Slashdot Mirror


Huge Star Quake Rocks Milky Way

SJrX writes "The BBC is reporting that scientists have detected "the biggest explosion observed by humans within [the past 400 years]". The explosion luckily occured about 50,000 light years away form us, on the far side of the Milky Way, as the article goes on to say that had the explosion been within 10 light years of us, it "would possibly have triggered a mass extinction.""

95 of 548 comments (clear)

  1. Equation constraints by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course the existence of magnetars will place constraints on estimations of life on other planets like the Drake equation, and it might be useful to map out these sources of potential periodic radiation bursts to limit/make more efficient radio/laser surveys of the sky.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Equation constraints by PoopJuggler · · Score: 3, Funny

      What about the existance of Sinistars?

    2. Re:Equation constraints by augmenter · · Score: 3, Informative

      Given that the "constants" in the Drake equation are order-of-magnitude estimates and that explosions like this are very rare, I don't think it will be a real impovement.

      --
      There is no good and bad. There is only cause and effect.
    3. Re:Equation constraints by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Given our rather limited data on the matter, what makes you think the Drake equation is anything more than a structured guess?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:Equation constraints by mbrother · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure, the Drake equation is but a structured guess, but it is a handy way of organizing the important terms and quantifying each and how certain they are. I got to have dinner with Frank Drake a few years ago at Lick Observatory, which was pretty cool.

      --
      Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
    5. Re:Equation constraints by mbrother · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Drake equation IS an equation. That's the right term for it in science, hard or soft. The number of technological civilizations in the galaxy we can communicate with is equal to the product of the probabilites/numbers on the other side of the equal sign. Just because some of those numbers/probabilites are uncertain does not stop it from being an equation. For instance, it isn't a proportionality or an approximation (unless you actually start pluggin in approximate numbers). And I wouldn't say that the term equation is a "title." You're reading too much into this.

      These sort of estimation games are really valuable in lots of branches of science and often lead to insight. Enrico Fermi used to do this all the time, which is especially relvant since his "Fermi Paradox" about how it's strange we haven't encountered alien intelligences is the same sort of thing that Drake formalized.

      --
      Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
    6. Re:Equation constraints by mbrother · · Score: 4, Informative

      ???

      I guess I've observed there too many times for such a joke to be funny. Lick Observatory is named after James Lick who funded the establishment of the Observatory back in the 1890s. It's an interesting place -- the first observatory put on a mountaintop (it was originally going to be in downtown San Francisco, imagine that). His ashes are kept in a memorial under the 36 inch refractor.

      It's a spectacularly pretty location, overlooking the bay, and the old observatory portion is all marble and brass, 19th century elegance. I got married there and the reception was great (band, catered dinner, and the 36 inch refractor was available for guest viewing).

      The road to Lick from San Jose is a very twisty 19 miles. The mules, originally used to haul material there, wouldn't go up more than a six degree incline, so it's switchback city. This also makes it a popular road for bicyclists. I used to be annoyed with them, since I had to go there semi-regularly for work and often drove while sleepy. I imagined I'd come around a corner and have a tired rider at zero speed in the middle of the lane. They paid me back though one time. I was sitting in the dining room eating breakfast one afternoon, and these two riders and a car pulled up. The car driver switched off to ride a bike, and she stepped in front of the window and stripped out of all her clothes while the milk dripped off my spoon, caught halfway to my mouth. Good times.

      --
      Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
    7. Re:Equation constraints by General+Alcazar · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I find the Drake equation very interesting. It is an interesting speculation, but since it is based on all kinds of arbitrary assumptions, it is almost useless. But not totally. One of the most interesting things about it is that it points out that, based on our assumptions, we should be detecting some kind of extra-terran life. Since we are not, clearly some of our assumptions are erroneous. The question is - WHICH assumptions are erroneous?

      Here are some things we do know:

      1. We are here.
      2. We have the means to communicate between ourselves.
      3. The ability to communicate between individual organisms has given rise to something greater than the sum of our parts: culture, society, language, mass consiousness, the internet, music, etc.
      4. We have not encountered any communications to date that are like what we would expect.

      But let's step back a bit, and look at the processes that life goes through as a whole. A long, long time ago, there were no multi-cellular life forms on earth. At first, just organic compounds. Then something appeared (maybe some kind of virus?). Eventually, single cell organism appeared. Things stayed like this for an awfully long time. Then, multi-cellular organisms appeared. These multi-cellular organisms gave rise to something we call consciousness. One version of these creatures - humans - developed quite sophisticated consciousnesses. These units of consciousness, together gave rise to very interesting 'things' such as language, memes, and other insubstantial, but very real 'things'.

      See the pattern? What we see here is a continuous pattern of units coming together and creating units out of their aggregate which possess qualities fundamentally transcendant than those of their parts. Particles > Atoms > Molecules > Compounds > Cells > Organisms > Consciousness > Memes and so on.

      I would buy the argument that life is very common in the Universe, and even the Milky Way. The vastness of it all seems to make it so probable. But what if our current point in evolution is only a brief transitional state, in the grand scheme of things? We have only been radio communicators for about one hundred years or so. That is a super super tiny blip in time. A lot of us seem to assume that the future will be like some sort of Star Trek reality or something, where technological advancement is the primary area of change. But what if what we are going through is more of a spiritual evolution - one that we have only just begun, and one that will ultimately transcend our own existence as we know it?

      For all we know, we could be surrounded by alien consciousness all the time, and not even know it, much the same way a bacteria has very limited awareness of the presence of humans, let alone any concept of what one is.

    8. Re:Equation constraints by mbrother · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know all the details myself, but the article focuses on SWIFT, which is designed to monitor the whole sky for bright gamma ray bursts. It just went up itself in November, although there are other satelites up with similar (but worse) capability). Gamma ray bursts go off about once a day, give or take, and spacecraft like SWIFT detect them, point toward them and localize them, then relay that information to ground-based telescopes for follow-up at other wavelenghts. So some of your analysis is right, but some of your assumptions are wrong.

      It's funny that gamma ray bursts were first discovered by the military who wanted to watch for nuclear weapons. This was in the early 1970s, maybe a bit earlier. They went batshit when these previously unknown bursts started setting off alarms on a regular basis.

      --
      Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
    9. Re:Equation constraints by Eric604 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      One of the most interesting things about it is that it points out that, based on our assumptions, we should be detecting some kind of extra-terran life

      I am not so sure about that. The avarage distance to other civilisations is proportional to how rare life is. Unless our observation technology improves vastly, I don't think we'll detect anything. Look at it this way, can we detect earth over many lightyears just by searching for human activities with our current technology? I don't think so. Another thing is, since I don't believe in hyperdrives and other scifi tech, if there is extra-terran life then their technology and radio emission won't be much different than ours.

    10. Re:Equation constraints by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      You were surprised that you observed a heavenly body while at an observatory?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    11. Re:Equation constraints by IdleTime · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One thing we need to consider is the following: One plnate has to be the first to develop intelligent life!

      What if it has taken 13 billion years for intelligent life to evolve and we are the first to do so?

      What if life flares up and dies out again within a few million years?

      What if this galaxy only contains a few planets with intelligent life and far apart, but other galaxies contains life in abundance. The distances makes it very difficult to communicate.

      What if the universe is full of life but because of distances it is not possible or extremly difficult to communicate?

      It is a very interesting area, but unfortunatly we can do little more than speculate. And yes, SETI is just a speculation, a speculation based on how WE think another life-form would communicate. Alas, I will never live to find out if there is life on other planets.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    12. Re:Equation constraints by Flaming+Death · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For most things, life needs a few critical elements, gravity being one (otherwise water may not hang around for life to be created - no amino acids). With gravity then comes the problem of escaping you original home (well down the track of course) - that genuinely requires a tool/assitance of some form. While I dont doubt what you suggest is not a wonderful concept (or new, very Childhoods endish..) .. mankind through tools has begun its move to a new frontier. Transitional?, that is possible, but this is a _critical_ transisitonal state. One which brings the ability to possibly escape 'planet wide destruction scenarios' and to 'spread' our race throughout space - the worry here is we just move to another planet to rape and pillage.

      With our 'advancement' there are some big problems we have created that suggest our 'spiritual side' is extremely flawed. Being an entirely tool based society we no longer rely on our evolutionary/spiritual abilities to get through the day, let alone through life - everything humans do, is through the use of some tool. Even religion and spirituality. Pushing us further away from ever being able to understand/know/feel the true nature of ourselves :-)

      Think carefully about it next time you sit in a church, read a bible, or post on slashdot. As a race, we have irrecoverably doomed ourselves from knowing our true self's. In fact to rid oneself of all posessions, wasnt far wrong from JC..

      Also it is quite hilarious to read how people put humans up on the pedestal of intelligence on earth - making and using tools doesnt make anyone smarter/better. We are happy to even eat some of the most intelligent lifeforms on this planet - octupus, and squid for instance. Yet we think it barbaric/distasteful to eat dolphins - intellegence may as well just be a beauty contest.

      My personal guess is that mankind has to be able to just be kind to one another before anything good can come from this race. Its almost ludicrous to consider ourselves even vaguely intelligent while the western world is happy to rape and pillage the poorer nations, and then also go destroy their countries and homelands in the name of 'good' ?? (Iraq isnt the example here.. there are soooooo many more).. go figure.. humanity needs to be more than rhetoric, vengence, hatred, religious fervour, and snazzy tools...

      Until we have a society based on community rather than economy, I think mankind is probably in for more of the same... so spiritualy or with tools, I dont expect us to go anywhere in the near future at all, let alone see anyone who wants anything to do with us swamp rats..

    13. Re:Equation constraints by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We know that in our experience, something man-made, such as a car does not just appear, but is the product of intelligent design and purposeful construction, all arising out of a thing we call mind.

      Well duh, man made things are made by man.

      why is it BELIEVED that even a singe cell 'appeared' out of seemingly nowhere?

      It isn't. A single cell is thought to be the product of about 1-2B years of evolution, starting with much simpler organisms.

      Indeed, as you say, life could be common in the universe, but why can it not be attributed to a mind that has made it happen in many places.

      So aliens are seeding life though the universe? Who made them? When you get down to it, someone has to be the first and, new evidence notwithstanding, it may as well be us.

      Why is it so hard to admit that the order and information content of the "natural" world is the product of a mind just as the products of our modern technological world are conceived in the minds of their creators?

      That's a religious argument and has no place in science. Specifically, it allows no new understanding or predictions. Save your ID stuff for philosophy.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    14. Re:Equation constraints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      > why is it BELIEVED that even a singe cell 'appeared' out of seemingly nowhere?

      It isn't.

      It's believed that self-replicating molecules appeared. It's believed that self-replicating molecules that synthesized lipids were better replicators than those that didn't. It's believed that mitochondria - which aren't much more than bits of RNA with a wrapper around it - were once independent lifeforms, predating cells by a wide margin. Single-celled organisms that use mitochondria as fuel source are a pretty natural extension -- just a big lipid layer around a benign environment for self-replicating molecules.

      > Microbiology has shown that a "simple" cell is more complicated by far than anything ever designed by humans.

      It's also a lot more complicated than anything taught at the high school (or even undergraduate) biology classes.

      > Why is it so hard to admit that the order and information content of the "natural" world is the product of a mind just as the products of our modern technological world are conceived in the minds of their creators? All of science would still be just as fascinating and useful if that BELIEF were accepted as the cause for the origin of the order, design and laws that scientists seek to explore.

      Because most people (such as proponents of ID) find something they can't explain, bow down before it as evidence of God's genius, and then stop investigating. After all, if something's "irreducably" complex, why bother investigating it any further?

      Meanwhile, us scientists (whether we believe in God or not -- and I, as a scientist and a Christian, see no contradiction between evolution and my faith) will continue on doing science.

      Here endeth the science lesson and beginneth the metaphysics/theology.

      Have you ever considered that a God smart enough to create a universe 13.8 billion years ago out of a few physical constants, just might be smart enough to create a universe in which intelligent life spontaneously evolved (on Earth, and perhaps on billions of other worlds) to recognize His existence?

      Have you ever further condidered that a God smart enough to pull off a stunt like that is probably a hell of a lot smarter than one who had to manually kludge in lifeforms, regardless of whether he whipped the thing up a mere 6000 years ago, or even if he created the universe, and has spent most of the past 3 billion years constantly hacking in things like cells, multicellular organisms, eyes, lungs, exploding beetles, and the human cerebral cortex and what-not every few hundred million years?

      I know which one I'd consider the more glorious. Why do you cram your God into such a small box?

    15. Re:Equation constraints by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why is it so hard to admit that the order and information content of the "natural" world is the product of a mind just as the products of our modern technological world are conceived in the minds of their creators? All of science would still be just as fascinating and useful if that BELIEF were accepted as the cause for the origin of the order, design and laws that scientists seek to explore.

      Because what you are describing is metaphysics, not science. I generally have no problem with you or anyone holding whatever metaphysical beliefs you want. It's when you attempt to substitute the metaphysics for science or impose the metaphysics on science that I have a problem.

      Your stated metaphysical belief is sufficiently vague as to not conflict with science. You do not seem to be trying to impose your metaphysical beliefs on others. However, we've seen time and again, through out history into the present what happens when scientific development challenges metaphysical notions of those with political power, especially when that power is based on those metaphysical notions.

      Furthermore, if you rely on supernatural explanations, why bother doing science? Why attempt to understand the physical world when the supernatural world trumps it? (I realize that your stated beliefs are more akin to that of the Deists, many of whom compared the universe to a clockwork that had been set into motion by some "Mind" and left to run on it's own. By seeking to understand the universe, one was also seeking to understand the mind that created it.)

      Anyway, as I said, I don't have a problem with your personal metaphysical beliefs, but I think they're totally extracurricular to science.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    16. Re:Equation constraints by Mandrel · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did not make any reference to time at all and the time it takes to create an intelligent complicated device is not relevant. What is relevant however is that the device contains an incredible amount of INFORMATION, which CANNOT, according information theory arise from randomness, but only from another source of information.

      While the total entropy of a closed system must rise, that doesn't mean that there can't be isolated pockets of entropy reduction (information creation), balanced by regions of increased randomness. For example the sun is graduallly messing itself up to allow the earth to be more ordered.

      The interesting question is where all the potential inherent in the big bang came from.

    17. Re:Equation constraints by Decaff · · Score: 2, Informative

      In other words only if they are next door right this minute and not past the noisy stage we're starting to get out of.

      Are we?

      If you're assesment of our current detection abilities isn't shy at least an order of magnitude seti would have to be pretty lucky indeed (lottery levels at least) to pick up anything.

      Only if we were watching out for everyday TV and radio signals. If we looked for a directed signal we could detect it half way across the galaxy.

      The thing about space is it's not big, but mindshatteringly hugely enormously big.

      Well, not really in terms of SETI. Even a very slow moving civilisation that drifted across space at far less than sub-light speed, spending a long time colonising each new solar system, could have filled the entire galaxy dozens of times over. If not organisms, then robotic probes could have done this. We are nearly at the stage of being able to do this. The galaxy looks empty.

  2. Gee... by gumpish · · Score: 5, Funny

    The explosion luckily occured about 50,000 light years away form us, on the far side of the Milky Way, as the article goes on to say that had the explosion been within 10 light years of us, it "would possibly have triggered a mass extinction."

    Yeah... that would have been a real loss.

    (Yes folks, I'm just that bitter.)

    1. Re:Gee... by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, I have relatives who voted for Bush, too.

    2. Re:Gee... by Loconut1389 · · Score: 4, Funny

      With mass extinction, everyone wins! SGR-1806-20 is an equal opportunity destroyer.

    3. Re:Gee... by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't worry. I'm sure Luke wasn't on that thing when it blew.

      --
      All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
    4. Re:Gee... by Neop2Lemus · · Score: 4, Funny

      it's true, the eggs predicted it.

      --
      Needle Nardle Noo
    5. Re:Gee... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why would we have worried? Given Luke's inherited genes, wouldn't we want him to go? I'd think people would ask for Jar Jar to have been in the area though.

    6. Re:Gee... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because I'm sure that if I came over to your house tommorow and chainsawed you and your family, you'd thing it was a bad thing.

      Chainsaw? You can bring lethal amounts of drugs to my house. My wife and I will give you our solemn word that we will overdose on them after you leave.

      (The LD50 for marijuana is somewhere around 10 g/kg, and my wife and I are each about 80 kg, to give you an idea of how much to bring.)

  3. Give Me The Stars by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's say 50Kly is as far away as this starquake can be (obviously not). And they happen on a 10ly granularity. That's something like 1 in 50K^3/10, or 1.25E13 to 1 against it happening in 400 years. Staring down the barrels of nuclear and Greenhouse extinction in the next century, I'll take those odds.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Give Me The Stars by pVoid · · Score: 5, Funny
      Jebus man...

      You should be a numerologist. You know, those people who ask you when you were born, and you answer "uuh... 4th of january, 1972", and they say "well, if you add 72 and 19, that makes 91 and you add 4 and 1, that makes five, and five plus 9 plus one gives you 96, modulus three, that's THREE!!!

      THE HOLY TRINITY!!!

      You are the chosen one, my son.

      **ding**

      Times up, that'll be $29.99 dear, my assistant will take your fee out front no cheques, only cash please. You can ask her for a receipt too. Thank you, come again!

  4. Magnetars.. by salvorHardin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Apparently there's no Magnetars anywhere near Earth, and I'm wondering, since this star was 'the other side of the galactic center', could such things possibly be closer to the center than we thought? Would this explain what we currently think is the gravity of a central black hole?
    Oh, and check out the New Scientist article.

  5. Re:Pffft... by salvorHardin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought it was just that it was the biggest such explosion recorded by humans within the last 400 years.

  6. Faintly heard by SETI by Boyceterous · · Score: 4, Funny

    just before the explosion:
    "Damn you, you bloody baboon!"

    1. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by ari_j · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you sure it wasn't "USS Voyager self-destruct sequence, in 10, 9, 8, ..." ?

    2. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by isny · · Score: 3, Funny

      Other possible answers:
      1. Whoops.
      2. What does this button do?
      3. ...
      I'm sorry I can't think of any more, but I'm sure that someone around here has saved up a similar list for just such an occasion.

    3. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You didn't get it. The beacons would not be exploding stars, the beacons would warn ships not to go near an unstable star.

    4. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by KFK+-+Wildcat · · Score: 3, Informative

      That must be the Dynamite Monkey by Random McEric, originally on Fark's The last thing you'll ever see photoshop contest.

    5. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by Boyceterous · · Score: 4, Funny

      3. Cut the RED wire. 4. But first, cut the BLUE wire.

    6. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by IceFoot · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just after the explosion:
      D'oh!

    7. Re:Faintly heard by SETI by Agripa · · Score: 4, Informative

      It does not look like FARK's link to the Dynamite Monkey is hosted anymore. It is too good to miss:

      http://www.banishedsouls.org/635850d13f/Dynamite_M onkey.jpg

  7. Science by Press Release by Einer2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Come on, give me a break. I've seen some of the science being done on this flare. There are enough cool things without being needlessly sensational, and invoking the Wipe-Out-All-Civilization radius definitely counts as sensational. After all, isn't the nearest magnetar something like 5 kiloparsecs away?

    --
    Microsoft delenda est!
    1. Re:Science by Press Release by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

      "After all, isn't the nearest magnetar something like 5 kiloparsecs away?"

      Pssh. The Millineum Falcon could reach that in no time!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:Science by Press Release by blackomegax · · Score: 3, Interesting

      well still, you gotta feel some pity for whatever lifeform died in that area. (hey, its POSSIBLE) ;)

    3. Re:Science by Press Release by jesterzog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There are enough cool things without being needlessly sensational, and invoking the Wipe-Out-All-Civilization radius definitely counts as sensational.

      I couldn't agree more. There are only 10 stars within 10 light years of us -- one trinary, two doubles and three individual stars. None of them are anywhere near being potential supernovae. The BBC sensationalism was pointless and misleading.

      The actual quote from which that comment was derived was probably the one in the New Scientist article:

      That relatively small distance, coupled with an accurate energy measurement by NASA's RHESSI satellite, means the explosion was not as powerful - at source - as more distant bursts linked with black holes. Nevertheless, it "may have sterilised any planets within a few light years of it", says Rob Fender, an astronomer at Southampton University, UK, who is studying the lingering radio emission from the flare.

      Assuming this is correct, the BBC journalist seems to have taken an off-hand comment and put it into an unreleated and meaningless context.

    4. Re:Science by Press Release by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just under 417 Kessel runs.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    5. Re:Science by Press Release by kaalamaadan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Assuming this is correct, the BBC journalist seems to have taken an off-hand comment and put it into an unreleated and meaningless context.

      Perhaps. But "Earth" seems much more immediate than "any planets within a few light years of it". Just like in "Earthly" disasters, irrespective of the fact that 200,000 people died, people are much more shocked when they think that ~300 of their countrymen are missing. In the words of Ursula K Le Guin, this is "making a molehill out of a mountain.".

  8. More Informative by dev_sda · · Score: 5, Informative

    I though that the New scientist article on it was a bit more informative.

    1. Re:More Informative by Scott7477 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed...it quoted one researcher as saying that the distance to the magnetar could have been as low as 30,000 light years. And it said the magnetic field generated by this star could wipe a credit card that
      was 160,000 kilometers away.

      --
      "Lack of technical competence coupled with the arrogance of power, as usual, leads to no good end."
  9. Nevermind extinct!... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...what happened to the data on all my magnetic media?

  10. Re:Excuse me but... by Ced_Ex · · Score: 5, Informative

    10 light years is really close... Thats like only 3 times the distance form us to the sun.

    Considering that it takes 8 mins for light from the sun to reach Earth, I think your calculations are a bit off.

    365 days x 24 hours x 60 mins = 525600 mins/year

    525600 mins/year x 10 years = 5256000 mins

    5256000 mins / 8 mins = 6.57x10^6 times

    Therefore 10 light years is actually 6.57x10^6 times the distance from us to the sun.

    QED

    --
    Live forever, or die trying.
  11. Hooray Atmosphere... by helioquake · · Score: 3, Funny

    Thanks goodness for Atmosphere. It has protected us once again!

    ps. It happened in August 1998. Back then it was SGR1900+14. Apparently a weaker event, but it knocked our socks off back then.

  12. Disaster Area by randomiam · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did anyone else think that maybe we just saw the end of a Disaster Area Concert from the back row?

  13. Re:Breaking news! by multiplexo · · Score: 2, Informative
    If the sun was only 10 kilometres from your house, a mass extinction might occur.

    Seriously, this has to be the most bizzare astronomy story tagline I've ever read. I figured this was the submitter's quote, or possibly the article writer - nope, it was from one of the physicists.

    Then you didn't read the New Scientist article which had this gem:

    But Christopher Thompson, an astrophysicist at the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Physics, says that may not be so. The neutron star in question is rare magnetar, with a magnetic field so strong it could wipe a credit card clean from a distance of 160,000 kilometres. And this magnetar is even rarer yet, one of three "soft gamma repeaters" (SGRs) in the Milky Way.

    Ya know, IANAPOAPOA (I Am Not A Physicist Or AstroPhysicist or Astronomer) but I'm willing to bet that if I were 160,000 kilometers from this object, or even our sun, I might be worried about other things than my credit cards getting wiped.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
  14. Trillion Trillion Trillion? by Man+in+Spandex · · Score: 2, Funny

    From the article
    One calculation has the giant flare on SGR 1806-20 unleashing about 10,000 trillion trillion trillion watts.

    Very impressive but as reading those consecutive huge "units", I just had to:

    Dr Evil: I'll hold the world ransom for.....
    1 Hundread, Billion, Trillion TRiLLion TRILLION Dollars! *pinky*

    1. Re:Trillion Trillion Trillion? by MP3Chuck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I never understood why they coulnd't just use scientific notation... a lot of articles do this. I mean, is "10^40 Watts" just not impressive enough? Did they really take the time to figure out what 10^40 watts was in "10,000 trillion trillion trillion watts?"

  15. Re:This is evidence of the Death Star by simplemachine · · Score: 2, Funny
    The empire could not destroy the entire planet. It would take a thousand ships with more firepower then I've...

    A still hopefull Star Wars fan.

  16. Re:Pffft... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Informative
    since the star is 50,000 light-years away, it didn't happen 400 years ago, but rather 50,000 years ago

    It depends on your frame of reference. IIRC, from the viewpoint of the gamma ray photons themselves, there was no delay at all between the time of the starquake and reaching earth.

  17. Dang! Starting Fresh Would Be Fun! by zapadoo · · Score: 4, Funny

    had the explosion been within 10 light years of us, it "would possibly have triggered a mass extinction."

    Dang! Extinction has an upside -- it would be nice to start over and ditch the red-state, blue-state stuff and perhaps come out better for starting anew. Maybe the next batch of primordial ooze will grow up smarter than us, and perhaps along the way find something less verbose than XML in the process!

    1. Re:Dang! Starting Fresh Would Be Fun! by AngryElmo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Primordial ooze is already much smarter than us. It is happy in its oozingness and has no reason to buy a car or a house, thus doesn't need a dead-end job and surf slashdot for hours at a time.

      In short, Primordial Ooze has it all over slash-dotters...

  18. Don't panic... by catdevnull · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...I regret to inform you that in order to make room for the hyperspace express route...

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
  19. I don't get it... by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2, Funny
    "would possibly have triggered a mass extinction."
    But matter is energy and energy cannot be destroyed, only change its form
    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    1. Re:I don't get it... by potpie · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ok I get it now... they mean "mass" as in "total" or "complete," not mass as a noun. Sorry for the double-post.

      --
      Esoteric reference.
  20. Re:50,000 light years = 50,000 years? by hugesmile · · Score: 2, Funny

    You are slightly off in your estimate. Originally, astronomical events were measured in years. Then Light Years were invented, which had a third less calories than our regular years. So the energy in a Light Year is one third less than a full-bodied year.

  21. How's this news? by melted · · Score: 3, Funny

    According to TFA this shit happened 50000 years ago. Is this some kind of slashdot record, posting news that mattered 50K years ago?

  22. No, it won't by Einer2 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From what I know, magnetars radiate most of their energy on an extremely short timescale, of order tens of thousands of years or so. Considering how rare they are, the number of stars that are irradiated by SGR flares must be pretty small, and so any additional term in the Drake equation would be very, very close to unity.

    If anyone wants to cruise for mod points, you could do an order-of-magnitude estimate of the fraction of irradiated stars using the age and total volume of the Milky Way, the mean time between SGR flares of this magnitude (call it a decade to a century), and the radius of OMG-We're-All-Gonna-Die that was specified in the article.

    Of course, the supernova explosion that led to a magnetar's formation would would have already done quite a bit of damage to the surrounding area, so they aren't likely to have any meaningful impact on any planetary systems around them anyway.

    --
    Microsoft delenda est!
    1. Re:No, it won't by clem · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hell, to cruise for mod points you wouldn't even have to be remotely accurate.

      --
      Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
    2. Re:No, it won't by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 4, Insightful
      the supernova explosion that led to a magnetar's formation would would have already done quite a bit of damage to the surrounding area

      Put another way, it would be like worrying about being deafened by the shock wave of a nuclear bomb going off a mile away.

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    3. Re:No, it won't by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's the first time on slashdot I've actually seen a decent analogy. Wow. Have a biscuit!

  23. Tsunami? by jasonmicron · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With what little understanding we have of Universe, I seriously wonder if this ties in any way to the Tsunami. Remember, it happened only hours before this was "recorded", depending on where you were on this planet.

    Either that or God was just drinking too much of the haterade. ;)

  24. Screw that by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm from the Bush administration. Put that in terms of burning Libraries of Congress.

  25. This is old news. by JPriest · · Score: 5, Funny

    This happened 50,000 years ago and it is just now being posted to Slashdot? :)

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    1. Re:This is old news. by l0b0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dude, this joke is getting old. ...did I just say that?

  26. Re:Breaking news! by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ya know, IANAPOAPOA (I Am Not A Physicist Or AstroPhysicist or Astronomer) but I'm willing to bet that if I were 160,000 kilometers from this object, or even our sun, I might be worried about other things than my credit cards getting wiped.

    That's why YANAPOAPOA. I can imagine the interview.
    "If you were 160,000 kilometers from this black hole... we'll, you'd be in space, so you'd be dead! So don't go there!"

    Magnetic fields are difficult to characterize. What are you going to do, tell people the field is 1000000000000 Tesla? (Yawn, what's a Tesla?) You can't compare magnetic fields to hens eggs or Libraries of Congress. The only thing you can really do is compare them to a field strength that people are intuitively familiar with- like a refrigerator magnet's field, an MRI field, or a field sufficient to wipe magnetic cards. Refrigerator magnets and MRIs come in a variety of field strengths. Plus, smartasses would make comments about refrigerators and magnetic imaging machines in space.

  27. Hey! by DeputySpade · · Score: 5, Funny

    At least it's not a repost. :D

    --


    This space intentionally left blank
    1. Re:Hey! by chiph · · Score: 2, Funny

      It is now :-(

      Chip H.

  28. People of SGR 1806-20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    People of SGR 1806-20, your attention please. This is Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz of the Galactic Hyperspace Planning Council.

    Plans for development if the outlying regions of the galaxy require the building of a hyperspatial express route through your star system, and regrettably your star is scheduled for demolition.

    The process will take slightly less that two of your SGR 1806-20 minutes. Thank you.

  29. Who to blame? by toupsie · · Score: 2, Funny
    as the article goes on to say that had the explosion been within 10 light years of us, it "would possibly have triggered a mass extinction."

    And it still would be George Bush's fault, right?

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
  30. Mass extintion? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Funny

    From the article:

    This is a once-in-a-lifetime event

    I bet the aliens who lived less than 10 light-years from there couldn't possibly deny what you just said.

  31. Re:Excuse me but... by handsome+b · · Score: 3, Informative

    10 light years is 3 times the distance from earth to the sun? Light takes approx. 8 minutes to reach the earth from the sun. Thus, the earth is 8 light-minutes from the sun. Thus, the earth is not 3.33- light years from the sun.

  32. It couldn't have been "The Empire" by Port-0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We know that's in a different galaxy... far far away...

  33. Re:Excuse me but... by jericho4.0 · · Score: 2, Informative
    1- light years = 632,396.717 Astronomical Units.

    --
    "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
  34. Re:Breaking news! by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 3, Informative

    If the sun was only 10 kilometres from your house, a mass extinction might occur.
    Seriously, this has to be the most bizzare astronomy story tagline I've ever read. I figured this was the submitter's quote, or possibly the article writer - nope, it was from one of the physicists.

    Why is it bizarre? When I read it I understood what he meant and why he said it. Light years are big. For anything ten light years distant to have a measurable effect on the Earth is pretty amazing!

    The radiation intensity at the surface of the Sun is 63,000,000 watts per square meter. (Your 10 km makes no real difference.) The intensity 10 light years (10^17 m) away from a 10^40 watt source would be approx. 100,000 watts per square meter. So you'd have to be 25 solar radii away from the Sun for its radiation intensity to be equivalent to this magnetar if it were ten light years distant. (For comparison, mercury orbits at about 86 solar radii.) Nitpickers may note that the Sun is mostly radiating UV through IR, and the magnetar's energy is brief and in the gamma ray spectrum, but this is still impressive.

  35. Don't tell me that was any meteor shower! by Leebert · · Score: 2, Funny

    "It's Praxis, sir. It's a klingon moon."

  36. Eta Carinae: It's Gonna Blow! by ispdrudge · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember reading about the variable star Eta Carinae, which has varied greatly in brightness over the years. It varies because it's a huge, unstable star that has already blown off a big gas nebula. It's expected to go supernova eventually. One scientist claims that it's close enough to bathe the earth in so much gamma radiation that the nitrogen in the upper atmosphere turns into NOx, and the sky becomes opaque. Like in the Matrix.
    Google for pix of thy Doom.

  37. Constraints on where they can afford to live! by jd · · Score: 2, Funny
    Total output - ten thousand trillion trillion trillion watts. Not sure of the duration, but let's say that it lasted a second.


    At an estimated cost of 3 cents per kilowatt/hour, that would put the total cost at $8.3 billion trillion trillion, which is more than the Galactic Lending Limit.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  38. Re:Does not matter by stalbott972 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since no one seemed to catch this :

    POPULATION OF UNIVERSE : None.

    It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in it. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.

    Courtesy of the late Douglas Adamas

    --
    Only 8 away from being prime (569919 - 569927) And mom told me I'm unique!!! Sheesh
  39. Awesome writeup of the effects... by blincoln · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...this would have on the Earth at close range, courtesy a really smart guy who posted on POE News.

    --
    "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  40. ISS? by bStrom · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How did it affect the astronauts/cosmonauts on the ISS?

    --
    Try eMusic. DRM free, legal, MP3 downloads.
  41. Re:WRONG by mbrother · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, it's more complicated. Yes, the radiation/heating would not be uniform, but the bigger killer would be from the destruction of chemicals like ozone in the upper atmosphere that protects us from the sun's radiation. The details are kind of complicated, and depends on exact distances, fluxes, and spectral energy distrubution. And atmospheric science.

    Yeah, excuse me, big science nit-picker tonight.

    --
    Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
  42. Re:Excuse me but... by goon+america · · Score: 2, Informative

    You put the comma in the wrong place. So sayeth Google!

    http://www.google.com/search?q=astronomical+units+ per+light+year

    1 light year = 63 239.6717 Astronomical Units

  43. Bush and SETI by Punboy · · Score: 3, Funny

    George W. Bush is now working with SETI to negotiate the disarmament of SGR 1806-20's WME's (Weapons of Mass Extinction).

    --
    If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
  44. Re:Quantify ??? by mbrother · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How many piano tuners are there in Chicago? This is an example Fermi used to use. Yes, maybe you could go out and measure this, using the "job" field in tax returns, the yellow pages, etc., but you can also get an idea of the number by figuring out how many people live in Chicago. How many of those people on average have pianos? How often do they need tuning? How fast can they be tuned? You have a pretty good idea (or he did anyway) of the answers to those individual questions, you can put an estimate on the number without actually making a direct measurement. Some problems in science can be tackled this way, and it's a type of reasoning scientists ought to be able to use well.

    --
    Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
  45. 10 lightyears... instead of 50,000. Do the maths by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 2, Informative
    as the article goes on to say that had the explosion been within 10 light years of us, it "would possibly have triggered a mass extinction.""
    Ok, let's look at a toymodel:

    Say the density of such stars is uniform in the galaxy. Then the frequency of such explosions within 10 ly from us should be something like

    (1/400) * (10/50000)^3

    if we assume that the frequency of these things within 50000ly is on the order of 400 years. That is... wait... *tiptiptip* 2*10^-14, i.e. once (or twice) in about 10 trillion years (the universe has an age of a few 10^9 years!).

    Well, the galaxy is more like a disc. So let's try the same with an exponent of 2 instead of 3. This gives 1*10^-10, still less then one of these "mass estinction" events in the age of the universe. Not much to fear here...
  46. Raw reports of the burst by vrmlguy · · Score: 4, Informative
    http://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/other/180620041227.gcn3

    This is a series of emails that discuss the burst. Interesting posts include the following:

    There were a series of small bursts observed before the big one, but no one seems to have realized that they were precursors until after the big one arrived. "During 21 December more than 30 SGR-like bursts were detected by Konus-Wind and Helicon-Coronas-F" satellites.

    The burst was detected by the Mars Odyssey spacecraft. "A very preliminary analysis indicates that the arrival time at Odyssey is indeed consistent with an arrival direction from SGR1806-20."

    There is also discussion of an Earth-orbiting satellite that did not have a direct view of the flare; however, it picked up a faint echo 7.70 seconds after everyone else saw it. "This value corresponds exactly to burst travelling time from the Wind to the Moon and back to the Coronas-F."

    Finally, serendipious observations were made by spacecraft whose primary mission is solar observation. "The SGR was 5 degrees from RHESSI's pointing axis which was directed toward the Sun."

    --
    Nothing for 6-digit uids?
  47. Lick Observatory by Heisenbug · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guess I've observed there too many times for such a joke to be funny.

    Especially when there's so many better jokes. Like, did you ever come out in the winter to see some guy with his tongue stuck to the sign, going "I thought they were inthructionth!"

    You also don't mention what the road to Lick is paved with. Somehow I doubt it's good intentions.

  48. A scary theory by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Briefly, I think it is quite probable that the characteristics that allow a species to become dominant and develop advanced technology ensure the species' destruction once the technology becomes sufficiently advanced.

    A short post cannot contain much detail. As far as humans are concerned we see

    • A period of struggle for survival. During this period, gradual development of some basic technologies helped. However, a willingness to band together in groups and fight and kill or enslave humans in other groups (as well as animals) to gain access to critical resources was probably most important.
    • To ensure cohesion of an individual group and optimise its effectiveness as a fighting force, dominant leaders who could dicate to the rest of the group were necessary. As a practical matter, the leader was normally an individual who was single minded in his pursuit of power and totally amoral in the methods used to achieve it. This was combined with more positive strengths such as physical prowess and general intelligence to allow him (usually, occasionally her) to win and maintain his position.
    • Once technology reached a certain point, both
      1. the instinct to band together in groups and seek conflict with other groups, and
      2. the tendency to allow amoral, power-mad individuals to gain leadership of the groups
      became counter productive. However, they are built into our genetic makeup and few would be willing to even consider genetic engineering to eliminate these traits.
    • Technology tends to develop at an exponential rate. While initial developments occurred over a very long time period, once technology reaches a certain level, progress becomes very rapid. There is insufficient time for scientists to educate the population as whole as to the dangers of new technologies before the amoral leaders have already started misusing them.
    • It is inevitable that power crazed individuals, eventually possessing enormous power, will clash with each other: destroying the rest of us in the process. There is no way of predicting how the end will come, but quite likely in a totally different way to that any of us currently imagine -- and I guess it might happen in less than 50 years.
  49. Re:How powerful was it really? by CrazyDuke · · Score: 2, Informative

    Your trying to do an apples to oranges comparison. A Watt is a unit of power. The bomb is usually measured in kilotons or megatons, energy units. But I'll try:

    P = E/t
    A Watt is a Joule per second.

    The energy released by a ton of TNT exploding as a unit of energy is 4.2 x 10^9 Joules. So divide 10^39 (10,000 trillion trillion trillion watts) by 4.2x10^9 and get 2.38095238 x 10^29 tons of TNT per second. That's 2.38 x 10^26 kilotons or 2.38 x 10^23 megatons.

    The Hiroshima bomb released about 12.5 kilotons of TNT of energy. That means at one point the magnetar was releasing the energy at the rate of about 1.9 x 10^25 (19,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000)Hiroshima bombs per second.

    Of course assuming all my math is correct...

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
  50. Re:Classical vs. Quantum physics... by man_ls · · Score: 3, Informative

    My understanding is, at the densities we're talking about, the force of gravity is stronger than the nuclear forces of the atoms -- you get funny things like electron orbits being heavily deformed.

    A spinning neutron star that's charged on one side more than another due to gravity pulling electrons around, would induce a magnetic field. Probably a damn strong one too, seeing the forces involved.