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…

A Brief History of Time. What a Wonderful Book...

Well, besides being caught up in that HUGE science session yesterday, I also happened to begin reading A Brief History of Time (by Stephen Hawking)...
To many of you this is probably a surprise that I haven't read it yet, as I am a huge fan of Hawking!
I was thinking about what he says a scientific theory is defined as.
He said it can't be proven, but it can be disproven.
Man, does that feel threatening.
But I also wanted to mention that I've had some second thoughts about this whole theory - thing. I mean, is it truly a theory?

And so, I've come to looking through each and every detail Hawking says defines a theory, and mine covers all of it, to my surprise. I was very happy with this definition!
If only there was someway to prove my theory, but of course, with technology now, and at the rate it is developing, it would probably be around at least 10,000 years before they can begin to prove the smallest of things within my theory.
Am I naming my theory?
Well, I suppose I could name it, but it's not really into the pop-culture yet... Nowadays, everything is about either Quantum Mechanics or String Theory or The Big Bang Theory... Or a Quantum Theory of Gravity, which would be all of them together, as the Ultimate Theory.
I'm naming mine 'MTM Theory', or 'Modern Theory', just for the sake of sticking with names, and the fact that it just sticks with me. 'Modern Time Machine Theory' just sounds way too long and doesn't quite ring when said out loud, too.

So, there's this guy, and for the sake of identity, I'll make up a name for him. I'll call him Brian, just for the heck of it.
So this Brian, he decided to date me for a month and a half, and tell me that I was "the only one for him" and that he "loved me more than any other" and all that BS, but I believed him. But then after we just had a date the night before, he calls me just to dump me, saying something stupid like "we don't have enough time for each other" and that "we have different needs" to which, I was just like "Hello, you don't have time for me, ever. I always have time for you." and to the Needs comment, I just said "Okay... Whatever that means, Brian."
Let's just say, being intelligent has it's advantages. I knew something was up because he had been very spacey and quiet the past few weeks, but he kept saying it was stuff at home: More BS. So, twenty minutes, later, it hits me: Duh, that girl (I'll change her name to Brittany) Brittany that he's been talking to. Wow, how did I miss that????
So, of course, I log into Facebook and get ready for a war to happen. All of a sudden, I get the cleverest few lines in my mind that he probably won't even understand but had just fleeted through my mind as if it was nothing:
That he's "Improbable just like M-Theory", that he's "As destructive as a supernova" and that he's "As intelligent as a corn-husker from Omaha, Nebraska" (reference to the Big Bang Theory show).
As you can imagine, I face-palmed and just began thinking to myself "What is wrong with me?????????????????"
Then of course, I switched those comments around to some much more primitive vocabulary that I'd rather not post in this blog...
Actually, the only reason I just thought of this moment now was that Brian just called and left a message on my answering machine. He's about as over-dramatic as Brian Greene when he wrote "The Elegant Universe". (If you don't get this one, borrow the book from the library or go and buy it, and just try reading past the first few pages without feeling over-emotional about the science involved.
....Well, I think that's all for tonight. I'll update more on the theory tomorrow, when primitive, under-evolved people aren't calling me and leaving dumb messages like those.
I do have a family reunion tomorrow, so I'll let you know if anything science or math-related goes on!