Subscribe to our Technology & Innovation newsletter
Virgin Galactic uses space tech to create new supersonic jet
The space tourism company Virgin Galactic teams up with Rolls Royce to create a new Mach 3 supersonic aircraft.
New supersonic aircraft from Virgin Galactic.
Credit: Virgin Galactic
- Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic has announced a partnership with Rolls Royce.
- The space tourism company will create a new supersonic jet for super-fast travel on Earth.
- The aircraft will travel at Mach 3 – three times the speed of sound.
Virgin Galactic made the hearts of all speed enthusiasts beat faster by announcing a new agreement with Rolls-Royce to create a supersonic passenger jet.
The space tourism company founded by billionaire Richard Branson revealed an enticing look at the aircraft's design, which would not be taking people to the edge of space but between points on Earth. The move allows the company to leverage its space technology for super-fast travel across the planet. Crucially, the craft would utilize sustainable, next-generation fuel.
The concept for the supersonic jet, which can potentially disrupt commercial airline travel, has undergone a NASA review. Next, the company is planning to work with the FAA to create a framework for certifying the new aircraft for flight.
Virgin's Galactic's partner in this venture, the British company Rolls-Royce, is, of course, no stranger to supersonic aircraft-making, having built engines for the famous Concordes.
The first aircraft built will be targeted the speed of Mach 3, which is three times the speed of sound. In other words – a blazing 2300 mph. The plane will be able to carry from 9 to 19 people, cruising at an altitude of over 60,000 feet.
Virgin Galactic's chief space officer George Whitesides was bullish on the company's achievement:
"We have made great progress so far, and we look forward to opening up a new frontier in high speed travel," he said in a statement.
Credit: Virgin Galactic
The company has also made great strides in the development of its spacecraft. Check out the recently-released interior of its SpaceShipTwo Unity cabin:
Virgin Galactic Spaceship Cabin Design Reveal
From Your Site Articles
- Top-secret U.S. space plane about to leave Earth for years - Big Think ›
- The Flying-V: A radical new airplane requiring 20% less fuel - Big ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Live on Monday: Does the US need one billion people?
What would happen if you tripled the US population? Join Matthew Yglesias and Charles Duhigg at 1pm ET on Monday, September 28.
26 September, 2020
Big Think LIVE
Add event to calendar
<p>
<br>
</p><p>
Is immigration key to bolstering the American economy? Could having one billion Americans secure the US's position as <em>the</em> global superpower? What if massive population growth could nourish rural economies and strengthen our country from the inside out? Perhaps these questions are provocative fodder for more debate and contention but, for Matthew Yglesias, asking them and arguing about them is part of the American way. Join him in a conversation moderated by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Charles Duhigg as they explore the case for one billion Americans.
</p><p>
Ask your questions for Matthew Yglesias during the Q&A!
</p><p><strong>Join the live stream at 1pm ET on Monday, September 28.<br></strong></p><h2>STREAMING LINKS<br><a href="https://youtu.be/FKaApFbTpx4" target="_blank">YouTube</a> | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/BigThinkdotcom/posts/10157677011223527" target="_blank">Facebook</a> | <a href="https://edge.bigthink.com/live_streams/111" target="_blank">Big Think Edge</a></h2>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
‘Time is elastic’: Why time passes faster atop a mountain than at sea level
The idea of 'absolute time' is an illusion. Physics and subjective experience reveal why.
31 December, 2019
ESA
Surprising Science
- Since Einstein posited his theory of general relativity, we've understood that gravity has the power to warp space and time.
- This "time dilation" effect occurs even at small levels.
- Outside of physics, we experience distortions in how we perceive time — sometimes to a startling extent.
<p><br></p></div>
<p>Place one clock at the top of a mountain. Place another on the beach. Eventually, you'll see that each clock tells a different time. Why? Time moves slower as you get closer to Earth, because, as Einstein posited in his theory of general relativity, the gravity of a large mass, like Earth, warps the space and time around it.</p><p>Scientists first observed this "time dilation" effect on the cosmic scale, such as when a star passes near a black hole. Then, in 2010, researchers observed <a href="https://www.livescience.com/8672-higher-faster-age.html" target="_blank">the same effect on a much smaller scale</a>, using two extremely precise atomic clocks, one placed 33 centimeters higher than the other. Again, time moved slower for the clock closer to Earth.</p><p>The differences were tiny, but the implications were massive: absolute time<em> does not exist.</em> For each clock in the world, and for each of us, time passes slightly differently. But even if time is passing at ever-fluctuating speeds throughout the universe, time <em>is still passing</em> in some kind of objective sense, right? Maybe not. </p>
Physics without time
<p>In his book "The Order of Time," Italian theoretical physicist Carlo Rovelli suggests that our perception of time — our sense that time is forever flowing forward — could be a highly subjective projection. After all, when you look at reality on the smallest scale (using equations of quantum gravity, at least), time vanishes.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"If I observe the microscopic state of things," writes Rovelli, "then the difference between past and future vanishes … in the elementary grammar of things, there is no distinction between 'cause' and 'effect.'"</p><p>So, why do we perceive time as flowing <em>forward</em>? Rovelli notes that, although time disappears on extremely small scales, we still obviously perceive events occur sequentially in reality. In other words, we observe entropy: Order changing into disorder; an egg cracking and getting scrambled.</p><p>Rovelli says key aspects of time are described by the second law of thermodynamics, which states that heat always passes from hot to cold. This is a one-way street. For example, an ice cube melts into a hot cup of tea, never the reverse. Rovelli suggests a similar phenomenon might explain why we're only able to perceive the past and not the future.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Any time the future is definitely distinguishable from the past, there is something like heat involved," Rovelli wrote for the <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/ce6ef7b8-429a-11e8-93cf-67ac3a6482fd" target="_blank"><em>Financial Times</em></a>. "Thermodynamics traces the direction of time to something called the 'low entropy of the past', a still mysterious phenomenon on which discussions rage."</p><span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="18dc320f386b7e59468c0de4d0c2b408"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EthxLecFVcM?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>He continues:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Entropy growth orients time and permits the existence of traces of the past, and these permit the possibility of memories, which hold together our sense of identity. I suspect that what we call the "flowing" of time has to be understood by studying the structure of our brain rather than by studying physics: evolution has shaped our brain into a machine that feeds off memory in order to anticipate the future. This is what we are listening to when we listen to the passing of time. Understanding the "flowing" of time is therefore something that may pertain to neuroscience more than to fundamental physics. Searching for the explanation of the feeling of flow in physics might be a mistake."</p><p>Scientists still have much to learn about how we perceive time, and why time operates differently depending on the scale. But what's certain is that, outside of the realm of physics, our individual perception of time is also surprisingly elastic.</p>
The strange subjectivity of time
<p>Time moves differently atop a mountain than it does on a beach. But you don't need to travel any distance at all to experience strange distortions in your perception of time. In moments of life-or-death fear, for example, your brain would release large amounts of adrenaline, which would speed up your internal clock, causing you to perceive the outside world as moving slowly.<br></p><p>Another common distortion occurs when we focus our attention in particular ways.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"If you're thinking about how time is <em>currently</em> passing by, the biggest factor influencing your time perception is attention," Aaron Sackett, associate professor of marketing at the University of St. Thomas, told <em><a href="https://gizmodo.com/why-does-time-slow-down-and-speed-up-1840133782" target="_blank">Gizmodo</a></em>.<em> "</em>The more attention you give to the passage of time, the slower it tends to go. As you become distracted from time's passing—perhaps by something interesting happening nearby, or a good daydreaming session—you're more likely to lose track of time, giving you the feeling that it's slipping by more quickly than before. "Time flies when you're having fun," they say, but really, it's more like "time flies when you're thinking about other things." That's why time will also often fly by when you're definitely <em>not</em> having fun—like when you're having a heated argument or are terrified about an upcoming presentation."</p><p>One of the most mysterious ways people experience time-perception distortions is through psychedelic drugs. In an interview with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/apr/14/carlo-rovelli-exploding-commonsense-notions-order-of-time-interview" target="_blank"><em>The Guardian</em></a>, Rovelli described a time he experimented with LSD.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"It was an extraordinarily strong experience that touched me also intellectually," he said. "Among the strange phenomena was the sense of time stopping. Things were happening in my mind but the clock was not going ahead; the flow of time was not passing any more. It was a total subversion of the structure of reality."<br></p><p>It seems few scientists or philosophers believe time is completely an illusion.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"What we call <em>time</em> is a rich, stratified concept; it has many layers," Rovelli told <em><a href="https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.4.20190219a/full/" target="_blank">Physics Today</a>.</em> "Some of time's layers apply only at limited scales within limited domains. This does not make them illusions."</p>What <em>is</em> an illusion is the idea that time flows at an absolute rate. The river of time might be flowing forever forward, but it moves at different speeds, between people, and even within your own mind.
Keep reading
Show less
Learn innovation with 3-star Michelin chef Dominique Crenn
Dominique Crenn, the only female chef in America with three Michelin stars, joins Big Think Live.
24 September, 2020
Big Think LIVE
Having been exposed to mavericks in the French culinary world at a young age, three-star Michelin chef Dominique Crenn made it her mission to cook in a way that is not only delicious and elegant, but also expressive, memorable, and true to her experience.
<p>
Having been exposed to mavericks in the French culinary world at a young age, three-star Michelin chef Dominique Crenn made it her mission to cook in a way that is not only delicious and elegant, but also expressive, memorable, and true to her experience. Crenn will share the importance of gaining knowledge and inspiration from what and who surrounds you, building a unified and empowered team, and inventing a business model out of inspiration, as well as necessity.
</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Universe works like a cosmological neural network, argues new paper
Controversial physics theory says reality around us behaves like a computer neural network.
27 September, 2020
Synapses in space.
Credit: sakkmesterke
Surprising Science
- Physicist proposes that the universe behaves like an artificial neural network.
- The scientist's new paper seeks to reconcile classical physics and quantum mechanics.
- The theory claims that natural selection produces both atoms and "observers".
<p>Does the reality around us work like a neural network, a Matrix-like computer system that operates similar to a human brain? A new physics paper argues that looking at the universe that way can provide the elusive "theory of everything".</p><p>This controversial proposal is the brainchild of the University of Minnesota Duluth physics professor Vitaly Vanchurin. In an interview with <a href="https://futurism.com/physicist-entire-universe-neural-network" target="_blank"><em>Futurism</em></a>, Vanchurin conceded that "the idea is definitely crazy, but if it is crazy enough to be true?"</p><p>The scientist developed the theory while <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.09280" target="_blank">exploring</a> the workings of machine learning using statistical mechanics. He found that mechanisms involved in the computer learning were similar in some instances to the dynamics of quantum mechanics. </p>
<p>A computer neural network works via <em>nodes</em>, which mimic biological neurons, processing and passing on signals. As the network learns new information, it changes, giving certain nodes more priority, allowing it to connect bits of information in such a way that next time in will know, for example, what are they key traits of a "zebra".</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"We are not just saying that the artificial neural networks can be useful for analyzing physical systems or for discovering physical laws, we are saying that this is how the world around us actually works," writes Vanchurin in the paper. "With this respect it could be considered as a proposal for the theory of everything, and as such it should be easy to prove it wrong."</p><p>How do you prove his theory wrong? Vanchurin proposes a way. All you have to do is "find a phenomenon which cannot be modeled with a neural network." That, of course, isn't actually so easy to pull off, as Vanchurin himself points out. We don't fully understand how neural network and machine learning work and need to grasp those processes first. </p>
Vanchurin interview:
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="539759cbfd8fcd5b6ebf14a3b597b3f9"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bmyRy2-UhEE?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>Vanchurin thinks his idea can accomplish another purpose that has been the goal of modern physics – to reconcile classical physics, which describes how the universe works on a large scale, and quantum mechanics, the study of the atomic and subatomic level of existence. The physicist thinks that if you view the universe as working essentially as a neural network, its behavior under certain conditions can be explained by both the quirky equations of quantum mechanics and the laws of classical physics like the theory of general relativity devised by Albert Einstein. </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"The learning dynamics of a neural network can indeed exhibit approximate behaviors described by both quantum mechanics and general relativity," writes Vanchurin in his study. </p><p>Diving deeper into his theory, Vanchurin thinks it supports such apparent mechanisms of our world as <em>natural selection</em>. He suggests that in a neural network, particles and atoms, but even us, the "observers" would emerge from a natural-selection-like process. On the microscopic level of the network, some structures would become more stable while some would be less so. The stable ones would survive the evolutionary process, while the less stable ones would not.</p>
<p style="margin-left: 20px;">'On the smallest scales I expect that the natural selection should produce some very low complexity structures such as chains of neurons, but on larger scales the structures would be more complicated," he shared with <a href="https://futurism.com/physicist-entire-universe-neural-network" target="_blank">Futurism</a>.</p><p>He sees little reason why this kind of process would only work on just the small scale, writing in the paper:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"If correct, then what we now call atoms and particles might actually be the outcomes of a long evolution starting from some very low complexity structures and what we now call macroscopic observers and biological cells might be the outcome of an even longer evolution."</p><p>While he posits the neural network explanation, Vanchurin doesn't necessarily mean we all live in a computer simulation, like <a href="https://bigthink.com/mind-brain/are-we-living-in-a-simulation" target="_blank">proposed</a> by philosopher Nick Bostrom, <a href="https://futurism.com/boson-stars-black-holes-invisible-stars" target="_blank">adding the caveat</a> that even if we did, "we might never know the difference."</p><p>Vanchurin's idea has so far been received with skepticism by other physicists but he is undeterred. You can check out his paper for yourself on <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.01540" target="_blank">ArXiv</a>.</p>
Vanchurin on “Hidden Phenomena”:
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="18886ffd5e5840bb19d4494212f88d82"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2NDVdNwsHCo?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>Vitaly Vanchurin speaking at the 6th International FQXi Conference, "Mind Matters: Intelligence and Agency in the Physical World." The Foundational Questions...
Keep reading
Show less
We studied what happens when guys add their cats to their dating app profiles
43% of people think they can get a sense of someone's personality by their picture.
27 September, 2020
Photo by Luigi Pozzoli on Unsplash
Sex & Relationships
If you've used a dating app, you'll know the importance of choosing good profile pics.
<p>These photos don't just relay attractiveness; a recent study suggested that <a href="https://www.diyphotography.net/interesting-survey-shows-just-how-important-photos-are-in-online-dating/">43% of people</a> think they can get a sense of someone's personality by their picture. You might guess that someone who has included a photo of themselves hiking is an outdoorsy type of person. </p><p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Q3FOUqcAAAAJ&hl=en">But as scientists</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=8JxdDd8AAAAJ&hl=en">who study human-animal interactions</a>, we wanted to know what this meant for pet owners – in particular, male cat owners. </p><p>If you're a guy who owns a cat, what kind of effect does it have on suitors if you post a picture posing with your favorite feline?</p>
<p>Prior studies suggested that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2015.1064216" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">women do judge a potential male partner based on whether he has pets</a>. While they favor men with dogs, the results showed that they also give men with cats an edge over non-pet owners.</p><p>Because of this, we reasoned that men pictured with cats would probably be viewed as more attractive and desirable than men who didn't pose with any animals.</p><p><a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10061007" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">In our study</a>, we recruited 1,388 heterosexual American women from 18 to 24 years old to take a short anonymous online survey. In the survey, we presented them with photos of one of two young white men in their early 20s either posing alone or with a cat. To avoid biasing the women's responses, we randomly presented which photo they saw first. Each participant only rated one man, with and without a cat.</p><p>Each time the participants saw a photo, we asked them to rate the man pictured on several personality attributes, including his masculinity, femininity and dateability. We also asked the women if they defined themselves as a "cat person," "dog person," "neither" or "both."</p>
<p>Most of the women found the men holding cats to be less dateable. This result surprised us, since previous studies had shown that <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2752/175303708X371564" target="_blank">women found men with pets to have higher potential as partners</a>. They also thought the men holding cats were less extroverted and more neurotic, agreeable and open. Importantly, they saw these men as less masculine, too.</p><p>This last point may explain our findings.</p><p>Prior research suggests that <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/29775193?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents" target="_blank">women often seek masculine men</a> – both in terms of physical appearance and behaviors. So the fact that women in our study found the photo of the man alone more masculine and more dateable supports the idea that women are likely to look first for clues related to masculinity when determining dateability.</p><p>We suspect old cultural norms may be playing a role in the responses. Past research suggests that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000034" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">male femininity and homosexuality are still perceived to be connected</a>. Since cats are sometimes <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.1998.11425085" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">associated more closely with female owners</a> – and therefore, considered a feminine pet – posing with cats may have primed the women taking our survey to default to this outdated trope, despite <a href="https://www.bustle.com/articles/79524-10-reasons-to-date-a-man-who-owns-a-cat-because-it-actually-makes-him-10" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">some popular media efforts</a> to elevate the status of male cat owners.</p>
<p>Alternatively, the perception of male cat owners as less extroverted and more neurotic, agreeable and open may have nudged our respondents to put these men in the "friend zone." In other words, perhaps seeing a man pose with the cat suggests he might be a better confidant than date.</p><p>It's important to note that whether the women identified themselves as "cat people," "dog people," "both" or "neither" affected their perceptions. Women who self-identified as "cat people" were more inclined to view the men pictured with cats as more dateable or say they had no preference.</p><p>Of course, like any research, our work has its limitations. Our sample is a very specific population – heterosexual, primarily white women, aged 18 to 24 years and living in the United States. We don't know how these results would change if we surveyed, say, bisexual or gender-fluid women, men interested in men or individuals from different cultural backgrounds.</p><p>And that's the best part. This is a new, growing area of research, and it's only one of a handful of potential studies on the relationship between pet ownership and first impressions on dating apps. This means we have our work cut out for us.</p><p>But in the meantime, if heterosexual men are looking to get a match, it's probably a good idea if they save showing off their photos with their favorite felines for the first or second date.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144999/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation"></p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lori-kogan-1026738" target="_blank">Lori Kogan</a>, Professor of Clinical Sciences, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/colorado-state-university-1267" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Colorado State University</a></em> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/shelly-volsche-1063004" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Shelly Volsche</a>, Lecturer, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/boise-state-university-1983" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Boise State University</a></em></p><p>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com/" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-studied-what-happens-when-guys-add-their-cats-to-their-dating-app-profiles-144999" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Coronavirus
Quarantine rule breakers in 17th-century Italy partied all night – and some clergy condemned the feasting
17th-century outbreaks of plague in Italy reveal both tensions between religious and public health authorities.
Scroll down to load more…
