211–220 of 246 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
we should definitely just reverse the shield polarity and be done by the third act. hopefully the robot can learn a lesson about humanity before the end credits.
I’m afraid only the power of love and empathy and togetherness can resolve this climax
The key claim in the paper ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.12310.pdf ) is that there are detectable changes in cosmic ray activity around 15 days before major seismic events. One posited mechanism is that stuff happens deep in the earth that affects the magnetic field first, and then kicks off some big earthquake. But they don't rule out loopier ideas (like sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that the…
> looking for precursor patterns in an ad hoc way, with no physical theory in mind A bit of skepticism is healthy but some of these threads are approaching downright dismissive. There's a long history of research in this area to be aware of, though I know the paper in question doesn't elaborate on it. Here's one physical theory for you, straight from NASA [1]. > In the ionosphere, the solar winds generate electrical…
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234022172_Explosive...
"The strong negative correlation observed between the timing of silica-rich eruptions and solar activity can be explained by variations in cosmic-ray flux arising from solar modulation. Because silica-rich magma has relatively high surface tension (similar to 0.1 Nm(-1)), the homogeneous nucleation rate is so low that such magma exists in a highly supersaturated state without considerable exsolution, even when located relatively close to the surface, within the penetration range of cosmic-ray muons (1-10 GeV)."
The key claim in the paper ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.12310.pdf ) is that there are detectable changes in cosmic ray activity around 15 days before major seismic events. One posited mechanism is that stuff happens deep in the earth that affects the magnetic field first, and then kicks off some big earthquake. But they don't rule out loopier ideas (like sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that the…
> One posited mechanism is that stuff happens deep in the earth that affects the magnetic field first, and then kicks off some big earthquake. If this was real, would it not be easier to measure the perturbation of the magnetic field than measure the cosmic rays being let in by the perturbed magnetic field?
However, it's a more complex data set to work with, given the vast dimensional dynamics of the field itself vs measuring the flux of radiation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of particle physics is people searching for jobs that give meaning to their life. This often biases them against finding results against meaning.
Not to mention that they are themselves made of the particles they study, which ineradicably biases their outlook.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing that troubles me in the paper is that the researchers appear to have gone looking for precursor patterns in an ad hoc way, with no physical theory in mind That seems like an extremely good thing to me. Looking for patterns and then figuring out causality later is a great way to solve real-world problems. Of course you can be led astray if your filters are too open, but if your work is rigorous and you still…
If you dredge through enough random data, you will always find a six sigma correlation (or five, or however many sigmas you want), kind of by definition. This is why experimenters like particle physicists or gravitational wave astronomers who have petabytes of raw data have to define their criteria in advance, instead of just going to town looking for patterns. I agree with you that if this observation proves to have…
there should be people dredging through petabytes of cern data like this, exploratory analysis can give you insight into things you didn't know to look for.
even if you find things that are bogus you figure out why and learn how to avoid it given the context of the data.
to say otherwise becomes a hindrance to progress. plus its not like we have any other way of predicting earthquakes, trying to read the magnetic field to predict events sounds really promising, i'd be willing to give it a shot even if it is bogus, that's just risk assessment.
The key claim in the paper ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.12310.pdf ) is that there are detectable changes in cosmic ray activity around 15 days before major seismic events. One posited mechanism is that stuff happens deep in the earth that affects the magnetic field first, and then kicks off some big earthquake. But they don't rule out loopier ideas (like sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that the…
The key claim in the paper ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.12310.pdf ) is that there are detectable changes in cosmic ray activity around 15 days before major seismic events. One posited mechanism is that stuff happens deep in the earth that affects the magnetic field first, and then kicks off some big earthquake. But they don't rule out loopier ideas (like sunspot activity driving changes in the Earth's dynamo that the…
Or there's a common trigger event, like, say, a large gravitational wave or a passing cloud of weakly interacting matter(dark matter?) which triggers both increased cosmic ray emissions along with earthquakes. Not that I believe any of this, but it seems we're just pulling stuff out of our asses so I figured I'd give it a shot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing that troubles me in the paper is that the researchers appear to have gone looking for precursor patterns in an ad hoc way, with no physical theory in mind That seems like an extremely good thing to me. Looking for patterns and then figuring out causality later is a great way to solve real-world problems. Of course you can be led astray if your filters are too open, but if your work is rigorous and you still…
If you dredge through enough random data, you will always find a six sigma correlation (or five, or however many sigmas you want), kind of by definition. This is why experimenters like particle physicists or gravitational wave astronomers who have petabytes of raw data have to define their criteria in advance, instead of just going to town looking for patterns. I agree with you that if this observation proves to have…
Besides, the first "scientists" looked at the sky and just stared until patterns appeared.
You can't condemn scientists for looking at data. Not everything can be magicked up from first principles in a vacuum.
No scientist would claim that falsifiable hypothesis and empirical validation aren't needed. But I don't think any scientist would criticise someone for looking for patterns on a whim and pointing it out to others.
A favourite example[0].
Related : Earthquakes here on earth DO emit light !! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_lights
At least one of the videos linked from the references in that article is pretty dramatic, with frequent pulses of blue light from different locations near the ground.[1] If there is a link between cosmic radiation and earthquakes (and that's a very big "if"), could it be Cherenkov radiation caused by super-high-energy particles exceeding the speed of electromagnetic radiation in bedrock/soil/whatever (not C, obviousl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US, in 1988 https://www.americaspace.com/2012/01/30/into-the-black-nasas... >
I can't help but think of this horrible movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_Siege_2:_Dark_Territory
> Jerry tells her that NASA is trying to kill the President using a secret weapon on the Space Shuttle that can trigger earthquakes.