A geeky sidebar on #Wandavision, and the fact that the TV signal from Westview is encoded in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR)
I wonder if this is at some level a reference to the fact that some of the CMBR is indeed on old broadcast TV wavelengths. I think it was dear @cgseife who first told me that about 1% of the noise seen as static on old TVs was in fact the long-wavelength tail of the CMBR
A fact which completely fucking blew my mind.
To the extent that there needs to be a reason for Westview to be in New Jersey, (cc @EmpirePodcast) could it be in deference to the fact that it was there, at Bell Labs, that the CMBR was discovered?
(As a source of noise in the microwave wavelengths used for early satellite communications)
Almost certainly not.
But the idea that one of the writing staff, like me, had found a memorable poetry to the idea that the noise between the channels on an old tv was in part *the noise of the Big Bang itself* and delighted in using it as a plot point brings me pleasure.
And conceivably might be true.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This New Yorker piece on solar #geoengineering by Bill McKibben really irritated me, not because I disagree with it (although I do) but because of the fatuous way it expresses itself. newyorker.com/news/annals-of…
His argument is that the Scopex experiment looking at stratospheric aerosol injection should not go ahead now, because over the next decade all of humankind's effort needs to go into emissions reduction and Scopex would be a distraction which bad actors would exploit.
So, there was a 10-minute discussion on @BBCRadio4#TheWorldThisWeekend between three eminent foreign policy commentators & Ed Stourton on Biden and the world, and unless it was very brief and coincided with a moment of distraction there was no mention at all of #climate change
This seems a serious omission on the part of Mr Stourton and his producers, what with climate change being a critical issue and one in which the USA has fallen profoundly out of step.
Their decision to run the discussion as one that could be arranged on a regional basis may perhaps have made it hard to slot climate change in.
The #IPCC#SR15 report says very little about solar #geoengineering, which is the main, but not only subject, of my book #ThePlanetRemade beyond saying that there is high agreement that a particular form of it could keep temperatures below 1.5C (Cross chapter box 10 in Chapter 4)
If the IPCC not going into this more seems an odd omission, given the topic, I think it is because a) the scientific understanding on solar #geoengineering, which obviously will never be complete, is still pretty sketchy in many respects (though not as sketchy as some may think)
b) the structure that the IPCC chose for the report (which was forced on it in part by the UNFCCC's mandate to it) did not allow it o assess solar #geoengineering's potential contribution in any of its scenarios
Dr Hare tells @LeoHickman that, “along with...most physicists who have looked at” solar geoengineering, he thinks it is “a very dangerous technology”. There are forms of solar #geoengineering which could indeed be very dangerous. Two points to make about this: 2/
One: as @jack_stilgoe, @rose_cairns, Steve Rayner and others point out, geoengineering is not yet a technology; it is poorly defined conceptual space where a technology might be – a “technological imaginary”, as social scientists sometimes say 3/