Tom Cruise is going into outer space.He is Hollywood’s one of the A-listed stars and known for his characters in action-packed movies, including the macho character of Ethan Hunt in the Mission Impossible franchise.He also performs most of his stunts on his own.Thomas Cruise Mapother IV is an American producer and actor.He has received many awards for his work, including three Golden Globe Awards and three nominations for Academy Awards.Cruise began his career in the 1980s and gained popularity from films like Risky Business in 1983, Top Gun in 1986, The Color of Money in 1986, Rain Man in 1988, and many more.The tweet highlights that Commander Michael Lopez-Alegria, who manages the record of NASA spacewalk, will pilot the Axiom Space Station on a tourist mission in October 2021.
Satya Nadella makes the case for Microsoft’s tech stack, from the bottom of the sea to outer space.
“Jesus will return within the next decade, mark my words,” said my father as we walked home from church. It was 1998, and I had just turned six.Secretly, I was gutted. If judgement day comes so soon, I’ll never learn to drive, I remember worrying. But the second I thought this, I was flooded with guilt. According to Psalm 139, “God knows what I am going to say before I say it. He knows my thoughts from afar. Like a caged bird, he’s got me surrounded.” For 21 years, I earnestly believed this. Growing up, it seemed logical, because God was omnipresent.At home, he was there.Christian memorabilia cluttered every room. Hand-written Bible verses and straw crosses were pinned to the walls. Even above the toilet, a poster read: “God is the same yesterday, today, and forever”. In the car, he was there. Our Honda was an indoctrination mobile, the glove compartment crammed with sermon tapes describing hell in graphic detail. Those who rejected Christ, the narrator warned, would be “thrown into the furnace, where there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth”. At school, he was there. A wooden crucifix hung in the hall, as though Jesus watched as we ate our meals, which always began with grace and ended with a hymn. Our headteacher would praise God rapturously, swaying at the piano.  On holiday, he was there. Summers were spent at Christian retreats, filled with like-minded, God-fearing families, whoprayed in tongues andhealed the sick. My life was an echo chamber of Christianity. That’s because my father, a born-again Christian, believed in the six-day creation narrative, biblical giants, and flat-earth theory. Interpreting the scriptures literally, he believed the earth had four corners, based on a prophecy in the book of Revelation, where angels guard each one in a war against God’s enemies last days.He believed 90% of the population were hell-bound. Meaning well, he did everything he could to ensure me and my siblings were in the 10%.I was raised to be suspicious of anyone sacrilegious enough to suggest otherwise, including Nasa (rebels who rejected God by seeking answers in outer space), science teachers, and even Universal Pictures. The latter may seem bizarre, but the infamous movie introduction featuring a rotating globe was, in my father’s view, blasphemous. Growing up in a small seaside town, we would often go on ‘prayer walks’ along the beach as a family, where the glowing horizon did indeed appear to be flat. My father would point to this as unequivocal evidence – and as a small child, it seemed pretty compelling. He also gravitated toward thefire and brimstone of the Old Testament (unlike more liberal Christians, who were almost apologetic about it, as if excusing a cranky grandparent).He also believed 90% of the population were hell-bound. Meaning well, he did everything he could to ensure me and my siblings were in the 10%, leading us in daily prayer and Bible study. We had to beat Satan, the “father of lies”, who led God’s children astray with his tricks. Such tricks includedplanting dinosaur bones to fool mankind into believing in evolution. We were in a cosmic battle of good versus evil – it was petrifying, in a thrilling sort of way. So I ′preached the good news’ to anyone who would listen (and this didn’t come naturally to a painfully shy introvert). People invariably reacted with ridicule, but this only strengthened my faith – after all, the Bible predicts that unbelievers would scoff at the truth.I often struggle to fathom how I believed for so long, but now I attribute it to three things.First, my formative years were spent in an environment where the Bible was indistinguishable from reality. That Jesus existed was as normal as brushing my teeth. According to the Church of England, 64% of church-goers became Christian as toddlers. Take it from me, childhood indoctrination works. Second, there was the exclusion of mainstream media. Films like Harry Potter – “an abomination to God” – were forbidden. Instead, we watchedGod TV or wholesome cartoons likeVeggie Tales. We only went to the cinema once, to watch The Prince of Egypt, based on thebook of Exodus, in 1999. Lastly, there was the fear of being ostracised. Everyone I loved believed, and I thought the authority figures – parents, teachers, and churchgoers, knew best.   I confessed my doubts to the church, who treated me like a heretic. It hurt more than I can describe – they were my second familyAs a teenager, I came to see how incongruent my faith was with the outside world. I did a great deal of mental gymnastics to rationalise it, researching Christian books and websites, leading to confirmation bias. But it didn’t last. Deep down, I always doubted. I remember eyeing middle-aged Sunday school teachers, thinking how can you possibly believe this? But my hardwired fear of hell always triumphed.When I was 21, my faith unravelled. I was working at a Canadian summer camp as a pianist, where attendees were predominantly Jewish. I found myself amongst people who believed just as fervently in their God. They were kind-hearted, they loved their neighbours, and I couldn’t justify why they were hell-bound for being brought up outside Christianity. So I studiedChristian apologetics, but ended up encounteringmore problematic aspects of the faith such as the inconsistencies between the gospels, the lack of archaeological evidence, and the heavy influence of Greek mythology in the Bible.Once home, I confessed my doubts to the church, who treated me like a heretic. It hurt more than I can describe – they were my second family. I left and travelled through South America, learning Spanish as I went, seeking new perspectives and answers. I never did find them. Now, as an agnostic, I am at peace with the fact that I never will.In desperate moments – say, if a car is speeding toward me – I still pray instinctively, even though I no longer believe anyone is listening. And when I am anxious, I catch myself repeating Bible verses out of habit, a relic from another life.I don’t regret my upbringing. It gave me a love of literature, music, and an insight into Judeo-Christian culture. The secular world could learn a great deal from it – the importance of introspection, community, and, in our frantic lives, rest.My dad still invites me to church, hopeful I will rediscover the truth there. Occasionally I attend, but as a passive observer; I no longer believe I need a saviour. And this truth has set me free. Lara Joan is an author and journalist, writing under a pseudonymHave a compelling personal story you want to tell? Find out what we’re looking for here, and pitch us on [email protected] from HuffPost UK Personal Just When I Thought It Was Over, Lockdown Saved My Marriage Coronavirus Stole My Favourite Pastime: Chatting With Strangers I Spent Three Years Homeless. In This Pandemic, No One Should Be Sleeping Rough
You might like to skip making over your messy living room because, with Zoom’s virtual background, your actual background won’t be visible anymore.However, to do so, there are a few requirements for your system to fulfill.Mute Your Audio and Turn Off Your Camera by DefaultHas it happened to you that the very moment you connect a video call, your dog starts barking around, or maybe your kid lands into your lap?And then, after the awkward show, you would dive to mute the audio and camera buttons.Mute and Unmute With the Space BarYou can very easily mute and unmute your mic by pressing and holding the spacebar from your keyboard.You can send a thumbs up or a clapping emoji, by doing this, you can keep acknowledging the speaker without interrupting in between.Know that if your meeting has less than 49 attendees, only then all the screens will be displayed on a single page.
NASA is looking to recruit private companies to help it collect up space resources. And it’s starting with a request for moon dirt and rocks.
Panspermia means “seeds everywhere,” and the concept represents the idea that life on Earth may have been seeded by biological lifeforms from outer space. This long-controversial idea recently received some experimental support from a new study out of Japan. These extremes of life were tested utilizing the International Space Station to examine how microbes might live in the extreme conditions of space. “The origin of life on Earth is the biggest mystery of human beings. Scientists can have totally different points of view on the matter. Some think that life is very rare and happened only once in the Universe,… This story continues at The Next Web
An asteroid the size of a car flew within about 1,830 miles of Earth this weekend — closer than any known space rock has ever come without crashing into the planet. A NASA-funded program detected the asteroid, called 2020 QG, six hours after its close approach. If the asteroid had hit Earth, it probably would have exploded in the atmosphere in an airburst too high up to do any damage on the ground. But the near miss highlights a major blind spot in Earth's programs to search for dangerous asteroids. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. A car-sized asteroid flew within about 1,830 miles (2,950 kilometers) of Earth on Sunday. That's a remarkably close shave — the closest ever recorded, in fact, according to asteroid trackers and a catalog compiled by Sormano Astronomical Observatory in Italy.  Because of its size, the space rock likely wouldn't have posed any danger to people on the ground had it struck our planet. But the close call is worrisome nonetheless, since astronomers had no idea the asteroid existed until after it passed by. "The asteroid approached undetected from the direction of the sun," Paul Chodas, the director of NASA's Center for Near Earth Object Studies, told Business Insider. "We didn't see it coming." Instead, the Palomar Observatory in California first detected the space rock about six hours after it flew by Earth. Chodas confirmed the record-breaking nature of the event: "Yesterday's close approach is closest on record, if you discount a few known asteroids that have actually impacted our planet," he said. NASA knows about only a fraction of near-Earth objects (NEOs) like this one. Many do not cross any telescope's line of sight, and several potentially dangerous asteroids have snuck up on scientists in recent years. If the wrong one slipped through the gaps in our NEO-surveillance systems, it could kill tens of thousands of people.  2020 QG flew over the Southern Hemisphere This recent near-Earth asteroid was initially called ZTF0DxQ but is now formally known to astronomers as 2020 QG. Business Insider first learned about it from Tony Dunn, the creator of the website "Newly-discovered asteroid ZTF0DxQ passed less than 1/4 Earth diameter yesterday, making it the closest-known flyby that didn't hit our planet," Dunn tweeted on Monday. He shared the animation below, republished here with permission. The sped-up simulation shows the approximate orbital path of 2020 QG as it careened by at a speed of about 7.7 miles per second (12.4 kilometers per second) or about 27,600 mph. Early observations suggest the space rock flew over the Southern Hemisphere just before 4 a.m. Universal Time on Sunday (just before midnight ET on Saturday). The animation above shows 2020 QG flying over the Southern Ocean near Antarctica. However, the International Astronomical Union's Minor Planet Center calculated a slightly different trajectory. The group's rendering (shown at the beginning of this story), suggests the asteroid flew over the Pacific Ocean hundreds of miles east of Australia. Not dangerous, but definitely not welcome As far as space rocks go, 2020 QG wasn't too dangerous. Telescope observations suggest the object is between 6 feet (2 meters) and 18 feet (5.5 meters) wide — somewhere between the size of a small car and an extended pickup truck. But even if it was on the largest end of that spectrum and made of dense iron, only small pieces of such an asteroid may have reached the ground, according to the "Impact Earth" simulator from Purdue University and Imperial College London. Such an asteroid would have exploded in the atmosphere, creating a brilliant fireball and unleashing an airburst equivalent to detonating a couple dozen kilotons of TNT. That's about the same as one of the atomic bombs the US dropped on Japan in 1945. But the airburst would have happened about 2 or 3 miles above the ground, so it wouldn't have sounded any louder than heavy traffic to people on the ground. This doesn't make the asteroid's discovery much less unnerving, though — it does not take a huge space rock to create a big problem. Take, for example, the roughly 66-foot-wide (20-meter) asteroid that exploded without warning over Chelyabinsk, Russia, in February 2013. That space rock created a superbolide event, unleashing an airburst equivalent to 500 kilotons of TNT — about 30 Hiroshima nuclear bombs' worth of energy. The explosion, which began about 12 miles (20 kilometers) above Earth, resulted in a blast wave that shattered windows in six Russian cities and injured about 1,500 people. And in July 2019, a 427-foot (130-meter) asteroid called 2019 OK passed within 45,000 miles (72,400 kilometers) of our planet, or less than 20% of the distance between Earth and the moon. Astronomers detected that rock less than a week before its closest approach, leading one scientist to tell The Washington Post that the asteroid essentially appeared "out of nowhere." In an unlikely direct hit to a city, such an asteroid might kill tens of thousands of people. NASA is actively looking for dangerous space rocks, as Congress has required it to do since 2005. However, the agency is mandated to detect only 90% of "city killer" space rocks larger than about 460 feet (140 meters) in diameter. In May 2019, NASA said it had found less than half of the estimated 25,000 objects of that size or larger. And of course, that doesn't count smaller rocks such as the Chelyabinsk and 2019 OK asteroids. Objects that come from the direction of the sun, meanwhile — like 2020 QG — are basically impossible to spot. "There's not much we can do about detecting inbound asteroids coming from the sunward direction, as asteroids are detected using optical telescopes only (like ZTF), and we can only search for them in the night sky," Chodas said. "The idea is that we discover them on one of their prior passages by our planet, and then make predictions years and decades in advance to see whether they have any possibility of impacting." NASA has a plan to address these gaps in its asteroid-hunting program. The agency is in the early stages of developing a space telescope that could detect asteroids and comets coming from the sun's direction. NASA's 2020 budget allotted nearly $36 million for that telescope, called the Near-Earth Object Surveillance Mission. If funding continues, it could launch as early as 2025.SEE ALSO: 16 plutonium-powered space missions shaping our understanding of space — including the NASA rover that will search for alien life on Mars DON'T MISS: NASA added 6 HD video cameras to its next Mars rover so we can all watch the first footage of a spacecraft landing on another planet Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: NASA's 5-step plan for when it discovers a giant, killer asteroid headed straight for Earth
SpaceX just launched a new batch of Starlink internet-beaming satellites equipped with visors to block sun glare. The new visors should make the fleet of satellites less visible in the night sky. But visor technology won't prevent satellite constellations generally from affecting many scientists' astronomy projects. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. After a two-month gap, SpaceX has resumed launching batches of dozens of satellites in its gambit to blanket Earth with high-speed internet access. The satellites are a new "VisorSat" variety to make them less shiny to the ground and especially to astronomers' telescopes. But researchers say the spacecraft's experimental new feature, while helpful, won't fully solve problems posed by the existence of Starlink itself (or other planned thousands-strong satellite fleets, for that matter). SpaceX, founded by Elon Musk, calls its internet project Starlink, and may deploy tens of thousands of the broadband internet-beaming satellites into low-Earth orbit. On Friday at 1:12 a.m ET, one of the company's Falcon 9 rockets launched a new batch of them, along with two Earth-imaging spacecraft built by BlackSky Global. SpaceX fitted all 57 of its desk-sized Starlink satellites with a new feature: sun visors or shades. The visors should deploy after launch and block sunlight from reflecting off the satellites' surfaces — glare that makes Starlink spacecraft appear as bright, moving trails in the night sky that can photobomb telescope observations, blot out faint astronomical objects, and even hinder searches for killer asteroids. The visors will probably make the satellites less bright, but it won't stop them from interfering with astronomy, says astronomer Jonathan McDowell. "If you figure out where to put the visors, you should be able to really cut down those reflections. And that will make the satellites no longer naked-eye objects, which is good," he told Business Insider in June. "It won't, probably, make them so faint that they won't be a problem for professional astronomers." Astronomers fear that SpaceX's bright satellites could outshine the stars After SpaceX launched its first set of Starlink satellites in May 2019, many astronomers were alarmed by how bright the new objects were. In the days after the launch, people across the world spotted the train of satellites, like a line of twinkling stars. "I felt as if life as an astronomer and a lover of the night sky would never be the same," astronomer James Lowenthal told The New York Times in November. "If there are lots and lots of bright moving objects in the sky, it tremendously complicates our job," Lowenthal added. "It potentially threatens the science of astronomy itself." Telescopes on Earth that look for distant, dim objects could pick up these false stars and ruin astronomers' data. A single satellite can create a continuous streak of light across a telescope's long-exposure images of the sky, blocking the objects astronomers want to study. "It takes just a couple seconds for the satellite to cross the telescope's field of view, but we take really long exposures with our cameras. So in that couple of seconds, a whole 10- or 15-minute exposure is ruined," McDowell said. The satellites can especially affect telescopes that observe close to the horizon near dawn — the kind of observations that help astronomers track asteroids flying close to Earth. SpaceX is sharing Starlink's orbital-path data with astronomers so that they can plan their telescope observations around the satellites' movements. Briefly shutting off the camera as the satellite passes overhead can save a long-exposure image. To date, SpaceX has flown nearly 600 Starlink spacecraft to orbit — the most of any satellite operator. But Musk's grand ambitions could make it practically impossible for astronomers to avoid the fast-moving satellites. SpaceX already has permission to launch nearly 12,000 satellites, and last year sought additional clearance to put up to a total of 42,000 satellites into orbit. And that's not counting other providers' plans. "If they're coming over all the time, then knowing when they're coming over isn't helpful," McDowell said. Even now, he added, sometimes astronomers can't avoid the photobombers. It's not yet clear how well a VisorSat works It's unclear how effective the SpaceX's new visors will be, though the company launched an experimental "VisorSat" to test the concept on June 3. SpaceX has yet to report the results of that test. "We're still waiting for the satellite to reach its operational orbit," Youmei Zhou, an integration and test engineer for SpaceX's Crew Dragon spaceship, said during a live broadcast of the launch early Friday morning. Launching a whole fleet of visor-equipped satellites without widely sharing, or possibly knowing, the results of the experimental spacecraft visor seems like "a gusty move" to McDowell. "I think what it reflects is that they have much more confidence now that they understand the sources of the problem," he said. The company doesn't expect earlier, visor-free Starlink satellites to complete their five-year life span, Patricia Cooper, SpaceX's vice president of satellite government relations, told Spaceflight Now in May. That means that, in a few years, the brightest satellites may no longer appear in the sky. Satellite constellations pose larger problems that visors can't fix The Starlink fleet caught astronomers' attention for how bright it was, but it revealed a much larger problem: The skies could soon be swarming with false stars. SpaceX isn't the only company building a massive fleet of satellites. Companies like Amazon and OneWeb have similar aspirations to establish their own fleets and rake in billions of dollars each year. "If OneWeb goes ahead and launches its proposed constellation without mitigation, that is going to have very severe impacts on ground-based astronomy to the point that, for at least four months out of the year, it's going to be pretty impossible to do most observations," McDowell said. "You might as well just shut the observatory down for the summer months, because there's going to be so many satellites screwing up your data." Mitigating solar reflections also goes only so far. Astronomers also worry about invisible wavelengths of light that stand to compromise other forms of astronomy. The Federal Communications Commission, which authorizes the flight and use of internet-beaming satellites in the US, says preventing disruption to astronomy is "not a condition" for licensing — so SpaceX is pursuing solutions on its own accord. Sources known to Business Insider also say Amazon's Kuiper satellite-internet project is working with astronomers to reduce those satellites' impact. But SpaceX and others have yet to announce potential harm-reduction measures for radiowaves the satellites will broadcast, or for the infrared light they emit by producing heat. Both can interfere with telescopes on Earth that observe the skies using radio or infrared. "We're in a new phase of space utilization. It's a new space industrial revolution, things are different, and astronomy's going to be affected," McDowell said. "We just have to make sure we're part of the conversation so we can keep it down to the 'pain in the neck' level and not the 'give up and go home' level." SpaceX did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Dave Mosher contributed reporting.SEE ALSO: 27 epic images show how SpaceX made history by flying NASA astronauts to and from the space station DON'T MISS: SpaceX just won an epic, high-stakes game of capture the flag that Barack Obama started 9 years ago Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: How social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic looks from a satellite
Outer space and aliens are genre favorites, but sci-fi also has time travel, parallel dimensions, and more.
Amazon wants to launch 3,236 internet-beaming satellites in an effort called Project Kuiper, which would directly compete with SpaceX's growing fleet of Starlink spacecraft. Despite heated competition, Amazon managed to trounce the opposition of its competitors and win US Federal Communications Commission approval to deploy Kuiper in space. SpaceX's Starlink project appears to be years ahead of Amazon's Kuiper, having already launched hundreds of satellites and started a beta test program for consumers. However, Amazon has committed to invest "more than $10 billion" to realize Kuiper and blanket Earth with affordable web access. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. Amazon, founded by Jeff Bezos in 1995, just claimed a major victory by getting regulatory approval to create Kuiper, a planned fleet or constellation of 3,236 of internet-beaming satellites. If realized, Kuiper would compete with Starlink, a similar yet potentially much larger fleet of 12,000 to 42,000 satellites — many times the number of spacecraft humanity has ever launched — being formed by SpaceX, the aerospace company founded by Elon Musk. On Wednesday, the FCC's five commissioners unanimously voted to permit Amazon to launch its Kuiper fleet into space and communicate with Earth-based antennas, giving the project the paperwork it needs to get off the ground. "We conclude that grant of Kuiper's application would advance the public interest by authorizing a system designed to increase the availability of high-speed broadband service to consumers, government, and businesses," the FCC wrote in its order, released on July 30. In a subsequent announcement by Amazon on Thursday, the company pledged to invest "more than $10 billion" in its effort to provide "reliable, affordable broadband service to unserved and underserved communities around the world." "A project of this scale requires significant effort and resources, and, due to the nature of [low-Earth orbit] constellations, it is not the kind of initiative that can start small. You have to commit," Amazon said. That amount, incidentally, is precisely what SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell estimated in May 2018 as the cash it may take to complete Starlink. A heated competition to dominate space-based internet In his descriptions of Starlink to reporters in May 2019, Elon Musk has said SpaceX is attempting to claim just 1-3% of a roughly trillion-dollar-a-year global telecommunications business. He also said the project could net SpaceX between $30 billion to $50 billion a year — about 10 times what it takes in for launching rockets. (This has prompted some analysts to value the company upwards of $100 billion.) The same market access and capture is likely true of Amazon, which has prompted heated regulatory battles with SpaceX and other companies, at one point even prompting Musk to call Bezos a copycat. However, with Amazon's growing and lucrative digital entertainment divisions, bringing affordable high-speed internet to populated and remote areas alike stands to expand its customer base and bottom line. Like SpaceX, though, Amazon had to go through the FCC first. The federal regulator is in charge of divvying up the wireless spectrum and assigning permission to use certain frequencies for specific purposes — in the case of Kuiper, Starlink, OneWeb, and other planned providers, shuttling web data to and from space to blanket America (and other parts of the world) in high-speed, low-lag broadband. Amazon asked for the FCC's permission in 2019, engaging the company in a heated competition with similar providers. Now, with the FCC's authorization, Amazon can launch its planned satellites, which would circle the planet at altitudes ranging from about 367 miles (590 kilometers) to 391 miles (630 kilometers), a region called low-Earth orbit (LEO) or even very low-Earth orbit (VLEO). Such distances are more than 50 times closer than traditional geostationary internet satellites, enabling them to shuttle data at fiber-optic-like spaces. The FCC order states that Amazon plans to launch Kuiper in five phases and that its not-yet-existent internet service is supposed to come online after 578 satellites. How big those satellites will be, what they will look like, and which rocket or rockets will launch them into orbit is not yet clear. But Bezos in 2000 founded an aerospace company called Blue Origin that is working to — as SpaceX has successfully done — develop reusable rockets. Blue Origin's forthcoming planned heavy-lift rocket is called New Glenn, and it may have the potential to deploy dozens or hundreds of satellites at once. SpaceX, for its part, seems potentially years ahead of Amazon, having already deployed more than 500 Starlink satellites, built user terminal and ground stations, and even launched a private beta that could lead to the first public service later this year. The FCC's order didn't grant everything Amazon wanted, but the company nevertheless emphasized its importance by announcing its massive planned investment in the scheme. "We have heard so many stories lately about people who are unable to do their job or complete schoolwork because they don't have reliable internet at home," Dave Limp, a senior vice president at Amazon who previously developed its Kindle product and is now overseeing Kuiper. "There are still too many places where broadband access is unreliable or where it doesn't exist at all. Kuiper will change that. Our $10 billion investment will create jobs and infrastructure around the United States that will help us close this gap." In addition to its goals of serving up internet to home consumers, schools, businesses, emergency responders, medical establishments, Amazon said it also plans to "provide backhaul solutions for wireless carriers extending LTE and 5G service to new regions" to bring internet to hard-to-reach areas by other means. Late last year, Amazon unveiled plans to open a giant factory to develop, test, and build Kuiper satellites in Redmond, Washington. The clock is ticking for Amazon to execute. The FCC requires 50% of its satellites to be operational by July 30, 2026, and the rest of its fleet to launch before July 30, 2029, or the company could lose its permission to operate the network. The government's decision only obliquely addressed the threat and growing impact of low-flying fleets of satellites to astronomy, and especially to radio astronomers. In its decision, the FCC noted avoiding such disruption is "not a condition" for its authorization, but that Amazon "should be aware of these facts" and work with the National Science Foundation to mitigate the problems.SEE ALSO: SpaceX and Amazon are making huge gambles on internet satellites that just might pay off — and transform where people live and work DON'T MISS: Billionaires plan to launch tens of thousands of new satellites. Experts are working hard to ensure this doesn't lead to a disaster that ends human access to orbit. Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are in an epic feud that's lasted years
While there are many close friendships among tech CEOs in Silicon Valley, there are plenty of feuds, too.  Some appear to be friendly rivalries — like Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff and Oracle CEO Larry Ellison — but others have become more contentious.  Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg, for example, have been openly feuding for years, while Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos have made digs at each other over outer space.  Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. Silicon Valley is a breeding ground for rivalries.  In a place where world-changing ideas are born and billions of dollars are at stake, it's only natural that rivalries develop between Silicon Valley's power players, ranging from friendly sparring to pointed critiques.  While some feuds, like the one between Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff and Oracle founder Larry Ellison, appear to be born out of a close friendship and mutual respect, others — like the one between Mark Zuckerberg and Evan Spiegel — started over a spurned acquisition offer.  Here are some of the long-standing feuds, friendly or otherwise, between some of the world's most powerful execs.SEE ALSO: Billionaire tech mogul Larry Ellison has said he's 'close friends' with Elon Musk. Here are six other tech exec friendships that have thrived in the competitive world of Silicon Valley. Elon Musk and Bill Gates Elon Musk and Bill Gates don't appear to have a warm relationship, at least if their comments about each other over the last six months are any indication.  Things heated up in February when Gates said during an interview with YouTuber Marques Brownlee that while Tesla has helped drive innovation and adoption of electric vehicles, he didn't buy a Tesla when making a recent vehicle purchase — he bought a Porsche Taycan.  In response, Musk tweeted that his conversations with Gates have always been "underwhelming."  Then, in July, Gates said in an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box" that Musk's comments about COVID-19 are "outrageous," as Musk has frequently downplayed the severity of the virus and questioned how the US has handled its coronavirus response.  "Elon's positioning is to maintain a high level of outrageous comments," Gates said. "He's not much involved in vaccines. He makes a great electric car. And his rockets work well. So he's allowed to say these things. I hope that he doesn't confuse areas he's not involved in too much." Musk took to Twitter a few days later to taunt Gates, tweeting, "Billy G is not my lover" and "The rumor that Bill Gates & I are lovers is completely untrue." Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk aren't competitors in any earthly pursuits, but they're bitter rivals when it comes to outer space.  Bezos founded his rocket company, Blue Origin, in 2000, while Musk founded SpaceX in 2002. Two years later, the pair met for dinner, and even then, things were getting testy. "I actually did my best to give good advice, which he largely ignored," Musk said after the meeting. In 2013, their rivalry heated up when SpaceX tried to get exclusive use of a NASA launch pad and Blue Origin (along with SpaceX rival United Launch Alliance) filed a formal protest with the government. Musk called it a "phony blocking tactic" and SpaceX eventually won the right to take over the pad. Months later, the two companies got into a patent battle, and soon after, Bezos and Musk took their feud public, trading barbs on Twitter. Once, when the BBC asked Musk about Bezos, he responded, "Jeff who?" For his part, Bezos has frequently criticized the idea of colonizing Mars — a main goal of SpaceX — describing the idea as "un-motivating." In May 2019, Musk jabbed at Bezos again, calling him a copycat for Amazon's plan to launch internet-beaming satellites. And last week, Musk repeated the claim, tweeting that Bezos is a copycat after Amazon acquired self-driving-taxi company Zoox for a reported $1.2 billion.  In July 2020, Musk made yet another dig at Bezos' space ambitions. In an interview with The New York Times' Maureen Dowd, took the opportunity to comment on Blue Origin, appearing to imply that Jeff Bezos is too old and Blue Origin too slow to ever make real progress.   "The rate of progress is too slow and the amount of years he has left is not enough, but I'm still glad he's doing what he's doing with Blue Origin," Musk said.  Kevin Systrom and Jack Dorsey Instagram founder Kevin Systrom and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey started out as close friends, but had a falling out around the time Instagram sold to Facebook.   According to the book "No Filter: The Inside Story of Instagram" by Sarah Frier, the pair met when they were early employees at Odeo, the audio and video site created by eventual Twitter cofounders Ev Williams and Noah Glass. Dorsey expected to dislike Systrom when he joined as a summer intern in the mid-2000s, but the pair ended up bonding over photography and expensive coffee.  Systrom and Dorsey stayed in touch even after Systrom got a full-time job at Google. Systrom was an early proponent of Twitter (then known as Twttr) and when he started working on Burbn, the precursor to Instagram, he reached out to Dorsey for guidance. Dorsey ended up becoming an early investor, putting in $25,000. When Burbn pivoted to Instagram, Dorsey became one of the app's biggest fans, cross-posting his Instagrams to Twitter and helping the app go viral soon after it launched. Dorsey eventually attempted to buy Instagram, but Systrom declined, saying he wanted to make Instagram too expensive to be acquired, according to Frier.  The Dorsey-Systrom relationship appeared to have soured in 2012, when Dorsey found out that Instagram had signed a deal to be acquired by Facebook, Twitter's biggest rival. According to Frier, Dorsey was hurt that Systrom hadn't called him first to discuss the deal, or to negotiate one with Twitter instead. Dorsey hasn't posted to his Instagram account since April 9, 2012, when he snapped a photo of an unusually empty San Francisco city bus — according to Frier, it was taken the morning he found out Instagram had sold. While Systrom had been quiet on Twitter for the last few years, he's recently begun using the platform again, and the pair even recently had a pleasant tweet exchange. Marc Benioff and Larry Ellison Oracle founder Larry Ellison and Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff met when Benioff began working at Oracle when he was 23. He was a star early on, earning a "rookie of the year" award that same year and becoming Oracle's youngest VP by age 26. He spent 13 years at Oracle, during which he became a trusted lieutenant to Ellison.  Benioff began working on Salesforce with Ellison's blessing, and Ellison became an investor, putting in $2 million early on.  But since then, the duo has publicly feuded on multiple occasions. In 2000, Oracle launched software that directly competed with Salesforce. Benioff asked Ellison to resign from Salesforce's board, and Ellison refused (he eventually left the board, but Benioff let him keep his stock and options). Over the years, Benioff and Ellison have sparred off and on: Ellison once mocked Salesforce, calling it an "itty bitty application" that's dependent on Oracle, while Benioff has called Oracle a "false cloud." And in 2011, Ellison ordered that Benioff be removed from the speaker lineup of Oracle's OpenWorld conference, which Benioff said was because Oracle was afraid he'd give a better speech.  But throughout it all, Benioff has described Ellison as his mentor. "There is no one I've learned more from than Larry Ellison," Benioff said in 2013. Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg There is no love lost between Apple CEO Tim Cook and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The two moguls have traded insults over the years, beginning as early as 2014, when Cook said in an interview that "when an online service is free, you're not the customer. You're the product." Shortly after, Zuckerberg appeared noticeably tense in an interview with Time when the subject of Cook's comments came up, saying, "'What, you think because you're paying Apple that you're somehow in alignment with them? If you were in alignment with them, then they'd make their products a lot cheaper!'" But the tension between Cook and Zuckerberg came to a head in the aftermath of Facebook's Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which private Facebook user data was stolen from 50 million users. In 2018, Recode's Kara Swisher asked Cook what he would do if he was in Zuckerberg's shoes, to which he responded: "What would I do? I wouldn't be in this situation." Zuckerberg was reportedly so incensed by Cook's comments that he asked executives to switch to Android phones. In a company blog post in 2018, Facebook confirmed the feud between the two execs: "Tim Cook has consistently criticized our business model and Mark has been equally clear he disagrees." Steve Jobs and Bill Gates In the early days of Apple and Microsoft, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates got along — Microsoft made software for the Apple II computer, and Gates was a frequent guest in Cupertino, where Apple is headquartered.  But the tides started to turn in the early '80s, when Jobs flew up to Microsoft's headquarters in Washington to try to convince Gates to make software for the Macintosh computer. Gates later described it as "a weird seduction visit" and said he felt like Jobs was saying "I don't need you, but I might let you be involved." Still, they remained relatively friendly until 1985, when Microsoft launched the first version of Windows and Jobs accused him of ripping off the Macintosh.  "They just ripped us off completely, because Gates has no shame," Jobs later told his biographer, Walter Isaacson, to which Gates replied: "If he believes that, he really has entered into one of his own reality distortion fields." The duo traded barbs for years, with Jobs calling Gates boring and Gates calling Jobs "weirdly flawed as a human being." Tensions remained high even after Microsoft invested in Apple to keep it afloat, with both Gates and Jobs insulting each other and their companies' products time and time again.  Still, they clearly respected and admired each other, despite their animosity. When Jobs died in 2011, Gates said: "I respect Steve, we got to work together. We spurred each other on, even as competitors. None of [what he said] bothers me at all." Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Zuckerberg have never seemed particularly chummy, but the rivalry between the two execs seems to have grown worse in the last few years.  Facebook has come under fire during the last several months over its decision not to fact-check political ads. In response, Dorsey announced last October that Twitter was suspending political advertising altogether, saying "political message reach should be earned, not bought." Dorsey also said at an event that month that Zuckerberg's argument that Facebook is an advocate for free speech "a major gap and flaw in the substance he was getting across," and that "there's some amount of revisionist history in all his storytelling." For his part, Zuckerberg hasn't been shy about criticizing Twitter, saying in an all hands that "Twitter can't do as good of a job as we can," according to leaked audio obtained by The Verge. In December, Dorsey unfollowed Zuckerberg on Twitter.  Larry Ellison and Bill Gates Gates and Ellison may have patched things up these days, but back in the late '90s and early 2000s, they were enemies.  While it seems like there's no real bad blood currently between the two, there definitely appears to have been a touchy relationship between the them throughout the '90s, mostly defined by Ellison trying to outdo Gates.  "He's utterly obsessed with trying to beat Bill Gates," former Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold once told Vanity Fair. "I mean, the guy's got six billion bucks. You'd think he wouldn't be so dramatically obsessed that one guy in the Northwest is more successful. [With Larry] it's just a mania." Their animosity partly stemmed from Ellison's close friendship with Steve Jobs, a frequent opponent of Gates. But things took a more serious turn in 2000 when Microsoft was being investigated by the federal government over antitrust violations. At the time, several groups were openly supportive of Microsoft, and Ellison suspected they were being funded by Microsoft itself. He hired private investigators to in an attempt to out Microsoft and help out the feds.  Eventually, Microsoft lost the suit, and Gates stepped down as Microsoft CEO.  Evan Spiegel and Mark Zuckerberg Snap CEO Evan Spiegel and Mark Zuckerberg seemed to get off on the wrong foot right from the start, beginning with what may have been a Spiegel brush-off in 2012.  Snap had reportedly turned down an acquisition offer from Facebook on three separate occasions.  Spiegel and Zuckerberg haven't been friendly since. Facebook has mimicked many of Snapchat's features over the years — both on its own app and its subsidiary, Instagram — and the CEOs have made jabs at each other in public. In 2018, after Facebook cloned yet another Snapchat feature, Stories, Spiegel said: "We would really appreciate it if they copied our data protection practices also," a dig at Facebook's various privacy scandals. Steve Jobs and Michael Dell In 1997, Dell founder and CEO Michael Dell was asked for his opinion on Apple, which, at the time, was in dire straits. He responded that he'd "shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." That comment irritated Steve Jobs, who told his team in response: "The world doesn't need another Dell or HP. It doesn't need another manufacturer of plain, beige, boring PCs. If that's all we're going to do, then we should really pack up now." At an Apple keynote shortly after, Jobs said Dell's comments were "rude" and told him that Apple was coming for him.  Dell later softened his comments, saying that he was trying to make clear that he wasn't for hire.  But Dell rankled Jobs enough that, in January 2006, Jobs sent around this memo to the entire company: "Team, it turned out that Michael Dell wasn't perfect at predicting the future. Based on today's stock market close, Apple is worth more than Dell. Stocks go up and down, and things may be different tomorrow, but I thought it was worth a moment of reflection today." Mark Zuckerberg and Kevin Systrom Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram founder Kevin Systrom used to get along well — so well that Zuckerberg bought Instagram for $1 billion in 2012. But in the intervening years, the relationship between the two executives seemingly fell apart. When asked why he left, Systrom said, "no one ever leaves a job because everything's awesome." According to an April 2019 piece from Wired's Nick Thompson and Fred Vogelstein, Systrom and cofounder Mike Krieger left because of increasing tensions with Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg reportedly became increasingly controlling, banning Systrom from doing magazine profiles without approval, taking away Facebook tools that helped Instagram grow, testing location-tracking while Systrom was out on paternity leave, and adding a new button to Instagram that Systrom detested. 
The goal sounds altruistic enough, to provided Internet access both to remote places on Earth where few terrestrial and satellite networks can reach as well as future network connectivity to structures orbiting around the Earth in outer space. Elon Musk’s Starlink vision, however, has long been criticized by the scientific community, especially the astronomy field, for polluting the night sky … Continue reading
ECG Equipment Market Research Report (2020-2025) Provides In-Depth Analysis by Scope, Growth Rate, Driving Factors, Competitive Situation, Top Manufacturers and Upcoming Trends.ECG Equipment Market report split global into several key Regions which mainly includes Market Overview, Table of Content, List of Figures and Applications.Summery:- The global ECG Equipment Market size is expected to value at USD 6.3 billion by 2022.An ECG equipment offers smart diagnosis based treatment with the help of highly accurate diagnosis of physiological parameters in the real-time.The ECG systems provide highly accurate test results that helps in further treatment of patients suffering from cardo-vascular disorders.The application of the electrocardiogram (ECG) equipment includes intensive care units, battlefield medical facility and outer-space operations.
Physics holds the key to multiple mysteries of the universe from the big bang to the apple that fell on Sir Isaac Newton’s head.The reason why this particular subject is so intriguing is that there is a chance for every student to enhance their knowledge and document themselves in the history book.If an individual is intrigued by outer space, then the student has an option of aerospace engineering.If the student is interested about the working of machinery, most probably, an automobile then there is an option for the student to undertake automobile engineering and if the student just wants to get a deeper understanding of a particular concept of Physics then he/she has an option of pursuing higher studies and then maybe in future years might even get a tag of a scientist.As you might have observed from the above-provided discussion, physics can be life-changing for a student.But there are times when the students might require physics homework help.Because at times the concepts that are taught by the professors are quite hard to recollect, and even if one of the concepts is not clear in the mind of the student, then it can pose critical problems in the later stages of the course.