pion-muon decay

Getting to know Jupiter

The fact that we mere humans engaging in and utilizing science(s) can build and send machines to low-Jupiter orbit and continue to communicate with those machines and receive data they collect is most certainly a testament to the epistemic standing and credibility of science(s) as a collection of investigative methods for gaining knowledge and understanding that towers above the epistemic standing and credibility of just about every other method intended for gaining knowledge and understanding.

We had no idea that Jupiter's poles are such complex cyclonic storm systems! https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap180308.html (Note: that's an infrared (composite) image; i.e. not the coloring we would see with our own eyes (or instruments calibrated to the light wavelengths equivalent to our eyes). In other words, read the caption to the image.)

Everything more about the Juno Mission:
https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu/
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/juno/main/index.html

It is also worth checking out NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/index.php

And, as a side note, because I can't resist pointing it out:
The generous amounts of openness and transparency with which all of this kind of scientific research is done is more than enough to diffuse the plethora of conspiracy "theories" about anything to do with any of this kind of scientific research and work. And I have to put scare quotes around 'theories' because they don't deserve to be called theories, because they're really just a bunch of hypotheses strung together with a few or more facts that are cleverly misrepresented and misconstrued, while other facts are intentionally ignored. To be called a theory requires meeting some rather rigorous and stringent standards and criteria, which includes, by the way, being open to modification (or even replacement) due to new and well-confirmed findings (data, experimental results, discoveries, etc.).

[trying to get back into the habit of writing and posting]
self inflicted

2020

Okay, I get why tons of people are in favour of Oprah running in 2020…
In the very least, I will say this:
We were extremely concerned about Trump's conflicts of interest. Now, if there's anyone who actually has what you might want to call a powerful business / financial empire – as opposed to someone who merely desperately tries to convince you that he does – it's Oprah.

So, shouldn't we be just a tad bit concerned about Ms. Oprah's conflicts of interest?

Now, what about Tom Hanks? At this point – I have no problem saying that I have little information here – I have no reason to think he wouldn't make a good President or Vice President…
haunted

Evolution, the fall of U.S. life expectancy, and journalists vs. the government

Ya, it's been far too long since I've written anything. For now, I wanted to share one of my new favourite podcasts, and share episodes from two other podcasts because the topics and discussions are deeply fascinating and important.

This Week in Evolution
Admittedly the topics and discussions are very science-heavy and can get rather technical – these are real and practicing scientists after all – but if you have enough background knowledge to follow it and understand both what they're saying and the implications of it, it's great stuff.
I also appreciate that they talk about scientific practice, i.e., what scientists actually do, what it's like working in this or that lab with a team of other scientists, how scientists collaborate with each other, how they get funding, the process of writing up their findings and getting them published, what fieldwork is like, the kind of equipment they use, their methodologies, and perhaps most importantly, when they get things wrong, when they make mistakes, when things turn out very differently from what they expected, etc., and how they proceed forward from that, what they learn from it, what silver linings they find, what new questions are opened, and so on. And of course, much of that is coming from their own personal experiences as scientists. Getting that "side of the story", so to speak, can be very helpful and eye-opening to the rest of us non-scientists to understand science better. (And I use the word "science" there as a catch-all term to include: scientists, scientific practices, scientific research, experiments and studies, scientific findings, scientific publications, scientific hypotheses, scientific theories, scientific claims, scientific knowledge, the applications of scientific findings and scientific knowledge, etc.)

An episode from Vox's The Weeds: Why is U.S. life expectancy falling? Plus, political elites are biased about what they think the general public thinks; and, why pushing for unpopular policy is bad for democracy.
Very thought-provoking stuff there.

An episode from The Intercept's Intercepted: All the news unfit to print: James Risen on his battles with Bush, Obama, and the New York Times
From the intro:
"James Risen is a legend in the world of investigative and national security journalism. As a reporter for the New York Times, Risen broke some of the most important stories of the post 9/11 era, from the warrantless surveillance against Americans conducted under the Bush-Cheney administration, to black prison sites run by the CIA, to failed covert actions in Iran. Risen has won the Pulitzer and other major journalism awards. But perhaps what he is now most famous for is fighting a battle under both the Bush and Obama administrations as they demanded — under threat of imprisonment —the name of one of Risen’s alleged confidential sources. In the end, Risen prevailed and refused to testify and he was not locked up. But during the course of his case, there were rulings that could have far reaching implications for journalists, particularly in a climate where the president of the United States is characterizing news outlets as enemies of the people, contemplating arresting reporters, and is conducting at least 27 leak investigations. All before the end of his first year in office."

Enjoy!
But more importantly, think!
haunted

What exactly *are* the Details and Consequences of Trump's healthcare bill???

Vox's The Weeds Podcast try their hand at figuring that out: http://traffic.megaphone.fm/PP9079033447.mp3 Are they right? I haven't the slightest clue. Which is why I'll be very interested to hear what others who are much closer to being experts than I am have to say about it.
Just as Trump suddenly discovered, despite everyone else already knowing it, all this healthcare stuff is very complicated and very complex, and the economic, political, and social consequences are not always obvious, and sometimes not what you'd expect.


[I've been doing rather terribly. When I will ever write again, I have no idea. I'm not sure there's much of a point anymore.]