Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Dark matter (Score 1) 212

Actually, I think physicists have speculated that gravity is the weakest force because some of it leaks out of our brane. Stands to reason that some would leak in from other branes to. Mutual attraction means matter clumps up "in the same place" on nearby branes. Dark matter is dark because only its gravitation leaks in; other forces and interactions are constrained to its own universe.

The amount of dark matter - or rather, the amount of gravitational energy leaking in - might tell us how many branes we are "adjacent to" in the bigger scheme of things.

Comment Re:Who remembers Global Cooling? (Score 1) 958

Whereas in the real world, if you look at published papers rather than magazine articles, scientists predicted warming over cooling by a 6:1 ratio during 1965-1979.

Also, for those who didn't understand greenhouse gasses, cooling would be a natural supposition since we had been in an interglacial for about as long as the previous time. Turns out that interglacials aren't as clockwork as people used to think, but some scientists still think there's an end-interglacial forcing that partly counteracts the anthropogenic forcing in the opposite direction.

Please add these to your list of facts to ignore.

Comment Huh? (Score 1) 237

GRBs clearly haven't prevented life in *our* galaxy, so the Fermi Paradox still stands.

The caluculations probably rule out life in the core of our galaxy, but systems further out would be exposed even less often than ours is. And even though GRBs can periodically sterilize a planet, their directionality means that one burst would not likely sterilize all the planets in an intercellar civilization simultaneously.

So, to modify what someone said above, we can add another term to the Drake equation, but this doesn't do much to answer Fermi.

Comment Re:We Really Don't (Score 1) 153

Sorry... I was going for the joke and didn't pitch it very well. My actual views are more like yours.

As for the reality of the subject matter, I would borrow the concept of "probably approximately correct" from machine learning, and give it a 90-95% chance of being ~80% correct. (The 80% is lower to allow room for some more big discoveries like inflation.)

Unfortunately, people will be (hopefully) studying this for thousands of years on top of the <100 we have so far, and none of us will live to see how it turns out in the long term.

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Working...