The Big Question

Over the course of history, religion has been one of the most dangerous weapons and one of greatest allies to the human race. It has split entire countries, nearly wiped out entire ethnicities, and been the cause of some of the most horrific acts in human history. However, it has also been able to bring humans to perform acts that seemed defy logic, create bonds stronger than steel among communities, and brought those at the edge of death back to the living. Religion has brought out unjustified, immoral, and frightening acts of evil but also compassionate, astounding, and amazing acts of good. Religion has brought out the worst of humanity, but it has also brought out the best of it.

One thing has truly intrigued me about religion for a long time. This being the fact that regardless of which religion is being referred to, religious people have claimed that a belief in God, although may not lead to miracles, is necessary in living a happy and prosperous life. And many of these religious leaders are in fact very intellectual people. Budha once said, "Just as a candle cannot burn without fire, men cannot live without a spiritual life." However, in a day and age when science takes precedence, it's difficult to find a place for religion to fit into the mix. According to Time, "Atheists are one of the fastest growing groups in the world." And this trend makes sense with the rapid discoveries made in science seeming to refute many religious beliefs that have been said to be true for thousands of years. One example of these rapidly changing ideas is the age of  the Earth and what role humans played in it. Christians believe that Jack and Jill were the first humans on Earth. It is also widely accepted that the Earth is less than ten-thousand years old, with James Ussher, a Bishop in the Church of Ireland, calculated the exact day to be Sunday, October 23, 4004 BC. However, scientists estimate Earth's creation to have occurred about 4.54 billion years ago, with the entirety of written human history making up to less than a crumb on a timeline spanning the length of the US. Because of differences like this, it's here that many people lose interest in religion. Instead, people choose to simply trust science and what they were taught in school and just assume religion is simply a relic that belongs in history books. One of the most popular advocates on this stance in modern times in biologist Richard Dawkins. He has been famous for sayings things such as, "Gods are fragile things that may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense," as well as, "I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."  But I want take this eminent clash between religion and science in a different perspective. Instead, I want to question the notion and ask with an open mind if religion has a scientific connection with a person's happiness and wellbeing.

So far, I have thought of religion as a pre-historic science that humans have decided to mindlessly follow for thousands of years. However, as I stated above, I recently began looking if I could think the idea of religion differently. I started off by thinking about how religion came to be and what purpose it really served. For a large portion of human history, groups were isolated from one another in their own civilizations.  Yet somehow, religion seemed to appear in almost every single one of these civilizations without any form of contact with one another. Each group of people created their own ideas of a higher power that formed who we are and watches over us. In early Middle-Eastern civilizations, Yahweh was thought to be God. and to this day has been the source for the creation of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Hinduism evolved in the Indus River Valley as a way of life. Across the globe, the Aztec, Mayan and Incan civilizations had also come up with the idea of worshipping their gods. In Africa, many tribes had gods they worshipped. Even in China, without a god, Buddhism arose through the simple practice of prayer to achieve enlightenment. Although the appearance of religion and prayer in various isolated civilizations does not directly answer anything about how religion is connected with a persons wellbeing, it does open the book to the idea. Why else would people from across history all share similar practices if it did not lead to some sort of positive outcome for themselves?

 At the same time, it is entirely possible that religion has played some other role in the past across all of these civilizations. Some argue that religion is simply used to fill the gaps in scientific knowledge. When people couldn't figure out when and how the Earth was created, God was used to explain the "gaps." This idea coined, "God of the Gaps" claims that God served the purpose of filling in the holes in human understanding at the time, and it is continued to be used as such among religious scientists today. And although this point does make sense, it does not answer why so many intellectuals claim that prayer is a necessary element in living a healthy and good life. 

I'm still far from convinced that simply the belief in a religion and regular prayer can increase the health and wellbeing of people, I believe that this blank is necessary before scientists like Richard Dawkins continue to trivialize religion and religious leaders continue to convert people based on these claims. And if religion truly does prove to have a substantial effect on a person’s health, it would be monumental to not just science or religion, but to the human race as a whole. Experimentation is crucial though, and studies similar to this idea have been picking up momentum in recent years. 

One of these studies I happened to come across was conducted by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. They concluded that women that pray regularly, defined by going to Church at least once a week, have live on average 5 years longer than those who do not. Directly quoted from the study, "Frequent attendance at religious services was associated with significantly lower risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality among women.” They went on to state that physicians should begin exploring the use of regular prayer as a possible option. This suggests a connection between health and prayer that religious experts have been trying to convince the public of for centuries. This study from a well reputed university may be what gets the ball rolling. I want to see where this ball rolls.

I recently read a book called The Chemistry Between Us coauthored by Larry Young and Brian Alexander. They wrote about how chemicals had such monumental effects on not just our emotions but the entire course of our lives. One of the ideas that intrigued me the most in the book was this: “In the case of all of us, a single molecule, a hormone applied or withheld during discrete moments in fetal development has not only affected genitals but also set a path for some of our most important behaviors over the course of our lives. Different circuitry, different behavior.” This mattered to me because it revealed the idea of something so powerful that simply its existence could alter our thoughts, emotions, futures, and our health and wellbeing. Sound familiar? This strikes a resemblance to the claims made about the effects of prayer. As stated above, prayer has been claimed to make those who are faithful be happier emotionally, healthier physically, and lead a more successful life fully. These striking resemblances between the effects of chemical imbalances in our bodies and regular prayer in our lives raise the possibility that the two may be related. 

It has been proven by numerous research studies that prayer has an effect on a person’s health. It has also been proven by myriad research studies that certain chemicals have a strong effect on a person’s health as well. The next step is to test the relationship between the two. How does regular prayer effect the chemical balance in our body? This is the big question that we must answer. Now it’s time to go back to the drawing board and find out how we can solve this puzzle.

Vinay Konuru            

Random Thoughts: Why the Issue of Diversity is Important

Some of you may be questioning why the issue of diversity, especially regarding the black minority, is one that bothers me. I an Indian-American middle-class student who loves chemistry. I am far removed from an issue like this, but that does not mean it's one that should not or does not effect me. And it definitely does not mean that I shouldn't care. But why do I care? That is the question that I sought out to answer today, not just for readers but also for myself.

Ever since I first learned of the story of America in Kindergarten, we were taught that all people are given an equal chance to succeed regardless of their race, ethnicity, color, creed, religion, or parents.  At the College Opportunity Summit in 2014, President Obama lectured students; "Now, as a nation, we don't promise equal outcomes, but we were founded on the idea everybody should have an equal opportunity to succeed. No matter who you are, what you look like, where you come from, you can make it. That's an essential promise of America. Where you start should not determine where you end up." Yet, this is not the same ideals that we are keeping firm to in our community.

Blacks are extremely underrepresented at Pine View, which decreases their opportunity to succeed. If we aim to give all people an equal opportunity for success, then why do we turn a blind eye to the issue that disadvantages the black community. This is upsetting because it shows that the dream that I was taught America gives does not apply equally to all.

This is the reason that I care. I want to make the dream that a black kid in Sarasota County has the same chance to succeed as any other kid. Although I understand that equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome, that does not mean that nothing should be done.

I was debating about this issue with on of the kids in my class today when he brought up the point that Sarasota is segregated and this is the way it just is. There is nothing we can do about it, and therefore there is no point in trying. So where do you start with an issue like this, something that is a fact of life made up in most people's minds. Data is the answer that I've reached. The answer I've come to is lots and lots of data. Over the next few months I will get as much data I can possibly obtain from public records to studies to find what it is truly bugging me. Why can't gifted education be provided with as much equal opportunity as America aims for?

Anyway, off of that tangent, it's also possible that I care simply because I know the challenge that accompanies a task like this, and I love a good challenge. This is just a random thought that I wanted to address today, and I want to begin doing more random thought articles like this. Stay tuned!

My thoughts- Physics vs Chemistry

Since the apple fell from the tree and landed on Sir Issac Newton's head, physics has been a subject that was at the forefront of science. It created the basics to our understanding of the world around us and helped answer some of the most trying questions that puzzled even the smartest philosophers. However, it seems as though conventional physics has begun to die down as we get into a more complex field that doesn't follow the same rules: quantum physics. This field started answering questions that scientists in other fields hadn't even thought of yet. One of these fields was chemistry. The question is why physics has been able to come so much farther and has so much more focus than chemistry.

Well to answer this question, we must first look at the beginnings of chemistry. The origins of chemistry can be found in alchemy with the aim special metals using less special materials. For example, trying to create gold from less valuables like copper and iron. Of course this wasn't possible. However, alchemy was still practiced for centuries driven forward by myths of success passed around by the loosely connected world of the 1500s.

During all of this time, physics had already been a respected science for centuries. Newton had created the founding principles to the field, but he was among several prodigious scientists studying similar things and he certainly wasn't the first. Physics goes back all the way to the Ancient Greeks like Democritus and Leucippus. It is regarded as the most basic science and was even known as natural philosophy until the 19th century.

Physics had entered a new field in the 1900s with the understanding of subatomic particles and energy. Quantum physics started being studied with Albert Einstein's theory, E=mc^2, commonly being associated with it. This new field allowed for the subject to be expanded to solve many problems and applications previously thought unrelated and impossible. This made the millennia old science a new cutting edge discovery with much to discover for new scientists.

The question is if in time Chemistry will have a similar expansion such as a study of of different elements in the island if stability or different materials for space exploration. Although this may happen, even then, the line between chemistry has become so vague with physics often being used to theorize in chemistry.

However, even still, why is it that quantum physics is often seen as a more complex subject than chemistry. My current idea is that the shear number of discoveries in quantum physics being made everyday about subjects that most would have a very difficult time grasping, just outnumber those made about pure chemistry. However, applied chemistry surrounds us everywhere, and it will continue to be very important in the constantly evolving world around us.

Marijuana Legalization- A THC Sensor

This is a topic that I've been passionate ever since I was first exposed to it through Teen Court. There are so many aspects to the issue that many people simply ignore or don't realize.

One fact is that marijuana, although it is not harmful to adults, it can still cause permanent damage to minors. Yet, in reality, this group makes up one of the greatest majorities of marijuana users currently.

This is what I want to focus on for now. If the youth, my generation, the future generation has a large percentage of people dependent on marijuana, then that is we should start fixing the problem. One of the big issues now is the fact that it is tough to figure out whether your kid is smoking marijuana. Although there are subtle clues, there is no objective test that is inconspicuous, and no kid wants to get their urine tested by their parents.

If there was a gas based test that identified THC in the air, it would be possible to signal areas where marijunana is being smoked, because THC is a cannabinoid(it is chemically unique to marijuana) This product would be useful because it can help employers and parents know if their employees/children are smoking marijuana. It could be put in cars or offices about the size of a clip on febreeze air freshener. It could also be placed in public places that don't want people smoking.

This THC sensor is especially useful now because marijuana is becoming more and more prominent in daily life. Currently, legalization is one of the most controversial issues, and a product like this is necessary to adapt to a world where weed is readily available.

I hope to begin working on this project, and hopefully provide it for free to concerned parents and repeat offenders on probation to assist police. The product will work similar to a cigarette smoke detector in airplanes and will be just as useful one day.

Why Can Compost be the Next Recycling?

The idea behind composting is to decompose your organic waste rather than putting it in a landfill. By decomposing it, it will be beneficial both to the environment and to the plants to plants that use the enriched soil the waste decomposed in.

The way that composting works is that organic material decomposes quite quickly, especially in soil where microbes speed up the process. Certain synthetic things take much longer to decompose, like plastics and metals, so they are instead recycled. But many of the things we throw out, like banana peels and apple cores can very easily decompose. In order to compost, you need very little. All you need is the soil in the ground. However, to keep it clean and keep the trash isolated and off your lawn, I reccomend getting a clay pot and some potting soil. This will only cost you a few dollars, and you can feel great that you aren't contributing to land fills and hurting the environment. Whoever said soil was useless was quite wrong!

But actually, there is one benefit of composting I've been holding out on you. The soil you get from this is actually extremely rich in minerals, and it will allow you to begin growing a very successful garden with a few seeds, some water and a little bit of patience. You could grow food from the food you've already eaten!

Explains the cycle of composting and the ideology it. The cycle start with food, to trash, to the composting process, to soil to grow more food.

I'll be posting pictures of the compost box I'm making right now, and I'll leave some instructions on how to build one.

However, I want to relate this back to chemistry, because I want to figure out two things to make the process better. One of the main drawbacks of composting is it can stink up your entire house unless you buy hundreds of dollars of composting equipment. The other is it can take a few weeks to decompose, which means it will most likely fill up faster than the material can decompose.

I want to begin researching the science of smell, and figure out if there is some way to neutralize or at least decrease the odor given off of the system during the reaction. My hypothesis at this point is to add some reactant that bonds with the product that causes smell in the reaction. However, it isn't that simple because I have to make sure that I do not get in the way of the reaction occuring. I've found how small the difference between a reaction occuring and not occuring really is after learning about gibbs free energy and entropy. But trust me, this is a problem if this process os ever going to expand in popularity because it mercilessly stinks up your house, especially if you leave it in your house or don't do something right. I'll be posting more articles about smell the more I learn and experiment with it. 

The other thing I want to figure out is how to speed up this reaction. This increased efficiency would allow compost bags to be sold commercially or even made into boxes similar to recycling containers, especially if I can find out how to decrease the smell given off.

Who knows what the future might be like, but I hope that I can play my part in building it. The part I want to play is figuring out how to solve some of the common problems that has drawn people away from composting in the past. Who knows? Maybe if we can figure this out, there be compost boxes sitting next to every trash can and recycling bin on the corner of every street, saving the environment one banana peel and apple core at a time.


P.S
Sorry this isn't the article about kinetics I promised you guys. It is coming soon, so don't worry! But this article I want to talk about composting, what I believe should be as common a word as recycling in the near future.

Lab: The Supercooling of Water

This lab is actuall very simple, but it isn great way to learn about how entropy and enthalpy come together in thermodynamics. I have written an article as theory for this lab and as an introduction to these terms, so for the sake of time I will just build off of that.

The supercooling of water is something that occurs when you have water that is still in liquid form under the freezing point, 32°F or 0°C.

This occurs because in order for the reaction to occur, the gibbs free energy of the system must be negative.

The first time I attempted this lab, I failed because the water I used wasn't pure enough, so it froze before I wanted it to. Less pure water has a smaller change in entropy because it has a higher entropy to begin with. The change in entropy generally must be quite great for a reaction to occur, and in this case must be greater than the change in enthalpy times the temperature (~2nd 71K).

Grpah representing the freezing point and the nucleization point of water at the point with high entropy relative to the time of the reaction.

When the lab finally does occur, it happens because the gibbs free energy is not yet negative, because the change in entropy is not great enough. In order to push it over the edge, the bottle must be smashed down, increasing the entropy of the liquid enough to make the gibbs free energy negative, thus allowing the reaction to occur. In this case, the reaction is a physical change, but these thermodynamic laws still apply. The reaction is the freezing of the water in the bottle in front of your eyes, beginning from the hearth of greatest entropy where you hit it.

The change itself is very exciting when you finally get it to occur. Just remember to make sure that your water is pure, and keep in mind that the change in enthalpy doesnt have to be as high if the entropy of the system is great enough, and the more water, the higher the entropy.

I will leave a video of the reaction below, so that you know what to look for. Good luck!

Vinay Konuru

An Introduction to Thermodynamics and the Gibbs Free Energy Law

I recently learned about the amazing science behind a part of thermodynamics, the bases behind the both the what and why of chemistry. Thermodynamics is one of two principles that defines an experiment, with the other being kinetics. Thermodynaics deals with whether a reaction will occur. Kinetics determines the rate at which a reaction occurs. These principles shouldnt be confused, because althiugh they seem interlocked by definition, they are actually independent of each other. This is why I have decided to keep this article as an intro purely to thermodynamics and principles like Gibbs free energy.

I already told you that the basic definition of thermodynamics is whether a reaction  can occur based on the entropy and enthalpy of the the reactants. Now it's time I start throwing some definitions at you so get ready. Entropy is the so called "order" or "randomness" of the system of the reactant. For example, imagine the molecules inside a cloud of smoke. The molecules in the system are going to be moving very fast and there is a large potential for different possibilities or configurations as they fly past each other. On the other hand, a solid block of ice will have little movement on a molecular scale, mostly vibrating in place based on its known properties as a solid. Entropy can be estimated based on logic, but it is quantitativelt measured in J/K based on the SI system.

A visual to understand  entropy. As the temperature increases, a trend can be noticed of large entropy increases during state changes.

The other important principle to calculate the thermodynamics of a system in a reaction is enthalpy defined as the total heat content if a system. This is measured by the internal energy plus the product pressure and volume. This isnt as easily imagined as entropy, but the easiest way to imagine it is simply state changes. The enthalpy of an ice cube is lower than that of water vapor because the gaseous state of water has greater internal energy. The unit of measurement for this is simply Joules by the SI system.

The graph above models enthalpy and expands upon what I said above. The products of a reaction typically have a lower enthalpy than the reactants. However, sometimes an initial activation energy to kick off this reaction, which is the hump in the graph.

Now for the exciting stuff. Thermodynamics is the key to calculate the Gibbs free energy of a reaction, which determines whether a reaction can happen. In laments terms, a system always wants to obtain a lower energy state, with exceptions of course. So if we had a way to calculate the internal energy in a reaction and find whether it is increasing or decreasing, we use the gibbs free energy equation.

∆G=∆H-T∆S

H is the symbol to reference enthalpy. S is the symbol for entropy. T is the symbol for temperature. G is the symbol for Gibbs free energy. If the change is enthalpy minus the change in entropy multiplied by the temperature, measired in K, is less than 0, we know the reaction can occur This is to represent that the energy is lower in the new system, shown by the negative, than before.

Demonstrates the effect of entropy and enthalpy on a reaction. The change in enthalpy(H) must be greater than the change in entropy(S) times the temperature for the change in Gibbs free energy to be negative.

Although this is a very simplified explanation of thermodynamics, it is where Ive decided to start my journey. The laws and science of thermodynamics is immense, and it takes years of study to even get a grasp on it. I have to start at some point though, so I've decided to begin with the gibbs free energy law. I will post the lab I did, the supercooling of water, to understand these certain principles further. and some interesting issues I found to have initiallt with it. It will be exciting, I promise! The theory behind kinetics will come after that but it may be a bit delayed, because I would like to conduct a lab to understand the equations better before I try to write about it.

 Stay tuned!
Vinay Konuru

Link to wikepedia articles:

Thermodynamics equations: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_thermodynamic_equations

Gibbs Free Energy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_free_energy

Entropy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

Enthalpy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy