In season 2, episode 9 of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Captain Picard was faced with an issue regarding the android that he considers to be his shipmate, Commander Data. In this episode, Data is forced to give up his body, so to say, in the name of science. While he himself and his fellow crewmates alike do not want to give up this valuable asset towards the team, cyberneticist Commander Maddox insists that since Data isn’t sentient, it is therefore not a being and therefore is a property of the ship Enterprise. The episode brings up the question of whether or not artificial intelligence, like Commander Data This episode, although aired years ago could come to be more relevant today than it was back then. That is because as we advance into society, science is accelerating even faster which means soon, androids like Commander Data would become a relaity, no longer science fiction. Now that too brings up the question of do these “machines” who are capable of acting like humans deserve rights like humans. Are they even to be considered humans or are they a race of their own? From the readings of Safiya Umoja Noble in Algorithms of Oppression, Noble brings up the question of racism being enforced upon these androids. Due to the fact that these androids have to be programmed by someone, then there will be an inevitable source of racism, sexism or any type of bias.

The New York Times article, Andromeda is Coming for our Milky Way, Eventually, by Dennis Overbye published February 8, 2019, was created to inform readers about a new finding made by astronomers. The path and speed of the galaxy Andromeda, also known as Messier 31, has changed from their last findings. The former report had declared the galaxy would collide into the Milky Way in 3.9 billion years. Traveling at about 68 miles per second, the collision would end with the Milky Way and Andromeda conglomerating into a singular, enormous cosmic being. New data declares that Andromeda is actually moving a lot slower than expected, at only about 20 miles per second and sideways. This denoting it would take approximately 4.5 billion years to strike our galaxy, in turn also changing the path of Andromeda. At a faster speed, it could be assumed we would have had a harder, more direct hit. The galaxy’s decreased velocity would make the encounter a subtler clash.

This article contains a video attachment from 2014 in which the previous data found through the Hubble Space Telescope had shown scientist the Andromeda galaxy, made of a trillion stars, would have a head-on collision with the Milky Way galaxy. The video gives a visual representation of how the collision would look to a faraway onlooker. Also, there is an insight into what specifically would happen to the earth and humans in the process of this collision. It is said before the collision would even occur human life would cease to exist from its sterilization by the sun. After the collision and many billion years, the two galaxies after intertwining will be able to assemble into one, large galaxy.

This video is vital to the article as it helps to explain a difficult to grasp the topic. A galaxy’s immense size makes interpreting its behavior hard. These extensive time periods between the actual collisions and how the collision will look are complex to comprehend. Although the video shows a totally different outcome from what will happen with the present data, it allows us to compare the two outcomes. The video also serves as a tool to exhibit the new path Andromeda will take by evaluating the video with the new data in mind.

In the excerpt from the New York : Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2014, STEM Education: How to Train 21st Century Teachers,there is extensive national curiosity for STEM activities, yet there is little exchange concerning what STEM implies as far as an educational programs idea to be connected to class programming. This section centers around STEM as an educational modules idea. To begin with, STEM writing computer programs are examined regarding separate subjects, associated and wide field educational program models. The issue of subject structure is inspected. A qualification is additionally made between the four STEM subjects regarding formal and useful employments of information. Second, some down to earth programming issues are talked about. These incorporate the practically select spotlight on science and math to the rejection of innovation and designing; the test of serving numerous understudy populaces; and the issue of how to manage the “T”  in STEM. A closing segment recommends ways that the STEM activity can be conceptualized so as to understand its significant potential to accomplish educational programs reformulation. Enthusiasm for science, innovation, engineering and math, instructional models is actually detonating over the instructive scene. Colleges are investigating STEM models as an approach to rebuild science and building guidance; optional schools are occupied with exploring different avenues regarding changed educational module; the instructive writing is full with references to STEM activities; and specialists and entrepreneurs are hurrying into the instructive commercial center with confirmations that they also can help in the usage of powerful STEM programming. STEM does not speak to a particular educational model; rather, there are numerous approaches to define STEM programming. Truth be told, it is difficult to observe what precisely is implied by “STEM.” Practically any sort of instructive mediation that is even remotely connected with science, innovation, building or math is alluded to as a STEM advancement. This absence of a cementing impression of STEM undermines over the long haul to decimate support for the development. Inability to convey results will most likely surpass victories.