Upload
Login or register
x

10/1/2016

10/1/2016. Sorry im late, went to queensland for the week. futurism.com/science-weekly/ Subscribe for update, or dont I dont care. THIS WEEK IN SCIENCE January

Sorry im late, went to queensland for the week.
futurism.com/science-weekly/
Subscribe for update, or dont I dont care

THIS WEEK IN SCIENCE
January 3 - 10, 2016
Physic: t Space
Burnett scientists verify that Space! announces that the Falcon
mums will net metre when "t ‘it l? will Land an a mehili drama ship
is conserving them [aka far its next launch an Jan 17th
the EMU Effect]
2 Eva"
Scientists develop a new class at tit' Scientists essence dim flickers at
mend were that are gentle visible tight coming mam a black
Waugh tn manipulate stem cells hale forthe first time
withoout damage
A new implantable "shack
absurder" far knees has been
developed ta delay knee
replacement surgeries
Scientists teach bacteria ta
perform artificial photosynthesis
ta convert sunlight into valuable
chemical products
...
+623
Views: 28960
Favorited: 37
Submitted: 01/11/2016
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to thisweekinscience

Comments(92):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
12>
[ 92 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
63 comments displayed.
Reply
+103
#8 - brickfest (01/11/2016) [-]
The light coming from the black hole wasn't from the black hole itself... think the article mentioned the flashes were coming from the material orbiting black hole, not from the area beyond event horizon.

Think NASA is preparing telescope to photograph the phenomenon properly. Sorry if I'm not entirely correct, my entire space knowledge comes from Kerbal space program and movies like Interstellar
Reply
0
User avatar #63 to #8 - mastadong ONLINE (19 hours ago) [-]
Not arguing but wouldnt something close enough to be getting sucked into a black hole, hypothetically, not be displaying light at this distance seeing how black holes "as we know them" absorb all light around them?
Reply
0
User avatar #78 to #63 - walurs (18 hours ago) [-]
Like he said, the material was not beyond the event horizon, hence the object can still emit light without issues.
Black holes don't really absorb light around them, photons do not have mass so they cannot be affected by gravity in a traditional sense, rather the black hole's immense density bends and warps spacetime itself, so the light that collides with the black hole still travels in a straight line, but the spacetime it travels through bends it into the black hole, "absorbing" it.
Reply
0
User avatar #84 to #78 - mastadong ONLINE (8 hours ago) [-]
May I ask you to define "event horizon" to me?

inb4 "a pretty ok sam neill flick"
Reply
0
User avatar #85 to #84 - walurs (5 hours ago) [-]
The event horizon is the theoretical "point of no return." It is the point in a black hole in which once you cross it, events cannot affect an outside observer. Once you crossed the event horizon of a black hole, you would have 100% chance of being sucked into it, and you would no longer be visible to any outside observer.
Reply
0
User avatar #86 to #85 - mastadong ONLINE (4 hours ago) [-]
The sharing of your wisdom has been most appreciated.
However now I have another question. Might this "event horizon" alter simply by our perception of black holes at very distinctly different differences?
Reply
0
User avatar #87 to #86 - walurs (4 hours ago) [-]
The event horizon isn't really anything that is "perceived"
I apologize for not going into greater detail originally.
The event horizon is the point in which once it is passed, gravity becomes so immense on the object passing it, that the escape velocity becomes greater than the speed of light, which as we know is unattainable. The event horizon's location and size is determined by the mass of the black hole itself.

Found a good, although short, article on the event horizon at
www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_blackholes_event.html
Reply
0
User avatar #88 to #87 - mastadong ONLINE (4 hours ago) [-]
No need to apologize. Now THAT was described beautifully and I will make sure to check out that article. By the way, how old are you?
Reply
0
User avatar #89 to #88 - walurs (4 hours ago) [-]
18, not a scientist or anything, just fascinated when it comes to theoretical physics (especially superstring theory)
Reply
0
User avatar #90 to #89 - mastadong ONLINE (4 hours ago) [-]
Well you're far more versed than myself at that age. Good for you.
Reply
0
User avatar #91 to #90 - walurs (4 hours ago) [-]
Appreciated, if you have any other questions I'd be happy to help
Reply
+3
User avatar #12 to #8 - casinoer (01/11/2016) [-]
That was pretty good.
Reply
+2
User avatar #36 to #8 - wutthephuk (23 hours ago) [-]
Well, from the ages of 4-10 my father passed out in front of the T.V. drunk whilst watching the history channel and not having a remote to change it. While all in the mean time the History channel played space documentaries and I became to love it. I am still in love with space today and I can almost tell you every detail about space. and I can tell you that black holes do spew out light that can leave the gravitational field. although it isnt the light from around it, its from Hawking radiation caused from when a particle is generated from a black hole while at the same time losing an atom. It is possible the the light is hawking radiation being bent and shot out if its spinning fast enough.
Reply
0
#81 to #36 - anon (17 hours ago) [-]
Didn't have to tell us you life story
Reply
+5
#14 to #8 - silasP (01/11/2016) [-]
I haven't read the article yet, but maybe they're referring to Hawking radiation, which does indeed come from within the black hole. In fact, it's the ONLY thing that comes from black holes.
Reply
+5
User avatar #16 to #8 - lapsushominum ONLINE (01/11/2016) [-]
Yes generally the light "from" black holes is generated by the matter around it that is spinning so rapidly the friction generates heat and radiates light
Reply
+40
User avatar #5 - lapsushominum ONLINE (01/11/2016) [-]
The first one is cool but the terminology of "observing" has always bugged me because it conveys an incorrect message to the layman that a human witnessing whatever event is special when in reality in this experiment it refers to measuring their movement via lasers in which case contact with the lasers is what is causing the effect.
Reply
0
User avatar #20 to #5 - wiwaaaa (01/11/2016) [-]
It is probably just the person who made the picture doesn't have an understanding of quantum mechanics, and so just copied the term used in the scientific publication to be safe. I agree that it is a confusing term for people who haven't seen the terminology defined properly though.
Reply
+5
#15 to #5 - captainbalu (01/11/2016) [-]
Was about to write the same thing. I know people who would tend to think humans are special for altering things by observing them wich is not the case. therefore i like your comment
Reply
+2
User avatar #17 to #15 - lapsushominum ONLINE (01/11/2016) [-]
Yeah it's just unfortunate word choice because it conveys the message that somehow observing an event as in light entering the eye and being interpreted by the brain somehow retroactively changes the event when in reality it's the physical interaction with the measuring instrument that caused a reaction.
Reply
+8
User avatar #18 to #5 - skumbaner (01/11/2016) [-]
Aw. I thought the atoms were shy and tensed up when someone was looking at them
Reply
+132
User avatar #1 - admin (01/11/2016) [-]
it's october already? damn son
Reply
0
#82 to #1 - anon (17 hours ago) [-]
from Canada and I had no idea what you were talking about for a second
Reply
+1
User avatar #25 to #1 - mattdoggy ONLINE (01/12/2016) [-]
Bring on the Skeletons
Reply
+5
User avatar #3 to #1 - necrova (01/11/2016) [-]
Go to sleep dude, no where does it mention anything about October.
Reply
+9
User avatar #4 to #3 - hightechlowlife ONLINE (01/11/2016) [-]
The joke is that the title is 10/1/2016 AKA October 1st.
Reply
+8
User avatar #11 to #4 - necrova (01/11/2016) [-]
Oh, well I was only pretending to be stupid.

I haven't gone to sleep yet either
Reply
0
User avatar #35 to #4 - dreygur (01/12/2016) [-]
It's pretty refreshing actually. I always have to think twice about the dates on this site because I'm an ********
Reply
+16
#6 to #1 - thisweekinscience [OP]ONLINE (01/11/2016) [-]
>"back from queensland"
>expecting me to use ****** american style of time telling
>go home admin, ur high
Reply
+12
#21 - raisinbeuponhim (01/11/2016) [-]
bacteria photosynthesis? Are we becoming protoss now?
Reply
+7
#23 - djequalizee (01/11/2016) [-]
These posts are always a little misleading. They seem to bend what is actually going on a bit to make it seem more interesting. Though i guess they need to fit it into a couple sentences, so i can forgive it a bit
Reply
0
#64 to #23 - gravysponge ONLINE (19 hours ago) [-]
The SpaceX one is pretty much 100% accurate, but they left out the fact that they've already recovered a stage from their last launch, which was the first launch of their upgraded Falcon 9 Full Thrust rocket. The upcoming launch is the last launch of the old Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket.

Here's a clip of the other landing I mentioned, it's a historic achievement in space technology, and incredibly awesome, I basically jizzed myself at work when I found out.
Reply
+6
User avatar #34 - friedgreenpomatoes ONLINE (01/12/2016) [-]
so black holes aren't black at all, just very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, dark grey holes.
Reply
+1
User avatar #48 to #34 - LtShinySides (22 hours ago) [-]
yes
Reply
+4
#58 - diamondpie ONLINE (20 hours ago) [-]
What i thought of when i saw the knee shock absorber
Reply
+4
#42 - blackoutonetwotwo (22 hours ago) [-]
>atoms will not move when someone is observing them
>not move

Reply
0
User avatar #72 to #42 - AlexPaincakes (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh **** , I forgot about that ******* thing.
Reply
+3
#65 - xtnega (19 hours ago) [-]
Jeez, it seems every week one of these is wrong: Atoms continuously move, even at absolute zero, to say otherwise would contradict Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The main effect of continually observing the particles was that there was a 'dramatic' reduction in quantum tunnelling. A far cry from 'not moving'. I get that it needs to be dumbed down for the lowest common denominator, but this is just borderline misinformation.
Reply
+3
User avatar #52 - gittons (21 hours ago) [-]
that first one.
does that mean that there are things in the universe that have completely different reactions depending
on if we are watching it or not?
that could make science a little more complicated.
Reply
0
User avatar #66 to #52 - xtnega (18 hours ago) [-]
Unfortunately, there's nothing uniquely interesting about a human's eyesight that make our observations **** things up.
It's just bad terminology; 'Observing' in quantum mechanics means 'measuring'. For example, in the experiment above, the particles were continuously measured by firing photons at them, which were then recieved by an optical microscope.
Reply
+1
User avatar #68 to #66 - gittons (18 hours ago) [-]
still interesting.
Reply
0
User avatar #70 to #68 - xtnega (18 hours ago) [-]
Oh yeah, it's still really weird. All of quantum mechanics is ****** up. Though, there seems to be this ongoing thing of science-illiterate journalists attempting to romanticise humans by making it sound as though we have some kinda super-power to change the universe by gazing at it with our eyeballs.
Reply
0
User avatar #71 to #70 - gittons (18 hours ago) [-]
i can understand why, science is great but god can it be dry and cold, there is never any wow
to anything.
Reply
+4
User avatar #31 - sourceror (01/12/2016) [-]
Physics: so wait you're telling me that atoms are the equivalent of deer in the headlights???
Reply
+2
#44 - supersixfourr ONLINE (22 hours ago) [-]
>10/1/2016
Reply
0
User avatar #49 to #44 - saltyfries (22 hours ago) [-]
Inferior European date, day month year, understandable but we all know American date is much superior, 1-12, day, year, smallest numbers to biggest numbers. MUCH less confusing
Reply
+2
User avatar #57 to #49 - jacklane (20 hours ago) [-]
official military dating: 12JAN2016

Reply
+1
#59 to #44 - thisweekinscience [OP]ONLINE (20 hours ago) [-]
I live in Australia
Reply
+2
User avatar #54 to #44 - mentlgen ONLINE (21 hours ago) [-]
Tenth of January, 2016.

DD/MM/YYYY

Silly ameritard.
Reply
0
#56 to #54 - supersixfourr ONLINE (21 hours ago) [-]
Well at least I pay my taxes!

Also as an engineering student, I do actually prefer the SI units against English units
Reply
+1
#40 - anon (23 hours ago) [-]
**anonymous used "*roll picture*"**
**anonymous rolled image**
Reply
+1
#29 - nebuelaeus (01/12/2016) [-]
>Purposely confusing information about black holes is confusing
This annoyed me, I read that **** and thought "what?! holy **** !"
But no, it's the light from around a black hole, something we've known about for a while. Why do you hurt me so
Reply
+1
#38 - vivified ONLINE (23 hours ago) [-]
**vivified used "*roll picture*"**
**vivified rolled image**
I am rooting for the knee shock absorbers.
Reply
0
#39 to #38 - antibronywiseman ONLINE (23 hours ago) [-]
That roll.
Reply
0
#53 to #38 - sherlockbatman (21 hours ago) [-]
**sherlockbatman used "*roll picture*"**
**sherlockbatman rolled image**
Knee sock absorbers
Reply
0
User avatar #80 - thedutchs (17 hours ago) [-]
The medical one is actually really good news for me since it's possible that I won't be able to walk after I'm 50. It tore my meniscus really badly once.
Reply
0
#79 - spatulaman ONLINE (17 hours ago) [-]
Lights? From a black hole.
Oh god the Reapers are coming for us.
Reply
0
#76 - thisisestonia (18 hours ago) [-]
Also happened this week. Photo by Rein Tafenau, Estonia.
Reply
0
#75 - hikakiller (18 hours ago) [-]
I want knee shock absorber things.
Reply
0
User avatar #74 - pyjamadog (18 hours ago) [-]
I am not a science man but the first light flickering from the black hole is old news right?
i thought it was called something like quasar? or a light that sends out more energy than 10 times the duration of energy sended out by our sun durings it's whole lifespan
12>
[ 92 comments ]
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)