Not that I’m concerned in the least because at the end of the day I’m far more likely to win a big lottery jackpot than see it happen within my lifetime. But it’s still remarkable how to this day we continue to occasionally discover massive celestial objects previously unknown to us that are about to do a flyby with very little notice. Extra points for fact that this one was discovered by an amateur civilian.
Newly discovered comet Nishimura could be visible to naked eye this weekend | Comets | The Guardian
Stargazers in the northern hemisphere get a once-in-437-year chance to observe the comet as it reaches peak visibility just weeks after being identifiedamp.theguardian.com
The above article doesn’t mention the estimated size, but in another article I read it was suggested it was likely a few hundred metres across, and perhaps even more than 1 km.
Whereas very unlikely statistically speaking, basically there’s no guarantee at all that one day we might be told ‘People of Earth: we’ve just detected a massive 2-mile comet we didn’t know about at all heading right for us and due to hit us in three weeks, and we don’t have a chance of launching a missile countermeasure response in such little time, so that’s all, folks.’
Would be interesting to estimate the carnage. Tunguska was estimated at only 200m, but that was a solid iron meteor not an icy comet. I imagine it would suck to be under it/near it, but it's not world-ending.Not that I’m concerned in the least because at the end of the day I’m far more likely to win a big lottery jackpot than see it happen within my lifetime. But it’s still remarkable how to this day we continue to occasionally discover massive celestial objects previously unknown to us that are about to do a flyby with very little notice. Extra points for fact that this one was discovered by an amateur civilian.
Newly discovered comet Nishimura could be visible to naked eye this weekend | Comets | The Guardian
Stargazers in the northern hemisphere get a once-in-437-year chance to observe the comet as it reaches peak visibility just weeks after being identifiedamp.theguardian.com
The above article doesn’t mention the estimated size, but in another article I read it was suggested it was likely a few hundred metres across, and perhaps even more than 1 km.
Whereas very unlikely statistically speaking, basically there’s no guarantee at all that one day we might be told ‘People of Earth: we’ve just detected a massive 2-mile comet we didn’t know about at all heading right for us and due to hit us in three weeks, and we don’t have a chance of launching a missile countermeasure response in such little time, so that’s all, folks.’
That would be awful - everyone lies all the time as its a necessary evil to get through life.Given how much neurological science has advanced over the past few decades, including people being able to control bionic limbs with their thoughts, are we ever likely to develop a foolproof and non-painful/ damaging technology to show whether someone is lying? The effect it would have on criminal justice, politics and society in general across the world cannot be overstated.
Site not available in the UK.CAN WE SEE THE LOST TOOLBAG FROM EARTH?
Yes! For a tool bag, it’s pretty reflective. You can make it out on a clear night with just a pair of good binoculars.
Site not available in the UK.
The work bags aren't that bright (typically around mag +6). You'd need a very dark sky (sitting on top of a mountain surrounded by desert or ocean, for example, would be ideal), know exactly where & when to look (it is currently ~1200km ahead of the ISS; drag is rapidly opening up this gap) and time that for a pass through the zenith (to avoid atmospheric extinction greatly reducing your chances) whilst not in eclipse. There's now sufficient separation from the ISS that you'd have to plan the observation quite carefully to have any chance of spotting it.CAN WE SEE THE LOST TOOLBAG FROM EARTH?
Yes! For a tool bag, it’s pretty reflective. You can make it out on a clear night with just a pair of good binoculars.
Here's an article that can be accessed in the UK.well then move.
Is this why it has become more common to see the Northern Lights?nicely illustrated explainer
The sun’s poles are about to flip. It’s awesome — and slightly terrifying.
The sun is growing feistier. Great news for aurora watchers. Bad news for communication satellites.www.vox.com
He found that during rest, when we turn mentally inward, task-negative areas [when you're daydreaming/just thinking about things] use more energy than the rest of the brain. In a 2001 paper, he dubbed this activity “a default mode of brain function.” Two years later, after generating higher-resolution data, a team from the Stanford University School of Medicine discovered that this task-negative activity defines a coherent network of interacting brain regions, which they called the default mode network.
The discovery of the default mode network ignited curiosity among neuroscientists about what the brain is doing in the absence of an outward-focused task. Although some researchers believed that the network’s main function was to generate our experience of mind wandering or daydreaming, there were plenty of other conjectures. Maybe it controlled streams of consciousness or activated memories of past experiences. And dysfunction in the default mode network was floated as a potential feature of nearly every psychiatric and neurological disorder, including depression, schizophrenia and Alzheimer’s disease.
These [default mode] regions are associated with memory, experience replay, prediction, action consideration, reward/punishment and information integration.
A scientist [...] did successfully publish a paper [...] where they did explore some aspect of an alternative theory.
Then, a public or media relations person, usually someone associated with the host university [...] writes a press release that tries their best to promote this research to as wide of an audience as possible.
And then [...] a large series of websites will simply republish that press release as news [...] rarely fact-checking with other scientists or finding the appropriate context for the new research, and instead just repeating or even amplifying the sensational claims that were made in the paper and exaggerated in the press release.
Very good article on why we keep seeing stories about how everything we know is wrong.