beecee

You have made many claims in more then one thread so far.....some have proven to be wrong or false. Please can you link to Born's statement so the forum can determine if once again you are taking something out of context. Either way even if correct, the overwhelming evidence in the greater scheme of things, says you are certainly wrong. eg: Theories that are well supported such as SR, GR, the BB, and the theory of the evolution of life, are tested and confirmed every day.

That certainly would be ground breaking convincing evidence for Panspermia.

As I mentioned in the OP, my knowledge and research into climate change is rather limited, although that is something I am working on. My thoughts always though has been, whatever doubts exist re climate change, we should err on the side of caution. I found the following just 30 minutes ago, and was about to post it here as a supplementary item....... https://phys.org/news/2018-10-mammals-evolve-fast-current-extinction.html Humans are exterminating animal and plant species so quickly that nature's built-in defence mechanism, evolution, cannot keep up. An Aarhus-led research team calculated that if current conservation efforts are not improved, so many mammal species will become extinct during the next five decades that nature will need 3 to 5 million years to recover. There have been five upheavals over the past 450 million years when the environment has changed so dramatically that the majority of Earth's plant and animal species became extinct. After each mass extinction, evolution has slowly filled in the gaps with new species. The sixth mass extinction is happening now, but this time, the extinctions are not being caused by natural disasters; they are the work of humans. A team of researchers from Aarhus University and the University of Gothenburg has calculated that the extinctions are moving too rapidly for evolution to keep up. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-mammals-evolve-fast-current-extinction.html#jCp http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/10/09/1804906115 Mammal diversity will take millions of years to recover from the current biodiversity crisis: Abstract The incipient sixth mass extinction that started in the Late Pleistocene has already erased over 300 mammal species and, with them, more than 2.5 billion y of unique evolutionary history. At the global scale, this lost phylogenetic diversity (PD) can only be restored with time as lineages evolve and create new evolutionary history. Given the increasing rate of extinctions however, can mammals evolve fast enough to recover their lost PD on a human time scale? We use a birth–death tree framework to show that even if extinction rates slow to preanthropogenic background levels, recovery of lost PD will likely take millions of years. These findings emphasize the severity of the potential sixth mass extinction and the need to avoid the loss of unique evolutionary history now.

https://phys.org/news/2018-10-milky-life-star.html For almost two centuries, scientists have theorized that life may be distributed throughout the universe by meteoroids, asteroids, planetoids, and other astronomical objects. This theory, known as Panspermia, is based on the idea that microorganisms and the chemical precursors of life are able to survive being transported from one star system to the next. Expanding on this theory, a team of researchers from the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) conducted a study that considered whether panspermia could be possible on a galactic scale. According to the model they created, they determined that the entire Milky Way (and even other galaxies) could be exchanging the components necessary for life. The study, "Galactic Panspermia," recently appeared online and is being reviewed for publication by the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. The study was led by Idan Ginsburg, a visiting scholar at the CfA's Institute for Theory and Computation (ITC), and included Manasvi Lingam and Abraham Loeb – an ITC postdoctoral researcher and the director of the ITC and the Frank B. Baird Jr. Chair of Science at Harvard University, respectively. As they indicate their study, most of the past research into panspermia has focused on whether life could had been distributed through the solar system or neighboring stars. More specifically, these studies addressed the possibility that life could have been transferred between Mars and Earth (or other Solar bodies) via asteroids or meteorites. For the sake of their study, Ginsburg and his colleagues cast a wider net, looking at the Milky Way Galaxy and beyond. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-milky-life-star.html#jCp <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.04307.pdf Galactic Panspermia: ABSTRACT We present an analytic model to estimate the total number of rocky or icy objects that could be captured by planetary systems within the Milky Way galaxy and result in panspermia should they harbor life. We estimate the capture rate of objects ejected from planetary systems over the entire phase space as well as time. Our final expression for the capture rate depends upon the velocity dispersion as well as the characteristic biological survival time and the size of the captured object. We further take into account the number of stars that an interstellar object traverses, as well as the scale height and length of the Milky Way’s disk. The likelihood of Galactic panspermia is strongly dependent upon the survival lifetime of the putative organisms as well as the velocity of the transporter. Velocities between 10 − 100 km s−1 result in the highest probabilities. However, given large enough survival lifetimes, even hypervelocity objects traveling at over 1000 km s−1 have a significant chance of capture, thereby increasing the likelihood of panspermia. Thus, we show that panspermia is not exclusively relegated to solar-system sized scales, and the entire Milky Way could potentially be exchanging biotic components across vast distances. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, as one who has always found Panspermia as an attractive reasonable proposition, I never had any thoughts of having it exclusively applying to Solar system size scales and saw Galactic Panspermia as a logical extension.

Photons/light follow geodesic paths in spacetime. When space expands it causes light following that path to be redshifted- cosmological redshift. Wrong, totally. The CMBR is the left over relic heat from the time when the observable universe was in a hotter denser state. It is one of the pillars that support the BB. - The wavelength of light is affected by gravitational redshift/blueshift, and this is taken into account when observing that light when reaching Earth. Wrong. The observed redshift, both gravitational and cosmological are taken into account and like the CMBR supports the expansion of the universe and consequently the BB. The universe has undergone phases in the expansion rate due to mass/energy density and that expansion is now accelerating according to latest findings and which we call DE. You appear to have the Bull by the wrong end. But hey, if you believe you have evidence that falsifies the BB, then write up an appropriate paper for professional peer review. And for the fools that would like to say that science/cosmology is too recalcitrant and set in there ways to change or modify incumbent theories, the facts are that even the BB was at one time outside looking in, and was in competition with two other hypotheticals...Steady State and Oscillating. The BB won out because the overwhelming evidence totally supports that concept, along of course with the fact that it compliments GR.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181014142709.htm extract: Physicists send a beam of either electrons, protons, or a laser through a plasma. Free electrons in the plasma move toward the beam, but overshoot it, then come crashing back, creating a bubble structure behind the beam and intense electric fields. If you inject particles, like more electrons, into the wake, it can accelerate the injected particles in a shorter amount of time with an electric field 10 or more times stronger. In the study, proton-driven plasma wakefield acceleration has been demonstrated for the first time. The strong electric fields, generated by a series of proton microbunches, were sampled with a bunch of electrons. These electrons were accelerated up to 2 GeV in approximately 10 m of plasma and measured using a magnetic spectrometer. This technique has the potential to accelerate electrons to the TeV scale in a single accelerating stage. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0485-4 Acceleration of electrons in the plasma wakefield of a proton bunch: Abstract: High-energy particle accelerators have been crucial in providing a deeper understanding of fundamental particles and the forces that govern their interactions. To increase the energy of the particles or to reduce the size of the accelerator, new acceleration schemes need to be developed. Plasma wakefield acceleration1,2,3,4,5, in which the electrons in a plasma are excited, leading to strong electric fields (so called ‘wakefields’), is one such promising acceleration technique. Experiments have shown that an intense laser pulse6,7,8,9 or electron bunch10,11 traversing a plasma can drive electric fields of tens of gigavolts per metre and above—well beyond those achieved in conventional radio-frequency accelerators (about 0.1 gigavolt per metre). However, the low stored energy of laser pulses and electron bunches means that multiple acceleration stages are needed to reach very high particle energies5,12. The use of proton bunches is compelling because they have the potential to drive wakefields and to accelerate electrons to high energy in a single acceleration stage13. Long, thin proton bunches can be used because they undergo a process called self-modulation14,15,16, a particle–plasma interaction that splits the bunch longitudinally into a series of high-density microbunches, which then act resonantly to create large wakefields. The Advanced Wakefield (AWAKE) experiment at CERN17,18,19uses high-intensity proton bunches—in which each proton has an energy of 400 gigaelectronvolts, resulting in a total bunch energy of 19 kilojoules—to drive a wakefield in a ten-metre-long plasma. Electron bunches are then injected into this wakefield. Here we present measurements of electrons accelerated up to two gigaelectronvolts at the AWAKE experiment, in a demonstration of proton-driven plasma wakefield acceleration. Measurements were conducted under various plasma conditions and the acceleration was found to be consistent and reliable. The potential for this scheme to produce very high-energy electron bunches in a single accelerating stage20 means that our results are an important step towards the development of future high-energy particle accelerators

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/elon-musk-spacex-mars-plan-timeline-2018-10?r=US&IR=T Elon Musk is hell-bent on colonizing Mars. That’s the spirit with which he founded SpaceX, his rocket company, in 2002. Musk was frustrated that NASA wasn’t doing more to get people to the red planet – and concerned a backup plan for humanity wasn’t being developed (for when Earth becomes an uninhabitablewasteland). Since then, SpaceX has developed several impressive aerospace systems: Falcon 1, SpaceX’s first orbital rocket; Grasshopper, a small self-landing test rocket; Falcon 9, a reusable orbital-class launcher; Dragona, a spaceship for cargo and soon NASA astronauts; and Falcon Heavy, a super-heavy-lift launcher. But Mars is a cold, unforgiving, and almost airless rock located some 140 million miles from Earth. Astounding ingenuity is required to land even a small spacecraft there today, let alone a giant spaceship full of people and cargo in the future. That’s why SpaceX is taking the lessons the company has learned over the past 16 years – and an increasing amount of money and staff – and using them to build a space vehicle called the Big Falcon Rocket, or BFR. more at link........ A scale diagram of SpaceX’s Big Falcon Rocket showing its booster and spaceship. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Elon surprised us with his reusable rocket.....Will he surprise us again? Or is he totally bonkers? I actually applaud his efforts and zeal and enthusiasm, while not agreeing with the criticism of NASA which afterall is tied to the whims and wills of the government of the day and budget requirements But again, I say wouldn't it be wonderful for an International effort...private or government run. And then we also have MARS ON. A one-way trip for those interested. Although news from that quarter has been scarce of late. What are the thoughts of others?

Again you have proved nothing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVINOl0Ctfk

Perhaps it is your definition of nothing that needs redetermining. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EilZ4VY5Vs

https://phys.org/news/2014-08-what-is-nothing.html extract: "There are physicists like Lawrence Krauss that argue the "universe from nothing", really meaning "the universe from a potentiality". Which comes down to if you add all the mass and energy in the universe, all the gravitational curvature, everything… it looks like it all sums up to zero. So it is possible that the universe really did come from nothing. And if that's the case, then "nothing" is everything we see around us, and "everything" is nothing". Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2014-08-what-is-nothing.html#jCp

The quantum foam is sometimes seen as close to "nothing" that we can get.....The "nothing" that could be seen as having existed forever. The observable universe did have a start, but we are talking about the pre BB quantum foam...How did that start? I speculate that it is "nothing" that certainly has existed forever.

Don't really like getting involved in another country's politics and such, but could "MAD" be a consideration as it continually was during the cold war with the old USSR?

Yes excellent point!

Hmmm great minds think alike...Never read the book.

How about the quantum foam from whence we speculate that the BB arose?

10 also, but disappointed in that I believe I should have answered at least two more correctly if I had given more thought to the subject at hand.

There are many philosophical takes on time including "time is an illusion" I prefer to stick to my simple definition that time is just that which stops everything from happening together It is also a flexible entity that depends on one's frame of reference, although time will always seem to pass at 1 second per second for everyone within his or her own frame of reference. It also forms the four dimensional spacetime within which it is possible to locate events and describe the relationships between them in terms of spatial coordinates and time. Perhaps the question that needs to be asked is whether time is fundamental or not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVINOl0Ctfk Spacetime is a real concept as is space and time, albeit non physical. What really amazes me is that once again, we have a newbie popping in to claim with utmost certainty, that which is mostly a philosophical take on a debatable matter. Time is real.....time is non absolute....Time travel at least to the future is achievable and in line with GR. Time travel to the past is another matter and probably not possible. There now is some reasonable certainty for you to ponder! PS: And of course nothing has been disproven.

So, what is our best guess as to what these FRB's are......The instant a mass collapses to a BH? Neutron star/s collisions? and how are they related to GRB's? Any other suggestions? Any suggestions? Obviously these FRB's happened a long long time ago, in a galaxy/s far far away.

Some sad from NASA this week is that the Chandra X-Ray Observatory is dead. On Friday, Oct. 12, 2018, the space agency said that the telescope automatically went into so-called safe mode. Also the HST went into hibernation last Friday 5th due to a gyroscope failure. Yet Voyager 2 is nearing the edge of the heliosphere, which Voyager 1 has already left. Obviously everything has a "use by date" but did we make things better 40 years ago? The Mars Opportunity Rover I suppose is an exception as is probably the Curiosity Rover. Probable reasons I would imagine is that the HST simply has more intricate parts, such as its gyroscopes and mirrors...So what other reasons facts would determine how long space probes, rovers etc last for?

Why do people immediately claim some incumbent theory/model is wrong when they come across some obscure text/claim on the Internet? There is an underlying reason...A-G-E-N-D-A If it turns out that DM is wrong, then it will be science that discovers it...not some obscure random claim on the web. Science can and do make errors and false claims at time, but again, if and when that happens, it is always science that is self correcting, and again, certainly not some random claim on the web. eg: The BICEP2 experiment claimed to have discovered gravitational waves. The claim was made prematurely and later shown that the experiment was actually due to dust contamination. [Gravitational waves were of course discovered some time later by aLIGO] Another was a claim that the speed of light, "c" had been seemingly exceeded in some other remote experiment. Later data was forthcoming showing that this was an anomalous reading caused by a loose wire or something similar. Just about any fact and or incident in history is probably contradicted on the web by conspiracy nuts, or some other fanatical breed of fools that would like to attempt to refute known facts for their own benefit and satisfaction with regards to some agenda or personal belief. DM of course as Strange has said is the best theory we have, and while being a "fudge factor" when first proposed, is now fairly well supported with many observed phenomena supporting the concept, the bullet cluster observation being the most notable.

Might have something to do with Father George LaMaitre.

To simply "consider"evolution is an understatement. The evidence makes it a certainty, hence why the Catholic church to gain some semblance of respect now recognise it, as well as the BB...Then they jump ship as we enter a region where scientific data is less clear as to how life came to be, and install the old "god of the gaps" while ignoring that the same speculations re the universe arising from nothing, should also apply to this imagined deity. Here are two of my favourite links, one explaining how reasonable speculation can formulate a case for the universe coming from nothing, the other from one of the greatest educators of our time, with regards to the same standards being applied to any deity. https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag6fH8cU-MU I have absolutely no argument against any religious person [my wife is a christian in the true sense of the word] except when they come to science forums such as this, and start their ranting, raving and preaching mostly about imagined faults with science and the scientific method, and whether they do that out in the open or closeted.

https://phys.org/news/2018-10-science-low-carbon-future-today.html The science is clear: We have to start creating our low-carbon future today October 12, 2018, The Conversation This week's release of the special report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has put scientific evidence on the front page of the world's newspapers. As Australia's Chief Scientist, I hope it will be recognised as a tremendous validation of the work that scientists do. The people of the world, speaking through their governments, requested this report to quantify the impacts of warming by 1.5℃ and what steps might be taken to limit it. They asked for the clearest possible picture of the consequences and feasible solutions. It is not my intention in this article to offer a detailed commentary on the IPCC's findings. I commend the many scientists with expertise in climate systems who have helped Australians to understand the messages of this report. My purpose is to urge all decision-makers – in government, industry and the community – to listen to the science. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-science-low-carbon-future-today.html#jCp <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another article..... https://phys.org/news/2018-10-farmers-climate-denial-wane-reality.html Farmers' climate denial begins to wane as reality bites: Australia has been described as the "front line of the battle for climate change adaptation", and our farmers are the ones who have to lead the charge. Farmers will have to cope, among other pressures, with longer droughts, more erratic rainfall, higher temperatures, and changes to the timing of seasons. Yet, puzzlingly enough to many commentators, climate denial has been widespread among farmers and in the ranks of the National Party, which purports to represent their interests. Back in 2008, only one-third of farmers accepted the science of climate change. Our 2010-11 survey of 946 irrigators in the southern Murray-Darling Basin (published in 2013) found similar results: 32 percent accepted that climate change posed a risk to their region; half disagreed; and 18 percent did not know. These numbers have consistently trailed behind the wider public, a clear majority of whom have consistently accepted the science. More Australians in 2018 accepted the reality of climate change than at almost any time, with 76 percent accepting climate change is occurring, 11 percent not believing in it and 13 percent being unsure. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-farmers-climate-denial-wane-reality.html#jCp <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are seeing dramatic weather patterns all around the world it seems to me.....Monster hurricanes, Incredible storms with tennis ball size hail, higher temperatures in general Climate change: How do we know? This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Credit: Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.) Find out more about ice cores (external site) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly, I'm not entirely familiar with all the evidence and/or the whole picture on climate change, but one that I'm trying to change. An argument put to me the other day, and one I could not deny, was that at this time, in this electronic age with social media etc, communications etc about what is happening on one side of the world, is immediately reported to the other side...at the same instant. This gives us a false picture with regards to some of the weather events that are occurring at any one time. While this maybe true, the scientific facts remain that if we don't "contain" or "limit" climate change, we may see dramatic changes within our children's lifetime. In Australia we have what I believe to be one of the most stunning and breathtaking structures on the planet.....one that I have been fortunate enough to dive and scuba on...The Great Barrier Reef. This incredible structure is already feeling the stress, both natural and man-made. What can we do to get the message not only to Australian farmers, but farmers all around the world? Are we simply going to have to adapt, [which we apparently are good at] and to what degree will any adaption reach its zenith?

https://phys.org/news/2018-10-rowthe-planets-align-night-sky.html Five in a row—the planets align in the night sky October 12, 2018 by Tanya Hill, The Conversation For the second time this year, the five brightest planets can be seen at the same time. You can catch them by looking towards the western sky after sunset. The planets will form a line rising up from the horizon. Mercury and Venus are low to the west, with bright Jupiter shining just above. Higher up in the northwestern sky is Saturn, and completing the set of five is the red planet Mars, high overhead. On Friday October 12 a beautiful crescent Moon sits just to the right of Jupiter. Keep watching the planets night after night and you can track the progression of the Moon. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-rowthe-planets-align-night-sky.html#jCp excerpt: Not only are the five easy-to-see planets visible in the evening sky, but they are joined by Uranus and Neptune to complete the planetary set. These two ice giants that orbit beyond Saturn are modern-day planets. They were not known in ancient times because their discovery needed the aid of a telescope and an understanding of gravity to know how the Solar System works. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-rowthe-planets-align-night-sky.html#jCp

https://phys.org/news/2018-10-world-fastest-camera-trillion.html What happens when a new technology is so precise that it operates on a scale beyond our characterization capabilities? For example, the lasers used at INRS produce ultrashort pulses in the femtosecond range (10-15 s), which is far too short to visualize. Although some measurements are possible, nothing beats a clear image, says INRS professor and ultrafast imaging specialist Jinyang Liang. He and his colleagues, led by Caltech's Lihong Wang, have developed what they call T-CUP: the world's fastest camera, capable of capturing 10 trillion (1013) frames per second (Fig. 1). This new camera literally makes it possible to freeze time to see phenomena—and even light—in extremely slow motion. more at https://phys.org/news/2018-10-world-fastest-camera-trillion.html <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41377-018-0044-7 Single-shot real-time femtosecond imaging of temporal focusing: Abstract While the concept of focusing usually applies to the spatial domain, it is equally applicable to the time domain. Real-time imaging of temporal focusing of single ultrashort laser pulses is of great significance in exploring the physics of the space–time duality and finding diverse applications. The drastic changes in the width and intensity of an ultrashort laser pulse during temporal focusing impose a requirement for femtosecond-level exposure to capture the instantaneous light patterns generated in this exquisite phenomenon. Thus far, established ultrafast imaging techniques either struggle to reach the desired exposure time or require repeatable measurements. We have developed single-shot 10-trillion-frame-per-second compressed ultrafast photography (T-CUP), which passively captures dynamic events with 100-fs frame intervals in a single camera exposure. The synergy between compressed sensing and the Radon transformation empowers T-CUP to significantly reduce the number of projections needed for reconstructing a high-quality three-dimensional spatiotemporal datacube. As the only currently available real-time, passive imaging modality with a femtosecond exposure time, T-CUP was used to record the first-ever movie of non-repeatable temporal focusing of a single ultrashort laser pulse in a dynamic scattering medium. T-CUP’s unprecedented ability to clearly reveal the complex evolution in the shape, intensity, and width of a temporally focused pulse in a single measurement paves the way for single-shot characterization of ultrashort pulses, experimental investigation of nonlinear light-matter interactions, and real-time wavefront engineering for deep-tissue light focusing.