Home | Community | Message Board


World Seed Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Community >> The Smoke Lounge

Welcome to the Growery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 * 1
    #796940 - 10/15/15 12:37 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

Paper published on KIC 8462852 Flux anomaly


Apparently whatever is orbiting this star blocks over 80% of the visible when it passes in front of it. It's gotten a lot of publicity in the last few days because new outlets are claiming "alien megastructure discovery".

Anyway, feel free to discuss or ask questions...I'd love to discuss any plausible scenarios that could explain thus highly unusual star system.


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDeadkndys420
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/28/12
Posts: 7,824
Loc: █████
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #796948 - 10/15/15 03:00 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

I was listening to coast to coast last night and they were talking about it. Definitely interesting to say the least.

:strokebeard:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleChemical Addiction
Male User Gallery Arcade Champion: El Emigrante, Rotation

Registered: 11/20/14
Posts: 1,204
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #796986 - 10/15/15 10:19 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

you failed to mention your opinion/guess what do you think it might be?


--------------------
Sure. Don't expect me to compensate your wife and five retarded kids after I've drowned your exposed brain in my semen.
    Spider Jerusalem


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleP-O
 Arcade Champion: Simon


Registered: 10/08/11
Posts: 17,561
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #796989 - 10/15/15 11:15 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

:ancientaliens:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #797012 - 10/16/15 08:35 AM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Chemical Addiction said:
you failed to mention your opinion/guess what do you think it might be?



That's because I don't have one.

Whatever is orbiting the star is huge. If we were viewing the sun from the same distance (~1400 light years), and Jupiter passed in front of the sun, the amount of light observed would drop about 1%. This object is blocking 80-90% of the light observed when it passes between us and it's host star.

If the object was solid (like a planet, brown dwarf star, or just a hypothetical chunk of planet-density matter), then the immense gravity of the object would cause the star to wobble around the center of gravity formed by the host star and the object, and this would be easily observed. Since this has not been observed (and the fact that something that massive would be able to generate enough heat to glow, and thus show as a binary star system) suggests that the object has a large surface, but not much mass (relative to a typical celestial body of that size).

The star is classed as a main sequence star, with no infrared signature that typically comes with a proto planetary disc. The system is too old to have significant debris left over from star formation, as that would have been consolidated into planets withing the first billion years or so.

Similarly, a planetary collision also gives off a characteristic infrared signature, which is absent in the data taken before the first observation of light variation. Therefore, the chances of a planetary collision occuring between measurements, without any sort of signs before or after the collision (a cold debris field days after a collision between two planet-sized objects), is highly improbable.

The linked paper supports the theory that a cloud of comets was pulled out of the host star's oort cloud by a gravitational disturbance (a nearby star passing through the local neighborhood). These comets then pulverized each other as they flew into towards the star, and the debris field from this event continues to orbit the host star, periodically blocking the light. Even this theory is shaky at best, as the closet companion star could possibly interact with orbiting bodies, but can't physically interact with the host star, suggesting that the ability of the companion star to physically interact with the system as a whole is minimal.

Finally, at a radius of 1.58 solar radii, and a distance of 1400 light years, the angular diameter of the star is .03 milli arc seconds, which is roughly 1/1000th of the diffraction-limited resolution of any optical telescopes that I know of. This means that we won't be able to simply point the hubble space telescope at the system and find out. :shrug:

I personally don't know what to make of this. I'll be very interested in what shows up when we image the system in more frequency bands (infrared, microwave, radio, xray, etc.) For now, I'd just like to hear other opinions, and discuss possibilities that I may have not considered.

Also this forum is slow as shit, I haven't posted a thread in a while, and was itching to discuss something relevant to my interests with somebody. You'd be surprised how many of my engineering friends and coworkers hate space topics, don't believe in evolution, and will preach to you about how one should not seek truth in the stars when it can be found in The Book....:doublefacepalm:

:pipesmoke:


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleChemical Addiction
Male User Gallery Arcade Champion: El Emigrante, Rotation

Registered: 11/20/14
Posts: 1,204
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #797014 - 10/16/15 09:09 AM (1 year, 1 month ago)

I'd love to engage you in intelligent conversation but I lack the intelligent requirement. I remember in the article it saying aliens should be the very last theory, that being said if it were why would they build something that large? I thought it would be neat if it was some kind of solar screen use to collect energy and send it wirelessly to said civilization. But technology usually gets smaller as it advances, or so I thought.

Edit: I don't remember if they said it was a sphere shape or just a round circle


--------------------
Sure. Don't expect me to compensate your wife and five retarded kids after I've drowned your exposed brain in my semen.
    Spider Jerusalem


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblethoughts
Stranger

Registered: 01/11/15
Posts: 1,231
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #797017 - 10/16/15 09:54 AM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Aliens for sure.

Cool thread, ill definitely be staying tuned.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleP-O
 Arcade Champion: Simon


Registered: 10/08/11
Posts: 17,561
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: thoughts]
    #797019 - 10/16/15 10:25 AM (1 year, 1 month ago)

prob just some weird ass "moons" that cover most the surface, we have trouble picturing


If the universe does have infinite possibilities, then it could be anything i guess :thatsayes:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #797033 - 10/16/15 12:09 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Chemical Addiction said:
I'd love to engage you in intelligent conversation but I lack the intelligent requirement. I remember in the article it saying aliens should be the very last theory, that being said if it were why would they build something that large? I thought it would be neat if it was some kind of solar screen use to collect energy and send it wirelessly to said civilization. But technology usually gets smaller as it advances, or so I thought.





The Dyson sphere is a hollow sphere. This hypothetical megastructure completely surrounds the host star at the radius of the habitable zone (so for our solar system, the Dyson sphere would be 93 million miles in diameter).

The structure itself provides ample living space (a Dyson sphere 10 feet thick would provide enough room to cover the entire surface of the earth with a solid layer of buildings 32,700 miles thick).

The inside surface of the sphere would have access to the entirety of the host star's energy output (for the solar system, a Dyson sphere would have access to enough energy in one hour to meet 3.7 billion times the earth's annual energy consumption in 2012).

As an added bonus, encasing the star in a Dyson sphere would render it invisible in the optical and (more than likely) the xray, UV, microwave, and radio bands....leaving only infrared and gamma as the only bands in which significant evidence of the civilization's presence exists.

I think that's what most people are suggesting when they talk about the "alien megastructures" theory. Something like that would be necessary for a civilization to reach a Kardeshev Type II status, and would be a crucial foundation for the next step, which is to harness the power output of the civilization's host galaxy (a Type III civilization, which would be what you are talking about, collecting solar energy from individual stars, and transferring it to wherever the energy is needed in the galaxy). Either way, there are quite a few motivations for an intelligent civilization to attempt a star-orbiting megastructure like a Dyson sphere.

It's neat to think about, but the complications when considering it's construction are migraine-inducing. A spinning sphere does not have a possible configuration that allows all points on the surface to be in a stable orbit, so significant portions of the structure would be pulled toward the star at all times, and would need to be held in place during construction and then adequately supported once construction is complete.

:thataintright:


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: P-O]
    #797035 - 10/16/15 12:12 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

P-O said:
prob just some weird ass "moons" that cover most the surface, we have trouble picturing


If the universe does have infinite possibilities, then it could be anything i guess :thatsayes:




Including a planet made entirely of diamond (existence confirmed), and a large section of space made entirely of cookie dough (existence confirmation pending).


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleP-O
 Arcade Champion: Simon


Registered: 10/08/11
Posts: 17,561
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #797036 - 10/16/15 02:06 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

entirely of cookie dough (existence confirmation pending).




scotty beam me up! :crazy:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleChemical Addiction
Male User Gallery Arcade Champion: El Emigrante, Rotation

Registered: 11/20/14
Posts: 1,204
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: P-O]
    #797046 - 10/16/15 07:21 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

It's funny you should mention the dyson sphere, I was talking to one of my customers today asking if he had read about this article, I told him about my solar screen idea and he started telling me about the dyson sphere. He didn't remember the name though, however he did remember who came up with the idea(theory?) and I've already forgot the guys name.

He could probably give you the discussion you looking for. I like him because he's really interested in ethnobotanicals, I cant really talk about entheogens with most of my customers or i'd sound like a drug addict. He's got more paperback/ hardback copy's of drug related books than I do in .pdf and I have a bunch.

The problem with talking with him is i'm very bad at articulating my thoughts, finding the right words to describe what i'm thinking. So I always feel like a fucking retard, plus I have a shit memory and i'll start to tell him about something interesting I read and then I don't even remember all the details. He wants to know more and all I can say it where to find the article and to read it himself if hes interested. basically I just outline the subject.


--------------------
Sure. Don't expect me to compensate your wife and five retarded kids after I've drowned your exposed brain in my semen.
    Spider Jerusalem


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleChemical Addiction
Male User Gallery Arcade Champion: El Emigrante, Rotation

Registered: 11/20/14
Posts: 1,204
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #797047 - 10/16/15 07:27 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Also I was  thinking about space all day because of this thread and a question popped into my mind that never occurred to me before. Lets say there's a star 1000 light years away, as I understand it it will take 1000 of our years for the light of the star to be visible to the human eye; to travel to earth.

But what about telescopes? if you look at that planet with just your eyes 1000 years has passed but with the magnifying lens of the telescope I would think you'd be seeing the rays long before they made it to earth. Does that mean If you look at a star with your naked eye and see the plantet 1000 years in the past would the telescope being seeing the same star at a completely different point in time? And I don't mean just the time it takes to look through the telescope, I mean years.


--------------------
Sure. Don't expect me to compensate your wife and five retarded kids after I've drowned your exposed brain in my semen.
    Spider Jerusalem


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleChemical Addiction
Male User Gallery Arcade Champion: El Emigrante, Rotation

Registered: 11/20/14
Posts: 1,204
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #797048 - 10/16/15 07:36 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

and would need to be held in place during construction and then adequately supported once construction is complete.




Once the construction  of the dyson sphere is complete if the star was in the middle of the sphere would it not pull on all sides equally? Although I can imagine it would be very difficult to build even with ample resources, that's extremely large and as you said they would be fighting the gravity of a moving star.


--------------------
Sure. Don't expect me to compensate your wife and five retarded kids after I've drowned your exposed brain in my semen.
    Spider Jerusalem


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #797146 - 10/19/15 06:47 AM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Chemical Addiction said:
Also I was  thinking about space all day because of this thread and a question popped into my mind that never occurred to me before. Lets say there's a star 1000 light years away, as I understand it it will take 1000 of our years for the light of the star to be visible to the human eye; to travel to earth.

But what about telescopes? if you look at that planet with just your eyes 1000 years has passed but with the magnifying lens of the telescope I would think you'd be seeing the rays long before they made it to earth. Does that mean If you look at a star with your naked eye and see the plantet 1000 years in the past would the telescope being seeing the same star at a completely different point in time? And I don't mean just the time it takes to look through the telescope, I mean years.




That's actually a really interesting question, and highlights how odd light and it's interactions are. Sorry for the slow response, I was either working my ass off or baked out of my mind all weekend :dawerp:

In order for a telescope to form an image (whether it uses film plates or a CCD-type detector), the photons from a distant object must travel to the telescope and physically interact with the detection equipment. Because of this, the telescope cannot image any photons that have not yet traveled the full distance from a distant object to the telescope.

The same restriction applies to your eye. The photons must physically interact with the rods and cones in your retina before an image signal can be generated. This is why we all see an image of a distant galaxy or star in roughly the same timeframe, even if we zoom in with a telescope.

Feel free to ask questions like this, I love discussing the universe and it's inner workings :highfive:


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleChemical Addiction
Male User Gallery Arcade Champion: El Emigrante, Rotation

Registered: 11/20/14
Posts: 1,204
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #797147 - 10/19/15 07:47 AM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Anymore that pop into my head while i'm working I will ask about. I like your answers,  will try to spend some time thinking about the question first.  I almost remember a quote having to do with being able to answer your own questions most of the time if you just stop and think about it. I might look it up later, got to get ready atm.


--------------------
Sure. Don't expect me to compensate your wife and five retarded kids after I've drowned your exposed brain in my semen.
    Spider Jerusalem


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Chemical Addiction]
    #797154 - 10/19/15 12:24 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Update: SETI has aquired radio-telescope time and is currently listening for technological noise coming from KIC 8462852. I personally wouldn't bet on them finding anything....but would be happy to be proven wrong. :shrug:

Link to article.


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineThebooedocksaint
Dead Dictator
 User Gallery


Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 5,525
Loc: Wild & Free
Last seen: 17 days, 16 hours
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #797158 - 10/19/15 02:12 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

So for it to be an object blocking such a large amount of the stars light it would have to be of larger radius than the star correct?

This object would have to be opaque to the wavelengths of light blocked.

I feel if it was overly reflective it would intensify the light when it's on the far-side of the star, possibly not (I can't cosmology/astrophysics).




WHAT if the star passed behind "dark matter"?


--------------------
"To say that nothing is true, is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile, and that we must be the shepherds of our own civilization. To say that everything is permitted, is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious or tragic."

"Je pense, donc je suis (I am thinking, therefore I am)." -Rene Descartes

I am tired of Earth
I am tired of these people


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleagmotes165
That Guy
Male


Registered: 08/12/08
Posts: 1,552
Loc: Southeastern U.S.
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: Thebooedocksaint]
    #797165 - 10/19/15 08:01 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Thebooedocksaint said:
So for it to be an object blocking such a large amount of the stars light it would have to be of larger radius than the star correct?

This object would have to be opaque to the wavelengths of light blocked.

I feel if it was overly reflective it would intensify the light when it's on the far-side of the star, possibly not (I can't cosmology/astrophysics).




WHAT if the star passed behind "dark matter"?




While the object is not estimated to be larger than the host star, it is close to the same size (lower bounds of 50% of the star's diameter). If it was larger than the star, then it would either block out all of the host star's visible light output, or it would have to be so far away from the star that it's apparent size would be smaller than the star.

Then again, it could be that the object (or object field) is partially translucent and larger than the host star, and the light that we are seeing is what is making it through the object as the object passes in front of the star. If this were the case, then further observation would reveal a "filtering effect" where only specific bands of visible light (and possibly other Electromagnetic radiation) would show up when the object passes in front of the host star. If that is the case, then it would be very easy for us to determine (at the very least) a partial list of chemical constituents of the mystery object. This technique can be used anyway, unless the object is 100% opaque with a discrete boundary (i.e. not a gradual transition, as would be the case in a dust/gas/debris field).

You are exactly right about the object's reflectivity. If the object is made up of mostly free, non-reactive metals like silver, platinum, rhodium, etc., then the object would reflect 75-90% of all visible light hitting it, and we would see a periodic spike in light output from the host star in between the periodic dips in light output. However, non-reactive metals are fairly rare in the universe (because they are typically of a higher atomic number than iron, and thus require supernova shock wave conditions in order to form). Comets and asteroids are typically made up of ices (water, CO2, methane, etc.), and as counter-intuitive as it sounds, ice is not very reflective.

As an example:

- Polished silver reflects 98% of all light that hits it
- Dry soil reflects 8%
- Asphalt reflects 12%
- Snow reflects 10 to 20%
- Solid water ice reflects 3%

So, the object is more than likely not overly reflective, and this seems to line up well with the data, as the light output of the star is fairly consistent at a maximum value until the periodic dip in light output.


As far as "dark matter" goes, I'm not sure if you're referring to the dark matter that the scientific community uses to account for the lack of mass in the observable universe....or matter that is dark, like it absorbs a lot of light rather than reflecting it.

If you are referring to the former, then I think the answer is nothing. The reason I say that is because all experimental evidence suggests that dark matter is non-clumping (locally speaking, it is a diffuse cloud that is relatively evenly dispersed throughout the galaxy), and does not appear to interact with the electromagnetic field. This would mean that dark matter would not actually block light, or interact with it at all.

Then again, dark matter is a hypothetical idea to explain a gaping hole in our understanding of the universe, and we may think we know a lot more about it than we actually know :shrug:


--------------------
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you” -NDT


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineThebooedocksaint
Dead Dictator
 User Gallery


Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 5,525
Loc: Wild & Free
Last seen: 17 days, 16 hours
Re: Kepler's mystery star...KIC 8462852 [Re: agmotes165]
    #797166 - 10/19/15 08:27 PM (1 year, 1 month ago)

My last line was just being silly.

I want to get into cosmology/astrophysics but they have a lot of pre-reqs that are far beyond my physics minor (General Relativity/E. Fields/Mechanics). Wish it didn't have so many pre-reqs out here, but I'm sure it's for the best if it really requires all that.

Maybe it was the nephilim :lol:?


--------------------
"To say that nothing is true, is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile, and that we must be the shepherds of our own civilization. To say that everything is permitted, is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious or tragic."

"Je pense, donc je suis (I am thinking, therefore I am)." -Rene Descartes

I am tired of Earth
I am tired of these people


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Community >> The Smoke Lounge

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Full of stars
( 1 2 all )
ltd 3,479 29 12/07/08 05:47 PM
by Justice_Fish
* does your ID/drivers license have a gold star on it?
( 1 2 all )
CrushNazT 3,897 24 12/27/13 08:50 PM
by Deadkndys420
* Star Trek: A Love Hate Relationship Jefferson 1,219 11 09/09/10 08:38 PM
by Kilroy
* Star Wars: The Old Republic IS NOW FREE
( 1 2 3 all )
Picklez 4,112 49 04/05/13 11:50 AM
by Picklez
* bitches are objects b0b gnarley 1,394 10 02/19/09 01:24 AM
by Justice_Fish
* I just ate a mystery sweet tart...hehe openmind 1,631 10 08/11/09 07:14 PM
by Zippy
* Who wants 5 stars?
( 1 2 all )
Debute23 2,445 27 02/06/14 04:31 PM
by poor boy
* Star Wars: The Old Republic MMO
( 1 2 3 all )
Picklez 5,085 47 04/21/12 05:06 PM
by Picklez

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: FurrowedBrow, Harry_Ba11sach, Stoneth, Dr. Siekadellyk
2,606 topic views. 2 members, 456 guests and 391 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Vaposhop
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.125 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 16 queries.