The SKA has 5 key science goals, one of them, called 'The cradle of life' is aimed at looking for possible life in other star systems, but I believe it is mainly focusing on studying the formation of earth-like planets (to better understand our own). I think that any real SETI efforts will be done as a sort of 'piggyback' on other projects (Although I don't think the scheduling arrangements are anywhere near ready yet!).
The current shortage of cash in NRAO (The US Radio-astronomy programme), principally due to the cost of ALMA, has caused funding reviews to suggest closing Arecebo. Of course the people that work there and the many astronomers around the world that use it would rather not have it closed. For many projects, including SETI, radar astrometry and pulsar studies, the large single dish collecting area of Arecebo cannot be beaten (until that is, the Chinese build their FAST telescope, which is in essence a much larger telescope of similar design).
I have done a few tests myself from a remote linux box (using nmap). By default, there doesn't seem to be any ports open, but I have a python script that listens for connections on any specified port.
It seems that the firewall is a bit odd... From my quick tests, it seems that if you run something as root (i.e. sudo it) then the firewall lets it listen and allows incoming connections, however as a user it blocks it. Therefore it seems that this firewall is aimed at users running some malicious code, rather than for protecting against vunerabilities in the underlying OS.
It would be interesting if someone could confirm this.
Newtonian mechanics implies that for gravity to affect an object it must have a mass, however General Relitivity does not impose this restriction. I am pretty sure that the gravity effect is caused by the distortion of space time such that the 'shortest' path (That which the light must follow) is curved.
I am not an expert in GR, but perhaps someone here can verfy my claims.
Perhaps the clumpyness comes from standing waves, or if it is directly related to the baryonic matter.
Of course this assumes that the baryonic matter formed first. I also think that this kind of model would imply that a star would produce a constant stream of photons that 'weigh' 10 times its own mass. There is some conservation of energy problems there!
I don't think that photons could naturaly clump under their own mass as I imagine very strange physics would result.
I am not sure that photons 'have' to have mass. I would indeed suspect that they are 'forbidden' from having mass, due to the fact that they are traveling at the speed of light. If they did have any intrinsic mass, traveling at that speed would cause the mass to move towards an infinite value, esencialy meaning that light would not be able to travel at the speed of light.
Of course relitivity could be wrong, or light could travel slower than the 'speed of light', if that makes any sense.
Re:The whole argument seems quite ridiculous
on
Pluto Making a Comeback
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I am a profesional astronomer and in my experiance most of my collegues could not really care less about this. For evidance, the fact that so few people voted shows that most astronomers are more interested in real science, not pointless naming conventions.
Slashdot Mirror
The SKA has 5 key science goals, one of them, called 'The cradle of life' is aimed at looking for possible life in other star systems, but I believe it is mainly focusing on studying the formation of earth-like planets (to better understand our own). I think that any real SETI efforts will be done as a sort of 'piggyback' on other projects (Although I don't think the scheduling arrangements are anywhere near ready yet!).
The current shortage of cash in NRAO (The US Radio-astronomy programme), principally due to the cost of ALMA, has caused funding reviews to suggest closing Arecebo. Of course the people that work there and the many astronomers around the world that use it would rather not have it closed. For many projects, including SETI, radar astrometry and pulsar studies, the large single dish collecting area of Arecebo cannot be beaten (until that is, the Chinese build their FAST telescope, which is in essence a much larger telescope of similar design).
(I don't actually own a Ferrari, but I think it's an good counter-example)
I have done a few tests myself from a remote linux box (using nmap). By default, there doesn't seem to be any ports open, but I have a python script that listens for connections on any specified port.
It seems that the firewall is a bit odd... From my quick tests, it seems that if you run something as root (i.e. sudo it) then the firewall lets it listen and allows incoming connections, however as a user it blocks it. Therefore it seems that this firewall is aimed at users running some malicious code, rather than for protecting against vunerabilities in the underlying OS.
It would be interesting if someone could confirm this.
If you have the copyright holder's permission. I think they should talk to some real lawyers before writing these notices!
No, Gravity waves are the 21st century ether, Dark matter is the 21st century phlogiston
I do not beleve that this is true.
Newtonian mechanics implies that for gravity to affect an object it must have a mass, however General Relitivity does not impose this restriction.
I am pretty sure that the gravity effect is caused by the distortion of space time such that the 'shortest' path (That which the light must follow) is curved.
I am not an expert in GR, but perhaps someone here can verfy my claims.
Perhaps the clumpyness comes from standing waves, or if it is directly related to the baryonic matter.
Of course this assumes that the baryonic matter formed first. I also think that this kind of model would imply that a star would produce a constant stream of photons that 'weigh' 10 times its own mass. There is some conservation of energy problems there!
I don't think that photons could naturaly clump under their own mass as I imagine very strange physics would result.
I am not sure that photons 'have' to have mass. I would indeed suspect that they are 'forbidden' from having mass, due to the fact that they are traveling at the speed of light. If they did have any intrinsic mass, traveling at that speed would cause the mass to move towards an infinite value, esencialy meaning that light would not be able to travel at the speed of light.
Of course relitivity could be wrong, or light could travel slower than the 'speed of light', if that makes any sense.
I am a profesional astronomer and in my experiance most of my collegues could not really care less about this. For evidance, the fact that so few people voted shows that most astronomers are more interested in real science, not pointless naming conventions.