Carbon Dioxide Uptake by Vegetation After Emissions Shutoff “Now”

If all carbon dioxide emissions were immediately and permanently shut off in the year 2020 (with 417ppm of CO2 presently in the atmosphere), when would the natural uptake of CO2 by Earth’s vegetation (primarily, at first) bring the CO2 concentration down to its “ancient” level of 280ppm?; and when would the average global surface temperature return to its 1910 level (the “ancient” level, with 0°C of global warming)?

By a series of inferences based on my previous calculations of global warming, I estimate that the answers to the above questions are:

1,354 years to reach 280ppm (after an abrupt CO2 shutoff in 2020);

even so, the global temperature will rise another +2.75°C by 300 years (year 2320), remain there for a century (till year 2420), then slowly reduce to the point of 0°C of global warming (the temperature in 1910, used as my baseline for “ancient” pre-warming conditions) in the year 3374.

Figure 1, below, summarizes these findings.

FIGURE 1: CO2ppm/100 and Relative Temperature after 2020 shutoff

What follows is an explanation of how I arrived at these conclusions. It is an exercise of inductive reasoning that I present in a detailed manner for the benefit of the reader’s understanding of my logic, and to give the reader every opportunity to challenge the arguments I advance.

I proceed by making inferences from incomplete data at my disposal, linked as necessary by physical assumptions that are clearly stated, to eventually arrive at projected histories of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, and the relative temperature (with respect to that of 1910), for the 1,354 years between 2020 and 3374.

Data on Earth’s Biomass

Humanity today comprises only 0.01% of all life on Planet Earth, but over the course of human history our species has destroyed 83% of wild mammal species. [1]

The world’s 7.6 billion people [in May 2018] represent just 0.01% of all living things. Yet since the dawn of civilization, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds. The new work cited is the first comprehensive estimate of the weight of every class of living creature and overturns some long-held assumptions. Bacteria are indeed a major life form – 13% of everything – but plants overshadow everything, representing 82% of all living matter. All other creatures, from insects to fungi, to fish and animals, make up just 5% of the world’s biomass. Farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals. Where is all that life to be found?: 86% on land, 1% in the oceans, and 13% as deep subsurface bacteria. [2]

I assume that “today” 7.7 billion humans are 0.01% of Earth’s biomass, and that the “average” human weighs 65 kilograms (kg), which is equivalent to 143.4 pounds (lb).

From this, the mass of humanity is estimated to be 5.0×10^11 kg, and the totality of biomass is estimated to be 5.0×10^15 kg.

The estimated totality of biomass can also be stated as 5,000 giga-metric-tons. A metric ton (tonne) is equivalent to 1,000 kg.

The following table lists the quantitative estimates made from the data (above) regarding the Earth’s biomass (the NOTES column in the table indicate assumptions made). Yes, there are gaps and imperfections in the table, which reflect the incomplete knowledge I begin with.

Mass of CO2 in the Atmosphere

The mass of Earth’s atmosphere is 5.2×10^18 kg.

To a good approximation, Earth’s atmosphere is made up of diatomic nitrogen (N2), at 79%, and diatomic oxygen (O2) at 21%. The molecular weight of an N2 molecule is 28 (atomic mass units); and the molecular weight of an O2 molecule is 32 (atomic mass units). A conceptual “air” molecule is defined as having a molecular weight that is 79% that of N2 plus 21% that of O2; that value is 28.8 atomic mass units (AMU).

A carbon dioxide molecule has a molecular weight of 44 atomic mass units (the carbon atom contributes 12 AMU, the two oxygen atoms contribute 32 AMU, combined). So, a CO2 molecule is 1.526x heavier than an “air” molecule.

The concentration of CO2 in the “ancient” atmosphere was 280ppmv (parts per million by volume). The mass (weight) of that ancient (original or baseline) quantity of atmospheric CO2 is thus:

(280ppmv) x (5.2×10^18 kg) x (1.525) = 2.22×10^15 kg.

The mass (weight) of the CO2 presently in the atmosphere (417ppmv) is estimated by a simple ratio:

(417ppm/280ppm) x 2.22×10^15 kg = 3.31×10^15 kg.

The difference between the masses of CO2 today, and in the “ancient” (pre 1910) atmosphere, is the “excess” CO2 driving global warming. The quantity is:

(3.31×10^15 kg) – (2.22×10^15 kg) = 1.09×10^15 kg.

That is 1,090 giga-tonnes.

A second route to estimating the mass of CO2 in the atmosphere is as follows.

Modeling of the huge CO2 spike that occurred 55.5 million years ago and that produced the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) was described in [2], drawing on work cited in [3] and [4].

5,000 billion tonnes of carbon were quickly injected into the model atmosphere, producing a concentration of 2,500ppmv of CO2. The modeling showed the excess CO2 being cleared from the atmosphere by a variety of processes, down to a level of about 280ppmv by 200,000 years.

I interpreted the statements about this modeling, in both [3] and [4], to mean that 5,000 billion metric tonnes of carbon (which happened to be bound in carbon dioxide molecules) — but not 5,000 gigatons carbon dioxide — were injected into the model atmosphere.

The ratio of the molecular weight of carbon dioxide, to the atomic weight of carbon is 44/12 = 3.667.

The quantity of injected CO2 (2,500ppmv) in that model is then:

(3.667) x (5,000×10^9 tonnes) x (1,000 kg/tonne) = 1.834×10^16 kg.

By simple ratios I estimate the masses of CO2 at both 280ppmv and 417ppmv:

(280ppmv/2500ppmv) x (1.834×10^16 kg) = 2.05×10^15 kg,

(417ppmv/2500ppmv) x (1.834×10^16 kg) = 3.06×10^15 kg.

Note that by the first method of estimating these masses I arrived at:

2.22×10^15 kg, at 280ppmv,

3.31×10^15 kg, at 417ppmv.

The agreement between the two methods is heartening. So, continue.

Notice that the mass of CO2 per ppm is:

1.834×10^16kg/2500ppm = 7.34×10^12kg/ppm; equivalently 7.34giga-tonne/ppm.

Lifetime of CO2 in the Atmosphere

The modeling of the PETM described in [2], [3] and [4] showed that after about 10,000 years after the “quick” CO2 injection, the concentration had been reduced to about 30% of its peak level, so to about 750ppm.

This means that the mass of atmospheric CO2 was reduced by 12,840 giga-tonnes (from 18,340 giga-tonnes to 5,500 giga-tonnes) over the course of 10,000 years.

Assuming that this reduction occurred at a uniform rate (linearly) implies that the rate was -1.284 giga-tonne/year, or -1.284×10^12 kg/yr.

The Earth during the PETM (55.5 million years ago) and the Eocene (between 56 and 35 million years ago) was ice-free. The Arctic was a swamp with ferns, Redwood trees and crocodiles; and the Antarctic was a tropical jungle. The quantity of vegetation over the surface of the Earth must certainly have been at a maximum.

Roughly half of the CO2 injected into the model of the PETM atmosphere (mentioned earlier) was drawn out by a combination of photosynthesis, uptake by the oceans, and some dissolution of seafloor sediments (chalk deposits), by 1,000 years. About 30% remained at 10,000 years, and that was further reduced (to about 280ppm, or 11% of the 2,500ppm peak) by 200,000 years by the processes of weathering of carbonate rocks, and then silicate rocks.

If the linear reduction rate of -1.284 giga-tonnes/year (estimated for the first 10,000 years of CO2 reduction during the PETM) were operative for the next millennia or two, the excess 1,090 giga-tonnes of CO2 presently in the atmosphere could be cleared down to 280ppm within:

(1,090 giga-tonnes)/(1.284 giga-tonne/year) = 849 years.

However, since 13 million years ago Antarctica has been in a deep deep freeze; and the Arctic has also been a region of deep cold, ice, and minimal vegetation. Also, “since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants.” [1]

So this combination of natural and anthropogenic reductions of Earth’s vegetation from it’s peak during the Eocene would mean that the process of extracting CO2 from the atmosphere by photosynthesis will be slower. For the moment, I assume at half the rate given earlier, or -0.642 giga-tonnes/year. At that rate, clearing the current CO2 excess (linearly) would take 1,698 years.

In [5] I described my model of how average global surface temperature can be influenced by the exponential decay of CO2 in the atmosphere, after an abrupt and permanent cessation of CO2 emissions. I call the time constant (parameter) used in the exponential function that models the longevity of CO2 in the atmosphere, it’s “lifetime.” In [5], I showed a number of post-shutoff temperature histories, each characterized by a specific value of the lifetime parameter, which in mathematical jargon is called the “e-folding time.” The exponential function is reduced to 36.79% of its peak value when the elapsed time is equal to the e-folding time (e^-1).

The case of the e-folding time being 10,000 years (in my model) has the excess CO2 cleared out of the atmosphere by 1,300 years after the abrupt shutoff of emissions (when global warming is at +1°C, as it is now). That “10,000 year case” is shown in Figure 3 of reference [5], and will be described further below.

It also happens that 10,000 years was found to be the time span required to reduce the CO2 concentration in the model PETM atmosphere to about 30% to 40% of its beginning peak value.

So, I infer that 10,000 years is a reasonable estimate of the lifetime parameter (e-folding time) for CO2 in the atmosphere, and that the present excess of CO2 in the atmosphere (417ppm – 280ppm = 137ppm) would be cleared — if there were an immediate and permanent cessation of emissions — within about 1,300 years, which is similar (in this speculative modeling) to the 1,698 years clearing time gotten by halving an estimated clearing rate during the PETM, above.

A linear rate of decrease of 137ppm over 1,300 years would be -0.11ppm/year (this number will be further refined below).

Reduction of excess CO2 concentration after Abrupt Shutoff
(given a 10,000 year e-folding parameter)

Using the “10,000 year case” post-shutoff temperature change history, just noted [5], the following is observed:

The global temperature relative to “now” (2020, at +1°C) is:

above +2.75°C, at 300 to 400 years (net >3.75°C),
above +2.4°C, at 212 to 550 years (net >3.4°C),
above +1.6°C, at 110 to 766 years (net >2.6°C),
above +1.0°C, at 55 to 900 years (net >2°C),
above +0.5°C, at 30 to 1,100 years (net >1.5°C),
above +0°C, at 0 to 1,100 years (net >1°C).

200 years after the temperature overshoot dips below +0°C (below the 1°C of global warming above “ancient” we have now), further cooling returns the global temperature to its level in 1910 (“ancient,” as used here). This is the behavior, over a span of 1,300 years, of the “10,000 year case” calculated in reference [5].

So, I assume that a CO2 “lifetime” of 10,000 years (e-folding time parameter) would result in a reduction of the atmospheric concentration of CO2 from 417ppm (“now”) to 280ppm (“ancient”) in about 1,300 years. That would be a 32.8% reduction of concentration down to a level of 67.2% of the present peak; a linear rate of decrease of 137ppm/1,300years = 0.105ppm/yr (this number will be further refined, below).

Earlier (above) I had found that the mass of CO2 per ppm is:

7.34×10^12kg/ppm, equivalently 7.34giga-tonne/ppm.

If so, then the weight of CO2 removed per year (at -0.105ppm/yr) is:

7.71×10^11kg/yr, equivalently 0.771 giga-tonnes/yr.

The present excess of CO2 is 1,090 giga-tonnes. Clearing it in 1,300 years would imply a uniform (linear) removal rate of 0.839 giga-tonnes/yr.

I will average the two estimates just given for the CO2 removal rate, to settle on:

0.805 giga-tonnes/yr = 8.05×10^11kg/yr

as the CO2 removal rate.

Earlier (above) I found the mass of the present excess of CO2 in the atmosphere to be 1,090 giga-tonnes. It would take 1,354 years to clear away that excess, given a uniform removal rate of 0.805 giga-tonnes/yr.

That reduction of 137ppm over 1,354 years implies a uniform rate of -0.1012ppm/yr.

Earlier (above) I found the total mass of Earth’s plants to be 4,100 giga-tonnes, equivalently 4.10×10^15 kg. The present excess of atmospheric CO2 (1,090 giga-tonnes) is equivalent to 26.6% of the present cumulative mass of all of Earth’s vegetation (plants). The uptake per year is equivalent to 0.0196% of the current total mass of Earth’s plants.

CO2 uptake occurs within the continuing carbon cycle of:

– carbon dioxide absorbed by plant photosynthesis,

– plants consumed as food by animals (heterotrophs),

– organic solids and wastes absorbed by the soil (decay, nutrients, peat, oil, coal),

– carbon dioxide absorbed by the oceans and used to make shells and corals,

– organic gases emitted to the atmosphere (like methane, CH4, which is soon oxidized to CO2 and water vapor),

– re-release of plant-bound carbon to the atmosphere by wildfires,

– mineralization of CO2 by the weathering of carbonate, and then silicate rocks

From “final” quantities and rates determined in all the above, the following projected histories of the reduction of CO2 concentration (in ppm), and global warming (average global temperature excursion above its level in 1910), after an abrupt cessation of CO2 emissions “now,” are determined and tabulated. This is my estimation of the 1,464 year global warming blip projected to occur between 1910 and 3374.


Figure 1, at the top of this report, is a graph of this table.

It is important to note that the conclusions of inductive reasoning — as is the case with this exercise — are viewed as supplying some evidence for the truth of the conclusion. They are not definitive as is the case with proofs by deductive reasoning.

In other words, I did the best I could with what I have. Only the unrolling of the future can supply us the definitive answers.


[1] Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals – study

[2] Ye Cannot Swerve Me: Moby-Dick and Climate Change
15 July 2019

[3] Global Warming 56 Million Years Ago, and What it Means For Us
30 January 2014
Dr. Scott Wing, Curator of Fossil Plants,
Smithsonian Museum of Natural History
Washington, DC

[4] CO2 “lifetime” in the atmosphere
National Research Council 2011. Understanding Earth’s Deep Past: Lessons for Our Climate Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Figure 3.5, page 93 of the PDF file, page numbered 78 in the text.

[5] Global Warming and Cooling After CO2 Shutoff at +1.5°C
20 June 2020



From Caesar’s Last Breath To Ours

After the career: books donated in 2019.


From Caesar’s Last Breath To Ours

Human Life is a sexually transmitted planetary disease, Climate Change is the disinfectant that will cure it. (I’ll explain myself on this later.)

Sam Kean’s concluding 5 paragraphs, on CO2 in the atmosphere, from his book Caesar’s Last Breath (And Other True Tales of History, Science, and the Sextillions of Molecules in the Air Around Us, 2017, Back Bay Books, Little Brown & Co) are interesting, being a series of statements of long-known physical quantities. Since I studied “gas physics” for my graduate studies (in the 1970s), and I developed an interest in climate change at least by 2004 (when I published my first article on climate change), I’ve known the basic facts Kean commented on for quite some time.

In one of my technical books on gas physics (Introduction to Physical Gas Dynamics, by Walter G. Vincenti and Charles H. Kruger, 1965, John Wiley & Sons, NY) an example is given in which the authors illustrate the physical phenomena of gaseous diffusion by showing that the last breath expelled by Julius Caeser will have taken years to fully disperse in a homogenous manner throughout the earth’s atmosphere, and so each person ‘today’ would likely breath in, on average, 5 molecules of that last breath. One amazing feature of the example is that it shows just how many molecules there are in each cubic meter of air (at sea level and ‘normal’ temperature), 2.69×10^25 per meter^3 = 2.69×10^19 per cm^3. Vincenti and Kruger quote the following from James Jeans’ 1940 book An Introduction to the Kinetic Theory of Gases (Cambridge University Press):

“…, a man is known to breath out about 400 c.c. of air at each breath, so that a single breath of air must contain about 10^22 molecules. The whole atmosphere of the earth consists of about 10^44 molecules. Thus one molecule bears the same relation to a breath of air as the latter does to the whole atmosphere of the earth. If we assume that the last breath of, say, Julius Caesar has by now become thoroughly scattered through the atmosphere, then the chances are that each of us inhales one molecule of it with every breath we take. A man’s lungs hold about 2000 c.c. of air, so that the chances are that in the lungs of each of us there are about five molecules from the last breath of Julius Caesar.”

The average spacing between air molecules (at sea level, or “standard temperature and pressure” = STP) is about 3.3×10^-7 centimeters. Since air molecules travel at an average speed of 5×10^4 centimeters/second (at STP), and each such molecule travels an average distance of 6×10^-6 centimeters before colliding into another molecule (obviously whizzing by many others between collisions), the frequency of collisions per molecule is about 10^10 collisions/second, or about 10 collisions per nanosecond.

Each such collision will deflect the colliding molecules into new directions of travel, so it can take them a very long time to actually transport from Point A to Point B separated by global distances. One number bandied about by commentators on climate change (who at least halfway know what they’re talking about) is that it takes “30 years” for local CO2 emissions to begin having a “global effect” as part of global warming. This is basically the timescale of atmospheric homogenization by diffusion of the locally emitted plumes, because of course the individual CO2 molecules of such plumes are quite ready to absorb infrared radiation, and lose it as heat released to other air molecules during collisions (the actual mechanics of global warming) from the instant those CO2 molecules are formed.

A different indicator of atmospheric trace gas homogenization is that a uniform (independent of geographical location) quantity per unit mass of radioactive fallout absorption/take-up by trees was first measured (recently, from tree corings) to have occurred in late 1965. Radioactive fallout was first created in 1945, and the greatest number of atmospheric (and any) nuclear explosions, by far, occurred in 1962. Some geologists have now proposed labeling the beginning of the Anthropocene from late 1965, and calling that year the end of the Holocene (which is/was the current geological epoch, which began with the last glacial period/retreat approximately 11,650 years ago). “Anthropocene” because it is the first epoch in which human activity (anthropo) has a global geophysical impact; such impacts being worldwide nuclear fallout (as in the 1957 book and 1959 movie On The Beach), and anthropogenic CO2/greenhouse gas-driven global warming.

When I first wrote about global warming/climate change, it was out of this perspective as a gas physicist trying to explain the technical details to a lay audience. I soon learned that the audience was not only laying, but snoring. I was trying to prod “people” into action to forestall climate change by “greening” energy technology, since I was also an engineer focused on “energy” and “efficiency.” Plus I was hoping a huge public shift in this direction would open up some nice ($$$) job opportunities for me. But the snoozing audience just wants consumerism at the lowest common denominator level, and the Big Bosses just want bombs (and money for themselves). So no sweet high-tech green-physics job for me, but more firepower for the ‘criminalated’ psychopaths who are our guiding self-worshipping self-imagined Olympians, more gargantuan Black Friday tsunamis of electro-plastic garbage consumerism for the ‘amnesiatariat,’ and as a result giga-tons more carbonation of the atmosphere and acidification of the seas, and less viability for our planet with its growing human population.

Since “the human element” (mental inertia, ego, tribalism) always controls and limits the actualization of any technical enterprise by a group of people — like greening away from fossil fuels — it was quickly obvious to me that though most “solar energy” technologies were ancient and well-understood “we” were not going to give up fossil fuel convenience, wealth-generation and enablement-of-political-power in favor of green energy, and so consequently global warming could only increase. And it has, and will. So I write about climate change “for the art of it” and for personal satisfaction, in particular to put my views “on the record” for my children. But I can only fantasize, without belief, that such writing will have any practical political effect — of course I’d like it to, but I’m a realist. Happily, it’s always nice to hear every now and then from someone who already agrees with my views, that something I’ve written has given them some encouragement.

And that is where the arc of my climate change consciousness — from the science to our society — has brought me to today: human connection. Given that fossil fueled humanity is intransigent, and now the advance of climate change is implacable (“tipping points”), I see the best focus for most people’s limited energies beyond their immediate survival and family needs to be the developing of a consciousness of climate change and political reality, and a commitment to acting toward others at a minimum with benign neutrality and better yet with compassion, honesty and solidarity, so human society is generally improved and economically more leveled, regardless of the geophysical conditions under which it exists at any given time. For a society that is as deeply humane as I’ve suggested (and vastly different than today’s) then if and when we really do enter a rapidly accelerating “end time” our individual exits would be as decently humane as possible because they would be occurring within a societal death-with-dignity of a society of broad solidarity. I suppose this is kind of glum thinking, but maybe that’s an inevitable result of my growing ‘old’ in these times.

All this has been a rather prolix introduction to a video about climate change I thought you might enjoy. The Age Of Stupid is a 90 minute British documentary from 2009 (five years in the making) that remains brilliantly cogent about the “human element” driving the climate change geophysics, and is also refreshingly accurate about the physical details of that geophysics. [1] The Age Of Stupid Revisited is a 15 minute look back on the original documentary, from today. [2] Nothing has changed for the better; for the worse yes. Reflecting on this documentary, on the arc of my climate change consciousness, and on my belief (which I wish future reality would contradict) that there will never be any significant collective action to stop anthropo-exacerbation of climate change, and to also end poverty and to economically level national and world societies, I arrived at the rather tart characterization that: human life is a sexually transmitted planetary disease, and climate change is the disinfectant that will cure it.


[1] The Age of Stupid

[2] The Age of Stupid revisited: what’s changed on climate change?
15 March 2019


Electric Vortex in MHD Flow

(Spring 1995)

Electric Vortex in MHD Flow

A PDF file of this report is available from the link above; and the report is displayed below.


Closely related:

Proton Beam Driven Electron MHD


My Mind’s Ramble in Science

Ferrari P4 (2004)

(Above: 13, 17, 24, 28)

1972 US GP: Ferrari F1 engine (3 liter, flat 12 cylinder).

(Above: 14, 18, 19, 22, 28)

1972 US GP: Ferrari F1: Car 7 = Jacky Ickx (5th), Car 8 = Clay Regazzoni (8th), Car 9 = Mario Andretti (6th).

(Above: 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 28)

P-51 Mustang (EMG photo, 1992)

(Above: 01, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 24, 28)

Spitefire Mk. XVIe (1987)

(Above: 01, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 24, 28)

Supersonic Jacob’s Ladder – Static

(Above: 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33)

Supersonic Jacob’s Ladder – Flow

(Above: 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 40, 42)

Imagine a 1 nanosecond snapshot of a nuclear explosion.

(Above: 26, 28, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39)

Sunflare Blue Sky Clouds

(Above: 27, 28, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45)

Longwood Gardens Greenhouse

(Above: 27, 28, 44, 45)

My Mind’s Ramble in Science (1952-2007):

01. Airplanes
02. Tinker Toys
03. Godzilla
04. Rodan
05. Invaders From Mars
06. The Day The Earth Stood Still
07. Forbidden Planet
08. Tom Swift, Jr.
09. Nuclear Power
10. Submarines
11. Bicycles
12. Skateboards
13. Race Cars
14. Piston Engines
15. WW2 Aircraft
16. Supercharged Piston Engines
17. Race Car design
18. Piston Engine design
19. Engineering
20. Mathematics
21. Computer programing
22. Thermodynamics
23. Fluid Mechanics
24. Aerodynamics
25. Supersonic Flow
26. Fusion Energy
27. Solar Energy
28. Photography
29. Gas Physics
30. Plasma Physics
31. Ionized Flow
32. Molecular Physics
33. Gas Lasers
34. Nuclear Explosion Radiation
35. Electrical Physics
36. Nuclear Explosion Electric Generators
37. Magnetohydrodynamics
38. Solar Physics
39. Cosmic Plasma
40. Lightning
41. Atmospheric Physics
42. De-NOx chemical physics
43. Global Warming chemical physics
44. Solar thermal-to-electric generators
45. Publicly Owned National Solar Electric System


Darwin’s Living Legacy

Dickinsonia costata

Dickinsonia costata

This February 12th, 2009, is the bicentennial birthday of one of the greatest minds in history. This man’s inquisitive nature, generous spirit, strong character and hatred of slavery led him to ideas that jolted the society of his times, led to protracted conflict, and caused a seismic shift in how civilized society thought of human beings and life itself.

Abraham Lincoln?, the Civil War?, the abolition of slavery in the United States? Well, yes it is also Lincoln’s 200th birthday, but no, our man is Charles Robert Darwin (12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882). While the celebration of Abraham Lincoln (12 February 1809 – 15 April 1865) is important in the United States because of his role in the abolition of slavery there, the celebration of Charles Darwin is of wider significance because he opened a cornucopia of scientific knowledge, which helped free the minds of so many from the stunting influences of prejudice and religious fantasy. Just as Abraham Lincoln is the iconic marker for a major advancement in the social, political and economic nature of the United States of America, so is Charles Darwin the marker for a vast expansion in the understanding of this living world.

A Biographical Summary

Darwin was the son of a wealthy doctor, and soon showed an interest in natural history. He received an excellent education, first at the University of Edinburgh and then Cambridge, drifting from medicine to taxidermy, and numerous topics in natural history: marine biology, geology, botany, entomology. Darwin gravitated to the company of other gentlemen naturalists and parsons-to-be, who viewed their scientific studies as religious natural theology, the elaboration of the details of the divine design. At 22, he was invited to join Captain Robert FitzRoy, as a self-financed naturalist and gentleman companion, on the planned two-year voyage of the HMS Beagle to chart the coastline of South America.

The voyage of the Beagle lasted nearly five years. They sailed south from England to the Cape Verde Islands off the west coast of northern Africa, across the mid Atlantic Ocean to Brazil, and south along the Patagonian coast to Tierra del Fuego at the cold and stormy tip of the South American continent, then into the Pacific Ocean and north along the coast of Chile and Peru, west from Ecuador to the Galapagos Islands, then southwest across the Pacific to New Zealand, southern Australia and Tasmania, then into the Indian Ocean and north to the coral atolls known as the Keeling Islands, southwest to the island of Mauritius and Cape Town, South Africa, then across the southern Atlantic to Brazil again, and finally home to England. Darwin spent most of his time on land, making observations on the flora, fauna and geology, and collecting specimens. The 27 year old Darwin who returned to England in 1836 was already a celebrated scientist because of his many revelations in the form of his specimens, fossils and written reports, which had preceded his return to Cambridge.

Darwin plunged himself into the work of analyzing the profusion of data he had gathered, and information he caused to be generated. Data was in the form of his journals, the geo-physical data gathered by FitzRoy for the Royal Navy, and the wide variety of specimens he had retrieved. As geologists, ornithologists, botanists, entomologists, zoologists and early paleontologists studied the specimen collections and described their findings, Darwin was drawn to integrate all this information on the observed patterns of adaptation and geographical distribution, with corresponding environmental conditions. The central questions were: how do species come about?, and why have many passed away? In 1838, he conceived his theory of natural selection. In 1842 he wrote a 35 page synopsis of his idea, which was expanded to 230 pages by 1844. He instructed his wife, Emma, to publish this monograph in the event he died before publishing his theory.

Organizing his scientific findings from the Beagle’s voyage, and publishing them, was Darwin’s major task between his return to England and 1854. During this time he married, had children, developed a recurring illness (lactose intolerance?, Crohn’s disease?), and made geological and other field observations. He studied the role earthworms in soil formation, published separate books on the formation of coral reefs, and geology, and published two monographs on barnacles, in 1851 and 1854. Darwin’s work on barnacles earned him the Royal Society’s Royal Medal in 1853, and made his reputation as a biologist. Darwin had made his detailed eight-year study of barnacles so as to fully understand at least one species prior to publishing the generalizations in his theory of evolution by natural selection.

In 1856, Darwin began writing a “big book on species.” He was a methodical man intent to justify his radical generalizations with a profusion of specifics. This took time. Sir Charles Lyell, the foremost geologist of his day, urged Darwin to establish precedence by publishing a short paper on his ideas, because Lyell had seen similarities to Darwin’s thinking in a recent paper by Alfred Russel Wallace, a British biologist exploring Borneo. Darwin saw enough difference to remain unconcerned, but wrote a short draft updating material from his manuscript of 1844, for possible later use. In June 1858, Darwin was shocked to receive a scientific essay from Wallace, describing an independently arrived at theory of natural selection, which he sought comment on. Wallace had also asked Darwin to send this paper on to Lyell, which Darwin did with a recommendation it be published if Wallace consented. Darwin left the matter in Lyell’s hands because he was in the midst of a family crisis. There had been an outbreak of scarlett fever in his village, which Darwin’s baby son (Charles Waring Darwin) had contracted and would soon die from. Lyell and his editorial colleague decided to combine Wallace’s essay with Darwin’s short draft for a joint presentation on natural selection, on July 1st, which was published later that summer. Darwin was too grief-stricken to attend or notice, and the scientific community paid little attention to the new idea. Darwin returned to his writing in the fall, working hard, despite ill health, for thirteen months to complete a streamlined version of his “big book.” On The Origin Of Species By Means Of Natural Selection, Or The Preservation Of Favoured Races In The Struggle For Life, his most famous publication, premiered on 22 November 1859. The essential idea was stated in the introduction:

“As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive; and as, consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for existence, it follows that any being, if it vary however slightly in any manner profitable to itself, under the complex and sometimes varying conditions of life, will have a better chance of surviving, and thus be naturally selected. From the strong principle of inheritance, any selected variety will tend to propagate its new and modified form.”

Variations occur among each new generation of any species. Some of these variants are better adapted to the conditions of their environment, and such individuals are more likely to survive and produce offspring, some of which may inherit the new trait. Over very long periods of time, small changes between generations can accumulate, mutating one species into another. Physiological and behavioral changes in harmony with the trend of environmental conditions shape the nature of successful species; traits that are maladapted to environmental conditions drive a species toward extinction. The greater reproductive success of well-adapted variants is a natural selection that drives the development of new species.

Darwin would live another twenty-two years, during which time he would write eleven more books on topics including: orchid fertilization by insects, variation in domesticated plants and animals, human evolution and sexual selection, human and animal expression of emotion, climbing plants, insectivorous plants, the action of worms; and an autobiography intended for his children. He would see himself lionized by scientists, and excoriated by religious fundamentalists; and he would see his ideas diffused widely among the public by sales of his own publications as well as by the popularization of his ideas by many speakers and other writers.

Darwin’s ideas breathed life into so many lines of scientific research, and were such a refreshing liberation of thought from the confines of ignorant religious dogma, that after Darwin’s death his colleagues at the Royal Society requested he be given the rare honor of a state funeral and burial in Westminster Abbey, which was done.

To give some idea of the nature of Western society during the course of Darwin’s maturity, we can mention a few notables who died within a year or so of Darwin: Fyodor Dostoevsky, Henry McCarty, better known as Billy the Kid, and James A. Garfield in 1881; and Ralph Waldo Emerson, Jesse James, Mary Todd Lincoln and Dante Gabriel Rossetti in 1882. Darwin’s life had spanned the interval from the Napoleonic period to the dawn of the electric age (Napoleon divorced Joséphine and married Marie Louise of Austria in 1810; Nikola Tesla conceived the induction motor in 1882).

Darwin Day 2009 is a celebration of the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin Of Species. Darwin Day in any year is always a celebration of the many triumphs of the human mind over backwardness, ignorance and superstition. Many Darwin Day events are planned around the world.

The Evolution of a Scientist

Darwin was born advantageously into a family of comfortable means and humanistic intellectual orientation. His father, Robert Waring Darwin (30 May 1766 – 13 November 1848) was a doctor, financier and freethinker who was reserved on the topic of religion so as not to antagonize his wealthy Anglican clientele.

Darwin’s paternal grandfather, Erasmus Darwin (12 December 1731 – 18 April 1802), was a quite amazing man: a successful doctor, natural philosopher, inventor, poet, freethinker and abolitionist. Erasmus developed a theory of evolution — absent natural selection — that anticipated the ideas of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, who in turn is regarded to have foreshadowed Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace. Erasmus had also written a poetical cosmological speculation of the universe as a recurring cycle of, in modern terms: big bang, expansion then collapse.

Charles Darwin’s older brother, Erasmus Alvey Darwin (29 December 1804 – 26 August 1881), was also a freethinking abolitionist. Both Erasmus Alvey and Charles Robert were pensioned off by their father in their late twenties, so each could pursue their interests: literary Whig activities and naturalist studies, respectively.

Charles Robert was baptized into the Anglican Church for social reasons though both the Darwins and Wedgewoods (his mother, Susannah’s family) were traditionally Unitarian. Charles and his siblings were taken to Unitarian chapel by their mother, and his religious belief — in the literal truth of the Bible — into early adulthood was both sincere and typical; his education at Cambridge was for the Anglican ministry.

During his years on the expedition of the Beagle, Darwin observed too many natural artifacts, like fossils and geological marine formations raised to great heights, and clear physiological evidence of adaptation by plants and animals, to continue believing the dogma of separately created and immutable species. The varieties of finches and tortoises on the Galapagos Islands were especially telling in this regard. By his return to England, in 1836, he viewed the Bible as fiction, and all religions as equally valid. Two years later:

“In October 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic enquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population [An Essay on the Principle of Population, 1798], and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result of this would be the formation of new species. Here, then, I had at last got a theory by which to work…”

Malthus had asserted that unless human population was held in check — a very stone-hearted suggestion in the 18th century — it would increase in geometric progression until the food supply was exhausted, and catastrophe result. Darwin could see how this would apply to the struggle for survival between species, and to the natural maintenance of a rough stability of the populations of existing species. Random variations within any species are always occurring. Those best adapted to the demands of the times are most likely to be passed on to offspring — a natural selection instead of the intentional policy of some overseeing Malthusian breeder — so the best variants select themselves by passing through the filter of natural conditions; “the most beautiful part of my theory” thought Darwin.

Life is evolution, it is a continuum of variation in harmony with the history of the geo-physical environment. Natural selection produces the good of adaptation without requiring an assumed Malthusian Omnipotentate whose “intelligent design” requires mass die-offs by starvation, and such individual agonies as that of a caterpillar paralyzed by an ichneumon wasp as live food for its eggs. What is most admirable about Darwin was that his objections to the Malthusian Omnipotentate are both intellectual — scientific and logical — and also compassionate. Why believe in a cruel god?

Darwin still believed in God during the 1840s, but one far removed from the orthodox conception of his contemporaries. He continued to take an active role in the activities of his parish church, no doubt from altruistic motives, sociability, and finally out of consideration for his observant wife, Emma Wedgewood Darwin (also a cousin). From about 1849, Darwin went for Sunday morning walks in the country while his wife and children attended church services. In late May 1876, Darwin began his autobiography, which he intended as a posthumous memoir for his family. In it he frankly described the evolution of his religious views, but these passages were omitted in the published edition, because Emma and Darwin’s son Francis were concerned about a negative impact to Darwin’s reputation. The unexpurgated autobiography was published in 1958 by Emma Nora Barlow, a granddaughter of Charles Darwin. A selection of six passages of this material follows.

“By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported, — that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible, do miracles become, — that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us, — that the Gospels cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events, — that they differ in many important details, far too important as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eyewitness; — by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. The fact that many false religions have spread over large portions of the earth like wild-fire had some weight with me. Beautiful as is the morality of the New Testament, it can hardly be denied that its perfection depends in part on the interpretation which we now put on metaphors and allegories.”

“Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but at last was complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct.”

“I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine.”

“The old argument of design in nature, as given by Paley, which formerly seemed to me so conclusive, fails, now that the law of natural selection had been discovered. We can no longer argue that, for instance, the beautiful hinge of a bivalve shell must have been made by an intelligent being, like the hinge of a door by man. There seems to be no more design in the variability of organic beings and in the action of natural selection, than in the course which the wind blows. Everything in nature is the result of fixed laws.”

“At the present day (ca. 1872) the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons. But it cannot be doubted that Hindoos, Mahomadans and others might argue in the same manner and with equal force in favor of the existence of one God, or of many Gods, or as with the Buddists of no God…This argument would be a valid one if all men of all races had the same inward conviction of the existence of one God: but we know that this is very far from being the case. Therefore I cannot see that such inward convictions and feelings are of any weight as evidence of what really exists.”

“Nor must we overlook the probability of the constant inculcation in a belief in God on the minds of children producing so strong and perhaps as inherited effect on their brains not yet fully developed, that it would be as difficult for them to throw off their belief in God, as for a monkey to throw off its instinctive fear and hatred of a snake.”

In his later years, Darwin would call himself an agnostic in the rare instances he spoke of his religious views. At a dinner with the Darwin family in 1881, Edward Bibbens Aveling (an English Marxist and partner of Karl’s daughter Eleanor Marx) advocated atheism because he “did not commit the folly of god-denial, [and] avoided with equal care the folly of god-assertion.” The essentials of the subsequent exchange were as follows:

Darwin: “I am with you in thought, but I should prefer the word Agnostic to the word Atheist.”

Aveling: “after all, ‘Agnostic’ is but ‘Atheist’ writ respectable, and ‘Atheist’ is only ‘Agnostic’ writ aggressive.”

Darwin: “Why should you be so aggressive? Is anything gained by trying to force these new ideas upon the mass of mankind? It is all very well for educated, cultured, thoughtful people; but are the masses yet ripe for it?”

Aveling: social progress required the wide dissemination of new and radical ideas, as was the case with The Origin Of Species.

Darwin was by nature non-confrontational, his methods of study and argument were logical, steady, incremental and based on a wealth of physical data. Also, we cannot neglect the fact that he was an old man not in the best of health, and might prefer to maintain the peacefulness of his life by keeping his peace in public on religion. Darwin had already responded to Aveling’s last point, on the possible benefits of speaking out publicly in favor of “atheism,” in a private letter to Aveling in 1880:

“Though I am a strong advocate for free thought on all subjects, yet it appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against Christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men’s minds which follows from the advance of science. It has, therefore, been always my object to avoid writing on religion, and I have confined myself to science. I may, however, have been unduly biased by the pain which it would give some members of my family, if I aided in any way direct attacks on religion.”

In 2008 and in anticipation of Darwin’s 200th birthday, the Church of England published an apology to Darwin “for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still”.

Darwin’s Influence On Today’s Science

Evolution by natural selection is the core phenomenon in the scientific study of life, and Darwinian logic is applied to questions as varied as the spread of viruses, and the interactions between human cultures. “Darwinian thought” has been so fruitful to life scientists that investigators in other fields, like psychology and computer science, have been drawn to mimic it. The word “Darwinian” has even appeared in papers on thermodynamics, quantum physics and black holes.

Within the life sciences, evolutionary theory has evolved and expanded with new complexities. One new development is “evo-devo,” the combination of evolutionary theory, embryology and genetics, to study the evolution of structure and form in organisms. Evo-devo makes use of modern capabilities for the analysis and manipulation of DNA, as well as computation.

While Darwin thought evolution was invariably a gradual process, Niles Eldredge, in 1971, proposed that it could also have sudden bursts of activity. This idea, called punctuated equilibrium, was further developed by Stephen Jay Gould, a prominent paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science, and one of the most popular writers on science from the 1970s to 2000, when he died.

The theory of punctuated equilibrium proposes that instead of just being a uniformly gradual progression of change, the evolution of most species is characterized by long periods of evolutionary stability punctuated by rare instances of rapid change. The theory was advanced to explain the overwhelming trend of the fossil record, and those periods of exceptional efflorescence of life, such as the 20 million year Cambrian explosion that began 520 million years ago.

Recent efforts in evolutionary biology involve the combination of evolutionary theory with genetics to study questions of bio-diversity and ecology, and involved interdisciplinary problems such as the impact of climate change and invasive species on ecosystems.

The application of modern molecular evolutionary science to medical applications is obvious: predicting next year’s strain of the influenza virus, or the next pandemic pathogen, so as to devise vaccines; and understanding how bacteria and parasites develop resistances to our antibiotics.

Mind and Freedom

The unknown and the unknowable are united anthropomorphically in the human imagination, and called God. As we evolve, God recedes. Our projections of fear, desire and anxiety onto the opacity of the unknown are reflected back to us as the mirages God, heaven and hell. These phantasms fade as we learn more about the nature we are a part of, by using our brains for rational and scientific thought. This enlarges our experience of freedom and our human potential. Darwin’s comment on religion stunting the mental development of children is chilling (“…the probability of the constant inculcation in a belief in God on the minds of children producing so strong and perhaps as inherited effect on their brains not yet fully developed…”). Indeed, religious fundamentalism is a mental illness, and a great deal of religious training is mass child abuse. All gods are human inventions, and their societies of mind-limiting veneration are cults. Church is cult politics. Because all religions are cults of mass participation, the Hitler Youth and the Stalin Cult were religions. As long as we have temporal potentates on this planet there will be efforts to deify them, and to expand their cults into religions that seek to devour their rivals. This is the “clash of civilizations” debilitating the Judeo-Christian West and eroding the Islamic East. These psycho-viral infections of collective consciousness evolve resistantly over the course of human history, and we can only hope they all soon fall extinct before the evolution of the human mind.


Charles Robert Darwin

Charles Darwin’s voyage on the Beagle

Publication of The Origin Of Species’s_theory

Darwin Day

Erasmus Darwin

Robert Waring Darwin

Erasmus Alvey Darwin

Emma (Wedgewood) Darwin

Charles Darwin’s views on religion’s_views_on_religion

Darwin turns 200
(Science News, Vol. 175, No. 3, January 31, 2009)

Stephen Jay Gould

History (and evolution) of Darwin Day

Appendix: Darwin And Lincoln Parallel Lives


12 Feb 1809
Darwin (birth): in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England
Lincoln (birth): in southeast Hardin County, Kentucky (now part of LaRue County)


27 Dec 1831
Darwin (22):
– embarks on 2nd exploratory voyage of HMS Beagle
– a believer in literal truth of the Bible

Lincoln (23):
– unsuccessful campaign for the Illinois General Assembly, as a Whig
– parents were Hardshell Baptists, he never joined any church

Mastering Professions

2 October 1836
Darwin (27):
– HMS Beagle returns to England
– skeptical of religion

Lincoln (28):
– first protest against slavery in the Illinois House
– slavery was “founded on both injustice and bad policy.”

Darwin (29): conceived his theory of natural selection


Lincoln (49): Lincoln-Douglas debates

Darwin (50): On the Origin of Species

Lincoln (51): Cooper Union Address; 1st Republican president-elect


Lincoln (56): assassinated

Lincoln was reserved about his religious views so as not to offend public sentiment, or upset his wife. Intellectually, he was at least a deist, like Tom Paine, and at most a skeptic. During the depths of his depression in 1861-1862, when the Union suffered catastrophic and bloody military defeats, and during which time his young son Willie died, his speech was more infused with religious sentiments than ever before. One can see the “religious” tendencies of his life as being expressions of both deep emotional pain, and the pull of consoling socialization.

The following is from Forrest Church’s sermon of 17 February 2002:

Lincoln’s religious beliefs were far from conventional. Raised by Free-will Baptists in Kentucky, the young Lincoln found Thomas Paine’s Deism more attractive than his parents’ Christianity. But as he grew older, suffering through the death of brother, sister, and two sons, and contemplating the carnage of war, Lincoln gradually adopted a more Christian outlook. Even then he held no truck with theologians. “The more a man knew of theology,” he once said, “the further he got away from the spirit of Christ.” When asked why he refused to join a church, Lincoln replied, “Because I find difficulty without mental reservation in giving my assent to their long and complicated creeds,” adding that, “When any church inscribes on its altar, as a qualification for membership, the Savior’s statement of the substance of the law and the Gospel–’Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind … and thy neighbor as thyself’–that church will I join with all my heart and soul.”

Darwin (73): dies.

“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.”

— from the Introduction of Darwin’s 1871 book, The Descent Of Man.


Original publication:

Darwin’s Living Legacy
6 February 2009

Outline History of Life and Human Evolution

The following Outline of the History of Life on Earth, and Human Evolution was written by my friend HWPTRA, a Life Sciences scholar. This outline history is a list of some of the significant events during the 4.5 billion years of Earth’s history. Any one of the entries in this list is itself a vast topic with an enormous literature (both scientific and popular) behind it; the brief descriptions here are little more than labels pointing the interested reader toward that literature (as on the Internet) for all the details.

The years and periods listed for the events are always to be taken as very approximate. As science advances, the time or period estimated for a listed event can be found to be different than previously thought, sometimes significantly different, and the sequence of events can even change as a result of new knowledge. So, this list is a snapshot of our knowledge today, where we understand that there are limits to the precision of that knowledge. Even so, it is a fascinating and enlightening presentation, which can help us gain a bare-bones yet integrated overview of the natural history that eventually produced us, Homo sapiens sapiens.

Following the outline history of life on Earth, I post a Histo-Map of human civilizations, compiled by John B. Sparks in 1931. To help the reader, I have posted six images of this map: one of the entire map, and five of sequential sections of the map. Also, I list a link to a website that shows a “big” version of the entire map. In all cases you will find lots of tiny print, and may wish to expand an image for easier reading (until it becomes fuzzy due to the low resolution of the original). The Histomap covers the interval of 2000 BC to 1930 AD, perhaps half of human history, and a very late 0.86 millionths of Earth’s history. Enjoy.


Outline of the History of Life on Earth, and Human Evolution

If the entire 4.5 billion years of Earth’s history were compressed into a single year:

1. January and February: it was too hot for any life to evolve.

2. March 1st to July 25th: bacteria were the only life forms on the planet.

3. July 25th: oxygen in the atmosphere was finally at near modern levels, and oxygen-using eukaryotic cells evolved.

4. November 20th: animals with backbones appeared.

5. December 22nd: first placental mammals appeared.

6. December 29th: the first apes appeared.

7. December 31st, 6:00 PM: Homo erectus appears.

8. December 31st, 11:46 PM: Homo sapiens (modern man) appears.

9. December 31st, from 11:59 PM to 12:00 AM (midnight): all of human history.











Histomap 2000BC-1930AD


Addendum (1 March 2017)


Earliest evidence of life on Earth ‘found’
1 March 2017

DEP Micro-device 2D Electric Field

I used to have the ambition of being an “artistic scientist,” a physicist and engineer aiming to produce scientific findings that were both useful and elegant, and which I would present in as beautiful a manner as I was able. The type of beauty I sought is a combination of logical simplicity, mathematical elegance, some range and depth of insight provided by the ideas, all communicated with visual and literary crispness in my written reports and other presentations.

I achieved this ideal, to my own satisfaction at least, a few times during my scientific career. One of those proud achievements is my model of the electric field in dielectrophoretic (DEP) micro-devices.

My original report “The 2D Electric Field Above A Planar Sequence Of Independent Strip Electrodes” is available below (a link to a PDF file). The report is dated 4 October 1999, and lists two authors; the second author is the patron who paid my salary during the months I worked on this project.

This paper was sent to a journal and subsequently published, but with egregious errors introduced by the journal’s editors, who “simplified” my math for publishing convenience. Months after I pointed this out to them, they issued an errata. The combination of the published paper and the errata (showing correct formulas) did not include many of the illustrations I had produced for my original report (Version 1), and which I think would help anyone actually thinking of using my mathematical model of DEP electrostatics.

So, this blog entry is similar to the case of a former artist who pulls out an obscure and favorite painting of theirs from storage in an attic or basement, dusts it off, and hangs it up on the wall so he can look at it again, and remember how good it felt to make.

A second report (an excerpt in PDF form) describes how use of the electrostatic model could assist in the development of DEP micro-devices (which are used in DNA sequencing technology).

DEP Device Diagram

DEP Device Diagram

DEP 2D Math Beauty

DEP 2D Math Beauty

DEP 2D Model Version-1

DEP 2D Model & micro-devices