاک دشوارتر باشد.

ابوت می گوید: برخی از آنها فقط به پول و همكاران ماهر موجود در زمینه بوم شناسی برمی گردد – كه به گفته وی ، “درآمدزایی ترین” رشته ها نیست. او می گوید شرکت هایی مانند Blizzard ، که StarCraft را ساخته اند ، “هر ساله صدها میلیون دلار صرف توسعه الگوریتم های اجرای بازی های خود می کنند.” “آنها فقط منابع بیشتری نسبت به ما دارند. اما ما البته فکر می کنیم که س questionsالات ما بسیار مهمتر از سالات آنها است. ” او فقط نیمی شوخی می کند – بالاخره ، این فقط یک بازی نیست.

بازی انفجار شرطی
سایت انفجار
سایت شرط بندی انفجار
سایت بازی انفجار

سایت انفجار : پنج آزمایش علوم سینک ظرفشویی آشپزخانه که باید در خانه امتحان کنید


بازی بوم شرطی:بازی انفجار

Citizen Science Salon یک همکاری بین است کشف کردن و SciStarter.org.


دانش شهروندی زمانی اتفاق می افتد که افرادی مانند شما فرضیه هایی را بیان کنند ، داده ها را جمع آوری کرده و یافته های خود را با محققان در میان بگذارند. به عنوان یک دانشمند شهروند ، شما می توانید هر کجا که هستید علم انجام دهید. که شامل انجام آزمایش های علمی در خانه ، استفاده از وسایل روزمره خانه است. برای هر کسی که دوست دارد با پروژه های علمی عملی شهروندان کثیف شود ، می توانید پروژه های علمی جذاب و ساده ای را که امروز شما و خانواده می توانید شروع کنید ، کشف کنید.

حتی بهتر ، بسیاری از این پروژه ها به طور خاص در داخل خانه تمرکز دارند. این یک فرصت عالی برای کسب اطلاعات بیشتر در مورد چگونگی اتصال فضای زندگی شما به دنیای بزرگ اطراف شما و جمع آوری برخی از داده ها برای راه اندازی علم است. در اینجا ، ما پنج پروژه علمی DIY را انتخاب کرده ایم که از شما می خواهد دنیای داخل و اطراف خانه خود را کشف کنید. دستانتان را خیس می کنید ، پاها را کثیف می کنید و آشپزخانه تان کثیف می شود – همه مواد تشکیل دهنده یک تجربه عالی است که برای علم نیز تفاوت ایجاد می کند.

سینک آشپزخانه

(اعتبار: ایمانی / Unsplash)

Tap را لمس کنید

آب آشامیدنی سالم باید برای همه افراد در ایالات متحده داده شود. اما در برخی از نقاط کشور ، لوله های قدیمی و تخریب شده می توانند سرب یا سایر آلاینده ها را به آب خانگی بریزند. پروژه علمی شهروندی Crowd the Tap ابزاری را در اختیار شما قرار می دهد تا بفهمید خانه شما در معرض خطر آلودگی به سرب است یا خیر و از شرکت کنندگان می خواهد داده های خود را به سرشماری ملی کیفیت آب اضافه کنند. هدف این است که به مقامات کمک کنیم تا مناطق را برای آزمایش آب و جایگزینی زیرساخت ها در اولویت قرار دهند و به اطمینان از آب تمیز برای همه کمک کنند.

این پروژه با حمایت مالی آژانس حفاظت از محیط زیست ، ویرجینیا تک و دانشگاه ایالتی کارولینای شمالی ، از شرکت کنندگان می خواهد چند مرحله ساده برای ارزیابی آب در خانه خود بردارند. با برخی اطلاعات اولیه در مورد منطقه و خانواده و همچنین آب خارج شده از شیر ، یک نظر سنجی را پر کنید. سپس ، شما می توانید عملی شوید و چند آزمایش ساده انجام دهید تا بفهمید از لوله های شما چه ساخته شده است. داده ها توسط محققان جمع آوری شده و به یک پایگاه داده ملی در حال رشد با هدف جمع آوری یک نگاه جامع به کیفیت آب در سراسر کشور اضافه شده است.

علم خمیر مایه

(اعتبار: آزمایشگاه راب دون)

ترشی برای علم

نان فقط آرد ، آب و نمک است ، درست است؟ نه کاملاً: یک ماده مخفی وجود دارد که طعم و بافت خاص خود را به نان از سراسر جهان می دهد. این ماده خاص میکروب ها – باکتری ها و مخمرها هستند که به تولید انواع مختلف نان در اطراف خود کمک می کنند.

با استفاده از پروژه Sourdough for Science می توانید تنوع میکروب هایی را که نان را بی نظیر می کنند کشف کنید و در حالی که در آن هستید یک میان وعده خوشمزه داشته باشید! این پروژه شرکت کنندگان را از طریق مراحل ساخت یک نان اساسی مایه ترشی راهنمایی می کند. سپس ، در طی دو هفته ، شما یک سری اندازه گیری انجام می دهید که شما را از فعل و انفعالات میکروبی که در داخل نان شما اتفاق می افتد ، نشان می دهد. محققان از این داده ها برای درک بهتر نحوه رشد و رفتار انواع مختلف میکروب ها در انواع مختلف آرد استفاده می کنند. سپس ، وقتی همه چیز تمام شد ، از یک ساندویچ خوشمزه لذت ببرید!

اسکوربوت فضا

پروژه علمی شهروندی Space Scurvy از داوطلبان می خواهد محتوای ویتامین C آب آنها را اندازه گیری کنند. (اعتبار: Space Scurvy)

اسکوربوی فضایی

فضانوردانی که به فضا می روند ممکن است با مشکلی روبرو شوند که ملوانان بدخیم قرن های گذشته: اسکوربوت. این بیماری که با مشکلات پوستی ، کم خونی و لق شدن دندان مشخص می شود ، زمانی اتفاق می افتد که ویتامین C کافی دریافت نکنیم.

پروژه علمی شهروندی Space Scurvy از شرکت کنندگان می خواهد تصور کنند که آنها یک کاوشگر فضایی در قرن بیست و یکم هستند که تصمیم می گیرند آب میوه ها را به همراه خود ببرند تا از اسکوربوت جلوگیری کنند. دستورالعمل های ساده را برای تهیه یک کیت علمی از مواد تشکیل دهنده خانگی دنبال کنید که به شما امکان می دهد ویتامین C آب میوه هایی را که در خانه دارید آزمایش کنید. کدام یک بهترین است که به فضا برود؟

این آزمایش کوتاه و ساده علمی برای خانواده ها و کلاس های درس ایده آل است و روشی عملی برای گشودن علم روزمره را ارائه می دهد. و از همه بهتر ، می توانید وانمود کنید که هم یک دزد دریایی هستید و هم یک فضانورد.

آفتابگردان و زنبورعسل

گرده افشان ها جز component حیاتی یک اکوسیستم سالم هستند. آنها همچنین 35 درصد از محصولات زراعی جهان را تحت تأثیر قرار می دهند. (اعتبار تصویر: USFWS)

یک باغ گرده افشان بکارید: پروژه عالی آفتابگردان

با فرا رسیدن بهار ، زمان بهتری برای بیرون رفتن و باغ وجود ندارد. پروژه بزرگ آفتابگردان از شرکت کنندگان می خواهد که در جستجوی گیاهانی که گرده افشان بازدید می کنند ، به فضای خارج از منزل بپردازند. هدف این است که ثبت تمام گرده افشان ها ، مانند زنبورها و پروانه ها ، که برای ایجاد سابقه سلامت جمعیت حشرات در سراسر کشور بازدید می کنند ، باشد.

گل آفتابگردان فقط یکی از گیاهانی است که ممکن است در باغ خود در خانه داشته باشید و برای زنده ماندن به گرده افشان نیاز دارند. در بهار امسال با گیاهان اطراف خود تماس بگیرید و به ایجاد یک بانک اطلاعاتی در سراسر کشور برای گرده افشان کمک کنید. و در حالی که در این کار هستید ، ایجاد باغ گرده افشان پر از گیاهانی را که حشرات نزدیک شما دوست دارند از آن بازدید کنند ، در نظر بگیرید. می توانید بذرهای جیره شیر را از داخل – مورد علاقه پروانه های سلطان – شروع کنید و سپس آنها را در حیاط خود یا در اطراف جامعه خود بکارید که آماده پیوند شوند. سپس ، برای آگاهی از همه دانش شهروندی که می توانید در آنجا انجام دهید ، به صفحه مرکز گرده های گرده افشان مراجعه کنید.

سطل زباله بازیافت کیسه های پلاستیکی - Shutterstock

(اعتبار: Potatomedia / Shutterstock)

حسابرسی پسماندهای خانگی

وقتی چیزی را به سطل آشغال می اندازیم ، بیشتر ما فقط آن را فراموش می کنیم. اما این زباله ها در محل های دفن زباله می چسبند ، یا برای ایجاد گرما و انرژی سوزانده می شوند و باعث ایجاد گازهای گلخانه ای می شوند. پروژه علمی حسابرسی پسماندهای خانگی ، مشارکت کنندگان را با تفکر عمیق تر درباره چیزهایی که استفاده می کنند و سپس دور انداختن ، وظیفه می گذارد.

با توجه به پلاستیک های یکبار مصرف ، یک هفته را به مرتب سازی و فهرست بندی هر آنچه دور می ریزید اختصاص دهید. از 33.6 میلیون تن پلاستیکی که آمریکایی ها هر ساله استفاده می کنند ، تقریباً 6 درصد آن در واقع بازیافت می شود. در پایان هفته ، همه چیز را جمع کنید و از کل به عنوان فرصتی برای ایده پردازی برخی از روش های خلاقانه برای کاهش ضایعات و بازیافت بیشتر استفاده کنید.


با استفاده از ابزار Project Finder در SciStarter.Org می توانید پروژه های علوم شهروندی بیشتری پیدا کنید.

بازی انفجار شرطی
سایت انفجار
سایت شرط بندی انفجار
سایت بازی انفجار