6292 Members
61 Forums
17084 Topics
306840 Posts
Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
|
|
|
|
#332728 - 02/23/21 01:51 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: TatumAH]
|
journeyman
Registered: 02/18/11
Posts: 841
Loc: Upstate NY
|
off and on  As long as we are already debating wormholes, quantum chromodynamics, and differentiating between beauty and bottom, one can only hope that further discussions of tops and bottoms does not get sucked into black holes, whose mysteries can only be penetrated by a large HADRON... The bottom quark or b quark, also known as the beauty quark, is a third-generation heavy quark with a charge of −1/3 e.
All quarks are described in a similar way by electroweak and quantum chromodynamics, but the bottom quark has exceptionally low rates of transition to lower-mass quarks. The bottom quark is also notable because it is a product in almost all top quark decays, and is a frequent decay product of the Higgs boson.
Guff seems to be the path forward, upward and onward, vs downward and backword... TAT Ironically PALindromically yours
Edited by TatumAH (02/23/21 03:07 PM)
_________________________
There's nothing wrong with thinking Except that it's lonesome work sevil regit
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332733 - 02/23/21 04:24 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: TatumAH]
|
veteran
Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 10780
Loc: One of the Mexicos
|
If it ducks like a quark, and walks like a quark, it the atmosphere on Mars sufficient to allow it to quack like a quark?
(back on topic...)
(copious liberties taken...)
Edited by logtroll (02/23/21 04:26 PM) Edit Reason: clarification
_________________________
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.” – R. Buckminster Fuller
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332736 - 02/23/21 04:34 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: logtroll]
|
journeyman
Registered: 02/18/11
Posts: 841
Loc: Upstate NY
|
sanctimonious activities forsaken
_________________________
There's nothing wrong with thinking Except that it's lonesome work sevil regit
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332739 - 02/23/21 04:48 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: TatumAH]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 17712
Loc: Florida
|
Space exploration was cool when it was run by government for the sake of gathering knowledge through research and experimentation. Today space has been privatized. Elon Musk is going to place thousands of satellites into a near earth orbit in order to make billions for himself by providing internet access worldwide.
Why didn't government do this?
Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and others are lobbying for a Mars colony, so that they can escape the poors who made them rich. Government will pay for most of the research and development, then the billionaires can take over.
_________________________
Good coffee, good weed, and time on my hands...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332740 - 02/23/21 05:17 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: Greger]
|
journeyman
Registered: 02/18/11
Posts: 841
Loc: Upstate NY
|
Musk plan to obstruct Astronomers Clearly Musk's satellite fleet is designed to take over the sky, think alien's checkmate in Independence Day. The flavor/gambit of this checkmate is unclear, but this will be able to block astronomers by shining a bright light in their faces. Check out the string of satellites in the link! The purpose, other than global domination, is to prevent astronomers from noticing the approach of the Mutha Shipt to pick him up and return him to his rightful throne as Galactic Emperor! Butt I could be worng  QATAT shameon Latency, a measure of how long it takes your internet signal to travel to space and back, will also drop to around 20ms this year, Musk added. That would be a validation of the company's strategy of launching its satellites into low-Earth orbit, which reduces the distance that those signals need to travel. That strategy has also raised red flags with astronomers worried about obstructions to night sky visibility, which is something SpaceX has been working to address with updates to its satellite design. Astronomers complaints and display
_________________________
There's nothing wrong with thinking Except that it's lonesome work sevil regit
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332746 - 02/23/21 10:20 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: pondering_it_all]
|
journeyman
Registered: 02/18/11
Posts: 841
Loc: Upstate NY
|
When scientists "edit" data, its the equivalent of fake news. except for scientists it a career ending event, if caught. You cant edit data to make it look like how you know it should look, that's not an experiment or observation. The sensitivity of the sensors in large telescopes are, well astronomical, and a flash of up close light, like in low orbits, can render them useless for a while, if not destroy them. As for writing off land base telescopes, there will be a lot of unemployed graduate students, post doc, and professors! screw them egghead elites, because Musk and other preverts need to be able to fast-forward through their porn without loosing the money shot, while touring Yemen or Tierra-del-Fuego.
_________________________
There's nothing wrong with thinking Except that it's lonesome work sevil regit
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332748 - 02/24/21 12:27 AM
Re: Mars
[Re: TatumAH]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 17712
Loc: Florida
|
Seems like Musk plans to put 12,000 satellites in orbit. A while back Bezos was planning to put his own 12,000 satellites in orbit to compete with Musk...polluting space just like we pollute everything else.
_________________________
Good coffee, good weed, and time on my hands...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#332756 - 02/24/21 02:46 PM
Re: Mars
[Re: pondering_it_all]
|
journeyman
Registered: 02/18/11
Posts: 841
Loc: Upstate NY
|
Artists can freely manipulate images at will, but there are very strict limitations on "scientific" data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconduct scientific misconduct Photo manipulation
Compared to other forms of scientific misconduct, image fraud (manipulation of images to distort their meaning) is of particular interest since it can frequently be detected by external parties. In 2006, the Journal of Cell Biology gained publicity for instituting tests to detect photo manipulation in papers that were being considered for publication.[23] This was in response to the increased usage of programs such as Adobe Photoshop by scientists, which facilitate photo manipulation. Since then more publishers, including the Nature Publishing Group, have instituted similar tests and require authors to minimize and specify the extent of photo manipulation when a manuscript is submitted for publication. However, there is little evidence to indicate that such tests are applied rigorously. One Nature paper published in 2009[24] has subsequently been reported to contain around 20 separate instances[25] of image fraud.
Although the type of manipulation that is allowed can depend greatly on the type of experiment that is presented and also differ from one journal to another, in general the following manipulations are not allowed:[citation needed]
splicing together different images to represent a single experiment changing brightness and contrast of only a part of the image any change that conceals information, even when it is considered to be aspecific, which includes: changing brightness and contrast to leave only the most intense signal using clone tools to hide information showing only a very small part of the photograph so that additional information is not visible
Image manipulations are typically done on visually repetitive images such as those of western blots, histologies or data visualisations like graphs.
_________________________
There's nothing wrong with thinking Except that it's lonesome work sevil regit
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
53
Guests and
4
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|