I love physics, despite the fact that so much of it is puzzling if not outright Greek (the equations in particular). And I am a fan of the television serious “The Big Bang.” My same inner nerd enjoyed encountering the below image and, even more, the explanation of it -
Does gravity have a magnetic counterpart? Spin any electric charge and you get a magnetic field. Spin any mass and, according to Einstein, you should get a very slight effect that acts something like magnetism. This effect is expected to be so small that it is beyond practical experience and ground laboratory measurement. In a bold attempt to directly measure gravitomagnetism, NASA launched in 2004 the smoothest spheres ever manufactured into space to see how they spin. These four spheres, each roughly the size of a ping-pong ball, are the key to the ultra-precise gyroscopes at the core of Gravity Probe B. Last week, after accounting for persistent background signals, the results were announced — the gyroscopes precessed at a rate consistent with the gravitational predictions of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. The results, which bolster existing findings, may have untold long term benefits as well as shorter term benefits such as better clocks and global positioning trackers. [source]
Spin an electric charge and you generate magnetism. Spin some mass and you . . . get something like gravity??? Cool! Double cool! Cool to the power of Pi!
I now believe in parallel universes. At least if you’ll allow me to define one as “my old computer” and the other as “my new computer.” Presently the only way I can send information directly from one to the other is via my much-less-than-the-speed-of-light USB flashdrive-equipped arm. Soon I may be able to connect the darn separate digital realities at light speed thanks to wireless technology. Just not yet. The two machines speak different OS languages, so I think I need some sort of wormhole/translator to expedite the process. Or something.
[photo thanks to NASA]
Is that a cosmic angel? Actually it’s a nebula. Why the angelic shape?
The unusual shape of the Red Rectangle is likely due to a thick dust torus which pinches the otherwise spherical outflow into tip-touching cone shapes. [NASA]
Ever look at a streetlight while squinting your eyes?
You might call the refracted light an illusion of sorts. A vision that is both real in terms of perception, but not so real it terms of evidence of something fully existing “out there.”
In what way or ways does a nebula exist as a single, independent-of-an-observer entity?
Wow. Almost blew my own mind for a second there. Will have to shelve that inquiry until the weekend. You should never do philosophy while operating a motor vehicle or attempting to be otherwise productive.
What the hell is that thing?! It looks absolutely menacing.
Actually, it’s a bit o’ weather. A supercell over some plains in Montana [NASA source].
Were that to approach me, I’d “take it” a bit personally.
You angry bastard! Stay way or I’ll punch you in the . . . nose . . . if you had a nose!
Hey, I’m an animal What do you expect? I have an initial tendency to respond to events as if there is intention behind them, even where there is none.
But today we know better. At least when we have time to think about it. If we see something like the above approaching fast, we don’t kneel down and pray, we don’t roll onto our backs in a sign of submission, expecting mercy. We run for cover. And don’t take it personally.
Recent Comments