G.N.A. Publishing░N░e░w░ ░A░u░t░h░o░r░s░ discussion
Ⓟⓤⓡⓔ Ⓕⓤⓝ
>
≋S≋P≋A≋C≋E≋:≋ ≋T≋h≋e≋ ≋F≋i≋n≋a≋l≋ ≋F≋r≋o≋n≋t≋i≋e≋r≋
Mod
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world...
Grasshopper wrote: "Nasa releases eerie audio sample of Martian sounds recorded by its InSight probe on Mars. Is this real?https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world......"
I would have to hear the sounds for myself, to decide if they are authentically Martian.
They are real, although they appear to be interactions with the probe, so if the probe was not there, that noise would not be there.
Mod
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-n...
Did you see this one Beatrice?
Quick reflexes, that committee. Look how long ago the discoveries were made!
Seriously!25 years?? The Big Bang itself probably took a shorter time!
Thanks GB. I can see it clearly now .. A moon named Simon Bradley. 😎
Mod
Mod
Thanks. That bit about the first art work in space is news to me.
Yes, that is new to me. And to think I missed his work on show at the Science Museum.
Aww. That's too bad. I'm sure it will come around again.
Well if it's any consolation, the art still lives on.
It is. Works of art also have a finite life, but a ceramic item can last thousands of years.
Bernard wrote: "First person to walk in space dieshttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-euro..."
This is news to me.
Mod
https://www.mirror.co.uk/science/nasa...
Grasshopper wrote: "NASA engineer proposes fuelless engine to propel spacecraft 'almost at speed of light'https://www.mirror.co.uk/science/nasa..."
I am wondering whether this guy has instead invented one of the few relativistic paradoxes? There are a few of them, and they are all mathematically sound, but for various reasons they are not practical to build.
Mod
Could you tell us more please?
The closest explanation that I can give is, the twin paradox.In physics, it is a thought experiment in special relativity involving identical twins, one of whom makes a journey into space in a high-speed rocket and returns home to find that the twin who remained on Earth has aged more.
Mod
The concept is that if a space ship was travelling at near the speed of light, and you could make some object bounce back and forth after hitting a wall at speeds approaching the speed of light, in the frame of reference of an external observer, the ball going in the direction of the ship gains relativistic mass, and going in the opposite direction it loses it. Therefore there is more momentum when it hits the front wall than the rear on and it propels the ship. The obvious problem is if it is in the frame of reference of the ship it does nothing of the sort, and it hits both walls equally. The paradox, as I see it, is that what happens depends on who is looking. In an external frame of reference, the ship has to do one of the two options, but which one?
I'm a man of many hidden talents GB. Will be divulged in stages ..However, with all due respect to Ian, I haven't fully been able to answer the question. Over to Ian and Bernard.
Mod
Mod
The twin paradox is more subtle than that because the travelling twin observes the other one moving away from his frame of reference at near light speed, so in his frame of reference he should be ageing faster. The usual response to this is that the travelling twin "knows" he is travelling because he had to accelerate, and do the same again when he turns around to come back, and decelerate to stop. However, in a thought experiment, if not in practice, these could be done extremely quickly, and the maths say the effect depends on the velocity, NOT the acceleration. I happen to agree it is the traveller who ages the least, but to do that you have to have an absolute time and relativity doesn't like that.
Grasshopper wrote: "If anything, I'm more muddled now. I guess if I read these posts a couple of times more, I may spell paradox correctly 😅"Success! (With the spelling :-)
The theory seems way out, but who knows? I think it would make a good sf story.
Bernard wrote: "The theory seems way out, but who knows? I think it would make a good sf story."Get writing, then :-)
@this rate, we are not far from the day when we establish again that Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus. A case of predictive text?😅
Mod
Quite possible Beatrice.
Are the newspapers to be believed?
WE FOUND EVIDENCE OF LIFE ON MARS IN THE 1970S, FORMER NASA SCIENTIST SAYS
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...
Really cannot say anymore GB. Fake news has infiltrated the ranks!
Mod
https://www.express.co.uk/news/scienc...
Mod
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-en..."
Designer Flag togas?
G.N.A. Publishing░N░e░w░ ░A░u░t░h░o░r░s░
Books mentioned in this topic
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (other topics)Walt Disney's Dumbo (other topics)
Walt Disney's Dumbo (other topics)
Walt Disney's Dumbo (other topics)
Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus (other topics)
More...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan..."
I somehow doubt the hundred jobs. These are sprouting up, though - even New Zealand has one, and launches satellites from NZ private company.