Slashdot Mirror


Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula

Stranger4U writes "Researchers at New Mexico Tech and the NRAO have used the Aricebo radio telescope in Puerto Rico and some specilized equipment to more closely examine the pulses from the Crab Nebula pulsar. Some of the signals lasted less than two nanoseconds, meaning the originated from a volume no bigger than beach ball. Stories are here(1) and here(2)."

123 comments

  1. So that's where my beach ball went... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I was playing with my beach ball, and all of a sudden it was gone. I should've known that crab on the beach was the one that took it. Now where the hell is his nebula?

    1. Re:So that's where my beach ball went... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was playing with my beach ball, and all of a sudden it was gone. I should've known that crab on the beach was the one that took it. Now where the hell is his nebula?

      <flashback type="bad">
      Well, I was playing with my beach ball, and, like, all of a sudden, my beach ball crashed, so I, like, had to get another one, but it wasn't as good. So I bought a Mac.
      </flashback>

    2. Re:So that's where my beach ball went... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it was that same beach vacation where you got those nebulous crabs. VDs can cause selective amnesia, y'know...

    3. Re:So that's where my beach ball went... by gearheadsmp · · Score: 1

      Gee, I thought the Real Thief was Leonard "J." Crabs

    4. Re:So that's where my beach ball went... by Peterus7 · · Score: 1

      You know, this could all be some weird time dialation that makes it seem a lot quicker than it is...

    5. Re:So that's where my beach ball went... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what about a really huge beach ball? like one of those 72 inch ones?

  2. Sputnik? by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 2, Funny

    little sputniks?

    --
    This space available.
  3. is that really true??? by SegaVegas · · Score: 0, Insightful

    there's a lack of information to back this story up

    1. Re:is that really true??? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      A lack of substantiating imformation in a non-technical article is hardly surprising. However, I don't see anything too questionable in the articles. If you don't doubt that they managed to detect 2ns pules, then it is reasonable to suggest that it originated from within a very small volume.

      Though, I now wonder why they would say that it originated from an area 2 feet in diameter. An area two feet in radius makes more sense to me.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    2. Re:is that really true??? by Stranger4U · · Score: 1

      I would have added the Nature link to the article, but the registration process is invasive and a pain.

  4. Actually.... by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    The article clearly states:

    Although it is premature to discount all other possibilities, Kern told UPI, "for now it looks as though the mechanism we propose is probably correct."

    "The interpretation here looks appealing," he told UPI, "although further predictions and tests will have to be made for it to carry the day."


    It article seems a bit more reserved than the editor posting it. An interesting read tho.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    1. Re:Actually.... by Metallic+Matty · · Score: 1

      It article seems a bit more reserved than the editor posting it. An interesting read tho.

      So, you you're saying that it isn't beachballs in space?

    2. Re:Actually.... by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, you you're saying that it isn't beachballs in space?

      Actually THEY are saying that is SEEMS TO BE beachballs in space. But they need more evidence. And need to test it more. But it looks like beachballs in space. But they can't rule out other stuff yet.

      That is very different than "it IS beachballs in space". Its a matter of degrees of confidence.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    3. Re:Actually.... by Metallic+Matty · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is very different than "it IS beachballs in space". Its a matter of degrees of confidence.

      Only on /. would you find two individuals arguing the degree of confidence in the belief of beachballs in space.

    4. Re:Actually.... by eglamkowski · · Score: 1

      Obviously they aren't beachballs, they are SpaceBalls!

      --
      Government IS the problem.
  5. for those who's never seen it... by rexguo · · Score: 5, Informative

    here's a pic of the Crab nebula: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap991122.html

    --
    www.rexguo.com - Technologist + Designer
  6. Coolness Matters! ! by FFtrDale · · Score: 5, Insightful
    In Story (1), Romani says,
    "but if the 'coolness' of seeing ultra-bright beachball-sized plasma clouds thousands of light years away captures some young person's imagination and encourages them in technical pursuits, that's a good day's work."
    How many of us spent years studying difficult topics in technical fields and learned how to do things because of the "coolness" of some things that we saw as children? I'm guessing that there are a lot of us for whom that was a big motivation for sticking with it when things got hard.

    --
    Think, write, think, edit, think...then post.
    1. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      How many of us spent years studying difficult topics in technical fields and learned how to do things because of the "coolness" of some things that we saw as children? I'm guessing that there are a lot of us for whom that was a big motivation for sticking with it when things got hard.

      with all due respect, pulsars (and more) are pretty damn cool as they are. I am not sure how them being the size of a beachball raises their 'cool' level. I agree that 'cool' helps, and get people to go forward at times, but the size just doesn't push it from "almost cool" to "cool enough" for me. I dunno.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    2. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by idlethought · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Perhaps it's the implication that there's still cool stuff to discover, rather than the idea that all the stuff worth discovering has is already available found. I was born after the moon landing. Although I know that it was more important than the Columbia's first space flight, it was seeing the space shuttle land for the first time that made me really feel that space flight was cool. Well, that and Star Wars.

    3. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by BWJones · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How many of us spent years studying difficult topics in technical fields and learned how to do things because of the "coolness" of some things that we saw as children? I'm guessing that there are a lot of us for whom that was a big motivation for sticking with it when things got hard.

      Shoot, I found "cool" things as an adult when I decided that human vision was pretty damn facsinating. Integrating computer technology into the study of retinal vision is also compelling allowing us to discover what is going wrong in retinas of disorders that cause blindness. The "coolest" outcome would be finding a prevention for blinding diseases or even figuring out how to "cure" blindness or enhance existing vision.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    4. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by On+Lawn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Its a tough call. I was very interested in sports as a child, as well as the outdoors computers and cars. Nowadays sports has kind of dropped off the map. Astronomy, creative writing, physics and mechanical engineering have climbed. I've gone back and read Watership Down, and other books that were assigned to me in High School and now I love them.

      In school, they couldn't get me to touch a bunch of these subjects but for some reason now that I'm an adult I find them much more fascinating. I'm going back and re-learning calculus for some fluid dynamics equations I used to know, and pounding out my old dynamics problems for kicks.

      I guess what I'm saying is that I didn't stick with them when things went hard, but I rekindled a interest in them when I got older. Me and school never really mixed very well.

      --------------
      OnRoad: JunkYard Wars meets SCCA racing.

    5. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but when I watched the picture go from subatomic to universal while listening to Philip Morris' whispery voice describe the science at each power of 10 change in scale, I recall that it was me who said "this is cool", not him.

      And Nova used to rule. Now it's a cross between Popular Science, Rush Limbaugh, and biotech-company commercials.

    6. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by error0x100 · · Score: 1

      One famous example of this, although not sure if its true, is Albert Einstein, who was apparently fascinated as a child by the 'invisible force' that moved the needle of a compass given to him by his grandfather.

    7. Re:Coolness Matters! ! by sjames · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In school, they couldn't get me to touch a bunch of these subjects but for some reason now that I'm an adult I find them much more fascinating.

      That's just because modern 'education' has a way of taking anything fascinating and dissecting it into a small pile of dessicated lifeless chunks. While a few teachers here and there manage not to do this, it's all on their own, and they have to swim upstream in order to do it.

      It's mostly a question of getting enough of the excellent teachers early enough to avoid being turned off on the subject. Otherwise, it takes years to get over it enough to approach the subject again on it's own merits.

      I'm convinced that if the authors of great literature were resurrected and forced to sit through an average high school lit class studying their own works, they wouldn't even recognize them.

  7. Not Aricebo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's Arecibo... Look at you Seti@Home account.

    1. Re:Not Aricebo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be new here if you are bothering to correct spelling.

    2. Re:Not Aricebo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be new here if you are bothering to correct spelling.

      YOU must be new here. :) You should know we have plenty of idiots that correct spelling. I just prefer they post as NOT AC so i can FOE them as lamers. Its always nice to thin the herd.

    3. Re:Not Aricebo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but let us all rejoice in laughing at a message that corrects spelling that has a grammar error in it.

      Look again at you message, corncob.

    4. Re:Not Aricebo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      God, you must *love* to FOE people!

      Can you keep a job?

      Somehow I find the idea of working in your vicinity most unpleasant.

  8. Re:Ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    slashdot has never, ever trashed Microsoft.

    You must be new here.

  9. More URLs On This Story From Sci-Fi Today by cybrpnk2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    We ran this story with lots of extra URLs earlier this morning here. Get Sci-Fi Today headlines on your Slashdot page by clicking here .

  10. I thought... by Wes+Janson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That something so small and so massive would have gone ahead and collapsed into a black hole. Were there multiple beachballs per supernova?

    1. Re:I thought... by drudd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, but not in the way you're thinking...

      The beachballs aren't the neutron stars, which are somewhere around 20 km in radius. So they weren't a direct result of supernova collapse.

      The beachballs they are observing are the regions of plasma near the magnetic poles of the neutron star which are causing the large bursts of radio waves.

      Doug

      --
      Venn ist das nurnstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ya! Beigerhund das oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
  11. Good pic for those who's already seen it... by FFtrDale · · Score: 1
    I've seen pictures of it since I was a child, but your reference is better. I like the concise explanation of the colors in the photo, too. Masses, speeds and ongoing processes - Thanks!

    --
    Think, write, think, edit, think...then post.
    1. Re:Good pic for those who's already seen it... by bluxus · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      That is nice! I've seen it and often wondered; Is it sculpture, or the real thing? I mean, you can see what looks like the end of a tube used in one of those super fun home enema kits, but gosh, the preassure involved must be terrible. Something about the inverted nature of the rectal opening seems fake looking. I think it would make an excellent sculpture, maybe something for the corporate world, like right outside of a conglomerate's headquarters building or the like. Maybe at 4-5 times the scale. What do you think?

  12. curious by Vej · · Score: 0

    Is there any information on how many of these sources there might be in the nebula?

  13. Re: Already Cool by FFtrDale · · Score: 1
    No argument from me. I'm glad that the story put pulsars back in the news this week. UPI gets a lot of readers.

    --
    Think, write, think, edit, think...then post.
  14. Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula by DJPenguin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula - this has to be the most nonsensical headline I've EVER read!

    1. Re:Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula by Vej · · Score: 0

      Haha, not as much as the nonsensicalness of naming a cloud a "Crab Nebula"...they seem to fit together.

      All cosmic greatness boils down to a sand crab farting out beachballs.

    2. Re:Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula by bluxus · · Score: 1

      Maybe "Tossing Beachballs in the Crab Nebula" would have been better? Conjures images of jetpacking off to space for holiday. Then getting torn apart by some mean ass forces and stuff.

    3. Re:Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula by G4M8I7 · · Score: 0

      Are space beachballs related in any way to Space Balls?? -- I'm a Mog. Half man, half dog. I'm my own best friend!

    4. Re:Resolving Beachballs in the Crab Nebula by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps it should have read 'revolving', since that more accurately describes what is going on.

      Except for the beachball part.

      Actually you are right: it IS the most non-sensical headline ever.

  15. But Do They Have A Women's Beach Volleyball Team? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Wearing thong bikinis. That's all we really care about.

  16. Google News by mickcim · · Score: 1

    Very interesting that the first link in Google's Sci/Tech headline for this story was to the slashdot post. They referenced other sources too but /. was the main headline link.

    1. Re:Google News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same thing happened with the space shuttle article a few below this. I click on the google news link and was like, "What the hell... I thought I was... Did google... oh... odd."

  17. Reverse-slashdotted! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When a /. story shows up on google it means lots of people have blogged it right?

  18. coming soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dead Or Alive Extreme Space Beachball.

    Where more than the beachballs jiggle.

  19. Suffering Succotash! by nlh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did anyone else notice the sheet number of alliterations the author of the first article used? I think someone wishes he weren't a science reporter....

    Astronomers have tracked the long-sought source of brilliant beams that bounce across galaxies from super-dense spinning star...

    ...helps illuminate one of the most exotic environments ever perceived...

    ...a pulsar spews sprays of radio waves...

    ...A supernova marks the farewell flicker...

    ...expelling a great belch that spits the stellar shell into space...


    etc...

    1. Re:Suffering Succotash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you missed the last one:

      spits, stellar shell, space...

    2. Re:Suffering Succotash! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Did anyone else notice the sheet number of alliterations the author of the first article used?......"expelling a great belch that spits the stellar shell into space..."

      The author probably has a PhD in astrophysics, but the suits pressured him to "spice it up". You know, the same kind of managers who won't declare your app "done" until you add pretty icons.

  20. Kinda presumptuous physics by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Some of the signals lasted less than two nanoseconds, meaning the originated from a volume no bigger than beach ball. That is very presumptuous. There are ways to get around that. It would be possible for larger object to produce pulses much shorter than the time it would take light to travel the distance of its diameter. When a shockwave starts well below the surface of a sphere, and propagates uniformly along a fairly crisp expanding sphere, it could cause the surface to flare up briefly wherever it hits, and the radius of the affected area would expand faster than the speed of light because of the geometry of it. Something like that, only happening in a neutron star, could explain those kinds of pulses without the requirement that they occur in such a small volume.

    1. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not nearly as easy as you think for an object to consistently produce symmetric, coherent pulses.

    2. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by zer0vector · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have to understand they are assuming already that this object is a pulsar, which means the pulses are very likely powered by a rapidly spinning neutron star. The energy is emitted constantly but is tightly beamed, so the rotation of the object causes the pulsing. For an object to pulse that fast and to not be spinning faster than the speed of light, the size must be less than the beachball.

      --

      ----
      Striving to put right what once went wrong, and hoping each time that his next leap, will be the leap ho
    3. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It wouldn't create a two nanosecond pulse. You would see a ring who would star at the center of the star and would move outward. If you have a star with a radius of .03 seconds(like a neutron star) you would get a pulse of .03 seconds out of it

    4. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 1

      Exactly. They shouldn't just assume thaty it's a pulsar and the time between pulses is how long it takes to rotate. There are plenty of other possible explanations, such as rapid changes of the direction of the jet relative to the rotational axis caused by small scale magnetic effects.

    5. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by zer0vector · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think you might have to look to Occam's Razor on this one. Getting a spinning neutron star isn't very "hard". A asymmetric collapse of a white dwarf does just fine. As well there are mounds of experimental evidence to support a spinning neutron stars. Other interpretations are much more "difficult" to produce, and require vast amounts of energy and extremely strict circumstances for them to occur.

      --

      ----
      Striving to put right what once went wrong, and hoping each time that his next leap, will be the leap ho
    6. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by jacquesm · · Score: 1
      this seems to be the most enlightened thread in here, so I guess this is the best place to ask this:


      Is there any chance that losses 'left' us with nohting but the very brief pulses to look at ?


      If you compare that to any other wave analogy, you could say that a wave has 'tops', and the smaller the slice of the tops the shorter the 'pulse' would seem, but it doesn't say anything about the size of the wave underneath it (but the PERIOD does!).

    7. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by ca1v1n · · Score: 2, Informative

      Waves have characteristic "shapes" in both frequency and time domains depending on what created them. A pulse of waves would itself be a wave, and if the output from a pulsar is not a simple sinusoidal wave, it's probably some other form from which a distinct start and end can be determined. There are some forms that come to mind that do not lend themselves to a meaningful determination of start and finish, like exponentials, but those would have infinite energy output anyway, so they're not too likely. The computer simulations they did support these results, and we all know that simulations are always right. So either they've found something new and interesting, or they've found something not so new and interesting that will require them to refine their model of how pulsars work anyway. Either way, something interesting has been learned.

    8. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by Univac_1004 · · Score: 2, Informative

      its a few nanosecs between pulses, so that is the period. Your comment ignores that.

    9. Re:Kinda presumptuous physics by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I have to agree that other sources of the pulses should be ruled out, it just seems likely to my lay mind that something that dense, and spinning that rapidly would very likely be very homogenous. This would decrese the probability that the emissions come from that small of a area of the total surface.

      The other thing that seems hockey is these are pulses in the range of 0.5 -1 GHz, what kind of carrier freq are they looking at? I don't think anybody should get to excited untill ther's indendent confirmation use different equipment.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  21. A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Ardias · · Score: 5, Informative

    These are not separate beachball sized objects within the Crab Nebula. The pulses come from a beachball sized area on the pulsar within the Crab Nebula.

    The magnetic field of the neutron star is so strong that it sends out radiation. The points of origin for the radiation are at the north and south magnetic poles of the neutron star. Since the neutron star rotates so fast, the radiation looks like a pulse to us. The surface locations that create those beams of radiation are small, only the size of a beach ball. And the radiation is so strong that it ionizes the atoms on the surface or just above the surface, making a little plasma cloud above the neutron star's magnetic poles.

    Light travels across 12 inches in one nanosecond. (Side note: When radio astronomy technicians install optic cables, they have to measure the cables in nanosecond-light-lengths.) Since the subpulses are measured in nanoseconds, that means the beaming region on the pulsar is about that wide. A neutron star is 12 to 20km wide, and astronomers once thought the beaming region was as much as 10% of the surface area. Now, they are surprised to discover it is much smaller.

    So, the question now is: what confines the neutron star's very powerful magnetic field to such a small region?

    1. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      12 inches ~= 11.47 inches.

    2. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by zulux · · Score: 1

      Light travels across 12 inches in one nanosecond.

      Excelent!

      I knew imperial measurements wern't arbertary at all!

      A imperial foot is whole light-nanosenced long, in addition to also being the length of my penis!

      Take that, all you Metric poofs!

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    3. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A neutron star spins very quickly and i asume that the material which produces the radiowaves is falling in very quickly to(maybe not even needed with the big gravity field) so you can make the radiation source larger

    4. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by nizo · · Score: 1
      Light travels across 12 inches in one nanosecond.
      Excelent!
      I knew imperial measurements wern't arbertary at all!

      Except you forget that light travels exactly one meter in (newly invented, by me) one metric second. It sure is a good thing that seconds aren't arbitrary eh? ;-)

    5. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by g4dget · · Score: 2, Informative
      Since the subpulses are measured in nanoseconds, that means the beaming region on the pulsar is about that wide.

      Even assuming this very simple geometry and mechanism, it only means that they are 60 cm deep in the direction you are looking at them. Perpendicular to the optical axis, they can be much larger.

    6. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Something doesn't add up here.

      Draw a right triangle.
      .|\
      a| \ c
      .+--+
      b
      let c = b + delta

      let b = 5.67e19 meters (6,000 LY = dist to the nebula)
      let delta = 0.3 meters (1 light nanosecond)

      take a^2 = c^2 - b^2 = (b+delta)^2 - b^2
      so a^2 = 2 * b * delta + delta^2

      ignoring delta^2, we get a^2 = 2 * b * delta

      a = 5.8e9 meters (about 19.5 light seconds)

      I'll let you draw your own conclusions, but I think these astronomers are on crack.
    7. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Dragon's Egg" type alien life! It's a giant neutron star communication dish :)

    8. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? The imperial foot is obviously modeled after the length of your penis! It has nothing to do with a light's nanosecond travel distance.

    9. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes... or smaller :-)

      Actually these "spots" are not on the surface, but somewhere in mid-space above the magnetic pole. We know about synchroton radiation that it is very non-thermal, both in spectrum and in directionality. There simply is no way to infer lateral structure from this observation of line-of-sight structure.

      ...and I still feel that this is a bit like trying to infer the size of one of those party "mirror balls" from the size of single lamp reflection off it --- what you get doesn't tell you too much about the ball as a whole or even about a single mirror facet. Sure it tells you something, but what it is, is not intuitive.

    10. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

      I hate to burst your bubble (being from the US, feet and inches still seem "normal" to me too), but it's actually the meter that is based on the speed of light. A light nanosecond is really only around 98% of a foot.

    11. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Wes+Janson · · Score: 1

      Being the only other human being alive who read that book...I must say that's an awfully bad reference ;)

    12. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by zulux · · Score: 1

      I hate to burst your bubble (being from the US, feet and inches still seem "normal" to me too), but it's actually the meter that is based on the speed of light. A light nanosecond is really only around 98% of a foot.

      Actually - the Meter is arbatrary now.

      The reason? The definition of a second has changed in the last 75 years.

      A second use to be a slice of an earth day - but unfortunatly earth days are not quite stable.

      So the definition of a seond was changed to a specifc number of atomic vibrations at particular set of circumstances.

      Unfortunatly changing the defintion of the second, changed the definition of the Meter. Faced with changing the lenth of the Meter or keeping it at it's historical length, they chose to keep the Meter's length at it's historical length.

      Aside: Russians use a diferent Meter than the rest of the world. It made for interesting timess when connecting the Russian ISS modules to the European/American Modules.

      Anyways: I like imperial measurments for 'civilian' uses: cooking, wood-working, car speed and hiking - but only a fool would do scientific calcualtions in imperial measure: the mind boggels.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    13. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Cyberia125 · · Score: 1

      Where did you learn math?

      let c = b + delta

      Where did this come from? Just suddenly make up an extension to euclidean geometry? If b is the distance to the nebula, then a must be the width of the phenomenon on the nebula, which the story claims to be ~.3m.

      let c = b + delta (assuming delta=.3m) This is just WRONG! where did you get this?

      The article was about how precisely astronomers were able to measure b and c (they are very close), and thus determined that a (not some mystical term 'delta') = ~.3m.

    14. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Scott+Carnahan · · Score: 1

      The article was about how precisely astronomers were able to measure b and c (they are very close), and thus determined that a (not some mystical term 'delta') = ~.3m.

      Not really. The estimate of 0.3m comes from a general physical principle, stating that events that are synchronized to within a short amount of time (say 1 ns) are usually triggered by processes that take up very little space (e.g. 0.3m), since larger triggering processes have a speed-of-light obstruction to getting the necessary information to all of their parts in a timely fashion. This is how astronomers first concluded that pulsars are compact objects - repeated millisecond pulses are unlikely to be triggered by anything bigger than 300km.

      It isn't clear what the parent was trying to say, since he never made his point very clear. I think the idea was that if the surface of the pulsar were somehow absolutely flat (say it was a cube), with normal vector facing us dead-on, and the pulsar managed to produce some kind of instantaneous pulse that took zero time in our rest frame, he could place some kind of bound on the size of the side facing us (about 4 times the diameter of the sun) via the pythagorean theorem.

      It was quite a calculational tour de force, but I can't really see why it would be useful.

      --
      "Your notation sucks!" -- Serge Lang (1927-2005)
    15. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scott, you hit the nail on the head.

      And you're correct: if we believe that the maximum information transfer rate is C, then it follows logically that the duration of the pulse is limited by how far the signal can travel thru whatever medium. In practice, we assume that speed is close to C. However, it's a bit of a silly to say that we are "resolving" 1-2' diameter sections on a pulsar. In fact, all we're doing is measuring 1-2ns pulses. How do we know the signal originates on the surface? How do we know the pulse doesn't last longer? Perhaps the tail end of the pulse is too faint for us to resolve?

      Just for grins, suppose we assume that the signal originates in the center of the pulsar and radiates outwards, but it doesn't cause a 'pulse' until it hits the surface. We might expect to receive a very long pulse (up to 20ms). Except: we're talking about very high frequency here, so the pulses will radiate fairly normal to the surface -- with a very steep (but not infinite) roll-off as you leave 90 degrees.

      Now, if we perform the same calculation as in my original post, except we use 6km radius (the typical radius of a pulsar, as stated in one of the parent posts). Then a is about 200ft. This could imply that we can only receive significant output from a 200ft radius section on the surface of the pulsar, and the rest of the pulse is beyond our ability to measure.

      That's all for now. Personally I'd like to see the shape of the pulse in question. That would definitely help me generate random crackpot theories on how the signal actually propagates. ;)

    16. Re:A surface spot of the pulsar is beachball size. by mike_mgo · · Score: 1

      Do you have any references for the difference between the "international" and the "Russian" meter? I'd never heard this before and am curious.

  22. There are no pulses from pulsars. by Ardias · · Score: 5, Informative

    A pulsar does not produce pulses. The "pulse" that we see comes from a steady uniform beam of radiation from a rotating neutron star.

    Ever see a lighthouse in action at night? That light is a steady beam from a very strong lamp mounted on a rotating platform. The platform spins at a steady rate. If you are nearby, such as on the ground looking up at the lighthouse, you can see the rotating beam. If you are on a ship, far away at sea, you don't see a rotating beam. Instead the observer on the ship sees a pulse.

    The neutron star inside the Crab Nebula spins at a very steady rate of 33 rotations per seconds. It has 2 hot spots, one at the magnetic north pole, and another at the magnetic south pole. These hot spots produce a steady beam of light, which we see as 33 pulses per second.

    Now, there are shockwaves produced by by seismic shifts within the neutron star. The neutron star has a crust that breaks into pieces and shifts around occasionally. (Think of earthquakes here, but the crust is very thin, and very dense, so the energy released is much greater than what powers an earthquake around here.) These shifts cause "hiccups" in the radiation beam. We can actually measure these hiccups because the "pulse" goes out of phase for a moment.

    But, to finally answer your question, those shockwaves do not cause the "pulses", but merely adjust their timing for a brief moment. Also, a shockwave would be only an occasional event, rather than something that happens 33 times every second like clockwork.

    The subpulses within the pulses are also very well timed, to within 2 nanoseconds. Since light travels about 61 cm in 2 nanoseconds, the hot spots that cause the subpulses are at most 61 cm wide.

    We still have a few unknowns here, such as what confines the hot spot to such a small region. But, what causes the pulse itself is known.

    1. Re:There are no pulses from pulsars. by error0x100 · · Score: 1

      These hot spots produce a steady beam of light, which we see as 33 pulses per second.

      Since there are two, wouldn't that imply we see 66 pulses per second?

    2. Re:There are no pulses from pulsars. by tyrann · · Score: 1

      The hot spots are on the rotational axis, on the opposite poles of the pulsar.

      If one the beam is directed in the earth direction, we will see it. We will not see, however, the other beam, directed away from us.

  23. Sputniks from Little Green Men? by Ardias · · Score: 1

    Thinking of the Little Green Men hypothesis which was once proposed to explain why pulsars are so regular?

    1. Re:Sputniks from Little Green Men? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there's always the Metamucil Hypothesis...

    2. Re:Sputniks from Little Green Men? by richie2000 · · Score: 1
      explain why pulsars are so regular?

      I thought it was because they had lots of fibers in their food. *badabing*

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
  24. doesn't seem very conclusive by g4dget · · Score: 3, Insightful
    First of all, it is only "nearly imperceptible subpulses" that are 2ns short, so we are not talking about the entire energy output of the pulsar.

    But just as importantly, all that this seems to tell you is that the region from which these subpulses come is less than 2ft thick along the line from here to there, it tells you much less about its area. So, perhaps this is just the signal you see when looking straight at the neutron star and something happens on a surface pacth. The patch could have a much larger diameter than 2ft.

    1. Re:doesn't seem very conclusive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we need to alert SETI? We might have a candidate signal here.

  25. Plasma balls about 1 m in diameter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ET has finally contacted us, and it's Space-Beavis and Space-Butthead lighting farts.

  26. I can't resolve the nebula of crabs on my balls by Hao+Wu · · Score: 0, Troll

    If any astronomer have telescope to help me, please don't wait for E.T. to phone home...

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
    1. Re:I can't resolve the nebula of crabs on my balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use the magnification wheel!! I am telling you to twist wheel 1 and you are twisting wheel 2!!

  27. Smallest Deep Space Structures Detected??????? by c4thy · · Score: 0, Insightful
    With sensitive new equipment, astronomers studying radio emissions from a fast-spinning star have detected what they say are the smallest structures found so far in deep space.

    i thought blackholes were the smallest detected structures found in deep space?

    --

    i am convinced that "/.ers" are homosexuals and imma make that my "sig"
  28. Re:But Do They Have A Women's Beach Volleyball Tea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yes, but they all have crabs. :(

  29. Re:But Do They Have A Women's Beach Volleyball Tea by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    They are searchin' for space beach babes in bikini's with our tax money? "Pure science" my ass.

  30. you mean to tell me by CakerX · · Score: 1

    you mean to tell me the could see a beach ball at intersolar distances????

    that is fucking insane! Now not only if we descover alien life, we can see what they are eating for breakfast as well

  31. Whipping Star reference by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    In Frank Herbert's "Whipping Star", Beachballs were "houses" for multidimensional superbeings whose three-dimensional projections on our universe were our stars.

  32. They're... by egjertse · · Score: 1
    space balls!!!

    Ow!! What was that for?!!

  33. A virtual mod +5 by On+Lawn · · Score: 1


    The most insightful thing said on slashdot in as many months.

  34. A palimpsest! by pomakis · · Score: 1
    Maybe this is an alien transmission a la the movie Contact. The 30th-of-a-second pulses are only a carrier signal, and the sub-pulses, once analyzed more closely, will reveal a message containing detailed blueprints for a massive transportation/communication device!