Writing Residencies: Five Weeks on the Side of a Mountain (Part 4) November 19, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Writing.
Tags: Books, Writing Retreats
add a comment
MORE FROM DOUG (Part 4)
If you want to start with Part 1 of this series, click HERE.
Nearly every writing day at Dorland Mountain Arts Colony was the same as the previous day. Day after day, pretty much the same. This was a good thing.
My morning routine was the same each and every day: Breakfast, then coffee on the cabin’s porch with some classical music playing in the background. After that, I spent between two and three hours at the table, writing. This was followed by lunch, another several hours writing, a walk or jog on the hill, time on the porch watching the sun go down, dinner, more writing, and, finally, reading before bed. After a night of sleep, it was lather, rinse, repeat.
Only two days of the week differed from this daily schedule. Every Monday morning, I went into town for email and groceries. On Fridays after Anna arrived for the weekend, we went to Barnes and Noble, a movie, and dinner at Yard House. Friday nights became a comforting and easy reward. While they varied from my usual routine, we established a Friday evening routine that we repeated. We even had the same meal each Friday evening. Ordering the same meal wasn’t exactly an intentional part the routine; we merely became overly fond of the gardein buffalo wings and the ahi poke stack.
At some point, I’d certainly like to explore more of Temecula and its environs, but that isn’t why I was there in September. The daily routine, a ritual, if you will, trained my mind and body to understand what was needed each day and the next. Routine was extraordinarily effective and complemented the quietude I lauded last week. In fact, one of the most difficult parts of my transition from the sabbatical back to my ordinary life has been the loss of daily ritual.
Exercise and reading were each part of my daily routine. People who know me know that I love to work out. Just as in my ordinary life, I found that my daily walking and jogging on the road—the steep hill—that leads up from the valley to the cabins was an integral part of my life. Many of my best ideas occurred on the hill. Just the act of giving myself over to movement and to my physical body freed my mind to explore. It was one of the most important times of the day for me.
I write because I read. A lifetime as a reader is one of the things that convinced me to try my hand at writing in the first place. Like many writers I know, I can become engrossed in a book to the detriment of nearly all of other activities in my life. That’s why I avoided the stack of novels that I have sitting next to my bed at home and, instead, focused on shorter pieces and poetry.
Over the past few years, I’ve heard an impressive number of fiction writers recommending poetry as an important part of any writer’s reading. I decided to redouble my efforts in this area, and the Dorland retreat was as good a time as any to rekindle my love for poetry. I also read a single short novel, Hermann Hesse’s Siddhartha. In addition to being of modest length, Siddhartha has a lyric, poetic quality to it. My reading, then, became a daily reminder that my work was dependent on words and sentences as well as on plot, setting, and character.
I’d like to have some grand summary about the importance of setting goals and tracking progress toward them, but that really didn’t play an enormous part in my five weeks on the side of a mountain. I certainly kept track of my progress via word count and making sure that I was moving from one chapter to the next, scene-by-scene. But I didn’t fret about hitting a daily goal, in part because the quietude and routine kept me writing steadily.
In the end, it was really the one big goal—completing a draft—that I kept present in my mind. Each day was simply another step toward that largest goal. I achieved that goal.
And now I have begun all over again, on page one, to revise.
Writing Residencies: Five Weeks on the Side of a Mountain (Part 3) November 12, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Writing.
Tags: Writing Retreats
add a comment
DOUG’S OVERVIEW (Part 3)
Last week, I wrote about what I accomplished at Dorland Mountain Arts Colony in numbers: 76,000 words. I thought generally about how I did that, focusing on one task (completing a draft of my novel) and continually moving forward, instead of allowing myself to revise along the way.
In those five weeks, I learned a lot about myself and how I work. While each writer must find his or her own way through a book project, I find it helpful to hear about how other writers do it and to test out some of those attitudes and practices. With that in mind, I’ve been thinking more deeply about how I managed to write 76,000 words in five weeks and end up with a complete draft (admittedly parts had been drafted earlier this summer during a shorter, self-made retreat in Santa Fe).
I was Alone.
Although Anna came to visit on the weekends, during the week I was alone. If it weren’t for my evening phone calls with Anna, I wouldn’t have spoken with another human being for days at a time. Dorland is set up so that, if it is solitude you are after, it is solitude you will find.
I knew that being alone would be part of the deal going into this residency. I wasn’t necessarily worried about it, but I was interested to see how I’d handle it because I’m a fairly social person. When you work and live on a college campus, you are typically surrounded by people, and I enjoy a lot of those interactions.
Quiet is a remarkable thing. I don’t just mean the absence of sound, although that is certainly a component of it. I mean to imply the quietude that results from an absence of distractions. Being alone gave rise to a stillness in me that allowed me to create a space where the primary thing in my mind was the work, the novel.
In the end, being alone wasn’t hard at all. In fact, I liked it.
The Internet is the devil.
For me, one enormous aspect of this quietude was the absence of Internet access. Dorland has cell phone access, but no wifi. While I had my smart phone with me, the size of that device discouraged extensive use for social media, browsing, or extensive research. I purposefully left the iPad, which is more tempting, at home.
When I say that the Internet is the devil, I mean this in the same vein as ‘the devil is in the details,’ and the perhaps greatest source of details in my life—things that I have to schedule and track, generate and respond to—is email. I’ve reached the point in my career, as I suspect many of us have, where answering email only begets more email.
The same is true for all of my various social media outlets. They are self-perpetuating. The more time I spend curating my Facebook and Twitter feeds, the more time I have to spend monitoring and contributing to the outcome of my initial posting.
I understand the importance of these activities in the grand scheme of a writing life, but it was liberating to be free of them for five weeks. In an earlier post, we wrote about Pico Iyer’s notion of ‘The Device Sabbath.’ Iyer takes one day of rest from his devices. I had long stretches without my devices, and it was heavenly.
With these notions as the backdrop, I’ve also been thinking about the role of routine and some other odds and ends. So I’ll wrap this series up next week with those ideas.
Writing Residencies: Five Weeks on the Side of a Mountain (Part 2) November 5, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Writing.
Tags: Books, Writing Retreats
add a comment
Read Part 1 HERE.
DOUG’S OVERVIEW (Part 2)
My sojourn at Dorland Mountain Arts Colony started on Saturday, August 30th. From that vantage, 36 uninterrupted days stretched out before me.
Earlier in the summer, I’d kicked off my sabbatical with a shorter writing retreat in Sante Fe, and it had been fantastic. I’m as taken with my daily word count as any beginning writer, and what I accomplished in Santa Fe led me to develop some overly optimistic projections of how much I could get down on paper in a given timeframe. In some ways, then, those 36 uninterrupted days seemed a vast expanse divided neatly into word-count benchmarks that Scrivener would track for me.
I’m never as productive as when I can focus on a single task. I have several friends who claim that multitasking is their forte, and I can juggle multiple responsibilities with the best of them, but I never feel as comfortable doing that as I do when I’m working on one thing. Though I thoroughly love my current job, one aspect that I miss from my previous job at Fermilab is the ability to concentrate on a single task for long stretches of time.
Santa Fe had been like that for my writing. I had one thing to do: work on the novel. Each day was centered on that simple premise. I wanted Dorland to work like that as well.
The Canadian novelist Margaret Laurence once said,
When I say ‘work’ I only mean writing. Everything else is odd jobs.
I don’t think of being a librarian and a professor as odd jobs, but when I am able to dedicate my days to writing, I get a sense of what she was talking about.
So, when I headed to Dorland, the goal was simple: complete the first draft of my novel.
At first, this goal seemed a daunting task. If I measured my progress on the novel by word count and finished scenes (checked-off against my outline), I was already roughly one-third of the way through the novel when I sat myself down on the side of a mountain. If I was going to meet my goal, I’d have to keep in mind last week’s admonition about perfection from Anne Lamott.
A complete draft would require steady forward progress. No editing. No revising. No looking back. In the beginning, I allowed myself to go back to clean up things if I made a character or plot change that altered an earlier part of the story. A couple of weeks into my Dorland stay, I no longer gave myself that loophole.
I left Dorland on Sunday, October 5th. I finished the first draft during my five weeks on the mountain. I even had a few days to spare, and I did let myself go back to do some revising during the last couple of days.
I wrote 76,000 words in that time. And all the novel’s parts are there. It’s complete. Of course, even though the draft is in need of thorough revision now, I’m thrilled with that creative output.
However, I think that the things that I learned about myself and how I work are just as important as that word count. Every writer works somewhat differently and must find his or her own way through a book project. That said, we can learn—and steal—strategies from each other. Here at Lofty Ambitions, we’ve written before about some practices and attitudes that have helped us stick with large tasks (HERE and HERE, for instance). In the next post, I’ll write about some of the things that I took away from my five weeks on the mountain.
Writing Residencies: Five Weeks on the Side of a Mountain October 30, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Writing.
Tags: Art & Science, Writing Retreats
add a comment
DOUG’S OVERVIEW (PART 1)
Warning—this post uses a bit of profanity. It’s so commonplace in the adult world that most of us take in for granted. That said, Lofty Ambitions has some younger readers. In fact, Anna and I have received email from some parents indicating that they read our blog with their children. We love that part of our audience, and it’s garnered some of our favorite anecdotes over the years.
Just before I went to Dorland Mountain Arts Colony at the end of the summer, I saw the following quote in my Twitter stream:
Novelist’s prime rule: Shitty first drafts. The need for perfection has killed more novels than N.Y. editors.
I’ve left the name of the Twitter user off of the tweet because that person didn’t acknowledge the origin of the quote. It comes from Anne Lamott’s Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life.
Besides the beautiful serendipity of being reminded of Bird by Bird in a tweet (rimshot!), Lamott’s book often comes up when writers discussed their favorite books on writing. In fact, I’ve heard more than one writer express that it’s their absolute favorite book on craft. Here’s the full quote, which I find to be very instructive.
Perfectionism is the voice of the oppressor, the enemy of the people. It will keep you cramped and insane your whole life, and it is the main obstacle between you and a shitty first draft. I think perfectionism is based on the obsessive belief that if you run carefully enough, hitting each stepping-stone just right, you won’t have to die. The truth is that you will die anyway and that a lot of people who aren’t even looking at their feet are going to do a whole lot better than you, and have a lot more fun while they’re doing it.
Although I had never been completely paralyzed by an abject pursuit of perfection, I have on occasion hindered my own progress through attempts to get everything just right before being able to move on. This quote and the intention behind it had arrived at just the right moment. I adopted it as a mantra for my recent stay at Dorland. I vowed that I would move continuously forward on my novel project and that I would worry about making things better—less shitty—in revision.
Some of this was a practical necessity. My sabbatical (or, in the parlance of the library where I work, a professional development leave) was extensive but not endless. The deadline imposed by the end of my leave was looming six weeks in the future, and if I was going to get a complete draft of my novel, something was going to have to fall by the wayside. The pursuit of perfection—a doomed folly in the first place—seemed a perfectly logical thing to give up.
Anna and I are starting to feel a significant connection to Dorland. Like most of us, I grow attached to places. In a midlife discovery that continues to surprise me, the desert has become an important place for me. Years ago, I took a sunrise horseback ride in the desert near Wickenburg, Arizona. For me, during that first desert foray on the back of the horse, it was the colors and the clarity of the light. I later tried to describe the experience to Anna in a phone call. She laughed at me then. Now, Anna and I have both grown fond of the landscape of New Mexico’s high desert near Los Alamos and Santa Fe as well as at Dorland. It’s quiet, hot, dry, removed somehow from the world with which we’re more familiar. The desert reminds us that only certain types of plants and creatures survive in certain environments.
Our stays at Dorland have often included surprises. During my recent stay, an enormous thunderstorm swept over the Palomar Mountains, and it rained. Hard. The hard rain was followed by an even harder hailstorm. Did I mention that it hit 107 F that day? Two of my lizard friends took shelter on the porch of my cabin during the storm. Growing up in Illinois didn’t prepare me to write those words in a single sentence: desert, hailstorm, lizard.
Even though it happened little more than a year ago, one of our Dorland surprises has made into my family lore. This is, of course, the story of the tarantula who came to dinner. My father particularly likes this story. He’s asked me to retell it each time I’ve seen him over the past year. He likes it best of all when Anna is there to add the part that I’ve been accused of leaving out. It seems that my version doesn’t include a supposed squeal that I purportedly emitted upon seeing the tarantula. I have no memory of this scream. I don’t normally doubt the veracity of my wife’s claims, but hers is the only testimony of this event. When Anna chimes in with her bit, my father chuckles loudly. It’s almost a guffaw. I think he likes it that someone is able to keep my ego in check.
If you can’t already tell, I thoroughly enjoyed my most recent stay at Dorland. With five weeks on the side of Palomar Mountain at my disposal, I even managed to learn a few things about my self and about writing. I’ll cover those things in next week’s post.
JPL Open House 2014 (Part 2) October 22, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Science, Space Exploration.
Tags: Countdown to The Cold War, JPL, Mars, Physics
add a comment
On October 12th, Doug spent the day at the 2014 iteration of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL) Open House. You can read the first Lofty installment HERE, but there’s more! It was a day full of space-nerd goodness, and one of the highpoints was Site 18: “Flying Saucers for Mars.”
This particular site was dedicated to a project known to researchers by the acronym LDSD, the Low-Density Supersonic Demonstrators. Low-Density is a descriptor for Mars’s atmosphere, and Supersonic is an indication of the speed range where the balloons and parachutes are useful. To cut to the chase, we’re talking parachutes—parachutes for Mars—and how they work in a low-density atmosphere and at supersonic speeds.
Tommaso Rivellini, one of the EDL (Entry, Descent, and Landing) engineering leads for the Mars Curiosity lander, describes the problem as this in his article “The Challenges of Landing on Mars”:
Upon arrival at Mars, a spacecraft is traveling at velocities of 4 to 7 kilometers per second (km/s). For a lander to deliver its payload to the surface, 100 percent of this kinetic energy must be safely removed. Fortunately, Mars has an atmosphere substantial enough for the combination of a high-drag heat shield and a parachute to remove 99 percent and 0.98 percent respectively of the kinetic energy. Unfortunately, the Martian atmosphere is not substantial enough to bring a lander to a safe touchdown.
Kinetic energy is the energy of motion, and the wispy atmosphere of Mars—roughly 1% as dense as Earth’s atmosphere—is just thick enough for a parachute to do its job. So, unlike with Earthbound parachutes, that job doesn’t include gently lowering the lander to the surface. The atmosphere on Mars simply isn’t dense enough for a parachute to bring the mass of a spacecraft to the surface.
Our current Mars parachute designs date to the era of Viking Martian landers in 1976, and those parachute systems have reached their performance limits with the Mars Science Lander (MSL). More popularly known as Curiosity, the size of the one-ton MSL is often compared to a Mini Cooper automobile.
In order to deliver landers to Mars that are larger than Curiosity, or to land in a mountainous region—Mars has the largest mountain in the solar system in the 69,459 foot tall Olympus Mons and four other mountains which are taller than comparably puny Everest—NASA needs new parachute designs. LDSD steps in.
LDSD is suite of deceleration technologies being investigated by NASA. The project is being lead by principal investigator Dr. Ian Clark. Clark earned his PhD in Aerospace Engineering at Georgia Tech, and he has been awarded the prestigious Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers.
The first LDSD testing mechanism that Clark discussed was a rocket sled used to test the SIAD-R (Supersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator). This particular device isn’t a parachute. It’s more like an inflatable bladder that encircles the outer edge of a spacecraft’s aeroshell. This device is meant to slow the spacecraft from supersonic speeds (ranging from Mach 2 – 3.5) to subsonic speeds. A look at the videos with this post will give you an idea of the origin of the “flying saucer” part of the “Flying Saucers for Mars” title of this exhibit.
Clark indicated that the rocket sled, which he vividly described as a siege tower, was powered by Cold War-era solid rocket motors that had formerly been used as a part of a missile defense system for Los Angeles. Though he didn’t say it by name, Clark could only be talking about the Project Nike sites that ringed Los Angeles. It’s wonderful to think about these Cold Warriors being used for science as opposed to their original purpose.
The LDSD program also included the testing of a more traditional looking parachute, complete with a billowing canopy and long control lines. In keeping with the rigorous nature of its intended use, the parachute design also required some extreme engineering so that it might be tested in a manner that approximates its use. Because of the low density of the Martian atmosphere, the parachute has to be enormous to generate the necessary amount of drag to slow the spacecraft down. In this case, the parachute that was tested was thirty-four meters (roughly 110 feet) in diameter. A parachute this size is too large for a wind tunnel, and so it has to be tested outside. The parachute test rig resembled a Rube Goldberg device as much as something designed by NASA. For this test, a helicopter carried the parachute canopy aloft. Lines from the canopy (the line was nearly a kilometer in length) were connected via a wench/puller to yet another rocket sled. Once the helicopter released the canopy of the supersonic parachute, the rocket sled was ignited to tug on the parachute to simulate the forces to which it would be subject on Mars. In this test, the peak force generated by the rocket sled and transferred to the parachute was over 90,000 foot pounds. Although the parachute did develop a single tear, the test was deemed a success.
The second flying saucer (the test device really does resemble a saucer) of the LDSD program took part in an extremely ambitious test that was conducted this past summer. An enormous experimental balloon—it has a volume of more than 1million cubic meters and, according to Clark, when fully expanded it’s the size of the Rose Bowl—carried the test device to an altitude of 120,000 feet. Once the balloon reached this height, it released the saucer, and the fun began. A solid rocket motor fired, accelerated the saucer to Mach 4, and propelled it to an altitude of 180,000 feet. It’s necessary to conduct the test at this altitude, because this is the zone where Earth’s atmosphere most resembles that of Mars. At this point, the SIAD device expanded and began slowing the saucer from its top speed of Mach 4. At Mach 2.5, onboard sensors deployed the new supersonic parachute design. In this test, the supersonic parachute failed to fill completely with air, thus pointing out another design flaw. But, this is why testing is done, to find the weaknesses in a design. So it was a successful failure.
The total cost of the LDSD program is about $200M. Considering the price of the Curiosity mission was about $2.5B, this is a small price compared to the cost of real failure.
The Academic Minute: Science Meets Poetry October 20, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Science, Writing.
Tags: Art & Science, Books, Radioactivity
add a comment
On Saturday, Anna was featured on The Academic Minute, an NPR show out of WAMC that airs on stations nationwide, mostly in university towns. Her subject was the intersection of science and poetry. What’s great is that her segment–both audio and transcript–are now in the archives at The Academic Minute, and the page also includes tidbits about some of Anna’s poems that incorporate scientific terminology and concepts.
LISTEN/READ: ANNA ON THE ACADEMIC MINUTE
One of the recurring goals of both artists and scientists is to explain the universe. A poem can offer a particularized truth: a perspective that, because it is embodied in language that engages the intellect, senses, and emotions, offers knowledge of our world. Similarly, both poets and scientists are limited by the constraints of their respective disciplines, but the methodology and priorities of each are quite distinct.
JPL Open House 2014 October 15, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Space Exploration.
Tags: JPL, Mars
add a comment
This past weekend, October 11th and 12th, marked the return of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL) annual Open House. The 2013 event was canceled due to the federal government’s budgetary issues. The Lofty Duo has attended JPL’s Open House in previous years, but this year only Doug was able to make the trek up and around Los Angeles to JPL’s home in Pasadena.
JPL’s Open House is an intoxicating mix of Southern California street fair, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, & Math) carnival, and full-on NerdFest. The Open House regularly draws upwards of 15,000 people on each of its two days. A casual glance around the JPL grounds made it seem as if this year’s event might actually top those numbers. Perhaps it was a bit of pent-up demand deriving from last year’s cancellation and people’s continuing enthusiasm for space exploration.
The Open House is also a large event from a geographical perspective. As the map of JPL’s event shows, there were 22 different sites at the JPL campus to visit, if a person had time. Several years ago, a museum exhibit curator told us that she planned for three kinds of patrons: streakers, strollers, and studiers. Here at Lofty Ambitions, we are definitely studiers. We read every bit of text that accompanies an exhibit, and we have been known to track down docents to get any lingering questions answered. In that context, Doug had to be very strategic in planning his JPL Open House experience.
The attendance figures that point to interest in science in general and space science in particular are heartening. However, large crowds also meant long lines for certain sites. Last time, this waiting led to a tiny bit of disappointment because we couldn’t see as much as we’d expected. Specifically, we were unable to make it into the Space Flight Operations Facility (SFOF). So, this time, the SFOF was his first stop.
Built in 1963, the SFOF is JPL’s mission control center for all of its interplanetary missions. The volunteer who introduced the SFOF pointed out that not only are the missions controlled via the SFOF, but all of the science data that is collected by the interplanetary probes and planetary rovers first passes through the computers of the SFOF.
Included among the missions currently controlled from the SFOF are the two still-active Mars rovers: the Mini Cooper-sized Curiosity and the more diminutive, but remarkably tenacious, Opportunity. As of this writing, Opportunity is on Sol 3813. A Sol is a Martian solar day, and it is roughly 3% longer than an Earth day. Opportunity and Spirit were originally designed for a 90-day mission length, and as the home page for the rovers proudly points out, it also means that Opportunity is 3723 Sols past its warranty. In other words, Opportunity has been operational 40 times longer that was planned.
In JPL’s mission control, the person in charge of a particular mission is known as the Ace. During this year’s Open House, the Aces for both Curiosity and Opportunity were present. The tour of the SFOF also included the room where Curiosity’s landing was controlled. A cardboard cut-out of the now famous “NASA Mohawk Guy,” Bobak Ferdowsi, stood keeping watch in the corner.
After the SFOF, Doug headed to site #17, Mobility and Robotic Technologies. On display in the parking lot of JPL Building 318 were a variety of rover-like vehicles. Two projects that caught Doug’s eye: TRESSA, or Teamed Robots for Exploration and Science on Steep Areas, and BRUIE, or Buoyant Rover for Under-Ice Exploration. Although the lengths that NASA scientists will go to for an acronym is often impressive in and of itself, the technology behind these two projects was more impressive.
TRESSA uses three collaborative robots—two so-called Anchorbots and a Cliffbot—to scale rocky slopes of up to 85 degrees. TRESSA was designed to perform experimental work similar to the Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity. In the summer of 2006, TRESSA was tested in Norway.
BRUIE is a kind of submersible. It’s controlled like a rover, but it’s designed to crawl along the underside of open water ice. The ultimate hope would be to use a BRUIE-inspired robot to investigate the ocean’s of Jupiter’s moon, Europa.
Doug also had a chance to see a film about the Low-Density Supersonic Demonstrator project, so it was a full day and seems to deserve more than one post.
To read Part 2 about–wait for it–LDSD, click HERE.
Countdown to The Cold War: October 1944 October 8, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Science.
Tags: Books, Countdown to The Cold War, Nobel Prize, Nuclear Weapons
add a comment
In the book, Hanford and the Bomb: An Oral History of World War II, author S. L. Sanger gives perhaps the most straightforward description of Hanford’s role in the Manhattan Project:
In simplest terms, Hanford’s job was to make plutonium inside the nuclear reactors by bombarding uranium fuel with neutrons, and to separate the plutonium from the irradiated uranium. The first step was nuclear; the second was chemical.
The first Hanford nuclear reactor (also known as atomic piles in the 1940s) in which the bombardment process took place was the B Reactor. After a fifteenth-month construction period, scientists and engineers began coaxing the B Reactor into operation in the fall of 1944. The B Reactor initially went critical on September 26, 1944. But getting the B Reactor into operational status was a lengthy, problematic exercise. Many of those problems were diagnosed and solved 70 years ago this month, in October 1944.
When you think of the Hanford reactors, imagine a roughly square box—36 ft. x 28 ft. x 36 ft.—of graphite with horizontal holes that function as tubes running through the box. In order to create a functioning reactor, the horizontal tubes are filled with cans—“slugs” in the nuclear business—of uranium. The nuclear reactor goes critical when enough uranium is placed inside the graphite box. If everything is properly controlled, the reaction is said to be self-sustaining.
The Hanford reactors were designed with 2,004 horizontal tubes. There were also a number of tubes for control rods, also mounted horizontally, that cut across the 2,004 tubes designed to contain uranium. The control rods, as the name implies, were used to control the level of neutron production within the pile and, therefore, the power production of the reactor. There were a few tubes drilled vertically through the reactor as well. These tubes could be used to shut down the reactor in an emergency. That way, in the event of the failure of the control rods, a last-ditch system consisting of a boron solution could be dumped over the pile from five 105-gallon tanks positioned on top of the reactor.
The amount of material and effort that went into the construction of the reactors is staggering. In his book The History and the Science of the Manhattan Project, physicist Bruce Cameron Reed has the following to say:
The piles themselves were welded to be gas-tight, and contained 2.5 million cubic feet of masonite; 4,415 t of steel plate; 1,093 t of cast iron; 2,200 t of graphite; 221,000 feet of copper tubing; 176,700 feet of plastic tubing; and some 86,000 feet of aluminum tubing.
As he had with the first atomic pile—CP-1—famously built under the stands of the University of Chicago’s former football field, Enrico Fermi loaded the first uranium slugs into the B Reactor at Hanford. This action, informally known as “the blessing of the pope,” took place on September 13, 1944. Loading of uranium continued until various measures of criticality took place on September 15-18.
In late September, power levels in the B reactor began to fluctuate because of the creation of the fission product xenon-135. The xenon-135 was capturing neutrons at a greater rate than had been predicted, and the resulting effect played havoc with the reactor’s ability to sustain a nuclear reaction. The solution turned out to be to add more uranium into more of the reactor’s tubes. The effect was discovered at many power levels. As a result, for much of October the engineers and scientists continued to add more uranium slugs to the reactor.
About the construction of Hanford as a whole, Reed says, “The total volume of land excavated at Hanford was equivalent to about 10% of that of the Panama Canal.” Though Hanford is almost entirely decommissioned now, the volume of radioactive waste that remains there makes it the most contaminated nuclear site in the United States.
Writing Residencies: Dorland and Balancing Projects October 1, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Writing.
Tags: Writing Retreats
add a comment
ANNA’S UPDATE (See the previous update from Anna HERE.) First, an aside. Please take this post as a reminder to back up your hard drive! Because I was aware of writing new pieces every weekend, I became more cognizant of backing up my hard drive each week. According to one data storage company, more than one-quarter of people report never backing up their data, fewer than that report backing up at least weekly, those over 55 are more likely than the 18-44 crowd to back up data frequently, and men back up frequently at a higher rate than women. If you’ve added stuff you can’t afford to lose, make sure it’s saved in a second place—external hard drive, cloud, emailed to yourself, copied on a usb stick, something.
I often have differently sized writing projects at different stages of development. Setting several things in motion, knowing that not all things will pan out, has risks and sometimes makes my progress look slow for a while. Still, I’ve heard other writers talk about the need to juggle projects in order to increase chances of success, and it’s the tack I tend to take.
Usually, I jot a writing project on my list of things to do and, if it has a deadline, jot it on my calendar in a couple of places as well (when it’s due but also a reminder of when to really get working on it seriously). I fit such a writing project into my job obligations and make steady progress. Or, sometimes, I don’t fit it in, maybe I can’t meet that soft but important starting date, or maybe I make tough decisions about how to spend my time, and I let it drop off my list.
Before this month going back and forth between Dorland Mountain Arts Colony and home, I’ve never as consciously thought about and planned ahead how to use my day-to-day-to-day schedule to make steady progress on specific writing projects. The compartmentalization of this month (which I wrote about in a previous post) has given me a way to schedule writing projects more consciously and steadily. When I’m not at Dorland, I don’t work on these writing projects at all, other than to print a draft or pack a book that might be a good reference point. Another long weekend of writing is ahead, and I plan for that time.
What’s great about my current writing schedule is that I’m able to work on the big project—a book I’m writing with a colleague in another field—over the whole month, bits and pieces at a time. Because I rewrote that manuscript on the whole over the summer and most chapters also had edits on hard copy before this Dorland back-and-forth began, I can keep dropping in and out of the revising process without losing momentum. This steady, unpressured pace will get me to the soft deadline I have with my co-author in another week. (We’ll have more work to do, but we’ll be working with something complete.)
In addition to making progress on the big project, my goal for each long weekend at Dorland is to finish the small project I’d started the previous weekend and to start another small project. (I don’t finish even tiny projects in one weekend because I need time and perspective between drafting and revising.) Each small project is something very specific that I can draft one weekend and revise the next, maybe a short essay or a couple of poems. These do not emerge out of a general impulse that I must write. Each emerges from not only an idea but also an assignment of sorts, a particular journal’s submissions guidelines, for instance.
Writing residencies are great for large projects, and that’s how I’ve treated residencies before and how Doug is treating his residency now—with a book project as the priority, a big risk in some ways. (We always also keep up with this blog.) This time, by figuring out how to balance projects according to my compartmentalized schedule, I leave Dorland each weekend with something complete—an essay, a couple of poems. Once thus far, I submitted a two-weekend finished piece as soon as I made my way through traffic back home to wifi. Journalists work on tight deadlines, and maybe that’s more realistic than I’d led myself to believe all these years.
Also, while I’m at home, I have the in-progress essay or poem in the back of mind, as I teach, wander among meetings, catch up with laundry, and back up my hard drive. In a way, that’s the sort of approach Ernest Hemingway took, ending his day of writing before he’d exhausted the idea or scene at hand, knowing exactly what he’d be jumping back into in the morning. As I make the drive back to Dorland for each long weekend, I know what’s waiting for me there: a specific writing task and, of course, Doug. On those drives, I’m often smiling both coming and going and thinking, How amazing is that!
Countdown to the Cold War: September 1944 September 24, 2014Posted by Lofty Ambitions in Science.
Tags: Books, Cancer, Countdown to The Cold War, Nuclear Weapons, Physics, Radioactivity, WWII
In the last couple of posts, we’ve begun our Countdown to the Cold War by talking about the reorganized at Los Alamos in the fall of 1944 to develop a method known as implosion. You can read the last post in the series by clicking HERE.
The next step on the Manhattan Project’s Countdown to the Cold War occurred on September 22, 1944, and was known as the RaLa experiment. Very early in the implosion research program, it became obvious that being able to systematically verify the success or failure of implosion would be a crucial measure for success. But very few experimental measures of implosion existed at the time.
In particular, for a successful atomic weapon, it was imperative that the scientists be able to engineer a symmetric implosion. Early attempts at creating implosion revealed a wide range of asymmetric behaviors that scattered material unevenly. In order to measure the symmetry of implosion, it became necessary to observe implosion events with instruments. One technique that was developed for observing implosion was known as RaLa.
RaLa is a shorthand for the active ingredient in a RaLa test: radiolanthanum. Radiolanthanum (La-140) is a manmade radioactive isotope of lanthanum. According to Critical Assembly (by Hoddesson, et al), Robert Serber first outlined what would become the RaLa method on November 1, 1943. Serber was arguably Robert Oppenheimer’s right-hand man at Los Alamos and someone familiar to folks there for the Los Alamos Primer, the introductory lectures that kicked off the Manhattan Project’s bomb design effort.
The RaLa method depended upon the use of gamma radiation given off by the radiolanthanum isotope. Gamma radiation—or just gamma rays—are a very energetic type of electromagnetic radiation. The EPA.gov website devoted to radiation protection has this to say about gamma rays:
Gamma photons have about 10,000 times as much energy as the photons in the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum. Gamma photons have no mass and no electrical charge. The are pure electromagnetic energy.
Highly energetic gamma rays travel at the speed of light and easily pass through most materials. It is this set of properties that made them useful in characterizing the implosion necessary for setting off an atomic bomb.
Serber hypothesized that by placing an amount of radiolanthanum in the center of the metal sphere to be compressed by implosion, the strength of the gamma rays emitted during that implosion would vary in such a way that the scientists could use instruments to understand how symmetrical the implosion was. Serber knew that, as an implosion event progressed in a metallic core (uranium or plutonium for the atom bomb), there would be significant changes in the density of the material being compressed. These changes in density would retard the gamma rays in predictable ways. In addition, because the gamma rays would radiate out from the center of the sphere, the scientists would be able to collect information about the implosion in three physical dimensions.
Given that the radiolanthanum material would be at the center of an explosion, there would of course be radioactive debris and dispersal of that debris. Gamma radiation is ionizing—releases electrons—and therefore has biological implications, meaning that it affects human bodies. And because gamma rays penetrate materials, they can be very dangerous. In this way, the RaLa experiments constitute the world’s first production of radioactive fallout, a waft of the Cold War to come. In order to minimize human exposure to the radiation that would be released, the RaLa experiments were held offsite in Bayo Canyon, located about two miles east of Los Alamos—a sort of lab away from lab. Checking the wind direction or measuring fallout, however, weren’t much a priority for these early radioactive test explosions.