... newer stories
Samstag, 19. März 2011
Zur Atomkraftnutzung: Klartext von Harald Lesch
klauslange,19:16h
Zuerst erklärt Lesch die Physik der Kernkraft, dann aber redet er - mit dem dargestelltem Wissen - Klartext: Das musste mal gesagt werden...!!!
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
Freitag, 18. März 2011
Merkur - Sonde im Orbit!
klauslange,23:04h
Erstmalig ist es gelungen eine Raumsonde in den Orbit des Merkur zu platzieren. Es gab in der Vergangenheit Vorbeiflüge am Merkur, aber noch keine Sonde im Orbit des sonnennächsten Planeten.
Berichte von
astronews.com
raumfahrer.net
Berichte von
astronews.com
raumfahrer.net
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
Donnerstag, 17. März 2011
AKW Fukushima aus dem Hubschrauber betrachtet
klauslange,21:48h
Bei diesen Bildern musste ich an das Lied Hiroshima von Wishful Thinking denken, nur mit einer neuen Strophe 'Fukushima':
There is a wave across the Land and Fukushima...
Offizielles Video aus einem Hubschrauber:
There is a wave across the Land and Fukushima...
Offizielles Video aus einem Hubschrauber:
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
Mittwoch, 16. März 2011
LHC: Erste Zeitmaschine?
klauslange,23:21h
Eine interessante Theorie wird in sciencedaily.com vorgestellt, die eine Art von Zeitmaschine für Materieteilchen durch das LHC beschreibt:
hier
One of the major goals of the collider is to find the elusive Higgs boson: the particle that physicists invoke to explain why particles like protons, neutrons and electrons have mass. If the collider succeeds in producing the Higgs boson, some scientists predict that it will create a second particle, called the Higgs singlet, at the same time.
According to Weiler and Ho's theory, these singlets should have the ability to jump into an extra, fifth dimension where they can move either forward or backward in time and reappear in the future or past.
"One of the attractive things about this approach to time travel is that it avoids all the big paradoxes," Weiler said. "Because time travel is limited to these special particles, it is not possible for a man to travel back in time and murder one of his parents before he himself is born, for example. However, if scientists could control the production of Higgs singlets, they might be able to send messages to the past or future."
Unsticking the "brane"
The test of the researchers' theory will be whether the physicists monitoring the collider begin seeing Higgs singlet particles and their decay products spontaneously appearing. If they do, Weiler and Ho believe that they will have been produced by particles that travel back in time to appear before the collisions that produced them.
Weiler and Ho's theory is based on M-theory, a "theory of everything." A small cadre of theoretical physicists have developed M-theory to the point that it can accommodate the properties of all the known subatomic particles and forces, including gravity, but it requires 10 or 11 dimensions instead of our familiar four. This has led to the suggestion that our universe may be like a four-dimensional membrane or "brane" floating in a multi-dimensional space-time called the "bulk."
According to this view, the basic building blocks of our universe are permanently stuck to the brane and so cannot travel in other dimensions. There are some exceptions, however. Some argue that gravity, for example, is weaker than other fundamental forces because it diffuses into other dimensions. Another possible exception is the proposed Higgs singlet, which responds to gravity but not to any of the other basic forces.
Answers in neutrinos?
Weiler began looking at time travel six years ago to explain anomalies that had been observed in several experiments with neutrinos. Neutrinos are nicknamed ghost particles because they react so rarely with ordinary matter: Trillions of neutrinos hit our bodies every second, yet we don't notice them because they zip through without affecting us.
Weiler and colleagues Heinrich Päs and Sandip Pakvasa at the University of Hawaii came up with an explanation of the anomalies based on the existence of a hypothetical particle called the sterile neutrino. In theory, sterile neutrinos are even less detectable than regular neutrinos because they interact only with gravitational force. As a result, sterile neutrinos are another particle that is not attached to the brane and so should be capable of traveling through extra dimensions.
Weiler, Päs and Pakvasa proposed that sterile neutrinos travel faster than light by taking shortcuts through extra dimensions. According to Einstein's general theory of relativity, there are certain conditions where traveling faster than the speed of light is equivalent to traveling backward in time. This led the physicists into the speculative realm of time travel.
hier
One of the major goals of the collider is to find the elusive Higgs boson: the particle that physicists invoke to explain why particles like protons, neutrons and electrons have mass. If the collider succeeds in producing the Higgs boson, some scientists predict that it will create a second particle, called the Higgs singlet, at the same time.
According to Weiler and Ho's theory, these singlets should have the ability to jump into an extra, fifth dimension where they can move either forward or backward in time and reappear in the future or past.
"One of the attractive things about this approach to time travel is that it avoids all the big paradoxes," Weiler said. "Because time travel is limited to these special particles, it is not possible for a man to travel back in time and murder one of his parents before he himself is born, for example. However, if scientists could control the production of Higgs singlets, they might be able to send messages to the past or future."
Unsticking the "brane"
The test of the researchers' theory will be whether the physicists monitoring the collider begin seeing Higgs singlet particles and their decay products spontaneously appearing. If they do, Weiler and Ho believe that they will have been produced by particles that travel back in time to appear before the collisions that produced them.
Weiler and Ho's theory is based on M-theory, a "theory of everything." A small cadre of theoretical physicists have developed M-theory to the point that it can accommodate the properties of all the known subatomic particles and forces, including gravity, but it requires 10 or 11 dimensions instead of our familiar four. This has led to the suggestion that our universe may be like a four-dimensional membrane or "brane" floating in a multi-dimensional space-time called the "bulk."
According to this view, the basic building blocks of our universe are permanently stuck to the brane and so cannot travel in other dimensions. There are some exceptions, however. Some argue that gravity, for example, is weaker than other fundamental forces because it diffuses into other dimensions. Another possible exception is the proposed Higgs singlet, which responds to gravity but not to any of the other basic forces.
Answers in neutrinos?
Weiler began looking at time travel six years ago to explain anomalies that had been observed in several experiments with neutrinos. Neutrinos are nicknamed ghost particles because they react so rarely with ordinary matter: Trillions of neutrinos hit our bodies every second, yet we don't notice them because they zip through without affecting us.
Weiler and colleagues Heinrich Päs and Sandip Pakvasa at the University of Hawaii came up with an explanation of the anomalies based on the existence of a hypothetical particle called the sterile neutrino. In theory, sterile neutrinos are even less detectable than regular neutrinos because they interact only with gravitational force. As a result, sterile neutrinos are another particle that is not attached to the brane and so should be capable of traveling through extra dimensions.
Weiler, Päs and Pakvasa proposed that sterile neutrinos travel faster than light by taking shortcuts through extra dimensions. According to Einstein's general theory of relativity, there are certain conditions where traveling faster than the speed of light is equivalent to traveling backward in time. This led the physicists into the speculative realm of time travel.
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
Mittwoch, 16. März 2011
Eine Alternative zur Dunklen Energie widerlegt
klauslange,00:23h
Eine interessante Alternative zur Dunklen Energie konnte nun widerlegt werden, wie science daily berichtet: hier
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
Samstag, 12. März 2011
Erdbeben in Japan: AKW explodiert!
klauslange,11:55h
In Folge eines sehr starken Erdbebens in Japan gab es jetzt eine Explosion in einem AKW. Wahrscheinlich war ein Reaktor explodiert.
Ein Artikel der faz beschreibt die Situation recht fundiert:
hier
Ein Artikel der faz beschreibt die Situation recht fundiert:
hier
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
Freitag, 11. März 2011
Stellungnahme des Journal of Cosmology
klauslange,22:38h
Zu den oft geäußerten Angriffen gegen das Journal of Cosmology, es sei nicht wissenschaftlich und hätte keine Reputation, gibt es nun folgenden Stellungnahme:
The Controversy of the Hoover Meteorite Study
Official Statement The Journal of Cosmology,
Have the Terrorists Won?
The Journal of Cosmology is free, online, open access. Free means = No money.
Our intention has always been to promote science and this means, particularly in this case, stepping on the toes of the "status quo" who have responded with a barrage of slanderous attacks.
The Journal of Cosmology is a Prestigious Scientific Journal Two of NASA Senior Scientists Science Directorates have published in the Journal of Cosmology (JOC). A NASA Senior Scientist Science Directorate served as a "guest" Executive editor and repeatedly referred to the Journal as "prestigious." Four astronauts, two who walked on the Moon have published with JOC. Over 30 top NASA scientists have published in JOC.
Top scientists from prestigious universities from around the world have published in the Journal of Cosmology, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, Oxford, Cambridge, MIT, and so on. Sir Roger Penrose of Oxford and who shared the "Wolf Prize" in physics with Stephen Hawking is Guest editing the April edition.
Peer Review NASA Senior Scientist Science Directorate Joel Levine, while participating in a NASA press conference, remarked about how his papers were peer reviewed and he was required to revise all of them, even though he was the editor for that edition of JOC!
As every editor, and guest editor will attest, all articles are subjected to peer review. We reject over 30% of invited papers and over 70% of those which are not invited. Every editor, and Guest editor, has had their work subjected to peer review, and every editor has been required to revise their articles after peer review. Even the executive editors have been required to revise their papers after peer review. We believe in peer review. Peer review provides wonderful feedback which can help make a paper better, or which can explain why the paper is hopeless and must be rejected. However, we do not reject great papers because we disagree with them as is the habit of other periodicals.
Richard Hoover's paper was received in November. It was subjected to repeated reviews and underwent one significant revision.
The Journal of Cosmology is Not For Sale & Will Continue Publishing The Journal of Cosmology has no income, a small staff, and is overwhelmed with submissions from scientists around the world.
We were well aware we would suffer profound, slanderous, attacks by those who would do anything to destroy our reputation. It took tremendous courage to publish this paper, and despite its lack of funds, the Journal will continue publishing great ideas and great research.
Have the Terrorist Won? Only a few crackpots and charlatans have denounced the Hoover study. NASA's chief scientist was charged with unprofessional conduct for lying publicly about the Journal of Cosmology and the Hoover paper. His latest official statement is littered with falsehoods. This is the same man who approved the bogus "Arsenic-life" story which was published in Science magazine and immediately shown to be untrue. Science magazine with its 180 editors was accused by numerous scientists of failing to have the "arsenic" paper properly reviewed. NASA has no credibility on these issues.
Tremendous efforts have been made to shout down the truth, and the same crackpots, self-promoters, liars, and failures, are quoted repeatedly in the media. However, where is the evidence the Hoover study is not accurate?
Few legitimate scientists have come forward to contest Hoover's findings. Why is that? Because the evidence is solid.
In 1584, Giordano Bruno published "Of Infinity, the Universe, and the World" and wrote: "There are innumerable suns and an infinite number of planets which circle around their suns as our seven planets circle around our Sun." However, according to Bruno, we are unable to see these planets and suns "because of their great distance or small mass." On February 19, 1600 Bruno was burned at the stake by the Inquisition for publishing these claims.
Following the publication of Richard Hoover's paper, what ensued could be likened to a rein of terror, a witch hunt, an inquisition designed to crush all discussion of his findings. There were even calls to "hang" Richard Hoover. Three hundred years ago, they would have burned us all at the stake.
The silence is deafening. What prominent scientist would dare to publicly support Hoover's findings, when they know that raving lunatics will be unleashed to destroy their reputation?
How can science advance in this country if NASA and the media promotes frothing-at the-mouth-attacks on legitimate scientists and scientific periodicals who dare to publish new discoveries or new ideas?
The Journal of Cosmology sought to promote science and scientific debate, but the scientific community is too frightened and terrorized to speak up.
It took courage to publish the Hoover discoveries. The Journal of Cosmology will continue to publish great theories and new discoveries.
The terrorists and the lunatic fringe have lost.
The Controversy of the Hoover Meteorite Study
Official Statement The Journal of Cosmology,
Have the Terrorists Won?
The Journal of Cosmology is free, online, open access. Free means = No money.
Our intention has always been to promote science and this means, particularly in this case, stepping on the toes of the "status quo" who have responded with a barrage of slanderous attacks.
The Journal of Cosmology is a Prestigious Scientific Journal Two of NASA Senior Scientists Science Directorates have published in the Journal of Cosmology (JOC). A NASA Senior Scientist Science Directorate served as a "guest" Executive editor and repeatedly referred to the Journal as "prestigious." Four astronauts, two who walked on the Moon have published with JOC. Over 30 top NASA scientists have published in JOC.
Top scientists from prestigious universities from around the world have published in the Journal of Cosmology, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, Oxford, Cambridge, MIT, and so on. Sir Roger Penrose of Oxford and who shared the "Wolf Prize" in physics with Stephen Hawking is Guest editing the April edition.
Peer Review NASA Senior Scientist Science Directorate Joel Levine, while participating in a NASA press conference, remarked about how his papers were peer reviewed and he was required to revise all of them, even though he was the editor for that edition of JOC!
As every editor, and guest editor will attest, all articles are subjected to peer review. We reject over 30% of invited papers and over 70% of those which are not invited. Every editor, and Guest editor, has had their work subjected to peer review, and every editor has been required to revise their articles after peer review. Even the executive editors have been required to revise their papers after peer review. We believe in peer review. Peer review provides wonderful feedback which can help make a paper better, or which can explain why the paper is hopeless and must be rejected. However, we do not reject great papers because we disagree with them as is the habit of other periodicals.
Richard Hoover's paper was received in November. It was subjected to repeated reviews and underwent one significant revision.
The Journal of Cosmology is Not For Sale & Will Continue Publishing The Journal of Cosmology has no income, a small staff, and is overwhelmed with submissions from scientists around the world.
We were well aware we would suffer profound, slanderous, attacks by those who would do anything to destroy our reputation. It took tremendous courage to publish this paper, and despite its lack of funds, the Journal will continue publishing great ideas and great research.
Have the Terrorist Won? Only a few crackpots and charlatans have denounced the Hoover study. NASA's chief scientist was charged with unprofessional conduct for lying publicly about the Journal of Cosmology and the Hoover paper. His latest official statement is littered with falsehoods. This is the same man who approved the bogus "Arsenic-life" story which was published in Science magazine and immediately shown to be untrue. Science magazine with its 180 editors was accused by numerous scientists of failing to have the "arsenic" paper properly reviewed. NASA has no credibility on these issues.
Tremendous efforts have been made to shout down the truth, and the same crackpots, self-promoters, liars, and failures, are quoted repeatedly in the media. However, where is the evidence the Hoover study is not accurate?
Few legitimate scientists have come forward to contest Hoover's findings. Why is that? Because the evidence is solid.
In 1584, Giordano Bruno published "Of Infinity, the Universe, and the World" and wrote: "There are innumerable suns and an infinite number of planets which circle around their suns as our seven planets circle around our Sun." However, according to Bruno, we are unable to see these planets and suns "because of their great distance or small mass." On February 19, 1600 Bruno was burned at the stake by the Inquisition for publishing these claims.
Following the publication of Richard Hoover's paper, what ensued could be likened to a rein of terror, a witch hunt, an inquisition designed to crush all discussion of his findings. There were even calls to "hang" Richard Hoover. Three hundred years ago, they would have burned us all at the stake.
The silence is deafening. What prominent scientist would dare to publicly support Hoover's findings, when they know that raving lunatics will be unleashed to destroy their reputation?
How can science advance in this country if NASA and the media promotes frothing-at the-mouth-attacks on legitimate scientists and scientific periodicals who dare to publish new discoveries or new ideas?
The Journal of Cosmology sought to promote science and scientific debate, but the scientific community is too frightened and terrorized to speak up.
It took courage to publish the Hoover discoveries. The Journal of Cosmology will continue to publish great theories and new discoveries.
The terrorists and the lunatic fringe have lost.
... link (0 Kommentare) ... comment
... older stories
