Quasars, Pulsars, Novae, and Blinking Molecules…

What I am about to explain to you may be a bit confusing unless we begin with what the heck a ‘quasar’ is.

A quasar is defined as an extragalactic, super massive star-like object in that it is luminescent, but that it is the most luminescent object in the universe.

A pulsar, however (and yes, they have been found which is awesome!) is a quasar that acts sort of like a lighthouse: it blinks in a rotating fashion. However, scientists have not yet figured out exactly how this works.

But what they have found out is that some molecules actually do blink.

According to an article from August 12th, last week Neils Bohr’s prediction of molecules blinking was correct after all.

Neils Bohr had predicted this long ago, as a chemical physicist. Now physicists have found that molecules can blink due to a transition of electrons between discreet levels of energy within individual atoms at a time.

These have been coined ‘Quantum jumps’ by Neils Bohr and they have finally found how exactly this works. There are discreet interruptions when the electrons are being transferred, and so the molecules actually light up with energy when all the electrons are in it, then when the interruption is gone they all then go to the other molecule. The interruptions are caused by the emissions (of carbon and such) from the atom, blocking out the electrons.

What’s cool is that these are molecules that are blinking here. What it means is, different ways of imaging for cancer. Real time images of viruses such as HIV and soforth.

But not only for medical professionals: if blinking molecules could be controlled (which may be coming sooner than we know it), these could be used as an electricity-free way to use house-hold lights, brighter display screens on computers and gaming systems, TVs, and could change the way we see electronics as we know them.

As far as novae go, I wanted to explain why you can’t see quasars, pulsars, or supernovae (or novae) with the naked eye.

The problem is this: the closest stars to us besides the Sun take a loooooooong time to send their light to us.

If we were very close to the supernova or pulsar or quasar or whatever it is, we could see it in real time, or close to it.

But in the same way, you cannot see supernovae or quasars with the naked eye because they are so far away, that by the time the light gets here it would barely be noticeable. Any star that is massive enough to have a supernova (or a nova, which is a supernova that causes a white dwarf not a black hole), or any pulsar or quasar, is not even close to being seen with the naked eye. You even need a telescope to see all of the separate areas and craters on the moon, let alone a supernova that’s happening a thousand thousand thousand thousand thousand million light years away.

Next post: The ending of “The Time Machine” (contains spoilers!) and how probable the ideas really are about what the future will be like…

Almost the Beginning of the End, But a Fresh Start has Emerged...

 

So, I haven't updated as much as I would, but it does happen to be a very hard week for me.
Besides all that life stuff, I've been reading a few works of H.P. Lovecraft (A very old, but famous horror/sci fi writer) that included many supernatural dimensions, space, time, and many references to an 'Abyss of time' and such. I wanted to put in a quote that I just had to smile at, because his trademark is putting numerous descriptions all in a line in one large run-on sentence. This is from The Lurking Fear (pub. Necronomicon Press, 1977):
"I felt the stranging tendrils of a cancerous horror whose roots reached into illimitable pasts and fathomless abysms of the night that broods beyond time." - pg. 23
I have to say, in my opinion, this is a much more awesome description, rather than just saying "I was scared, I wanted to run, and scream, but I couldn't."
Although in the second quote, these are commonly used in today's horror books, to suffice the average bowel movement, instead of attempting to stretch our imagination beyond our limits.
I had to write a paper for school in March about my favorite author, or just an author of literary merit. I chose Lovecraft because he fits both of those descriptions. We had to choose an X, Y, and Z about the author (three descriptions of his work, three pieces of literature by him, three themes he commonly uses, etc.) and argue why this author is a great author, or how in the world these three things appropriately describe his work. I chose for my thesis: "H. P. Lovecraft’s use of magic-realism, New England lore, and supernatural dimensions were made more effective in his writings by his obsession with the sciences." which actually turned out to be great, compared to some who used the old X, Y, and Z method, I just chose his three usual literary devices, and made it work with how EVERYONE who has analyzed his works says over and over how he loved the sciences, especially astronomy and physics (which is ironic, clearly).
Anyways, so I've been very distracted from my science reading, until Thursday when at the library, I stumbled upon "The Nothing That Is: A Natural History of Zero" by Robert Kaplan.
I was looking for something fresh, something besides "Blah, blah blah, can't go faster than the speed of light, blah, blah blah" and this was definitely something I was looking for: Something about the sciences that definitely showed genuine interest from the narrator, and didn't start babbling over useless things just to fill the pages.
If I had to suggest it to anyone, seriously, I'd suggest it to anyone who's interested in history, math, science, mysteries, or human nature (behavior, etc.). It talks about numbers from the beginning besides zero, too, and it says how it ties in with the cultures, how the cultures exchanged symbols, and how the symbol for zero wasn't developed until far into the development of civilization. It gives pictures, too, to give the reader a visual of what the old numbers used to look like, and how they weren't exactly numbers, such as Roman Numerals, the Indian 'Kha', and the Greek symbols for different amounts. Many of them weren't exactly numbers because they were only ten-based, not one-based. It's terribly confusing when you tried to make slightly larger numbers such as 72 or 160.
And so, I am taking a break from "A Brief History of Time" for something a bit newer and refreshed, then I'll get back down to the nitty-gritty of spacetime.

The Old Binder... I Need to Change It, For the Second Time

 

Originally, my project was turning into a binder, consisting of a drawn cover with a rocket and two different titles:
The Modern Time Machine Project by Madeleine Michaud and Kyle Oelofse, and The SIEMEN's Math, Science, and Technology Competition by Madeleine Michaud and Dean Thurston.
Of course, my interests have taken a huge turn from first, writing a book with Kyle, and second, adding on a project to do with all of this information. But that would be terribly difficult for someone going into junior year... I mean, you can't prove my theory, so what good would an experiment do for me if I can't go to the large hadron collider??
This picture was version 2.0 of the project, as it turned into not a book, but just the project and THEN writing a book later..
Of course, my partner for the project was not as interested as I thought he was. And to enter the Siemen's competition before you're going into senior year, you HAVE to have a partner.
So, to my dismay, the project was dismissed, as well as the book.
So for a couple of weeks I had absolutely nothing, except ideas, which is all I had begun with.
As far as my theory went, that stupid stuff with "Brian" (the one from the previous post) had distracted me from everything... Because he wasn't interested in it.
So, I made a big mistake. But I've learned from it, which is the important piece of it.
And so, here I am, writing this post for today...Awesome!
And that wasn't sarcastic. Writing a blog is possibly one of the best ideas ever come up with for blooming writers and people who want to share ideas and information with the world!
It's much less intimidating than writing a book, because all it is, is whatever you want to say for the day, and it doesn't have to be writting in a certain way. You can write it any way you want, and it doesn't have to be over 100 pages to be considered to show to the world (to be printed and sold)....
All it is, is typing stuff in a somewhat-entertaining way and and clicking a button.
How easy...
Anyways, I wanted to tell you all about this dialogue that happens every single time I meet someone new or catch up with a relative:

Person: "Are you thinking about college yet?"
Me: "I want to get my Ph.D in Astrophysics at Cambridge University"
(With a look of surprise)Person: Wow! That's (insert 'wonderful' or 'intense')!
Me: "Yeah, it's in England..."
(Still looking astonished)Person: "Well, that sounds (insert 'wonderful' or 'fascinating')!"

I wonder if a conversation like this happens with anyone else with one of their relatives or when meeting someone new....

As far as science goes, I was thinking about my theory on the way to my family reunion in the car today, and I realized that if the theory is called Modern Theory, and if our universe is actually another universe's waste disposal system, shouldn't that part of it be called the Garbage Can Theorem? I laughed, what a funny name... I suppose it could be called the Excess Energy Theorem or something good-sounding like that?

It's funny because I'm still reading "A Brief History of Time", and I realized that String Theory didn't exist until after this book was released in 1989/1990.
This means that String Theory has only been around for, at the most, 19 years!
Really, I would like to meet the scientist who came up with it, and analyze their brain for a plethora of psychological issues....
Haha, just kidding.
Anyways, next time I'm posting a diagram of the time-travel aspect of my theory, so stay tuned!