Financial Times reporter Michael Peel features CubeSat, a proposed satellite sensor by Associate Prof. Areg Danagoulian, able to identify hidden nuclear weapons in space. “If one state suspects another of placing a nuclear weapon in orbit, the absence of a verification mechanism makes the crisis harder to manage,” says Danagoulian. “If a bad-faith actor knows that their attempt will be discovered via inspection, they will be more likely to decide it's not worth pursuing.”
Gizmodo’s Ellyn Lapointe reports on a new paper from Associate Prof. Areg Danagoulian, which offers a solution to verifying satellites aren’t carrying hidden nuclear weapons in space: an inspector satellite able to indicate the presence of uranium from neutron signals via sensor technology. Danagoulian’s proposal seeks to fill the gaps of The Outer Space Treaty (OST), established in 1967 and signed by 118 countries to ban nuclear weapons in space, which “has always lacked robust means of verification for space-based nuclear threats,” says Danagoulian.
In a new study, Associate Prof. Areg Danagoulian proposes a satellite-based sensor that could monitor suspicious craft for signs of nuclear activity in space with 99% accuracy, reports Andrew Paul for Popular Science. “You can fake intelligence, but you can’t fake physics,” says Danagoulian. “The goal right now is to get national labs to use this work for their own research, and to get policymakers to seriously consider this technology as a potential part of national technical means.”
Scientific American’s Adam Kovac highlights a paper by Associate Prof. Areg Danagoulian that proposes a satellite to detect and police hidden nuclear weapons in space by detecting spallation, the ejection of neutrons, from the bombardment of high energy protons, and uranium atoms. “If you detect those neutrons, that itself can be a telltale sign that there is an unusual amount of uranium on the satellite, and it’s most likely to be a nuclear weapon,” Danagoulian says.
Research Affiliates Mathilde Poyet and Mathieu Groussin are featured by The New York Times Magazine reporter Jeneen Interlandi for their comprehensive fieldwork collecting diverse, microbial samples from communities across the globe to understand how differences in diet, lifestyle and industrialization affect microbiome health. “Microbes don’t like antibiotics, for obvious reasons,” Groussin says. “They don’t like C-sections, which rob them of the opportunity to colonize new human territory. And they hate ultra processed diets. All three of those are more prevalent in an industrialized world.”
MIT researchers have developed a non-invasive, wearable pacemaker that stimulates the heart using ultrasound, writes Physics World reporter Tami Freeman. “For cardiac pacing, we envisage that the final goal of NUP [Non-Invasive Ultrasound Pacemaker] technology is to be a permanent alternative to a long-term implanted pacemaker,” says Prof. Xuanhe Zhao. “More broadly, we are interested in expanding ultrasound-enabled bioelectronic medicine beyond cardiac pacing toward other organs and therapeutic applications where non-invasive, spatially precise modulation could have clinical impact.”
A study by MIT researchers has found evidence that the first signs of ozone depletion appeared in 1957 in the upper tropical stratosphere, driven by carbon tetrachloride, an industrial chemical introduced in the 1930s and widely used as a dry-cleaning and degreasing agent, writes Gizmodo reporter Ellyn Lapointe. “This finding underscores the importance of long-term atmospheric monitoring so that we can fully understand how it responds to chemical pollution,” Lapointe notes.
In a New York Times opinion piece, Prof. Carlo Ratti examines the debate around Ferrari’s first electric vehicle (EV) and the future of EV self-driving technology. “The self-driving technology available in most EVs turns the car into something summoned on demand,” writes Ratti. “Our work at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology suggests that autonomous driving could allow cities to operate with a small fraction of today’s vehicles while reducing parking demand by as much as 85 percent.”
The Economist’s “Bartleby Newsletter” spotlights a survey led by Prof. Danielle Li that found American employees were less likely to opt into training AI after learning how their data could be used. "In an experiment, the researchers offered to buy survey data from participants; those who had been shown a video on how data could be used to train AI were less willing to sell,” writes Andrew Palmer.
MIT researchers have found that colon cancer cells can “change their identity, allowing them to travel through the body and form new tumors,” reports Daniella Gray for Newsweek. The findings could point to future treatments that can prevent metastasis—the leading cause of death for colorectal cancer patients, Gray explains.
In an interview with Fortune reporter Nick Lichtenberg, Prof. Daron Acemoglu discusses AI’s economic impact and his book, What Happened to Liberal Democracy. Acemoglu estimates AI will deliver roughly 0.55% in total factor productivity gains. “It’s not that you cannot get big productivity gains from automation. It is that it’s not as easy as sometimes it’s presumed,” says Acemoglu.
Prof. Eric So joins CBS News Tech Watch to discuss a new Pew Research Center study that reveals 40% of U.S. adults perceive AI’s future impact to be negative, as well as his upcoming book, The Collision: What AI Does to Us. “The growth of AI is simply overwhelming for so many people in terms of the pace of progress. But also, a reflection of the fact that for so much of human history, human level intelligence was our most scarce resource, our most defensible advantage,” says So. “It was why we were paid the salaries that we are. And now AI is increasingly commoditizing that. It’s being mass produced in a way that really causes us to question what’s going on to make us valuable in the future.”
Prof. David Kaiser joins GBH “Particles of Thought” podcast host Dr. Hakeem Oluseyi to discuss his hunt for primordial black holes. “It’s a lot easier to find stuff coming off of a very bright, hot source, than a cold, dim one. So, the Hawking temperature of a black hole that has the same mass as our sun, or a little bigger would be so cold we would literally never be able to measure [its] radiation,” says Kaiser. “You’ll never see it [Hawking Radiation] from stellar collapse black holes, you’ll never see it from supermassive black holes, or even colder. The only hope to ever see it would be a smaller mass black hole.”
For Scientific American’s special section “The Young American Scientists,” Prof. Feng Zhang speaks with Tara Haelle about the importance of investing in science and education, noting that “American science has long been the strongest engine of discovery and innovation in the world.” Zhang shares: “I’m fortunate to work with extraordinary students and postdocs, but the infrastructure that lets them do their best work is under real stress: funding instability..., immigration uncertainty for international scientists and an erosion of public trust in expertise. We can lose the lead rapidly if we do not protect our innovation ecosystem.”
Prof. Emery Brown speaks with Scientific American reporter Tara Haelle for Scientific American’s special “Young American Scientists” section, discussing the evolution of the field of neuroscience and why he is optimistic about the future of scientific research in the U.S. “I am optimistic because I see new and exciting findings being discovered every day,” says Brown. “With [MIT] President [Sally] Kornbluth’s support, [the university] has developed its Health and Life Sciences (HEALS) program to encourage MIT faculty to look more deeply into solving health care problems. The enthusiasm for HEALS has been contagious across the campus.”