Skip to main content

Loosely in the sky, with diamonds

When one mentions stars, the image called to mind is a massive, constantly-exploding ball of hydrogen & helium.

Not so, claims ScienceNOW, the learned observer would be keeping their eyes out for the diamonds!

Well... it’s a tad hot for diamonds as such, but a lot of white dwarves have been found — not resting on white toadstools at the bottom of the garden, but whizzing along through space — with predominantly carbon atmospheres.

Naturally, this represents much confusion & surprise (well, what doesn’t in astronomy?) because the traditional way of looking at things demands that the carbon gradually formed from fusing H & He (via other elements), so there should be substantial dregs from this phase kicking around.

To put it simply, there ain’t.

My selfish reaction to this is “Excellent! We’re learning new things!” but many people express dismay at the fact that traditional approaches now have to be ploughed up & revised. Hey, guys, that’s how science was intended to work! (-:

Comments

sen said…
Damned right.
This should be viewed as a terribly exciting finding.
Leon RJ Brooks said…
As with so much else in this life, the inbuilt terror of change (as in, fear of losing what we have already) stands firmly across our willingness to actually learn something worthwhile & to press on.

Actually, I’ve seen this happen before in — of all places — a church. Mum was an Elder in the Uniting Church at Geraldton, & every so often would have to deal with parishoners squabbling over which pew they sat on.

Not that this one or that one had any obvious advantage, but because “this is our pew.” Never mind about being humble, or doing service for others, or rules which actually matter, or anything else long-term & lasting, we’re going to roll up all of our insecurity & panic about whether we can sit on a particular chunk of wood or not.

Um, & I’m sure I don’t need to point out that this kind of pewtility is hardly unique to Uniting, but I have anyway because I’m a pedant. (-:

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...