Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: GRB's.... back to the blackboard

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Metrowest, Boston
    Posts
    4,787

    Cool GRB's.... back to the blackboard

    Gamma Ray Bursts, amongst the most energetic things we can observe and contemplate, continue to confuse and elude strict classifications. This hinders our understanding of some of the distant universe. Longs look like shorts and vice versa. Pieces of spectral data seem missing when theory seems to require that it be there. The author, Maxim Lyutikov, summarizes the state of affairs in a conference paper....at "The Shocking Universe" conference. see:http://www.merate.mi.astro.it/docM/O...009/index.html

    see:http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...911.0349v1.pdf
    Last edited by trinitree88; 2009-Nov-04 at 11:35 AM. Reason: link typo

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,066
    Quote Originally Posted by trinitree88 View Post
    Gamma Ray Bursts, amonst the most energetic things we can observe and contemplate, continue to confuse and elude strict classifications. This hinders our understanding of some of the distant universe. Longs look like shorts and vice versa. Pieces of spectral data seem missing when theory seems to require that it be there. The author, Maxim Lyutikov, summarizes the state of affairs in a conference paper....at "The Shocking Universe" conference. see:http://www.merate.mi.astro.it/docM/O...009/index.html

    see:http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...911.0349v1.pdf


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    517
    Now, I have not read it yet, just looked over it, but...

    No, your* theory of Galactic neutron stars being impacted by comets is still wrong.

    Maxim is far and away not attacking the basics: GRBs are collimated explosions at cosmological distances, at least some of them are associated with the core collapse of massive stars, and some with galaxies that exhibit no current star formation.

    The problems he points out are details in the models.

    * "your" being any ATMers who now think the baby has officially been tossed out with the bath water...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ocean Shores, Wa
    Posts
    5,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Alexander View Post
    Now, I have not read it yet, just looked over it, but...

    Maxim is far and away not attacking the basics: GRBs are collimated explosions at cosmological distances, at least some of them are associated with the core collapse of massive stars, and some with galaxies that exhibit no current star formation.

    The problems he points out are details in the models.
    Huh? The Title of the paper is 'Going Back to the Blackboard' which is generally what you do when your rocket/theory/pet idea explodes and you have to start over; or as the author puts it:

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyutikov
    I argue that any present day model of GRBs, especially of Short type, is grossly incomplete.
    "grossly incomplete" is NOT the same as saying "we need to work out the details".

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyutikov
    Our lack of understanding of how GRBs work is impeding the progress and applications of GRBs, e.g., to cosmology. One can only hope that GRB theory will not suffer the same destiny as theories of pulsar radio emission: though we do not understand it and basically gave up hopes, pulsars are still very useful probes of interstellar medium and General Relativity. In case of pulsar radio emission, only about one millionth part of energy is emitted as radio waves; this make the problem especially hard. In contrast, in case of GRBs we are dealing with the dominant energy release, of the order of Solar rest mass energy in a matter of seconds. It is frustrating that we have a hard time to understand even the basic elements in such energetic phenomena.
    “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” ― Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ocean Shores, Wa
    Posts
    5,649

    Back to the Drawing Board II.

    http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0911.2328v1

    Quote Originally Posted by Savaglio
    Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are the brightest events in the universe. They have been used in the last five years to study the cosmic chemical evolution, from the local universe to the first stars. The sample size is still relatively small when compared to field galaxy surveys. However, GRBs show a universe that is surprising. At z > 2, the cold interstellar medium in galaxies is chemically evolved, with a mean metallicity of about 1/10 solar. At lower redshift (z < 1), metallicities of the ionized gas are relatively low, on average 1/6 solar. Not only is there no evidence of redshift evolution in the interval 0 < z < 6.3, but also the dispersion in the ~ 30 objects is large. This suggests that the metallicity of host galaxies is not the physical quantity triggering GRB events
    Redshift evolution of metal content is one of the three pillars of the BB. Quasars have already demonstrated high metal content at high redshifts. The number of gamma ray events with chemical information is small, but the first look says we don't have a handle on metal abundance.

    Another trend in gamma rays to keep an eye on, is that the duration appears to increase with cosmic age - the more rescent the burst, the longer the burst. If metallicity cannot be correlated with this apparent signature of aging, what can? Or is something more fundamental amiss?
    “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” ― Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    18,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Huh? The Title of the paper is 'Going Back to the Blackboard' which is generally what you do when your rocket/theory/pet idea explodes and you have to start over ...
    That's "back to the drawing board".
    Is the "back to the blackboard" title merely a problem with translation? "Back to the drawing board" implies a complete redesign; "back to the blackboard" seems to instead imply learning new stuff and doing new calculations. From the text, I find it difficult to tell which the author really means.

    Grant Hutchison

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,455
    Quote Originally Posted by trinitree88 View Post
    Gamma Ray Bursts... continue to confuse and elude strict classifications.
    Well, there's physics, and everything else is stamp collecting.
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Metrowest, Boston
    Posts
    4,787

    Talking yep

    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    Well, there's physics, and everything else is stamp collecting.
    Cougar. Yep. pete

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,455
    Quote Originally Posted by trinitree88 View Post
    Cougar. Yep. pete
    Well, the more I think of that quote, the more I think it's perhaps a bit misguiding, if not a bit elitist. Obviously, there is great value in classifying observations of supernovae and GRBs. Such, in fact, has led to the discovery of the apparent acceleration of the expansion. No small realization there! if, in fact, the current, admittedly incomplete, explanation remains fundamentally accurate as new information flows into computer storage banks at exponential rates.
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,455
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Redshift evolution of metal content is one of the three pillars of the BB.
    I'd say that's a bit of an overstatement. That pillar is based on the abundance of the elements. The base of the pillar doesn't speak to any subsequent evolution of those abundances. Of course, the dynamics of our universe generates heavier elements. The very early history of heavy element production and dispersal is rather in the workshop of science, isn't it, as opposed to the Archives of Contingent Acceptance?

    What was the temperature of the CMB at the epochs we're talking about?
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    506

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by trinitree88 View Post
    Gamma Ray Bursts, amongst the most energetic things we can observe and contemplate, continue to confuse and elude strict classifications. This hinders our understanding of some of the distant universe. Longs look like shorts and vice versa. Pieces of spectral data seem missing when theory seems to require that it be there. The author, Maxim Lyutikov, summarizes the state of affairs in a conference paper....at "The Shocking Universe" conference. see:http://www.merate.mi.astro.it/docM/O...009/index.html

    see:http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...911.0349v1.pdf
    Quite possible GCRs are derivatives of GRBs

Similar Threads

  1. I'm Back....
    By Gamefreak89 in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2011-Jun-28, 02:13 PM
  2. Is using back to back Orion’s the smartest way?
    By samkent in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 2010-Aug-31, 11:48 AM
  3. Three go, one gets back
    By The Saint in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2005-Jul-03, 05:16 PM
  4. Im back, sorry for going away
    By Humphrey in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 2005-Apr-05, 09:48 PM
  5. They're back...
    By ObiWan377 in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2003-Nov-25, 10:46 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
  •