A quark star is a hypothesized type of object more dense than a Neutron star but not dense enough to form a black hole. Long ago theorized, could such an object be observed via, and even made possibly through, gravitational waves? This is not a likely outcome since the conditions it would take to create such an object would be very rare however it is just barely possible. Read on and consider with me what well established theories and laws of physics say about what the LIGO collaboration reportedly observed. Theories posited by Steven W Hawking and Jacob Bekenstein in particular regarding black hole thermodynamics may be put to the test by this kind of observation.

Gravitational wave astronomy in space, that is the goal of the LISA Collaboration.  LISA stands for Laser Interferometer Space Antenna.  This collaboration is having a very early meeting in Florida and at that meeting there will be certain public talks broadcast on YouTube.  I will embed those here. With perhaps a translation for the perplexed later.  

If you find gravitational wave astronomy i.e. as done by the LIGO collaboration interesting, then you will love what LISA will do. 

Biased against Women and Black People? That is what the Harvard Implicit Association test  (IAT)showed me.  I took them more than once and this was the overall result.  As a SMALL part of a large collaboration that may put hardware into space, I was invited to take this test in preparation for a diversity workshop.  Since I could not attend the conference, I thought it wise to send these results out to the group.   Some may feel like these tests only target straight white males to malign them as racist and sexist.   The IAT could also show one is biased against white people.

A simple slice of life as an academic.  No chair was assigned for the session Z13 in which my theoretical research was presented along with great work in varying fields but with related themes.  Waves, and/or fluids connected all that was discussed.  The research I found most interesting was not my own.    My peers in the session elected me to the honored position since none was assigned.  Likely because APS trusted us not to act in appropriately.

Theoretical physicist have no more than five good unique insights in a lifetime. Then spend years chasing down the implications of those insights. May computers at least help with if not supplant us in this effort? Maybe, maybe not. I Went to talk, did a lot of good listening, and served as a sort of unofficial chair of the session because APS didn’t assign one for session Z13. (No so unusual peruse the session index and a handful don’t have chairs. Sessions B10, Y08). That was a new interesting experience. I could see the overarching themes of the talks APS put in the session.

A hypothesis of everything, that is not what I first thought it would be, is what I will present tomorrow at the April 2019 APS conference. Quantum Gravity, finding a way to make general relativity into a quantum theory of some kind, has been the driving mystery of my adult life.  Now, after years of work towards that, a few who have researched the problem think it was the wrong approach.  That instead we should make Quantum Field theory compatible with General Relativity in some way or the other.   Not the other way around.