Friday, January 17, 2025

 SPACE/COSMOS

'It blew up': Social media mockery takes off as SpaceX rebrands midair explosion


Erik De La Garza
January 16, 2025 
RAW STORY

FILE PHOTO: Tesla and SpaceX's CEO Elon Musk gestures, as he attends political festival Atreju organised by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's Brothers of Italy (Fratelli d'Italia) right-wing party, in Rome, Italy, December 16, 2023. REUTERS/Guglielmo Mangiapane/File Photo

The midair explosion of SpaceX’s Starship rocket took over social media on Thursday with space watchers ridiculing the Elon Musk-owned company’s rebranding of the incident as “a rapid unscheduled disassembly.”

“Starship experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly during its ascent burn,” the company wrote in a post on X of the company's seventh test of its mega-rocket. “Teams will continue to review data from today's flight test to better understand root cause.”

Musk himself weighed in on his own X account, ensuring his space enthusiast followers that “nothing so far suggests pushing next launch past next month,” and thanking supporters like NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, who just months ago called for Musk to be investigated for his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.


“Spaceflight is not easy,” Nelson wrote on X. “It’s anything but routine. That’s why these tests are so important—each one bringing us closer on our path to the Moon and onward to Mars through #Artemis.”

But not all were as impressed by the spacecraft blowing up midair as Nelson was, with many social media users particularly amused by the company’s curious rewording.

“It blew up,” biologist Daniel Schneider wrote on Bluesky. “Elon Musk. It. Blew. Up. Starship exploded.” He later shared a photo circulating social media of a colorful array of fireballs falling from the sky and added: “Who knew that when Space X Starship explodes it looks like an LGBTQ pride flag.”

“SpaceX: Starship experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly during its ascent burn,” artist Art Candee wrote to her followers on Bluesky. “Everyone else: It blew up.”

“Hope Musk's presidency experiences a rapid unscheduled disassembly,” Michael Little, a U.S. Navy veteran, said on Bluesky.

Legal report Chris Geidner posted to his social media followers: “Yeah, ‘rapid unscheduled disassembly’ is going in the books.”

“The harbinger of Tuesday January 20, the rapid unscheduled disassembly of democracy,” teacher Paulette Feeney told her followers.

Watch the explosion below or at this link.


The Moon: a chunk ejected from Earth?


Researchers from Göttingen in Germany shed new light on the formation of the Moon and origin of water on Earth



University of Göttingen

Lunar samples 

image: 

Since the Apollo era, the lunar samples have been stored at NASA's Johnson Space Centre in Houston and are available for research. All lunar samples analysed in the laboratory in Göttingen were provided by NASA.

view more 

Credit: Andreas Pack




A research team from the University of Göttingen and the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research (MPS) has discovered another piece in the puzzle of the formation of the Moon and water on Earth. The prevailing theory was that the Moon was the result of a collision between the early Earth and the protoplanet Theia. New measurements indicate that the Moon formed from material ejected from the Earth's mantle with little contribution from Theia. In addition, the findings support the idea that water could have reached the Earth early in its development and may not have been added by late impacts. The results were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

 

The researchers analysed oxygen isotopes from 14 samples from the Moon and carried out 191 measurements on minerals from Earth. Isotopes are varieties of the same element that differ only in the weight of their nucleus. The team used an improved version of “laser fluorination”, a method in which oxygen is released from rock using a laser. The new measurements show a very high similarity between samples taken from both Earth and the Moon of an isotope called oxygen-17 (17O). The isotopic similarity between Earth and Moon is a long-standing problem in cosmochemistry for which the term “isotope crisis” had been coined.

 

“One explanation is that Theia lost its rocky mantle in earlier collisions and then slammed into the early Earth like a metallic cannonball,” says Professor Andreas Pack, Managing Director of Göttingen University’s Geoscience Centre and Head of the Geochemistry and Isotope Geology Division. “If this were the case, Theia would be part of the Earth's core today, and the Moon would have formed from ejected material from the Earth's mantle. This would explain the similarity in the composition of the Earth and the Moon.”

 

The data obtained also provide an insight into the history of water on Earth: according to a widespread assumption, it only arrived on Earth after the formation of the Moon through a series of further impacts known as the “Late Veneer Event”. As the Earth was hit much more frequently by these impacts than the Moon, there should also be a measurable difference between the oxygen isotopes – depending on the origin of the material that impacted. “However, since the new data shows this is not the case, many types of meteorites can be ruled out as the cause of the ‘late veneer’,” explains first author Meike Fischer, who was working at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Göttingen at the time of the research. “Our data can be explained particularly well by a class of meteorites called ‘enstatite chondrites’: they are isotopically similar to the Earth and contain enough water to be solely responsible for the Earth's water.”

Original publication: Meike Fischer et al. Oxygen isotope identity of Earth and Moon with implications for the formation of the Moon and source of volatiles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2321070121

  

View of the Moon with the Earth in the foreground: new measurements support the theory that the Moon is material ejected from the Earth's mantle.

Credit

NASA Goddard Space Flight Centex

New measurements turn the Hubble tension into a crisis



New measurements support faster-than-expected Universe expansion


Duke University

Extremely precise measurements of the distance between the Earth and the Coma cluster of galaxies provide new evidence for the Universe’s faster-than-expected rate of expansion. 

image: 

Extremely precise measurements of the distance between the Earth and the Coma cluster of galaxies provide new evidence for the Universe’s faster-than-expected rate of expansion. 

view more 

Credit: Photo courtesy NOIRLab



The Universe really seems to be expanding fast. Too fast, even.

A new measurement confirms what previous — and highly debated — results had shown: The Universe is expanding faster than predicted by theoretical models, and faster than can be explained by our current understanding of physics.

This discrepancy between model and data became known as the Hubble tension. Now, results published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters provide even stronger support to the faster rate of expansion.

“The tension now turns into a crisis,” said Dan Scolnic, who led the research team.

Determining the expansion rate of the Universe — known as the Hubble constant — has been a major scientific pursuit ever since 1929, when Edwin Hubble first discovered that the Universe was expanding.

Scolnic, an associate professor of physics at Duke University, explains it as trying to build the Universe’s growth chart: we know what size it had at the Big Bang, but how did it get to the size it is now? In his analogy, the Universe’s baby picture represents the distant Universe, the primordial seeds of galaxies. The Universe’s current headshot represents the local Universe, which contains the Milky Way and its neighbors. The standard model of cosmology is the growth curve connecting the two. The problem is: things don’t connect.

“This is saying, to some respect, that our model of cosmology might be broken,” said Scolnic.

Measuring the Universe requires a cosmic ladder, which is a succession of methods used to measure the distances to celestial objects, with each method, or “rung,” relying on the previous for calibration.

The ladder used by Scolnic was created by a separate team using data from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), which is observing more than 100,000 galaxies every night from its vantage point at the Kitt Peak National Observatory.

Scolnic recognized that this ladder could be anchored closer to Earth with a more precise distance to the Coma Cluster, one of the galaxy clusters nearest to us.

“The DESI collaboration did the really hard part, their ladder was missing the first rung,” said Scolnic. “I knew how to get it, and I knew that that would give us one of the most precise measurements of the Hubble constant we could get, so when their paper came out, I dropped absolutely everything and worked on this non-stop.” 

To get a precise distance to the Coma cluster, Scolnic and his collaborators, with funding from the Templeton foundation, used the light curves from 12 Type Ia supernovae within the cluster. Just like candles lighting a dark path, Type Ia supernovae have a predictable luminosity that correlates to their distance, making them reliable objects for distance calculations.

The team arrived at a distance of about 320 million light-years, nearly in the center of the range of distances reported across 40 years of previous studies — a reassuring sign of its accuracy.

“This measurement isn’t biased by how we think the Hubble tension story will end,” said Scolnic. “This cluster is in our backyard, it has been measured long before anyone knew how important it was going to be.”

Using this high-precision measurement as a first rung, the team calibrated the rest of the cosmic distance ladder. They arrived at a value for the Hubble constant of 76.5 kilometers per second per megaparsec, which essentially means that the local Universe is expanding 76.5 kilometers per second faster every 3.26 million light-years.

This value matches existing measurements of the expansion rate of the local Universe. However, like all of those measurements, it conflicts with measurements of the Hubble constant using predictions from the distant Universe. In other words: it matches the Universe’s expansion rate as other teams have recently measured it, but not as our current understanding of physics predicts it. The longstanding question is: is the flaw in the measurements or in the models?

Scolnic’s team’s new results adds tremendous support to the emerging picture that the root of the Hubble tension lies in the models.

“Over the last decade or so, there's been a lot of re-analysis from the community to see if my team’s original results were correct,” said Scolnic, whose research has consistently challenged the Hubble constant predicted using the standard model of physics. “Ultimately, even though we're swapping out so many of the pieces, we all still get a very similar number. So, for me, this is as good of a confirmation as it's ever gotten.”

“We’re at a point where we’re pressing really hard against the models we’ve been using for two and a half decades, and we’re seeing that things aren’t matching up,” said Scolnic. “This may be reshaping how we think about the Universe, and it’s exciting! There are still surprises left in cosmology, and who knows what discoveries will come next?”

#

CITATION: Scolnic, D., Riess, A.G., Murakami, Y.S., Peterson, E.R., Brout, D., Acevedo, M., Carreres, B., Jones, D.O., Said, K., Howlett, C. and Anand, G.S., 2025. The Hubble Tension in our own Backyard: DESI and the Nearness of the Coma Cluster. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 979, L9. DOI 10.3847/2041-8213/ada0bd

This work was conducted with funding from the Templeton Foundation, the Department of Energy, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Sloan Foundation, the National Science Foundation and NASA.

'Den of lions': Evangelists take over the Texas State Capitol to cast out 'Jezebel' spirit


Jennifer Bowers Bahney
January 15, 2025 

(Shutterstock.com)

The line separating church and state was mercilessly blurred in Texas this week, as Christian worshippers inundated the state capitol to pray for spiritual protection for lawmakers.

Robert Downen, who covers politics and extremism for The Texas Tribune, posted to X, "At the Texas Capitol, Christian worshippers are blessing the walls of a hearing room to protect lawmakers from spiritual forces and the 'Jezebel' spirit. 'Pray for the fear of the Lord to come into this place,' says MercyCulture pastor Landon Schott."

In the video, participants can be seen laying hands on the walls of the capitol, while others raised their hands in worship.


Schott can be heard over music playing in the background, "We pray that we would not bow to fear! We pray like Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, be willing to be thrown into a fiery furnace. We say that our God is able. And even if he doesn't, he's God. We say, like a Queen Esther that says, 'If I perish, I perish.' We say like a Daniel, 'I will sleep in a den of lions.'"





Downen also posted a link to Wednesday's Tribune article, writing, "The chair of the Texas GOP said Tuesday that church-state separation doesn't exist as Republican lawmakers vowed to give the Legislature 'back to the Holy Spirit' and pastors promised to weed out 'cowardly' clergy who won't politick from the pulpit."

Downen wrote that the chair's comments "are the latest sign of the Texas GOP’s embrace of fundamentalist ideologies that seek to center public life around their faith by claiming church-state separation is a myth or that America’s founding was God-ordained, and its laws should thus favor conservative Christianity."

Evangelicals have long rallied around Republicans, and were instrumental in helping Donald Trump win the presidency in 2016 and 2024. Time magazine reported, "Trump has white evangelicals in his pocket. Whatever cognitive dissonance some devout Christians may feel for supporting a twice-impeached serial philandering liar who tried to stage a coup and threatens violence against political opponents is easily dismissed with the conviction that no Republican nominee, no matter how problematic, could be worse than losing to a Democrat."

The Jezebel Spirit, Eno/Byrne





If only more Democrats had Michelle Obama's guts


John Stoehr
January 16, 2025
ALTERNET

Michelle Obama (Everett Collection / Shutterstock)

The Associated Press reported Monday that the former first lady will not attend Donald Trump’s inauguration next week. Her husband will be there, however. So will the other former presidents and their spouses. So will the current president and the current first lady.

Michelle Obama didn’t attend Jimmy Carter’s funeral, so her decision to skip Trump’s swearing-in can be interpreted as less pointed than it seems. However, I’m not buying speculation about her health. She has said on more than one occasion that Trump’s white-power rhetoric (not her words) literally puts her life and her loved one’s lives at risk.

It’s fair to say that she “just hates Trump,” as Margaret Hartmann reported, but it’s also fair to say that she hates him for a good reason. And it’s fair to say that when someone endangers your life, you’re under no obligation to be nice to him. Indeed, being nice to him might actually embolden him, compounding the danger to you and yours.

Liberals like New York magazine’s Ed Kilgore might interpret Obama’s “boycott” as a sign of weakness. Last month, he said “the peaceful transition of power is central to our traditions as a constitutional democracy, which was precisely why it was so outrageous that the 45th president tried to disrupt it four years ago. His installment as the 47th president will be the last time Democrats have to bow to Trump’s power as a properly elected chief executive, but bow they must before getting down to the hard and essential work of fighting his agenda.”

I don’t see Obama’s decision as a sign of weakness.

She knows people will fairly and unfairly compare her actions to Trump’s. There’s no doubt about that. She understands the expedience that goes into bowing down briefly before “getting down to the hard and essential work of fighting his agenda.” She knows the trade-offs.

Yet she’s choosing to play according to her own rules. She is not going to extend to someone who threatens her life and humanity the same courtesy that she would to someone who does not. That’s not a sign of weakness, because courage like that is never a sign of weakness.

Honestly, the same can’t be said of her husband.

Trump tried in his first term to not only erase Barack Obama’s record as president, including Obamacare, but also erase Barack Obama’s image. Yet, at Carter’s funeral, Barack Obamasat next to Trump. According to the AP, he even “chatted and laughed” with him, like they were “old friends,” as if declaring to the world that politicians never mean what they say, whether it’s that Obama is an evil foreign-born puppetmaster or that Trump is an existential threat to democracy.

The same can’t be said of other Democrats, too.

At least five House Democrats who boycotted Trump’s first inaugural are going to his second, per Politico. California Congressman Jared Hoffman rationalized his choice, saying, “Like it or not, this guy was just elected by the country with full disclosure of all of his ugliness.”

Another takeaway, however, is Trump’s ugliness can’t have been so ugly given that at least five Democrats have now changed their minds.


At least four Democratic governors will be attending, according to the Connecticut Post, including Connecticut’s. Ned Lamont said he was going out of respect for the presidency, even though Trump’s agents have already threatened him and other governors with arrest and prosecution “if they don't comply with Trump's actions on immigrants.” “Look,” Lamont told Dan Haar, “I’m not looking to pick fights and I’m going down there out of respect for the peaceful transition of power."

All this sounds noble, but it looks like fear.

Because it is, according to Keith Ellison. Podcaster Dean Obeidallah asked the Minnesota attorney general why leading Democrats are suddenly quiet about Trump being a fascist threat to democracy.


“I have an answer for you,” said Ellison, a Democrat. “It’s like, ‘yeah, we think he’s a fascist and now that he has power, we’re scared, and so we’re trying to keep our head down so we don’t attract the negative attention of the fascist.’ I have been in so many [cover-your-ass] conversations, Dean, I’ve stopped counting people who have said ‘I’m going to keep my head down and hope I don’t get any attention by the bad guy.’ It’s really fear. That’s what you’re seeing. Many of the louder voices are quiet, because they fear he’s going to keep his promise.”

That promise of vengeance against his enemies, through the Justice Department or some other means available to a president, should put all the happy talk about democratic norms in a less flattering light.

Was Barack Obama chatting and laughing with Trump, as if they were old friends, out of basic human decency, even though Trump has tried to erase him and his presidential record? Or was he scared? (If so, George W. Bush put him to shame by completely ignoring Trump. )


Did at least five House Democrats change their minds about attending Trump’s inaugural out of deference to the will of voters who elected him despite “full disclosure of all of his ugliness”? Or were they scared?

Are Lamont and three other Democratic governors extending a courtesy to Trump, which by the way Trump never felt obligated to extend to his Democratic successor, out of respect for norms and institutions or fear of getting negative attention “by the bad guy.”

The Democrats’ defense of norms and institutions sounded righteous before the election. Afterward, however, and in the calm before the storm, such defense increasingly has the ring of appeasement to it.


The Democrats say they don’t want to normalize Trump, yet the highest-profile among them are about to do just that. And perhaps they are going to do that, not because of some passion for principle but because they are afraid of what might happen to them if they don’t.

"It's breathtaking that in the United States of America, a powerful person tied to the incoming president, credited as the architect of Trump's immigration policy, would threaten governors with prison for their state laws protecting immigrants,” said the Connecticut Post’s Dan Haar on the threat to Lamont. “That's not the stuff of a free country.

That’s the stuff of fear.

There’s no freedom with fear like that.


If only more Democrats were as free as Michelle Obama.