Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 07:59am PT
|
Please explain further Dingus. How is it that our understanding of what we take to be the physical world is more understood than that of an infant's understanding of human society around it?
My point referenced in your post above is that our basis of understanding, that which is our human world and original reference point, is incomplete if not totally insufficient, or even the wrong road to understanding of the deepest layers and widest expanses of the cosmos around us. Much now considered impossible will become reality as our understanding of nature matures.
Anyway, this is going a little off topic. There are billions of world's out there, many millions just as capable as earth to sustain life. We are finding them, we will soon begin to determine the extent of life. We will detect advanced civilizations. We must explore and settle ,first our solar system, then others.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 08:05am PT
|
Can a shaft both be rotating both forward and backward at the same time?
Seems like it does. Turn a shaft clockwise, then look directly at each end. One end is turning clockwise, the other counterclockwise.
Same goes with our planet. The northern hemisphere turns clockwise, while the southern is turning counterclockwise.
You tell me?
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 08:11am PT
|
bluecolor,
you are taking a different measurement when you look at the other end. You rotated your coordinate system 180 degrees for the second measurement. If you employ the right hand rule for the rotation vector you would get the same vector looking at either end.
Remember all measurements are local.
In other words you used a different coordinate system location. And that is part of what understanding calculus is about.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 08:13am PT
|
Rick,
In order for something to become that conversion process [change] to make it happen needs a pathway for it to happen. If no pathway exists there can be no becoming for such an event.
e.g. Until the soup of the big bang cooled enough DNA could not exist.
A babies brain changes as it grows -- it becomes an adult brain not = a babies brain.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 09:00am PT
|
Rick,
there is second phase of understanding calculus. It is how integration works.
To get any sum [idea of a total] we need to know rate or density and some bounding values.
You simply assert that there are billions & billions ....
How big is the Universe? Bounding values?
At what density are the specific items occurring? Real earth like planets.
Behind his mask, even Werner know this stuff.
I am done with non sense for now and the idea that physics is stupid ...
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 09:03am PT
|
Your expression of your thoughts sounds to me like garble Dingus. Probably a processing mess on my side. Or maybe not.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 10:05am PT
|
A babies brain changes as it grows -- it becomes an adult brain not = a babies brain.
"Remember, all measurements are local."
Not trying to be a smartazz or anything, but?
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 10:52am PT
|
bluecolor
Problem?? I don't see one.
Apply a transform matrix if you switch locales.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2016 - 01:11pm PT
|
Dingus garble interpreter:
I'm not the one asserting billions and billions of planets (the phrase billions and billions was popularized by Sagan in his Cosmos series) . That estimate is made by Nasa-see the op and contents of thread Dingus. Density of planets? See contents of thread, but they seem to be typically present around a good percentage of stars, of which their are hundreds of billions in our galaxy alone.
As far as estimating the size and age of the known universe; that estimate has changed in my adult lifetime from roughly 3-20 billion years depending on different studies based on different methods from using the Hubble constant to the current observations of CMB by the Planck satellite. The current size estimate is 92 billion light years across. All estimates are made by models using the best observationally backed assumptions. Therein lies a problem, perhaps.
What I am asserting, besides an abundance of life throughout the universe, is that physics is still in infancy; meaning much more is yet to be learned than is currently known and just like the ancients cosmology controlled by a panoply of God's seems primitive to us, our cosmology will seem primitive to diviners of nature in the future.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 15, 2016 - 06:45pm PT
|
Big doings out there. ASASSN-15lh
Scientists stunned by brightest-ever supernova
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/01/15/scientists-stunned-by-brightest-ever-supernova.html
If that is enough to astound you, its explosion at its peak intensity was 570 billion times the brightness of the Sun. At that rate, its luminosity level is approximately 20 times the entire output of the 100 billion stars comprising our Milky Way galaxy.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 02:11pm PT
|
The last two posts contain two of my very favorite essays ever written. Read by their author, a man who significantly formed my view of the world and how to think as a child.
Thankyou Carl Sagan.
"It will not be we who reach the stars..but a species much like us..with fewer of our weaknesses and more of our strengths." ------
Evidence currently suggests the possibility of a 100% rate of intelligent life occurring on planets like earth.
Depending how you define intelligent life anyway..hehe
I'll admit the sample size it a bit small for significant conclusions.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 02:25pm PT
|
The gross materialists have no fund of knowledge how other planets intelligent life communicates.
The just sit on earth and think everyone else has to be like us.
Then they build a stooopid radio telescope thinking everyone else in the universe will communicate just like us cavemen.
No one answered on their stoopid gross material listening machine.
They use far more advance methods unknown to the fool gross materialists cavemen ......
|
|
rlf
Trad climber
Josh, CA
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 03:05pm PT
|
I have to agree with you Werner. The other problem that nobody gets is if anything we are beaming signals out to distant galaxies, millions of light years away. Exactly when were they expecting any kind of answer in return?
Moronic waste of money. Stare at the cosmos all you please, but spending huge amounts of cash looking ET is stupid. Thinking anything else is just as stupid.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 03:22pm PT
|
I have to agree with you Werner.
Congrats, rlf, you're now in the WB camp.
(I'll try not to forget.)
The other problem that nobody gets is if anything we are beaming signals out to distant galaxies, millions of light years away. Exactly when were they expecting any kind of answer in return?
Tell me, genius, has it ever occurred to you the ETIs - if they're out there - don't have to "answer"? Instead, genius, they could just be broadcasting on their own, one way. Say, for instance, they could be broadcasting an Encyclopedia Galactica. Or beta... galactic beta... in our direction for surviving our so-called "technological adolescence." So receiving THAT wouldn't be worth the ROI?
Who YOU voting for WB Camp member rlf? Trump?
WBC members:
11. rlf
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 03:54pm PT
|
There is NO intelligent life on Super Topo. Well--maybe a few random geniuses, and a carload of idiots.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 04:14pm PT
|
How so, BDC?
Let's hear your thoughts.
For instance, couldn't we pick up on some useful beta from an ETI? even from our own galactic neighborhood? even as early as tomorrow? if they were out there and we were lucky? and wouldn't our listening efforts amount to just a minuscule fraction of some of our other national expenditures?
Isn't it true that our Arecibo could pick up a signal from an imaginary Arecibo twin as far away as 15,000 light-years (if memory serves and I think it does)? Sure seems that could be a useful pick-up to me.
How many star systems do we have within 15k? I can't remember. But it's a lot. Right? Most importantly, because we don't hear anything (the Fermi Paradox) well, it seems to me that's useful info as well. Imo.
Consider how much we pay for national defense. Compare that to how much this nation spends on space activities. It's pretty sad and disappointing in my book.
I'd love to wake up tomorrow to the news that SETI's heard something, that reams of knowledge from another intelligence have been received and much of it already decoded, that they have DNA and a genetic code like we do and that we are related by panspermia or some such. I ask how cool would that be?
Eyes open.
.....
So who funds the SETI search now?
http://www.seti.org/faq#obs7
If an extraterrestrial civilization has a SETI project similar to our own, could they detect signals from Earth?
In general, no. Most earthly transmissions are too weak to be found by equipment similar to ours at the distance of even the nearest star. But there are some important exceptions. High-powered radars and the Arecibo broadcast of 1974 (which lasted for only three minutes) could be detected at distances of tens to hundreds of light-years with a setup similar to our best SETI experiments.
tens to hundreds of light-years...
Hence, the Fermi paradox.
|
|
Spiny Norman
Social climber
Boring, Oregon
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 05:05pm PT
|
The inverse-square rule is a bitch.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!