You should really stop sitting on your hands and call NASA. And let them know about your skills of interpreting single point data into a trend - and intuiting the size of debris in a field better. You should hop onto LinkedIn and see how you can turn your third degree connections into a direct line so you can save the telescope. Don't leave your skills hidden from the scientific public.

Ha ha, thanks for the laugh. But really if you disagree then show us why and some proof of your concept. You can never prove anything by simply mocking or joking you need to show some evidence. You should also stop leaning on NASA or any other organization unless you can prove that they are all knowing or something. I knew people who worked at NASA back in the 1980's and i know they are not beyond reproach. I am not saying they are stupid just that they make mistakes and over look things just like everybody else. So i dont recommend praying to NASA for anything (chuckle).

Here's a little humor of my own i'll interject here just to lighten up the mood a little...
Maybe we should ask NASA how to land on Mars using two different system of units (har har har). (reference to the silly mistake of not realizing one group was using metric and the other imperial and crashing a very expensive craft). Is that who we should ask? (har har har).
Oh and (back in the 1980's again) they did NOT know the physics of why the first space shuttle launch turned over belly up as it got up in the air. To this day they may STILL not know what physical effect that was because it is not well known and they claim that they KNEW it was going to turn belly up but back then they were all surprised and didnt know why. Id' like to see their reasoning now, but i guess they may have figured out the effect that caused that. So dont be surprised if NASA comes up with an explanation of the 'micro' meteor in the near future, but we may have to take it with a grain of salt, or sand, or something else small but larger than we ever thought it could be (har har har, har har, cant stop laughing now).

Ok humor over for now
.

 

Good expression which is especially fitting for me because I play a lot of chess! I'm my case most of my blunders are a result of simply not looking at the whole board! In many ways debate is like a chess game which must be planned to have the planned and proper effect.

Someone posted this image that I like for debate. I think it's psychologically incomplete but still an excellent baseline to argue on.

View attachment 269355

Also, I have a hard time with any statement that includes the 'we' like "we won (our team)" or "we know earth has an iron core" because it's effectively taking contribution and passing them off as if we ourselves contributed. I see this all the time with scientists which in my opinion comes out because of ego. If ego was not part of any of us, we would only want to help each learn and not resort to means that should be below us. And to paraphrase my hero, "If two people disagree, they should argue until they finally agree OR they agree that the answer is beyond them."

This has context because this topic is discussing what is one of the most complex combined efforts yet of man. The line from fact to conjecture becomes nonexistent to many people for some reason (ego????)

I'm off topic already I just hate seeing strong minds resort to anything that isn't helping humanity and this includes basic feelings of worth and acceptance.

Hi,

That's very interesting. Is there a reason why the items are in the shape of a triangle, is that some kind of ordering or some indication of priority?

 

Hi,

That's very interesting. Is there a reason why the items are in the shape of a triangle, is that some kind of ordering or some indication of priority?

Good question, I'm not sure what the author implied with a pyramid. A ladder hierarchy might have been more appropriate.

 

Ha ha, thanks for the laugh. But really if you disagree then show us why and some proof of your concept.

i cannot disagree or agree. Like said, you are a very funny person thinking a single datapoint is a trend. Also, thinking I somehow have proof other than a single point on a graph making it possible to draw a trend in any direction - I need to show you proof why that's crazy. Ha. Good one.

 

i cannot disagree or agree. Like said, you are a very funny person thinking a single datapoint is a trend. Also, thinking I somehow have proof other than a single point on a graph making it possible to draw a trend in any direction - I need to show you proof why that's crazy. Ha. Good one.

Hello again and thanks for the reply,

You can not agree or disagree. Well that helps a lot now doesnt it? he he. So it seems that you want everyone to stay perfectly neutral without any thoughts about what might happen. No gut feelings allowed.

I dont know where you are getting this "one data point" from though. I had said this long before we had any data points. That must mean i had some other logic that underlies the assumptions i made that did not rely on raw data except in a very general sense of how things work in space with gravity and other forces. In other words, you dont need data to know that if someone drops a brick from 1000 feet that it SHOULD hit the ground. You can make educated guesses without data and designers do this all the time. The data comes during bench testing and that proves or disproves some of the design concepts. Usually however there are only small changes needed because of the 'educated' guesses from experienced designers.
It's not like we never heard of a Lagrange point before is it. One thing we note right off is that it is DIFFERENT than other regions of space, so there right off there is a chance that it is either better or worse for some things. Can it be the same as say deep space? I doubt it because there are very peculiar things about the gravity fields in that area so something is bound to be DIFFERENT.
But as i said, i was assuming a uniform debris field and who knows, it could be either more concentrated or less concentrated in that area. We'd have do some measurements to find out. In the mean time, i assume what i believe is the best we can do for what we have at the moment.

But i think maybe you are just making too big of a deal out of this, although it is interesting to think about. Maybe just relax and let it unfold. Oh, and get that $100 bill ready (ha ha just kidding).

But just to recap, i never mentioned having any data point that i needed anyway, i had made this prediction long before we got the news of the hit. I was not the only one to make this prediction either. But how about we just wait and see what happens.

 

You can not agree or disagree. Well that helps a lot now doesnt it? he he. So it seems that you want everyone to stay perfectly neutral without any thoughts about what might happen. No gut feelings allowed.

You are a master of absolutes.
I don't want you to stay "neutral", I just think it is hilarious that you state predictions as facts. Tell us that your thoughts are predictions and we can all have fun putting money on whether your prediction is true or not. When you tell everyone your prediction is a fact by using words like "will", "must" or "are" is just laughable or sloppy. If you truly believe it is not a guess and that your hypothesis is proven as fact because you have one datapoint, well I don't have to explain how stupid that is because my explanation clearly wouldn't help you.

 

You are a master of absolutes.
I don't want you to stay "neutral", I just think it is hilarious that you state predictions as facts. Tell us that your thoughts are predictions and we can all have fun putting money on whether your prediction is true or not. When you tell everyone your prediction is a fact by using words like "will", "must" or "are" is just laughable or sloppy. If you truly believe it is not a guess and that your hypothesis is proven as fact because you have one datapoint, well I don't have to explain how stupid that is because my explanation clearly wouldn't help you.

Hello again and thanks again for the reply,

Again with that "one data point". I told you i did not use one data point i used ZERO data points. Maybe that gives you more 'ammo' but that's the way it was there was no data point at the time of the original prediction. I did not need a data point then and i dont need one now.

In the scientific world it is common for someone to make a prediction or really just a theory of what might happen in a given situation. Call that statement #1. Then later if someone else does not agree with them they dont just say they disagree they come up with some solid reason why they dont agree and it's not because of lack of data because it is very very common to have no data at all. So it's not about data all the time it's about what the theory states and why it states that and perhaps some math with that. I'll admit though i have not revealed all of my reasoning yet but if you have a reason why the main statement is not true then you could come up with a statement that contradicts statement #1 based on some cosmology or something, not simply that there is only 'one' data point because there is often no data at all and yet discussions ensue.

But let's back up just a little here...

Since you dont seem to like what i've said, how would you propose i change it to sound more like something that would be more acceptable to you? Keep in mind though that it is in fact my belief that what i said was true, even if it is not true to you.
So tell me how you would rephrase it while at the same time conveying the idea that i believe it to be that way.

 

Time out. Somebody is baiting the others, trying to stir up a argument. Please stop...

 

AAC is a no flame zone, please remember this. Failure to do so can have consequences.

 

Problem at least temporarily solved. Thread unlocked.

 

Problem at least temporarily solved. Thread unlocked.

Oh that's nice so members can still talk about the James Webb telescope. They are making good progress with it too. We should see some real results very soon.

I'll have to remember to ask other members to talk in PM's when a disagreement comes up i forget to ask that sometimes.

 

 

https://www.earth.com/news/first-ever-recorded-planetary-engulfment-event-captured-by-webb/


Instead of being engulfed in a sudden flash, the planet met its end in slow motion.

Researchers now believe the planet was roughly the size of Jupiter and orbited its host star much closer than Mercury orbits the Sun.