PDA

View Full Version : We Are Stardust



dianna
21st January 2014, 23:06
Water found in stardust suggests life is universal

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24907-water-found-in-stardust-suggests-life-is-universal.html#.Ut73Q_30A1h


Crosby Stills and Nash We Are Stardust

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3MUH8tFZTA


A sprinkling of stardust is as magical as it sounds. The dust grains that float through our solar system contain tiny pockets of water, which form when they are zapped by a blast of charged wind from the sun.

The chemical reaction causing this to happen had previously been mimicked in laboratories, but this is the first time water has been found trapped inside real stardust.

Combined with previous findings of organic compounds in interplanetary dust, the results suggest that these grains contain the basic ingredients needed for life. As similar dust grains are thought to be found in solar systems all over the universe, this bodes well for the existence of life across the cosmos.

"The implications are potentially huge," says Hope Ishii of the University of Hawaii in Honolulu, one of the researchers behind the study. "It is a particularly thrilling possibility that this influx of dust on the surfaces of solar system bodies has acted as a continuous rainfall of little reaction vessels containing both the water and organics needed for the eventual origin of life."

Dust rain

Solar systems are full of dust a result of many processes, including the break-up of comets. John Bradley of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and his colleagues inspected the outer layer of interplanetary dust particles extracted from Earth's stratosphere.

Ultra-high-resolution microscopy allowed them to probe the 5- to 25-micrometre specks of dust to reveal small pockets of trapped water just beneath the surface.

Laboratory experiments offer clues to how the water forms. The dust is mostly made of silicates, which contains oxygen. As it travels through space, it encounters the solar wind. This stream of charged particles including high-energy hydrogen ions is ejected from the sun's atmosphere. When the two collide, hydrogen and oxygen combine to make water.

As interplanetary dust is thought to have rained down on early Earth, it is likely that the stuff brought water to our planet, although it is difficult to conceive how it could account for the millions of cubic kilometres of water that cover Earth today. "In no way do we suggest that this was sufficient to form oceans," says Ishii.

Universal water

A more likely origin for the huge volume of water on our planet is wet asteroids that pummelled early Earth. Comets are also a candidate: the European Space Agency's Rosetta spacecraft, due to send a lander to a comet later this year, is tasked with probing their role.

However, the Bradley team's results are relevant to the quest for life on other planets. The water-producing reaction is likely to be universal, and to happen in any corner of the universe with a star, or even a supernova, says Ishii.

What's more, interplanetary dust in our solar system and in others contains organic carbon. If stardust contains carbon and water, it means the essentials of life could be present in solar systems anywhere in the universe and raining down on their planets.

"These are the types of processes that we expect to occur in other planetary systems," says Fred Ciesla of the University of Chicago in Illinois, who was not involved in the work. "Water and organics are not uncommon."

Aragorn
21st January 2014, 23:19
Don't you love it when mainstream science finally catches up with what the rest of us have already known for many years? :p

Agape
21st January 2014, 23:50
The next big 'discovery' is going to be that 'life is intelligent' . It may take some of the smartest of scientists much longer to prove than the time it took them to pulverise every piece of theory and matter to ashes .

It's simply that dissolution is faster . Does ( not ) light dissolve faster than it travels ? ;)

Aragorn
22nd January 2014, 00:23
The next big 'discovery' is going to be that 'life is intelligent' . It may take some of the smartest of scientists much longer to prove than the time it took them to pulverise every piece of theory and matter to ashes .

It's simply that dissolution is faster . Does ( not ) light dissolve faster than it travels ? ;)

Well, I'm not so sure whether light actually dissolves. In order to answer that question, we would first have to determine what light really is, and I believe that science is still trying to figure that one out. So far, they're still stuck on the double slit experiment and the collapse of the quantum wave function. Which is convenient of course, because that means that they can make light be a wave when they need it to be, and be a particle when they need it to be. ;-)

One of the more interesting phenomena is Cherenkov radiation. It happens when electrons or other particles travel through a medium in which light itself travels slower than these particles. The particles then start emanating a blue light, perpendicular to the axis of their travel. As if light doesn't want to be contained, or otherwise put, as if light wants to return to its natural constant speed as in a vacuum, i.e. Einstein's "c", and objects to the fact that it is slowed down in a particular medium where other particles are allowed (by the medium itself) to travel faster.

If you're not familiar with Cherenkov radiation, then there's a good chance that you've already seen it in photos without realizing it. It's the blue light you see in the cooling water of operational nuclear reactors. It's quite beautiful, really. :-)

Namaste. :-)

Agape
22nd January 2014, 00:51
Well, I'm not so sure whether light actually dissolves. In order to answer that question, we would first have to determine what light really is, and I believe that science is still trying to figure that one out. So far, they're still stuck on the double slit experiment and the collapse of the quantum wave function. Which is convenient of course, because that means that they can make light be a wave when they need it to be, and be a particle when they need it to be. ;-)

Actually, light dissolves as fast as it travels , well, either it travels or it dissolves ( joke ) ;)

Any kind of physical formation , be it a wave , a beam , a frequency .. have temporary life time, decay time so to say that can be traced and calculated back to their source and source of the source and so forth.
All phenomena are relative . If I see fire fly the ant sees a lamp . To the firefly , human life is eternity.
The cube is perfect to the extent of my perception of perfection, not yours. When two asynchronous frequencies collide in space they produce 'light' . It lasts only as long as the collision predicted . For billions of years . Or millisecond .

In either case .. either it travels .. or it dissolves ( ;) ).

Alekahn2
22nd January 2014, 01:23
Don't you love it when mainstream science finally catches up with what the rest of us have already known for many years? :p

Many years ago, when preparing an evening meal in a communal setting, I was alone with a 4 year old boy who some had labeled as an "indigo child". I remember it vividly...I was mincing onion and garlic, while he was playing with a 'transformer' toy...and he, in a matter of fact way, stated clearly:
"We are all stardust, and then, we all have a star". :wizard: I stopped my meal prep, sat down next to him and proceeded to listen to him intently.

"Out of the mouths of babes", the truth is emerging.

Perhaps one day more of our 'scientists' will discover the intricacies and truths of the human soul. Who and what we truly are. May it be so.

Great website by the way. Thanks for the reminder.
(Cherenkov :thumb:)

Aragorn
22nd January 2014, 01:39
Well, I'm not so sure whether light actually dissolves. In order to answer that question, we would first have to determine what light really is, and I believe that science is still trying to figure that one out. So far, they're still stuck on the double slit experiment and the collapse of the quantum wave function. Which is convenient of course, because that means that they can make light be a wave when they need it to be, and be a particle when they need it to be. ;-)

Actually, light dissolves as fast as it travels , well, either it travels or it dissolves ( joke ) ;)

Any kind of physical formation , be it a wave , a beam , a frequency .. have temporary life time, decay time so to say that can be traced and calculated back to their source and source of the source and so forth.
All phenomena are relative . If I see fire fly the ant sees a lamp . To the firefly , human life is eternity.
The cube is perfect to the extent of my perception of perfection, not yours. When two asynchronous frequencies collide in space they produce 'light' . It lasts only as long as the collision predicted . For billions of years . Or millisecond .

In either case .. either it travels .. or it dissolves ( ;) ).

That which you are talking about is not just relativity - and light has an interesting role in both Einstein's theories of Special Relativity and General Relativity in that it is always measured as travelling at the same speed by all observers - but also subjectivity versus objectivity. And that brings us to the primary dichotomy, namely Self versus Other.

And that, my friends, is the very reason for Creation. It is one thing to know everything and be everything, but it is another thing to experience everything. As a hint: read my signature... :p

Namaste. :-)

DeDukshyn
22nd January 2014, 01:44
...

When two asynchronous frequencies collide in space they produce 'light' ...

Produce light ... ? Or reveal it? Traveling light is invisible, and is ubiquitous. We can only perceive it's interactions with matter as illumination. I dare to say light is much much more than illumination ;) Just a rambling thought ...

Conchis
22nd January 2014, 01:53
...

When two asynchronous frequencies collide in space they produce 'light' ...

Produce light ... ? Or reveal it? Traveling light is invisible, and is ubiquitous. We can only perceive it's interactions with matter as illumination. I dare to say light is much much more than illumination ;) Just a thought ...


So I'm going to ask a stupid question here, because it's always intrigued me. We stand here on the surface of the earth peering up a the moon. The moon of course is about 250,000 miles away, give or take. The moon reflects photons theoretically produced by the sun. The photons bounce off the moon which is smaller than earth, hurtle 250,000 spreading (according to some in a manner inverse to the distance making fewer and fewer of them per given space), and enter a circular pupil less than 5mm across. And we stand here and we see the whole moon. We don't see a few photons here and then a few there...we experience the whole circular thing. I always say to myself, what are the odds....what kinds of numbers of photons do we have to start with so that we all end up with enough in this tiny little circular pupil?

dianna
22nd January 2014, 14:57
Astronomers Capture The First Image Of The Mysterious Web That Connects All Galaxies In The Universe

http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/52d988ffeab8eab865769278-534-480/image1-16.jpg

For the first time, astronomers were able to see a string of hot gas known as a filament that is thought to be part of the mysterious underlying structure that dictates the layout of all the stars and galaxies in our universe.

Scientists believe that matter in the universe is arranged into a gigantic web-like structure. This is called the cosmic web.

There are signatures of this structure in the remaining radiation from the Big Bang and in the layout of the universe itself. Without some mysterious force pulling visible matter into this web, galaxies would be randomly scattered across the universe. But they aren't.

We can see that galaxies are found in groups and those groups come together in larger clusters.

Computer models tell us that those galaxy clusters are linked by long filaments of hot gas and dark matter a mystery substance that we can't see because it doesn't radiate or scatter light but that makes up most of the web.

It's believed that gas and dark matter flow along the filaments to form clumps of galaxies where the strands intersect. So filaments are important because they represent what the universe looks like on a large scale. The problem is that, even though we should technically be able to see hot gas filaments, they are really hard to detect.

To find this strand of gas, astronomers where able to take advantage of an extremely bright mass of energy and light known as a quasar.

The light from a quasar located 10 billion light-years-away acted like a "flashlight" to make the surrounding gas glow, researchers report Jan. 19 in the journal Nature. This boosted the Lyman alpha radiation that hydrogen gas emits to detectable levels over a huge swath of the region.
https://fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net/safe_image.php?d=AQA06sia7UrLbyfo&w=377&h=197&url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.businessinsider.com%2Fima ge%2F52d988cfecad047426769270-1101-935%2Fimage2-11.jpg&cfs=1

Cosmic WebThe researchers were able to figure out the wavelength of the Lyman alpha radiation emitted by the gas and used the Keck telescope in Hawaii to get an image at that wavelength.

What they were able to see is a cloud of gas extending two million light years across intergalactic space the largest ever found. And it wasn't just a diffuse cloud, there are areas where there is more gas and areas of darker, emptier space. The gas-filled areas are filament, while the emptier areas are the gaps between filaments and galaxy clusters.

"This is a very exceptional object," first author Sebastiano Cantalupo, a postdoctoral fellow at UC Santa Cruz said in a statement. "It's huge, at least twice as large as any nebula detected before, and it extends well beyond the galactic environment of the quasar."

Researchers think that the gas filament is even more extended since they only see the part that is illuminated by the radiation from the quasar.

The research still "provides a terrific insight into the overall structure of our universe," co-author J. Xavier Prochaska, a professor of astronomy and astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz said in statement, since the "quasar is illuminating diffuse gas on scales well beyond any we've seen before, giving us the first picture of extended gas between galaxies."
http://www.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/Astronomers-Capture-The-First-Image-Of-The-5157713.php

Agape
22nd January 2014, 16:09
...

When two asynchronous frequencies collide in space they produce 'light' ...

Produce light ... ? Or reveal it? Traveling light is invisible, and is ubiquitous. We can only perceive it's interactions with matter as illumination. I dare to say light is much much more than illumination ;) Just a rambling thought ...

Exactly . Produce the luminosity , visible spectrum of interacting fields of energy , like countless phenomena occurring in the sky ..or even the '4th state of matter' - plasmatic discharge on the tip of your match stick .

How big are the energy fields and their respective frequencies that remain invisible , undetectable to us till they encounter another dissimilar frequency to produce 'phenomenon' , visible and detectable phenomenon is rather difficult to say .

Some ancient people used to say that we are floating in Space .. or , I'd say in one of the 'Space Bubbles' large enough to stretch across billions of 'light years' ..
large enough to contain its own specific environment of physical laws and variables , constants that are seemingly universal,
yet always dependable on the place of their origin .

Almost all in those Spaces and sub-spaces seems to move in rounds .. so also most of energy is trapped in cyclic systems ,
and only the part allowed to escape those traps can communicate with other systems , galaxies, space-times .

So in fact we see very little of what really exists ..


;)

Agape
22nd January 2014, 16:21
...

When two asynchronous frequencies collide in space they produce 'light' ...

Produce light ... ? Or reveal it? Traveling light is invisible, and is ubiquitous. We can only perceive it's interactions with matter as illumination. I dare to say light is much much more than illumination ;) Just a thought ...


So I'm going to ask a stupid question here, because it's always intrigued me. We stand here on the surface of the earth peering up a the moon. The moon of course is about 250,000 miles away, give or take. The moon reflects photons theoretically produced by the sun. The photons bounce off the moon which is smaller than earth, hurtle 250,000 spreading (according to some in a manner inverse to the distance making fewer and fewer of them per given space), and enter a circular pupil less than 5mm across. And we stand here and we see the whole moon. We don't see a few photons here and then a few there...we experience the whole circular thing. I always say to myself, what are the odds....what kinds of numbers of photons do we have to start with so that we all end up with enough in this tiny little circular pupil?



I think it depends exactly of the star mass and magnitude . It wraps and evolves all the solar system from start to the end , most of the planets and its moons were part of the solar mass when they were born ,
they all take daily 'sun bath' . The system is virtually saturated with the photons you mention bouncing of solidified reflective surfaces . It's shared energy that in turn allows certain level of tolerance in each living organism ,
because we all depend on the solar energy and its frequency , from the tiniest microbes to highly advanced beings, and even those microorganisms living deep underground do partake of the solar frequency , just another ways.

It's the number of photons your retina allows to absorb and reflect , in matter of milliseconds , with constantly taking new and new snaps ..
it's intriguing indeed because where we perceive 'fluent reality' there's actually millions of snaps taking place in our eyes, skin, all senses, brains etc . In effect , like complicated computers they synthesise an image .

Conchis
22nd January 2014, 19:33
When you break a glass holographic plate....you don't get a bunch of pieces of glass each containing parts of a three dimensional image...instead you get a bunch of pieces each containing a complete two dimensional image. I think each photon has a complete 2D image

Aragorn
22nd January 2014, 19:44
When you break a glass holographic plate....you don't get a bunch of pieces of glass each containing parts of a three dimensional image...instead you get a bunch of pieces each containing a complete two dimensional image. I think each photon has a complete 2D image

I do not agree with that statement, because it is quite a stretch to go from pieces of glass from a holographic plate to the nature of photons. The photons hitting the holographic plate do this on a 2D surface, but from different angles. So the 2D aspect here is an aspect of the refraction of the photons, not of the photons themselves.

Most likely, photons will have 10 or 11 physical dimensions, or even 26 dimensions, depending on what subtheory of quantum physics you adhere to, i.e. string theory, brane theory or whatever.

Namaste. ;-)

GoodETxSG
23rd January 2014, 00:42
WOW, ALREADY A THREAD ON THIS... SAME TOPICS AND ALL!

I just posted this same info on the Water on Dwarf Planet Thread. Sorry... Yet synchronistic!

Thread: 22 Jan 2014 - Herschel Telescope Detects Water on Dwarf Planet

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?67660-22-Jan-2014-Herschel-Telescope-Detects-Water-on-Dwarf-Planet

Agape
23rd January 2014, 01:42
When you break a glass holographic plate....you don't get a bunch of pieces of glass each containing parts of a three dimensional image...instead you get a bunch of pieces each containing a complete two dimensional image. I think each photon has a complete 2D image

But they each carry a momentum , characterised by spin , vector in space ( even in time ) that sets them to motion in different directions . Though they all have been a part of 'one image' , they reflect subsequent and unique reflections of that image and its dissolution , in other words, the 'time of the event' that preceded existence of the plate and continues to carry its memory within each .
It sort of explains why on observation of glass breaking to pieces we do perceive past and future , very close to each other .

;)

Conchis
23rd January 2014, 12:43
When you break a glass holographic plate....you don't get a bunch of pieces of glass each containing parts of a three dimensional image...instead you get a bunch of pieces each containing a complete two dimensional image. I think each photon has a complete 2D image

But they each carry a momentum , characterised by spin , vector in space ( even in time ) that sets them to motion in different directions . Though they all have been a part of 'one image' , they reflect subsequent and unique reflections of that image and its dissolution , in other words, the 'time of the event' that preceded existence of the plate and continues to carry its memory within each .
It sort of explains why on observation of glass breaking to pieces we do perceive past and future , very close to each other .

;)

and the photon carries the memory of it's collision with the moon, not it's creation at the sun

Agape
23rd January 2014, 15:06
When you break a glass holographic plate....you don't get a bunch of pieces of glass each containing parts of a three dimensional image...instead you get a bunch of pieces each containing a complete two dimensional image. I think each photon has a complete 2D image

But they each carry a momentum , characterised by spin , vector in space ( even in time ) that sets them to motion in different directions . Though they all have been a part of 'one image' , they reflect subsequent and unique reflections of that image and its dissolution , in other words, the 'time of the event' that preceded existence of the plate and continues to carry its memory within each .
It sort of explains why on observation of glass breaking to pieces we do perceive past and future , very close to each other .

;)

and the photon carries the memory of it's collision with the moon, not it's creation at the sun


I will draw you a picture /graph about the 'mirror break event' with some time vectors to show how memories are stored in 4D.

:yo: