This is a repository for all cool scientific discussion and fascination. Scientific facts, theories, and overall cool scientific stuff that you'd like to share with others. Stuff that makes you smile and wonder at the amazing shit going on around us, that most people don't notice.
Post pictures, vidoes, stories, or links. Ask questions. Share science.
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Wow, has anyone else published some theories similar to this. Pretty far out from the mainstream.
Ever wonder why we teach Conservation Laws with the energy concept and fore go doing so from Momentum conservation. The problem is that at atomic levels you can't label every atom to follow path. They all look alike (at least the same isotopes do). But we know Conservation exists so we switch to the squaring of things (the most famous E=mcSquared) and fore go keeping track of direction (as in vectors) which is in line with a statistical understanding of Entropy and 2nd Law Thermodynamics. It is even more necessitated when you throw in Quantum Mechanics on top of this. So notice we give up on following each individual thing and go with general relationships.
I think in this same Science thread is an article about leaving Feynman's diagrams behind (which try to model individual paths and are nice in simple systems) and go with a higher dimensional geometry that reflects the energy time result and gives us a simpler look at the final answer because there are both restricted states going in and out of a system Quantum Mechanically. You don't get bogged down in the details of trying to follow an ever larger accounting of possibilities to sum to the result.
So there are higher dimensional systems that can give us an answer in general questions. And the trick is to knit together well behaved manifolds where each of the parts are well behaved and additionally representative of different physical parts of the system under investigation.
I am sure this is what this Physicist has done.
The whole 10 and 11 dimensional space and Penrose and his parts in discussing reality all use similar approaches. The inverse deSitter spaces and other inventive well behaved vector spaces or better yet Clifford spaces are being mathematically developed and tried in looking at a multidimensional explanation. (Even in computer games we see 5 dimensional systems with one of the axis set at infinity to be a projective geometry that facilitates following extended relationships lost in three dimensions say when something goes behind a building in line of sight in three dimensions.)
The problem is these processes is they need real results as predictions of behavior of some momentum involved items because that is what we really detect in this world in order to be substantiated as reflective of our particular universe. [Reply]
Scientists using two different age-determining techniques have shown that a tiny zircon crystal found on a sheep ranch in western Australia is the oldest known piece of our planet, dating to 4.4 billion years ago.
Writing in the journal Nature Geoscience on Sunday, the researchers said the discovery indicates that Earth's crust formed relatively soon after the planet formed and that the little gem was a remnant of it.
John Valley, a University of Wisconsin geoscience professor who led the research, said the findings suggest that the early Earth was not as harsh a place as many scientists have thought.
To determine the age of the zircon fragment, the scientists first used a widely accepted dating technique based on determining the radioactive decay of uranium to lead in a mineral sample.
But because some scientists hypothesized that this technique might give a false date due to possible movement of lead atoms within the crystal over time, the researchers turned to a second sophisticated method to verify the finding.
They used a technique known as atom-probe tomography that was able to identify individual atoms of lead in the crystal and determine their mass, and confirmed that the zircon was indeed 4.4 billion years old.
To put that age in perspective, the Earth itself formed 4.5 billion years ago as a ball of molten rock, meaning that its crust formed relatively soon thereafter, 100 million years later. The age of the crystal also means that the crust appeared just 160 million years after the very formation of the solar system.
The finding supports the notion of a "cool early Earth" where temperatures were low enough to sustain oceans, and perhaps life, earlier than previously thought, Valley said.
The zircon was extracted in 2001 from a rock outcrop in Australia's Jack Hills region. For a rock of such importance, it is rather small. It measures only about 200 by 400 microns, about twice the diameter of a human hair.
Originally Posted by Donger:
The finding supports the notion of a "cool early Earth" where temperatures were low enough to sustain oceans, and perhaps life, earlier than previously thought, Valley said.
This type of thing is why you don't base a government on science or religion. [Reply]
Watch a Car-Sized Asteroid Slam Into the Moon
by NANCY ATKINSON on FEBRUARY 24, 2014
Hey, all you astro-photographers/videographers out there: were you shooting the Moon back on September 11, 2013? You may want to review your footage and see if you captured a bright flash which occurred at about 20:07 GMT. Astronomers say a meteorite with the mass of a small car slammed into the Moon at that time and the impact produced a bright flash, and it even would have been easy to spot from the Earth.
According to astronomers Jose M. Madiedo, from the University of Huelva and Jose L. Ortiz, from the Institute of Astrophysics of Andalusia both in Spain, this impact was the longest and brightest confirmed lunar impact flash ever observed, as the “afterglow” of the impact remained visible for 8 seconds.
I'm not convinced that Hawking can do anything other than drool at this point. I saw a History or Discovery Channel show on the guy and he can't even type into his voice machine anymore. Anything Hawking "says" has to be pre-programmed into the voice box prior to an appearance.
He has a full-time theoretical physicist guy that hangs out with him all the time that supposedly interprets his grunts and eye movements to figure out what he's trying to say.
So I'm guessing any new theory he puts forth is largely the assistant's theory with Hawking's name attached to give it some kind of weight. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigChiefTablet:
I'm not convinced that Hawking can do anything other than drool at this point. I saw a History or Discovery Channel show on the guy and he can't even type into his voice machine anymore. Anything Hawking "says" has to be pre-programmed into the voice box prior to an appearance.
He has a full-time theoretical physicist guy that hangs out with him all the time that supposedly interprets his grunts and eye movements to figure out what he's trying to say.
So I'm guessing any new theory he puts forth is largely the assistant's theory with Hawking's name attached to give it some kind of weight.
Not sure where you would get that idea. Especially on the heals of his latest publication which was less than one month ago, that could potentially change much of what has been predicted of black hole physics.
He hasn't typed into a voice machine in well over a decade. He's been using a system that interprets a range of small facial movements. He does program entire presentations sentence by sentence. But any interpretations are done by his complex hardware/software setup custom made from Intel, and not his personal assistant translating grunts.
His new theory is absolutely his own, and to suggest otherwise is crazy. I'm really surprised you would suggest that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
Not sure where you would get that idea. Especially on the heals of his latest publication which was less than one month ago, that could potentially change much of what has been predicted of black hole physics.
He hasn't typed into a voice machine in well over a decade. He's been using a system that interprets a range of small facial movements. He does program entire presentations sentence by sentence. But any interpretations are done by his complex hardware/software setup custom made from Intel, and not his personal assistant translating grunts.
His new theory is absolutely his own, and to suggest otherwise is crazy. I'm really surprised you would suggest that.
From wikipedia:
Originally Posted by :
Hawking's disease-related deterioration has continued, and in 2005 he began to control his communication device with movements of his cheek muscles,[295][296][297] with a rate of about one word per minute.
So in 2005 he could get about one word a minute and has continued to deteriorate. It's nine years later.
And I'm just going by what the show (which I watched a few years ago) showed in real time. His assistant was writing equations on a board and he was literally trying to translate grunts and eye movement to determine if he had it right, or where he had it wrong. [Reply]
