Lets Talk About Things Science Cannot Explain

Brian Turner said:
Regarding "dark matter" - there was a telling paragraph in this piece at New Scientist:

Doomed Japanese satellite glimpsed galactic wind before it died

"We have long known that superheated plasma fills the spaces between galaxies in a cluster. This swirling material outweighs stars and other normal matter – that is, not dark matter made from exotic, unknown particles – by a factor of about five, making it a key part of the universe. But it is difficult to detect except in the X-ray wavelengths Hitomi was sensitive to, where it gives off a faint glow."

In other words, it may simply be the case that we have underestimated the amount of matter in the universe, simply because much of it is not easily observable. I also wonder how much of this "missing mass" will be contained in cold but massive dust clouds that, for all intents and purposes, are effectively invisible.
Click to expand...

Dark matter is pulling the universe together and Dark energy is pushing it apart. It make me wonder more then ever what the nature of the universe is? With all the moving and contracting and pushing pulling . Perhaps our universe is a small part of an amoeba?;)
 
Last edited:
Time is something Science can't explain.

This article is a bit simplistic and amusing.
The quantum origin of time
In some respects misleading, but the BBC doesn't really do science as well as it did 30 years ago.
"Post-selection is like a parlour trick that makes it seem like there is backwards causation where there actually is none," says Todd Brun of the University of Southern California. "It's like the guy who shoots at the side of a barn and then goes and draws a target around the bullet hole."
Click to expand...
Yes!
 
Isn't it something how the best science documentaries are decades old?
I can't stand history documentaries, or biographies... but the basic stuff, nature, science-based, geology, biology and wot-not... all the basics are there, and new intel plugs in but doesn't change much.
The world's largest 'lake', under the Kalahari for ex: (29 mi. NW of Grootfontein) - who knew? That's one newish documentary that is worth a look.
 
J Riff said:
Isn't it something how the best science documentaries are decades old?
I can't stand history documentaries, or biographies... but the basic stuff, nature, science-based, geology, biology and wot-not... all the basics are there, and new intel plugs in but doesn't change much.
The world's largest 'lake', under the Kalahari for ex: (29 mi. NW of Grootfontein) - who knew? That's one newish documentary that is worth a look.
Click to expand...

A lake under the Kalahari Desert? Interesting. :)
 
JunkMonkey said:
It doesn't does it? I tried to watch an episode of Horizon on iPlayer a couple of months ago and quit in disgust after 10 minutes. It was moronic.
Click to expand...

They have to "dumb down" things nowadays. That's apparently more cost effective than improving education. :(
 
Yes, now it's like they are explaining the things that science can't talk about... * ?
Still, 20 amazing uses for WD40 is better than nothing..
 
JunkMonkey said:
It doesn't does it? I tried to watch an episode of Horizon on iPlayer a couple of months ago and quit in disgust after 10 minutes. It was moronic.
Click to expand...

The most irritating thing about Horizon are the two standard time wasting scenes. First, the 'scientist driving to work' scene. Usually takes about five minutes, or longer if said scientist drives a motor bike when an extra half minute can be wasted putting on a crash helmet. If said scientist drives a motor bike and is also a woman then additional time can be wasted with her driving around aimlessly as well as driving to work.

The second time waster is the scientist 'just standing looking either into the mid-distance or at the horizon' for no apparent reason.
 
And then there's the metronomicly regular restating of the 'mystery' confronting the scientists, followed by an open-ended question, followed by a restating of the problem - carefully constructed to fall either side of commercial breaks on US television...
 
Ah! Now there we have a true scientific unexplainable. "How can science be done in six eight minute segments with a rock solid conclusion expressed in language and symbols that a ten year old understands?"
 
Horizon can be quite good, but over the years I think it has been dumbed down a lot.
Also I find a lot of the flashy over clever way it is shot some times a bit annoying.
 
BigBadBob141 said:
Horizon can be quite good, but over the years I think it has been dumbed down a lot.
Also I find a lot of the flashy over clever way it is shot some times a bit annoying.
Click to expand...
To be fair a lot of the subjects they tackle are very theoretical and don't necessarily lend themselves very well to the (modern) documentary format. But I agree it is very annoying. I think the problem is the producers probably think it's too old fashioned to rely on too many nice simple explanatory diagrams and such like rather than flashy eye catching visuals.

Also, in fairness, they do still come up with some good 'uns. And I'm afraid I struggle to find any alternatives that reliably produce better.
 
Nuts. Sorry about that I have tried to find it elsewhere but can't. Basically it's from a BBC kids programme called "All Over The Place" where both presenters do a faultless imitation of Brian Cox talking in part about men walking on the surface of "that White discy thing we call - 'the moon'... but don't look at that... Look at me... amazing!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T This NASA Tool Lets You Track Asteroids And Comets In Real Time Science & Nature 0
O Advanced Toilets SFF Lounge 20
S (Found) Condensation droplets change scientists' physical characteristics Book Search 6
Vertigo Slow Bullets by Alastair Reynolds Reviews & Interviews 0
CTRandall Green bullets Science & Nature 0

Similar threads


Back
Top