Haven't disappeared from coin writing just yet.... 1 1

[RWB]

I've gotten several notes asking if I've published anything lately, or why public comments seem limited. First, several article have recently, or will soon appear in print. Others are scheduled up through January and February 2023.

Here are some of the subjects/titles forthcoming:

FDR-List medal 4th term

Additional Confirmation of Large Berry Half Cents as Contemporaneous Pieces v04.docx

Estimating proof pieces struck from original dies (pre 1850)

Proof Coin Manufacturing Methods to the present

Reusing reverse dies - Longacre Ledger.docx

The Last Restrikes

Thoughts on Production of Half Cent Proof Restrikes

1919 Victory Liberty Loan medal

Why Were Arrows and Rays Added to Silver Coins in 1853?

As for the current large research project, Restrikes, Novodels and Collector Coins, I am taking a break to work on a somewhat different subject. I find this a good procedure in research -- a way of not getting bogged down in trying to solve a small problem but using too much time doing it. Here are a couple of pages from the draft proposal.

 

Edited February 8 by RWB

[GoldFinger1969]

Roger, while I am sure that in-depth analyses of some of those topics are gratifying to those who follow them, do you do them because YOU like those topics or because you feel OTHERS like them ?

Those are very specific topics you are covering.

[Woods020]

I’ll stick to your coin books. Those equations remind me too much of grad school. You have fun with that sir 😂

[GoldFinger1969]

My astronomy club has had numerous people from NASA who work on the JWST in recent years:

http://www.rocklandastronomy.com/neaftalks.html

NEAF is the premiere amateur (and professional !) astronomy show in the United States, bar none !! 

 

[RWB]

On 2/7/2022 at 11:30 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Roger, while I am sure that in-depth analyses of some of those topics are gratifying to those who follow them, do you do them because YOU like those topics or because you feel OTHERS like them ?

Those are very specific topics you are covering.

The topics grew out of citizen information requests through NARA or the US Mint, and current personal research where specific results can be identified. An example is "Additional Confirmation of Large Berry Half Cents as Contemporaneous Pieces." where locating the supporting material was part of the Restrikes, Novodels and Collector Coins research, but is applicable to those who collect half cents and specifically the novodel proofs of the 1840s. (Commonly called "restrikes.")

"Proof Coin Manufacturing Methods to the Present" is an article that explains how "proof" coins were made during different eras at the US Mint. Production methods differed, and understanding this can help separate authentic "proofs" from proof-like, imitation and non-proof coins. To a certain extent, it can be combined with the intervals of proof die repolishing identified in my 1936-1942 book to place limits on the number of pieces made before a proof die required refacing.

[RWB]

The other subject is a draft proposal that would place an ultra-long wavelength radio telescope on the moon's far side. This would able to detect red shifted 21 cm hydrogen radiation from the earliest period of the universe....something we cannot do from earth. Rather than using rovers and wires, as in other multi-billion dollar proposals, I suggest individual tripole antennas implanted in the moon from orbit.....no machines or other complex (read "very expensive") gadgets, just basic solar cells, battery and electronics. snugly placed 500 mm below the surface.

[tj96]

So it's basically a time machine?

[VKurtB]

On 2/9/2022 at 9:31 PM, RWB said:

snugly placed 500 mm below the surface.

Curious how you get that uniform enough without a landing of at least a pretty involved robot. The density and cohesion of the regolith varies greatly. And the back side has no major marea. All heavily pocked surface of very little level ground. And why doesn’t the James Webb fill that need even better? I think I see you have addressed some of that, but the attachment is very hard to see with my present hardware. 
 

My surgeon has declared my upstairs lair as a no-go zone for a couple more weeks. Too much risk of tearing out sutures. 

Edited February 24 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 2/24/2022 at 1:14 AM, VKurtB said:

And why doesn’t the James Webb fill that need even better?

I hope it is able to tell us why the supermassive black hole at the center of the Andromeda Galaxy is 100x bigger than ours, though the former is only 2x the size of our galaxy.

[VKurtB]

On 2/24/2022 at 12:24 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I hope it is able to tell us why the supermassive black hole at the center of the Andromeda Galaxy is 100x bigger than ours, though the former is only 2x the size of our galaxy.

Is there enough data to see if there is a smooth, if unexpected, function of such central black holes versus galaxy mass? Sample size of 2 is kind of, ohhhh, let’s say “unsatisfying”. 
 

When I suggested the idea of huge black holes at the center of spiral galaxies to my Astronomy prof as an undergrad in 1974, as an answer to the “missing mass” problem, he scoffed audibly. I’m feeling a little dissed, frankly. 
 

Maybe physicists need to get in line BEHIND economists as “universal sages” of truth. 

Edited February 24 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 2/24/2022 at 1:29 AM, VKurtB said:

Is there enough data to see if there is a smooth, if unexpected, function of such central black holes versus galaxy mass? Sample size of 2 is kind of, ohhhh, let’s say “unsatisfying”. 

Supermassive black hole is for the most part directly related to the size of the galaxy and presumably, galaxy mergers and collissions which is how many of these galaxies got so big (like M87).

[VKurtB]

On 2/24/2022 at 1:08 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Supermassive black hole is for the most part directly related to the size of the galaxy and presumably, galaxy mergers and collissions which is how many of these galaxies got so big (like M87).

Linear? Exponential? What?

[GoldFinger1969]

On 2/24/2022 at 2:11 AM, VKurtB said:

Linear? Exponential? What?

Damnit, I'm a money manager, not an astrophysicist, Jim !!  

[VKurtB]

On 2/24/2022 at 1:12 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Damnit, I'm a money manager, not an astrophysicist, Jim !!  

Sounds like if a galaxy has an unexpectedly large central black hole, it has err, umm, had an active social life? All that merging and combining and stuff. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 2/24/2022 at 2:15 AM, VKurtB said:

Sounds like if a galaxy has an unexpectedly large central black hole, it has err, umm, had an active social life? All that merging and combining and stuff. 

I may reach out to my astronomy contacts.  Not sure much work has been done on this.  I'll let you know.  Might also be some speakers at NEAF who talked about this (check the RAC NEAF Talks YouTube Channel).

BTW, that quote above was a parody from Star Trek, for those who didn't get it. 

[VKurtB]

On 2/24/2022 at 1:16 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I may reach out to my astronomy contacts.  Not sure much work has been done on this.  I'll let you know.  Might also be some speakers at NEAF who talked about this (check the RAC NEAF Talks YouTube Channel).

BTW, that quote above was a parody from Star Trek, for those who didn't get it. 

I got it. Immediately. My demographic. 

[VKurtB]

When I did my undergrad work at Franklin & Marshall, there was no such thing as a “minor” field of study, only “majors”. They instituted “minors” three years after I graduated. I took all the courses for an astronomy minor, as it came to be. When I went back for our 5 year reunion in 1982, several of my astronomy photos were STILL on the department bulletin board. I was a darkroom rat to end all darkroom rats.

But in astronomy, 1977 might as well be eons ago. 

Edited February 24 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 2/24/2022 at 2:50 AM, VKurtB said:

When I did my undergrad work at Franklin & Marshall, there was no such thing as a “minor” field of study, only “majors”. They instituted “minors” three years after I graduated. I took all the courses for an astronomy minor, as it came to be. When I went back for our 5 year reunion in 1982, several of my astronomy photos were STILL on the department bulletin board. I was a darkroom rat to end all darkroom rats.  But in astronomy, 1977 might as well be eons ago. 

Digital CCD imaging now.

[RWB]

The main proposal is done, but I have more reviewing and cross-checking to do. It uses space-proven equipment and technology, and could be in operation within 18 months.

"Terrestrial radio telescopes can fill much of the long wavelength electromagnetic spectrum. Yet at wavelengths greater than ten meters our present view from earth or space fades to dark. We know the photons are there for the “seeing,” but our safe atmosphere blocks long wavelengths from the surface, and our space exploration skills remain too modestly utilized for meaningful observation.

"To open the ultra-long wavelength radio spectrum for observation, we need a radio telescope capable of operating in the ten to fifty meter range. With our present capabilities, the most reasonable and efficient option is to place a radio telescope on the far side of the moon. Our moon has no atmosphere to prevent long wavelengths from reaching its surface. Additionally, the moon’s far side faces away from earth during its orbit, thereby blocking radio noise from natural and human activities on earth, and solar radiation during the lunar night. As author Casey Dreier noted, a goal of the decadal survey is to open “new windows on the dynamic universe…and the full electromagnetic spectrum.” This proposal is consistent with that goal."

---

 

Edited February 24 by RWB

[VKurtB]

On 2/24/2022 at 8:43 AM, RWB said:

The main proposal is done, but I have more reviewing and cross-checking to do. It uses space-proven equipment and technology, and could be in operation within 18 months.

"Terrestrial radio telescopes can fill much of the long wavelength electromagnetic spectrum. Yet at wavelengths greater than ten meters our present view from earth or space fades to dark. We know the photons are there for the “seeing,” but our safe atmosphere blocks long wavelengths from the surface, and our space exploration skills remain too modestly utilized for meaningful observation.

"To open the ultra-long wavelength radio spectrum for observation, we need a radio telescope capable of operating in the ten to fifty meter range. With our present capabilities, the most reasonable and efficient option is to place a radio telescope on the far side of the moon. Our moon has no atmosphere to prevent long wavelengths from reaching its surface. Additionally, the moon’s far side faces away from earth during its orbit, thereby blocking radio noise from natural and human activities on earth, and solar radiation during the lunar night. As author Casey Dreier noted, a goal of the decadal survey is to open “new windows on the dynamic universe…and the full electromagnetic spectrum.” This proposal is consistent with that goal."

---

 

Thanks. What is the technology with which we might bury things to a depth of 500mm reliably on the far side? Just ballistics?

[RWB]

The "proposal" is actually a pair of proposals --- one has fixed lunar far side antennas of about 200 km span, and the other has an orbiting interferometric array with a maximum baseline of about 4,156 km. The first requires development of new but very simple antenna landers -- not expensive rovers to gum up with lunar dust. The second uses Hall effect cubesats (0.5 m) for station keeping.

Nearly everything is current, tested, off-the-shelf -- and inexpensive as space hardware goes.

[VKurtB]

On 2/24/2022 at 3:58 PM, RWB said:

new but very simple antenna landers

Sounds a little like “famous last words”. Very little is as simple as it looks in the computer. I hope you’re right about this. Even the landing simulation videos would be pretty darned cool looking. 

Edited February 25 by VKurtB

[RWB]

PS: The lander antennas have no engines or rocket motors.

[tj96]

On 2/24/2022 at 12:00 AM, tj96 said:

So it's basically a time machine?

Looking back in time...

[RWB]

On 2/25/2022 at 1:51 PM, tj96 said:

Looking back in time...

Yes. Electromagnetic radiation produced about 13.7 billion years ago -- that's older than George Burns or his cigar!

[tj96]

On 2/25/2022 at 3:25 PM, RWB said:

Yes. Electromagnetic radiation produced about 13.7 billion years ago -- that's older than George Burns or his cigar!

I'll be impressed when it can look into the future! 

[RWB]

On 2/25/2022 at 3:49 PM, tj96 said:

I'll be impressed when it can look into the future! 

Well, in a way we can. All the physical processes present at the beginning are still there and working according to their rules. If we can understand the rules of the universe we can then predict, and envision the future - at lease on some utilitarian level. Many pieces already fall into place, but there's also much we don't understand or possibly even are aware of.  Talk about "dark matter" or "dark energy" 50 years ago, and the best physicists would have shaken their heads in disbelief.

[tj96]

On 2/25/2022 at 5:59 PM, RWB said:

Well, in a way we can. All the physical processes present at the beginning are still there and working according to their rules. If we can understand the rules of the universe we can then predict, and envision the future - at lease on some utilitarian level. Many pieces already fall into place, but there's also much we don't understand or possibly even are aware of.  Talk about "dark matter" or "dark energy" 50 years ago, and the best physicists would have shaken their heads in disbelief.

We are all Carbon Based Units, from the Universe.  So the Universe is discovering itself?......I'll answer that.  Yes.

So when did the first radio wave/signal leave earth, late 1800 early 1900's?  So what's that, 120-130 years ago?  How fast does a radio signal travel?... The speed of light?  What's that, 1,860,000 miles per. second?  So that first signal is only 130 light years from earth, which is nothing in the big scheme of things. 

I guess my point is, if there's other intelligent life out there; no one will know we're here for a very very very long time.  But it's fun to think about.

Edited February 26 by tj96

[RWB]

The first EM signal strong enough to get very far were TV and radio from the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. See the film "Contact" [1997].

[tj96]