Green Baron

Oh, and current consensus is that the universe has no end or zero K is so far in the future that it is not imaginable, probably only reached asymptotically. So forget this. Yeah, some animals can survive a short freeze (- a few degrees celsius for a week or so) by controlling the water in the body cells and producing freeze protectants and means to repair the cellular damage. Metabolism doesn't stop completely, the age but slowly. Fish die when water temp drops below -2°C. Some insects can do longer and lower by applying the means above. Freezing a human to ice completely means killing it and partly means amputation. It is meat afterwards, body tissues are damaged beyond repair, which is bad. First find a means to get the water out of the body without killing the poor thing. Transforming a highly adaptive brain into a steady state machine ? How scary, we don't do this to our computers any more :-) Computer, like all things technology, don't last that long, 99% don't even last 10 years. You can't do away so hand wavy with 100 my. These time scales weather away mountain ranges, change continental arrangements and bury geology under layers of sediments. No material stuff on earth, natural or artificial, lasts even a few hundred years without a change through radiation, oxidation or simply molecular /chemical decay. No energy source lasts more than tens of years at most without being attended or exchanged. A few minerals last very long in space without much of a change, but i don't think anybody will end up as a piece of olivine ... :-) Still even they change chemically under radiation and through isotopic decay, an effect that can be used for dating.

Not even a few seconds (Edit: i mean freeze a living animal/human). It's dead, dead, dead, questions :-) ? Put a finger in ice until it's frozen. You can simply break it off. If you thaw it it'll soon start to smell and you have a good chance to die of blood poisoning if it's not amputated fast.

Nice to see how fast Jupiter rotates ...

1.3 powers down one of my pcs. No idea how this comes. Stock, no overclocking, cpu is ok, ram is ok, no log entries neither in system logs nor ksp logs. Never seen that before. On another one it runs fine. But i don't play that much any more ... i had my fun :-) "You see, in this system there's two kinds of astronauts, my friend: Those with a working spaceship and those who dig. You dig." :-)

I am not a thermodynamics specialist and my brain stays where it is, but is Boltzmann not applicable here ? Heat transfer to the environment: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/stefan.html Flow between parts: https://www.efunda.com/formulae/heat_transfer/radiation/calc_2bodies_enclosure.cfm Or am i thinking too simple ? Edit: a search results in plethora of information for heat transfer by radiation or convection. http://www.auburn.edu/academic/classes/matl0501/coursepack/radiation/text.htm

I am not a specialist, but 10 cores, 20 threads ... which real world software besides a few specially made simulations can make use that ? And 140W power consumption when running full steam !

Yes, that is true, the transition from non-life to life was put ever more forward. New discussion on the topic here from an energy source point of view. In the past two or three decades, since we started to think seriously :-) about 42, the overall picture points to an easy beginning and long hard way with a lot of coincidences, chances and luck that led to today's biosphere. 3 to 8 billion years really say little, even if everything went as fine as possible. Imo

Looking at the stars, i find the colour ok ...

No problem, just for completeness :-) Romans actually populated much of their pantheon with disused Greek deities, renamed them and / or assigned them to new competences, so the book was probably not totally wrong.

Traditionally naming an object is the task of the discoverers. Since nothing is discovered until now no names were officially given. Also doubts have been expressed that the newly proposed object ("Planet 9.5" :-)) that might warp the kuiper belt fullfills the definition of a full-featured planet. @Cabbink: Erebos and Amphitryon were Greek.

Calima weather on La Palma island. Very hot air full of dust is directed from the african desert over the sea towards the canary islands. On its way over the water it takes up a lot of moisture and so it can get really sticky there (here), it doesn't really cool down at night. Inversion layer clearly visible, above the inversion layer 35°C, below 22°C.

I feel honoured :-) I probably have my knowledge from the same sites as you. Example (not regarding offset) Or this. Newtons can be demanding, another reason why i got me an apo :-) A assume that your eyepiece is centered in the drawtube and the drawtube of the fcuser is rectangular to the optical axis. Then this looks to me as if the secondary is not quite centered towards the drawtube. If this is because of the offset then it might be okay, but afaik the offset goes towards the focuser and the main, not away from the focuser. Also i see the focuser tube getiing in the way, which might lead to partial vignetting. Maybe you can find a setup where it is as far out as possible ? But by all means please do ask on CN and let us know the opinions of the savants there :-) !

Well, ask if not content with the answer ... "almost legit" could be interpreted as "not what i expected". ... as some here have probably noticed i am not after the likes. Spare them for the ones in need :-)

The sun revolves fast, i assume you mean earth years ? 50.000 is a long time. It covers several oxygen isotope stages (quaternial quaternary climatic scale) and more than a single human race living on earth. 40.000 of these years are hunter gatherer times. Yet it is quite well understood but i can only help out with hints, otherwise i'd have to write a paper ;-). 50.000 before now hunters of the cold steppe followed the herds that underwent seasonal wanderings, of course climate dependent. A highly stressed environment in late ois 3 led to the extinction of several top predators like cave bear and lion, sabretooth cat,... and the decline of the huge animal herds of the cold steppe in asia and europe. America plays no role then. In ois 2, the last cold phase, only a few small groups lived between the scandinavian iceshield and the alp's glaciers that flowed out until the danube. After that, the reforestation didn't allow for the buildup of large groups like there were in the iceage. Mesolithic groups in the forests were small and highly mobile. One thing that could be of interest to you is the eruption of Laacher See volcano, a continent wide desaster, which is exactly dated and the impact on late ice age groups well studied and understood. Local groups simply vanished because the environment couldn't support them. It took several hundred years until population regained it's numbers (you should check this if interested, not sure if it is still valid;-) Edit: yes, it is). 10.000 before is more or the less a fundamental break in human subsistence as it in that time falls the "invention" of homes, storage, animal breeding and finally growing of sorts of stuff. Human numbers increased quickly, leading to population pressure and intraspecies violence (aka war). But that also means that punctual desasters had a greater effect than before, killing more, and even if not directly so, took the base of subsistence away and thus leading to intraspecies .... you get it :-) 5.000 before now is the end of the neolithic, beginning of copper / bronze crafting and thus better methods to kill each other. The wheel comes up and horses bring humans, especially those with a certain thrive, faster from A to B. Also, it is called "history" in some parts of the world as we have written or depicted information. To sum up: local climate has always and in any case been one of if not the main force for changes in human subsistence.I leave it to you to judge if for the good or bad. Punctual catastrophic events led to extinction and/or flight of the affected groups as long as there was space to flee to. As the space narrowed and people became more dependent of stability (rainfall, erosion, ground type, ...) these events killed many more than ever before or led to wars over the ressources. Two late examples for the immediate death toll of catastrophies and the rising impact due to growing densities: Cracatoa eruption killed approx. 40.000 in 1883, 2004 indian ocean tsunami/earthquake 280.000 plus unknown missing. Future desasters like storms and flooding can easily kill millions in a wink of an eye, draughts many more over the decades because the poor affected people e.g. in central and east Africa will have little chance to get away or demand territory from the neighbours ...

Some point to Russell's teapot with a stern mine, others, wearing a grin, paint Alabama teapots while Picard's aunt Adele is ready to serve the famous ginger tea. A horrible swill that coils up your toenails ... :-)

Rome, the eternal city ! Cheers from La Palma, a greean island in the atlantic ocean. Gain and offset don't tell me nothing. My camera doesn't have these settings. It can only take pictures at a given temperature for a given exposure time. I assume they are settings for the signal amplifier/processor to do something ? Like ISO settings on a dslr ? What i know from dslr photography is that a chip has its highest dynamic range (in terms of light values, lv) when the signal is unamplified. That means for a dslr, if a chip is designed with an iso of 200, it will have the best performance at iso 200. Every higher setting will make things worse, like the noise is equally amplified with the signal. Good luck !

The earth does actually as well draw a tail of gas behind it on its orbit and thus looses a small amount of gas constantly. Atmospheric gases (as well as many other elements) are constantly renewed and exchanged in the course of the various geological cycles on earth, in this case plate tectonics play a presumably vital role in storing and releasing elements over medium- to long term cycles (e.g. Wilson cycles). It is all not that easy ... :-) Edit: the earth's gas tail is mostly lost because it is blown away by radiation pressure from the sun. When the earth comes next year to look for it it is up and away :-)

We must wait. Until then: Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.

Anyone still asking him-/herself why no aliens come visiting us ?

And look as intelligent and prudent as the four gaw err guys in the picture ?

@Epox75: it seems that there is less noise and the filaments are clearer than in the 30sec exposures, what do you think ? Now with 2min exposures the nebula might even be clearer. Yeah, stars are overexposed. There is nothing one can do i think ... There was an open sky this morning, i saw the galaxy high in the sky. The next two days we'll have a phenomenon called Calima, that means high moisture and a lot of desert dust in the lower atmosphere. Thereafter we'll see :-)

It condensates again. But i have hopes for the second half of the night. Well, one of your suggestions, why not, Crescent or Northamerica nebula. The first has 18*12min and is rather small, i have the reducer mounted now. Also i haven't tried to run guider and framegrabber on the "new" old eee pc i got. I mean, they start and ask for the cameras, that's a good sign. Will keep you informed :-) Isn't that a famous last word, attributed to the captain of the submarine Thresher short before it sank ? Edit: yes, it sadly is.

Thanks for sharing. So the guy says that because of the low read out noise of the camera and a high background lighting you should use short exposures. Hmmm ... *rubchin* i am only a beginner like you but that doesn't seem logical to me. I would just try it out. Worst thing that can happen is that i will have learnt something new. But wait ... 2min for the RGB at f/4 ? That is more or less the same as my 4min at ~5.8, even a little longer. And L should be at least as long as the colour channels because L defines the fine structures. Be it as it my, i am going to put my stuff outside now for cooling.

@Epox75: less is more. Really. Try fewer but longer exposures and you get a better snr. Like 20*2min or so. The center may be overexposed, so you can combine like 10 * 30sec L only. PixInsight does it right then (hdr-wise). I did the same with my M42 I have done a better version in the meantime without those artifacts and satellite trails, but i don't find it. It's 10*4min LRGB plus 3*1min L (f/5.8). Darks and biases. @munlander1: no. But for an f/4 it is very small.

The article is a little misleading. What they call a gyroscope (Hemispherical Resonator Gyroscope) is only for measuring the bearing and it does so electrostatically. It has no moving parts and is, if manufactured thoroughly, very accurate and long lived. For actual aiming jwst of course must use a reaction mass in the form of moving wheels. Thrusters aren't applicable for that purpose, they are for long term station keeping around the lagrange point. Magnetic bearing isn't applicable out there, earth's magnetic field is too weak and a little "biased" towards earth :-), the sun's is too variable.