Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 15232425
Results 721 to 738 of 738

Thread: Up to 22% Dips Detected in Starlight 1,500 LY Away

  1. #721
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,115
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    Latest rumor is that there is "color" after all
    From my post on the Reddit:
    Planets as they migrate can collide (a dust ring around an old star was attributed to this a few years ago, and some simulations have this happening in the inner Solar System billions of years from now). So say about a couple centuries ago two planets collided in the KIC 8462852 system. Big cloud of debris formed. Gradually, it starts spreading out. As the dust starts to form a ring, the star begins to dim, while the cloud still orbits in the ring like a diamond on a wedding band. So the star slowly dims, with a dip every orbit, Could this work?
    It can only work if you can find a way round the IR problem.

    What would be the temperature of such debris at this orbital radius and would that IR be detectable? I don't possess the skills to do these calculations but this is how I would either rule it out or put it forward as a viable hypothesis.

  2. 2017-May-23, 04:12 PM

  3. #722
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,272
    Reddit ruled it out.
    You know, if I had proposed this star as a possible future observation back when I was earning my B.S. in Astronomy (CWRU 1980), I would have been expelled from the university.

  4. #723
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    9,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    Reddit ruled it out.
    You know, if I had proposed this star as a possible future observation back when I was earning my B.S. in Astronomy (CWRU 1980), I would have been expelled from the university.
    I doubt you would have been expelled, just shunned and turned into a laughing stock.

    Information about American English usage here and here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting.

    How do things fly? This explains it all.

    Actually they can't: "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." - Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.



  5. #724
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    Reddit ruled it out.
    You know, if I had proposed this star as a possible future observation back when I was earning my B.S. in Astronomy (CWRU 1980), I would have been expelled from the university.
    Why is that? I don't quite understand what the reason would be for being expelled. Illicitly using observations from a satellite that hadn't yet been launched?
    As above, so below

  6. #725
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,272
    I mean that these observations are so bizarre that it would have been like proposing Astrology...the professors would never have believed such a phenomena could exist.

  7. #726
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    3,619
    It's a continuing source of amazement to me (in light of this, and another highly contested thread) how much misunderstanding of science there is on this board.

    CJSF

    Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
    "I found my mind on the ground below. I was looking down, it was looking back.
    I was in the sky, all dressed in black.
    See the constellation ride across the sky. No cigar, no lady on his arm.
    Just a guy made of dots and lines."
    -They Might Be Giants, "See The Constellation"

    lonelybirder.org

  8. #727
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    I mean that these observations are so bizarre that it would have been like proposing Astrology...the professors would never have believed such a phenomena could exist.
    But if the observations existed then I think they probably would have encouraged you and others to try to figure out what was happening. There have always been weird phenomena in astrophysics, and people have always tried to figure out how to explain them. I mean even earlier, when Hubble found the redshift thing, it was weird but people tried to explain what was going on.
    As above, so below

  9. #728
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    9,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    I mean that these observations are so bizarre that it would have been like proposing Astrology...the professors would never have believed such a phenomena could exist.
    Aah... I had thought you were positing expulsion for proposing concentrating on a star that had, as far as anybody knew, absolutely nothing interesting about it. Did it even have a catalogue number?

    Information about American English usage here and here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting.

    How do things fly? This explains it all.

    Actually they can't: "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." - Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.



  10. #729
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,272
    Shouldn't use hyperbole online.
    There was some Palomar survey of the sky which would have picked it up. Prof. Bidelman (sp?) said any star on the plates can be identified by some system, but I don't remember what the system was.

  11. #730
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by CJSF View Post
    It's a continuing source of amazement to me (in light of this, and another highly contested thread) how much misunderstanding of science there is on this board.
    '''Tis better to light a candle than curse the darkness."
    Please, feel free to enlighten us.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  12. #731
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    3,619
    I was referring to Tom's comment that he'd be effectively run out of college for flagging an odd observation - that's not how science happens. Others have already addressed it in this thread. My other reference was to a "complaints" thread and all that nonsense.

    CJSF
    "I found my mind on the ground below. I was looking down, it was looking back.
    I was in the sky, all dressed in black.
    See the constellation ride across the sky. No cigar, no lady on his arm.
    Just a guy made of dots and lines."
    -They Might Be Giants, "See The Constellation"

    lonelybirder.org

  13. #732
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    4,040
    Sorry, I misunderstood your intention.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  14. #733
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    3,619
    Here's a diagram from an arXiv paper showing a potential solution to the light-dips from this system. If you read the associated Twitter thread, you can see there are still serious questions that might not be addressed. The forecast (at the time) secondary eclipse on 2017 May 19 did not happen as expected, but the data is still coming in. We may have a 4 year wait to know more clearly.
    DAjVXoeW0AEYZJn.jpg
    Click image to embiggen.

    Twitter link:
    https://twitter.com/david_kipping/st...77535607640064

    arXiv abstract:
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08427

    CJSF
    Last edited by CJSF; 2017-May-24 at 04:14 PM. Reason: links
    "I found my mind on the ground below. I was looking down, it was looking back.
    I was in the sky, all dressed in black.
    See the constellation ride across the sky. No cigar, no lady on his arm.
    Just a guy made of dots and lines."
    -They Might Be Giants, "See The Constellation"

    lonelybirder.org

  15. #734
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,115
    Quote Originally Posted by CJSF View Post
    Here's a diagram from an arXiv paper showing a potential solution to the light-dips from this system. If you read the associated Twitter thread, you can see there are still serious questions that might not be addressed. The forecast (at the time) secondary eclipse on 2017 May 19 did not happen as expected, but the data is still coming in. We may have a 4 year wait to know more clearly.
    DAjVXoeW0AEYZJn.jpg
    Click image to embiggen.

    Twitter link:
    https://twitter.com/david_kipping/st...77535607640064

    arXiv abstract:
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08427

    CJSF
    But a giant ringed object in such an orbit would need to be several times the diameter of the star itself to produce the amount of dimming measured. I seem to recall it's about five times the diameter (assuming it is spherical)

  16. #735
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    3,619
    Yes, they are proposing an extremely wide ring system.

    CJSF

    Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
    "I found my mind on the ground below. I was looking down, it was looking back.
    I was in the sky, all dressed in black.
    See the constellation ride across the sky. No cigar, no lady on his arm.
    Just a guy made of dots and lines."
    -They Might Be Giants, "See The Constellation"

    lonelybirder.org

  17. #736
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec View Post
    Shouldn't use hyperbole online.
    There was some Palomar survey of the sky which would have picked it up. Prof. Bidelman (sp?) said any star on the plates can be identified by some system, but I don't remember what the system was.
    The only Palomar surveys I'm aware of are the ones done in the fifties to seventies, which were basically static star surveys, so essentially to make catalogs of star types. They wouldn't have picked up variability. For one thing, Tabby's star was only picked up recently (it was not known as a variable star before recently), and it was only picked up (I think) because of the combination of technology (space-based satellites) and crowd-sourcing (using the Internet). If the star had been known to have such variability (for example, due to a coincidental finding), I assume the response in 1985 would have been the same as it is now. I mean, in 1967, when the first pulsar was found, the authors thought that it might be ETI, and eventually it turned out to have a natural explanation but nobody was expelled for making such a discovery.
    As above, so below

  18. #737
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,085
    I'm still kind of partial to the idea that this is some intrinsic dimming because of the paper on "avalanche statistics" and the fact that it seems to be a "pseudocycle" rather than a pure cycle. The idea that it ate a big planet and is now cooling off after the feast seems attractive and could (I think) lead to periodic dimmings of different magnitudes, in the same way that earthquakes are often accompanied by foreshocks and aftershocks that are of varying magnitudes.
    As above, so below

  19. #738
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    I mean, in 1967, when the first pulsar was found, the authors thought that it might be ETI, and eventually it turned out to have a natural explanation but nobody was expelled for making such a discovery.
    Well, they entertained the thought, but didn't try to explain it as ETI.

    "We did not really believe that we had picked up signals from another civilization, but obviously the idea had crossed our minds and we had no proof that it was an entirely natural radio emission. " - Jocelyn Bell Burnell

    Edited to add:

    More from Jocelyn:

    "In the paper to NATURE we mentioned that at one stage we had thought the signals might be from another civilization. When the paper was published the press descended, and when they discovered a woman was involved they descended even faster. I had my photograph taken standing on a bank, sitting on a bank, standing on a bank examining bogus records, sitting on a bank examining bogus records: one of them even had me running down the bank waving my arms in the air - Look happy dear, you've just made a Discovery! (Archimedes doesn't know what he missed!) Meanwhile the journalists were asking relevant questions like was I taller than or not quite as tall as Princess Margaret (we have quaint units of measurement in Britain) and how many boyfriends did I have at a time? "
    Last edited by Amber Robot; Yesterday at 05:53 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •