01 Jun 15
http://phys.org/news/2015-06-astronomers-real-time-d-movies-plasma.html
She is very erudite in the explanation of these ionosphere tubes now shown in 3D, and she doesn't even have her Phd yet. I imagine that won't be long now! Really nice work!
One thing I see about the instrument, it has taken 3D images of the plasma tubes but only in a rather small spot on the Earth, the volume directly above the radio telescope. Even though it has a wide analysis angle, it is clear more such instruments will be needed around the world to get the full picture of these newly discovered plasma tubes.
AND she is beautiful🙂
01 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonhouseYes, she is beautiful. But that has nothing, repeat: nothing, to do with her skills as an astronomer.
http://phys.org/news/2015-06-astronomers-real-time-d-movies-plasma.html
She is very erudite in the explanation of these ionosphere tubes now shown in 3D, and she doesn't even have her Phd yet. I imagine that won't be long now! Really nice work!
One thing I see about the instrument, it has taken 3D images of the plasma tubes but only in a rather smal ...[text shortened]... world to get the full picture of these newly discovered plasma tubes.
AND she is beautiful🙂
What she has done has nothing to do with her gender. Noone should say that "For a girl she is a good astonomer." She is good regardless of her sex. She is good because she is ... good!
She has produced marvelous 3D pictures of until now never seen structures because her new way of thinking. She can very well be a model for other young people to achieve similar things, the field is open for anyone to explore. Boys and girls, men and women, go and do marvelous things!
01 Jun 15
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasI would never say 'she is good, for a girl'. I just liked her instantly🙂 It would have been good science if it had come from an Australian Aborigine! I think her Phd is assured.
Yes, she is beautiful. But that has nothing, repeat: nothing, to do with her skills as an astronomer.
What she has done has nothing to do with her gender. Noone should say that "For a girl she is a good astonomer." She is good regardless of her sex. She is good because she is ... good!
She has produced marvelous 3D pictures of until now never seen s ...[text shortened]... field is open for anyone to explore. Boys and girls, men and women, go and do marvelous things!
Hey googlefudge, could you take a look at my post in posers and puzzles, the one about converting algebraic to RPN? I worked up a nice equation that on my TI86 solves for either of the three variables, S, distance, T, time, and A, acceleration. In this case, Acceleration in feet per second squared, distance in miles and time in days. This formula is for space travel where you want to accelerate at X amount but only to half way then DEcelerate the rest of the way so you end up at the other end with zero relative velocity so you can do things like actually land🙂 instead of flying by at 1000 miles per second🙂 Eventually propulsion is going to exceed modern chemical rockets and my formula can tell how long it takes to get from point A to point B in the solar system. It is easy to mod the formula to make it metric also. But I want to shove that one into my HP48 which is RPN but not sure exactly the best route to do the stacks and so forth.
03 Jun 15
The post that was quoted here has been removedI understood Mr Googlefudge perfectly. You didn't.
I've seen journalists interviewing female researching wanting more to talk about her relationship with her boyfriend than her actual scientific achievements that she actually was there to talk about. The journalist wouldn't do the same if it was a male scientist he was to interview.
How has this to do with your examples...?
03 Jun 15
Originally posted by FabianFnasThat depends on the circumstances. Nobody can ask Max Born about Olivia Newton John since he is dead, but if he was alive I'm sure he would get a lot of questions about his grand daughter. Now imagine a female pop star who has a boyfriend that is a physicist.
I understood Mr Googlefudge perfectly. You didn't.
I've seen journalists interviewing female researching wanting more to talk about her relationship with her boyfriend than her actual scientific achievements that she actually was there to talk about. The journalist wouldn't do the same if it was a male scientist he was to interview.
How has this to do with your examples...?
03 Jun 15
Originally posted by Metal BrainWell, my daughter HAS a physicist for a boyfriend, they actually got married. I don't think anyone has asked her that question, because mainly she has a large number of friends. They both live in Brazil and both teach at the Federal University, she in music and he in physics.
That depends on the circumstances. Nobody can ask Max Born about Olivia Newton John since he is dead, but if he was alive I'm sure he would get a lot of questions about his grand daughter. Now imagine a female pop star who has a boyfriend that is a physicist.
03 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonhouseWhen I have something important to say and the only thing I get back is that "Your have improved in English!" Well, I am flattered, of course, but didn't they listen of what what I just said?
Well, my daughter HAS a physicist for a boyfriend, they actually got married. I don't think anyone has asked her that question, because mainly she has a large number of friends. They both live in Brazil and both teach at the Federal University, she in music and he in physics.
The same goes for women scientists. A woman gives an explanation of a mystery phenomenon and gets the remark "Wow, you are beautiful!" Well, she is flattered, of course, but didn't they listen anything what she just explained?
I say that the message is more important than the gender, appearance, religion, ethnicity, and other non important things else than the message itself.
03 Jun 15
Originally posted by FabianFnasI certainly didn't forget her message for one minute, I followed the development of that radio telescope since they started with antenna #1. One of the first tests when there were only a few antenna's used, they picked up the signal from the Voyager, now about 5 billion miles away. I was totally surprised a few stick antenna's like that could be that sensitive. The sticks I just mentioned are dipole, 2 each for each antenna and now there are dozens of them in a kind of random array in the desert.
When I have something important to say and the only thing I get back is that "Your have improved in English!" Well, I am flattered, of course, but didn't they listen of what what I just said?
The same goes for women scientists. A woman gives an explanation of a mystery phenomenon and gets the remark "Wow, you are beautiful!" Well, she is flattered, of ...[text shortened]... r, appearance, religion, ethnicity, and other non important things else than the message itself.
This latest result is one that could have been done ONLY by this radio telescope. I think they need to build a dozen just like it scattered around the globe now that they can see these plasma tubes, it was clear from the image the antenna array was limited in it's angular resolution or limited by the curvature of Earth or both. So to get a more detailed map of the tubes more of them need to be built around the planet.
And besides all that, she is STILL beautiful🙂
I remember as a kid in Denver, watching a chess match between two girls, one an ok looking girl with total concentration on the board, the other this girl, a beautiful Danish looking blonde, playing her moves quickly, then going back to her differential calculus homework🙂 I was in awe!