Airbrush

The James Webb telescope should do much of that. There must be a next generation after the James Webb, larger scale like maybe 10 times as large as the Webb? Eventually propulsion methods may allow us to send probes at such high speeds, like about 1/10 light speed. These probes could flyby nearby stars with Earth-like planets in habitable zones, and send info back to Earth which would take decades for us to receive their transmissions. The question is will there be anyone listening for the transmission from the probes? Stephen Hawking thinks the human race has about 100 years before our expiration date, due to any number of disasters that can befall us.

Before the Jack Webb Telescope we should be watching TESS (Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite). "TESS will monitor the brightness of more than 500,000 stars during a two year mission. The TESS launch date is NLT June 2018 (the current working launch date is March 2018). TESS stars will be 30-100 times brighter than those surveyed by the Kepler satellite; thus,TESS planets should be far easier to characterize with follow-up observations. These follow-up observations will provide refined measurements of the planet masses, sizes, densities, and atmospheric properties. TESS will provide prime targets for further, more detailed characterization with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), as well as other large ground-based and space-based telescopes of the future. TESS's legacy will be a catalog of the nearest and brightest stars hosting transiting exoplanets, which will comprise the most favorable targets for detailed investigations in the coming decades. The Kepler project has provided ground-breaking new insights into the population of exoplanets in our galaxies; among the discoveries made using data from Kepler is the fact that the most common members of the exoplanet family are Earths and Super-Earths. However, the majority of exoplanets found by Kepler orbit faraway, faint stars. This, combined with the relatively small size of Earths and Super-Earths, means that there is currently a dearth of such planets that can be characterized with follow-up observations." https://tess.gsfc.nasa.gov/overview.html Does anyone know what NLT means? As in "TESS lunch date is NLT June 2018." T

Stephen Hawking is not noted for making outrageous claims. In 2016 he said it looked to him like humanity had about 1,000 years before humanity gets sent back to a pre-industrial age, if not a stone age. In 2017, he revised his estimate to only 100 years before we lose technology. We have population always growing, resources shrinking, global temperatures rising, and threats increasing. We could have a supervolcano eruption, asteroid strike, bio-disaster, nuclear war, or things we don't even know about. Maybe Trump has intuited this and therefore why not withdraw from the Paris climate accord? Why do anything if the whole world is going to hell in 100 years? Will 100 years give us time to colonize the Moon or Mars? I doubt that.

"Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking has already asserted that humans need to colonize a new planet soon — and now he’s arguing that we need to start within 100 years to keep the species alive. Hawking will lay out his reasoning for why and how people must start inhabiting another planet in a BBC program airing this summer called Stephen Hawking: Expedition New Earth. He has theorized in the past that the chance of a disaster on Earth adds up over time, so that it’s a “near certainty” in the next 1,000 or 10,000 years, but the human race will survive if it expands into outer space. “With climate change, overdue asteroid strikes, epidemics and population growth, our own planet is increasingly precarious,” BBC said in a statement about the show. “Prof. Hawking’s ambition isn’t as fantastical as it sounds.” http://www.time.com/4767595/stephen-hawking-100-years-new-planet/

Very interesting. Where do you get this info? Does it tell you what percentage of ALL stars in the Milky Way have Earth-mass planets in the habitable zone? What I really want to know is what percentage of stars have habitable-mass planets (Earth-mass or half-Earth-sized or superearths) with circular orbits. That would allow complex life to evolve.

That is what I thought. Intelligent aliens have nothing to gain by being detected. So they may use a cloak of invisibility through advanced technology to avoid being detected by equal or more advanced aliens. And in the event they came to Earth, they would be capable of removing any undeniable evidence of their presence here using their superior technology. But why would they have lights on the OUTSIDE of their flying saucers?

How are these tallied? By wisdom? Complaints? By lack of cussing? For not being too obnoxious? Education? What else?

Could you please explain what the Fermi Paradox has to do with religion? I don't yet see the connection. In my mind the Fermi Paradox is explained by the possibility that interstellar travel is much more difficult than we think, and intelligent life is scarcer than we think. "...The second aspect of the Fermi paradox is the argument of probability: given intelligent life's ability to overcome scarcity, and its tendency to colonize new habitats, it seems possible that at least some civilizations would be technologically advanced, seek out new resources in space, and colonize their own star system and, subsequently, surrounding star systems. Since there is no significant evidence on Earth, or elsewhere in the known universe of other intelligent life after 13.8 billion years of the universe's history, there is a conflict requiring a resolution. Some examples of possible resolutions are that intelligent life is rarer than we think, that our assumptions about the general development or behavior of intelligent species are flawed, or, more radically, that our current scientific understanding of the nature of the universe itself is quite incomplete." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox I don't believe there is a paradox.

Trump's latest tweet. What do you think? "Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office "begging" for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!" Please help me figure this out. Because Gillibrand called for Trump to resign, so he lashes back with fury, that she is a "lightweight, flunky, would come begging for contributions, and would do anything for them." Even for Trump this is an outrageous, sexist slur, to the extreme. Then press secretary Sanders explains it away that if we think there is a disgusting sexual innuendo, it means our minds are in the gutter. What does Trump mean by: "Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!" Trump needs to be impeached, this is an insane thing to say and points to what I believe is a uniquely Trumpian dementia. It will only get worse with age.

The center of galaxies, and along the spiral arms, have more heavy elements than the outer and less dense regions because there are more giant stars packed closer together near the center of the galaxy that go supernova and scatter their heavy elements around. Earth is in the galactic habitable zone because it is far enough away from the center of the galaxy with the deadly radiation but still close enough to populated regions to get enough heavy elements from supernovas.

Can the US develop an anti-ICBM missile system that is 100% effective and so numerous that it can overwhelm any number of attacking missiles? Is it just a matter of time before anti-ICBM technology can actually make ICBMs obsolete? Can we park a few satellites in orbit over North Korea, and whenever they launch an ICBM, this defense system can destroy any ICBMs launched using lasers or particle beams or anti-missiles?

The "unknown force" is gravity. Stop using the name "Dark Matter"? Motion of stars around a galaxy is caused by gravity alone. Galaxies follow paths because of gravity alone. Superclusters are drifting apart because dark energy is able to overcome gravity. Yes, there is a dark force, it is called gravity. Now please try to explain your theory in plain English that a novice as myself will understand.

Space is not expanding here. It only expands between superclusters, where dark energy overcomes gravity. If viewing of distant images was rendered impossible, then obviously we could not see with the precision we do. Since we can see with clarity to the edge of the observable universe, even the structure of newborn galaxies over 13 billion years old. That means such blurring is not happening.

Superclusters do not become more massive in the future. Their mass remains constant, only the matter within them gets rearranged. Yes, they won't ever be massive enough to impact other superclusters. However I think the mass of a supercluster will slow down expansion between adjacent superclusters. If there was no supercluster, and a void instead, the neighboring superclusters would expand away from each other faster. Is that correct StringJunky?

Whatever happens with galaxy mergers within the Local Group, or even the entire Virgo Supercluster, will have no impact on the rest of the universe because all superclusters are isolated from all others.

Will all of the galaxies in the Virgo Supercluster eventually become one giant galaxy? That is with the exception of a few galaxies that get ejected or torn apart during the mergers? "In roughly 150 billion years from now, the remaining galaxies of the Local Group will coalesce into [one] object, that being the next evolutionary stage of the local group of galaxies." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda–Milky_Way_collision

How can time begin some period after the BB, if our region of the Universe came into existence as BB occurred? Don't you think time would start when the BB banged?

According to Trump leaks are fake news because the sources are anonymous. So how can we be sure that, for example, the leak that Tillerson called Trump a moron, was not made up? Tillerson would not deny it, but theoretically how do we know most leaks are true since there is no way to verify them? Maybe that is why 46% of voters think some stories are made-up.

Since the recent poll shows that 46% of all voters believe the media makes-up stories about Trump. Here is where the nearly one half of all voters may post what recent stories about Trump are (sometimes) made-up. Let's hear all about it. The media should not be allowed to get away with "made-up" stories about Trump. Any made-up stories folks? I think these 46% are NOT usually thinking about any specific news story as made-up, but rather a general belief: "Yeah I guess some of the stories are made-up" but only because Trump or his supporters make claims of fake news. Just voicing it or writing it, is enough to sew the seeds of doubt in anyone's mind.

Russia. "During a meeting with members of the Senate Finance Committee at the White House Wednesday morning, he again denied the account [about his phone call to Mrs. Johnson]. "Didn't say what that congresswoman said," Mr. Trump said. "Didn't say it at all. She knows it, and she now is not saying it. I did not say what she said." Mr. Trump said he had a "lovely" conversation with the widow, but declined to say what "proof" he had of the conversation. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-told-la-david-johnson-widow-that-he-knew-what-he-was-getting-into-congresswoman-says/ Interesting how Trump's denial could not use the personal pronoun "I". That sounds so much like a child lying. "Didn't say that...." and "Didn't say it at all." When a normal adult is HONESTLY and emphatically denying something they would more likely use the personal pronoun "I" in the initial denial, for emphasis. Just saying "didn't do it" is a way to rationalize what he said. I do believe his intention was to console the widow, but his "wise-guy" manner of speaking in fragments sounds too gangster. That is out of his control. He just does NOT have a way with words. Also Trump should know that it is very likely that the widow did not vote for him, statistically speaking. When chief of staff Kelly described the situation, he did NOT deny Trump said "he knew what he signed up for, but I guess it hurt anyhow...." but made it sound ok to say that.

My invitation stands for all believers that the "media makes-up [negative] stories" about Trump. It must mean negative stories, right? It doesn't count to have made-up stories about Trump's brilliance from Fox News, how what looks like chaos is actually Trump playing 4 dimensional chess. Please post them here, so the truth or fiction can be debated. I would start a discussion called "Made-Up Stories About Trump" but I suspect there won't be much. If this question gets an overwhelming response with lots and lots of made-up stories about Trump, then I think it deserves a discussion dedicated to it, right? Very true and very sad.

"Nearly half of voters, 46 percent, believe the news media fabricate news stories about President Donald Trump and his administration, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll. "Just 37 percent of voters think the media do not fabricate stories, the poll shows, while the remaining 17 percent are undecided. "More than three-quarters of Republican voters, 76 percent, think the news media invent stories about Trump and his administration, compared with only 11 percent who don’t think so. Among Democrats, one-in-five think the media make up stories, but a 65 percent majority think they do not. Forty-four percent of independent voters think the media make up stories about Trump, and 31 percent think they do not." http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/18/trump-media-fake-news-poll-243884 What do you think about that? It scares the hell out of me! What are some examples of "made-up" stories?

Thank you, that is well-stated, and what I suspected. Changes are slower at maxima and minima. Yes, I should have clarified length of daylight hours.

I just did some calculations using a sunrise & sunset times calculator and confirms my suspicion that the day lengths change more rapidly during the equinoxes than the solstices, using my location Southern California. I entered the equinox dates 3/20 & 3/22, a 2-day period, and the day lengths got longer by 4 minutes, but when I entered solstice dates 6/21 & 6/23, the day lengths did not change at all! Then I tried equinox dates 9/22 & 9/24 and day lengths, during the 2-day period, got shorter by 5 minutes, but the solstice dates of 12/21 & 12/23, during the 2-day period, day length got longer by 1 minute only. So, for my location in Socal, it seems to be generally true that day lengths change faster during equinoxes, and change slower during solstices. http://www.calendar-updates.com/sun.asp?PostalCode=91406&Submit=Get+Sunrise+%2F+Sunset+Times

Very interesting, thank you.