APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :ssmile: :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol2: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by owlice » Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:22 pm

It's the Federal Reserve BANK OF NEW YORK which has gold stored in its vault (not the Board). I don't know whether the NY Fed Bank still does tours of the vault, but they used to. I've been in the vault and it is very impressive.

Banks hold all sorts of things for all sorts of people; even I have a safe deposit box in a local bank for various things, including some bonds I've held for years. As the Federal Reserve Banks are banks for the banking industry, it's natural that they would hold things, too, for their clients.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Beyond » Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:29 pm

rstevenson wrote:
Beyond wrote:... There is nothing in the Federal Reserve but paper! ...
From the Wikipedia article The United States Bullion Depository, aka "Fort Knox"...
The United States Bullion Depository holds 4,577 metric tons (5046 tons) of gold bullion (147.2 million oz. troy). This is roughly 2.5% of all the gold ever refined throughout human history. Even so, the depository is second in the United States to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's underground vault in Manhattan, which holds 7,000 metric tons (7716 tons) of gold bullion (225.1 million oz. troy), some of it in trust for foreign nations, central banks and official international organizations.
Rob
I suppose we can all use a little :oops: now and then. When i did the post i was thinking of the accounts, which deal in credit only, and thus have only paper-work in them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Re ... c_currency(Scroll down to -Federal Funds-) Many years ago, before i had a computer, i went to the library and looked how the Federal Reserve operates, in an old encyclopedia, with very small print. The Federal Reserve board has either expanded it's operations since it was printed, or because the print was so small, i missed about them having the gold reserves. I had to use a magnifying glass to read about how they operated. When i read how they operated, i discovered that it was, to put it politely, a bunch of gooble-de-gook. Now-a-days it's written somewhat differently, and that's where I'll leave it.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by neufer » Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:39 pm

starstruck wrote:
Image
After a short but very heavy downpour there was an intense rainbow over the dale. It came out quite nicely in this photo; thought you might like to see . .

Actually, if you look carefully, it was a double rainbow. There's a fainter one visible too!

Yay!, my first 'official' post as a fully signed-up board member
. . and with a picture too! :D
  • _________________________ Check under the: :tree:

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by rstevenson » Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:23 pm

Beyond wrote:... There is nothing in the Federal Reserve but paper! ...
From the Wikipedia article The United States Bullion Depository, aka "Fort Knox"...
The United States Bullion Depository holds 4,577 metric tons (5046 tons) of gold bullion (147.2 million oz. troy). This is roughly 2.5% of all the gold ever refined throughout human history. Even so, the depository is second in the United States to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's underground vault in Manhattan, which holds 7,000 metric tons (7716 tons) of gold bullion (225.1 million oz. troy), some of it in trust for foreign nations, central banks and official international organizations.
Rob

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by owlice » Sat Sep 17, 2011 3:37 am

The central bank of the US (Federal Reserve System) is a private-public organization. The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are non-governmental non-profits (.org); the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, DC is public (.gov).

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Beyond » Sat Sep 17, 2011 3:00 am

rdf wrote:Interesting APOD!
Does this suggest that a prior generation of stars in our immediate neighborhood (pre-Sun) may have included nutron stars that collided?
If only a few Jupiters worth of material were ejected, wouldn't some merged core remain (possibly precluding the formation of our sun)?
Perhaps it would have been slung off into oblivion, leaving a cloud of heavy-element-tainted gas and dust to form into our solar system and us.
Or is the idea that colliding neutron stars at some astronomically modest distance from us would have irradiated our solar system?
How far away could it be and still enrich us in heavy elements due to neutron bombardment alone?
Most importantly I ask you this: If we positioned the Federal Reserve next to a strong neutron source, would that get us back any closer to a gold standard?
We won't know until we try.
Thank you APOD!
We know already that that won't work. There is nothing in the Federal Reserve but paper! It is also a private organization. But it just may make us feel better to see how neutron star radiation effects the thieves people who run it.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by rdf » Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:46 pm

Interesting APOD!
Does this suggest that a prior generation of stars in our immediate neighborhood (pre-Sun) may have included nutron stars that collided?
If only a few Jupiters worth of material were ejected, wouldn't some merged core remain (possibly precluding the formation of our sun)?
Perhaps it would have been slung off into oblivion, leaving a cloud of heavy-element-tainted gas and dust to form into our solar system and us.
Or is the idea that colliding neutron stars at some astronomically modest distance from us would have irradiated our solar system?
How far away could it be and still enrich us in heavy elements due to neutron bombardment alone?
Most importantly I ask you this: If we positioned the Federal Reserve next to a strong neutron source, would that get us back any closer to a gold standard?
We won't know until we try.
Thank you APOD!

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Visitor » Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:06 pm

.



A wide and large variety of different people use "Guest" as their name.




.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by islader2 » Tue Sep 13, 2011 5:04 am

@ alter-ego Your response to "guest" was outstanding. However, sending "guest" into the realm of Godel might be a hopeless task; because, as I see it IMHO, Godel's work is as complicated as Einstein's relativity. Anyway, "guest" posted on other issues so that psychometric analysis of his graphology would seem to indicate==in my professional opinion==that it would be better if our cadre of solons would ignore "guest." Thanx. :ssmile: 8-) :!:

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by DavidLeodis » Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:05 pm

It amused and also intrigued me that the "duration" in the explanation is a link to the APOD of 2005 October 17, which is titled 'Short Gamma-Ray Bursts Localized'. The image in that APOD is the same as that in the APOD of 2011 September 11. Whereas the topic for the APOD of 2011 September 11 is about gold the explanation to the APOD of 2005 October 17 has however no direct mention of gold at all and is about gamma-ray bursts. :!: :)

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by alter-ego » Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:50 am

lhmsr44@gmail.com wrote:This web site is a great information site for non-science truck drivers like me. Thanks for being there...Santa Lorrin :D :D
Now that is warmth to my soul.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by lhmsr44@gmail.com » Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:39 am

This web site is a great information site for non-science truck drivers like me. Thanks for being there...Santa Lorrin :D :D

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by alter-ego » Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:30 am

Ann,
It is this perspective, the one where I feel just epsiilon above nothingness that is the most important to me. The fact that I exist amongst all this begets the feeling of being most alive. The routine day-to-day living often takes this feeling away from me.

By the way, as much as science is my life, I must admit there have been times when I have wanted both a doctor and prayer.

AE

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Ann » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:28 am

Guest wrote:
Chris Peterson wrote:
Guest wrote:You are absolutely right!
I am trying to provoke answers to questions that this website has amazingly left on answered.
What is light?
What is gravity?
What is magnetism?
What is water?
and on and on....
It is not the mission or intent of this forum to answer those questions. Of course, there are good answers to all of them, and discussions about them may come up in the context of discussing APOD images and the science around them... which is what this forum is all about.
Again I am confused I thought those images were images of stars and planets etc?

Apparently light, gravity, magnetism, and water do not exist there.

"The problem is mans ignorance is only outpaced by his arrogance."
"in a court of law it doens't matter what you believe it's what you can prove."
Image
This is the solar spectrum:

The light from the Sun consists of several colors. When the light from the Sun is divided into its various colors, dark spectral lines appear, which are caused by chemical elements in the Sun.

Guess what: the light from the stars in the night sky can be similarly divided into different colors. When the light from the stars is separated into different colors in the way that you can see in the image at right, then the light from the stars is also seen to contain dark spectral lines, just like the light from the Sun.

Guess what this proves? It proves that the stars are light sources similar to the Sun. It proves, in fact, that the stars are suns.

Isn't it amazing? Go outside the next clear and moonless night and have a look at the night sky. Those tiny lights in the sky up there are suns. Like the Sun. (Except that most stars that we can see in the night sky with the naked eye are intrinsically much brighter than the Sun.)

Isn't it amazing? Isn't it wonderful?

How big does that make the universe? That those tiny points of light are suns? And yet the stars that we can see with the naked eye are all nearby stars belonging to our own galaxy.
Image
There are other galaxies. This is a Jason Ware image of the Andromeda galaxy, which you can see with the naked eye in the constellation Andromeda, if you are in a dark spot away from light-pollution. The Andromeda galaxy contains hundreds of billions of stars, many of them similar to the Sun. And there are many other galaxies. Modern astronomy has proven the existence of millions of other galaxies.

It's impossible for the human mind to grasp how big the universe is. Even so, astronomy has, over the centuries and through the application of science - careful and repeated observations and the use of rigorous math - gathered an absolutely amazing body of knowledge about this vastness that is all around us and that we are a tiny part of. Isn't it amazing?

You want definite answers? You want certainty? Then you should probably turn to religion, not to science.

But if you were to become very seriously ill or very severely injured, ask yourself whose help would be most likely to save your life, a doctor who has studied the science of medicine or a religious leader who can pray for you.

Ann

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Chris Peterson » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:22 am

NoelC wrote:So if some neutron star stuff pukes out of a neutron star during some kind of cataclysmic event, under the reduced gravity the stuff pops back into "normal" matter?
It was always "normal" in most respects- just under very high pressure.
I find it easy to believe, but hard to imagine anyone has any kind of handle on the rules of physics that govern that.
Actually, I think it is fairly well understood (although obviously not examined experimentally). The physics of phase states and phase changes of normal matter under a range of temperatures and pressures has been studied for a long time. The fact that the pressures in the case of a neutron star are very high doesn't really change the fundamental theory, however.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by NoelC » Sun Sep 11, 2011 11:25 pm

So if some neutron star stuff pukes out of a neutron star during some kind of cataclysmic event, under the reduced gravity the stuff pops back into "normal" matter?

I find it easy to believe, but hard to imagine anyone has any kind of handle on the rules of physics that govern that.

-Noel

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by JohnD » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:15 pm

Ooooops!
I opened todays APOD, saw that apocalyptic picture,and read the title, missing out the 'l'.
And rememberd Arthur Clarke's "Nine Billion Names of God" (QV: http://downlode.org/Etext/nine_billion_ ... f_god.html )
I've got my breath back now.

John

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by alter-ego » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:16 pm

Guest wrote:
Chris Peterson wrote:
Guest wrote:You are absolutely right!
I am trying to provoke answers to questions that this website has amazingly left on answered.
What is light?
What is gravity?
What is magnetism?
What is water?
and on and on....
It is not the mission or intent of this forum to answer those questions. Of course, there are good answers to all of them, and discussions about them may come up in the context of discussing APOD images and the science around them... which is what this forum is all about.
Guest wrote:Again I am confused I thought those images were images of stars and planets etc?
Don't be confused here. Yes, they are those things.
Apparently light, gravity, magnetism, and water do not exist there.
Nope, not true. Those things do exist there.
"The problem is mans ignorance is only outpaced by his arrogance."
"in a court of law it doens't matter what you believe it's what you can prove."
I think I understand your point, but you are a bit extreme in your implication. First off, man is human :roll: Often the struggle to ask the right questions to illuminate the right mystery entails barriers within one self. In a big way, ego gets in the way of truth, and "ignorance" is maintained as you suggested. Freeing one self of these bonds to see anew is key to breaking the barriers of old knowledge. But Nature is NOT a court of law. Laws are a creation of man which, when describing the Universe, always fall short, i.e. theories evolve. Proof implies a final answer, an ultimate solution. Proof is a construct which is self consistent within a closed set of information and constraints. With regard to the Universe, proof will not be had, but approaching the truth is real and is the quest of science (albeit a bumpy road :ssmile:). APOD and this forum is on this road. As stated in other posts, the goal is not to answer the grand questions, but to discuss them and hopefully help those interested acquire new perspectives and a better understanding. I personally find real satisfaction when any questions can be answered definitively.

Last point, it is interesting that a famous set of theorems explicitly state that within the realm of natural numbers, there are observable truths that are not provable within that system, and I believe that this is a fundamental tenet of mathematically describing the Universe. I'll speculate with confidence that we will always be faced with boundaries preventing us from explaining (proving) everything.

To me, your statements reflect an arrogance preventing you from seeing the Universe as it really is. :idea: :)

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by neufer » Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:23 pm

<<An indirect way in which extinct weird life might leave a trace is through mineral processing. Many mineral deposits, including iron, copper and gold, are thought to be biogenic - that is, their deposition and concentration have been caused at least in part by the activities of microbes that use these metals for metabolism. A mineral deposit that was impossible for known life to create, yet showed all the marks of being biogenic, would be circumstantial evidence for alternative biochemistry at work.>>

- _The Eerie Silence: Renewing Our Search for Alien Intelligence_ By Paul Davies
--------------------------------------------------
http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=09-P13-00013&segmentID=7 wrote: <<Paul Davies is an astrobiologist at Arizona State University, and in a recent
article in the journal Astrobiology he calls for a mission to planet earth
in search of, what he calls, "weird life."

Professor Davies, welcome to Living on Earth.

DAVIES: Thank you.

GELLERMAN: So you’re calling on scientists to search for alien life. In your paper you call it weird life. What’s weird life?

DAVIES: Weird life is life as we don’t know it. All life on Earth that we currently know is the same life, it’s descended from a common ancestor. But, I don’t think we’ve looked carefully enough to see whether there could be another form of life right here on Earth. And what interests me is the issue – has life happened more than once?

GELLERMAN: It’s what you call the shadow biosphere – that is that there would be a second genesis, kind of like a second tree of life.

DAVIES: Exactly right. So Darwin had this idea that life forms a sort of tree, and I think we’re all familiar with that, that species branch and that you can look at all the different species on earth today and trace back when they would have been genetically identical in the far past. And there’s been this assumption for decades that the tree of life is single tree. But I’ve often wondered, could it be a forest. Could there have been many geneses of life either on Earth or somewhere else and come to Earth. And the first thought is, well, surely we would have noticed. But almost all life on Earth that we know, that is that belongs to our tree, is microbial. And you can’t tell by looking at microbes what they’re made of.

GELLERMAN: Yeah, you write that if you had one gram of dirt, there’d be a million microbes and we’ve only characterized one percent of them. So we really don’t – we don’t even know what’s in that gram.

DAVIES: Exactly right, yeah. We tend to notice the big things, the elephants and the oak trees and, of course, the people, but overwhelmingly, life on Earth is bacterial life or there’s another branch of microbes called Archaea. And they make up the lion share of all life. But most of these haven’t been characterized or catalogued and nobody really knows what’s out there. And I’m just saying let’s be open to the fact that there could be microbes from a different genesis of life from you and me.

GELLERMAN: Well all this really begs the question, what is life? What is life?

DAVIES: Well, you probably remember in high school all these definitions like reproduction and metabolism and response to stimulus and so on. Now the difficulty is that for every one of those properties, you can find something that we all agree is not living that shares them. So for, example, crystals and bush fires replicate. And then the flip side is we can find living things that don’t satisfy some of those definitions. So mules, for example, are certainly living, but they’re sterile, so they don’t reproduce. But some people turn the whole thing around and they say that any system that undergoes Darwinian evolution is by definition living. It doesn’t really matter too much for my purposes except the transition from nonliving to living should be a well defined thing. And the difficulty is that even the simplest known living cell is already so immensely complex it’s inconceivable it just sort of popped into existence ready made. It would have had to have come from some long series of simpler, earlier things. And we don’t know what those things are. And one of the fascinating aspects of this entire study is that if we go look, if we go out there to look for another form of life, weird life, we might find that, of course, but we might also find a living fossil, a precursor of familiar life.

GELLERMAN: Well here we are living on Earth, where would you boldly go where no one has boldly gone before to find weird, unknown life?

DAVIES: Well, there are two strategies here. One of these is that we could look somewhere that’s beyond the reach of known life because then it’s easier to identify. If anything’s living there and we know that known life can’t, well, then, by definition that’s going to be weird life. So my first thought is to look in areas that are just simply so hostile to known life that maybe weird life has got a toehold there. But the other scenario, which is actually I think more plausible is that weird life and known life are simply intermingled. That is that these weird or alien bugs are all around us because you can’t tell by looking what they are. And if you go and see microbiologists at work and ask them do they ever have any microbes they’re working with they’re having difficulty with, they can’t culture them, they can’t sequence them – well all the time. And what happens to these, well, they get thrown down the sink. So, it’s entirely likely that microbiologists have seen weird life but not recognized it for what it is because its not going to stand out saying “I am weird.” It’s not going to be wearing a uniform.

GELLERMAN: So how would you know something when you didn’t know what you were looking for?

DAVIES: That’s part of the difficulty. So you need to make an educated guess as to how weird life might differ. And so, all life uses molecules that have the same handedness. That is that DNA is always wound like a right-handed spiral staircase, a right-handed helix. And amino acids that make up the proteins in our bodies are all by some definition left handed. Now there’s nothing in the laws of chemistry that says something’s got to be left handed or right handed, but life has made one particular choice. But we can imagine that life would use all the same stuff, the same bases for DNA, the same amino acids for proteins, identical molecules, but the mirror images, called this mirror life, if you like. And then one way of identifying that is you make a soup, a nutrient medium of mirror molecules and you see if anything will grow in it.

GELLERMAN: You know that soup, I think I have some of that in my refrigerator from a few years ago, way in the back.

[LAUGHING]

GELLERMAN: If we did find alien life on Earth, what do you think we might learn?

DAVIES: Oh I think this would be the most stupendous discovery in biology since Darwin, because it’s telling us what we would really like to know which is that life is not a stupendously improbable freak. It’s not just an accident of chemistry that’s occurred only once in the universe. It’s something that emerges naturally and relatively easily from the underlying laws of physics and chemistry. Now, the truth of the matter is that we don’t know. It could be that that’s it – we’re alone in the universe. Or it could be that it does emerge more or less automatically and readily in Earth like conditions and there’s no planet more Earth like than Earth itself. So, if it’s true that life pops up on Earth like planets around the universe, it should pop up many times here on Earth. So we would test that and if we found that yes, indeed there isn’t just one form of life on Earth, there’s two or maybe ten – who knows – we could say with confidence that we will find life all around the universe and with almost equal confidence that we are not alone. And that is a very very deep and profound conclusion. And we can do it without basically leaving our own planetary doorstep.

GELLERMAN: So Professor, why do you think the search for different life forms is so interesting to us earthlings?

DAVIES: I think we are curious because it touches on some of the deep issues. Go back 500 years when everybody’s thinking about the nature of life was based on religion. And so in Europe at that time, Giordano Bruno, while he lived somewhat earlier than that, was burned at the stake for, in part, suggesting that there are other inhabited worlds. Because the idea was that human beings and life on Earth was God’s special creation. And then after Darwinism, people accepted that this wasn’t so, that life is a natural phenomenon, that we have emerged from nature naturally. And then the question is, you know, are we freaks? Is this just an accident? And some people don’t like to think of themselves as freaks. They feel more comfortable with the idea of a biofriendly universe that brings forth life as part of its grand overarching scheme. So, I think the answer to this does touch on some very, very deep issues about what we think of ourselves and how we position ourselves in nature. It does matter.
---------------------------------------------

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Chris Peterson » Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:03 pm

Guest wrote:Again I am confused I thought those images were images of stars and planets etc?
Apparently light, gravity, magnetism, and water do not exist there.
Really? Your point escapes me.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Guest » Sun Sep 11, 2011 5:50 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
Guest wrote:You are absolutely right!
I am trying to provoke answers to questions that this website has amazingly left on answered.
What is light?
What is gravity?
What is magnetism?
What is water?
and on and on....
It is not the mission or intent of this forum to answer those questions. Of course, there are good answers to all of them, and discussions about them may come up in the context of discussing APOD images and the science around them... which is what this forum is all about.
Again I am confused I thought those images were images of stars and planets etc?

Apparently light, gravity, magnetism, and water do not exist there.

"The problem is mans ignorance is only outpaced by his arrogance."
"in a court of law it doens't matter what you believe it's what you can prove."

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by bystander » Sun Sep 11, 2011 5:22 pm

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by owlice » Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:50 pm

Guest wrote:You are absolutely right!
I am trying to provoke answers to questions that this website has amazingly left on answered.
What is light?
What is gravity?
What is magnetism?
What is water?
and on and on....
Why is it amazing that this website has in your opinion left those questions unanswered? APOD isn't a quiz show.

If what you're trying to provoke is answers, I'd say it's likely you're in the wrong place. If you are continuously disappointed in what you find on APOD, why do you keep looking at it??

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Chris Peterson » Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:47 pm

Guest wrote:You are absolutely right!
I am trying to provoke answers to questions that this website has amazingly left on answered.
What is light?
What is gravity?
What is magnetism?
What is water?
and on and on....
It is not the mission or intent of this forum to answer those questions. Of course, there are good answers to all of them, and discussions about them may come up in the context of discussing APOD images and the science around them... which is what this forum is all about.

Re: APOD: On the Origin of Gold (2011 Sep 11)

by Guest » Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:42 pm

Case wrote:
Amazed wrote:For once I like to read 'WE KNOW"
Realizing you posted to provoke, I'll try to answer anyway.
I thought it is quite refreshing to see APOD scientists honestly admit what isn't known (yet). Compare that to other reports on any subject in the media, presented as absolute truths, but it fact either propaganda or most likely scenario without stating the uncertainty.
And: cutting edge science is ALWAYS on what we don't know (precisely), otherwise it would be a history lesson, not science to learn new things.
Also: each answer we get usually results in a multitude of new questions. (“The more you know, the more you realise how much you don't know”)

If known process "A" can't be the cause of thing-we-find "B", then yet-to-be-discovered process "C" must be needed to explain "B". Let's make a model of what "C" could be, and try to test that. No absolute certainty there, but the best we (humanity) can do. It's how we advanced since the dawn of mankind.
You are absolutely right!
I am trying to provoke answers to questions that this website has amazingly left on answered.
What is light?
What is gravity?
What is magnetism?
What is water?
and on and on....

Top