The ISS detects some Dark Matter in Cosmic Rays... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54AxeJFlVgI A video that explains how Parallax and Redshifting are used to measure interstellar distances... Always wondered how that worked... http://vimeo.com/41434123
Here's another interesting science video for those with an interest in biology: [yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzcTgrxMzZk[/yt]
Dark matter is an ad hoc non-explanation invented to gloss over the failing of gravity to account for the shape and movement of galaxies. One might as well call it "magic matter." It is non-baryonic and detectable only by its gravitational effects—at least that's the hypothesis. No one has detected any yet. And antimatter has been generated in labs without the help of dark matter. A proper scientist would revisit the original premise that gravity alone drives the universe. Pulsars are another ad hoc detour into fantasyland based on the premise that a rotating body is sweeping us with its radio beams. Some pulsars have frequencies so high that no known matter could stand the centrifugal force...so naturally someone invented an "unknown" type of matter that experience tells us should not be able to exist. That is, bare neutrons "evaporate" in about 14 minutes, and fly apart when forced into proximity with other neutrons. So neutronium, or neutron stars (the alleged core of a pulsar) cannot exist. A good scientist would revisit the original assumption that pulsar frequencies are due to rotation. And supernovas "don't work." Computer models are not reality, as one can program anything to happen. Yet repeated attempts to model stars cannot produce a nova explosion. At best, the stars fizzle out. Ergo, there is something wrong with the mainstream astrophysical explanation of how stars work. The Doppler effect is only one of several mechanisms for creating a redshift in Fraunhofer lines. (Yet even Wikipedia's definition of redshift begins with a statement about the Doppler effect.) There is abundant work throwing the "Hubble constant" into question, but you won't hear about it from pop science sources. Believing is seeing.
Not exactly. Curiosity and a wonder of the natural world are healthy. But "authority" figures often present speculation as indisputable fact, and that's not science. Without a PhD, one may not have the tools to contest the opinions of those who have the PhDs, but one can still be skeptical, or even call "BS" when a PhD tries to pull the sheepskin over our eyes. "It's too esoteric for you to understand. You just have to take my word for it."
No, it detects an anomalously high positron count, which may or may not have anything to do with a hypothetical particle interaction which may or may not have anything to do with dark matter. Of course, six months from now we'll be reading articles in Scientific American about how the AMS test actually confirmed the presence of dark matter and how new research based on the AMS data gives us a better understanding of how dark matter interacts with galaxies or something. In short, dark matter is bullshit, and every article claiming to have confirmed it, studied it or examined any concrete facet OF it is, in fact, presenting bullshit based on an assumption based on another assumption based on an hypothesis for which no evidence exists.
So long as you realize we are not attacking you. Much of the astrophysical stuff presented in pop science programs and literature is not really science—black holes and dark matter are the poster children for a menagerie of "virtual" concepts. But science is supposed to be the search for reality, not the invention of it.
I don't know if this counts as a "science" video... but it;s pretty kewl. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSCX78-8-q0 I like the comment from one of the makers, that if it gets a 1000 kids to go into science instead of going into the law, it was worth the effort. [yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSCX78-8-q0[/yt]
They're not ready to take on Pixar, but since the IBM researchers are approaching absolute zero to keep their atoms in place, I'd say this is very cool.
The protoplaser seems real now http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ng-lasers-gold.html?ico=sciencetech^headlines space weapons http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31762.60 http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2289/1 Here is one for Ripley: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...e-Solar-System.html?ico=sciencetech^headlines It seems there are two suns 150 ly out--in the Hyades no less Along the shore the cloud waves break, The twin suns sink behind the lake, The shadows lengthen...In Carcosa....Strange is the night where black stars rise, And strange moons circle through the skies, But stranger still is--Lost Carcosa. Songs that the Hyades shall sing, Where flap the tatters of the King, Must die unheard in--Dim Carcosa. Song of my soul, my voice is dead, Die thou, unsung, as tears unshed Shall dry and die in Lost Carcosa. —"Cassilda's Song" in The King in Yellow Act 1, Scene 2
When galaxies collide (simulation, mixed with actual photos): [yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-0GaBQ494E[/yt] Pretty wild.