Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 October 2019 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Anja Aucamp
Dr Brain van Soelen and Prof Pieter Meintjies
UFS scientists, Prof Pieter Meintjes and Dr Brian van Soelen, are part of the prestigious H.E.S.S. collaboration that recently published in Nature Astronomy.

Think of an object with a mass exceeding that of the Sun, squeezed into a volume of a sphere with the radius of a city like Bloemfontein. This very dense, compact object, known as a pulsar, is also a great source of energy. According to Physics Professor, Prof Pieter Meintjes, this pulsar (neutron star produced in supernova explosion) is also a key element of a recently submitted paper in Nature Astronomy.

Prof Meintjes and Dr Brian van Soelen, Senior Lecturer, both from the Department of Physics at the University of the Free State (UFS), were part of the High Energy Stereoscopic System (H.E.S.S.) collaboration of 220-plus scientists worldwide who worked on the paper Resolving the Crab pulsar wind nebula at tera-electronvolt energies, published in the prestige journal Nature Astronomy. 

According to Prof Meintjes, the fact that the paper was accepted for publication in Nature Astronomy testifies of the importance of this finding in the high-energy astrophysics community.

Powerful generators of electricity

He elaborates on the study: “The name pulsar originates from the fact that rotating neutron stars produced in supernova explosions produce beams of radiation, much like a lighthouse. Every time the beam intersects the observer’s line of sight, the observer receives a pulse of radiation.”

“As a result of this enormous mass squeezed into a small volume, these objects have the same density as that of an atomic nucleus. These objects (very dense pulsars) spin very rapidly and have enormous magnetic fields; for example, the pulsar at the centre of the Crab Nebulae spins around its axis once every 33 milliseconds (millisecond: one thousandth of a second) and possesses a magnetic field strength of the order of one tera-Gauss (tera – million x million). For comparison, the average strength of the Earth’s magnetic field is 0.5. Gauss and the magnetic field strength on the Sun ranges between 1 000 and 4 000 Gauss.”

“Because of this very super-strong rapid-spinning magnet, enormous electric fields are induced that can accelerate particles such as electrons and protons to energies in excess of one tera-electronvolt (optical light that are emitted by an ordinary lightbulb has energies of the order of one electronvolt).”

Prof Meintjes continues: “This means that these fast-rotating neutron stars are extraordinary powerful generators of electricity, which fills the surrounding cloud (supernova remnant) with super-high energy-charged particles that can produce, in turn, very high energy gamma rays through various processes such as synchrotron radiation and inverse-Compton radiation, to name a few.”

H.E.S.S. collaboration 

Above one tera-electronvolt, the gamma rays are detected by huge ground-based telescopes such as H.E.S.S., utilising the Earth’s atmosphere.

“When these high-energy gamma rays enter the atmosphere, they produce showers of super-relativistic particles that produce Cherenkov light – detected by the telescope. The technique is called the Atmospheric Cherenkov Technique (ACT).”

HESS
The High Energy Stereoscopic System. (Photo: Supplied)

“The H.E.S.S. gamma-ray collaboration is but one collaboration that has studied this source intensively over the past couple of decades or so.  Being the most powerful gamma-ray telescope facility currently operational, very careful analysis of the data managed to reveal that the gamma-ray emitting region inside the nebula is about 10 times bigger in size than the region where the x-rays are emitted within the nebula.” 

“This has solved a long-standing question as to how big the gamma-ray emitting region within these supernova remnants are, compared to the region where the x-rays, for example, originates,” says Prof Meintjes. 

Both Prof Meintjes and Dr Van Soelen are members of this prestigious H.E.S.S. collaboration. Their participation in this project, together with scientists from universities such as the University of Oxford, the University of Leicester, and the University of Bordeaux, opens up valuable research opportunities for UFS postgraduate students to enter the international stage and interact with the best scientists in the world.

They are also members of the editorial board responsible for the internal review of research papers before being submitted to more prestigious journals, for example, Nature Astronomy. Dr Van Soelen is also a coordinator of multi-wavelength follow-up observations within the H.E.S.S. collaboration. 

This is the second time that Prof Meintjes published in Nature Astronomy. Previously, he was co-author of a paper on emission from a white dwarf pulsar, showing that fast-rotating white dwarf stars could in fact mimic emission from neutron star pulsars. He developed the theoretical model reported in that paper, explaining the multi-wavelength emission from radio to X-ray energies.


News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept