Blog Directory - In order of appearance - below. Click on your selection to go directly to it. Also Click on any other link and that will be opened automatically.

Library - Dec 2011, Frozen Planet Final episdoe, 2/11/11 New £50 note and Bouton & Watt, 1/11/11 Inset Training, 27/10/11. My Twitter problems, 26/10/11. Basquing in the glow of a chance meeting. 27/10/11 Book Fairs and the ocal Library, 7/10/11. My new boo, Ball of Confusion Published. 29/9/11. Son Nick and Lara's fabulous Wedding. 21/6/11 Chemistry Curriculum alarm, 22/2/11 Blog following Newspapaer activity - Special Announcement9/2/11 - Zoe's 40th - Your the Top, - 19th Nov, Public Service Review, Science and Technology Review, Johnny's piece - Hello Again 2/8/10 - Getting to know JB, Science Mag interview - The Three Sciences - Why so unclear about Nuclear - Being Sat Nav Savvy - The Advent of Christmas Lectures - Following Science Religiously - 90 Words, Nothing is perfect - "If only."

Recent press - 21st December, 09 - Express Article http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/147328/It-s-not-the-end-of-the-World-

NB. Johnny's monthly Blogs for Triple Sience and the Learning and Skills Council, can all be found at :

http://community.triplescience.org.uk/JohnnyBallsBlog/default.aspx

December 2011. After the final episode of Frozen Planet, I had to write to a group of people who were lambasting the BBC and Sir David Attenborough for not coming clean about filming Polar Bear Cubs in a Zoo and not in the wild, as the programme sort of indicated. In deference to the animals, it would have been far too intrusive to film a wild Polar Bear in hybernation and the Zoo was the perfect solution. Neither did the BBC hide the fact, as they announced how it was done on their website prior to the transmission.

However I was dismayed at the comments on receding ice in the Weddel Sea area. It is as plain as a pike staff that the currents in the South Atlantic move anticlockwise and sweep warm equatorial air down past Eastern South America, past the Falkland Islands and hit the Weddel Sea area, as they have done for millenia. This is why Scott and Shackleton both chose this sight in mid summer, for their attack on the South Pole - those Atlantic currents make it the best possible jumping off point when heading for the Pole. The notch in the Antarctic around the Weddel Sea is natural and not an indication of climate "change!"

However, there is clear evidence that the majority of the Antarctic is fairing better ice-wise in recent times. The programme talked of the ice being 3 miles thick. Well it is close to that on Greenland? However the script added that the ice at the floating North Pole is only 3 metres thick? This is nothing new either, as submarines have been punching their way through the ice precisely at the North Pole for around 50 years, as the summer ice thickness always ceases to be a barrier, which was the basis for the film Ice Station Zebra.

So I was saddened by the emphasis on global warming, explained with carefully selected and biased examples. Perhaps this unbalanced reporting was the reason the show was not aired in the USA, whereas the rest of this quite wonderful series was?

2nd November 2011. The new £50 notes comes out today. BBC TV said the back featured Boulton and Watt who many people would not know? Well though Watt improved the Steam Engine which made it a practical machine, it was Boulton who made it all possible He took Watt from failure in Glasgow to Birmingham. When they had improved the steam engine, no one would buy them, so Boulton "Gave them away" for a contractual deal which included their own live in Engineer and every new idea to be fitted as soon as they were discovered, and all for 50% of the increased profits from using the Engine in the first year and 10% of increased profits for the subsequent 10 years. 500 steam Engines later, thanks to Boulton's wheeze, they were millionaires and more importantly, the Industrial Revolution had started in Great Britain. The fact that this is never mentioned in the curriculum, is a sad reflection on what is taught rather than what ought to be taught in our modern curriclum. JB

1st November 2011. Had an Inset Maths Training Day with Exeter and district Primary Schools. Loved the event and hope the teachers did too. These are among the most enjoyable of things I do, these days.

27th October. Why does twitter get me all a flutter? I have never seen the need to Twitter, but I am assured that I am losing out. So I try to enroll, to find that @the johnnyball has been suggested on the cover of my new Book, as a contact for my Tweets. But that is wrong as that site was set up 30 months ago by a North East publicity agency for a single day event in teh North East.

@johnnyball is not available and I have had to resort to" @johnnyballco"? So I will give it a few days, offering tweets as tweets come to me

JOHNNY BALL AT BETT 2012 - FOR NELSON THORNES.

FUNTASTIC MATHS.

5000 puzzle. It is over 100 years old, but still fools around 97% of people seeing it for the first time. It is natural to make mistakes in maths, and by this method, we learn. Egyptians were clever enough to build the pyramids, but 1000 years later, they couldn’t multiply - mathematically, that is.

Well they could do their 2 x table. Pathetic. But they managed. Demo the Egyptian system and link it to Binary Numbers. So this ancient system is now the power behind all our communications and computing technology.

To my mind the object of any Maths tutoring service is not just to push forward the learning front and ability of the student, but to demonstrate that learning and achieving is fun and that at all times, the learning experience is broadening their outlook on Maths and its importance.

A good example of what learning is all about, can be gleaned from observing this well known drawing - The Vitruvian Man. This has a lot to say about learning. Who created it? Leonardo Da Vinci - there is his backwards writing. Why did he write backwards - to be different - to be an individual - and probably to annoy his teachers.

But where did he get the idea from? He knicked it - and that is precisely what learning and education is all about. We show kids how to steal ideas from those who have gone before. Everything we teach has been taught before and learnt before and passed on before. So what can be so difficult about learning?

The idea was stolen by Da Vinci from Vitruvius who lived 1500 years before and was a Roman architect and engineer. It shows us that we have two things - our minds and our bodies. In this instance, the body is an ideal measuring tool. Stature = equals height = reach.
Fathoms and rope. Yards and Cubits. Double Paces helped map out the Roman Empire and every distance to Rome in miles or mille or thousand double paces.

What point is half way up your body? Your navel - wrong - it is the Pubic bone. The navel in the picture is the centre of the circle at 5 spans radius and the man is 8 spans tall and can reach another two making ten spans.

Height in metric? In feet and inches? Measurement is a natural ability, if we teach it naturally.

Eratosthenes - Measured the distance around the earth. Accurately 200 BC.
His Mesolabe Compass. - For multiplying and dividing any two numbers in pictures.
Galileo and the first pocket calculator- Rene Descartes and the significance if this. Cartesian co-ordinates and computer power.
Finding the Square root of any number. The 3, 4, 5 triangle. Alf Russ Wallace diam of Earth
Descartes used these two as the intro to The Geometry - along with the Steam Engine, a major catalyst in empowering the Industrial Revolution. Measure anything using Geom and Algebra. Numeracy and Statistics - important, but we really on machines to do that for us.

The joy and charm of Maths is in its diversity. If we do not teach that, we are failing this generation of kids and failing to grasp the natural ability of all of us to do things better.

FUNTASTIC SCIENCE.

Arrow Card - Fools the audience as to which way the arrow on the reverse side of the card is pointing. It is easy to fool people with Maths. It is less easy to enthuse people about maths.
But that is what I have been doing for many years. It is also something Nelson Thornes are brilliant at.

Maths underpins everything we do - and especially our science and technology. We today produce more genii than any generation before. But how does that work? Who was Britains greatest every Scientists? Newton.

Newton discovered the Force of ? - Gravity? Let me tell you the true story, for it explains how Genius works. Genius is a relay race, and each person who takes the baton just one step further than anyone else has ever gone, is a genius.

Galileo - In Piza Cathedral discovered the workings of the pendulum. 60 years later, he suggested it might regulate a clock.

Pendulum and to double the Speed requires only 1/4 the length of string.
Dropped Balls. Which lands first? This way and then that. Happy Motor Cyclist.
Could not time a falling ball, so slowed them down using a ramp or slope.
It increase speed as the Square of the Distances. Celebrated by firing a cannon.
Cannon Demo and parabolic curves.

Johannus Kepler, an Astronomer who couldn’t see the stars? Tycho Brahe did the work.
Kepler applied the maths. Explained it with a Ball and String.
Speed of revolving balls and planets. If they spun in circles they would stop - so they must fly in ellipses. There is no string on a Planet, but there must be a force acting like a string, pulling stronger with mercury than with Saturn.

Newton added to this - squares of distances, which he got from Galileo. In 1665, the plague and everyone was sent home. Newton went, but took the books. Galileo’s book on things falling and cannon balls flying through the air. Kepler’s book on Planetary Motion.

Put the two books together and called it Gravity. Britains greatest every genius read 2 books.

Other genii? Priestley and Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide, Dalton and his Atomic Theory.
Boulton and Watt in making Steam work. Darwin in unravelling evolution. Curie in explaining radiation - which has been our scientific salvation. From her work, the Electron and Rutherford’s Nucleus. Bohr and the structure of the Atom.

Einstein and his three 1904 ideas. Collision of Molecules, Jumping Electrons and how they produce all our light, of every kind, Relativity.

The future is bright as long as our science and technology is able to keep the advances going, by schooling and training the next generation of genii - and for the sake of UK plc, we must hope that a sufficient number of them are schooled and trained in Britain.

JOHNNY BALL AT BETT 2012 - FOR NELSON THORNES.

FUNTASTIC MATHS.

5000 puzzle. It is over 100 years old, but still fools around 97% of people seeing it for the first time. It is natural to make mistakes in maths, and by this method, we learn. Egyptians were clever enough to build the pyramids, but 1000 years later, they couldn’t multiply - mathematically, that is.

Well they could do their 2 x table. Pathetic. But they managed. Demo the Egyptian system and link it to Binary Numbers. So this ancient system is now the power behind all our communications and computing technology.

To my mind the object of any Maths tutoring service is not just to push forward the learning front and ability of the student, but to demonstrate that learning and achieving is fun and that at all times, the learning experience is broadening their outlook on Maths and its importance.

A good example of what learning is all about, can be gleaned from observing this well known drawing - The Vitruvian Man. This has a lot to say about learning. Who created it? Leonardo Da Vinci - there is his backwards writing. Why did he write backwards - to be different - to be an individual - and probably to annoy his teachers.

But where did he get the idea from? He knicked it - and that is precisely what learning and education is all about. We show kids how to steal ideas from those who have gone before. Everything we teach has been taught before and learnt before and passed on before. So what can be so difficult about learning?

The idea was stolen by Da Vinci from Vitruvius who lived 1500 years before and was a Roman architect and engineer. It shows us that we have two things - our minds and our bodies. In this instance, the body is an ideal measuring tool. Stature = equals height = reach.
Fathoms and rope. Yards and Cubits. Double Paces helped map out the Roman Empire and every distance to Rome in miles or mille or thousand double paces.

What point is half way up your body? Your navel - wrong - it is the Pubic bone. The navel in the picture is the centre of the circle at 5 spans radius and the man is 8 spans tall and can reach another two making ten spans.

Height in metric? In feet and inches? Measurement is a natural ability, if we teach it naturally.

Eratosthenes - Measured the distance around the earth. Accurately 200 BC.
His Mesolabe Compass. - For multiplying and dividing any two numbers in pictures.
Galileo and the first pocket calculator- Rene Descartes and the significance if this. Cartesian co-ordinates and computer power.
Finding the Square root of any number. The 3, 4, 5 triangle. Alf Russ Wallace diam of Earth
Descartes used these two as the intro to The Geometry - along with the Steam Engine, a major catalyst in empowering the Industrial Revolution. Measure anything using Geom and Algebra. Numeracy and Statistics - important, but we really on machines to do that for us.

The joy and charm of Maths is in its diversity. If we do not teach that, we are failing this generation of kids and failing to grasp the natural ability of all of us to do things better.

FUNTASTIC SCIENCE.

Arrow Card - Fools the audience as to which way the arrow on the reverse side of the card is pointing. It is easy to fool people with Maths. It is less easy to enthuse people about maths.
But that is what I have been doing for many years. It is also something Nelson Thornes are brilliant at.

Maths underpins everything we do - and especially our science and technology. We today produce more genii than any generation before. But how does that work? Who was Britains greatest every Scientists? Newton.

Newton discovered the Force of ? - Gravity? Let me tell you the true story, for it explains how Genius works. Genius is a relay race, and each person who takes the baton just one step further than anyone else has ever gone, is a genius.

Galileo - In Piza Cathedral discovered the workings of the pendulum. 60 years later, he suggested it might regulate a clock.

Pendulum and to double the Speed requires only 1/4 the length of string.
Dropped Balls. Which lands first? This way and then that. Happy Motor Cyclist.
Could not time a falling ball, so slowed them down using a ramp or slope.
It increase speed as the Square of the Distances. Celebrated by firing a cannon.
Cannon Demo and parabolic curves.

Johannus Kepler, an Astronomer who couldn’t see the stars? Tycho Brahe did the work.
Kepler applied the maths. Explained it with a Ball and String.
Speed of revolving balls and planets. If they spun in circles they would stop - so they must fly in ellipses. There is no string on a Planet, but there must be a force acting like a string, pulling stronger with mercury than with Saturn.

Newton added to this - squares of distances, which he got from Galileo. In 1665, the plague and everyone was sent home. Newton went, but took the books. Galileo’s book on things falling and cannon balls flying through the air. Kepler’s book on Planetary Motion.

Put the two books together and called it Gravity. Britains greatest every genius read 2 books.

Other genii? Priestley and Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide, Dalton and his Atomic Theory.
Boulton and Watt in making Steam work. Darwin in unravelling evolution. Curie in explaining radiation - which has been our scientific salvation. From her work, the Electron and Rutherford’s Nucleus. Bohr and the structure of the Atom.

Einstein and his three 1904 ideas. Collision of Molecules, Jumping Electrons and how they produce all our light, of every kind, Relativity.

The future is bright as long as our science and technology is able to keep the advances going, by schooling and training the next generation of genii - and for the sake of UK plc, we must hope that a sufficient number of them are schooled and trained in Britain.

?

26th October. I have always had the habit of being in the right place at the right time. Some two and a half years ago, in Bilbao, I met a chap who like Di and I, had been to see the Basque headquarters some 20 miles north, that day. The small town was the first raised to the ground by Nazi Planes in 1936 to assist Franco in the Spanish Civil War. Since then, as is understandable, there has been conflict in that area. The fella I met was the nicest Northern Irish fella you could wish to meet. He had been to see the leaders of ETA, the basque seperatist movement who had blown up several trains, etc in Spain. Why was this fella there? To tell the basques to lay down their arms and come to the negotiating table. Who sent the fella? Martin McGunness. What happened this week? The Basques at last agreed to lay down their arms and come to the negotiating table. The papers have said that the SAS were involved, as they were, but under cover, the to-ing and fro-ing has been very complex indeed. But what heartening news. The push for a better world is always going on - and it is not always known to the newsapaers or the general public, just how, why and where that push is gong on.

22nd October 2011. Following book fair appearances at Cheltenham, Guildford and Henley, was asked to open Farnham Common Library. The country council could no longer support the staffing of the library, but once volunteers offered, then council have now pledged support by paying all outgoings and providing the previous Book Financing deal, for 3 years. It is wonderful news. I do hope that local people step in to save other threatened Libraries. This depression will not last for ever and hopefully we will all come out of it, with our local community facilities still intact.

7th October. My new book published by Icon Books - "Ball of Confusion" - a large collection of puzzles based on those produced on Saturday mornings for Zoe's BBC 2 Radio Show. Seems to be going well. The puzzles range from the simplest to some quite serious brain benders. It is intended for all ages, to be fun, but also to broaden and flex the mathematical side of the Brain.

29th September. On the 17th September, my Son Nick and his partner Lara, got married. It was the third Ball family wedding and all three have been spectacular. The were married in a house and cottage we rented near Taunton - they live in Harlesden.

The ceremony took place in a pagoda in the middle of a small lake. The reception was in a Double Wigwam, with an open fire at one end. It was a showery day which was fine, as every time it rained, we all rushed for cover and it collected us all together again. There was a small fairground for the kids. Zoe and Norman borrowed and got someone else to perform a Punch and Judy. We were not short of DJ's with the Chemical Brothers on hand and Daz Dazzle who came all the way just to accompany me.

Some people "Always Cry at Weddings" as the Sweet Charity song goes. I always sing at them, by request. For Nick and Lara, I produced versions of "Arthur's Theme", "For Once in my Life" and "From this moment On" from Kiss Me Kate. Here are the lyrics, more or less as I delivered them on our wonderful day.

FOR NICK AND LARA’S WEDDING.

Once in your life you find her,
Someone who turns your heart around,
Next thing you know you’re closing down the town.
Later and it’s still with you,
Even though you left her way across town
Wondering to yourself, “Hey what have I found?”

When you get caught between the moon and bloody Harlesden
Get off at Willesden Junction, one after Kensal Green,
When you get caught between the moon and bloody Harlesden,
Best thing that you can do,
Was the best thing that you did do!
Now the best thing you’ve ever done, you’ve done it today!

So - For the rest of your lives, you have someone who needs you
Someone you’ve loved all along
For the rest of your lives, you can go where life leads you,
Together you know you’ll be strong

From now, you can say, “This is ours, they can’t take it,”
As long as you know you have love, you will make it.”
For the rest of your lives you have someone,
And as friends, well you have all these ones,
Plus the very ,very, very special, young Ron-nee
For the rest of your lives you have all you need - so,

From this moment on, happiness beckons,
You’ve a house, shed and some lovely decking, from this moment on,
From this happy day, laughs and great fun,
Another bun in the oven? - I hope. You’re not going to stop at one.

For he’s got the love you need so much,
She’s got the skin you love to touch,
You got the arms to hold each other tight,
So its up to you, what you do, the rest of the night.

From this wedding day, fun and laughter,
Happy ever after, raise your glasses every one,
To Nick and Lara’s Wedding, (Repeat - Drink)
Now everyone “Do yer ‘ead in!”
From this very mo - ment on!

Sat 9th July 2011 . Is this a record? On March 2nd, I appeared on the BBC's "Daily Politic" where I raised awareness that the GCSE Chemistry Curriculum had been badly effected by spurious scientific ideas about Air Quality and Climate Change, which, I suggested, was in danger of brainwashing a generation of young people.

As examples, on page 1, CO2 at one particle in 2500 was placed above Water at 1 particle in 25 on average? Also the concept of the Three Sates of Matter, Solid, Liquid, Gas was so watered down, that it did not mention that as a liquid, like water or fuel oil, turns into a gas, it expands around 600 times which is the power that still today produces 95% of the entire world's electricity and powers all her vehicles.

Once you remove the concept of how power is traditionally produced, you can kid people that any form of energy production, Wind, Solar, or Electric Vehicles can compete evenly with the traditional methods. In fact, though we can improve the efficiency of these newer methods, they will never come close to the traditional methods - though there is long term hope for Solar.

Another alarming example was four to six pages on the dangers of Nitrogen Dioxide in the atmosphere. The artcile suggested it was solely produced by motor vehicles. In fact the catalytic converter breaks down most of the NO2 into harmless Nitrogen and Oxygen, just as it breaks down unburnt and semi burnt carbons into CO2 precisely because it is harmless (Not the most dagerous substance on earth, as some current Chemistry books would have us believe.

However, the point completely missed is that Nitrogen Dioxide is natural fertilizer, without which plant life would have a very difficult time of it indeed. Rathe than a polutant, NO2 is vital in getting nitrogen into the soil, which via plants gets into our bodes. Every finger tap I am making on this keyboard in writing this, involves chemical changes involving nitrogen. But nitrogen in the air at 68% is inert. So it has to be shocked into joining with Oxygen to make NO2, in lightening and thunder storrms, to aid the Nitrogen cycle, essential to life on earth.

I produced a short report which I showed to Education Minister Nick Gibb in April. Two weeks ago an article appeard in the Guardian and other Newspapers where Tim Oates said, "There is no room for Climate Change in the Chemistry curriculum." Tim is an executive for Cambridge Assessment who set the groups who formulate the educational curriculum. I rang him to congratulate him on the article to which he replied, "Well, you wrote it, John!" He had gone through my report and the points I had made and found every one of them valid in Chemistry terms with no hint of exaggeration or bias. Then he announced that the process of changing it all back to a more sensible approach to Chemistry for GCSE students was already underway.

So in just four months, it seems I have been a major factor in getting some common sense back into Chemistry Education. I am thrilled. But this work is only just beginning. Watch this space.

Tuesday 21st June, 2011. Been a long time since the last blog. When I was having web trouble, I decided to take a lower profile for a month or two. But it seems the email blocking and name defilinghas stopped, as far as I know. The reports of a 90% loss in bookings was always false. But there had been a sharp dip in educational requests. Now and after the long delay when all educational estaqblishments had no idea of their budgets for this year, all is just about as was a year ago.

I have had a meeting with Nick Gibb, Education Minister and am reporting on the manipulation of the Chemistry Curiculum which in the name of Climate Change has thrown much essential science out of the window. As an example, atmospheric CO2 at 1 part in 2,500 is now featured above water at an average of 1 pat in 25, when water is 97% the cause of local temperature change and the reason for all the life on earth? The concept of three states of matter has also been removed. Unless students understand that water as it turns to steram, expands 600 times, they will have no conception of what that expansion means in power terms. Then they will not understand why Wind, Wave, Tidal and Solar Power, though of some use, can never replace steam expansion which accounts for some 95% of all the electricity on earth being produced efficiently and at a comparitively low cost.

Two points to make here. Renewables, as they become more efficient (solar is the best bet in say ten years time) wll play a greater part, but subsidies which skew the market and favour spurious business practices are not the way to do it. Also efficiency in all traditional power generation moves forward faster than anyone thought possible - twice the fuel mileage for all cars and just a smidgeon of their polutants compared with ten years ago - Power generators doubling their efficiency in the past 15 years - There is no doubt that we will power the next generation and make life better for everyone.

But the main priority is, we must get the curriculum back on coarse over the next two years, for the benefity of UK plc.

Maths is also an educational problem. The government are looking at teh Chinese and Singapore Maths Curriculum. I have pointed out that their teaching is based on the books used in the UK in the 50's and 60's. Once again we must get this all back on track for the sake of the present and future generations.

I have a book coming out in October, called "Ball of Confusion" based on the puzzles I have offered on Zoe's Saturday mornng Radio 2 show. I have included many more puzzles, traditional and original, with puzzles at all levels of difficulty to suit a very wide audience.

Tuesday 22nd February, 2011. BLOG FOLLOWING ALL THE NEWSPAPER ACTIVITY SINCE FRIDAY LAST.

I have to say that I am glad, overall, that I brought to everyone's attention that a person or persons unknown have been planting damaging links on the web, leaving phone messages cancelling my work and possibly intercepting other emails? We have someone working on that. It had to be done. When I started emailing people telling them what was happening, the damaging links magically disappeared, seeming to show that someone has free access to my web traffic??

I chose to publish through the TES, as I needed to tell Education more than anyone else, and I thought the TES would be responsible and not treat the issue in a Tabloid way. In fact I specifically asked them not to do that and that this was the reason I came to them. So it was a surpirse and disappointement to find that despite agreeing to print verbatim the piece that I wrote for them, they in fact added all kinds of lines that I had not uttered and worse still, decided, without any indication that they would, to email every other newspaper with the story.

But worse still, it was the TES that added lines that were used as headlines - Daily Express Friday "Climate "zealots" hate me, says Ball"

Well I rang the TES and told them I have NEVER USED THE WORD "ZEALOT." I know the word, but it is not in my vocabulary. They trawled the recordings of our conversations and could not find the word uttered by me! So the TES themselves orginated this quote attributed to me. Thanks a lot TES.

Today in the Mail, there is a long piece final edited by myself, for which I thank them. But the headline, reading "BEWARE THE GLOBAL WARMING FASCISTS," is something I have never said. I have never used the word Fascist, and frankly I never would in describing those deeply convinced of immenently catastrophic Climate Change.

Some newspapers even trawled up the deliberate errors reporting what I had said some 14 months ago, when I received a slow handclap from an audience of "Godless People." They referred to my talking about "spider's flatulence." I have never referred to spider's flatulence in my life. But what I actually said, was supposed to be some fun and humourous facts borne out by my scientific research - In the 1930's Bristowe evaluated correctly that the spiders in the UK eat annually a greater weight than the weight of the entire UK human population. From that it is reasonable to surmise that the spiders of the world probably consume a greater weight each year than that of the total human population. My point is that, all this activity in breaking down so much material and returning the gases including CO2 back to the atmosphere, goes totally unchecked. But spiders are preditors and a small minority of all insects. The number and weight of insects alive at any given moment works out at roughly the weight of 7 african elephants for every single human. The activity of insects breaking down plant material and helping it rot and ferment and give up it's gases equates to about 350 Billion tons of CO2 a year. Man's output of CO2 including industry is around 24 Billion tons. If you require the source for that, it is Emsley's Consummer's Good Chemical Guide, 1994, which I seem to recall won Science Book of the Year.

So here we have plants rotting producing more CO2 than man by a factor of around 14. In fact man's contribution to atmospheric CO2 is no more than 4%. The UK produces around 2% of that. Now if atmospheric CO2 amounts to 1 particle in every 2500 of air, then 4% of that and then 2% of that, means that we are putting 1 particle of CO2 in the atmosphere for every 3,125,000 particles of air. Seems to be a lot of fuss about very little? Then of course there is the realisation that in breaking down hydro-carbons - all food, living matter, fossil fuel and anything that will burn or decompose - for every molecule of CO2 produced there are two of Water. But water is 97% the cause of temperature change in the atmosphere, not only year on year but day by day and minute by minute.

So why was it that the exploration of CO2 in air by the IPCC which declared that man made CO2 was causing Global Warming, was actually carried out on "Dry Air" or air with no water content - which in normal life, we never meet? In dry air, CO2 would be fairly assessed as the most important greenhouse gas. But in normal air it cannot account for more than 3% if water vapour acounts for 97%?

P.S. I am sorry that my daughter Zoe's picture has been featured with me. Zoe has her own opinions and ideas, but would not wish to be involved in these matters as she has never studied them or even intends to. Quite right to, as all of this does nothing to make my life happier, and at heart like Zoe and the rest of our family, I am a person of happy disposition, until someone mentions climate change.

I think that is enough for now. Cheers with a smile, Johnny Ball.

VERY IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT. Wednesday 9/2/2011

It is with horror and disgust that I find that I am the victim of some kind of Internet Smear Campaign.

I have had to complain to the police and my problem is now logged as a harrassment case and is being investigated.

This morning, an early phone call asked if the voice mail saying I could not attend a Teacher Training event on 1st March was true. Luckily the recipient knew that I make all my own telephone calls. We have the recording which we will hand to the police. The event was posted on my News and Apperances listing.

Anyone Googling “JOHNNYBALL” (without the gap) may have found a sponsored direct link to “Johnny Ball/Paul Raymond” which when clicked on immediately opens up on a collection of explicit nude pictures of females. I had obviously opened this link and contacted the Paul Raymond organisation. Before they could act, the link had been removed, - 9/2/11 - so it is clear that I am being monitored.

Also on a Northern Ireland Blog, The Family Voyage, which prides itself on winning some Blog Award, flagged JohnnyBall and featured the statement, “Johnny Ball should not be allowed near children.” Being near to children has been my career for over 50 years. As yet I cannot contact them, as their site is only open to known members?? (Their flagged Johnny Ball link has now miraculously disappeared)

Their beef is that I dared suggest in 2009 on NI Radio that Sammy Wilson as Energy Minister was right when he refused to air “Carbon Trust” TV commercials, one of which showed a very young child being told a story of a drowning world through climate change. Following complaints to the Advertising Authorities, these ads were found “guilty of exaggeration and alarmism over climate change” and were ordered to be dropped. So that would indicate that I was totally justified in condemning them?

Anyone who knows me and my career, must know that I have never done anything that in any way would harm a single child.

I defy anyone to find anything that I have done in my career that, were it publicly known, would harm my reputation.

My declared position on Climate Change is well known. It is born of my wanting to protect the next generation from alarmism, which is scaring children and putting many of them off the thought of scientific careers or confidence in the future or in trusting adults, politics or technology.

It does not seem logical to me, to tell kids that the older generation has screwed up the world so much, that we are in danger of the world not being able to support human life by 2050 - especially when it is patently not true.

In fact, technology is moving forward commendably in improving every aspect of our impact on the earth. Just one example - Gas Fire Power Stations have increased their efficiency in the past 15 years by 100%, which means we get twice as much energy from the same fossil fuel - a tremendous success story, which will continue to improve while we still need fossil fuel.

The IPPC themselves have stated clearly that “There must be no more exaggeration” which shows that they accept that every aspect of the threat of endangering climate change has been exaggerated.

Al Gores film was shown in a British Court to be wrong on nine separate points. The Hockey Stick showing an alarming rise in world temperatures has been shown to be wrong and intended to mislead . The recent NASA claim that there is an increase of 0.7% in world temperatures in the past 50 years, chooses that starting point (early 1960's) as temperatures were markedly lower at that time, which began a “New Ice Age is Coming” scare, which I remember well. But why all the fuss over a 0.7% rise which has been static for 10 years?

My other reason for continuing to object to Climate Change exaggeration, is that the unnecessary and unwarranted carbon taxes and subsidies are making many industrialists immensely rich, while making the parents of every child in the UK and thus the children themselves, considerably poorer. On top of the financial situation we are in, this is becoming catastrophic for society across the UK as must be obvious to everyone.

Around 50% of all energy bills and air flight costs and 66% of motor fuel bills go in taxes and much of it towards subsidies on futile projects to stop global warming by reducing carbon emissions, which they are patently not achieving.

Of course we must reduce the pressure of the human race on the earth. I promote ways in which we can and are doing that right across the technological spectrum, to show young people that the future for all of them is brighter than we can yet imagine.

Everyone who knows me, will know just how sad I am that I have had to write this blog.

Hopefully it will be the last. I so enjoy working to kids and making them laugh, before I add material that should hopefully give them confidence in their own abailities and their future as adults. Whatever is wrong with our society I see nothing wrong with the vast majority of the kids I aim to inspire.

Johnny Ball - Wednesday 9/2/2011 - updated 14/2/11

Wed 24th November 2010.

Yesterday was Zoe's 40th birthday and we had a super party in London, with the BBC Dance Orchestra on hand. I felt I had to mark the occasion and wrote new lyrics to one of our favourite songs, which I sang to her on behalf of all her friends, family and workmates :

FOR ZOE’S 40th BIRTHDAY - HER DAD’S SPECIAL LYRICS TO

YOU’RE THE TOP.

At words poetic, I’m so pathetic, but I felt that I ought to say,
That on this very special day, you ought to know, - dearest Zo
What all those gathered - and mostly lathered - what they really think of you,
And though these lyrics, won’t cause hysterics, I hope they convey why we so “Love You.”

You’re the top, You’re the Brighton flower,
You’re the top, Blackpool’s second tower,
And just like me, t’was in Kids TV, that your career first begun,
You were first ever girl, to be given a whirl,
on Breakfast Radio One - oh what fun?
You’re so You, You’re a Winning Slogan,
On Radio Two, You’re the best since Wogan
I’m an ageing turn, who just won’t learn when to stop.
But if babe, I’m mediocre, you’re the top.

You’re the top, You’re a great romancer.
A-mazed us all, as a Strictly dancer,
When with Ian Waite, you danced so great, like Ginger and Fred Astaire,
But when first place beckoned, they put you second,
to Darren Gough? Oh Bugger off!
You’re tick VG, You’re Di’s Christmas Dinner,
Just like me, You’re a BAFTA winner
You’re a Dover sole, a Gerrard goal, for the Kop,
But while Liverpool are down, you and Brighton are top.

You’re the top, You’re the Mum to Woody,
Whose a sod, at times, Hurray - Not a goody goody.
And we’re so impressed, that you’ve both been blessed, with the wonderful Nelly May,
Which shows if you lose, the love of booze,
There’s the world to gain - and we all stay sane.
You’re tall and lean, Like the Tower of Pisa,
With that grin, You’re no Mona Lisa,
But you’ve vim and vigour, and a figure, that hasn’t begun to flop, yet.
And you’ve still got a lovely bottom, you’re the top.

You’re the top, You’re so bright and fresh, pet,
And so young, you haven’t reached your best yet,
And you fella’s top, cos of course you are Norman’s spouse,
He’s a DJ star, but you’re a fillum star?
You’re Mickey Mouse - It’s my ears - I’m a louse.
You’re full on. You’re refined, not tarty,
You’re A1, like Norm’s Brighton Beach Party.
I’m a doddering loon, who is fated soon to stop.
But if Baby I’m the bottom, I’m still here and not forgotten,
If they say your worth is nothing, I’ll say you’re great and they're all rotten,
Yes if Zoe I’m the bottom -
On be- half, of ev-ery, one here to-night,
You’re the top !

19th November 2010. The Public Service Review: Science and Technology issue, out this week, will feature 300 word pieces from people in the Science and Technology world, offering their take on where Science and Technology might be going in the future. This is the one I submitted.

Public Service Review: Science and Technology UK

"Having witnessed as a child the devastation of the Second World War, before we cleaned it up; having as a teenager suffered pea soup fogs before the Clean Air Act of the late 1950, since when buildings remain as clean as first intended; having as a young man, seen dreadful factory conditions when today you could eat your dinner off the floor; and suffered choking exhaust fumes from inefficient vehicles, before the catalytic converter stopped all that and our air became cleaner than ever in modern history; and having witnessed advancements in civil engineering, all forms of transport and the miracles of communications technology over the past 20 years, one would think I would be so positively hopeful for our future?

But having seen GM crops opposed in Europe, when four million farmers are applauding their results worldwide and they could more efficiently feed the third world and support their progress out of poverty; having seen costly, inefficient and grossly unpopular wind generation proliferate, none of which would be built without massive subsidy which in turn makes every family poorer; having witnessed attempts to halt nuclear power generation even though it has efficiently provided fully 30% of all European electrical supply over the past 20 years and when the new Nuclear Build will be as much as 400% more efficient still; and having witnessed gross exaggerations from the IPCC right across the board in their assessment of Climate Change, since when their chairman has avowed, "there must be no more exaggeration!"; when all this is happening for non scientific, quasi political and ideological reasons, under immense pressure from so called "green" lobbyists, who would turn the clock of advancing technology to run backwards, then I despair.

However, I have the advantage of experience and I am unshakably hopeful for the future of science and technology, for the misplaced ideology of the doom and gloom mongers will fall by the wayside and the steady progress of firm footed science and technology worldwide, as before, will create a future brighter and better than any one of us can yet imagine. "

2nd August 2010. Hello Again after a long Blog rest

I am sorry have not been keeping up the Blog in recent months. However, I am in the process of livening up the Website and I have been looking for suitable clips of my old shows, to place on You Tube and link through the Blog.

The links above will work automatically if you just Click on them.

Others have been posting clips for me - they are very kind guestures, but the selection choices have been disappointing, so I am trying to rectify all that.

On Thursday 29th July, I was on GMTV answering questions from kids that their parents couldn't answer. I was thrilled to be asked.

GMTV that day featured Kate Russell who is a bright young Technology Journalist. Amazingly we met when with her family won the first (and last - it was only a pilot) "Johnny Ball Games" show back in the mid 80's. You can find a clip of the show at :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn7WDfIAyQg

One of Kate's pals edited my GMTV appearances into two short pieces. So with thanks to Kate and her pal, you can find them at :

http://www.youtube.com/user/MorningMILFs#p/a/u/1/SeNViG9H-SY
http://www.youtube.com/user/MorningMILFs#p/a/u/0/y-BIaS9vSqY

Questions Answered - Please always remember that should you even need an answer to something puzzling in the area of maths, science and technology - I am always willing to spend a few moments finding the answer. Go to Contact Us and email me.

21st December, 2009 - For the Daily Express.

Express Article http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/147328/It-s-not-the-end-of-the-World-

IT’S TIME FOR A CLIMATE “ALL CHANGE”.

Ever since writing my TV shows in the 1980's, I have been talking to students, teachers and the general public and enthusing about the amazing possibilities for science and technology in the future. But over thirty years I have seen a terrible change in science education. Roll models like Dalton, Faraday and Curie are hardly ever mentioned and most basic science has disappeared.

Kids are introduced to science as something that is life threatening and deprived of exploration through health and safety. They are being brainwashed into believing that science and technology are crippling the earth and our future, when exactly the opposite is true.

Science education has been turned upside down by worry merchants and it is already costing us dearly in a widespread lack of understanding - it is ignorance that breeds fear and we are raising a generation of scared and scientifically unschooled future adults - It is utter lunacy.

This ignorance goes right to the top and the politics of Climate Change at Copenhagen had lost all sense of rationality. At the end of the Copenhagen fiasco, I heard an IPCC spokesman on BBC Radio 4, say that a Copenhagen commitment of $100 billion might keep the global temperature rise by the end of the century, down to 1.5° C, but it won't keep it down by 2°C. That statement on behalf of the IPCC is so devoid of scientific thought that these people must surely be on another planet? I so wish they were.

On Tuesday 15th December at the Bloomsbury Theatre, I was slow handclapped by a section of the audience. They had taken well my Climate Change thoughts, but when I said “The University of East Anglia has been caught cooking the books (scientifically, not financially) for the sake of research funding grants,” the reaction started. The plain truth can be upsetting to those who have one set opinion.

My claim that Climate Change is not being caused by man made Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide is not based on one scientific fact but a whole raft of them. Let me explain a couple.

HOW THINGS BURN.
John Dalton’s 1803 Atomic Theory, forms the basis of all Chemistry. It is explained with just three elements - Hydrogen, Oxygen and Carbon. If we burn Methane (Carbon and Hydrogen) with Oxygen, the Methane breaks up. The Carbon joins Oxygen to make CO2. The Hydrogen join more Oxygen to form H2O or Water. Nothing is lost or gained, but energy is released - that is the Atomic Theory.
Human energy comes from our food, Carbohydrate (Hydrocarbon and Water) and the Oxygen we breath. As we burn energy, we break up the hydrocarbons and release H2O and CO2 in the same way. All burning, rotting or fermenting produces carbon dioxide and water. So how can we say that one is bad and ignore the other?

In normal air, Water is 60 times more present than CO2, but in rain storm or monsoon climates the ratio is far greater. Atmospheric CO2 forms less than 0.04% of the whole atmosphere or one particle in 2500. But man made CO2 is at most 4% of that or one particle in every 62,500.

The first IPCC computer models which claimed that not just CO2, but man made CO2 was causing global warming, had no input for water at all and were scientifically indefensible. Far from carrying a consensus, many scientists resigned from the IPCC, which still used those names as supporters? (The Global Warming Debate, March 1996 - ISBN 0952773406)

But we all know that water effects climate? On a summers day, with cloud it is mild; no cloud and it is hot. On a winters night with cloud, temperatures stay mild; with no cloud, the heat escapes upwards and we have morning frost. This is not rocket science - it’s as plain as the nose on your face and it cannot be ignored. But the IPCC ignored it and all the scientists who disagreed with their flawed computer models? On what grounds?

It is estimated that the atmosphere contains 2,750 billion tons of CO2, which is an enormous amount to frighten people with. But that is still less than 0.04% of the whole atmosphere. Also CO2 is half as heavy as air again and falls back to earth or is washed out of the atmosphere by rain, all the time.

So atmospheric CO2 “has to be replaced”, to keep a balance - this is part of the essential Carbon Cycle. Volcanoes produce by far the greatest amounts of CO2. Many are on land, but far more in the oceans, pushing the continents apart at about the rate your finger nails grow. Their CO2 production is massive.

On a smaller scale, soil releases CO2 as do plants and animals which produce around 350 billion tons. Ocean life produces perhaps much more - An incredible 80% of all plant life on earth is in the Oceans. However, it is difficult to measure 70% of the entire Earth’s surface, so figures are guesses.

Against all that, Industrial man made CO2, though growing, is small by comparison; perhaps 24 billion tons or 1/16th plant and animal CO2 and no more than 4% of replenished CO2.

CARE OF THE PLANET.

Of course we cannot ignore our impact on the planet and we should not rape the world of all it’s fossil fuels until they run out. But we have to get our impact into rational proportion and not apply alarmist Man Made CO2 scare tactics.

But we are lessening our impact commendably. Power Station generators in the past 15 years by getting steam to do more work, now get 64% more energy out of coal, oil, gas or nuclear fuel. Has anyone told you that before?

Rolls Royce, just three years ago, thought they could not further improve aircraft engines unless aircraft became flying wings. But with USA agreement they are producing an engine that spears an aircraft to 7 miles high and then switches to an economy mode for the rest of the journey. Likely saving on fuel? 25%.

Modern cars have doubled fuel efficiency in recent years *and are around 90% recyclable and almost 100% reclaimable. I back new Nuclear Power not because it is carbon free, which it is, but because the new plant will be at least four time more efficient.

However, third world poverty makes their adoption of the latest technologies impossible. We even deprive them of GM crops for idealist reasons, completely forgetting that European soil will grow practically anything but Third World soil is often so delicate that our methods are totally unsuited for them. It is utter selfishness and scientific lunacy.

Copenhagen activists have been asking for CO2 reductions for the sake of the Third World. But their argument is wrong. They do not need investment to cut energy use and CO2 production. They need money for more energy to give them a power base, so that their hospitals can function and they can maintain an electrical grid. Then multi national companies can invest and provide jobs and a financial base on which to build towards equality with our disgracefully rich end of the world.

If we scrapped completely the foolhardy and scientifically unsound chase to reduce carbon, while still aiming for greater efficiency, we would have all the money needed to bring the third world out of poverty, save millions of lives year on year and create a fairer and far more balanced world for our kids.

* - An additional thought. Catalytic converts were introduced into cars over 20 years ago and if working correctly eliminte noxious exhaust fumes by a commendable 95 to 98%. They convert Nitrous Oxide into Nitrogen and Oxygen and Carbon Monoxied into Carbon Dioxide - why? Because Nitrous Oxide and Carbon Monoxide are highly poluting and poisonous. However, Nitrogen, Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide are completely harmless - hence CO2 in soft drinks and fire extinguishers. What is so alarmingly sad and misguided scientific opportunism, is that now we pay a tax on the amount of harmless CO2 that comes from cars, planes and even power stations. If you play a sport you will double the amount of CO2 you produce via your breath each day - are they going to tax that soon? We are told to talk to our plants, as they seem to thrive better - could it be that we are breathing CO2 onto them and thus directly feeding them, as was discovered by Joseph Priestley?

Library

Monday 21st April, 2008. Introduction.

As is the modern fashion, I have decided at last that I should start and maintain a Blog, in which I record from time to time, my thoughts and motivations.

I am most active these days as a speaker or lecturer, and happily the demand for my services remains very strong indeed. So what do I talk about?

Well, my audiences rang from late primary, secondary and sixth form students, through teacher seminars, university outreach events, and for corporate bodies of ever persuasion, either internally, or for their motivational and exploratory conferences or for celebration dinners. As a result, over many years of experience, I have by now found something to say on practically every subject under the sun. One thing I am definitely not, and that is a "Yes Man" who will say anything in support of anything, if the price is right. I am very selective in the engagements that I accept.

Indeed I feel that I have build my reputation on being someone who bring his own ideas to an event, to hopefully give a clearer view of what might be possible. Whatever I have said in the past, I would hope that I have never said anything that I did not believe in implicitly.

All this started when I was writing and presenting my TV series (23 in all). In those days, though I sought expert guidance from time to time, the bulk of research and the formulation of all the programmes was done by me, and I had the last word on the content and intended message of every show.

Today I am above all, a supreme optimist. I believe that there is nothing wrong with the modern generation and the majority of students I meet in schools, other than that the curriculum they are taught is on the thin side, to say the least. However, I find the energy and committment of teachers seems stronger than I have ever known. I worry that career opportunities are not explained adequately and that though the kids have a drive and desire to succeed perhaps stronger than ever before, they are very often not sure of which way to go and why, and they seem not to be helped in these directions as adequately as they deserve?

I am also an optimist about the future. I am not naive enough to feel that there are not huge problems facing us in the near future. However, having lived through the most expansive and incredible 60 years of progress in every aspect of science and technology, and have seen the basic quality of life improve beyond recognition, I have every hope for tomorrow.

Though mankind is causing a great strain on the earth, I truly believe that we not only can, but already are advancing on every front, to reduce that impact. There is a great deal to be done, but I believe most strongly that given it's head, modern and future technology will do everything required to sustain and support the human race, and the vast majority of creatures and habitats, to a commendable degree. In other words, I feel that we will after the first half of the 21st century, be more thrilled with progress through that period, than we are today with regard to the second half of the 20th century.

Why should I believe this? The answers are complex and I will drip feed them onto the blog as time progresses.

But above all, I believe that a guarded optimism should be instilled in every young person, because that is the way, in an ideal world, life should be for all of us. Without confidence in the future, for our ourselves and everyone sharing the world with us, life would be more strain than joy, and that must be avoided at all costs.

Life is something in which we should each make a daily effort to help everyone else smile through.

Cheers for now,

Johnny Ball.

29th August, 2008. Getting to know ..... Johnny Ball.

The original idea of my Blog was to drop in my "take" on all kinds of issues, as they occurred to me. However, I see that so many blogs become "Rant" pages, where people state their opinions, usually in a disgruntled and opinionated sort of way. I did not want to produce that kind of blog, even though I have no shortage of topics I would like to have my say on.

So I have decided that I will log on the blog, Articles or pieces that I write for magazines or periodicals, from time to time.

This article, by way of a questionnaire, was written for Science and Technology - an Independant Public Service Review, which has just been published.

Getting to know ..... Johnny Ball.

What do you believe are the key challenges for the advancement of science in the years to come?

I could not be more confident about the future of science and technology and its potential for making life better for everyone on earth. However, I am worried about political influences and knee jerk or quick fix reactions from politicians that can have the effect of warping the true picture in some areas of science. As an example, I feel reactions to the so-called threat of global warming and it’s causes are grossly overstated. They have resulted in very costly and often unwise policy decisions and created an atmosphere of depression and apprehension that is proving to be very bad for educational science and for encouraging students towards the right kind of science careers, to the detriment of the future science base of UK plc. I personally do not consider environmental science to be a sensible vocational path as there are no organisations that do not already think environmentally in the strongest and most scientifically sound terms.

How can we attract more people into science and maths?

By explaining how wonderful and rewarding science can be. Providing whizz bang science shows does not particularly help here, as one soon realises on any science path of learning, that much must be done that is mundane in gaining a basic knowledge of science, in order to find the route that most suits each individual student. Like reading a good book, it takes some time and effort to get into and to begin to enjoy the book, by which time, first impressions have often changed or been replaced by deeper feelings.

In five words, what does it take to make a great scientist?

Desiring, believing, wanting to succeed.

What would you regard as your greatest achievement?

Being born mathematically minded was the greatest help, but writing and making the Think programmes and making them work for literally any subject and for any audience, has to be my pinnacle.

What would you regard was the most difficult challenge you have faced in your career?

Not having anyone give me the chance to write for an adult audience.

Have you ever had a Eureka moment?

Often, when I was a comedian and a new idea suddenly burst from my mouth before I ever knew it was coming. Then to find a new way to simplify something very complex in writing TV or stage shows or lectures - they are always Eureka moments.

Who or what inspired you?

The advance of technology is so wonderful that I cannot understand young people who are not inspired by it. This is our greatest error in education today: not conveying the belief, based on our experience of progress, that in the future we will be able to do almost anything we choose, and definitely enough to secure our future and that of the planet.

What is you greatest fear?

That the doom and gloom merchants and the political lobby groups, long with health and safety experts, the over the top child protection agencies, the accident chasing lawyers and all those who restrict our freedoms and the enjoyment of the adventure of life, will prevail and make all our lives a complete misery of controls and restrictions.

You describe yourself as a supreme optimist. What can this achieve?

Everything that pessimism is incapable of achieving, but most of all an enrichment of life for everyone and indeed for the whole earth.

What are your priorities for 2008?

To get across the true message of what science can and is doing for all of us, to more and more people, and by doing that, make them happier that it is happening.

"The Three Sciences" - They always have been, and always will be ever more amazing.

I have had such a wonderful career in Science over the past 30 years, working with almost every branch of the science industry, making videos on water management and nuclear power, learning about the very latest aircraft or vehicles for the disabled, exploring the origins of chemistry and making modern materials technology films, lecturing on Darwin and Mendel and clarifying what DNA and the British Genome project means for our future.

It all began when I wrote and presented Maths and Science series for BBC Children’’s TV. I kept the programmes entertaining by always linking and cross referencing one branch of science with another and so made my name as a promoter of all things scientific.

Through all this, I quickly learned that in this technological age, the basic three Sciences of Physics, Chemistry and Biology become ever more intrinsically linked. So I was so thrilled whenthe Triple Science educational initiative was set up. There is no doubt that these three very different sciences, Physics, Chemistry and Biology all developed independently and at separate times. So why should we be happy to ““Mix them all Up”” as ““Triple Science”” today?

Physics really began some 400 years ago, when Galileo discovered much about basic forces, things falling or flying through the air and the principles of light and lenses. This, along with Kepler’’s explanation of how the planets revolve around the Sun, was all that Isaac Newton needed to tie the whole thing up with his Theory of Universal Gravitation and Three Laws of Motion. This then enabled the very physical Industrial Revolution to get going in the late 18th century.

Chemistry was still mostly mysticism and alchemy. Then 1804, John Dalton’’s Atomic Theory, showed that energy in a fire or even a human body, requires just 3 basic elements; Hydrogen and Carbon mixes with Oxygen and a chemically change produces Water and CO2 - nothing is lost, nothing is gained, but Energy is released. Very quickly Humphry Davy alone discovered half a dozen new Elements and Michael Faraday showed how we could produce stronger metals, tougher glass or use electricity to coat cheap metal with silver or gold. Mendeleev produced his Periodic Table around 1850, and soon the whole set of 92 naturally occurring elements was complete. The Chemical Industry was born and the materials revolution had begun with the pharmaceutical revolution quickly following as scientists learnt to juggle the basic elements in thousands of different ways.

Biology was last to arrive, with Darwin’’s publishing The Origin of the Species by Natural Selection in 1859. Gregor Mendel showed how species pass on their characteristics to their offspring, whether plant or animal and when Rosie Franklin X rayed DNA around 1950, Crick and Watson realised from the pictures that it formed a double helix which could easily replicate itself. Today our understand of Biology, means we can cure diseases, assist every living thing and produce food more successfully than ever before.

So how come these three totally different sciences, with their own unique histories, can be taught as one science today? As we have grown to understand more, so we have discovered that they are more interconnected than we ever realized. We are biological creatures, yet we move physically due to electrical impulses which carry signals around the body, generated by our control centre, the brain. These impulses enable the body to react through subtle chemical changes which enable us to grow and function biologically or move physically.

Recently, at the Beijing Olympics, the UK performed better than at any time for over 100 years. Just one example of our success shows that all three sciences were involved and were essential to our success? Our Cycling Team rode a bike which required physics to help understand how it works and how to make it work better. However, a modern bike is a triumph of chemical engineering using modern synthetic materials that are incredibly light, strong and efficient. However, the Bike still requires a biological rider, and he or she had to be supremely efficient, physically, thanks to an understanding of what the chemistry of their diet does to and for them in order to make them such a brilliant biological being. What is more, by 2012 when the Olympics come to London, every aspect of those three sciences will have been engineered better and advanced and improved, and so it will go on.

So, what does the future hold for all of us? Well, Physically we will engineer ever more efficient machines, devices, buildings and infrastructure that will also be cleaner and more environmentally friendly than anyone has yet imagined. We will learn to assemble Chemicals ever more efficiently, perhaps even building things one atom at a time and thus producing perfect devices, stronger and more reliable than ever believed possible. Biologically we will understand ever more about all living things, not just to cure diseases or keep them healthy, but to help ensure their survival in the future.

All these improvements will be engineered to happen. It is not a question of “If”; It is just a question of “When?” To my mind, this should be explained to every student, with the plea that they just think from time to time, “How many brilliant new scientists will we need to make all this happen, and could I perhaps be one of them?”

27th Sept, 2008. This article was written for and appeared in The Sun newspapeer on Friday 26th September 2008, following the news that EDF had bought British Energy and is planning 4 new Nuclear reactors on two established Nuclear sites in the UK.

Why So Unclear About Nuclear? _ asks Johnny Ball.

With over 400 Nuclear Power Generators operating without concern around the world, why should the UK, which invented the process, be last to adopt it now, or as the greens would wish, throw it out altogether? Every single branch of technology has improved beyond recognition over the past 20 years. Why should anyone think that the same has not happened in the Nuclear Industry?

OK, so what improvements? Well those that the anti brigade never acknowledge. In all fossil fuel power stations (mostly thanks to Rolls Royce UK technology) generator efficiency alone has improved over 15 years by a staggering 62% (from 33% to 54% ) producing that much more electricity from the same amount of fuel. Good Green News? You would think so?

Partly as a result of this, but more to do with improvements in design and operation, new Nuclear will produce around 8 times as much energy as the old Magnox stations did, from the same fuel. When one closed down, an engineer wrote to me, "We have been safely producing exactly what we were designed to produce, but with 50 year old plumbing. Imagine what we could do with the latest equipment."

The new plant will be around 25% the size of the old and easily fit onto existing sites. It will produce only 10% the waste, but it will eat the high level waste produced over the past 50 years and turn that to low level waste, as a small percentage of fuel used, year on year. It's just like taking a squeezed lemon and squeezing it more efficiently. Working for a year in or near a new plant, will expose you to as much radiation as you get from a single brazil nut.

Why should we trust the French to do it? I would much prefer it to be UK based, but at least the majority of the jobs will be filled by our engineers. However the French are already 85% Nuclear reliant and export cheap electricity across every border including the UK where between 5 and 15% of our energy most days, comes from.

The Ukraine of Chernobyl fame, is around 50% nuclear reliant with a desire to go to 85%. As in all things we now follow Europe, which is 30% reliant on Nuclear. For every European citizen the industry produces 5 grams of waste a year (much of that low level). Yet the Chemical Industry produces 120,000 grams of waste per person, much of it toxic and radio active, a greater amount by a factor of 24,000 and all without a squeak from the greens. How come?

Lets compare new Nuclear with Wind. Both are carbon free, discounting construction. Just one of these new stations will produce more electricity than all the wind farms, both built and planned. Not one wind tower would be built without massive subsidies from you and me, the tax payer _ how much? Well once you count industrial tax breaks, we're paying all of it. New Nuclear will neither ask for nor receive any Government funding, so sure or the operators, that they will make their money back over years, as is the normal way of business. EDF are already saying, it will produce the cheapest electricity of all systems. Why? Because they know it to be true.

An audit on British Wind Farms (and German and USA) showed them to be returning around 13% of their potential. So in fact, they are all costing 8 times as much as it says on the tin. Would you buy any product offering such a deal? New Nuclear is 8 times better than the old. Would you refuse such a deal? Of course not. Yet the greens are desperately pushing us towards the option that is 64/1 (64 times) less sensible? Cloud Cuckoo Land or what?

A friend who worked in the French Generating Industry all his life, told me, "Johnny, Britain is famous for the farce, with the MP with trousers around his ankles and the girl in the wardrobe in her underwear. British Energy policy over the last 20 years, would make the greatest farce ever." Please lets stop the farce and ensure a sound supply of electricity for the future, whilst we learn to adopt across the board, new technologies that will give us eventually, a safer and far greener world.

Here is another story that did not appear in the article. When Calder Hall was opened by the Queen, some 50 years ago, a scientist put a brown paper bag onto her outstretched hands. "It's very warm?" she said. "Yes Ma'am, it's plutonium," said the scientist, "but don't worry Ma'am, the brown paper is sufficient to ensure you come to no harm from the radiation". We haven't learnt much since then have we?

BEING SAT NAV SAVVY.

Do you have a Sat Nav system in your car?

Now that everyone wants one, the price has dropped like a stone and they are incredibly cheap, especially when you consider just how clever the maths needs to be to make them work reliably.

It was good old Galileo who worked out how cannon balls fly through the air and
Johannes Kepler who worked out how planets move in ellipses around the Sun.
Then along came Isaac Newton who put the two ideas together and came up with Gravity and how that works.

Now Newton’s maths is all fine for building bridges and skyscrapers and working out how aircraft fly, but it just wasn’t good enough to produce our Satellite systems. For that we needed Albert Einstein.

It was Albert and his relativity that threw a spanner in the works, relatively, when he said that a clock moving through space would move slower than a clock on earth.

Let me explain that, if I can. Light travels at 300,000 kilometres per second, which is very fast indeed. Einstein said, “If you look at a clock, you can see a second hand moving as it passes the time. What would happen, if while you were looking at the clock, you moved away on a beam of light? The clock would seem to stop moving and as far as you could see, it would be frozen in time. For you, on your beam of light, time would have stopped.”

Now we cannot travel at the speed of light but a satellite does travel at high speed and it is also travels some distance above the earth. So a GPS satellite’s clock does move slower --- and faster -- Ouch.

Well clever old Albert came up with two separate theories of relativity. First, Special Relativity and then General Relativity.

The GPS satellite system has 32 satellites at present of which between 8 and 10 are within sight of your Sat Nav at any one time. They travel in 6 different orbits, some 20,200 km above the earth at a speed of around 14,000 kph or about twice around the Earth in a day (only 1/77,000th the speed of light).

General Relativity says that a GPS satellite’s atomic clock will tick more rapidly by 46 microseconds per day, because of its distance from earth and the weaker pull of gravity, whilst Special Relativity says that the same clock will tick slower by 7 microseconds a day because of its speed, compared to the speed of light. So altogether it is going 38 millionths of a second faster, per day.

To account for that, when it is launched, software onboard gives it an offset frequency of 10.22999999543 MHz instead of 10.23 MHz and that keeps it in perfect line with clocks on the surface of the earth.

Now this is just as well. You see, if the two clocks were out of sync by 1/1,000,000,000 of a second per day then your Sat Nav would be out by 1 ft or 30 cms, which is as accurate as it needs to be.

However, if the two clocks were out by 100 times that and still only 1/10,000,000th of a second out, then your Sat Nav would be out by 100 ft or 30 metres, and you will be driving in your car with your relatives, on the wrong carriageway of the motorway.

You would also be going the wrong way, at which point, for you, time might suddenly and finally stop altogether, relatively.

THE ADVENT OF CHRISTMAS LECTURES

For most religions, candles represent life in the living flame. As Christian Advent Candles burn for the 25 days until Christmas, I am reminded of another 25, for ever linked to Christmas and also to science. In 1825 Michael Faraday became director of The Royal Institution in London and began the Faraday Christmas Lectures, still maintained to this day.

Faraday’s first Christmas Lecture topic was also his favourite, repeated at least 3 times in his life; “The Chemical History of a Candle”, so apt for Christmas. His book is now in print once again - probably no better Christmas present for a scientifically minded young person or perhaps more importantly, a modern science teacher?

Let me paraphrase the lectures as briefly as I can, to show the simplicity and richness in Faraday’s scientific method and its relevance in today’s scientific world.

A candle is made of a wax that usually contains paraffin, but which is clean and nonstaining. It has a wick which would burn up in a couple of minutes, but which in the wax candle, will last for hours? Why?

A match ignites the wick and immediately the wax just bellow starts to melt. Solid paraffin wax does not burn and neither does the liquid wax. However the liquid wax rises up the wick by capillary action. To test capillary action, stand a bunched up paper or cloth napkin in a saucer of water or wine and watch the liquid rise up the napkin. Let a towel hang over the edge of a bowl of water, with one end in the water. Quickly, the water travels up the towel, over the edge and forms a puddle outside the bowl.

Capillary action causes liquid wax to rise up the wick and vaporise as it gets hotter. Then at last it burns and sustains the candle flame. With inflammable liquids, it is the vapour that burns. In movies, when anyone sets light to leaking petrol, the flame hovers over the liquid fuel, but its heat creates more vapour and the flame gallops along the stream of fuel.

But wick, heat and inflammable vapour are not enough for the candle to burn. Place a glass over the candle and it goes out in seconds as the part of the air it needs for combustion - the Oxygen - is exhausted. The candle flame behaves like an invalid. They both need oxygen. Feed them pure oxygen and they are both invigorated. Without Oxygen nothing can burn. How do fire extinguishers work? They cut off the oxygen.

It is Oxygen that determines how the candle burns. Hot air rises and fresh air is drawn up the outside of the candle to replace it, keeping the outer surface of the candle cool. Under the flame, the heat produces a perfect bowl shaped pool of hot liquid wax at the top of the candle. But no Oxygen gets in and the flame sits above the liquid. The air which is 20% Oxygen, comes up the candle surface and bends into the flame, producing both the brightness and the characteristic shape of the flame. Place a card against one side of the candle, quite near the top and see how the flame is affected by receiving less rising oxygen.

But what happens to the paraffin wax vapour and oxygen as they burn? Hold a plate, upside down a few inches above a candle flame for a minute or so. A black spot of Carbon soot forms on the plate. Remove the plate and touch the spot with your finger - it is moist. The plate surface and the soot are wet. Where did the water come from?

Every time we burn anything, we are burning hydro-carbons. Oil, coal, gas, wood, paper, the food we eat (carbohydrate), and even ourselves, are all made of hydro-carbons - Hydrogen, the element the Sun is made of, and Carbon.

Hydro-carbons with oxygen, burn vigorously. A Hydro-Carbon molecule is 4 very light Hydrogen atoms with a single Carbon atom. Oxygen usually comes in groups of two atoms. Burn them and the Hydro Carbons split and they all get mixed up.

H H C H H when burned becomes H O H___?__H O H
O O O O ? O C O ?
One Oxygen joins each two Hydrogens to make two molecules of H2O - Water.
The Carbon joins two Oxygens to form CO2 , which Faraday called Carbonic Acid.

Nothing is lost - Nothing is gained. But Energy is released as Heat - a classic Chemical Change, as explained in Dalton’s Atomic Theory. This simple experiment explains how life itself exists on Earth. Hydrogen on its own is so light it would disappear up into space. Burn Hydrogen with Oxygen and it can power rockets into space.

Locked together, Oxygen and Hydrogen form Water, the most vital substance on the planet. The moist parts of your body are Water. The solid stuff is mostly Carbon.

Dalton and Faraday wondered why, if burning things always produces CO2 and H2O, there is not a build up of H2O and CO2 in the atmosphere? They realised that plants reverse the process. Plants absorb water and die without it - large trees suck up water in huge quantities.
But plants are not made of water. Plants are mostly Carbon.

CO2 is half as heavy as air again. Hot CO2 rises but soon cools and falls where the plants are waiting to gulp in all the CO2 they can get. A Tree is 85% Carbon, which all comes from the atmosphere. But of all the pant life on earth, a massive 80% is in the Oceans, which must also absorb vast quantities of CO2 to grow. The Carbon is fixed and becomes part of the plant, and the Oxygen is released back into the atmosphere, to maintain the balance.

Now man is capable of upsetting the balance, but with only 4% of all CO2 being man made, the upset is amazingly slight and natural extra plant growth more or less maintains the balance. You could say that man’s industry is helping to Green the planet.

Today, science teaching is bogged down by alarmist fears of climate change and students are asked not so much to learn and enjoy science, as to spend the majority of science lesson time in seeking ways to save the planet? And all of it is based on spurious fears of CO2 being somehow dangerous, which is totally false. CO2 is as natural and vital as water. The damage to science teaching and to the future scientists we are producing is immense.

The 2008 Faraday Christmas lectures are to be presented by Prof Chris Bishop, who will take us on a hi-tech trek to explore the science behind the digital revolution in search of the ultimate computer. As with Faraday in 1825, the audience will be rivetted and inspired by wonderful examples of man’s scientific ingenuity. They will not be depressed by largely baseless claims of impending doom or the idea that CO2 is in any way, a pollutant or a danger to the earth and to mankind. Merry Christmas.

Nothing is perfect? - “If only?” (In 90 words, for a forthcoming Book)

What is Britain’s most popular poem? Rudyard Kipling’s “If.” Remember? So how sad, when I spotted a fatal flaw; the line “If neither foe nor loving friend can hurt you!” What? If a loving friend cannot hurt you, you are not “a man, my son,” you are a self centred unfeeling monster. So dear Rudyard, how about the less callous “If you can bear the hurt your loved ones bring you?” That hurt is inevitable; most cutting; part of life! Manage that - then perhaps, “you’ll be a man, my son.”

Johnny Ball - Nov 08.