Global Quantum Computing Market to Gain $667.3 Million and Surge at a CAGR of 30.0% from 2020-2027 Timeframe – Exclusive [193 pages] COVID-19 Impact…

The global quantum computing industry is projected to surge from 2020 to 2027 due to the rise in the number of cyber-attacks across the world. Consulting solutions sub-segment is estimated to be the most profitable. The European market is estimated to be the most dominating during the forecasted period.

New York, USA, June 07, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- According to a recent report studied by Research Dive, the global quantum computing market is speculated to exceed $667.3 million by the end of 2027, rising from a market size of $88.2 million in 2019, at a growth rate of 30.0% during 2020-2027 estimated timeframe. The report highlights the coronavirus mayhem impact on the market, major drivers, hindrances, and regional outlook of the market. The research methodology used in the report is a combination of both primary and secondary research methods.

Download FREE Sample Report of the Global Quantum Computing Market: https://www.researchdive.com/download-sample/8332

Covid-19 Outbreak Impact on the Global Market

The quantum computing market is anticipated to experience a positive impact globally during the coronavirus crises. The reason for market growth is that quantum technology offers augmented performance computing that can shift dynamics for quantum chemistry. Further, quantum technology provides exponential speed for amplified optimization and vital calculations. These facets are predicted to govern the market growth during the coronavirus emergency.

Check out How COVID-19 impacts the Global Quantum Computing Market. Click here to Connect with our Analyst to get more Market Insight: https://www.researchdive.com/connect-to-analyst/8332

Aspects Impacting the Market

The global quantum computing market is projected to witness progressive growth due to rise in the cyber-attack cases. Quantum technology assures security to software systems and applications and protects vital data of organizations from attacks such as ransomware, phishing, worms, and much more. Furthermore, key companies of the market are planning strategic frameworks by utilizing quantum personal computers for cyber-security. These aspects are anticipated to surge the market growth during the forecasted timeframe. However, a lack of awareness of quantum technology and unskilled employees is expected to hinder the market growth. On the other hand, the ability of quantum technology to aid farmers in augmenting the yield and efficiency of plants is projected to create promising opportunities for the market growth.

Story continues

Access Varied Market Reports Bearing Extensive Analysis of the Market Situation, Updated With The Impact of COVID-19: https://www.researchdive.com/covid-19-insights

Consulting Solutions Sub-Segment to be the Most Profitable

From the offerings type segment, the consulting solutions sub-segment is anticipated to reach newer heights during the timeframe. The sub-segment is expected to register a revenue of $354.0 million by the end of the 2027 timeframe. The sub-segment upsurge is due to the usage of quantum computing in applications such as drug discovery, formulation of chemicals, material science, and automotive. Apart from this, it is also used in the chemical industry, aerospace & defense, healthcare, and energy & power sectors. These wide-scale applications are speculated to bolster the growth of the sub-segment during the forecasted years.

Check out all Information and communication technology & media Industry Reports: https://www.researchdive.com/information-and-communication-technology-and-media

Machine Learning Sub-Segment to Gain Maximum Revenue

From the application segment, the machine learning sub-segment is projected to achieve maximum revenue during the forecasted timeframe. The sub-segment is anticipated to cross $236.9 million by the end of 2027, rising from a market share of $29.7 million in the year 2019. The ability of quantum learning to accelerate machine learning such as optimization, deep learning, Kernel evaluation, and linear algebra is expected to propel the sub-segment market growth during the analyzed timeframe.

Finance & Banking Sub-Segment to Witness Rapid Growth

From the end-user segment, the finance & banking sub-division is speculated to grow rapidly and register a revenue of $159.2 million by 2027. The sub-segment growth is due to the usage of quantum technology in banking for supporting the large-frequency trading aspect.

Regional Outlook

The European market was expected to hold a market size of $28.2 million in 2019 and is speculated to garner a revenue of $221.2 million by the end of 2027. The market growth is mainly attributed to the extensive use of quantum computing in fields such as chemicals, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, and utilities. Moreover, its usage in cryptography, novel drugs, defense, and cybersecurity is predicted to drive the global market during the estimated timeframe.

Major Key Players

QC Ware, Corp. Cambridge Quantum Computing Limited D-Wave Systems Inc., International Business Machines Corporation Rigetti Computing 1QB Information Technologies River Lane Research StationQ Microsoft Anyon Google Inc.

These leading players are planning varied strategies such as acquisitions of companies, product developments, tie-ups & collaborations for maximizing profits, research & development, and organizational development to gain an upper edge in the market worldwide. For example, in April 2021, Nvidia, a computer systems design services company, revealed cuQuantum SDK. This product is a developmental platform for revitalizing quantum circuits on GPU-accelerated systems.

The report consists of various facets of all the vital players that are operative in the market such as financial performance, product portfolio, present strategic moves, major developments and SWOT. Click Here to Get Absolute Top Companies Development Strategies Summary Report.

TRENDING REPORTS WITH COVID-19 IMPACT ANALYSIS

Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) Protection Market https://www.researchdive.com/8335/advanced-persistent-threat-apt-protection-market

Network Slicing Market https://www.researchdive.com/5670/network-slicing-market

Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) Market https://www.researchdive.com/5478/signals-intelligence-sigint-market

Application Security Market https://www.researchdive.com/5735/application-security-market

See the rest here:

Global Quantum Computing Market to Gain $667.3 Million and Surge at a CAGR of 30.0% from 2020-2027 Timeframe - Exclusive [193 pages] COVID-19 Impact...

UK govt and IBM together to build 210M AI & quantum computing centre in Daresbury – UKTN (UK Technology News

Modern-day complex problems require power-packed technological solutions to revamp industrial growth. UK government is stepping into helping industries get maximum access to the latest technology and modernising by establishing an AI and quantum computing centre in Daresbury, Cheshire.

The government will invest 172m over five years through UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) with a further investment of 38m from computing giant IBM. The centre is now aimed at developing next-generation computers using AI and quantum computing technologies to help out the businesses future-ready.

The Centre will be operated through collaboration between IBM and the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC). The Hartree National Centre for Digital Innovation (HNCDI) programme will create 60 new job and exciting opportunities for students to witness complex problem solving through technology application.

Further, the centre will support AI & Quantum Computing application to tasks such as optimising complex logistics, power grid distribution, designing and manufacturing, traffic management, warehouse management and product innovation.

HNCDI will work with different sectors, including materials, life sciences, environment and manufacturing. It will also engage in collaboration with academic and industrial research communities, startups as well as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Ms Solloway, the science minister said quantum computing and AI were not just far-fetched ideas, but real technologies that are already transforming our lives. Artificial intelligence and quantum computing have the potential to revolutionise everything from the way we travel to the way we shop. The building blocks of everyday products like your laptop or your phone are already products of quantum technology, harnessing the unique ways that light and matter behave at tiny atomic or subatomic levels.

Further, she added, This fantastic new partnership with IBM will not only help businesses get ready for the future of computing but create 60 jobs in the region boosting innovation and growing the economy as we build back better from the pandemic.

A spokesman for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said the centres aim was to make cutting-edge technologies like AI and quantum computing more accessible to businesses and public sector organisations.

As well as breaking down practical barriers to using new technologies, the team of experts will also provide training and support to make sure the UK is at the forefront of the next generation of computing, he added.

Prof Mark Thomson, STFCs executive chairman said that by allowing industry to access a ready-made community of digital experts and cutting-edge technology, it will provide momentum for new ideas and solutions.

This programme has the potential to transform the way UK industry engages with AI and digital technologies, to the benefit of not just research communities but all of society.

Senior VP and Director of IBM Research, Mr Dario Gil said that This partnership establishes our first Discovery Accelerator in Europe driven by our two UK-based IBM Research locations in Hursley and Daresbury as they contribute to our global mission of building discovery-driven communities around the world.

Read the rest here:

UK govt and IBM together to build 210M AI & quantum computing centre in Daresbury - UKTN (UK Technology News

IBM and UK Government invest 210m in new AI and computing centre – Built Environment Networking

A new artificial intelligence and quantum computing centre has been launched in North West England, thanks to a 210 million investment from the Government and IBM to help cement the UKs status as a science superpower.

The Hartree National Centre for Digital Innovation (HNCDI), based at the Science and Technology Facilities Councils (STFC) Daresbury Laboratory in the Liverpool City Region, will create vacancies for an additional 60 scientists and opportunities for students to gain invaluable hands-on experience.

The centre a partnership between STFC and IBM will bring together world-leading expertise in artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing to support the application of the cutting-edge technologies in industry and the public sector.

Possible industry applications of quantum computing include optimising complex logistics such as picking and packing orders in large warehouses for supermarkets; traffic routing; energy distribution; improving design and manufacturing processes across automotive sectors.

The government will invest 172 million over 5 years through UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), with an additional 38 million being invested by IBM. 28 million of the governments investment will be in the first year.

Science Minister Amanda Solloway:

Artificial intelligence and quantum computing have the potential to revolutionise everything from the way we travel to the way we shop.

This fantastic new partnership with IBM will not only help businesses get ready for the future of computing, but create 60 jobs in the region boosting innovation and growing the economy as we build back better from the pandemic.

The HNCDI will make cutting-edge technologies like AI and quantum computing more accessible to businesses and public sector organisations.

As well as breaking down practical barriers to using new technologies, for example by providing access to equipment and infrastructure, the team of experts at HNCDI will also provide training and support to make sure the UK is at the forefront of the next generation of computing.

Dario Gil, Senior Vice President and Director, IBM Research:

The world is facing grand challenges which demand a different approach towards science in computing, including AI and quantum computing, to engage a broad community across industry, government, and academia to accelerate discovery in science and business.

This partnership establishes our first Discovery Accelerator in Europe driven by our two UK-based IBM Research locations in Hursley and Daresbury as they contribute to our global mission of building discovery-driven communities around the world.

The technologies that have transformed our lives the building blocks of modern computers, the mobile phone, the laser, the MRI scanner are all products of quantum science. This involves harnessing the unique ways that light and matter behave at tiny atomic or subatomic levels.

A new generation of quantum technologies exploit breakthroughs in the way that we are able to precisely manipulate and measure these special properties, to engineer quantum devices like sensors and computers with dramatically enhanced functionality and performance.

The centre will work across sectors including materials, life sciences, environment and manufacturing. This will include collaboration with academic and industrial research communities, including start-ups and SMEs, public sector, and government.

Professor Mark Thomson, Executive Chair of STFC:

The HNCDI programme will foster discovery and provide a stimulus for industry innovation in the UK.

By allowing industry to access a ready-made community of digital experts and cutting-edge technology, it will provide momentum for new ideas and solutions.

This programme has the potential to transform the way UK industry engages with AI and digital technologies, to the benefit of not just research communities but all of society.

Read more:

IBM and UK Government invest 210m in new AI and computing centre - Built Environment Networking

Quantum Computing & Technologies Market Share at a CAGR of 32.5 %, Trends, Growth, Sales, Demand, Revenue, Size, Forecast and COVID-19 Impacts…

The Quantum Computing & Technologies Market research report is prepared by implying robust research methodology and including Porters Five Forces analysis to provide the complex matrix of the market. The report covers comprehensive data on emerging trends, market drivers, growth opportunities, and restraints that can change the market dynamics of the report. It provides an in-depth analysis of the market segments which include products, applications, and end-user applications. This report also includes a complete analysis of industry players that cover their latest developments, product portfolio, pricing, mergers, acquisitions, and collaborations. Moreover, it provides crucial strategies that are helping them to expand their market share.

Quantum Computing & Technologies Market is Expected to Grow with a CAGR of 32.5 % over the Forecast Period.

Significant Players of this Global Quantum Computing &

Global Quantum Computing & Technologies market report is segmented on the basis of product type, application, end-user and regional & country level. Based on product type, global Quantum Computing & Technologies markets are classified as holographic display, microscopes, software, holographic prints and others. Based upon application, global Quantum Computing & Technologies markets is classified as medical imaging, medical education and biomedical research. Based upon end-user, global Quantum Computing & Technologies markets is classified as biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, academic and research institutes and hospitals and clinics.

Segmentation Analysis:

By Type of Technology: Block chain, Adiabatic, Measurement-Based, Superconducting, Topological

By Applications: Cryptography, IoT/Big data/Artificial intelligence/ML, Teleportation, Simulation & Data Optimization, Others

By Component: Hardware, Software & Systems, Services

By End-User Industry: Aerospace and Defense, Healthcare, Manufacturing, IT & Telecommunications, Energy and Power, Others

Geographically, this report split global into several key Regions, revenue (Million USD) the geography (North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Middle East & Africa) focusing on key countries in each region. It also covers market drivers, restraints, opportunities, challenges, and key issues in Global Post-Consumer Quantum Computing & Technologies Market.

Download Free Exclusive Sample (200 Pages PDF) Report: To Know the Impact of COVID-19 on this Industry @ https://brandessenceresearch.com/requestSample/PostId/941?utm_source=MC&utm_medium=AR

Key Benefits for Quantum Computing & Technologies Market Reports

The analysis provides an exhaustive investigation of the global Post-Consumer Quantum Computing & Technologies market together with the future projections to assess the investment feasibility. Furthermore, the report includes both quantitative and qualitative analyses of the Post-Consumer Quantum Computing & Technologies market throughout the forecast period. The report also comprehends business opportunities and scope for expansion. Besides this, it provides insights into market threats or barriers and the impact of regulatory framework to give an executive-level blueprint the Post-Consumer Quantum Computing & Technologies market.

Key Features of the Report:

Global Quantum Computing & Technologies Markets: Countries and Regions

North America, Asia-Pacific, UK, Europe, Central & South America, Middle East & Africa

Frequently asked questions (FAQs) about the report

Yes. The Quantum Computing & Technologies market report can be customized according to your needs. For instance, the company can be profiled you ask for while specific region/country analysis can be focused that meets your interests. You can talk to our research analyst about your exact requirements and UMR will accordingly tailor the required report.

Yes, the market report can be further segmented on the basis of data availability and feasibility. We can provide a further breakdown in product types and applications (if applicable) by size, volume, or revenue. In the market segmentation part, the latest product developments and customer behavior insights are also included to give an in-depth analysis of the market.

Yes. The market research report covers the detailed analysis of COVID-19 impact on the market. Our research team has been monitoring the market closely while it has been conducting interviews with the industry experts to get better insights on the present and future implications of the COVID-19 virus on the market.

The market report provides vital information on the strategies deployed by industry players during the COVID-19 crisis to maintain their position in the market. Along with this, it also shares crucial data on product developments due to the inevitable pandemic across the globe.

Table of Content

1.1. Research Process1.2. Primary Research1.3. Secondary Research1.4. Market Size Estimates1.5. Data Triangulation1.6. Forecast Model1.7. USPs of Report1.8. Report Description

2.1. Market Introduction2.2. Executive2.3. Global Quantum Computing & Technologies Market Classification2.4. Market Drivers2.5. Market Restraints2.6. Market Opportunity2.7. Quantum Computing & Technologies Market: Trends2.8. Porters Five Forces Analysis2.9. Market Attractiveness Analysis

Thanks for reading this article; you can also get individual chapter wise section or region wise report version like North America, Europe or Asia.

About Brandessence market research publishes market research reports & business insights produced by highly qualified and experienced industry analysts. Brand Essence Market Research report will be best fit for senior executives, business development managers, marketing managers, consultants, CEOs, CIOs, COOs, and Directors, governments, agencies, organizations and Ph.D. Students. We have a delivery center in Pune, India and our sales office is in London.Contact Us:

Alan Ruffalo

Corporate Sales: +44-20380741

Email: sales@brandessenceresearch.com

Web: https://brandessenceresearch.com/

Trending Link :

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ai-enabled-kitchen-appliances-market-is-exhibited-to-grow-at-25-8-cagr-over-the-forecast-period-2021-2027brandessence-market-research-301246403.html

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/rise-of-contactless-dining-anticipating-food-service-industry-says-brandessence-market-research-301198600.html

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/at-cagr-of-6-71healthcare-consulting-industry-expected-to-cross-20-usd-billion-by-2025-says-brandessence-market-research-301200108.html

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/at-6-15-cagrglobal-construction-glass-market-is-expected-to-reach-usd-66-83-billion-in-2026says-brandessence-market-research-301201873.html

Original post:

Quantum Computing & Technologies Market Share at a CAGR of 32.5 %, Trends, Growth, Sales, Demand, Revenue, Size, Forecast and COVID-19 Impacts...

STFC and IBM sign 210m AI and quantum computing deal – BusinessCloud

TheScience and Technology FacilitiesCouncilhas announced a 210 million deal with IBM to acceleratediscovery and innovation with artificial intelligence and quantum computing.

Science Minister Amanda Solloway unveiledthefive-year partnershipwhich will see the launch oftheHartree National Centre for Digital Innovation in theNorth Westtosupport UK businesses and the public sector.

The aim is tobreak down practical barriers to innovation such as access to infrastructure or digital skills gaps within organisationsin sectors such asmaterials development, life sciences, environmental sustainability and manufacturing.

By advancing the pace at which businesses can take advantage of new digital technologies, the collaborationis expected toenhance productivity, create new skilled jobs and boost regional and national economic growth.

Based in Daresbury, an additional 60 new scientists, interns and students will join IBM Research and the Hartree Centre.

The research is part of IBMs global Discovery Accelerator initiative, which seeks to accelerate discovery and innovation based on a convergence of advanced technologies by establishing research centres, fostering and enabling collaborative communities, and advancing skills and economic growth in large-scale programs.

Artificial intelligence and quantum computing have the potential to revolutionise everything from the way we travel to the way we shop,saidSolloway.

They are exactly the kind of fields I want the UK to be leading in, and this new centre in theNorth Westis a big step towards that.

Thanks to this fantastic new partnership with IBM, British businesses will have access to the kind of infrastructure and expertise that will help them boost innovation and grow the economy.

The HNCDI programme will support several industry projects to accelerate the adoption of advanced digital technologies with UK companies of various sizes.

HNCDI will enable the UK to develop the skills, knowledge and technical capability required to adopt emerging digital technologies, seeding the UK with new ideas and innovative solutions, said Professor Mark Thomson, Executive Chair of STFC Hartree Centre.

The programme has transformative potential to generate long-term GVA for the economy by embedding AI solutions across the UK industry.

We are applying knowledge from the UKs strong fundamental research base to develop tools and techniques that address identified industry and public sector needs, improving economic and societal outcomes.

View post:

STFC and IBM sign 210m AI and quantum computing deal - BusinessCloud

$100 Million to Advance Duke Science and Technology Research – Duke Today

The Duke Endowment of Charlotte, N.C., is supporting Duke Universitys efforts to expand its faculty in computation, materials science and the resilience of the body and brain by completing the second phase of a $100 million investment.

This is the largest award Duke University has ever received. Advancing Science and Technology

Better designs to capture the full potential of carbon-neutral energy. Harnessing the brain's resilience to fight Alzheimer's Disease. Developing Develop cybersecurity tools to defend us from future threats. Read about these and other investments Duke is making in science and technology research and teaching.

The funds form the base of Duke Science and Technology, a faculty-hiring and fund-raising effort designed to elevate excellence in the sciences at Duke. They will be used to accelerate and expand the recruitment of new faculty in science, medicine, technology, engineering and mathematics. The funds will also expand core research strengths that allow Duke faculty to address difficult global challenges and prepare Duke students to be the leaders of the future.

This extraordinary gift from The Duke Endowment advances our universitys position as a destination for exceptional and visionary faculty in a competitive global market, said Duke President Vincent E. Price. These scholars will accelerate discovery and collaborative research across our campus and around the world. Dukes next century will be one of unbounded intellectual curiosity in which uniquely talented and creative scientists come together in new ways to ask the most difficult questions and try to tackle the most critical challenges of our day.

The first $50 million of The Duke Endowments historic commitment to support Duke Science and Technology was announced in 2019.

Minor Shaw, chair of the Endowments Board of Trustees, said The Duke Endowments founder, James B. Duke, was a visionary leader in business and philanthropy who seized opportunities to experiment and innovate. Advancements in science and technology will transform our world, Shaw said. By investing in the next generation of faculty at Duke, we can achieve a better future for us all.

The funding comes at a time when Duke is placing big bets on emerging technologies like quantum computing and addressing global challenges such as climate change and pandemic disease.

The faculty we are able to recruit thanks to this investment from The Duke Endowment have enormous quality and potential, said Provost Sally Kornbluth, the universitys chief academic officer. We are confident that their work will result in increased impact, elevate Duke to new levels of scientific discovery and improve health outcomes for the citizens of North Carolina and beyond. We want to continue to build on this success.

In the two years since the university announced the first half of this $100 million award, the Duke Endowments investment has been used to recruit and retain some of the countrys leading scholar-scientists in a range of disciplines.

At Duke, we are redefining what is possible in preventing and treating a range of health conditions from cancer, brain disorders and infectious diseases to behavioral health issues, said A. Eugene Washington, M.D., chancellor for health affairs and president and chief executive officer of the Duke University Health System. This generous gift ensures that our exceptional research community will continue to thrive with the very best scientists who value collaboration and interdisciplinarity, and drive bold ideas."

Duke will continue a targeted effort to recruit scientist-scholars at all levels in its strategic areas. The hiring effort is expected to continue over the next few years.

--- --- ---

Based in Charlotte and established in 1924 by industrialist and philanthropist James B. Duke, The Duke Endowment is a private foundation that strengthens communities in North Carolina and South Carolina by nurturing children, promoting health, educating minds and enriching spirits. Since its founding, it has distributed more than $4 billion in grants. The Endowment shares a name with Duke University and Duke Energy, but all are separate organizations.

Read more:

$100 Million to Advance Duke Science and Technology Research - Duke Today

Bristol startup scores 3.1M to control next-gen quantum hacks threatening the future of internet – UKTN (UK Technology News

The quantum computing industry witnessed exponential growth over recent years. As a result, the threat of quantum attacks on our communications is rapidly approaching a point when quantum computers will be able to crack all the existing encryption that protects our data.

Bristol-based KETS Quantum Security is a quantum tech company passionate about solving real-world security issues by leveraging the advantages of quantum technologies.

Redefining the Future of Secure Communications, the company just bagged 3.1 million in funding to bring to market hardware to protect data from a new generation of cyberattacks that will use quantum computers. The round was co-led by Quantonation and Speedinvest, with participation from Mustard Seed MAZE.

The investment will be used to accelerate development, production, and delivery of first products. It will also allow KETS to expand key first trials of the technology in real-world applications and environments that are already in development. To deliver all of this, KETS will continue building a world-leading team passionate about the companys technology and values. Furthermore, KETS will continue to expand into the global marketplace beyond its first international office following its recent expansion into Paris.

In todays world, we dont go 30 seconds without touching digital technology of some kind, all of which is networked, none of which is quantum-safe, said Dr Chris Erven, CEO and co-founder of KETS Quantum Security. At KETS, weve made it our mission to protect the worlds most valuable resourceinformationfrom the threat of quantum computing. This investment will allow us to make quantum-safe communications solutions ubiquitous and easily integrated. Ultimately, KETS is building a world in which we can trust our digital connections as much as our personal ones.

Olivier Tonneau from Quantonation said, KETS is reaching a key point in its story, with products that will now be available to deploy, bringing clients the worlds first on-chip, quantum-secured solutions protecting against the future threat of quantum computers.

Rick Hao from Speedinvest said, KETS is developing technology with a vision to solve some of the global cybersecurity challenges faced by the largest organisations by combining the power of quantum encryption technologies with the scalability and practicality of integrated, chip-based quantum photonics. Bristol is leading the world on building quantum technology hardware, and Speedinvest is excited to be backing great deep tech entrepreneurs here.

Current cybersecurity is threatened by powerful hardware, sophisticated algorithms and the emergence of quantum computing. KETS on-chip Quantum Key Distribution offers a practical solution by optically distributing secure cryptographic keys. Secret random numbers are at the heart of cryptography. Inferior generators can render communications insecure.

Established in 2016 by Chris Erven, Caroline Clark, and Jake Kennard, KETS Quantum Security develops a unique chip-based solutions provide ultra-low size power and weight without compromising performance. It develops protection against quantum security threats, starting with chip-based, quantum-safe encryption development kits.

Go here to read the rest:

Bristol startup scores 3.1M to control next-gen quantum hacks threatening the future of internet - UKTN (UK Technology News

Stars Made of Antimatter Might Be Lurking in the Universe – Scientific American

Antimatter may seem like the stuff of science fictionespecially because scarcely any of it can be seen in our universe, despite physicists best theories suggesting antimatter should have arisen in equal proportion to normal matter during the big bang. But researchers do regularly produce particles of antimatter in their experiments, and they have the inklings of an explanation for its cosmic absence: Whenever antimatter and normal matter meet, they mutually annihilate in a burst of energy. The slimmest overabundance of normal matter at the beginning of time would have therefore effectively wiped antimatter off the celestial map, save for its occasional production in cosmic-ray strikes, human-made particle accelerators and perhaps certain theorized interactions between particles of dark matter.

That is why physicists were so greatly puzzled back in 2018, when the head of the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) experiment mounted on the exterior of the International Space Station announced that the instrument might have detected two antihelium nucleiin addition to six that were possibly detected earlier. Any way you slice it, known natural processes would struggle to produce enough antihelium for any of it to end up in our space-based detectors. But the easiest of all those hard methods would be to cook up the antihelium inside antistarswhich, of course, do not seem to exist. Despite the fact that the entirely unexpected AMS results have yet to be confirmed, let alone formally published, scientists have taken them seriously, and some have scrambled to find explanations.

Inspired by the tentative AMS findings, a group of researchers recently published a study calculating the maximum number of antimatter stars that could be lurking in our universe, based on a count of currently unexplained gamma-ray sources found by the Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT). Simon Dupourqu, the studys lead author and an astrophysics graduate student at the Research Institute in Astrophysics and Planetology at the University of Toulouse IIIPaul Sabatier in France and the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), made the estimate after looking for antistar candidates in a decades worth of the LATs data.

Antistars would shine much as normal ones doproducing light of the same wavelengths. But they would exist in a matter-dominated universe. As particles and gases made of regular matter fell into such a stars gravitational pull and made contact with its antimatter, the resulting annihilation would produce a flash of high-energy light. We can see this light as a specific color of gamma rays. The team took 10 years of data, which amounted to roughly 6,000 light-emitting objects. They pared the list down to sources that shone with the right gamma frequency and that were not ascribed to previously cataloged astronomical objects. So this left us with 14 candidates, which, in my opinion and my co-authors opinion, too, are not antistars, Dupourqu says. If all of those sources were such stars, however, the group estimated that about one antistar would exist for every 400,000 ordinary ones in our stellar neck of the woods.

In place of any putative antistars, Dupourqu says, these gamma flashes could instead be coming from pulsars or the supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies. Or they might simply be some kind of detector noise. The next step would be to point telescopes at the locations of the 14 candidate sources to find out if they resemble a star or a prosaic gamma-emitting object.

Given some interesting but questionable gamma sources, calculating the conceivable upper limit to the number of antistars is a long shot from actually discovering such astrophysical objects, So most researchers are not leaning toward that conclusion. According to both theory and observations of extragalactic gamma rays, there should be no antistars in our galaxy.... One would only expect upper limits consistent with zero, says Floyd Stecker, an astrophysicist at NASAs Goddard Space Flight Center, who was not involved in the research. However, it is always good to have further observational data confirming this.

If scientists, including the authors, are skeptical of antistars very existence, why are they worth discussing? The mystery lies in those pesky possible detections of antihelium made by the AMS, which remain unexplained. Antiparticles can be created from two known natural sourcescosmic rays and dark matterbut the odds that either of them are responsible appear to be vanishingly slim.

As we increase the size of an atom, it becomes harder and harder to produce as an antiparticle, says Vivian Poulin, a CNRS cosmologist based in Montpelier, France. This means that its rarer and rarer that it occurs, but its allowed by physics. An antiproton is relatively easy to form, yet anything heavier, such as antideuteriuman antiproton plus an antineutronor antiheliumtwo antiprotons plus typically one or two antineutronsgets progressively harder to make as it gets more massive. In a paper published in 2019, Poulin used the AMSs potential antihelium detections to calculate a rough estimate of the prevalence of antistars, which inspired Dupourqus new study.

In a process called spallation, high-energy cosmic rays from exploding stars can ram into interstellar gas particles, says Pierre Salati, a particle astrophysicist at the Annecy-le-Vieux Particle Physics Laboratory, who worked on Poulins 2019 study. The team responsible for the AMSs antiparticle detections claim it may have detected six antihelium-3 nuclei, which would be incredibly rare products of spallation, and two antihelium-4 nuclei, which would be almost statistically impossible to form from cosmic rays, Salati says. (The difference between the two isotopes is the addition of one antineutron.)

As for dark matter, certain models predict that dark matter particles can annihilate one anothera process that could also create antiparticles. But this process still might not be able to make antihelium-4 in high enough quantities for us to have a realistic chance of ever seeing it (if such speculative models reflect reality at all). That is why the antistar hypothesis is still on the table. Verified antihelium detections would be a good indicator for the existence of antistars, but so far the AMS is the lone experiment to offer any such evidencewhich has yet to be granted peer-reviewed publication, Salati notes.

Its a very challenging analysis because, for every one antihelium event, there are 100 million regular helium events, says Ilias Cholis, an astrophysicist at Oakland University, who also worked on Poulins study. It is possible, he and others say, that the detections turn out to be a fluke of a very complicated analysis.

Samuel Ting, a Nobel laureate physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, heads the AMS team and first publicly presented the two latest possible antihelium detectionsthe antihelium-4 candidatesin 2018. We are not yet ready to publish any heavy antimatter results, he says.We are collecting more data before any [further] announcement is made.

It is possible that a different experiment may give answers sooner. The General AntiParticle Spectrometer (GAPS) experiment is a balloon-borne detector that will hunt for antiparticles above Antarctica this year. Finding more antiparticlesantideuterons or even antihelium, in particular, according to Choliswith the GAPS detector would make the AMS results far more convincing.

If antistars were found to be the culprit, that discovery would require a major reenvisioning of the universes evolution: no longer could we relegate antistars and other hypothetical astrophysical objects composed of antimatter to the fringes of reasonable speculation. Even if they do exist, however, antistars probably are not forming now, Salati says, because their presumptive natal clouds of antihydrogen would face steep odds of avoiding annihilation for the past 13 billion years or so. Thus, any antistars that might be found likely would be exceedingly old remnants of the early universe. If so, one deep mystery would be replaced with another: How, exactly, did such ancient relics manage to survive to today? As is often the case, a new discovery raises far more questions than it answers.

Continue reading here:

Stars Made of Antimatter Might Be Lurking in the Universe - Scientific American

Brown alumni to oversee new NASA robotic missions to Venus – Brown University

PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] As NASA embarks upon plans to send a pair of new spacecraft to peer into the thick clouds of Venus over the next decade, each of the two Discovery Program missions will be led by a Brown University graduate.

The DAVINCI+ mission will measure the composition of Venus thick toxic blanket of an atmosphere to understand how it formed and evolved. James Garvin, a scientist at NASAs Goddard Spaceflight Center who earned his Ph.D. in geological sciences from Brown in 1984, will lead the mission. The other mission, VERITAS, will look beneath the clouds to study the planets geology and composition. That mission will be led by Suzanne Smrekar of NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who earned a bachelors degree from Brown in 1984.

Jim Head, a research professor of planetary science at Brown, has worked with both mission leaders and was a member of the VERITAS science team in its earlier stages. He says that Smrekar and Garvin are the right choices to lead these critical missions to Earths nearest neighbor.

Both Sue Smrekar and Jim Garvin are passionate, energetic and incredibly creative planetary scientists, as well as steady, thoughtful leaders, Head said. I've had the pleasure to work extensively with both of them over the years, and I couldn't be more confident that NASA has made the right choices to lead these two missions.

Over the years, Venus has received less attention from NASA than Earths other next-door neighbor, Mars. But thats not because Venus isnt an interesting place, Head says. Venus is a dead ringer for Earth in many ways. The two are similar in diameter, mass and gravity, and both orbit in the so-called habitable zone around the sun. But at some point, the twin planets diverged onto very different paths. While Earths climate is temperate and conducive to life, Venus runaway greenhouse effect turned it into a stifling inferno, with surface temperatures approaching 900 degrees Fahrenheit.

Understanding how and why these twins wound up with such different fates is a critical question in planetary science, Head says.

Venus is the most Earth-like planet but is so different in so many ways, he said. If we dont understand Venus, we surely cannot fully understand the missing chapters in Earths history, and why the atmospheres are so different. Could the hot, inhospitable Venus we see today be where the Earth is heading in the future?

These two missions should shed light on that question and others. DAVINCI+ will use a descent sphere to dip into the Venusian clouds and measure concentrations of noble gases and other elements in the atmosphere. It will also snap the first high-resolution pictures of Venus tesserae, odd geological features that suggest the planet may have had something like Earths plate tectonics. VERITAS, meanwhile, will use radar to map elevation and surface features across much of the planet. That mapping will help to determine if Venus is volcanically active and whether that volcanism is contributing water vapor to the atmosphere. Using an infrared spectrometer, VERITAS will also look at surface rock composition, which remains largely unknown.

Both missions are part of NASAs Discovery Program and were selected through a competitive process. Both are expected to launch in the 2028-2030 timeframe.

Head worked with the VERITAS mission during much of the selection process, but recently stepped aside to make room for younger scientists to join the team, he said. In addition to Smrekar, three members of the current VERITAS team are Brown Ph.D. graduates: Jennifer Whitten, Caleb Fassett and Lauren Jozwiak. Smrekar is a geophysicist who currently serves as deputy principal investigator for NASAs InSIGHT mission to Mars, and was deputy project scientist for the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter mission. Garvin is a veteran planetary scientist who has worked on numerous NASA missions, and served as the agencys chief scientist. Brown graduates Noam Izenberg and Mike Ravine work with Garvin on DAVINCI+. Martha Gilmore, a 1997 Ph.D. graduate, serves on both mission teams.

Brown has had strong presence in space exploration over the years, Head says, and the leadership of Brown alumni in these new missions is the latest example.

Starting with Professor Tim Mutch in the 1960's, Brown's robust planetary geoscience research and teaching program has prepared generations of undergraduates and graduates for leadership and partnership roles in NASA and international exploration missions, including those of the European Space Agency, India, Israel, the Soviet Union and Russia, Head said.Brown graduates have included two NASA Chief Scientists and two NASA Astronauts, one of whom, Jessica Meir, is a candidateto explore the Moonin the Artemis Program.

Its been 30 years since NASAs last mission to Venus, and Head says hes thrilled that the agency has decided its time to go back. The data returned by these two missions will shed critical light not only on Venus, but on Earth as well, he says.

When we explore the solar system, were doing comparative planetology, Head said. Everything we learn about the other terrestrial planets helps us to understand our own home, and answer critical questions about how our world came to be and how it will evolve in the future.

See the original post:

Brown alumni to oversee new NASA robotic missions to Venus - Brown University

Op-Ed: Eugenics is making a comeback. Resist, before …

Provided by The LA Times President Trump speaks at a campaign rally Sept. 18 in Bemidji, Minn., where he made remarks espousing eugenics. (Associated Press)

Politicians often flatter their audiences, but at a rally in Bemidji, Minn., last month, President Trump found an unusual thing to praise about the nearly all-white crowd: its genetics. You have good genes, he insisted. A lot of it is about the genes, isnt it, dont you believe? The racehorse theory. You have good genes in Minnesota.

In case it was not clear from the sea of white faces that he was making a point about race, Trump later said the quiet part out loud. Every family in Minnesota needs to know about Sleepy Joe Bidens extreme plan to flood your state with an influx of refugees from Somalia, from other places all over the planet, he declared.

Trumps ugly endorsement of race-based eugenics got national attention, but in a presidency filled with outrages, our focus quickly moved to the next. Besides, this wasnt the first time wed heard about these views. A "Frontline" documentary reported in 2016 that Trump believed the racehorse theory of human development that he referred to in Minnesota that superior men and women will have superior children. That same year, the Huffington Post released a video collecting Trumps statements on human genetics, including his declarations that Im a gene believer and Im proud to have that German blood.

On eugenics, as in so many areas, the scariest thing about Trumps views is not the fact that he holds them, but that there is no shortage of Americans who share them. The United States has a long, dark history with eugenics. Starting in 1907, a majority of states passed laws authorizing the sterilization of people deemed to have undesirable genes, for reasons as varied as feeblemindedness and alcoholism. The Supreme Court upheld these laws by an 8-1 vote, in the infamous 1927 case Buck vs. Bell, and as many as 70,000 Americans were sterilized for eugenic reasons in the 20th century.

Americas passion for eugenics waned after World War II, when Nazism discredited the idea of dividing people based on the quality of their genes. But in recent years, public support for eugenics has made a comeback. Steve King, a Republican congressman from Iowa, tweeted in 2017, We cant restore our civilization with somebody elses babies. The comment struck many as a claim that American children were genetically superior, though King later insisted he was concerned with the culture, not the blood of foreign babies.

Eugenics has also had a resurgence in England, where the movement was first launched in the 1880s by Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin. In February, Andrew Sabisky, an advisor to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, resigned after it was revealed that he had reportedly written blog posts suggesting that there are genetic differences in intelligence among races, and that compulsory contraception could be used to prevent the rise of a permanent underclass. Richard Dawkins, one of Britains most prominent scientists, added fuel to the fire by tweeting that although eugenics could be criticized on moral or ideological grounds, of course it would work in practice. Eugenics works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses, he said. Why on earth wouldnt it work for humans?

There is reason to believe the eugenics movement will continue to grow. Americas first embrace of it came at a time when immigration levels were high, and it was closely tied to fears that genetically inferior foreigners were hurting the nations gene pool. Eugenicists persuaded Congress to pass the Immigration Act of 1924, which sharply reduced the number of Italian, Jewish and Asian people allowed in.

Today, the percentage of Americans who were born outside the United States is the highest it has been since 1910, and fear of immigrants is again an animating force in politics. As our nation continues to become more diverse, the sort of xenophobia that fueled Trump's and Kings comments is likely to produce more talk of better genes and babies.

It is critically important to push back against these toxic ideas. One way to do this is by ensuring that people who promote eugenics are denounced and kept out of positions of power. It is encouraging that Sabisky was forced out and that King was defeated for reelection in his Republican primary in June. Hopefully, Trump will be the next to go.

Education, including an honest reckoning with our own tragic eugenics history, is another form of resistance. It is starting to happen: Stanford University just announced that it is removing the name of its first president, David Starr Jordan, a leading eugenicist, from campus buildings, and that it will actively work to better explain his legacy. We need more of this kind of self-scrutiny from universities like Harvard, Yale and many others that promoted eugenics and pseudo race science, as well as institutions like the American Museum of Natural History, which in 1921 hosted the Second International Eugenics Congress, at which eugenicists advocated for eliminating the unfit.

Trumps appalling remarks in Minnesota show how serious the situation is now. Seventy-five years after the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps, a United States president not only spoke about good genes in racialized terms he believed that his observations would help him to win in the relatively liberal state of Minnesota. It is crucial that everyone who understands the horrors of eugenics works to defeat these views before they become any more popular.

Adam Cohen, a former member of the New York Times editorial board, is the author of "Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, American Eugenics, and the Sterilization of Carrie Buck" and, this year, "Supreme Inequality: The Supreme Courts Fifty-Year Battle for a More Unjust America."

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

See the rest here:

Op-Ed: Eugenics is making a comeback. Resist, before ...

The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics | History …

Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminatedmillions in his quest for a co-called "Master Race."

But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didn't originate with Hitler. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little known, role in the American eugenics movement's campaign for ethnic cleansing.

Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in twenty-seven states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.

California was considered an epicenter of the American eugenics movement. During the Twentieth Century's first decades, California's eugenicists included potent but little known race scientists, such as Army venereal disease specialist Dr. Paul Popenoe, citrus magnate and Polytechnic benefactor Paul Gosney, Sacramento banker Charles M. Goethe, as well as members of the California State Board of Charities and Corrections and the University of California Board of Regents.

Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America's most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Stamford, Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics' racist aims.

Stanford president David Starr Jordan originated the notion of "race and blood" in his 1902 racial epistle "Blood of a Nation," in which the university scholar declared that human qualities and conditions such as talent and poverty were passed through the blood.

In 1904, the Carnegie Institution established a laboratory complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island that stockpiled millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation's social service agencies and associations.

The Harriman railroad fortune paid local charities, such as the New York Bureau of Industries and Immigration, to seek out Jewish, Italian and other immigrants in New York and other crowded cities and subject them to deportation, trumped up confinement or forced sterilization.

The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz.

Much of the spiritual guidance and political agitation for the American eugenics movement came from California's quasi-autonomous eugenic societies, such as the Pasadena-based Human Betterment Foundation and the California branch of the American Eugenics Society, which coordinated much of their activity with the Eugenics Research Society in Long Island. These organizations--which functioned as part of a closely-knit network--published racist eugenic newsletters and pseudoscientific journals, such as Eugenical News and Eugenics, and propagandized for the Nazis.

Eugenics was born as a scientific curiosity in the Victorian age. In 1863, Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, theorized that if talented people only married other talented people, the result would be measurably better offspring. At the turn of the last century, Galton's ideas were imported into the United States just as Gregor Mendel's principles of heredity were rediscovered. American eugenic advocates believed with religious fervor that the same Mendelian concepts determining the color and size of peas, corn and cattle also governed the social and intellectual character of man.

In an America demographically reeling from immigration upheaval and torn by post-Reconstruction chaos, race conflict was everywhere in the early twentieth century. Elitists, utopians and so-called "progressives" fused their smoldering race fears and class bias with their desire to make a better world. They reinvented Galton's eugenics into a repressive and racist ideology. The intent: populate the earth with vastly more of their own socio-economic and biological kind--and less or none of everyone else.

The superior species the eugenics movement sought was populated not merely by tall, strong, talented people. Eugenicists craved blond, blue-eyed Nordic types. This group alone, they believed, was fit to inherit the earth. In the process, the movement intended to subtract emancipated Negroes, immigrant Asian laborers, Indians, Hispanics, East Europeans, Jews, dark-haired hill folk, poor people, the infirm and really anyone classified outside the gentrified genetic lines drawn up by American raceologists.

How? By identifying so-called "defective" family trees and subjecting them to lifelong segregation and sterilization programs to kill their bloodlines. The grand plan was to literally wipe away the reproductive capability of those deemed weak and inferior--the so-called "unfit." The eugenicists hoped to neutralize the viability of 10 percent of the population at a sweep, until none were left except themselves.

Eighteen solutions were explored in a Carnegie-supported 1911 "Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder's Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population." Point eight was euthanasia.

The most commonly suggested method of eugenicide in America was a "lethal chamber" or public locally operated gas chambers. In 1918, Popenoe, the Army venereal disease specialist during World War I, co-wrote the widely used textbook, Applied Eugenics, which argued, "From an historical point of view, the first method which presents itself is execution Its value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated." Applied Eugenics also devoted a chapter to "Lethal Selection," which operated "through the destruction of the individual by some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria, or by bodily deficiency."

Eugenic breeders believed American society was not ready to implement an organized lethal solution. But many mental institutions and doctors practiced improvised medical lethality and passive euthanasia on their own. One institution in Lincoln, Illinois fed its incoming patients milk from tubercular cows believing a eugenically strong individual would be immune. Thirty to forty percent annual death rates resulted at Lincoln. Some doctors practiced passive eugenicide one newborn infant at a time. Others doctors at mental institutions engaged in lethal neglect.

Nonetheless, with eugenicide marginalized, the main solution for eugenicists was the rapid expansion of forced segregation and sterilization, as well as more marriage restrictions. California led the nation, performing nearly all sterilization procedures with little or no due process. In its first twenty-five years of eugenic legislation, California sterilized 9,782 individuals, mostly women. Many were classified as "bad girls," diagnosed as "passionate," "oversexed" or "sexually wayward." At Sonoma, some women were sterilized because of what was deemed an abnormally large clitoris or labia.

In 1933 alone, at least 1,278 coercive sterilizations were performed, 700 of which were on women. The state's two leading sterilization mills in 1933 were Sonoma State Home with 388 operations and Patton State Hospital with 363 operations. Other sterilization centers included Agnews, Mendocino, Napa, Norwalk, Stockton and Pacific Colony state hospitals.

Even the United States Supreme Court endorsed aspects of eugenics. In its infamous 1927 decision, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. Three generations of imbeciles are enough." This decision opened the floodgates for thousands to be coercively sterilized or otherwise persecuted as subhuman. Years later, the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials quoted Holmes's words in their own defense.

Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German officials and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.

During the '20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany's fascist eugenicists. In Mein Kampf, published in 1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. "There is today one state," wrote Hitler, "in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States."

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. "I have studied with great interest," he told a fellow Nazi, "the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock."

Hitler even wrote a fan letter to American eugenic leader Madison Grant calling his race-based eugenics book, The Passing of the Great Race his "bible."

Hitler's struggle for a superior race would be a mad crusade for a Master Race. Now, the American term "Nordic" was freely exchanged with "Germanic" or "Aryan." Race science, racial purity and racial dominance became the driving force behind Hitler's Nazism. Nazi eugenics would ultimately dictate who would be persecuted in a Reich-dominated Europe, how people would live, and how they would die. Nazi doctors would become the unseen generals in Hitler's war against the Jews and other Europeans deemed inferior. Doctors would create the science, devise the eugenic formulas, and even hand-select the victims for sterilization, euthanasia and mass extermination.

During the Reich's early years, eugenicists across America welcomed Hitler's plans as the logical fulfillment of their own decades of research and effort. California eugenicists republished Nazi propaganda for American consumption. They also arranged for Nazi scientific exhibits, such as an August 1934 display at the L.A. County Museum, for the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association.

In 1934, as Germany's sterilizations were accelerating beyond 5,000 per month, the California eugenics leader C. M. Goethe upon returning from Germany ebulliently bragged to a key colleague, "You will be interested to know, that your work has played a powerful part in shaping the opinions of the group of intellectuals who are behind Hitler in this epoch-making program. Everywhere I sensed that their opinions have been tremendously stimulated by American thought.I want you, my dear friend, to carry this thought with you for the rest of your life, that you have really jolted into action a great government of 60 million people."

That same year, ten years after Virginia passed its sterilization act, Joseph DeJarnette, superintendent of Virginia's Western State Hospital, observed in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, "The Germans are beating us at our own game."

More than just providing the scientific roadmap, America funded Germany's eugenic institutions. By 1926, Rockefeller had donated some $410,000 -- almost $4 million in 21st-Century money -- to hundreds of German researchers. In May 1926, Rockefeller awarded $250,000 to the German Psychiatric Institute of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, later to become the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry. Among the leading psychiatrists at the German Psychiatric Institute was Ernst Rdin, who became director and eventually an architect of Hitler's systematic medical repression.

Another in the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute's eugenic complex of institutions was the Institute for Brain Research. Since 1915, it had operated out of a single room. Everything changed when Rockefeller money arrived in 1929. A grant of $317,000 allowed the Institute to construct a major building and take center stage in German race biology. The Institute received additional grants from the Rockefeller Foundation during the next several years. Leading the Institute, once again, was Hitler's medical henchman Ernst Rdin. Rdin's organization became a prime director and recipient of the murderous experimentation and research conducted on Jews, Gypsies and others.

Beginning in 1940, thousands of Germans taken from old age homes, mental institutions and other custodial facilities were systematically gassed. Between 50,000 and 100,000 were eventually killed.

Leon Whitney, executive secretary of the American Eugenics Society declared of Nazism, "While we were pussy-footing aroundthe Germans were calling a spade a spade."

A special recipient of Rockefeller funding was the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics in Berlin. For decades, American eugenicists had craved twins to advance their research into heredity. The Institute was now prepared to undertake such research on an unprecedented level. On May 13, 1932, the Rockefeller Foundation in New York dispatched a radiogram to its Paris office: JUNE MEETING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS OVER THREE YEAR PERIOD TO KWG INSTITUTE ANTHROPOLOGY FOR RESEARCH ON TWINS AND EFFECTS ON LATER GENERATIONS OF SUBSTANCES TOXIC FOR GERM PLASM.

At the time of Rockefeller's endowment, Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer, a hero in American eugenics circles, functioned as a head of the Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics. Rockefeller funding of that Institute continued both directly and through other research conduits during Verschuer's early tenure. In 1935, Verschuer left the Institute to form a rival eugenics facility in Frankfurt that was much heralded in the American eugenic press. Research on twins in the Third Reich exploded, backed up by government decrees. Verschuer wrote in Der Erbarzt, a eugenic doctor's journal he edited, that Germany's war would yield a "total solution to the Jewish problem."

Verschuer had a long-time assistant. His name was Josef Mengele. On May 30, 1943, Mengele arrived at Auschwitz. Verschuer notified the German Research Society, "My assistant, Dr. Josef Mengele (M.D., Ph.D.) joined me in this branch of research. He is presently employed as Hauptsturmfhrer [captain] and camp physician in the Auschwitz concentration camp. Anthropological testing of the most diverse racial groups in this concentration camp is being carried out with permission of the SS Reichsfhrer [Himmler]."

Mengele began searching the boxcar arrivals for twins. When he found them, he performed beastly experiments, scrupulously wrote up the reports and sent the paperwork back to Verschuer's institute for evaluation. Often, cadavers, eyes and other body parts were also dispatched to Berlin's eugenic institutes.

Rockefeller executives never knew of Mengele. With few exceptions, the foundation had ceased all eugenic studies in Nazi-occupied Europe before the war erupted in 1939. But by that time the die had been cast. The talented men Rockefeller and Carnegie financed, the institutions they helped found, and the science it helped create took on a scientific momentum of their own.

After the war, eugenics was declared a crime against humanity--an act of genocide. Germans were tried and they cited the California statutes in their defense. To no avail. They were found guilty.

However, Mengele's boss Verschuer escaped prosecution. Verschuer re-established his connections with California eugenicists who had gone underground and renamed their crusade "human genetics." Typical was an exchange July 25, 1946 when Popenoe wrote Verschuer, "It was indeed a pleasure to hear from you again. I have been very anxious about my colleagues in Germany. I suppose sterilization has been discontinued in Germany?" Popenoe offered tidbits about various American eugenic luminaries and then sent various eugenic publications. In a separate package, Popenoe sent some cocoa, coffee and other goodies.

Verschuer wrote back, "Your very friendly letter of 7/25 gave me a great deal of pleasure and you have my heartfelt thanks for it. The letter builds another bridge between your and my scientific work; I hope that this bridge will never again collapse but rather make possible valuable mutual enrichment and stimulation."

Soon, Verschuer once again became a respected scientist in Germany and around the world. In 1949, he became a corresponding member of the newly formed American Society of Human Genetics, organized by American eugenicists and geneticists.

In the fall of 1950, the University of Mnster offered Verschuer a position at its new Institute of Human Genetics, where he later became a dean. In the early and mid-1950s, Verschuer became an honorary member of numerous prestigious societies, including the Italian Society of Genetics, the Anthropological Society of Vienna, and the Japanese Society for Human Genetics.

Human genetics' genocidal roots in eugenics were ignored by a victorious generation that refused to link itself to the crimes of Nazism and by succeeding generations that never knew the truth of the years leading up to war. Now governors of five states, including California have issued public apologies to their citizens, past and present, for sterilization and other abuses spawned by the eugenics movement.

Human genetics became an enlightened endeavor in the late twentieth century. Hard-working, devoted scientists finally cracked the human code through the Human Genome Project. Now, every individual can be biologically identified and classified by trait and ancestry. Yet even now, some leading voices in the genetic world are calling for a cleansing of the unwanted among us, and even a master human species.

There is understandable wariness about more ordinary forms of abuse, for example, in denying insurance or employment based on genetic tests. On October 14, America's first genetic anti-discrimination legislation passed the Senate by unanimous vote. Yet because genetics research is global, no single nation's law can stop the threats.

This article was first published in the San Francisco Chronicle and is reprinted with permission of the author.

Read the original here:

The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics | History ...

What the Public Gets Wrong About "Reason-Based" Abortion Bans – Ms. Magazine

In a post-Dobbs world, previability abortion might be even more restrictedor not exist at all. So-called eugenic prohibitions will be the first past the constitutional post.

The Supreme Court recently agreed to hear Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization, a case that will decide whether restrictions that states place on previability abortions are constitutional. Much commentary has focused on the real possibility the court will overturn Roe v. Wade. Less attention has been paid to another, potentially more likely outcome: The court could uphold Roeand preserve constitutional protection for abortionbut create exceptions for previability bans. Indeed, thats similar to what happened in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, a decision in which the court preserved constitutional abortion rights, yet rejected Roes trimester framework and weakened protections for those rights.

Over the last year, states have enacted numerous previability restrictions: Texas just passed a law banning abortions at six weeks, to take one example. A different law that applies before viability has received less press, but is increasingly popular with anti-abortion legislators. Twenty states have adopted laws that prohibit abortions performed because of the fetuss sex, race or disability. In a post-Dobbs world, where some previability abortion bans are permissible, these so-called eugenic prohibitions will be the first past the constitutional post.

Federal appellate courts are split on the constitutionality of reason-based bans after the Sixth Circuit upheld Ohios law prohibition on abortion because of a Down syndrome diagnosis. Reason-based bans apply throughout pregnancy, but Ohios law responds specifically to innovations in early prenatal genetic testing. With a non-invasive prenatal test, patients can detect a limited number of conditions, including Down syndrome, with a blood test administered during the first trimester of pregnancy.

The new conservative majority Supreme Court is poised to decide the question of whether a state can vet someones reason to end a pregnancy.In a 2019 concurring opinion, Justice Thomas, writing about a race-based ban, opined that to uphold such a law would constitutionalize the views of the 20th-century eugenics movement. Essentially, Justice Thomas argued that anti-abortion laws are on the side of equality and justice. And an increasing segment of the public appears to agree. Reason-based bans like Ohios make sense to people as the most recent Gallup poll reports. Almost 50 percent of people responded that abortions because of a Down syndrome diagnosis should be illegal.

That the Supreme Court might allow states to make criminals out of health professionals and possibly patients who choose to end a previability pregnancy is startling. But what is also troubling is how popular opinion favors substituting the states judgment for that of the pregnant person, at least in certain circumstances.Moreover, the polls question, as well as public discourse, doesnt capture the complexity of the issues individuals face when their fetus is diagnosed with a genetic anomaly or another condition. Just asking whether abortion should be legal or illegal ignores how contextwhat support or needs does a pregnant person have or the stage of pregnancyshapes abortion decisions.

Whether or not people feel equipped to raise and the meet the needs of children is something only they can discern. But in the case of prenatal diagnosis and abortion, new technology and states abortion animus are on a collision course. On the one hand, pregnant people are encouraged to learn as much about their pregnancies as early as possible. On the other, states are legislating to bar what people do with that information.

Perhaps more saliently, criminalizing choice does not create the conditions for racial, gender and disability equality. And policing pregnant peoples decisions does not result in deeper inclusivity or greater acceptance of and support for people with Down syndrome, for instance. To the contrary, reason-based bans do nothing to assist potential parents and ignore the many considerations that drive peoples decisions to raise a child.

Instead, these laws incrementally advance an agenda of ending legal abortion for all reasons. Equating decisions to terminate a pregnancy with the state-sponsored eugenics gives cold comfort to anyone who receives a diagnosis of fetal impairment and further stigmatizes their choices. And make no mistake, there will be more reason-based bans: not being able to afford another child or the interruption of other life plans will be next on the chopping block, denounced as frivolous in comparison to an alleged state interest in protecting potential life or the health of the pregnant person.

Drawing the line for abortion restrictions at viability always has been a constitutional compromise; one that protected early abortion in exchange for recognizing that states could limit patients decision-making at some point in a pregnancy. Post-Dobbs, previability abortion might be even more restrictedor not exist at all. In either scenario, nationwide rights to abortion could be established by federal law.

One such proposal is the Womens Health Protection Act, which soon will be introduced in Congress. The legislation would preempt state laws that ban abortion before viability and prohibit reason-based bans specifically. We may not be able to count on the Supreme Court to protect abortion rights. But we should demand laws more in step with peoples lived realities from our legislators.

Up next:

If you found this articlehelpful,please consider supporting our independent reporting and truth-telling for as little as $5 per month.

Read this article:

What the Public Gets Wrong About "Reason-Based" Abortion Bans - Ms. Magazine

EDITORIAL: NFL, at last, comes to realization that ‘race-norming’ should be discontinued – York Dispatch

YORK DISPATCH EDITORIAL BOARD Published 1:00 a.m. ET June 9, 2021

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell(Photo: Luis M. Alvarez, AP)

The National Football League has finally seen the light.

Its just too bad that it took an avalanche of bad publicity for Commissioner Roger Goodell and the league to finally reverse course on race-norming.

For those who missed it, the NFL has promised to end the controversial practice, which assumed Black players started out with a lower level of cognitive function. That assumption made it harder for Black NFL retirees to prove that they qualified for payouts in the 2017 $1 billion-plus concussion settlement.

The NFL only made the decision after a pair of Black players filed a civil rights lawsuit over the practice, medical experts raised concerns and a group of NFL families last month dropped 50,000 petitions at the federal courthouse in Philadelphia where the lawsuit had been thrown out by the judge overseeing the settlement.

Race-norming sounds like something from the long-disgraced eugenics movement that aimed to improve the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior, while promoting those judged to be superior.

The NFL said in a statement that no actual discrimination took place in the administration of the settlement and that the race-norming practice was never mandatory, but left to the discretion of doctors taking part in the settlement program.

That sounds very much like double talk.

How the NFL couldve considered the use of race-norming under any circumstances in a league that is 74% Black is almost mind boggling.

Harry Edwards(Photo: Josie Lepe, AP)

Edwards weighs in: Harry Edwards, a noted sociologist and a longtime staff consultant for the San Francisco 49ers, has spent 50 years studying the intersection of sports and society.

He rightly called the race-norming practice by the NFL ridiculous, asinine and almost comedic. He added that its morally unconscionable, politically unsustainable and legally indefensible.

Thats quite a condemnation from a man who has long ties to the NFL.

Checkered history: Of course, the NFLs history with race relations is checkered at best.

Heres just a recent example.

Quarterback Colin Kaepernick led the San Francisco 49ers to a Super Bowl, but still cant even get a tryout for an NFL job. Tim Tebow, meanwhile, was a first-round bust, but is still getting an NFL opportunity with the Jacksonville Jaguars at age 33 despite not playing in the league for more than six years.

Like what you're reading?: Not a subscriber? Click here for full access to The York Dispatch.

Kaepernick is Black and well known for social activism, especially his decision to kneel for the national anthem. Tebow is white and a beloved figure in Florida, where he starred for the Florida Gators.

History of foot-dragging: Then theres the NFLs foot-dragging when it came to the concussion issue in the first place.

The NFL spent years denying any link between head injuries suffered while playing football with long-term brain disorders.

Finally, in the 2017 concussion settlement, the league caved in to the obvious football is a violent, collision sport that will lead to concussions, which can leave permanent brain damage.

The NFL likes to bill itself as an organization that is ahead of the curve on the issue of social justice. But when given the opportunity to act on those supposed beliefs, the league has repeatedly failed to act in an appropriate and timely manner.

At least the NFL has finally come to the realization that race-norming has no place in the concussion settlement.

Its just unfortunate that it took the league so long to see the light.

Read or Share this story: https://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/opinion/editorials/2021/06/09/editorial-nfl-finally-reverses-course-race-norming/7602003002/

Read more:

EDITORIAL: NFL, at last, comes to realization that 'race-norming' should be discontinued - York Dispatch

NFL agrees to end ‘race-norming’ – MSR News Online

Facebook Twitter LinkedInReddit EmailPrint

The practice disadvantaged Black players seeking injury settlements

Last week the NFL called for an end to what has been referred to as race-norming in determining settlement payments for players who suffered debilitating brain injuries as a result of their time in the league. The decision came after a mainstream news special, a lawsuit by two Black players, and more than a dozen wives of Black retired players organizing and sending the judge presiding over the settlement a petition with nearly 50,000 signatures calling for an end to race-norming.

Doctors had denied Black players compensation because they assumed that Black players started with less cognitive brain function than their White teammates. In other words, the Black players were considered less intelligent. For Black players to qualify for settlement relief they must have had an even greater reduction in cognitive brain function than their fellow White players.

Race-norming is the practice of adjusting test scores to account for the race or ethnicity of the test-taker. Its morally unconscionable, most certainly politically unsustainable, and legally indefensible, said sports sociologist Harry Edwards in an LA Times interview upon hearing the news that the NFL is eliminating race-based norms in their evaluation of players seeking compensation for their injuries sustained while in the league.

You cant have 74% of the players in the league Black, but when it comes to actually being able to claim access to funds resulting from brain damage, dementia, CTE, other kind of cognitive-deficit-inducing conditions that are directly related to football, all of a sudden theres a different standard for them. Theres a presumption that they [Blacks] come in at a cognitively lower ranking.

The NFL in its defense said there was no discrimination and that if there was it had been based on individual doctors evaluations of testing scores. We are committed to eliminating race-based norms in the program and more broadly in the neuropsychological community, wrote the NFL in a statement, while maintaining that no such discrimination took place in the administration of the settlement.

However, the civil rights suit brought by Najeh Davenport and Kevin Henry alleged that they had been denied compensation for their brain injuries because of their race. When they use a different scale for African Americans versus any other race, thats literally the definition of systematic racism, said Davenport.

Cyril Smith, a lawyer for Henry and Davenport, asserted that White players dementia claims were being approved at two to three times the rate of those of Black players. But Smith was unable to substantiate his claim because, he said, Seeger and the NFL had not shared any data on the approval rates for dementia claims by White and Black players.

The presumed effort to defraud Black players of their share of money promised to all players who suffered brain injury harkens back to pseudoscience and old fashioned eugenics of the late 19th century that attempted to use science to defend White Supremacy.

The tests assume that Black players have lower cognitive function at baseline. The NFL has defended the practice in the past saying this was based on long-established tests and widely accepted scoring methodologies, but theres no scientific evidence to show that Black patients have lower cognitive function, of course, said Massachusetts General Hospital resident physician Dr. Darshali Vyas. And its at odds with all of our genetic understanding of race to begin with.

More than 7,000 former NFLers took the free neuropsychological and neurological exams offered in the settlement. There are no clear numbers on how many Black players were denied settlement compensation because of the bias in the testing. Evaluations were given, but many of the players apparently do not know how they actually scored on their exams.

More here:

NFL agrees to end 'race-norming' - MSR News Online

Erika DeBenedictis and the Cost of Playing God – Discovery Institute

Photo: Erika DeBenedictis, via YouTube (screenshot).

Erika DeBenedictis is not a mad scientist. Shes the class nerd who made good photogenic, articulate, driven, and full of ambition to leave the world a better place than she found it. When it comes to her specialty of bio-engineering, she means that quite literally: She can make the world a better place, right down to the design of our own genes.In her TEDx talk, Its Time for Intelligent Design, which biochemist andEvolution NewswriterEmily Reevesbroke down recently in a carefully detailed series, DeBenedictis encourages people to not be as timid as all that as they approach the world as-is. It is beautiful, yes, but its not perfect. Far from it.

This is where DeBenedictis comes in, or hopes to anyway. But she knows what youre thinking. She knows the free-association that goes on in peoples heads when they hear a phrase like gene editing. Probably your mind is already getting carried away with icky things like eugenics, designer babies, creating kids who are tall and blond and good at basketball, etc., etc. But she wants to assure you thatthisis not atalllikethat. What she has in mind would only ever be used ethically and would only ever be used in carefully controlled ways to effect carefully controlled solutions to human suffering. Because thats what everyone would want to use it for, right?

What could possibly go wrong?

I wont recap the splendid work Emily Reeves has already done here dissecting the TEDx talk from a scientific angle. Read her entire series under the Erika DeBenedictis tag here. Its highly instructive. Reeves, like DeBenedictis herself, is a recently minted science PhD. She politely but perceptively lays out weakness after weakness in Erikas thesis. Underlying it all is the fact that DeBenedictis has simply begged the question on the nature of biological design, or lack thereof. Her thesis is that Since all this [gestures] came about over 4 billion years of random chance, we should expect to find bugs in the system. So lets get debugging.

There are a lot of angles from which to attack this, and Reeves covers many of them. Theres the very fact that in talking about bugs in the system, were acknowledging a system to begin with. Theres the fact that since natural selection is supposed to select things for a reason, from the mainstream scientists own perspective theres a reason to have a care before assuming something thats survived this long must be a glitch. Reeves even finds papers in the literature that discuss the very example DeBenedictis raises in her video, the puzzle of the INK4a/ARF overlap, speculating openly about alternative explanations.

In listening to rhetoric like Erikas, Im always put in mind of someone opening up the tower-case of a computer, disassembling it, and nonchalantly planning which bits hes going to leave out when he reassembles it, since he can clearly perceive theyre not needed. We would fire any such technician on the spot, because it is obvious that the tower-case has been designed the way it is, with the parts it has, for a purpose. The analogy makes itself. DeBenedictis wants to fix broken stuff. But how does the saying go? If it aint broke, dont fix it.

Dr. He Jiankui didnt think he was a mad scientist either. He just wanted to help HIV+ couples have babies without fear of passing on the curse of their infection. Do you see your friends or relatives who may have a disease? They need help, Jiankui said at a summit in Hong Kong, rising nervously to present his research. For millions of families with inherited disease or infectious disease, if we have this technology we can help them. Thats all he wants to help. Who could blame him for that?

Almost everyone, in fact. The Center for Genetics and Societytraces the whole saga, quoting peer after peer who came forward to condemn Jiankui for his reckless malpractice after it was discovered he had attempted to edit the genomes of twin baby girls. Well intentioned or not, it was rogue work, with all manner of potential complications (because, as you may have noticed, our genomes are slightly complicated). Thats the thing about roads paved with good intentions: They can still lead somewhere you very much dont want to go.

But as we all know, or at least all of us except Erika DeBenedictis, not everyones intentions are good. There is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that powerful bio-tech will never be turned to purposes with far more deliberate bad consequences than the purposes of a reckless young rogue scientist. Just have a look at some of the people watching him from the sidelines as quoted in the CGS report, saying at worst he had a too-fast trigger finger. As Jordan Peterson loves to point out, plenty of Marxists were well intentioned, too. They were usually the first ones to be shot and replaced.

Dr. Jiankuis experiment didnt even succeed on its own terms. One of the twins was still vulnerable to HIV+ even after his attempt to edit her genome. This led some to question his choice to implant both embryos at all. Why choose this [failed] embryo? asked Seoul National University geneticist Jin-Soo Kim at the Hong Kong summit. It just doesnt make sense scientifically.

Translation: The scientific thing to do was to scrap the embryo, like all failed experiments. To quote Audrey Hepburns French cooking school instructor in the classic Hollywood movieSabrina, New egg! The irony is rich: Here he was in fact cooperating with the parents in the one ethical element of this whole affair, taking responsibility for both the lives created in the process, and yet this in itself drew criticism.

But this shouldnt surprise. After all, creating and disposing of failed embryonic experiments is already routine practice in our nations labs, at least up to 14 days when the neural system begins to grow, at which point scientistsare nowallowed to keep experimenting, actually, as of last month. So there went that particular arbitrary barrier. One down, who knows how many more to go? (Of course,Natureassures us that new ISSCR guidelines will allow more extended experimentation on a case-by-case basis, subject to several phases of review. As Wesley Smithputs it atNational Review, Ri-i-i-i-ight.)

Meanwhile,Forbesreportsthat the U.S. Senate has just killed legislation that would have banned taxpayer-funded human-chimera experiments. Whether true chimeras are an actual physical/metaphysical possibility is a fascinating question, deserving its own discussion, but whats not in question is the fact that any such experiment beginning with a human embryo is unethical out of the gate. Yet its clear that enough scientists are eager to get experimenting that the pressure was enough to kill the bill. But remember, Erika DeBenedictis assures us we can trust scientists. Theyre only trying to help.

I am sure Dr. DeBenedictis is trying to help. I am far less confident that her conception of helping wont lead to hurting, even on its own terms. And when it comes to the cost of playing with life in the lab, that tally counter isnt stopping. It never has stopped. It never will.

Read the original:

Erika DeBenedictis and the Cost of Playing God - Discovery Institute

We never needed a Jan. 6 Commission. We need a Nov. 3 Commission. This is why | Bruce Ledewitz – Pennsylvania Capital-Star

On May 28, Republicans in the U.S. Senate blocked the formation of an independent commission to study the events of Jan. 6.

Thats OK. We never needed that commission. We already know all we need to know about the insurrection.

What America needs, instead, is a national commission to study the 2020 presidential election. We need to convince millions of Americans that the election was not stolen from Donald Trump.

We can see how useless a Jan. 6 commission would have been from the questions that a New York Times story claimed may now go unanswered. The main issues raised concerns about why security preparations for the expected demonstration were so lax, and why the response to the attack on the Capitol was so delayed.

But we already know the answers. The officials involved were loath to break publicly with former President Donald Trump, and brand his supporters potential terrorists, even after the attack began.

The article also asked, What was Mr. Trump doing during the attack?

We already know that too. He was cheering the attackers on. It will never be known whether Trump seriously believed a crowd could force then-Vice President Mike Pence and the Congress to reject the certified electors and hand him the election.

He might just have been expressing frustration with the way the election turned out. But a commission would not answer that.

Those constitutional amendments were aimed at the Pa. Supreme Court as much as they were at Wolf | Bruce Ledewitz

The questions we do need answered include, for example, the degree of coordination among extremist groups on Jan. 6, will come out during the upcoming trials of the perpetrators.

As for questions concerning the killing of protestor Ashli Babbitt by the Capitol police, Americans now realize how important it is to investigate all uses of lethal force by the police. But we hardly need a national commission for that.

Republicans charge that the real motivation behind the proposed commission was to promote Trump bashing prior to the 2022 midterm elections. There is an element of truth to that charge.

The deeper concern with the failure to constitute a Jan. 6 Commission was expressed by writers such as Charles Blow, who fear that American democracy is slipping away.

He is right to be concerned about that. But the reason American democracy is slipping away is not the insurrection Jan. 6. It is the backdrop and instigation of that attack. Millions of Americans, perhaps a quarter of all voters, believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

And they believe this because Trump and other Republican leaders have relentlessly claimed that in 2020 there was fraud and election rigging.

Pa. Rep. Mike Kelly came closer than you think to stealing the election for Trump | Bruce Ledewitz

We need an independent commission to confront that lie, to investigate fairly and transparently every claim of fraud, every assertion of illegality, no matter how outlandish or unlikely.

Then we need a simple Congressional resolution that states, Joe Biden was legitimately elected President; there was no steal. The vote would be yes or no.

Let anyone with a doubt see that whole process unfold in the light of national publicity.

You will not have a democracy for long if 50 million Americans believe that Trump was actually reelected.

Even now, Republican legislators in swing states are preparing the legal groundwork for rejecting the next popular vote for president and substituting Republican electors instead. Their legal authority for doing so is dubious but untested.

No one should want the current U.S. Supreme Court to decide that issue in 2024.

These efforts would be impossible without the widespread belief among Republicans that the 2020 election was fraudulent and that democracy has already died.

There are several reasons why Democrats are not pressing for an independent commission to examine the 2020 election.

First, Democrats do not want to do anything that might cast doubt on the legitimacy of Bidens election. It is Republican state legislators, as in Pennsylvania, who have been conducting investigations into claims of election fraud.

But this concern misses the point: none of these investigations have uncovered fraud or illegality. It is true that Republicans have proposed new election laws to combat alleged fraud, but their actions have been taken in bad faith after their own investigations have failed to find anything wrong. An independent, national commission would make that clear.

Second, Democrats assume that such a commission would be useless because you cannot convince these people. This is the Hillary Clinton basket of deplorables syndrome.

It is not necessary to convince everyone. To eliminate the myth of the stolen election it is only necessary to confront and undermine that lie in a serious and open way.

Democrats have a hard time understanding that many of the demonstrators on Jan. 6 were sincere in their belief that the Presidential election had been stolen. Democrats like to think the demonstrator were just a white nationalist mob.

Some number of Americans who have doubts about the 2020 election would be open to the conclusions of an independent investigation. No one knows how many. But certainly that number is higher than without a commission.

Finally, Democrats are afraid that some Republican complaints about the 2020 election might have merit. In 2020, there were judicial decisions that stretched, if not broke, standing election law. There were instances of inconsistent guidance from election officials. There were inconsistencies in ballot counting and in the treatment of mail-in votes.

None of this amounted to illegality and none of it changed the result of the presidential election. In fact, the 2020 election probably had less of this kind of thing than many previous national elections.

Nevertheless, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Courts three-day ballot extension decision demonstrates, Republicans have a point when they ask whether Democrats manipulated election law to gain a partisan advantage.

An independent commission also would have to look at those charges.

All this is necessary to address the very serious crisis of democracy that we are facing. Democrats have been strangely indifferent to widespread voter concerns about election integrity. The fact that these concerns have been provoked by lies does not make the concerns any less damaging.

Democrats cannot even see that an independent commission would destroy Trumps credibility. He would be offered a chance to testify under oath, which he would certainly decline. That refusal would haunt him going forward.

If you want to keep Trump from running for office ever again, an independent commission to investigate the 2020 election would do it.

Opinion contributor Bruce Ledewitz teaches constitutional law at Duquesne University Law School in Pittsburgh. His work appears biweekly on the Capital-Stars Commentary Page. Listen to his podcast, Bends Toward Justicehere.His forthcoming book, The Universe Is On Our Side: Restoring Faith in American Public Life, will be published in October.

Continue reading here:

We never needed a Jan. 6 Commission. We need a Nov. 3 Commission. This is why | Bruce Ledewitz - Pennsylvania Capital-Star

Potential of Nanotech Adoption in the EV Industry – Express Computer

By Dr Inderpreet Kaur, IEEE Senior Member

Though the concept of electric vehicles (EV) has been around for a long time, it has drawn a considerable amount of interest in the past decade especially amid a rising carbon footprint and other environmental impacts of fuel-based vehicles. Battery Management Systems (BMS) still face many challenges like fires or explosions, which at times can overshadow the advantages of EVs, however EVs are still more efficient than an internal combustion engine as they have fewer moving parts that need maintenance. It also has much less operative noise, as there are not clutch, gears, exhaust pipes, or spark plugs on the vehicle. As the name suggests, EVs include two categories: All Electric Vehicles (AEVs) and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs). While AEVs have one or more electric motors, their batteries get charged by plugging into the grid. Whereas, PHEVs have an electric grid to charge and fuel to power the internal combustion engine.

Electric Vehicle Technology

Due to both the presence of electric motors and the absence of spark plugs, gears, etc., EVs can tremendously increase the energy efficiency of the transportation industry. EVs are much more efficient at converting chemical energy into electrical energy to drive a motor than conventional internal combustion engines are at powering vehicles. Furthermore, the usage of electric vehicles is more eco-friendly due to the absence of pollution from vehicles and reduced dependency on oil that is required to ignite combustion engines.

BMS are the heart of any EV and currently, either nickel metal hydride or lithium-ion technology is used for the batteries. Lithium-ion batteries offer many advantages over nickel metal hydride but the recharging time of EVs is a challenge as it limits their use to shorter trips.

Role of Nano Technology in EV Industry

The main challenge faced by EVs are their batteries. They are very costly and have a short charging life. The battery performance of an EV could be enhanced by adopting Nanotechnology. This technology can address the gaps in e-mobility and have great benefits. On top of this, specific attributes of lithium batteries could be improved by using nanoparticles and nanocomposite materials. Battery performance parameters such as weight reduction, energy efficiency, life cycle, improved control, and communications could be increased by using Polymer nanocomposites, nano-enhanced sensors, and nanostructured metals.

Nanotechnology in Batteries

Specific performance parameters of batteries can be achieved through Nanotechnology. Conventionally, for lithium-ion batteries, negative electrode graphite powder has been used as an intercalation material. If micrometer-sized powder were replaced with carbon nanomaterials (e.g., carbon nanotubes), then the rate of insertion or removal of lithium and the battery capacity can be improved. The current density of electrodes will be increased because the diffusion path for the lithium ions is reduced, their mobility is enhanced, and electrical conductivity is increased. This makes the electrochemical reaction occur more efficiently and ultimately the use of nanomaterials will increase the efficiency of the battery.

The carbon nanotubes can bind to much higher concentrations of lithium because they have a high surface area. Another alternative for negative electrode materials will be Nanowires made of titanium dioxide (TiO2), vanadium oxide (V2O5) or tin oxide (SnO). Though the commercial manufacturing of these materials is still in its early stages, to date, most of the commercially available oxide materials are Li (NiCoAl)O2, Li (NiMnCo)O2, LiMn2O4, Li (AlMn)2O4, or LiCo2O4. But all these materials are neither cost-effective nor safe. The nanostructuring of these materials has been shown to significantly improve their intercalation capacity. Research is still being done to find optimum compositions to attain better performance of batteries that will be economical, light, and compact.

Therefore, the objectives of future EV research will be focused on improved charging periods of batteries, nanomaterials to improve the efficiency of batteries by bringing down the cost of nanomaterials for batteries as well as the size and weight of battery pack, and commercial development of these nanomaterials. This also will automatically improve the battery management and thermal management systems of the battery pack of an EV.

If you have an interesting article / experience / case study to share, please get in touch with us at [emailprotected]

See the original post here:

Potential of Nanotech Adoption in the EV Industry - Express Computer

Petition To Make Nelly Furtados 2004 Fora The Official Song Of Every Euro – The18

LCD Soundsystems song tonite begins with a lyric that could be applicable to every UEFA European Championship anthem ever written. Everybodys singing the same song, James Murphy laments. It goes tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight. I never realized these artists thought so much about dying.

Each official track dating back to 1992 is laced with the idea of seizing the moment, living it to the fullest and coming together RIGHT NOW because tomorrow, the bomb will drop. You put every songs lyrics into a word cloud generator (I did) and you get the boldfaced centerpieces of heart, love, time, people, drum, way, sun.

Its time to love, with all your heart, the sound of the drum and the way the people move under the sun. Eh, eh, yeah, yeah. Put a Martin Solveig beat on that and thats the Euro 2024 anthem done and dusted. Credit me.

The official Euro 2020 song dropped last month after being kept secret for two years. Its by 25-year-old DJ Martin Garrix (shit, I remember when he was 17-year-old Animals Martin Garrix), who, according to Rolling Stone, noticed the guitar intro had somewhat of a U2 vibe to it and duly got the Edge to play that part while Bono came around to say I feel your heart beatin in my chest. If you come with me tonight is gonna be the one.

It's always gotta be tonight.

Its about what youd expect. I dont like it as much as 2016s This Ones for You by David The Vanquisher Of Racism Guetta. But I dont like that one or any other official anthem as much as Euro 2004s Fora" by Nelly Furtado.

Maybe it was the beauty of sun-washed matches in the Algarve, the stunning architecture of The Quarry in Braga, the cinematic final four in Lisbon and Porto or maybe it was just the Euro 2004 video game that made it a major chore trying to score against even the minnows but Nelly Furtados anthem didnt just talk about hedonism, it made it normative. Of course were going buck wild for a month straight; its an unstoppable force!

Como uma fora, como uma fora

Como uma fora que ningum parar

Pauleta just dicing Pavel Nedved.

I petition that this should be the official anthem of every European Championship. It could be like the UEFA Champions League Anthem, except we get Nelly Furtado to come out instead of British composer Tony Britten.

Euro 2020: We Are The People | Martin Garrix featuring Bono & The Edge

Euro 2016: This Ones for You | David Guetta featuring Zara Larsson

Euro 2012: Endless Summer | Oceana

Euro 2008: Can You Hear Me | Enrique Iglesias

Euro 2004: Fora" | Nelly Furtado

Euro 2000: Campione 2000 | E-Type

Euro 1996: Were in This Together | Simply Red

Euro 1992: More Than a Game | Towe Jaarnek & Peter Jback

The rest is here:

Petition To Make Nelly Furtados 2004 Fora The Official Song Of Every Euro - The18

The White Horse in Mayfair’s Shepherd Market is Hedonism Wine’s first wine-led pub – Hot Dinners

As of last week, Mayfair had a new pub. But this isn't any old pub, it's a Hedonism Wines pub. The White Horse has taken over the old Hatchett's site on White Horse Street and is the high end wine merchants first public house.

What will you find in a wine-led pub? Well, for starters things like a 1974 Blandys Verdelho Madeira, and a Lagavulin distillers edition 2005 on the optics.

There are going to be a massive 6000+ wines to choose from, using Hedonism's full range, but the pub itself will have a 100 bin list focusing on "delicious, yet affordable bottles".

On the food front, they'll be serving up cheese from La Fromagerie, charcuterie or a selection of small plates.

They're promising regular events from resident wine writer Sherry Rose including tastings and a quiz and their lower ground floor Cellar Bar will be available for private events and tastings.

More about The White Horse

Where is it?5 White Horse St, London W1J 7LQ

When?Open now - Tues-Saturday

Soft launch offer: Until 17 June mentioning the word Hedonist gets you a complimentary tasting plate of La Fromagerie cheeses to accompany your wine.

Find out more: Visit their website or follow them on Instagram@thewhitehorsemayfair

Subscribe to be the first to get the news from Hot Dinners

Read more here:

The White Horse in Mayfair's Shepherd Market is Hedonism Wine's first wine-led pub - Hot Dinners

Behind the Hedonist Persona of Francis Bacon – The Nation

Francis Bacon, 1984. (Photo by Ulf Andersen / Getty Images)

In August of 1998, a team of curators, conservators, and archaeologists arrived at 7 Reece Mews, a small flat in Londons South Kensington neighborhood, to start work on the month-long task of transporting its contents to the Hugh Lane Gallery in Dublin. There, over the next five years, the team labored to painstakingly reconstruct the flat, which for some 30 years had served as the home and studio of Francis Bacon. The artist had moved to Reece Mews in the fall of 1961 and lived there until his death, in 1992, of a heart attack while on a trip to Madrid. The studio re-creation opened at the Hugh Lane in 2001 with some 7,500 pieces of materialslashed canvases, crumpled photographs, pages ripped from medical textbooks, drawings, and hand-scrawled notesnow available for consumption by a public hungry for insight into Bacons life and artistic process.BOOKS IN REVIEW

In the three decades since his death, that appetite seems not to have waned but waxed, as indicated by the staggering amount of material now devoted to Bacon: centenary retrospectives at the Tate and the Metropolitan Museum of Art, a five-volume catalogue raisonn, and various biographic monographs whose titles (The Gilded Gutter Life of Francis Bacon; Anatomy of an Enigma) point to his canonization in the public eye as the enfant terrible of 20th-century art.

With Revelations, the latest addition to this litany of biographies, Annalyn Swan and Mark Stevens (who previously collaborated on a lengthy biography of Willem de Kooning) enter the fray, offering the most comprehensive study of one of the leading figures of modernism, someone whose paradoxical pop gravitas places him with the likes of Beckett, Camus, and Sartre. In some 800 pages of text and footnotes, the authorsaided by the artists estatedetail the trajectory of Bacons career with archaeological precision, excavating public and private records to unearth how the openly homosexual painter, preternaturally attuned to the social stage, crafted a rebellious public persona characterized by excesses of sex and violence, drink and drugs. As Swan and Stevens tell it, the ultimate secret of Bacons life was an intractable contradiction: his desperate wish to partake in the ordinary joys and solace denied him as [a sickly] child and young man, and his fear of anything that would shatter his glamorous veneer and make him appear commonplace, vulnerable, or pathetic.

Neither hagiographic nor sordid, Revelations is divided into three sections detailing Bacons youth and early success and failures, his breakthrough in the mid-1940s, and his final decades in London. The authors are adept at contextualizing Bacons artistic development within the story of his romances and exploits and go to great lengths to correct the record, dispelling errant mythologies (often propagated by Bacon himself) that lean too heavily on assertions of natural genius, such as Bacons claim that he rarely made preparatory drawings. Where the last major biography, Michael Peppiatts Anatomy of an Enigmawhich drew from the authors confidential conversations with Bacon over the course of several yearsindulges the mythography of its subject, conceding to Bacons many quips, his claim of being the most artificial person there is, to justify his use of cosmetics, Swan and Stevens are far more restrained, if also excessively discursive, preferring to refract Bacon through the company he kept, studies of his family, and analyses of his art. Their comprehensiveness is particularly instructive when illuminating his years as a commercial furniture and rug designer in the 1930s, a facet of his career that Bacon rarely discussed in public, lest it detract from his reputation as a painter of the macabrea reputation he achieved only in midlife with his 1945 triptych, Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion. That painting marked, according to John Russell, a transition in English art, shocking a society numbed from the long years of World War II. And it also marked a transition for Bacon, who would insist that he began as a painter with this work, a claim that drives Swan and Stevenss investigation into the contours of his artistic persona.

The appeal of an artist biography typically lies in its discussion of creative genius, as well as the hindrances and defeatsor the comfortsthat led to artistic success. Bacon was in no shortage of the elite privilege, particularly in his early years. Born in 1909 to an aristocratic Anglo-Irish family, he was the second of four children, his father a British major who had served in Burma and later trained horses and his mother the heiress to a steel fortune. Asthmatic from a young age, Bacon suffered from an inability to participate in the masculinist traditions of hunting and riding, causing his fatherto whom Bacon claimed to be sexually attractedto regard his son as sexually effete and weak. Both his asthma and his early sexual awakening would provide fodder for Bacons early self-mythologizing. He often spoke of an experience as a child, struggling to breathe and nearly fainting while locked in a dark closet by the family maid, who purportedly kept him hidden away so she could cavort with a secret boyfriend; he also claimed to have had his first sexual encounters with his fathers horse grooms, who purportedly whipped him in the family stables.

While the veracity of these claims remains uncertain, what is true is that Bacon left his family home in the English countryside at 16, supported by a weekly allowance from his mother. In the spring of 1927, he moved briefly to Berlin, where he imbibed the libertine atmosphere of Weimar, and then headed to Paris, where he first saw the works of Picasso in person and fell in with a crowd of artists and designers who inspired him to pursue a career in design. He returned to London in 1928, and it was at this time that he began his relationship with Eric Allden, the first of several powerful older men who provided him not only with sex and companionship but also financial support, as he pursued his ambition of becoming a furniture and rug designer, freelancing for prominent designers and debuting in popular magazines. Men like Allden, and later the well-connected Tory politician Eric Hall, would be among the many sponsors, financial and emotional, that Bacon relied on throughout his life as he stubbornly attempted to develop his own career outside the family name; others included his childhood nanny, who accompanied him for nearly 40 years, and later the gallerists who bailed him out when his gambling debts and profligate spending rendered him temporarily destitute.

A common feature of the artist biography is the allusion to a transformative moment, the pivot point at which the subject recognizes their artistic potential. Swan and Stevens do not stray from this convention: For Bacon, as intimated in this biography as well as the many interviews he gave during his lifetime, this moment came in 1931, when he saw Thirty Years of Picasso, an exhibition held at Alex Reid and Lefevre Gallery in London, and committed himself to studying art. He went back to Paris for two years and took painting lessons from the modernist Roy de Maistre; returning to London in 1933, he exhibited at successively more prominent galleries with the support of his many confidants and connections and was recognizedthough often with mixed reviewsin the British press. (John Berger, in a scathing 1952 review in The New Statesman and Nation, remarked that Bacon was not an important painter.)

Bacons early paintings were riffs on the surrealist mode that had taken Europe by storm in the early 1930s, and for the next several years, he struggled to find a style that would set him apart and that he could claim as his own. By 1937, he stopped exhibiting entirely, a personal defeat that was eclipsed by the arrival of the Second World War in England. When London was bombed by the Germans in 1940, Bacon fled to the countryside to escape the dust that now filled the air. For two years, he worked there in solitude, using as source material newspaper photos of Nazi soldiers and the wreckage of war. The authors of Revelations are at their best when reflecting, as Bacon did, on these moments of internal reckonings, the junctures at which artistic development meets introspection.

After these quiet but crucial years, the figure that begins to emerge is not only the recognized painter of crucifixions and cadavers but the Bacon of popular lore, who prowled the clubs and bars of Soho, gambled away his earnings in Monte Carlo, and had long, torrid, sadomasochistic affairs with a succession of loversfirst with former fighter pilot Peter Lacy and later with George Dyer, the East End hustler who did not, in fact, crash through the Reece Mews skylight (as Bacon claimed) but who met him in a bar. With Lacy, Bacon spent time in Tangier, borrowing advances from gallerists to live in North Africa, where he fell in with American expats like Paul and Jane Bowles and William Burroughs.

But to understand Bacons legacy as an artistnot the one marked by astronomical auction prices but by his assault on the modernist sensibility and his dogged determination to succeed at whatever costthe authors direct readers to Three Studies at the Base of a Crucifixion, the triptych that debuted at Londons Lefevre Gallery in April of 1945, near the end of World War II, to what Swan and Stevens portray as a minor moral and critical uproar. Across its three panels, Bacon depicted the Three Furies from Aeschyluss Oresteia, mythological creatures of vengeance painted with sharp, attenuated necks and engorged bodies against a blood-orange backdrop, a color to shock wan, gray, war-weary London, where for years there had not been any intense light apart from the bomb flashes and subsequent fires.

The true shock of Three Studies, however, was not the sacrilegious subject matter or its garish composition, but rather its moral ambiguity. In refusing to distinguish between good and evil within his painting, Bacon presented a quandary for critics who sought a neat paradigm in the context of the war against German fascism. Nobody wanted to believe that there was in human nature an element that was irreducibly evil, wrote the critic John Russell, and yet Three Studies asserted this condition as primeval fact in a confrontation too beguiling to ignore. That in subsequent decades Bacon would, in his own revisionist approach, use this very painting to mark his beginning as an artista decision that Swan and Stevens present as convincing evidence of his shrewd approach to fashioning his legacy (as well as, frankly, his good taste)justifies the authors somewhat outsize focus on the painting in this biography, though one wishes there were richer descriptions of other notable works.

If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nations work.

Revelations lingers on the period between the mid-1940s and the early 70s when Bacon ascended to celebrity, detailing the elite social milieu that swirled around him, which included designer Isabel Rawsthorne, writer Sonia Orwell, and painter Lucien Freud. The authors provide many sketches of the coterie of sponsors, confidants, lovers, and enemies that populated Bacons life, but the effect is one that occludes the subject of their study, as the presence of so many supporting characters thrusts Bacon himself into the background. As rife as they are with tales of excess, these years are also marked by moments of tragic symmetry: Lacy died the night of Bacons first retrospective at the Tate in 1962, George Dyer two days before his 1971 retrospective at the Pompidou. In the following two decades, Bacon garnered international acclaim and embarked on long-term, obsessive relationships with younger lovers, including John Edwards, to whom he bequeathed his estate, and Jos Capelo, the man who would be with Bacon in his last moments in Madrid. Throughout the 1970s and 80s, Bacon maintained his reputation for grandiosity and hedonism by swanning around in a Bentley and jet-setting through Europe and the United States, flush with cash from his sales with Marlborough Gallery.

Critics have argued that it was during this period that Bacons paintings became branded, his once-eviscerating symbolism now rote, his celebrity obscuring his talents. This is the double-edged sword of biography, which, like the tortured visages Bacon wrought in his lifetime, may distort as much as it clarifies. In attending to the many details and specifics of Bacons life as well as his legacy, Revelations comprises a more satisfying portrait of the artist.

Continued here:

Behind the Hedonist Persona of Francis Bacon - The Nation