Using technology developed at MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory, the Artemis II astronauts are using lasers to send high-resolution video and images back to Earth, reports Hanna Ali for WBUR. Bryan Robinson, the leader of the Lincoln Laboratory Optical and Quantum Communications Group, explained that laser beams allow them to direct more energy at a target receiver. In other words, "you can communicate at higher data rates," Robinson said.
MassLive reporter John Micek writes about how the Artemis II astronauts are using optical communications technology developed at MIT Lincoln Laboratory to send high-resolution video and images of the lunar surface back to Earth.
The stunning images of the moon and Earth being shared by the Artemis II crew have been made possible thanks to new optical communications technology developed by researchers at MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory, reports Emily Maher for WCVB-TV. "It was just awe-inspiring to think humans haven't seen the Earth from pole-to-pole in over 50 years, and being part of helping to make that happen is very cool," said Corrie Smeaton, associate group leader of the Optical Engineering Group at Lincoln Lab.
Artemis II features laser communication technology developed by researchers at MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory, reports Mary Salanda for WCVB. “Known as the O2O, the Orion Artemis II Optical Communications System is mounted on the spacecraft and features a 4-inch telescope that relies on lasers to quickly transmit images from space, including from the far side of the moon.”
Onboard NASA’s Artemis II mission is an optical (laser) communication system developed by researchers from MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory , reports Steph Solis for Axios. The spacecraft will carry “an optical communication system that can produce 4K video in space during the roughly 10-day flight,” explains Solis.
Felice Frankel, a research scientist in the MIT Department of Chemical Engineering and a science photographer, speaks with Science Friday host Flora Lichtman about science communicators can more effectively engage the public and make a better case for the importance of scientific research.
Prof. Abhijit Banerjee speaks with Financial Times reporter John Reed about global politics and the increased need for trust in economists. On his book, Poor Economics, Banerjee says, “I think we have always thought that economic ideas were too important to be left out of the public discourse. There is a sense in which we think economics does a disservice to ourselves and the world by wrapping ourselves in this omniscient jargon.”
Using Cortico, a nonprofit collaboration with the MIT Center for Constructive Communication that aims “to facilitate conversations and spot themes across a large number of conversations,” NPR’s Morning Edition began a new project to learn more about communities, big and small, across the United States. “This project yielded hours and hours of taped conversations,” reports NPR. “So we used Cortico's AI tools and a prototype from MIT to search for shared themes across all the recordings so that we could listen more closely.”
Prof. Evelina Fedorenko speaks with Scientific American reporter Gary Stix about her research demonstrating that “language and thought are, in fact, distinct entities that the brain processes separately.” Speaking about how large language models could be used to help scientists better understand the neuroscience of how language works, Fedorenko explains that "there are many, many questions that we can now ask that had been totally out of reach: for example, questions about [language] development.”
A study by researchers at MIT and elsewhere has found that both lawyers and non-lawyers use legalese when asked to write about laws, reports June Casagrande for The Los Angeles Times. The "researchers tested the hypothesis by asking 200 participants to write laws prohibiting crimes like drunk driving and burglary,” explains Casagrande. “Then they asked them to write stories about those crimes. The laws they wrote contained unnecessarily long, labyrinthine sentences with lots of parenthetical explanations crammed in. The stories, however, were written simply, without the parenthetical information stuffing.”
Researchers at MIT have uncovered a possible reason why legal documents can be so difficult to read, finding that “convoluted legalese often acts as a way to convey authority,” reports Joe Berkowitz for Fast Company. The researchers “tested whether nonlawyers would end up using legalese if asked to write legal documents,” explains Berkowitz. “In the end, all subjects wrote their laws with complex, center-embedded clauses.”
Researchers at MIT have found that the use of legalese in writing “to assert authority over those less versed in such language,” reports Noor Al-Sibai for Futurism. “By studying this cryptic take on the English language, the researchers are hoping to make legal documents much easier to read in the future,” explains Al-Sibai.
In a letter to the editor of The New York Times, Alfred Ironside, the MIT vice president for communications, addresses the necessary role staff play at MIT. “At MIT, the research and education enterprise requires far more to thrive than our outstanding faculty alone,” writes Ironside. He adds that the Institute’s staff are essential to “running a top-flight research organization where breakthrough discoveries and innovations provide continuous service to the nation.”
MIT researchers have found that lawyers prefer, and better understand, simplified texts, rather than legalese, reports Jesse Greenspan for Scientific American. “The researchers presented 105 U.S. attorneys with contract excerpts written in both “legalese” and plain English and tested their comprehension and recall for each,” explains Greenspan. “While the attorneys outperformed laypeople overall, they still found the legalese contracts harder to grasp than those written in plain English.”
Wall Street Journal reporter Emily Bobrow spotlights Laurel Braitman PhD '13 for her work teaching writing and communication skills to healthcare workers. “We need people who are trained in science and medicine to be able to tell stories about what matters in public health in a way that makes people listen,” says Braitman. “But to do that, they have to be in touch with what they really feel.”