text:
15 comments so far
The King's Chamber was never designed for funery purposes and until this fact is ever accepted, its real purpose will not be forthcoming!
Thanks for commenting, Terence 🙂
There are other theories, of course. One popular one I myself believed for some time was that the KC was used for ceremonial/initiation purposes. Do you have a theory you want to pass along?
Occam would have a hard time with this explanation, given other ideas in circulation.
I started with the basic question of why a civilization would put this much effort into a tomb.. is there something else they would have been interested in besides burying their leaders. I can see past that now, but in the case of Khufu and its unique features I've yet to discover a more compelling theory than the one assembled by John Cadman. He focuses on the subterranean aspect of the design and concludes that it was a pump intended to produce an acoustic standing wave. Above the king's chamber we have several layers of piezoelectric granite. This is where I lose the plot.
[Link removed–John Cadman can rely on Google same as me]
Would love to hear your take.
First, thank you for your interest in the article.
I took a look at Cadman's article, and I will admit that I didn't finish it. I too will invoke Occam's razor.. 😉
There are many, many other pyramids that were clearly never intended to be anything other than a tomb. The reason those of Khufu and Khafre get special attention by alternative theorists is because they are so honkin' big. Nobody is suggesting that the pyramids of Teti or Unas were intended as pumps or acoustic standing wave generators because for people who are not interested in mainstream Egyptology, they are pretty boring. Other than their remarkable insides, they are just piles of rubble by now, and not particularly large piles of rubble at that.
I think the angle from which Occam might approach the question is to ask why, with a culture so totally preoccupied with religion and the afterlife, and the cult of dead leaders as their own key to an afterlife (this was, after all, during the Old Kingdom period, before the "democratization of mummification"), would they build a giant tomb, which is undeniably what pyramids were, for the purpose of pumping something or producing an acoustic wave? Occam might ask why a civilization which has produced more gigantic religious monuments and structures than any other prior to Roman Christianity, and which is replete with religious and mortuary imagery everywhere, would expend their greatest effort to build something about which there is no attestment anywhere in the Egyptian literature at all?
I am not intending to be sarcastic, although I know that is probably how I am coming across. But there are a lot of theories out there that seem whiskey bent and hellbound to prove that the pyramids were anything other than a tomb. But there is a very well established mortuary tradition with pyramid complexes, and I just don't see the point in taking serious a theory that says that the Great Pyramid was a pump, a power generator, a beacon to extra terrestrials, or anything else that cannot account for the fact that it has a mortuary temple right there at the base, a valley temple where the embalming took place, and… well… a casket inside. Plus, the Egyptians themselves practiced Khufu's mortuary cult there for a heck of a long time after his death. They knew it was a tomb and treated it as such.
Thanks for your reply. (No sarcasm taken btw.)
I agree that if one looks at the Great Pyramid in a vacuum, all kinds of wondrous theories can seem plausible. I looked at the pump idea, saw how it had been replicated using Khufu as a model, and simply agreed with it. When I came back around for historical perspective I realized that pyramid building was an Egyptian dynastic tradition. You might say this discredits the idea that a pyramid is anything other than a tomb, but I would disagree, if only in the case of Giza.
I have read (here) that the pyramid builders did experiment with their designs. I would be happily refuted if you told me that, aside from its size, the design of Khufu was common among many pyramids. But if it is unique, what do you attribute its uniqueness to?
Hi Greg,
I don't normally get drawn in to alternative theories because there are already many places on the internet devoted to them, but sometimes you have to bend the rules. After all, every established theory began as an alternative theory at one point, and the questions you ask are fair: In what ways is Khufu's pyramid similar to others, in what ways is it different, and what accounts for the differences?
Jean-Pierre's theory about the two antechambers began with the same question: A certain pattern had been established with pyramid antechambers, so why aren't there any in Khufu? The whole subject of Khufu Reborn and the second phase of Jean-Pierre's work revolved around that question and where it led him. Marc's interviews (of which this article is one) laid out the theory, and when I resume the "Hemienu to Houdin" series I plan to build on Marc's work. But for now, these interviews can partially answer your questions about how Khufu's pyramid was the same as others, and how and why there were innovations.
I can say this—the innovations had largely to do with the size and the decision to have a burial chamber with a flat ceiling. According to Jean-Pierre's work, the innovations also have to do with protecting inner structures that have not yet been opened, but for which there is some pretty strong circumstantial and physical evidence. Once Laval University is able to proceed with planned empirical testing of Jean-Pierre's work we might have more answers, but for now we are all at the mercy of the political situation in Egypt.
In the meanwhile, I will take a closer look at John Cadman's theory and see if I can give you a more satisfactory answer, or at least a more informed opinion. I don't know what common ground we might find, but at least you will know I did not simply write your enquiry off in a kneejerk manner. Please understand that I get emails practically every day accusing me of everything from mental incompetency to being either an Illuminati dupe or an active conspirator. As with most things, the truth is somewhere in the middle… 😉
And thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt (re: no sarcasm taken, btw). It was maybe more generous than I deserved. Hopefully my tone now is a little more appropriate to your own.
To be continued..
Hello Keith,
Science seems to be in a desperate place these days. (At least that makes it easy to identify the people who are committed to it.)
I learned a lot from the Jean-Pierre interviews. The subterranean component is the only piece of the puzzle that I don't see him address.
It looks like all the pyramids were built near water, which makes sense at least for transporting stone to the site. I haven't been able to determine whether the subterranean tunnels were a regular pyramid feature or a more recent innovation. I'm still getting my head around Jean-Pierre's work but I think a water lock and pumping scheme would be an elegant solution for moving monolithic blocks into place.
[link removed]
Hi Greg,
First, I want to be 100% clear that this is a response to Cadmen, not you. You seem to be as interested in knowing the truth about the Great Pyramid as me, and we share a passion for Ancient Egypt. But after immersing myself in Cadmen… well… you'll see.
Okeyyyyyy…… :-\
I spent a good part of last night and this morning dedicated to trying to understand Cadmen's work because I wanted to be fair. Here is what I came up with. I would point out here that if you get bored or just want to skip the entire thing, the myth is pretty much busted in two bullet points at the end. Everything in between is just me taking it seriously before I knew better. So…
There is no question that if you were to flood the subterranean chamber in the Great Pyramid and somehow create a vacuum, water would be pulled up the so-called well-shaft to flood the Queen's Chamber, Grand Gallery, and presuming enough water and pressure, flood the entire interior of the Great Pyramid. That is just physics. My question is: Why would you want to do that?? Was the pyramid designed to do this, was it ever used to do this, why and for what purpose, and what is the evidence?
For answers I turned to the author's faq (by the way, I apologize for the sometimes awkward conventions I use for avoiding the author's name, but I am happy to say that Em Hotep ranks pretty well with search engines in the narrow field of Egyptology, and I don't want to become known as a place for discussing his work. It is the same reason why I exclude his links). His faq addresses some of the same questions I have about the water, its source, and the purpose. Let's see how "well" (cheesy pun number one) he does so.
Question number one—where did the water for the pump come from? He makes the assertion that if a pump is a pump, it doesn't matter where the water is, it's still a pump. To me that is sort of like saying that a crowbar is a toothpick for giants. If you begin with the assumption that a crowbar is a toothpick for giants, then the absence of giants is no real problem. But just because a crowbar could be used as a toothpick for giants (if there were giants) that is not a reliable basis for assuming that is what crowbars were made for.
Just because a source of water poured down the descending passageway of the Great Pyramid could result, I am assuming via displacement, in a pumping action, it does not necessarily follow that it was designed for that purpose, and the absence of a water source is not only a fair critique, it's a pretty glaring weakness in the hypothesis. If the ancient Egyptians wanted to use the pyramid for a pump, they would have built it closer to the Nile, rather than a couple of kilometers away, up on a plateau.
The author of the water pump hypothesis is apparently aware of this and gets around it by relying on another alternative theory—that the pyramids were built at a time when the Giza Plateau was not a desert. He proposes that the Lake of Moeris once surrounded the Great Pyramid, but this would have also flooded the tombs of the builders and nobles that are contemporary to the building of the Great Pyramid, as well as the builder's city currently being excavated by Mark Lehner. In fact, if the Lake of Moeris had been present during the building of the pyramid, it would have flooded the entire Memphis Necropolis. There is not a stitch of evidence for this. But as we e will see a little later, by compounding conspiracy theory on top of conspiracy theory, the lack of evidence is actually pretty good evidence itself. And who can argue with that?
So my own answer is that there was no water source for a pump.
Question number two—wasn't the Great Pyramid more than a pump? The author of the hypothesis answers his own question by pointing out that water could not only have turned the desert into farmland, it could also have powered other machines as well. But…
It takes more than water to turn a desert into farmland.. It takes soil. Egypt developed around the Nile because the Nile had very regular annual flooding that not only irrigated narrow strips along its banks, but which deposited dark, nutrient rich silt from the south, where it runs through lands that are not deserts. The ancient Egyptians did expand this fertile strip by artificial canals, much like the one that reached the base of the Giza Plateau for transporting some of the non-local blocks (the Tura facing stones and the Aswan granite), but these canals carried the Nile water, along with its silt deposits. The presence of this dark silt is why the ancients called the living part of the land the "Black Land", and its absence is why the dead desert was called the "Red Land".
I guess the theory's author might say that it was the dark, nutrient rich water that was being carried to the pyramid and then pumped out, but why not just build canals that would carry the water from the plateau's high point downward if they were wanting, for whatever reason, to flood the necropolis? Somebody mentions Occam's Razor…?
As for the machines that were powered by the water from the pyramid pump, some evidence would help. Where are they? Where are the pictorial representations? What did the ancient Egyptians call them? Again, just because a crowbar could function as a toothpick for giants does not mean that is what it is.
So my answer is that the question is based on a false premise—the Great Pyramids was not "more than a pump", it was a tomb for a pharaoh, not a pump.
Question number three—were all pyramids hydraulic pumps? The author does not directly answer the question, but judging from his description of the many variances between pyramids I will presume he means "no". But he does make an assertion worth addressing—that the reason for each side of the Great Pyramid being equally divided from the apex to the center of the base is in order to provide increased strength against water pressure from within the pyramid during construction. He then goes on to conclude that this feature (and unnamed others) indicates that the builders used hydraulic techniques to build the pyramid.
But part of what makes a true pyramid, no matter where or what it is built of, or for what purpose, is that its sides can be equally divided from apex to base. That has to do with mathematics and physics, not water containment. Again, maybe these qualities could be used for that purpose, but their presence does not necessarily lead to that conclusion, as the author says they do. An arch operates on the same principle—that equal sides leaning against each other can span a space and support the weight above it. This principle allowed the construction of both cathedrals and aqueducts, but it does not necessarily follow that cathedrals were built to carry water.
So my answer to this question would be that no pyramids, including the Great Pyramid, were pumps, and the fact that its sturdy construction would have contained water pressure does not mean that it ever did. The physical characteristics of any pyramidal structure can be employed for a variety of uses, but that does not mean that any particular pyramid can be definitively described as being for a given use just based on its inherent physical characteristics.
Question number four—if the Great Pyramid was an irrigation pump, what area was irrigated? The author of the theory points out correctly that the Libyan Desert is higher than the site of the Great Pyramid—so is Khafre's Pyramid, which is why it looks taller. He also asserts, not quite so correctly, that the Great Pyramid is not higher than the surrounding landscape. True, it is not higher than the part of the Plateau that is uphill… a given. But it is a good bit higher than the valley below. I am not exactly sure of where he is going with this. I guess he is saying that the higher plain would need a pump to be irrigable. Again, that's a given. Where is the proof that it ever was?
The valley would have been irrigated by the annual flooding of the Nile. The Libyan Desert is irrigated, inasmuch as it is irrigated, by oases. There is no evidence of the desert around the Great Pyramid having been irrigated by the Ancient Egyptians.
So my answer to this question would be that the Great Pyramid was not an irrigation pump, therefore no area was irrigated by it.
Question number five—is this theory the hallucinations of a raving maniac? False dichotomy. The author of the theory seems to me to be a thinking person with an extremely high level of technical aptitude, I just think that his logic is faulty and his theory is wrong. The false dichotomy carries with it the implication that there are two camps—those who are correct, and therefore rational, and those who are incorrect, who are raving maniacs. History is replete with raving maniacs who happened to be correct, and level headed people who happened to be wrong.
The author's answer to his question also includes another logical fallacy—appeal to authority. As evidence of his sanity the author cites the fact that his theory is included in a book by a Mr. Richard Noone, which predicted that the world would end on May, 5th, 2000. Appeal to authority is never a safe bet. You can cite the authority's relevant work, but name dropping alone is risky business.
Dr. Smith may be the best oral surgeon in the world, but if he says that cavities are caused by evil spirits from Pluto, I might be very privileged to have him extract my wisdom teeth, but I'm probably not going to ask for his opinion on astrophysics, nor is he getting anywhere near my heart with a scalpel.
And all of that aside, what if Noone is a raving maniac? C. (Cadmen) does not establish Noone's sanity. I know it seems like I am being nitpicky here, but C. himself opened that floodgate (cheesy pun number two) when he used Noone's company as the measure of sanity. If Noone is sane, it does not necessarily follow that his inclusion of the pump theory in his book makes the theory's author sane, nor can we rightly question the sanity of the theory's author if Noone is a lunatic.
So my answer is to this question is that I do not know enough about C. to determine if he is a raving maniac, but I think his citing his inclusion in a book that predicted the world would end twelve years ago as evidence of his sanity—and by erroneous extension, the validity of his theory—shows poor judgment.
Question number six—Why aren't the ideas of [another alternative theorist] accepted by most Egyptologists? To answer this, the author of the theory cites yet a third alternative theorist, who has a theory about the Great Sphinx being twice as old as orthodox Egyptologists claim. The author of the theory goes on to explain that he and the other two are marginalized by mainstream Egyptology because, if Egyptologists admitted to being wrong it would invalidate the books they have written and the classes they teach, and that there is a vested interest in suppressing alternative theories to eliminate the competition.
I have some degree of sympathy for this argument. Who amongst us has not been oppressed by Them at some point or another? They control the media, They rig the elections, and They killed Davey Jones and replaced him with Justin Beiber. Obviously They have a vested interest in keeping Egyptology locked in the Nineteenth Century. But the truth is, there really is resistance to new theories, and the tenured Dons of academia certainly do not what to spend their twilight years seeing their theories trashed by brash Young Turks with their ePhones and imail.
But in seriousness, a philosopher/sociologist of science by the name of Thomas Kuhn wrote a book called "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" that dealt with this very concept. Paradigm shifts in science as a rule meet a hell of a lot of resistance from those who want to maintain the status quo, often for personal and cynical reasons. It does not help matters that the paradigm breakers often come from an outside discipline, making them instant Others, the opposite number and sworn enemies of Them.
The example C. cites, of geologists disagreeing with Egyptologists about the age of the Great Sphinx, is a good example of Others challenging Them in a battle royale over control of the narrative. My problem is that I don't think it is a good example of a successful scientific revolution because, as is too damned often the case, They are probably right. I think C. overplays his hand in the same way that climate change "debunkers" overplay their own case by citing a few experts who are supposed to be the exception to the rule—less equals more. The fact is, there are not a majority of geologists who say the Sphinx is twice as old as They say it is, it is in reality just a handful of outspoken media-savvy Others promoting an agenda of their own, which seems to me to be to sell books and get specials on TV.
So my answer to question number six would be, some (but not all) alternative theories are rejected by most Egyptologists because they happen to be unsupported by the evidence. In fact, some (but not all) are contradicted by the evidence. I think both the water pumping pyramid and the pre-Egyptian Sphinx fall into the "some" category. I think they are rejected by mainstream Egyptology not out of a hidden agenda to keep science from progressing, I think the only agenda is to keep the scientific field uncluttered by spurious theories.
Question number seven—what about the archaeological evidence that the Great Pyramid is surrounded by tombs? Why build a water pump in the middle of a grave yard? The author's answer is that "most researchers (except traditional Egyptologists) [contend] that the Great Pyramid predated Dynastic Egypt." The parenthetical part, by the way, is original to C., the bracketed part is my addition.
Now we are getting to the nub of it—Them vs Others. Them (the bad guys) think that the Great Pyramid was built by ancient Egyptians during the Fourth Dynasty. The Others (the good guys) agree that it was built prior to Dynastic Egypt. While most of what C. calls "researchers" may agree that the Great Pyramid was built before the Dynastic Egyptians, you might find that "by who" generates a wide diversity of answers. Maybe it was built by the people from Atlantis. Maybe it was built by, or under the guidance of, extra terrestrials. Maybe it was built by an ancient lost civilization. Anybody but the ancient Egyptians.
Now we see why evidence of the Great Pyramid being a pump is non-existant—the ancient Egyptians themselves obliterated the evidence with their unenlightened presence and turned the invention of a great lost civilization into a mere tomb. To which I say, prove it.
My answer to question number seven is, yes, I agree that most traditional Egyptologists think that the necropolis surrounding the Great Pyramid is contemporary to its construction. This has been established to the satisfaction of pretty much everyone who has studied and conducted actual research in the Giza Necropolis. It is not the contention of a few stuffy old gents who never get out of their office, it is the result of a fresh new crop of graduate students every year, working with established Egyptologists on site, to test, challenge, and build on the older theories. As regards the second part of the question—they didn't build a water pump in the middle of a graveyard, they built a grave in the middle of a graveyard.
Question number eight—Was the pyramid built by slaves pulling blocks up a ramp? The author of the theory does not answer the question, he instead writes a paragraph about why you should buy the book. So I will answer it myself. No, slaves did not build the Great Pyramid, Egyptians working in a rotating feudal-style workforce built the pyramid by pulling blocks up ramps. As for whether or not you should buy the book, I can only say that I won't, and from what I have seen, I don't recommend you do either. Sorry.
Question nine—The Great Pyramid was built as a tomb for a pharaoh, true or false? The author asserts that there is little if any evidence that Khufu was buried in the Great Pyramid. He goes on to assert that the various "ineffective obstacles to tomb robbers" were actually valves to control the pyramid water pump.
At this point I consulted the author's schematic of the pyramid pump in an effort to understand where these valves were and how he says they work. I am reconsidering the "Raving Maniac Hypothesis." The schematic drawing of the "Pharaoh's Pump" has the Grand Gallery facing in the opposite direction of how it actually faces, with the King's Chamber on the opposite side and unconnected to the Grand Gallery, and a drain in the floor of the Queen's Chamber leading down, across, and then up to where the entrance of the King's Chamber is actually located.
There is a bonfire at the top of the Grand Gallery that plays some role in making the pump work, the Queen's Chamber shafts are non-existent and the King's Chamber shafts appear to have water running in them. The mechanism that in the REAL Great Pyramid is located between the top of the Grand Gallery and the King's Chamber, C. has apparently moved to the bottom of the Grand Gallery, at the entrance to the Queen's Chamber. There is no evidence of C.'s so-called combustion area at the top of the Grand Gallery. The amount of soot and burn evidence would be undeniable, if it were there. It isn't.
His schematic does not even look like the inside of the Great Pyramid.
Ok, I think I have gone far enough. I have wasted half a day on this, the joke's on me.
C. makes one more point about how the pyramid could not have been built with the tools the ancient Egyptians had, but that has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere and I have wasted enough time with this conspiracy theory. The remaining points in the faq have to do with how you can contribute money to C. If you really want to contribute to Egyptology, call a university with an Egyptology program, they are mostly starved for cash. This "theory" is standard issue conspiracy crap, and any money you contribute to it will be spent on something other than Egyptology, what C. and his cadre apparently call "research".
I promised at the top that if you wanted the myth busted in two bullet points you could skip to the end, so here it is:
There are red ochre mason's lines in the pyramid shafts of both the King's Chamber and Queen's Chamber, and there are hieratic characters painted in the small chamber at the end of the southern shaft in the Queen's Chamber. These marks could only have been made during the shafts' construction—they were inaccessible afterwards and were only discovered a couple of years ago by Project Djedi. Water flowing in these shafts, as depicted by C.'s own schematic would have washed these painted marks away. Water has never flowed through the pyramid shafts, full stop.
C. contends that there is no evidence of "non-invasive" burials in any pyramid. If the Great Pyramid was ever used as a tomb, and C. denies that it was, then it was only used by the Egyptians who he contends did not build it. Thus, the presence of a sarcophagus in the King's Chamber of the Great Pyramid is another example of an "invasive" burial. But the sarcophagus is too large to have been inserted later, the chamber had to have been constructed around it, which means it was put there by the people who built the pyramid. Very fortuitous for those benighted Egyptians.
So far as Em Hotep goes, this topic is now dead. If the debate is going to be resumed, it will have to be elsewhere. Cadmen's theory does not hold water (cheesy pun number three), and will get no more air time here.
Keith, I'm sorry I didn't warn you that C does have a lot of wild ideas. With respect to this discussion, the only one I was interested in is the purpose of the pyramid's subterranean features. I still find it compelling that he built a working pump using those features as a guide.
I have enjoyed the hours spent on this exchange but the best I can come up with at the moment is that the Egyptians are credited with a lot of historical firsts relating to water, hydrodynamics, hydraulics. (See articles on water clock, Moeris, siphon.) Perhaps the cycles of the Nile led them to conquer this force.
I suppose you'd say I'm stuck on this theory that water was involved in the construction of Khufu. I do consider it a very elegant solution and it's not flagrantly out of time and place for the technology of this civilization. Yet the only 'official' theories I've read about the subterranean features is that they were screwups or they were intended to confuse robbers. Is that acceptable? How does one ignore this question when we haven't proven that it was built another way?
Hi Greg,
That's ok! As for the subterranean chamber in Khufu's pyramid, I tend to favor Jean-Pierre's hypothesis that both it and the so-called Queen's Chamber were provisional burial chambers constructed in case Khufu died before the pyramid was finished. The subterranean chamber was left unfinished because they had it to the point where, if Khufu did die, it could be finished in the time it took to mummify him. Once the QC provisional tomb was finished, there was no longer any need for it even as a provisional tomb, so it was left as is.
I agree that the Ancient Egyptians made good use of water both as a resource and as a tool. I agree, this has been an interesting and enjoyable exchange. Thank you, Greg 🙂
Hi, my only difficulty here is the burial in the sky and not in the earth, in the dark. And who would steal a lid of the sarcophagus. two questions in fact. thanks for this site. Gideon
Hi all!
Congrats, this is the greatest site I have ever seen! I also read the book of Pierre.
I have two qoestions to the forum, perhaps somebody knows the answer.
How old is the unfinished bedrock chamber? Heminu was such a great engineer constructing the whole pyramid; would he really waste so much time and effort to build a chamber 30 meters below surface, in the bedrock, and with a passage as straight it can be?
2nd question: in the red Snefru pyramid, the transition of pyramid blocks build on the bedrock is weird. I shows that the bedrock has the same wearing caused by weather influences as is seen at the sphinx and on the walls of the valley temples. The "modern" masonry blocks placed by Snefru's architect are not worn. It seem that those underground chambers existed long before the pyramid was built. Might that be also with Kufu's underground chamber?
And yes, does anyone now when further investigations in the great pyramid continue?
Cheers all,
Really enjoying this whole site, is there an up to date publication on Houdin's work, as a lot of this material wasn't in the first book
Sorry to be a latecomer, but I was wondering if the problem of the roof of the King's chamber putting too much pressure on the antechambers wouold not have been easier solved by rotating the roof 90 degrees so the pressure would be deflected into the mass of the pyramid?
(Apologies if this was already mentioned somewhere; I didn't see it.)
Paul, the room isn't square but could have been rotated 90° to do exactly what you suggest. It didn't need to be at right angles to the Grand gallery and could have had the same construction as the queen's chamber. Alternatively, the ceiling of the kings chamber could have been raised to reduce the number of "relieving" chambers. I found this site after reading about the void found with muon detectors and wondered if they were connected. As an engineer, I have always doubted that they did much to justify their effort; but FEA want around back then. If the pyramid took a lot more than 20 years to build, and Khufu died during construction, he could still be sealed up somewhere inside.


text:
About Us | Upcoming Programs | Prior Programs | Publications | Links | Cemeteries | Contact Us | Picture Gallery
2015 Meeting ProgramsAugust 6th Program Details
Featured Speaker: All Members
The Granville County Genealogical Society 1746, Inc. August 6, 2015 meeting will afford all society members and guests an opportunity to "show and tell" some of their genealogical experiences. This will be an excellent opportunity to brag a little about your successes and possibly get some assistance from other members if you have been less than successful in your endeavors. You do not have to make any presentation to attend; just come and listen to the "show and tell.
Explaining how you solved a particular problem in your research might help save someone else countless hours and much frustration. And showing something in your ancestor's past is always entertaining.
This meeting, which in the past has proven to be an interesting and informative program, and beginning at 6:30 P.M. on August 6, 2015 in the conference room at Richard H. Thornton Library, is open to the public and visitors are always welcome.
All GCGS meetings are open to the public and guests are cordially invited to attend.
Questions or comments send to: email@example.com
Copyright © 2000-2017 Granville County Genealogical Society 1746, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
he first feature film from accomplished short filmmaker Kate Shenton On Tender Hooks is a fly-on-the-wall documentary film delving into the world of Human Suspension; the act of piercing metal hooks through flesh and using them to suspend mid-air.
Filmed over the course of a year, Kate follows groups in the UK, Croatia and Norway who practice this art form, gaining a deep insight into the secretive and guarded community. Kate discovers how far the body can be pushed, the benefits it has on the mind and even goes on her own journey into suspending for the first time.


text:
7:30 p.m. Thursday, October 12, 2017 at the Newly Renovated GRCC Albert P. Smith Music Building
Buy Tickets Now
Jordan Dodson
A winner of Astral's 2013 National Auditions, he is an active soloist and chamber musician based in New York and Philadelphia. He has also received awards from the 2011 Lillian Fuchs Chamber Music Competition, the 2010 Indiana International Guitar Competition, and the 2008 American String Teachers Association Competition. In 2013, he was a Young Artist in Residence on American Public Media's Performance Today
Mr. Dodson's recent performance and teaching schedule has taken him across the U.S. and abroad to venues such as (Le) Poisson Rouge (NewYork City), Roulette (Brooklyn), the Kimmel Center for thePerforming Arts (Philadelphia), and the Museo Nacional de Colombia (Bogotá), and to such music festivals as the Kingston Chamber Music Festival, Aspen Music Festival, and Festival Daniou (France).
An advocate for contemporary music, Mr. Dodson has commissioned and premiered dozens of pieces internationally, including works by Lewis Nielson, Elliot Cole, Robert Sirota, and Gabriella Smith. He performs in several New York City chamber ensembles including Ensemble Moto Perpetuo, Marcel, and Ensemble sans maître, and he recently collaborated with such acclaimed artists as the International Contemporary Ensemble, Anne Marie McDermott, Ransom Wilson, and Contemporaneous. He can be heard on the album Subject on Tzadik Records.
In the fall of 2011, Mr. Dodson was one of two students selected to inaugurate the Curtis Institute of Music's classical guitar studio bringing to the school not only a new instrument, but also new repertoire and new possibilities for music making. Curtis Dean John Mangan said Dodson fulfilled the school's need for "ambassadors for the instrument and its repertoire who could create interest among their peers, alongwith a desire to collaborate."
Originally from Columbus, Ohio, Jordan Dodson started playing music at a young age. He holds degrees from the Curtis Institute of Music, the Manhattan School of Music, and the Cincinnati College Conservatory of Music, and his teachers have included Clare Callahan, David Starobin, and Jason Vieaux.
He plays a Gary Lee guitar
$15.00 General Admission/ $10.00 for Students and Seniors
Parking is available in the GRCC Parking Ramp for $3.50. Be sure to ask for a parking voucher at the door.
Call 616-459-2921 for further information or e-mail: email@example.com


text:
Find a Doctor
Request an Appointment
The Harvard Medical School Fellowship in General Medicine and Primary Care offers 2-year academic fellowships to prepare talented physicians for careers in academic medicine. Since the program began in 1979, we have trained over 200 fellows, who now work in prestigious institutions nationally and internationally. Any questions or inquiries can be directed to email@example.com.
There are many benefits to choosing the Harvard Medical School Fellowship in General Medicine and Primary Care.
1. Fellows have the opportunity to collaborate between the six different Harvard-affiliated medical institutions listed below. For more information about the programs at each site, please click on the name of the individual site.
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Boston V.A. Health Care System
Brigham and Women's Hospital
The Cambridge Hospital
Department of Population Medicine-HMS and Harvard Pilgrim HC
Massachusetts General Hospital
2. The Program faculty includes outstanding mentors who are experienced in a variety of research areas.
3. Boston, Cambridge and the surrounding neighborhoods provide a plethora of diverse study populations including primary care clinics, community health centers and health maintenance organizations. Also, each site has access to numerous research databases. For more information, please visit our Research Program page.
For more information regarding the fellowship, please visit the fellowship site here
© 2017 Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215
617-667-7000 | TDD: 800-439-0183 | Maps & Directions


text:
Hi Kerstin, Thanks Kerstin for taking this on and for the update. I'm not sure I understand how your group plans to handle this on a technique level. Based on our current guidelines, I believe CAPCHAs have to have text equivalents. Unless I am mistaken, unless you come up with something that is an SC or we edit our current SC then there will be no place to put your techniques and CAPCHAs would still require text equivalents --- unless they are multimeda. We have a loophole if you will for multimedia. All other content requires a text alternative. We have another loophole for functional non-text content that cannot be described in text - but CAPCHAs don't qualify as functional and can be described in text. Cause that is what you do to make them work. Which SC did you think the CAPCHAs would fall under? (Where did you think your techniques would go as sufficient solutions). Thanks. Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison -----Original Message----- From: email@example.com [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Kerstin Goldsmith Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 9:13 PM To: wcag Subject: issue 741 Gregg, et al: Issue 741: We came to a conceptual agreement on the approach to the CAPTCHA issue, but we need to work on the wording more. We all three agree that this would not be normative, or SC, but would rather be a technique. We will need another week to work on this. Cheers, Judy, Cythia, KerstinReceived on Friday, 3 February 2006 19:58:23 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:58 UTC


text:
Here's the recipe for the second batch of cupcakes I made for a recent baby shower!
1 cup all purpose flour
3/4 cup self-rising flour
1/2 cup (1 stick) unsalted butter, room temperature
1 1/4 cup sugar
2 large eggs
2 1/2 tablespoons fresh lime juice
1 tablespoon finely grated lime peel
3/4 cup buttermilk
(Ingredients for frosting):
1 8-ounce package cream cheese, room temperature
1 1/2 cups powdered sugar
1/2 cup (1 stick) unsalted butter, room temperature
1 tablespoon finely grated lime peel
1/2 teaspoon vanilla extract
Yellow food coloring (optional)
Preparation (CUPCAKES):
Preheat oven to 350°F. Line standard muffin pan with 12 paper liners. Whisk both flours in medium bowl. Beat butter in large bowl until smooth. Add sugar; beat to blend. Beat in eggs 1 at a time, then next 3 ingredients (batter may look curdled). Beat in flour mixture in 3 additions alternately with buttermilk in 2 additions. Spoon scant 1/3 cup batter into each liner.
Bake cupcakes until tester inserted into center comes out clean, 20 to 25 minutes. Cool 10 minutes. Remove from pan; cool.
Preparation (FROSTING):
Beat all ingredients in medium bowl until smooth. Spread or pipe onto cupcakes.
Garnish with lime slices if desired.


text:
|Related Sections:
|Darlington County
Darlington Country Club125 Country Club Rd
Darlington, SC 29532
Phone: (843)393-2196Fax: (843)393-8713
This course's most difficult hole is #9, a par 4. The course was carved around Black Creek which comes into play on six holes. There are enough right and left dogleg fairways to make the course a challenge for the most experienced golfer.
|Holes: 18
|Greens: Bermuda Grass
|Fairways: Bermuda Grass
|Greens Fees:
|Course Type:
|Dress Code:
|Collared shirt, no cutoffs, denim OK
|Open all year
|Guest Policy:
* Update this Course: Update/modify the details for this golf course's listing.
*All Greens Fees provided are subject to change. Please call the golf course to confirm the current fees.


text:
Fossil of oldest bird to go on show in new Museum gallery
The fossil that confirmed Darwin's theory of evolution, Archaeopteryx, will be displayed for the first time in a new gallery called Treasures, opening at the Natural History Museum in November 2012.
The fossil Archaeopteryx lithographica showsboth bird and reptile features and was discovered just two years after Darwin published On the Origin of Species.
The fossil became a key piece of evidence for the origin of birds and the confirmation of evolution and is known by some as the Mona Lisa of natural history.
It is not a replica or cast that is going on display, but the real fossil. The fossil is the official representative of the Archaeopteryx lithographica species, and is known as thetype. When scientists need to identify other similar animals they refer to the type specimen for comparison.
Archaeopteryx lithographica will be centre stage in the permanent Treasures gallery that will showcase the very best of the Museum's world-renowned collection.
'Each specimen tells its own unique story, but the role of Archaeopteryx in evolutionary science is profound,' says Sharon Ament, Museum Director of Public Engagement.
'As the type specimen it could be said to be the Natural History Museum's equivalent of the Louvre's Mona Lisa. Because of it's history, it's scientific significance and the sheer beauty of its features captured in fine detail it has a real wow-factor.
'Treasures will bring together our most amazing specimens, highlighting not only their scientific value but also their historical, social and cultural worth. It will be a snapshot of the depth, variety and value of our collection.'
Archaeopteryx (meaning ancient wing) lived 147 million years ago during the late Jurassic Period. It had a bird-like feathered tail and wings along with a reptilian long bony tail, teeth and three claw-like fingers.
The discovery of this fossil in 1861 was a breakthrough, giving the first snapshot ofevolution in action between two major groups. It later became a key piece of evidence in demonstrating that birds are the descendents of dinosaurs.
Source: Natural History Museum


text:
Looks don't matter in kidney cancer as much as they used to, as more information comes to us about the molecular or biological nature of the diseases which fall under the "kidney cancer" umbrella. Can those important biological differences be seen in the pathology laboratory? Must we rely on next generation sequencing to determine which of the subtypes we might have?
Recent work by Dr. James Brugarolas and colleagues is reassuring. Even as they found new subtypes of clear cell renal cell carcinoma, they have also determined that these differences can be seen the pathology lab.
Why is this important? So-called similar tumors may behave in quite different and more aggressive ways, so this is vital to understand the threat of recurrence from a very small tumor. The affects monitoring and eventually will be helpful in drug selection.
An interview at the 13th International Kidney Cancer Symposium October 2014
Cut and paste the above youtube address into your browser to be able to hear the lecture, while following along below. The questions are in bold face.
Dr. James Brugarolas Discusses Biologically Classifying Kidney Cancer
"What we have learned with the development of next generation sequencing (NGS) is that no two tumors are the same. Every tumor has different mutations. Mutations are the drivers of tumor biology. With the advances of next generation sequencing, we have been able to identify and group different subtypes of kidney cancer, according to their mutation status.
Specifically, my laboratory discovered that the BAP1 gene is inactivated in 15% of clear-cell renal cell carcinomas. We found that BAP1 mutations are associated with high nuclear grade. That let us to hypothesize that patients who had BAP1 deficient tumors are going to have more aggressive tumors.
Furthermore, we found that mutations in BAP1 tended to anti-correlate with mutations in the second gene discovered by the Sanger Institute, by Michael Estrada and Andrew Futreal, the polybromo1 gene, PBRM1.
That led us to a classification that about 50% of the patients with clear-cell renal cell carcinoma will have PBRM1 deficient tumors and 15% of patients will have BAP1 deficient tumors. A small percentage of patients will have tumors that are deficient for both genes.
In a very productive collaboration we have had with Mayo Clinic, with Rick Joseph and Alex Parker, we've been able to determine that these different subtypes are associated with very different outcomes in patients. Patients that have tumors which are competent (not deficient) for both BAP1 and PBRM1 have excellent survival, whereas the cancer specific survival (CSS) is very poor in patients that have tumors that are deficient for both BAP1 and PBRM1. BAP1 deficient tumors have a somewhat intermediate survival phenotype, and the PBRM1 deficient tumors are similar to tumors that are competent for both BAP1 and PBRM1.
So we think for the first time, we've able to identify subtypes of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma that are likely to inform therapy in the future.
There is a gap between the discovery of the gene, to the determination of the clinical implications and subsequently to the therapeutic developments. That is because the therapeutic developments are going to emerge from the biologic understanding which we don't have yet.
How can improved classification of kidney cancer subtypes improve clinical trial design?
That's actually a very good question. So, what has traditionally happened is that a trial may be performed and one may find a group of patients–sometimes small, sometimes larger–that appear to do well with that agent. But if the group of patients is small, the trial is considered to be negative and the drug is abandoned. And I would say the problem is not that the drug did not have activity, it is that we were not able to identify the group of patients who appeared to benefit from that agent.
So the classification that we have developed and the identification of these different subtypes will pave the way to be able to do correlations. So then, when a clinical trial is executed when it is able to characterize better those subsets of patients that may benefit from the agent. For instance, as I was alluding to before, the BAP1 gene is inactivated in 15% of the tumors. It is possible that one of the drugs which has been tried in kidney cancer could have activity against that tumor. But there could never be a trial in that is positive that is being active in a small percentage of the patients, in 15% of the patients.
By identifying meaningful biological subtypes, we hope to deconvolute kidney cancer. It probably makes sense in trials going forward to do prespecified analysis of these genes that we now define as different biological subtypes–to be able to get at the question whether a particular treatment is having greater affect in one biological subtype versus the other. It is possible that it may not be that not all the PBRM1 deficient tumors that benefit, that are inhibited by a particular agent, there are other mutations. But it's the beginning that which will lead us to identify those biomarkers and patients who are most resistant to a particular treatment.
What is the significance of improved disease classification for kidney cancer patients?
That is also an excellent question. These are discoveries that we and others have made over the last two or three years. The implications clinically have begun to be unraveled. It's going to take significant effort and investment in research for us to go forward. We need to understand how loss of these genes, how mutations in BAP1 and PBRM1, are affecting processes inside the cancer cell, leading to kidney cancer development.
And in particular, we need to understand how BAP1, which is associated with most aggressive type of kidney cancer, is inducing that process. How is it that loss of the BAP1 gene makes the tumor be so aggressive? It's only once we are able to elucidate the signaling pathways, that we will be able to identify targets for therapeutic invention.
On the other hand, we already know that for patients with localized disease, their prognosis is influenced biology of the tumor. I was alluding to this before, those patients who have removal of a tumor, localized to the kidney who deficient for BAP1 and PBRM1, they have a very high likelihood of recurrence in a short period of time. Those patients whose tumors are wild type for PBRM1 and BAP1 can do very well. (Wild type here means that the two genes are competent, or not deficient.)
Importantly, from the important view of translating these findings to the clinic, we have been able to develop assays, immunohistochemistry assays which are routinely performed in tumor samples at most institutions. (This is done in pathology labs).That allows us to very quickly determine whether we are dealing with the wild type tumor, BAP1 tumor, PBRM1 deficient tumor, or one that is deficient for both.
(Transcribed from the above YouTube video by Peggy Zuckerman. Any mistakes are mine alone, but hope this is helpful in understanding this approach to using gene sequencing in kidney cancer.
May 16, 2015)


text:
A fuel tax that Spain imposed in 2002 was illegal, Europe's highest court ruled on Thursday, clearing the way for consumers to claim back billions of euros and potentially knock Madrid's deficit-reduction programme off track.
The tax on fuel including petrol, diesel, heavy fuel oil and kerosene ran from Jan. 1 2002 to Jan. 1 2013.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) in Luxembourg said it had been incompatible with the EU Excise Duty Directive because it did not have a specific purpose that must not be purely budgetary, such as an environmental aim.
Proceeds from the tax, set up to finance healthcare in Spain's autonomous regions, were about 13 billion euros ($17.8 billion).
"We note that the implementation of this tax was made after consultation with the European Commission ... who authorised the Spanish government and its regions," Treasury Minister Cristobal Montoro told reporters, adding that some of the responsibility should be shared.
He said the financial impact could not be calculated.
Consumers will have to provide receipts of purchase, meaning the government will almost certainly not have to pay back the whole sum.
But some companies will have records. Catalan haulage company Transportes Jordi Besora SL, which brought the case to court, paid fuel duty of more than 45,000 euros for the years 2005-2008.
"I'm extremely satisfied by this ruling and hope to be able to eventually receive the money," said Jordi Besora, head of the company.
Madrid asked for back payments on the tax to be limited and said a payout in full would jeopardise public health spending.
But Thursday's ruling - which Spain cannot appeal against - found it was inappropriate to "limit the temporal effects of this judgment" because, in maintaining the tax for more than a decade, the Spanish authorities did not act in good faith.
Spain must cut its budget gap to 5.8 percent of GDP - or around 60 billion euros - this year and to 4.2 percent of GDP in 2015, to ensure it drops below 3 percent in 2016 as requested by EU finance ministers last June.


text:
13 June 2016 :: 07:06:50 am 113906
Police And Soldier Clamped Down CrimePattaya police and soldier made the statement about crime crackdown.
Advertise Here
Share this
PATTAYA – June 11,2016 [PattayaDailyNews]; at 11.00am Pattaya police and soldier of Military Circle 14th made the statement about crime crackdown at Pattaya police station.
Pattaya police could arrest 4 drug dealers, 1.Mr.Jaroonsak Promsiri 2.Mr.Sumethee Pikulchart 3.Mr.Komsan Koseng 4.Ms.Datchanee Chikkhan, and they all were caught with some drugs.
Pattaya police and soldiers also caught Mr.Sompong Chansira aged 28 holding a lot of weapons and ammunitions.
In addition, the officials clamped down drug party and they arrested Mr.Kitti Thong-Aon aged 20, Mr.Artit Juphajon aged 19, Ms.Inthuorn Sriwichai aged 21 and Ms.Natcharee Wongnuam aged 23 who consumed crystal meth in a room of BB resort.
Reporter : Tanasab Photo : Tanasab Category : Crime News
Comments in News


text:
I haven't heard much about this kid and was really hoping that he'd turn into something special? Any news on how he is coming along and if he'll see significant playing time this year?
What's up with Je'Ron Stokes?
I should know, but I don't
From all accounts he's lining up to be the #3 receiver behind Hemingway and Stonum right now.
Over Roundtree?
My understanding is he looked god in practice and everything last year, but we have a lot of depth at WR so he didn't see the field right away.
So God didn't look back?
God was too busy looking at Tim Tebow. He's dreamy.
High hopes for Stokes. I'm not sure why you'd be expecting to be hearing all sorts of things about him at this point. He was only a freshman last year. A true freshman at that. He'll get his opportunity. And I imagine that he'll pretty damn good when he does. But to think that he should be doing more than he has at this point, with all the depth that we have at receiver, is just ludicrous.
It wasn't as good as the normal steak and lobster meal but it'll do.
I made a comment, and it was stupid as usual, but this one seemed extra stupid, so I deleted it. I have no constructive answer to the OP's question. I ate some peanut butter today.
If you joined this board with the intent of making constructive comments, you may have made a critical error.
Crunchy or smooth?
Repetition, Repetition, Repetition.
They ought to practice him on the o-line a little bit, just so he gets a better feeling for what he should be looking for from his normal position.
That might be too much, though.
I thought he made a couple of really nice plays in the Ohio State game. I kind of wish there was a UFR for that game so I could see his +/-
Don't do that. The title implied that he did something wrong, or was about to transfer. There is nothing wrong with Stokes. He just needs to work harder, wait his time and he will get a chance to play.
What's the deal with airplane peanuts?
I agree. Campbell showed some flashes of talent in the last couple of games. I remember several plays where he showed a lot of athleticism getting off his blocker. With a year of S&C and some time to study the mental elements of the game, I think he could be poised for a breakout year.
that may be, but I heard that Fitz Toussaint looked Odin-esque or even Gilgamesh-y. I hope that Jibreel can be somewhat Shiva-like myself.
that made me sad. even on mgoblog i can't escape Histart 481, art and archaeology of ancient Iran
We have a long, well-established tradition of hardly using freshman WRs. Take a look at the numbers (or lack thereof) that Desmond Howard, Tai Streets, Marcus Knight, David Terrell, Marquise Walker, Braylon Edwards, Jason Avant and Roy Roundtree put up as true freshmen. Manningham and Odoms were two rare exceptions to this rule (but even then, they didn't put up huge numbers).
The second year generally is the better indicator. All of the above players (save Knight) made a big splash that year.
RichRod doesn't follow any Michigan traditions remember? Didn't you get that memo?
potato salad
you know, i think i have really way too high hopes for this offense next year, but I don't really care about how Stokes is coming along at this point. I'm sure he's learning and doing all that stuff. But one of Stonum or Hemingway (if not both) need to turn a corner and be a big play threat. If that happens, we really should be excellent in the pass game. Roundtree & Odoms have the posession routes in control. We just need someone to stretch the field vertically once in awhile. I'm not expecting Stonum or Hemingway to be 1000 yard receivers. but 20-30 catches for 15-20 yp catch.
IMHO, i think Coach Rod has the pieces in place (except for the stud tailback) for this offense to hum next year.
I wouldn't worry, RB by committee is fine, as long as the OL is healthy and the passing game is keeps 9 men out of the box (Yeah the Spread), UM will lead the BIG TEN in rushing.
What are you talking about? We have a FAST CHRIS PERRY! No sugarcoat!
He should get some quality reps this year. Stonum and Hemingway will likely be ahead of him at outside wr, but he should def. be the 3rd guy in the rotation. He was only a frosh last year. Can't really expect much from them.


text:
TIC Challenge
The Targeted Innovation Challenge (TIC) Challenge Day, held in early December in Danang, was a roaring success. After a course of eight weeks, innovator teams submitted their final work product aimed at solving issues with handline tuna fishing in the East Sea. The challenge was featured in the November issue of Word.
Banyan Tree Lang Co Winter Special Offer
How does this sound? Stunning views of the East Sea in one direction and equally stunning views of the Truong Son mountain range in the other. Now, think of looking at that with your special someone followed by some fine dining and maybe a rejuvenating spa treatment to help ignite (maybe even reignite) the love within.
Family Getaway to Angsana Lang Co
Angsana Lang Co resort located midway between Danang and Hue on the central coast is offering a family getaway promotion from now until Dec.22.
Crescent Apartments for Sale at City Garden
City Garden have announced the official sale of the project's final 160 luxury condominium apartments in the Crescent — the fourth and final tower of the City Garden project. The apartments will be available to the public on a first-come, first-serve basis starting on the morning of Saturday, Nov. 12 from 9am until noon.
Com Tam Burger at Relish
First came the Pho Burger. Now Relish & Sons have upped the ante with the all new Com Tam Burger.
Henry Forwood Design Launch
English designer Henry Forwood has spent the last 20 years developing and manufacturing designs in furniture, accessories, ornaments and other household objects for clients worldwide.
There's a Manual for That
UK-born artist, mixologist and general manager of Shri Restaurant and Lounge Richie Fawcett has just released the definitive cocktail manual of Saigon.
Smart Kids Celebrates 10 Years
This month, Smart Kids child care centre in Ho Chi Minh City is celebrating its 10-year anniversary of preparing kids for life in the international community.
Maison de Tet Autumn Menu
Maison de Tet is introducing their autumn Vietnamese and fusion cuisine with fresh ingredients and in-house sauces, marinades and relishes.
Happiness Beauty and Skincare
Created out of a deep connection with nature, fashion designer May Cortazzi's new line of skin products is made with only natural ingredients ranging from Himalayan minerals, French clays and exotic plants.


text:
Actor Suriya's upcoming movie after Singam 3 is the most wanted news among Suriya fans. As per the reports, Director Trivikram has roped Suriya for his next movie which will be made in both Tamil and Telugu simultaneously. Suriya will start the shooting for this movie in june / july of 2016, after finishing his Singam 3. Trivikram who is a busy Telugu director ropes a Tamil actor for the first time for his upcoming movie. Keep visiting for more updates on Suriya's upcoming movie.
|Suriya next movie after Singam 3 is ready


text:
Carbon nanotubes form in space but use a metal-free chemistry until now unavailable to chemists on Earth. The discovery is a surprising outcome of laboratory experiments designed by Joseph Nuth at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in Greenbelt, Maryland, and his colleagues. They were hoping to understand how carbon atoms are recycled in stellar nurseries, the regions of space where stars and planets are born, but the finding could have applications in nanotechnology, as well as help explain some characteristics of supernovae.
Writing in the journal Astrophys J Lett, Nuth and colleagues explain how astrochemistry makes carbon nanotubes without requiring a metal catalyst. Nanotubes are produced, they say, when graphite dust particles are exposed to a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen gases, conditions that exist in interstellar space.
The finding corroborates the discovery of graphite whiskers, bigger than nano nanotubes, in three meteorites. The meteoric discovery hinted at why some supernovae appear dimmer and farther away than they ought to be based on calculations using current models. Nuth's approach is a variation of a well-established way to produce gasoline or other liquid fuels from coal. It's known as Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, and researchers suspect that it could have produced at least some of the simple carbon-based compounds in the early solar system. Nuth proposes that the nanotubes yielded by such reactions could be the key to the recycling of the carbon that gets released when carbon-rich grains are destroyed by supernova explosions.
The structure of the carbon nanotubes produced by Nuth and colleagues was determined by materials scientist Yuki Kimura, of Tohoku University, Japan, using transmission electron microscopy. He observed particles on which the original smooth graphite gradually morphed into an unstructured region and finally to an area rich in tangled hair-like masses. A closer look with an even more powerful microscope showed that these tendrils were in fact cup-stacked carbon nanotubes, resembling a stack of disposable drinking cups with the bottoms removed. If further testing indicates that the new method is suitable for materials-science applications, it could supplement, or even replace, the familiar way of making nanotubes, explains Kimura.
Researchers might also now evaluate whether graphite whiskers absorb light. A positive result would lend credence to the proposition that the presence of these molecules in space affects the observations of some supernovae.
Astrophys J Lett, 2010, 710, L98-L101