Podcast appearances and mentions of eugene parker

On December 24, 2024, NASA's Parker Solar Probe shattered records: becoming simultaneously the closest a human-made object has ever approached the Sun, and, travelling at 430,000 mph, the fastest object ever built on Earth. This was the culmination of a 70-year long legacy of its namesake, Eugene Parker, who in 1958 transformed our understanding of the Sun from a static ball of fire to a dynamic, magnetic entity capable of ejecting extremely hot winds into vast reaches of space. In this episode, we revisit Parker's seminal paper and its impact on exploratory missions of the Solar System for decades after.

The NFL agent who represents Michael Bennett, Michael Crabtree, Marshawn Lynch, Kenny Stills and over forty other professional football players became the Executive VP at Wasserman .The agents, Doug Hendrickson and CJ LaBoy, have worked together dating back to their days at Octagon. However, in February 2014, they left to work under NFL agent Eugene Parker (who passed away in 2016) at what was called Relativity Sports and was rebranded to ISE under the new leadership of Hank Ratner, who was the former President and CEO of The Madison Square Garden Company.Hendrickson and LaBoy were basically left in charge of ISE's football division after Parker's death and veteran NFL agent Tory Dandy leaving ISE for Creative Artists Agency, bringing along with him clients such as Sammy Watkins and Shaq Lawson. To View This Episode- https://youtu.be/AcKyTcHz17Q#philfriedrich #whoknewinthemoment #marshawnlynch #nfl #sportsagent

STERNENGESCHICHTEN LIVE TOUR 2025! Tickets unter https://sternengeschichten.live Von der Sonne leuchtet es nicht nur, von dort weht auch der "Sonnenwind". Das hat man lange nicht gelaubt und als Eugene Parker seine Existenz vorhergesagt hat, war man nicht begeistert. Die ganze Geschichte hört ihr in der neuen Folge der Sternengeschichten. Wer den Podcast finanziell unterstützen möchte, kann das hier tun: Mit PayPal (https://www.paypal.me/florianfreistetter), Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/sternengeschichten) oder Steady (https://steadyhq.com/sternengeschichten)

La sonda Parker Solar Probe alcanza récord de cercanía al Sol esta Navidad   Por Félix Riaño @LocutorCoLa sonda Parker Solar Probe, de la NASA, hará historia este 24 de diciembre al acercarse a tan solo 6,1 millones de kilómetros de la superficie del Sol, la mayor proximidad lograda por un objeto humano.Escucha más sobre esta misión y otros temas fascinantes en nuestro pódcast en Spotify.Lanzada en 2018, la misión busca responder preguntas clave sobre el comportamiento solar y su impacto en la Tierra. Con un escudo capaz de resistir hasta 1.370 grados Celsius, la sonda viajará a 692.000 kilómetros por hora, enfrentando condiciones extremas mientras orbita la corona solar. Su aproximación coincide con el máximo de actividad solar, aumentando las posibilidades de captar eventos inéditos en tiempo real.  La Parker Solar Probe está equipada con un escudo térmico de carbono de 11,4 centímetros de grosor que la protege de las temperaturas y radiación extremas. Este escudo mantiene los instrumentos internos a una temperatura estable de 29 grados Celsius gracias a un innovador sistema de enfriamiento por agua.El diseño de la sonda permite que sea completamente autónoma durante sus acercamientos al Sol, ya que la proximidad bloquea las comunicaciones con la Tierra. Sus instrumentos están optimizados para captar partículas cargadas, campos magnéticos y eyecciones de masa coronal, los cuales pueden afectar a la tecnología y sistemas eléctricos terrestres.  Objetivos de la misión  El Sol plantea dos grandes enigmas científicos que Parker busca resolver:¿Por qué la corona solar, su atmósfera exterior, alcanza temperaturas de millones de grados Celsius, mientras que su superficie es mucho más fría, con "solo" 5.500 grados?¿Cómo se originan y aceleran las partículas del viento solar, una corriente que viaja a velocidades supersónicas y afecta a la Tierra y otros planetas?Además, la sonda está diseñada para estudiar el comportamiento de las eyecciones de masa coronal, explosiones de plasma que pueden generar tormentas geomagnéticas, las cuales afectan satélites, redes eléctricas y sistemas de comunicación en nuestro planeta.  Velocidad y récords históricos  La Parker Solar Probe es el objeto más veloz construido por la humanidad, alcanzando 692.000 kilómetros por hora. Esta velocidad le permite completar su órbita en menos de tres meses. Durante este acercamiento, Parker pasará a una distancia equivalente a cuatro yardas si el espacio entre la Tierra y el Sol se redujera al tamaño de un campo de fútbol americano.Este sobrevuelo es el primero de tres acercamientos históricos que tendrán lugar en marzo y junio de 2025, permitiendo recopilar más datos únicos de la corona solar.  Un regalo de ciencia en navidad  El momento es simbólico: la sonda realizará su perihelio (punto más cercano al Sol) en plena Nochebuena. Este evento recuerda otros hitos navideños de la NASA, como el lanzamiento del telescopio James Webb en 2021 o la famosa foto “Earthrise” del Apolo 8 en 1968.La Parker Solar Probe fue nombrada en honor a Eugene Parker, astrofísico pionero en el estudio del Sol y descubridor del viento solar en 1958. Este científico revolucionó la comprensión de la heliosfera, la burbuja de partículas cargadas que rodea el sistema solar. Fue la primera persona viva en tener una misión de la NASA bautizada en su honor y pudo presenciar el lanzamiento de la sonda antes de fallecer en 2022.  Los datos de Parker no solo revelarán secretos sobre el Sol, sino que también permitirán mejorar la predicción de fenómenos solares y reducir el impacto de las tormentas geomagnéticas en la tecnología terrestre. Esta misión establece un precedente para la exploración estelar y la investigación de las interacciones entre estrellas y planetas.  Escucha más sobre esta misión y otros temas fascinantes en nuestro pódcast en Spotify.Bibliografía:The Washington PostCTV NewsCNNPhys.orgConviértete en un seguidor de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/flash-diario-de-el-siglo-21-es-hoy--5835407/support.

Astronomy Cast Ep. 728: Solar Scientist Eugene Parker By Fraser Cain & Dr. Pamela Gay Streamed live on Sep 23, 2024. Last week, we talked about the Parker Solar Probe. As always, we like to talk about the person who inspired the mission. What makes this amazing and different is that Eugene Parker was there to watch the launch of the mission that shares his name. Why is he so influential on solar astronomy?   SUPPORTED BY YOU! This Episode is made possible thanks to our Patrons on Patreon. Join at the Galaxy Group level or higher to be listed in our YouTube videos.  Thanks to: Paul Fischer, Joe Holistein, Janelle aka Veronica_Cure, Lenore Horner, David Troug, Timelord Iroh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf4qdzyKsfY Streamed live on Sep 23, 2024. Last week, we talked about the Parker Solar Probe. As always, we like to talk about the person who inspired the mission. What makes this amazing and different is that Eugene Parker was there to watch the launch of the mission that shares his name. Why is he so influential on solar astronomy?   SUPPORTED BY YOU! This Episode is made possible thanks to our Patrons on Patreon. Join at the Galaxy Group level or higher to be listed in our YouTube videos.  Thanks to: Paul Fischer, Joe Holistein, Janelle aka Veronica_Cure, Lenore Horner, David Troug, Timelord Iroh.   We've added a new way to donate to 365 Days of Astronomy to support editing, hosting, and production costs.  Just visit: https://www.patreon.com/365DaysOfAstronomy and donate as much as you can! Share the podcast with your friends and send the Patreon link to them too!  Every bit helps! Thank you! ------------------------------------ Do go visit http://www.redbubble.com/people/CosmoQuestX/shop for cool Astronomy Cast and CosmoQuest t-shirts, coffee mugs and other awesomeness! http://cosmoquest.org/Donate This show is made possible through your donations.  Thank you! (Haven't donated? It's not too late! Just click!) ------------------------------------ The 365 Days of Astronomy Podcast is produced by the Planetary Science Institute. http://www.psi.edu Visit us on the web at 365DaysOfAstronomy.org or email us at info@365DaysOfAstronomy.org.

Streamed live on Sep 23, 2024. Last week, we talked about the Parker Solar Probe. As always, we like to talk about the person who inspired the mission. What makes this amazing and different is that Eugene Parker was there to watch the launch of the mission that shares his name. Why is he so influential on solar astronomy?

How can college students who would like to work in the space industry and at NASA get their foot in the door? And what is the purpose of the Lucy mission to the Trojan Asteroids? To get the answers to both of these questions, Dr. Charles Liu and co-host Allen Liu welcome Freya Holloway, a NASA L'SPACE Lab Tech at ASU. As always, though, we start off with the day's joyfully cool cosmic thing: the latest, most accurate coloration of Neptune. It turns out, the rich, deep blue Neptune we've come to know and love was placed by scientists to increase contrast which are no longer necessary. And Neptune is now a much lighter tone of blue, more in line with the current, turquoise coloration of Uranus. And with that, we turn to the Lucy mission to investigate the “Trojan Asteroids” which share Jupiter's orbit around our sun. Lucy recently did a flyby of the asteroid Dinkinesh and its moon Selam, discovering that it actually not one asteroid but three distinct bodies. Freya Holloway is an ambassador for Lucy, and she explains the purpose of the flyby and brings us up to speed on where the mission is at. In December this year, Lucy will be making her second Earth gravity assist flyby to build up momentum to slingshot her towards Jupiter. And in April 2025, Lucy will encounter her second main belt asteroid, Donald Johanson. That asteroid is named for the paleontologist involved in the discovery of the Lucy fossil (the mission's namesake) in Ethiopia in the 1970s, and who has actually been involved in the current Lucy mission. Freya explains why the mission is aptly named. Trojan asteroids are fossils, astronomically speaking, and they may be able to teach us something about the birth and evolution of our solar system the same way that Lucy has taught us about early hominids and our own evolution. You'll learn all about this unique population of asteroids, which are far less familiar to most people than either the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter or the Kuiper Belt beyond Neptune. One group precedes Jupiter in its orbit around the sun and the other orbits behind, and both groups are relatively pristine and date back to the origins of our solar system. In this episode, we have a special set of questions for Freya that all come from students who attend Notre Dame Academy on Staten Island. First up, Isabella wants to know who Freya's favorite scientist is, and also, does she have a favorite song to listen to while studying. Freya tells us about Dr. Eugene Parker, the heliophysicist who predicted the existence of the solar wind and after whom the Parker Solar Probe and the “The Parker Instability” is named. For the second part, Freya listens to David Bowie's “Let's Dance” as a pick me up for long study sessions. For the first time in the history of The LIUniverse, Charles then brings up a second joyfully cool cosmic thing: the recent meteor (a bolide) that broke up over Germany whose pieces have been collected, many by students! It turns out that Freya collects meteorites, although none which she found on her own. Her favorite is the lunar meteorite she keeps on display at home. The next question from Notre Dame Academy comes from Caitlin Sweeney, who asks Freya, “What's the coolest thing about labs in college?” Freya describes how, compared to high school, labs in college are her favorite part of college and are much more interactive. Another Notre Dame Academy students asks, “What was the biggest challenge you overcame and how did you learn from it?” For Freya, that was finding her place in the academic and professional world. She tells the story of how in 2015, she was a single mom with two young children, one of whom was 8 and just diagnosed with leukemia who lost her job she loved in finance at the Columbus Ohio Zoo. She made the decision to show her children that no matter what life throws at us, we can still be who we want to be, and she enrolled in college and embarked on an entirely new direction. As a student, Freya applied for and went through the NASA L'SPACE Program (Lucy Student Pipeline Accelerator and Competency Enabler), a workforce development program that consists of two academies. In one, the Mission Concept Academy, students work as a team to complete a mission task. In the other academy, students will work as a team to introduce new technology ideas to NASA. NASA chooses a winner each semester and gives them a $10,000 seed fund to develop the idea. After completing the Academies, Freya became an intern on the Lucy mission. She began as a Lucy ambassador, and then came back to serve as an outreach mentor and a student success advisor. If you're a student of at least 18 years of age and enrolled in a US college or university and you'd like to learn more about NASA's L'SPACE Program, visit their website at lspace.asu.edu. You can follow them on Instagram @l_spaceprogram, where Freya helps manage the account, or at NASA L'SPACE Program on LinkedIn and Facebook. We hope you enjoy this episode of The LIUniverse, and, if you do, please support us on Patreon. Credits for Images Used in this Episode: – Neptune calibrated in true color – NASA w/ color by Ardenau4, Public domain – Neptune in exaggerated color – NASA, Public Domain – Uranus in true color – NASA w/ color by Ardenau4, Public domain – The Lucy spacecraft – NASA, public domain – Dinkinesh and its moon Selam – NASA/Goddard/SwRI/Johns Hopkins APL, public domain – The Lucy fossil – 120 on Wikimedia commons, CC BY 2.5 – Diagram of the main belt and Trojan asteroids –  Mdf at English Wikipedia, Public Domain – Dr. Eugene Parker in 2018 – NASA, public domain – Model of the Parker Solar Probe – NASA, public domain – A bolide in the sky – Thomas Grau, Public Domain #TheLIUniverse #CharlesLiu #AllenLiu #SciencePodcast #AstronomyPodcast #FreyaHolloway #Lucy #Neptune #Uranus #Dinkinesh #Selam #TrojanAsteroids #Jupiter #EugeneParker #ParkerSolarProbe #ParkertInstability #asteroid #bolide #meteorite #L'SPACE #NASA #NotreDameAcademy #MissionConceptAcademy  

This is a tribute to the late solar astrophysicist Dr. Eugene Parker, featuring my interview with him from 2018. In the mid-1950s Dr. Parker developed the theory of the supersonic solar wind and predicted the spiral shape of the solar magnetic field. He was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1967 and received...

Royal Observatory Astronomers Patricia and Jake take you through what to see in the night sky during the month of April in our family friendly Look Up! podcast. On this month's podcast, Patricia talks about the legacy of solar physicist Eugene Parker, while Jake dives into the first image taken by the James Webb Space Telescope. We also have this month's viewing highlights in our Cosmic Diary! Join us on Twitter @ROGAstronomers and take part in our poll at the start of the month! Don't miss out on the wonders of the night sky this month: https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/blog/astronomy/night-sky-highlights-april-2022

Eugene Newman Parker (10 de junio de 1927 - 15 de marzo de 2022) fue un físico solar y físico de plasma estadounidense. En la década de 1950 propuso la existencia del viento solar y que el campo magnético en el Sistema Solar exterior tendría la forma de una espiral de Parker, predicciones que luego fueron confirmadas por las mediciones de la nave espacial. En 1987, Parker propuso la existencia de nanoflares, uno de los principales candidatos para explicar el problema del calentamiento coronal.

On the 66th anniversary of his birth (Feb. 24), we commemorate the life and times of Eugene Parker. The former All-Big Ten guard, who passed away in 2016, touched the lives of so many people both in and out of sports. In today's special Birthday Zoom, Parker's son Brandon, and former Boilermaker student-athletes Walter Jordan, Jerry Sichting, Mike Steele and Rod Woodson share their memories that played a significant role in their lives. Jordan, Sichting and Steele were teammates of Parker's when Parker was a four-year starter for coach Fred Schaus from 1975-78. Like Parker, Woodson, who hailed from Fort Wayne, Indiana, utilized Parker as his agent during Woodson's Hall-of-Fame NFL career. Yet, all of the relationships with Parker transcended sports. 

El sol ha sido venerado durante mucho tiempo como un dios, y como la fuente de calor y luz que permite la vida en la Tierra. Pero cómo funciona en realidad y qué peligros puede conllevar siguen siendo misterios que los científicos están tratando de desentrañar. En los años 50, Eugene Parker teorizó sobre la posibilidad que el sol pudiera expandirse por el espacio, golpeando nuestro planeta con radiación en forma de partículas letales de movimiento rápido. Ahora la NASA ha lanzado una sonda espacial con el nombre de Parker para tocar realmente la atmósfera del Sol, una osada misión que pretende averiguar más sobre cómo funciona el Sol y la amenaza que podría suponer para nuestra forma de vida moderna.Venus es el gemelo misterioso de la Tierra, un mundo que es casi del mismo tamaño que nuestro planeta, formado en la misma región del espacio. Una vez que supimos que Venus era un planeta y no una estrella, empezamos a preguntarnos cómo sería la vida en Venus. ¿Sería un mundo oceánico, envuelto en gruesas nubes, con verdes selvas, repleto de insectos y dinosaurios? Ahora sabemos que Venus es como el infierno, con una atmósfera tan densa que se parece más a un líquido que a un gas, y con la superficie más caliente que cualquier otro planeta del sistema solar. Definitivamente, Venus no es un paraíso. ¿Cómo pudieron dos planetas, aparentemente tan similares, tomar caminos tan diferentes?

Remember, we welcome comments, questions and suggested topics at thewonderpodcastQs@gmail.com   S2E09 TRANSCRIPT: ----more---- Yucca: Welcome back to the Wonder Science-based Paganism. I'm your host Yucca Mark: And I'm your host, Mark. Yucca: And this week we're actually talking about science. And how science plays into science-based paganism, what science really is, and a little bit around the current events with the relationship of science and paganism. Mark: Right. This subject is very timely as it turns out. We've been wanting to do this episode for a while. But as it turns out, there is a sort of controversial thread on Starhawk's Facebook page currently in which she expressed her happiness about getting the second installment of the COVID-19 vaccination and really had a number of people, I wouldn't say a majority, but quite a number of people, very hostile to vaccination, very hostile to the pharmaceutical industry, science products and really attacking her quite a bit personally for her going along with what we currently know in, in terms of medical science for addressing COVID-19. So we felt that it would be a good time to talk about science what it is, what it, isn't, how that dovetails with our scientific, science-based pagan practices and what that all means, how that all fits together. Yucca: Exactly. Yeah. So a huge amount to cover here. Mark: Yes. Yucca: So let's dive in. I think we should actually start with the topic of what is science in the first place, because this is an area where as important as it is in our lives, there's a tremendous amount of misconception around just the concept of science itself. Mark: Yes indeed. One of the, one of those misconceptions is something that atheists encounter quite a bit in their conversation with people who are, I guess what I would call credulous religionists people who have beliefs that are not evidence-based, but are more experiential based. So they believe things because they've had experiences or simply because they've been told that they're true by people who they believe. And that accusation is that atheists, and this would also be true of godless pagans, worship science or that our our trust in the products of science is as much faith based as the faith based Willie of someone who believes in God's, for example hear that pretty frequently in those circles. And it's not true. But in order to understand that it's not true you need to know what science is to begin with and what it's not. Science is not an assertion of a cosmology apropos of nothing. That's not what it is. It's not an assertion that these things are true and you must believe them. It's an evidence-based process. Yucca: So let's start by unpacking what somebody could mean when they say science. So typically in the English speaking world, if we say science, there's one of three things that we could be referring to. And first and foremost, science is a process. It's a process of inquiry of learning about the world and in school, they might've made you memorize the scientific method or the scientific process that you had to go through in each of the steps and observation, and hypothesis and all of that. And that's an idealized version of the process. In real life it's never so cut and dry and clean. It's very messy. But that's what we're doing. Now, science, when someone says science, they could also be referring to the body of knowledge, which has been gained through that. Process. So if you take a biology course or you pick up a book about physics, those are talking about the things that we have learned by doing science. Now, the third way that the word gets used is science can also refer to the institutions or the people who practice science. So when you read a headline that says science says XYZ is bad for you. Well, science as an a process can't say anything. It's a process. It's a tool that we're using a body of knowledge. Can't say anything, but institutions can take positions. They can draw conclusions, individual scientists can. The word can be used to mean any of those three things, but it's technical meaning really is that process of inquiry and there's, it's not just, Oh, I ask a question. I have to ask very specific kinds of questions for them to be scientific. They have to be independently, the evidence has to be independently verifiable and it has to be reproducible. It can't, to be scientific, it can't be just an experience that I personally had that no one else can verify. If I do an experiment, the results that I get have to be, somebody else in another lab on the other side of the world, or on, out in the field, has to be able to get those same results and to replicate that. Mark: In order for the hypothesis to be verified. Yucca: Yes. Yes. And you have to, when you set up your experiment, it has to be set up in such a way that you can disprove or support your hypothesis. And I'm kind of jumping around here but that leads me to one other really important thing that I want to, conceptual thing, that I want to bring up, which is in science, you cannot prove a hypothesis. There's mathematical proofs, it's a legal term. You can disprove. But you could only add evidence in support of an idea. Now, when you have enough evidence becomes overwhelming and we then switched to talking about that idea as a fact, we're always learning more, always coming back and refining our understanding, looking for the exceptions and rewriting the story. There's things that we took for granted that we put in textbooks for years, and then we go, Oh wait, the data doesn't support that. Mark: There's new data and it doesn't support. Yucca: And when that happens, that's exciting. That's where the good stuff is. Look for where the data conflicts with our previous understanding and, whole new fields spring out of that. Mark: I think it was Richard Fineman. I'm not entirely sure, but I think it was the physicist Richard Fineman, who said the most exciting words in science are not Eureka it's that's funny. Yucca: Exactly. And I also want to step back for a moment and say that, my background is I'm a scientist, so I'm an ecologist. And then I later went into the space sciences into planetary science. So I work both as an independent ecologist and am also a science teacher. So I get really fired up about all of this, but we often in our culture have this idea where. As though science is close to only certain people, you have to have a degree in this field or else you can't possibly be an authority in it, or you have to have your PhD and this and that, and have done your postdoc over here, right. Where there is use in there being in someone, having a degree in an area. But that is only the start. Most scientists, their knowledge. Yeah. They spent a few years in school and they learned some really important processes there. And some of the ethics that guide whatever their field is, but the real knowledge comes from the continual learning. Always going back, learning more, reading the literature in your field, experimenting. And that's not something that's just limited to someone who's got a degree. Everybody can do that. That's something that, and personally, I think that's a responsibility that we, as citizens of the modern world have. To be able to make informed decisions that are going to influence the direction that our society and our ecosystems and our world go in. Mark: I agree. I agree. And the term that we use for that is science literacy, which is much less about absorbing A pattern of facts and much more about understanding the thinking process that's involved in analyzing a given proposed statement so that we, as scientifically literate, people can look at a given proposal and say, well, Is that true or not, or is it likely to be true or not? And what is the available evidence that points towards it? And is there available evidence that contradicts it? What is the relative weight of that evidence that we're going to consider? Is it just somebody say so, or is it the consensus of a whole bunch of studies that have been done independently in order to draw the conclusion that they've drawn? And that's something called the hierarchy of evidence. Which is an important aspect of doing scientific analysis. I do not call myself a scientist because I'm not one, I don't do science. And I don't have a degree in it. I took a bunch of courses in college. But what I am is someone who's really fired up about science and has been since he was very young. And so I am an autodidact in various scientific fields. I'm interested in cosmological physics. I'm interested in planetary science. I'm very interested in physical anthropology and human evolution. These are fields that I am always pouring over the internet to learn things about because they just happened to scratch a particular itch that I have to want to know more. Curiosity is at the heart science. Yucca: Excuse me Mark: Go ahead. Yucca: I think you worked in conservation for many years. Didn't you? Have so a field that, that is very heavy leaf science-based with some other fields in tied in there as well. Mark: At its best. It's very science-based at its worst, it's sort of just opposed to change. I have, I've seen and, you know, regrettably been a part of some self-styled environmental efforts that were really just about, you know, people not wanting more houses in their neighborhood or more traffic or for their nice view to be spoiled. And it's not that spoiling a nice view. Isn't something important. I consider beauty to be a really important, element of human experience. In fact, it's one of the four sacred pillars in atheopagan . But that's not as science driven as say conservation of a wetland area for a set of endangered species which is more the kind of work that I prefer to do. Yucca: I pulled you away though. You are on a beautiful train of thought there about curiosity being the heart of inquiry and Mark: Well, yes. I mean, we have these four brains, right? We have these frontal neocortexes, and what they seek is answers because. That is our superpower as humans. We aren't fast. We aren't strong. We don't have, you know, giant teeth and claws. We are soft, squishy, slow extremely vulnerable organisms. But what we can do is we can think in our capacity to think, and our curiosity about the nature of the world enables us to do extraordinary things. Thanks. Yucca: Yeah. I mean, just this last month alone has shown some of the amazing things that we can do, especially when we work together on this stuff. I mean, last month we. Landed Perseverance on Mars, which has a little drone on it, right. Flying in another world's atmosphere. And that it's the one of many that have come before it. And all of the other missions that are there too. So the HOPE mission and Tianwen 1 mission. And we're just reaching out and exploring and answering questions that, that our ancestors could only dream to be able to answer questions like that for. Mark: Right. And of course the deepest question that Perseverance is designed to inquire into is are we alone? It's looking for life. It's looking for signs that life existed on Mars. And of course by a, and I don't mean are there other intelligent beings that were on Mars? That's not that's not what I'm talking about, but life, if life was on Mars, the way that it is on and perhaps still is deep in the soil, we don't know. But if life was on Mars, the way that it is on Earth, that means that life is not a fluke. It means that it's kind of common, right? Given the conditions life will arise. And that has profound impacts for every year aspect of human exploration, everything from art and philosophy and religion to to the scientific disciplines. So this curiosity, this burning curiosity in humanity, And our soaring imagination, our capacity to dream of these questions and their possible answers. It's deeply moving and inspiring. And so the scientific enterprise, it's not just. This sort of dry fact-finding mission. It is, it's kind of at the heart of the human project. Yucca: And I want to take a quick tangent about Perseverance mission for the search for life. One of the questions that I hear voiced quite often as, okay. So if there's life on Mars now, it's almost certainly not on the surface because Mars has lost most of its atmosphere. It's still has quite a bit of atmosphere compared to many other places, but the radiation environments very high, the temperatures can be quite extreme if it's there, it's almost certainly not on the surface. It's going to be several meters down. It's going to be at the. Polar ice caps, maybe in subsurface lakes. So why are we searching on the surface where we're fairly sure there is no current life? And the assumptions behind that is that if life is that now there's certainly more dead things than living. That's the case here on Earth. But also, the life which could have developed if it followed the same path as life on Earth during the short period of time that Mars was a wet, warm world. So there was about a billion year period. Mars actually was what we'd consider habitable before we were during its Noachian period. Well, the life would have most likely been microscopic at the time. But that would have influenced the chemistry of the lake bed, where we're searching currently. We're looking for what the chemical signs left behind. Types of minerals that could only form in the presence of organic matter or in the presence of these processes, which are not possible, as far as we can tell, abiotically. So we're searching where we can, and then we have the major ethical questions to then look at is okay. If we find those signatures, then we might go and look in the places where we might think that they'd be. But if they are there, we have to really think carefully about the possibility of contamination. Mark: Right, Yucca: Right. Do we want to introduce Earth life? To Mars and perhaps back to Mars, because the very popular hypothesis is that we come from Mars, that life developed first on Mars and then hitchhiked to Earth. Mark: In raining down in, in meteorites that had been struck off of Mars. Yucca: Yeah. Quite easy to go down the gravity hill. Right. So this is one of the questions that Perseverance and the other rovers and experiments might help us find out is are we Martians? Where are we from? Right. And that really changes our view of ourselves and our place in the cosmos. Mark: Yes. And as you can hear in the animation, in our voices, this is tremendously exciting stuff. The implications of this for just our understanding of ourselves and who we are and what we're doing here are really profound. So, you know, science, isn't just people titrating with glassware in a laboratory wearing white coats. It is, it's the search for it's the search for the text of reality. The factual nature of the objective world that we live in, the objective universe that we live in. Now that said there are questions that science cannot answer. And anyone who's involved with science, who's honest about it will acknowledge that this is the case ethical questions, for example. I may get sidetracked into game theory later on, but I'm not going to do that right now. Questions about morality are not, they do not lend themselves to the scientific process. Very well. We were not going to run an experiment where we take a population of people and say, okay, 50% of you murder is okay. 50% of the murder is not okay. Now we're going to run the experiment and see how well your society gets along. That's it's not going to happen. Yucca: Well, there, there are ways to set experiments up like that in a way that would be falsifiable. And that is what makes it scientific or not. But you couldn't answer a question like is what's the best color? What is the meaning of this song? You could answer questions like perhaps do humans have an instinctual morality, right? This is something that has been investigated. And we're leaning towards saying yes, there are certain things which are instinctual we've talked about before, like the idea of reciprocity and things like that are instinctually ingrained into us as animals where other animals have different things ingrained in them. So the what question you are asking is something that has to, you have to be able to test it. And if you can't test it, it's not scientific. That doesn't mean it's not valuable. That doesn't mean it doesn't have meaning in our lives. It's just not science and science doesn't answer that. Now there are certain questions, which right now are not scientific or unscientific, but one day may become scientific. Mark: Yes. Yucca: Multiverse questions for instance. Mark: Well, or they're even, here on Earth, which at one time were not scientifically testable, but now are I think of the question from the film and book contact by Carl Sagan, where the preacher character Palmer, Joss asks of Ellie, the the astronomer. Did you love your father? And she says, yes. And he says, prove it. And the truth is that when we talk about the brain experience of love, if you put a bunch of electrodes in somebody's head, you can actually track that there is a particular kind of state that equates to our felt sense of love, but that, so it is possible to prove these things, but that doesn't mean that's necessarily the most meaningful way of approaching that kind of a question. Science is a very powerful and robust set of tools, but it's not a universal set of tools. There are questions that we have to answer for ourselves around right and wrong and around qualitative betterness or worseness, that's a bad construction. That, that science is really not. You know, science is just not the way you're going to approach these things. So that leads me to want to talk about scientism. Does that seem like a good place to go? Now there's so much in this topic, honestly, you know, we were talking before we started recording and we realized, yes, exactly. We, we We realized early on, there's probably way more of this than will fit in a podcast, but we'll do our best. One of the accusations that I have seen in atheist circles a lot in the conversations between religionists, what I call credulous religionists, who are people who believe in things for which there is scant or no scientifically credible evidence. Like gods or souls or spirits or ghosts or magic, things like that. Those folks will often accuse people who use science as a system for defining the cosmology that they subscribed to as subscribing to scientism and scientism is portrayed as science as a religion that you just, you believe in it and it's faith based and you just believe in it because you believe in it. And it's just a choice, just like choosing to believe in Vishnu or Apollo. There are real problems with that proposal because the nature of science, first of all, is not to be declarative about what is true. What science says is according to the evidence we have thus far with the best analysis we've been able to apply, this is what is most likely to be true. And in some cases, that evidence is so overwhelming that we talk about those things as facts. I joked before the, the show started, gravity is real. We we have enough evidence available that nobody is not subject to gravity and it's not subject to what you believe in. Gravity is just real. Yucca: Sure. On some very large scales, Mark: yes, Yucca: Do we understand it properly. There are some real questions there, but right now, If I jump up, I'm falling back to Earth. Mark: You're going to fall back to Earth. Exactly. So, so this, what that means is that the body of knowledge that is accumulated together, which is some kind of sometimes termed as science, that body of knowledge is all a set of probabilistic guesses, based on evidence about what is most likely to be true. And the based on evidence part is the real difference, because, you know, I had an experience where where I heard a voice in my head and I believe that it was, you know, Vishnu talking to me. That is not scientifically credible evidence. It's not reproducible. It's not capturable in any way. And there are other explanations for that kind of phenomenon happening that are more likely to be true. So the accusation of scientism I feel has to do with a lack of understanding about what science really is. And in some cases and then willingness to understand what science really is, a desire that science be a faith based process. Like those others. But it isn't faith-based. That said it is a human enterprise and human enterprises have human frailties built into them. There's something called confirmation bias. We're all subject to it. Confirmation bias is seeing what you want to see. You know, the seeing what you want to confirm, what you already believe. And scientists are as subject to this as everybody else, which is why we have these double blind experiments in order to take the observer out of the equation of what the outcome of the experiment is. Because if we just leave it up to humans, to judge, they're going to go with their biases, they it's inevitable that they will. And there are some unethical scientists who cling to their beloved theory, even when the evidence flies in its face. That's a problem. There are some scientists who are unethical, who are paid by grants or other funding from particular sources that want the outcome of the science to be a particular way. And the scientist cooperates. That is a problem. Yucca: Although I'd like to say that is far less of an issue than is often accused. And when you look at within the peer reviewed world there in any journal worth its salt, there's the declarations in the actual article. So you can go and look, okay, are there any conflicts or anything that needs to be declared about the relationships between the authors and the subjects that they're presenting. Mark: Right, right. But all of this is to say that it's a human enterprise and humans have failings, and those can get sewn into the findings of certain studies. But the solution to that is not to throw science out. The solution is better science, exactly science that does not involve people that are so locked into their confirmation biases, that they can't let them go. Science that's done, you know, without people feeling pressure from their funders. So that's the beautiful thing about science is that it's, self-correcting the peer review process whereby other experts take a look at your out your results and do their best to tear it apart. Okay. Is a really powerful element of the scientific method. So once you've published your results, Oh boy, I found something. This is great. Then everybody in the world does their best to say, no, you didn't find anything here. Your methodology was flawed and your data was dirty and no. And maybe they're successful and they're right. And now you've learned something. Maybe they're unsuccessful and you were right. And now you've learned something. So in either case it's very important this constant accretion of experimental and evidential body of knowledge and then analysis of it. And then and then Prosecution of inquiry into those results to see whether they really stand up. It's all very important and it gives us knowledge with a high degree of certainty. In many cases. Yucca: And I do want to speak for a moment to the peer reviewed process. It is incredible on many fronts and gives us just as you've been talking about a high level of certainty, it is one of the areas where it really highlighted that science is a human endeavor and that it is fraught with human problems. And one of the challenges with the peer reviewed process is that it often can entrench pre-existing biases. There's a lot of examples. One of the classic examples is Dr. Eugene Parker and his idea of the solar wind. And that kept, he tried publishing multiple times the The experts in the V in the field that were reviewing his paper, kept throwing it out. Eventually it was published and he was then later vindicated. We found the solar wind, and now we have a probe named after him, which is incredibly rare to have a space mission named after a living individual. But there are many instances in which changing a paradigm is blocked by this process. So it's a process that helps us on many fronts, but has challenges on other fronts. And sometimes people will latch onto, well, here's the challenge with peer reviewed, or there's a challenge that there's a minority of scientists who are being paid or the challenge in what you can get funding for. But again, we don't want to throw the whole process out. We don't want to throw science out with that bath water because the science as a tool and even as an institution has allowed us to achieve and learn so much too that the world that we live in today would be unrecognizable to just a few generations back. Mark: Yes. Yes. Yes. And so this, you know, a lot of what we've been explaining here is this sort of love song to science, which is, you know, a wonderful thing, but I'd like to bring it back a little bit now, to science-based paganism and what that means to us and what that means in the broader context of the pagan umbrella of various kinds of faiths and paths. I initially stepped away from the pagan community after practicing with it for 27 years. No, that's not right. 22 years. Because of experiences that I had that just were so far out of consistency with anything that could be scientifically validated that I just became incredibly uncomfortable. And then that got exacerbated by two instances where people used supernatural explanations to excuse really unethical behavior, in my opinion, and that, I mean, at that moment, it's like, well, you could excuse anything because you can just say that, you know, some spirit told you to do it or Yucca: God wanted it. Mark: Yeah, exactly. And we've certainly seen through history, what, what can happen. The horrible things that can happen when somebody says God wants it. And so I stepped away and I mean, you've heard this story before. I, I. I started to miss it a lot. And that got me into an inquiry about, well, what is religion? How does that, what does that have to do with the brain? What in the human organism is religion serving, right? And what I came back to was a frame, a framing of a particular path within science-based paganism called atheopagan ism. And the reason that the science base is so important is that it gives us a solid evidentiary base. For understanding the nature of the universe that we live in which we can then celebrate Revere live in service to it, it provides the foundation on which a rich, emotionally satisfying ethically coherent religious practice can be built. And that is why that's why I'm on this podcast right now. It's why I'm doing the things that I'm doing to promote science-based paganism in the world. My, my belief personally, is that the world, as it is the world as described by science is so marvelous, so extraordinary and beautiful and amazing and strange and mysterious. And. All of those, you know, kind of super-light of adjectives that I don't need or want anything else to worship or celebrate or revere in order to have a very rich and abundant life. And that doesn't mean that those other things don't exist. It means that they don't meet an evidentiary standard that I find compelling. Well, I'll leave it there. How about you? Yucca. Yucca: Well, I mean, there's so many directions to go with this. I want to come to the idea of, so we've been talking about what science is and what scientists do and all of this, and, but bringing it back to being pagan and how that informs our understanding of the world of ourselves, of existence, where most pagans, and most of us in our daily lives are not doing formal science. There's a lot of pagans who are scientists, right. That's really common. I think the very first episode has shared that in my early 20 years being at LANL with a bunch of the LANL folks. So Los Alamos National Laboratory, that a ton of them were pagans. Right. That's really common. But in everyday life how we use science as a way of understanding and informing our decisions around the world, what is this being science based? And I think that for me, well, one it's using the scientific method in my daily life, but also informing my understanding on things that I value and the choices that I make looking at what we have learned from science about these things and lifestyle choices. In my way of understanding what ritual is or how can I level up my ritual? Okay. I want to level up my ritual. I'm going to go read as much as I can about what the field of neuroplasticity is talking about right now. What have they found out? Right. And even if one doesn't have a formal training in these fields, the summaries of these, of the experiments done. There's lots of, you know, pop science books and articles and podcasts. There's tons of podcasts out there by scientists who are translating their field into a more accessible format and just looking for as much information as I can. And keeping that really open mind. The, you know, the good mind of a scientist, even if you're not formally trained as a scientist, you can still have a scientist's mind. And that's where the science-based comes in for me with paganism. Mark: I really agree. And certainly in terms of my my environmental ethic. Choices about, you know, why I decided to drive an electric car, you know, these kinds of things certainly come down to science-based assessments that I've made based on what my values are around how much do I want to impact the atmosphere? How much do I, you know, want to consume energy, all those kinds of things. The other piece when talking about science-based paganism, I think both of us have articulated really well, what it means to us as individuals, but science-based paganism is also a movement. It's been on the move in recent years and there's more and more attention to it. There's more and more people participating in it which is exciting. And I need to say a little bit about why I think that's it important because I have high hopes for paganism. I think that reverence for the Earth, which brings us forth and sustains us throughout our lives and for the Sun, of course, which is the energy source, which drives all of that process. It's such a truthful form of spirituality. It's rooted in reality. And that's why it is so much more moving to me than some others, which, as far as I can tell are not so much rooted in reality. They're rooted in stories and I love stories. I love stories and I love myths and I love metaphors and, you know, symbols and imagery and all that stuff. And I use it all in my rituals. But when it comes to what I'm going to direct, my spiritual love towards. I want it to be real. I want to know that it's real. And the best tool that we have for knowing things is science. So my hope is that over time, the pagan community will become more science-based and people who don't want to be science-based, they don't have to be, you know, I'm not trying to convert anybody, but my hope is that more and more of us will become more scientifically literate and will become a movement that stands up and starts to speak with credibility. In our society about what's really important here, you know, how should we be living in relation to the natural world? How should we be living in relation to one another? Because right now that language is all about money and money besides being imaginary. Which doesn't mean it isn't real. It just means that it's something that we've collectively decided to behave as if it's real. That's an insufficient capture of value. And I want to live my life in relation to what is most of value. That at root that's really where I am with it. Did we actually run out of stuff to say on this topic? I can't believe it. Yucca: Well, choose a topic and I can run off on a tangent with it. But I think that for the story of today, far as the story of this podcast I think that this is a wonderful place to wrap up and say as always, we so appreciate all of you being here with us and taking the time out of your day to listen. And for the feedback that we get from you just for being part of this movement, this community. Mark: Yes. Yes. Very much so. The I'm always just so tickled when someone joins the Atheopagan Facebook group, for example, and says, Oh, I heard you on a podcast. Or if they leave a comment on the blog. Yes. So I was listening to this thing called the wonder and I heard about the blog. It's just, it's really heartwarming. And to know that these ideas and this direction for spirituality is, has real appeal for people. Well Yucca. Thank you so much. What a wonderful conversation I've really enjoyed today. Yeah. Yucca: Likewise. Thank you.

In this episode, we’re blown back and blown away by the solar wind. Will offers a historical overview of how Eugene Parker discovered the solar wind without running a single experiment. Malena covers early results and next steps for the eponymous and incredibly hot Parker Solar Probe, as it ~enters the Sun~. Postdoc Chris Spalding also discusses Mercury’s (literally) impactful and (solar) windy childhood.   Astrobites: astrobites.org/2020/02/13/visiting-the-sun/ astrobites.org/2020/09/03/parker-solar-wind-2/   Original solar wind paper:  ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1958ApJ...128..664P/abstract   Chris’ personal website:  christopherspalding.net   Space sound:  https://www.system-sounds.com/exoplanets4k/

On today's episode of You're Wrong, Sir, I'm spending some time with NFL Agent & Founder of Grady Sports Agency, Joshua Grady. Joshua may not know this however, he's definitely someone who motivates me everyday from afar and an individual who I look up to as a mentor. Now by the name of today's podcast you may be wondering what we're talking about. For the first time in NFL history, during this years draft more than 50% of the 1st round draft picks were represented by black agents. This is definitely a huge stride however, Joshua & I dive more into why this is only just happening in 2020! Joshua touches on his process of become an agent, being under the mentorship of the legendary Eugene Parker, and his thoughts on the Rooney Rule. If you're an athlete or an aspiring agent, this podcast is definitely a MUST LISTEN! Also, look out for Joshua's Agent Academy coming in the fall! I promise it'll be worth it! Stay connected with us! Follow Us: https://www.instagram.com/yourewrongsir_/ Follow my personal account: https://www.instagram.com/niyhaaa._/ Follow Joshua: https://www.instagram.com/agentgrady_/ Agent Talk Pod: https://open.spotify.com/show/47YnJp0bloxNrcin5PZJMU?si=TMEMle4iRweL8PPZanCDig Loving the You’re Wrong, Sir Podcast? Be sure to subscribe and rate to help other sport enthusiasts find us on Apple Podcast, Spotify, and more! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/aniyhajones/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/aniyhajones/support

Tory Dandy has been close to football his entire life. Tory's experience as a college football standout at Tusculum College allows him the ability to relate to his clients both on and off the field. As an NFLPA agent, Tory is very passionate about supporting his clients and their families both personally and professionally. Tory obtained a Bachelor's degree in Business Management with a minor in Sports Management from Tusculum College in 2002. He earned his Master's degree in Business Administration from Webster University in 2004. Tory is actively involved in the community where he tours numerous schools and churches speaking to and positively encouraging youth. Tory also serves as a youth mentor of the CDC Mentor Program of the Carolinas. In 2013, he established an annual scholarship, “The Tory Dandy Educational Scholarship” for graduating seniors from his high school (Woodruff High) in South Carolina.Tory began his professional career in 2004 and was soon promoted to Director of Recruiting at Synergy Sports. In 2006, Tory transitioned to Director of Recruiting with Maximum Sports with veteran agents Eugene Parker and Roosevelt Barnes. In 2009, at the young age of 29 years old, Tory signed the #3 overall pick with client, Tyson Jackson. ​Tory helped represent numerous clients while at Maximum Sports. After a very successful career at Maximum Sports, Tory joined the Relativity Sports Family in 2013. As a certified NFLPA agent, Tory is involved in all aspects of his clients' representation with his primary focus being contract negotiation, client services, and pre-draft process. Tory is now the Executive Senior Agent at CAA Football. 

En 1958, Eugene Parker avait démontré qu'une couronne solaire à plusieurs millions de degrés devait nécessairement produire une émission de particules qu'on appelle aujourd'hui le vent solaire. Il ne se doutait certainement pas que soixante ans plus tard, une sonde spatiale irait s'approcher au plus près du Soleil pour étudier ce même vent solaire, et bien d'autres phénomènes. Les premiers résultats de la sonde Parker Solar Probe (PSP) ont été publiés la semaine dernière dans un supplément spécial de The Astrophysical Journal : 52 articles de pointe issus des données enregistrées durant les deux premières orbites de la sonde.

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the flow of particles from the outer region of the Sun which we observe in the Northern and Southern Lights, interacting with Earth's magnetosphere, and in comet tails that stream away from the Sun regardless of their own direction. One way of defining the boundary of the solar system is where the pressure from the solar wind is balanced by that from the region between the stars, the interstellar medium. Its existence was suggested from the C19th and Eugene Parker developed the theory of it in the 1950s and it has been examined and tested by a series of probes in C20th up to today, with more planned. With Andrew Coates Professor of Physics and Deputy Director in charge of the Solar System at the Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London Helen Mason OBE Reader in Solar Physics at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Fellow at St Edmund's College And Tim Horbury Professor of Physics at Imperial College London Producer: Simon Tillotson

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the flow of particles from the outer region of the Sun which we observe in the Northern and Southern Lights, interacting with Earth's magnetosphere, and in comet tails that stream away from the Sun regardless of their own direction. One way of defining the boundary of the solar system is where the pressure from the solar wind is balanced by that from the region between the stars, the interstellar medium. Its existence was suggested from the C19th and Eugene Parker developed the theory of it in the 1950s and it has been examined and tested by a series of probes in C20th up to today, with more planned. With Andrew Coates Professor of Physics and Deputy Director in charge of the Solar System at the Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London Helen Mason OBE Reader in Solar Physics at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Fellow at St Edmund's College And Tim Horbury Professor of Physics at Imperial College London Producer: Simon Tillotson

The Parker Solar Probe is already well into its third orbit around the Sun.

Back in mid -August of 2018 as a phalanx of reporters and social media attendees awaited the launch of the Parker Solar Probe, we were all given a grand opportunity to listen to and glean a little wisdom from Dr. Eugene Parker, the spacecraft’s namesake. Dr. Parker’s contributions unveiled the supersonic nature of the  Sun’s solar wind, an observation he was at first ridiculed for but eventually was proven correct by the Mariner 2  spacecraft. This was an unprecedented opportunity and one that was not announced until those in attendance were told to stay for an incredible thirty minutes of wisdom from the 92-year-old astrophysicist. This rare 30-minute event so far as we know, has never been broadcast in its entirety. NASA indicated they planned to use segments however no other media outlet has offered any of the contents of the event, until now.    Born on July 10, 1927, Dr. Parker Received his Bachelor’s Degree in Physics from Michigan State University in 1948, and his PhD. from the California Institute of Technology in 1951. He then spent 4 years at the University of Utah then the University of Chicago form 1955 until present day. Dr. Parker developed a theory on the supersonic nature of the solar wind and predicted the spiral shape of the solar magnetic field in the outer solar system. His predictions were very controversial in fact two reviewer’s rejected Dr. Parker’s work outright. His theories were later published and in the 1960’s proven by the Mariner 2 Satellite.  Dr. Parker’s work contributed greatly to the understanding of the nature of the solar wind, the solar corona and magnetic fields.  He is the S. Chandrasekhar Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of the Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics at the Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago and recipient of the Medal for Exceptional Achievement in Research from the American Physical Society.  NASA named the Parker Solar Probe to honor his body of work and is contribution to the field of heliophysics. Dr. Parker is the only living scientist to have a spacecraft named in his honor. To learn more about Dr. Eugene Parker,  click here. To learn more about the Parker Solar Probe, click here Show Host – Gene Mikulka, with Sawyer Rosenstein

It's not just about getting to the sun, it's about the people behind the mission making it all happen. That's what this episode of Talking Space is all about. We speak with four integral members of the Parker Solar Probe team. The mission launched successfully in early August. To hear more about the mission along with the spectacular Delta IV Heavy launch audio, be sure to check out Part 1 in Episode 1007. In this episode, we begin speaking with Dr. Adam Szabo, the mission scientist for Parker Solar Probe. From him we learn more about the mission objectives, how the gravity assist will be different from those in the past, and how PSP fits in with the host of solar observing missions already in orbit. Next, we speak with David McComas of Princeton University who is in charge of the ISʘIS experiment. We discuss more about the role of the instrument, along with his excitement, plus a person "struggle" so-to-speak that's he's used to his advantage and hopes to share with others. Then, we hear from two of the mission's leads immediately following the successful liftoff. That includes project scientist and soon to be head of Heliophysics at NASA Nikki Fox and Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen about the status of the mission and what's next for the spacecraft as it nears its first Venus encounter to help slow it down. Stay tuned for Part 3, following our normal news episode, featuring a Q&A which you can only hear in high quality in its entirety here with Dr. Eugene Parker. The session was held for a very limited audience before launch and has never been aired in its entirety, so stay tuned! Show recorded 8-19-2018 Host: Sawyer Rosenstein Panelist: Gene Mikulka with special guest interviews recorded on location at the Kennedy Space Center.

Dr. Eugene Parker is the solar astrophysicist who developed the theory of the supersonic solar wind and predicted the Parker spiral shape of the solar magnetic field in the mid-1950s. In this episode Dr. Parker joins us by phone to discuss his incredible theories about the Sun and NASA's Solar Parker Probe mission. Dr. Parker... The post 47. Dr. Eugene Parker – The Mysteries of the Sun & NASA's Parker Solar Probe appeared first on 15 Minutes With Chuck - podcast.

Dr. Eugene Parker is the solar astrophysicist who developed the theory of the supersonic solar wind and predicted the Parker spiral shape of the solar magnetic field in the mid-1950s. In this episode Dr. Parker joins us by phone to discuss his incredible theories about the Sun and NASA's Solar Parker Probe mission. Dr. Parker... The post 47. Dr. Eugene Parker – The Mysteries of the Sun & NASA’s Parker Solar Probe appeared first on Your Online Coffee Break podcast.

The NFL Draft is fast approaching and PodVader and the SuperFans are getting fired up!  This week, Pod is joined by Greg (Steelers), Neil (Redskins) and Andrew (Jets).  They start with the latest news: - Reggie Nelson is a Raider (Pod thinks the Raiders are looking prettier and prettier every day.)- Marvin Lewis on the hotseat?- Ryan Fitzpatrick's situation (will the Jets get it done?)Then Pod talks with Andrew Brandt, his old friend from ESPN. Brandt is the ESPN Sports Business Analyst, columinst for MMQB, Director of Sports Law at Villanova and former VP for the Green Bay Packers.  They discuss what is going on behind the scenes with NFL teams right now, the Colin Kaepernick situation, remembering Eugene Parker and the concussion story in the NFL.  The SuperFans return and share thoughts on the Kaepernick situation and could there be interest in the Titans Number 1 pick?  The SuperFan Super Mock Draft is going on right now. Next week, you'll hear how the first round went. Next up, Pod and the SuperFans dive in on a couple of articles from the Sporting News. Here are the links to those stories:http://www.sportingnews.com/list/4699707-nfl-draft-misses-regrets-bad-picks-blaine-gabbert-jj-watt-ted-ginn-darrelle-revishttp://www.sportingnews.com/list/4700904-biggest-nfl-draft-steals-since-2000-sleepers-tom-brady-darren-sproles-antonio-brown-richard-shermanEmail us your thoughts: nextfanup@gmail.comTweet us @nfupodcastCheck out our Facebook page: facebook.com/nfupodcast