TOW #3 Curiosity discovers water in the dust that coats Mars written by Amina Khan

This article is relying the exciting information about water on Mars. The NASA Curiosity rover has been hard at work retrieving information for scientists back on Earth to analyze and evaluate. One such discovery was that there was water in a fine-grain part of the Mars dust layer. The Curiosity rover used its many drills and sample analysis programs to send information back on this new find. Scientists in France and America were able to conclude that there was indeed water in the soil. The author of this article is Amina Khan, a renowned reporter in the scientific community. She has written many stories about the world of science and even has a section in the Los Angels Times devoted to scientific discovery. She does this because she wants the public to be more educated on the interesting and fascinating world of science that is happening around them. She wants to address the masses, or genera public because most of them would not take time out of their day to read a scientific journal to find advances in science. She uses easy vocabulary for everyone to understand and tries to make the subject matter interesting to everyone. Amina is able to use quotes and studies from the many universities and labs to establish her credibility. There is appoint in the article where she references the people at the University of Toulouse explaining that they were the first people to say that the dust that contained water was not similar to the dust that Curiosity first landed on. Referencing to the many universities establishes her credibility and allows readers to get interested in the subject matter, which is essentially her purpose. I think that the author was definitely able to achieve her purpose in this article. She establishes her credibility and makes finding water on Mars very interesting.

Tow #2 DNA Double Take written by Carl Zimmerman

Carl Zimmer, a popular science writer and blogger, wrote DNA Double Take. Mr. Zimmerman is graduated from Yale University and has won many accolades for his scientific articles he has written. He has written for the New York Times, Discover, and the National Geographic Magazine. Carl Zimmerman is famous for writing articles on science, evolution and parasites. In this article, published by the New York Times, is about DNA and the many breakthroughs scientists are having in the field of genealogy. The article begins with a question about why people have different DNA’s inside their body. Carl then goes into detail on two different ideas. The first idea would be chimerism, or when one person has two or more genetically distinct parts. This was thought to be a myth that the Greeks created in stories. In the mid-1900s a women donated a pint of her blood to some scientists. These people looked at her blood and noticed that she had both O and A type blood in the donation. They brought her in and tested her blood to find the same results. It was later concluded that the women, who had donated her blood, had actually gotten parts of her twin brother’s blood in the womb. Now scientists are beginning to believe that chimerism is not actually that rare. One lady found out she was a chimera when she was 52 years old. She needed a kidney transplant and when the doctors were looking to see who could donate a kidney, they noticed that she was not the mother of two of her three children. It turns out that she was originated from two genomes, one created her blood and the other created her eggs. There was also another study that showed that if a woman had given birth to a baby boy she might have the chance of getting some of the left over male fetal cells, which can be later absorbed into the mother’s tissues. In Canada scientists preformed autopsies on 59 women and found that 63 percent had neurons of Y-chromosomes in their brains. The second idea the Carl goes into is mosaicism. This is when there are two different types of cells inside of one person. This was seen in the 1960s when researchers noted that a form of leukemia originated from a mosaicism. They saw a blood cell mutate after it divide, moving a part of the chromosome to another part of the cell killing the carrier. The author then goes into detail on how scientists are now beginning to accept these two theories and using them in their research. Dr. Walsh, a man who studies childhood brain disorders, has seen many cases with his patients that they are a chimera or mosaic. He notes that with the widespread acceptance of these phenomena there will be a lot of work done to make sure humanity knows all it can about the chimeras and mosaics. Finally the author ends his article off with a very exciting reference to the crime and punishment world. He explains that if people are indeed chimeras or mosaics then it might be hard for doctors to find out who committed the crime. There was one incident in the Washington Sate Patrol Laboratory that a Saliva sample did not match the sperm sample in a sexual assault case. Mr. Zimmerman clearly wrote this article for the everyday people who are interested in science, in particular, genetics. However the average reader can look at this article and still be interested about what is going on, and they might learn something new about genetics. The author’s purpose for writing the article was to explain to the average reader about chimerism and mosaicism. He wanted to explain to tell the reader about the most up to date news about the world of genetics. Since the New York Times published DNA Double Take many people would be able to read it and they could learn about genetics. The vocabulary is not extremely high leveled allowing for many people to read the article. Some strategies that the author used when writing this article was that he used events that actually happened to people. The author used the events that happened to the lady who donated blood and found out she was a chimera to display that people who are chimeras do not actually know it themselves. He also used the records of the Washington Sate Patrol Laboratory to explain to the reader that not only do scientists and doctors have to deal with chimeras and mosaics, but also the police investigators. I believe that the author did a fantastic job of explaining his topic and allowing the reader to get excited about genetics. I remember when I was in biology and we were learning about chimeras. I had to create a way to explain to the class what they were and how they lived. It was very hard explaining that topic to the class because all I could think of using in my speech to the class were words used by professionals, which were not understood by my classmates. However I believe that this author managed to convey his message without losing any of his readers on the journey.

TOW #1 A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte painted by Georges Seurat

This is a painting showing a Sunday Afternoon on the Island of the La Grande Jatte using a revolutionary new art style called pointillism. The painter was Georges Seurat, a French artist who lived from 1851 to 1891; he died at 31 from unknown causes. Georges was a well-respected painter in France for having pioneered a new type of Impressionism that he called "Pointillism." This new art style involved many dots arranged so that when looked from afar it would form a picture. This painting is actually a mirror of an image the Seurat created earlier called Bathers at Asniéres but that was much smaller in comparison. Sunday Afternoon on the Island of the La Grande Jatte is 81 by 121 inches in size and took two years to complete and is currently located in the Art Institute of Chicago. Seurat meticulously placed dots on large canvas and even though it took two years of his life to complete it has remained a masterpiece. The selling price for the painting was 24,000 dollars. Seurat wanted to paint this picture because he believed that if he made a famous work that would exemplify his new style of Impressionism then he would become as famous as Monet. The artist also wanted to show a new type of pigment called zinc yellow. This pigment was new for the time and it created a brilliant sunlight in the painting that was never seen before. Georges painted this Sunday Afternoon on the Island of the La Grande Jatte for the general public and for artists. He wanted the general public to see his work and request it at different salons across France. He wanted artist to see the painting because he wanted them to take notice of an up and coming art form. A way that the Georges used to make his piece stand out was his use of multiple colors on one object. If one were to look very closely at the painting they would see that the lady in the front of the painting has blue dots, black dots and mainly white dots. When the viewer steps back they only see a white face and not a black face. He also creates sunlight in the painting with the zinc yellow pigment allowing the afternoon of the Sunday to be seen by the audience. Georges also uses perspective to make his painting of the scenery actually look as though the viewer is there in real life looking through the lens of pointillism.  Finally the use of pointillism was revolutionary for the time.  During Seurat’s lifetime he was used to seeing works by Monet and other famous impressionism painters. He, however, wanted to make something of himself and create a whole new type of impressionism critics called, pointillism. Seurat was able to create scientifically accurate painting with the use of millions of dots in the process. This shocked the art world because such a style was never before seen in France. Georges was able to make a huge impression in the art world as many other painters such as Paul Signac. He was able to use individual dots to create something larger. Seurat also pioneered another art style called divisionism. This is a technique where different colors are seen without using a mixing palette but rather seen optically. In the painting the viewer can see the sunlight on the painting with out having the image of the people distorted. This can also be seen with the people who are in the shade of the tree in the painting. They do not have a black tinge on their skin, they merely mix with heir surrounding lighting creating shade and an afternoon setting. In my opinion this painting is a masterpiece. I saw the Art Institute of Chicago when my family visited it for a vacation one year and loved it. We got a copy of the painting because my dad and I both liked it a lot and I we have it hanging on a wall. I have actually tried to recreate this type of painting before because I thought that it would be a fun project.  I soon learned that I was mistaken when I thought that the painting would be fun and games. It took me about three weeks to compose something that looked vaguely similar to Seurat’s painting. I realized why it took Georges Seurat two years to complete this masterpiece. I believe that people should appreciate this painting more and that Georges Seurat should not be forgotten.

Shiva Rahman's 1st IRB Intro - Malcolm Gladwell "Blink"

I chose Malcolm Gladwell's Blink because I wanted to see what the science was behind decision making. The book goes into the psychological and neurological view on decision making. Decision making has been viewed in a primarily bad light, in my opinion, because there are normally two choices that will upset two sides and no one ends up happy. An example of a "lose-lose" situation would be when President Truman had to either drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima or prolong the World War II. I would like to learn more about decision making and see if my views on this topic change when I have finished reading the book. I hope to learn the science behind decision making so, if the time comes, I can be ready for anything.

Who are You and What are You Doing

Written by Mark Edmundson a professor of English in the University of Virginia. This essay is about college and how you have to do what you want to do in life and that the professors in college do not care about you. The essay explains that if you want anything out of college, you are going to have to work your butt off and earn it. The author wrote this essay for parents and their children who are going into college. He wants to explain to the parent that they need to let their children do what they want to do and not what the parent wants them to do. The essay is for the child going into college because it tells them that the professors are not going to be very helpful and that if they want anything from college they are going to have to go after it themselves. The author wants the people who are going into college now not to have to deal with the Mr. Edmundson used his own life as an example of someone who went to college, did not get any extra help from the professors and worked hard toward what he wanted to do. The author uses his life because he believes that he was able to do what he wanted, and how he had mediocre professors. The author is also a professor and can see the same things he is writing about happen to children in college. I believe that the author was able to convince the parents and children going into college that they should do what they want to do and that they should always work hard to trying to accomplish their goal. Finally many of the author’s ideas are based on the present day America. He focuses on the current day, not only because he is a teacher, but also because he does not want children of the modern age to make the mistakes he sees as a teacher.

Killing My Body to Save My Mind

This article is about the author, Lauren Slater, who has taken a drug called Zyprexa, an anti-depressant drug that has a side affect of diabetes. Lauren Slater is an American psychologist and writer, having written Opening Skinner’s Box, a critically acclaimed book that is a book about psychological experiments, however they are explained through a narrative. The author explains that she was facing severe depression and that she wanted to do anything that would help end her depression. One day her doctor says that a drug called Zyprexa, a dangerous drug that has a side effect of gaining weight leading to diabetes. The author understood this but was desperate on ending her depression, so she took the drug and soon she gained fifty pounds. Shocked the author tried to cut back on eating however the drug makes her hungry and as she gets better she eats more food. She is finally diagnosed with diabetes and knows that she will die, however she still has to take Zyprexa to stay away from depression and is taking the measures to not die of diabetes. The author uses her personal narrative as well as ideas from philosophers to convey her emotions in the essay. She explains that she is killing her body, the diabetes, to save her mind, the depression. The author is primarily addressing people who are depressed; there is no specific age. The author wants to explain to them that with this deadly drug that she is taking she cherishes life much more and wants them to understand that they do not have to go through this pain. The author uses her past experiences; however, they are in the modern world and can be used to help people who are depressed today. The author’s purpose for writing this essay was to tell readers that the body and mind do not work together, and that one should cherish life and not be depressed, or get into a situation like she has. I believe that the author has successfully been able to convey her purpose by using famous philosophers and her own experiences.