1. A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking — A book in which Hawking attempts to explain a range of subjects in cosmology to the non-specialist reader.
If it’s 4x the size and 10x the mass (like the article says) of earth isn’t it a possibility that there’s still geothermal energy being put out? I know Mars grew cold a long time ago and it’s only marginally smaller in comparison, so theoretically there could be life that uses geothermal vents for energy, possibly underwater. People have speculated similarly about one of the moons of Jupiter (but in that case the energy was coming from tidal friction from Jupiter)
Look I’ve been up for 29 hours so my math is probably off but if something is 4x the diameter and 10x the mass of earth, it would be just way too dense to be made of anything other than, like, solid metal.
So I went and looked at the academic paper and they never even mention it being 4x the size of earth. The caltech news article that I pulled up (remember these researchers are from caltech) never mention a 4x size number either. I have no idea where The Guardian got that number, but I found the Washington Post mentions it too, but it’s never mentioned anywhere in any scientific news sources, so I’m disregarding it entirely.
The only thing mentioning the possible dimensions in the academic paper is that it’s between 1 and 10 times the mass of Earth.
Because the only thing we have is mass, there’s no way to determine density or that it’s a rocky planet like people seem to default it to.
Logically, it would probably be a gas giant similar to both Uranus and Neptune. Uranus is 15 earth masses and Neptune is 17 earth masses. It would probably have a very similar composition with a miles thick atmosphere, then underneath that, miles and miles of ice, and below that, a tiny rocky core.
So from that, and because the rocky core is actually quite small, (most likely smaller than that of Earth) it probably isn’t geothermally active anymore.
The language of the article seemed to imply it was a rocky planet, at least that’s how it seemed to me, and at the time of reading it I had also been up for more than a day and now I’ve realized we have no bloody clue what it’s made of because we’re not even sure it exists. I believe the assumption comes from general patterns in exoplanets that we’ve found in the past several years, and there are rocky bodies many times the mass of the earth, in fact we’ve found many more of those than we have planets with similar masses to the Earth. The question was mentioned in the article that if they’re so common why doesn’t our solar system have any, the answer to that question was well maybe this one is.
It is a possibility that it has 10x the mass and the basic same layering as Earth. Although from what I’ve learned of Earth’s formation we do have an unusually large iron core, in comparison to say Mars, due to the collision that formed our moon. It is a strong possibility that it’s another gas giant but ya know. Ice aliens.
”in fact we’ve found many more of those than we have planets with similar masses to the Earth.”
That’s because Kepler, the telescope that’s finding all these exoplanets, is doing so by looking at light curves from distant stars. Only large planets cause noticeable light dips, while Earth-sized planets go unnoticed. And if you’ll look at this graph of exoplanets, you’ll find that of the exoplanets found, most are larger than jupiter, and gaseous.
Sorry about the quality, it’s from a textbook. Red dots are exoplanets, green dots are our planets, the green band at the bottom is terrestrial planets. Most exoplanets fall in the ‘hot jupiter’ and jovian ranges, with very few being terrestrial at all, let alone super earths.
The question they should be asking is “Why don’t we have more gas giants?”
And to be honest, the Guardian is sensationalist and they use the ‘rocky planet = aliens’ trope that people believe in to get more hype for their article. Most science based news sources believe the planet to be a gaseous ice ball.
I NEED THE SCIENCE BEHIND KINGSMAN TECHNOLOGY OKAY
how they modified their Tokarevs T-30s to have an extra shotgun cartridge release, what chemical reaction they’ve concocted for their hand grenades, hOW DID THEY EFFORTLESSLY PROGRAM A POISON PEN THAT ACTIVATES AT A TOUCH?? HOW MANY EXPERIMENTS DID THEY GO THROUGH TO GET THE RIGHT MEASURE OF ACTIVATION???
WHAT TYPE OF NEUROTOXIN DO THEY USE ON THE BLADES IN THE OXFORDS, COULD THEY REAPPLY THAT INTO ANYTHING ELSE, SUCH AS A RAINMAKER???
HOW DID THEY PROGRAMMING THE RAINMAKERS, DURABLE MICROTECHONOLOGY TO EFFORTLESSLY WEAVED INTO BULLET RESISTANT WEAVING
AND WHAT TYPE OF BALLISTICS RESISTANT WEAVE DO THEY USE FOR BOTH THE RAINMAKER AND THEIR SUITS, IS IT THE SAME WEAVE THATS USED FOR THE USUAL VESTS OR IS IT SPECIALLY MADE IN KINGSMAN LABS ONLY FOR KINGSMAN SUITS AND DO THEY USE A DIFFERENT WEAVE FOR THE a RAINMAKERS
AT WHAT CALIBRE BULLETS ARE THE SUITS COMPROMISED. WE SAW IN THE MOVIE THAT THE RAINMAKER WAS VULNERABLE TO A CERTAIN CALIBRE OF BULLET
WHAT ABOUT WOMANS CLOTHING, WERE NOT SURE WHETHER ROXY WAS THE FIRST WOMAN IN KINGSMAN AS AN AGENT THOUGH I FIND IT HIGHLY UNBELIEVABLE, BUT TBH THE KINGSMAN IS ALL ABOUT TRADITION SO I WOULDNT BE SURPRISED
WILL THEY CREATE BULLET RESISTANT DRESSES FOR LANCELOT?? WEAPONS MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR HER, HIGH HEELS WITH THE NEUROTOXIN BLADE, WEAPONS THAT CAN BE EASILY CONCEALED AS COSMETICS?????
So I can answer some of these questions because I’m a physics nerd.
First of all, the handgun with an addon shotgun shell is, for the most part, impossible, at least with that design. The shell would create so much force that it’d likely blow out the back of where the shell was sitting, and cause injury to the shooter. Plus, with where the trigger for the shotgun shell is, you’d need some pretty interesting mechanics to get it to fire, and there’s simply not enough room between the trigger and the back of the shotgun barrel (See how the trigger works in second picture).
The hand grenade looks to be pretty similar (damage wise) to a normal grenade. But it’s also a lighter, as in the lighter needs fuel to burn. As in the fuel contributing to the fiery explosion-ness that doesn’t exist in a normal grenade.
The only thing I can think of as far as a poison being poisonous on command, would be something having to do with nanotechnology. The button on the pen signalling for tiny little nanobots to release a chemical, such as cyanide maybe? Or possibly the robots itself doing the attacking, like ripping at the esophagus and stomach lining, (not likely as King’s death happened pretty quickly).
As for the fast acting neurotoxin in the shoe blade? Possibly a type of botulinum (aka botox). It’s one of the most poisonous substances known to man. It’s median lethal dose (LD50) is 1.3-2.1 ng/kg (really fucking poisonous).
As for their suits? MIT has recently created a razor thin material (just 20 nanometers!) that can stop bullets (Read about it here). You can layer the material and theoretically it be able to withstand pretty heavy artillery. With an organization like Kingsman having tons of resources at their hands, it wouldn't be surprising that they beat them to the punch. They’d probably give Roxy a suit instead of a dress, unless absolutely needed otherwise, as a dress often leaves the arms and legs exposed. One could make bulletproof pantyhose and long armed gloves out of the bulletproof material, though.
For the umbrellas, I’d say they can withstand anything under a 50 cal bullet. .9, .22, and .45 are all common, but a .50 bullet is more rare.
I hope this answered some of your questions because I most definitely have been put on some sort of watchlist after googling this stuff.
If it’s 4x the size and 10x the mass (like the article says) of earth isn’t it a possibility that there’s still geothermal energy being put out? I know Mars grew cold a long time ago and it’s only marginally smaller in comparison, so theoretically there could be life that uses geothermal vents for energy, possibly underwater. People have speculated similarly about one of the moons of Jupiter (but in that case the energy was coming from tidal friction from Jupiter)
Look I’ve been up for 29 hours so my math is probably off but if something is 4x the diameter and 10x the mass of earth, it would be just way too dense to be made of anything other than, like, solid metal.
So I went and looked at the academic paper and they never even mention it being 4x the size of earth. The caltech news article that I pulled up (remember these researchers are from caltech) never mention a 4x size number either. I have no idea where The Guardian got that number, but I found the Washington Post mentions it too, but it’s never mentioned anywhere in any scientific news sources, so I’m disregarding it entirely.
The only thing mentioning the possible dimensions in the academic paper is that it’s between 1 and 10 times the mass of Earth.
Because the only thing we have is mass, there’s no way to determine density or that it’s a rocky planet like people seem to default it to.
Logically, it would probably be a gas giant similar to both Uranus and Neptune. Uranus is 15 earth masses and Neptune is 17 earth masses. It would probably have a very similar composition with a miles thick atmosphere, then underneath that, miles and miles of ice, and below that, a tiny rocky core.
So from that, and because the rocky core is actually quite small, (most likely smaller than that of Earth) it probably isn’t geothermally active anymore.
This doesn’t look like much, but these are RR Lyrae variable stars! They’re 10,500 light years way! I took about half of these pictures, and my classmates took the other half. I took the data and ran it through a few Python programs and made them into a gif! The observing period here was unfortunately only about 2 hours, but we got some good data!
The two stars here that are RR Lyrae variable stars are V* BH Peg and V* BG Peg (circled in the image below, BH Peg is the top star and BG Peg is the bottom).
RR Lyrae Variable stars are stars that are nearing the end of their life, and their luminosity changes periodically. There are non-RR Lyrae Variable stars that can have periods of years, or they may fluctuate irregularly.
RR Lyraes are really cool though!
RR Lyraes are pulsating aging stars with a mass of around half the Sun’s. They’re thought to have previously shed mass during the Red-Giant Branch phase, and consequently, they were once stars with similar or slightly less mass than the Sun. Because of this, they’re super easy to use to gauge distances in our galaxy and local globular clusters (blobs of stars). But what’s even crazier is that they have periods of between 40 and 0.3 days. That’s super fast, cosmically speaking!
Oh! and the bottom star is an Eclipsing Binary! That means that one blob is actually two stars, and because of our vantage point from earth, they cross in front of each other!
V* BH Peg has a period of 0.6 days, and V* BG Peg has a period of 1.9 days.
He is still teaching science without politics tho, problem is that the far right has declared all science as a political statement
What we are seeing is the idea of “science” and “knowledge” been put as political statements cause the rock bed of conservatives depends on people being ignorant and in order to achieve that they have to make it seem like all science is by nature “political”
It’s the South Park effect, were ignorance is labeled as the “true center” while knowledge and education are labeled “SJW propaganda”
fayeconsumerofcoochiefayeconsumerofcoochie
I hate how one of our biggest political problems is a concept called the fucking south park effect.
Anonymous asked:
How do you study THREE things?! Two of them being science stuff... What's your secret?? Ok but for real, I've always been jealous of people who were good at math and science stuff. I know the science / art dichotomy is supposed to be false, but... :C did being good at science come naturally for you, or was it mostly hard, systematic work?
Idk I just really liked science it came fairly naturally
Cat in the summer meadow, 1920 - Bruno Liljefors (Swedish, 1860-1939)
