What if the question perhaps becomes something or anything else?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wfYIMyS_dI&list=RDpKezsrhev6I&index=27

You know, the washing and cleaning typically around.

I had to rewind for this clip.

You know, a competitition could be about a possible space race, including that of getting first at the Moon.

You probably know that I am not a Russian myself and therefore do not have to wear or knit the mittens myself.

But this should perhaps be the common or usual thing, except for perhaps bying Slade or Elvis Presley for that of "Rock and Roll".

Next the fact that I have never checked up on Elvis Presley and could be doing so,

My bad here.

Getting back at it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LlVwU8mA0I&list=RDpKezsrhev6I&index=30

I noted down this clip or video knowing that it is not the best.

Also asking the question about the location of the grave or graveyard in question, but at least it should be the local graveyard or cemetary for this.

Apparently no specific location decided, but rather my thoughts goes to a fine thinking person here.

Perhaps difficult or impossible right now, but I will be there with him when his place of burial is being found at the local cemetary.

Here is was thinking about that of possible decency for such a thing, because after all, here is really the thing that matters.

Yes, me and next you.

Never forget that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xyUSJ33mEs&list=RDpKezsrhev6I&index=27

Notice the speedy fingers here if I am not wrong.

Possibly or most likely she could be greedy as well, but appararently or probably another story.

It became the Thursday beer. My apologies.

Here is something being noticed.

Buy a pack of vegetables (and not fruit) meant for the freezer, next put it back in the freezer when returning back home.

One such ended up in the fridge and in fact it lost its taste overnight and became not any food at all.

Continuing with the tasks, the first one was from Enif (epsilon Pegasi), but apparently with no big score.

Are you really supposed to believe in the "Galactic Federation".

Should it be any reason to believe that possible space travelers are doing such a journey between this star and possibly NGC 752, or the like?

Could they also be making us a visit as well?

You probably know the fact that at times Politicians may not be speaking for science and the same could be with those being Religious people as well.

If you look at the conflict in Syria, that of death and destruction should be quite evident, but is such a thing as possible evilness something which could be pushed on us in any way?

If so, then by certain people, or possible acts of terrorism, except for that of natural disasters, could we still be thinking about that of a possible "enlightenment" , including a possible "spiritual" one for such for
that of the possible UFO people, or community, meaning extraterrestrials?

If the Devil was able to overcome God, he probably would be making an end to the Universe as it is.

Neither Eric Korpela, or myself, like most others are probably no Cosmologists in any way, but still a possible knowledge or understanding of the Universe could be happening in such a way.

One reason for knowing about the evolving Universe is because we are able to see its evolution by looking back in time to its early days.

The Hubble Deep Field could bring us back to a time which the Universe had only 10 % of its current age and still galaxies are well formed.

So, without having to go back at that previous discussion, are we still left to choose between that of "Intelligent Design" and that of possible Religion and Faith?

For one thing we could be having the story about both Maria Magdalene, as well as Jesus, of course, but look at the bees and the beehives, it could be such a thing as design,
but rather we think about that of being programmed functionality rather than a given intelligence, or even conscience for such a thing.

I find it not so easy to believe that the Universe was created or came in by pure chance only.

I probably already mentioned that, but apparently those things which could be both Laws and Equations became the result of its Creation.

You know, musical artist Vangelis was being asked the perhaps silly question of what I believe could be the same thing, but lost the question.

At that time I thought both the question being asked, as well as the answer being given was silly for obvious reasons, but when next looking back, I am not so sure.

Should both musicians as well as painters be representing any given science because of perhaps ideas and thoughts on their mind, or their finished results, like "Mona Lisa", by Picasso?

Or perhaps that of "Wonderous Stories", by Yes.

A physicist like Steven Weinberg could perhaps tell us about the first three minutes of the Universe, by means of that of Matter Creation.

But you do not have to be a Cosmologist either in order to explain events happening the Event Horizon of a Black Hole.

I always was busy or thinking of the flaw in the thinking which could make us believe that E=mc2 could explain such a thing as both time travel and gravity.

Any Isaac Newton in here, or is this rather supposed to be Albert Einstein, with his Theory of Relativity?

A given theory about matter alone would probably be dealing with the subject of gravity, but next such a thing as energy is supposed to be about radiation only.

In the Periodic Table of Elements, some three light elements comes after the first two ones, Hydrogen and Helium, which are not too well known.

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

In fact, I could make gravity from all these three elements, but when it comes to that of nuclear research and also that of fusion processes inside stars, it becomes another subject.

Like the three Laws of Gravity by Newton, I also would like to see similar Laws or Equations for that of energy as well, but apparently this is not possible.

The fact is that an apple in the head of a scientist could perhaps make for a documentary, but could this be possible in order to explain the first three minutes?

Mentioned before, such a thing could perhaps be found at YouTube, but for now not the one which once was on my mind.

This strange thing still being with me.

Children of the Earth, at times.

Or it could be the human civilization, including that of Demography and Statistics making up this.

Also that of both Ecology as well as Demography for that of the Earth itself.

I mentioned the UFO community earlier on.

Erich von Däniken is perhaps making these things as possibly being gods, while Billy Meier could be making Semjase a human or humanoid, at least by means of appearance.

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

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

Yes, by the way, who is she, meaning Semjase?

If you happen to be asking, you probably are not with me.

Using Google, I get the following search results when keying in the word Semjase.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Meier#Contact

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

Apparently on the same page, so no difference here.

The fact is that science could leave a trail of both destruction and despair because of its results and also the people behind.

There definitely should be a difference between the Manhattan Project and the Asian earthquake of 2004, because one thing is having a natural cause, while the other is human made.

If I happen to look around, I could find some three graphics files showing the display of the WOW signal in the graphics, but apparently with no corresponding numbers.

Either this was the finished result, or more likely it could be numbers from the processing being underway.

Should tell that I have it from the man itself, but the WOW signal was not a gaussian at all.

Are we assumed to believe that an intelligent signal should be a gaussian, or could it be something else?

The story being told about the possible UFO community and the possible involvement by both the military and scientists look quite credible to me,
but the fact that we are still looking for an intelligent signal coming from space.

If not perhaps 0, or possibly 1 or more are known, should we next be counting them, by means of the current work in progress?

The fact is that you may not be able to see the Uncertainty Principle in neither that of Demography or that of Statistics, or at least not that of Ecology,
but the Drake Equation could perhaps tell us about a given Probability for such a thing and next assuming a chance of this being greater than zero (0).

Before the cup of coffee.

Being visited by my uncle and mother, as previously mentioned, my mother was left sitting in the car after they both went for the shop for at least me to have the weekend beer.

When returning back only he got upstairs with the goods.

But when doing so, it became five minutes of mentioning a couple of words about the funeral.

Also it became that of except reading the local newspaper each day and also sitting in front of the piano, before getting Parkinsons disease, the fact that I probably have
inherited more from him than my younger brother, who probably received more from his mother.

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

Here I am not into the discussion of actually doing this thing or business, but rather the abbreviation or terminology itself.

As you probably know, at least those Politicians and sometimes also the Religious people may not always be up to the task, so whether or not this could be a matter for the
scientists as well, probably is an open question.

Here is a figure at the right showing the 1679 bit Arecibo message and also the fact that 1679 = 23 * 73 .

In fact I do not think that it is that easy.

Should tell that I did not get anything more there, but for now apparently a "semiprime" number could be made by the bit structure or composition making up the Arecibo message,
which should not be confused with the WOW signal.

The fact that the WOW signal was reproduced using an earlier version of the Seti@home client, both shows its authenticity as well as the possibility that it could be interpreted.

But apparently not such a thing happens and for now I could rather get back at that bit structure in order to perhaps know anything more.

But I will have a cup of coffee first, because once again I became overcommitted and unable to run the tasks.

00000010101010000000010
00101000001010000000100
10001000100010010110010
10101010101010100100100


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

Here are the four first lines of the Arecibo message in binary format.

Counting, at least each line is 23 single or individual digits, which next should make for a total of 73 lines horizontally or above each other.

If I could post all the lines in a similar way, you may be able to show the figure.

But rather I am perhaps doing the error or possible misjudgment of making integer number of this, even when starting with 0 rather than 1.

1679/8 makes it 209, which again is 11 * 19 and therefore not correct.

So when mentioning that of a possible semiprime number, I may in fact be wrong here and it becomes two different or separate things.

Again, I am perhaps being fooled and thinking that there could be a similarity between these two things and also the fact that the WOW signal may not be genuine.

Except for that, the possible assumption that if it could be happening one way, meaning on the sending end, like that of Active Seti, it could also be such when it comes to that of listening.

Do you spell it desease or disease?

You know, that bad illness that took away my father for this.

Still time for the edit, but for now it became the other word.

Altering it for the second time, it should be a difference between that of having an illness and that of falling away, meaning becoming deceased for the latter.

Ask The Google, it wil tell you.


Really.

---

Helping where I can. Hindering everywhere else.

https://translate.google.com/

I am not that silly, you know.

Forgot buying the coffee this time as well.

Left to one or two more cups only over the weekend.

But thinking back at the start of the Seti@home project back in 1999, meaning its launch or inception, I was not there at that time, but only some four years later for the first time.

Also there is the picture or photograph showing the moment of its launch.

If you ever have been able to carry out an intelligence test, you may know that it could be difficult and not all answers may be answered or known.

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

Really there should be a difference between that of an intelligence test for a given purpose and that of thinking of possible events or certain objects of nature making up such a thing.

Without having the name, I was right now reminded about a fish which when threatened or the similar, could blow itself up into a ball.

Also yellow or yellowish in color, this little fish could be having a smile in its face as well.

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

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

Not being visited or read before, except for that of the vents at the bottom of the sea, which could be that of geysirs, we should never forget the diversity, possibly biodiversity,
being present or found in the oceans.

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

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

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

Also here are some interesting contents.

The fact is that life started with that of bacteria and viruses and not only dinosaurs alone.

A combination of water and heat made this possible, but still we could also be left to believe that radiation coming from the Sun could also be a factor.

But next the fact that I do not see neither the Drake equation or the Uncertainty Principle in these articles.

So, the question could perhaps if or whether the Method of Proof, by means of the Standard Model, or the Scientific Method alone or both
could be any better in order to possibly prove whether we are alone in space or not.

One thing is or may be that you could be looking for an intelligent signal in the hope that any sender also could be a human like us or ourselves.

If perhaps not so, we could be back at Erich von Däniken once again and his belief that we have been visited by possible gods in the past.

Here I do not necessarily claim or state that any such gods are extraterrestrials or perhaps vice versa, but rather that it could be a possibility.

My guess is that based on his own interest or opinion on these subjects, von Däniken definitely or most likely is not a skeptic or possible debunker either.

Making it plural here, I really do not know how many different things became his subject area, or points of interest.

Seeing is believing perhaps and for this reason you could believe in many of these stories, but perhaps not all.

Compare with the events of the Rendlesham forest and you have military witnesses to a possible extraterrestrial event.

Possibly more easy to accept rather than reject these events, but at least the fact that these people were not scientists either.

In order for the possible truth to be known, the actual events have to be told and not necessarily that of the people involved.

Credible witnesses supposedly also makes for a credible story as well.

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

Apparently it became a new article in the Wikipedia in the last days.

A bit short of coffee as mentioned.

Trying a cup of hot chocolate instead, or perhaps a cup of tea tomorrow.

One of my running CUDA tasks (I chose to go for two at the same time right now) is having a power (or score) of 35.62693 .

Except for not necessarily being about numbers, because we are supposed to read their lips, at least this score is a bit higher than usual.

In addition, the pulse score now becoming above 1.02, I am still waiting for the gaussian score to climb.

Not a secret perhaps, but the square root of 2 is some 1.4142135 . . .

A gaussian fit or chi-square is never supposed to get above 1.42, as far as I happen to know.

Except for that it may perhaps be another story.

Ended up with a spike count of 18 and a gaussian score of -0.505467.

The pulse score went up to 1.124042 with pulse count 7, so right now a little better than before.

Also a gaussian score in yet another task with 4.169136 for the score.

Something else perhaps.

Always rely on the source for a given thing.

I already know that Seti@home as a project is being part of NSF (or National Scientific Foundation), but also that the word Scientific American came up with me.

https://www.nsf.gov/

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

http://www.nature.com/scientificamerican/index.html

As usual, perhaps http://www.science.com/ and YouTube instead for most of it, but here I was thinking about the possible sources for that of relevant information.

http://www.sciencemag.org/

Or perhaps not science.com, but rather something else.

In fact I lost it for now, but also there is a Government page for that of science as well.

https://www.science.gov/

Except for that, possibly a bit of a blunder when it comes to everything.

Perhaps getting off track a little, but assumedly or presumably a -0.69 starting value for the spike score is of no meaning.

Next that any score becomes a calculated score and for this the final result of the task or workunit being run.

For now it does not get in the positive when it comes to these scores, meaning above 0 or 0.000000 since this is the number of digits in SMV.

A large spike score is not necessarily any indication, or at least proof of any extraterrestrial intelligence, but some figures being noticed, could tell about such values
between 0.5 and possible above 3 (possibly even 5 at times).

Sorting on the highest spike in SMV, it becomes 21408.50654278 for the power (and not score this time) and next have to sort the 13686 lines in the main table to get at the task or WU itself.

Here it becomes 2.728526 for the score, with spike count at 30 and this is probably a valid result, because it is on line 8622 in the log.

Should tell that when looking around, I also notice the word Metascore being used, but here its actual meaning is unclear to me.

If you happen to know about the Seticlassic web pages, my guess was that the gaussian scores listed there also made an assumption, or at least a best guess,
when it comes to that of possible extraterrestrial life.

Do we next interpret this as perhaps we are being visited by aliens and that they are coming and going by means of craft we should think or believe of as UFO's?

If this happens to be that true, should we perhaps believe in Steven M. Greer for such a thing, or perhaps a debunker of the whole thing with a name which needs checking.

My guess is that if you happen to love nature and perhaps not only that of animals and the rainforests, you could also love such things as orbs and rods, if you wish.

But if these things could perhaps be believed, there is no such thing as an intelligent signal, or even any communication being heard from these thing.

In a museum or an art studio for that of paintings and litographies, the usual rule of thumb is watch, but do not touch.

If I could have the opportunity of perhaps watching such things myself, I could be able to tell that they are from space.

Always the difference, even though not everything on our planet may be known when it comes to the details.

As a user with the name of Uli is saying, "Pluto is always a planet to me", next could perhaps be asked "Where are the motherships"?

Yes, "Open up your mind" and science could also be open ended as well, with at least one end being visible.

Back tomorrow.

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

With a cup of tea for my glass of coffee which became empty, I went to above from the Golden Ratio in the Wikipedia.

The can of beer left standing on the table turned over, spilling its contents, so not a good start of the day.

But except for that, this link is perhaps a bit of interest, when comparing to that of Billy Meier.

It came to me that an ufologist may not necessarily be the same as a UFO researcher, at least not all the time.

If you compare with the work for this being carried out by Dr. Steven M. Greer, his words regarding this, about that of "Credible evidence".

The problem at least when it comes to me is that I could be approaching a subject, like the UFO phenomenon and next think that it could be a subject not readily acknowledged,
at least by part of the scientific community.

For one thing we could be perhaps scientists and next looking at nature and next think we know everything.

For those things still left unknown, or having no answers, we next could be having a view, or possible meaning for the similar thing.

By means of the fine words in the small text. there is apprently still not a "ready acknowledgment" about the existence of other civilizations, but perhaps there could still be reason to
believe in the UFO phenomenon.

There definitely should be a difference between the "Falling man" and that of the possible "Spiritual mind", which could mean possible conscience.

Those things which could be related to that of functionality has been mentioned and discussed before, but except for that, it probably becomes the smile of Mona Lisa.

You probably noticed the new discoveries being made near the Giza pyramids of Egypt and also the fact that other similar civilizations also are known on Earth.

Again that of having a possible simple or primitive mentality, including that of a given Religion and Faith, but also that the Indians of Asia are worshipping "Buddha" as their God.

Not about that of atheists, or possible agnostics here, but rather the fact that we typically associate the crocodile with both instinct and aggression and here I wanted to carry on.

Thinking about it, there could be a reason to believe that scientists perhaps could be having another approach, or possible inclination, when it comes to that of having a possible belief in the
spiritual, or perhaps overnatural or supernatural, by perhaps believing in such a thing as UFO's and the similar.

That of hypnosis itself is not any proof of a possible extraterrestrial visit, but rather a tool for such a thing, or which could be used, in order to next determine whether or not such a thing could be possible.

I got a sense from being here that we should in fact respect the work of these people and what they are standing for.

You probably know that the Bible could be a different story and next that such a thing is not popular with everyone.

Therefore, should it perhaps be made or set a possible criterion, or possibly criteria, for when a given subject could be having a possible interest, or perhaps not?

An astronomer and a ufologist may not necessarily be the same, but they are both supposed to be adhering in given principles and next believe in their things of work.

My guess is that it may not be that easy to debunk, or possibly ridicule an astronomer, but rather the fact that I finally was able to come across this man.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_J._Klass

Here is both the name and the link I was looking for and here only for reference.

This because despite willing to accept everything when it comes to the whole story, this man as a debunker of the whole subject does not go well with me.

Rather that of possible debunking of a given subject, it could be more healthy to be having a skeptical opinion instead.

But once again, if you happen to be an astronomer, what do these things perhaps tell about a Universe supposedly filled with both stars and galaxies?

Are our place as human beings still that of the Earth, or should we rather believe we are part of a Universe for which not all answers are still known?

Believe in the smile of Mona Lisa, except for that of a crocodile for such a thing and you probably are having part of the answer.

What you next could be able to make of the questions still left being answered is perhaps the next way of approach, because in fact it could be about that of UFO research, rather than the smile of Mona Lisa.

https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=81220#1857656

Really, I hate Politics, or perhaps not.

Edit something, including that of possible contents and at times it could end up for the better and sometimes for the worse.

In fact such a thing as carrying out science could at times be about both numbers and also processing.

To others it could mean possible discoveries and also that of adventure and exploration at times.

If I am not wrong, Cary Craig, who once posted here in Number Crunching, is having a picture of himself close to the South Pole.

When doing so, he is possibly an explorer and also seeking that of adventure as well.

Both dolphins and seals in the sea need air for breathing. Therefore their breathing holes or the like at the top of their back.

Apparently the polar caps are melting right now and the ice bear could be coming on shore in my country as well.

To be more specific, or precise, we are having a debate right now about a possible extension, or perhaps widening of our current search for extraterrestrial intelligence.

Therefore, if such a thing could be happening, it also could be that of a "scientific debate" for such.

Which one such, may I ask, because if so, do we actually have any such debate at all?

In fact I corrected "NOT" to "not" somewhere else today, finding that it looked or appeared slightly better.

But except for that, "NOT" is still supposed to be about that of Logic.

If such a thing as explaining, or perhaps an explanation, of an "unexplained" phenomenon is perhaps needed, we could be having a given Method for such, including that of Logic.

Is such a thing as a possible "truth" that of a given "validness" all the time, or could it perhaps be something else?

If you did not catch me this time, I was rather thinking about the possible "hard" facts right now and not necessarily any other similar thing or things.

Is perhaps Steven M. Greer dealing with, or referring to that of a given Logic when mentioning or stating the words "Evidence" ... and so on and here losing the words for this.

Becomes that of "Credible evidence" for such a thing.

As usual, that of Logic is supposed to be part of both science and also the Scientific Method, so why perhaps anything better?

You know, Budd Hopkins could perhaps be able to prove that of possible alien visits or visitors, but is the same possible by watching UFO's in the sky?

Perhaps bluestar for that of Sirius, Regulus, or maybe even Rigel, but not for Betelgeuse in any way.

Also there is supposed to be a difference between a star and a planet in a similar way.

What if I tried or happened to give an explanation for a given thing by just excluding one thing for another, in order for a possible result to be visible?

Are you supposed to believe in ghosts, perhaps?

Or is perhaps the Scientific Method only telling you that one thing could be possible, or maybe vice versa, only because it, or such a thing may be proven?

In which way is that of Logic supposed to apply to that of the Scientific Method when we are supposed to perhaps believe that science could be almost everything?

Both when it comes to that of our lives, as well as our material way of living, we could be speaking about possible values.

If next doing so, is that of values supposed to be that of, or synonymous with that of moral and and possible dignity as well, except for that of possible Faith?

I may have mentioned the fact earlier on, but such a thing as "Matter Creation" is probably a better thing for that of science than that of Creation myth.

Are we supposed to believe that God could be having a similar moral, or perhaps dignity, or perhaps even lack of it, because he is supposed to be the maker of the Universe and therefore
such a thing should also be readily assumed or expected?

When I look at it, I find both that of possible Creation and also that of the opposite possibly "open-ended" when it comes to its nature, or character.

Creation could mean the possible birth of a star in space, but also its possible demise, meaning end.

Therefore we relate such a thing to that of Matter Creation, without giving a possible thought of the opposite, meaning the possible end, or destiny.

One word, or perhaps meaning for it when it comes to that of Matter Creation, but maybe not so when it comes to that of Creation myth, which is understandable.

My guess is that such a thing as infinity could explain the properties of a Black Hole as meaning the end of it when it comes to a star, but not any similar when it comes to that of a similar birth.

The fact is that you may not really need such a thing as Creation myth for neither of these two, because it rather could be explained by means of both Mathematics and Physics.

Back tomorrow.

Yes, Edit: for that of a post, but next that of perhaps changing or altering something for either the better or the worse.

Missed that small thing.

In fact watching a debate in the national assembly right now about that of wolves being part of nature, as opposed to possibly that of bears, but not having the sound turned on for this.

Still, a quite important debate going on.

Noticing this as well, by watching the debate.

Each of the representatives, with their own desk, or at least chair, is having a quite big voting panel on their desks.

Really it should not be about perhaps shouting either, but the voting panel makes for almost a television set, if perhaps not a personal computer at all.

In fact makes it silly to watch when noticing the debate.

Yes, dang as well, because I was not in the funeral or the rest of it because of a good reason.

But if my brother chooses to play the guitar, who should be doing the crossword in the newspaper?

Yes, dang.

Again the current or ongoing debate in the National Assembly here about that of wolves.

Dogs versus wolves here and not "Cry Wolf" either, which I think is A-ha as the musical band.

I possibly said or told it before, but not wolves here in my opinion and next you should know my credentials.

Needs an understanding of possible "Management" here and here such a thing by means of that of Law.

Perhaps that of "Jurisdiction" should perhaps fit better, but when it comes to this, or in this case, it is not a matter for the Department of Justice either.

Should note from the current debate that it is for the Politicians to make up the Laws, meaning Judical Laws and not the individual "Departments".

Here in my country such a thing as a, or that of a given Constitution, is for the National Assembly to decide and next the King, not anyone else.

Therefore not such a thing as Security, or security clearance, or perhaps Security Law here, but rather that of Parlamentiarism for such a thing and my guess is that they also know.

Please do not forget that in amongst a couple of other things, including that of a stupid Politician in the news, this case or matter get quite high up on my list.

When thinking about such a thing, I am also thinking about Alaska as that of a subcontinent being part of the United States.

For this, perhaps not only the beers or perhaps the wolves, but also the salmon in the river as a possible ecological resource and also income.

For now should tell that I need a key in order to lock myself into the flat of my possession.

The same should be about the wolves being part of our nature, because that of bears for a similar thing may not necessarily be the same.