7 ms·
Mysterious object unlike anything astronomers have seen before
- belter 5y agohttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04272-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04272-x
- ianai 5y agoIt radiates a signal around every 18 minutes. It sounds like a pulsar. How is it unlike “Mysterious object unlike anything astronomers have seen before”? This being the current title.
- adrianN 5y agoIt says in the article that pulses from pulsars are usually much shorter than what is detected from this object.
- MauranKilom 5y ago> pulses from pulsars are usually much shorter ...and more frequent.
- okokwhatever 5y agoThen it's a slow pulsar LOL Sorry, I had to make it :)
- delcaran 5y agoArticle says it's a theoretically possible object described as "slow magnetar".
- okokwhatever 5y agoDon't be so serious my friend, it was an easy joke, i know :)
- ianai 5y agoIs that really that mysterious? Just seems they went out of their way for clickbaity title.
- dekhn 5y agoThat's correct. The original paper doesn't call it mysterious, just "unusual". Science PR people are under a lot of stress to get pageviews.
- rbanffy 5y agoThe original description was most likely “hmmm… that’s funny”.
- Vetch 5y agoThe mysterious (unpredicted/as yet unexplained) aspect is the precise physics of its emission properties. It's a refinement of known physics sure, but that doesn't make it less interesting. Not unlike how finally completing a full physics accounting for how bicycles remain upright would be fascinating even if positively pedestrian.
- valyagolev 5y agoto continue our idle lazy speculation game “explain the title without really reading”, perhaps it’s just doppler effect…
- MauranKilom 5y agoDoppler effect would reduce both the emission interval as well as the radio frequency. Not to mention that an object (which is comparatively close to us, i.e. not just red-shifted due to distance) would have to move at very close to the speed of light to be red-shifted that much. Now that would be unlike anything we've seen before...
- pizza234 5y agoGist of the article: > Dr Hurley-Walker said the observations match a predicted astrophysical object called an ‘ultra-long period magnetar’. > “It’s a type of slowly spinning neutron star that has been predicted to exist theoretically,” she said. > “But nobody expected to directly detect one like this because we didn’t expect them to be so bright. > “Somehow it’s converting magnetic energy to radio waves much more effectively than anything we’ve seen before.”
- Trombone12 5y agoThe abstract of the article suggests it is a magnetar, which depending on your mood could be counted as a type of pulsar, though it's probably more sensible to label both as types of neutron stars. > By measuring the dispersion of the radio pulses with respect to frequency, we have localized the source to within our own Galaxy and suggest that it could be an ultra-long-period magnetar.
- dekhn 5y agobut... magnetars aren't mysterious or unlike anything astronomers have seen. The most the press release says is that it's brighter or closer than previous ones.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThe article is quite clear that this one exhibits characteristics predicted, but not previously observed, and with some surprises. > But Dr Anderson said finding something that turned on for a minute was really weird. > Dr Hurley-Walker said the observations match a predicted astrophysical object called an ‘ultra-long period magnetar’. > “But nobody expected to directly detect one like this because we didn’t expect them to be so bright. “Somehow it’s converting magnetic energy to radio waves much more effectively than anything we’ve seen before.”
- dekhn 5y agothis is not what astronomers or physicists think is mysterious. Just unexpected, and within the bounds of normal physical science. Everybody who is complaining that the PR about the paper is clickbait is right. The PR is just clickbait. The paper is not.
- idiotsecant 5y agoIf I saw a bright pink duck I would wonder how that duck came to be. If someone called it's origins mysterious I wouldn't write a string of angry HN posts about it, I don't think.
- joshuahedlund 5y agoBecause the level of "unlike"-ness exists on a spectrum, so the headline can be technically correct while implying a position on the spectrum much farther than it actually is.
- colordrops 5y agoReading the article would dispel your confusion.
- BatteryMountain 5y agoInterstellar light house?
- rbanffy 5y agoWe can already use pulsars for that, but this one being so unique would be very convenient. OTOH, you won’t be able to make multiple observations in a short period.
- blakesterz 5y agoIs this the kind of thing they'll be able to point the James Webb Telescope at and say "Aha, here's what this thing is!" ? I don't know enough about the James Webb Telescope or astronomy to know what it's going to be looking at, but I know it was something about light spectrum or something.
- nsilvestri 5y agoNo, this is a radio source and JWST is primarily an infrared observatory.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThat we've detected a radio source doesn't mean there's not something there in infrared as well, though.
- eternalban 5y agoNo that's the entire point of calling it a 'magnetar'. These things convert the magnetic field into radio waves. That's the only thing that is being emitted and 'observable'. This specific specimen matches a theoretical variant that has an ultra long cycle.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThat doesn't mean there's nothing to see. Here's a magnetar imaged with infrared via the Spitzer telescope: https://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/image/ssc2008-08a-ghostly-ring-around-a-magnetar https://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/image/ssc2008-08a-ghostly-ri...
- dekhn 5y agofrom your link: "The magnetar itself is not visible in this image, as it has not been detected at infrared wavelengths (it has been seen in X-ray light)." so what they are imaging is indirect effects of the magnetar, not the magnetar itself.
- kseistrup 5y agoYou know it's clickbait when you see the word "mysterious" in a headline. Why not simply write "Celestial object unlike anything astronomers have seen before."
- robofanatic 5y agostill it's a good read.
- tzs 5y agoThe original is better than your proposed rewrite. "Mysterious" does convey useful information. Something can be new but not mysterious. "Celestial", on the other hand, conveys almost no useful information because generally every object astronomers look at is celestial.
- throwhauser 5y agoIt actually is mysterious though. Not mentioning the mystery would be click-repellent.
- antishatter 5y agoIf clickbait gets people reading science why do we care?
- louissan 5y agoYes the World needs more clickbait that takes to actual learning resources, not people-ish articles, property porn and other horrors. "Is this is the best XXX algorithm in the world?" "I have tried XXX low-level programming language and it's amazing!" "We went to the Science Museum and met XXX" "Top tips to enjoy working late at night on subject XXX and YYY" "Why STEM studies makes you look more sexy than XXX" "15 ways to look good while loving maths & physics" "You won't believe why the Riemann hypothesis was right!" "The 6 thing to do when banish Economics teacher fatigue" "Can't focus on XXX? Try this, it works!" etc, etc, etc.
- dekhn 5y agoI'll tell you why. I read clickbait about molecular biology when I was a teenager (quite some time ago) and ended up thinking that biology was far more advanced than it really is. it took me decades of training to understand that publicly, scientists are more optimistic and likely to overstate the quality and applicability to their results. It would have helped me a lot if the original articles about gene therapy had said "this is a very risky technology and it's likely it will never be approved because people are terrified of side effects"
- mmettler 5y agoIs it sending primes?
- w-m 5y agoAt the rate of 1 bit in 18 minutes (assuming to just coding the signal as off/on every period), that's 34.2 years to transmit 1 MB. Without error correction. If its aliens, they're not in a particular rush to transmit the latest weather data.
- dylan604 5y agoBut see, you're not thinking as a Vegan. They'd be using higher harmonics to encode much more data than just the one bit. I thought we had all learned this by now! Back to remedial sci-fi for all of you!
- akomtu 5y agoThe period - 1080 seconds - is interesting by itself. If I were an alien and wanted to broadcast some important number, an ultra stable magnetar would be my top choice.
- bencollier49 5y agoOh, not another one!
- ck2 5y agoIf a civilization was exponentially more advanced yet still didn't have FTL travel (or FTL communication) might they harness such a galaxy-level radio signal as a beacon? All you'd have to do at that point is figure out how to make it blink in a pattern by intermittently blocking it Might take centuries for others to receive but it could be a historical record.
- dylan604 5y agoMore realistically, wouldn't they be better used as locating beacons? Find the magnetar with a frequency of 18mins18s, then turn left and go just a few light years until you reach Sagitarius A*. you can't miss it!
- omnicognate 5y agoHN discussion on this is entirely about aliens, clickbait and pink ducks (for some reason). Come on people. Given this thing is only 4000 light years I way I'd like to know if there's any chance of it causing some kind of apocalypse at some point. I guess if it's a magnetar the gamma-ray-burst-producing event in its life is already past?
- varelse 5y agoAnything beyond ~50 light years is out of range.
- TheOtherHobbes 5y agoPotentially a direct hit from a GRB few kiloparsecs away would cause issues, but for extinction level events the GRB needs to be a lot closer. This doesn't seem to be a GRB. It's more likely to be a magnetar, and at this distance there's nothing at all to worry about.
- varelse 5y agoThe concept of anything a light year away or more being able to wipe out life on Earth is pretty mind-boggling to me. I wish we focused more on things that were mind-boggling rather than mind killing. But that's just not how this culture is playing out.
- vanusa 5y agoAnd yet, with a clickbait title we've seen 10,000 times before
- mabbo 5y ago> The object was discovered by Curtin University Honours student Tyrone O’Doherty using the Murchison Widefield Array (MWA) telescope in outback Western Australia and a new technique he developed. > “It’s exciting that the source I identified last year has turned out to be such a peculiar object,” said Mr O’Doherty, who is now studying for a PhD at Curtin. That must be exciting, to make a cool discovery like this during your undergrad.
- albert_e 5y agosounds like the opening of the movie DONT LOOK UP!
- mmacvicarprett 5y agoIt is just an alien intergalactic VOR
- splittingTimes 5y agoPer Wikipedia: "The Earth and most of the planets in the Solar System, as well as the Sun and other stars, all generate magnetic fields through the motion of electrically conducting fluids." So how does a Neutron star generate these intense and even twisted magnetic fields? What irritates me: 1. During NS formation the electrons are pressed into the protons, creating neutrons. So there is no electric charges left. 2. A NS is so dense, that the neutrons form a closest packing of equal sphereres. There is no room for movement of any kind of "layers" inside a NS. === https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field
- 0xdeadb00f 5y ago> A team mapping radio waves in the Universe has discovered something unusual that releases a giant burst of energy three times an hour First line of the article. Is it really that constant? Every 3hrs? If so could this possibly be a sign of intelligent life? I mean most likely not, I'm not getting my hopes up. A while back I read on here a commenter saying that if they were to try and see if there's intelligent life out there, they'd release a signal periodically at fixed intervals - try to make it as "regular" as possible - so that intelligent beings would hopefully notice the pattern.