The Great Oxygenation Event (GOE) the beginning of oxygen’s permanent presence in the atmosphere.

 occurred 2.33 billion years ago, plus or minus 7 million years.......what we call the Great Oxidation Event—when appreciable levels of oxygen became a permanent feature in our atmosphere,”


discovered a large fractionation of the isotope sulfur-34, indicating a spike in marine sulfate levels around this same time. Such sulfate would have been produced from the reaction between atmospheric oxygen with sulfide minerals in rocks on land, and sulfur dioxide from volcanoes. 

 

This sulfate was then used by ocean-dwelling, sulfate-respiring bacteria to generate a particular pattern of sulfur-34 in subsequent sediment layers that were dated between 1 and 10 million years after the S-MIF transition.The results suggest that

 

 the initial buildup of oxygen in the atmosphere was relatively rapid. Since its first appearance 2.33 billion years ago, oxygen accumulated in high enough concentrations to have a weathering effect on rocks just 10 million years later.


================================

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Study pinpoints timing of oxygen’s first appearance in Earth’s atmosphere
And we need to understand that.”

Beginning 2.33 billion years ago, atmospheric oxygen built up in just 10 million years.
Press Inquiries
MIT scientists say that the Great Oxygenation Event (GOE), a period that scientists believe marked the beginning of oxygen’s permanent presence in the atmosphere, started as early as 2.33 billion years ago.
Caption:
MIT scientists say that the Great Oxygenation Event (GOE), a period that scientists believe marked the beginning of oxygen’s permanent presence in the atmosphere, started as early as 2.33 billion years ago.

Today, 21 percent of the air we breathe is made up of molecular oxygen. But this gas was not always in such ample, life-sustaining supply, and in fact was largely absent from the atmosphere for the first 2 billion years of Earth’s history. When, then, did oxygen first accumulate in the atmosphere?

MIT scientists now have an answer. In a paper appearing today in Science Advances, the team reports that the Earth’s atmosphere experienced the first significant, irreversible influx of oxygen as early as 2.33 billion years ago. This period marks the start of the Great Oxygenation Event, which was followed by further increases later in Earth’s history.  

The scientists have also determined that this initial rise in atmospheric oxygen, although small, took place within just 1 to 10 million years and set off a cascade of events that would ultimately lead to the advent of multicellular life.

“It’s the start of a very long interval that culminated in complex life,” says Roger Summons, senior author of the paper and professor in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences (EAPS) at MIT. “It took another roughly 1.7 billion years for animals similar to those we have today to evolve. But the presence of molecular oxygen in the ocean and the atmosphere means that organisms that respire oxygen could thrive.”

Summons’ MIT co-authors include lead author and postdoc Genming Luo, as well as EAPS Associate Professor Shuhei Ono and graduate student David Wang. Professors Nicolas Beukes from the University of Johannesburg, in South Africa, and Shucheng Xie from the China University of Geosciences are the other co-authors.

Whiffs in the air

For the most part, scientists agree that oxygen, though lacking in the atmosphere, was likely brewing in the oceans as a byproduct of cyanobacterial photosynthesis as early as 3 billion years ago. However, as Summons puts it, oxygen in the ancient ocean “would have instantly been sucked up” by hungry microbes, ferrous iron, and other sinks, keeping it from escaping into the atmosphere.

“There may have been earlier, and temporary, ‘whiffs’ of oxygen in the atmosphere, but their abundances and durations are not currently measurable,” Summons says.

That changed with the Great Oxygenation Event (GOE), a period that scientists believe marked the beginning of oxygen’s permanent presence in the atmosphere. Previous estimates have placed the start of the GOE at around 2.3 billion years ago, though with uncertainties of tens to hundreds of millions of years.

“The dating of this event has been rather imprecise until now,” Summons says.

A transition, pinned

To get a more precise timing for the GOE, Luo first analyzed rocks from around this period, looking for a particular sulfur isotope pattern. When volcanoes erupt, they emit sulfur gases, which, when exposed to the sun’s ultraviolet radiation, can fractionate chemically and isotopically. The pattern of isotopes generated in this process depends on whether or not oxygen was present above a certain threshold.

Luo looked to pinpoint a major transition in a particular sulfur isotope pattern called mass-independent fraction of sulfur isotopes (S-MIF), in order to determine when oxygen first appeared in the Earth’s atmosphere. To do this, he first looked through sediment cores collected by Ono on a previous expedition to South Africa.

“Genming is a very tenacious and thorough guy,” Summons says. “He found rocks from deep in the core had S-MIF, and rocks shallow in the core had no S-MIF, but he didn’t have anything in between. So he went back to South Africa.”

There, he was able to sample from the rest of the sediment core and two others nearby, and determined that the S-MIF transition — marking the permanent passing of the oxygen threshold — occurred 2.33 billion years ago, plus or minus 7 million years, a much smaller uncertainty compared with previous estimates.

Getting a “decent hold”

The team also discovered a large fractionation of the isotope sulfur-34, indicating a spike in marine sulfate levels around this same time. Such sulfate would have been produced from the reaction between atmospheric oxygen with sulfide minerals in rocks on land, and sulfur dioxide from volcanoes. This sulfate was then used by ocean-dwelling, sulfate-respiring bacteria to generate a particular pattern of sulfur-34 in subsequent sediment layers that were dated between 1 and 10 million years after the S-MIF transition.

The results suggest that the initial buildup of oxygen in the atmosphere was relatively rapid. Since its first appearance 2.33 billion years ago, oxygen accumulated in high enough concentrations to have a weathering effect on rocks just 10 million years later. This weathering process, however, would have leached more sulfate and certain metals into waterways and ultimately, the oceans. Summons points out that it would be quite some time before the Earth system would reach another stable state, by the burial of organic carbon, and exceed the higher oxygen thresholds needed to encourage further biological evolution.

“Complex life couldn’t really get a decent hold on the planet until oxygen was prevalent in the deep ocean,” Summons says. “And that took a long, long time. But this is the first step in a cascade of processes.”

Timothy Lyons, professor of biogeochemistry at the University of California, Riverside, says the group’s timeline for oxygen’s rise “is a major contribution toward a refined understanding of the co-evolution of Earth’s early life and environments.”

“There are hints from past research of early transient accumulation of oxygen in the atmosphere and surface oceans before the loss of S-MIF, but the irreversible loss of this signal from the geologic record is now taken as the smoking gun for what we call the Great Oxidation Event—when appreciable levels of oxygen became a permanent feature in our atmosphere,” says Lyons, who did not contribute to the research. “The authors have done the community a great service by refining the timing of this event.”

Now that the team has constrained the timing of the GOE, Summons hopes others will apply the new dates to determine a cause, or mechanism, for the event. One hypothesis that the team hopes to explore is the connection between oxygen’s sudden and rapid appearance, and Snowball Earth, the period in which Earth’s continents and oceans were largely ice-covered. Now, thanks to the improved precision in geochronology, which Summons largely credits to EAPS Professor Samuel Bowring, scientists can start to nail down the mechanisms behind major events in Earth’s history, with more precise dates.

“It’s Sam’s insistence about this whole issue about ‘no dates, no rates’ that I think encourages people to focus on getting better data on the timing and duration of geological events,” Summons says.

“Because the other big question is, why do we have 21 percent oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere that’s stable? That’s remarkable. And we need to understand that.”

This research was funded by the Simons Foundation with additional support from NASA, the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation, and the National Science Foundation.

And we need to understand that.”



faster-than-light space travel;Warp drives:

 

Warp drives: Physicists give chances of faster-than-light space travel a boost

April 24,
Faster than light travel is the only way humans could ever get to other stars in a reasonable amount of time. Les Bossinas/NASA/Wikimedia Commons

Warp drives: Physicists give chances of faster-than-light space travel a boost

April 24,

April 24,

The closest star to Earth is Proxima Centauri. It is about 4.25 light-years away, or about 25 trillion miles (40 trillion km). The fastest ever spacecraft, the now- in-space Parker Solar Probe will reach a top speed of 450,000 mph. It would take just 20 seconds to go from Los Angeles to New York City at that speed, but it would take the solar probe about 6,633 years to reach Earth’s nearest neighboring solar system.

If humanity ever wants to travel easily between stars, people will need to go faster than light. But so far, faster-than-light travel is possible only in science fiction.

In Issac Asimov’s Foundation series, humanity can travel from planet to planet, star to star or across the universe using jump drives. As a kid, I read as many of those stories as I could get my hands on. I am now a theoretical physicist and study nanotechnology, but I am still fascinated by the ways humanity could one day travel in space.

Some characters – like the astronauts in the movies “Interstellar” and “Thor” – use wormholes to travel between solar systems in seconds. Another approach – familiar to “Star Trek” fans – is warp drive technology. Warp drives are theoretically possible if still far-fetched technology. Two recent papers made headlines in March when researchers claimed to have overcome one of the many challenges that stand between the theory of warp drives and reality.


But how do these theoretical warp drives really work? And will humans be making the jump to warp speed anytime soon?

A circle on a flat blue plane with the surface dipping down in front and rising up behind.
This 2-dimensional representation shows the flat, unwarped bubble of spacetime in the center where a warp drive would sit surrounded by compressed spacetime to the right (downward curve) and expanded spacetime to the left (upward curve). AllenMcC/Wikimedia Commons

Compression and expansion

Physicists’ current understanding of spacetime comes from Albert Einstein’s theory of General Relativity. General Relativity states that space and time are fused and that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. General relativity also describes how mass and energy warp spacetime – hefty objects like stars and black holes curve spacetime around them. This curvature is what you feel as gravity and why many spacefaring heroes worry about “getting stuck in” or “falling into” a gravity well. Early science fiction writers John Campbell and Asimov saw this warping as a way to skirt the speed limit.

What if a starship could compress space in front of it while expanding spacetime behind it? “Star Trek” took this idea and named it the warp drive.

In 1994, Miguel Alcubierre, a Mexican theoretical physicist, showed that compressing spacetime in front of the spaceship while expanding it behind was mathematically possible within the laws of General Relativity. So, what does that mean? Imagine the distance between two points is 10 meters (33 feet). If you are standing at point A and can travel one meter per second, it would take 10 seconds to get to point B. However, let’s say you could somehow compress the space between you and point B so that the interval is now just one meter. Then, moving through spacetime at your maximum speed of one meter per second, you would be able to reach point B in about one second. In theory, this approach does not contradict the laws of relativity since you are not moving faster than light in the space around you. Alcubierre showed that the warp drive from “Star Trek” was in fact theoretically possible.

Proxima Centauri here we come, right? Unfortunately, Alcubierre’s method of compressing spacetime had one problem: it requires negative energy or negative mass.

A 2–dimensional diagram showing how matter warps spacetime
This 2–dimensional representation shows how positive mass curves spacetime (left side, blue earth) and negative mass curves spacetime in an opposite direction (right side, red earth). Tokamac/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

A negative energy problem

Alcubierre’s warp drive would work by creating a bubble of flat spacetime around the spaceship and curving spacetime around that bubble to reduce distances. The warp drive would require either negative mass – a theorized type of matter – or a ring of negative energy density to work. Physicists have never observed negative mass, so that leaves negative energy as the only option.

To create negative energy, a warp drive would use a huge amount of mass to create an imbalance between particles and antiparticles. For example, if an electron and an antielectron appear near the warp drive, one of the particles would get trapped by the mass and this results in an imbalance. This imbalance results in negative energy density. Alcubierre’s warp drive would use this negative energy to create the spacetime bubble.

But for a warp drive to generate enough negative energy, you would need a lot of matter. Alcubierre estimated that a warp drive with a 100-meter bubble would require the mass of the entire visible universe.

In 1999, physicist Chris Van Den Broeck showed that expanding the volume inside the bubble but keeping the surface area constant would reduce the energy requirements significantly, to just about the mass of the sun. A significant improvement, but still far beyond all practical possibilities.

A sci-fi future?

Two recent papers – one by Alexey Bobrick and Gianni Martire and another by Erik Lentz – provide solutions that seem to bring warp drives closer to reality.

Bobrick and Martire realized that by modifying spacetime within the bubble in a certain way, they could remove the need to use negative energy. This solution, though, does not produce a warp drive that can go faster than light.


Independently, Lentz also proposed a solution that does not require negative energy. He used a different geometric approach to solve the equations of General Relativity, and by doing so, he found that a warp drive wouldn’t need to use negative energy. Lentz’s solution would allow the bubble to travel faster than the speed of light.

It is essential to point out that these exciting developments are mathematical models. As a physicist, I won’t fully trust models until we have experimental proof. Yet, the science of warp drives is coming into view. As a science fiction fan, I welcome all this innovative thinking. In the words of Captain Picard, things are only impossible until they are not.

Lessons from the pandemic's superstar data scientist

 

 

technologyreview.com

Lessons from the pandemic’s superstar data scientist, Youyang Gu

He made a machine-learning model in a week and ran it daily on his laptop (it only took an hour), generating remarkably accurate covid-19 predictions.

Lessons from the pandemic's superstar data scientist ...

4 days ago — Lessons from the pandemic's superstar data scientist, Youyang Gu. He made a machine-learning model in a week and ran it daily on his laptop ...