Connect with us

Science

W. Jason Morgan, 87, Dies; Developed the Theory of Plate Tectonics

Published

on

W. Jason Morgan, 87, Dies; Developed the Theory of Plate Tectonics

W. Jason Morgan, who in 1967 developed the theory of plate tectonics — a framework that revolutionized the study of earthquakes, volcanoes and the slow, steady shift of the continents across the earth’s mantle — died on July 31 at his home in Natick, Mass. He was 87.

His children, Jason Morgan and Michèle Morgan DeLossa, confirmed the death.

The notion that the earth’s surface moved was not new when Professor Morgan, who taught at Princeton University, first presented his theory at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in Washington in April 1967. People had long noticed, for example, that the northeastern edge of South America seemed to match the notch along Africa’s western coast, and wondered if they had once fit together like puzzle pieces.

By the mid-20th century, researchers had made significant steps forward in studying the movement of the earth’s surface, including the discovery that stretches of the sea floor were spreading apart. But the idea, called continental drift, remained highly debated into the 1960s, and no one had come up with a way to synthesize it all into a grand, testable framework.

Professor Morgan had initially planned to discuss underwater trenches at the Geophysical Union meeting. But after reading a paper about fracture zones — vast scars across the ocean floor that offer evidence of past distortions in the earth’s surface — he changed his mind.

Advertisement

Looking at a map of several such zones in the Pacific Ocean, he realized that they were not random; they could be understood as a result of great plates colliding and pulling apart as they slowly moved around the earth.

He also posited that the plates were rigid and fixed in shape, whereas previous theories had argued that the continents scooted around the earth on a malleable mantle. That insight made it possible to measure plate movement in the past and predict it in the future.

With just weeks to go before his talk, Professor Morgan set aside his original subject and dived into his new conjecture. He collected reams of data from expeditions to map the ocean floor, then built a computer program to test what he found against his hypothesis.

“Mom said he basically worked nonstop,” said his son, Jason, himself a geophysicist at Cornell University. “And she was getting a little nervous whether this was what life was going to be like, married to an academic.”

Professor Morgan took just an outline with him to the podium, along with handouts for the audience. Afterward he turned his talk into a paper, which he published in the Journal of Geophysical Research in March 1968.

Advertisement

In the meantime, a pair of researchers affiliated with the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Dan McKenzie and Robert Parker, published a paper in the journal Nature describing the same theory as Professor Morgan’s, though with different evidence.

While Professor McKenzie is sometimes credited with discovering plate tectonics, and while he, Professor Morgan and Xavier Le Pichon, another tectonics pioneer, shared the prestigious Japan Prize in 1990 in recognition of their work, Professor McKenzie said in a phone interview that Professor Morgan “has priority” in taking credit for defining the theory.

The impact of plate tectonics was immediate. It offered a unified framework for research across the natural sciences, opening the door to new advances in seismology, volcanology and evolutionary biology.

“It was all very, very quick,” said Professor McKenzie, who later joined the faculty at the University of Cambridge, where he is now an emeritus professor. “In 1965, no one believed anything. By the end of 1967, everything was finished.”

So rapid and complete was the academic and public acceptance of plate tectonics that within a decade it was standard fare in grade-school science textbooks. A few skeptics remained, but they too came around once satellites and GPS data were able to confirm Professor Morgan’s theory without reservation.

Advertisement

“‘Paradigm shift’ is an overused phrase, but this was a paradigm shift,” John A. Tarduno, a professor of geophysics at the University of Rochester, said by phone.

William Jason Morgan was born on Oct. 10, 1935, in Savannah, Ga., to William Morgan, who owned a hardware and dry goods store with his family, and Maxie Ponita (Donehoo) Morgan, a French teacher and a volunteer with the Girl Scouts of America.

He attended Georgia Tech, where he initially studied mechanical engineering with an eye toward joining the family business. But halfway through his studies he fell in love with physics, switched majors (he graduated in 1955) and started looking for a different career.

He spent two years in the Navy as an instructor at its Nuclear Power School, an experience that pointed him toward graduate studies. He entered Princeton in 1959, received his doctorate in 1964 and remained at the university until his retirement in 2004.

He married Cary Goldschmidt in 1959. She died in 1991. In addition to their children, he is survived by six grandchildren.

Advertisement

Professor Morgan continued to make significant contributions after his paper on plate tectonics. In 1969 he and Professor McKenzie published a paper on the complex geophysics involved in so-called triple junctions, places where three plates intersect.

He later did important work on mantle plumes, fixed points hundreds of miles below the earth’s surface that occasionally send streams of molten rock upward — a phenomenon that he argued resulted in features like the Hawaiian Islands.

Professor Morgan remained humble about his discovery, insisting that if he hadn’t made it, someone else soon would have. Others were less hesitant in giving him credit.

“The theory of plate tectonics he published in 1968 is one of the major milestones of U.S. science in the 20th century,” Anthony Dahlen, a former chairman of Princeton’s Department of Geosciences who died in 2007, said in a statement in 2003 after Professor Morgan was selected to receive the National Medal of Science. “The scientific careers of a generation of geologists and geophysicists have been founded upon his landmark 1968 paper.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Science

Cluster of farmworkers diagnosed with rare animal-borne disease in Ventura County

Published

on

Cluster of farmworkers diagnosed with rare animal-borne disease in Ventura County

A cluster of workers at Ventura County berry farms have been diagnosed with a rare disease often transmitted through sick animals’ urine, according to a public health advisory distributed to local doctors by county health officials Tuesday.

The bacterial infection, leptospirosis, has resulted in severe symptoms for some workers, including meningitis, an inflammation of the brain lining and spinal cord. Symptoms for mild cases included headaches and fevers.

The disease, which can be fatal, rarely spreads from human to human, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Ventura County Public Health has not given an official case count but said it had not identified any cases outside of the agriculture sector. The county’s agriculture commissioner was aware of 18 cases, the Ventura County Star reported.

Advertisement

The health department said it was first contacted by a local physician in October, who reported an unusual trend in symptoms among hospital patients.

After launching an investigation, the department identified leptospirosis as a probable cause of the illness and found most patients worked on caneberry farms that utilize hoop houses — greenhouse structures to shelter the crops.

As the investigation to identify any additional cases and the exact sources of exposure continues, Ventura County Public Health has asked healthcare providers to consider a leptospirosis diagnosis for sick agricultural workers, particularly berry harvesters.

Rodents are a common source and transmitter of disease, though other mammals — including livestock, cats and dogs — can transmit it as well.

The disease is spread through bodily fluids, such as urine, and is often contracted through cuts and abrasions that contact contaminated water and soil, where the bacteria can survive for months.

Advertisement

Humans can also contract the illness through contaminated food; however, the county health agency has found no known health risks to the general public, including through the contact or consumption of caneberries such as raspberries and blackberries.

Symptom onset typically occurs between two and 30 days after exposure, and symptoms can last for months if untreated, according to the CDC.

The illness often begins with mild symptoms, with fevers, chills, vomiting and headaches. Some cases can then enter a second, more severe phase that can result in kidney or liver failure.

Ventura County Public Health recommends agriculture and berry harvesters regularly rinse any cuts with soap and water and cover them with bandages. They also recommend wearing waterproof clothing and protection while working outdoors, including gloves and long-sleeve shirts and pants.

While there is no evidence of spread to the larger community, according to the department, residents should wash hands frequently and work to control rodents around their property if possible.

Advertisement

Pet owners can consult a veterinarian about leptospirosis vaccinations and should keep pets away from ponds, lakes and other natural bodies of water.

Continue Reading

Science

Political stress: Can you stay engaged without sacrificing your mental health?

Published

on

Political stress: Can you stay engaged without sacrificing your mental health?

It’s been two weeks since Donald Trump won the presidential election, but Stacey Lamirand’s brain hasn’t stopped churning.

“I still think about the election all the time,” said the 60-year-old Bay Area resident, who wanted a Kamala Harris victory so badly that she flew to Pennsylvania and knocked on voters’ doors in the final days of the campaign. “I honestly don’t know what to do about that.”

Neither do the psychologists and political scientists who have been tracking the country’s slide toward toxic levels of partisanship.

Fully 69% of U.S. adults found the presidential election a significant source of stress in their lives, the American Psychological Assn. said in its latest Stress in America report.

The distress was present across the political spectrum, with 80% of Republicans, 79% of Democrats and 73% of independents surveyed saying they were stressed about the country’s future.

Advertisement

That’s unhealthy for the body politic — and for voters themselves. Stress can cause muscle tension, headaches, sleep problems and loss of appetite. Chronic stress can inflict more serious damage to the immune system and make people more vulnerable to heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, infertility, clinical anxiety, depression and other ailments.

In most circumstances, the sound medical advice is to disengage from the source of stress, therapists said. But when stress is coming from politics, that prescription pits the health of the individual against the health of the nation.

“I’m worried about people totally withdrawing from politics because it’s unpleasant,” said Aaron Weinschenk, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin–Green Bay who studies political behavior and elections. “We don’t want them to do that. But we also don’t want them to feel sick.”

Modern life is full of stressors of all kinds: paying bills, pleasing difficult bosses, getting along with frenemies, caring for children or aging parents (or both).

The stress that stems from politics isn’t fundamentally different from other kinds of stress. What’s unique about it is the way it encompasses and enhances other sources of stress, said Brett Ford, a social psychologist at the University of Toronto who studies the link between emotions and political engagement.

Advertisement

For instance, she said, elections have the potential to make everyday stressors like money and health concerns more difficult to manage as candidates debate policies that could raise the price of gas or cut off access to certain kinds of medical care.

Layered on top of that is the fact that political disagreements have morphed into moral conflicts that are perceived as pitting good against evil.

“When someone comes into power who is not on the same page as you morally, that can hit very deeply,” Ford said.

Partisanship and polarization have raised the stakes as well. Voters who feel a strong connection to a political party become more invested in its success. That can make a loss at the ballot box feel like a personal defeat, she said.

There’s also the fact that we have limited control over the outcome of an election. A patient with heart disease can improve their prognosis by taking medicine, changing their diet, getting more exercise or quitting smoking. But a person with political stress is largely at the mercy of others.

Advertisement

“Politics is many forms of stress all rolled into one,” Ford said.

Weinschenk observed this firsthand the day after the election.

“I could feel it when I went into my classroom,” said the professor, whose research has found that people with political anxiety aren’t necessarily anxious in general. “I have a student who’s transgender and a couple of students who are gay. Their emotional state was so closed down.”

That’s almost to be expected in a place like Wisconsin, whose swing-state status caused residents to be bombarded with political messages. The more campaign ads a person is exposed to, the greater the risk of being diagnosed with anxiety, depression or another psychological ailment, according to a 2022 study in the journal PLOS One.

Political messages seem designed to keep voters “emotionally on edge,” said Vaile Wright, a licensed psychologist in Villa Park, Ill., and a member of the APA’s Stress in America team.

Advertisement

“It encourages emotion to drive our decision-making behavior, as opposed to logic,” Wright said. “When we’re really emotionally stimulated, it makes it so much more challenging to have civil conversation. For politicians, I think that’s powerful, because emotions can be very easily manipulated.”

Making voters feel anxious is a tried-and-true way to grab their attention, said Christopher Ojeda, a political scientist at UC Merced who studies mental health and politics.

“Feelings of anxiety can be mobilizing, definitely,” he said. “That’s why politicians make fear appeals — they want people to get engaged.”

On the other hand, “feelings of depression are demobilizing and take you out of the political system,” said Ojeda, author of “The Sad Citizen: How Politics is Depressing and Why it Matters.”

“What [these feelings] can tell you is, ‘Things aren’t going the way I want them to. Maybe I need to step back,’” he said.

Advertisement

Genessa Krasnow has been seeing a lot of that since the election.

The Seattle entrepreneur, who also campaigned for Harris, said it grates on her to see people laughing in restaurants “as if nothing had happened.” At a recent book club meeting, her fellow group members were willing to let her vent about politics for five minutes, but they weren’t interested in discussing ways they could counteract the incoming president.

“They’re in a state of disengagement,” said Krasnow, who is 56. She, meanwhile, is looking for new ways to reach young voters.

“I am exhausted. I am so sad,” she said. “But I don’t believe that disengaging is the answer.”

That’s the fundamental trade-off, Ojeda said, and there’s no one-size-fits-all solution.

Advertisement

“Everyone has to make a decision about how much engagement they can tolerate without undermining their psychological well-being,” he said.

Lamirand took steps to protect her mental health by cutting social media ties with people whose values aren’t aligned with hers. But she will remain politically active and expects to volunteer for phone-banking duty soon.

“Doing something is the only thing that allows me to feel better,” Lamirand said. “It allows me to feel some level of control.”

Ideally, Ford said, people would not have to choose between being politically active and preserving their mental health. She is investigating ways to help people feel hopeful, inspired and compassionate about political challenges, since these emotions can motivate action without triggering stress and anxiety.

“We want to counteract this pattern where the more involved you are, the worse you are,” Ford said.

Advertisement

The benefits would be felt across the political spectrum. In the APA survey, similar shares of Democrats, Republicans and independents agreed with statements like, “It causes me stress that politicians aren’t talking about the things that are most important to me,” and, “The political climate has caused strain between my family members and me.”

“Both sides are very invested in this country, and that is a good thing,” Wright said. “Antipathy and hopelessness really doesn’t serve us in the long run.”

Continue Reading

Science

Video: SpaceX Unable to Recover Booster Stage During Sixth Test Flight

Published

on

Video: SpaceX Unable to Recover Booster Stage During Sixth Test Flight

President-elect Donald Trump joined Elon Musk in Texas and watched the launch from a nearby location on Tuesday. While the Starship’s giant booster stage was unable to repeat a “chopsticks” landing, the vehicle’s upper stage successfully splashed down in the Indian Ocean.

Continue Reading

Trending