I got the feeling after watching some of her other videos that she targets a group of kids that have had a tough and abusive life. Her words or lyrics or style harmonize with victims and gets their attention but may also elude the "fortunate". She also shows hope that they can overcome just as she has.

Music, no matter the genre will reach those that are looking for answers to cope with whatever the damage may be and the answer will always be, "you are not alone in being alone."

-----------------------------------

All alone, or in two's
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands
The bleeding hearts and the artists
Make their stand
And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall - Pink Floyd

-----------------------------------

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9W3X0T15Rs

-----------------------------------

The Spirit of Radio

Begin the day
With a friendly voice
A companion, unobtrusive
Plays that song that's so elusive
And the magic music makes your morning mood
Off on your way
Hit the open road
There is magic at your fingers
For the spirit ever lingers
Undemanding contact
In your happy solitude
Invisible airwaves
Crackle with life
Bright antennae bristle
With the energy
Emotional feedback
On a timeless wavelength
Bearing a gift beyond price
Almost free
All this machinery
Making modern music
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted
It's really just a question
Of your honesty, yeah, your honesty
One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity, yeah
Invisible airwaves
Crackle with life
Bright antennae bristle
With the energy
Emotional feedback
On a timeless wavelength
Bearing a gift beyond price
Almost free
For the words of the profits
Were written on the studio wall
Concert hall
And echoes with the sound of salesmen
Of salesmen, of salesmen - Rush

I still think about this a lot, lol. And I totally agree with his reference to extraterrestrials living on a different wavelength/dimension. And I always come back to what humanity has accomplished in such a short time period relative to the Universe itself.

There's no doubt that extra-dimensions exist that we have no clue about, so there could be existence beyond our capability to imagine in those dimensions. But, even more so - the Universe as we know it is chaotic in a way that it wouldn't be complicated to imagine advanced civilizations finding a way out of the "material" world somehow to find permanent safety. Which might mean transcending bodies into another form that can exist in one of these "realms". Humans are babies in the Universe - the impossible is possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A10V_t95VfI

Essentially there is no such thing as white light or indeed pink light. White light is when all your color receptors are saturated, what you think of as pink is when blue and red light is combined, and the possible wavelength combinations in both cases are sadly endless and impossible to represent fully in a simple table or graph.

Pink is a relatively easy color for monitors because, unlike for example yellow, pink is always a combination of blue and red light, while real life yellow is represented by a combination of blue and green light on your monitor and blue and green receptors in your eye. So yellow exists but we only ever see its representation as a mix of green and blue, while pink is a virtual colour all round :-)

Yes I suspect fluorescense is at play in this case somehow.

With RGB and CMYk the key word is representatiom. There are real life impressions of colours, and then there is the wish for standardisation and representation, but the eye is a very imperfect tool and representation is approximate. Real life paintings are awesome and you dont even come close watching photographs or computer monitors or prints in books.

It does not have to be about fitting into gamut, pink is a combination of blue and red light, which monitors are good at.

The problem with real world materials is that perception is not as simple as that. The combination of reflected, refracted, and even radiated (transformed wavelength) and polarized light, the micro-structure of the surface and possibly other properties can influence perception.

Like your favourite washing powder makes your whites whiter, this stuff makes pinks look pinker somehow. Its about fooling your eyes in specific conditions. You can simulate the difference between a known pink - a standard colour sample - and this awesome new pink by putting them side by side and calibrating the camera and monitor to show the new pink as pink and the reference pink as less pink, like at the end of the video, but that cant beat walking into an art gallery and seeing it with your own eyes. I mean probably, I havent seen this particular pink, but I have seen modern paintings which look nothing like their RGB or CMYK reproductions.

When they jammed it out on stage, I doubt it was as succinct as radio / record version. But a lot of great songs tend to be written(or should I say discovered) in this kind of instant form, all of a sudden something just clicks, and it just feels natural, it's almost a subconscious processes. Especially if you've been jamming with people for a while, then you're all on the same wavelength, or same drugs as I'm sure anyone from the 60s will tell you.

Many bands most popular songs start off as a joke, such as Nirvana's Smells Like Teens Spirit, or Primus' Shakehands with Beef. Which is why you get a lot of one hit wonders. They've had their light bulb moments, but nobody really knows how it happens, so it can't be reproduced. (not to say that Nirvana or Primus are one hit wonders by any means).

I see parallels with song writing and inventing or engineering. A lot of the greatest inventions were eureka moments while most of the others were just plain old hard work by dedicated engineers. But it's usually the eureka moments that change the course of history.

Cells have no "purpose"?

I think that depends on how you define "purpose". I don't think humans (or other animals / organisms) have any particular intrinsic purpose. At least, nothing granted to us by a higher power or outside influence or whatever. We assign purpose to ourselves, and to other fuzzy-boundary collections of things. Things that are "alive" exist to use energy, move, reproduce, etc. Things that are "tools" exist to be a preferable means of accomplishing some task. Etc.

If any of those things have "purpose", certainly cells can have a "purpose" as well. Neurons exist to transfer bio-electric currents. Rod and cone cells in our eyes exist to react to light in general or particular wavelengths of light.

I don't think that we have any physical or intangible soul that serves as the core of our being. We have cells, organs, and organ systems that make up a "meat computer" that provides us with consciousness (a word that we invented, but which describes a fairly concrete idea), and I would argue that consciousness is the closest thing that we have to a "soul".

At some point, if we can create a machine that emulates / replaces the functionality of all those cells, organs, and organ systems that are responsible for consciousness, and copy a snapshot of the states of all of that in an organic being (like us) into a mechanical counterpart, then ... yeah. I think that machine would be the organic being that it was a copy of, in a far more meaningful way than Henrietta's cancer cells are "her".

There are limits, of course. They are only stealthy under certain circumstances, it requires the radar installation to use certain wavelengths, and they need to avoid flying in front of another target (or there will be a stealth plane shaped hole in the radar return).

I would expect it to still work just fine against a single older export style Buk installation, but perhaps not so well against the newest ones used by the Russian army (and although I have heard nothing about the Chinese equivalents, I expect the same would apply).

Hey now...it clearly said BIO-FLOURESCENT, not bioluminescent....so not fake. Biofluorescence is a relatively unstudied feature of some sea life where their coloring fluoresces under certain wavelengths. It's being found all over the animal kingdom, but apparently this is the first reptile found to show it.
Yes, they are shining some light (likely black light) to cause the fluorescence.
It's unknown how this feature might help marine animals. In land plants, it's often used to attract certain insects with colors/patterns they recognize....perhaps the markings on turtles allow other turtles to recognize differing sub species for 'racial purity'?

You asked Ulysses a question and he answered it. Stale humour, he did not find it funny. Curiousity sated.

You escalated from there.

Perhaps offended was the wrong word, but you seem driven to prove that non feminists, particularly the male variant, seem to be colourblind to Schuler's humour, it's something they can't possibly find funny because their attitude or lack of understanding blocks out the spectrum where the funny wavelength is in this particular comedic light source. Basically any other reason than a good old fashioned, totally subjective "I didn't find that funny".

And if you want a bug free patio at night, use yellow lights, most insects can't see that wavelength and ignore it. ; )

I enjoyed it. I don't understand many of the criticisms - it's a film, were we somehow expecting to have our humanity validated by it? A scientifically accurate description of a mission would be boring - they'd almost certainly die in the wormhole.

The science wasn't unreasonable. It was a lot closer to reality than anything in star trek or star wars. Anne Hathaway's character muses on the power of love and suddenly it's a force of the universe? My memory might be flawed, but i don't remember hearing anyone confirm that or discuss it - in fact, the state her "lover" was in was kind of contrary to the opinion she gave and certainty to how she felt. We really do have no idea about black holes, either, so for all we know it could be manipulated by some future technology. The tesseract "library" was an interesting take on time travel/time manipulation.

The only thing that broke my suspension of disbelief was the bit when they said they thought they had years of good readings from the water planet due to time dilation. But that doesn't make any sense, because the number of signal pulses sent from the surface must equal the number of signal pulses received in orbit. My best guess is that the pulses would be elongated and have their wavelength shifted, possibly, but one thing i am certain of is that the total number can't be different.

The problem is, the older you get, the more you know about science, the less faith you have to put in films to give you a mind-bending experience that works on so many levels. None of it is plausible, so why rule it out based on what Hathaway thinks about the nature of love, or anything else?

Good film! And funny video. Someone's got to defend it though!

In that case they're using it in a very strange way. They certainly seem to be using it in a way that prevents heat build up.

I understand completely what you're saying and you're right, if the correct wavelengths are used there wouldn't be so much of an issue. I wonder if there's an overlap between the wavelength that heats the paint and the wavelength that heats the metal.

Lasers have a pretty amazing attribute where you can use a wavelength that is only absorbed by certain materials, leaving all other materials entirely untouched by the photons (as they have a very high reflectivity or transmission index for the wavelength).

No idea whats going on with this system, but its possible they are using a colour that is optimised for maximal paint absorption (heats up the paint the most), whilst at the same time maximal metal reflection (doesnt transfer any energy into the metal).

Source: telecom engineer (I work with lasers...)

The solar flares are very cool. I suggest watching in HD and full screen for maximum awesomeness.

Also from YT description:

The surface of the sun from October 14th to 30th, 2014, showing sunspot AR 2192, the largest sunspot of the last two solar cycles (22 years). During this time sunspot AR 2191 produced six X-class and four M-class solar flares. The animation shows the sun in the ultraviolet 304 ångström wavelength, and plays at a rate of 52.5 minutes per second. It is composed of more than 17,000 images, 72 GB of data produced by the solar dynamics observatory (http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/) + (http://www.helioviewer.org/). This animation has be rendered in 4K, and resized to the Youtube maximum resolution of 3840×2160. The animation has been rotated 180 degrees so that south is 'up'. The audio is the "heartbeat" of the sun, processed from SOHO HMI data by Alexander G. Kosovichev. Image processing and animation by James Tyrwhitt-Drake.

I think color could be achieved by having the ionization at a different frequency so it produces photons on a colored wavelength.

What I want to know is:
1) does it fry the flesh from your skeleton if you stick your hand in the middle?
and
2) how long until we can get lightsabers?