Profile

Cover photo
Ngumi Mirie
Lives in Nairobi
153 followers|36,669 views
AboutPostsPhotosVideos

Stream

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Black Hole Alignment Is Not So Mysterious

There’s news of a mysterious alignment of black holes. While that makes for good headlines, the actual scientific findings aren’t so mysterious.

The research has just been published in MNRAS, and it looked at the orientation of black hole jets. When black holes consume matter, the heat and pressure of the surrounding accretion disk can throw some of the material away from the black hole at tremendous speed. This material streams away from the black hole forming long trails we call jets. Since these jets always stream away from the poles of a rotating black hole, the alignment of the jets tells us the orientation of the black hole.

The team looked at distant black holes across a 1-degree span of sky, which is about twice the apparent width of the Moon. When they looked at the jets of black holes in this area, they found an apparent alignment. The chance of such alignment occurring randomly is about 0.1%, so it is likely that something caused them to have similar alignments. This is “mysterious” because the black holes are not close enough to each other to be interacting. So there is no way for them to be tugging each other into alignment.

However this kind of alignment is not unexpected. Computer simulations of the cosmos show that intergalactic material should be rotationally aligned along filaments between superclusters. We’ve seen similar alignments among quasars, which is indicative of this large filament structure. So what this work actually shows is further evidence of the large scale filament structure as predicted by computer simulations. The authors are clear to point this out, and don’t claim there is anything mysterious about it.

Unfortunately, “we’ve found further evidence confirming cosmological models” doesn’t garner as many clicks as “Ooh! Mysterious black holes!”

Paper: A. R. Taylor and P. Jagannathan. Alignments of radio galaxies in deep radio imaging of ELAIS N1. MNRAS Vol. 459 L36-L40 (2016). doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw038



There's news of a mysterious alignment of black holes. While that makes for good headlines, the actual scientific findings aren't so mysterious.
14 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Earth-Like Protoplanet Around A Young Star

TW Hydrae is the closest T Tauri star, only about 180 light years away. T Tauri stars are young stars in the late stages of formation. This means any planetary system they have are also in the early stages, so they give us insight on just how planetary systems form. Studying these early planetary systems can prove difficult, since they consist largely of cold gas and dust, which can be challenging to observe. But recent observations from the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array have given us the most detailed images of TW Hydrae yet, and they are kind of amazing.

The protoplanetary planetary disk of TW Hydrae happens to be face-on from our perspective, so ALMA has a very clear view of the disk’s structure. As with other young planetary systems, the disk has gaps indicative of early planet formation. With this observation and others, it is clear that young stars form planetary systems from the gas and dust of a protoplanetary disk. But this system is particularly interesting because it shows a gap at about 1 astronomical unit, which is the distance of the Earth from the Sun. It’s close to the resolution limit of AMLA, but there is a clear gap. So we now have evidence of Earth-distance planets forming in a solar system.

Paper: Sean M. Andrews, et al. Ringed Substructure and a Gap at 1 AU in the Nearest Protoplanetary Disk. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, Volume 820, Number 2 (2016) arXiv:1603.09352 [astro-ph.EP]
A young star shows evidence of forming an Earth-like world.
43 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
The Mystery Of Fast Radio Bursts

They aren’t local, they aren’t aliens, and they might help us understand dark matter.

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are blasts of radio energy that last for only a fraction of a second but are extraordinarily bright. Because of their short duration, and the fact that the same FRB never repeats, they’ve been very difficult to study. They were first discovered in 2007, and for a while they were observed only at the Parkes radio telescope in Australia. Because of this, and the fact that FRBs were so incredibly bright, there was a great deal of speculation that they could be due to local radio interference rather than some new astronomical event. In fact a similar short-burst phenomenon known as perytons were found to be due to stray signals from an unshielded microwave.

Fast radio bursts are somewhat different from perytons, and have two distinct features that imply they are distant in origin. The first is that rather than being a simple burst with a range of frequencies happening at once, the frequencies are spread out, with higher frequencies arriving first and lower ones later. This whistler effect is characteristic of a pulse that has traveled through the interstellar medium. It occurs because when an electromagnetic pulse interacts with charged ions, different frequencies are slowed by different amounts, with the lower frequencies slowed down more. So you get a dispersion effect. Stray bursts or chirps from terrestrial sources generally don’t have the same dispersion because they don’t travel through plasma and they don’t travel far. The second is that the bursts seen by a single radio detector rather than a range of nearby detectors. This implies it comes from a particular point in the sky rather than somewhere near the telescope.

Unfortunately radio telescopes are not good at determining an FRB’s location in the sky. This makes it difficult to determine their cause. This led to a great deal of speculation about their origin, including the idea that they might be due to some alien civilization. Combined with the fact that perytons were caused by a microwave, FRBs began to take on a fringe science status.

But recently the Parkes observatory detected a fast radio burst, then two hours later the Australia Telescope Compact Array in New South Wales saw a fading radio glow in the same region of the sky. Using the two observations to triangulate its position in the sky, a team of astronomers narrowed the source down to an elliptical galaxy 6 billion light years away. To verify this source the team compared the dispersion effect of the FRB signal with the amount of ionized material between us and this particular galaxy as estimated by the WMAP probe. The amount of frequency dispersion agreed with the estimated amount of ionized material, indicating that it did indeed originate from the distant galaxy.

Now that we know they are real astrophysical events, the next step is to confirm their cause. The leading idea is that they are due to neutron stars, either through neutron star collisions or perhaps when a neutron star collapses into a black hole. They might also help us solve the mystery of dark matter. In order to better understand dark matter we need to know exactly how much faint regular matter there is between galaxies. Since the dispersion measure of FRBs gives us an excellent measure of the amount of material between us and a particular distant galaxy, they can be used to help map the distribution of faint matter throughout the universe.

There’s still much to learn about fast radio bursts, but this recent work brings them clearly back out of the fringe.

Paper: E. F. Keane, et al. The host galaxy of a fast radio burst. Nature 530, 453–456 (25 February 2016).
They aren't local, they aren't aliens, and they might help us understand dark matter.
25 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
The Sky Of A Different Sun

In the past decade we’ve discovered thousands of planets around other stars, but we’re only able to observe a few of the larger ones directly. This means that while we can determine some of an exoplanet’s properties such as its size and mass, it’s far more difficult to determine other properties such as the composition of its atmosphere.

If a planet passes in front of its star from our vantage point, then it is theoretically possible to determine some of the compounds that make up its atmosphere. When a planet passes in front of its star, the atmosphere absorbs certain wavelengths of light, and those wavelengths depend upon the types of molecules in the atmosphere. So far we’ve been able to study the composition of gas giant atmospheres, but recently a team of astronomers observed the atmosphere of a “super-Earth” sized planet.

55 Cancri e has a mass about 8 times that of Earth, or about half that of Neptune. We don’t have a similar planet in our own solar system, so understanding this type of planet is a big goal of astronomy. This particular planet orbits it star at about 1/20th the distance of Mercury from the Sun. It’s star-facing side is estimated to have a temperature of about 2000°C, so there was some question as to whether it would have an atmosphere at all. Using observations from the Hubble’s Wide Field Camera 3, the team found not only that the planet has an atmosphere, but that the atmosphere contains significant amounts of hydrogen cyanide (HCN).

An atmosphere with significant HCN means that 55 Cancri e is likely a carbon planet, meaning that it would likely have an iron core like Earth, but instead of silicates its crust would consist of oxygen-carbon compounds. So it would likely have a crust of graphite, diamond and carbonate minerals. Carbon planets would also likely lack water, since carbon bonds so well with oxygen there would likely be little left to bond with hydrogen to form water. It was suspected that 55 Cancri e was a carbon planet because its parent star contains much more carbon than our Sun. Now it seems our suspicions were correct.

Paper: A. Tsiaras, et al. Detection of an atmosphere around the super-Earth 55 Cancri e. arXiv:1511.08901 [astro-ph.EP]
We've observed the toxic atmosphere of a super-Earth 40 light years away.
8 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Now this is scary
Ocean Eats SCUBA Diver
1
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Testing Relativity With Fast Radio Bursts

A fast radio burst (FRB) is a short burst of intense radio energy originating from outside our galaxy. We aren’t sure what causes FRBs, though the likely candidate is a white dwarf or neutron star falling into a black hole. They only last a few milliseconds, which makes them a challenge to study, but their brief duration may also allow us to test the limits of general relativity.

The foundational idea of general relativity is known as the principle of equivalence. On a basic level it states that two objects of different masses should fall at the same rate under the influence of gravity. The principle is necessary to equate the apparent force of gravity with a curvature of spacetime. So far all tests of the equivalence principle have confirmed it to the limits of observation, but there’s an interesting catch. Since relativity also states that there is a connection between mass and energy, the equivalence principle should also hold for two objects of different energy. Specifically, two beams of light with different wavelengths (and therefore different energies) should be affected by gravity in the same way.

We know that the path of light is changed by the curvature of space (an effect known as gravitational lensing), but the curvature also affects the travel time of light from its source to us (known as the Shapiro time delay). According to relativity, the amount of curvature and the time delay shouldn’t depend upon the wavelength of light. This means we can in principle use FRBs to test this idea.

Since FRBs only last milliseconds, they provide a sharp pulse of light at range of frequencies. If relativity is correct, then the pulse we observe won’t be affected by gravity. If the equivalence principle is wrong, then shorter wavelengths of radio waves from the burst could arrive at a different time than longer wavelengths. We already see different wavelengths arrive at different times due to the interaction between the radio waves and the interstellar plasma in our galaxy, but we know from other observations how much that shift should be. The key is to test whether there is an additional shift not accounted for by standard physics.

Relativity is an extremely well-tested scientific theory, so I wouldn’t count on FRBs showing an energy-based effect, but it’s great that we could have yet another way to test our model. It’s a win-win, since we’ll either confirm our theory yet again, or we’ll discover something new to explore.

Paper: Y. F. Huang & J. J. Geng. Collision between Neutron Stars and Asteroids as a Mechanism for Fast Radio Bursts. arXiv:1512.06519 [astro-ph.HE] arxiv.org/abs/1512.06519
Fast radio bursts are strange bursts of energy originating from outside our galaxy. Their short duration means they could be used to test the limits of general relativity.
27 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
153 people
Dull Men's Club's profile photo
Oludare Adegbite's profile photo
Mohammed Seicko's profile photo
Ian Hopkinson's profile photo
Julius Lagat's profile photo
kamau ali's profile photo
Cheryl fernandez's profile photo
ricardo campbell vevo's profile photo
Joseph Munyonyi's profile photo

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Cassini and the Ninth World

The Cassini spacecraft currently orbiting Saturn has provided us with a wealth of discoveries. It’s mapped the surface of Titan, studied the age of Saturn’s rings, and found liquid water on Enceladus. But because it actively sends and receives radio transmissions to and from Earth, it’s position and movement can be tracked with extraordinary precision. Using the telemetry of Cassini, we’ve been able to determine the position of Saturn to within a mile. That level of precision also means the gravitational influence of other planets and moons can be measured by Cassini, and it may have felt the gravitational pull of the yet undiscovered ninth planet.

The existence of the a ninth major planet in our solar system was first proposed by looking at the orbits of the outermost known bodies in our solar system. If they were truly at the outer edge of our solar system, one would expect their orbits to be randomly distributed. But instead they are clustered in a similar region, implying the presence of a large planet orbiting the Sun at 600 – 1,200 AU. Recently a team realized that if such a planet existed, its gravitational tug could be felt by bodies closer to the Sun as well. Normally this pull would be far to small to notice, but the extreme sensitivity of Cassini might make it known. So they analyzed the orbital data of Cassini. Taking into account the 8 known planets, the moons of Saturn and about 200 of the largest asteroids, they found Cassini’s orbit didn’t quite match up. This would imply something unaccounted for is gravitationally influencing the probe. When they added a ninth planet to the mix, they found it could agree with Cassini’s motion if the planet was about 600 AU from the Sun in the direction of the constellation Cetus.

The result isn’t definitive. There are lots of things that could account for the motion of Cassini, and an undiscovered planet is just one of them. However if it is a new planet, with a distance of “only” 600 AU it should be detectable by current technology such as the dark energy sky survey or the Planck survey of the cosmic microwave background. If that’s the case, it’s only a matter of time before a new planet is discovered in our solar system.

Paper: A. Fienga, et al. Constraints on the location of a possible 9th planet derived from the Cassini data. A&A, 587 L8 (2016) arXiv:1602.06116 [astro-ph.EP]


The Cassini spacecraft orbiting Saturn may have felt the gravitational pull of a ninth planet.
41 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
According to astrophysics you're pretty amazing.

Astrophysics has an amazing story to tell about you.
29 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
A Dance Of Light

A small telescope is often described as a rather simple device. By place two lenses in a tube at the right distance, Galileo changed our understanding of the universe. But in fact the interaction of light and glass is extraordinarily complex, as you can see in the video below.

The video simulates a pulse of light striking a series of lenses. You can see how some of the light reflects off the surface of the lenses rather than simply passing through and how the effective speed of the light slows down while passing through the glass. You can also see how the colors of the light begin to spread apart, which is a process known as chromatic aberration. It’s a subtle dance we can’t see directly, but the effects of this dance makes telescope design challenging.

While it is fairly easy to make a basic telescope, making a truly good one is a big challenge. It’s forced us to learn how to make lenses and mirrors with precision, and even to use computer modeling to create more useful telescope designs. We’ve come a long way, but we are still learning about the ways light interacts with material, and how we can use that dance of light to better see the cosmos.

17 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
What Makes A Planet A Planet?

On August 24, 2006 astronomers outraged the public by declaring Pluto is no longer a planet. The official declaration by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) is still controversial, but it was the result of a growing understanding that Pluto is very different from other worlds.

In its declaration the IAU defined a planet as an object which 1) orbits the Sun, 2) is massive enough to be in hydrostatic equilibrium (basically that means it’s round), and 3) has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit. Pluto doesn’t satisfy the last criteria, thus excluding it from the family of planets. Of the three criteria, the last one seems the most arbitrary, as if it was added specifically to remove Pluto’s planetary title. For example, lots of asteroids cross the path of Earth’s orbit, and yet Earth is still a planet. But Earth is much, much larger than anything else in its general orbit. Pluto shares its neighborhood with other trans-Neptunian bodies, much like Ceres shares its space with other bodies in the asteroid belt.

In many ways it is easy to separate planets such as Mars or Jupiter from non-planets (or dwarf planets) like Pluto and Ceres. The latter are much smaller than planets, and share space with similar small bodies in a way that planets don’t. There’s no body that is on the fuzzy edge of being a planet. As we discover bodies around other stars, however, things are bound to become more confusing. Given that it is currently impossible to detect very small bodies orbiting a star, how could we possibly tell whether a potential exoplanet has “cleared the neighborhood around its orbit?” How much clearing would a body have to do? When astronomers are asked “Why is Pluto no longer a planet?” the bigger question strikes at the heart of what a universal definition for a planet would be.

If we consider the IAU definition to be fairly reasonable, the most difficult criteria is the third one. It is particularly troublesome for planets orbiting other stars (exoplanets) where we have limited information about a potential planet. But from computer simulations we know that a planet-sized object will clear other objects from its orbit over time. The time it takes depends upon its mass (larger objects clear regions faster) and how close the object is to its star (closer objects orbit the star more quickly and have more chances to clear a region). That means clearing an orbit depends upon three things: the mass of the object, its distance from the star, and the age of the stellar system. Using these criteria we can define a threshold where an object’s orbit is considered clear.

Solar system bodies under the new planet criteria. The dotted line represents the age of our solar system. Credit: Jean Luc Margot
Solar system bodies under the new planet criteria. The dotted line represents the age of our solar system. Credit: Jean Luc Margot
When the standard is applied to our solar system, Pluto and Ceres still don’t match the definition of a planet. They are far too small and too distant from the Sun. Things get interesting if you drop the IAU’s second criterion of needing to orbit the star. The Moon is just massive enough to meet the orbit-clearing threshold on its own, so under this new definition we could consider the Earth-Moon system to be a double planet.

What’s particularly appealing about this new method is that it could be used as the only criterion for defining a planet. Anything large enough to clear its orbit within, say, 10 billion years will be in hydrostatic equilibrium, meeting the IAU’s first criterion. If we drop the first criteria to allow double planets like the Earth-Moon, then orbit clearing becomes the only real threshold a planet needs to meet.

Within our solar system we also separate planets into small, terrestrial planets like Earth, and large gas planets like Jupiter and Saturn. In our solar system the dividing line is clear, since the smallest gas planet (Uranus) is more than 14 times the mass of Earth (the largest terrestrial planet).

Among exoplanets that gap is filled. There exoplanets with masses of 2 to 10 Earths, and whether they are more like the jovian or terrestrial planets of our solar system remains a mystery. Right now we only know basic characteristics such as their mass and density. But that might be enough to divide them into two broad groups. Plotting the density of known exoplanets vs. their mass, there seems to be a clear split between low mass and high mass planets. Below about 0.3 Jupiter masses (95 Earth masses) the densities vary widely. This is indicative of the fact that planets of this size can be rocky (Mars), icy (Pluto-like) or gaseous (Neptune). In this regime the composition of a planet greatly affects its density. Above 0.3 Jovian masses, the composition of a planet is dominated by hydrogen and helium, similar to Jupiter. Because of the properties of hydrogen and helium, the size of these planets are all roughly that of Jupiter. The bigger the mass, the more the hydrogen and helium compress under their own weight, so the density increases with increasing mass. Around 60 Jupiter masses, the density once again starts dropping. This is due to the fact that above this mass a body has enough heat and pressure within its core to undergo fusion. As a result the body heats and expands significantly, thus decreasing its density.

It would seem then that the realm of gas planets lies between 95 Earth masses and 60 Jupiter masses. Interestingly, if we apply this to our own solar system, Uranus and Neptune fall into the small, more Earth-like category, and only Jupiter and (just barely) Saturn would qualify as gas giants. While Jupiter is sometimes referred to as the king of the planets, it’s actually on the small end of gas dominated planets just as brown dwarfs. While it might seem odd that a planet like Uranus isn’t a gas planet, if it had formed closer to the Sun, its outer layers may have been stripped away early on by the Sun’s solar wind, leaving a more super-Earth like world.

We’re still in the early stages of discovering and studying exoplanets. As we learn more about these remote worlds, our definition of what a planet is and is not will likely change. But even now we can see that what makes a planet a planet isn’t as clear cut as we once thought.

Paper: Jean-Luc Margot. A Quantitative Criterion for Defining Planets. arXiv:1507.06300 [astro-ph.EP]

Paper: Artie P. Hatzes Heike Rauer. A Definition for Giant Planets Based on the Mass-Density Relationship. arXiv:1506.05097 [astro-ph.EP]
When astronomers are asked "Why is Pluto no longer a planet?" the bigger question strikes at the heart of what a universal definition for a planet would be.
25 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Brighter Than Twenty Galaxies

A superluminous supernova is an immense supernova more than ten times that of the type Ia supernovae used to measure cosmic distances. They are so intense that they challenge our understanding of just how they occur. Two possible mechanisms include the idea that they may be caused by magnetic heating as the core collapses into a magnetar, or that it’s intensity is strengthened by pair-instability reactions in its core. The evidence leaned toward the magnetar model, but observations of a new supernova challenge that idea.

The new supernova is known as ASASSN-15lh, and it was more luminous than any supernova ever seen. About 20 times more luminous than the entire Milky Way. It’s light has traveled for about 2.7 billion years, so it’s apparent brightness in our sky wasn’t particularly bright, but in terms of absolute magnitude it was about three times as bright as other known superluminous supernovae. It is also unusual in that it occurred in a bright galaxy where there is not much new star formation. Other superluminous supernovae occur in active dwarf galaxies.

The team observing the spectra of this supernova found that it was low in hydrogen. This is indicative of a star that has cast off its hydrogen-rich outer later, and would seem to support the magnetar model. But the extreme energy of ASASSN-15lh puts it at the upper limit of the model. If this was indeed a magnetar supernova, then it was at the upper limit of the hypothetical energy range. That seems a bit unusual, and it raises the question of whether the magnetar model might be flawed.

The key to solving this mystery will be the discovery of similar superluminous supernovae. This particular supernova was discovered by the All Sky Automated Survey for SuperNovae (ASASSN) which is a collection of small (14 centimeter) telescopes in Chile and Hawaii. It’s a relatively low cost project that lays the groundwork for larger projects such as LSST. So over time we’re bound to find similar supernovae.

Paper: Subo Dong, et al. ASASSN-15lh: A highly super-luminous supernova. Science Vol. 351, Issue 6270, pp. 257-260 (2016)
A supernova known as ASASSN-15lh is more luminous than any supernova ever seen.
48 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Ngumi Mirie

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Relative Units

In an earlier post I talked about the astronomical unit, and how it was standardized in 2012 because the old definition (the distance from the Earth to the Sun) was gradually increasing due to the Sun’s loss of mass. It turns out that’s not the completely correct story.

Using radar telemetry we can measure the astronomical unit to an accuracy of a few meters. In my earlier post I had stated the accuracy was 3 parts per billion, but that wasn’t quite right. In 2009 the IAU defined the astronomical unit to be 149,597,870,700 meters, with an uncertainty of 3 meters. Since the change in distance due to the Sun’s mass loss is only about 1.5 centimeters, it would seem an uncertainty of 3 meters is too large for the Sun’s effect to make a difference.

It turns out that analysis of telemetric data for the solar system seemed to point toward a change in the astronomical unit of about 15 meters per century, which is much larger than the effect of the Sun. But other observations haven’t confirmed such a drift, and so the result remains highly controversial.

So why did the IAU adopt a fixed standard for the astronomical unit? In the actual 2012 resolution, the possible drift due to the Sun’s mass loss is listed as one reason, but the main reason was the need for self consistent units in the framework of general relativity. The big problem is not the Sun’s mass loss, but the fact that (because of relativity) an astronomical unit when measured by a spacecraft orbiting Jupiter is different than one made when orbiting Earth. When all of our measurements were made from Earth, relativity didn’t play a big role. But we now have a flotilla of spacecraft across the solar system, so relativity is an issue.

So now the astronomical unit is 149,597,870,700 meters exactly by definition. The Earth’s distance from the Sun is pretty close to that, but your results may vary depending on where you are in the universe.

Paper: Krasinsky, G. A., Brumberg, V. A. Secular increase of astronomical unit from analysis of the major planet motions, and its interpretation. Celest. Mech. Dynam. Astron. 90 (3–4): 267–288 (2004)
So why did the IAU adopt a fixed standard for the astronomical unit?
41 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
153 people
Dull Men's Club's profile photo
Oludare Adegbite's profile photo
Mohammed Seicko's profile photo
Ian Hopkinson's profile photo
Julius Lagat's profile photo
kamau ali's profile photo
Cheryl fernandez's profile photo
ricardo campbell vevo's profile photo
Joseph Munyonyi's profile photo
Collections Ngumi is following
View all
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Story
Tagline
Origin.The ancient Egyptian name,Meri-Amun,meaning "beloved of the sun god Amun"when adopted by the Isralites was recorded in the bible as Miriam.The sister of the famous Moses who led the Isralites to the promised land of Canaan was called Miriam.The Latin adopted the name as Maria which form appears in most Western European languages.Mary is the English Bible Version.The Ethiopia versions Maryam and Mariam unlike in Europe where it is a female baptisimal name have been used as patronymics/surnames for ages.Some examples of well known Ethiopians with the patronymic are;Emporor Takla Maryam(1430-1433) of the Solomonic Dynasty,Emporor Baeda Maryam (1468-1478) and more recently Mengistu Haile Mariam who was head of state between 1977 and 1991.And the current Ethiopian Prime Minister HailleMariam Desalegn.The introduction of the name to giküyüland(Central Kenya)came about either in the late 1700s or early 1800s during the period in Ethiopian history reffered to as Zamana Masafint or" Era of the Prince" when there was protracted conflicts between the many claimants of the seat of the emporor populary known as the king of kings(Nègusa Nagäst)Among the group of royals who escaped the terror of Ras Sehul the powerful Tigrean Warlord were several women with the title Waizero.One of the women,escorted by some men among them Kassa and Tefere reached an area now known as Dagorreti and settled there.The woman was carrying a boy whose name was Mariam which the Agiküyü adopted as Miríí.Though Waizero was a title(Married Woman or the equivalent of Dame in the court titles of Ethiopian Nobility) the Agiküyü were not to know that and they called her Waithera,so,the boy grew up to be known as Miríí wa Waithera and is the originator of the family by the name Mbari ya Mirie.The boy is my anscestor and it is partly the reason why I have a fairer skin color than most kikiyus.
Bragging rights
Able to relate to matters of science while lifting weights.I know a thing or two about the origin of the universe and at my weight of 152lbs(70 Kgs) My PB deadlift is 330lbs(150 Kgs) and I am aiming a bit higher than that.
Places
Map of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has lived
Currently
Nairobi