• John
  • Felde
  • University of Maryland
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • James
  • Doherty
  • Open University
  • United Kingdom

Latest Posts

  • Andrea
  • Signori
  • Nikhef
  • Netherlands

Latest Posts

  • CERN
  • Geneva
  • Switzerland

Latest Posts

  • Aidan
  • Randle-Conde
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles
  • Belgium

Latest Posts

  • Vancouver, BC
  • Canada

Latest Posts

  • Laura
  • Gladstone
  • MIT
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Steven
  • Goldfarb
  • University of Michigan

Latest Posts

  • Fermilab
  • Batavia, IL
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Seth
  • Zenz
  • Imperial College London
  • UK

Latest Posts

  • Nhan
  • Tran
  • Fermilab
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Alex
  • Millar
  • University of Melbourne
  • Australia

Latest Posts

  • Ken
  • Bloom
  • USA

Latest Posts

Fermilab | Batavia, IL | USA

View Blog | Read Bio

Astrophysicist and TV host describe faster way to board airplanes

Almost everyone has been there: You rush to the airport only to stand in line and watch your plane board at what feels like a snail’s pace. Yet few people take the time to come up with a better solution and even fewer see their idea tested.

Frustration and luck helped Fermilab astrophysicist Jason Steffen accomplish both.

In 2008, after a particularly blood-boiling wait in an airport, the frequent flier decided to put his skills developing algorithms to track potentially habitable planets and dark matter particles to use developing a computer model to virtually load passengers. After testing several loading patterns, Steffen determined that loading in groups spaced two or three rows apart makes the process much more efficient. The improvement in boarding time depends on the size of the airplane. Spacing out passengers was key to allowing simultaneous depositing of luggage in over-head bins.

Although Steffen was sure his formula worked, it was still just theory on paper that needed flesh and bone testing.

Enter This vs. That, a new science program that uses often quirky experiments to test the merits of everyday choices such as what burns hotter in your grill – natural gas or propane. The show is being distributed internationally by MIPCOM and under discussion for Internet release in the United States. Jon Hotchkiss, producer of the program, came across Steffen’s paper on the Internet shortly after his own molasses-like airplane boarding experience, and a new episode was born.

“As much as This vs. That is entertaining, I also wanted there to be a take away,”  Hotchkiss said. “I wanted to provide answers to questions that people have in their daily lives.”

The show flew Steffen to Los Angeles during his vacation earlier this year to test five models of airplane boarding, including Steffen’s preferred method, on a mock 757 airplane in a movie sound stage. Steffen and Hotchkiss measured the plane’s interior to make sure it conformed with the specifications of a real 757. Seventy-two people, and their luggage, were loaded with boarding order and seat number randomized. Steffen was a little taken back at first by the producer’s call but said that, “When someone offers to take you’re theoretical work and test it; you should jump at the chance.”

During the filming, Steffen’s nerves were put to the test by the show’s co-host comedian Marc DeCarlo, who also hosts the Travel Channel’s Taste of America and Windy City LIVE’s  man-about-town segments. Steffen wasn’t allowed to know the time it took for each boarding method until the end of the episode and DeCarlo kept implying that Steffen shouldn’t quit his day job.

“I was watching people load and this one girl was slow,” Steffen said. “I kept thinking, ‘Man this last girl is going to make me look bad. Put the bag in the overhead bin already’. But once the time ‘three minutes’ came out of DeCarlo’s mouth, I knew I had it.” Steffen’s method was nearly twice as fast as the nearest competing method.
You can read about Steffen’s method and the sound-stage test in his white paper posted Sunday on the preprint server arXiv.
The first 7 ½ minutes of the This vs. That episode testing Steffen’s method can be viewed here and a few clips of Steffen’s boarding method.

The program’s Twitter feed will announce the U.S. release date of the full one-hour episode , pending a distribution contract.

–Tona Kunz

  • n

    typo —

    “When someone offers to take you’re theoretical work and test it; you should jump at the chance.”


  • Victor Gudym

    In our opinion, the new experiments, where the neutrino velocity was measured, are not unexpected. The failure of the relativity theory in that concerning the light velocity is already revealed in the experiments on the electron-proton scattering (R Hofstadter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 28, 214 (1956)).
    Hofstadter studied the scattering of electrons with energies of 188 and 400 MeV. It is quite obvious that the velocity of electrons with such energies exceeds significantly the light velocity. But then nobody noticed that the distribution of scattered electrons corresponds strictly to the famous classical Rutherford formula.
    Hofstadter modified the Rutherford formula with the help of formulas of the relativity theory and made conclusion that only the relativity theory allowed one to explain the experiment.
    But we have recently shown (V.K. Gudym and E.V. Andreeva, Journal of Surface Investigation 1, 223 (2007), V.K. Gudym and E.V. Andreeva, Concepts of Physics IV, 553 (2007), V.K. Gudym and E.V. Andreeva, Concepts of Physics V, 435 (2008)) that another explanation is possible on the classical level without the use of the relativity theory. Respectively, no limiting velocity of particles exists.
    We believe that there is no sense to restrict themselves only by the experiments with neutrino. It is necessary to return to the study of the scattering of relativistic electrons, where the erroneousness of the relativity theory can be also demonstrated in a more clear way.

    V.K. Gudym