|
I read that Russia won’t tell us why the ISS had a puncture in it. What’s the story behind why they won’t?
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 08:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 21:59 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/someone-drilled-hole-international-space-station-180970208/ Then what’s this all about? From the 23rd: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiec...s-to-tell-nasa/ quote:Now a row has broken out about the incident, with hints that Russian space agency Roscosmos now knows the cause of the leak, but will keep it secret from NASA, its main partner at the ISS.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 11:05
|
|
|
Yeah I asked because I’m wondering if it’s an embarrassment thing or if it’s some stupid geopolitical bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 13:26
|
|
|
My biggest question is why put a telescope on an airplane?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
I would have thought the constant motion of the plane would interfere with the telescope but I guess it's not a problem? Makes sense then I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2020 03:09
|
|
|
Are there any good sci fi books that go into different evolutionary paths for intelligent life kinda like the hypothetical dolphins finding out fish left out in the sun taste better and oh look something melted and it’s hard and we can use it to kill etc fantasy someone posted above?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2020 03:15
|
|
|
Is there a reason why defense contractors aren’t working on fully or partially reusable rockets like SpaceX or Blue Origin are trying to do? Is it a if it ain’t broke type of thing? Or because they’re rolling in contracts either way so why bother? Is there something about it that makes it not worth it?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 00:57
|
|
|
Communist Zombie posted:Technically ULA is supposed to coming up with a semi reusable version of one of their rockets where they jettison the engine with a parachute and catch it with a helicopter (which is something thats been done before), but we have no idea how 'real' that plan is. What, like that scene in Batman TDK?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 03:03
|
|
|
Objurium posted:I wanted to thank the thread for turning me onto John Godier. His podcast episode with Avi Loeb discussing why Oumuamua might be a probe or light sail rather than a hydrogen comet we've never seen anywhere else is fascinating. Is there a way to get this into Overcast app? The only Event Horizon podcast that comes up in search is about weird stuff, not space stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2021 16:32
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I vaguely assume physics is going to roughly take the route of videogame speedrunning. What the gently caress is happening in that video? I need a video to explain it to me. My childhood was a long time ago but I don’t remember… that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2021 19:01
|
|
|
Isn’t it mathematically possible to invert a shelled object? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere_eversion E: I understand the words in that wiki page… but I don’t understand the words the particular order they’re written in. TLDR I have no idea what I’m saying except I remember seeing a YouTube video about this a while ago. Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Feb 2, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
FFT posted:Just start with aphantasia and extrapolate from there. Huh. Interesting. I’ve never been able to picture faces or people in my head but I can recognize them. Like if someone I was close with asked me what their face looked like through a text message I’d just say “umm, you have [color] eyes and [length] [color] hair.” Ask me to describe my apartment and I can tell you about the layout and vaguely what it looks like (“there’s a living room and two bedrooms, a [color] rug in the living room and [furniture] in [color/style]”) but I can’t imagine it. There’s just nothing there. Give me a piece of paper and I can sketch the layout for you, but I can’t “see” it. I can tell you about the trail I walk/run through every morning (“it’s through a neighborhood, and then I loop off into the woods, there’s a lake, sometimes I see cats, sometimes I see herons, they really need to repair the footbridge that crosses the small creek”). But once again, I can’t really picture it. Like, if you ask me to describe something it’s all a series of facts that I know. I know what that lake looks like and how big it is, but if I close my eyes I can’t picture it. I’ve never liked LEGO (blasphemy I know) because I can’t imagine anything to build. I’m also bad at Minecraft cause of the same reason. I should read more about this… E: If I close my eyes and try really hard I can imagine what my living room looks like I guess, but it doesn’t come natural and I have to really focus. I could list off the objective facts about it that I remember on a moment’s notice though. Weirdly enough, one thing that I can picture without trying are math equations lol. Like I can clearly picture what y(x) = ln(x) looks like for example. Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Mar 11, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2021 04:10
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Can anyone help me find a short story I read as a kid? It was the future and some lady had a kid dying of cancer and they were like "oh yeah just give us your kid and we will remove his brain and will resurrect them on mars as mars rovers" then the lady does it, then goes to mars to go get her son back, then the twist at the end is like... the rovers are just random remote control cars that don't do anything and don't have anyone's brain in them and it was all a scam. Are you sure that wasn’t a black mirror episode
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2021 15:11
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:Tier A: I just started listening to his podcast and it’s interesting and good IMO. Are there any other science related podcasts similar to his? Specifically I like the long form no-bullshit format and that he has doesn’t have a loud and obnoxious personality. I tried listening to Star Talk once and I just don’t like the 2-3 guys sitting around talking and joking to each other loudly format at all.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2021 13:50
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:On Youtube there's Cool Worlds with Prof. Brian Kipping. I love his voice and delivery, it's so soothing, and he's very hard-science - being a legit astronomer after all. I’ve watched a few of his videos now and you’re 100% spot on about his soothing voice. Thanks for the recommendation. I just wish he made audio only versions too so I could fall asleep to his voice. And I’ve been going through Sean Carol’s podcast backlog and the way he talks about his quantum mechanics interpretation does sound kinda weird. The way he talks about “being a good Everettian” (direct quote from several of his podcasts on quantum mechanics) sounds a bit… cult-like. Granted he does recognize that the MWI isn’t the only interpretation and has on more than one occasion said (paraphrased) that he’d go wherever the data goes, so it’s not like blind faith in it but still. You don’t hear about people talking about being a good Newtonian.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2021 16:33
|
|
|
You’re going to absolutely need to learn calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations if you want to understand the mathematics and nitty gritty of things. But if all you’re looking for is a high level overview so that you could follow along in a conversation then the math isn’t necessary. Basically, do you want to be able to write down the Schrödinger equation and how to solve for it, or do you want to just know what it is and what it does?
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2021 13:38
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:The latter. I just want to know what people are talking about beyond the pop-science level at which I usually encounter physics ideas. If you’re ok with videos I really like Sabine Hossenfelder’s no-nonsense style videos. She’s a theoretical physicist and has a short series of videos about 10 minutes each that goes over some of the key parts of quantum mechanics. She doesn’t go into too much detail, but it’s enough to get the gist and gives you search terms if you’re interested in zooming in. The Mindscape podcast mentioned above is also pretty informative and accessible if you’re ok with just listening as well. In particular this episode gives a pretty decent overview I think. I don’t have any book suggestions. Maybe try asking the physics thread.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2021 04:07
|
|
|
Even if you think it’s aliens you should want the more simpler explanation of camera artifact/reflection/weather balloon/person lying to be true because that’s how science loving works. If you believe A is true, then you look for explanations that show A is false. Otherwise you might as well be like those flat earthers in that Netflix documentary. And all people here are saying is that those videos can easily be explained so we need better evidence before asserting that it’s aliens.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2021 11:25
|
|
|
Fireant posted:Also separately, I believe we can have these discussions without frothing at the mouth with a skeptic hard on about the impossibility of intelligent species contacting each other. Who’s saying this?
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2021 15:00
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:But to bar playing around with speculation of aliens and FTL travel and wormholes, hell, for some it's the spice of this thread. Which poster is forbidding people from speculating that it’s aliens? My entire point was that there are videos of UFOs and people claiming they saw them, that’s undeniable. But before jumping to the conclusion that it’s aliens we ought to exhaust all other explanations that are more simpler, which that Mick guy does rather convincingly with examples of the exact same phenomena he made and filmed in his garage. Does this prove it’s not aliens? No of course not. But it does show that these unexplained aerial phenomena can be explained with what we currently know with the tech that we currently have. Given this, we need better evidence before claiming aliens.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2021 15:17
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:I feel being told wanting/wishing/speculating UFOs and phenomon like the gas on Venus, ʻOumuamua, Tabby's Star's being a Dyson sphere, etc is wrong and we shouldn't want aliens is equally truly, and sort of maybe where some of the heat in the opposite direction is going in this thread at the moment. I mean, look at this post. I didn’t say you shouldn’t want it to be aliens, and I’m not saying you’re a heretic or crazy for wanting the explanation to be aliens. I’m not passing any judgement. Like I 100% believe that aliens exist somewhere, and I seriously hope we discover evidence for them in my lifetime. But if there’s supposed evidence of these aliens or UFOs then I also 100% went them to be explained through what we currently know and understand. We don’t know what we don’t know, so we can’t prove that those are aliens. But we do know that weather balloons or drones or camera artifacts exist and how to reproduce the ones shown in the videos, and like we have half the country believing that the other half of the country are demon worshiping baby eaters (meaning eyewitness testimony is not dependable at all because you’re going to believe what you believe). Now the moment we have something that just can’t be explained, with concrete objective data backing it up, then I’ll get excited.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
Here’s Mick showing the math that that poster is also asserting: https://youtu.be/PLyEO0jNt6M Unless I’ve read their post wrong I’m not really sure how this shows that it’s aliens. Tldr the object is around 13000ft up and flying at wind speed more or less, and appears to be 6-8 ft based on the video and is “cold” which all matches the description of a weather balloon.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
Captain Monkey posted:No? I didn’t know if there was some other factor about string theory that I was unaware of so I asked a clarifying question. It was non-adversarial and asked in good faith. I’m also interested in reading about those topics. It’s not just about switching theories. It’s that our two theories of the understanding of the world, general relativity and quantum mechanics, are incompatible with each other. We know for a fact that gravity as described by general relativity is real. We know for a fact that quantum effects as described by quantum mechanics is real. But so far we have no idea how gravity and the other forces work together because GR doesn’t describe the strong, weak, or electromagnetic forces and QM doesn’t describe gravity. They are just not compatible, yet both GR and QM are undeniable facts that we can observe. String theory is hypothesized to describe all four of those forces but as of now has been untested.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
Oh wow we’re still talking about this
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2021 12:19
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:Yeah, I agree with the above post and also had a little laugh about the idea of an alien thread where you can't say it's not aliens and making this thread alienless. gently caress yeah. Honestly, it's just god of the gaps at this stage - i.e. the most reasonable position is that I don't know and the burden of proof is on both the drone/projector folk and the alien folk to make their case. The burden of proof is on the people making the claim that it’s aliens. The default argument is that it’s unexplained but we have no reason to believe that it can’t be explained with what we know, we just haven’t. If you claim that it’s aliens then the burden of proof is on you. DrSunshine posted:Also there's a question of why the military specifically? Why are these things hanging around specifically Navy ships, and specifically American navy ships? If they were aliens, they could have their whole run of the planet. We have a whole planet's worth of interesting things to observe- massive cargo liners, cities full of people, hundreds of other nations. Why the US military, while conducting training exercises off the coast? Obviously it’s because 🇺🇸 #1. Or because they get all the Hollywood videos and see how awesome/terrible the US military is. Or maybe it’s just cause the US military is everywhere and has a ton of people compared to the rest of the world’s military.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2021 14:56
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:OK, so maybe I worded it wrong. I mean, more like, the sentiment that it would be cool if there were aliens communicating or visiting. It feels like you can't even admit to wanting that to be the case, see the above post I've quoted plus many more of a similar edge. I think my one and only point I was trying to make was that there is this persistent thread that it's only the pro-alien peeps who are being irrational or unhelpful. When, in fact, there folks being 'skeptical' and 'rational' but really they are just being the space thread equivalent of internet atheist dicks. You seem to be super bothered by what I said so why don’t you do your health a favor and block me and move on?
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2021 20:23
|
|
|
I don’t think FTL communication through quantum entanglement could work because ok, you have a pair of entangled particles on two planets/ships/etc separated apart by 1+ light year. When Planet A measures the particle to send information to Planet B, how is Planet B gonna know that Planet A has measured the particle and so they should now measure it too? If they built a detector to continuously monitor their particle then by definition they have measured it the moment they turned the detector online. Now the question is, how does Planet A know that Planet B has measured their particle?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2021 16:06
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Guys, the facts have changed. Update your assumptions. They are detecting things that they (supposedly) don’t have an explanation for. This is not the same as detecting “advanced unidentified craft” or any craft for that matter.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:Hm, maybe we could have a this thread and then a new space thread which bans all alien talk; uap, recent ufo stuff, hypothetical aliens elsewhere in the universe, etc. Right now you’re trying to “debate” that god exists based on people claiming they’ve witnessed miracles. That is not a debate.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2021 11:21
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:No, I'm not. Please don't put that on me. I don't think the recent UAP sightings are aliens. My position is, I don't know what they are. Stop doing this weird thing where you keep trying to tell people what they believe or are trying to argue. thx. But my eyewitness testimony
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2021 11:32
|
|
|
As yes the reputable journal Space.com
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2021 15:02
|
|
|
Ok for fucks sake it’s aliens. They are 100% aliens you have convinced me. Now what the gently caress is there to talk about? Why are they here? We don’t loving know. How do they work? We don’t loving know. How did they get here? We don’t loving know. How long have they been here? We don’t loving know. Where are they from? We don’t loving know. Wow what a riveting debate and discussion! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2021 00:49
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:What do people think about this proposal of a geodesic propulsion system being able to explain the UFO behaviour without violating laws of motion? This is not a theory. This is someone’s fan fiction disguised as science. They start by saying that UFOs would need to obey the laws of physics, and from that they get aliens. No poo poo a theoretical alien spaceship would need to obey the laws of physics. They assert that their understanding of quantum gravity is correct and make “predictions” based on that. They make further “predictions” based on their other predictions which they assert to be true. quote:Given the agreement of this theory with virtually all credible data over the last century, we consider the matter of the origin of these vehicles settled. I don’t even know how to respond to that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:"Wrap it up boys, these guys figured out Quantum Gravity and the origin of all UFO phenomena! They explain it clearly and completely in their...paper? No...um, in short, ambiguous language on their website." Sean Carrol has a new AMA episode where one person goes “I have my own interpretation of quantum mechanics,  ” and Sean responds with something of the effects of “until you have math and specific details to show no you don’t.” Made me think about this UFO “theory” lol.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2021 13:34
|
|
|
Has it been released or what my stream says starting soon but this news live blog is saying it’s been released.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2022 22:44
|
|
|
can someone smart explain how this picture compares with the Hubble deep field picture
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
Unormal posted:https://twitter.com/ianlauerastro/status/1546625603641790465?t=Yx0jfvA4wBSCx1ne-FRuMQ&s=19 Wow why didn’t they just show this on the stream E: I meant to quote the tweet with the closeup gif holy poo poo that’s insane. That’s like in tv when they go “enhance and tighten up the graphics” except this time it’s real
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Still praying for a spinoff that's just her and Amos tooling around the solar system and kicking peoples asses in every possible way. Books, show, I'll take whatever Fanfics? https://archiveofourown.org/tags/Chrisjen%20Avasarala*s*Amos%20Burton/works
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:If I were a whistleblower trying to get the US to acknowledge partial remains of alien spacecraft, I’d use my time remaining with the alien spacecraft to get some incontrovertible evidence and share that with the press before I made a statement, or possibly while I made my statement. Apparently the guy in question didn't actually see anything, but he knows people who TOTALLY SWARE they saw something.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2023 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 21:59 |
|
|
Nessus posted:Do they have an explicit legal requirement to do so, or is it more a case of “if you go much off that beam, they install a new executive”? According to this NYTimes Opinion Piece the answer is no, they are not legally mandated to do so: quote:There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” — even if this means skirting ethical rules, damaging the environment or harming employees. But this belief is utterly false. To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.” It goes on to say that the directors of the corporation are instead to act in the best interest of the company, which may or may not include maximizing profits in the short term: quote:And corporate case law describes directors as fiduciaries who owe duties not only to shareholders but also to the corporate entity itself, and instructs directors to use their powers in “the best interests of the company.” This is probably how companies like Apple can "get away" with sitting on a metric fuckton of straight up cash ($56,000,000,000 as of March 2023) instead of using it to generate more money. In practice, I suspect that Boeing's CEO could just say "hey guys we are planning on spending a poo poo ton of money for the next x years which will lose us money in the short term, but in x+y years it will pay off tenfold" but he would probably just get sacked because the leeches don't want 10x more money in x+y years–they want 1x money today and 10x money in x+y years. Tim Apple on the other hand probably doesn't have to worry about any of this poo poo for various reasons. The next guy after Tim? Yeah he'd probably be more traditionally beholden to shareholders as he wouldn't be Jobs's protégé. Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Jun 7, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2023 16:11
|
|