Observational Gravitational-Wave Astronomy.

Figure 1: Gravitational wave strain and strain sensitivity for a 5 year observation with PTAs.
The red dashed line is the approximate strain sensitivity for current PTAs (11), and the green
dashed line shows the previous estimate for the stochastic signal strength that is currently in
standard use for PTA analyses (13, 14). The dark blue solid line corresponds to our mean
estimate for the stochastic signal strength, with the blue shaded region bound by thin solid
blue lines showing our 95% confidence interval for this estimate, based on the observational
uncertainties of our model parameters. The light blue (△ACD) and cyan (△ABE) shaded
regions show the area corresponding to the square root of the 2 integrand, to be integrated over
logarithmic frequency intervals as in Eq. (3), for our expected SNR of 8, and the SNR of 2
expected from previous estimates (13, 14), respectively. See: The Imminent Detection Of Gravitational Waves From Massive Black-Hole Binaries With Pulsar Timing Arrays

As mentioned in article by Technology Review the idea of previous information as to supplying data would have to be identified in future experiments as confirmations. In this instance information gained from Taylor and Hulse  in terms of binary star rotations closeness.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

TEDxCambridge – Jeff Lieberman on science and spirituality

 Jeff Lieberman, an MIT-trained artist, scientist and engineer, makes a scientific argument for mystical experience. He asks us to challenge our perception of what we are, our relationship to the universe, and our relationship to one another. Our minds are “thought-generating machines.” What we would happen if we could turn off the machine? If we could transcend our individual experience of the world?

This talk was transcribed by Brad Miele. Transcript here: http://bea.st/inevolution/?p=264

Three years ago was a turning point in my life, because I finally had everything I thought I needed to be fulfilled, and I still had this voice in my head saying “I’ve got to do more to be happy”. The more that I looked at my own suffering deeply, the more I saw it in every single person around us. We have trouble standing in lines, we’re impatient with our own children. It’s as if we all think the future holds the promise for our fulfillment. I come from a scientific background, and so I wanted to use that background to understand the real root and source of why there is so much suffering. Where it’s led me has totally changed my views of the current scientific paradigm. More importantly than that, it’s changed my views on what it means to be a human being, and to be alive. I want to share this theory with you, and it is way out there, so I ask you to have a critical but open mind for the next 14 minutes, because you might not actually be what you think you are.Transcript from TEDx talk

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Do We Create the Reality by Observing

SeeD Magazine
Anton Zeilinger heads up the IQOQI lab in Vienna. Photograph by Mark Mahaney.

Zeilinger and his group have only just begun to consider the grand implications of all their work for reality and our world. Like others in their field, they had focused on entanglement and decoherence to construct our future information technology, such as quantum computers, and not for understanding reality. But the group’s work on these kinds of applications pushed up against quantum mechanics’ foundations. To repeat a famous dictum, “All information is physical.” How we get information from our world depends on how it is encoded. Quantum mechanics encodes information, and how we obtain this through measurement is how we study and construct our world.Do we create the world just by looking at it?

Interesting question and article by Seed Magazine.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments

Noam Chomsky – "The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding"

Professor Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding: Newton’s contributions to the study of mind” at the University of Oslo, September 2011. Q&A at 45:33

I push back on the limitations inferred by others so as to direct my mode of operation, “in a question form,” so as to move forward and not be stalled in my efforts. I believe I have made clear the difficulties as a logical directed outcome in presentation.

Internet development today asks how evolutionary consequence may be to influence forehead development( ahem……frontal cortex) when thought with regard to full brain used and direction is revealed in the keyboard displayed in the comment box. So while not being a cabby…..your a writer, a journalist. What MRI imaging would actually represent your correlative use of brain research information collection and pathway construction?

Chomsky refers back to this evolutionary inherent trait of human being identification in uteri manifestation. While referencing innate points of discussion it is interesting that such innateness may be limited to block of time or a  frame of reference in the evolutionary development of that consciousness.

Chomsky discusses the euclidean direction of development toward the evoking apparent correlation in of historical development. While there is some difficulty as to pointing out this feature in the Amazon tribe child toward such comprehension. A triangle is used and it’s comprehension as to the lines  of expression is explicit toward the imperfection of that triangle perceived.

See: A Priori Intuition of Space?

Link above brought forward contradictory data in  relation to the subject of innateness discussed by Chomsky.

There are a lot of things discussed that are included in the overall discussions I have had with others about how we perceive consciousness and perspectives shared by others that questions how it is that consciousness can be perceived apart from the body. How difficult it would be to make this measure if possible at all?

The empirical methodis generally taken to mean the approach of using a collection of data to base a theory or derive a conclusion in science. It is part of the scientific method, but is often mistakenly assumed to be synonymous with the experimental method. The empirical method is not sharply defined and is often contrasted with the precision of the experimental method, where data are derived from the systematic manipulation of variables in an experiment. Some of the difficulty in discussing the empirical method is from the ambiguity of the meaning of its linguist root: empiric.

The mind body problem is dismissed in this talk below as to demonstrate that the pathway to empirical methods had been established by Newton. For sake of clarity one would have to refer back to Chomsky video to clarify this issue and how we move forward in today’s world having arrive at a settled perspective about the mind body problem.

Further to this discussion in terms of the evolutionary the status quo of consciousness has not changed for 50000 years and example to help direct that perspective were raised in the contrast of a baby born in a tribe in the Amazon being raised in our modern day society and function quite well and a baby born in this modern society doing equally as well in the tribe.

Bold emphasized in order to provide a move toward this explanation outside of the NDE consideration… to see the theoretical position adopted and the attempts at an empirical method toward the development of that theory.

In the Q&A part of the lecture there is some correspondence in which a question is asked about this correlation of bits. Chomsky’s reference to Wheeler in that context.

UpDate:

Eben Alexander had some response to the idea of neural oscillation as to explaining away his reason for the NDE and what happened to his brain when attacked by the E coli. It was his son who suggested to him that he write of his experience without doing any research on the NDE until he had finished detailing the experience all in written form. Then he went out and did his research.

From his new perspective as he looked at the information he found many things as fluffy and questionable in terms of what happens with the brain. He had a critical analyses of this. Death by heart attack was brought up and how the shift to brain wave activity was the decisive factor as he went through his research.

Sleep is a naturally recurring state characterized by reduced or absent consciousness and proceeds in cycles of rapid eye movement (REM) and non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep. The normal order of sleep stages is N1 → N2 → N3 → N2 → REM. Sleep stages are characterized by spectral content of EEG, for instance stage N1 refers to the transition of the brain from alpha waves (common in the awake state) to theta waves, whereas stage N3 (deep or slow-wave sleep) is characterized by the presence of delta waves.

My question of consciousness based on this neural oscillation was a method in determination and function of brain waves in individual and youths. How one may see the relation of the Near death as a function of the brain in neural oscillation mode, but as mentioned Eben dismissed this because his brain was basically dead.

Other Brain Waves
Theta wave – (4–7 Hz)
Alpha wave – (8–12 Hz)
Mu wave – (8–13 Hz)
Beta wave – (12–30 Hz)
Gamma wave – (25–100 Hz)

Now as to focus levels and the idea of these gradation of consciousness induced into synchronization established by resonance,  is of interest to me as to how the brain/consciousness may be characterize by such rhythms. Hence,  featured and attributes expressed in the idea of those Brain Waves.

The idea of Biofeedback is a useful subject in terms of a measured response to teach the mind to relax, while recording body temperature, heart rate and skin conductance.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 13 Comments

Do We Create the Reality by Observing

SeeD Magazine

Anton Zeilinger heads up the IQOQI lab in Vienna. Photograph by Mark Mahaney.

Zeilinger and his group have only just begun to consider the grand implications of all their work for reality and our world. Like others in their field, they had focused on entanglement and decoherence to construct our future information technology, such as quantum computers, and not for understanding reality. But the group’s work on these kinds of applications pushed up against quantum mechanics’ foundations. To repeat a famous dictum, “All information is physical.” How we get information from our world depends on how it is encoded. Quantum mechanics encodes information, and how we obtain this through measurement is how we study and construct our world.Do we create the world just by looking at it?

Interesting question and article by Seed Magazine.

Posted in Computers, Entanglement, Quantum Chlorophyll, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Noam Chomsky – “The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding”

Professor Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding: Newton’s contributions to the study of mind” at the University of Oslo, September 2011. Q&A at 45:33

 

I push back on the limitations inferred by others so as to direct my mode of operation, “in a question form,” so as to move forward and not be stalled in my efforts. I believe I have made clear the difficulties as a logical directed outcome in presentation.

Internet development today asks how evolutionary consequence may be to influence forehead development( ahem……frontal cortex) when thought with regard to full brain used and direction is revealed in the keyboard displayed in the comment box. So while not being a cabby…..your a writer, a journalist. What MRI imaging would actually represent your correlative use of brain research information collection and pathway construction?

Chomsky refers back to this evolutionary inherent trait of human being identification in uteri manifestation. While referencing innate points of discussion it is interesting that such innateness may be limited to block of time or a  frame of reference in the evolutionary development of that consciousness.

Chomsky discusses the euclidean direction of development toward the evoking apparent correlation in of historical development. While there is some difficulty as to pointing out this feature in the Amazon tribe child toward such comprehension. A triangle is used and it’s comprehension as to the lines  of expression is explicit toward the imperfection of that triangle perceived.

See: A Priori Intuition of Space?

Link above brought forward contradictory data in  relation to the subject of innateness discussed by Chomsky.

There are a lot of things discussed that are included in the overall discussions I have had with others about how we perceive consciousness and perspectives shared by others that questions how it is that consciousness can be perceived apart from the body. How difficult it would be to make this measure if possible at all?

The empirical methodis generally taken to mean the approach of using a collection of data to base a theory or derive a conclusion in science. It is part of the scientific method, but is often mistakenly assumed to be synonymous with the experimental method. The empirical method is not sharply defined and is often contrasted with the precision of the experimental method, where data are derived from the systematic manipulation of variables in an experiment. Some of the difficulty in discussing the empirical method is from the ambiguity of the meaning of its linguist root: empiric.

The mind body problem is dismissed in this talk below as to demonstrate that the pathway to empirical methods had been established by Newton. For sake of clarity one would have to refer back to Chomsky video to clarify this issue and how we move forward in today’s world having arrive at a settled perspective about the mind body problem.

Further to this discussion in terms of the evolutionary the status quo of consciousness has not changed for 50000 years and example to help direct that perspective were raised in the contrast of a baby born in a tribe in the Amazon being raised in our modern day society and function quite well and a baby born in this modern society doing equally as well in the tribe.

Bold emphasized in order to provide a move toward this explanation outside of the NDE consideration… to see the theoretical position adopted and the attempts at an empirical method toward the development of that theory.

In the Q&A part of the lecture there is some correspondence in which a question is asked about this correlation of bits. Chomsky’s reference to Wheeler in that context.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Supersymmetry

Image: Event display of candidate event for this ultra-rare decay observed in the LHCb experiment
Scientists at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, near Geneva, have spotted one of the rarest particle decays ever seen in nature. The result is very damaging to new theories like the extremely popular Supersymmetry (or SUSY for short).

Current knowledge about the most fundamental matter particles (quarks and leptons, such as an electron) and the forces between them is embedded in the so-called Standard Model. The particle masses are a consequence of their interactions with the Higgs field. Exciting the Higgs field in particle collisions at the LHC recently resulted in the discovery of the Higgs boson.

However, the Standard Model is not the ultimate theory; it does not include gravity nor explain 95% of the Universe, which is in the form of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.  See:
SUPERSYMMETRY SQUEEZED AS  LHC SPOTS ULTRA RARE PARTICLE DECAY

The worst thing about the BBC article is the headline, “Supersymmetry theory dealt a blow” (though that’s presumably the editor’s fault, as much as or more than the author’s) and the ensuing prose, “The finding deals a significant blow to the theory of physics known as supersymmetry.”  What’s wrong with it?  It’s certainly true that the measurement means that many variants of supersymmetry (of which there are a vast number) are now inconsistent with what we know about nature.  But what does it mean to say a theory has suffered a blow? and why supersymmetry? See: Supersymmetry Dealt a Blow”?

The graph showing evidence of the Bs0 → μ+ μdecay. The result was presented Monday 12 November at the HCP Conference in Kyoto (photo courtesy of the LHCb Collaboration).

Today, at the Hadron Collider Physics Symposium in Kyoto, the LHCb collaboration has presented the evidence of a very rare B decay, the rarest ever seen. The result further shrinks the region in which scientists can still look for supersymmetry. See: A rare sight

A typical B0s →μμ decay candidate event is shown above. The two muon tracks from B0s decay are seen as a pair of purple tracks traversing the whole detector in the left image above.

See Also:

Posted in Supersymmetry, Symmetry, Symmetry Breaking | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Space policy of the Barack Obama administration

The space policy of the Barack Obama administration was announced by U.S. President Barack Obama on April 15, 2010, at a major space policy speech at Kennedy Space Center.[1] He committed to increasing NASA funding by $6 billion over five years and completing the design of a new heavy-lift launch vehicle by 2015 and to begin construction thereafter. He also predicted a U.S. crewed orbital Mars mission by the mid-2030s, preceded by an asteroid mission by 2025. In response to concerns over job losses, Obama promised a $40 million effort to help Space Coast workers affected by the cancellation of the Space Shuttle program and Constellation program.

Any Problem with this type of video player  player have a look here

SLS-1/EM-1 December 2017 Block I[19] Send Orion/MPCV on unmanned trip around the Moon.
SLS-2/EM-2 August 2019[56] Block I[19] Send Orion MPCV with four members into lunar orbit.
SLS-3 August 2022[55] Block IA[19]
SLS-4 August 2023[55] Block IA[19]
SLS-5 August 2024[55] Block IA[55] First launch of SLS Cargo configuration, first flight with RS-25E engines.[19]
SLS-6 August 2025[55] Block IA[55] Manned “Exploration” Mission
SLS-7 August 2026[55] Block IA[55] Cargo launch
SLS-8 August 2027[55] Block IA[55] Manned launch
SLS-9 August 2028[55] Block IA[55] Cargo launch
SLS-10 August 2029[55] Block IA[55] Manned launch
SLS-11 August 2030[55] Block IA[55] New configuration, Cargo launch
SLS-12 August 2031[55] Block IA[55] Manned mission
SLS-13 August 2032[55] Block II[55] New configuration, Cargo launch
Posted in Moon, Moon Base, Plato's Nightlight Mining Company | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Artemis

Illustration of Artemis-P1 liberations orbits. Credit: NASA/Goddard

ARTEMIS-P1 is the first spacecraft to navigate to and perform stationkeeping operations around the Earth-Moon L1 and L2 Lagrangian points. There are five Lagrangian points associated with the Earth-Moon system. The two points nearest the moon are of great interest for lunar exploration. These points are called L1 (located between the Earth and Moon) and L2 (located on the far side of the Moon from Earth), each about 61,300 km (38,100 miles) above the lunar surface. It takes about 14 to 15 days to complete one revolution about either the L1 or L2 point. These distinctive kidney-shaped orbits are dynamically unstable and require weekly monitoring from ground personnel. Orbit corrections to maintain stability are regularly performed using onboard thrusters.

  continued….

 Other benefits of this first ever libration orbit mission include the investigation of lunar regions to provide a staging location for both assembly of telescopes or human exploration of planets and asteroids or even to serve as a communication relay location for a future lunar outpost. The navigation and control of the spacecraft will also provide NASA engineers with important information on propellant usage, requirements on ground station resources, and the sensitivity of controlling these unique orbits.

A contour plot of the effective potential due to gravity and the centrifugal force of a two-body system in a rotating frame of reference. The arrows indicate the gradients of the potential around the five Lagrange points — downhill toward them (red) or away from them (blue). Counterintuitively, the L4 and L5 points are the high points of the potential. At the points themselves these forces are balanced.

Lagrangian points L2 through L5 only exist in rotating systems, such as in the monthly orbiting of the Moon about the Earth. At these points, the combined attraction from the two masses is equivalent to what would be exerted by a single mass at the barycenter of the system, sufficient to cause a small body to orbit with the same period.

Future and proposed missions

Mission Lagrangian point Agency Status
Deep Space Climate Observatory Sun–Earth L1 NASA On hold[citation needed]
LISA Pathfinder (LPF) Sun–Earth L1 ESA, NASA Launch Date 2014 [30]
Solar-C Sun–Earth L1 Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Possible mission after 2010[citation needed]
Gaia Sun–Earth L2 ESA Planned for August 2013 [31]
James Webb Space Telescope Sun–Earth L2 NASA, ESA, Canadian Space Agency Working on 2018 launch[32][33]
Euclid Sun–Earth L2 ESA Proposed for launch in 2019[34]
Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope Sun–Earth L2 NASA, U.S. Department of Energy Proposed for launch in 2020[35]
“Lunar Far-Side Communication Satellites” Earth–Moon L2 NASA Proposed in 1968[36]
Exploration Gateway Platform Earth–Moon L2[37] NASA Proposed in 2011[38]
Space colonization and manufacturing Earth–Moon L4 or L5 L5 Society Proposed in 1974[39]

Exploration Gateway Platform

 The Exploration Gateway Platform[1] is a design proposed by Boeing in December 2011 to drastically reduce the cost of Moon, NEA’s, or Mars missions by using components already designed to construct a refueling depot and servicing station located at one of the Earth–Moon Lagrange points, L1 or L2.[2] The system claims its cost savings based on an ability to be reused for multiple missions such as a launch platform for deep space exploration, robotic relay station for moon rovers, telescope servicing and a deep space practice platform located outside the Earth’s protective radiation belts.

  

See Also :

  1. Obama and Earth-Moon L2 Lagrange point base
  2. Ltool
Posted in L5, lagrangian, Moon Base | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

It Starts with a Bang

A purple haze shows dark matter flanking the “Bullet Cluster.” Image Credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/M.Markevitch et al. Optical: NASA/STScI; Magellan/U.Arizona/D.Clowe et al. Lensing Map: NASA/STScI; ESO WFI; Magellan/U.Arizona/D.Clowe et al

See also: Dark Energy

Galaxy clusters and gravitational lensing

Strong gravitational lensing as observed by the Hubble Space Telescope in Abell 1689 indicates the presence of dark matter—enlarge the image to see the lensing arcs.

A gravitational lens is formed when the light from a very distant, bright source (such as a quasar) is “bent” around a massive object (such as a cluster of galaxies) between the source object and the observer. The process is known as gravitational lensing.

Dark matter affects galaxy clusters as well. X-ray measurements of hot intracluster gas correspond closely to Zwicky’s observations of mass-to-light ratios for large clusters of nearly 10 to 1. Many of the experiments of the Chandra X-ray Observatory use this technique to independently determine the mass of clusters.[32]

The galaxy cluster Abell 2029 is composed of thousands of galaxies enveloped in a cloud of hot gas, and an amount of dark matter equivalent to more than 1014 Suns. At the center of this cluster is an enormous, elliptically shaped galaxy that is thought to have been formed from the mergers of many smaller galaxies.[33] The measured orbital velocities of galaxies within galactic clusters have been found to be consistent with dark matter observations.

Another important tool for future dark matter observations is gravitational lensing. Lensing relies on the effects of general relativity to predict masses without relying on dynamics, and so is a completely independent means of measuring the dark matter. Strong lensing, the observed distortion of background galaxies into arcs when the light passes through a gravitational lens, has been observed around a few distant clusters including Abell 1689 (pictured right).[34] By measuring the distortion geometry, the mass of the cluster causing the phenomena can be obtained. In the dozens of cases where this has been done, the mass-to-light ratios obtained correspond to the dynamical dark matter measurements of clusters.[35]

A technique has been developed over the last 10 years called weak gravitational lensing, which looks at minute distortions of galaxies observed in vast galaxy surveys due to foreground objects through statistical analyses. By examining the apparent shear deformation of the adjacent background galaxies, astrophysicists can characterize the mean distribution of dark matter by statistical means and have found mass-to-light ratios that correspond to dark matter densities predicted by other large-scale structure measurements.[36] The correspondence of the two gravitational lens techniques to other dark matter measurements has convinced almost all astrophysicists that dark matter actually exists as a major component of the universe’s composition.

The Bullet Cluster: HST image with overlays. The total projected mass distribution reconstructed from strong and weak gravitational lensing is shown in blue, while the X-ray emitting hot gas observed with Chandra is shown in red.

The most direct observational evidence to date for dark matter is in a system known as the Bullet Cluster. In most regions of the universe, dark matter and visible material are found together,[37] as expected because of their mutual gravitational attraction. In the Bullet Cluster, a collision between two galaxy clusters appears to have caused a separation of dark matter and baryonic matter. X-ray observations show that much of the baryonic matter (in the form of 107–108 Kelvin[38] gas, or plasma) in the system is concentrated in the center of the system. Electromagnetic interactions between passing gas particles caused them to slow down and settle near the point of impact. However, weak gravitational lensing observations of the same system show that much of the mass resides outside of the central region of baryonic gas. Because dark matter does not interact by electromagnetic forces, it would not have been slowed in the same way as the X-ray visible gas, so the dark matter components of the two clusters passed through each other without slowing down substantially. This accounts for the separation. Unlike the galactic rotation curves, this evidence for dark matter is independent of the details of Newtonian gravity, so it is claimed to be direct evidence of the existence of dark matter.[38] Another galaxy cluster, known as the Train Wreck Cluster/Abell 520, appears to have an unusually massive and dark core containing few of the cluster’s galaxies, which presents problems for standard dark matter models.[39]

This may be explained by the dark core actually being a long, low-density dark matter filament (containing few galaxies) along the line of sight, projected onto the cluster core.[40]
The observed behavior of dark matter in clusters constrains whether and how much dark matter scatters off other dark matter particles, quantified as its self-interaction cross section. More simply, the question is whether the dark matter has pressure, and thus can be described as a perfect fluid.[41] The distribution of mass (and thus dark matter) in galaxy clusters has been used to argue both for[42] and against[43] the existence of significant self-interaction in dark matter. Specifically, the distribution of dark matter in merging clusters such as the Bullet Cluster shows that dark matter scatters off other dark matter particles only very weakly if at all.[44]

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments