Where did the 16 million year planetary age come from?
Is it concluded from the composition on the stars?
394 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Aug 2007
That's it.
A Prime Minister is never elected as Prime Minister and yet every time a conversation comes up like this somebody trots out about the 'unelected Prime Minister' line. All the candidates are elected MPs eligible to stand for the leadership of the ruling party and therefore become Prime Minister. End of.
You know, I believe that Boris is bright enough (whatever you think of his schtick) to have known that negotiating a sensible and beneficial withdrawal that 27 other national entities have all agreed to (in line with their own national self-interests) would be a hideous game of russian roulette which really does lend weight to the view that he never expected to win and only wanted to undermine Cameron.
If that is true then I would guess right now, rather than planning for said sensible and beneficial agreement, he is tearing around the hamster wheel in his mind wondering how he can still be Prime Minister without shooting his political career in the head.
I want to see him get the job and i will stand an applaud while he chokes on it.
"I dont think negotiations with the EU CAN last more than 2 years unless everybody in the EU wants them to."
Exactly, if someone doesn't agree to extend and the talks are not complete then WTO rules come into force; 10% tarrifs on cars, 35% on dairy, etc. and apparently the rules are 'not favourable' for financial services (alarm bells anyone?).
Greenland took two years to sort out essentially fishing and they were far less deeply embedded in the EEA, as was, than we are in the EU.
Shortened talks do NOT work in our favour.
Nothing is going to change for a lot more than two years (assuming that no country - out of 27 - is suicidal enough to spike extensions to the talks). For the next 2-10 years we will be locked in unending horse-trading and politicking. In the meantime we will continue to be members of the EU (but with no influence), we will continue to pay our subscription, immigration will remain unchanged, there will be no new money for the NHS or any other bribe that was offered.
By the time this comes to pass most of the 'leavers' will have forgotten they voted for it and will have moved on to blaming some other entity for all of their woes.
Oh f@ck!
"They are predicted to have formed in the early universe from massive dense clouds that collapsed straight into black holes without forming any stars and galaxies beforehand"
I have seen this mentioned a number of times recently and I'm wondering how is this supposed to happen? My vague memories suggest that as the gas collapses it heats, nuclear fusion starts, radiation slows the inflow of matter (or dissipates it into the outer reaches of the 'system'. Does this model depend on matter falling in such large volumes and so rapidly that it snuffs out the nascent star?
@Ken Strain - Ken, it is indeed I. And I'm very glad to see you haven't had to correct any egregious errors on my part. It's been a long time and the memory's not what it was. I re-read my thesis after the announcement of the first detection and it really brought home how much I had forgotten..
Oh, and congratulations of course to everyone in Glasgow!
It's an interesting question - and I don't know the answer - but you need to consider that such a proposed planet has to be far enough away from both black holes not to have been ripped apart by tidal forces (which will be far more powerful than the tidal forces of any gravitational radiation emitted by the system) so I am going to say - at such a distance - still pretty negligible.
"I wonder how they arrange it so that, say, a nuke going off in North Korea doesn't disturb the mirrors by such a tiny amount?"
Basically the nuke will generate 'ringing' at one set of frequencies and the detector will be sensitive at different frequencies. Also if there a coincident signal at two or more detectors in the right frequency range there are plenty of seismometers (including at the sites of the detectors) to throw up a 'just check this would you?' alert. Then you look at amplitudes, frwquencies, attack, decay, etc.
"However, aren't there quite a lot of other variables to consider? If there's a large sun between us and the event (a sun which passed across the wave front) then wouldn't that distort the wave? So, I would imagine that large events produce such enormous waves that other objects in their path have limited impact but I'd also imagine that there will come a point where it is like looking at the waves on the shore... so many that it's basically noise with no useful information."
Not really. The waves are quadropoles and therefore will be pretty well unaffected by a 'monopole' object (not the best scientific explanation but I think gives a clear image of what is happening).
Also for your second point the waves are incredibly weak to start with, energy falls off according to 1/R^2 as they expand spherically and therefore 'soon' fade into undetectability. Also there is no 'shore' for them to be reflected from (current modesl, etc.)
@John Sager - "gravitational radiation has only been measured by one method". Not entirely true. If you are referring to direct measurement I will grant you the point. However I believe that the energy loss of certain pulsars has been calculated to match what would be predicted by GR for gravitational radiation - so an indirect detection and not for the same sources.
"Cold gas raining in . . " sounds like a purely radial flow which makes me wonder what conditions give rise to gas with no angular momentum?
Also, as the gas gets closer to the super-massive black hole presumably it is accelerated and compressed and so becomes 'hot'. So wouldn't any gas actually seen falling into a black hole be hot and, if so, how can anyone know that previously observed infalls weren't cold gas as well (originally). What criteria are being applied here?
I truly wish I could believe that.
I tend to side with the view that most of these people are doing the best job they can and are looking at efficiency, savings, etc. but if anyone of a totalitarian disposition every does get into power with these tools to hand then we are all well and truly f@cked on a scale never before seen in human history.
Agreed with you right up to the reckless, ill-considered
" In the short term, we should be reviving bodies left and right despite whatever horrifying outcomes are encountered due to damaged brain tissue. Hopefully they signed consent forms beforehand, but that is just a courtesy"
No, there have to be checks, balances and forethought!
is that they are no use for the frequent, reliable transfer of information. Although what you are suggesting would probably work very nicely for a single communication, or set of communications, with a known other (who knows what tricks you are pulling) it would not work as a widely available communications system where standards have to be created, agreed to, implemented and therefore become common knowledge and easily reversed.
The reason we rely on maths is because it provides a known method for reducing structured information into essentially random data together with a key that can be shown to be breakable only by the application of 'n' clock cycles and that 'n' can be adjusted to whatever level of security you require (bugs and implementation errors excepted).
. . that before an encryption apocalypse is upon us there are already several avenues of investigation open because mathematicians (I assume) 'wasted' their time with developing branches of Number Theory that most people would look at and say, "What's the use of that?".
Anyone responsible for science funding should take lessons from these sort of developments.
Okay I'm definitely not an expert but:
There is a fundamental problem that universe is an archaic term for when we thought what we could see was all there was. That is no longer the case but we still call what we can see (by whatever physically allowed means) the universe. it is, by definition, the only one we can 'know' about.
There are, as you have surmised, several possibilities for other 'universes'. An incomplete list includes:
- universes beyond the observable horizon. There are some theories which allow some inferences to be made from movements of matter within our observable uinverse.
- multiple universes existing in various branes in the multi-dimensional M-theory
- multiple universes generated by (or causing indirectly) quantum weirdness (take your pick).
. . . . and others.
You have selected a specific sub-set of universes that you are happy with and arrived at a (possibly valid) conclusion based on that alone.
As one of the other posters alluded to there are very many books, programmes and web articles on these subjects and you need to do some investigation of your own before you can ask a question that others will find sufficiently well formed/defined to provide an answer to.
I don't want to come off as patronising because I am only too well aware how short my knowledge in this area falls but (I hope I'm not being too presumptious here) the general tenor of your question implies that you are not.
I probably should post this anonymously . . . .
There are a whole array of isolation mechanisms. There are passive items like lead/rubber stacks, the mirrors are suspended on fine 'wires' to filter higher frequency noise. There are feedback mechanisms using laser beam sidebands to further reduce noise.
On top of that although the impression given is that a laser beam enters the arm, reflects at the end and then exits these arms are actually Fabry-Perot cavities and the light bounces back and forth 'a lot'. The reflectivity of the mirrors define the 'finesse' of the cavity and the 'finesse' also defines the frequency response to gravitational waves. So one photon hitting a bump isn't going to be a big deal.
There are also baffles along the tubes to ensure that scattered light doesn't get to re-enter the beam and (almost certainly) a whole host of other enhancements that weren't even thought of when I left the field nearly three decades ago.
. . .if 'terrorists' eschew encrypted communications because they fear they would raise a large flag over any device that sends such messages.
Surely easier and less conspicuous to post on facebook/twitter about "meeting at the 'cafe' on Tuesday. Bring your 'packed lunch'.", and get lost in the morass of other vacuous meanderings filling the intertubes?
I hope you are right - and when the 'Republican Grandees' spoke out against him I expected it to increase his popularity; reinforcing his image as not part of the establishment.
However I fear that a lot of Trump support is based on narrow self-interest and buying into his promise to make America great and get rid of all the immigrants and stop terrorism. I'm aware of the Godwin risk but, in this case, I really do believe the parallels to Hitler are worrying.
However I then comfort myself by believing that Trump is nowhere near as bright as Hitler - which is no doubt how pre-WWII observers comforted themselves when Hitler was seeking election - by comparing him to $ARCHETYPAL_HISTORICAL_BADDY <sad face>.
I think provable fact is better than a guess - no matter how well founded. It's also a lot harder for governments to ignore said facts and dismiss them as conspiracy theories.
If the US or GB had an ounce of integrity Snowden would be summarily pardoned (by one) or offered asylum (by the other).
I think that Edward Snowden should be lauded throughout the free world as a modern hero.
Whatever the result of this bill he has, at least, made us all (for a given value of 'all') aware of what is being done behind the scenes and how the government views the governed.
That alone is valuable information.
Awesome to think that we have created a satellite network around another planet. Hopefully we have learned some lessons from here and will strive to keep the debris levels to a minimum.
Does anyone know how many active satellites are currently in orbit around Mars?
And, although I can understand the transmission power savings by orbiting 250 miles above the surface, what's the altitude for a 'geo'-stationary orbit?
(Hoping I've learnt something from Worral).
I think the desire on the part of a vendor for a monopoly is entirely natural, more profit, but the market naturally suffers if the monopoly is reinforced by unreasonable rules, bonuses or other behaviour.
If the monopolist raises prices too high, or drops quality too low, or restricts supply to greatly, et. then the market should respond by allowing other suppliers to come to market.
The more information gathered the more false positives there will be.
It doesn't matter if you whittle them down to the fractions of a per cent of the total individuals involved. Even 0.01% of 70 million people is 7000 people (and their families/friends) potentially having their lives turned upside down 'because'.
Does anyone believe sufficient resources will be provided to include checks and counter-checks to get the figure even as low as this?
. . by the cover picture. Very dramatic.
Less impressed by the actual logo - 40k! - I'm in the wrong job. I have no artistic talents that I am aware of but I can swap fonts and change colours with the best of them for, shall we say, 30k (introductory offer because I like your face).
That's not really true though, is it? Probably for bestsellers, classics and so on but for the smaller titles, niche interest and out of print books ebooks do have an advantage. Also not everyone lives within walking distance of a library, certainly not a main library, and . . . . you have to give them back (that bit actually looks very like the Nook now I think about it).
I too prefer paper books. I have some that I bought over forty years ago that have never run out of batteries, failed certificate expiration tests or become obsolete/unreadable formats.
Unfortunately I too have run out of space and resorted to the Kobo because of its multiple format support and the ability to bypass DRM using Calibre. Battery life is excellent, the screen light is superb and the ability to carry dozens of books in a small form factor is brilliant.
I have NEVER paid more for an ebook than for a paperback and bookbub is good if you want notifications of offers that are available.