jump to navigation

Dr. John Learned, Monday, 5-18-15 May 19, 2015

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
trackback

Dr. John Learned, Monday, 5-18-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2475-BWB-2015-05-18.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guest:  Dr. John Learned.  Topics:  Fast Radio Bursts, neutrinos, and related physics issues.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed Dr. John Learned to the show to discuss Fast Radio Bursts (FRB), neutrinos, and more.  Note that this program was co-hosted with Dr. John Jurist.  During the first segment of our 1 hour 26 minute discussion, Dr. Learned introduced us to FRBs and talked about what they may or may not be. We also talked about the Parkes Observatory in Australia and the peryton issue.  The discussion of FRBs and peryton issues took up a significant part of our first segment.  Later in the segment we switched over to talking about neutrinos.  Dr Learned spoke to the three kinds of neutrinos, mass differences and more.  We fielded many listener emails on neutrinos and the FRBs. I asked our guest about media reports suggesting FRBs might be a form of ET communication.  Our guest addressed this several times during our discussion.  Later in the segment, Sally asked what the benefit of these studies were to humanity.  Dr. Learned appreciated the question and gave a good answer.  In fact, he answered it several times during the program as did Dr. Jurist.  Near the end of the segment, I asked how neutrons were detected.  Detecting neutrons is quite a challenge so don’t miss the response.  It is not trivial for sure.

In the second segment, we talked about the Purdue Group and other groups doing research with neutrinos per questions from listeners.  Dr. Learned then spoke more about the hunt for modulated or variable stars.  The subject of neutrino beams came up as a possible far out method of ET communication.  Other topics in the segment included non linear dynamics, chaos theory, and frequencies.  Later our guest talked about a new class of star found in the Kepler data.  Our guest was asked about Higgs-Boson, we talked about the LHC, and the IceCube Neutrino Observatory and experiments.  Our last topic addressed a series of questions about commercial space development, the cost to access space, and science research cost benefits.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach either Dr. Learned or Dr. Jurist through me.

Comments»

1. Luke - June 2, 2015

Dr. John Learned was a good guest, surprisingly eloquent and witty in this answers and history / explanations, an overall excellent speaker, informative and easy to listen to. Definitely a guest that could be brought back on at a later time to discuss other interesting subjects related to Space. I wonder what other space related subjects he could engage the listeners with?

2. J Fincannon - May 20, 2015

A very interesting show and surprising, since it is a rather highbrow topic. I particularly appreciated Dr. Jurist’s question about the Purdue work on fluctuations of radioactive decay as attributed to neutrinos. I was not too fond of the answer by Dr. Learned. Isn’t it the job of science to push the boundaries? He said Purdue has published “crazy results”and “wild things” that have been discredited. I have noticed this kind of response by scientists who do not appreciate data outside the accepted paradigm. A better thing to have done than this disparaging remark is that “their work has not been sufficiently replicated to validate their results”, and leave it at that. Dr. Learned then goes on to describe how he was looking for alien stellar neutrino transmitters and eventually was proven wrong, although his observations were helpful in another area. Someone could have made a statement how HIS work was “crazy”. In fact, he said that you can only do this kind of work “if you have tenure”. This is a very sad but true observation about “science”. Science is a process which should be self correcting, but also NOT be afraid of going outside the paradigms. Purdue DID publish results. It is up to others in science to publish results showing they could or could not repeat the measurements. The “others” could simply say, “its not worth our time” or file the rebuttal in their file drawers. That is not science.

B John - May 31, 2015

Science is the method of disproving claims. If you claim to have disproved established science, you’ll get opposition. But if it is true, it will eventually become the new establishment (which will call those “crazy” who claim that it actually was like in the old way after all).

J Fincannon - June 3, 2015

I approve of science as a methodology, but science is performed by people and people offer their unnecessary additions to it, such as argumentum ad hominem or painting with a broad brush. Science suffers indirectly. People operate in cliques, even in that pure world of “science”, and protect the paradigm for various reasons, good or ill. It have seen it written that the only way to get a paradigm shift is not only by establishing the “truth” of an idea, but by the eventual retirement of the establishment leaders.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: