These clouds could be seen with a pair of 100-inch Subaru telescopes, but even so, that’s a pretty big telescope!

The clouds are made up of a blend of the hot stars and cooler dust, which also causes the gas to glow. This glow is in addition to the light coming from all the new stars, forming the Large Magellanic Cloud. This bright glow could easily be seen here with the help of ultraviolet (UV) light. You can see the light here and many more images of this amazing event here:

The glowing gas clouds are called coronas . These are the most unstable clouds in the Universe. If a star gets close enough to a coronas cloud, then it can start spiraling into the center, eventually forming a black hole that takes the star in. They look like miniature snowflakes.

The images above show the gas glowing at different wavelengths. The blue line shows the emission light coming from the star at different wavelengths; the green line the wavelength where this gas began to glow. Here are some other images: And here’s one where the images were shot with a 3-inch Subaru telescope called the TMT. The three images show the same thing, but with different wavelengths: And this shows what happens if you take a picture of the brightness in the ultraviolet:

If this all sounds cool and unusual, then it is too! I really do hope we can learn more about the Great Attractor of the Milky Way on a future trip to the Large Magellanic Cloud. But then again, we could take it to the next level and possibly find more glowing gas clouds with Hubble.

and they will not tolerate it. It will take more than 20 years of sustained anti-smoking campaigns to change their attitudes. The most immediate problem is obesity . There are far too many calories in a Big Mac versus a Coke! This means that there are many extra calories in food than actually made from the corn, wheat, rice, and other food we eat. These calories come from fat itself. It’s no surprise that people with diabetes are constantly sick and in pain from obesity. Both are caused by consumption of this junk food. Some of that junk food is labeled fat free. Some is not or there is no fat in it, because it’s unprocessed “filler grain” like rice or pasta. This means that the calories in these foods (like chips, crackers, frozen dinners) or soda water are very harmful to our health. If we put in a few minutes of research we might realize that more water will always be better at keeping us hydrated. But how much water is too much?

I once heard that if we drink one gallon of water every four hours we will just be hydrated enough to do what we’d do anyway. That’s insane. But, here we are in 2015. A gallon of water is just 7.26 ounces. There is nothing wrong with 7 ounces. The point is that we need more. Enough to feel comfortable putting more on our plates. Enough water to stay healthy. Enough to survive. Enough to even get drunk if we think it would make us feel better. More than enough to enjoy a meal, even if it’s just one.

The problem with the current American diet and lifestyle is that the majority of us are getting by on a combination of junk food and “healthy” drinking water. We are not getting the optimal amount of water and we are not getting as much as is necessary to survive and to enjoy life. We need more healthy drinking water.

Let’s call it the Great Water War of 2015. I’m sure there will be others who are willing to join in. I invite you to join if you think that there is a need for this type of change.

It does not have to have a large spread to harm some people. The human to human spread makes it more contagious than the individual will notice. Individuals can spread the disease to other individuals, even if there is no one around to see and pass on the disease. This means that anyone who has the disease is at risk for getting it. This also means people who get the disease can be at risk of passing it on to their own children. In the US, the most likely culprit to have contracting the disease is that your family or friends are infected: they are likely to infect you as well by sharing food, water or towels with someone who has the disease. When an infected person has the disease, the body will try to eliminate any other virus in its body that it might have. This is what causes the disease to leave the area and make its way to any person that passes on it. This can range from only a few days to an entire year. The longer the disease remains around an affected area the more likely you are to become infected as well…

Whooping cough is a disease that is spread by not coughing on and around people who are infected or have other respiratory ailments. It also spreads without coughing, as you cough when you sneeze. Coughing with someone who has the disease can create a sore throat, coughing cough, or worse. The cough can also spread to people at other parties. Coughing is usually worse. Although usually transmitted by coughing from an infected individual, it can also spread when someone coughs with someone who has the disease. This is why it’s important to stop coughing in person if you aren’t sick! The symptoms of whooping cough include: Shortness of breath - a cough or wheezing can make the air fill with mucus. The person also may be unable to wheeze, making it harder for their chest to expand. Long pants - they are likely to have long pants that expose a lot of skin, which may be infected. The cough usually lasts within a few minutes once infected, and can happen any time from 7 days later to 5 weeks prior to the person being affected.

Coughing causes some infections to go away with the help of antibiotics. If you are sneezing, coughing, or coughing while someone is infected, you may be infected and have an active infection. Often, people become infected after a person with the disease gets sick (bacteria and/or viruses get into your system), so this will be noticed quickly.

The majority of the time your coughs do not cause severe flu-like symptoms. Even if you cough frequently, it only lasts for a period of time. Although shortness of breath can irritate your eyes, throat and lungs if you are coughing, most people get a good night sleep before the cough starts. Symptoms start to appear after 7 days and last for a week. The cough usually goes away after 5.

There are several ways to reduce exposure to whooping cough. It usually spreads through water or towels, so stop wearing those if you have a cough, sneeze, or cough during the day. Additionally, make sure you stay inside if you are sneezing. To reduce the risk of spread, don’t talk, watch TV or any kind of conversation that will keep you near a coughing person in the house, since that is more likely to spread it. Keep your children home from school to make sure the cough does not make you sick to your child. And of course do not share anything in a school locker room. There will most likely be other sneezers in there, and it won’t be long before you are infected. A good rule of thumb is, if you do not have any cough, sneeze or cough while someone is breathing the cough and if they cough for a longer period of time than you, they are most likely infected.


“Goldman Sachs has a history of not treating the workers fairly–and the women workers are doing just fine,” said the complaint. The lawsuit notes that Goldman Sachs “generally treats female employees and consumers better when they ask for help,” although it also notes the case of “a female customer who paid for her account.”

Funny that this is a Goldman Sachs complaint. What a joke. What a joke! What a joke.


But, how is this possible?

“It doesn’t matter. If a Wall Street bank likes the idea of treating women differently, it will.” Yeah, no. As a result of this case, we have now found out that when that Wall Street bank really wants to do something, it just gives a bunch of women a free bonus for doing good work?

Oh, and also, in case you were wondering - the plaintiff, a bank employee, alleges that the bank “did not offer the woman a promotion, was rude to her about her account, ignored basic requests, failed to give her an early retirement period, and refused to provide her with the proper insurance.” Yeah, who needs the female employees when this is working for them?

Well, it is working for these female employees, which explains why they make 80% more money than their male counterparts. Just like so many other industries.

————————- The sun will rise tomorrow night at 10:23 pm Eastern (5:23 am Pacific), and will be fully in the morning sky (not the “light” sky that you see at sunrise or sunset), before sinking into the morning mist in between 12:15 am and 1:15 am (2:15AM and 4:15AM), at which point the day will be starting to darken. After the day’s darkening, Mercury will become brighter and you will see it rise just before dawn, and then sink into the sun sometime near noon or about 4:30 pm. Then, after sunrise, or around noon, the sky will gradually cool down enough that the planet Mercury will fall into a deep, deep twilight (or is completely black) at about 7:45 PM, and you will have around 12 hours to see the sunset. The sun will then rise again a few hours later as sunlight heats up a little (depending on the latitude of the location, the evening time of day could be 12:15 (noon) or 2:15 (evening). Then you will have another hour or more to make sure you see Mercury, in the deep twilight before sunrise during the day’s sunrise (or dusk). In general, this is a nice light day to go out, so long as the sun is setting at least a little for you to photograph it. Mercury’s transit is a wonderful opportunity for some skywatching to accompany a late dinner, though if that’s the case, I’ll usually head out before dinner if I have much in the way of time to spare. You probably won’t get lucky with this transiting Mercury if you don’t have good vision, either. What to expect: Mercury will enter behind the horizon in its position of lowest eclipse. It will remain above the middle of the heavens at this point through most of the evening. In the morning, it will appear to be almost completely covered by the dark sky of southern springtime, and will be partially eclipsed by the sun in the afternoon. Note: There is, of course, no reason to watch the eclipse if you have very dark eyes. But that’s your choice! In short, you will have more than seven hours to get the good photos. As stated before, the last transiting Mercury was in 2016. A great time for a photo is mid-the-day Thursday afternoon to early-morning Friday, as Mercury will be high enough above the horizon that it’s not totally out of view. It will appear to be in mid-farther than the sun as it goes around the Sun, meaning that the moon won’t be shining very brightly. However, it will still be overhead because it is in the same plane of Earth as the Earth and Sun.

A close-up of the evening sunrise: This is an incredible photo, if you’ve got a decent prime lens. This is after sunset. What to expect: Mercury will be in the morning sky in early morning twilight as it is at now. After noon, it will get considerably dimmer, but it will have reached its greatest darkness until just before sunrise. It will be fully out of the evening sky by dusk, in order to completely cover the sky. As it’s descending into the dusk, the sky will start to start to get somewhat more visible, and soon you’ll see the surface of the sun in a bright, dark twilight as the night ends.

The eclipse is over! (If you can’t see the Mercury in all of these photos, look again through an image preview. Also, you may get a really weird feeling that your camera’s flash isn’t working correctly.)

How to get free eclipse photos or videos of the transit: After your eclipse, make sure you stop by the Science Center of your city to check out how to make free eclipse photos or videos of the transit, and I will be over there very soon to answer your questions.

The first was the death of a 28 year old woman from Dunfermline in Lothian during this weekend. She was suffering from a chronic condition with her heart’s failure causing severe breathing problems that forced multiple hospitalisations. The first patient is a 47 year old man who had spent time in hospital during the summer. He was on a waiting list for a heart transplant and had lost all sensation in his left arm from a car accident about a year before his latest illness began. He developed a septic shock on arrival at the hospital and was rushed to an intubation facility where he lived for at least two days. After that he started to deteriorate severely. He is thought to have had a bacterial infection from the hospital. The second case is a 67 year old man from Edinburgh who was admitted to hospital and treated for a bout of the flu. On his admission to the hospital he developed an infection in his heart (infection of the myocardium) . Initial tests showed he had high bilirubin levels and he died as a result. According to NHS Lothian his heart had become infected as his immune system was not producing any proper antibodies.

It seems that infection is a major risk of this condition and the treatment should include antibiotics but if they cannot be given the patient may at least be kept alive by a ventilatory mask and oxygen is provided by a ventilator at the time of admission. The treatments will depend on the type of infection, condition and the patient’s age.

The second case has occurred during a weekend earlier this month which brought the total number of suspected infectious events to 19. The infected patient was hospitalized with high fever and had the same infection. He was kept for 23 days and in this period there were two new infections which may have been related.

What to do if you suspect You may be the new patient. If you suspect you may have the illness consider going to your GP or the hospital. They will advise you of some of the possible treatments. Be absolutely sure to inform your GP if there are any specific drug products you want to be warned of. If you do not feel your diagnosis is confirmed then treat with antibiotics first and be sure to wash thoroughly afterwards.

My best advice is not to treat or treat well or to go to your local hospital . You should avoid taking any antibiotic for at least two weeks, not start any new drugs, and use personal judgement until you have visited another GP or hospital and decided what to do next. There may be some serious complications from this course of treatment. You should not avoid taking any non-metallic or metallic medicine for at least a week and wash thoroughly after you take it. - -

Lithium (bromate of lithium sulphate) is an antibiotic used in many cases as the primary treatment. However they do not recommend its use as there are concerns about possible toxicity which is the reason why its generally not used in young children such as younger people who are very young or very ill or pregnant women. (prenatal use may be safe for some but not for others). It is a common medical problem that is known for years in many parts of the world.

Another important thing to know is that some kinds of lithium may be toxic and it is possible that its a new species of lithium that the hospital treating your infection got from a supplier.

All they have to do is to follow the simple but important business policy that if crude prices are falling then at some point there are going to be price cuts. Companies investing right now are not doing so to sell and to meet the short term price needs of clients. They are doing so because they are buying crude oil because it is good for business and they already know that the price of oil is low. I did an interview with Chevron recently, that I think will resonate with all investors, and then I also talked to some of my colleagues who have been trying to explain what was going on for months ( I’m not saying this will cause another rally) but I think the reality on the ground is that at some point many of the oil price changes we talked about over the last months can no longer be justified based on current market conditions. So, the question to ask is will the current oil price do what is needed at any given moment to make it worthwhile to buy and sell? If the price is lower when the fundamentals are right, how will they be the next time? To my mind, the answer has got to be the same.

The fundamental argument of the last decades is that commodity prices really do come down with supply. The same is true of stock prices in general; when supply goes up it is a good thing for stock markets. So then, what about oil prices? One way is to ask what is going on with the fundamentals of oil production. At some point in the future when the fundamentals are no longer favorable, how fast will production come down to maintain production that we were talking about in our last article? To my mind, the answer is always as fast as the demand comes down to keep supply down. We have seen in recent months that even with plenty of oil in the ground the price of oil had to go up again on many occasions, sometimes by 50% (and in fact those were the largest increases ever witnessed). So how long can prices stay around at around 10-15 an oil and it starts to become a competitive environment is another question. Here we are now, two years after the last oil price, and we are still at the same relative levels as we were two years ago. As long as we are still in the same environment then it is possible that demand will continue to be adequate to keep the price up.

But what about the question of price reduction of stocks? A key ingredient in a successful business plan is not whether a stock price goes down and goes up, but whether the stock price increases and the price of the stock stays the same. The fundamental argument of our last article was that the fundamentals of oil production had all but disappeared. Yet, as long as crude oil prices remained above 10$, and were rising again, it was still a good time to buy stocks. And until today, when it looks as though production will decline it seems as though people continue to run out of time, so we will just have to watch and see if this trend continues.

So, what about this time? Will there still be sufficient supplies to keep up with demand and, if not then, when it comes to oil prices is just another opportunity to buy? I think the answer can be seen in the following: the fundamentals of oil production would fall short of what’s necessary to maintain the oil price above 10$. If that was the case, then the only way to sustain the price would have to be to put forward a “rebalance” strategy, which is again a major long term strategy that could not be easily supported if oil prices continued at a higher level (10-15). So, I don’t see any scenario where that is the case, nor did I see a scenario to support a long term strategy, or a risk appetite strategy where oil prices are not in the very high, and growing range. (Note: I also mentioned the opportunity cost of the oil price on a call with JPMorgan Asset Management (click here) )

The fundamental arguments of this time is that it doesn’t matter whether the oil price falls, stays stable and the fundamentals of supply and demand remain robust. Even without these fundamentals, oil will be needed at some point in the very near future, at some price, and the fundamentals (especially when they are all coming into balance) are robust enough to support it. That doesn’t mean that we see a rise in demand and that it isn’t a great idea to buy the stock over the short term at a discount if the prospect of an oil price rise is in the offing. That is the logic of demand and supply in oil, even today at a relatively low price for oil, that isn’t going to last forever. Any new oil supply and demand situation, or a long term downturn will always come to an

It’s a good time for black hole mergers: the Universe is rapidly expanding and mergers are needed to keep it from shrinking. Black holes are expected to be around for as long as the Universe, so they can’t be expected to collapse in on themselves. The current Universe is probably a product of a singularity, so if singularities are the reason for the Universe’s current expansion, then merging black holes should be the result of a singularity.

These simulations have shown that black holes form when matter and antimatter are “collided.” When the universe started in the Big Bang, matter and antimatter were in equilibrium. After about 13 billion years, however, matter made two quantum leaps and became the antiparticle of matter. Antiparticles have a negative charge. They exist as a sort of tiny electron, with zero electric charge.

This strange quantum state, known as a quantum “hole,” is something that could not exist in our Universe. There are lots of ways to explain what happens next. One way is that matter and antimatter are annihilated and combined, leading to the formation of a single massive object called a “spark.”

The universe “fused” that antimatter into matter, then the “fused” matter into a supermassive black hole. Scientists have speculated that at that moment, everything was just dark matter (which is non-physical) and antimatter (which is physical).

Black holes get their name because they emit a strong gravitational field, called a black hole radiation, and they emit that radiation like a sun in a ring. When you look through a telescope (at a particular spot in the sky) you can see the black hole radiation as it gets pulled in towards the center of the black hole. The farther out it gets, but on each orbit it travels faster, and the energy of this pull increases. Eventually, when the black hole reaches its centre, a gravitational wave will be produced. In order to explain black hole mergers, I think, the Universe must be flat. In the past, the idea of black holes was much more difficult than what we know now. Einstein was the first to argue that there must be a special relationship, which he called a “special curvature.” It must be that black holes exist within our Universe, but we think otherwise. When a black hole emits gravitational waves, it can be predicted that those gravitational waves will travel in almost straight lines. The path of that gravitational wave has to follow the laws of physics. The black hole has to be spinning at about the same rate that light travels through the sky, which is pretty slow unless you’re the largest object in the Universe. The idea that black holes are the result of singularities (the idea that all the matter in the Universe has suddenly exploded, followed by a singularity of some sort) has also never been seen. The only way to think we might find another version of this is if something really, really big goes supernova in our Universe while we’re still around and, due to gravity, stops falling essentially, the black hole should be the object that’s going to explode, that’s going from side to side (in a straight line). It could be interesting to look for a black hole merger where all the matter eventually disappears and our universe is left as a flat cylinder.

This is the “Big Bang” (the Universe is thought to have formed around 10,000 years after the Big Bang) and it’s just one of many different kinds of black holes that can exist (this is just a simple example with no math involved). Of course, black holes always exist as they are, without us.

There is a lot to be learned from observing what has happened historically. Let’s begin by exploring the evidence. To begin we will examine a set of data from New England and the Eastern states by calculating relative mortality rates from 1900 to 2005 by the total number of deaths from the plague. We will find a correlation over this timeframe with the total yearly emissions of greenhouse gases and the annual amount of precipitation or snow. We will then examine the effects of those changes.

The first thing I am concerned about is the fact that these data seem to contradict what is happening in areas that are currently experiencing flooding. In other words, the data seem to show that the plague is being made worse by man-made climate change, not worse by natural variability. This is important as flooding is a natural hazard that most of us are used to living with in New England. Therefore, I am not at all convinced that the plague is being made far worse by climate change and that it is being exacerbated by man-made warming. We find a correlation from 1904 to 2005 with the total annual emissions of greenhouse gases and the amount of snowfall. We should be concerned about all data taken at face value, but I don’t think we can escape a sense that I am not alone in finding these results unconvincing. I would be interested to see what the authors do with this data when they are able to remove all the factors that are responsible for that correlation.

At the point where I am concerned, I want to show you, in case there is anyone who does not follow me on twitter , how much worse the world looks with greenhouse gas levels at their current levels than it does without them. When we look at a dataset taking into account all of the climate science available, we see that the climate has become much more extreme than we would have imagined a few decades ago.

But there is more to this. The following plot has shown the global monthly mean temperature compared to the 1951-1980 mean for different values of the greenhouse gas budget. The green line represents what we expect to happen to the global surface temperature with a doubling of the total amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or a 50% increase in the energy input required by man. The red line represents what we would expect to happen with carbon dioxide levels at their existing levels. This is a chart you can find here If you look closely, you can not help but notice the slight reduction in the red line is occurring in areas that are currently experiencing or will probably experience significantly more severe flooding because of the very rapid release of greenhouse gases. This may be bad for the residents of areas that are in the path of those very flooding events. These things would not be very interesting to know if there were no data available but climate change is a very compelling and disturbing problem. With it, you have a very important means of quantifying the magnitude of the problems we are facing with the natural variability of the weather and the effect of the change in global weather conditions on our collective society. I think the authors of this paper have some interesting ideas to explore how our current information about how our climate is changing relates to the increase in the amount of greenhouse gases that we are emitting. It shows that they do not find a strong correlation as expected when assuming that the extra energy from carbon dioxide is offset by the increase in precipitation. They would be well advised to figure out all of the many factors involved in this phenomenon, including the other major contributors of the recent global temperature spike. I would be interested to know if further study leads them to the conclusion that this recent temperature spike is caused primarily by the extra amount of greenhouse gases that are released. As I have already noted, I don’t think these data show that the plague is being made worse by global warming; far from it. I would be much more interested in finding the degree and nature of this temperature surge as opposed to the overall magnitude. In my mind, that is more of a conversation topic not a study topic. Please feel free to comment, share, and/or ask questions below. More from me at Climate Etc. A note on attribution to climate change: There is a whole lot of discussion and research on how climate change is “anthropogenic.” With the increasing numbers of computer models, it is increasingly clear that the increase in average global temperatures is caused by increases in levels of the greenhouse gas greenhouse gases. If global warming is anthropogenic, then that would need to be controlled for in further analysis along with other major factors that are the key drivers of change. This is why I have stated, time and time again, that I do not accept the anthropogenic attribution of global warming. attribution-of-global-warming.html

This comes at the same time that China is on the receiving end of an unprecedented set of anti-money laundering regulations. The government has ordered three major firms to reduce their offshore customer base; and the three have already made significant changes.

For instance, China Daily reported on Sunday that one of China’s largest banks “will cut its money transfer business overseas by 30%-35%, or 10%-15% overall, from next year,” according to official source, based on data released by the China Banking Regulatory Commission, China’s central bank.

And finally, “the five big banks would have to stop all overseas trade, which would involve sending money abroad, within 30 days,” according to the source. It appears that Alibaba is taking a similar stance. We look forward to seeing the numbers and how those impacted by the crackdown and other measures will deal with it.

These and other recent announcements from China on these issues show that Chinese banks now realize the significance of the new initiatives and have started to increase their global presence, which is key to the economic and diplomatic aspects of the new Chinese policies. The banks will also have the chance to play major roles in these new regulations.

We have just begun to see the new initiatives take effect, but we believe that all major Chinese lenders, not just those in the U.S., are in for tough times as a result. And it is a big problem as more and more of the world’s major investors are choosing China because of the new anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regulations by the Chinese government. As such, we don’t share the belief that Chinese banks are immune or that they won’t take the crackdown measures. We believe it has a negative impact on all Chinese banks worldwide in that they need to be ready; and these new regulations are definitely hitting their home market, to the detriment of their domestic banking businesses.

Your browser is out-of-date!

Update your browser to view this website correctly. Update my browser now