Near Perfect Symmetry Revealed In Red Cosmic Square
dear friends,
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...al_nebula.html
be well, be love.
david
near-perfect symmetry revealed in red cosmic square
by ker than
staff writer
posted: 12 april 2007
02:00 pm et
if symmetry is a sign of splendor, then the newly discovered red square nebula is one of the most beautiful objects in the universe.
seen in the infrared, the nebula resembles a giant, glowing red box in the sky, with a bright white inner core. a dying star called mwc 922 is located at the system’s center and spewing its innards from opposite poles into space. (a nebula is an interstellar cloud of gas, dust and plasma where stars can both emerge and die.)
“this spectacular event is the death of a star,” said study team member james lloyd of cornell university.
after mwc 922 ejects most of its material into space, it will contract into a dense stellar corpse known as a white dwarf, shrouded by clouds of its own remains.
the red square nebula discovery is detailed in the april 13 issue of the journal science.
Cosmic Intelligence & Black Holes
dear friends,
http://rrrgroup.blogspot.com/2007/04...ack-holes.html
be well, be love.
david
cosmic intelligence and black holes
the paper by vladimir a. lefebvre, school of social sciences, university of california, irvine and yuri n. efremov. sternberg astronomical institute. moscow state university, moscow, titled above, takes the idea of teilhard de chardin and others, about the “living” -- even divine – universe, and puts a scientific patina on it, providing a new operative template for seti in the process.
The Astrophysical Crisis At Red Square
dear friends,
this article mentions among other things the red star nebula...
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=41wjs24r
be well, be love.
david
the astrophysical crisis at red square
"the history of science shows that the progress of science has constantly been hampered by the tyrannical influence of certain conceptions that finally come to be considered as dogma. for this reason, it is proper to submit periodically to a very searching examination, principles that we have come to assume without discussion."
—louis de broglie, revolution in physics, 1953.
in 1970, hannes alfvén, the 'father of plasma physics,' warned that cosmology was headed into crisis. he was referring to the treatment of plasma—which makes up about 99.9% of the visible universe—as a magnetizable gas. alfvén was responsible for the theory, known as 'magnetohydrodynamics' or mhd. but he publicly repudiated its use for space plasma in his 1970 nobel prize acceptance speech:
"the cosmical plasma physics of today is far less advanced than the thermonuclear research physics. it is to some extent the playground of theoreticians who have never seen a plasma in a laboratory. many of them still believe in formulae which we know from laboratory experiments to be wrong. the astrophysical correspondence to the thermonuclear crisis has not yet come."
—h. alfvén, plasma physics, space research and the origin of the solar system, nobel lecture, december 11, 1970
but astrophysicists didn't want to know. mhd made their theoretical work easy compared with the intricate behavior of plasma discovered in attempts to harness fusion power-the so-called 'power source of the sun.' their ignorance of the real behavior of plasma was certain to lead to divergence between theory and reality, just as it did for fusion power.
in fact each specialist group fuelled the mistakes of the other. it is a common situation in institutionalized science today. the astrophysicists misled the nuclear physicists into thinking the sun is powered internally, which led nuclear physicists to try unsuccessfully to mimic the sun's thermonuclear 'engine.' the nuclear physicists have nevertheless misled the astrophysicists into thinking that a stable thermonuclear reaction is possible inside the sun even though it results in a weird body that transfers internal heat unlike any other-by radiation instead of conduction and convection. and the sun is a cosmic body that is assumed to have much the same composition at its center as at the top of its atmosphere! clearly, it has been a theoretical 'deadly embrace.'
alfvén was considered a brilliant maverick. he railed against the consensus of big bang cosmology and insisted that we live in an electric universe. he argued that it was not enough to treat magnetism in space without considering the electric circuits in space necessary to generate and sustain magnetic fields. yet no book on astronomy mentions electricity or circuits. future historians of science will find this beyond rational understanding, like the belief in a flat earth. astronomy labors in the space age under the yoke of gaslight era science. our model of stars is little better than the ancient one of a 'campfire' in the sky. only the fuel is different.
thirty-seven years after alfvén's speech, the astrophysical crisis is becoming more obvious. adaptive optics and space telescopes give us much clearer views of stars, nebulae and galaxies, which theorists are floundering to explain. some express mild concern that their models aren't working. but there is no recognition that there is a deep crisis. denial, minimization and obfuscation can be expected before a paradigm shift begins. two reports in the april 13 issue of science highlight the situation.
the first report, "surveys of exploding stars show one size does not fit all," says "type ia supernovae are regular enough that astronomers can use them to measure the universe. but some of the "standard candles" are breaking the theoretical mold. when astronomers wish upon a star, they wish they knew more about how stars explode. in particular, experts on the stellar explosions known as supernovae wonder whether textbook accounts tell the true story."
The Mathematical Universe
dear friends,
here's the paper;
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0704.0646
here's an abstract;
http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/toe_frames.html
be well, be love.
david
the new paper: the mathematical universe
author: max tegmark
abstract: i explore physics implications of the external reality hypothesis (erh) that there exists an external physical reality completely independent of us humans. i argue that with a sufficiently broad definition of mathematics, it implies the mathematical universe hypothesis (muh) that our physical world is an abstract mathematical structure. i discuss various implications of the erh and muh, ranging from standard physics topics like symmetries, irreducible representations, units, free parameters and initial conditions to broader issues like consciousness, parallel universes and gödel incompleteness. i hypothesize that only computable and decidable (in gödel's sense) structures exist, which alleviates the cosmological measure problem and help explain why our physical laws appear so simple. i also comment on the intimate relation between mathematical structures, computations, simulations and physical systems.
