The big names on this one are gonna be obvious, the co-author page is mostly gonna read like the end of a credits reel on a blockbuster...you know, the stuff nobody actually looks at once they get past the actual actors.
The big names on this one are gonna be obvious, the co-author page is mostly gonna read like the end of a credits reel on a blockbuster...you know, the stuff nobody actually looks at once they get past the actual actors.
That's essentially how it looks. It's pretty funny. Being a theorist it's something I'm not used to at all.
This was an indirect measurement. It was using predictions from GR that the pulsars would give up energy in the form of GW and begin to coalesce, there were other factors like rates of orbits and rates of energy loss, but it wasn't a direct measurement. LIGO's measurement was the first direct measurement of GW. After the last GW debacle, it's not shocking they waited until the paper was peer reviewed before calling the press. It's an amazing discovery and honestly, the signal was spot on.
Stem cells used to regrow damaged knee cartilage in world-first Melbourne trials
http://www.9news.com.au/national/201...jbPkWfSDsuZ.99
http://www.sciencealert.com/a-blind-...cell-treatmentA blind woman has regained sight following a controversial stem cell treatment
The details are scary.
Fuck. Yes.
Keyword unfortunately is regained, which means she wasn't born blind. Still great.
It's not that scary. As long as the patients give informed consent that it's experimental, there isn't really a problem. I agree with the doctor, though - we don't need to fully understand why or how something works. The only thing truly important is that it works. Clearly this is working.
por que no los dos?
What do you mean why not both?
The way he phrased that made it sound entirely uninquisitive. "Don't ask why it works, it just does" type of thing. im all for going for it even if we dont know why it works, but we should definitely still be interested in finding out.
Injected into the right eye and left optic nerve? Makes perfect sense.
Amazing what that doctor can get away with when a patient is desperate enough. Totally just educated guessed his way into the procedure if he has no idea what the mechanism is. I wonder if similarly desperate people will see this and start consenting to a bunch of random ops in the name of science.
I may have phrased it poorly if that's what you took from it, but I'm in the same boat as you. Finding out why it works is a good thing, but saying "oh this is terrible this never should've happened" is how we limit progress in science. Trying something that we don't fully understand allows us to focus our research in directions we might not have been thinking of before. This is how groundbreaking things are done.
I kind of hope more people do, especially if their cases are like this. What would've been the worst possible result? It's not like he can make her more blind.
That's why most of us do that, I imagine.
Second LIGO detection. Another binary BH system. 8 and 14 solar masses.
Just saw that, very cool!
Article
http://phys.org/news/2016-06-gravita...ack-holes.html
Juno probe: Nasa spacecraft successfully enters Jupiter's orbit
This sounds ridiculously bad ass! Can someone explain in laymen terms the whole issue with the one second burn time it needed to put it in the correct orbit? If I'm understanding this correctly, did they sling shot it around Jupiter?
I'm guessing here, could be completely off base, someone who actually does know will probably tell me I'm wrong.
Jupiter has a gravity well that is a beast, and they want to have the probe be orbiting (relatively) close to the planet. With the way the physics of it works, it means there is narrow envelope to manage it without having the thing either crash into the planet or go shooting off away from it. Add in the fact of the distance involved, and to quote Scotty from the first reboot film "Like trying to hit a bullet with a smaller bullet, whilst wearing a blindfold, riding a horse."
This is a pretty good overview. I haven't read up and tbh I've barely looked into the Juno stuff at all since I've been at work but essentially yeah, putting something into orbit is as hard or as difficult as the gravitational pull of the object.
I would wager, again, without reading up, that the narrowness of the acceptable range is due at least partially to the fact that Jupes has many moons of significant size that are in orbit at varying distances. Having so many large moons in orbit constrains the range that the satellite can slot in without hitting anything over the course of the orbit.
Consider a planet with no moons you actually have a very, very, very large region to put something in orbit where it is still gravitationally locked. The more obstacles you put in the path of something which you don't want to have to constantly move, the more care you need to take in where you place it.