MesaZona > Table of Contents : Here's The Menu. Enjoy

Sunday, April 23, 2017

BlackOuts Totally Surreal??US POWER OUTAGES/Gotham Shield or Solar Burst?

Published on Apr 22, 2017

Our Website http://www.BPEarthWatch.Com

World’s First All-Electric VTOL Jet Tested – Are Flying Cars Here?

21st Jetson Century ???

Published on Apr 22, 2017

I had to re-upload due to a copyright issue with YouTube.
Subscribe here: https://goo.gl/9FS8uF
Check out the previous episode:
Become a Patreon!: https://www.patreon.com/ColdFusion_TV

Hi, welcome to ColdFusion (formerly known as ColdfusTion).
Experience the cutting edge of the world around us in a fun relaxed atmosphere.

Sources:
https://lilium.com/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eustacia...

http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/201605...

Where Will We Find Alien Life? (AbSciCon 2017) Here in Mesa

AbSciCom 2017

24-28-April

The Astrobiology Science Conference 2017 (AbSciCon 2017) will be held April 24-28, 2017 at the Mesa Convention Center and the Phoenix Marriot Mesa in Mesa, Arizona. Details are on the conference website.

On April 23, the day prior to the conference, NASA will hold a Town Hall meeting to discuss the Science Definition Team report on a Europa lander in order to obtain community input.

The Town Hall will be available via WebEx/telecom.

NASA Town Hall on Europa Lander at AbSciCon

Sun 23 April 2017 12:30-6:00 pm

In conjunction with the 2017 Astrobiology Science Conference (AbSciCom) in Mesa, AZ, NASA will hold a "town hall" meeting to discuss the Science Definition Team (SDT) report on a mission concept for a lander for the mission to Jupiter's moon Europa.

The SDT report was released in January 2017 and NASA is seeking feedback from the science community at this town hall. (Another was held on March 19 in conjunction with Lunar and Planetary Science Conference).

This town hall will be held from 12:30-6:00 pm local time (3:30-9:00 pm Eastern) on Sunday, April 23, 2017, in the Starlight Room at the Phoenix Marriott Mesa in Mesa, AZ.

It will be available by WebEx and telecon by following these instructions as posted in the April 16, 2017 Planetary Exploration Newsletter:

Webex Meeting Link:

https://nasa.webex.com/nasa/

j.php?MTID=m87b0c6e539ca2b2adbaa81438321ca4a

Meeting number: 992 222 852

Meeting password: W@lc0m31

Audio connection:

Teleconference #: 888-989-9784

Participant Passcode: 7070481

Contact NASA's Curt Niebur for more information (curt.niebur@nasa.gov).

[ Note that while Arizona is in the Mountain Time Zone (Eastern Daylight Time -2), it does not observe Daylight Saving Time so is currently EDT-3 (add three hours for EDT).]

Plenary sessions and sessions taking placing in the Ballroom or Ballroom D will be livestreamed. See the agenda for details.

Two public events, on Tuesday and Thursday evening, also will be livestreamed:
> Tuesday 7:00 – 8:30pm

Where Will We Find Alien Life?

> Thursday 6:30 – 8:30pm

How Astrobiology and Planetary Science Inform a.

Perspective of Planetary Stewardship

This week, scientists will gather at the Astrobiology Science Conference (AbSciCon) in Mesa, Arizona. A quick glance at the 63 session topics shows Europa (and other ocean worlds) will be a hot topic of discussion. And it’s easy to see why.

Link: http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/events/nasa-town-hall-on-europa-lander-at-abscicon-2017-apr-2017-mesa-az

Earlier this month, two NASA missions gave us new insight into the icy, wet worlds of Enceladus and Europa. Enceladus stole most of the headlines, but the new data from Europa is promising. The Hubble Space Telescope found more evidence of plumes erupting from the Jupiter moon. Images captured by the telescope in 2016 show what appears to be a plume of material erupting from the moon’s surface. In the same spot a possible plume erupted in 2014.

Saturday, April 22, 2017

Max Galka Again: Visualizing America’s Middle Class Squeeze 1970-2015

Don't know about you, but your MesaZona blogger goes zingers just looking at tables and figures. . . some welcome help arrives again from Max via Metrocosm

Explore the map below to see how the distribution of incomes in American cities has changed since 1970.

Select one of the eight cities shown and toggle between years. The color and height of each region correspond to that area’s median household income, adjusted for inflation.
To navigate the map with a mouse:

Rotate = left button
Drag = right button
Zoom = middle button / two-finger swipe

Income Polarization in U.S. Cities (full screen version)

The Widening Income Gap in American Cities, 1970-2015

Since 1970, household incomes in American cities have seen a dramatic shift away from the middle toward the extremes.

To see how the distribution of incomes has changed, select a city from the list and toggle between 1970 and 2015. Each city is divided up into small regions (Census tracts). The height and color of each region corresonds to its median household income, adjusted for inflation.

To navigate the map with a mouse: left button = rotate / right button = drag / middle button (or two-finger swipe) = zoom.
Made by @galka_max / built with Blue shift
Each city is divided up by its Census tracts, small territorial units of roughly-equal population (about 4,000 people each). The color and height of each Census tract correspond to the inflation-adjusted median household income of its residents.

America’s “squashed” income distribution

Since 1970, the US economy has grown significantly larger. Real US GDP per capita, a measure of the country’s average income, has more than doubled. However, the median household income, a measure of what the typical American family earns, has not kept up. Across the US, median household income has increased by only about 20% over the same period.
Such a large disparity between the average and median incomes is possible because the economic gains have not been shared evenly. They have been realized predominantly by high-income households, with only a small share going to the lower majority of the income spectrum. The result is an income distribution that looks like it’s been “squashed,” as illustrated brilliantly in this animated chart by the FT.

The flattening income distributions of US cities

This trend is not only happening at the nationwide level. Income distributions within individual cities are also being flattened.

Since 1970, some cities, such as San Francisco, have fared well economically. Others, such as Detroit, have struggled. But nearly without exception, American cities have seen a sharp rise in inequality — a widening gap between those at the top of the income spectrum and those at the bottom.
Like the map above. this graphic shows the distribution of median household income across each city’s Census tracts. It includes the eight cities from the map as well as 12 additional major US cities.

In 1970, each of these cities shows a near-symmetrical, bell-shaped income distribution — a high concentration of people in the middle, with a narrow tail of low and high-income households on either end.
As of 2015, the distribution of each city has been compressed. The concentration of middle-income households in the center has been squashed down and pushed out to one or both extremes — fewer middle-income households, more households in the low-income and/or high-income strata.

Is America’s middle class being “crushed”?

Contrary to the prevailing view that America’s middle class is in terrible shape, the typical US household today is earning about 20% more than in 1970, after adjusting for inflation. That’s small relative to the growth of the economy and even smaller compared to the income growth seen at the top of the spectrum. But it means the middle class is no worse off today income-wise than in 1970. So, to say the middle class is being “crushed” may be a stretch. On the other hand, there are real societal costs when wealth is distributed in a way that is perceived as unfair.
These contrasting views are explained well in the posts below, both from people I greatly respect:

Controversial essay by Paul Graham, founder of the startup accelerator Y Combinator, essentially arguing that as long as a society has economic mobility, inequality is a good thing. It’s drives of innovation and fuels the country’s economic engine.

Article by Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, someone I had the pleasure of meeting a few years ago, discussing inequality not as merely an economic problem, but one that comes down to fairness and social cohesion.

Notes

Household income data comes from: LTDB at Brown University and IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System.

For some of the cities, I used the urban agglomeration boundaries (as defined by the US Census), rather than the boundaries of the city proper. In these cases, the cities’ administrative boundaries included large areas of non-urban land, some of which may not have had tract-level data available as far back as 1970.

Built with Blueshift.

Getting THE BIG PICTURE > Thank You MetroCosm + Max Galka [A Genius]

Mapping the Flow of International Trade
December 14, 2016
Source: http://metrocosm.com/map-international-trade/
According the UN’s Comtrade database, the global market for imported goods totaled $15.6 trillion in 2015. This map shows where those goods came from and where they went, each dot representing $1 billion in value.

MaxGalka: With the election of Donald Trump, international trade is suddenly at the top of the U.S. agenda. And it occurred to me, I actually have very little idea what the big picture of foreign trade looks like. And there are surprisingly few resources on the web. So, I gathered up the data via the U.N. Comtrade API and put it together in this map (see how this map was made).

What does this map tell us?

I can only speak for myself, but what jumps out most to me is how concentrated the flows are in just three countries: the U.S., China, and Germany. Nearly half of all goods traded around the world go through one of these three countries, either exported to or imported from.
Germany has the largest economy in the EU, but not by much. The GDP’s of the UK and France are both about 25% smaller than Germany. But it’s clear by looking at the map that Germany dominates EU trade. Its total exports are nearly on a par with the US, $1.3 trillion vs $1.5 trillion. Of the 28 EU member states, Germany is the #1 exporter to 17.
What strikes me about the United States is how balanced its trade is with Canada and Mexico. To hear some of the recent rhetoric about Mexico, you would think the trade is completely one-sided — goods flowing in, money flowing out. In reality, America’s imports and exports with Mexico are roughly equal ($240 billion and $294 billion). The same is true of Canada ($312 billion and $347 billion).
With total imports of $1.9 trillion and total exports of $2.1 trillion, China holds the largest share of foreign trade. I don’t know whether China’s trade policies are good or bad for the rest of the world. But visually, it sure does look like an octopus with its tentacles wrapped around the Earth.

Credit:

International trade flows from U.N. Comtrade. The categories of goods shown are derived from the Harmonized Coding System. For readability purposes, I reduced the 15 top level categories down to 9 categories by [somewhat arbitrarily] grouping similar items together.
Built with Blueshift, my forthcoming map-building platform. See how this map was made.

Max Galka

I'm an NYC-based entrepreneur (my newest project: Blueshift) and adjunct instructor at UPenn. I'm fascinated by data visualization and the ways that data is transforming our understanding of the world. I spend a lot of time with my face buried in Excel, and when I find something interesting I write about it here and also as a Guardian Cities and Huffington Post contributor.
More about my background

Max's latest project is launching soon: Blueshift, a platform for designing and publishing dynamic maps for the web.

BEA News Release: Finance and Insurance Led Growth in the Fourth Quarter 2016

News release

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT,
Friday, April 21, 2017
Finance and Insurance Led Growth in the Fourth Quarter
Gross Domestic Product by Industry: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2016
For the full release and tables, visit http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/industry/gdpindustry/gdpindnewsrelease.htm

Finance and insurance; retail trade; and professional, scientific, and technical services were the leading contributors to the increase in U.S. economic growth in the fourth quarter of 2016. According to gross domestic product (GDP) by industry statistics released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, 19 of 22 industry groups contributed to the overall 2.1 percent increase in real GDP in the fourth quarter.

For the finance and insurance industry group, real value added—a measure of an industry’s contribution to GDP—increased 6.3 percent in the fourth quarter, after increasing 9.0 percent in the third quarter. The fourth quarter growth primarily reflected increases in Federal Reserve banks, credit intermediation, and related activities, as well as insurance carriers and related activities.
Retail trade increased 5.7 percent, after increasing 2.6 percent. The fourth quarter growth primarily reflected an increase in other retail, which includes gasoline stations, as well as building material and garden equipment and supplies stores.
Professional, scientific, and technical services increased 3.6 percent, after increasing 2.6 percent. This was the eleventh consecutive quarter of growth and primarily reflected increases in miscellaneous professional, scientific, and technical services, which includes industries like architectural and engineering services; scientific research and development services; and management consulting services.

Other highlights

Real GDP growth slowed to 2.1 percent in the fourth quarter, from 3.5 percent in the third quarter. Nondurable goods manufacturing was the leading contributor to the deceleration in real GDP in the fourth quarter. Real value added for the industry group decreased 7.1 percent, after decreasing 0.4 percent in the third quarter. The larger decrease was primarily attributed to petroleum and coal products manufacturing.
Information services increased 0.9 percent, after increasing 8.6 percent, and was the second leading contributor to the slowdown. The deceleration was primarily attributed to a slowdown in broadcasting and telecommunications.
Wholesale trade increased 2.6 percent, after increasing 8.3 percent.

Gross output by industry Real gross output—principally a measure of an industry’s sales or receipts, which includes sales to final users in the economy (GDP) and sales to other industries (intermediate inputs)—increased in the fourth quarter. This reflected increases in real gross output for both the private goods- and services-producing sectors, while the government sector decreased. Overall, real gross output increased in 18 of 22 industry groups. Real gross output for retail trade increased 8.0 percent, after increasing 2.5 percent in the third quarter. Information services increased 1.5 percent, after increasing 8.5 percent. The increase was primarily attributed to broadcasting and telecommunications, which has increased for fifteen consecutive quarters. Professional, scientific, and technical services increased 3.9 percent, after increasing 1.9 percent, primarily reflecting growth in legal services. 2016 GDP by industry Real GDP increased 1.6 percent in 2016 (that is, from the 2015 annual level to the 2016 annual level). The private goods- and services-producing sectors, as well as the government sector, contributed to the increase. Growth was widespread, with 19 of 22 industry groups contributing to the increase. Information services; professional, scientific, and technical services; and health care and social assistance were the leading contributors to the increase in real GDP. Information services real value added increased 6.4 percent in 2016, after increasing 7.5 percent in 2015. This was the seventh consecutive annual increase. Professional, scientific, and technical services increased 3.3 percent, after increasing 5.1 percent. Health care and social assistance increased 3.0 percent, after increasing 4.5 percent, primarily reflecting an increase in ambulatory health care services. Next release — July 21, 2017 at 8:30 A.M. EDT for: Gross Domestic Product by Industry: First Quarter 2017
###
Technical Contact
Thomas Howells	(301) 278-9586	industryeconomicaccounts@bea.gov
Edward Morgan	(301) 278-9541
Media Contact
Jeannine Aversa	(301) 278-9003	jeannine.aversa@bea.gov
Thomas Dail		thomas.dail@bea.gov
twitter.com/BEA_News	blog.bea.gov	www.bea.gov/_subscribe

Russia to Develop 5th Generation Attack Helicopter by 2017

Published on Jan 5, 2017

It could take Russia about three years to complete the development of a fifth-generation attack helicopter and start testing its prototype, a defense industry official said Wednesday. The Mi-28NM, a modernized version of the Mi-28N Night Hunter attack helicopter that is being upgraded to standards of a fifth-generation aircraft, has been in development since 2008. “I think we will need no more than three years to develop a new modernized version of the Mi-28N helicopter,” said Andrei Shibitov, chief executive officer of the Russian Helicopters company.

Shibitov did not specify the characteristics of the future combat helicopter, but he was quoted earlier by the Russian media as saying that the criteria for a fifth-generation attack helicopter must include low radar signature, an extended flying range, an advanced weapons control system, the capability to combat fighter jets and have a speed of up to 600 kilometers (370 miles) per hour.