The nature of discovery is a psychological term reconsidered multiple times by scientists. Many perceive it as a moment of a leap of insight based on cognitive processes like Watson and Crick’s visualizations of DNA. Others claim that perceiving a hypothesis through predictions is at least rational, like Franklin’s discovery of DNA through crystallography. Thus, scientists should expand the idea about the nature of discovery without relying only on insight or results, acknowledging Franklin as a discoverer of DNA structure.
The nature of discovery has been challenged several times throughout history. It is often defined as a repeated cycle of eureka experiences based on speculations1. For example, Watson and Crick received a Nobel Prize for such scientific assumptions that resulted in the discovery of DNA. However, all scientists who connect the nature of discovery to stable cognitive thinking disregard Franklin’s crystal-clear photograph of the structure of DNA. Although she was trying out various models and speculations, she never used them in her discovery, which made her crystallographer distrusted intuitive guessing. Thus, her discovery through photographs and observed intensities make her ineligible for the title of discoverer based on traditional views of the nature of discovery.
The whole world underestimated Franklin’s role in discovering DNA, letting her die without a Nobel prize. She is the first scientist who captured DNA X-ray diffraction images at high humidity. Without Franklin’s findings, Watson and Crick would have never published their book The Double Helix, revealing the DNA structure2. Her Photograph 51 clearly illustrates the double helix nature of DNA continuing in both directions around the central X. This is a significant discovery based on observations rather than speculations that challenge the whole nature of discovery.
To conclude, Franklin’s findings led to numerous researches in microbiology today, which makes her a discoverer of DNA structure. Watson and Crick are the ones who received all fame for discovering the DNA structure, but they are not the only ones whose merit it is. The nature of discovery should be more flexible. It is time to reconsider the nature of discovery and Rosalind’s role in the discovery of DNA.
The book primarily started by introducing the characters that played significant roles in the research and development of the DNA structure. The first parts of the book comprised of the opening of Sir Lawrence Bragg, who gave an overview of the entire book and talked about the significance of Francis Crick and James Watson’s discovery with regard to the scientific findings that prevailed in the discovery of DNA structure. Ethical problems are also involved as to how some of the major characters showed in the context in which Watson himself struggled. Actually, the book seems to be an autobiography of the author, which highlighted his memories on his impressions and not technically through the process of learning that describes a historical work.
An opening remark was made on the mode of the phrase, “Honest Jim,” which basically pertains to him as. The phrase depicts him as an honest man who claimed that the discovery was made not only by him and Francis Crick but also Maurice Wilkins, Linus Pauling, and Rosalind Franklin. “Honest Jim” was the name called to him by one of his fellow scientists, though there has been an insight that the meaning integrates a relative sarcasm.
The serendipitous discovery made by James Watson with the DNA structure had been highlighted with the chapters that described his great pursuance of studying the DNA structure, and this was shown in chapters 22 and the following.
Discussion
The first chapter started when James Watson met his colleague Francis Crick in the year 1951, who was an intelligent man though he was not famous then. Crick and Watson’s unit at the Cavendish Laboratory of Cambridge University was supervised by a chemist Max Perutz and Lawrence Bragg, the Laboratory director. The primary reason for their stay at the Laboratory was to empirically investigate the structure of the proteins.
It was described that the Cavendish was some kind of a shabby chemical laboratory at the University, and it appears to be widely different from colleges in the US. Inside the University, there are a number of small colleges that are gathered as one, and each represents a faculty that offers a tutorial program for students. At the college dining hall, Watson noted the elevated platform of a high table which, according to hi, gives a chance for the tutors to carefully observe the acts and behavior of the students. Upon meeting Crick, Watson describes him as an active man who has got a lot of enthusiasm in all his principles.
Thus, Watson told himself that the life of a scientist is interesting in both social and intellectual manner. Although he was busy with his experiments, he still finds time to put a social aspect in his life through the midnight trips to waterfront bars and other activities he was into.
The purpose of Watson entering the University is to study the molecular structure of the proteins through an exemplar of a 3D or three-dimensional system, which will give a realistic approach to the study. Being close to CrickCrick, who also has interests in DNA discoveries, they started to exchange ideas and perceptions, which apparently resulted in a deeper investigation of the matter. However, studying the DNA molecules requires a skill in crystallography to be able to have a better view of the molecules through the use of an X-ray because DNA molecules are too microscopic in size and presenting a vague view in a microscopic.
Hence a crystallized form is required, and this should be seen in an x-ray. Hence, a drastic companionship arises through other scientists, and a conflict prevailed between Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins. This was primarily accounted for the questions of ethics in the midst of competition among them through the knowledge involving the discovery of DNA structure. However, the male scientists have been good companions, and because of Franklin’s portrayal of being a belligerent woman, she seemed to be left out with the social companionship of the other three scientists.
But still, they considered her and realize that they need her knowledge and skills for the completion of the study because she is more knowledgeable in using such tools needed for further observations about the DNA structure. And, this is a way to compete with Linus Pauling, who also pushes a study regarding the same matter. Watson and CrickCrick know the circumstances, though, so they decided to concentrate on every substance that they may acquire from Franklin to have a better foundation in winning over the experiment of Pauling.
In addition, a chapter has focused on personality issues that revolved in the story rather than the scientific ideas and t indeed accounted for the interesting reality. The turning points in personalities, the tensions among the competing minds and the friendship that created a bond for the collaboration of the colleagues in order to come out with a single idea have illustrated the development of each personality in parallel with the step-by-step discoveries of the experiment. Talking Pauling earlier, he has been successful in different areas of sciences and, in fact, had been awarded a Nobel Prize and regarded him with a par excellence.
And thus, Watson also viewed him as an intelligent man who has emerged in the experimentations of proteins in the model of DNA as well as creating a line that will open up a particular writing to it. This was attributed to the creation of a paper and wire models of the amino acid chains in proteins which is specifically polypeptides, and twisted them into an assortment of probable shapes. Apparently, he compared these models with the real data to know and observe that any of them relates with assessing the X-ray patterns. It originally came from an alpha- helical pattern of protein folding that was solved.
Certainly, Watson was learning from the paths of Pauling and applied these ideas on his own thinking but a dilemma seems to be visible in acquiring data as a foundation for the work and the only data available was on the chemical information about the nature of the polynucleotide chains which basically compose the DNA.
Specifically in chapter ten of the book, this opened the evidence that Franklin is indeed a genius upon giving a lecture regarding the DNA. However, Watson neglected to take the important notes on the lecture and insisted that he will remember everything through his memory. The point of the seminar highlighted the critical thinking of Franklin in creating a double- helix model. Franklin was not into the use of molecular models to come out with a conclusion about structures, as what Watson cleared.
Watson as well-considered her lack of enthusiasm in using a model- building as unhelpful though it helped to consider for her as an assertion of developing more data that will probably be the answer to the curiosity and experiment of the structure of DNA. However, Watson did not give much importance with the talk. But his attention was caught by the measurement of water in the DNA samples which accounts as an element in getting food diffraction pictures of DNA.
About a year had passed, Watson and Crick decided to conduct an experiment, but a big error was committed because of the wrong information that Watson gave to CrickCrick. Watson missed a very important detail which Franklin gave in her lecture, and due to Watson’s disregard in taking down notes, he did not remembered the exact idea about where to put the backbone. The big error fell into the model that they created upon the appearance of the backbone inside. Upon finishing their model, with an excitement for their proposal, it was negatively turned down by Franklin and Wilkins because of the big mistake that they made and though it was not just a big mistake but also unreasonable.
Consequently, the failure they made caused them to abort the experiment due to the order of Lawrence Bragg and instead focus on their respective studies wherein Watson concentrated on his Tobacco Mosaic Virus (TMV). But that did not end Watson’s perseverance in discovering the structure of DNA though. Watson though that one essential element of the TMV was a nucleic acid and this fit his exploration and pursued his experiments about DNA because the two relates. Watson faced a lot of struggles during the course and had to convince the United States to retain his sponsorship with regard to the scientific studies he was conducting, and this was because he feared that he might lose his research if the sponsorship will be lost.
There came the part which started the climax of the story wherein the serendipitous discovery of Watson toward the double- helix prevailed. The arrival Peter Pauling, the son of Linus Pauling, marked them the fear of being defeated in their some kind of a scientific competition on the discovery of the DNA structure. However, Peter Pauling, Watson and Crick became friends. Pauling was the one who opened that his father was publishing a proposal for the structure of the DNA. Obviously, Watson felt alarmed and hence he carefully reviewed the work of Linus Pauling and found a big mistake with his knowledge that the nucleic acid of Pauling was not actually an acid anymore and without the hydrogen atoms, the chains will easily disperse or break up and the structure will eventually fade out.
As a result, he consulted a lot of colleagues regarding the mistake and considered the mistake as a simple one that had been disregarded, but it greatly affects the whole structure and largely brings an impact to the idea. Apparently, Watson and CrickCrick waited for the perceptions and feedback of the experts with the proposal and with the expected result, they became more motivated to pursue their research and present a better proposal that will more likely commit no mistakes.
The main climax of the story was depicted on the 22nd chapter wherein the Watson narrated his and Crick’sCrick’s gradual discovery of the DNA structure. Pater Pauling showed the preprint copy of his father’s work and there illustrates a triple- helix model of DNA. The major aspect of the model was the positioning of the sugar- phosphate backbone in the middle of the structure which Pauling proposed that hydrogen bonds held the strands together.
But regrettably, a problem seemed to occur for the model. In able for the hydrogen bonds to form, the oxygen atoms that were included in the group of the phosphate would need to have hydrogen atoms that are bound to them. Although in a real cellular pH, the hydrogen atoms should have been separated and the group of the phosphate should have been negatively charged. This proved that the proposal of Pauling was somehow unviable. Watson and CrickCrick were undoubtedly sure that Pauling was wrong and had seen a way in which they can propose a better revision of the proposal presenting the correct information.
Watson described the various experiments they have tried at the end chapters of the book before coming out with a concrete series of the four nitrogen bases in each DNA strand. To be able to have a positive result of their primary objective, Watson returned to Wilkins to have a better look at the X rays wherein he and CrickCrick used this as a pattern for the model that they planned to. Watson was delighted when he found out that Wilkins had been secretly keeping a copy of Franklin’s notes. He also saw a photo of an X-ray which added more ideas about the development of the structure. Watson in fact, sketched a helix- shaped molecule on a newspaper and made a conclusion that the molecules are composed of two strands of DNA which is a double helix.
The disagreements of Franklin on the anti- helical compositions of the DNA X-ray patterns was relatively for the structure of an A-form DNA which has a very minimal amount of water. Actually, it has an anti- helical composition in its pattern of diffraction. Those compositions likely took a lot of years to work out. After some time, a different form of DNA was illustrated by Wilkins to Watson and this is the B- form. This is overtly a helical one and Franklin depicted that as well.
Watson insisted on the idea that Franklin was an anti- helical person in all instances that they had. Empirically observing the B- form of the structure, considering the fact that Watson did not have any concrete knowledge of crystallography, he was amazed when he saw a black cross at the center of the structure, and this can only be seen in a helical molecule. As the book went by, the success of Watson was revealed and productively came out with a double- helix structure of a DNA. Above all, the most important substance in the book is that the observation that vital biological objects should appear in pairs is some what a level of being narrow though but it should be highlighted in the sense of the properties of DNA.
Conclusion
The serendipitous discovery of Watson on the double- helix DNA generally figured out by the collaboration of the significant persons who contributed for the discovery. Watson accounted for each information and knowledge that he got from his colleagues and applied this through his own understanding and critical thinking. What separated Watson from other scientists was his full determination of learning and acquiring the end product with an open- mindedness trait and continuous passion for unraveling the curiosity inside him.
It is somehow viewed as a serendipitous discovery because of the traces that Watson followed through the entire discovery from other people’s perspectives. What made him won was his personal enthusiasm, and he undoubtedly possessed the characters of a true scientist at the end of the day.
Billions of stellar-mass black holes in the local galaxies group are not yet discovered. Even though black holes are gigantic, many of them are almost impossible to find. The problem is the fact that they do not emit light. However, some clues help scientists detect them, such as looking for X-rays created by an accretion disk, but most do not have an accretion disc. This article’s research aimed to find the sleeping black hole and prove its realness. The group of specialists known for refutation claims about black holes found this gigantic one that is nine times larger than the sun in terms of mass. They found this sleeping black hole by studying about a thousand stars in the Tarantula Nebula, knowing that one of them could be in a black hole binary. However, the group of scientists had doubts about this discovery.
As a result, they found that the remnants of the supernova could not be found. This black hole did not pair with the supernova’s leftover debris. Even though it is believed that when a massive star reaches the end of its life, its core is destroyed, and the star’s outer layers are ejected in a supernova explosion. This star is so massive that its core immediately collapses into a black hole, preventing the supernova from exploding. To conclude, “this has huge implications for the origin of black hole mergers in space” (Buongiorno 9). This elusive prey within the territory of the Tarantula Nebula is vital for future discoveries in this field and provided one of the main implications for the origin of black hole mergers in space.
Works Cited
Buongiorno, Caitlyn. “Black Hole Debunkers Discover a Sleeping Giant.” Astronomy, 2022, p. 9.
It was not Oswald Avery’s main goal to discover the material that controls the expression of genes in biological organisms. He was working on something else when he and his team realized that it is the Deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA that is dictates the expression of biological characteristics from something as complex as eye color to the more simple such as the determination of which type of protective coat a bacterium will develop to defend itself. It was groundbreaking discovery indeed. But it took decades before Oswald Avery and his team received the recognition that they so well-deserved. It was partly due to the humble demeanor and cautious ways of Avery that made their work go unnoticed for a very long time. It can also be partially attributed to the science behind genetics; its complexity made it difficult for others to truly appreciate what Avery and his team has accomplished in 1944. Oswald Avery was a man driven with the desire to contribute to humanity but when he finally discovered something of utmost importance the world of science was not quick enough to give recognition to his work.
Background
Oswald Theodor Avery was born on October 21, 1877. That piece of information will help provide a little perspective on his background. He was born before two decades before the 20th century, at a time when the whole world is still struggling to understand microorganisms and other aspects of biology that could not be observed by the naked eye. Oswald Avery was born to English parents. His father Joseph Francis Avery was a Baptist pastor and his mother, Elizabeth Crowdy was also religious and active in ministry (Simmons, 113). The family first immigrated to Halifax, Nova Scotia before they decided to relocate to New York.
Moving to New York was beneficial to the career of his father because he became the pastor of the Mariner’s Temple which still stands today on Lower East Side Manhattan (Simmons, 113). But this move also benefited Oswald because he was able to study medicine at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and finally received his medical degree in 1904. After college he became interested in research and went to work at the Hoagland Laboratory in Brooklyn. It is at this time when Oswald Avery established the pattern of his career which was described by his biographer as the, “…systematic effort to understand the biological activities of pathogenic bacteria through a knowledge of their chemical composition” (Dochez, par. 3). It is also at this time when he was noticed by Rufos Cole director of the hospital of the Rockefeller Institute. At his prodding he was able make Oswald Avery leave Hoagland Laboratory and transfer to the Rockefeller Institute.
By the turn of the 20th century it was clear that Avery would use his exceptional intelligence and capacity for hard work to find solutions to problems that plague mankind. In 1913 he decided to come and work in the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. At that time it was one of the most prestigious places to work with if one considers himself a scientist or researcher. It was the sort of place where Avery can easily fit in. The said institute was founded in 1901 by John D. Rockefeller. The Rockefeller Institute was established at time when infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, diphtheria, and typhoid fever were the greatest threat to human health (The Rockefeller University, par. 4). Thus, the institute became the first biomedical research center in the United States.
When Avery came to Rockefeller he was not hunting for DNA, the genetic material but he was more interested about harmful bacteria. In fact, “…he came to study differences in virulence among strains of pneumococcus, a bacterium that causes severe pneumonia” (The Rockefeller University, par. 8). It is his study on pneumococcus that led him to discover that DNA has something to do with heredity. But it was not going to be smooth travel all the way. Avery and his team were very cautious with regards to this discovery and this may have been the major contributing factor why it took a long time before the scientific community gave them the recognition that they richly deserved.
Serendipity and Hard work
It seems that there are many discoveries in the biomedical field that came as the byproduct of a series of serendipitous events. The story regarding the serendipitous discovery of pasteurization is well-known in the scientific community. The same is true with the discovery of DNA as the hereditary material. Oswald Avery, Colin Mcleod and Maclyn McCarty set their sights on understanding infectious diseases but their hard work was rewarded with the discovery of DNA. But it has to be pointed out that without the previous research made in the field of genetics it would not have been possible for the trio to realize that they have stumbled upon something significant.
Avery, Mcleod and McCarty were standing on the shoulders of great scientists who came before them, especially those who contributed much to the advancement of genetics which at that time was a new science that tried to explain biological hereditary phenomena. It was Mendel who started it all when in 1865 he published his work concerning the hereditary factors that made it possible for parents to influence the physical attributes of their offspring. Decades later it was Johannsen who coined the term “genes” to describe the so-called hereditary factors first described by Mendel. Then in 1906 Bateson defined genetics as the, “…science that studies inheritance and variation in living beings” (Lacadena, 3). But in 1944 Avery, Mcleod and McCarty did not wish to add to the rapid development of genetics they were simply trying to use the principles gleaned from past discoveries to help them in their quest to stop pneumonia.
Avery and his team worked hard to gain a better understanding of the bacteria that causes acute infection of the alveolar spaces in the lungs that in turn would cause severe pulmonary congestion. Louis Pasteur was the first one to isolate the fist strain of pneumococcal bacteria in 1881 (Simmons, 114). From then on other scientists were able to identify other pneumonia-causing bacteria. Avery and his team at the Rockefeller Institute took great pains in “…typing the various strains of pneumococci … which were distinguished by shape and other significant characteristics…” (Simmons, 114). Avery and his team knew very well that differences in biological characteristics in different pneumococcal bacteria is the reason why some are deadly while others are relatively harmless.
Avery discovered that lethal types of pneumococcal bacteria are encapsulated and this is the reason why white blood cells could not neutralize them. White blood cells, the major component in the body’s immune system normally engulf pathogens, thus protecting the body from their deadly effects. But the capsule makes it impossible for the immune system to do its work. Avery continued to study different strains of pneumonia causing bacteria until another scientist made a breakthrough that would set a chain reaction of events.
While Avery and his colleagues were content in tracking down the development of pneumococcal bacteria the scientific community was stunned by the discovery of a British researcher named Frederick Griffith. By chance, Griffith found out that by injecting dead but lethal bacteria into mice together with harmless and yet living bacteria the mice developed pneumonia (Simmons, 114). Scientists all over the world had the right to be amazed and at the same time skeptical. Griffith’s experiment seems to indicate that life comes from non-living matter. This theory has been debunked a long time ago. Life only comes from life and so Avery and his team decided to recreate Griffith’s experiment in order to prove him wrong.
Avery, Mcleod and McCarty were able to replicate Griffith’s research methodology but they were surprised by what they learned in the process. When Griffith was asked as to the explanation for this phenomenon he said, “…the dead bacteria might furnish some nutrient to the living bacteria by which they developed a capsule and became lethal” (Simmons, 115). It was an interesting theory but Avery and his team was able to prove that this is not the answer.
In 1931 Avery and his colleagues were able to make the first breakthrough. They discovered that the mice used in Griffith’s experiment could be discarded because even if they would place dead virulent bacteria and live harmless bacteria in a Petri dish the same thing occurred. According to Simmons (115), Avery had one burning question that he needed an answer: What is the substance responsible? From that day forward his team was no a mission to isolate and purify until they will be able to identify the agent that caused the transformation.
The following will help summarize the methodology used by Avery, Mcleod and McCarty:
Beginning with some 20 gallons of bacteria, Avery and his colleagues employed centrifuges, filters, and chemical reagents in attempts to isolate the substance … Avery and his colleagues attempted to disable the transforming mechanism in pneumococci by removing protein, they failed. When enzymes that attacked DNA were used, the principle became inactive. Separated by centrifuge, the “transforming principle” proved to be a homogenous substance that could be matched to DNA (Simmons, 115).
Instead of celebrating, Avery and his team could not see the significance of their discovery. They were the pioneers and there is not enough prior research made that could back up their claim or could even encourage them that they are on the right track. This led many to conclude that in the aftermath of the discovery, “Avery et al. were overcautious and extremely skeptical” (Hausmann, 103). They could not be blamed for feeling that way because what they were able to accomplish was truly a groundbreaking discovery. They were trailblazers who could not see very far ahead.
Significance of Discovery
The discovery that the DNA was responsible for heredity was able to establish genetics as a new science that will now be able to explain why parents pass on their characteristics to their children. According to one author the discovery was able to finally answer the second question pertaining to the early beginnings of genetics and these two questions are listed as follows (Lacadena, 3):
What are the laws by which biological characters are transmitted from parents to offspring?
What is the physical basis by which such characteristics are conserved and transmitted?
Gregor Mendel was able to answer the first question and then Avery, Mcleod and McCarty were able to answer the second one in 1944. Logic therefore dictates that these men should have been rewarded for their efforts or at least be celebrated in the scientific community for their highly intelligent work and groundbreaking discovery. But there was no Nobel Prize for them. In fact when one mentions DNA the first name that comes to mind are the two Nobel laureates named Watson and Crick who were able to show that DNA is a double-helix structure. But it is doubtful if Watson and Crick would have pursued their study without the findings of Avery, Mcleod and McCarty.
There were other factors involved as to why their work were not recognized in their lifetime or even shortly afterwards. First of all Avery was already 67 years old by the time he published his now famous work (Hausmann, 109). He died shortly after the publication of his work regarding DNA. Secondly, Avery and his team were overly cautious. The following statement is the only statement that they permitted themselves to reveal to the whole world. After the experiments they declared, “The evidence presented supports the belief that a nucleic acid of the deoxyribose type is the fundamental unit of the transforming principle of Pneumococcus Type III” (Hausmann, 109). It was very clear that they tried to limit their conclusions on the experiments that they previously conducted and they did not permit their imagination to wander beyond that.
If they permitted themselves to publicly express what they felt in private regarding the DNA as the genetic material then the world would have noticed and it would invite more scrutiny and because Avery, Mcleod and McCarty were very thorough then the world will know that they were correct in their assertion. But they never made that assertion. On the other hand there could be a third factor why the three men were not as famous as Watson and Crick. At the time of the discovery in 1944 very little was known about genetics and DNA, the world was not yet ready for such experimental results. It would take some time before the world would take notice.
Conclusion
Avery was the son of religious parents. This fact coupled with his other life experience made him a compassionate man ready and willing to help those who are in need. His skills, talent, and immense intellect were put to good use when he studied medicine. It was plain to see that he will use his expertise in helping people through healthcare. It did not take long after graduation from Columbia University that he soon discovered he was meant to be a researcher. His great work ethic and his dedication to his job earned him a spot at the prestigious Rockefeller Institute for Biomedical Research and it is here where he devoted his life to fighting infectious disease.
But while working in the institute, Avery, Mcleod and McCarty were forced to veer a little bit in their quest to find a cure for pneumonia. They were forced to investigate the validity of Griffith’s experiment because he claimed that dead virulent bacteria when injected into mice with live harmless bacteria the mice died from pneumonia. It was the need to prove Griffith wrong that led Avery and his team to the discovery that the transforming factor is the DNA. This discovery firmly established the fact that DNA is responsible not only in transforming harmless bacteria into lethal ones but it also proves that DNA is the physical basis for passing characteristics from parents to offspring.
While they were still alive their contribution to the world of genetics was never properly recognized. Others with similar groundbreaking discoveries were able to receive a Nobel Prize but not Avery, Mcleod and McCarty. Part of their problem is that they were overcautious. No one could blame them because they were treading into uncharted territory. Moreover, at the time of publication only a few people fully understood hereditary laws as well as DNA. But in the 21st century they are now enjoying the recognition that they so richly deserved.
Works Cited
Dochez, Alphonse. “The Oswald T. Avery Collection.” Profiles in Science: National Library of Medicine. 2008. Web.
Hausmann, Rudolph. To Grasp the Essence of Life. MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.
Lacadena, J.R. “Cytogenetics: Yesterday, today and forever. A conceptual and historical overview.” Chromosomes Today. Eds. Henriques-Gil, N., J.S. Parker, & M. J. Puertas. New York: Springer, 1997, 3-10.
Simmons, John. Doctors and Discoveries. MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002.
The Rockefeller University. “More than a century of science for the benefit of humanity.” 2008. Web.
Microbiology is a study of minute organisms that can only be resolved using a microscope. These microorganisms cannot be seen using our naked eyes. Cell function has been studied extensively in microbiology. In addition, there have been studies at the level of genes and proteins known as molecular biology and at the level of community which is referred to as epidemiological and ecological microbiology. Examples of microbial organisms include bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites or protozoa.
History of Microbiology
The study of microbes is not a current study. It also existed several centuries ago. The advancements being seen at present are just innovations of the discoveries made by a few scientists in the past. Louis Pasteur, a former research scientist discovered the microorganisms responsible for rancidity in milk and even other dairy products (Brul et al., 2008). In addition, he made discoveries in the health sector by studying drugs that are against bacteria.
These drugs were named called antibiotics. Pasteur’s discoveries were research highlights that were mainly meant to disapprove the spontaneous generation theory. Another scientist who made a lot of discoveries was Koch. He was specialized in the field of disease causatives. He made some discoveries on novel microorganisms that caused diseases in organisms hence the disease and germ theory (Klein, 2002). Also, Koch contributed much to the culture of microorganisms which became a mode of study for most discoveries in microbiology.
Microbiology and Health
A great contribution has been made in the health field through studies in microbiology. Major research work is being done on the treatment of flu and Tuberculosis (Tang, 2009). A perfect cure for these diseases has not been found yet. Therefore, research microbiologists, lab technologists, and clinicians are doing collective research work in the field for continuity of research studies to come up with curatives for treatment and vaccines that would help prevent the spread of such infectious diseases (Land, 1999). Another contribution of microbiology is in the area of sample analysis for disease diagnosis, infections, outbreaks, and management.
Microbiology and Agriculture
Agriculture and microbiology are two inseparable disciplines. For the agricultural sector to flourish, soil issues and plant issues must be addressed. Microbiology provides an avenue to cater to these issues. Studies in agriculture involve soil studies for the presence of microbes that are important for plants and those that pose threat to the plants and crops (Insam, 2001). In addition, some studies involve pests and the diseases they cause in plants. Studies involving diseases and pest control have resulted in growth in the agricultural sector. Moreover, these pests have been found to infest crops and even farm animals hence leading to reduced production. Major studies in this field have greatly contributed to agricultural development.
Microbiology and Industry
Industrial microbiology has had a great impact on the safety and control of manufactured products (Wackett, 2002). Recombinant technology and biotechnology have been exploited for the production of industrial components such as food, cosmetics, medicine, biochemical products, and even toiletries. These products are very useful to human being especially food which is a basic need. Advancement in this field can help alleviate certain insufficiency hence contributing to good health and high standards of living to people who can afford the products.
Microbiology and Environment
Certain issues can be addressed using microbiological studies. The environment comprises components that are both biotic and biotic (Tillet, 1995). Accumulation of toxic matters in the environment poses health risks to people and other biotic components. These toxic materials can be eliminated by the use of microbes and decomposition strategies. Research scientists are still assembling findings of ways that can help change the environment positively and make it a better place to exist in.
Reference List
Brul, S. Femke I.C., Mensonides, K. J., Hellingwerf, M., Joost T. M. (2008). Microbial systems biology. International Journal Food Microbiology. 128.1. 16-21.
Insam, H. (2001). Soil Microbiology. Geoderma, 100(3), 389-402. Web.
Klein, A. D., Lansing, M. P. and John, P. H. (2002). Scope and History of Microbiology. Web.
Land, F. (1999). Focus: Drug Resistance. Trends in Microbiology, 7(9), 344-345. Web.
Tang, Y. (2009). Diagnostic Microbiology. Encyclopedia of Microbiology. 308-320. Web.
Tillet, H. (1995). Environmental Microbiology and Quality control. Water Science and Technology, 31(5), 471-477. Web.
Wackett, L. (2002). Industrial and Ecological Microbiology-Microbial Diversity. Current Opinion in Microbiology, 5(1), 37-239. Web.
A photon is a particle of electromagnetic radiation. It is most widely recognized as a light particle but ranges across the whole electromagnetic spectrum, from the longest radio waves to the shortest gamma rays. Since its discovery in the early twentieth century, the photon has contributed greatly to the understanding of the fundamental physics, was used in the multitude of experiments to prove the dualistic nature of light, served as a basis for the conceptualization of the quantum mechanics theory and has found its application in the wide variety of human life, ranging from theoretical concepts of analogous computation and information techniques to the basic utilization of its zero rest mass and speed.
The idea of light as a sum of particles has predated the wave hypothesis for several centuries, mainly because of Sir Isaac Newton’s influential Hypothesis of Light of 1675. However, certain properties of light, primarily the refraction and diffraction, and, to a lesser degree, birefringence, aligned poorly with this idea, and, as a result, the wave nature of light has been suggested instead.
This hypothesis, confirmed experimentally by Thomas Young and August Fresnel and further strengthened by the detection of radio waves by Heinrich Hertz, finally became generally accepted in the late nineteenth century. Paradoxically, the wave nature also did not explain some of the characteristics of light. For instance, some chemical reactions require the light of certain frequencies to be set in action. If the light is assumed to be a wave, the frequency does not determine the energy of the light beam.
Instead, the intensity is the only relevant parameter. However, the intensity of light does not matter when it comes to triggering the said reaction. Besides, the photoelectric effect, which was well studied and documented at the time, produced similar results, where the electrons produced by exposing a metal plate to the light source differed in their energy depending on the frequency of the source, not the intensity.
Thus, in the early twentieth century, Max Planck suggested that the energy carried by light was transmitted by discreet amounts, called “packets.” This was partially confirmed by the experiments of black-body radiation studies, where the energies observed inside a cavity at a certain temperature exhibited an uneven distribution, forming a bell curve, with a peak in certain frequencies and a decline in higher and lower values (Bortz 24).
This bell curves aligned well with the similar curve of the velocities of molecules of the ideal gas, where certain median velocities dominated while both higher and lower values occurred significantly less frequently (Bortz 24). This correlation has drawn the attention of Albert Einstein, who, in 1905, has suggested that light waves are carrying energy in discreet amounts, or quantized, much like particles. The quantization of energy was initially thought of as a result of some material obstacle that interrupted the energy flow until Einstein has suggested that it was an intrinsic property of radiation itself (Bortz 26).
Later, Einstein has expanded on the law of black-body radiation, stating that the quanta suggested by Planck must have momentum, which means they are particles. The term “photon” was applied to them as late as 1928 by Arthur Compton, who also contributed greatly to the discovery of light particles by demonstrating the validity of Einstein’s theories in what is now known a “Compton effect” – a mathematical analysis of the scattering angle and wavelength shift of x-rays (Bortz 28).
The subsequent development of the studies of photon further enhanced the understanding of the nature of electromagnetic radiation and gave way to the discovery of its quantum properties. The current understanding of a photon’s life cycle is as follows: the photon is formed when a certain amount of energy is released from an atom (i.e. a transition from one discreet level of energy to the other).
This most commonly happens when the heat is applied to a body, which frees the energy in the form of radiation (visible light is the most recognizable example). At this point, a photon is released and travels in a certain direction at a speed of light. A photon has zero mass, so it can travel infinite distances until it is absorbed, effectively transferring its energy to other atom and disintegrating in the result. Alternatively, if the energy of the photon is high enough, it can create an electron and a positron without colliding with a quantum system (i.e. an atom) by splitting into a particle and an anti-particle (positron) which, in turn, disintegrate upon collision and produce a photon (Zettili 17).
However, the most important development in understanding the quantum properties of a photon has occurred when the double-slit experiment has been conducted to confirm the wave-particle duality of the EM radiation, suggested by Einstein. The photons exhibit a certain behavior, characteristics of waves, such as diffraction. At the same time, it does not divide when it encounters a beam splitter, thus suggesting its particle nature (Paul 6).
At the same time, it does not behave strictly like a point-like particle, as its trajectory is not influenced by an electromagnetic field as predicted (Zettili 588). Most interestingly, the photon, like any quantum particle, demonstrates the uncertainty principle, where the position of a photon’s arrival is determined, among other things, by the fact of the measurements conducted at the splitting point (the slit). This effect has led to the establishment of the quantum theory, which views the particle as being in a superposition, i.e. more than one state at once. Besides contributing greatly to the fundamental theoretical physics, the quantum characteristics of a photon are potentially useful in a range of practical applications.
The most widely recognized area of application of the quantum mechanics pertinent to photons is commonly known as quantum computing. The theory suggests the usage of photons as carriers of information. Whereas the traditional electronic computers, which are binary, carry the information by assigning the transistor one of the two defined states (commonly recognized as 0 and 1), the quantum computation device makes use of the superposition of light particles, which may be in two states simultaneously.
These data packets, termed qubits, allow for the much faster computation capabilities of the device. Additionally, some of the functions of the current computers, mostly those of non-deterministic and probabilistic nature, require complex simulations to be performed, while the quantum computer would have an intrinsic capability for them (Hirvensalo 5). Finally, the physical characteristics of such machines, most prominently their size, would be superior compared to the available technology. Currently, the development of quantum computers is still in its theoretical stage, with few actual working computations performed on a small scale (Hirvensalo 2). Nevertheless, the benefits of quantum computing are already recognized by investors in both the private and state sector.
Another possible area where the quantum properties of photons are expected to yield superior results in quantum information. While the concept of the information carried by the qubits instead of bits is valuable primarily for the field of theoretical physics, several theories exist of practical applications. Most notable of these are superdense coding and quantum teleportation. The former allows storing twice the amount of classical information by using one qubit as two classical bits.
The latter significantly speeds up the transfer of information. However, both rely on the quantum entanglement, the concept which allows the extrapolation of parameters of a photon by measuring the same parameters of its Bell pair, and which is still in the stage of early development (Marinescu 329). Thus, while certain progress was made, and both concepts have been experimentally proven to work, none of them is close to practical implementation.
Other characteristics of a photon, such as its speed and zero rest mass, have found application in multiple fields of human activity. Optical telecommunication, for example, is a widely accepted method of transferring information that ranges from macroscopic to an atomic scale. Photochemistry is a branch of chemistry that utilizes properties of electromagnetic radiation (usually of a visible spectrum) to trigger chemical reactions. Finally, photons offer a wide variety of monitoring capabilities, from the optical sensors in robotics to the medical equipment relying on the radiation of varying wavelengths, from ultraviolet to hard x-rays.
The impact of a photon’s discovery can not be overestimated. Since the early twentieth century, it has not only contributed greatly to the understanding of the fundamental physical laws and allowed for the formation of the quantum theory but has found itself in a variety of applications. While the majority of these applications are currently theoretical in origin, these implementations will doubtlessly serve to advance the computation and information transfer in the nearest future.
Works Cited
Bortz, Alfred. The Photon, New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, 2004. Print.
Hirvensalo, Mika. Quantum Computing, New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. Print.
Marinescu, Dan. Classical and Quantum Information, New York: Academic Press, 2011. Print.
Paul, Harry. Introduction to Quantum Theory, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Print.
Zettili, Nouredine. Quantum Mechanics: Concepts and Applications, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009. Print.
The scientific method has important learning and educational significance because it facilitates the exploration of phenomena. It refers to the sequence of events that make up a plan for the achievement of specific research goals that involve the construction and application of knowledge (Haig, 2019). The approach has been applied in a variety of scientific fields, such as physics, to explain the nature of phenomena. The application of the scientific method in the discovery and development of the photoelectric effect triggered a scientific revolution that changed humanity’s understanding of the physical world.
The Scientific Method
There are three key theories that define the elements of the scientific method. The first is the hypothetico-deductive theory, which posits that the identification of a hypothesis is followed by indirect testing for the purposes of the derivation of observable predictions that are amenable to direct empirical testing (Haig, 2019). The postulated hypothesis is confirmed in situations where the gathered information supports the proposed theory.
The second theory that describes the scientific approach is the inductive method. It defines a process that begins with the identification of observable facts that are collected without the proposal of a theory (Haig, 2019). The gathered data forms a foundation upon which researchers propose hypotheses through enumerative induction, which emphasizes the counting of observable cases that are used to draw a conclusion. The final theory is inference to the best explanation, which posits that a significant degree of what is known about the world is premised on explanations of explanatory worth (Haig, 2019). The scientific method involves distinct steps in which a researcher asks a question, conducts research, forms a hypothesis, tests it through experimentation, and uses the results to make a conclusion. It is vital to note that the conclusions can either accept or reject a hypothesis.
Historical and Modern Descriptions of the Natural World
One of the biggest controversies linked to the understanding of the natural world involves the shape of the earth. Pre-millennial literature promoted beliefs that the planet was flat. For instance, Homer emphasized the fact that the Earth was a flat disc supported by a hemispherical sky (Arif et al., 2019). This view was further supported by Greek philosophers such as Mimnermus of Colophon and Stasinus of Cyprus. Pre-Socratic philosophers such as Thales, Democritus, and Leucippus also believed that the planet was flat (Arif et al., 2019). The assertions that the Earth was flat were based on religious views and non-scientific observations that were not based on rigorous assessment and effective data collection.
The modern perspective on the shape of the world is that it is round. The idea was first presented in the 6th Century by Pythagoras and Aristotle, who noted that the round shape seen in a lunar eclipse must indicate that the Earth is spherical (Arif et al., 2019). In addition, the changes in the sizes of ships at sea as they got bigger or smaller depending on their direction of travel were indicative of the planet’s round shape. Scientists such as Posidonus dedicated significant efforts to the determination of the Earth’s shape by applying methods that involved the observation of the movement of celestial bodies (Arif et al., 2019). Their efforts led to the development of astronomy, which necessitated the application of the scientific method. In addition, their efforts influenced contemporary researchers such as Henry De a Beche, who etched the spherical shape of the Earth in his influential book in 1834 (Grevsmühl, 2019). The scientific method has consistently been applied to disprove the notion that the Earth is flat.
The Photoelectric Effect and the Scientific Method
The photoelectric effect is believed to have facilitated the birth of quantum physics. It refers to the phenomenon that facilitates the release of charged particles from materials exposed to sources of radiant energy. It is often viewed as the release of electrons from a metal surface that is exposed to visible light (Rablau et al., 2019). Early studies demonstrated the fact that the effect represented a relationship between light and matter that could not be explained by the existing rules of classical physics. It was commonly believed that light acted as an electromagnetic wave, yet the released electrons’ kinetic energy did not change with the intensity of light (Rablau et al., 2019). The initial observation and systematic study of the phenomenon were conducted by a German physicist called Heinrich Rudolf Hertz between 1886 and 1887 (Rablau et al., 2019). His work was inspired by Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetic radiation, which was published in 1865 and posited that electromagnetic waves moved at the speed of light and facilitated the movement of light as a wave (Rablau et al., 2019). Hertz successfully confirmed Maxwell’s theory in addition to measuring the wavelength and velocity of electromagnetic waves. It is worth noting that Hertz made an incidental discovery that would play a critical role in the particle theory of light that would later be formulated by Albert Einstein. In his experiments, Hertz used a high-voltage induction coil to develop a spark discharge between two pieces of brass and an open copper wire loop to detect the generated waves (Rablau et al., 2019). The experiments inspired Wilhelm Hallwachs to explore the phenomenon further. The photoelectric effect impacts electrons in the atomic and quantum wells (Fornalski, 2019). It should be noted, however, that none of the aforementioned scientists provided a theoretical explanation for their observations.
The photoelectric effect’s theoretical basis would be explored by independent scientists in later years. Joseph John Thompson and Philip von Lenard conducted experiments using cathode rays after which they concluded that electrons, which were negatively charged particles, were the constituent parts of electromagnetic waves (Rablau et al., 2019). It is vital to note that J.J Thomson was awarded the 1906 Nobel Prize for his contributions to the conduction of electricity by gasses (Rablau et al., 2019). The results from the highlighted experiments contributed significantly to the contemporary understanding of the photoelectric effect.
Einstein’s Theory
The basis of Einstein’s theory is the assumption that light rays are made up of packets referred to as quanta. The hypothesis adds to Plank’s assertion that electromagnetic radiation is absorbed in specific multiples of quanta of energy (Hewit, 2019). Einstein posited that radiation fields are quantized, meaning that quantum energy, also referred to as photons, has energy as represented by the equation E = hv (Spagnolo et al., 2019). It is worth noting that h is Plank’s constant, and v is the frequency of the electromagnetic wave. When one assumes that in the photoelectric effect a photon is absorbed by a single electron, then the most energetic electrons have kinetic energy as represented by KEmax = hv – W. W is a material-dependent constant that represents the work needed to free the electron. The most energetic electrons can be slowed down through the application of a retarding voltage, which brings the photocurrent to zero as represented by the eV0 = KEmax (Rablau et al., 2019). Therefore, Einstein’s equation of the photoelectric effect is represented as eV0 = hv – W. In essence, Einstein’s new corpuscular theory of light highlighted the fact that each particle or photon has a fixed amount of energy that is dependent on the light’s frequency.
The photoelectric effect revolutionized humanity’s understanding of light and the world. It played a critical role in the growth of modern physics seeing as it raised significant questions regarding the nature of light. It has been integral in the development of astrophysics and material science. Revolutions in imaging technology, the assessment of nuclear processes, the chemical assessment of materials, and the transition of electrons and atoms between various energy states depend on the principle. The most important contribution that is attributed to the phenomenon is the birth of the quantum revolution, which changed how scientists viewed the structure of atoms and the nature of light.
Conclusion
The application of the scientific method in the discovery and development of the photoelectric effect produced a scientific revolution that altered the world’s understanding of physics. The phenomenon has played a critical role in the conceptualization of light and has had a significant impact on various facets of life, such as imaging, nuclear processes, and the structure of atoms. The scientific method has heralded a transformation of humanity’s understanding of the physical world.
References
Arif, F., Ab Rahman, A. A., Abdul Maulud, K. N., & Kamaludin, A. H. (2019). Debunking flat earth: from a geomatics perspective. International Conference on Space Science and Communication, 150–153. Web.
Blackberry is a bristly plant shrub or creeper, recurrent, and is believed to be indigenous to Eastern N. America and is found in abundance from Nova Scotia to Ontario, New York, Virginia and North Carolina south. It appears in dry copses, clearings and forest edges, hedgerows, open pastures, waysides in and also in wastelands. Biologically termed as Rubus Alleghenies, the plant also goes by the popular names of Allegheny Blackberry, American Blackberry, Bly, Bramble, Bramble-Kite, Brambleberry, Brameberry, and is also sometimes known as Brummel.
Blackberry is suitable for eating and exhibits medicinal characteristics. The Native American tribes have been known to make use of it extensively. The leaf of the plant is the part of the plant which is more frequently exploited in the form of a remedial herb, although the root of the plant also exhibits medical properties. Young comestible shoots are reaped during the spring season, peeled off, and made use of in the preparation of salads. Blackberries are extremely delectable can be eaten raw or sometimes taken in the form of jelly or jam. The root-bark and the leaves are diuretic, styptic, depurative, vulnerable, and tonic. The cab is used as a productive substitute medicine for symptoms of dysentery, diarrhea, pileses, and cystitis.
Blackberries were in historic ages rumored to provide safety against all ‘evil runes,’ if collected during the appropriate lunar phases. Greek physicians were arguably the first to discover the medicinal properties of the herb. Native Americans produced fiber, procured from the stem of the plant, to make a tough yarn. Additionally, it served as an enormous blockade constituted by heaps of the prickly canes protecting the communities. (Jackson & Bergeron, p. 1).
A little story about the blackberry
“That wicked old witch dragged me into their cottage and the younger witch cut my arm and put my blood into boiling water”, said the ten-year-old weeping girl while many of the villagers kept nodding their heads in frustration. It had been the third attack this month on small children. The villagers in Little Middleton were completely at a loss not knowing what to do about a group of uncultured, nasty-looking women who were allegedly witches.
That summer a portly-looking elderly old monk, with a white beard came to the village to meet the priests of the village church. He displayed extraordinary healing capabilities. All villagers went to him to cure their ailments. He learned about the wicked witches and decided to visit them.
One evening he reached the edge of the woods surrounding the village, where there was a ruined cottage where the three witches lived. He politely knocked on the cottage door. A nasty-looking young woman answered and scowled at him. He asked the lady why they were doing such things to innocent children. She gave a frightened look and turned to a woman who had a crooked nose and she emerged out with another horrible-looking lady and they had a terrible argument with the monk. The villagers saw from their houses brightly lit sparks against the dusky skies at the edge of the woods.
It was nearly midnight when the monk returned with a bunch of stems and shoots and asked the villagers to plant these wherever they wanted. He said that the witches won’t trouble them in the future. He said he had trapped the wicked souls into those plants and they will bear berries that will have immensely powerful magical powers.
After a few days when the monk had left, the plants bore bunches of berries that were black in color. The villagers started using the leaves, stems of the plant and ate the berries. Slowly they discovered the many uses the plant has. They named the plant blackberries and believed that they were black because they had evil souls trapped within them.
Passion Flower is an indigenous returning creeping plant found in the Southeastern parts of the United States known to occur all across Virginia and Kentucky, Florida and Texas. They return every year, budding and scattering across any medium they are given and are seen cropping up in dusty copses and open grasslands, waysides, hedgerows and wastelands.
Passionflower is safe to be eaten and also exhibits medicinal properties. The scrumptious fruit as well as flowers are edible in their naturally occurring form or made into jellies, jams. Freshly picked leaves are prepared as vegetable dishes or used in salads. Recent researches have revealed the flavonoids found in passionflower as the key elements accountable for their comforting and anti-anxiety essence. A few essentials found in the plant, like Apigenin, Luteolin, Kaempferol, and Quercetin, have been the subject for various studies which divulge its potential to provide remedial solutions to diseases like Parkinson’s disease, cancer, HIV, Leukemia, amongst others. The foliage and shoots are medically used in the form of antispasmodic, styptic, sudorific, soporific, narcotic, depressant, and vasodilator in addition to being used in the healing of some female complaints. Passionflower is often drawn on as an extremely fruitful substitute medicine in the handling of complaints relating to sleeplessness, nervousness, bad temper, neuralgy, bowel problems, premenstrual anxiety, and vaginal discharges. Alkaloids are also found in the plant in addition to flavonoids which produce a valuable non-addictive tranquilizing drug that does not induce sleepiness. It is a valuable herb in the treatment of epilepsy. However, it is suggested that pregnant women should refrain from using passion flowers as drugs. The dehydrated herb is also exported to Europe in large quantities due to its varied medicinal uses. (Jackson & Bergeron, p. 1).
Discovery of the healing properties of the plant in story
Martha wept and held her husband’s hand and said, “John, please don’t go. Make up some excuses and they may let you go.”
John said, “I have a duty towards my motherland which I must fulfill.”
“But you may not come back. What about your duty towards me, towards little James, your only son”, she said.
He smiled and said passionately, “I’ll come back. Somehow or the other I’ll come back for you and my son.”
All the men in the village were leaving for the border to join up with the army the next day. The country was fighting a fierce battle and the army needed reinforcements. It was the last supper Martha and John were having before he went to the battle.
The next day morning, when John was kissing his infant son and beautiful wife goodbye he gave his wife a strange-looking plant and said, “found it near the well and I liked the flower. I think you must plant it in the backyard garden, Martha. And remember what I said. No matter what, I’ll come back.” Martha said nothing taking the plant from his hand. Only silent tears rolled down her eyes.
The news came after a few days. They had won the battle, but alas, Martha would never celebrate the victory with John. She could never forget him, but whenever she looked at those strange-looking flowers in the backyard she had the feeling that John was watching her.
One day she fell terribly ill due to sadness and continuous weeping. Her now five-year-old son not knowing what to do picked up a flower and gave it to her. She inhaled it and found a strangely soothing sensation. And slowly and gradually she recovered. She understood there was something strange in that flower and started experimenting with it. Gradually she found many uses of the plant that helped her sustain herself and her child. Now she understood what John had meant by saying, “No matter what, I’ll come back”. Tears rolled down her rosy cheeks once again and she said to herself softly, “Passion Flower”.
The concept of solar system has had several changes in its theories throughout thousands of years. Majority of people thought that there was no solar system. Ancient astronomers believed that the earth was the center of universe and the sun moved through the sky (Nine Planets, 2011).
Ancient astronomers saw points of lights moving through the skies and named them planets, with specific names after their gods, Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Venus and Saturn. Heliocentric reordering was proposed and later, Galileo discovered the solar system. Invention of the telescope led to discoveries of 3 more planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto in the 17th century.
Examples Scientific concepts that changed with time
The earth is thought to be stationery at the center of universe and the ethereal objects moving through sky.
Aristarchus proposes heliocentric reordering of the cosmos.
Nicolaus develops the first heliocentric system.
Galieo, Kepler and Newton develops the current the understanding that the earth revolves around the sun and rotates about its axis
Historical event that changed scientific aspects of natural world
The Chernobyl Disaster
Historical Context
Chernobyl nuclear reactor suffered a catastrophic power increase which caused explosion of its core.
Occurred in Ukraine on 26th April 1986.
Occurred during the test of a safety emergency core cooling.
The plant was under direct jurisdiction of the central Moscow’s authorities
Effects
Released numerous quantities of radioactive fuel and core materials into the surface.
Ignited graphite moderator which increased emission of radioactive particles into the atmosphere.
Health of plant workers and local people affected.
Rivers, lakes and reservoirs polluted (Harti, Hoffman & Fleming, 2005), p. 1).
Impact on scientific understanding
This accident led to discoveries of more effects of radiation on health and environment such as thyroid cancer, beta burns and mutations, among others.
The understanding nuclear technology and its effect took a new turn, with its emerging influence on global worming and environmental effects researched.
Examples
This accident led to a new understanding of impacts of the adverse effects of radiation. Further research ware initiated by UNSCEAR (United Nations Scientific of the Effects of Atomic Radiation) on treatment for thyroid cancer, down syndrome, chromosomal aberrations, neural tube defects etc. The Chernobyl disaster led to a new twist to the understanding of its real effects on health, leading to a series of research on the risk observed.
Extensive research and screening were done , for cancer along with other diseases and other environmental effects. The natural world is usually known to be safe and eternal, but disaster witnessed changed our understanding of nature, that it needs to be conserved. Chernobyl Nuclear disaster became a revolution in scientific discoveries and clearly led to numerous changes in our conception of the natural world.
Ecosystem
A specific area of a given size in which climate, animals, plants and the landscape continually interact.
It is all the organisms in an area along with non-living factors with which they interact.
It ids the interaction between biotic and abiotic factors in a specific area.
The Florida everglades
Geographical location
The everglades is a subtropical wetland in the southern part of Florida.
Its location in coordinates is 26.00 N 80.70 W
It starts from Orlando all the way to Lake Okeechobee with river Kissimmee.
Biotic and abiotic factors of the everglades
These are all the living organisms in a given ecosystem and their interaction.
They include coastal lowlands, plants species such as saw grass, mangroves, Marsh, Orchids, Bromeliads and Ferns as well as Tree Island and Hammock.
Animals species include the tiniest frog, Birds such as the whooping crane, land mammals such as bobcat and the largest crocodiles in America known as the American alligator
Abiotic factors: Comprises of dissolved oxygen and inorganic carbon in its various forms, ph. (4.9 – 7.0), water temperature, climate, light intensity, water flow, salinity, and a high toxic mercury concentration.
The everglades comprise of wetlands, and fresh water body that supports aquatic life ,sawgrass and other biotic ecosystems.
Impact of Humans on the Everglades
Human has been part of everglades ecosystem for thousands of years.
The past 100year has seen significant changes in landscape, which has affected the ecosystem.
The pressure on land due to the expansion of urban centre have affected the ecosystem
The drainage system implemented was without adequate research on its effect on ecosystem causing further pollution.
Environmental degradation has been due to pollution (U.S. Geological Survey, 1999).
Other causes are due to the change of landscape from natural ecosystem to urban centre.
Establishment of sugar processing plant and plantations have also contributed to environmental degradation in Everglades.
These activities have degraded local environment leading to a decline in quality of biotic life.
Future Impact of Humans on the Everglades
Revision of the plan to halt sugar manufacturing plant would contribute to further environmental degradation if much is not done to conserve the ecosystem.
Population increase in the future may decline future life of biotic factors as well as exhaust abiotic factors such as phosphorus concentration which is essential to biotic factors.
Future settlement may lead to further change in the landscape, causing significant (negative) changes to the Everglades ecosystem.
Continued awareness on environmental conservation and good drainage systems would help conserve the ecosystem in the future (National Park Service, 2010).
Guidelines on human activities that would conserve Everglades
Further research should be conducted to implement drainage systems that would help in conserving the ecosystem.
More environmental awareness should be conducted in the area to enable people to help in conserving the ecosystem.
If research shows that the plantations are depleting phosphorus then it should be halted to avoid depletion of abiotic factors that support the ecosystem.
References
U.S. Geological Survey. (1999). Florida Everglades. Circular 1182. U.S. Geological Survey. Web.
National Park Service. (2010). Everglades: Nature and Science. nps.gov. Web.
Harti, G., Hoffman M., & Fleming M. (2005). Chernobyl: The True Scale of The Accident. World Health Organization. Web.
Nine Planets. (2011). A multimedia Tour of the Solar System: One Star, Eight Planets, and More. Nine Planets.org. Web.