Water temperature in the Gulf of St. Lawrence was the hottest ever recorded in 2024
Scientists who study the gulf are noticing worrisome trends as global temperatures rise. That can lead to dangerous conditions for marine life.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
5 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
U.S. judge blocks National Science Foundation from slashing universities' federal funding
A federal judge on Friday prevented the National Science Foundation from sharply cutting research funding provided to universities in the latest legal setback to efforts by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration to slash government support of research at major academic institutions. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston invalidated a policy NSF adopted in May that limited the ability of universities to be reimbursed for administrative and facility costs that indirectly support grant-funded research, ruling that it was 'arbitrary and capricious.' Spokespeople for NSF and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling. NSF, a US$9 billion agency that funds scientific research, adopted the policy after having already canceled hundreds of grants out of step with the Republican president's priorities. His administration has also been freezing billions of dollars in government funding for numerous universities, including Harvard. NSF's policy, which was announced on May 2, set a cap on how much grant funding could go to cover indirect costs. NSF said funding for such costs could equal no more than 15% of the funding for direct research costs, regardless of what the costs actually were at universities. Historically, universities had negotiated with NSF and other agencies over the rate at which indirect costs could be reimbursed. The cap meant that for every $100 in funding going directly to a research grant award, universities would receive just $15 to cover overhead, such as the costs of maintaining lab space and paying for electricity and staff. The Trump administration said it sought through the policy to rein in spending on administrative overhead, which had grown to consume US$1.07 billion of NSF's annual US$4.22 billion grant-making budget for higher education institutions. That rate, though, is significantly lower than the indirect cost that many of the 69 research universities belonging to Association of American Universities had negotiated, which was often in the 50 per cent to 65 per cent range, the group's lawyers said. Talwani, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, said in her Friday decision that the administration's 15 per cent rate was unlawful. The association along with two other academic trade groups and 13 schools sued in May to block the policy, after earlier convincing judges in Boston to block similar funding cuts at the National Institutes of Health and U.S. Department of Energy. The association did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Friday decision. Among the schools that challenged NSF's funding cuts were the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University, Brown University, the University of California, Carnegie Mellon University, Cornell University, the University of Michigan and the University of Pennsylvania. They argued that NSF's action, if allowed to stand, 'will badly undermine scientific research at America's universities and erode our nation's enviable status as a global leader in scientific research and innovation.' The U.S. Department of Defense has since also adopted a 15 per cent cap, which a judge on Tuesday temporarily blocked pending a hearing on July 2. He did so a day after a different judge in Boston ordered NIH to reinstate hundreds of grants for research on diversity-related topics nixed as part of the administration's purge of initiatives viewed as supporting 'diversity, equity and inclusion.'
Globe and Mail
14 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
James Webb Telescope's shocking findings spectacularly validate the revolutionary, ‘ultimate theory' of science
James Webb Telescope is looking at 13.5 billion years old objects from human perspective, but is seeing in real-time from universe's perspective. James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been repeatedly making global headline news. It has shaken the foundations of cosmology, and entire science. JWST has discovered that MoM z14 galaxy existed when the universe was just 280 million years old (i.e. when the universe was really in infant stage). The measured emission lines from this galaxy indicated overabundance of elements like nitrogen and carbon. This was damn shocking because there is not a single theoretical model that predicts this much nitrogen this early on (which would require the birth and death of several generations of stars). JWST also discovered Zhúlóng, an enormous spiral galaxy (appears as Milky Way galaxy's cosmic twin). Zhúlóng is a mature galaxy and seriously challenges current theories about galaxy formation. JWST has made many other such incredible discoveries. But the core message is: the infant universe appears to be eerily similar to what it is right now after 13.8 billion years since the Big Bang. The reason why the infant universe looks the same as mature (adult) universe might be very simple: James Webb Telescope is looking at 13.5 billion years old objects from human perspective, but is seeing in real-time from universe's perspective, and hence it looking at those distant object as it is right now. It will be shame if the core message from the largest and most powerful space telescope ever (with a price tag of more than 10 billion US dollars) is ignored by the global scientific community. At the heart of Einstein's relativity, there is a contradiction; a paradox. For any observer, light appears to be travelling at the velocity c (= 299,792,458 m/s), and hence would take millions or even billions of years to move from one galaxy to another. But from the photon's perspective, time stops ticking completely. Photon (particle of light) does not experience the passage of time while moving from one galaxy to another. In other words, light can travel instantaneously across farthest distances in the universe. Unfortunately, Einstein did not understand the true physical meaning of relativity, and the world is also unaware what Einstein's mathematics is really telling. A revolutionary theory has emerged which reconciles the two bitterly conflicting pillars of physics, as well as unifies physics with cosmology. It claims to satisfy all three necessary conditions for a scientific revolution, and usher in a complete paradigm shift in science. It claims that the universe is like an expanding (hyper) balloon, which has a 3D hyper-surface. The wall of the balloon universe is made up of invisible scalar fields (somewhat similar to invisible electric and magnetic fields) and particles (which are mere excitations/resonances in those fields, just as the stunningly accurate 'Quantum Field Theory' insists). Since stars and planets and even humans are made up of particles, therefore all forms of matter is eternally trapped within the 3D hypersurface of fields which makes up the wall of the (hyper) balloon. The above-mentioned article claimed about the existence of two different frames of reference/viewpoints (one viewpoint is from any point on the surface, and another viewpoint is from the center of the balloon universe). The universe is perceived differently from each viewpoint, and this also implies the existence of two different concepts of time. Photon's perspective happens to be the center of the universe viewpoint. There are two pillars of modern physics: Einstein's Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Both are spectacularly successful in their own domains, but are in bitter mutual conflicts. The core conflict is about the nature of time and is known as the 'problem of time'. Quantum mechanics regards the flow of time as universal and absolute, whereas relativity regards the flow of time as malleable and relative. Experiments have supported both concepts. Sagnac effect demonstrates that simultaneity is absolute and support Quantum Mechanics' view of time. Muon decay experiments as well as Hafele-Keating experiment (which involved flying atomic clocks around the world on commercial airplanes) support relativistic view about time. Actually Quantum Mechanics is the center of the universe perspective, while relativity is all about being trapped in the 3D (hyper) surface of the expanding universe, but being free to move along any three mutually perpendicular directions. Physics and cosmology are both in crisis because of (presently accepted) wrong model of the universe. Veritasium science channel hosts a YouTube video (23 million views) titled 'Why No One Has Measured the Speed of Light' which explains why it is fundamentally impossible to measure the one-way speed of light. That video provides a crucial hint of how nature truly works. The presenter gives the accepted value of speed of light (c = 299,792,458 m/s) and then goes on to prove that light may never travel at this speed! While one way speed of light cannot be measured, the two way speed of light can be measured (by placing a mirror at the other end for reflecting light). But now, the problem shifts to synchronization of the two clocks placed at the source and the mirror. The real problem lies NOT with ONE WAY speed. The true problem is whether a distant point is also located in the past or not. The two-way velocity of light has been measured very accurately and found to be 299,792,458 m/s. But, what if, the delay in time (between the shining of torch and detection after reflection in the mirror) is actually contributed by the space distance? Indeed, that is exactly what happens! Please see the provided image. Actually the velocity of light is infinite. It the peculiarity of Minkowski SpaceTime (MST) hyperbolic geometry which throttles the value of the velocity of light (as well as velocity of gravity wave) at the particular value c. Actually, c is the expansion velocity of the universe, and light picks this particular value. It is a peculiarity of MST geometry that it mixes space and time. As any object moves very fast, the spatial distance covered (dr) is large. Therefore, the base of the right angled triangle is large. But as the base increases, the hypotenuse also increases, and hence time dilation (dt) also increases. Therefore, the space (spatial) distance gets measured as time distance. It is for this reason that the farther an object is located the more distant in the past it lies. However, that problem arises for humans (trapped eternally in the surface of the balloon universe), because of the compulsion of placing the origin at the wrong place. But for nature, the origin is at the true center of the universe and hence distances between points located on the surface are ignored. From nature's view, simultaneity is absolute. That is because the time elapsed since the Big Bang is just a function of radius of the universe (distance from true center of the universe to any point on the surface), and is same everywhere. Whether the point is located on the moon or the sun or on the Andromeda galaxy does not matter, because all of them are equidistant from the true center of the universe (where the Big Bang happened). In essence, the James Webb Telescope (JWST) it looking at those distant galaxies as it is right now! Just because those galaxies are extremely red-shifted does not mean that they have to be in the very distant past (from nature's perspective). Light is travelling instantly from those galaxies to JWST. This is not an insane claim. After all, quantum entanglement experiments have demonstrated beyond doubt that particles can communicate instantly over vast distances. Similarly, emission and absorption of photons takes place simultaneously, but appear to have travelled at finite velocity c from human perspective. BUT WHY THE 'ULTIMATE' TAG WITH THIS SCIENCE THEORY? Is it justified? Probably, yes. The list of achievements (explaining power) of this theory is incredibly stunning. It easily (and naturally) explains: 1) Standard Model of Particle physics (which accounts for three forces, and all particles of nature), by explaining the origin of U(1), SU(2) and SU(3) internal symmetries. 2) Principle of Least Action (PLA). All known laws of physics can be derived from PLA. The PLA can be generalized to 'Principle of Maximum Proper time', which reduces to the shockingly simple statement: 'The least distance between two points in four dimensional (hyper) space is a straight line'. Nature's true geometry is therefore Euclidean, and nature has to obey this geometrical (mathematical) law everywhere! 3) Ever increasing entropy (second law of thermodynamics). Many scientists regard this as the most fundamental law, but, in fact, it originates from the stretching of the wall (expansion of 3D space) of the universe. 4) Imaginary time and its relation with temperature. 5) Origin of crucial conservation laws of physics (arises from the simple symmetries of the balloon according to Noether's theorem). 6) True origin of the rest mass energy (which is given by the most famous equation of science E=mc2). It supersedes the two pillars of modern physics. It also unifies physics and cosmology, and can replace the (presently accepted) Standard Model of Cosmology. In addition, this theory may remain reigning for a long time to come. It is immune to new physics. For example: Discovery of Higg's Boson in 2012 has completed the Standard Model of Particle physics. Claims of new physics at extremely small distances (which is taken to be synonymous with extremely high energy) may be erroneous. Since time and space starts exchanging roles at a very small size scale (according to above model), the above logic might also reverse. This is actually hinted by nature: i) Strong nuclear force start becoming weak at smaller distances (the relative coupling strength decreases with increasing energy). ii) Quarks interaction strength also decreases with distance (Asymptotic freedom). This theory is also immune to new physics (new particles etc.) arising due to Dark Matter and Dark Energy. The universe is expanding at a constant rate (zero acceleration) and hence there is no Dark Energy. This theory reinterprets the physical meaning of all metrics (like FLRW metric, Minskowski metric, Schwarzchild metric) and claims that Dark Matter is an illusion arising from improper understanding of General Relativity. This theory clearly states that the universe is a (hyper) balloon in 4D (hyper) space, which is Euclidean rather than Minkowskian. The 4D (hyper) space may be infinite in extent. Emptiness (nothingness of true vacuum) may be infinite in spatial extent. But amount of field and matter (which constitutes the universe) is finite. What about multiverse? This theory does not deny it, but does not require it either. It is silent on that topic. And even if multiverses really existed, there will be absolutely no interaction (of our universe) with those universes. Not even gravity leaks outside the 3+1 dimensions, as confirmed by recent measurements. So as far as humans are concerned, it is a final and ultimate theory. It is THE rock solid foundation on which all future theories in science will be based. It is THE bedrock theory of entire science. [194 National Anthems tunes have been merged into a single tune using World's most intelligent, musical A.I. software 'Emmy', to create this United Nations Anthem (World Anthem). Kindly watch and share: ] Mr. Joseph T. Kurien (a former Cochin University graduate) is an independent researcher and a part-time science writer. He presently works in Manappuram software and consultancy. Media Contact Company Name: Manappuram software and consultancy Contact Person: Joseph T. Kurien Email: Send Email State: Kerala Country: India Website:
Globe and Mail
17 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Is Rocket Lab USA Stock a Buy Now?
Over the past few decades, private companies have expanded the possibilities of space exploration and research. According to estimates from consultancy McKinsey, the space economy is projected to grow to $1.8 trillion by 2035. With such substantial growth ahead and innovation across the industry, the space economy is emerging as a potentially significant investment opportunity. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » While companies like SpaceX lead the way, they remain private. Alternatives like Rocket Lab USA (NASDAQ: RKLB) are making waves in the small-satellite launch market, and it is the second-most utilized launch provider in the U.S. The space company is expanding its services, including lunar exploration and satellite deployment, in response to increasing demand. Here's what investors should know about Rocket Lab and its long-term opportunity today. Second in space launches in the U.S. Rocket Lab USA, founded in 2017, has enjoyed strong demand for its services over the past several years. The company generated $436.2 million in revenue in 2024, representing a 78% increase from the previous year. Strong growth has been driven by increasing demand, as evidenced by its rising backlog of orders, which now stands at $1.1 billion. That sizable figure indicates strong demand and provides some visibility into its future revenue generation. The company anticipates recognizing about 56% of this backlog as revenue over the next year. Since its founding, Rocket Lab has completed 66 launch missions, including 16 in 2024, making it the No. 2 launch company in the U.S. However, it remains well behind SpaceX, which launched 132 rockets last year and has larger rockets and the ability to transport bigger payloads. Rocket Lab aims to close this gap with its Neutron rocket, which it expects to launch sometime this year. The rocket represents a significant development for Rocket Lab since it will allow transport of larger payloads -- nearly 40 times larger than its Electron launch vehicle. This capability is vital as demand for launching satellites and other cargo continues to grow. The larger rocket will also enable Rocket Lab to compete for larger contracts and achieve higher profits and margins per launch. Pursuing every part of the space value chain Besides its launch vehicles, Rocket Lab is carving out a niche in the space systems section of the broader space economy. For example, it acquired the German company Mynaric for $75 million. It provides laser optical- communications terminals for air, space, and mobile applications. By acquiring Mynaric, Rocket Lab can scale up production of optical communication terminals, which are crucial for satellite-to-satellite connectivity. The German company was already a subcontractor for Rocket Lab, and the integration will give it greater control over its supply chain, allowing it to operate more efficiently. CEO Peter Beck said that his company would pursue every part of the space value chain and that it was "closing in on the final step and most valuable part of the space economy: operating our own constellations to provide data and services from space." Rocket Lab's finances As an investor evaluating opportunities within the aerospace sector, it's crucial to analyze the current financial state of Rocket Lab. Delays in the launch of the Neutron rocket could hinder its near-term prospects and would likely weigh on the stock in the short term. Furthermore, the company is grappling with sizable operational losses, reflecting its high cash burn, which may be a red flag for conservative investors seeking stability. Last year, revenue was $436.2 million while the cost of revenue and operating expenses soared to $626 million. As a result, the company had an operating loss of $190 million. This trend continued in the first quarter, with an operating loss of $59 million on $122.5 million in revenue. RKLB Revenue (Quarterly) data by YCharts. Rocket Lab has expressed optimism about its path toward profitability. Analysts project the company could achieve positive cash flow by 2026 and earnings by 2027. Is Rocket Lab USA right for you? Rocket Lab's future is bright. Its backlog of orders is significant, and it has been included as part of the U.S. Space Force's $5.6 billion National Security Space Launch program. As part of this, Rocket Lab has been selected to compete for the Department of Defense's national security missions for its National Security Space Launch (NSSL) Phase 3 Lane 1 program. If chosen, its success here could lead to stable and potentially lucrative contracts over the long term. As investors, we must strike a balance between risk and reward and understand what we are getting into. Rocket Lab USA is a fast-growing company in the emerging space economy. It is positioning itself not just as a launch company, but as one that also operates across the entire space value chain. Rocket Lab's current financials may deter those seeking steady, reliable returns. However, for growth-focused investors, today could be an opportunity to get in at ground level with a company in an industry expected to experience significant growth in the years to come. Should you invest $1,000 in Rocket Lab right now? Before you buy stock in Rocket Lab, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Rocket Lab wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $659,171!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $891,722!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is995% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to172%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025
