The Dragon And The Swan
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лип 2010
- / sciencereason ... Hidden behind a dark veil of dust in the constellation Sagittarius, a lurking dragon has been revealed by the infrared eye of NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope. It gives us a glimpse into how spiral arms affect the formation of stars.
This is the Hidden Universe of the Spitzer Space Telescope, exploring the mysteries of infrared astronomy with your host Dr. Robert Hurt.
---
Please SUBSCRIBE to Science & Reason:
• / best0fscience
• / sciencetv
• / ffreethinker
• / rationalhumanism
---
The Omega Nebula, also known as the Swan Nebula and the Horseshoe Nebula (catalogued as Messier 17 or M17 and as NGC 6618) is an H II region in the constellation Sagittarius. It was discovered by Philippe Loys de Chéseaux in 1745. Charles Messier catalogued it in 1764. It is located in the rich starfields of the Sagittarius area of the Milky Way.
The Omega Nebula is between 5,000 and 6,000 light-years from Earth and it spans some 15 light-years in diameter. The cloud of interstellar matter of which this nebula is a part is roughly 40 light-years in diameter. The total mass of the Omega Nebula is an estimated 800 solar masses.
A open cluster of 35 stars lies embedded in the nebulosity and causes the gases of the nebula to shine due to radiation from these hot, young stars.
• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_Ne...
---
'The Hidden Universe' video series showcases some of the most exciting discoveries in infrared astronomy from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope. Looking beyond the visible spectrum of light, Spitzer can see a whole new universe of dust and stars hidden from our Earth-bound eyes.
• www.spitzer.caltech.edu/
. - Наука та технологія
These images were utterly hypnotic. Thanks for the knowledge ScienceMagazine :-)
Beautiful.
Thank you.
Excellent!!!
that would be a sweet picture to have in a frame on the wall
Beautiful!
Maravilloso, que pequeños somos en el Universo.
Gracias, me parece importante su difusion.
truly amazing
so beautiful pictures,I´m speechless...
just wonderful
Plus, its nice knowing that certain situations that I can't handle can be dealt with by calling my local law enforcement agency, provided by my government, and they can deal with them.
This is pretty damn cool
Space is amazing
I hope someday, preferably in my lifetime, we will be able to travel to these places and see these nebulae simply by looking out our spaceship windows. :)
thats so cool
NICE.
wow! wow! wow! Thanks!
The Universe is so cool.
Cool
@InteGrayting
Density of the hypothetical object in question is pretty irrelevant. What's more relevant are its electrical properties, but at the energy levels we're talking about, the end result is typically the same, electrical flaring followed by an expected gentle drop at terminal velocity.
What could cause the most damage to Earth is an object with the most different possible charge. In the solar system, that would mean a comet. Comets spend most of their time in other regions.
"Swan" I'd have gone with "Duck". To me it looks like the neck is too short. But hey, one man's swan is another man's duck.
@fertilizerspike
You're absolutely right. Now if you understand the scientific method, you know the whole thing is built on doubt. Critical thinking is how we keep science honest. The reason it works is because it's open to the scrutiny of everyone, constantly being verified. In other words, debate is *pivotal* to the scientific method.
When you shy away from doubt and insist you can't be wrong, that's the opposite of science. If you ARE right, let your case stand on its own merits in debate.
How/where do I get that image for my background picture?
@InteGrayting
You seem to be missing the point. Observed meteorite impacts all share common traits. There is electrical flaring, there is electrophonic noise generated, and the impact itself occurs at terminal velocity. No hypervelocity impact events have ever been observed taking place on Earth. The most significant event in any such interaction is the electric discharge between the Earth and the body. The initiation of modes of discharge occur at "boundary layers" in the plasma around Earth.
@TheFounderUtopia
I'm not interested in debate tactics since I'm not in a debate here, I'm just trying to help people learn this information. I haven't refused to discuss anything, and I have no capacity to make such a discussion anything but fair. I can't control the other participants except indirectly by abusing the voting and spam flagging process.
@TheFounderUtopia
Also, science is not performed by consensus, other people don't have to see it for you to know something. In fact, every single person who's ever discovered a fundamental aspect of science was in disagreement with virtually everyone else on the planet when they did so.
@MrAugustNidor
i like your way of thinking :)+
@fertilizerspike
I substantiated my case - substantiate yours.
@KasparHauser4 That's your opinion of course.
is there a legend behind the Dragon and the Swan
@InteGrayting
A rock of such size would be a great many orders of magnitude smaller than the Earth. The magnitude of charge exchange would be proportional to the difference in charge and the difference in mass. This would be a tiny pinprick to the Earth and a devastating discharge to the falling rock. Objects from different regions of the solar system would have a much different charge, so for something to be truly dangerous it would have to have an almost cometary orbit.
What nebula is this? Anyone know? Orion?
@fertilizerspike
And how exactly do you think one determines whether or not a suposition is factual?
@TheFounderUtopia
I'm not arguing with you, and I'm not debating you, I'm trying to help you learn this information.
@InteGrayting
Contradiction isn't always a bad thing if it encourages thought. Personally I think people should be encouraged for changing their minds, not criticized for it. It is when people refuse to budge that things get bad.
Nor is hypocrisy always what it seems. Consider the dichotomy between our reliance on a government for protection, and our resentment over its mistakes. In this context - aren't both reactions merely a cry for better leadership? As such, isn't the opinion consitent?
Anarchy is a state of society without laws or government. Governments don't create misery and suffering, people do. Government is just a tool, and can be misused; thats the problem. You only focus on the negative side of it, and conclude that it should be done away with. Depends on which people are running it. Throughout history, by organizing leaders and forming governments and rules to abide, in order to live in a particular society, we've been able to greatly advance our knowledge.
@csrtitus Quite literally too :o)
@TheFounderUtopia
The scientific method is used to determine what's factual. Go research the scientific method, it's a formal process that should be easy to uncover and decipher.
@InteGrayting
The Earth has very little to fear from any falling rock from space. Even a rock half a kilometer across would do very little damage. Charge equalization between the Earth and the rock would vaporize the rock long before it ever reached the ground.
I want the dragon nebula image.
@Ellacey Hey now that's a bit un-called for, It's a perfectly good looking gas cloud. Now if you were talking about the horse-head nebula, "Horses ass" maybe
@Mastertim2006 lol I know.
Ooooo.....pretty
@fertilizerspike I never said anarchy is a synonym for primitive, I'm saying the concept of anarchy is primitive. I think you just have an anti-authority complex. Yes, law is a threat of force by the state. In a true anarchy, anyone should be able to do what they want, unhindered. If there is a social code to follow, then how is that different than laws? Anarchy is simply idealism. Yes it would be nice if everyone could co-exist , with no need for law, but reality is many people won't do that.
@fertilizerspike I'm not saying governments are perfect, my original point was that history doesn't show us government fails, it shows us it changes. I don't agree with all laws, either. Especially those that involve what I do with my own body, but I don't want to scrap the whole thing because of that. The people that do what they want despite the law are, by definition, anarchists.
@fertilizerspike
Government is a social inevitability - and we are a social species. Even in its most primitive forms; insect colonies, pack animals, even the equalibrium between species we see patterns of leadership and social selection beginning to take root.
Our survival depends on a process of reasoning that takes all viewpoints into consideration and depends on a single decisive figure to make the safest choice. The moment you have a leader you have a government, and we all depend on it.
I find these pictures more beautiful than a woman! (artistically)
*then consider
@fertilizerspike
No, listen to what I'm saying. You may not be interested in debating, but you are interested in getting people to believe what you have to say.
Debate is how you *do* that. Debate *is* discussion, it's being able to discuss something rationally and fairly. What you're doing is insisting that you are right and then plugging your ears and going "lalalala" when they explain why they don't agree.
If you have the truth, and you want other people to see it, then do it properly.
Founder: 1
Fertilizer: PWNED
@fertilizerspike
They consider this a valuable lesson, if you want to make people believe what you have to say - debate is how to do that.
If we all just shout at each other or refuse to let one another make any points, then it doesn't matter who is actually in the right - nothing gets achieved.
You can't get people to take you seriously by refusing to discuss things fairly, that just makes you look like someone who is afraid of a rational conversation because they know they are wrong.
@InteGrayting
Meteors fall to Earth all the time without causing any significant damage to anything. In one case a rock fell on a car and put a dent in one of the front quarter panels. IIt did less damage than a 5mph impact with another vehicle would have done and it endangered no lives anywhere. Never has there been a verified case of a falling rock from space killing anyone.
@NAWRARESNAW: eductional* :P
hihi, the dragon has zits
@hyperseauton Woah! EPIC WORD WIN!
Ladies & Gentlemen I am an Galactophile........
science is what liberates people, not religion.
@TheFounderUtopia
I personally don't really give a shit if people believe me or not, the information I present is still factual, I can lead a horse's ass to water but I can not make one drink.
it looks unworldly, i guess thats because it is
@KasparHauser4 Many or most are funded with private donations.
@SillyCyban
The concept of anarchy is no more "primitive" than the concept of government. In fact, it relies on the concept of government for its very existence. If there was no concept of government, anarchy would have no meaning. All anarchy means is no coercive government. Are you in favor of coercive government? I'm certainly not.
Even with a government you'll find people "do what they want". The law is not magical, it doesn't stop crime, it defines and thus creates crime.
@TheFounderUtopia
There is nothing about science that requires scrutiny. If you'd care to research the scientific method a little, you'll notice that nowhere in the method do you find a requirement or even a suggestion that other people must also believe it or must agree that it's correct. Also, chaos is a myth, it can't exist in a universe that obeys physical laws.
I'm not seeing the dragon.
@fertilizerspike
And now if I tell you to substantiate that claim - even though I went to great lengths to substantiate mine, you're just gonna say "i don't have to". You've locked yourself in the hub of a circular logic that prevents anyone from getting through to you.
The scientific method is *DEPENDANT* on empiricism. Look *THAT* up. For something to be empirical is has to hold up to the scrutiny of peer review, every single claim has to be observable by others before it can be accepted.
@fertilizerspike "Eventually all governments fail. This is what history tells us"
If they all failed, then there'd be no governments today. History tells me governments evolve along with civilization. If civilization were to fall, and mankind goes back to anarchy and primitive lives, its only a matter of time before another form of government arises.
@fertilizerspike Lawlessness is what we had before there was a governing body, so yes, its primitive. Do you really expect other people to abide by an honor code? You don't know people very well, if so.
@TheFounderUtopia
I'm already very familiar with the scientific method, I suggest you learn more about it before you discuss it or discuss anything to do with science.
Debate has nothing to do with science. Nowhere in the scientific method do you find debate.
You obviously don't understand the scientific method, go educate yourself then maybe we can have an intelligent, informed discussion about science. I can't do all the work myself, you have to be willing to learn.
@TheFounderUtopia
You also contradict yourself when you say in order to be a scientist you have to both "be a skeptic" and also maintain "neutrality". The skeptical viewpoint is NOT neutral. Make up your mind. Or better yet just stay out of it and leave it to those of us who understand science. Here's a ball, perhaps you'd like to bounce it.
@ShallowBeThyGames Could be an ugly duckling.
@InteGrayting
None of what you mention is relevant. The only relevant factor is the difference in charge between the falling rock and the Earth. The magnitude of difference in size dwarfs all other factors, and a massive size differential equates to a massive current relative to the smaller body. The observed behaviour of meteorites does not favor your speculations. Only an imaginary version of a meteorite that you might find in a movie could do as you suggest.
@TheFounderUtopia
What's not going to get "through to" me is the nonsensical collection of fables and wishful thinking that most people consider to be astronomy. It is nothing more than star gazing and story telling, plasma cosmology is firmly rooted in direct observation and experimental verification.
Without doubt and taking a critical approach to every claim and demanding proof before accepting them, nothing would BE scientific. A debate is just an exchange of information. This is what peer review IS, you can't just say "nahuh" and then stop talking. If you're going to tell me that this isn't part of science even though I've invoked multiple intrinsic terms that say otherise, the burden of proof is on YOU.
But that's what this is all about isn't it? You trying to evade the burden of proof.
My DragonSwan god miracle totally kicks the ass of those crappy "Allah's name in a tomato" miracles!
@fertilizerspike
Everything you just said is wrong.
How do you think science eliminates bias if not by questioning and second-guessing the verasity of every claim? If we didn't use this empiricism in science then it would stop. If everyone could just make whatever claims they wanted, call it science, and not open themselves up for scrutiny then science would be chaos.
To be a scientist you have to be a skeptic, you hold a position of doubt and neutrality until the truth is *PROVED* to you.
@KasparHauser4 Troll. The End.
@JamesThWilliams
Money is worthless, why do you care how it's spent.
What's important is resources and as long as we operate under this paradigm of labor for income and income for everything else, as long as we keep trying to put a dollar value on everything and charge money for everything, we will live in a miserable, pathetic excuse for a society. NASA is a military administrative agency, the goals they further are military.
@TheFounderUtopia
Speak for yourself, government isn't inevitable, anarchy is inevitable. All governments will fail.
anarchy online
@fertilizerspike
You argue dishonestly so I see no reason to continue the debate.
Have a nice day.
I really can't beleive you told me to go look up scientific methodology. Please, do it yourself, right now.
Honestly I've never in my life heard anyone claim anything quite so stupid as doubt and debate having nothing to do with science, those things are the very *definition* of science. It's like you went out of your way to say the most opposite to true thing that you could possible say. Even your own definition contradicted you.
Just stop being unreasonable will you? Discuss things properly.
Again astronogers fall back on their idiotic notions, like "gas and dust" in space and "gravitational traffic jams". These ideas are severe impediments to their insights. Stars are not formed by "gravitational collapse" when "gases" "bunch up". Stars are not formed by "compressed dust" and "gas", they form in z pinches, an effect of electric discharge in plasma.
@SillyCyban
Your beliefs about anarchy are cartoonish and vile. Anarchy is not a synonym of primitive. Governments don't participate in science. Money is not beneficial to the progress of science, it's an onerous burden we must all endure.
Beautiful!
@TheFounderUtopia
I'm already very familiar with the scientific method, I suggest you learn more about it before you discuss it or discuss anything to do with science.
Debate has nothing to do with science. Nowhere in the scientific method do you find debate.
You obviously don't understand the scientific method, go educate yourself then maybe we can have an intelligent, informed discussion about science. I can't do all the work myself, you have to be willing to learn.