Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

Well Sisu first of all answer how about you answer this:

Are you arguing that
1. your mass effect can explain why muons are observed at sea level
or
2. your mass effect does not need to explain why muons are observed at sea level because those observations are fake
?

 

When faced with some facts about muons you pull out the old consiracy card and pay out some little fiction regarding me personally, the very same format of your entire participation in this thread.

You must be insufferable in person

Stick to your football charts and dodgy predictions lad.

 

My detectors are picking up particles that are normally emitted during a meltdown.

 

As already stated my knowledge of muons and how the relate to relativity is limited so I cannot answer 1 re my mass assertion, more reading needed.

On 2 the muons at sea level have no realtive bearing to the high energy muons coming into the atmosphere, most of which never reach the supposed mountain top they were detected on given they can only travel 1km. (work needs confirmation) otherwise very speculative indeed

I am obviously questioning the study, but if you look on line I am not a random nut, this study is questioned by more than me it seems from an initial glance.

What is funny is the personal offence you feel from my opinions on stuff

 

Or more simply re the study, you cannot say anything about muons you cannot detect. no energised muon can travel more than 6 or 7 km to meet a mountain top that the study supposedly detected them on.

Stupid particle physics eh..


#Bunk

 

Furthermore.
The only noted muons have been in particle acceletators. The others are the subject of mathematical calculations not empirical measurement.


Much of the study is assumption that some of the muons at sea level came from the upper atmosphere, cos the maths says so.. sorry that is nothing even remotely empirical.

It may be "good work" or whatever but it certainly is not hard proof for time dilation

 

The muon argument for realtivity is an intersting actually.

Using "theoretical A" (relativity) to "prove theoretical B" (muon decay) while using "theoretical B" (muon decay) to prove "theoretical A" (relativity).. circular reasoning.

Theory A lends itself to theory B in order for theory B to prove theory A is correct

Its a fair argument for why Muon Decay does not support relativity and makes little sense when you examine it

 

Nothing circular. Relativity is simple logic based on the observed fact that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant. It then perfectly explains muon observations, and is confirmed precisely by direct experimental tests.

 

I see, you are either drinking or something because I can't really believe you are that stupid. The muon experiment didn't actually confirm relativity because the muon theory relies on Relativity, there could not possibly be a result in the negative if Relativity is used to show muon decay.


You argue "B" Muon decay is true because of "A" Relativity's time diation. That is using A to evidence B. Then you claim B is proof A is right. Its called a logical fallacy

Let me put it in a way even you can grasp

please log in to view this image

Happy logic face

 

WATER FOUND ON MARS
Discuss


As Donga mentioned a couple of pages back. How important could this prove to be?

 

Is it sparkling spring water, if not I won't drink it

 

I see the Governor of the Bank of England is saying we're going to be ****ed by climate change. It must be true

 

Mars has glaciers and we know this for a very long time Those glaciers recede and advance meaning there is and always has been liquid water on mars at least periodically. What happens to that water once the ice melts is another matter but this is not news at all

Water is everywhere in the universe either frozen or liquid. Hydrogen hits our atmosphere and combines with Oxygen. This is where most water on earth came from imo, and the rest from coments.

If an asteroid has an electrical field and solar wind hits the asteroid the hydrogen can combine with oxygen in the rock and create HO2 as well. This might explain comets and why they have a lot of ice on them, though they have are mostly rock not ice

Stars shoot water jets which is really ****ing odd, if ever actually empirically confirmed it means for sure the thermonuclear sun is in fact nonsense.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/06/110613-space-science-star-water-bullets-kristensen/

Illustration obviously

please log in to view this image

 

Found any way to refute the light clock time dilation yet?

 

Bee Tongues Are Getting Shorter as Temperatures Warm
In Colorado, alpine bumblebee tongues are shrinking in response to shifting wildflower populations
image: http://thumbs.media.smithsonianmag....millerstruttmann8hr.jpg__800x600_q85_crop.jpg

please log in to view this image

Queen bumblebee, Bombus balteatus, foraging for nectar on the alpine wildflower Polemonium viscosum. (Candace Galen)
By Rachel Nuwer
SMITHSONIAN.COM SEPTEMBER 24, 2015
rapidly changing planet.

Bees and flowers are prime examples of mutualism. Some bee tongues are perfectly evolved to tap into the nectar and pollen of certain flowers with elongated, tubular petals. By specializing in those plants, the longer-tongued bees reduce competition with generalist insects that can't access those sweet resources, and they ensure that their plant species of choice get in on the pollination action.

Climate change, however, has thrown that mutualistic relationship out of whack in at least one population of bees and flowers. As certain flowers in Colorado have become scarcer due to warming temperatures, the tongues of the alpine bumblebees that historically fed on them have become shorter.




Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...peratures-warm-180956738/#6XvTmDUi4GRZ1IkJ.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

Lady bees won't be too thrilled about this

 

Look, I'm thick so you're all going have to help me with this PAP thing.

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

So, the only way to explain the wave collapse in a double-slit experiment is that light consciously knows it's being observed. So consciousness turns waves into matter? Okay so far? Does that mean the dinosaurs were "conscious"? Or, in fact, there was something conscious that started matter forming @ 400k years after the Big Bang? Did the quantum flux become 'conscious' to form itself?

Counter-intuitive stuff is very confusing. I keep trying though.

 

"Lady bees won't be too thrilled about this" You mean you wont be happy dont you


Bees survived the medieval warming period, the Roman warming period, the little ice age. Bees are around 100 million years, pretty sure a little warming is nothing.

 

Thought they were all ladies, apart from a few drones that never leave the hive? Or is that just wasps? What few pissed-up bitches that are still about are homeless, emotional and aggressive now. A bit like the few stragglers after a hen party kneeling by the gutter, crying about their ex boyfriend and snarling at passers-by for ****ing looking at them.

 

Nasa is about to make an “amazing” announcement about Pluto, according to a senior scientist, who described the planet as “alive”.

Dr Alan Stern, who leads the New Horizons mission to Pluto, said during a university speech that the agency was about to reveal new information today.

"Nasa won't let me tell you what we're going to tell you on Thursday,” he said during the speech. “It's amazing."

That was the only thing that Stern said, and the agency has otherwise remained tight-lipped about its announcement. Usually, Nasa trails its big announcements and hosts them live on its Nasa TV channel.

But Stern said that “the world is alive”, leading many to hope that the discovery

“It has weather, it has hazes in the atmosphere, active geology... Every week I am floored."

It’s unlikely that the craft will be able to reveal life on the dwarf planet — as with Mars, any life there is almost certainly microbial, and so would need something to actually be on the planet to be sure.

please log in to view this image

READ MORE
Pluto's landscape so complex that Nasa scientists aren't sure how it got there
But it may still be a huge announcement about the nature of the planet and perhaps how well it would support life: Nasa has already said that discoveries from the New Horizons mission have completely changed its understanding of the dwarf planet, and it’s only got a tiny amount of the information back.

And some scientists have suggested that Pluto could support alien life.

In pictures: Nasa mission to Pluto

• 5show all

Soon after New Horizons made its flypast, Brian Cox said that the probe “showed you that there may well be a subsurface ocean on Pluto, which means — if our understanding of life on Earth is even slightly correct — that you could have living things there".

There are a range of new findings that could increase the likelihood of Pluto being able to support life, even if they don't show that there is life already there. The discovery of water, for instance, would hugely increase the chance of alien life as it has on Mars — especially if it is warm.





Play
0:00
/
1:22



Fullscreen
Mute
Share
USA: NASA scientists find evidence of flowing water on Mars
Only 10 per cent of the data from the New Horizons spacecraft has been downloaded so far, Dr Stern said. That means that much more is likely to be revealed as more images are sent back.

Dr Stern also said that “2015 will be a year in textbooks forever”. It’s unclear whether he meant because of the discoveries that are set to be announced or those that already have been revealed — which include the discovery of water on Mars, the finding of an “Earth 2.0” and the successful New Horizons mission to Pluto.

 

NASA Orion mission. We need to send "unmanned craft through Van Allen belt before we send astronauts".

Hold on, didn't they do that twice decades ago without shielding and craft and astronauts were all fine apparently

No human has ever passsed through those belts which is why they will actually launch an unmanned craft first.

It seems modern NASA hasnt got a patch on 60s NASA