Blinken’s State Dept. Held Taxpayer-Funded ‘Cry Sessions’ After Trump’s Election: Report [WATCH]

Donald Trump will remove all transgender members of the US military from their posts, according to reports. The president-elect will use an executive order to make the move and it could come as soon as his first day in office, The Times reported. It will lead to the dismissal of thousands of service personnel at a time when the US armed forces are struggling to meet recruitment targets. In his first term, Mr Trump banned transgender people from joining the US armed forces but those already in...

Donald Trump is planning an executive order that would lead to the removal of all transgender members of the US military, defence sources say. The order could come on his first day back in the White House, January 20. There are believed to be about 15,000 active service personnel who are transgender. They would be medically discharged, which would determine that they were unfit to serve. It would also lead to a ban on trans people joining the military and would come at a time when almost...

Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order that would remove transgender service members from the military as soon as his first day in office. The president-elect is reportedly preparing to issue an order following his inauguration on January 20 that would effectively ban trans people serving in the military — and then medically discharge the thousands of currently serving trans service members in the armed forces. In his first term in office, Trump declared that the US would no longer...

A heart-wrecnhing song The post The John Lennon and Eric Clapton collaboration that was rejected by The Beatles: “It was banned again” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

from YourNews: President-elect Donald Trump is set to overhaul the Justice Department, remove special counsel Jack Smith, and prioritize an investigation into the 2020 election. By yourNEWS Media Newsroom President-elect Donald Trump intends to fire special counsel Jack Smith and his team of prosecutors and initiate a Justice Department investigation into alleged fraud in the […]

System Of A Down frontman Serj Tankian reveals that his first ever metal show involved one of the greatest metal bands of them all

A groundbreaking hypothesis suggests that distant stars, racing through the cosmos at extraordinary speeds, might be under the control of intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations. This idea comes from Belgian philosopher and researcher Clément Vidal, whose recent paper explores the potential of “hypervelocity stars” as interstellar transportation systems for advanced alien societies. Dr. Clément Vidal is a philosopher with a background in logic and cognitive sciences. To satisfy his intellectual curiosity when facing the big questions, he brings together many areas of knowledge such as cosmology, physics, astrobiology, complexity science, evolutionary theory and philosophy of science. At first glance, the concept might sound far-fetched, but it has a logical foundation. Imagine the implications of moving an entire star system—planets, moons, and all—across the galaxy. Such a feat could serve practical purposes, such as escaping a looming supernova explosion or relocating to a more resource-rich region of space. With your homeworld intact, you wouldn’t need to leave “home” behind; instead, you could take it with you. How Could Aliens Move a Star? According to Vidal, the key lies in utilizing the star’s immense energy. By ejecting material from the star’s surface in a controlled manner, an advanced civilization could generate thrust, effectively steering the star through space. This stellar propulsion concept isn’t purely speculative; the physics of such a mechanism aligns with our understanding of how energy and momentum work on a cosmic scale. The idea extends to binary star systems as well, where the gravitational interactions between two stars could be exploited to amplify motion and control. This would make binary star systems particularly attractive candidates for intelligent manipulation. Are There Signs of Alien-Controlled Stars? Intriguingly, there are already known hypervelocity stars—stars moving at extraordinary speeds—that exhibit some of the traits one might expect if they were artificially accelerated. While these stars are typically explained as the result of natural gravitational phenomena, Vidal’s hypothesis opens the door to the possibility of intelligent design. This idea joins the growing field of “technosignatures,” potential evidence of advanced extraterrestrial technology. From Dyson spheres—hypothetical megastructures built to harness a star’s energy—to unusual radio signals, researchers are beginning to compile a list of phenomena that might point to intelligent life beyond Earth. If Vidal’s theory holds any merit, it could revolutionize the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. Rather than limiting the hunt to planets and radio signals, astronomers could also look for signs of deliberate star movement. A hypervelocity star with peculiar ejection patterns, for instance, might be a clue worth investigating. While there’s no concrete evidence yet, Vidal’s work encourages scientists to expand their search. After all, as humanity looks to the stars for answers, it’s worth considering that the stars themselves might hold the key. The post Are Hypervelocity Stars Cosmic Vehicles for Intelligent Aliens? appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Daniele Sorini: Physicists have long grappled with the question of why the universe was able to support the evolution of intelligent life. The values of the many forces and particles, represented by some 30 so-called fundamental constants, all seem to line up perfectly to enable it. Take gravity. If it were much weaker, matter would struggle to clump together to form stars, planets and living beings. And if it were stronger, that would also create problems. Why are we so lucky? Research that I recently published with my colleagues John Peacock and Lucas Lombriser now suggests that our universe may not be optimally tailored for life. In fact, we may not be inhabiting the most likely of possible universes. We particularly studied how the emergence of intelligent life is affected by the density of “dark energy” in the universe. This manifests as a mysterious force that speeds up the expansion of the universe, but we do not know what it is. The good news is that we can still measure it. The bad news is that the observed value is way smaller than what we would expect from theory. This puzzle is one of the biggest open questions in cosmology, and was a primary motivation for our research. Anthropic reasoning We tested whether “anthropic reasoning” may offer a suitable answer. Anthropic reasoning is the idea that we can infer properties of our universe from the fact that we, humans, exist. In the late 80s, physics Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg discussed a possible anthropic solution for the observed value of the dark energy density. Weinberg reasoned that a larger dark energy density would speed up the universe’s expansion. This would counteract gravity’s effort to clump matter together and form galaxies. Fewer galaxies means fewer stars in the universe. Stars are essential for the emergence of life as we know it, so too much dark energy would suppress the odds of intelligent life such as humans appearing. Weinberg then considered a “multiverse” of different possible universes, each with a different dark energy content. Such a scenario follows from some theories of cosmic inflation, a period of accelerated expansion occurring early in the universe’s history. Weinberg proposed that only a tiny fraction of the universes within the multiverse, whether real or hypothetical, would have a sufficiently small dark energy density to enable galaxies, stars and, ultimately, intelligent life, to appear. This would explain why we observe a small dark energy density – despite our theories suggesting it should be much larger – we simply could not exist otherwise. A potential pitfall in Weinberg’s reasoning is the assumption that the fraction of matter in the universe that ends up in galaxies is proportional to the number of stars formed. Some 35 years later, we know that it is not that simple. Our research then aimed at testing Weinberg’s anthropic argument with a more realistic star formation model. Number of stars (white) produced in universes with different dark energy densities. Clockwise from the upper-left panel: no dark energy, same dark energy density as in our universe, 30 and 10 times the dark energy density in our universe. Credit: Courtesy of Oscar Veenema, former undergraduate student at Durham University, now PhD student at Oxford University, CC BY-SA Counting stars Our goal was to determine the number of stars formed over the entire history of a universe with a given dark energy density. This boils down to a counting exercise. First, we picked a dark energy density between zero and 100,000 times the observed value. Depending on the amount, gravity can hold matter together more or less easily, determining how galaxies can form. Next, we estimated the yearly amount of stars formed within galaxies over time. This followed from the balance between the amount of cool gas that can fuel star formation, and the opposing action of galactic outflows that heat up and push gas outside galaxies. We then determined the fraction of ordinary matter that was converted into stars over the entire lifetime (past and future) of a certain universe model. This number expressed the efficiency of that universe at producing stars. We then assumed that the likelihood of generating intelligent life in a universe is proportional to its star formation efficiency. As the figure above shows, this suggests that the most hospitable universe contains about one-tenth of the dark energy density observed in our universe. Our universe is thus not too far from the most favourable possible for life. But it also isn’t the most ideal. But to validate Weinberg’s anthropic reasoning, we should imagine picking a random intelligent life form in the multiverse, and ask them what dark energy density they observe. We found that 99.5% of them would experience a larger dark energy density than observed in our universe. In other words, it looks like we inhabit a rare and unusual universe within the multiverse. This does not contradict the fact that universes with more dark energy would suppress star formation, hence reducing the chances of forming intelligent life. By analogy, suppose we want to sort 300 marbles into 100 boxes. Each box represents a universe, and each marble an intelligent observer. Let us put 100 marbles in box number one, four in box number two and then two marbles in all other boxes. Clearly, the first box contains the single largest number of marbles. But if we pick one marble at random from all boxes, it is more likely to come from a box other than number one. Likewise, universes with little dark energy are individually more hospitable for life. But life, although more unlikely, can still spawn in the many possible universes with abundant dark energy too – there will still be a few stars in them. Our calculation finds that most observers among all universes will experience a higher dark energy density than is measured in our universe. Also, we found that the most typical observer would measure a value about 500 times larger than in our universe. Where does that leave us? In conclusion, our results challenge the anthropic argument that our existence explains why we have such a low value of dark energy. We could have more easily found ourselves in a universe with a larger dark energy density. Anthropic reasoning may still be salvaged if we adopt more complex multiverse models. For example, we could allow for the amount of both dark energy and ordinary matter to vary across different universes. Perhaps, the reduced spawning of intelligent life due to a higher dark energy density might be compensated by a higher density of ordinary matter. In any case, our findings warn us against a simplistic application of anthropic arguments. This makes the dark energy problem even harder to grapple with. What should we cosmologists do now? Roll up our sleeves and think harder. Only time will tell how we solve the puzzle. However we will do it, I am sure it will be incredibly exciting. Daniele Sorini, Post Doctoral Research Associate in Cosmology, Durham University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The post Is the Universe Fine-Tuned for Life—or Is It Just an Illusion? appeared first on Anomalien.com.