5 ms·

You 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 ago
still it's a good read.
tzs 5y ago
The 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 ago
It actually is mysterious though. Not mentioning the mystery would be click-repellent.
antishatter 5y ago
If clickbait gets people reading science why do we care?
- louissan 5y ago
  Yes 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 ago
  I'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"
  - oneoff786 5y ago
    It took you decades of training to understand that?
    - dekhn 5y ago
      Yes. I'm a slow learner, and basically the entire training system makes it hard to recognize just how juiced biology scientific communications are. There are legitimate subfields, and journals that aren't as bad as Nature. I mean if you want to be a successful scientist you have to practice some level of reality distortion to make progress. I also didn't expect nearly all gene therapy would be stopped for over a decade due to a single patient dying in a trial in 1999: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger That sort of educated me ot the fact that people take some medical risks really seriously (OH GOD EGGS HAVE CHOLESTEROL) and others they completely ignore/downweight (like Flu).
  - richardfey 5y ago
    I am still waiting for de-extinction.
postalrat 5y ago
Because "Celestial object unlike anything astronomers have seen before" might be happening every day.
sgustard 5y ago
The astronomers quoted in the article used the words "spooky", "unexpected" and "peculiar". It's not like the headline writer went completely off the rails.
kk6mrp 5y ago
"Astronomers puzzled by enigma in the sky"
- dylan604 5y ago
  Astronomers puzzled by object wrapped in mystery inside an enigma in the sky
sandebert 5y ago
The astronomers used the word "spooky", so I propose the headline below, for maximum correctness and confusion: Spooky action at a distance
dylan604 5y ago
It's not that they've seen it before, it's that they haven't heard it like this before. It's almost like someone put the star on 33 1/3 instead of the 78rpm it's meant to be played.
richardfey 5y ago
My proposed title: Neutron star (or a white dwarf) spotted emitting massive radio bursts thrice every hour
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  But it is peculiar. Since neutron stars inhibit the momentum from their previous lives, they usual spin extremely fast when they collapse into a far smaller state. Magnetars do spin more slowly because of their magnetic field. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_braking_(astronomy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_braking_(astronomy) They still usually spin much faster than the newly discovered object. Perhaps someone installed a strong magnet in the near vicinity.
  - richardfey 5y ago
    I reused the definition used in the article itself, stripping down the sensationalism to a minimum.

robofanatic 5y ago

still it's a good read.

tzs 5y ago

The 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 ago

It actually is mysterious though. Not mentioning the mystery would be click-repellent.

antishatter 5y ago

If clickbait gets people reading science why do we care?

louissan 5y ago
Yes 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 ago
I'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"
- oneoff786 5y ago
  It took you decades of training to understand that?
  - dekhn 5y ago
    Yes. I'm a slow learner, and basically the entire training system makes it hard to recognize just how juiced biology scientific communications are. There are legitimate subfields, and journals that aren't as bad as Nature. I mean if you want to be a successful scientist you have to practice some level of reality distortion to make progress. I also didn't expect nearly all gene therapy would be stopped for over a decade due to a single patient dying in a trial in 1999: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger That sort of educated me ot the fact that people take some medical risks really seriously (OH GOD EGGS HAVE CHOLESTEROL) and others they completely ignore/downweight (like Flu).
- richardfey 5y ago
  I am still waiting for de-extinction.

postalrat 5y ago

Because "Celestial object unlike anything astronomers have seen before" might be happening every day.

sgustard 5y ago

The astronomers quoted in the article used the words "spooky", "unexpected" and "peculiar". It's not like the headline writer went completely off the rails.

kk6mrp 5y ago

"Astronomers puzzled by enigma in the sky"

dylan604 5y ago
Astronomers puzzled by object wrapped in mystery inside an enigma in the sky

sandebert 5y ago

The astronomers used the word "spooky", so I propose the headline below, for maximum correctness and confusion: Spooky action at a distance

dylan604 5y ago

It's not that they've seen it before, it's that they haven't heard it like this before. It's almost like someone put the star on 33 1/3 instead of the 78rpm it's meant to be played.

richardfey 5y ago

My proposed title: Neutron star (or a white dwarf) spotted emitting massive radio bursts thrice every hour

raxxorrax 5y ago
But it is peculiar. Since neutron stars inhibit the momentum from their previous lives, they usual spin extremely fast when they collapse into a far smaller state. Magnetars do spin more slowly because of their magnetic field. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_braking_(astronomy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_braking_(astronomy) They still usually spin much faster than the newly discovered object. Perhaps someone installed a strong magnet in the near vicinity.
- richardfey 5y ago
  I reused the definition used in the article itself, stripping down the sensationalism to a minimum.