Category Archives: Engineering

Nanotube-producing Bacteria Show Manufacturing Promise

Genus Shewanella

Nanotube-producing Bacteria Show Manufacturing Promise:

The photoactive arsenic-sulfide nanotubes produced by the bacteria behave as metals with electrical and photoconductive properties. The researchers report that these properties may also provide novel functionality for the next generation of semiconductors in nano- and opto-electronic devices.

In a process that is not yet fully understood, the Shewanella bacterium secretes polysacarides that seem to produce the template for the arsenic sulfide nanotubes, Myung explained. The practical significance of this technique would be much greater if a bacterial species were identified that could produce nanotubes of cadmium sulfide or other superior semiconductor materials, he added.

“This is just a first step that points the way to future investigation,” he said. “Each species of Shewanella might have individual implications for manufacturing properties.”

Related: Self-assembling Nanotechnology in Chip ManufacturingBacteria Engineered to Sprout Conducting NanowiresUsing Bacteria to Carry Nanoparticles Into CellsNanotechnology Breakthroughs for Computer ChipsNanotechnology Research

Robo-One Grand Championship in Tokyo

Two-legged robots battle for supremacy at the the Robo-One Convention in Tokyo. Very fun video. The robots has to be built from scratch by amateurs. Also see ROBO-ONE: Grand Championship Competition @ IREX (with full video of final match).

Related: LEGO Sumo Robotic ChampionshipNorthwest FIRST Robotics CompetitionMaking Robots from TrashRobot DreamsToyota Robots

Science and Engineering in Politics

Politics of engineering by Patrick Mannion, EE Times:

Engineering interests historically haven’t been at the forefront of the political debate, at least not compared with those of, say, farming, law or health care. But given the importance of the technological advances that engineers help effect and the need to maintain our competitive edge in a rapidly changing global environment, that situation needs to change, and fast.

Then came word of the $25 billion being handed to farmers in yet another subsidy, loudly denounced by some as welfare for the wealthy. I’m not going to get into the right or wrong of the subsidies–but I am amazed at the ability of agribusiness to get them at all. It shows the power of the farm lobby. Ditto for pharmaceuticals, HMOs, lawyers, “big oil” and so on. It underscores the relative political weakness of the engineering community.

If the science and engineering community are not well represented to our representatives the interests of the science and engineering community will get short changed. Especially since so few politicians in the USA have even a basic understanding of science and the scientific method. And a very small percentage have any advanced degrees in science and engineering fields or work experience in them. That being said the political arena is much like a tar pit: that is it is difficult to interact with without becoming entangled in a big mess. And it is not as though the scientific and engineering community are even close to unified but still the impact of political decisions is very significant and science and engineering leaders need to be heard.

China’s Economic Science Experiment – China’s 9 most senior government official are all engineers (in 2006 – I am not sure now):

When China’s leaders meet with Hu each week in Beijing’s government district, Zhongnanhai, they could spend hours discussing cables, switches, tool-making machines and control devices. That’s because every one of them has a degree in engineering. The president himself, the son of a tea merchant from Jiangsu Province, trained to build hydroelectric power stations, while the others hold degrees in electrical engineering, metallurgy and geology.

Related: Larry Page on Marketing ScienceThe A to Z Guide to Political Interference in ScienceDiplomacy and Science ResearchOpen Access LegislationProposal to Triple NSF Graduate Research Fellowship AwardsScience Interview with John EdwardsProposed Legislation on Science and EducationHouse Testimony on Engineering EducationGermany’s Science ChancellorNanotechnology Investment as Strategic National Economic PolicySingapore Supporting Science ResearchersFarming Without Subsidies in New Zealand

Hands-on High School Engineering Education in Minnesota

Hands-on engineering education in Chaska

Chaska High is one of about a half-dozen schools in the west-metro area that let students get a taste of engineering work with project-based classes, which can qualify for college credit.

Chaska plans to add robotics and manufacturing courses to its technology department next year. More than 100 middle and high schools participate in the program statewide. In the west-metro area, Eden Prairie, Maple Grove, Park Center, Robbinsdale Armstrong, Robbinsdale Cooper and Wayzata high schools offer Project Lead the Way courses.

Project Lead the Way is based on research suggesting that real-world long-term projects that integrate math, science and technology boost achievement and expose students to potential careers. Colleges and universities, including partners such as the University of Minnesota and St. Cloud State University, view the program as a way to help strengthen the skills of incoming students.

Project Lead the Way continues to encourage engineering education for primary and secondary schools. Project Lead the Way builds strategic partnerships among middle schools, high schools, colleges and universities, and industry to provide students with the knowledge and experience necessary to pursue engineering or engineering technology programs in college.

Related: k-12 Engineering EducationGetting Students Hooked on Engineering, WisconsinK-12 Engineering Education, ArizonaProject Lead the Way, MilwaukeeMiddle School Engineers

Open Source: The Scientific Model Applied to Programming

xo-laptop: On the Open-Sourcing of Business – interesting post worth reading, though I disagree with some points:

There is no obligation to “give back” anything, though it often makes sense to participate in the community based on a particular open-source project. However, that is a strategic decision for you to make. Your sole obligation is to respect the license terms.

There is a difference between your sole legal obligation and your sole obligation. I agree legally all you are obliged to do is comply with the legal requirements. That does not mean that is your sole obligation. I don’t see any problem making money in efforts involving open source efforts but I do believe that as that happens an obligation (perhaps not legal but real none-the-less) grows to give back to the community (Google’s summer of code is a great example of giving back). Most open source efforts require that any additions you make to the software be given back to the community (those involved in open souce know this, I add this just for the information of those not familiar with open source practices). Legal obligations are the minimum you can be forced to do, not the only obligations one has. Great quote (emphasis mine):

I think the best is one I have often seen expressed by Linus Torvalds, and it was one of the explanations I gave in a talk to the New York City Linux User Group in a talk in December, 1999.

Simply put, free and open-source software is just the scientific model applied to programming: free sharing of work open collaboration; open publication; peer review; recognition of the best work, with priority given to the first to do a meaningful new piece of work; and so forth. As a programmer, it is the best arena in which to work. There are no secrets; the work must stand on its own.

Another great post on this topic: What Business Can Learn from Open Source.

Related: Open Source for LEGO MindstormsYoung Scientists Design Open-Source Program at NASAOpen-Source BiotechPublishers Continue to Fight Open Access to Science

Google Investing Huge Sums in Renewable Energy and is Hiring

Towards more renewable energy posted to Google’s blog by Larry Page, Co-Founder and President of Products:

Promising technologies already exist that could be developed to deliver renewable energy cheaper than coal. We think the time is ripe to build rapidly on the tremendous work on renewable energy. For example, I believe that solar thermal technology provides a very plausible path to generating cheaper electricity. By combining talented technologists, great partners and large investments, we have an opportunity to quickly push this technology forward. Our goal is to build 1 gigawatt of renewable energy capacity that is cheaper than coal. We are optimistic that this can be done within years, not decades. If we succeed, it would likely provide a path to replacing a substantial portion of the world’s electricity needs with renewable energy sources.

To lead this effort, we’re looking for a world-class team. We need creative and motivated entrepreneurs and technologists with expertise in a broad range of areas, including materials science, physics, chemistry, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, land acquisition and management, power transmission and substations, construction, and regulatory issues. Join us. And if you’re interested, read about our previous work toward a clean energy future

Very cool. And I think something Google might be able to pull off well. It is also true this may be a distraction and not work well. For many companies that would be my guess for how it would play out. Google has done an exceptional job of allowing engineers to do what they do best. And I think there is a chance they can translate that into effectively managing such a project as this. Google continues to try what they believe even if that is not the conventional path. Good for them.

Related: posts on energyposts on Google managementGoogle’s cheaper-than-coal targetWind PowerLarge-Scale, Cheap Solar Electricity12 Stocks for 10 Years UpdateLarry Page and Sergey Brin Interview WebcastGoogle’s Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal (press release)

Continue reading

Full Body 3-D CT Scan in Under a Minute

Pretty cool new gadget, though probably out of the range of most people’s budget – ‘Super’ scanner shows key detail

The new 256-slice CT machine takes large numbers of X-ray pictures, and combines them using computer technology to produce the final detailed images. It also generates images in a fraction of the time of other scanners: a full body scan takes less than a minute.

Because the images are 3D they can be rotated and viewed from different directions – giving doctors the greatest possible help in looking for signs of abnormalities or disease.

At present, it is only being used in one hospital: the Metro Health medical centre in Cleveland, Ohio, which has been using it for the past month.

the first commercially viable CT scanner, which was invented by Sir Godfrey Newbold Hounsfield in Hayes, United Kingdom at the company’s laboratories and unveiled in 1972. At the same time, Allan McLeod Cormack of Tufts University independently invented a similar machine, and the two men shared the 1979 Nobel Prize in Medicine. “This is a quantum shift from the first CT scanners as it gives a lot more detail,” says Dr Keith Prowse, Chairman of the British Lung Foundation.

Engineering Education Study Debate

Engineering education study draws industry fire by George Leopold, EE Times:

In a radio debate with Salzman on the NPR program “Science Friday,” Intel Corp. Chairman Craig Barrett blasted Salzman’s “backward-looking analysis.” Said Barrett: “The U.S. cannot be successful if we are only ‘average’ ” in math and science. “[S]aying we’re ‘OK’ because we’re average just can’t be right. That’s backward looking. That’s not looking ahead at competition with India, China, Russia and others that are putting heavy emphasis on education.”

Salzman did, however, conceded one point to his critics, acknowledging that the engineering field in the U.S. isn’t what it used to be. As a profession, “engineering is not a field that has a bright future,” he said. Quoting an engineer interviewed for the Urban Institute study, Salzman said, “It was a great ride, but it’s over.”

Previous posts on the study (The Importance of Science EducationMath and Science Education Assessment). I doubt the engineering ride is over – but everyone is entitled to their opinion. As I have said many times the economic future will be greatly influenced by science and engineering. Those countries that succeed in creating a positive economic climate for science and engineering development will find economic rewards those that fail to do so will suffer. The USA has come through a period where they received great economic benefit from science and engineering supremacy. There is little doubt other centers of excellence will emerge and gain the benefits. But if the USA were to actually fall backward (not just see the relative position decline as other countries gained ground) that will be a serious problem and one I think is unlikely.

Related: Top Degree for S&P 500 CEOs is EngineeringHighest Pay for Engineering GraduatesThe Future is EngineeringScience, Engineering and the Future of the American EconomyChina’s Economic Science ExperimentBrain Drain Benefits to the USA Less Than They Could BeBest Research University Rankings (2007)Economic Strength Through Technology LeadershipEngineers: Future ProspectsEngineers in the Workplace

Programming Ruby

Why I Program In Ruby (And Maybe Why You Shouldn’t):

Harmony and balance make you feel good. American Rubyists frequently take up all the points of Ruby’s power, expressiveness, and efficiency, but they don’t seem to register the point that Ruby was designed to make you feel good. Even Rubyists who want to explain why Ruby makes them feel good often fail to mention that it was expressly designed for that exact purpose.

Don’t program in Ruby because you want power or efficiency. Don’t program in Ruby because you think you “should”, either. Program in Ruby because you like it. And if you don’t like it, don’t program in it.

Very nice article discussing the importance of joy in work. I enjoy programming in Ruby on Rails.

Related: Neal Ford on what JRuby has that Java doesn’t (podcast)posts on improving software developmentA Career in Computer ProgrammingHiring Software DevelopersProgramming Grads Meet a Skills Gap in the Real WorldWant to be a Computer Game Programmer?High School Students Interest in Computer ProgramingDonald Knuth (Computer Scientist)IT Operations as a Competitive Advantage

Higgs

The god of small things:

While working on the conundrum, Higgs came up with an elegant mechanism to solve the problem. It showed that at the very beginning of the universe, the smallest building blocks of nature were truly weightless, but became heavy a fraction of a second later, when the fireball of the big bang cooled. His theory was a breakthrough in itself, but something more profound dropped out of his calculations.

Higgs’s theory showed that mass was produced by a new type of field that clings to particles wherever they are, dragging on them and making the heavy. Some particles find the field more sticky than others. Particles of light are oblivious to it. Others have to wade through it like an elephant in tar. So, in theory, particles can weigh nothing, but as soon as they are in the field, they get heavy.

Scientists now know that Higgs’s extraordinary field, or something very similar to it, played a key role in the formation of the universe. Without it, the cosmos would not have exploded into the rich, infinite galaxies we see today. The spinning disc of cosmic dust that collapsed 4.5 billion years ago to form our solar system would never have been. No planets would have formed, nor a sun to warm them. Life would not have stood a chance.

In late summer 1964, two years before he would give his Princeton lecture, Higgs rushed out a succinct letter, packed with mathematical formulae that backed his discovery and sent it to a leading physics journal run from Cern, the European nuclear research organisation in Geneva. The paper was published almost immediately, but went largely unnoticed.

Related: CERN Prepares for LHC OperationsQuantum Mechanics Made Relatively SimpleTime may not Exist