February 2006 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

RE: [Utah-astronomy] A disturbing ID article
by Michael Carnes 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

>I'm enjoying this conversation and really like being challenged to >dig in and see what I can find. That's the newspaperman in you. It's an interesting experiment and I'll be eager to hear what results may come of it. I know that one of the issues with the so-called Standard Model is that gravity is comparatively weak (funny, I don't feel that way if I slip on ice) and that one potential explanation is that it's often off in another dimension. Stay tuned, I guess.

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] A disturbing ID article
by Jim Cobb 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

Actually, this is about Joe's remarks on general relativity. Joe Bauman wrote: > But some great discoveries in science were made theoretically before > there was evidence for the theory. The most obvious case is > Einstein's general relativity, which was proved after it was > published. The first proof was through observing the deflection of > starlight during a total eclipse in 1919 -- I think that was 13 years > after general relativity was published. If we didn't have a moon, we > could not have checked the theory at that time. This ignores the deviation in the Newtonian prediction for the precession for the perihelion of Mercury. This deviation had astronomers searching for a long for an "undetected planet" Vulcan, much like deviations in the orbit of Uranus led to predictions of the orbit for Neptune, and putative deviations in Neptune's orbit led to the finding of Pluto. Did not the Mercury orbital evidence provide confirmation before the eclipse? Was it not included in the original general relativity publication? On the other hand, gravitational waves still await discovery (if indeed they exist as predicted by Einstein). Interestingly enough, a few years after I had studied general relativity in college, I recall reading an article (in Science News, perhaps) that stated that the rotation rate of the Sun differed from Einstein's understanding, and that the new data worsened the fit of GR's prediction to the observe precession rate. I thought in the subsequent (lo, many) years I've never heard another peep on this subject, though I've been on the lookup for a followup. Jim

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] A disturbing ID article
by Michael Carnes 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

>My understanding of string theory is certainly very, very limited. >But I don't think it's exactly right to say it "lacks a single shred >of evidence." It may and may not have evidence. True, there are few >if any tests, yet, that that back it up. I'm not claiming string theory is wrong (heck, I don't even understand the math), but it goes back 30 years and has not yet framed a set of experiments that might provide support. For all of the elegance of the math and all of the many bright people in the field, I'd say that even using the term 'Theory' is a stretch. As bizarre as strings might be, they could provide a deeper understanding of the universe. But only if we can test. We demand evidence of the ID/creationist crowd (I'm not holding my breath), and we must hold string theorists to the same high standard. This isn't even the argument Don was afraid of stirring up ;-)

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] A disturbing ID article
by Joe Bauman 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

My understanding of string theory is certainly very, very limited. But I don't think it's exactly right to say it "lacks a single shred of evidence." It may and may not have evidence. True, there are few if any tests, yet, that that back it up. But some great discoveries in science were made theoretically before there was evidence for the theory. The most obvious case is Einstein's general relativity, which was proved after it was published. The first proof was through observing the deflection of starlight during a total eclipse in 1919 -- I think that was 13 years after general relativity was published. If we didn't have a moon, we could not have checked the theory at that time. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but I have the idea that aspects of Maxwell's Equations that were based on theoretical mathematical principles were later proven to be true. That is, math is a way to get at underlying reality. String theory is still in its formative stages, like a gleam in Einstein's eye. It may be hard to search for evidence when it's still an incomplete notion. But there are some indications of its validity. Again, back to Einstein: In a 1966 Time Magazine article that is available on-line (though you have to pay if you want to read the whole thing!) quotes him as saying, "The chief attraction of the theory lies in its logical completeness." String theory, as I understand it, is not yet complete though a lot of brilliant people are working to complete it. "The Official String Theory Web Sites" makes the case this way: physicists dream of a unified theory, "a single mathematical framework in which all fundamental forces and units of matter can be described together in a manner that is internally consistent and consistent with current and future observation. "And it turns out that having extra dimensions of space [as envisioned by string theory] makes it possible to build candidates for such a theory." String theory's attraction, for now, lies in what is seen as "logical completeness." Even though the theory itself isn't complete, it is seen as the logical tie that binds the macro (Einstein) and the sub-micro (quantum theory). What if we never devise a method to test it? That would not mean it is scientifically invalid. I guess what I would argue that some aspects of science might be untestable but still valid. If a theory like this fills a gap and improves our understanding, it may have validity. It should not be written off as someone spinning moonbeams. My feeling is that our intelligence is limited and our technology is even more limited. They universe is old and humanity is young. There may be tests that smarter, more advanced creatures could perform that are far beyond us. Or it may be that soon we'll come up with our own verification. I've read recently about ways that may prove string theory, though I am not familiar enough with them to talk about it now. Best wishes, Joe

1 0

Re: Venus
by Chuck Hards 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

I should have added that I used my prescription sunglasses with the pinhole. Cutting the glare helps immensely. Darin, try a pinhole, you'll be amazed at how things sharpen-up. What it does is effectively increase the f-ratio of your eyeball. Works in daylight as well. > From: "Darin Christensen" <darinc(a)comcast.net> > My vision is too fuzzy..... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

3 2

RE: [Utah-astronomy] A disturbing ID article
by Michael Carnes 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

I read that article Don. It's an interesting article. Actually, inflation isn't strictly necessary for the Big Bang, but it certainly confuses our understanding of the speed of light. String theory may be in more trouble, since it lacks a single shred of evidence. But my on reading the remarks of the administration stooge, my issues weren't with questioning the B.B. That's a completely laudable aspect of scientific investigation. I objected to his 'just a theory' thing. This shows his complete ignorance of the two meanings of the word. In science, a theory is upheld by a rigorous evidentiary chain. In common parlance, a theory can be any damn fool notion that's not supported by anything. It's in the political interest of some groups to keep that confusion alive. >Not to start a new controversy but the Big Bang Theory is in trouble. >See the Scientific American Article, "Is the Universe out of Tune", >August 2005.

1 0

Venus
by Chuck Hards 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

It's great to see Venus back again, dazzlingly bright in the morning sky. It seems to me to be significantly brighter than it was before it disappeared from the evening sky a month ago, though this is probably illusion. It's declination is significantly further north than it was then- indicating the sun's progress back toward the equinox in the past few weeks. Spring is not far off- have you noticed the lengthening amount of daylight recently? Using a pinhole aperture (and wearing my glasses), I was JUST able to detect the thin crescent shape without magnification or further optical aid. Can anyone else see the crescent with the unaided eye? Venus is now past superior conjunction (closest to earth) and has begun to pull ahead of us in it's orbit around the sun. It will gradually gain altitude in the morning sky in coming months, while shrinking in apparent diameter telescopically, and waxing in phase. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Wide-angle Moon-Mars photo op tonight - weather permitting
by Canopus56 05 Feb '06

05 Feb '06

At 8:00 PM tonight, the Moon will be +03Â°31' from Mars at a PA of 41 degrees. Civil sunset is at 5:50pm; asto twilight is at 7:29 pm. At civil sunset, Mars will be +02Â°52' from the Moon. - Canopus56 (Kurt) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Hubble Favorites Top Ten: Public's Most Asked about pics at Star Parties?
by Canopus56 04 Feb '06

04 Feb '06

I am working on a personal observing catalogue and would appreciate some input on the Top 10 (or 20) most famous Hubble photographs. I would like to add a group of 10-15 objects that are the location markers for famous Hubble pictures. While I understand that observers will not see what the Hubble sees, much of the general public's common knowledge of astronomy comes from Hubble photos. But, I would like to have a list of location markers for some of more famous photos (visible in the northern hemisphere), so when people ask me at star parties, "oh, you know that Hubble picture," I can perhaps have a small binder with a some pictures in it and then be able to quickly slew to the vicinity of the object and then go "but here's something else nearby to look at." Probably the archtypeal Hubble photo is the famous - Pillars of Creation (Gas Pillars in M16 - Eagle Nebula) - http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr1995044a/ So, what's the groups consensus as to what are the Top Ten Hubble pictures? What are the most memorable Hubble pics? What are the one's you most get asked about at star parties? - Canopus56 Some of my top 20 favorites are: Swan Nebula (M17) http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr2003013a/ The Orion Nebula: http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/entire_collection/pr2006001a/ Light and Shadow in the Carina Nebula: http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/entire_collection/pr2000006a/ The Mosaic of the Crab Nebula http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr2005037a/ The Cat's Eye Nebula http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr2004027a/ V838 Moncerotis http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/star_collection/pr2005002f/ M51 Detail http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/star_collection/pr2005021b/ Sharp Field Eta Carinae http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/entire_collection/pr1996023a/ Helix Nebula mosasic http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr2003011a/ Cometary knots in the Helix nebula http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/1996/13/image/b Eskimo Nebula (NGC 2392) http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr2000007a/ Giant "Twisters" in the Lagoon Nebula http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr1996038b/ M57 http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula_collection/pr1999001a/ The Mice, NGC 4676 http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/galaxy_collection/pr2002011d/ Gravitational Lensing http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/galaxy_collection/pr1996010a/ Antennae galaxies NGC 4038/4039 http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/galaxy_collection/pr1997034d/ The Hubble Deep Field: http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/entire_collection/pr2004007a/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 2

Cassini images of the Encke Gap
by Canopus56 04 Feb '06

04 Feb '06

I have been clouded out for the last couple of weeks and have been unable to view Saturn. So, I spent some time mining the Cassini site for images on the Encke Gap. Here's a series of my favorites from large scale to small: Saturn with rings - analogous to amateur image view Voyager 1 view - 11/16/1980 http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=797 Saturn with rings - analogous to amateur image view - Cassini view Image PIA06077 6/29/2004 169km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=825 Ring nomenclature - schematic http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=798 Encke Gap to right; Cassini Gap at right; from ~ 40 deg "below" False color radio image showing detail of ring structure, wide angle view Coding shows particle sizes in rings - Purple = bigger than 5cm; Green = >5cm; Blue = >1cm PIA07873 5/23/2005 Scale not stated 158km/pixel? http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1537 PIA07874 5/23/2005 http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpegMod/PIA07874_modest.jpg Same as PAI07873, but color coded for temperature; inner rings warmer, outrings colder Coding: Blue -333F (70 Kelvin); Green = -298F (90 Kelvin); Red = -261F (110 Kelvin) Image PIA06425 9/2/2004 158km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=855 Cassini Division at left; Encke at right from ~45 deg angle False color coded in uv - showing higher rock content in the rings the closer you get to Saturn, more ice as you move out Image PIA05075 7/9/2004 Scale not stated 97km/pixel? http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA05075 Encke Gap to right; Cassini Gap at left; false high-contrast image; ~30 deg angle Image PIA07576 8/31/2005 43km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1694 Encke Gap to right; Cassini Gap at upper left; from ~50 deg "below" Image PIA07591 9/21/2005 13km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1739 Rising above the plane and looking down - Moon Pan in Encke Gap (320km wide) with Keeler Gap (42km wide) at right; from ~ 90 deg above Image PIA07574 8/29/2005 14km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1670 Encke Gap from ~90 deg Image - Closer view PIA07595 8/20/2005 13km/pixel http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA07595 Pan and Encke Gap from ~90 above Image PIA07528 6/24/2005 9km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1575 Encke Gap at a low angle; Moon Pandora and faint F-ring outside main ring; from ~5-10 degrees Image PIA07647 12/7/2005 3km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1896 Close-up of Pan and Encke Gap from ~90 deg Image PIA07574 7/1/2005 5km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1728 Encke Gap from ~90 deg above - Closer view Image PIA06534 4.5km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=876 Encke Gap extreme close-up with gravity waves in rings on either side of gap; ~90 above Image PIA07533 7/1/2005 2km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1587 Encke Gap ultra close-up showing gravity waves rings; ~70-80 deg angle PIA06099 7/1/2004 Scale noted stated 1km/pixel? http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1554 Keeler Gap (42 km wide) with the Encke Gap in top-right Image PIA07584 9/12/2005 5km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=1722 Keeler Gap - moon transit photo series with generation of gravity waves in adjacent rings - movie launch page 5/1/2005 8km/pixel http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/videos/video-details.cfm?videoID=87 Artist's rendition - from Pandroa and F-Ring, looking back onto the Encke Gap http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=806 Video image series - Saturn moon's sheparding out F-ring and Encke Gap - movie launch page Moon Pan moving through the Encke Gap http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/videos/video-details.cfm?videoID=77 Video pan of ring structure - Quicktime movie - movie launch page http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/videos/video-details.cfm?videoID=82 Video tour of Cassini orbital paths around Saturn - movie launch page http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/videos/video-details.cfm?videoID=85 On future orbits - Presentation on orbital path plan of Cassini by Dr. Kevin Grazier 7/26/2005 7/26/2005 Cassini Tour Selection http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/products/ppts/Tour_selection3.ppt (5megs) - in - Conference Presentations page http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/products/product-presentations.cfm (presentation launch page)\ - Peace Canopus56 (Kurt) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0