So how do they know that the "background" microwaves are from the edge of the universe? I thought that the primordial microwaves are scattered throughout the universe, so what we see when we look in some direction is the sum of all the background microwaves coming from that direction.
If we're actually seeing the edge, doesn't that shoot down the idea that the universe doesn't actually have an edge, and everywhere appears to be at the "center" of the universe? How was this idea disproved? I seem to have missed the discovery of an actual edge, somehow.
The cmb is simply the first light that was able to freely travel through space. There is no actual 'edge' but there is always the apparent virtual edge beyond which you cannot see. It's easiest to think of it as space being infinite in size but finite in age. Light needs to travel to your eye to see so the farthest you can see is simply the age of the universe x the speed of light. As the universe cooled right after the Big Bang, initially light could not directly pass through all the hot plasma, only after it cooled and became transparent to visible light did light spread out in significant amounts. The heavily red shifted version of this light is the cmb we see today. Your own two eyes see a slightly different virtual 'edge' as every point in the universe looks as if it is the center.
It took about 380k years for the universe to become transparent to light neutrinos pass through ionized material easily and the surface of last scattering is nearly as old as the Big Bang. It's a very old concept but has been researched lately as each kind of neutrino would have a slightly different background. The article is just random click bait there is nothing new or interesting about it really.
Okay, as long as we're in conspiracy theory land, I'll bite.
What route do you expect the 1% to take to eliminating the surplus population? Will they do it Adolph HItler style, with purpose built facilities where the 99% will be rounded up and exterminated? Will they do it Joseph Stalin style and simply deprive the vast population of food and other needed necessities?
It seems more probable that in a future dystopia, they might claim the best resources for themselves, set up their own communities with heavily armed guards, and live the good life while the masses eat one another to survive.
Woah woah woah. We are already talking about automated semi trailers why not go to the next logical step and assume a self replicating robot drone army? Why starve or kill the old fashion way when you can live on paradise island while the rest of the world burns terminator style in preparation for the construction robots to turn it into paradise? At the very least you could force them to do whatever you wanted. At no point in history could the 1% actually do away with the rest of the humans. Now with tech not only is this possible it may become preferable as they see it.
Thus they are very numerous but make up only a small fraction of the energy in the universe. The ratio of these photons to normal matter essentially is the symmetry breaking that tipped the balance in favor of matter throughout the visible universe. No one knows exactly why it's this ratio, a successful theory could net someone a novel prize.
besides the fact i have a personal grievance with how pollution is advertised with electric vehicles the main thing holding them back is the battery. Once that is reduced in cost and increased in performance they actually become practical. Right now they aren't very practical from a cost perspective at all.
I pretty strongly object to testing in real life situations when the populace has an expectation of safety. The google car is perhaps the most advanced in the world yet is not able to function safely in city driving. Google themselves admit it's not ready or it would be rolled out as a product. It's a far cry from teams of engineers, programmers, and scientists fussing over every last detail, planning routes where only expected problems (if any) are in ideal situations and real life situations where these vehicles will be dirty, neglected and abused.
Personally i dont feel that its reasonable to allow any self driving cars on any public roads until they have rigorous safety testing completed on closed courses first. I'm less worried about google than some of these fly by night companies that really are close to a mod/DIY community level of technical ability. The latest test by Delphi comes close to that.
How the fuck do you justify putting people's lives at risk with your crap box wanna be AI? I want self driving cars as much as anyone not employed in the commercial driving industry. But not when any jackass car with half capable systems risks everyone's life. Honestly it needs to be banned in the United States on public roads. Wanna play? Pony up for a closed course before risking people's lives. If you think moral decisions are the barrier to AI cars you haven't the foggiest idea what the actual challenges are.
You forget their flavor of the christian religion is not only correct, history is as they believe it to be. For example Allah may have acted according to contemporary norms but that's just showing how backward Islam is compared to the right religion which is nothing but love and the source of all morality and purpose.
At least we can all agree to hate atheists. They should be rounded up and put in camps. Thank god many states specifically state they can't hold any political office.
Robots capable of advanced manipulation could eventually take on many simple jobs that are still done by hand.
Just think with this advancement Walowitz would never have had to go to the ER.