The main lesson I have learned over the past couple of days is this: always space out the beginning and ends of your stories.
I know what you're thinking. This is quite evident because then you won't get bogged down with tons of interviews and have troubles meeting deadlines. But this is where you're wrong my friend. Dead wrong.
I have no problems juggling interviews and writing times and getting things in when they need to be. I do have problems with something that every journalist knows is outside the realm of their control; getting people to call you back.
Yesterday and today I started on no fewer than six stories, but only one contact person has bothered to get back to me, which makes for a pretty slow day. I've managed to stay sane by editing older pieces and researching my feature for Symmetry, but come on SLAC folks, have a heart for a guy trying to do his job and give me a call back!
And I would ceaselessly call and write emails and show up on doorsteps, but I don't want to be annoying and scare them off of the interview either.
Such a delicate rope to walk.
But by Monday at noon, if I haven't heard from them, I am going to be forced to track one or two all over the site and corner them like a wild, rabid dog. And I don't like going to that place inside myself. It gives me indigestion…
Friday, June 29, 2007
Process Journalism
So today I have a very, very sciency (is that a word… didn't think so…) article on SLAC Today. After some edits from the scientists it turned out a little more dense than I would like it, but I still think its good and am pretty proud of it.
OK, so maybe it's not too great, but it took a loooooooong time to get it to the point where it was publishable.
The story was generated from a list of scientific article pre-prints published by SLAC every week. The list gives every paper being published by SLAC personnel and a short description of the work along with it. Every week I read through the pre-prints and try to pick one out to write about.
This was my first. And it shows.
The first draft was pretty terrible. I didn't even have a firm grasp on what it was I was writing about. But the real problem was that I wrote like I am now, sort of off the cusp. I now believe that, especially when dealing with science-related articles, it is extremely important to have a rigid structure to the story.
This means a solid lead with the actual news in it, a solid nut graph to explain exactly where the story is going, and solid topic sentences that encapsulate the paragraph they precede.
The original draft basically had none of these, and my editor let me know it.
So I re-drafted it and it got a little better.
Then I studied a little more on what exactly "kinematics" is, re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Then I asked the researchers again what exactly the "cosmic jerk" is, re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Next, I asked why using x-ray clusters is innovative and new, re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Finally, it went through some final edits, I (you guessed it) re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Then it was sent off to the scientists for approval and editing. They re-drafted some bits, and it, well… it got more accurate scientifically speaking.
So seven drafts later, I had a working article that was much better than the original. I learned a lot about writing more sciency articles, and it was a great experience.
By the way, I have since written another article based on a pre-print, and got it done in two drafts. :o)
P.S. - Despite the time stamp on this, it was written on Thursday the 28, but my computer was on the fritz...
OK, so maybe it's not too great, but it took a loooooooong time to get it to the point where it was publishable.
The story was generated from a list of scientific article pre-prints published by SLAC every week. The list gives every paper being published by SLAC personnel and a short description of the work along with it. Every week I read through the pre-prints and try to pick one out to write about.
This was my first. And it shows.
The first draft was pretty terrible. I didn't even have a firm grasp on what it was I was writing about. But the real problem was that I wrote like I am now, sort of off the cusp. I now believe that, especially when dealing with science-related articles, it is extremely important to have a rigid structure to the story.
This means a solid lead with the actual news in it, a solid nut graph to explain exactly where the story is going, and solid topic sentences that encapsulate the paragraph they precede.
The original draft basically had none of these, and my editor let me know it.
So I re-drafted it and it got a little better.
Then I studied a little more on what exactly "kinematics" is, re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Then I asked the researchers again what exactly the "cosmic jerk" is, re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Next, I asked why using x-ray clusters is innovative and new, re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Finally, it went through some final edits, I (you guessed it) re-drafted, and it got a little better.
Then it was sent off to the scientists for approval and editing. They re-drafted some bits, and it, well… it got more accurate scientifically speaking.
So seven drafts later, I had a working article that was much better than the original. I learned a lot about writing more sciency articles, and it was a great experience.
By the way, I have since written another article based on a pre-print, and got it done in two drafts. :o)
P.S. - Despite the time stamp on this, it was written on Thursday the 28, but my computer was on the fritz...
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Conducting Interviews
My story about John Ku and Music for Minors ran today. Great guy, great story, check it out here…
Today was pretty quiet in the office, but I did get a fair amount of work done including, but not limited to, editing, redrafting, writing and interviewing.
Interviewing.
Hmmmm.
The quintessential way that we get information and quotes for stories.
Discuss.
I conducted three interviews for my developing work on poster art at particle accelerator labs for Symmetry magazine. Two of them were via the telephone due to geographic limitations and the other was in person just a few hundred feet away. The difference was astounding.
It may be easier to type an interview as you wedge the phone between your head and shoulder, but live interviews, even those that require a quick pen, are infinitely better. You get a sense of the person, see what the office is like, what sort of gizmos are on the desk, what is on the computer screen when you arrive. You get eye contact and body language. You get descriptions with hands and a description of the person. It's more relaxed and flows better.
So I would like to contend once and for all, that the only way to be a good journalist (or PR writer) is to get out of your office and meet people on their grounds and take in information with ever sense available and not just your ears. I've had teachers and mentors tell me this for years, and I always believed them, but it is something else entirely to experience first hand.
Video conferences are better, but still aren't quite the same. I don't believe technology will ever catch up to actually being somewhere.
Today was pretty quiet in the office, but I did get a fair amount of work done including, but not limited to, editing, redrafting, writing and interviewing.
Interviewing.
Hmmmm.
The quintessential way that we get information and quotes for stories.
Discuss.
I conducted three interviews for my developing work on poster art at particle accelerator labs for Symmetry magazine. Two of them were via the telephone due to geographic limitations and the other was in person just a few hundred feet away. The difference was astounding.
It may be easier to type an interview as you wedge the phone between your head and shoulder, but live interviews, even those that require a quick pen, are infinitely better. You get a sense of the person, see what the office is like, what sort of gizmos are on the desk, what is on the computer screen when you arrive. You get eye contact and body language. You get descriptions with hands and a description of the person. It's more relaxed and flows better.
So I would like to contend once and for all, that the only way to be a good journalist (or PR writer) is to get out of your office and meet people on their grounds and take in information with ever sense available and not just your ears. I've had teachers and mentors tell me this for years, and I always believed them, but it is something else entirely to experience first hand.
Video conferences are better, but still aren't quite the same. I don't believe technology will ever catch up to actually being somewhere.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
The Best Laid Plans...
First, two stories today on SLAC Today, one about an end-cap toroid magnet being installed at CERN that involved me calling Switzerland at 7:00 a.m. (damn time differences). The second is a short piece about SULI interns coming to work for the summer.
But tonight what I want to discuss is a story that ran several weeks ago. Though it turned out alright, there were a few nasty surprises along the way. In other words, the river was running low and there were a lot of portages that slowed me down (I'm still on a canoeing high...)
The story I'm referring to is a process piece from the Stanford Synchotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL, which I've blogged about briefly). Specifically the article was about arsenic poisoning and research to determine which natural substances inhibited its flow through the water table.
The process started innocently enough. A co-worker took me down the SSRL to introduce me to one of the employees who oversees the scientists using the beamlines. You see, SLAC and Stanford have nowhere near enough scientists and projects to even make a dent in the potential of the SSRL, so naturally scientists from all over the world visit to make use of its amazing abilities.
Anyways, the guy we were supposed to meet wasn't there, nor were the users of the beamline. No problem, we called the guy and figured we would set up something for the next day. Simple.
The next day rolls around, I call the guy, he informs me he can't make it that afternoon but he would inform the users I would be stopping by to talk to them about their research. So I head down there later that day and the users are clueless. Not only about my visit but about how to even begin explainging to me what it is they are doing.
Well now we have the beginnings of a problem.
Next day I call the SLAC employee again and he informs me it is that groups first time using the SSRL and there is a much more experienced group coming the next day that I should try. This is a little concerning because my editor is expecting something on her desk the day after, which is pretty quick turn around time. But he promises they are experienced and very good at talking to people like myself.
So again, I wait.
Next day rolls around, call the guy again, and again I can't reach him so I head back to the SSRL (and am beginning to be very glad it is only a few hundred yards away). Again, the two people there have no clue who I am or why I'm there. The scientists running the test samples tells me she doesn't speak good enough English to speak with me and to try the girl the next morning.
Well I'm becoming exasperated now and think she speaks English quite well and even has quite a lovely accent. But if she doesn't want to talk....
So I head back again the next morning to do an interview, learn about the science, background information, and spit out a story in one day. I feel determined to do this partly because I know I can, but also because it is only my third week or so on the job and I feel the urge to prove myself.
Again the girl down there has no idea who I am or that I was coming, but she is very nice and sits down to explain to me what she's working on. But, she informs me, I should really be talking to the girl who was there yesterday because the samples she is running are actually hers.
AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
Ten seconds later, I've calmed myself, and ask if we could please just go through it then. Fair enough she says, we do, I leave happy. I get the gist of the idea and feel I have enough to write about. So I sit down and a few hours later turn in a copy to my editor.
Whew! That was rough....
It's not over....
Editor comes back (remember a final draft needs to be done by the end of the day) and says my quotes stink, which they do. They simply provide information that doesn't need to be given in quotes and don't add any color to the story.
So what to do?
In the world of media relations the writers are often asked to draft quotes for their subjects who can then tweak it or work off of it themselves. This is usually either because they are too busy or think the writer may be able to state their main idea more articulately. So this is the route I take. I draft a short quote based on the gist of our conversation, and send the story asking her to either OK the quote, tweak it, or provide one in the same spirit.
I know some of the journalists are screaming out there (if anyone is even still reading this far down....) and I am sure my "boot camp" journalism instructor at Indiana is rolling in her bed this instant having nightmares about the words I just spoke.... But as I am learning, this is how journalism is practiced in the real world and sometimes there is simply no way around it.
But usually there is a way around it and there probably was. Either way, I didn't find it.
Anyways send it along and an hour later I get a heated reply saying no it's not alright and please don't quote me at all.
And now I'm really in trouble.
I head down to the SSRL to apologize and work things out. She informs me she worked for her school paper and just hates it when people make up quotes. Plus, it isn't even her research and doesn't feel right being attributed the credit.
This makes perfect sense, I apologize, she says its quite alright, and we sit down and edit the damn thing.
To make a longer story slightly shorter, the other scientists got back to me and edited the article but did not want to be quoted but the director of their research group kindly cooked one up for me. The result was an actually decent article that was a pain to get done but taught several good lessons.
Don't let deadlines push you to do stupid things.
Make sure people know you want to make up a quote first.
Talk to the people who are actually doing the research.
Talk conversationally first, don't be a reporter first.
Make sure they know you are in Public Relations and you're going to make them look good, and let them edit anything you write.
and Haste Makes Waste.
With these in mind, similar stories will hopefully never happen again. It's not my coworkers fault for not helping me my first time, I didn't ask for much help and he was headed on vacation. It wasn't my editor's, she needed a story to fill the next day's space. It wasn't the researcher's, one was uncomfortable talking and one it wasn't her reserach. It wasn't mine, I was just trying to do my job and do it well.....
...Of Mice and Men
But tonight what I want to discuss is a story that ran several weeks ago. Though it turned out alright, there were a few nasty surprises along the way. In other words, the river was running low and there were a lot of portages that slowed me down (I'm still on a canoeing high...)
The story I'm referring to is a process piece from the Stanford Synchotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL, which I've blogged about briefly). Specifically the article was about arsenic poisoning and research to determine which natural substances inhibited its flow through the water table.
The process started innocently enough. A co-worker took me down the SSRL to introduce me to one of the employees who oversees the scientists using the beamlines. You see, SLAC and Stanford have nowhere near enough scientists and projects to even make a dent in the potential of the SSRL, so naturally scientists from all over the world visit to make use of its amazing abilities.
Anyways, the guy we were supposed to meet wasn't there, nor were the users of the beamline. No problem, we called the guy and figured we would set up something for the next day. Simple.
The next day rolls around, I call the guy, he informs me he can't make it that afternoon but he would inform the users I would be stopping by to talk to them about their research. So I head down there later that day and the users are clueless. Not only about my visit but about how to even begin explainging to me what it is they are doing.
Well now we have the beginnings of a problem.
Next day I call the SLAC employee again and he informs me it is that groups first time using the SSRL and there is a much more experienced group coming the next day that I should try. This is a little concerning because my editor is expecting something on her desk the day after, which is pretty quick turn around time. But he promises they are experienced and very good at talking to people like myself.
So again, I wait.
Next day rolls around, call the guy again, and again I can't reach him so I head back to the SSRL (and am beginning to be very glad it is only a few hundred yards away). Again, the two people there have no clue who I am or why I'm there. The scientists running the test samples tells me she doesn't speak good enough English to speak with me and to try the girl the next morning.
Well I'm becoming exasperated now and think she speaks English quite well and even has quite a lovely accent. But if she doesn't want to talk....
So I head back again the next morning to do an interview, learn about the science, background information, and spit out a story in one day. I feel determined to do this partly because I know I can, but also because it is only my third week or so on the job and I feel the urge to prove myself.
Again the girl down there has no idea who I am or that I was coming, but she is very nice and sits down to explain to me what she's working on. But, she informs me, I should really be talking to the girl who was there yesterday because the samples she is running are actually hers.
AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!
Ten seconds later, I've calmed myself, and ask if we could please just go through it then. Fair enough she says, we do, I leave happy. I get the gist of the idea and feel I have enough to write about. So I sit down and a few hours later turn in a copy to my editor.
Whew! That was rough....
It's not over....
Editor comes back (remember a final draft needs to be done by the end of the day) and says my quotes stink, which they do. They simply provide information that doesn't need to be given in quotes and don't add any color to the story.
So what to do?
In the world of media relations the writers are often asked to draft quotes for their subjects who can then tweak it or work off of it themselves. This is usually either because they are too busy or think the writer may be able to state their main idea more articulately. So this is the route I take. I draft a short quote based on the gist of our conversation, and send the story asking her to either OK the quote, tweak it, or provide one in the same spirit.
I know some of the journalists are screaming out there (if anyone is even still reading this far down....) and I am sure my "boot camp" journalism instructor at Indiana is rolling in her bed this instant having nightmares about the words I just spoke.... But as I am learning, this is how journalism is practiced in the real world and sometimes there is simply no way around it.
But usually there is a way around it and there probably was. Either way, I didn't find it.
Anyways send it along and an hour later I get a heated reply saying no it's not alright and please don't quote me at all.
And now I'm really in trouble.
I head down to the SSRL to apologize and work things out. She informs me she worked for her school paper and just hates it when people make up quotes. Plus, it isn't even her research and doesn't feel right being attributed the credit.
This makes perfect sense, I apologize, she says its quite alright, and we sit down and edit the damn thing.
To make a longer story slightly shorter, the other scientists got back to me and edited the article but did not want to be quoted but the director of their research group kindly cooked one up for me. The result was an actually decent article that was a pain to get done but taught several good lessons.
Don't let deadlines push you to do stupid things.
Make sure people know you want to make up a quote first.
Talk to the people who are actually doing the research.
Talk conversationally first, don't be a reporter first.
Make sure they know you are in Public Relations and you're going to make them look good, and let them edit anything you write.
and Haste Makes Waste.
With these in mind, similar stories will hopefully never happen again. It's not my coworkers fault for not helping me my first time, I didn't ask for much help and he was headed on vacation. It wasn't my editor's, she needed a story to fill the next day's space. It wasn't the researcher's, one was uncomfortable talking and one it wasn't her reserach. It wasn't mine, I was just trying to do my job and do it well.....
...Of Mice and Men
Monday, June 25, 2007
End Station A
Well folks, I'm back after a highly successful excursion on the Grand River, or what is left of it after a long period of time with small amounts of rain...
Today, aside from catching up on many stories, edits, and other miscellanious chores that pop up after being gone for two days (and battling a stomach bug of some sort), I visited End Station A.
I could just tell you that End Station A is home of the original experiments at SLAC that used electrons accelerated by the linear accelerator. I could stop with a description of the cavernous concrete bunker with extravagant machines that look like they're from the future. I could... but this is an opportunity to teach you so much more...
End Station A was home to the experiments that led to the discovery of quarks, one of the two fundamental building blocks of matter.
Now wait a minute, you may say, I remember being taught in school that the fundamental building blocks of matter were protons, neutrons and electrons. I remember this as well, but do not recall learning anything at all about quarks. But it turns out that protons and neutrons are both made of three combined quarks--protons of 2 "up" quarks and 1 "down quark, and neutrons of 2 "down" quarks and 1 "up" quark.
To make matters more confusing, quarks were discovered at SLAC in 1968. Now how quarks did not manage to become large topics of discussion in my high school physics book 30 years later is beyond me...
Now it turns out there are 6 "flavors" of quarks, including anti-quarks, which make up mesons and a lot of other stuff that get really confusing really fast. But if this piques your interest, here is a link to an excellent site that does a spectacular (though very long) job of explaining just about everything there is to know about particle physics.... Check it out
But beyond all of this physics talk, I thought it was very interesting to walk through hallowed halls of physics and see where the real, Nobel-prize winning work took place. Especially since through time and technology advances, the facility is now simply a test station.
Today, aside from catching up on many stories, edits, and other miscellanious chores that pop up after being gone for two days (and battling a stomach bug of some sort), I visited End Station A.
I could just tell you that End Station A is home of the original experiments at SLAC that used electrons accelerated by the linear accelerator. I could stop with a description of the cavernous concrete bunker with extravagant machines that look like they're from the future. I could... but this is an opportunity to teach you so much more...
End Station A was home to the experiments that led to the discovery of quarks, one of the two fundamental building blocks of matter.
Now wait a minute, you may say, I remember being taught in school that the fundamental building blocks of matter were protons, neutrons and electrons. I remember this as well, but do not recall learning anything at all about quarks. But it turns out that protons and neutrons are both made of three combined quarks--protons of 2 "up" quarks and 1 "down quark, and neutrons of 2 "down" quarks and 1 "up" quark.
To make matters more confusing, quarks were discovered at SLAC in 1968. Now how quarks did not manage to become large topics of discussion in my high school physics book 30 years later is beyond me...
Now it turns out there are 6 "flavors" of quarks, including anti-quarks, which make up mesons and a lot of other stuff that get really confusing really fast. But if this piques your interest, here is a link to an excellent site that does a spectacular (though very long) job of explaining just about everything there is to know about particle physics.... Check it out
But beyond all of this physics talk, I thought it was very interesting to walk through hallowed halls of physics and see where the real, Nobel-prize winning work took place. Especially since through time and technology advances, the facility is now simply a test station.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
A Few Random Thoughts
Since yesterday was extremely sciencey and most likely grossly inaccurate, today's post will be nothing more than a stream of random thoughts. Ready? Here we go...
Today our office was moved to trailers. One is a double-wide.
I got to work from home for the first half of today since our computers and phone lines were down in the morning.
I'm flying home at midnight tonight to go camping with my Dad and friends in what is always my favorite weekend of the year.
The director of communications Neil (from Scotland, who worked at CERN in Geneva for many years) believes moving to a trailer is a uniquely American experience and is completely engrossed in the concept. Either that or it is his way of coping...
I need to pay attention to my nut graphs more when I write.
Douglas Adams is a genius author. I'm listening to the Salmon of Doubt during my commutes, and I highly recommend you pick up a copy.
The LCLS really will be an amazing machine. I hope I conveyed that yesterday in a fairly decent manner and didn't screw it up or bore you too much.
I'm really looking foreward to the final Harry Potter book.
Thanks in part to the move, I am now sharing an office with Neil, the head of the communications department here. I am excited about this. Not only because he happens to be one of the nicest and most interesting people I've ever met, but because I'll learn a ton by seeing what his job entails on a daily basis. But I may not be able to surf the internet as much......
Taking days off to visit friends and family sure is nice, but its a ton of work. I've been busting my butt to get things done in preparation of my leaving. I've got about five stories going through editing processes, including my short piece for Symmetry magazine. I hope it all goes smoothly...
As I will be in the Ohio wilderness until Sunday night, this is my last posting of the week.
Y'all come back now ya hear?
Today our office was moved to trailers. One is a double-wide.
I got to work from home for the first half of today since our computers and phone lines were down in the morning.
I'm flying home at midnight tonight to go camping with my Dad and friends in what is always my favorite weekend of the year.
The director of communications Neil (from Scotland, who worked at CERN in Geneva for many years) believes moving to a trailer is a uniquely American experience and is completely engrossed in the concept. Either that or it is his way of coping...
I need to pay attention to my nut graphs more when I write.
Douglas Adams is a genius author. I'm listening to the Salmon of Doubt during my commutes, and I highly recommend you pick up a copy.
The LCLS really will be an amazing machine. I hope I conveyed that yesterday in a fairly decent manner and didn't screw it up or bore you too much.
I'm really looking foreward to the final Harry Potter book.
Thanks in part to the move, I am now sharing an office with Neil, the head of the communications department here. I am excited about this. Not only because he happens to be one of the nicest and most interesting people I've ever met, but because I'll learn a ton by seeing what his job entails on a daily basis. But I may not be able to surf the internet as much......
Taking days off to visit friends and family sure is nice, but its a ton of work. I've been busting my butt to get things done in preparation of my leaving. I've got about five stories going through editing processes, including my short piece for Symmetry magazine. I hope it all goes smoothly...
As I will be in the Ohio wilderness until Sunday night, this is my last posting of the week.
Y'all come back now ya hear?
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
The Linac Coherent Light Source
*****WARNING*******WARNING*******WARNING
(Insert flashing red lights and buzzing alarm sounds)
The post you are about to read is very, very scientific, though I shall do my best to make it readable. This would be much easier if I understood the subject matter--the LCLS--myself. But a good friend who has a Chemical Engineering background has requested more light be shed on the visualization of chemical reactions as they occur mentioned a few days ago. So take a deep breath my friends, cry havoc! and let slip the dogs of war....
Let's start with the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL). It turns out that when electrons, having been accelerated to nearly the speed of light, are forced to change directions they emit a certain type of x-ray called, you guessed it, synchrotron radiation. Magnets installed in the ring that keeps the electrons flowing in a circle, called "wigglers," force the electrons to change directions, causing them to emit this radiation. The radiation is then harnessed and shot down a beam line. Scientists place samples in front of the x-rays. Some of the x-rays will pass right through the sample, but some will bounce of atoms, protons, molecules, and the like causing a diffraction pattern which is detected and analyzed into a picture by a computer.
If this confuses you, you're not alone. The computer spits out a pattern that looks like a bulls-eye target which people who are smarter than me can somehow read.
Technology... go figure.
Now the SSRL is good, but we can do better. Because of the longish wavelengths of the x-rays, there is a limit to how small of objects this technique can work with. Also, the x-rays pretty much always (someone correct me if I'm wrong) destroy the sample before many pictures can be taken.
Enter the LCLS.
The new technology takes the same radiation made by the same electrons but focuses them into a *Dr. Evil quote marks* "laser beam." The x-rays' wavelengths are synchronized together in amazingly short bursts of amazingly bright light.
Pauses....
Crowd responds--"How fast is it? How bright is it?"
I thought you'd never ask.
Brighter than 100 million light bulbs and faster than it takes light to travel the thickness of a sheet of paper. That's femtoseconds baby, a quadrillienth of one tick of the clock. Light reaches the moon from Earth in 1.3 seconds.
Think about that for a second...
Let that settle in...
Wow.
OK, moving on...
One problem with x-ray imagery is that it often destroys the test material. The LCLS is so fast, it can take enough pictures to make a flip-book of a molecule disintegrating before our very eyes before it has time to be obliterated.
And because it is so fast, it can take pictures of chemical reactions as they are occurring. Right now we have pictures of the before and after, but for the first time we will be able to peer into the actual process.
Imagine the possibilities.
Well, if you followed that at all, your mind is now totally blown. And if I completely lost you, your mind is totally blown.
Either way, for more mind-numbing numbers, and more detailed information that is probably clearer than this post I'm making at 11:00 pm, check out this brochure. It's old, but good. (I'm on the committee to make a new one.) Also, the website for the LCLS is here, and an article from Symmetry is here.
Good night, and good luck...
(Insert flashing red lights and buzzing alarm sounds)
The post you are about to read is very, very scientific, though I shall do my best to make it readable. This would be much easier if I understood the subject matter--the LCLS--myself. But a good friend who has a Chemical Engineering background has requested more light be shed on the visualization of chemical reactions as they occur mentioned a few days ago. So take a deep breath my friends, cry havoc! and let slip the dogs of war....
Let's start with the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL). It turns out that when electrons, having been accelerated to nearly the speed of light, are forced to change directions they emit a certain type of x-ray called, you guessed it, synchrotron radiation. Magnets installed in the ring that keeps the electrons flowing in a circle, called "wigglers," force the electrons to change directions, causing them to emit this radiation. The radiation is then harnessed and shot down a beam line. Scientists place samples in front of the x-rays. Some of the x-rays will pass right through the sample, but some will bounce of atoms, protons, molecules, and the like causing a diffraction pattern which is detected and analyzed into a picture by a computer.
If this confuses you, you're not alone. The computer spits out a pattern that looks like a bulls-eye target which people who are smarter than me can somehow read.
Technology... go figure.
Now the SSRL is good, but we can do better. Because of the longish wavelengths of the x-rays, there is a limit to how small of objects this technique can work with. Also, the x-rays pretty much always (someone correct me if I'm wrong) destroy the sample before many pictures can be taken.
Enter the LCLS.
The new technology takes the same radiation made by the same electrons but focuses them into a *Dr. Evil quote marks* "laser beam." The x-rays' wavelengths are synchronized together in amazingly short bursts of amazingly bright light.
Pauses....
Crowd responds--"How fast is it? How bright is it?"
I thought you'd never ask.
Brighter than 100 million light bulbs and faster than it takes light to travel the thickness of a sheet of paper. That's femtoseconds baby, a quadrillienth of one tick of the clock. Light reaches the moon from Earth in 1.3 seconds.
Think about that for a second...
Let that settle in...
Wow.
OK, moving on...
One problem with x-ray imagery is that it often destroys the test material. The LCLS is so fast, it can take enough pictures to make a flip-book of a molecule disintegrating before our very eyes before it has time to be obliterated.
And because it is so fast, it can take pictures of chemical reactions as they are occurring. Right now we have pictures of the before and after, but for the first time we will be able to peer into the actual process.
Imagine the possibilities.
Well, if you followed that at all, your mind is now totally blown. And if I completely lost you, your mind is totally blown.
Either way, for more mind-numbing numbers, and more detailed information that is probably clearer than this post I'm making at 11:00 pm, check out this brochure. It's old, but good. (I'm on the committee to make a new one.) Also, the website for the LCLS is here, and an article from Symmetry is here.
Good night, and good luck...
Monday, June 18, 2007
Symmetry Magazine
Welcome back from the weekend. I had a decent trip across the Golden Gate Bridge on Saturday, see picture... Though it was cold, cloudy, and EXTREMELY windy, I had a good time and am glad I did it.Anyways, today's entry is about Symmetry magazine. Symmetry is an absolutely gorgeous publication put out through a joint effort between SLAC and Fermilab. It's goal is to highlight research at accelerator labs across the world by bringing particle physics to the common person. The language is simple and easy to understand, and the layouts and images are simply beautiful.
I talk about it today because the 25th edition is coming out soon. The magazine runs 10 issues a year, so as you can see, it is a relatively new endeavor. I also bring it up because I am working a couple of pieces for the magazine. I'm really excited about this because I adore the magazine and it will be an amazing clip to add to my portfolio.
My assignment is to research and write about poster art for public lectures and events at accelerator labs. This may not sound interesting, but if you had ever seen the posters that SLAC creates to publicize their events, you would be looking forward to it as well. There's a whole slew of these posters hanging in the director's office. My favorite is for a public lecture entitled "Attack on Science" and features a cheesy old drawing of Godzilla circa 1960's.
The problem? The two editors here at SLAC will be in extended vacations throughout July, which means I have about two weeks to get this assignment done. A full length feature that I want to be absolutely perfect in addition to my regular SLAC Today writing duties.... yikes. Wish me luck all.
P.S. To help me get through any times of anxiety, I will be turning towards Sam Adams Summer Ale. A delightfully light and spicy wheat ale that refreshes in the summer heat. I highly recommend you pick up a 6-pack and give it a shot.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Juneteenth Celebration
Two articles up on SLAC Today, one a sort of profile about a team of riggers at SLAC who wear the same colored helmets in a sort of brotherhood statement and the second about SLAC's 18th Annual Juneteenth Celebration.
Here is where I think being a writer is fun, no matter what it is you're writing about. I had never heard of Juneteenth before, but apparently it is a holiday that is expanding to more and more places. It recognizes the general time when Southern slaves first learned of their freedom. Obviously southerners weren't too keen on letting their free labor know they were now free in a different sense.
I also got to meet the great-great-great-great-great grandson of one of the most famous abolitionists of all-time, John Brown. (Though since he had 20 kids, there are probably a fair amount of his lineage out there. Must be one hell of a family reunion.) So through the article I also brushed up on some history. I had forgotten what John Brown and other abolitionists had done, something that is always important to remember.
Anyways, the celebration included a lunch that cost $12, a bit steep if you ask me, but it went to a good cause and the food was homemade. The barbecue chicken was disappointing, but the ribs, cajun coleslaw, potato salad, peach cobbler, brownies, mac and cheese, and my personal favorite, corn bread and baked beans, were all excellent. Needless to say I sat in my chair the rest of the day feeling slightly stuffed and barely felt hungry enough for dinner at 8:30.
I love barbecues.
Well I'm out for the weekend, planning on biking over the Golden Gate Bridge.
P.S. Sam Adams Summer Ale is now on sale. There is truly nothing more refreshing on a hot summer's afternoon, especially now that it's getting into the 90's here.
Here is where I think being a writer is fun, no matter what it is you're writing about. I had never heard of Juneteenth before, but apparently it is a holiday that is expanding to more and more places. It recognizes the general time when Southern slaves first learned of their freedom. Obviously southerners weren't too keen on letting their free labor know they were now free in a different sense.
I also got to meet the great-great-great-great-great grandson of one of the most famous abolitionists of all-time, John Brown. (Though since he had 20 kids, there are probably a fair amount of his lineage out there. Must be one hell of a family reunion.) So through the article I also brushed up on some history. I had forgotten what John Brown and other abolitionists had done, something that is always important to remember.
Anyways, the celebration included a lunch that cost $12, a bit steep if you ask me, but it went to a good cause and the food was homemade. The barbecue chicken was disappointing, but the ribs, cajun coleslaw, potato salad, peach cobbler, brownies, mac and cheese, and my personal favorite, corn bread and baked beans, were all excellent. Needless to say I sat in my chair the rest of the day feeling slightly stuffed and barely felt hungry enough for dinner at 8:30.
I love barbecues.
Well I'm out for the weekend, planning on biking over the Golden Gate Bridge.
P.S. Sam Adams Summer Ale is now on sale. There is truly nothing more refreshing on a hot summer's afternoon, especially now that it's getting into the 90's here.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Politics and Writing
I think I'm going to start a trend where the first thing I post every time will be stories that are published online....
That being said, I just noticed today that I have three pieces published in Indiana University's Homepages, an internal publication that highlights people, events, and research throughout the university. The first two pieces deal with the Large Hadron Collider and provide great detail and background into what it is they're doing with that multi-billion dollar machine. One is on the detector that IU helped build and the other is on the computing systems required to process all of the data. The third story relates to Michael Crichton's newest novel "Next" and talks about contemporary genetic technologies and politics.
Beware, all three pieces, especially the first one, are pretty long. You might want to grab a bowl of popcorn first.
Moving on, yesterday I mentioned having written a story that had been affected by politics. While true, this may have been a bit of an overstatement.
Here's the scoop. An earlier article about a project at a particle physics lab in Japan called KEK ran several weeks ago. It failed to mention a group from Fermilab, currently the most powerful operational particle accelerator in the world and is based outside of Chicago, that installed the hardware as part of the project. One or two people felt a little insulted that the group didn't get any props.
Now, the article basically had nothing to do with the hardware that the Fermilab group installed, so the oversight was understandable. But, just to be safe, my follow up article that dealt solely on the remote participation set-up that was used included a shout-out to the Fermilab group anyways, just to make sure nobody is rocking the proverbial boat.
This is a major aspect of writing for an institution as opposed to a media outlet. You have to make sure everyone is happy and nothing negative is being said about your work place. You are to always shed events in the best light possible, and sources always screen articles before publication. Much, much different from reporting where, some may argue, it is part of the job description to ruffle some feathers in a good story.
This doesn't bother me in the least though. Maybe its because all of my experience is in public affairs writing and I've never done any hard journalism. But I enjoy working in an environment of cutting edge science where the researchers are always happy to talk to you and teach you about what they're working on. And it's a pleasure to be able to bring their blood, sweat, and tears to light in a well-written, accurate story.
On a side note, the remote participation story is actually pretty cool. Using internet set-ups and readily available software, research teams could collaborate in real-time across the Pacific Ocean to get good science accomplished. For more detail, the story is here, if you didn't read it yesterday.
That being said, I just noticed today that I have three pieces published in Indiana University's Homepages, an internal publication that highlights people, events, and research throughout the university. The first two pieces deal with the Large Hadron Collider and provide great detail and background into what it is they're doing with that multi-billion dollar machine. One is on the detector that IU helped build and the other is on the computing systems required to process all of the data. The third story relates to Michael Crichton's newest novel "Next" and talks about contemporary genetic technologies and politics.
Beware, all three pieces, especially the first one, are pretty long. You might want to grab a bowl of popcorn first.
Moving on, yesterday I mentioned having written a story that had been affected by politics. While true, this may have been a bit of an overstatement.
Here's the scoop. An earlier article about a project at a particle physics lab in Japan called KEK ran several weeks ago. It failed to mention a group from Fermilab, currently the most powerful operational particle accelerator in the world and is based outside of Chicago, that installed the hardware as part of the project. One or two people felt a little insulted that the group didn't get any props.
Now, the article basically had nothing to do with the hardware that the Fermilab group installed, so the oversight was understandable. But, just to be safe, my follow up article that dealt solely on the remote participation set-up that was used included a shout-out to the Fermilab group anyways, just to make sure nobody is rocking the proverbial boat.
This is a major aspect of writing for an institution as opposed to a media outlet. You have to make sure everyone is happy and nothing negative is being said about your work place. You are to always shed events in the best light possible, and sources always screen articles before publication. Much, much different from reporting where, some may argue, it is part of the job description to ruffle some feathers in a good story.
This doesn't bother me in the least though. Maybe its because all of my experience is in public affairs writing and I've never done any hard journalism. But I enjoy working in an environment of cutting edge science where the researchers are always happy to talk to you and teach you about what they're working on. And it's a pleasure to be able to bring their blood, sweat, and tears to light in a well-written, accurate story.
On a side note, the remote participation story is actually pretty cool. Using internet set-ups and readily available software, research teams could collaborate in real-time across the Pacific Ocean to get good science accomplished. For more detail, the story is here, if you didn't read it yesterday.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
The Joy of Profiles
Yesterday's post was a bit heavy on the science side, so I'm going lighter today.
Let me begin today's rant by pointing out I have two stories published in today's edition of SLAC Today. The first is about remote participation, which was a good exercise in having to write carefully for political reasons. The second is a profile about a SLAC researcher who is a nationally renowned player of a Russian quiz game called What? Where? When? This brings me today's point.
I love profiles.
I don't know why. It could be that I think I'm good at them. It could be getting to see a different side of scientists you don't usually glimpse. You get to talk to people about their passion, which may be different than their work. Maybe that's why I find the interviews are much smoother and the stories are much easier to write.
In any case, today I spoke to a SLAC employee who has been volunteering his time to teach music classes for kindergartners at his son's elementary school through Music for Minors. Three or four times a week he is there making sure the children are getting a well-rounded education. He and a couple of colleagues have even trained four new volunteers in the past year to teach the other grades. Talk about an amazing guy.
And, by the way, I learned that California gives the least amount of money to its schools for music and art education out of any state. I guess the government is too busy spending it on fixing global warming or something. Not to say that isn't important and all, but I think it's sad that children today are not getting music or art classes.
On an unrelated note, I found through my journalism studies at Indiana that I enjoy taking pictures. So I am going to periodically include some of my shots in my blog for your enjoyment.
On a completely unrelated note, on my bike ride home from work today I passed the fountain in the middle of Stanford's campus shown above (photo taken by myself) only to find a few dozen students playing in it in bathing suits (it was the first truly hot day of the summer here). What's more it appeared that there was a couple of empty cases of Coors Light. Now I don't know if there really was any drinking of beer going on during the festivities, but if there was, my opinion of Stanford's students has just gone up a notch. Maybe some of them do actually know how to have some fun.
My hat's off to you.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
So what is SLAC anyways????
Good question, my friend, and unfortunately for all of us, the answer is not short. In fact, it is going to take me the entire summer to tackle this beast of a question, but I'll start now.
A particle accelerator takes teeny-tiny bits of matter such as protons, electrons, and positrons and speeds them up to nearly the speed of light. Which particles it accelerates, how it accelerates them, how fast it gets them going, and what it does with them once they're up to speed is what makes accelerators different.
Stanford created the first electron accelerator 60 years ago and has been a leader in particle physics ever since. Soon after, SLAC built it's 2-mile-long linear accelerator, which is just what it sounds like, a machine that accelerates electrons and positrons in a straight line. In the past, these particles were smashed together in a small ring at the end of the line creating enormous amounts of energy. And because, as Einstein so correctly pointed out, E=MC^2, the energy created mass.
Some mass that is created is so unstable it almost immediately decays into other types of particles. Scientists track these particles, recreate the event, and look for new types of particles to gain a better understanding of life, the universe, and everything (plagiarized from Douglas Adams).
At least that's what SLAC used to do.
The bigger and more powerful the accelerator, the more types of particles it can create. There is an enormous accelerator being built at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland called the Large Hadron Collider that will collide particles at energies never before seen. The LHC is different in that it accelerates protons instead of electrons and positrons like SLAC, which allow for much greater energies in the collisions.
Research began at SLAC by shooting electron beams into hydrogen targets in an attempt to explore the inner workings of protons. The result was the discovery of quarks and a Nobel prize. Afterwards, collisions were reconstructed in a hunt for new particles, much like what the LHC will do. Since then, the collisions have been tuned to create a certain type of particle called the B-Meson, which is now being extensively researched. Because SLAC has become a mecca of research and cutting-edge technology, it is also exploring particle physics in many other different, but equally exciting, ways.
SLAC currently participates in many Department of Energy projects. Aside from investigating B-Mesons, the electron beam is also used in the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL), which uses x-rays created from the accelerated electrons to map the molecular structure of different compounds. SLAC is also building a camera for the most comprehensive and ambitious telescope ever conceived. And it is building new beam lines to create even more powerful x-ray bursts that will be able to map chemical reactions as they are occurring.
I don't care who you are, that's pretty neat.
Believe it or not, these descriptions are simplistic, and only scratch the surface of what is being done at SLAC.
And this entry has gotten long enough.
So stick with me over the next couple of months and I'll try to cover more of what's happening at SLAC today and tomorrow. But if you just can't wait that long, check out their website by clicking here.
A particle accelerator takes teeny-tiny bits of matter such as protons, electrons, and positrons and speeds them up to nearly the speed of light. Which particles it accelerates, how it accelerates them, how fast it gets them going, and what it does with them once they're up to speed is what makes accelerators different.
Stanford created the first electron accelerator 60 years ago and has been a leader in particle physics ever since. Soon after, SLAC built it's 2-mile-long linear accelerator, which is just what it sounds like, a machine that accelerates electrons and positrons in a straight line. In the past, these particles were smashed together in a small ring at the end of the line creating enormous amounts of energy. And because, as Einstein so correctly pointed out, E=MC^2, the energy created mass.
Some mass that is created is so unstable it almost immediately decays into other types of particles. Scientists track these particles, recreate the event, and look for new types of particles to gain a better understanding of life, the universe, and everything (plagiarized from Douglas Adams).
At least that's what SLAC used to do.
The bigger and more powerful the accelerator, the more types of particles it can create. There is an enormous accelerator being built at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland called the Large Hadron Collider that will collide particles at energies never before seen. The LHC is different in that it accelerates protons instead of electrons and positrons like SLAC, which allow for much greater energies in the collisions.
Research began at SLAC by shooting electron beams into hydrogen targets in an attempt to explore the inner workings of protons. The result was the discovery of quarks and a Nobel prize. Afterwards, collisions were reconstructed in a hunt for new particles, much like what the LHC will do. Since then, the collisions have been tuned to create a certain type of particle called the B-Meson, which is now being extensively researched. Because SLAC has become a mecca of research and cutting-edge technology, it is also exploring particle physics in many other different, but equally exciting, ways.
SLAC currently participates in many Department of Energy projects. Aside from investigating B-Mesons, the electron beam is also used in the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL), which uses x-rays created from the accelerated electrons to map the molecular structure of different compounds. SLAC is also building a camera for the most comprehensive and ambitious telescope ever conceived. And it is building new beam lines to create even more powerful x-ray bursts that will be able to map chemical reactions as they are occurring.
I don't care who you are, that's pretty neat.
Believe it or not, these descriptions are simplistic, and only scratch the surface of what is being done at SLAC.
And this entry has gotten long enough.
So stick with me over the next couple of months and I'll try to cover more of what's happening at SLAC today and tomorrow. But if you just can't wait that long, check out their website by clicking here.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Welcome to the Humble Home of My Blog
Hello everyone (or probably only Lesa Hatley-Major for now) and welcome to my blog!
First, let me introduce myself. My name is Ken Kingery, I'm a graduate student (soon to be graduating with credit from this blog... hopefully) at Indiana University in the school of Journalism. Before graduate school I earned a degree in Aerospace Engineering from THE Ohio State University.
That's right folks, I'm a rocket scientist.
A rocket scientist that loves to write. Enter my career ambition to become a full-time science writer. I've worked in the media relations office for Indiana University and also learned a few things from Earle Holland in the Office of Research Communications at Ohio State while getting a minor in professional writing.
Which brings us to the meat of the project, my summer internship at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). I am interning as the "article writing machine" as named by the Head of Communications Neil Calder.
Writing machine is my name, safety tips, personal profiles, anniversary celebrations, events, ice cream socials, and (most importantly) science research, is my game.
I've been on the job for a month now and have learned a ton already. I obviously can't put it all down right now or I'll bore you all (or most probably just Lesa Hatley-Major, the professor kind enough to oversee this project who has to read it) to death. Therefore, on slower days I will recount some lessons learned or science tidbits from the past four weeks.
Because that is what this blog is about. It's about what I am learning at SLAC professionally, journalistically, and scientifically. It's a forum for SLAC scientists, writers, and others to leave feedback on my stories and suggestions for future articles. It's a foray into the future of journalism, and my friends, the future has arrived.
So sit back, relax, have a beer (I recommend a Guinness), and visit my blog now and then. Maybe we'll both learn something together.
P.S. All my stories, past and present, can be found at http://today.slac.stanford.edu.
First, let me introduce myself. My name is Ken Kingery, I'm a graduate student (soon to be graduating with credit from this blog... hopefully) at Indiana University in the school of Journalism. Before graduate school I earned a degree in Aerospace Engineering from THE Ohio State University.
That's right folks, I'm a rocket scientist.
A rocket scientist that loves to write. Enter my career ambition to become a full-time science writer. I've worked in the media relations office for Indiana University and also learned a few things from Earle Holland in the Office of Research Communications at Ohio State while getting a minor in professional writing.
Which brings us to the meat of the project, my summer internship at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). I am interning as the "article writing machine" as named by the Head of Communications Neil Calder.
Writing machine is my name, safety tips, personal profiles, anniversary celebrations, events, ice cream socials, and (most importantly) science research, is my game.
I've been on the job for a month now and have learned a ton already. I obviously can't put it all down right now or I'll bore you all (or most probably just Lesa Hatley-Major, the professor kind enough to oversee this project who has to read it) to death. Therefore, on slower days I will recount some lessons learned or science tidbits from the past four weeks.
Because that is what this blog is about. It's about what I am learning at SLAC professionally, journalistically, and scientifically. It's a forum for SLAC scientists, writers, and others to leave feedback on my stories and suggestions for future articles. It's a foray into the future of journalism, and my friends, the future has arrived.
So sit back, relax, have a beer (I recommend a Guinness), and visit my blog now and then. Maybe we'll both learn something together.
P.S. All my stories, past and present, can be found at http://today.slac.stanford.edu.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)