Saturn’s largest moon has enough energy to run a colony
Scientists browsing a market in Southeast Asia have uncovered a highly unusual 99-million-year-old feathered dinosaur tail encased in amber.
It is rare to find a feather attached to a dinosaur’s body in an amber sample, and it supports the position among researchers that many dinosaurs had feathers rather than scales, like the birds that have descended from them.
The study’s lead author, Lida Xing of the China University of Geosciences in Beijing, found the unusual specimen at an amber market in Myanmar in 2015, and urged the Dexu Institute of Palaeontology to buy the piece after recognizing its potential scientific importance.
The team used a CT scan to peer into the fossil, finding that the long and flexible nature of the tail meant it had to belong to a dinosaur, not a bird.
The tail belonged to a dinosaur called Coelurosaur — a dinosaur about the size of a small bird, from the same theropod group of dinosaurs as Tyrannosaurus rex. Despite the feathers, the dinosaur was not able to fly, providing more evidence for the contention that plumage originally began popping up on animals for reasons other than flight — such as for camouflage or attracting mates.
Amber is fossilized tree sap, and it acts as a kind of resin that can preserve organic matter that would otherwise be lost.
“Amber pieces preserve tiny snapshots of ancient ecosystems, but they record microscopic details, three-dimensional arrangements, and labile tissues that are difficult to study in other settings,” one of the study’s authors, Ryan McKellar of the Royal Saskatchewan Museum in Canada, said in a news release. “This is a new source of information that is worth researching with intensity and protecting as a fossil resource.”
Here’s what it would take to survive this particular doomsday prophecy
FREE YOUR MIND
You might wonder, at some point today, what’s going on in another person’s mind. You may compliment someone’s great mind, or say they are out of their mind. You may even try to expand or free your own mind.
But what is a mind? Defining the concept is a surprisingly slippery task. The mind is the seat of consciousness, the essence of your being. Without a mind, you cannot be considered meaningfully alive. So what exactly, and where precisely, is it?
Traditionally, scientists have tried to define the mind as the product of brain activity: The brain is the physical substance, and the mind is the conscious product of those firing neurons, according to the classic argument. But growing evidence shows that the mind goes far beyond the physical workings of your brain.
No doubt, the brain plays an incredibly important role. But our mind cannot be confined to what’s inside our skull, or even our body, according to a definition first put forward by Dan Siegel, a professor of psychiatry at UCLA School of Medicine and the author of a recently published book, Mind: A Journey to the Heart of Being Human.
He first came up with the definition more than two decades ago, at a meeting of 40 scientists across disciplines, including neuroscientists, physicists, sociologists, and anthropologists. The aim was to come to an understanding of the mind that would appeal to common ground and satisfy those wrestling with the question across these fields.
After much discussion, they decided that a key component of the mind is: “the emergent self-organizing process, both embodied and relational, that regulates energy and information flow within and among us.” It’s not catchy. But it is interesting, and with meaningful implications.
The most immediately shocking element of this definition is that our mind extends beyond our physical selves. In other words, our mind is not simply our perception of experiences, but those experiences themselves. Siegel argues that it’s impossible to completely disentangle our subjective view of the world from our interactions.
“I realized if someone asked me to define the shoreline but insisted, is it the water or the sand, I would have to say the shore is both sand and sea,” says Siegel. “You can’t limit our understanding of the coastline to insist it’s one or the other. I started thinking, maybe the mind is like the coastline—some inner and inter process. Mental life for an anthropologist or sociologist is profoundly social. Your thoughts, feelings, memories, attention, what you experience in this subjective world is part of mind.”
The definition has since been supported by research across the sciences, but much of the original idea came from mathematics. Siegel realized the mind meets the mathematical definition of a complex system in that it’s open (can influence things outside itself), chaos capable (which simply means it’s roughly randomly distributed), and non-linear (which means a small input leads to large and difficult to predict result).
In math, complex systems are self-organizing, and Siegel believes this idea is the foundation to mental health. Again borrowing from the mathematics, optimal self-organization is: flexible, adaptive, coherent, energized, and stable. This means that without optimal self-organization, you arrive at either chaos or rigidity—a notion that, Siegel says, fits the range of symptoms of mental health disorders.
Finally, self-organization demands linking together differentiated ideas or, essentially, integration. And Siegel says integration—whether that’s within the brain or within society—is the foundation of a healthy mind.
Siegel says he wrote his book now because he sees so much misery in society, and he believes this is partly shaped by how we perceive our own minds. He talks of doing research in Namibia, where people he spoke to attributed their happiness to a sense of belonging.
When Siegel was asked in return whether he belonged in America, his answer was less upbeat: “I thought how isolated we all are and how disconnected we feel,” he says. “In our modern society we have this belief that mind is brain activity and this means the self, which comes from the mind, is separate and we don’t really belong. But we’re all part of each others’ lives. The mind is not just brain activity. When we realize it’s this relational process, there’s this huge shift in this sense of belonging.”
In other words, even perceiving our mind as simply a product of our brain, rather than relations, can make us feel more isolated. And to appreciate the benefits of interrelations, you simply have to open your mind.
Spurred by technology advances and demand for transportation alternatives in increasingly congested cities, entrepreneurs around the globe are vying to become the first to develop a commercially viable “flying car.” The designs vary greatly, and most aren’t actually cars capable of driving on roads. Here are some examples:
European aircraft manufacturer Airbus is working at its Silicon Valley research center on a driverless flying taxi that at first will have a pilot, but will later be autonomous. The vertical takeoff-landing, all-electric aircraft is a cockpit mounted on a sled and flanked by propellers in front and back. Airbus plans to test a prototype before the end of 2017, and to have the first Vahanas ready for production by 2020.
Israeli tech firm Urban Aeronautics originally designed its people-carrying drone as an “air mule” for military use. It takes off vertically and has a standard helicopter engine, but no large main rotor. Its lift comes from two fans buried inside the fuselage. Two smaller ducted “fans” mounted in the rear provide forward movement. It can fly between buildings and below power lines, attain speeds up to 115 mph, stay aloft for an hour and carry up to 1,100 pounds
German technology company Lilium Aviation is working on a two-seater aircraft that will take off vertically using 36 electric fan engines arrayed along its wings. The aircraft will hover and climb until the fans are turned backward slowly. After that, it flies forward like a plane using electric jet engines. The company has been flight-testing small scale models. The aircraft will have an estimated cruising speed of up to 190 mph and a range of 190 miles.
The Slovakian company AeroMobil has developed a car with wings that unfold for flight. It uses regular gasoline and fits into standard parking spaces. It can also take off from airports or “any grass strip or paved surface just a few hundred meters long,” according to the company’s website. Driver and pilot licenses will be required.
Chinese drone maker EHang has been flight-testing a person-carrying drone in Nevada. The vehicle is a cockpit with four arms equipped with rotors. Takeoff and landing targets are pre-programmed. A command station in China will be able to monitor and control the aircraft anywhere in the world, company officials say.
Joby Aviation of Santa Cruz, California is developing a two-seat, all-electric plane with 12 tilt rotors arrayed along its wings and tail. The aircraft takes off and lands vertically and can achieve speeds up to 200 mph, according to the company’s website.
Terrafugia, based in Woburn, Massachusetts, began working a decade ago on a car folding wings that can fly or be driven on roads that’s called the Transition. The company says it plans to begin production of the Transition in 2019. Terrafugia is also working on a “flying car” called the TF-X — a car with folding arms and rotors for vertical takeoff and landing.
This two-seater, electric multicopter from German company e-volo has 18-rotors and looks like a cross between a helicopter and a drone. It is controlled from the ground, eliminating the need for a pilot license.
This Mountain View, California, aircraft developer bankrolled by Google co-founder Larry Page says on its webpage that it is working on a “revolutionary new form of transportation” at the “intersection of aerodynamics, advanced manufacturing and electric propulsion.” Company officials declined to provide details about Zee’s projects.
By Melissa Horton
A:Nearly 90% of individuals over age 65 rely on Social Security income to pay for a large portion of living expenses throughout their retirement years. The federal government makes this benefit available to those who have worked and contributed to the system for a certain number of years, but the total monthly benefit varies from person to person. Although Social Security is an inevitable part of most individuals’ retirement planning, retirees may not be fully aware of how and when those benefits are taxed.
For retirees who receive Social Security income with little to no supplemental influx of cash, either from retirement plan distributions or other earnings, most likely those benefits are not taxable. The average benefit received is just under $1,300 each month, totaling $15,600 annually, and benefits are only taxable when combined income exceeds $25,000 for single retirees or $32,000 for couples filing joint tax returns. Individuals who are able to sustain the type of lifestyle they need or want on that level of income do not pay taxes on their Social Security benefits.
For Social Security benefits to be taxable, individuals must have income above the threshold. This is based on total combined income, calculated as an individual’s adjusted gross income plus nontaxable interest earnings and half of his or her Social Security benefit. If combined income for a single individual is above $25,000 but below $34,000, or above $32,000 but below $44,000 for married couples, 50% of Social Security benefits are taxed. Combined income above these maximum amounts results in benefits taxed up to 85%. At this time, there is no income level that creates a situation where Social Security benefits are 100% taxable for retirees.
The simplest way to keep Social Security income free from income tax is to keep total combined income low; however, most retirees are not able to live on the average monthly benefit of $1,300 without supplementing it from investments or savings. Individuals receiving Social Security benefits can get creative to avoid reaching or exceeding the relatively low combined income limits. Instead of taking distributions from a traditional IRA or other pre-tax retirement savings plans, such as an employer sponsored 401(k) or 403(b), distributions from a Roth IRA may provide the supplemental income necessary to meet living expenses without affecting the combined income calculation. Because Roth IRA distributions are made with post-tax dollars, withdrawals are tax-free in retirement and therefore do not increase total income for Social Security taxes. A similar effect can be achieved by withdrawing from conventional savings or money market accounts in lieu of pretax investments.
If Roth IRA or savings assets are not available during retirement, retirees may want to consider lowering living expenses to stay below the combined income limits. Paying off a mortgage balance or downsizing to a smaller home prior to receiving Social Security income may considerably reduce the need for supplemental income throughout retirement. Although Social Security income is not fully taxable at any time, retirees need to be aware that benefits are subject to income tax under some circumstances and they must plan to reduce other sources of income if necessary.
Read more: How can I avoid paying taxes on my Social Security income? | Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/013015/how-can-i-avoid-paying-taxes-my-social-security-income.asp#ixzz4SMmxiSgx
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook
Isaiah 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
I truly believe the Word of God is living, staying relevant to each generation as we apply it to today. Indeed, it is sharper than any two-edged sword. So, when I come upon a verse such as Isaiah 5:20 at a certain time, it cuts through all the rhetoric, all the arguments, all the politics, all the religious talk and “Christian-ese” and gets to the heart of the issue. This is a verse for such a time as this. For months, I and millions of others have been witness to this scripture being lived out in churches and on the national stage. It does not matter whether you are a Democrat or a Republican – this comes down to basic values and crosses party and denominational lines. I have seen what is good called evil and what is evil called good.
Putting Light for Darkness and Sweet for Bitter
Speaking in anger…is not good. Hateful attitudes and lack of compassion towards a person or group because of their immigration status, color, country of origin or religion…is not good. Pride and exalting oneself above others, ego that is out of control, and lack of humility…is not good. Bragging about sexual assault, stereotyping, lying, sexism, exalting one’s wealth, bullying…is never good. None of this is good, yet we have 81 percent of white evangelicals who have supported and called out what is evil as being good. We have a situation where a large population of our nation’s churches have declared that what Jesus said was evil in his sight, is now good. They have said that what He declared as bitter is now sweet, what He preached as darkness is now light! Thus, we have a spiritual crisis in America.
This isn’t about political and differing views on policy or “how to make America great again.” I am certainly not saying that everyone who voted for Donald Trump is not a Christian. It is never OK to make that accusation, as only God knows the heart. I am talking about those religious leaders and Christians who have embraced ideology of hate and judgment and supported, even promoted, values that are completely contrary to God’s Word and called it “holy.” For months before the election and even more so after the election, I have seen Christian people telling the followers of Christian Democrats of America and me personally that they are not Christians if they vote for Democrats, but they are good Christians if they vote for someone who said you can sexually assault women without their consent. They have embraced racism, bigotry, xenophobia and sexism and called it Christian values. They need to remember what Jesus embraced: character, love, and the outcasts of society.
Just look at Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman – an outcast because of her religion, her ethnic status, and because she was a woman. He not only broke the religious and society rules by speaking to her, He shocked all with His love and He touched her heart by reaching out to her. He was continuously criticized and degraded by the Pharisees and teachers of the law on who He dined with, and let’s not even start on the “riff-raff” He asked to be His disciples! And since this is Christmas, remember the complete humility of Jesus very beginnings. He was born in nothing more than a barn, and He rode into Jerusalem not on a beautiful noble steed with gold plated saddle, but a simple donkey.
So, to put this into perspective, let’s use this example: say you are a Republican Christian and you care deeply about the working poor of this country, as I, a Christian Democrat, do. We both care based on our Christian values, we just reach a different conclusion as to what will help the poor. This is not you being evil as a conservative and me being good as a liberal or vice versa – this is a difference of political views. We can and should hold mutual respect as believers on this standpoint, even as we disagree on policy and vote differently – remembering we have a mutual goal and value. However, if you belittle the poor, if you scapegoat minorities who are poor, if you insult them, if you are hardhearted and without compassion…we now stand on opposite ends of scripture and you have just embraced an ideology that calls what Jesus Christ said is evil, good.
Sometimes what is passed off as good or holy on the outside is not. Jesus made this abundantly clear in Matthew 23:5-7, “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.” And in verse 28, “In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.” Matthew 23 lays out very clearly the seriousness of this issue of hypocrisy, religious bullying and “gagging on a gnat while swallowing a camel.” Here is the best way to tell if you are dealing with a person or church that is calling good what is evil – the Pharisee will point out your sin and condemn you, Christ will point out your value and love you.
Putting Darkness for Light and Bitter for Sweet
Likewise, we have also seen good things and good works called bad. I have seen liberals mocked relentlessly for pushing an agenda of love and compassion. Efforts to help the poor are said to be giving handouts to drug addicts. A Christian President who has had no scandals while in office, no investigations for corruption, who has upheld the office with decency and a high moral grounding accused of being a Muslim terrorist and disrespected in every way. And I’ve seen a lifelong Christian woman who made her campaign slogan about love and kindness be slandered, insulted, threatened, and falsely accused of the worst things you can think of. She continually quoted the famous Methodist quote by John Wesley: “Do all the good you can. By all the means you can. In all the ways you can. In all the places you can. At all the times you can. To all the people you can. As long as ever you can,” and spoke of social justice and lifting every one up – but certain Christians called this, which was good, evil.
Divorce in many conservative Christian circles is still a very dirty word, yet they embraced and excused a man with three divorces and multiple adulterous affairs, and mocked a candidate who had stood through the trial of extra-marital affairs and saved her marriage. There was a special kind of hypocritical irony to watching Christian Trump supporters completely denigrate something which has always been applauded by conservative Christians…calling saving a marriage bitter and multiple divorces and affairs, sweet. One must begin to wonder what “family values” this group of believers actually believe anymore.
You may not have agreed with Hillary Clinton’s policies. You may have disagreed with her approach to the issues – and that’s fine. But what we saw this year was not simple disagreement. The Republican convention and the Trump rallies were full of hatred – it was chanted, it was on signs, even little children held signs with curse words. They said it with bitterness, they treated her supporters with hatred. This kind of visceral attack I saw from people who claim to know Christ, towards this woman who is a fellow sister-in-Christ, can only be put best into words by Jesus Himself: “You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘Never murder. Whoever murders will answer for it in court.’ But I can guarantee that whoever is angry with another believer will answer for it in court. Whoever calls another believer an insulting name will answer for it in the highest court. Whoever calls another believer a fool will answer for it in hellfire.” (Matthew 5:21-22)
Michael Gerson, columnist for the Washington Post, said, “Evangelicals in particular should be speaking out for values, not just being on a team…it’s what they said was the most important thing and now that’s totally discredited.” What so many in the conservative Christian church-world preached for decades they called bitter this year. So how can any person take seriously a staunch message of values from the church-world anymore? Well, if any of you are searching or are unsure, let me leave you with this: Let the Bible itself be your guide, and if your preacher is calling what Jesus said was good, evil, and what Jesus said was evil, good, get away from that place as fast as you can and shake the dust off your feet! People reach out to us at Christian Democrats of America on a daily basis, with a great increase after the election, asking if we know of a church they can attend that is not preaching Right-Wing politics, focuses on love and social justice, and is friendly and open to all people. We are building a national list of “safe churches” for this very reason.
A peculiar spherical cloud was spotted in the Japanese city of Fujisawa, just south of Tokyo, earlier this month, giving rise to comparisons with a Star Wars weaponized space station. Experts, however, have shot down any such possibility of extra terrestrial interaction.
Pictures of the phenomenon were posted on Twitter last week and went viral with thousands of retweets and comments. Social media user Poppy was one of the first to capture the large cloud.
“When I looked out of the car window I saw a round ball-shaped cloud. I gazed at the cloud for a while then I rushed to take the photo,” Poppy, whose Twitter handle is @pmxpvrtmx, told local Japanese news outlet, Rocket News 24. “When I saw the cloud it was an even more spherical shape, so I regret not taking the photo more quickly.”
Many likened the formation to a Death Star-style UFO or a “dragon’s nest” and this is not the first time such a cloud has been spotted. A similar mysterious cloud was recently spotted in Tremeirchion, north Wales, according to the BBC, and last year a Twitter user posted another picture of such a spherical structure in Japan.
Experts, however, are steering clear of any such theories.
While some say that the sighting could have been be a small portion of a larger cloud that was separated by strong winds, referred to as cumulus fractus clouds, others say that the angle from which it was photographed could have been the reason behind the distinctly spherical shape as another picture of the same cloud showed a change in shape.
“While I can’t verify the origin of this image, or whether it was even of the same cloud, it appears that the cloud only appeared spherical from one direction,” atmospheric scientist Todd Lane from the University in Melbourne, Australia told ScienceAlert.
“That is, the photographer was lucky to be in the right place to capture an interesting image of what is likely an uninteresting cloud. It looks to me to be some form of cumulus fractus cloud.”
A former NASA biologist just launched a kit to help everyday home brewers step up their beer game by making beverages that glow, because who needs those regular amber hues anymore?
Josiah Zayner left his job in synthetic biology to start his own company, The Odin, which has a goal of increasing the accessibility of science and technology research, as Gizmodo reports. Zayner and The Odin produce kits for interested parties to conduct their own experiments, of sorts, and this bioluminescent beer kit is no different.
The fluorescent yeast kit uses a gene from a jellyfish and retails for $199. It requires about 10 hours of work over the span of two days before a user can get down to brewing.
“There is no impact on the flavor of the beer with the GFP engineering kit,” Zayner tells Eater. “You can literally add the engineered yeast to honey and water (or mash or wort) and the yeast will ferment and fluoresce.”
“This kit demonstrates the power and simplicity of genetic engineering by adding plasmid DNA to the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae so that it turns a fluorescent green color,” the kit’s guide reads. When used in a batch of home brew, the fluorescent yeast will produce a beer that glows under a blacklight, much as tonic water does, albeit for different reasons (tonic water contains quinine, which produces a similar glow as engineered yeast).
The kit has come under some scrutiny from the FDA, but Zayner says The Odin is not trying to sell food-grade materials, and has done research to demonstrate that the kits are not toxic or allergenic. “Honestly, when I started working on this stuff I was just trying to create something cool and push genetic design into the mainstream consumer market,” he says. “We are trying to sell a kit that allows people to create a new type of yeast that they can then possibly use to ferment with. We are trying to create a whole new industry, a whole new way of life where people can use genetic design freely in their homes.”
Zayner’s kit puts beer in a category of other weird glowing foods, including some Floam-colored udon noodles made by a Japanese food scientist and glow-in-the-dark ice cream made at a pop-up ice cream shop in Australia using UV-reactive liquid coloring.