Interwebometry Looks at How the Web is Tied Together

The phenomenal growth of the World Wide Web has led to the study of how to measure the Web (and its growth and its impact on people and other things). The definitions of what and how to measure this stuff and the measurements themselves are called Webometrics.

I have published a few articles over the past few weeks at Science 2.0 on a new blog called Interwebometry, which I thought was a nice little pun of a name.

My most recent article is “Gazing at the Web from the Back Porch”, in which I discuss how we can view the Web through the referral data we see for our Websites.

Last week I wrote “How Webometrics Become a Liability in Webometry”, which takes a look at the challenges facing Webometry as tools and resources for studying the Web are being taken in-house or simply off-line.

In “Seeking Shape and Cardinality in the 0-Dimensional Web” I discussed the challenges that must be overcome in defining metrics and setting boundaries for crawling or viewing the Web. For example, the Calendar Paradox deals with how one simple widget can generate content than is currently on the Web if you keep crawling it indefinitely.

The introductory article “Reflections of the Realized Imagination” introduces some of the philosophical aspects of Webometry (what is a Web page, where does it exist, how long does it exist) as well as set the pace (I hoped) for the types of articles I want to publish on the blog.

Webometry is not the most frequently discussed topic on the Web by any means but we use it on a daily basis to measure the size of our Websites, the number of sites that link to our sites, the number of sites that mention our content, and more.

Regardless of how easy it is to understand or how little most people may care about it, Webometry is built into everything we do on the Web.

Scientists identify Solar System’s internal clock

I doubt you’ll find any news articles that actually put these events together this way, but it seems to me that separate research projects whose findings were published over a year apart have established that the Solar System maintains or runs an internal “clock” that affects planetary behaviors, including climate change.

In December 2008, CalTech researches established that Martian climate changes occur every 100,000 years as part of a 1-million year cycle. Although this article compares the Martian cycle of rotational shifts to Earth’s cycle (100,000 years versus 41,000 years), another article establishes a similar 100,000 year cycle in Earth’s climate that is also tied to the planetary wobbling (changes in the shape of Earth’s orbit).

While these two studies correlate climate changes on both planets to different causes, the strikingly similar cyclical changes demand further study. Could it be that the Solar System pulses every 100,000 years and — if so — why does it pulse like that?

Furthermore, what is the significance of the duo 1-million-year cycles as well? Dr. Lisiecki’s study suggests that three different orbital systems may be playing roles in Earth’s 100,000-year cycles but we are only just beginning to develop Mars science now. Planetologists and astrophysicists should be looking at the data coming out of these kinds of studies to determine if there isn’t a system-wide pattern at play.

But wait! Maybe scientists began to notice this pattern back in 2002, when a Dartmouth scientist noticed the sun has a 100,000-year magnetic cycle. Hm. We’re running into this 100,000-year phenomenon everywhere.

So, basically, the sun’s magnetic field seems to be breathing (inhaling and exhaling) in cycles that tune up or tone down the Solar radiation, which in turn may be connected to the Earth’s (and Mars’ and other planets’) orbital functions. These cycles produce regular climactic shifts.

Sounds like someone could put together a theory about all this, doesn’t it? Well, heck — before you and I go claiming any credit for Nobel Prizes to be awarded for this research, I have to point out that Serbian mathematician Muletin Milankovitch proposed what is now called the ‘Milankovitch theory of ice ages’ in the 1940s. Milankovitch suggested that Earth’s climactic cycles might be tied to Solar cycles.

Science since then has questioned and revised the data and calculations that went into Milankovitch’s hypothesis but it seems to have withstood the test of time pretty well.

What may be most significant about this branch of science (perhaps it’s too soon to call it Milankovitchistic Science) is that it may help help scientists distinguish between true planetary bodies and other bodies, or perhaps identify “rogue” bodies passing through star systems. After all, if you detect a planet-sized body close to a star but it doesn’t appear to be attuned to that star system’s internal clock, you have an anomaly.

While there may still be a need to further validate the Milankovitch theory within our own Solar System, it may be time for scientists to start analyzing the planetary systems we have discovered so far to determine if there are resonances of those suns’ internal clocks that tie their planets to them.

While we cannot yet study climate on planets outside the Solar System, we can study planetary behaviors, including some if not all of their orbital behaviors. And that, I think, should be good enough for a start in ascertaining how universal Milankovitch’s Principle may be.

Three more stories covering the Rhine princess

So the news is still spreading. Apparently this is turning into a major story. These three articles say much the same thing as the last group but I just wanted to keep a running tally.

You never really expected to hear about the discovery of a previously undocumented prehistoric civilization in the Rhine valley, did you?

Astonishing Find in Rhine Valley Surprises Archaeologists opens with:

Have you ever heard of the Princess of the Golden Wood? Dutch, French, and German scientists have just published a report on an excavation of a previously unknown prehistoric grave in a small copse of “golden” woodlands somewhere in the Black Forest region of the Rhine valley. The grave site’s lone occupant, a female of approximately 10,000 years’ age, has been dubbed the “Princess of the Golden Wood” by the archaeologists.

French Anthropologist Stakes Her Reputation on Controversial Research opens with:

Felecia Bonnet had a promising career in French academia until two years ago. That was when she accepted a teaching position at the Reinhard Van Gelder Institut fr Anthropologie und Archologie at the Universitt des Rheins near Basel, Switzerland. The institute, founded by eminent Dutch archaeologist Dr. Ernst Voorst, is named for the legendary Dr. Reinhard Van Gelder, whose work in the North Sea and Swiss Alps drew attention to previously unstudied aspects of European prehistory.

Rhine Valley Archaeologists Publish Stunning Discovery opens with:

In an announcement that is sure to turn the scientific world on its ear, a controversial archaeologist has published the first pictures from a secret dig site located near the Rhine river in the Black Forest region. Dr. Ernst Voorst, Director of the Reinhard Van Gelder Institute of Anthropology and Archaeology from the Univerisity of the Rhine, gave the media and the scientific world outside his team their first look at a prehistoric woodland community.

Putting all the pieces of this story together has been an amazing experience. I can’t wait to see what else Dr. Voorst and his colleagues have in store. This kind of research is what makes the world of archaeology (and anthropology) so exciting.

Way to go, Dr. Voorst and team! Keep up the good work!