Research relative to the heavy isotope spectrometer telescope experiment

The Heavy Isotope Spectrometer Telescope (HIST) was launched during August 1978 on ISEE-3 (ICE). HIST was designed to measure the isotopic composition of solar, galactic, and interplanetary cosmic ray nuclei for the elements from H to Ni (1 less than or equal to Z less than or equal to 28) in the energy range from approximately 5 to approximately 200 MeV/nucleon. The results of these measurements have been used in studies of the composition of solar matter and galactic cosmic ray sources, the study of nucleosynthesis processes, studies of particle acceleration and propagation, and studies of the life-history of cosmic rays in the heliosphere and in the galaxy. On December 1, 1978, after 110 days in orbit, HIST suffered an electronic failure in its readout system. After that point, only one-half of the telemetry bits associated with the pulse heights measured by HIST were transmitted to Earth. As a result, the resolution of HIST was significantly degraded, and it served as an element rather than an isotope spectrometer. Fortunately, HIST was able to measure the isotopic composition of heavy nuclei in the 9/23/78 solar event (the largest solar energetic particle event since 1972) during the brief period that it operated at full resolution. This grant funded the analysis of data from the HIST instrument over the period from 12/1/85 to 11/30/92. In section 2 of this final report, we summarize the scientific accomplishments that have resulted from HIST measurements during this time period. A bibliography of tasks and papers that resulted is attached

Research in cosmic and gamma ray astrophysics

Discussed here is research in cosmic ray and gamma ray astrophysics at the Space Radiation Laboratory (SRL) of the California Institute of Technology. The primary activities discussed involve the development of new instrumentation and techniques for future space flight. In many cases these instrumentation developments were tested in balloon flight instruments designed to conduct new investigations in cosmic ray and gamma ray astrophysics. The results of these investigations are briefly summarized. Specific topics include a quantitative investigation of the solar modulation of cosmic ray protons and helium nuclei, a study of cosmic ray positron and electron spectra in interplanetary and interstellar space, the solar modulation of cosmic rays, an investigation of techniques for the measurement and interpretation of cosmic ray isotopic abundances, and a balloon measurement of the isotopic composition of galactic cosmic ray boron, carbon, and nitrogen

Directional emission from asymmetric resonant cavities

Asymmetric resonant cavities (ARCs) with highly non-circular but convex cross-sections are predicted theoretically to have high-Q whispering gallery modes with very anisotropic emission. We develop a ray dynamics model for the emission pattern and present numerical and experimental confirmation of the theory.Comment: 7 pages LaTeX, 3 postscript figure

Not Just a Private Club: Self Regulatory Organizations as State Actors When Enforcing Federal Law

In the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Congress enacted a comprehensive scheme for regulating the national securities markets. Pursuant to that scheme, the Securities and Exchange Commission was given ultimate authority to enforce the newly enacted securities laws against market participants. The Exchange Act also created a prominent enforcement role for national securities exchanges, like the New York Stock Exchange. Congress required these self-regulatory organizations as a condition for their continued operation to enforce, among other things, compliance by their members with the provisions of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. The SROs were also given the power to sanction those members the SRO found to have violated federal law. The power and enforcement responsibilities conferred upon SROs under the Exchange Act raise the issue of whether constitutional protections such as due process and the right against self-incrimination apply in SRO enforcement proceedings when the SRO is enforcing federal law. The answer to that question, however, turns on whether SROs are state actors when enforcing federal law. State action is a fundamental prerequisite in cases alleging deprivation of constitutionally protected rights. At issue is whether SROs should be subject to the same constitutional limitations as the government when they are acting in the same capacity as the government in enforcing federal law, as required of them by the Exchange Act. Despite the Supreme Court\u27s extensive jurisprudence on the state action question, the Court has not addressed the issue of whether SROs are state actors. Lower courts have split on the question of whether SROs are state actors. The purpose of this Article is to explain why SROs should be considered state actors when enforcing federal law. The various Supreme Court precedents discussing the state action issue strongly suggest that when enforcing federal law, SROs are state actors. In that situation, SROs should be subject to the same constitutional limitations as the Commission or any other government agency. In Section II, the Article first examines the disciplinary responsibility of SROs imposed by the Exchange Act including the powers which the Commission has to coerce enforcement activity on the part of an SRO. Both the statutory and regulatory frameworks are analyzed. This Section then goes on to demonstrate the symbiotic relationship that exists between the Commission and the SROs in the context of SRO rule-making. This analysis examines the Commission\u27s role in approving rules and its authority to amend SRO rules and require SROs to adopt rules. This analysis is significant because the Commission\u27s authority in the rule-making area effectively allows the Commission to coerce SRO action, and because it demonstrates the heavily regulated nature of SRO activity. Section III then applies this analysis to the state action tests the Supreme Court currently employs. The Supreme Court has articulated several distinct tests for determining whether state action exists. This Section addresses two of the more relevant tests: (1) the coercion or encouragement test; and (2) the public function test. The Section explains the history and policy considerations that underlie each of these two tests, and demonstrates that under each of these tests SROs enforcing federal law should be considered state actors. In Section IV, the Article analyzes lower court decisions that have addressed the general topic of state action in the context of SROs. Finally, in Section V, the Article concludes that SROs are state actors when they enforce federal law. This conclusion not only follows from the Supreme Court\u27s extensive state action jurisprudence, but is also bolstered by the common sense argument that a dual system for enforcement of federal securities laws—one providing full constitutional protections and the other providing no such constitutional protections—is illogical. This dual enforcement system, which can lead to outcome determinative results based solely upon the prosecutorial forum, has a recognized historical foundation but is unsupported by current state action jurisprudence

The Invisible Web at Work: Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Surveillance in the Workplace

Employers and others who hire or engage workers to perform services use a dizzying array of electronic mechanisms to make personnel decisions about hiring, worker evaluation, compensation, discipline, and retention. These electronic mechanisms include electronic trackers, surveillance cameras, metabolism monitors, wearable biological measuring devices, and implantable technology. These tools enable employers to record their workers’ every movement, listen in on their conversations, measure minute aspects of performance, and detect oppositional organizing activities. The data collected is transformed by means of artificial intelligence (A-I) algorithms into a permanent electronic resume that can identify and predict an individual’s performance as well as their work ethic, personality, union proclivity, employer loyalty, and future health care costs. The electronic resume produced by A-I will accompany workers from job to job as they move around the boundaryless workplace. Thus A-I and electronic monitoring produce an invisible electronic web that threatens to invade worker privacy, deter unionization, enable subtle forms of employer blackballing, exacerbate employment discrimination, render unions ineffective, and obliterate the protections of the labor laws.This article describes the many ways A-I is being used in the workplace and how its use is transforming the practices of hiring, evaluating, compensating, controlling, and dismissing workers. It then focuses on four areas of law in which A-I threatens to undermine worker protections: anti-discrimination law, privacy law, antitrust law, and labor law. Finally, this article maps out an agenda for future law reform and research

Not Just a Private Club: Self Regulatory Organizations as State Actors When Enforcing Federal Law

In the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Congress enacted a comprehensive scheme for regulating the national securities markets. Pursuant to that scheme, the Securities and Exchange Commission was given ultimate authority to enforce the newly enacted securities laws against market participants. The Exchange Act also created a prominent enforcement role for national securities exchanges, like the New York Stock Exchange. Congress required these self-regulatory organizations as a condition for their continued operation to enforce, among other things, compliance by their members with the provisions of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. The SROs were also given the power to sanction those members the SRO found to have violated federal law. The power and enforcement responsibilities conferred upon SROs under the Exchange Act raise the issue of whether constitutional protections such as due process and the right against self-incrimination apply in SRO enforcement proceedings when the SRO is enforcing federal law. The answer to that question, however, turns on whether SROs are state actors when enforcing federal law. State action is a fundamental prerequisite in cases alleging deprivation of constitutionally protected rights. At issue is whether SROs should be subject to the same constitutional limitations as the government when they are acting in the same capacity as the government in enforcing federal law, as required of them by the Exchange Act. Despite the Supreme Court\u27s extensive jurisprudence on the state action question, the Court has not addressed the issue of whether SROs are state actors. Lower courts have split on the question of whether SROs are state actors. The purpose of this Article is to explain why SROs should be considered state actors when enforcing federal law. The various Supreme Court precedents discussing the state action issue strongly suggest that when enforcing federal law, SROs are state actors. In that situation, SROs should be subject to the same constitutional limitations as the Commission or any other government agency. In Section II, the Article first examines the disciplinary responsibility of SROs imposed by the Exchange Act including the powers which the Commission has to coerce enforcement activity on the part of an SRO. Both the statutory and regulatory frameworks are analyzed. This Section then goes on to demonstrate the symbiotic relationship that exists between the Commission and the SROs in the context of SRO rule-making. This analysis examines the Commission\u27s role in approving rules and its authority to amend SRO rules and require SROs to adopt rules. This analysis is significant because the Commission\u27s authority in the rule-making area effectively allows the Commission to coerce SRO action, and because it demonstrates the heavily regulated nature of SRO activity. Section III then applies this analysis to the state action tests the Supreme Court currently employs. The Supreme Court has articulated several distinct tests for determining whether state action exists. This Section addresses two of the more relevant tests: (1) the coercion or encouragement test; and (2) the public function test. The Section explains the history and policy considerations that underlie each of these two tests, and demonstrates that under each of these tests SROs enforcing federal law should be considered state actors. In Section IV, the Article analyzes lower court decisions that have addressed the general topic of state action in the context of SROs. Finally, in Section V, the Article concludes that SROs are state actors when they enforce federal law. This conclusion not only follows from the Supreme Court\u27s extensive state action jurisprudence, but is also bolstered by the common sense argument that a dual system for enforcement of federal securities laws—one providing full constitutional protections and the other providing no such constitutional protections—is illogical. This dual enforcement system, which can lead to outcome determinative results based solely upon the prosecutorial forum, has a recognized historical foundation but is unsupported by current state action jurisprudence

Improving over-the-counter medication safety for older adults: A study protocol for a demonstration and dissemination study

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events (ADEs) associated with over-the-counter (OTC) medications cause 178,000 hospitalizations each year. Older adults, aged 65 and older, are particularly vulnerable to ADEs. Of the 2.2 million older adults considered at risk for a major ADE, more than 50% are at risk due to concurrent use of an OTC and prescription medication. OBJECTIVES: To refine the intervention and implementation strategy through diagnostic and formative evaluation; to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention for preventing misuse of high-risk OTC medications by older adults; and to evaluate the implementation of the intervention in community pharmacies. METHODS: A system redesign intervention to decrease high-risk OTC medication misuse will be tested to reduce misuse by improving communication between older adults and community pharmacists via the following features: a redesign of the physical environment to sensitize older adults to high-risk OTC medications, and the implementation of a clinical decision tool to support the pharmacist when critically evaluating the older adult's health status. The study will be conducted in three phases: a participatory design phase, a beta phase, and a test phase. The test phase will be conducted in three mass-merchandise stores. A total of 144 older adults will be recruited. A pre (control)/post (intervention) test will determine the effectiveness of the intervention. The primary outcome will be a comparison of proportion of older adults who misuse OTC medication from baseline to post-intervention. The process of implementation in the community pharmacy setting will be evaluated using the taxonomy proposed by Proctor et al. The participatory design phase has been approved by the institution's IRB (2016-0743). PROJECTED IMPACT: It is anticipated that this project, which focuses on achieving systems-based improvement in an underemphasized area of the medication use process, will reduce ADEs associated with inappropriate OTC medication use in older adults