Black hole instead of a planet x? View Thread Reply Hide John Riccioli - Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:06:57 EST eY06FJul No.56529 File: 1476742017066.gif -(1621583B / 1.55MB, 277x283) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Wouldn't it be more likely that a [stationary?] black hole is accounting for the gravitational effects thought to be responsible by planet x? 9 posts and 3 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> William Lassell - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 16:21:01 EST OXINl/7g No.56617 Reply >>56529No, because black holes are rarer in the universe than planets, and a black hole with a small enough mass to cause those effects but without eating the rest of the Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud would be pretty hard to form in the first place. And if it did form, the supernova that caused it would have blasted the rest of the solar system to bits. >> Russel Hulse - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 17:35:06 EST eY06FJul No.56620 Reply >>56617Ty >> William Lassell - Fri, 04 Nov 2016 08:14:50 EST FBGYqnRT No.56634 Reply 1478261690103.jpg -(8474B / 8.28KB, 150x150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56529
>> William Lassell - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 16:21:01 EST OXINl/7g No.56617 Reply >>56529No, because black holes are rarer in the universe than planets, and a black hole with a small enough mass to cause those effects but without eating the rest of the Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud would be pretty hard to form in the first place. And if it did form, the supernova that caused it would have blasted the rest of the solar system to bits.
>> William Lassell - Fri, 04 Nov 2016 08:14:50 EST FBGYqnRT No.56634 Reply 1478261690103.jpg -(8474B / 8.28KB, 150x150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56529
MOTHERFUCKING ALIEREMS! View Thread Reply Hide George Herbig - Fri, 28 Oct 2016 17:32:07 EST rszf0FN0 No.56560 File: 1477690327717.gif -(97224B / 94.95KB, 400x332) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. I can't believe no one has posted this yet:http://www.techtimes.com/articles/183699/20161025/evidence-of-alien-life-2-scientists-say-strange-signals-from-stars-are-from-alien-civilization.htmTL;DR: We looked at a bunch of stars and found 234 -- that's right, two-hundred and fucking thirty fucking four -- stars that appear to have aliens trying to contact us with optical beams.Go nuts. 5 posts and 1 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> George Hale - Wed, 02 Nov 2016 23:34:33 EST 6+AQCLDz No.56613 Reply >>56610Agreed, probably more likely it's a yet-to-be understood stellar phenomenon, I mean would aliens seriously spend the time and resources necessary to modify STARS just to send messages? There has to be more efficient methods of stellar communication than modifying an entire fucking star. Like just the amount of engineering to construct a device able to modulate a stars light output seems retardedly complex for communicationThy being said, maybe it is aliens and the fluctuations in signals has to do with some sort of Dyson sphere like device, not ruling it out. Just saying that aliens are PROBABLY not trying to talk to us by fucking with stars' outputs >> Russel Hulse - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 17:34:05 EST eY06FJul No.56619 Reply 1478208845000.gif -(509442B / 497.50KB, 400x211) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56613Man, I just wanna chill with some ATLiens >> Henrietta Levitt - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 19:37:16 EST rszf0FN0 No.56621 Reply >>56613Ways to change the spectral qualities of a star:-pass a prism in front of it-pass a planet with a spectrally modulated atmosphere in front of it (fancy prism.)-drop mass with a different spectrographic profile than hydrogen or helium into it-ignite mass with the desired spectrographic profile with a probe in the photosphere-like I said before, just send a laser beam with different spectral properties in the same direction as photons from the star are travellingAll of those things would be trivial for a 1K civilization. Does that mean it is aliens? No. But we can't rule it out just because the method seems exotic. It might be hugely practical. I mean, the only thing they can see about our system is the star too, right? If we wanted to send them a message, and knew nothing about whether they are looking for radio signals or anything, the one thing we know they can see about us is our star, so if it can be used to send a message, why not?
>> George Hale - Wed, 02 Nov 2016 23:34:33 EST 6+AQCLDz No.56613 Reply >>56610Agreed, probably more likely it's a yet-to-be understood stellar phenomenon, I mean would aliens seriously spend the time and resources necessary to modify STARS just to send messages? There has to be more efficient methods of stellar communication than modifying an entire fucking star. Like just the amount of engineering to construct a device able to modulate a stars light output seems retardedly complex for communicationThy being said, maybe it is aliens and the fluctuations in signals has to do with some sort of Dyson sphere like device, not ruling it out. Just saying that aliens are PROBABLY not trying to talk to us by fucking with stars' outputs
>> Russel Hulse - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 17:34:05 EST eY06FJul No.56619 Reply 1478208845000.gif -(509442B / 497.50KB, 400x211) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56613Man, I just wanna chill with some ATLiens
>> Henrietta Levitt - Thu, 03 Nov 2016 19:37:16 EST rszf0FN0 No.56621 Reply >>56613Ways to change the spectral qualities of a star:-pass a prism in front of it-pass a planet with a spectrally modulated atmosphere in front of it (fancy prism.)-drop mass with a different spectrographic profile than hydrogen or helium into it-ignite mass with the desired spectrographic profile with a probe in the photosphere-like I said before, just send a laser beam with different spectral properties in the same direction as photons from the star are travellingAll of those things would be trivial for a 1K civilization. Does that mean it is aliens? No. But we can't rule it out just because the method seems exotic. It might be hugely practical. I mean, the only thing they can see about our system is the star too, right? If we wanted to send them a message, and knew nothing about whether they are looking for radio signals or anything, the one thing we know they can see about us is our star, so if it can be used to send a message, why not?
If you flush a toilet View Thread Reply Hide The Boat - Thu, 20 Oct 2016 18:56:39 EST P9AJW3+2 No.56545 File: 1477004199582.jpg -(44211B / 43.17KB, 400x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. In the northern hemisphere vs the Southern Hemisphere will the rotation be different? / how is this effected by these new low flow toilets?>side note thanks a lot Al Gore now when I go to del taco I have to flush like 20 times... thanks a lot 3 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Edward Barnard - Sat, 22 Oct 2016 20:55:52 EST Kz5Q207u No.56550 Reply Shit, didn't see that someone already said the last bit of my post in this post:>>56547 >> The Boat - Sun, 23 Oct 2016 00:16:26 EST UZoVrGk1 No.56551 Reply >>56547So like we don't vibrate, right? >> Joseph Taylor Jr. - Sun, 23 Oct 2016 23:44:22 EST u7UMnSpi No.56553 Reply i just hope that the poop goes away
>> Edward Barnard - Sat, 22 Oct 2016 20:55:52 EST Kz5Q207u No.56550 Reply Shit, didn't see that someone already said the last bit of my post in this post:>>56547
>> The Boat - Sun, 23 Oct 2016 00:16:26 EST UZoVrGk1 No.56551 Reply >>56547So like we don't vibrate, right?
>> Joseph Taylor Jr. - Sun, 23 Oct 2016 23:44:22 EST u7UMnSpi No.56553 Reply i just hope that the poop goes away
Is colonizing space really a good idea? View Thread Reply Hide Vera Rubiin - Thu, 13 Oct 2016 22:44:38 EST kkqIA5n0 No.56515 File: 1476413078998.jpg -(228458B / 223.10KB, 1161x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. There are more than enough resources on Earth to feed and cloth and house the entire world population several times over, but people are still starving and homeless due to our greed and incompetence. We can't make phones that don't blow up or cars that don't drive themselves into a wall. We're still dicking around with fossil fuels and nuclear reactors and steam turbines when we have a natural self-sustaining fusion reactor in the sky that could power the whole planet for millions of years if we just put more research into making better solar cells and superconducting materials and large-scale energy storage. With all our intelligence and resources, we can't make shit work on a planet that gives us everything we need, how the hell are we going to survive on a hostile world where just making food to eat and water to drink and air to breathe is a massive costly endeavor, and one tiny malfunction in our machines will result in horrible catastrophe and death? Is mankind really ready to live in space? 9 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> John Wheeler - Mon, 17 Oct 2016 16:56:39 EST rszf0FN0 No.56528 Reply >>56527rivate_spaceflight_companies" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoryrivate_spaceflight_companiesAlso on that list you won't see Hawking's Breakthrough Starshot project.Musk's SpaceX and Bezo's BlueOrigin get all the press because everyone likes the idea of billionaires having a pissing match in space, but private space industry is growing very rapidly and many of the 'visionary' founders are doing it expressly because of their understanding of humanity's predicament being stuck on earth. >> Arthur Eddington - Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:06:23 EST 3t/weoS/ No.56543 Reply >>56527NASA's new orbital craft, Orion, is supposed to be capable of manned Lunar missions. Shit's really happening now that the tech is moving beyond the bootstrap suicide missions of the 60/70ies, we just don't hear much of it because the public is so disinterested.The West ain't gonna let China's space ambitions go uncontested though, so expect more ambitious state-level missions in the future. >> Arno Penzias - Sat, 22 Oct 2016 17:05:33 EST KgKlYmGv No.56548 Reply You know, OP, you say we have all the resources here on Earth, yet still there's a lot of people living a life of distress due to lack of things and violence. You say we could fix it all, only if everybody started being logical and humane. But therein lies the problem - it's just that difficult to change humans on that level. So difficult in fact, that it will probably be easier to build a spaceship, living pods and all that's necessary and send it all to another planet with like-minded people that are focused on one goal - making it work there.In the sense of the mission, the monetary cost is completely irrelevant. 500 years from now nobody will give a shit about how much it cost. Even if there are failures and people will die, it only makes sense for us to keep reaching out there. Once any life arises, it wants to reach out as far as it can.I don't think mankind really is ready to live in space, until we actually do it and get ready doing it.
>> John Wheeler - Mon, 17 Oct 2016 16:56:39 EST rszf0FN0 No.56528 Reply >>56527rivate_spaceflight_companies" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoryrivate_spaceflight_companiesAlso on that list you won't see Hawking's Breakthrough Starshot project.Musk's SpaceX and Bezo's BlueOrigin get all the press because everyone likes the idea of billionaires having a pissing match in space, but private space industry is growing very rapidly and many of the 'visionary' founders are doing it expressly because of their understanding of humanity's predicament being stuck on earth.
>> Arthur Eddington - Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:06:23 EST 3t/weoS/ No.56543 Reply >>56527NASA's new orbital craft, Orion, is supposed to be capable of manned Lunar missions. Shit's really happening now that the tech is moving beyond the bootstrap suicide missions of the 60/70ies, we just don't hear much of it because the public is so disinterested.The West ain't gonna let China's space ambitions go uncontested though, so expect more ambitious state-level missions in the future.
>> Arno Penzias - Sat, 22 Oct 2016 17:05:33 EST KgKlYmGv No.56548 Reply You know, OP, you say we have all the resources here on Earth, yet still there's a lot of people living a life of distress due to lack of things and violence. You say we could fix it all, only if everybody started being logical and humane. But therein lies the problem - it's just that difficult to change humans on that level. So difficult in fact, that it will probably be easier to build a spaceship, living pods and all that's necessary and send it all to another planet with like-minded people that are focused on one goal - making it work there.In the sense of the mission, the monetary cost is completely irrelevant. 500 years from now nobody will give a shit about how much it cost. Even if there are failures and people will die, it only makes sense for us to keep reaching out there. Once any life arises, it wants to reach out as far as it can.I don't think mankind really is ready to live in space, until we actually do it and get ready doing it.
balck on black crime part2 View Thread Reply Hide Bernard-Ferdinand Lyot - Thu, 13 Oct 2016 22:29:28 EST XnHvuJOm No.56514 File: 1476412168960.jpg -(1814301B / 1.73MB, 1650x1275) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. do you think it would ever be possible for 2 black holes to meet? they say they are growing.. which makes it highly probably they will have a meeting one day.i don't think anything special would happen other than they merge basically. but i had been thinking because of what they eat, what if one day a black hole has consumed to much...like a pressure bomb, eventually it'll all be to much. what do you think 5 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Johannes Kepler - Tue, 18 Oct 2016 20:38:53 EST Kz5Q207u No.56536 Reply >>56514You realize we confirmed gravitational waves when LIGO detected the waves caused by two black holes coming together and eventually combining, right? >> George Airy - Tue, 18 Oct 2016 22:05:52 EST y/fkgY/C No.56537 Reply >>56536I posted a thread about that when it happened. This board is so fucking slow, it's still there >>56038 >> Henrietta Levitt - Wed, 19 Oct 2016 00:22:46 EST rszf0FN0 No.56538 Reply >>56534But that presumes there is an unlimited amount of radiation in the interstellar medium. By the time black holes are evaporating en masse, all matter will already have fallen into black holes, so there's no way it could replenish itself with ambient radiation.
>> Johannes Kepler - Tue, 18 Oct 2016 20:38:53 EST Kz5Q207u No.56536 Reply >>56514You realize we confirmed gravitational waves when LIGO detected the waves caused by two black holes coming together and eventually combining, right?
>> George Airy - Tue, 18 Oct 2016 22:05:52 EST y/fkgY/C No.56537 Reply >>56536I posted a thread about that when it happened. This board is so fucking slow, it's still there >>56038
>> Henrietta Levitt - Wed, 19 Oct 2016 00:22:46 EST rszf0FN0 No.56538 Reply >>56534But that presumes there is an unlimited amount of radiation in the interstellar medium. By the time black holes are evaporating en masse, all matter will already have fallen into black holes, so there's no way it could replenish itself with ambient radiation.
Truth View Thread Reply Hide Edward Barnard - Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:12:23 EST +4KamMvj No.56439 File: 1474380743780.jpg -(24054B / 23.49KB, 500x431) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >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. Poplawski proposes that the bursts may be discharges of matter from alternate universes. The matter, he says, might be escaping into our universe through supermassive black holes—wormholes—at the hearts of those galaxies, though it's not clear how that would be possible."It's kind of a crazy idea, but who knows?" he said. 7 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Vesto Slipher - Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:56:14 EST KgKlYmGv No.56499 Reply 1475171774066.jpg -(37815B / 36.93KB, 400x367) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56496I 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 tQX5ylFX No.56500 Reply >>56499Maybe 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 f/Tl+D5o No.56524 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.
>> Vesto Slipher - Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:56:14 EST KgKlYmGv No.56499 Reply 1475171774066.jpg -(37815B / 36.93KB, 400x367) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56496I 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 tQX5ylFX No.56500 Reply >>56499Maybe 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 f/Tl+D5o No.56524 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? View Thread Reply Hide George Gamow - Sat, 01 Oct 2016 08:29:02 EST tQX5ylFX No.56502 File: 1475324942532.jpg -(77817B / 75.99KB, 1024x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. http://www.inquisitr.com/3512502/gigantic-four-armed-ufo-sails-once-again-past-sun-nasa-still-wont-talk-about-artificial-object-spotted-in-2011-2012-and-2016-conspiracy-theorists-say-video/>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. 7 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Viktor Ambartsumian - Tue, 04 Oct 2016 03:23:45 EST tQX5ylFX No.56511 Reply >>56510no jolly african-american I was agreeing with you. calm your tits. >> Daniel Kirkwood - Wed, 05 Oct 2016 16:45:02 EST SsVk1i6e No.56512 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.https://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_01_17/ >> William de Sitter - Thu, 06 Oct 2016 01:19:46 EST qkTsbYde No.56513 Reply >>56512They'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.
>> Viktor Ambartsumian - Tue, 04 Oct 2016 03:23:45 EST tQX5ylFX No.56511 Reply >>56510no jolly african-american I was agreeing with you. calm your tits.
>> Daniel Kirkwood - Wed, 05 Oct 2016 16:45:02 EST SsVk1i6e No.56512 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.https://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_01_17/
>> William de Sitter - Thu, 06 Oct 2016 01:19:46 EST qkTsbYde No.56513 Reply >>56512They'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 View Thread Reply Hide Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:08:34 EST KRFHH0CT No.56414 File: 1473509314493.jpg -(71473B / 69.80KB, 768x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. If time and space are different forms of the same thing, and space is possibly infinite, is time infinite too? 23 posts and 3 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Stephen Hawking - Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:43:20 EST X4FAw0QG No.56478 Reply >>56414Time 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 Kz5Q207u No.56479 Reply >>56478That 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 p24Ges2t No.56480 Reply >>56479Nigga, it's Stephen Hawking. Give him a break
>> Stephen Hawking - Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:43:20 EST X4FAw0QG No.56478 Reply >>56414Time 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 Kz5Q207u No.56479 Reply >>56478That 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 p24Ges2t No.56480 Reply >>56479Nigga, it's Stephen Hawking. Give him a break
Submarines of Titan View Thread Reply Hide Henrietta Levitt - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 10:23:12 EST Y3T9nNnZ No.56335 File: 1472394192191.gif -(872884B / 852.43KB, 200x100) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Check it. NASA wants to send a submarine to Titan to go look for critters there.Please please let this happen. 20 posts and 4 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Daniel Kirkwood - Mon, 05 Sep 2016 02:52:24 EST Jqf9zBFl No.56406 Reply 1473058344124.jpg -(134366B / 131.22KB, 800x1150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56335>SUBMARINES OF TITANDICKS. EVERYWHERE. >> Fred Whipple - Fri, 23 Sep 2016 13:26:47 EST 3t/weoS/ No.56463 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. http://ringrom.ga/2016/09/22/life-not-as-we-know-it-possible-on-saturns-moon-titan/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 08CSyNx+ No.56468 Reply 1474660377624.jpg -(100318B / 97.97KB, 650x487) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. boy i shure do like critters
>> Daniel Kirkwood - Mon, 05 Sep 2016 02:52:24 EST Jqf9zBFl No.56406 Reply 1473058344124.jpg -(134366B / 131.22KB, 800x1150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56335>SUBMARINES OF TITANDICKS. EVERYWHERE.
>> Fred Whipple - Fri, 23 Sep 2016 13:26:47 EST 3t/weoS/ No.56463 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. http://ringrom.ga/2016/09/22/life-not-as-we-know-it-possible-on-saturns-moon-titan/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 08CSyNx+ No.56468 Reply 1474660377624.jpg -(100318B / 97.97KB, 650x487) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. boy i shure do like critters
Osiris Rex View Thread Reply Hide Allan Sandage - Thu, 08 Sep 2016 22:02:04 EST Y3T9nNnZ No.56410 File: 1473386524051.gif -(775584B / 757.41KB, 200x137) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 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=qLjyLh77WNEThe intent, of course, it to learn more about asteroids to prevent future disasters 6 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Edward Pickering - Sun, 18 Sep 2016 06:22:50 EST pjhpxsvC No.56436 Reply >>56429Err, they'd shoot you down with a Patriot missile? >> Henrietta Levitt - Wed, 21 Sep 2016 17:07:55 EST YHjXylC8 No.56450 Reply 1474492075619.jpg -(79638B / 77.77KB, 700x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56436Depending 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 AKPGknBR No.56452 Reply Space probes are so fucking efficient, what astounding machines
>> Edward Pickering - Sun, 18 Sep 2016 06:22:50 EST pjhpxsvC No.56436 Reply >>56429Err, they'd shoot you down with a Patriot missile?
>> Henrietta Levitt - Wed, 21 Sep 2016 17:07:55 EST YHjXylC8 No.56450 Reply 1474492075619.jpg -(79638B / 77.77KB, 700x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56436Depending 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 AKPGknBR No.56452 Reply Space probes are so fucking efficient, what astounding machines
Space Race vol. II View Thread Reply Hide Rudolph Minkowski - Fri, 02 Sep 2016 21:37:46 EST hdztUjP6 No.56357 File: 1472866666013.jpg -(363879B / 355.35KB, 1920x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 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 2018http://in.reuters.com/article/china-space-idINL3N17O1E8>China shows first images of Mars rover, aims for 2020 missionus-china-space-mars-idUSKCN10Z07B"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 ventureshttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-luxembourg-space-mining-idUSKCN0YP22H""Luxembourg's aims is to be in the top 10 space faring nations in the world," Schneider said.">U.S. astronauts prepare station for commercial space taxishttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-space-spacewalk-idUSKCN10U1CMYoutube link vaguely related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPN-ec4FLWA 7 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Fred Hoyle - Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:30:08 EST rszf0FN0 No.56433 Reply >>56432People who care about advancing space technology. >> Jocelyn Bell - Thu, 15 Sep 2016 21:57:09 EST YHjXylC8 No.56434 Reply 1473991029741.jpg -(56079B / 54.76KB, 650x409) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56432Because 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 tQX5ylFX No.56435 Reply >>56432when it lands you don thave to buy another? sort of the key feature.
>> Fred Hoyle - Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:30:08 EST rszf0FN0 No.56433 Reply >>56432People who care about advancing space technology.
>> Jocelyn Bell - Thu, 15 Sep 2016 21:57:09 EST YHjXylC8 No.56434 Reply 1473991029741.jpg -(56079B / 54.76KB, 650x409) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56432Because 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 tQX5ylFX No.56435 Reply >>56432when it lands you don thave to buy another? sort of the key feature.
Proxima B View Thread Reply Hide Johann Bode - Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:37:51 EST Y3T9nNnZ No.56342 File: 1472582271909.jpg -(375675B / 366.87KB, 1920x1247) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 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. 8 posts and 1 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Tycho Brahe - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 01:39:15 EST rszf0FN0 No.56402 Reply >>56400Yeah, 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 tQX5ylFX No.56408 Reply >>56402and 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 rszf0FN0 No.56409 Reply >>56408Breakthrough 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.
>> Tycho Brahe - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 01:39:15 EST rszf0FN0 No.56402 Reply >>56400Yeah, 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 tQX5ylFX No.56408 Reply >>56402and 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 rszf0FN0 No.56409 Reply >>56408Breakthrough 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 View Thread Reply Hide Paul Goldsmith - Wed, 17 Aug 2016 21:50:46 EST rszf0FN0 No.56313 File: 1471485046285.gif -(869344B / 848.97KB, 200x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Holy fucking shit guys, my mind is blown.The unification of QM and GR is HERE!!?!?!https://quantumfrontiers.com/2013/06/07/entanglement-wormholes/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 12 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Johannes Kepler - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:08:42 EST rszf0FN0 No.56333 Reply >>56332Fascinating (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 rszf0FN0 No.56334 Reply >>56333Just 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 d5o+epTm No.56363 Reply 1472874591251.gif -(2904316B / 2.77MB, 300x170) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56334damn shit nigga thats some crazy shit, my mind is bending trying to get a full grasp on the implications
>> Johannes Kepler - Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:08:42 EST rszf0FN0 No.56333 Reply >>56332Fascinating (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 rszf0FN0 No.56334 Reply >>56333Just 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 d5o+epTm No.56363 Reply 1472874591251.gif -(2904316B / 2.77MB, 300x170) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>56334damn shit nigga thats some crazy shit, my mind is bending trying to get a full grasp on the implications
Forgive me but... View Thread Reply Hide Tadashi Nakajima - Thu, 26 May 2016 21:42:57 EST VjH9pXwP No.56190 File: 1464313377750.jpg -(328323B / 320.63KB, 960x960) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. ...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 meWhat 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? 10 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Paul Goldsmith - Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:41:20 EST rszf0FN0 No.56316 Reply >>56311But the actual value is less than the expected value, not more. >> Fred Hoyle - Mon, 22 Aug 2016 14:10:47 EST qyc9lsem No.56324 Reply There's no dark matter. It's just the opposite reaction to the universal constant.-Λ >> Alan Guth - Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:20:11 EST rszf0FN0 No.56325 Reply >>56324No, 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?)
>> Paul Goldsmith - Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:41:20 EST rszf0FN0 No.56316 Reply >>56311But the actual value is less than the expected value, not more.
>> Fred Hoyle - Mon, 22 Aug 2016 14:10:47 EST qyc9lsem No.56324 Reply There's no dark matter. It's just the opposite reaction to the universal constant.-Λ
>> Alan Guth - Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:20:11 EST rszf0FN0 No.56325 Reply >>56324No, 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?)
