A theory of everything won't provide all the answers

We shouldn't be obsessed with finding a theory of everything, says Lisa Randall, one of the world's most prominent theoretical physicists

Doesn't every physicist dream of one neat theory of everything?
There are lots of physicists! I don't think about a theory of everything when I do my research. And even if we knew the ultimate underlying theory, how are you going to explain the fact that we're sitting here? Solving string theory won't tell us how humanity was born.

So is a theory of everything a myth?
It's not that it's a fallacy. It's one objective that will inspire progress. I just think the idea that we will ever get there is a little bit challenging.

But isn't beautiful mathematics supposed to lead us to the truth?
You have to be careful when you use beauty as a guide. There are many theories people didn't think were beautiful at the time, but did find beautiful later - and vice versa. I think simplicity is a good guide: the more economical a theory, the better.

Is it a problem, then, that our best theories of particle physics and cosmology are so messy?
We're trying to describe the universe from 10²⁷ metres down to 10^-35 metres, so it's not surprising there are lots of ingredients. The idea that the stuff we're made of should be everything seems quite preposterous. Dark matter and dark energy - these are not crazy ingredients we're adding.

Did the discovery of the Higgs boson - the "missing ingredient" of particle physics - take you by surprise last July?
I was surprised that the Large Hadron Collider experiments reached that landmark. I thought the teams would say something very affirming but the announcement of the discovery was amazing. It was a feat of engineering that they got the collision rate up to what it had to be, and the experiments did a better job at analysing the data.

Are you worried that the Higgs is the only discovery so far at the LHC?
I'm not worried that nothing else exists. But I am worried that the LHC might have too low an energy. Had the Superconducting Super Collider been built in Texas, it would have had almost three times the energy. There is a distinct possibility we'll discover things when the LHC's energy is nearly doubled next year. But it's too early to see signs of warped extra dimensions - they will take longer to find.

What would an extra dimension look like?
The best signature of the warped extra dimensions would be seeing a so-called Kaluza-Klein particle. These are partners of the particles that we know about but they get their momentum from extra dimensions. They would look to us like heavy particles with properties similar to the ones we know, but with bigger masses.

What if we don't see one? Some argue that seeing nothing else at the LHC would be best, as it would motivate new ideas.
I don't know what dream world they are living in. It would be very hard to make the argument to build a higher energy machine based on the fact that you didn't see something.

Profile

Lisa Randall is a professor of physics at Harvard University. Her recent books are Knocking on Heaven's Door (Vintage) and Higgs Discovery: The power of empty space (Bodley Head)

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Read More..

Penguin head-cam captures bird's eye view of hunt

TOKYO: Miniature cameras attached to a penguin's head have given Japanese scientists a bird's eye view of the creature's incredible underwater hunting skills, the lead researcher said Tuesday.

Using video cameras weighing just 33 grammes (around 1 oz) and equipped with accelerometers, depth gauges and thermometres, researchers were able to see exactly what the Adelie penguin sees when it goes out to catch krill and other prey in its native Antarctica.

Yuuki Watanabe, of the National Institute of Polar Research in Tokyo, said the team was amazed to discover that the bird adapts its hunting behaviour depending on what it is trying to snare.

Watanabe said the accelerometer -- a device also used in mobile phones, tablet computers and games consoles -- allowed researchers to precisely measure the bird's head movements and showed how one penguin could catch two krill in under a second.

"Now we know what the Adelie penguin preys on and how much it eats, we can understand how the penguin survives and how it relates to its environment," he said.

The penguin's fragile Antarctic habitat is at risk from climate change, with scientists warning that as pack ice melts, their numbers could fall dramatically.

Watanabe said the tiny cameras and micro equipment had given researchers a much better understanding of how the penguin lives.

"We now understand how much they rely on those fish that inhabit water just below the sea ice, which means that Adelie penguins can only survive in a sea ice environment," said Watanabe.

-AFP/fl

Read More..

Prince Harry: I killed Taliban

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

Prince Harry serves in Afghanistan

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

>

>>

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Britain's Prince Harry says he killed Taliban militants during tour in Afghanistan


• Harry, known to comrades as Captain Wales, had served for four months in Helmand province


• Harry: "We fire when we have to but we're more of a deterrent than anything else"

(CNN) -- Britain's Prince Harry has acknowledged that he killed Taliban insurgents on his latest tour of duty in Afghanistan as a crew member of an Apache attack helicopter.

Harry has been serving for four months as a co-pilot gunner (CPG) in southern Helmand province -- considered a Taliban heartland -- and flew on scores of missions with the trigger to rockets, missiles and a 30mm cannon at his fingertips.

No one is saying how many insurgents Harry might have killed but toward the end of his deployment, the 28-year-old, known to his comrades as Captain Wales, shared some of his feelings about combat with reporters while on duty in the massive military base known as Camp Bastion. He said it was sometimes justified to "take a life to save a life. That's what we revolve around, I suppose."

More: How 'soldier prince' tore up royal rule book

Harry through the years

HIDE CAPTION

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

>

>>

Harry explained how the roles of Apaches and CPGs have changed since his previous deployments in 2007 and 2008. "It used to be very much: front seat, you're firing the whole time.

"Now, yes we fire when we have to but essentially we're more of a deterrent than anything else.

"Our job out here is to make sure the guys are safe on the ground and if that means shooting someone who is shooting at them, then we will do it," said the prince, third in line to the British throne.

"It's not the reason I decided to do this job. The reason to do this job was to get back out here, and carry on with a job."

Away from his helicopter, the prince mixed freely on base, eating in the canteen with everyone else and relaxing by playing video games with others in the 130-strong 662 Squadron, 3 Regiment Army Air Corps (AAC). With those comrades, he was just "one of the guys."

More: Harry named world's most eligible bachelor

Now, yes we fire when we have to but essentially we're more of a deterrent than anything else
Prince Harry

In contrast to his privileged upbringing in palaces and an education at Eton College, the prince lived in a shared room within shipping containers converted into an accommodation block. He said he was free to stroll around the base, to visit the gym or the laundry. "It's completely normal," Harry added.

But he said he still received unwanted attention in more public places. "For me it's not that normal because I go into the cookhouse and everyone has a good old gawp, and that's one thing that I dislike about being here," he said.

Opinion: Cheeky Harry vs. dull brother William

"Because there's plenty of guys in there that have never met me, therefore look at me as Prince Harry and not as Captain Wales, which is frustrating.

"Which is probably another reason why I'd love to be out in the PBs (patrol bases), away from it all.

"But yeah, it's completely normal. It's as normal as it's going to get. I'm one of the guys. I don't get treated any differently."

His deployment meant he could step back from the public eye, although he said his father, the heir to the British throne Prince Charles, often reminded him of his position. Harry admitted he had "let himself and his family down" when he was photographed naked at a party in a Las Vegas hotel last year.

More: No action over naked Prince Harry photos

Harry appeared happier talking about his military role: building up the Afghan National Army, the ANA, so it can eventually take over.

"It's great to see the ANA taking more of a lead in things as well. And the professionalism is definitely shining through."

That's something his superiors in the army might say of the prince himself.

Read More..

Obama looks to past to set course for future

News Analysis

President Obama is a student of history - it was no coincidence that he formally announced his run to become the first African-American president back in 2007 at the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois, where Abraham Lincoln delivered his "house divided" speech in 1858 - and his inaugural address today drew an unmistakable line between the nation's past and its prospects for the future.

Play Video

President Obama's second inaugural speech

The president opened his remarks by referencing Lincoln's words from that speech, stating that America came to realize at that point in history that "no union founded on the principles of liberty and equality could survive half-slave and half-free." He grounded his remarks in the Declaration of Independence's claim that "all men are created equal," tying it to both the American Revolution and rules mandating that there is fair play in the free market, to the need for a great nation to "protect its people from life's worst hazards and misfortune."

Later, he again invoked the declaration - though this time, he referred to the notion that "all of us are created equal" - before referencing three landmark moments in the battle for civil rights: The Seneca Falls Convention for women's rights, the clashes in Selma for African-American rights and the riots at New York's Stonewall Inn for gay rights. (The speech marked the first presidential inaugural in which LGBT rights have been referenced.)

He then pivoted from the triumphs of the past to the necessity of continuing the fight, calling for equal pay for women, equal rights for gay men and women, an elimination of long lines to vote, better treatment of immigrants, and, in an indirect reference to his desire to pass gun control legislation, the necessity of children from Detroit to Appalachia to Newtown to know "that they are cared for, and cherished, and always safe from harm."

Play Video

Brinkley on inaugural address: "A great civil rights speech"

At five separate moments in his second inaugural address, delivered to an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 people at the Capitol, Mr. Obama uttered the words "We, the people" - the opening words to the preamble of the Constitution. Those words were deployed to underscore the president's argument that Americans need to recognize that we are all in it together - and that while America celebrates initiative and enterprise, "preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action."

"For the American people can no more meet the demands of today's world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias," he said. "No single person can train all the math and science teachers we'll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation, and one people." He went on to add that "we are made for this moment, and we will seize it - so long as we seize it together."

That idea underscored the positions Mr. Obama reiterated during the speech, which at times came closer to a policy-oriented State of the Union Address than an inaugural, which historically tends to be more about soaring rhetoric. (The president will offer his State of the Union on February 12.) In addition to arguing that economic inequality hampers the nation's success, he said that the future depends on harnessing "new ideas and technology to remake our government, revamp our tax code, reform our schools, and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work harder, learn more, and reach higher."

"We do not believe that in this country, freedom is reserved for the lucky, or happiness for the few," said the president. "We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us, at any time, may face a job loss, or a sudden illness, or a home swept away in a terrible storm. The commitments we make to each other - through Medicare, and Medicaid, and Social Security - these things do not sap our initiative; they strengthen us. They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great."

Mr. Obama also fit a call for a renewed focus on fighting climate change - an issue largely absent from his first-term agenda - into the notion of collective action for the common good, saying that "the failure to [address it] would betray our children and future generations."

Play Video

Axelrod on Obama's vision for economy

In addition to climate change, Mr. Obama's second term agenda involves pushing passage of gun control and immigration legislation, overseeing the further implementation of the health care law, winding down the war in Afghanistan, and continuing to try to find some way to come to a major agreement with Republicans to address the nation's massive debt and deficit.

He has signaled that to accomplish these goals, he will take a more confrontational approach with Republicans than he did in his first term -- an approach illustrated by his recent refusal to negotiate on raising the debt limit. His inaugural address offered little in the way of appeals for Washington bipartisanship; instead, Mr. Obama called on Americans in and out of the nation's capitol to come together to help the nation stay on the right path, even if the results are sometimes "imperfect."

"Progress does not compel us to settle centuries-long debates about the role of government for all time - but it does require us to act in our time," he said. "For now decisions are upon us, and we cannot afford delay."

It was an appeal grounded in the notion that America's strength comes from all its citizens, no matter their status. And it was offered by a president who knows the debt he owes to history - a president who sees himself both as a symbol of American progress and a vessel to keep it moving forward.

Read More..

Inauguration: 7.5 Things You Should Have Seen

A presidential inauguration is a big, long event that lasts all day and into the night–and who has time to really watch it? People have jobs, ones that don’t let you off for a federal holiday.

Everyone (or, at least, some) will be talking about it, which means potential embarrassment for anyone who doesn’t know what happened. Thankfully, ABC employs  news professionals stationed in Washington, D.C., to pay attention to these kinds of things and boil off some of the less noteworthy or interesting stuff, presenting you with short videos of everything that really mattered. Or at least the things a lot of people were talking about.

A full day of paying attention to President Obama’s second Inauguration leads one of those professionals to offer these 7 1/2 things:

1. Beyonce Sang the National Anthem

Boy, howdy! Did she ever? Beyonce has essentially become the Obama’s go-to female performer: She recorded a music video for Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” initiative in 2011, and she performed at the president’s last inauguration in 2009. Her velvety, soulful “Star Spangled Banner” is getting good reviews.

2. Kelly Clarkson Also Sang

Kelly Clarkson is not as “in” with the First Couple as Beyonce seems to be, but they let her sing “My Country ‘Tis of Thee,” and she did a pretty good job with it. This was kind of weird, though, because at one point she said she loved Ron Paul, although she later said she would vote for Obama.

3.  Obama Talked About Gay Rights

This may not seem shocking since more than half the country, including President Obama, supports gay marriage. But the president made a point of mentioning gay rights during his speech, equating the struggles of the LGBT community with those of  past civil rights movements, and in doing so made history.

He name-checked Stonewall, the New York City bar that was raided by police in 1969 sparking riots to protest the anti-gay crackdown. And he actually used the word “gay”: “Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well,” Obama said in his address.

Plenty of inaugural addresses have been chock full of rhetoric about freedom and equality, but in the last four years, the political culture surrounding gay rights has changed significantly, as more states legalized same-sex marriage and as broad swaths of the country got more comfortable with homosexuality in general. Obama’s “evolution” on gay marriage, and now his inaugural address, have helped signify that change.

4. Joe Biden Made Jokes and Shook Hands With People

Could we expect anything less?

Here’s how the Vice President toasting Sen. Chuck Schumer instead of President Obama at the big luncheon:  ”I raise my glass to a man who never, never, never operates out of fear, only operates out of confidence, and a guy–I’m toasting you, Chuck.” Watch it:

And here he is, scurrying around and jovially shaking hands with people along the parade route:

5. Richard Blanco Read a Poem That Was Sort of Whitman-esque, But Not Entirely

Cuban-born Richard Blanco became America’s first openly gay, Latino Inauguration poet. He read a nine-stanza poem entitled “One Today,” which set a kind of unifying American tableau scene.

6. Obama and Michelle Walked Around Outside The Limo

President Obama walked part of the parade route, from the Capitol to the White House, with Michelle. They waved to people. It is not entirely abnormal for a president to do this at an inaugural parade. But they walked quite a ways.

7. John Boehner: ‘Godspeed’

The speaker of the House presented American flags to Obama and Biden, telling them: “To you gentlemen, I say congratulations and Godspeed.”

7 1/2. Sasha and Malia Were There. 

Obama’s daughters, Sasha and Malia, were there. They didn’t really do much, but they did wear coats of different shades of purple that got a lot of  attention on Twitter.

Reports of the daughters looking at smartphones and applying lip gloss highlighted their day. As did this .gif of Sasha yawning.

Read More..

Wind power delivers too much to ignore

Although aesthetic concerns need to be heard, qualms about wind's reliability are wide of the mark, argues energy policy researcher Reg Platt

THE location of the British Isles at Europe's wild and windy western fringe does not always seem like a blessing. But in one important respect it is: the UK has the greatest potential for wind power, both onshore and offshore, of any European country.

Onshore wind power has expanded steadily across the UK in recent years and is a key plank of the country's commitment to greening its electricity supply. But as the turbines have gone up across the countryside, so has the level of opposition. Wind power has become a deeply divisive issue in British politics.

The issue exploded last year when 106 members of parliament, mostly Conservatives representing rural constituencies, signed a letter to Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron. They urged him to cut subsidies for the onshore wind industry, describing wind technology as "inefficient and intermittent".

Things escalated in the autumn when the recently appointed Conservative energy minister, John Hayes, told two newspapers that "enough is enough" and that no new onshore wind farms would be built. He was slapped down by his boss Edward Davey, the secretary of state for energy and climate change and a member of the Liberal Democrat party. But simmering tensions remain at the top level of the coalition government. Another Conservative, finance minister George Osborne, is known to be sympathetic to the anti-wind cause. Wind turbines also became an important point of contention between the parties in a recent by-election.

Two of the anti-wind campaigners' main concerns are the impact of turbines on the beauty of the countryside and the opposition of local people. It is absolutely right that these be taken into account. But they need to be balanced against the bulk of public opinion, which strongly supports the increased use of wind turbines.

Any misgivings must also be balanced against the important role that this technology can play for the UK, both in fulfilling its climate-change commitments and for future economic success.

Anti-wind campaigners frequently make claims about the shortcomings of wind power. Their main complaints are that the turbines are so inefficient that they actually increase carbon dioxide emissions, and so unreliable that they require constant backup from conventional coal and gas-fired stations.

If correct, these claims would be devastating to wind power. But they are not.

My organisation, the Institute for Public Policy Research, recently published a report tackling these questions. Our conclusions are unambiguous. Onshore wind power reduces carbon emissions and is a reliable source of electricity, at least up to the capacity of wind power that is forecast to be installed in the UK by 2020.

To answer the carbon question, we used a simple model of the UK electricity market. As demand increases, say on a weekday morning when people are waking up and getting ready to go to work, power plants increase output to meet it. Plants with the lowest marginal cost - that is, those that can produce additional electricity most cheaply - are selected first by the market. Here wind beats gas and coal, as no fuel is needed to generate electricity.

The upshot is that, in theory, adding wind power to the energy mix should displace coal and gas, and hence cut carbon. This is backed up by empirical data on emissions reductions from wind power in the US.

There is another way of looking at it. In 2011, wind energy contributed approximately 15.5 terawatt-hours of electricity to the UK. If this had been supplied by fossil fuels instead, CO₂ emissions would have been at least 5.5 million tonnes higher, and as much as 12 million tonnes higher.

As for the important matter of reliability, the obvious worry is that because the wind does not always blow, the system will sometimes not be able to supply electricity when needed.

This seems like common sense. However, the reliability of wind power does not depend on the variability of wind. Instead, it depends on how well changes in wind power output can be anticipated.

Forecasts of wind farm output are increasingly accurate, and drops in output can be predicted and compensated for using conventional power stations. In any case, output is surprisingly stable across the country's entire network of wind farms: when the wind isn't blowing in one area, it usually is somewhere else. The relatively small changes that do occur are well within the capabilities of existing systems for balancing supply and demand on the grid.

Even when winter delivers a "long, cold, calm spell" with low temperatures and little wind, the system can cope. This was demonstrated by a two-week period in February 2010 in Ireland, a country that is much more reliant on wind than the UK. It coped perfectly well.

If the UK government caves into pressure and lowers its ambitions for onshore wind, it will make more expensive forms of low-carbon generation a necessity to hit the UK's target of producing 30 per cent of its electricity from renewables by 2020. The result will be even higher electricity bills.

Scaling back on wind would also be a lost opportunity. The natural resource at our disposal, combined with the UK's engineering heritage, could create significant economic growth and jobs.

The concerns of people who do not want wind power on their doorsteps need to be taken into account. We must also be sensitive to the need to preserve areas of natural beauty. But we should not sacrifice important opportunities because of the views of vocal minority groups and their unsubstantiated claims.

Reg Platt is a research fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research, a think tank based in London

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Read More..

Business in Taiwan's Wowprime brisk despite slowing economy

TAIPEI: 2012 was a slow year for many industries in Taiwan except for the food and beverage industry, which bucked the trend.

Leading the pack is Taiwan's biggest restaurant chain, Wowprime. It is aiming to cater to the rest of the world.

Wowprime's Wang Steak restaurant is fully occupied almost all year round. Business did not seem to be affected by a slowing economy.

Many customers visit it for its signature dish - prime rib selected from only the six best pieces of a cow.

But it is not just the steak that draws the crowd. Some customers also appear to be fans of Steve Day, the chairman of Wowprime.

The 59-year-old started his first restaurant, Wang Steak, 20 years ago.

Today, he has 11 brands under his belt with 275 restaurants on both sides of the strait.

Among its 11 brands, there is a French-style teppanyaki restaurant which opened in 2005, and a low-priced hot pot chain in 2009, which is very popular among young Taiwanese. Recently, it added coffee shops to its latest venture.

The company's revenues have grown an average of nearly 30 per cent in the last three years. To keep the business growing, it plans to build one new brand every two years.

Mr Day said: "In a small market, you must have a number of brands in order to satisfy the customers. If you focus on one brand, it tends to stop growing once you reach the maximum size of the market."

Wowprime's ultimate ambition is to go global. It is already teaming up with Jollibee of the Philippines to open hot pot chains in China.

By 2020, it hopes to have 1000 restaurants worldwide.

Mr Day is confident the target can be achieved ahead of schedule because nobody can resist good food.

He said: "Every dish we bring to the table has gone through many levels of elimination. At the end, we choose only one from the best 50 dishes. So it must be the most delicious."

Competitive pricing is another key to Wowprime's success.

Mr Day said all of its cuisines are priced at 30 per cent below market. And to achieve this, the group has to keep a cap on its profit margin.

Mr Day said: "We have set a ceiling for our annual earnings. Our group earnings must not exceed 10 per cent. If the number exceeds 10 per cent, that means what you offer to your guests are not good enough. But the earnings must not fall below 10 per cent either because that would make the employees worry."

The pricing strategy has made Wowprime one of the fastest growing companies in Taiwan, and it is hoping to win over customers in the rest of the world.

- CNA/xq

Read More..

Midwest faces frostbite threat

By Ben Brumfield, CNN

updated 3:57 AM EST, Mon January 21, 2013

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Frostbite can occur in as little as 10 minutes in extreme wind chill, the CDC warns


• Monday's highs in North Dakota and Minnesota will stay below zero


• Extreme cold is dangerous to people with heart conditions

(CNN) -- Frigid temperatures in Minnesota and North Dakota this week will have residents thinking they've been living in the tropics all season.

Nighttime temperatures plummeted to 2 degrees Fahrenheit on Saturday night.

As if that's not enough, they will take another dive early Monday, this time to minus 28.

The National Weather Service warned that strong winds would dunk the mercury in the upper plains states and plunge wind chill factors to as low as minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit.

High temperatures Monday are predicted to stay below zero.

The Centers for Disease Control warns people in extremely cold areas to stay in heated rooms and keep outdoor trips brief.

At 30 below zero, frostbite can occur in as little as 10 minutes with the slightest winds, and in five minutes in a brisk breeze, the CDC warns. Newborns, the elderly and the homeless can quickly fall victim to hypothermia.

"Cold weather puts an extra strain on the heart," the CDC said, and overexertion can become even more dangerous to those with heart conditions in the Arctic cold.

Although such deep freezes are potentially deadly, they are not uncommon in the upper midsection of the United States. The North Dakota Department of Emergency Services said it did not deploy additional staffing because of the weather.

CNN's Jessica Jordan contributed to this report.

Part of complete coverage on

updated 3:47 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

The man behind the attack Algeria is a veteran jihadist, renowned for hostage-taking and smuggling anything from cigarettes to refugees.

updated 9:57 PM EST, Wed January 16, 2013

Video: CNN's Jim Clancy reports on why Africa, Europe and the U.S. are worried al Qaeda could soon control Mali completely.

Amid financial crises stretching across the world, the globe's greatest economists meet in Davos next week. What is your economic mood? Tell CNN here.

updated 3:01 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

Kurtz: Oprah showed her ability to land a big interview and to reclaim stardom.

updated 1:43 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

People cheat out of desires and incentives, experts say. Have you ever cheated?

CNN reports from Syria and Turkey on the suffering of those who have survived the civil war, but now face further hardship.

updated 6:31 AM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

CNN's Ted Rowlands reports on mounting pressure for Manti Te'o to make a public statement. on the hoax mystery.

updated 6:28 AM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

Two decades after her kidnapping, Katie Beers says, "I've said my piece and now I feel I can finally rebury everything."

updated 6:10 AM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

Resting on the icy cool surface of the Baltic Sea, a rickety old boat of hardy sailors works long into the night

Rum, vodka, bourbon, gin -- whatever you drink, someone will show you how they make it so delicious.

updated 5:11 AM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

CNN's Robyn Curnow reports South Africa's football team is gearing up for the African Cup of Nations tournament.

updated 4:04 AM EST, Fri January 18, 2013

Amateur Australian prospector unearths a 5.5 kilogram golden nugget.

Read More..

MLK's "content of character" quote inspires debate

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

This sentence spoken by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. has been quoted countless times as expressing one of America's bedrock values, its language almost sounding like a constitutional amendment on equality.

20 Photos

Martin Luther King Jr.

Play Video

Martin Luther King III talks his father's legacy

Play Video

King, Civil Rights Act remembered

Yet today, 50 years after King shared this vision during his most famous speech, there is considerable disagreement over what it means.

The quote is used to support opposing views on politics, affirmative action and programs intended to help the disadvantaged. Just as the words of the nation's founders are parsed for modern meanings on guns and abortion, so are King's words used in debates over the proper place of race in America.

As we mark the King holiday, what might he ask of us in a time when both the president and a disproportionate number of people in poverty are black? Would King have wanted us to completely ignore race in a "color-blind" society? To consider race as one of many factors about a person? And how do we discern character?

For at least two of King's children, the future envisioned by the father has yet to arrive.

"I don't think we can ignore race," says Martin Luther King III.

"What my father is asking is to create the climate where every American can realize his or her dreams," he says. "Now what does that mean when you have 50 million people living in poverty?"

Bernice King doubts her father would seek to ignore differences.

"When he talked about the beloved community, he talked about everyone bringing their gifts, their talents, their cultural experiences," she says. "We live in a society where we may have differences, of course, but we learn to celebrate these differences."

The meaning of King's monumental quote is more complex today than in 1963 because "the unconscious signals have changed," says the historian Taylor Branch, author of the acclaimed trilogy "America in the King Years."

Fifty years ago, bigotry was widely accepted. Today, Branch says, even though prejudice is widely denounced, many people unconsciously pre-judge others.

"Unfortunately race in American history has been one area in which Americans kid themselves and pretend to be fair-minded when they really are not," says Branch, whose new book is "The King Years: Historic Moments in the Civil Rights Movement."

Branch believes that today, King would ask people of all backgrounds - not just whites - to deepen their patriotism by leaving their comfort zones, reaching across barriers and learning about different people.

"To remember that we all have to stretch ourselves to build the ties that bind a democracy, which really is the source of our strength," Branch says.

Bernice King says her father is asking us "to get to a place - we're obviously not there - but to get to a place where the first thing that we utilize as a measurement is not someone's external designation, but it really is trying to look beyond that into the substance of a person in making certain decisions, to rid ourselves of those kinds of prejudices and biases that we often bring to decisions that we make."

That takes a lot of "psychological work," she says, adding, "He's really challenging us."

For many conservatives, the modern meaning of King's quote is clear: Special consideration for one racial or ethnic group is a violation of the dream.

The quote is like the Declaration of Independence, says Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank that studies race and ethnicity. In years past, he says, America may have needed to grow into the words, but today they must be obeyed to the letter.

"The Declaration of Independence says all men are created equal," Clegg says. "Nobody thinks it doesn't really mean what it says because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. King gave a brilliant and moving quotation, and I think it says we should not be treating people differently on the basis of skin color."

Many others agree. King's quote has become a staple of conservative belief that "judged by the color of their skin" includes things such as unique appeals to certain voter groups, reserving government contracts for Hispanic-owned businesses, seeking more non-white corporate executives, or admitting black students to college with lower test scores.

In the latest issue of the Weekly Standard magazine, the quote appears in the lead of a book review titled "The Price Was High: Affirmative Action and the Betrayal of a Colorblind Society."

Considering race as a factor in affirmative action keeps the wounds of slavery and Jim Crow "sore and festering. It encourages beneficiaries to rely on ethnicity rather than self-improvement to get ahead," wrote the author, George Leef.

Last week, the RightWingNews.com blog included "The idea that everyone should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin" in a list of "25 People, Places and Things Liberals Love to Hate."

"Conservatives feel they have embraced that quote completely. They are the embodiment of that quote but get no credit for doing it," says the author of the article, John Hawkins. "Liberals like the idea of the quote because it's the most famous thing Martin Luther King said, but they left the principles behind the quote behind a long time ago."

1/2

Read More..

Obamas Share the Love, Even for Michelle's Bangs

Jan 20, 2013 10:49pm

(Charles Dharapak/AP Photo)

President Obama used the first public remarks of his second term to address what he called the “most significant” event of this weekend: his wife’s much-talked-about new haircut.

“I love her bangs,” Obama told supporters at an inaugural reception at the National Building Museum. “She looks good. She always looks good.”

First lady Michelle Obama, wearing a black sequined cocktail dress and showcasing her new hairdo, also heaped compliments on her husband.

“Let me tell you, it has just been a true thrill to watch this handsome, charming individual grow into the man and the president that he is,” she said, as she reached out to playfully touch the president’s face, sparking laughter from the crowd.

Praising his compassion and courage, the first lady introduced the president as the “love of her life.”

Obama, who was sworn in for a second term in a small White House ceremony earlier today, kept his remarks short, noting he has another big speech to deliver Monday.

“There are a limited amount of good lines and you don’t want to use them all up tonight,” he joked.

Because the Constitutionally mandated date for the inauguration, Jan. 20, fell on a Sunday this year, the traditional, public ceremony was delayed until Monday.

Saving the best for his official inaugural address, the president instead dedicated the bulk of his remarks to thanking supporters for their hard work and dedication to getting him re-elected.

“You understood this was not just about a candidate; it was not just about Joe Biden or Barack Obama. This was about us, who we are as a nation, what values we cherish, how hard we’re willing to fight to make sure that those values live not just for today but for future generations,” he said.

“All of you here understood and were committed to the basic notion that when we put our shoulders to the wheel of history, it moves… It moves forward. And that’s part of what we celebrate when we come together for inauguration,” he said.

SHOWS: World News

Read More..