New high-speed video reveals the physics of a finger snap

It all happens in a snap. New high-speed video exposes the blink-and-you’ll-miss-it physics behind snapping your fingers.

The footage reveals the extreme speed at which the gesture occurs, and shows that friction plus the compressibility of the finger pads are key to humans’ ability to snap properly, researchers report November 17 in Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

Finger snaps last only about seven milliseconds — that’s roughly 20 times as fast as the blink of an eye, says biophysicist Saad Bhamla of Georgia Tech in Atlanta. After slipping off the thumb, the middle finger rotates at a rate up to 7.8 degrees per millisecond, nearly what a professional baseball pitcher’s arm can achieve, the team found. And a snapping finger accelerates almost three times as fast as pitchers’ arms.

When covered with high-friction rubber or low-friction lubricant, fingers made snaps that fell flat, the team found, indicating that bare fingers have a level of friction ideal for a speedy snap (SN: 8/1/19). That friction between thumb and middle finger allows energy to be stored before it’s suddenly unleashed. Too little friction means less pent-up energy and a slower snap. But too much friction impedes the finger’s release, also slowing the snap.

Bhamla and colleagues were inspired by a scene in the 2018 movie Avengers: Infinity War. The supervillain Thanos snaps his fingers while wearing a supernatural metal glove, obliterating half of the universe’s life. The team wondered if it would be possible to snap while wearing a rigid glove. Typically, when the fingers press together in a snap, they compress, increasing the contact area and friction between them. So the researchers tested snapping with fingers covered by hard thimbles. Sure enough, the snaps were sluggish.

So Thanos’ snap would have been a dud. No superheroes needed: Physics saves the day.

Earth will warm 2.7 degrees Celsius based on current pledges to cut emissions

This year was supposed to be a turning point in addressing climate change. But the world’s nations are failing to meet the moment, states a new report by the United Nations Environment Programme.

The Emissions Gap Report 2021: The Heat Is On, released October 26, reveals that current pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and rein in global warming still put the world on track to warm by 2.7 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels by the end of the century.

Aiming for “net-zero emissions” by midcentury — a goal recently announced by China, the United States and other countries, but without clear plans on how to do so — could reduce that warming to 2.2 degrees C. But that still falls short of the mark, U.N. officials stated at a news event for the report’s release.

At a landmark meeting in Paris in 2015, 195 nations pledged to eventually reduce their emissions enough to hold global warming to well below 2 degrees C by 2100 (SN: 12/12/15). Restricting global warming further, to just 1.5 degrees C, would forestall many more devastating consequences of climate change, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, reported in 2018 (SN: 12/17/18). In its latest report, released in August, the IPCC noted that extreme weather events, exacerbated by human-caused climate change, now occur in every part of the planet — and warned that the window to reverse some of these effects is closing (SN: 8/9/21).
Despite these dire warnings, “the parties to the Paris Agreement are utterly failing to keep [its] target in reach,” said U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres. “The era of half measures and hollow promises must end.”

The new U.N. report comes at a crucial time, just days before world leaders meet for the 2021 U.N. Climate Change Conference, or COP26, in Glasgow, Scotland. The COP26 meeting — postponed from 2020 to 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic — holds particular significance because it is the first COP meeting since the 2015 agreement in which signatories are expected to significantly ramp up their emissions reductions pledges.

The U.N. Environment Programme has kept annual tabs on the still-yawning gap between existing national pledges to reduce emissions and the Paris Agreement target (SN: 11/26/19). Ahead of the COP26 meeting, 120 countries, responsible for emitting just over half of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, announced their new commitments to address climate change by 2030.

The 2021 report finds that new commitments bring the world only slightly closer to where emissions need to be by 2030 to reach warming targets. With the new pledges, total annual emissions in 2030 would be 7.5 percent lower (about 55 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent) than they would have been with pledges as of last year (about 59 gigatons). But to stay on track for 2 degrees C of warming, emissions would have to be about 30 percent lower than the new pledges, or about 39 gigatons each year. To hold warming to 1.5 degrees C requires a roughly 55 percent drop in emissions compared with the latest pledges, to about 25 gigatons a year.

“I’m hoping that the collision of the science and the statistics in the gap analysis, and the voices of the people will promote a greater sense of urgency,” says Gabriel Filippelli, a geochemist at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis.

On October 26, Filippelli, the editor of the American Geophysical Union journal GeoHealth, and editors in chief of other journals published by the organization coauthored a statement in Geophysical Research Letters. Theyurged world leaders at COP26 to keep the “devastating impacts” of climate change in check by immediately reducing global carbon emissions and shifting to a green economy. “We are scientists, but we also have families and loved ones alongside our fellow citizens on this planet,” the letter states. “The time to bridge the divide between scientist and citizen, head and heart, is now.”

Publishing that plea was a departure for some of the scientists, Filippelli says. “We have been publishing papers for the last 20 to 30 years, documenting the train wreck of climate change,” he says. “As you can imagine, behind the scenes there were some people who were a little uncomfortable because it veered away from the true science. But ultimately, we felt it was more powerful to write a true statement that showed our hearts.”

‘Life as We Made It’ charts the past and future of genetic tinkering

With genetic engineering, humans have recently unleashed a surreal fantasia: pigs that excrete less environment-polluting phosphorus, ducklings hatched from chicken eggs, beagles that glow ruby red under ultraviolet light. Biotechnology poses unprecedented power and potential — but also follows a course thousands of years in the making.

In Life as We Made It, evolutionary biologist Beth Shapiro pieces together a palimpsest of human tinkering. From domesticating dogs to hybridizing endangered Florida panthers, people have been bending evolutionary trajectories for millennia. Modern-day technologies capable of swapping, altering and switching genes on and off inspire understandable unease, Shapiro writes. But they also offer opportunities to accelerate adaptation for the better — creating plague-resistant ferrets, for instance, or rendering disease-carrying mosquitoes sterile to reduce their numbers (SN: 5/14/21).

For anyone curious about the past, present and future of human interference in nature, Life as We Made It offers a compelling survey of the possibilities and pitfalls. Shapiro is an engaging, clear-eyed guide, leading readers through the technical tangles and ethical thickets of this not-so-new frontier. Along the way, the book glitters with lively, humorous vignettes from Shapiro’s career in ancient DNA research. Her tales are often rife with awe (and ripe with the stench of thawing mammoths and other Ice Age matter).
The book’s first half punctures the misconception that we “have only just begun to meddle with nature.” Humans have meddled for 50,000 years: hunting, domesticating and conserving. The second half chronicles the advent of recent biotechnologies and their often bumpy rollouts, leading to squeamishness about genetically modified food and a blunder that resulted in accidentally transgenic cattle.

As we teeter on a technological precipice, Shapiro contends we have a choice to make. We can learn to meddle with greater precision, wielding the sharpest tools at our disposal. Or, she writes, “we can reject our new biotechnologies” and continue directing evolutionary fates anyway, “just more slowly and with less success.” Shapiro speculates about what the future may hold if we embrace our role as tinkerers: plastic-gobbling microbes, saber-toothed house cats, agricultural crops optimized for sequestering carbon. Whether these visions will come true is anyone’s guess. But one thing is clear. No matter which route we choose, humans will continue to stir the evolutionary soup. There’s no backing out now.

Distant rocky planets may have exotic chemical makeups that don’t resemble Earth’s

If a real Captain Kirk ever blasts off for other stars in search of rocky planets like ours, he may find lots of strange new worlds whose innards actually bear no resemblance to Earth’s.

A smattering of heavy elements sprinkled on 23 white dwarf stars suggests that most of the rocky planets that once orbited the stars had unusual chemical makeups, researchers report online November 2 in Nature Communications. The elements, presumably debris from busted-up worlds, provide a possible peek at the planets’ mantles, the region between their crust and core.

“These planets could be just utterly alien to what we’re used to thinking of,” says geologist Keith Putirka of California State University, Fresno.

But deducing what a long-gone planet was made of from what it left behind is fraught with difficulties, cautions Caltech planetary scientist David Stevenson. Rocky worlds outside of the solar system may have exotic chemical compositions, he says. “It’s just that I don’t think this paper can be used to prove that.”

After a star like the sun expands into a red giant star, it ultimately blows off its atmosphere, leaving behind its small, dense core, which becomes a white dwarf. That star’s great gravity drags heavy chemical elements into its interior, so most white dwarfs have pristine surfaces of hydrogen and helium.

But more than a quarter of these stars sport surfaces with heavier elements such as silicon and iron, presumably from planets that once circled the star and met their ends when it expanded into a red giant (SN: 8/15/11). The heavy elements on these white dwarfs haven’t yet had time to sink beneath the stellar surface.

For that reason, Siyi Xu, an astronomer at the Gemini Observatory in Hilo, Hawaii, has long studied white dwarfs. Then she met Putirka. Because he’s a geologist, “he was like, ‘Oh! We can look at this problem from a new perspective,’” Xu says.

Xu had been measuring the abundances of chemical elements littered on white dwarfs by studying the wavelengths of light, or spectra, given off by the stars. Putirka realized that those measurements could indicate what rocks and minerals had made up the destroyed planets’ mantles, which constitute the bulk of a small planet’s rock, because different rocks and minerals contain different chemical elements.

By examining white dwarfs within 650 light-years of the sun, Putirka and Xu reached a startling conclusion about the ripped-apart rocky planets. Contrary to conventional wisdom, most of their planetary mantles didn’t resemble those of the sun’s rocky planets — Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars, the researchers say.

For example, some of the white dwarfs have lots of silicon. That suggests that their planets’ mantles had quartz — a mineral that in its pure form consists solely of silicon and oxygen. But there’s little, if any, quartz in Earth’s mantle. A planet with a quartz-rich mantle would probably differ greatly from Earth, Putirka says.

Such exotic mineral compositions might affect, for example, volcanic eruptions, continental drift and the fraction of a planet’s surface that consists of oceans versus continents. And all those phenomena might affect the development of life.

Stevenson, however, is skeptical of the new finding. When you measure the elemental composition of a “polluted white dwarf,” he says, “you do not know how to connect those numbers to what you started with.”

That’s partly because the destruction of rocky worlds around sunlike stars is complicated, Stevenson says. The planets first get blasted by the red giant’s bright light. Then they may get engulfed by the star’s expanding atmosphere and may even crash into another planet.

Each of these traumatic events could alter a planet’s elemental makeup, as well as possibly send some elements toward the white dwarf ahead of others. As a result, the planetary remains that end up on the star’s surface at one snapshot in time may not reflect the world’s starting composition.

Xu agrees that astronomers don’t know precisely how the breakup plays out or which elements wind up falling onto the white dwarf. Future theoretical studies could provide insight into the matter, she says.

She also notes that astronomers have caught asteroids disintegrating around white dwarfs, which offer a small window into the actual breakup process. And future observations of these white dwarfs, she says, could help