Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


We're recovering from a major server loss and are restoring backups as we gain access to them. Don't mind the odd time warp. Warn us in the future.

Truth by Edward Barnard - Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:12:23 EST ID:+4KamMvj No.56439 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1474380743780.jpg -(24054B / 23.49KB, 500x431) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 24054
>If the universe was born from a white hole it solves everything.
if black holes turn into white holes and birth new universes, that means holographic universe theory is real, multiverse is real (every black hole is its own universe), every single equation is solved, if science simply realized that it was not a singularity but rather a white hole.
>Our universe is inside a white hole, or event horizon.
>Looking at a star 90 million lightyears away is like looking at the star as it was 90 million years ago. is it possible we have not detected life, as we can only view stars in the past - and not as they currently exist?

For example, the big bang theory says the universe started as a singularity. But scientists have no satisfying explanation for how such a singularity might have formed in the first place.

If our universe was birthed by a white hole instead of a singularity, Poplawski said, "it would solve this problem of black hole singularities and also the big bang singularity."

Wormholes might also explain gamma ray bursts, the second most powerful explosions in the universe after the big bang.

Gamma ray bursts occur at the fringes of the known universe. They appear to be associated with supernovae, or star explosions, in faraway galaxies, but their exact sources are a mystery.

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
5 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Edmond Halley - Sat, 24 Sep 2016 03:24:08 EST ID:Kz5Q207u No.56469 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It's not about realizing anything. I'm sure plenty of physicists and cosmologists have entertained the idea, but it isn't science when you just make shit up that isn't able to be tested, measured, proven, or disproven to any degree. Cosmology has a bad habit of sometimes delving into the realm of psuedo-science. None of these are even hypotheses, they're simply musings. It could very well be true, but there isn't currently a way to tell one way or the other.
Nicolaus Copernicus - Sat, 24 Sep 2016 04:05:13 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56470 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It was sarcasm. 'Like that would ever happen' was implicit.
Vesto Slipher - Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:56:14 EST ID:KgKlYmGv No.56499 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1475171774066.jpg -(37815B / 36.93KB, 400x367) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I know you\re trolling but since it\s a chilled out night and im really laid back i'll take the bait cause reading them got me entertained.
While reading this got me thinking, do the people that write these up actually believe these "facts" or they just go with the thread for the kick of it. Or maybe they're just 15, eager to belong into some kind of social group and wanna feel special/entitled, with their mind not exactly made up what they're experiencing.

Basically the first 18 something disregard gravity (pic related).

19. is a funny one, based on a 16th century argument that stars in the sky should be visibly moving "back and forth" since we're on solar orbit and move somewhat closer and further to them.
20. says a cannon shot straight up should land slightly west because by the time the ball falls back the earth and the cannon should've moved east due to earth's spinning. except the atmosphere spins with the planet.

the rest just made no sense or were downright dumb and i got bored
Hannes Alven - Thu, 29 Sep 2016 15:36:29 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56500 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Maybe some one should also tell them that gravity is non-shperical. but the planet is. Might cause some explosions of rage.
Maximilian Wolf - Sun, 16 Oct 2016 17:47:26 EST ID:f/Tl+D5o No.56524 Ignore Report Quick Reply
it's centered on a couple, man and woman in space holding us together, there's a black hole that gets turned into white when there's enough gathered to break the threshold, the quantum dynamics are designed so that the people are part of the equation.

WTF is this thing? by George Gamow - Sat, 01 Oct 2016 08:29:02 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56502 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1475324942532.jpg -(77817B / 75.99KB, 1024x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 77817

>inb4 UFO hurr durr.

It does smell of the classic shit writen science journalism click bait. can post the archive.is if you guys would rather not give it clicks.

But what is that thing? remember UFO does not mean ayyy lmaos. Kinda looks like voyager probe to me. I have no idea the perspective and sizes involved here.
5 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Christiaan Huygens - Mon, 03 Oct 2016 02:24:49 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56509 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I should say alien space ships type star trek shit. not just life.
Annie Cannon - Tue, 04 Oct 2016 02:24:50 EST ID:M/g1akbS No.56510 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1475562290765.gif -(1531895B / 1.46MB, 246x184) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
No, this is pure pseudoscientific blabber.

If this was to taken seriously in any regard...I would want to see peer-reviewed data of some basic things....like spectra of the "object", or maybe something like, hmm, I don't know, orbital parameters? If they caught two images, you can at least roughly infer parameters.
Alas this info will never come to light, because the authors have nothing more in mind than tinfoil-y conjecture.

The ultimatum is that you expect your viewpoint to be correct, that there is some "massive" object passing by the sun, whose existence is inferred by data from a 20 year old satellite.
Moreover, why did you tell me to check if I have cancer? Are dissenting opinions that rough to you?

Also, do you want to know why this is the only source reporting on this? Because its fucking technobabble, made to look pretty in text. You want to know the truth? Any astrophysicist (a broad and international group, i may remind you) would love to have their name associated with definitive proof of ETI or the like. So honestly, come off it, tQX5ylFX, its pretty boring and we've heard it before.

Viktor Ambartsumian - Tue, 04 Oct 2016 03:23:45 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56511 Ignore Report Quick Reply
no jolly african-american I was agreeing with you. calm your tits.
Daniel Kirkwood - Wed, 05 Oct 2016 16:45:02 EST ID:SsVk1i6e No.56512 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Whoever wrote that article should be shot.

It's a cosmic ray, if the author bothered to fucking Google it they would have known that. A cosmic ray is a charged particle which hits the detector exciting pixels when there is no light. The same thing as all the other little streaks in that image, the multiple lines are secondary particles. If you look though the SOHO archives you will find thousands. Notice their object turned up months later but was gone just an hour or two later when the next image was taken, because it's not the same thing and it's not a real object. YouTube is crammed with these videos of SOHO UFOs, of course NASA doesn't respond to the same idiots who have been ignoring the response for a decade.

William de Sitter - Thu, 06 Oct 2016 01:19:46 EST ID:qkTsbYde No.56513 Ignore Report Quick Reply
They're all hoaxes. The people who repeat them are either gullible morons or trolls. Now that the obvious has been stated, that's an interesting thing about the cosmic rays affecting the detectors. The Apollo astronauts experienced a similar effect with their own eyesight. After they left low earth orbit, they saw phantom flashes of light when they closed their eyes.

smoked weed and was thinking by Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:08:34 EST ID:KRFHH0CT No.56414 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1473509314493.jpg -(71473B / 69.80KB, 768x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 71473
If time and space are different forms of the same thing, and space is possibly infinite, is time infinite too?
21 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Urbain Le Verrier - Sun, 25 Sep 2016 11:05:55 EST ID:9wXFDQAd No.56476 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The post you're replying to needs some clarification. It isn't that the universe isn't logical. It's that the universe was invented to make sense of ourselves. Everything that we know about the universe was formed in our mind. That's where the logic happens. Without the mind, there would be no definition of anything.
George Gamow - Sun, 25 Sep 2016 18:03:25 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56477 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Of course, only minds can have concepts or access to any information whatsoever. But we didn't invent or define the laws of physics or the rules of logic, we simply discovered approximations of them to lesser or greater degrees of accuracy.
Stephen Hawking - Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:43:20 EST ID:X4FAw0QG No.56478 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Time remains as it will be currently occuring in its form and matter in the presence under which we have sense in understanding it through our correlation with what we perceive in this istance of moments amounted, though it will always be so in a way of saying perhaps , its difficult to say properly
Charles Messier - Tue, 27 Sep 2016 01:49:47 EST ID:Kz5Q207u No.56479 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That was some of the most confusing shit I've ever read. Work on your wording nigga, took me like 3 reads to understand what you were saying.
William Hartmann - Tue, 27 Sep 2016 02:29:03 EST ID:p24Ges2t No.56480 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Nigga, it's Stephen Hawking. Give him a break

Submarines of Titan by Henrietta Levitt - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 10:23:12 EST ID:Y3T9nNnZ No.56335 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1472394192191.gif -(872884B / 852.43KB, 200x100) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 872884
Check it. NASA wants to send a submarine to Titan to go look for critters there.

Please please let this happen.
18 posts and 4 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
George Herbig - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 06:14:16 EST ID:3t/weoS/ No.56404 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>And saying your very finely tuned argument about why we should only care about it your specific way is 'actual science' while any other interpretation is ignoring the universe as 'stochastic' is well just intellectual bullying imo.

Uh ok. I didn't argue that we should look at the issue in my way only. I just pointed out that in science you need more than two data points to make solid predictions.

If you flip a coin twice and you get two heads, then flip it 10 times and get 7 heads, you can assume it's loaded in favor of heads and predict it's gonna give you more heads than tails no matter how often you flip it. However that assumption is completely wrong, the probability is still 50%. It just so happened that the few times you flipped the coin, you got a majority of heads. Had you flipped it 100 times you'd get closer to a 50/50 spread of results.

It's the same way with life. If our solar system contains two independent origins of life, we can assume all we want about the general incidence of life in the universe, but until we actually go to new systems we're still in the dark about how common it actually is.
Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 17:34:14 EST ID:YHjXylC8 No.56405 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>If our solar system contains two independent origins of life
There's also a question of panspermia within solar systems.
Maybe life was sprayed all over the solar system from planets that cooled sooner, if life on Titan seems related to earth-life, then we'd assume the reason life formed on earth so soon after it cooled is that it had formed on mars/a moon a million years earlier.

If we assume it's that, then we don't get any data points for biogenesis.
Daniel Kirkwood - Mon, 05 Sep 2016 02:52:24 EST ID:Jqf9zBFl No.56406 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1473058344124.jpg -(134366B / 131.22KB, 800x1150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Fred Whipple - Fri, 23 Sep 2016 13:26:47 EST ID:3t/weoS/ No.56463 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This is a pop-sci article I know, but the work it's based on seem very interesting and def relevant to this thread.


Essentially a team of chemical engineers and astronomers have theorized a template for an enclosed cell capable of thriving in liquid methane/ethane, rather than water as is the case for the lipid-based life on Earth. Pretty interesting read, and it offers insight into possible life on what we consider horribly cold worlds.
Friedrich Bessel - Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:52:57 EST ID:08CSyNx+ No.56468 Report Quick Reply
1474660377624.jpg -(100318B / 97.97KB, 650x487) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
boy i shure do like critters

Osiris Rex by Allan Sandage - Thu, 08 Sep 2016 22:02:04 EST ID:Y3T9nNnZ No.56410 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1473386524051.gif -(775584B / 757.41KB, 200x137) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 775584
Well Osiris Rex launched today. It's supposed to scoop up some asteroid and bring it home to Earth. The mechanism is craziest thing since the skycrane. It's going to bounce off of the asteroid "Bennu" and grab a handful as it does it.

They're trying to bring back between 60g to 2kg of material. They're also going to survey Bennu for about 6 months before the pick their sample site. So it will just be riding along up there chilling with Bennu for a bit.

> the sample mechanism: https://youtu.be/T0FxDxs7lyw?t=126
> animated mission timeline: http://www.asteroidmission.org/mission/
> obligatory boring launch video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjyLh77WNE

The intent, of course, it to learn more about asteroids to prevent future disasters
4 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Fred Whipple - Wed, 14 Sep 2016 22:35:41 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56430 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Assuming you did this in the US, they would get you on violating air-space protocols. But the fines would be trivial compared to how much this would cost you -- but then why not just pay the licensing fees?
Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Wed, 14 Sep 2016 22:38:51 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56431 Ignore Report Quick Reply
cuz fuck the system.
Edward Pickering - Sun, 18 Sep 2016 06:22:50 EST ID:pjhpxsvC No.56436 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Err, they'd shoot you down with a Patriot missile?
Henrietta Levitt - Wed, 21 Sep 2016 17:07:55 EST ID:YHjXylC8 No.56450 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1474492075619.jpg -(79638B / 77.77KB, 700x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Depending on where you're launching from and your angle of inclination, I would be somewhat concerned about accidentally starting WWIII.
Space exploration is simply ICBM demonstrations with unique payloads.
Thomas Gold - Wed, 21 Sep 2016 20:53:45 EST ID:AKPGknBR No.56452 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Space probes are so fucking efficient, what astounding machines

Space Race vol. II by Rudolph Minkowski - Fri, 02 Sep 2016 21:37:46 EST ID:hdztUjP6 No.56357 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1472866666013.jpg -(363879B / 355.35KB, 1920x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 363879
Some of you probably know about this already, but I was casually scrolling down the science section of Reuters, and I noticed that there seems to be some kind of race to the space going on these days. The hour is upon us.

>China to launch "core module" for space station around 2018


>China shows first images of Mars rover, aims for 2020 mission


"Advancing China's space program is a priority for Beijing, with President Xi Jinping calling for the country to establish itself as a space power."

>Luxembourg sets aside 200 million euros to fund space mining ventures

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
5 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Joseph von Fraunhofer - Mon, 12 Sep 2016 02:34:37 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56424 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It was a facebook satellite so I'm, not too bummed about it. Launch enough rockets and one is bound to explode.
George Gamow - Mon, 12 Sep 2016 19:05:01 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56426 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If anyone thinks we are developing recoverable rockets just to save on rocket fuel, they are entirely missing the point. The current recoverable rocket basically just tries to do what a normal rocket does in a new way, but it is the stepping stone to completely new kinds of space vehicles where we can put a lot more effort and expense into the vehicle itself because we know we will be able to recover it. It is not an end in itself.
Fred Hoyle - Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:30:08 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56433 Ignore Report Quick Reply
People who care about advancing space technology.
Jocelyn Bell - Thu, 15 Sep 2016 21:57:09 EST ID:YHjXylC8 No.56434 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1473991029741.jpg -(56079B / 54.76KB, 650x409) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Because the vehicles can be reused.
Fuel only accounts for like 1% of a rocket launch.

The Space Shuttle was supposed to have a far lower cost per launch, but then they ended up with a bunch of extra requirements and the design when through a bunch of mutations, and the end result required so much work between launches that it would have been cheaper to stick with totally-disposable rockets.
Joseph-Louis Lagrange - Fri, 16 Sep 2016 02:53:13 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56435 Ignore Report Quick Reply
when it lands you don thave to buy another? sort of the key feature.

Proxima B by Johann Bode - Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:37:51 EST ID:Y3T9nNnZ No.56342 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1472582271909.jpg -(375675B / 366.87KB, 1920x1247) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 375675
So it looks like Proxima Centauri has a planet in the habitable zone. It has an earth-like mass.

Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf that's about 4 light years away, and is as close as other stars get to us. We could maybe drive a small satelite there in about 25 years without scifi tech. http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/a22567/interstellar-travel-proxima-b/

It will make an interesting target for upcoming telescoper.
6 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Tycho Brahe - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 01:11:14 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56399 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Laser communication. Read the actual proposal. (Breakthrough Starshot, google it I'm not your secretary)
William Fowler - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 01:37:57 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56400 Ignore Report Quick Reply
lasers are still light speed though. I could use a string and two cups to speak over long distances but it's still going to go at the speed of sound.
Tycho Brahe - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 01:39:15 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56402 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah, but the ship isn't traveling at lightspeed. It takes 20 years to get there because it's only going ~20% the speed of light, Proxima is only 4 light years away.
Anders Angstrom - Tue, 06 Sep 2016 17:24:16 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56408 Ignore Report Quick Reply
and it still takes a 5 second delay to talk to the moon and it's just right there.
I mean the delay alone isn't enough to derail the mission. Just look at all the Mars rovers. The delay is variable pending on the phase of the orbits of Earth and Mars yet they plan ahead and lay out a course only after surveying the area and doing at home tests. The same could be applied to this fight but the end delay is going to be huge both ways. Meaning it's going to take longer to plan and set course. But this time there is a time limit and that limit is a burn window. Miss it by even a second and the entire mission is fucked.

The challenges here are larger than any thing previously attempted. Not that it's impossible at this tech level it's just going to be really hard.
John Bahcall - Tue, 06 Sep 2016 20:26:01 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56409 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Breakthrough Starshot doesn't depend on probes with the kinds of capabilities you're talking about and doesn't have the same problems. The probes are a swarm of very tiny instruments propelled by laser pulses, so the problems of small errors in vector setting or micro collisions are negated by the size of the swarm; some will get through. Likewise being so small they will probably only be capable of the most limited telemetry and so there would be no need to wait for 8 year round trip control, it would probably just transmit until it lost power.

I think spaceflight in general falls under the category of things that are 'really hard to do', but thankfully it is a field where success or failure is an entirely technical matter, so sooner or later we will get it right.

EP=EPR by Paul Goldsmith - Wed, 17 Aug 2016 21:50:46 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56313 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1471485046285.gif -(869344B / 848.97KB, 200x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 869344
Holy fucking shit guys, my mind is blown.
The unification of QM and GR is HERE!!?!?!


tl;dr: Susskind says spooky action at a distance IS wormholes and the Copenhagen Interpretation and Many-Worlds Interpretation were the same thing all along from different perspectives. HOLY FUCK
10 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Allan Sandage - Sat, 27 Aug 2016 01:49:43 EST ID:1xERvVrq No.56330 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>worm holes or warp drive. What is more likely to happen?
I would love to see the race between trying to collapse entangled particles into entangled blackhole for wormhole versus trying to synthesize negative mass from Casimir effect for Alcubierre drive.

>Now suppose Alice and Bob, universally acknowledged to be the most capable quantum experimenters ever imagined, start collecting these real entangled particles in the vacuum. Alice takes one member of each pair and Bob takes the other. They fly away separately to distant realms of space and then each smushes their particles so densely that they become a black hole. Because of the entanglement these particles started with, Alice and Bob have now created two entangled black holes. If ER=EPR is right, a wormhole will link those black holes; entanglement, therefore, can be described using the geometry of wormholes. “This is a remarkable claim whose impact has yet to be appreciated,” Susskind writes.
>Even more remarkable, he suggests, is the possibility that two entangled subatomic particles alone are themselves somehow connected by a sort of quantum wormhole. Since wormholes are contortions of spacetime geometry — described by Einstein’s gravitational equations — identifying them with quantum entanglement would forge a link between gravity and quantum mechanics.
Edward Pickering - Sat, 27 Aug 2016 19:02:15 EST ID:gRBEStbH No.56332 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Leonard Susskind space is entangled with space
Johannes Kepler - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:08:42 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56333 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Fascinating (if a bit dry) talk. I wonder if he deliberately did not go into other properties of black holes that might negate the limitations he described, or doesn't think they are relevant. Specifically I mean that we know we ultimately can get (all of) the information out of a black hole ultimately as it evaporates due to hawking radiation, could we then not (especially if we are creating a black hole from scratch and thus can make it as small as we want) project entangled particles into the entangled black hole and thus receive information out of the entangled black hole partner in the form of the hawking radiation it emits?
Johannes Kepler - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:31:39 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56334 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Just thinking about it some more (nb for double post) wouldn't it even be possible to get information out without hawking radiation by manipulating the size of the black hole? If the two black holes share the same singularity then putting mass into one increases the mass of the other, and so if you dumped mass into one it would alter the rate of evaporation of the other which could then be measured.
Russel Hulse - Fri, 02 Sep 2016 23:49:51 EST ID:d5o+epTm No.56363 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1472874591251.gif -(2904316B / 2.77MB, 300x170) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

damn shit nigga thats some crazy shit, my mind is bending trying to get a full grasp on the implications

Forgive me but... by Tadashi Nakajima - Thu, 26 May 2016 21:42:57 EST ID:VjH9pXwP No.56190 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1464313377750.jpg -(328323B / 320.63KB, 960x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 328323
...I was thinking about Dark Matter. My understanding is that in analyzing the universe, they detect there should be like 3-4 times as much matter as we can account for with stars and such. It just reeks of "luminiferous ether" to me

What if though, there's no invisible matter, but the universe is actually made up of 3-4x more stuff, stuff that is just accelerating away faster than we can see it (faster than the speed of light?). Or is that what is meant by dark matter?
8 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Mike Brown - Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:41:29 EST ID:f/Tl+D5o No.56283 Ignore Report Quick Reply
According to the standard Big Bang model, the universe was born during a period of inflation that began about 13.7 billion years ago. Like a rapidly expanding balloon, it swelled from a size smaller than an electron to nearly its current size within a tiny fraction of a second.

Smaller than an electron.. das it mane from outside of our universe
Johannes Kepler - Sun, 14 Aug 2016 01:01:10 EST ID:XEWmPjnl No.56311 Ignore Report Quick Reply
what if the discrepancy between the expected and actual amounts of matter in the universe is explained by highly advanced sentient beings entering our universe from a separate universe and bringing matter with them (bringing a planet or a ship or building their own custom galaxies or something) ?
Paul Goldsmith - Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:41:20 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56316 Ignore Report Quick Reply
But the actual value is less than the expected value, not more.
Fred Hoyle - Mon, 22 Aug 2016 14:10:47 EST ID:qyc9lsem No.56324 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There's no dark matter. It's just the opposite reaction to the universal constant.

Alan Guth - Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:20:11 EST ID:rszf0FN0 No.56325 Ignore Report Quick Reply
No, according to LCDM dark energy *is* the cosmological constant. Also if dark matter/energy comprise 97% of the universe, how could 3% of the universe generate an opposite reaction almost two orders of magnitude greater (and also where is the room for ordinary matter in this model?)

FIRST by Cecelia Payne-Gaposchkin - Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:47:51 EST ID:hnyGB63L No.56176 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1461941271509.jpg -(73000B / 71.29KB, 680x992) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 73000
Which crime will be the first to occur in a non-Earth environment, rape or murder?
7 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Edwin Hubble - Sat, 23 Jul 2016 18:05:19 EST ID:dkpHUKZj No.56289 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If that was true it would be impossible to maintain an erection while doing a handstand.
Rudolph Minkowski - Sat, 23 Jul 2016 20:37:49 EST ID:eY06FJul No.56290 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1469320669985.jpg -(94396B / 92.18KB, 800x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I don't understand. If gravity causes a little extra blood pressure, I'm not saying that it does, then why would it matter if you are doing a hand stand? Are you implying a handstand will negate the force of gravity?
Johann Encke - Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:52:13 EST ID:YHjXylC8 No.56293 Ignore Report Quick Reply
He's saying if you can achieve an erection on earth while doing a handstand, then you'll definitely be able to achieve an erection in space where you don't have gravity acting against your dick.
Clyde Tombaugh - Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:12:11 EST ID:3t/weoS/ No.56295 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I'd assume you'd loose your hand-standing erection eventually as blood flows into your upper body, though you might pass out before that. Zero-gravity is known to cause a sizable reduction of blood pressure, which is the reasoning behind the claim that getting a boner in space is difficult.

Interestingly NASA sits on data like this but refuse to reveal it thanks to their policies on funny business.
Walter Adams - Sat, 13 Aug 2016 01:03:53 EST ID:KgKlYmGv No.56309 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It's because they send some old saggy cunts over there that have difficulty with getting a boner send me over there and show me some pussy it's gonna be the fastest space mission you'll see

Actual photo of earth ? by Giuseppe Piazzi - Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:40:57 EST ID:a9VttgPi No.55637 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1440628857139.jpg -(94020B / 91.82KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 94020
Sry if this seems like tinfoil but i just cant get it.
So we have sattelites with further orbit than moon right?
Please give link to an actual photo of earth not some composed bull shit.
Something is going on and this might be the best brain wash ever. Not saying flat earth but hidden land or we just cant get further of some point. Also alot of the other NASA images ...you know, are fakes , there is documentation on this do your research. So a simple request , a photo of earth please :)

Have a nice day :) !
55 posts and 19 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Caroline Herschel - Mon, 01 Aug 2016 06:02:00 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56301 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1470045720420.jpg -(553903B / 540.92KB, 2389x2306) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
let's zoom out on that now.
John Bahcall - Thu, 04 Aug 2016 20:21:13 EST ID:nEPqqao+ No.56302 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Einstein's a faggot who got some things right and now everyone's too scared to take down the legend to admit that General Relativity is flawed as fuck. Show me a reference frame in real life and then suck my dick and get me a sandwich.
George Gamow - Fri, 05 Aug 2016 00:39:14 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56303 Ignore Report Quick Reply
doesn't showing that require near light speeds? we can't do that.... yet. wait till the hardon collider forms stable micro singularities we can use to power a warp core.
Grote Reuber - Fri, 05 Aug 2016 17:10:50 EST ID:3t/weoS/ No.56304 Ignore Report Quick Reply

So you're claiming that spherical objects are in fact mathematically flat in our universe?

Not hanging you out here or anything, I'm genuinely curious as it's an interesting claim.
. - Fri, 05 Aug 2016 21:07:05 EST ID:Q+36SNgx No.56305 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I love space by Plofressor chez - Sat, 23 Jul 2016 05:42:59 EST ID:p24Ges2t No.56286 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1469266979554.jpg -(3372909B / 3.22MB, 3069x3006) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 3372909
I first became interested in space exploration because of this website nearly eight years ago. Over that time space has piqued my curiosity enough that my dream is to work in a large observatory, or in a lab constructing instruments for spacecraft. I've spent a lot of time learning about the universe, and have simultaneously become interested in philosophy. I'm just really interested to learn new things about reality. It's such a marvelous and incredibly complex place, teeming with things to be discovered.

I want to know whatever is possible to know. Some things we might never be able to know, but I'm most certain that curiosity, as well as necessity, will drive our species towards distant planets in search of answers and new ways to survive as we go out. I really do hope that's how it plays out. Out of all of the possibilities, I think we'll always have a desire to travel into the next greatest frontier. We might travel inwards with digital worlds and biosynthetic machinery, but I believe the physical domain will continue to hold some deeper allure.
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Rudolph Minkowski - Sat, 23 Jul 2016 20:46:10 EST ID:eY06FJul No.56291 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Study astronomy, which is basically physics and astrophysics.
If you wanna build shit then you need to study engineering.
Or you could study all of that + philosophy without a formal education and never accomplish anything in your life.
A man who chases two hares will catch neither, in your case you are chasing three.

Be prepared for inferior job security in your desired field even if you do get a doctorate in astronomy or engineering. You were born in the wrong time.
Space won't be hyped until long in the future. You would have loved the Cold War space race if you were around though.
Irwin Shapiro - Mon, 25 Jul 2016 01:54:54 EST ID:nAYFwE81 No.56292 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1469426094150.jpg -(29779B / 29.08KB, 580x326) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Hell, imagine if you seeded Venus

She's just asking for it.
Walter Baade - Thu, 28 Jul 2016 02:16:23 EST ID:ma/jJXS2 No.56297 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Terraforming isn't a thing yet. Besides, how can we even think about terraforming another planet when the one we were born with which already supports life is being killed by us.
Hannes Alven - Thu, 28 Jul 2016 19:26:26 EST ID:73EoqW+9 No.56298 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1469748386686.jpg -(365218B / 356.66KB, 540x2559) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Alright take it easy green peace, the earth is more than capable of supporting life indefinitely
William de Sitter - Sat, 30 Jul 2016 09:27:05 EST ID:tQX5ylFX No.56299 Ignore Report Quick Reply
But Venus is toted as the prime example of what could happen to our world if it got choked completely. Seems more likely a good idea to learn to live indefinitely in artificial environments like stations or Moon bases. In the long run that will be the most common living space moving forward into the cosmos.Terraforming is in the distant future and by the time we could do that we would already be able to live in orbit of every major body in this system if not leave it already.

<<Last Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.