If It Was A Dust Cloud...
...surely the absorption lines in a spectrographic analysis would tell us if the dimming is being caused by dust or not, wouldn't it?
73 posts • joined 23 Aug 2016
The bottom two views from the side launchers coming in to land were probably meant to show the camera shots from each individual booster, but they are actually just duplicates from the one camera on one of the boosters - this is clearly visible at the end as they come in to land on Landing Zones 1 & 2 and 'both' rockets land on the same LZ.
This takes nothing away from the achievement and the external shots clearly show the near simultaneous landing, but in the interest of completeness I thought I'd point it out before the conspiracy theorist/flat earth nutters get their teeth into it.
But, as you say, Awesome.
the quality, condition, or fact of being exact and ACCURATE.
synonyms: exactness, exactitude, accuracy, accurateness, correctness, preciseness, clarity, clearness, distinctness; faithfulness, fidelity; care, carefulness, meticulousness, scrupulousness, punctiliousness, particularity, methodicalness, perfection, rigour, rigorousness, nicety
...I don't want my camera to produce the same colour under different ambient light. Half the challenge of creating an interesting photo is to get different colour balances on foreground and mid ground objects against different skies. My photos would look weird and unnatural if for example a bridge and a river were the same colour no matter what the sky background was (for example: overcast, sunset, bright day with blue sky, etc.)
The analogy was referencing the size through comparing event horizon (as opposed to solar masses) to turnover (rather than customer numbers), and therefore, in essence the grocery store grows by accreting stock. It does this by sucking in money - in the cosmology of the shopping mall greed = gravity.
"Toad Hall," said the Toad proudly, "is an eligible self- contained gentleman's residence, very unique; dating in part from the fourteenth century, but replete with every modern convenience. Up-to-date sanitation. Five minutes from church, post-office, and golf-links, Suitable for..."
Am I the only one here who doesn't understand this?
They're creating millions of pairs of photons and recording one a second that are 'entangled'!
How do they know that these,the ones claimed to be entangled, aren't just random associations? I've got to admit I'm entirely baffled by this entire 'technology'.
Science, a mistress! Nah. Science is a bloke usually lurking in his shed in a chunky knit pullover, with tiny splashes of chicken soup lost in a straggly beard, and a distant, pensive look in his eyes. You can sometimes find him down the pub having a swift half early doors, when his missus, Nature, has buggered off with her best pal, Art, for a night out on the town.
Bear with me...
The commonly espoused version of Black Holes posit a Singularity at the center where matter is crushed beyond what physics can predict about it, with an event horizon further out where the matter sucked within (and the information contained therein) becomes becomes lost to our universe.
Now as I understand it, light cannot escape from a Black Hole not because it is sucked into the Singularity but because once it 'dips' below the event horizon space-time is so curved that the photons orbit around the Singularity.
Now suppose that there is some kind of exotic supermassive particle 'larger' than a Singularity (i.e. existing in space-time and obeying all the laws of physics), but that this supermassive thing is smaller than the event horizon. In this case the results from the search would show the results as were gathered, and the supermassive particle would still be invisible - the star's matter would descend down and hit the hard surface of the supermassive particle whilst the radiation would circle space-time below the event horizon.
I've always been concerned about a singularity being totally unexplainable (and therefore somewhat 'un-scientific') whereas a supermassive particle only needs a small unknown quantity to enter into the equations to prevent the downward collapse of matter at a density prior to singularity-dom and thus still remain within the realms of explainable physics.
(NB If however Singularities do exist - and I'm not saying they don't, just that I'd prefer that they didn't - then I quite like the idea that they form some kind of feedback loop to the Big Bang and therefore re-enter the possibly explainable realm that is physics!)
Why do exobiologist/astroboffins insist on the 'goldilocks zone' thing. We are, after all, talking about alien life. The rulebook doesn't state that alien life must have DNA as a base code, it doesn't insist that the temperature should be like an average day on the beach at Brighton, or that water has to be involved, does it.
I'm not just talking extremophiles here (which we know can and do exist on our own planet), but exoticophiles - things like bugs that use solvents other than water, thingymajigs that operate at cryogenic temperatures utilising superfluidity and superconductivity, gassy bags of ephemeral catalysts floating in Jupiter like skies, organised magneto-creatures feeding off of a star's chromosphere... I could go on and on and on
> further object are older than nearer ones.<
Piffle sir!. I think you'll find that further objects are YOUNGER than nearer ones (in a space-time relativistic manner). It takes the light longer to get here and therefore the information it delivers comes from an earlier time frame than our current one.
Next in line should be all the bloody London luvvies who've installed wood burners in their little country hide-aways, that they invariably get to in gigantic diesel driven 4x4s.
As a born and bred country bumpkin, still resident in my ancestral village, I'm finding it increasingly difficult to snaffle up the pure unadulterated air of yore
Black Holes are sleight of hand objects. They are merely theoretically reduced to a singularity in the middle where all the mass congregates, but in actuality (because time slows down dramatically the further down the gravity well you descend, and so a second in the deep interior would correspond to billions of years out here on Earth's insignificant gravity wrinkle) no black hole would have had time to reach a singularity state - the matter would still be infalling (from the BH's perspective).
Also, according to loop quantum gravity, the singularity can't form as it can't squeeze space down below the planck length - there's a limit to how much stuff can be squeezed into a finite space.
Also, the mascara snake, fast and bulbous.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019