discuss Science & Technology news & discussion

[CraigD]

Post and discuss interesting articles & videos about science and technology.

You don't need to be an expert - just interested in the wonders of modern science, technology, and the history of these fields.

Please keep it rational, and post articles from reputable sources.
Try not to editorialise headlines and keep the copy to just a paragraph with a link to the original source. When quoting excerpts from articles, I think the best method is to italicise the copy, and include a link to the source.

Have some fun with your comments and discussions... just keep the sources legitimate.

Other threads:
The Break Room has a number of other popular threads, so there is no need to post material here that is better suited to these other threads:

- Covid19-Coronavirus updates and news
- Conspiracy Thread Free For All
- The *religious* discussion thread

Please enjoy!

 

[topdom]

Did you notice that 22 minutes is exactly double the 11 light-minutes?

That's how long it takes to send a command and receive a response - it's a 22-minute round trip.

No, it's all real.

The Russians and Chinese would have debunked it by now if any of this had been faked.

The Chinese have even photographed the American lunar landing sites.

Of course, that is how I get 22, by multiplying 11 by 2.
(the word "currently" can mean 11 or 22 minutes ago depending on whether we are watching only, or sending commands also. )
In the movie they pretend things are happening in real time. So landing and movie may be real,
but the conversation can't be.

Some success story was needed for US after stolen election, blm rioting, capitol riot, "corona failure" ,..
And good guys in US are working with Russia and China to create a new nonsatanic world.
They support Trump and success of Mars landing would be considered as Trump's success.

In Mars landing everything had to be programmed in advance.
Some adjustments can be made during the journey, but when the spacecraft approaches Mars, not much can be done because of time gap. The space craft has to take care of itself, and know what to do.

Failure would be unaffordable, so they can both try to land on Mars, and at the same time create a movie on the Earth, or animation on Mars. If it becomes failure then use those fake movies. If it is a success, then show actual landing movie.

A friend had sent me a video of a Space X rocket going backwards and landing perfectly where it was supposed to land (a few years ago). (And people were celebrating the success in the same way as above..)
But there was a problem, when the rocket landed, , the exhaust smoke disappeared, lights were turn off.
Obviously they were playing the launch event backwards.

 

[CraigD]

Of course, that is how I get 22, by multiplying 11 by 2.
(the word "currently" can mean 11 or 22 minutes ago depending on whether we are watching only, or sending commands also. )
In the movie they pretend things are happening in real time. So landing and movie may be real,
but the conversation can't be.

Some success story was needed for US after stolen election, blm rioting, capitol riot, "corona failure" ,..
And good guys in US are working with Russia and China to create a new nonsatanic world.
They support Trump and success of Mars landing would be considered as Trump's success.

In Mars landing everything had to be programmed in advance.
Some adjustments can be made during the journey, but when the spacecraft approaches Mars, not much can be done because of time gap. The space craft has to take care of itself, and know what to do.

Failure would be unaffordable, so they can both try to land on Mars, and at the same time create a movie on the Earth, or animation on Mars. If it becomes failure then use those fake movies. If it is a success, then show actual landing movie.

A friend had sent me a video of a Space X rocket going backwards and landing perfectly where it was supposed to land (a few years ago). (And people were celebrating the success in the same way as above..)
But there was a problem, when the rocket landed, , the exhaust smoke would disappear, lights would turn off.
Obviously they were playing the launch event backwards.

NASA has lost a number of Lunar and Mars spacecraft, and were always upfront in saying so.

The Mars Observer was lost in 1992.

The Mars Polar Lander (Surveyor) crashed on Mars in 1999, and they didn't use fake footage to pretend it was a successful landing.

Fifteen consecutive U.S. uncrewed lunar missions over a six-year period from 1958 to 1964 (Pioneer and Ranger missions) all failed their primary photographic missions. NASA didn't try and fake those failed mission photographs, and were open about their failures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing

 

[topdom]

NASA has lost a number of Lunar and Mars spacecraft, and were always upfront in saying so.

The Mars Observer was lost in 1992.

The Mars Polar Lander (Surveyor) crashed on Mars in 1999, and they didn't use fake footage to pretend it was a successful landing.

Fifteen consecutive U.S. uncrewed lunar missions over a six-year period from 1958 to 1964 (Pioneer and Ranger missions) all failed their primary photographic missions. NASA didn't try and fake those failed mission photographs, and were open about their failures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing

I'm not saying everything is fake.
But Apollos (manned landings) were obviously fake. (undebunkable poofs given here and elsewhere)
They were needed before leaving the gold standard of US dollar. (my theory about why it was faked)
This new Mars landing can be real,
but failure would be unaffordable, so there had to be a plan B.
We have seen animations before we saw real looking movies.
Also the conversation in the movie seems to be fake, because they pretend it is happening in realtime.

 

[CraigD]

An Astronomer Just Laid Out a Navigation System For Interstellar Space Travel

It's 2021, and we finally don't have to worry quite so much about our spacecraft getting lost in interstellar space.

Using the positions and shifting light of stars, both near and far, astronomer Coryn A.L. Bailer-Jones has demonstrated the feasibility of autonomous, on-the-fly navigation for spacecraft traveling far beyond the Solar System.

"When travelling to the nearest stars, signals will be far too weak and light travel times will be of order years," Bailer-Jones wrote in his paper, which is currently available on the preprint server arXiv, where it awaits peer review from the astronomy community.

"An interstellar spacecraft will therefore have to navigate autonomously, and use this information to decide when to make course corrections or to switch on instruments. Such a spacecraft needs to be able to determine its position and velocity using only onboard measurements."

Bailer-Jones, who works at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Germany, isn't the first to think of this. NASA has been working on navigation by pulsars, using the dead stars' regular pulsations as the basis for a galactic GPS. This method sounds pretty great, but it may be subject to errors at greater distances, due to distortion of the signal by the interstellar medium.

With a catalog of stars, Bailer-Jones was able to show that it's possible to work out a spacecraft's coordinates in six dimensions - three in space and three in velocity - to a high accuracy, based on the way the positions of those stars changes from the spacecraft's point of view.

"As a spacecraft moves away from the Sun, the observed positions and velocities of the stars will change relative to those in a Earth-based catalog due to parallax, aberration, and the Doppler effect," he wrote.

"By measuring just the angular distances between pairs of stars, and comparing these to the catalog, we can infer the coordinates of the spacecraft via an iterative forward-modelling process."

Read more...

https://www.sciencealert.com/fascin...ut-a-navigation-system-for-interstellar-space

 

[koolishman]

I'm not saying everything is fake.
But Apollos (manned landings) were obviously fake. (undebunkable poofs given here and elsewhere)
They were needed before leaving the gold standard of US dollar. (my theory about why it was faked)
This new Mars landing can be real,
but failure would be unaffordable, so there had to be a plan B.
We have seen animations before we saw real looking movies.
Also the conversation on the movie seems to be fake, because they pretend it is happening in realtime.

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Apollo11MoonLanding/story?id=8104410

https://www.theguardian.com/science/gallery/2009/jun/29/apollo-11-moon-landing-hoax

 

[CraigD]

BBC: Spaghetti-Harvest in Ticino (April 1, 1957)

 

[koolishman]

/\

Reminds me of the TP shortage broadcast.

 

[topdom]

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Apollo11MoonLanding/story?id=8104410

https://www.theguardian.com/science/gallery/2009/jun/29/apollo-11-moon-landing-hoax

If people went to the Moon, they would see a big beautiful "Moon" in the sky called Earth. Why not take a picture of it. Why not mention it. The earth would always be visible, because the Moon can never block all of the sunlight, and these people "landed" on the side of the Moon which faces the Earth (and the other side would be even more difficult to land on, because the big mass of the Moon would then block wireless communication).

Edit: minor detail: Ok, the Earth may become invisible from this side of the Moon in rare situations, but then it seems the Sun would also become invisible, because this can happen only if the Earth is between the Moon and the Sun. But it would be stupid and dangerous to choose a time like this to land, because astronauts can't see the Moon, (no light coming from the Sun), and Earth and Sun are also invisible. So there are no references to decide in which direction to move.


And here is a 1 line proof of fake Moon landing: Moon dust trajectory is not parabolic. Dust hits the air on the "Moon" which doesn't exist. Also gravity acceleration is much closer to 9,8 than 1,6.
meter/second^2. Go to 35:20 below.

It is disappoining that 25 percent of British people don't believe Moon landing. It should have been 100 percent.
Unmanned Moon landings exist. Probably not very difficult. Going there alive and come back, can be possible, but it would be very difficult and expensive even today, and impossible in 1969.

 

[CraigD]

If people went to the Moon, they would see a big beautiful "Moon" in the sky called Earth. Why not take a picture of it. Why not mention it. The earth would always be visible, because the Moon can never block all of the sunlight, and these people "landed" on the side of the Moon which faces the Earth (and the other side would be even more difficult to land on, because the big mass of the Moon would then block wireless communication)...

They did take pictures of the Earth from the surface of the Moon. This was was taken in 1969 on the Apollo 11 mission, standing next to the Eagle lander and looking almost directly upwards.

As you said, the Earth would be straight above, which is why there are only a few photos taken of it by the astronauts on the surface. It would have been difficult to look directly upwards and take a photograph while wearing a spacesuit.

That image was easy to find on NASA website, but you won't find it in any conspiracy documentaries because it doesn't fit with the agenda of disproving the landings.

Most of the images were taken with Hasselblad cameras attached to the front of their suits, so they could only shoot straight ahead. I'm assuming that Armstrong removed the camera from the mounting point on his suit to take that picture.

Here is a high definition scan from the Apollo 11 on-board motion picture (film) footage. The still shows Armstrong shortly after he collected a sample of lunar dust and rocks. You can see the Hasselblad camera strapped to his chest. It was the only camera they took on the surface that mission. All the good quality photographs taken with the Hasselblad are therefore of Buzz Aldrin, taken by Armstrong.

Here is a picture of Alan Bean on the Apollo 12 mission with Hasselblad attached to front of suit - No way he could have shot upwards. Both astronauts obviously had cameras on this moonwalk.

Anyway, I started watching that video you included above titled 'Was it Only a Paper Moon' by James Collier, and he's made some wildly inaccurate statements.

It's basically him against 100,000 engineers, scientists, mathematicians, physicists etc. who devoted their lives to Mankind's greatest achievement - none of whom to this day have come forward and said that they were part of an elaborate hoax. Even the Russians won't deny that the Americans landed on the moon.

You seem like an intelligent guy - much better at mathematics than myself, so I hope you stop being hoodwinked by the conspiracy dribble

 

[topdom]

One proof is enough. Despite air friction water moves along (almost perfect) parabolas in the movie below. And Moon dust trajectories had to be even more perfect parabolic arcs, how small the particle sizes are.

"Scientists" are scared of the deepstate and can't tell the truth directly.

Russia says in its RT.com advertisements , we were the first country in the space (slightly above the Earth). Ok, but if you are at least 50 years behind US in the space race why be proud of it.

I think US and Russia made a deal. US would "beat" Russia in space race, and then could leave gold standard of US dollar (and avoid bankruptcy), and a war would start in the middleeast between Israel and arabs, and this would be an excuse for increasing oil price 3-4 fold, and US would switch to petro-dollar standard and could get more debt (print more money), and Russia would make more money from higher oil prices, ..for a while at least , like 40-50 years.. .. And now it is time to switch to the new financial system.

....
Images of the Earth can be added later to pictures. I would prefer to see a movie of it.

 

[CraigD]

MIT’s New Artificial Intelligence Algorithm Designs Soft Robots That Sense

MIT researchers have developed an algorithm to help engineers design soft robots that collect more useful information about their surroundings. The deep-learning algorithm suggests an optimized placement of sensors within the robot’s body, allowing it to better interact with its environment and complete assigned tasks. The advance is a step toward the automation of robot design. “The system not only learns a given task, but also how to best design the robot to solve that task,” says Alexander Amini. “Sensor placement is a very difficult problem to solve. So, having this solution is extremely exciting.”

Creating soft robots that complete real-world tasks has been a long-running challenge in robotics. Their rigid counterparts have a built-in advantage: a limited range of motion. Rigid robots’ finite array of joints and limbs usually makes for manageable calculations by the algorithms that control mapping and motion planning. Soft robots are not so tractable.

Soft-bodied robots are flexible and pliant — they generally feel more like a bouncy ball than a bowling ball. “The main problem with soft robots is that they are infinitely dimensional,” says Spielberg. “Any point on a soft-bodied robot can, in theory, deform in any way possible.” That makes it tough to design a soft robot that can map the location of its body parts. Past efforts have used an external camera to chart the robot’s position and feed that information back into the robot’s control program. But the researchers wanted to create a soft robot untethered from external aid.

Read on...

https://scitechdaily.com/mits-new-artificial-intelligence-algorithm-designs-soft-robots-that-sense/

 

[CraigD]

One proof is enough. Despite air friction water moves along parabolas in the movie below. And Moon dust trajectories had to be even more perfect parabolic arcs, how small the particle sizes are.

"Scientists" are scared of the deepstate and can't tell the truth directly.

Russia says in its RT.com advertisements , we were the first in the space (slightly above the Earth). Ok, but if you are at least 60 years behind US in the space race why be proud of it.

I think US and Russia made a deal. US would "beat" Russia in space race, and then can leave gold standard, and a war would start in the middleeast between Israel and arabs, and this would be an excuse for increasing oil price 3-4 fold, and US would switch to petro-dollar standard and could get more debt, and Russia would make more money from higher oil prices, ..for a while at least , like 50-60 years..

....
Images of the Earth can be added later to pictures. I would prefer to see a movie of it.

Proof we landed on the Moon is in the dust | Popular Science (popsci.com)
https://www.popsci.com/blog-network/vintage-space/proof-we-landed-moon-dust/

There is an entire study by real scientists devoted to this effect.

"Because the dust in the images is so fine it was impossible to track any individual grains. Instead, they used the top of the dust cloud as their marker. Tracking the movement of the dust cloud clearly shows characteristic rooster tails and not the simple parabolic arc of a dust cloud we would see produced by a rover driving through, say, dust on Earth. This specific rooster tail shape is contingent on the lunar environment: the initial velocity of dust particles based on the rover’s speed, the gravitational field strength that is one-sixth what we have on Earth, and the complete lack of air resistance because the Moon has no appreciable atmosphere. Turning this visual data in to formulas allowed Hsu and Horányi to plot the movement of dust on a graph, turning the Grand Prix’s rooster tails into a mathematical visualization."

And here is your film footage (hand held super-8, and B+W television camera) of the Earth from Apollo 8 in orbit around the Moon.

This is a thread about science and technology - not about Deepstate conspiracy theories

 

[CraigD]

I actually think that it is an indictment on the tens of thousands of professional academics who worked on those ground breaking projects, that we now have to prove that these events actually occurred, especially when the evidence is freely available.

Please stop listening to ill-informed hacks who want's to make a name for themselves by calling into judgement the efforts and achievements of all those people.

Well, wasted another evening that I should have spent doing something more productive, but I'll leave you with this

 

[topdom]

Proof we landed on the Moon is in the dust | Popular Science (popsci.com)
https://www.popsci.com/blog-network/vintage-space/proof-we-landed-moon-dust/

There is an entire study by real scientists devoted to this effect.

"Because the dust in the images is so fine it was impossible to track any individual grains. Instead, they used the top of the dust cloud as their marker. Tracking the movement of the dust cloud clearly shows characteristic rooster tails and not the simple parabolic arc of a dust cloud we would see produced by a rover driving through, say, dust on Earth. This specific rooster tail shape is contingent on the lunar environment: the initial velocity of dust particles based on the rover’s speed, the gravitational field strength that is one-sixth what we have on Earth, and the complete lack of air resistance because the Moon has no appreciable atmosphere. Turning this visual data in to formulas allowed Hsu and Horányi to plot the movement of dust on a graph, turning the Grand Prix’s rooster tails into a mathematical visualization."

And here is your film footage (hand held super-8, and B+W television camera) of the Earth from Apollo 8 in orbit around the Moon.



This is a thread about science and technology - not about Deepstate conspiracy theories

She claims trajectories would be parabolic on the Earth and not parabolic on the Moon because of low gravity and spinning .. Nonsense. On the Earth trajectories would be close to or far away from a parabola depending on things affecting air friction, such as weight, shape, size of objects. Spinning wouldn't affect trajectories much, affects very little on the Earth (depends on shape etc..), almost none on the Moon (or just, none, if we look at centers of mass of each particle). On the Moon trajectories would be perfect parabolic arcs.

Yes Moon dust would go higher with the same initial speed, and formula is h=v^2/2g.
v here is the initial vertical speed. On the Moon, dust particles would go up 6 times higher.
But we don't see such a thing in that movie. Moon dust is lost in the air, we can't even follow their trajectories. We are supposed to see many parabolas almost parallel to each other as in the water movie above. Dust would go higher, and still fall and complete the parabola. Here dust doesn't even fall.

Movement of an object is determined by 2 things. Existing speed, and forces. On the earth there may be air friction and wind in addition to gravity. On the Moon there is only one force: Moon's gravity. All other forces, like gravity and magentic fields of other space objects (Earth, Jupiter, Sun, blackholes,..) would be either ignorable, or even if not, have no effect even if large, because (probably) the same gravity (or magentic) forces affect both the Moon and particles proportionally, and here we are looking at relative motions of the Moon and Moon dust.

Edit: in unquoted video we can see the Earth from a distance (as a big beautiful blue (bbb) sphere,.. )those films must have been taken from unmanned spacecrafts, otherwise leaving the earth that far would expose astronauts to high levels of Van Allen radiation.

 

[Cannuck]

From Tesla's $250,000 supercar to Ford's electric F-150, these are the 18 coolest EVs set to hit the streets in the next 3 years

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/best-new-electric-cars-tesla-ford-gmc-hummer-2023-2021-3

The most environmentally sound method would be to convert existing cars. I'm considering converting mine and it's already almost 40 years old (1982)

interesting.

Almost purely a math problem. Depends on what is meant by: accurate.

Edit (see below): Can't preserve distances, but can preserve areas, and can be accurate in area sense.

For example , let's say radius of circles is 1 unit. Then a great circle on Earth's surface passing through poles has length 4, and the equator has length 2pi~6,28, more than 50 percent longer.
But maybe areas are preserved better than lengths.
Can areas be the same or can they be made the same? It must have a simple answer (edit:yes, very simple indeed).

It sure took them long enough, lol

The familiar 2D world maps we see were originally made in 1569 using Mercator's projection, a cylindrical map projection in which meridians are charted to equally spaced vertical lines, while latitudes are plotted to horizontal lines. Mercator overextended the northern and southern ends of the map. Countries near the equator appear smaller, while the countries at the poles appear bigger than they actually are.

In 1999, Narukawa produced the AuthaGraph world map using tetrahedron projection to construct a realistic 2D world map.

 

[koolishman]

I actually think that it is an indictment on the tens of thousands of professional academics who worked on those ground breaking projects, that we now have to prove that these events actually occurred, especially when the evidence is freely available.

Please stop listening to ill-informed hacks who want's to make a name for themselves by calling into judgement the efforts and achievements of all those people.

Well, wasted another evening that I should have spent doing something more productive, but I'll leave you with this

About 400,000 people in total worked on Apollo 11 program. Imagine trying to pull a hoax of this magnitude, and how the brilliant engineers would have reacted.

 

[CraigD]

SpaceX Starship SN11 test-fired ahead of launch attempt

SpaceX's Starship SN11 prototype was test-fired at the private spaceflight company's Boca Chica, Texas facility on March 22, 2021. If the test was successful, SpaceX has launch opportunities available in the coming days.

 

[CraigD]

2020's Biggest Breakthroughs in Biology

 

[koolishman]

The River that Turns On and Off - World's Largest Intermittent Spring - Afton, Wyoming

The Periodic Spring of Swift Creek Canyon in Western Wyoming, where a river of water flows for 15 minutes before drying up for 15 minutes, on a continuous, never ending cycle due to some interesting hydrology.

 

[CraigD]

The River that Turns On and Off - World's Largest Intermittent Spring - Afton, Wyoming

The Periodic Spring of Swift Creek Canyon in Western Wyoming, where a river of water flows for 15 minutes before drying up for 15 minutes, on a continuous, never ending cycle due to some interesting hydrology.

That's quite amazing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhythmic_spring

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphon

 

[CraigD]

Everything We Don't Know

Even with the small steps and the giant leaps we’ve made as a species, there is still a lot to learn about earth, life, and the human condition. There’s still everything we don’t know.

 

[CraigD]

Illusions of Time

 

[Cannuck]

Get Ready for Brood X

In a few weeks across much of the United States a natural spectacle will take place, one that is not found anywhere else in the world. Billions of cicadas that have spent years patiently growing in complete darkness⁠⁠ will finally emerge. This year's emergence is a group containing all three 17-year species: Brood X.

Two broods, XI and XXI, have gone extinct, and a third, Brood VII, is currently declining. Cicadas need trees to lay eggs in and feed upon, so deforestation is devastating for them. A warming climate⁠ and a longer growing season⁠ might also favor a shorter lifespan, leading to 17-year species permanently switching to a 13-year lifespan, as happened in the midwestern species.

Why do they stay underground for 17-years? The prevailing research suggests they’ve evolved a long, 17-year lifecycle to avoid predators that can sync up with their lifecycle & emergence. Why are there so many?! Research suggests that their huge numbers allow them to overwhelm predators, so enough of them will live on to breed and perpetuate the brood.

https://www.cicadamania.com/cicadas/periodical-cicada-brood-x-10-will-emerge-in-15-states-in-2021/

 

[Cal2]

Interesting quote:

“The biggest challenge we face is shifting human consciousness, not saving the planet. The planet doesn’t need saving, we do.”

– Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, rapper, environmentalist, and Indigenous rights activist.

Agree? Disagree?

 

[Sutruk]

Interesting quote:

“The biggest challenge we face is shifting human consciousness, not saving the planet. The planet doesn’t need saving, we do.”

– Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, rapper, environmentalist, and Indigenous rights activist.

Agree? Disagree?

We need to change human consciousness to save our current environment and climate. The planet? of course it will continue to exist for millions of years, with or more presumably without humans.