https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laniakea_Supercluster

For idiots.

And not forgetting the things being stored here.

I have Mersenne48 lying in my C:\Temp folder.

This one still shows up better.

In a same or similar way, those people perhaps dreaming, or wishing for a result coming through could still be off.

My right forefinger developed a cut a couple of days ago.

Right now doing better, but my last two beers was picked or collected standing on the floor in the kitchen.

By the way, I did not find the answer to the question.

Guess which one.

Hrmmmm.

Edit: One of my factorizations completed in the meantime.

Noting down the numbers.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000848538431

Edit: Became this one, slightly hidden or obscured and it is a better one.

Speaking of survival and perhaps not idiots, run time became 99045.3421 seconds for this task.

Any idiots in here? Perhaps I should be keeping a tab with the watch on my arm.

A better one, it was put in the pocket when doing the shopping.

As usual, I leave a couple of scientific questions for others to better answer.

I will be looking for the comb for my hair tomorrow.

That was the usual Friday evening.

Once again not a good day here.

But I took some time here reading about the chemist Stanley Miller and the experiments he was carrying out in the laboratory in order to determine the presence of life.

The fact is that life is present here on Earth by means of anything from viruses, bacteria and plants through reptiles, mammals and humans.

Some people do not associate viruses with being life, however.

But in contrast there are probably many people around who may think that life itself should be synonymous with a higher value, including possible belief and faith.

Because of perhaps having or seeking to have such a high value of standards, we may find a couple of things immoral or wrong to do.

Life is not necessarily about the iron in your blood, or the calcium in your teeth and skeleton, but rather more about the DNA, RNA and enzymes being present in your body.

One part of the body, namely the brain is responsible for possible intelligence, by means of the neurons which makes up this part of yourself.

The nerves of your body also makes it able to feel pain, hot temperatures and freezing cold, among other things.

So, while evolution is a continuous process which is a result of an adaptation to a changing environment, there is also the fact that life and life processes are only known here on Earth.

Late last evening I took some time using sky-map.org in order to locate galaxies being found in the constellation Perseus, but without success.

Here either a name like a NGC number for a galaxy needs to be specified and for now I did not have any number available.

I am wondering, since we happen to be studying nature in order to gain new knowledge, we typically seek answers by means of experiments and practical solutions to given problems.

If we think that one thing is wrong to do, we are back to the question of moral and ethics.

Right now I do not see any use of philosophy when it comes to neither the question about microcosmos, macrocosmos, or even the possibility or fact that we are not alone in the Universe.

The Universe could well be a laboratory on its own, but regardless of viruses, bacteria, plants, animals, or humans, we also are having some knowledge about other intelligent civilizations which also could be present.

To most scientists, the Universe is synonymous with creation and for obvious reasons we may think of such creation as being not necessarily divine as such, or on its own.

If the divine should possibly be present, it may perhaps not be proven even by means of the Uncertainty Principle.

Most likely Albert Einstein was an atheist and therefore did not believe in a God.

Having a possible belief in the divine does not necessarily give any better answers or understanding of nature as we know it.

Both the Viking I and Viking II landers on the surface of Mars were trying to determine whether or not any signs of life could be detected by digging in the sand for possible such bacteria and viruses.

We think of the planet Jupiter as being a gaseous giant having no fixed core. At best it only becomes a metallic substance because of the high pressure, but the temperature is still to low for any fusion processes happening or taking place.

Here it should be better to explore the four moons of this planet instead.

One way of thinking about the presence of other intelligent life is by observing the UFO phenomenon and in some cases think that these may be alien craft being inhabited by some type of intelligent beings.

The Milky Way is being orbited by some 150-200 globular clusters where the stars are more than double the age of the sun.

Radiation giving heat and therefore a proper temperature could make a planet habitable if it also is having an atmosphere containing nitrogen and oxygen and also water as well.

Such a place is the Earth and this makes life a possibility.

Therefore, why not take the time at marveling at both the Universe and its creation, as well as the diversity of life being found here on Earth?

Still, we happen to be at least intellgent creatures ourselves and also being religious at times as well.

If you happen to be asking the big questions, do you always need to relate such things with either philosophy or religion all the time?

My best guess is that the famous words of Einstein was because he was not fond of the Uncertainty Principle, not necessarily because he was believing or not in the presence of any God.

The only thing we know for now is that the Universe was a result of a creation and we have yet to determine or prove whether or not this creation was the result of the possible divine.

We have yet to either prove or disprove the existence of the divine regardless of a possible attitude towards the subject and for this we probably are left with the Uncertainty Priniciple or the similar in order to do such.

One thing is perhaps believing in God because of Jesus and the 12 disciples here on Earth, but assumedly there may be some people around who do not believe in that story either.

For now I only happen to know the word or phrase "In the beginning".

This is not about the Ten Commandments at all, but if you happen to be an astronomer, it could be all about the first three seconds of initial time which happens to be creation, or assumedly could be so.

Here you may return back to Steven Weinberg for possible more information.

I do not have this right now, because I more relate Mr. Weinberg with the Nobel Prize being awarded for the discovery of two elementary particles which made it possible to unite three of the Fundamental Forces of Nature into one single theory.

Getting back at it when I know more.

"Tales of the Unexpected".

"Mysteries and Miracles".

It is supposed to be science most of the time, or possibly could be so, but often it is not such a thing.

Could perhaps add that I checked in with "Ark park" in Politics here.

Science could at times be about wishful thoughts and dreaming, but not necessarily about Religion or Politics either.

If you already do not know, I took the time finishing off yesterday evening by watching a couple of YouTube videos which generously ended up in my playlist.

Thank you for that, although it is not found right here.

There should be no doubt that some of this content could be scrutiny to an investigation, or possible research, but some things are also known to be carried out by the U.S. military.

A Japanese satellite was able to detect "serenity" in hot gases of distant galaxies before suffering a failure.

This is one way of thinking how the Universe should be all about, at least when you happen to be an astronomer.

In fact I was able to read that any Gold being found is having its origin from neutron stars.

For now I do not know anything more about this story.

Many dedicated and knowledgeful scientists, like Carl Sagan, Frank Drake and Stanley Miller have been using much time either in the laboratory, or making studies in the field in order to detect bacteria and viruses and next make possible guesses about whether or not a similar thing could be found at places like Mars, or the like.

Some people perhaps believe in ghosts and apparitions, but whether or not such things happen to be true, they are related to life here on Earth.

There should be no doubt that Gold could be found inside the computer in your room, but most likely no ghosts.

Therefore you make life what it happens to be and next what you are supposed to believe what it is about.

Both in the United States as well as other countries around the world, some activities are still being kept secret and its way of working its business becomes clandestine and for the most part obscure and hidden from the public.

Scientists are supposed to be able to explain nature from their point or angle of view, which includes both knowledge as well as experience.

My best guess is that either the U.S. Government before later, or soon will be ready to acknowledge the presence or existence of other intelligences in space.

But for now we have yet to compare ourselves with other such civilizations, because we are supposed to believe that current technological development for some reason could be confused with elements related to either pure science fiction, entertainment, or other similar purposes.

Think of it. The Wright brothers were able to make their first successful flight using a plane having an engine in 1903.

I have lost the details of this story, but is reminded about the name Kitty Hawk here.

Next we saw two World Wars, before Sputnik was launched in 1957, making room for the first man stepping foot on the Moon on July 20, 1969.

These things are definitely not science fiction, but part of real history.

If for some reason there are people around who believe in the presence of "Little Green Men", why not make such things ghosts or apparitions instead and treat the subject in a similar way?

We are supposed to know about the events which lead to the Manhattan project and the use of three Atomic bombs in order for testing and next finishing the Second World War.

But fusion processes happen to be a natural part of nature, not fission.

Controlled fusion is happening in the sun and other stars in order to create energy, possibly for the purpose of creating and maintaining life, at least here on Earth.

If I am not wrong, Seti@home is not necessarily about ufology, because such things more likely should be related to things like orbs, rods and critters, which many believe are part of nature and therefore could be observed.

Therefore, as usual, make a difference or separation between science fiction and real facts and end the hysteria which could sometimes be around when it comes to a couple of things.

If we for some reason are left with speculating about a couple of things, they might well be related to the subject of either Politics, or being part of your real life.

Therefore such a thing should not be part of science at all, because it should be easy to dismiss such things completely and when so, we should all know why this happens to be so.

And for a slightly different note or subject, two of the tasks in my task list are once again "Postponed: Waiting to acquire slot directory lock. Another instance may be running".

As a first attempt or remedy, I exited the Manager completely and also the processes for it as well.

Next restarting the Manager, the tasks runs for a couple of seconds before once again getting stuck.

I will need to restart the computer because of virus updates, but for now it also makes a couple of things impossible to finish, because there is not possible to store the temporary result for the computations.

Lost the correct wording for now, but it is like trying to use the elevator to the topmost floor and not be able to get there anytime.

Why not make an analogy of the previous post.

We all happen to know that Benjamin Franklin risked his life for the sake of understanding lightning.

Here where I am sitting, it is usually a quite safe place, but I also know from recent experience that thunder and lightning could be coming my way and possibly making life both unpleasant and uncomfortable.

Lightning is an electrical phenomenon and electricity is part of electromagnetism, which is one of the four fundamental forces of nature.

Because of research being carried out, we also happen to know about sprites hitting upward in the sky rather than downward as a result of such lightning, but definitely there are no ghosts or apparitions being present when such a thing happens.

Is it perhaps because you may be either an agnostic or atheist, but religion is most likely synonymous or related with the presence of a soul.

If such a presence could be found, it is not the same as energy by means of food consumption, or even radiation for that matter.

Compare with the subject of cold fusion.

In the end it became more or less ridiculed or hard to believe and for now there is no definite proof of its presence.

If you are the one person being selected for a particular mission, your main concern would be related to that of technology and its use or application, except for those things that are part of your daily routine.

A pilot of a jet engine would have to be dealing with both navigating, or steering the plane most of the time, as well as keeping a track of fuel consumption and amount of storage.

Because a mission like going to the Moon could be "critical" in its intended purpose, you most likely would not have the time looking out the window and start thinking or dreaming.

Rather your way of life becomes fixed to the technological matters related to those elements which are critical in a same way.

We are supposed to believe that lightning is a random event in where the precise details may not be readily explained or known.

Similarly, there is no secret that at least when it comes to human beings, certain acts being carried out are most likely intentional or deliberate, carrying with it a possible meaning.

If for some reason understanding electricity or electromagnetism happened to be "mission critical" in a same or similar way, are you supposed to know the outcome or result in advance?

Should technology and its possible advancement be synonymous with scientific advances in a similar way, because such a thing could be critical when it comes to its progress and we more likely could be able to develop new medicines in such a way rather than perhaps doing it in another way.

Perhaps we should return back to the thinking process in order to better understand these things.

And the same old story I guess, when I check in with news broadcaster ktla.com

Always the difference between science fiction and the real thing.

Also it could be added by checking in with Are humans born evil? II, both the forces of evil and those of good could be related to either the possible divine or maybe forces which are part of nature and may not be readily explained by current laws of physics.

For now it could be more easy or simple to relate both such things to the possible divine.

Cosmology is supposed to explain galaxies and clusters of galaxies and their evolution through eons of times, not necessarily be able to tell the difference between right or wrong by means of making a possible difference between God and the Devil.

Whether or not we are supposed to be able to believe in the divine or not, those things which to us might appear to relate more to sociological matters or issues, could well be part of the creation or evolution of both space, including life itself and also the equations which makes all these things possible.

In a movie like Terminator I, a robot of sorts came back from the future in order to pay us a visit and also make some nuisance with a couple of people.

Watching this movie, except for the entertainment part (or whatever else), we are supposed to believe in technology of sorts.

You may perhaps either believe in artificial intelligence, or have a knowledge about the subject, but where in this movie is technology being found or present?

In comparison with a movie like Blade Runner, where one of the things being shown was that of creating artificial eyes, the Terminator is a programmed robot with a mission to kill.

Scientists looking for possible extraterrestrial intelligence could at times be making a similar difference between objects related to nature which could be studied and certain other objects or elements which could be related to possible technology.

Because our world of living happens to be not about technology all the time, it could be a world dealing with sociological issues instead.

Because such issues could be related to moral and ethics, they are not necessarily about religion and faith most of the time.

Humans or their ancestors have been present here on Earth for some 1-4 million years, depending on how it is being measured.

Such things like fire or the wheel was not invented yesterday, but some products related to technology are only a couple of years old.

Like space itself, the notion of time became present at its initial moment of creation.

Right now we might be able to explain the notion of time by means of the Special Theory of Relativity, but not anything else which could be related to our daily lives and events happening here on Earth.

The reason for why you are not supposed to believe in the flat Earth is because science is telling you such and that this should also be evident by using only your eyes.

Seeing is believing. If for some reason a thing is either hard to believe or difficult to prove, it most likely becomes either ridiculed or debunked.

On one side you therefore find the Method of Proof in order to prove whether or not a given thing is true.

Next you are perhaps still left at debunking certain things because they either may not be proven, or it may be hard to believe in the subject at all.

Certain things of life may not always be what they are supposed to be. Such a thing could be the mirror, or maybe the trick being performed by a magician.

Supposedly nature is not always performing such tricks all the time and if such a thing could still happen, it could be readily explained most of the time.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle does probably not tell that a given thing might be impossible, only that it may not be possible to measure one state or condition in regards to or reference with another.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-FEAR_Act

Worth reading and should not be missed.

But perhaps its original or intended meaning became so.

Sorry, my bad.

But after sitting here all morning and day, I needed a short break before continuing.

Restarted the computer in the meantime.

For possible interest it could be noted that I am closing in on a number which probably should be of importance.

Still some way to go before the final result.

I also took the time reading through a couple of threads here and right now having the following thoughts.

There is supposed to be a difference between a theory and proven facts when it comes to science.

So therefore are we discussing, or possibly arguing at times about facts which are related to such discoveries.

Such discoveries are currently being done in the world of microcosmos, or perhaps better, the world of elementary physics.

Because mathematics can be used to explain the properties of individual particles, the question becomes whether or not it could be possible to prove whether or not God could exist by being able to either detect new particles or perhaps by means of any harnessing of what could be a creation of sorts could lead to the possible destruction or demise of the Universe.

Not all scientists are supposed to be religious or believe in a possible God.

Therefore, despite our intelligence and knowledge, we are not supposed to be messengers of the possible divine either.

If you for some reason could be able to prove that our current attempts in order to understand nature in no way will affect its properties or functionality, the better than anything else.

Despite or even though many models for the properties of the Universe are supposed to be based on equations, these mathematical models more likely than not gives a proper explanation for the way things are supposed to be working.

Because of that, we are speaking of Newton's LAWS of gravity, Einsteins THEORY of Relativity and the Heissenberg UNCERTAINTY principle in lack of anything else, because they are more or less either mathematical equations or perhaps models, which by means of their explanation or understanding should make it possible to understand a couple of things in lack of perhaps something else.

My best guess is that neither those believers or at least theologists are currently able to prove the existence of God by only looking at the currently known equations for the properties of nature as given by scientists.

If for some reason gravity alone could be enough to explain every property related to elementary particle, such a thing would be nice, but most likely such a thing would not be enough or suffice.

My best guess is that there could be some scientists around which could explain the possible presence of God by means of relating certain discoveries or knowledge with such a presence, even though I perhaps could have wished for such a thing to be true, I am not ready to give in right now.

And you probably do already know that the subject of theology does not always convince me either.

In fact, when looking at the Method of Proof, is this method supposed to be based on numbers alone, or is it rather about the subject of logic instead?

We are supposed to be thankful for any new discoveries being made, because than rather looking into the unknown, we are getting ourselves more familiar with a place of which we happen to be a part of.

Life and death could perhaps be a thing related to either matter or energy, or perhaps even not.

In the same way, materialism also should be part of your life as well.

Always the difference between the millions of coins or notes alone against the car, stereo and home which you could purchase.

Therefore such things like philosophy never becomes the same as neither materialism, or even those things related to matter and energy as well.

Also we are left to believe that such objects like stars, including our sun, is part of either evolution, or possibly creation as well, because whether or not we should believe in God or the Devil, life is synonymous with evolution in the same way as also death happens to be.

For now, scientists are able to define infinity in the context of mathematics and not necessarily by means of logic, or at least by means of applied theology.

It should not be forgotten that infinity is supposed to be the opposite of either 0, nothing, or nil, or even the small, or infinitesimal.

If I happen to be an astronomer, I could also be a cosmologist for the lack of anything else.

Depending on your skills or knowledge, you may be able to get a sense or notion of the splendors of nature, whether or not these are related to the elementary particles of microcosmos, or the galaxies or clusters of galaxies of macrocosmos.

Also, if I am not wrong, even mathematics and their equations are not necessarily any better proof alone for the existence of God, because again, such a thing more likely can only be explained by means of theology and as usual, such a thing is not what science is always about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform

I noted down this link sometime yesterday and thought it should be mentioned.

Also the following thought came up in my mind as well.

Mathematics is definitely the tool which should be used for a couple of things, because this makes it possible to give an answer to several problems.

But next it becomes clear that even such a thing should be used in a given context and be related to the specific subject of interest.

Equations are supposed to be mathematical expressions by means of their given context.

Therefore you are not supposed to be asking whether or not God happens to be a clever or skillful mathematician, but rather the question of whether our current understanding of the creation of the Universe by means of the Big Bang which initiated the Universe could be based on such mathematical principles.

Possibly being mentioned before, but if I am not wrong, such things as perfect symmetry and are only a very small part of a bigger picture where either fractional numbers, unpredictability or uncertainty happens to be more common than other things.

An equation like E=mc2 is having at least three separate parts or elements.

Gravity alone, by means of using G as the symbol could be listed or stated alone, but more likely could be expressed by subdividing it into separate parts which each makes up the representation of G in total.

Some galaxies like NGC 488 in Pisces is known are known for having perfect symmetrical shapes.

Is this because of equations which are supposed to represent things which are not related to symmetries at all, or is the reason for this something else?

As you probably know, Newton's three laws of gravity consist of two relatively simple ones and one quite more complex.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamics

In all of this, the laws of motion, or inertia, happens to be present as well.

For most things related to the subject of gravity, Newton's laws should suffice. If such a thing should not be enough, Einstein's equations should better explain such things like electromagnetism, thermodynamics and the like.

For now I have only been looking at this disambiguation page and I am not a mathematician or physicist myself.

Could also add that I earlier had a couple more ideas or thoughts related to a famous wording, but for now this has become lost from my mind.

So why not global warming instead, or perhaps the question of whether or not the Universe could better be explained by means of such things like orbs, rods and critters and the like, which Seti@home should perhaps be more about and therfore being related to the subject of ufology?

In my opinion it could be possible to step on someone's toes when it comes to result, but not necessarily so when it comes to a given opinion of meaning.

There could well be some people around here making predictions or statements about possible Armageddon or demise.

My national broadcaster is having some live video of seabirds in the coastal mountains, including their nests in the hills and cliff along the sea.

One of the playback clips is showing a turf of soil or grass hitting such a nest and carrying with it a hatched bird to its death.

Such a thing is part of life and means the death of a single living entity.

Compare this with an epidemics for which there is no protection and everyone could become perished or lost.

The demise of a star by means of becoming either a neutron star or Black Hole does not mean a similar end of the Universe.

A particle of matter hitting or encountering a particle of antimatter is supposed to annihilate each other by means of becoming pure energy.

Even such a thing is not supposed to neither prove or disprove the possibility of the existence of God, because right now we are unable to make a precise definition of what creation is supposed to be all about.

By means of adding the discovery of new bosons to the list, only completes or adds to the Standard Model of Physics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

We are currently unable to tell whether or not the equations of Newton, Einstein, or Heissenberg are better than anything else when it comes to explaining a couple of things, only that the Standard Model for now is being represented by at least three different parts, namely Electromagnetism, the Weak Nuclear Force and the Strong Nuclear Force.

For now, Gravity remains to be included among these three forces.

If scientists are able to prove that dinosaurs and reptiles are part of evolution, should you be able to explain nature by means of possible evilness and viciousness rather than perhaps a couple of wishful dreams or the mercy of God?

Getting back at it when I have it.

Something a bit interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation

This happens to be a disambiguation page as well.

Also I happen to be reading a little more about the Standard Model of Physics as well.

Scrolling down the page to the section Gauge bosons and in my opinion it it getting wrong when it comes to the contents.

The section above is slightly better because the figure or illustration is quite good.

In my opinion, the Standard Model of Physics should better be a summary of events rather than giving a reference to the specific details.

It soon could become a similarity or resemblance between such a thing like the mentioned Fourier transform and the equations being related to the Standard Model.

Therefore a separation should be made between the particles themselves and the mathematical equations for which they could be explained.

This should better be fixed.

See you later.

Oh so sad.

Should perhaps tell this.

https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunde_(fugl)

My national brodcaster apparently found a way of the definition or meaning of "faithful".

Here is a good example of such a faithful doing its job.

Again, it is not the national bird here, but the child or sibling being cared for by its parents, choose to "spit it off" when it comes to its droppings inside the cave.

Still, the mother, or father choose to lie calmly or patiently on top or atop these droppings most of the time.

The Lunde is not a national bird, but watching, it got my respect and appreciation.

Noone is telling this bird, but even though I found it using its beak on the disguise (a plank or plastic hiding a good camera), it still has to carry or bring its child or sibling into the world of the adults.

For now we probably do not know the end of this story, but the scientists apparently left the island with only the cameras running "as is".

Peace with the "Lunde".

It probably knows what it is doing, except for the curious visitors.

Edit: Choosing an alternative link for the video, right now, it leads nowhere.

Bump, does not really help.

Getting back at it.

Doing the weekend shopping, I came across a plastic box containing Sushi.

Just of curiosity, I bought the food and in fact finsished the meal a short time ago.

Really, I should not eat hot dogs or biscuits all the time, but I will probably not have this food anymore.

Also I am sometimes wondering what the difference between fish and egg products is supposed to be.

Also the large food shop nearby is having a such a dish and quite large one as well, also on a plastic box.

Needs checking, but probably is having peas, carrots, shrimp and the mentioned eggs in a mixture possible close to being aspic or the like, or perhaps being an add-on.

The Sushi definitely is food from the sea and it is the totally opposite of hot dogs and hamburgers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon

Perhaps more of interest and the contents of the article have been updated.

If I am not wrong, the full explanation for these things when compared with our current knowledge of particle physics and elementary particles is not yet fully understood.

Could get back at this later on, after the evening cake.

Edit: Dowloading new tasks, I could perhaps make a selection of GPU tasks as well, since a PrimeGrid Genefer task became finished.

The current tasks are a bit long and does not give much in return.

Ever heard about the arrogant or haughty scientist?

I had the chocolote, but the cake has yet to be tasted or eaten.

Is too much better than too little?

The fact is that scientists more likely are able to explain the wonders of nature from one point or perspective of view, but not necessarily another.

History here on Earth is showing that the world is full of wars and conflicts.

The fact is that the crocodile is supposed to be a reptile, but do you necessarily associate this animal with possible aggression?

If scientists are supposed to be looking for "Little Green Men", a separation should perhaps be made between bacteria and viruses being part of the Earth or this world and the rest of the Universe as we happen to know it.

Some people believe in UFO's and aliens. Others may not believe in such a thing.

Are all these people supposed to be scientists?

Regardless of possible belief (not religious belief), who are supposed to be giving the correct answer?

One part of the Earth, or be living here on this planet, is that of possible conspiracies.

A conspiracy is not necessarily the same as a lie, or even a falsification of matters.

Looking up Michael Rogers because I lost the original article, he is the head of NSA, or National Security Agency.

Because we as scientists are supposed to be marveling at the wonders of nature, people like Michael Rogers should be mostly concerned with such things like cybercriminality or cyberterrorism.

Leave such things like criminal matters, or terrorism to such entities like the FBI, or CIA, for clandestine operations, including overseas operations.

Is it not the fact or matter of the truth that the harder or higher it becomes, the harder it falls?

You probably did not notice, but the national Turkish broadcaster TRT was showing a light haired presenter.

Should a possible difference be made between a man or woman having light skin or hair, or a similar with black hair and possibly hiding the face behind a veil?

The woman wearing the microphone could be a monster in disguise, but for now we are left to believe that it is not so.

As you probably know, the Russians were offered a promising field for the exploration of oil resources in Iraq after the end of the Gulf war.

In a similar way we also may be left to believe that the former states of the Soviet Union, except Afghanistan, are not supposed to be any threat to the Western world.

Why not listen to their radio broadcasts and make up your own mind?

A country like Turkey is having the second largest Army in Nato.

Also a couple of planes and helicopters being at their disposal.

Should such a country possess any danger towards its neighbors?

Why not turn the other face against the whole situation and think it should not bother or maybe cook over into something else?

In fact, President Barack Obama is black-haired as well.

Should we be more concerned about race or perhaps history, rather than such a thing like hate or bigotry?

The important thing is that science is concerned about results rather than possible meaning or interpretation.

Because we are mainly concerned with the possible results, we probably forget about such interpretations at times.

If we were able to make a possible interpretation by means of an analysis of a result, we would be concerned with the possible meaning.

Everyone knows that that it is not the Pyramids of Giza which counts.

Rather it is more likely something else.

Looking up the subject, the short name "Ra" is having its own article in the Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra

Make it science if you will, but it could also be about sociology and even could become a subject of that of war and conflicts.

Keep watching.

This is why we are supposed to be here.

Anyway, science is supposed to be related to results.

Scientists are supposed to be asking why and not necessarily how.

Black holes happen to be relics of dying stars.

If you could stand or bother about the possible bad air or odor...

Given certain events as they could happen, the event of death when such a thing is happening could at times be part of or undergoing a religious process or principle.

Therefore, at times we are supposed to believe, but not necessarily know when it comes to such.

We do not see the principle or definition of infinity in the Ten Commandments, or vice versa.

Which one of these are supposed to fit or suit better when it comes to science?

If I am not wrong, one of the Commandments is "that you shall not lie".

Needs checking, but a lie is supposedly the opposite of the truth, where a possible falsification of facts, or maybe lack of credible evidence means lack of proof.

Thereby, or as a result, Proof <--> Evidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2TuFJMGZj0

At the end of the day.

Did not get the start of it, but for now listening to the music.

Ta-Ta...

Yes.

Good one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato

Sorry, my bad.

I am not always up to the task, but anyway...

This question has probably been asked before.

Are you supposed to be here for the purpose of science or the purpose of numbers?

Most likely Credit and CreditNew is not the same thing, but in the end there are certain people who are making the decision about how credit should be awarded and how this system is supposed to be working.

There definitely is a relationship between the tasks which are being run and the credit which is being awarded, but if I was able to make a complete list or statistics for every task that I have run by means of the Seti@home client, in the same way as for example the Proth Prime Search sieve tasks (PPS Sieve) at PrimeGrid, such a summary statistics could either be about such things like running times and possible errors, or it could be more about the actual results (factors or the like) being returned.

If you only run those GPU tasks, you most likely end up with mostly errors or spike overflows.

Not all radio signals are voice communication or speech, or even a data transmission for that matter.

If orbs, rods and critters were able to speak, they most likely would be having a language or dialect on their own.

If the sky is full of mysterious objects called UFO's, we probably would be able to detect a signal coming from these objects, possibly intelligent, but such a thing is not supposed to be happening either.

Most likely Jerry R. Ehman never gave a thought about neither UFO's or "Little Green Men" when he made his discovery.

In the same way what we are supposed to believe is flying dishes soon becomes either UFO's or even something that we could believe is spaceship inhabited by intelligent beings.

For now we only are able to relate intelligence with ourself and our relationship or interaction with nature.

Nature is able to define the principle of infinity by means of its creation and for now we are only able to make a possible comprehension of this entity by means of mathematics.

Religion is not supposed to be about dreams, intuition, or thoughts.

0 as a digit could mean nothing, including zero, or even a thing being false.

Viruses and bacteria are products of the evolution of Earth. Similarly science is not about understanding the possible divine by means of religion and faith.

If you did not already know, but 28 is supposed to be a "perfect number".

Since I became interested in numbers, I have always wondered what such a perfect number could otherwise be.

Is such a number perhaps odd, or even, or is it perhaps a prime number instead?

For our purpose we are making the results from the Seti@home client a possible intelligence test by means of the results being received.

We are measuring these results based or according to a scale or scheme, where a given spike score, possibly in the positive at times could be giving an indication or clue as to possible intelligence.

If you happen to be concerned or busy when it comes to credit, that is fine with me.

I happen to be starting the day a couple of times, but I may also be able to finish a couple of days as well.

This is why I still happen to be here, among a couple of other things.

Some or many people running the Seti@home client could be able to make a more or less educated "guess" when it comes to results being obtained, but since the inception of BOINC, there has not been that much being obtained, as far as I am able to tell.

If some people around here could make a table showing the possible relationship between what we think could be intelligence and the numbers or results being returned by all the users participating in this project, this would be a great idea.

One reason for this is that an intelligence test could at times be quite clever and personally I have encountered such a test while being a recruit in the military.

Making a possible separation between an intelligent being and something else is about making the difference between the possible genius and the stupid idiot or fool.

Being a mathematician or a physicist most likely makes you being a genius rather than a fool, but endless series of numbers, or even results, for that matter most likely is not able to produce any significant results.

For now we are not able to prove the existence of any God(s) or other such entities.

Edit: At least when it comes to the results we are able to produce or deliver.

Only the fact that infinity may be defined or possibly explained by mathematics.

Is Seth Shoestak perhaps operating the controls at Arecibo?

Most likely not.

Should he perhaps be associated or related with logical or deductive thinking and possible dreams and intuition as well?

The heart, liver and kidneys of your body are being located where they are supposed to be.

The control mechanisms for these parts of your body are also being found in your brain.

Should you be concerned or perhaps bother about this functionality?

Everyone knows that the human brain is not that good when it comes to calculating numbers.

Still, they happen to be an important part of your life.

Radio signals are mostly not intelligent, but for some reason we could possibly associate some numbers with the presence of extraterrestrial intelligence.

Because some or many people are having the thought that we may not be alone in the Universe, it is perhaps easy to forget that intelligence most likely was not a product of either Stone Age Man, the Egyptian or Mayan Pyramids, or even the invention or discovery of such things like the wheel or fire.

Viruses and bacteria are products of evolution over time. Their way of replication is not as a result of intelligence, but rather a result of productivity.

Only because there once back at the initial moment of time became both matter and energy, we also came to know about intelligence as well, because we happen to be a product of nature.

We are left to choose between believe or not believe when it comes to a couple of things, regardless of possible intelligence or maybe something else.

Intelligence, by means of knowledge, is supposed to make us able to prove something against something else.

The method of proof is typically based on the method of logic, because such logic is more likely to be able to tell whether or not a given thing is true or not and in such a way become proven.

Some stars belonging to globular clusters of the Milky Way are twice as old as our sun.

If some of these stars could be having planets, they more likely could be having either angels, or possibly devils as their inhabitants, rather than something else.

We do not define crystals as being any sign of life. Not even the droplets of the element Mercury when floating around.

The personal computer is not supposed to be about such things like intuition and dreams.

Still we are sometimes able to make such things a possibility, not because of such intuition or thinking, but rather by using our hands.

The surface of Mars is a desert and the planet is also having an atmosphere.

Like other stars and planets, we are seeing creation, but not necessarily intelligence.

We only are able to recognize certain patterns, because they are an alternative to our knowledge of numbers.

In the same way as nature is able to define limits, it could also define possible lack of such limits by means of infinity.

We are only able to make these definitions because it either fits our purpose, or could be more or less explained.

Most likely Jeremiah happened not to be one of Jesus 12 disciples, while Mattheus or John probably happened to be.

Again, because such a thing is supposed to better fit our purpose when it comes to possible knowledge.

The Revelation of John is only supposed to be explained by means of a theological context and not a scientific one.

In a similar way, the "wheels inside wheels" as described by Esekiel has yet to be explained by modern scientists, in the same way as we are supposed to believe in the Egyptian pyramids.

The possibility of time travel could be an impossible dream. Still we are able to define the notion of time by means of the clocks we are wearing and the sense of being late most of the time.

Count the grains of sand on the beach, or the individual molecules of water in a spoonful of water.

You are only able to measure such a thing because of either your intelligence, or because nature is able to tell such a thing.

Most of this and probably even more is what science is supposed to be all about, including our current understanding and knowledge about numbers.

So, perhaps a difference between randomness and chaos could perhaps be made.

In fact, whether or not E.T. is supposed to be flying around, or perhaps be a part of our fantasy, we probably, or most likely are better suited when it comes to comparing our own level of intelligence against something else.

What if the simple reason is that we may not yet be able to factorize RSA-1024?

Do we make such a thing a part of possible speculation or fantasies?

Or perhaps because most scientists do not believe in the Ten Commandments, because there is no light in the end.

A possible method of application does not necessarily reveal the presence of God.

Such a presence is only because of of a possible method and when it comes to science, such a method is not generally possible or available.

Yes suckers, stick with the title, or at least the method.

Hmm.

I will get back at it.

There is a mentioning of a volcano, some 19 miles from Rome, Italy.

Where, if I could ask.

Before asking or PM'ing tullio, there is a quite big lake not that far from Rome.

Last beer in the fridge. I will soon be in bed.

Sorry about that.

I was mentioning the Lunde.

The bird, that is.

Yes, it was hacking on the paper or plastic cover hiding the camera.

And it also was being shown quarreling with other birds in its neighborhood.

It is supposed to be flying around for the sake of fish being caught for its offspring to consume.

Never say thanks.

Sigh.

God bless (nature).

See you tomorrow.