In my point of view, the Blue Ray Disc is actually dead. The movies in Germany are still too expensive.
NEC, Microsoft, Toshiba, Intel, IBM und Hewlett Packard had formed the HD-consortium to promote the HD standard.
The all deceisive question however is: Why should one buy a mechanical disc with a movie or software on it when all stuff could actually better be stored on a USB-stick ? Since the 8 GB sticks are out and other non-mechanical memory devices surely on their way, why should one use an antique mechanical disc system ?
The only reason seems to be for copy protection purposes. I wonder if that is a sufficient reason to become a successful product ?
Maybe a small company who builds a copy protection into a USB stick will be the final winner ? If I were in electronics, I'd bet on that.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Über Mülleimer im Weltraum und die Notwendigkeit zu recyclen
Zitat aus Yahoo-News vom 28.08.2008: "US-Kollege Greg Chamitoff wartete den Hometrainer, auf dem sich die Astronauten fit halten. Gemeinsam mit Kommandant Sergej Wolkow (Russland) luden sie ferner Nachschub aus dem ATV in die Station um und verstauten Abfälle in ihm.
Der Frachter, der Anfang April an der ISS angedockt hatte, wird im September abgekoppelt und verglüht als kosmische Mülltonne über dem Pazifik. In den vergangenen Monaten ist die Flugbahn der Station bereits viermal mit den ATV-Triebwerken geliftet worden."
Erste Frage: Ist es notwendig das ATV abzukoppeln, bevor ihm der Treibstoff ausgeht ? Stellt das ATV ein Sicherheitsrisiko für die ISS dar, wenn es nach Verbrauch des eigenen Treibstoffs an der ISS angedockt bliebe ?
Muß der genutze Andockstutzen unbedingt frei gemacht werden ?
Zweite Frage: Benötigt man, um das ATV an der ISS befestigen zu können, unbedingt einen Andockstutzen oder könnte man das ATV auch anders befestigen (damit der Andockstutzen frei wird) ?
Dritte Frage: Muß das ATV unbedingt klimatisiert werden, um es als Lagerraum nutzen zu können ? Könnte man es später wieder mit Energie versorgen und in Betrieb nehmen, falls man das möchte (d.h. wenn eine Schleuse am Andockstutzen vorhanden wäre) ?
Vierte Frage: Könnte man auf einfache Weise eine Verschlußtür für den Andockstutzen schaffen ? Oder reicht vielleicht sogar ein Vorhang aus einer nicht benötigten Abdeckplane ?
Fünfte Frage: Wieviel mehr Energie wird bei Anhebung der Flugbahn der ISS benötigt, wenn ein ATV angedockt bleibt ? Wieviel kostet das mehr ?
Sechste Frage: Könnte man das ATV ggf. als Gegengewicht für eine rotierende ISS-Station (für künstliche Schwerkraft) nutzen (zusammen mit weiteren ATV oder sonstigen Raumfähren (Progress etc.) ? -> siehe The need for artificial gravity: http://bulsara-photon.blogspot.com/2005/03/lack-of-gravity.htmlSiebte Frage: Wieviel Energie wird benötigt, um ein ATV (leer) zur ISS hoch zu bringen ? Mit anderen Worten: Wieviel kostet das ? Welche Vorteile und welcher finanzielle Vorteil geht verloren, wenn man das ATV abstürzen läßt ?
Achte Frage: Könnte man das ATV ggf. auch später ohne Gefahr für die ISS abstürzen lassen ?
Neunte Frage: Was könnte man auf der ISS alles mehr, oder einfacher machen, wenn das ATV angedockt bliebe bzw. zumindest weiter an anderer Stelle der ISS befestigt bliebe ?
Meine Meinung darüber das ATV als Mülleimer zu verwenden und abstürzen zu lassen: Ich denke, das ist eine schreckliche Vergeudung von Ressorcen. Wie kommt bloß jemand auf die Idee ein Raumfahrzeug oder einen Campingbus als Mülleimer zu nutzen ? Wer macht das denn bei seinem Auto oder Campingbus ?? Auf der Erde ist niemand so reich oder so beschränkt. Nur im Weltraum, da ist so etwas offenbar möglich...
...und das nötige Geld für solche Späße vorhanden.
Doch was ist ein ATV (Automatisches Transfer Vehikel) überhaupt: - Ein ATV transportiert Lebensmittel und Ausrüstung zur ISS (Internationalen Raumstation). Es ist klimatisiert und kann wie ein gewöhnlicher Raum der ISS genutzt werden.
Unklar ist (nirgendwo habe ich davon gelesen), was passieren würde, wenn das ATV an der ISS angedockt bliebe. Zumindest eine teilweise eigene Energieversorgung durch eigene Sonnensegel besitzt das ATV.
Einige Antworten zur neunten Frage, was wären sinnvolle Nutzungsmöglichkeiten für das ATV ? -
...to be continued
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Über die Erwärmung von Oberflächen bei größerer Geschwindigkeit
Es stellt sich die Frage: Warum erwärmen sich Oberflächen ?
Eine Trivialantwort wäre: Wegen Reibung. Das ist aber eine makroskopische Antwort, also billig.
Eine bessere Antwort wäre vermutlich: Weil Vorgänge zwischen Elektronen und Atomkern eine Loslösung mindestens eines Elektrons vom Komplett-Atom bewirken. Gibt es viele losgelöste ehemalige Hüllenelektronen, so spricht man von einem Plasma(gemisch).
Eine Anschlußfrage stellt sich: Welche Temperaturen werden dabei maximal gemessen ?
Eine Gegenfrage wäre: Wie soll denn die Temperatur überhaupt gemessen werden ? Kann man Temperatur überhaupt vernünftig messen ? Wie bewertet man Temperatur ? Sind 1000°C normal, was ist mit 2000°C oder 3000°C ?
Was bewirken 2000°C anderes im Vergleich zu 1000° ? Wird ein Buch bei 2000°C doppelt so schnell verbrannt wie bei 1000° ? - Man sieht, der Begriff Temperatur scheint unsinnig.
Besser wäre vermutlich die Frage: Wenn ich eine Energie von 2000 J zuführe, was geschieht dann anders, als bei 1000 J Energiezufuhr ?
Eine sehr interessante Frage wäre: Welche Mechanismen sorgen für eine Zustandsänderung des Oberflächenmaterials ? Interessant deswegen, weil man vermutlich von mehr als einem Mechanismus auf atomarer Ebene ausgehen kann.
Eine erster Mechanismus könnte sein: Die Ablösung von Hülleneletronen eines Atoms (von außen nach innen).
Eine zweiter, interessanterer Mechanismus könnte sein: Das Schwingen des Atomkerns gegen seine Hüllenelektronen (s. den Artikel Über die Desintegration von Flugzeugen ohne Fremdeinwirkung) Dieses Schwingen dürfte bereits bei Geschwindigkeiten eines festen Makrokörpers in einem Luftkörper oberhalb von ca. 100 km/h Relativgeschwindigkeit eine Rolle spielen.
Gehen wir mal von ca. 1000 km/h Relativgeschwindigkeit zwischen Luft und Festkörper aus:
Dann...
...to be continued
Eine Trivialantwort wäre: Wegen Reibung. Das ist aber eine makroskopische Antwort, also billig.
Eine bessere Antwort wäre vermutlich: Weil Vorgänge zwischen Elektronen und Atomkern eine Loslösung mindestens eines Elektrons vom Komplett-Atom bewirken. Gibt es viele losgelöste ehemalige Hüllenelektronen, so spricht man von einem Plasma(gemisch).
Eine Anschlußfrage stellt sich: Welche Temperaturen werden dabei maximal gemessen ?
Eine Gegenfrage wäre: Wie soll denn die Temperatur überhaupt gemessen werden ? Kann man Temperatur überhaupt vernünftig messen ? Wie bewertet man Temperatur ? Sind 1000°C normal, was ist mit 2000°C oder 3000°C ?
Was bewirken 2000°C anderes im Vergleich zu 1000° ? Wird ein Buch bei 2000°C doppelt so schnell verbrannt wie bei 1000° ? - Man sieht, der Begriff Temperatur scheint unsinnig.
Besser wäre vermutlich die Frage: Wenn ich eine Energie von 2000 J zuführe, was geschieht dann anders, als bei 1000 J Energiezufuhr ?
Eine sehr interessante Frage wäre: Welche Mechanismen sorgen für eine Zustandsänderung des Oberflächenmaterials ? Interessant deswegen, weil man vermutlich von mehr als einem Mechanismus auf atomarer Ebene ausgehen kann.
Eine erster Mechanismus könnte sein: Die Ablösung von Hülleneletronen eines Atoms (von außen nach innen).
Eine zweiter, interessanterer Mechanismus könnte sein: Das Schwingen des Atomkerns gegen seine Hüllenelektronen (s. den Artikel Über die Desintegration von Flugzeugen ohne Fremdeinwirkung) Dieses Schwingen dürfte bereits bei Geschwindigkeiten eines festen Makrokörpers in einem Luftkörper oberhalb von ca. 100 km/h Relativgeschwindigkeit eine Rolle spielen.
Gehen wir mal von ca. 1000 km/h Relativgeschwindigkeit zwischen Luft und Festkörper aus:
Dann...
...to be continued
Über die Desintegration von Flugzeugen bei einem Absturz ohne Fremdeinwirkung
Beobachtung: Es fällt auf, dass bei Flugzeugabstürzen oftmals eine fast vollständige Desintegration sämtlicher Bestandteile des Flugzeugs und seiner mit ihm beförderten Inneneinrichtung, Waren und Menschen stattfindet.
Man könnte daher vielleicht besser von einer Desintegration auf atomarer Ebene sprechen, als von einem Auseinanderbrechen des Flugzeugs (was impliziert, dass größere Materialverbünde intakt bleiben, wenn man so will: eine makroskopische Desintegration stattfindet).
Untersuchung a: Es wäre daher interessant herauszufinden, bei welcher atomaren Belastung ein Atom desintegriert. Zunächst würde man vermuten, dass hierfür der aufbrechende Zusammenhalt der benachbarten Hüllenelektronen verantwortlich ist. Das ist auch vermutlich nicht falsch, aber eigentlich nicht der entscheidenede Punkt:
Da nämlich der Kern deutlich schwerer ist, als seine sämtlichen Hüllenelektronen zusammmen, so kann man modellmäßig sicher besser von einer volumenmäßig kleinen und gewichtsmäßig großen Masse in einem Hohlkörper mit dem ungefähren Durchmesser 10EE-10 m sprechen.
Weil die Massenträgheit (bis zu einem Gegenbeweis) auch auf das System Atomkern-Atomhülle zutrifft, kann man sich den Effekt einer plötzlichen Abbremsung (sprich: Crash eines Flugzeugatoms auf den Erdboden) gut vorstellen:
Der Atomkern nähert sich plötzlich einseitig der "unteren" (dem Erdboden zugewandten) Seite der Atomhülle: Dadurch finden starke Abstoßungsreaktionen zwischen Atomkern und seiner unteren Atomhülle statt.
Mit dem möglichen und zu beweisendem Effekt, dass viele Elektronen quasi durch ihren eigenen Atomkern "weggesprengt werden". Und zwar so weit, dass eine Atombindung zwischen benachbarten Atomen nicht meht gegeben ist.
Untersuchung b: Grundsätzlich wäre es daher interessant, die Grenzgeschwindigkeit(en) herauszufinden, bei der Zerstörung nur auf Grund von makroskopischen Atomverbundsfehlern auftritt und bei welchen Geschwindigkeiten in einem unbeschädigten Atomverbund ein Versagen auf Grund von Interaktionsvorgängen zwischen Atomkern und Atomhülle auftritt.
...to be continued
Man könnte daher vielleicht besser von einer Desintegration auf atomarer Ebene sprechen, als von einem Auseinanderbrechen des Flugzeugs (was impliziert, dass größere Materialverbünde intakt bleiben, wenn man so will: eine makroskopische Desintegration stattfindet).
Untersuchung a: Es wäre daher interessant herauszufinden, bei welcher atomaren Belastung ein Atom desintegriert. Zunächst würde man vermuten, dass hierfür der aufbrechende Zusammenhalt der benachbarten Hüllenelektronen verantwortlich ist. Das ist auch vermutlich nicht falsch, aber eigentlich nicht der entscheidenede Punkt:
Da nämlich der Kern deutlich schwerer ist, als seine sämtlichen Hüllenelektronen zusammmen, so kann man modellmäßig sicher besser von einer volumenmäßig kleinen und gewichtsmäßig großen Masse in einem Hohlkörper mit dem ungefähren Durchmesser 10EE-10 m sprechen.
Weil die Massenträgheit (bis zu einem Gegenbeweis) auch auf das System Atomkern-Atomhülle zutrifft, kann man sich den Effekt einer plötzlichen Abbremsung (sprich: Crash eines Flugzeugatoms auf den Erdboden) gut vorstellen:
Der Atomkern nähert sich plötzlich einseitig der "unteren" (dem Erdboden zugewandten) Seite der Atomhülle: Dadurch finden starke Abstoßungsreaktionen zwischen Atomkern und seiner unteren Atomhülle statt.
Mit dem möglichen und zu beweisendem Effekt, dass viele Elektronen quasi durch ihren eigenen Atomkern "weggesprengt werden". Und zwar so weit, dass eine Atombindung zwischen benachbarten Atomen nicht meht gegeben ist.
Untersuchung b: Grundsätzlich wäre es daher interessant, die Grenzgeschwindigkeit(en) herauszufinden, bei der Zerstörung nur auf Grund von makroskopischen Atomverbundsfehlern auftritt und bei welchen Geschwindigkeiten in einem unbeschädigten Atomverbund ein Versagen auf Grund von Interaktionsvorgängen zwischen Atomkern und Atomhülle auftritt.
...to be continued
Friday, August 15, 2008
About a BBC documentary about Nano robots by Nick Green from 2004
Preliminary statement: I assume that journalists are always under pressure to make a story look interesting, even more interesting than it would actually appear to the majority of spectators (if they came across the subject themselves).
The documentry: In 2004, BBC aired a documentary on TV about the dangers of nano robots and the threatening end of the miniaturization of electronic devices, referred to as "the end of Moore's law" (see Wikipedia.com for details).
My statement about this documentary: The way that Nick Green builds up an apocalypic tension in that documentary saying (among other things) that "the end of Moore's law will bring our economic progress to a halt" and finally destroy our industrial civilization is at best provocative and at worst absolutely nonsense.
Everyone with a slightly clear mind will accept that indeed the miniaturization will come to a halt one day because at the size of the atom level it might not be possible to further miniaturize electronic devices.
However, the conclusions that Nick Green draws from this are pretty much outrageous and rediculous.
Nick Green elaborates that when this happens, companies will not be able to make any more profits.
I can only assume what his funny trails of thoughts want to express by this statement: If he wants to say that companies will not be able to continue competition due to this, I would suggest that he interviews some company leaders who sell products in a saturated market (because that's a similar situation):
It seems that Nick Green takes the view that only competition due to technical innovation let's a company go ahead of the other and therefore gain them a temporary winning margin which delivers them the gains that they need to survive the battle.
Wait: I tell Nick Green a secret: If that was true, our world would have stopped long ago: One thing is clear, if there is no technical progress in a certain sector with mass products such as e.g. butter there must be other mechanisms at work as reality shows us every day. So, how can those companies survive ??
Well, it's rediculous being forced to answer that question, I actually feel like an idiot: In short I could say: The company with the better management will succeed the economic battle.
But, all right, I give some more ideas: The company with the higher marketing budget will probably gain an advantage (and the battle), the company with the cooler packaging design will win the battle, the company with the better sales personal will win the battle, the company with the better milk buying agents who get a better milk prize will win the battle and so on and so on and so on.
And what about the end customer: Will he suffer from the lack in technological progress in the production of butter or even computers and electronic devices ??
Answer: Of course not, as log as you don't take the butter or the computer away from him: The end customer still can do wonderful things with the butter of a hundred years or a computer - e.g. writing better articles than other authors against stupid documentaries such as the one by Nick Green.
And by the way, there will be technological progress in other areas so there is always hope.
End note: Thank you BBC for all the other great documentaries.-
The documentry: In 2004, BBC aired a documentary on TV about the dangers of nano robots and the threatening end of the miniaturization of electronic devices, referred to as "the end of Moore's law" (see Wikipedia.com for details).
My statement about this documentary: The way that Nick Green builds up an apocalypic tension in that documentary saying (among other things) that "the end of Moore's law will bring our economic progress to a halt" and finally destroy our industrial civilization is at best provocative and at worst absolutely nonsense.
Everyone with a slightly clear mind will accept that indeed the miniaturization will come to a halt one day because at the size of the atom level it might not be possible to further miniaturize electronic devices.
However, the conclusions that Nick Green draws from this are pretty much outrageous and rediculous.
Nick Green elaborates that when this happens, companies will not be able to make any more profits.
I can only assume what his funny trails of thoughts want to express by this statement: If he wants to say that companies will not be able to continue competition due to this, I would suggest that he interviews some company leaders who sell products in a saturated market (because that's a similar situation):
It seems that Nick Green takes the view that only competition due to technical innovation let's a company go ahead of the other and therefore gain them a temporary winning margin which delivers them the gains that they need to survive the battle.
Wait: I tell Nick Green a secret: If that was true, our world would have stopped long ago: One thing is clear, if there is no technical progress in a certain sector with mass products such as e.g. butter there must be other mechanisms at work as reality shows us every day. So, how can those companies survive ??
Well, it's rediculous being forced to answer that question, I actually feel like an idiot: In short I could say: The company with the better management will succeed the economic battle.
But, all right, I give some more ideas: The company with the higher marketing budget will probably gain an advantage (and the battle), the company with the cooler packaging design will win the battle, the company with the better sales personal will win the battle, the company with the better milk buying agents who get a better milk prize will win the battle and so on and so on and so on.
And what about the end customer: Will he suffer from the lack in technological progress in the production of butter or even computers and electronic devices ??
Answer: Of course not, as log as you don't take the butter or the computer away from him: The end customer still can do wonderful things with the butter of a hundred years or a computer - e.g. writing better articles than other authors against stupid documentaries such as the one by Nick Green.
And by the way, there will be technological progress in other areas so there is always hope.
End note: Thank you BBC for all the other great documentaries.-
Über die Fähigkeit Musik zu hören und Bilder zu betrachten
Für wen ist es leichter Musik zu hören oder Bilder zu betrachten ?
Ich denke für denjenigen, der dieses noch nie gemacht hat: Denn wer Musik zum ersten Mal hört, der besitzt die Gnade der Unschärfe: Er hört die Melodie und die Stimmung.
Wer Erfahrung hat, der hört die einzelnen Noten und die minimalen Abweichungen und Fehler im Spiel.
Genauso bei einem Bild: Ein Fachmann sieht die einzelnen Bildpunkte, ein Anfänger die Stimmung und das Gesamte.
Genauso bei einem Bild: Ein Fachmann sieht die einzelnen Bildpunkte, ein Anfänger die Stimmung und das Gesamte.
So sollte der schaffende Künstler am besten einen Anfänger nach seiner Meinung fragen.-
Thursday, August 07, 2008
About dark curtains and heat collection
Experiment: A thin white linen curtain in front of a window, the window is tilted (that's possible at many European windows) so that there is a gap to the open air for venting the room, and there are other smaller gaps between the curtain and the wall on the right and on the left hand side (inside the room) which allow heated air to enter the rest of the room (if there is any heated air).
To make the experiment a little more fun, let's further assume that the curtain consists of a 1 mm thick layer of flexible woven copper behind the thin almost transparent white linen layer (which is an isolator like most textiles).
Observation: When there is a white linen curtain at a window, its colour guarantees that sun beams (and thereby heat) are reflected pretty well.
In contrast to that, if you spray the white linen with a thin layer of let's say black paint, sun beams and thereby heat is collected pretty well, heating up the room.
Conclusion: A thin layer of dark material at a surface is sufficient to change the heat behaviour of a much bigger voluminous body below:
This indicates that the relevant physical processes of turning sun beams into heat take place at the surface of (such) materials.
Since the sun beams are not powerful enough - as far as I know - to change the core of an atom, it seems obvious that the excitation and electron recombination are changed by dark surfaces in a way that let's the resulting electro-magnetic waves not turn into light beams that move away from the surface again (i.e. are reflected) but instead let electro-magnetic waves change their wave length and frequency in a way that turns them into infra red heat waves (the latter is an assumption that one should prove or disprove).
After these different kind of e-m-waves do exist ("are alive finally"), it does not seem to matter that the material below is of different structure (i.e. actually white if exposed to light or is of copper or is just air).
These kind of e-m-waves ("heat waves") have a nature that is able to "infect" (heat up) almost all other materials. And this refers both to gaseous materials such as air but also to solid bodies such as metals.
Result: A dark material is "dark" because its electron hull behaves differently when it is hit by e-m-waves (light waves), compared to an electron hull of a "bright" material.
Explanation: An explanation is easy if we assume that the material is hit by light waves with wave lengths between 397 to 656 nm:
Whitish materials (mainly) will turn the impacting light waves into visible light waves again or in other words "reflect" the light.
Side remark: Not all visible e-m-light-waves turn into infrared e-m-heat-waves and some not even can (as a look at a term scheme of a spectrum shows): E.g. the alpha-3 excitation falls back from m = 3 to n = 2 whereas the infrared excitation has its base n =3 and thereby just sending out visible e-m-waves.
About the subjective darkish or whitish character of objects: One could possibly say that the human eye actually perceives surfaces as dark if a reasonable percentage of light - that hits a surface - is turned into "heat waves" and therefore "vanishes" from the human eye since the human eye is not able to perceive heat waves (at temperatures up to 100°C and way above at least).
Since less e-m-waves are turned back into light, less light waves can reach the human eye in comparison to surfaces with a "whitish electron character".
It can be assumed, since the human eye is easily deceivable, that a material only then appears as dark, if there are other surfaces around that reflect light seriously better (and thereby build an observable contrast).
On the other hand, a dark walled room containing dark objects is certainly perceived as a dark room with dark objects (but maybe also just because we know that there are brighter objects in the rest of the world).
Something clinical: To observe this thing more clinical, it can be said that an object can send out a minimum and maximum number of e-m-waves since the number of electrons are finite that can react with incoming (e-m light) waves.
So, if we look at a surface of 5*10-10 m (i.e. 25 atoms) and if we assume that only one hull electron interacts and if we further assume that the atoms don't interact with eath other we would have an y-axis from 1 to 25 units.
If we further see the time span of excitation and electron recombination ("mean time of exitation and electron recombination") as a defined known time intervall, we can estimate the maximum number of excitation-recombination intervals per time unit.
Let's just assume that each electron can experience a maximum number of 10 cycles per time unit, the x-axis then would go from 0 to 250 since we have 25 electrons (atoms) that are active.
A z-axis which would go from 0 to 100 % then could show us the amount of e-m waves that are turned back into "light waves" or changed into "heat waves".
Judging materials with this 3-d-graph, we might be able to decide more easily if we wonna regard a material as darkish or whitish.-
To make the experiment a little more fun, let's further assume that the curtain consists of a 1 mm thick layer of flexible woven copper behind the thin almost transparent white linen layer (which is an isolator like most textiles).
Observation: When there is a white linen curtain at a window, its colour guarantees that sun beams (and thereby heat) are reflected pretty well.
In contrast to that, if you spray the white linen with a thin layer of let's say black paint, sun beams and thereby heat is collected pretty well, heating up the room.
Conclusion: A thin layer of dark material at a surface is sufficient to change the heat behaviour of a much bigger voluminous body below:
This indicates that the relevant physical processes of turning sun beams into heat take place at the surface of (such) materials.
Since the sun beams are not powerful enough - as far as I know - to change the core of an atom, it seems obvious that the excitation and electron recombination are changed by dark surfaces in a way that let's the resulting electro-magnetic waves not turn into light beams that move away from the surface again (i.e. are reflected) but instead let electro-magnetic waves change their wave length and frequency in a way that turns them into infra red heat waves (the latter is an assumption that one should prove or disprove).
After these different kind of e-m-waves do exist ("are alive finally"), it does not seem to matter that the material below is of different structure (i.e. actually white if exposed to light or is of copper or is just air).
These kind of e-m-waves ("heat waves") have a nature that is able to "infect" (heat up) almost all other materials. And this refers both to gaseous materials such as air but also to solid bodies such as metals.
Result: A dark material is "dark" because its electron hull behaves differently when it is hit by e-m-waves (light waves), compared to an electron hull of a "bright" material.
Explanation: An explanation is easy if we assume that the material is hit by light waves with wave lengths between 397 to 656 nm:
Whitish materials (mainly) will turn the impacting light waves into visible light waves again or in other words "reflect" the light.
- Not a prove but: Feel the temperature of the copper on the backside of the curtain and compare it to the temperature of the darkish painted curtain.
- Not a prove but: One is often blended by the bright beaming of whitish objects but never by that of darkish objects.
- Not a prove but: Feel the temperature of the copper on the backside of the curtain and compare it to the temperature of the whitish curtain.
- Not a prove but: If dark objects would send out as many e-m-waves in the visible as a whitish body does, the human eye would perceive shiny objects. But this is generally not the case.-
Side remark: Not all visible e-m-light-waves turn into infrared e-m-heat-waves and some not even can (as a look at a term scheme of a spectrum shows): E.g. the alpha-3 excitation falls back from m = 3 to n = 2 whereas the infrared excitation has its base n =3 and thereby just sending out visible e-m-waves.
About the subjective darkish or whitish character of objects: One could possibly say that the human eye actually perceives surfaces as dark if a reasonable percentage of light - that hits a surface - is turned into "heat waves" and therefore "vanishes" from the human eye since the human eye is not able to perceive heat waves (at temperatures up to 100°C and way above at least).
Since less e-m-waves are turned back into light, less light waves can reach the human eye in comparison to surfaces with a "whitish electron character".
It can be assumed, since the human eye is easily deceivable, that a material only then appears as dark, if there are other surfaces around that reflect light seriously better (and thereby build an observable contrast).
On the other hand, a dark walled room containing dark objects is certainly perceived as a dark room with dark objects (but maybe also just because we know that there are brighter objects in the rest of the world).
Something clinical: To observe this thing more clinical, it can be said that an object can send out a minimum and maximum number of e-m-waves since the number of electrons are finite that can react with incoming (e-m light) waves.
So, if we look at a surface of 5*10-10 m (i.e. 25 atoms) and if we assume that only one hull electron interacts and if we further assume that the atoms don't interact with eath other we would have an y-axis from 1 to 25 units.
If we further see the time span of excitation and electron recombination ("mean time of exitation and electron recombination") as a defined known time intervall, we can estimate the maximum number of excitation-recombination intervals per time unit.
Let's just assume that each electron can experience a maximum number of 10 cycles per time unit, the x-axis then would go from 0 to 250 since we have 25 electrons (atoms) that are active.
A z-axis which would go from 0 to 100 % then could show us the amount of e-m waves that are turned back into "light waves" or changed into "heat waves".
Judging materials with this 3-d-graph, we might be able to decide more easily if we wonna regard a material as darkish or whitish.-
Thursday, June 12, 2008
La curiosidad de la entrada a la atmósfera terrestre
Referencia: Hay una curiosidad al respeto de la entrada de un vehiculo espacial a la atmósfera terrestre.
Al menos yo lo miro como una observación especial: Si un vehiculo espacial se acerca a la superficie de la tierra, cuando sube por la atmósfera terrestre, pasa un sector de unas 30 kilometros donde experimenta temperaturas muy altas.
Este sector se extiende aproximadamente desde la altitud de 85 kilometros hasta la altitud de 50 kilometros.
En cuanto a la temperatura, este sector es más peligrosa para el vehiculo espacial comparado con el sector de 50 km hasta 20 km de altitud.
Pero porqué es más peligrosa ? - Al pronto no parece muy lógico.
Porqué ? - Porque la densidad atmosférica no es tan denso que es en las altitudes debajo de 50 kilometros.
No hay tan muchas moléculas de aire entre la altitud de 80 km y la altitud de 50 km comparado con el sector de 50 km hasta 20 km de altitud.
Conclusión: No hay en el momento. Pero es muy interesante pensar sobre este.
Al menos yo lo miro como una observación especial: Si un vehiculo espacial se acerca a la superficie de la tierra, cuando sube por la atmósfera terrestre, pasa un sector de unas 30 kilometros donde experimenta temperaturas muy altas.
Este sector se extiende aproximadamente desde la altitud de 85 kilometros hasta la altitud de 50 kilometros.
En cuanto a la temperatura, este sector es más peligrosa para el vehiculo espacial comparado con el sector de 50 km hasta 20 km de altitud.
Pero porqué es más peligrosa ? - Al pronto no parece muy lógico.
Porqué ? - Porque la densidad atmosférica no es tan denso que es en las altitudes debajo de 50 kilometros.
No hay tan muchas moléculas de aire entre la altitud de 80 km y la altitud de 50 km comparado con el sector de 50 km hasta 20 km de altitud.
Conclusión: No hay en el momento. Pero es muy interesante pensar sobre este.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
About being grown up
Being grown up is a state where you have convinced yourself that you know more about life than somebody else. Thus grown up means that you think that you have grown in mental size up upon some other people.
An amusing idea.
Are you really bigger or do you just copy behaviour to pretend that you are bigger ? Do you use those phrases or cloth to pretend ?
And by the way: Is it really necessary for your life to be bigger than someone else ??
Maybe you should have a look upwards to realize that there are other peole who have grown even above your size.
My suggestion: Don't waste too much time on thinking about your size. It's all relative.
Just try to learn some more every day and pass your knowledge on.
An amusing idea.
Are you really bigger or do you just copy behaviour to pretend that you are bigger ? Do you use those phrases or cloth to pretend ?
And by the way: Is it really necessary for your life to be bigger than someone else ??
Maybe you should have a look upwards to realize that there are other peole who have grown even above your size.
My suggestion: Don't waste too much time on thinking about your size. It's all relative.
Just try to learn some more every day and pass your knowledge on.
Monday, April 21, 2008
About god
- Without god, would there be love on earth ?
- I believe: Yes.
- Without a devil, would there be evil on earth ?
- I believe: Yes.
- So, I ask you:
- Do you need god to be good ?
- Or do you need a devil to be bad ?
- Don't tell that !
- No excuses !
- Are you afraid to become bad - without god ?
- Are you afraid to become good - without a devil ?
- Don't be afraid !
- Don't be afraid !
- Don't be afraid of yourself !
- You can be love, you can be bad
- and you can be anything in between.
- So -
- what about god ?
- God does not live your life -
- it's you !
- So -
- where in life is god ?
- Do you need to know ?
- Would it make a difference ?
- But allright, I'll tell you:
- God is in the summer breeze
- when you're smiling.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Sun flares
On April 18th, 2008, ESA (the European Space Agency) published an
article about sun flares:
http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEM4SB4XQEF_index_0.html
In case it's gone there, I've uploaded a PDF-copy to my web space:
2008-04-18-ESA-Solar flares set the Sun quaking.pdf
The article describes a correlation between sun flares and solar quakes.
Cited from that article: "The correlation is not the end of the story.
Now the researchers have to work to understand the mechanism by which
the flares cause the oscillations."
The interpretation of the correlation won my attention as
my interpretation differs.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
About extraterrestrial life
Observation: From time to time - when there is a German astronaut involved in a space project - I observe this news in the (German) press:
German astronaut believes in extra terrestrial life
It's never been said directly so far, but what is says in between the lines is:
German astronaut believes in little green men from planet Mars
My statement concerning such articles: Are we still in medieval times ? Does anybody still seriously believe that all life forms on earth (Menkind, trees, animals, bacteria...) are the only life forms in the whole universe ?
Suggestion for people believing in that:
"Deutscher Astronaut glaubt an außerirdisches Leben"
DPA - Samstag, 2. Februar, 16:11 Uhr
German astronaut believes in extra terrestrial life
It's never been said directly so far, but what is says in between the lines is:
German astronaut believes in little green men from planet Mars
My statement concerning such articles: Are we still in medieval times ? Does anybody still seriously believe that all life forms on earth (Menkind, trees, animals, bacteria...) are the only life forms in the whole universe ?
Suggestion for people believing in that:
- Check out the undersea research concerning bacteria life
- Check out astronomy sources concerning extra solar planets
- Just think how unique life really is.
"Deutscher Astronaut glaubt an außerirdisches Leben"
DPA - Samstag, 2. Februar, 16:11 Uhr
Lübeck (dpa) - Der deutsche Astronaut Hans Schlegel glaubt an außerirdisches Leben. «Da bin ich felsenfest von überzeugt», sagte er den «Lübecker Nachrichten».
«Auf welchem Niveau, ist aber Spekulation. Die entscheidende Frage ist, werden wir jemals so weit kommen, um in der Lage zu sein, mit außerirdischem Leben Kontakt aufzunehmen? Da bin ich skeptisch.» Der 56-Jährige startet am kommenden Donnerstag (7.2.) mit der US-Raumfähre «Atlantis» und dem europäischen Weltraumlabor «Columbus» vom Weltraumbahnhof Cape Canaveral (Florida) zur ISS.
Schlegel soll bei seinem ersten Außeneinsatz in den Weltraum aussteigen, um «Columbus» an die Station anzubauen. «Dass mein amerikanischer Kollege und ich aussteigen, stellt schon eine höhere Gefährdung da», sagte er. «Die Anzüge sind praktisch unser eigenes kleines Raumschiff. Wir haben darin unsere eigene Kühlung, Sauerstoff und Stromversorgung, und wir sind nur mit einer Sicherheitsleine mit der ISS verbunden. Da muss alles funktionieren.» Er freue sich sehr auf den Einsatz.
Friday, January 11, 2008
How to cross a street
Theme: I read that our brain takes 3 seconds to analyse a situation. So what happens if there are cars driving on the street ? You don't have 3 seconds to react.
Thesis: Our brain is triggered by the approaching cars. It just plays the snippets of software that are appropiate for the situation. Even for cars approaching with different speeds, it has different replies.
Annotation: I think that it's one of the first things that a baby learns how to get from A to B and watch the reaction of your environment C while doing that.
Remark: Please excuse if the text above appears trivial. I didn't check on Google if the thesis is wrong, already known or whatever. I just wrote it down for fun.
Thesis: Our brain is triggered by the approaching cars. It just plays the snippets of software that are appropiate for the situation. Even for cars approaching with different speeds, it has different replies.
Annotation: I think that it's one of the first things that a baby learns how to get from A to B and watch the reaction of your environment C while doing that.
Remark: Please excuse if the text above appears trivial. I didn't check on Google if the thesis is wrong, already known or whatever. I just wrote it down for fun.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Movies with a wrong ending
Witness (Harrison Ford)
- One day of love can be enough for a lifetime.
- The presence of Mr. Hochleitner is superfluous.
- Some people might find it reasonable to accept the advances of a Mr. Hochleitner (a 'friend of the family') at last, however that idea seems strange to me.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Discovery of Lea Salonga
Yesterday I discovered Lea Salonga on YouTube.com
Lea Salonga is a Musical singer, currently singing on Broadway, New York.
Actually I had discovered her in 2001 but didn't pay attention at that time.
Another singer, Leah delos Santos, was having a rehearsal on a plaza in Berlin (Germany) in 2001 while I was having a walk and was passing by. The singing caught my attention and I took a break and became interested in the songs. I did some internet research later on and came across the name Lea Salonga, too (due to the similarity of names).
However, I did not know anything specific about Lea Salonga apart from some sound recordings that I found on that occasion and which did not please me too much at that time since the live experience of Leah delos Santos had impressed me more.
Now yesterday evening by chance I came across Lea Salonga again on YouTube. I had the chance to watch a video of her first major audition on the Phillipines in 1989 when she was 18:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd0xyePzdGA
It seemed to me that she just saw the song Sun and moon that evening for the first time at the grand piano with Claude-Michel Schönberg, the composer. The song belongs to the musical Miss Saigon which refers to the Vietnam war and came out in 1989, the year of the audition.
Actually I hadn't known that the guy at the grand piano was Claude-Michel Schönberg but guessed correctly that he was the composer which I found today when I checked it on wikipedia.de
What totally smashed me however was, how professional Lea Salonga behaved even though she was only 18. But I guess after being in business for about 10 years you learn that. (She started singing about 7 as she said in one of her interviews). I never could have done what she did when I was her age.
She was even so cool to ask Claude-Michel Schönberg for an autograph before she started singing. Of course, I guess she wanted to show that she knew his previous works and probably flatter him a bit, too, thereby making him be more patient in case of lapses.
But on the other hand she really showed how cool she was even just a few seconds before an all decesive audition. Maybe that impressed those guys there, too?
Meanwhile, Lea Salonga is married and has a baby daughter. She married in 2004 and got her baby daughter last year in May 2006. Currently in 2007 she is on Broadway again
My personal wishes for Lea Salongas future are that
* she keeps some of her natural determination
(that she showed in her first audition for Miss Saigon)
* she stays real,
* she stays cool,
* she does not get envious or jealous on other performers who are younger 'cause it would destroy the purity of her heart and make it opaque.
I think she overacted a bit in Inside the Academy (PDA Phillipine TV Academy soap?) where she kinda obviously seemed to play the role of a mother which she actually became in 2006.
I would say that people don't expect her to play the role of a mother - just being a mother would be sufficient from my point of view.
---------------------------------------------------------
Audition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd0xyePzdGA
Inside Academy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9n-WRjv0VHc
Biography: http://www.filipinoweb.com/leasalonga.html
Biography: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0758964/
End of discovery.
Lea Salonga is a Musical singer, currently singing on Broadway, New York.
Actually I had discovered her in 2001 but didn't pay attention at that time.
Another singer, Leah delos Santos, was having a rehearsal on a plaza in Berlin (Germany) in 2001 while I was having a walk and was passing by. The singing caught my attention and I took a break and became interested in the songs. I did some internet research later on and came across the name Lea Salonga, too (due to the similarity of names).
However, I did not know anything specific about Lea Salonga apart from some sound recordings that I found on that occasion and which did not please me too much at that time since the live experience of Leah delos Santos had impressed me more.
Now yesterday evening by chance I came across Lea Salonga again on YouTube. I had the chance to watch a video of her first major audition on the Phillipines in 1989 when she was 18:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd0xyePzdGA
It seemed to me that she just saw the song Sun and moon that evening for the first time at the grand piano with Claude-Michel Schönberg, the composer. The song belongs to the musical Miss Saigon which refers to the Vietnam war and came out in 1989, the year of the audition.
Actually I hadn't known that the guy at the grand piano was Claude-Michel Schönberg but guessed correctly that he was the composer which I found today when I checked it on wikipedia.de
What totally smashed me however was, how professional Lea Salonga behaved even though she was only 18. But I guess after being in business for about 10 years you learn that. (She started singing about 7 as she said in one of her interviews). I never could have done what she did when I was her age.
She was even so cool to ask Claude-Michel Schönberg for an autograph before she started singing. Of course, I guess she wanted to show that she knew his previous works and probably flatter him a bit, too, thereby making him be more patient in case of lapses.
But on the other hand she really showed how cool she was even just a few seconds before an all decesive audition. Maybe that impressed those guys there, too?
Meanwhile, Lea Salonga is married and has a baby daughter. She married in 2004 and got her baby daughter last year in May 2006. Currently in 2007 she is on Broadway again
My personal wishes for Lea Salongas future are that
* she keeps some of her natural determination
(that she showed in her first audition for Miss Saigon)
* she stays real,
* she stays cool,
* she does not get envious or jealous on other performers who are younger 'cause it would destroy the purity of her heart and make it opaque.
I think she overacted a bit in Inside the Academy (PDA Phillipine TV Academy soap?) where she kinda obviously seemed to play the role of a mother which she actually became in 2006.
I would say that people don't expect her to play the role of a mother - just being a mother would be sufficient from my point of view.
---------------------------------------------------------
Audition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd0xyePzdGA
Inside Academy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9n-WRjv0VHc
Biography: http://www.filipinoweb.com/leasalonga.html
Biography: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0758964/
End of discovery.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
The lost letter in "Ubi Caritas"
Today I would like to tell a story to the dear reader of a programmatic song called "Ubi Caritas"
(Where there is charity).
Once upon a time something dramatic happened to this song: 'Cause after weeks of work on the lyrics, one night, the night before the writer of the lyrics wanted to carry the finished lyrics to the printing shop, he actually died.
Sadly, a wind blew through the open window that night, too, and the lyrics got blown to the slightly dirty floor.
Luckily enough, the writer had told his friend about the finished lyrics before and so the paper was found and finally published.
And you could say, in those days, it became kind of a hit.
However, because the original paper was blown to the dirty floor, a letter was covered by some dirt making it look as if the letter was being crossed out.
The letter that got "crossed out" was an "s" actually.
Because of this, the true meaning of the song got actually lost: The lyrics as they were published were:
"Ubi caritas et amor, ubi caritas, deus ibi est."
Thats Latin and it actually means:
"Where there is charity and love,
where there is charity, there is god."
Not bad but actually not as devine as the original meaning:
"Ubi caritas est amor, ubi caritas, deus ibi est."
The translation of this is:
"Where there is charity, there is love,
where there is charity, there is god."
And this means that...
where there is charity, there is god
and...
love is god (and god is love).
Do you realize the difference? Pretty powerful the difference, huh?
Well, normally fairy tales have a happy end. This one obviously doesn't. But I do hope that one day, the lost "s" is rediscovered.
But until that day, let's keep ourselves aware that
god is love because god shows charity.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Million Dollar Baby
The "Million Dollar Baby" depended her life on the cheers of the audience and thought that she was meant.
But she didnt know that the audience cheered another boxer the next evening and a year later nobody thought about her anymore.
Nobody loved her and she was loved by nobody. Somebody read her some literature. But he didnt teach her love cause he didnt know love himself.
When she was laying down handicaped in her hospital bed she thought that she was dead. But in fact it was the only time when she had the chance to become alive. But she didnt know and nobody told her.
There she had the chance to forget about the physical and awake her mind. Instead she killed her body and thereby killed her mind, too.
She was full of self-pity and fear that people would forget about her. And she was right. 'Cause the qualities that she had gained in the gym were exchangable.
She never discovered the human inside herself. And her trainer neither. She never discovered the love inside herself. Neither did her trainer.
She never realized that there was a flower growing in the sun and never let her thoughts strive in the clouds of the Himalaya. She never saw a child dying in Africa and never smiled at the soul of her clients in the restaurant.
She defined her happiness by the physical qualities that she had gained in the gym.
She never discovered the beauty within her physical body.
And never realized that some people smiled at her soul. Mother Theresa was in the restaurant more than once and she didn't realize.
The "Million Dollar Baby" had a dream to become someone famous and when she had almost succeeded she had an accident and had to realize that she could not HAVE her dream fullfilled anymore.
So she decided to die cause she couldn't HAVE anymore, she would just be able to BE.
But she wasn't satisfied with just BEING.
She didnt love herself enough for just BEING,
she thought that without HAVING, life was not worth living.
But she didnt know that the audience cheered another boxer the next evening and a year later nobody thought about her anymore.Nobody loved her and she was loved by nobody. Somebody read her some literature. But he didnt teach her love cause he didnt know love himself.
When she was laying down handicaped in her hospital bed she thought that she was dead. But in fact it was the only time when she had the chance to become alive. But she didnt know and nobody told her.
There she had the chance to forget about the physical and awake her mind. Instead she killed her body and thereby killed her mind, too.
She was full of self-pity and fear that people would forget about her. And she was right. 'Cause the qualities that she had gained in the gym were exchangable.
She never discovered the human inside herself. And her trainer neither. She never discovered the love inside herself. Neither did her trainer.
She never realized that there was a flower growing in the sun and never let her thoughts strive in the clouds of the Himalaya. She never saw a child dying in Africa and never smiled at the soul of her clients in the restaurant.
She defined her happiness by the physical qualities that she had gained in the gym.She never discovered the beauty within her physical body.
And never realized that some people smiled at her soul. Mother Theresa was in the restaurant more than once and she didn't realize.
The "Million Dollar Baby" had a dream to become someone famous and when she had almost succeeded she had an accident and had to realize that she could not HAVE her dream fullfilled anymore.
So she decided to die cause she couldn't HAVE anymore, she would just be able to BE.
But she wasn't satisfied with just BEING.
She didnt love herself enough for just BEING,
she thought that without HAVING, life was not worth living.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
All you do
All you do is not too much,
because you need not do it.
**************************************
People often help out other people and...
* think they're doing a good deed.
* think the other one would need their help.
However... noone... not your brother, not your sister, not your father nor your mother is indispensable. Not your teacher, not your boss, not your wife... and especially you yourself are not indispensable.
People are stronger than you think they are...
and that includes you yourself.
because you need not do it.
**************************************
People often help out other people and...
* think they're doing a good deed.
* think the other one would need their help.
However... noone... not your brother, not your sister, not your father nor your mother is indispensable. Not your teacher, not your boss, not your wife... and especially you yourself are not indispensable.
People are stronger than you think they are...
and that includes you yourself.
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
SpaceShipOne - First private suborbital spaceship
SpaceShipOne, the first privatly built spaceship was built by Scaled Composites, a Californian, Mojave desert located experimental aircraft company.
Burt Rutan constructed SpaceShipOne, the first privately built spaceship. It went into space on September 29th 2004 and October 4th 2004 on a suborbital pretty ballistic flight path, reaching altitudes of more than 100 km (62 miles). By doing this twice within a fortnight SpaceShipOne won the Anzari X-Prize (worth $10 Mio.).
To achieve this goal of a (suborbital) space flight, two aircrafts were actually constructed: The socalled White Knight carrier aircraft and a rocket propelled space ship named SpaceShipOne, which was carried up to 45'000 feet (15 km) before being released and ignited.
Burt Rutan constructed SpaceShipOne, the first privately built spaceship. It went into space on September 29th 2004 and October 4th 2004 on a suborbital pretty ballistic flight path, reaching altitudes of more than 100 km (62 miles). By doing this twice within a fortnight SpaceShipOne won the Anzari X-Prize (worth $10 Mio.).
To achieve this goal of a (suborbital) space flight, two aircrafts were actually constructed: The socalled White Knight carrier aircraft and a rocket propelled space ship named SpaceShipOne, which was carried up to 45'000 feet (15 km) before being released and ignited.
Sunday, November 13, 2005
Me and Planet Saturn
Today I used my Bresser telescope for the first time.
My room window is Eastbound.
The sky was partly cloudy, the temperatures were quite autumn like. But I was sitting inside at my window.
I was lucky.
When I spotted the brightest spot available at the time, I realized soon after that it was the Planet Saturn. It showed a clearly visible white disc (the planet body), surrounded by an equally white belt disc around its belly.
To make sure, I checked the internet.
Saturn rose on the Eastbound night sky.
My room window is Eastbound.
The sky was partly cloudy, the temperatures were quite autumn like. But I was sitting inside at my window.
I was lucky.
When I spotted the brightest spot available at the time, I realized soon after that it was the Planet Saturn. It showed a clearly visible white disc (the planet body), surrounded by an equally white belt disc around its belly.
To make sure, I checked the internet.
Saturn rose on the Eastbound night sky.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
