Legianus
@Legianus@programming.dev
- Comment on Searching for signs of life on exoplanets is tough. 1 day ago:
Sure. Generally, it is a marker for life as we see it being produced by living organisms on Earth and it also should vanish quickly from atmospheres if it is not replenished. However, as you correctly put it, there may always be a non-biological explanation as well for any of these marker. So far I know, DMS has no non-biological explanation so far and is seen as a biological marker still.
Alas, the possibility of it being proven non-biological or even (as happend here) not a real detection makes it even more important to get more data and be very careful about the statements made from it than as otherwise those statements and/or connected papers have to be corrected/retracted.
- Comment on Searching for signs of life on exoplanets is tough. 1 day ago:
Astronomer here, the “life detection” on K2-18b was dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and which is and remains a marker for life. What you get from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is raw data that needs to be treated and calibrated to some extent to be usable in scientific study. This is called data retrieval.
However, the lead scientist on this paper claiming they found DMS basically used his own very specific way to do it and found very very weak signals in that way. Other scientist tried to both reproduce it in the way he did it and also with their ways to retrieve the data, but couldn’t find anything. So it turns out, it was simply a misdetection.
- Comment on Black Holes 2 months ago:
I feel like there is a misunderstanding in this thread.
The universe is described by math. Math itself is also very fundamental though.
However even the Singularities are disputed and generally not liked by physicist. We try to find other explanations for how black holes work (lots of papers on this). Moreover, we never really have a singularity, but ringularities, as all black holes rotate changing the singularity to a singularity (they probably also have a charge but that is a different matter).
And on the other hand, if you are a follower of the simulation argument (I know a few physicists that are) there are also counter arguments against this (which I believe are more likely).
- Comment on Black Holes 2 months ago:
I think you explain it pretty well, but one thing to add. Due to the General Relativity and thus spacetime it is actually not directions that all point toward the singularity, but as soon as you cross the event horizon all of your future becomes the Singularity, not as a point in space, but a point in time
- Comment on Simple GOG client for Linux, Minigalaxy version 1.4 released 2 months ago:
What are its advantages in comparison to Heroic?