Slashdot Mirror


Galaxy Zoo Produces a Rare Specimen

We discussed the Galaxy Zoo project soon after it launched last summer. Science News is now following developments about an odd celestial object that is fueling a lot of excitement among astronomers around the world. In August, a Dutch schoolteacher named Hanny, in the process of characterizing galaxy images, noticed a peculiar object and posted a query about it on the Galaxy Zoo blog. She called it a "Voorwerp," which Science News says is Dutch for "thing" but which Google translates as "subject." Hanny's Voorwerp emits mostly green light (the earlier report said blue). The best guess astronomers have now is that the Voorwerp is emitting "ghost light," i.e. it is "lit by the ultraviolet light and X-rays from a quasar that has vanished in the last 100,000 years," to quote astronomer Bill Keel. "As far as we can tell, it's an unprecedented thing," Keel added. Researchers are scrambling to book time on the Hubble and other major telescopes to get a closer look.

188 comments

  1. image in the post? by anotherone · · Score: 5, Funny

    this is the first time I've ever seen slashdot put an image in the post- welcome to 2001, guys!

    --
    Username taken, please choose another one.
    1. Re:image in the post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditto...

    2. Re:image in the post? by digidave · · Score: 4, Funny

      Do you mean Borg Gates isn't good enough for you?

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    3. Re:image in the post? by sycotic · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I was thinking exactly the same thing.

      I've been reading this site since 2000 and I can't recall *ever* seeing an image on the front page, I don't even think there was one for that monster thread about 9/11 as it unfolded...

      --
      -- If I were a fish, I'd be wet
    4. Re:image in the post? by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 2, Funny
      They obviously opted for the High-Res version too!


      Images on slashdot is about as dangerous as images in email. At least they included an alt tag.

    5. Re:image in the post? by hengdi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And just about the shortest amount of time that any image has ever taken to be slashdotted, as well!

    6. Re:image in the post? by noidentity · · Score: 1

      A Slashdotted image, that is.

    7. Re:image in the post? by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And given the number of readers here, hotlinking images like that could be seen as malicious.

    8. Re:image in the post? by maxume · · Score: 5, Informative

      It isn't a hotlink:

      http://images.slashdot.org/articles/08/06/voorwerp-wht1.jpg

      An image hosted on your server and placed inside an anchor tag is called a 'link'. Putting an image hosted on another server inside an image tag is a 'hotlink'.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    9. Re:image in the post? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      this is the first time I've ever seen slashdot put an image in the post- welcome to 2001, guys!

      They figured we were all blinded by goatse.
           

    10. Re:image in the post? by Eudial · · Score: 1

      At this pace, in 25 years or so, there might even be a youtube video embedded in a Slashdot post.

      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    11. Re:image in the post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Borg Gates should be enough for anyone

    12. Re:image in the post? by v1 · · Score: 1

      I prefer it to NOT do that. Clutters up the main page more than usual. I thought it got done once or twice in the past but was immediately removed?

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    13. Re:image in the post? by maxume · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    14. Re:image in the post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sadly, the image is not in the RSS feed. This follows the age old practice of also not including the in-article links in RSS, requiring unnecessary extra clicks and bandwidth usage.

    15. Re:image in the post? by bugnuts · · Score: 1

      That's what I was thinking, however I hope this does not become standard. I can read the links if I want pictures.

      Even the text-only version includes tons of javascript and other crap ... takes a long time to load. Functions completely borked on text-only browsers, etc.

      I need a "luddite version" of viewing. :-)

    16. Re:image in the post? by Deltaspectre · · Score: 1

      idle.* had a youtube video way before this post :P

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
    17. Re:image in the post? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Game reviews frequently have 3-4 screenshots if you click through to the full review. Well, they used to-- there haven't been any game reviews in awhile, not that I recall.

    18. Re:image in the post? by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 1

      Hence the robotic overlord reading the posts to us?

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    19. Re:image in the post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hot news: Slashdot publishes first ever picture in post.

    20. Re:image in the post? by JumperCable · · Score: 1

      They are really splurging on a whole 3,950 bytes.

    21. Re:image in the post? by nacturation · · Score: 1

      How about 2004? The Penny Arcade series were pretty popular:

      http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/17/188258
       

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    22. Re:image in the post? by Skuldo · · Score: 1

      Though there was an embedded YouTube video not so long ago, to much outrage :P

    23. Re:image in the post? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      An image hosted on your server and placed inside an anchor tag is called a 'link'. Putting an image hosted on another server inside an image tag is a 'hotlink'.

      Note: this is a neologism. "Hotlink" had been synonymous with "link" for a long time before that distinction was made; in fact, this is the first I've heard of it. Look for old Usenet posts where "hotlink" just meant a link to another site.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    24. Re:image in the post? by FredFredrickson · · Score: 1

      What reader are you using? I get both links and the picture in mine... (it may be that I'm a subscriber though...)

      --
      Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
  2. Voorwerp = Thing by Skinkie · · Score: 4, Informative

    Voorwerp is 'thing' in Dutch. But when you would like to say 'thing' in Dutch, you would obviously use 'ding'.

    --
    Support Eachother, Copy Dutch Property!
    1. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Basje · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Item" is a better translation of "voorwerp". "Subject" would be "onderwerp".

      --
      the pun is mightier than the sword
    2. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Probably the English word "object" would be more appropriate here then "thing". And as a plus, it directly translates to Dutch and back again.

    3. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think in this context 'object' would be the most appropriate translation

    4. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by denver38 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed, and it's not "thing" neither ("ding"). I would call it an "object".

    5. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 1

      As a Dutchman I can say that is correct. Thing = ding Object = voorwerp Subject = onderwerp There is a little bit more too it of course, translation depends on context. E.g. we have more words for (almost) the same thing, similar as in English.

      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
    6. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by pnagel · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, "object" is an even better translation of "voorwerp".

      And it makes better sense in context too: "astronomers find mystery object" sounds find. "Astronomers find mystery thing" sounds stilted.

    7. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by pheldens · · Score: 0

      or object

    8. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can something be both "Object" & "Subject"? I don't wish to pick a fight with Google, but the former would seem to be the better translation...

    9. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by WarwickRyan · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Object" would be the most accurate translation, taking into account the subject matter.

    10. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by tsjaikdus · · Score: 2, Informative

      'wat een prachtig voorwerp' translates to 'what a beautiful object'

      Even with Google.

    11. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by kitgerrits · · Score: 1

      Technically, the correct translation would be 'object', in the 'thing' sens of the word.

      "Objects in mirror are closer than they appear"

      --
      "I was in love with a beautiful blonde once, dear. She drove me to drink. It's the one thing I am indebted to her for."
    12. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by slashnik · · Score: 1

      Voorwerp shmoorwerp

      It's a cosmic frog

    13. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doohicky.

    14. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but "Astronomers find mystery voorwerp" makes no contextual sense whatsoever, so we'll take what we can get, stilted or otherwise.

      It sounds like someone whose been kicked in the beans as they approached the business end of the sentence, and it reads like it's actually an english word printed backwards, until you stare at it long enough to imagine it backwards and realise it makes just as much sense backwards as it does forwards.

      Also, WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY.

    15. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by jedie · · Score: 1

      /. still hasn't changed: it took about 40 posts for people to stop about images on the front page and the "voorwerp" before going on to the real subject (which is not "voorwerp" but "onderwerp" :))

      --
      "The majority is always sane, Louis." -- Nessus
      http://slashdot.jp
    16. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how close they are here but any bilingual Afrikaans native we would most likely translate 'voorwerp' as OBJECT. Definitely not subject, thing is valid in meaning but not in context and would be better translated as 'ding' anyway. There is a definite is slight difference in meaning between an 'object' and a 'thing' and the same difference exist in Afrikaans (and almost certainly Dutch) between a 'voorwerp' and a 'ding'.

      So my feel is that the best translation of her intent (and I have in fact been a professional news translator so I have a pretty good feel for such things) would not be 'subject' OR 'thing' but 'object'.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    17. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stilted - "stiffly dignified or formal, as speech or literary style; pompous." word choice?

    18. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by street+struttin' · · Score: 1

      Is that anything like the Mystery Hole?

    19. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by otopico · · Score: 1

      My vote is for ' doohicky '.

    20. Re:Voorwerp = Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Voorwerp can be translated as thing, item or object, depending on the context. However the nuance is lost as voorwerp means the thing, item or object in question, the thing, item or object being dealt with. To be honest its a slight bit archaic. In this case object is the most apropriate translation.

  3. Voorwerp = object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The correct translation would be 'object'. I can understand the confusion with 'subject', but Dutch people would then say 'onderwerp', never 'voorwerp'.

    1. Re:Voorwerp = object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. "Voorwerp" in the sense of "thing" should be translated "object". The translation "subject" comes from the fact that "voorwerp" is also used as a grammatical term. Clearly that's not the appropriate sense here.

    2. Re:Voorwerp = object by DirtySouthAfrican · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think google means 'subject' like, an artist or photographer's 'subject', rather than say, math, history or entomology.

    3. Re:Voorwerp = object by BorgDrone · · Score: 1

      I think google mistakes 'voorwerp' for 'onderwerp' which means 'subject' in the sense of "the subject of our discussion"

  4. Hey.... by Izabael_DaJinn · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's my taxi-ride home. Thank Xenu!

    --
    Careful What You Wish For....
    1. Re:Hey.... by laejoh · · Score: 0

      So that's what a Vogon Constructor Fleet looks like!

  5. It is an Excession.. by sayfawa · · Score: 4, Funny

    ..and we're about to have an Outside Context Problem

    --
    Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
    1. Re:It is an Excession.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Where's the Sleeper Service?

    2. Re:It is an Excession.. by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Making Engine. Lots and lots of Engine.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  6. He took his Voorwerp sword in hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One, two! One, two! And through and through
    The Voorwerp blade went snicker-snack!
    He left it dead, and with its head
    He went galumphing back.

  7. Simple Explanation by Tablizer · · Score: 0

    Either Shrek or Hulk, or both farted. (Who says summer movies are not good for science?)

  8. Image Offsite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone PLEASE get this on Flickr. It's pathetic that the server can't handle even 4 minutes of Slashdot.

  9. The Death Star by KozmoKramer · · Score: 1

    That's no moon.

    --
    My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my Father! Prepare to die!
  10. Voorwerp translates best to object. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both suggested translations are not really correct. I would translate it to "object".

  11. Voorwerp? by thewiz · · Score: 4, Funny

    I didn't know that was a word.
    That was the sound I made last time I threw up.
    Whodathunkit.

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
    1. Re:Voorwerp? by hkz · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm Dutch, and the proper translation of voorwerp is actually 'object', though 'thing' comes close enough. We have a funny language sometimes. I like words like 'zodra' and 'zoiets', and saying 'goeiemorgen' has the benefit of being offensive to Russians the way we pronounce it, which since yesterday is a good thing :-)

    2. Re:Voorwerp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess if you only speak English and lack a sense of humor you would make a joke like that and get a Score 3 Funny from a panel that has the same specifications.

      If possible give this reply a score in the informative category.

    3. Re:Voorwerp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Voorwerp is actually an odd word now that I really think about it. It is both generic, which is why it can be properly translated as "thing", and specific, in that it implies a purpose in the item it refers to (the exact purpose to be determined by the context it is used in). It can be translated as tool, thing, object, or item depending on the context it is used in.

      Example uses of voorwerp, which all have different translations:
      lijdend voorwerp - object (in grammar)
      meewerkend voorwerp - dative case
      gevonden voorwerpen - lost & found (typically referring both to the items and the booth/office to reclaim them)
      onbekend vliegend voorwerp - unidentified flying object

      Regarding the context of TFA, there is a very subtle implication which gets lost in whatever translation you may attempt: voorwerp implies a solid (crafted) object, which is why "thing" is the best translation in this case. It is very odd to refer to a celestial cloud as a solid item, and it says a lot about the peculiarity of the voorwerp...

    4. Re:Voorwerp? by DoubleEdd · · Score: 1

      It's a name that kind of stuck rather than being chosen by a large committee discussing all the details, to be honest!

    5. Re:Voorwerp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you like "slechtstschrijvende" (no offense) ?

      It's probably shorter if you write that bitch of an adjective phonetically in Russian...

    6. Re:Voorwerp? by notnAP · · Score: 1
      ...offensive to Russians the way we pronounce it, which since yesterday is a good thing :-)

      I put the over/under on American /. users who get this reference at about 5%.

    7. Re:Voorwerp? by Angostura · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mind if I go off-topic for a moment, since there is an expert in the room? No, good.

      Several years ago, when I was in France, I took a group of children to racing stables where they bred racing horses - a stud farm. While we were walking around, we met a charming, well-spoken Dutch couple in their 60s who chatted about this and that, and then indicating the breeding stables asked "So, tell me - do you have fuckeries like this England?" At least that's what I'm 90% sure they said.

      I presume that "fuck" exists in the Dutch language and that their on-the-fly translation attempt misfired?

    8. Re:Voorwerp? by MtHuurne · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Dutch verb "fokken" means "to breed"; "fokkerij" is a place where animals are bred.

    9. Re:Voorwerp? by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Good thing you didn't go for the ones who care, it would be vanishingly small.

    10. Re:Voorwerp? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Well, now that I know about it, it's the name of my next World of Warcraft character!

    11. Re:Voorwerp? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Mind if I go off-topic for a moment, since there is an expert in the room? No, good.

      Several years ago, when I was in France, I took a group of children to racing stables where they bred racing horses - a stud farm. While we were walking around, we met a charming, well-spoken Dutch couple in their 60s who chatted about this and that, and then indicating the breeding stables asked "So, tell me - do you have fuckeries like this England?" At least that's what I'm 90% sure they said.

      I presume that "fuck" exists in the Dutch language and that their on-the-fly translation attempt misfired?

      Holland suddenly sounds more interesting.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    12. Re:Voorwerp? by Askmum · · Score: 5, Funny

      To which there is a little dutch joke.
      A Dutch guy talks to an English guy:
      D: I fok horses!
      E: Pardon?
      D: Yes, paarden!

      Explanation: the term "fok horses" is the above misconjunction of fokken -> to fuck, instead of breed, and pardon, when spoken, can be misconstrued as "paarden" which is dutch for "horses".

    13. Re:Voorwerp? by nukal · · Score: 1

      Please mod parent up. It appears to be the only sensible comment that actually relates to TFA.

    14. Re:Voorwerp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And "fuck" comes from exactly that verb.

    15. Re:Voorwerp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'angstschreeuw' is nice too :)

    16. Re:Voorwerp? by EvilMonkeySlayer · · Score: 1

      It's not even remotely shaped like a chicken.

    17. Re:Voorwerp? by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, come on, I speak 3 languages and I still thought it was fucking hilarious.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    18. Re:Voorwerp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UEFA Euro 2008: Russia beat Netherlands 3-1 after extra time, advancing to the semi-finals.

  12. Slashdotted! by KasperMeerts · · Score: 1

    W00t! Another one bites the dust!

    I would translate "Voorwerp" as "Object".
    It's weird. That thing, whatever it might be, is probably quadrillions times bigger than our Earth, it's looking at us, and we have no idea what it is.
    I for one welcome our new Voorwerp-overlords.

    --
    As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
    1. Re:Slashdotted! by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      You know... I just realized something.
      Voorwerp = Object,
      This is not on the earth... which could be stretched to 'flying'.
      Thus far, we have no idea what it is... eg. it is unidentified.

      Does Hanny know she officially named something to be an Unidentified Flying Object... is this some kind of in-joke ?
      An astronomer just named her discovery a UFO !!!!

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    2. Re:Slashdotted! by dewey1 · · Score: 1

      I vote to name it "Kermit". Which, of course, means "green frog" in puppetese.

  13. Obviously An Ad For... by FurtiveGlancer · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    Invenio via vel creo
    1. Re:Obviously An Ad For... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean...could this really be...the Great Green Arkleseizure? It looks green enough to me, and surely will not fit into my back yard.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Obviously An Ad For... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      The Great While Handkerchief must be nearby.

  14. What's the rush? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Funny

    Researchers are scrambling to book time on the Hubble and other major telescopes to get a closer look.
    What's the rush? Isn't this celestial thing going to be out there and available for, say, the next few million years or so?
    1. Re:What's the rush? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Researchers are scrambling to book time on the Hubble and other major telescopes to get a closer look.

      What's the rush? Isn't this celestial thing going to be out there and available for, say, the next few million years or so?

      The anomaly will be there.

      The fanboys for early-bird-scientists won't.

    2. Re:What's the rush? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To beat the other astronomers.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:What's the rush? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The credit for the first paper to explain it, or to give the most feasible explanations cited by the next crop of graduate students, isn't going to be available for long. Discovering genuinely new classes of celestial objects depends very much on timing.

    4. Re:What's the rush? by CanadianRealist · · Score: 2, Funny

      Some astronomers want to use the Hubble telescope to beat other astronomers?

      I always thought these guys were just a bunch of nerds, but now they're going to get physical and become violent?

    5. Re:What's the rush? by gmuslera · · Score: 0, Troll

      The unexpected can tell you 2 kind of things... that there is something that we dont know, or that there are something in what we are wrong. Looking at the show is not so urgent, but finding an explanation for the unknown (specially, being the 1st doing so), is.

    6. Re:What's the rush? by negRo_slim · · Score: 4, Funny

      To beat the other astronomers.

      It's Slashdot 1st post syndrome in the real world!
      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    7. Re:What's the rush? by symbolset · · Score: 2, Informative

      Isn't this celestial thing going to be out there and available for, say, the next few million years or so?

      The Hubble, however, will most definitely not.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    8. Re:What's the rush? by Zanzibar+Q.+Tarquin · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Isn't this celestial thing going to be out there and available for, say, the next few million years or so?" --- If the current theory is correct, what we see is the result of an event that has long since ended - the glow of the Voorwerp being a "light echo". This means that the energy provided by the initial event could cease at any time, changing the nature of the Voorwerp. Also, the earler it is investigated, the better chance we have of understanding the true nature of the original event.

    9. Re:What's the rush? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To beat the other astronomers. Hubble is a weapon now?
  15. Voorwerp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In this meaning 'voorwerp' is a thing or object (which is a better translation here) but when you are talking about dissecting sentences a 'voorwerp' is not even a subject. Bad google.

  16. Green, Blue? by PPH · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How far away is this 'thing' and what sort of red shift should we be factoring into its true color?

    Once that has been answerd, what sorts of atoms would emit that wavelength when excited by a radiation source?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Green, Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know! Sheesh, some people!

    2. Re:Green, Blue? by cathector · · Score: 5, Informative

      for the first part,
      according to wikipedia, "the highest confirmed spectroscopic redshift of a galaxy is ... z = 6.96.", and if i interpret the formulas there correctly, emittedWavelength = observedWavelength / (z + 1), so if this thing has the maximum known redshift and the observed wavelength is say 550nm, then the emitted wavelength would be about 70nm or 7e-6cm, so pretty well in the UV.

      for the second part, atoms emit across a wide range of wavelengths.
      so it's more a matter of how much energy is driving the emission.

    3. Re:Green, Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And do you honestly think that there aren't a few hundred astronomers who have already asked those questions?

    4. Re:Green, Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bill Keel has made a page devoted to Hanny's Voorwerp with links to relevant sites; all the current data can be accessed from here: http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/research/voorwerp.html
      p.s. Hi Waveney!

    5. Re:Green, Blue? by cathector · · Score: 1

      and you think that's not a reason to ask them here ?

    6. Re:Green, Blue? by DoubleEdd · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's a redshift of 0.05 - six or seven hundred million light years away. We also have spectra of the voorwerp, so we know something about the atoms that make it up. You'll see some of these spectra at http://www.galaxyzooblog.org/2008/03/20/voorwerp-fever/ with the elements emitting the lines labelled.

    7. Re:Green, Blue? by Cattus+Curiosus · · Score: 1

      Same link as parent, but clickable: http://www.galaxyzooblog.org/2008/03/20/voorwerp-fever/

      --
      Snowclone is the new clich
    8. Re:Green, Blue? by nazsco · · Score: 1

      On a somewhat related not, Aoi used to mean both blue and green in japanese.

  17. Whatever you do ... by Fallen+Andy · · Score: 1
    don't open the box. (well it does look like a frog doesn't it?).

    Andy

  18. Oblig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This thread is useless without...hey, would you look at that!

  19. Zoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Where is the "Don't feed the Voorwerp" sign?

    1. Re:Zoo by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Right here:

      Die nichten feeden da Voorwerp!!!

    2. Re:Zoo by BrentH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Dutch != Deutsch == German

      The proper Dutch translation would be:

      Voorwerp niet voeren!

      Or, the Dutch funny edition:

      Niet voeren da Voorwerp!

      Or, the Anglo-Dutch funny edition:

      Niet food'n da Voorwerp!

    3. Re:Zoo by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I have been going sigless for too long.

    4. Re:Zoo by Urkki · · Score: 1

      Well, it seems they stopped feeding the central mouth of the Voorwerp a while ago. So it may be they had the sign, but they already moved it to another exhibit.

      Just a speculation, mind you.

  20. Frogs in Space by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else see Kermit the Frog in this image?

    1. Re:Frogs in Space by Hartree · · Score: 1

      "It's not easy being green."

    2. Re:Frogs in Space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will after I eat this.

    3. Re:Frogs in Space by zish · · Score: 1

      I, for one, saw the second coming of Jim Hensen.

      How long before Golden Palace purchases it?

      --
      Spork.

      P.S. Spork.
  21. I'd say... by ToastBusters · · Score: 1

    I'd say it's God's booger.

    1. Re:I'd say... by owlnation · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'd say it's God's booger.
      And we should fear the coming of the great handkerchief. If our glorious leaders decide to build a "B Ark" it'll be time to overthrow them (if it isn't already overdue).
    2. Re:I'd say... by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      I'd say it's God's booger.

      Indeed. I'm letting you guess how God made clouds of comets. If then you consider the theories of panspermia, you'll eventually realise the real nature of our planet.

      That's right, the Earth is an ovule. Now you know.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
  22. Meaning of Voorwerp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Voorwerp" can be object or item.
    In this context the closest translation would be "object".

  23. Green vs. Blue by WiglyWorm · · Score: 0

    The original article probably said the light was blue because many languages out there do not make a distinction between the colors green and blue.

    1. Re:Green vs. Blue by imsabbel · · Score: 4, Informative

      No.
      Its because those pics only use 3 of the 5 colour channels.
      As there are no R/G/B sensors, everything is an approximation.
      Some of the early ones looked blue, even though green would be a better optical equivalent (most likely because they weighted some near UV radiation as blue)

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    2. Re:Green vs. Blue by bigsmoke · · Score: 1

      Dutch does have this distinction. Green is 'groen' and blue is 'blauw'.

      --
      Morality is usually taught by the immoral.
    3. Re:Green vs. Blue by WiglyWorm · · Score: 1

      Well thanks. I was trying to look this up but obviously my google-foo has failed me.

    4. Re:Green vs. Blue by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      because many languages out there do not make a distinction between the colors green and blue. That is interesting if true. Can you give some examples?
      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    5. Re:Green vs. Blue by tehdaemon · · Score: 1
      link You may NOT be eaten by a grue. ;-)

      T

      --
      Laws are horrible moral guides, moral guides make even worse laws.
  24. 'Voorwerp' = 'Object' by ABoerma · · Score: 2, Informative

    'Voorwerp' would be most accurately traslated as 'Object'.

    1. Re:'Voorwerp' = 'Object' by McDutchie · · Score: 1

      'Voorwerp' would be most accurately traslated as 'Object'.

      For the language nerds, it might be interesting to know that 'voorwerp' is in fact a direct loan translation of Latin 'obiectum' (object).

    2. Re:'Voorwerp' = 'Object' by owlstead · · Score: 1

      And "voor" is pronounced like door. "Werp" uses an "e" like in nanny (the way somebody from Texas would pronounce it). Then you have the r's which are really pronounced as the r in, well, "really". The P is really sharp as well.

      OK, now try to pronounce it, it should be good for a few laughs :)

    3. Re:'Voorwerp' = 'Object' by j_sp_r · · Score: 1

      Isn't "voor" more likely to pronounced as "for " then door, or did you mean the "oor" part?

    4. Re:'Voorwerp' = 'Object' by Zanzibar+Q.+Tarquin · · Score: 1

      "foor-fairp" - In fact if you visit the Galaxy Zoo Forum, Hanny herself (the discoverer of the object) has helpfully posted an audio file of the pronunciation - Observant AND helpful, is Hanny. n.b. the name "Hanny" is in fact pronounced "Honey" in English...

  25. Mod parent up by MedeaMelana · · Score: 1

    "object" is indeed the most appropriate translation in this case.

  26. It might be a threat. Destroy it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I recommend photon torpedoes.

    Thing at sector 5, 7 : "AAAAAIIIIIIIEEEEEEEAAAAAAAUUUUUUGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!"
    Thing at sector 5, 7 : "HACK! HACK! COUGH! *CHOKE!*"
    Mr. Spock : "FASCINATING!"

    1. Re:It might be a threat. Destroy it! by Quasimodem · · Score: 1

      Just so long a FoxGnus doesn't start referring to it as a 'Voorwerpofascist.'

  27. There's only one thing it can be. by geckipede · · Score: 1

    Let's start running away now. greenfly

  28. I, for one, by denmarkw00t · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I, for one, welcome our green-thing-in-space-in-a-/.-post overlords

  29. Object summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    http://www.astr.ua.edu.nyud.net/keel/research/voorwerp.html

  30. Mods on crack again? by IvyKing · · Score: 0, Troll

    I thought CanadianRealist's post was pretty funny - though maybe a bit sexist as there are quite a few women astronomers out there.

  31. looks like by seventhc · · Score: 0

    Kermit the frog.

    --
    'sig' deleted due to the stupidity of it's 'nature'
    1. Re:looks like by zifferent · · Score: 1

      Obviously. I can't believe that we're the only two people to see it. Mod parent up!

      --
      cat sig > /dev/null
  32. Voorwerp? by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Looks more like a Quagaar to me.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  33. U.F.O. by gmuslera · · Score: 0, Troll

    Unknown F*king-image-in-slashdot-post Object

  34. Daddy, what's that Voorwerp? by MRe_nl · · Score: 1

    That's a Dangerous.
    And that one?
    That's also a Dangerous.
    All Voorwerps are Dangerous.

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  35. Voorwerp = Object by spectre_be · · Score: 1

    I suppose that's talking semantics but then again, it is the more accurate translation.

    Oh yea; ghost light, cool!!

  36. whoever did that by MrKaos · · Score: 2, Funny

    really should have turned the extractor fans on in the bathroom.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  37. Self Portrait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advanced life forms have given us a clue to their culture. I think it looks like a self portrait of a little green man.

  38. It it that important? by jd · · Score: 1

    It's the coolest name for a celestial object yet! And you just know that they'll try to slide it into a future Doctor Who. I can't wait to see David Tarrent try to keep a straight face whilst talking about the Vishnish aliens inhabiting the local Voorwerp.

    --
    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)
  39. Not always a 1:1 translation by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Translations from language to language are imprecise because there are often no 1:1 translations. The classic is Dutch "gesellig" which is approximated by "cozy".

    I grew up in South Africa, speaking mainly English, but also Afrikaans (a derivative of Dutch) and Zulu. My father and I would often mix all three in one sentence to get the words we wanted.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  40. To answer, "Why the rush?" by jordandeamattson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Folks ask, "Why the rush?" to get time on the Hubble and other instruments.

    Simply put, astronomical events can be extremely short lived. Yes, it happened millions of years ago. And it could continue for millions of years. But just as it appeared, it could go out.

    Think what happens to novas and super novas. They blink into existence and then disappear. The same could happen here. Having never seen this class of voorwerp (object, thing, etc.), it is possible it could go out tomorrow or change dramatically in way which would make baseline data of the current status incredibly valuable.

    Going a bit off topic here, I have to say it is totally cool to see a reference to my old friend and fellow Geek, Bill Keel here on Slashdot.

    Bill and I attended UC Santa Cruz in the 1980s. I entered as a Freshman while Bill was finishing up his Phd in Astronomy (by the way, UC Santa has the top graduate program in Astronomy).

    Even then he was the galaxy nerd and his dissertation was on the topic of, if I remember correctly, formation of spiral galaxies. I remember helping him with nroff and troff as he put his dissertation together.

    During his Post-Doc years, he would come back frequently to perform observations at Lick Observatory (above San Jose) and to crunch data using a program written in Forth that ran on a handful of systems in the world (one of which was at UCSC).

    Our friendship continued over the years (I was even one of his groomsmen).

    Bill is a passionate teacher and researcher. He is very supportive of amateur astronomy (one of the few fields left where a non-professional, non-academic can have a major impact).

    If you want to learn more about galaxies, check out one of his many web pages here: http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/galaxies/.

  41. kikker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's just a frog.

  42. Ghost lights? by nastro · · Score: 1

    Astronomer1: Oh my God! It just disappeared. It's a ghost-light! [reels away from the telescope] There are ghost-lights all over these skies, you know.
    Astronomer2: [timid] Hold me.
    Astronomer1: [conciliatory] Only if you hold me.

  43. Noise to signal ratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The noise to signal ratio of this article is utterly impossible.
    Also, this thread is usefull with pics!

  44. the hell? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

    Voorwerp? Sounds something like the Juffo-wup the Mycon were interested in.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:the hell? by Noren · · Score: 1

      When Juffo-Wup is complete, when at last there is no Void or Non, when the Creators return, then we can finally rest.

    2. Re:the hell? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Nice to know people still remember that game. :)

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  45. Green vs. Blue? by BarlowBrad · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know why the image Slashdot and Science News choose to display depicts the "Voorwerp" as Green while a Google Image Search depicts the "Voorwerp" as blue in all of the top results?

    1. Re:Green vs. Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try reading the article. It explains why.

    2. Re:Green vs. Blue? by Zanzibar+Q.+Tarquin · · Score: 2, Informative

      The original Sloan Digital Sky Survey image in which Hanny noticed the object that was to become known as "Hanny's Voorwerp" was shown as blue - indeed her post querying it was headed "What's The Blue Stuff Below?" (Below the galaxy that was the focus of the image). Members of the Galaxy Zoo team ran spectrum checks & realised that it was unique; further investigation showed that while the SDSS colour filtration system showed it as blue, the green we see in the top picture is a more accurate representation. So Google (& others) appear to be using an image of the Voorwerp as it was first discovered, whilst /. are obviously somewhat more alive to the current state of affairs... (& if that blatant plug for /. isn't worth a point I don't know what is...)

  46. The greenflies are coming!!! by freespac3 · · Score: 1

    We must evacuate to a near by pulsar quickly!

    --
    Better to regret something you have done, then something you haven't.
  47. it looks... by bferrell · · Score: 1

    It looks like mozilla to me

  48. UP PERISCOPE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    prepare to surface lol

  49. Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its the final Cylon of course. Frackin Toasters.

  50. You're describing torture ;-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word you're looking for is "gezellig" which can indeed mean cozy but the best translation is "nice / friendly atmosphere" or "having a good time", something like that. The word you used, gesellig, is awefully close to 'geselen' which basically means whipping someone with a rope :)

  51. Re:Not always a 1:1 translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The classic is Dutch "gesellig" which is approximated by "cozy". Actually in Afrikaans it's "gesellig", in Dutch it's "gezellig".

  52. Web dev here by 6Yankee · · Score: 1

    Can someone tell me what colour it is in hex codes? Cheers.

    1. Re:Web dev here by Viadd · · Score: 1

      It's out of gamut, unless you have an RGBUV monitor.

  53. Its Real Origins by StormReaver · · Score: 1

    You can't really see this from a static picture, but I think I have figured out the true nature of this object. Subsequent pictures should show the lower half (the part that looks like an open mouth) is actually a pair of huge legs in a seemingly closed position. These legs actually open and close in a predictable rhythm. Also not shown in the picture is the turret moving around attempting to track this thing as it rapidly zips back and forth across the cosmos, getting ever closer to the turret below.

    If we had captured this picture millions of years ago, we would have seen a tight formation of these objects moving across the galaxy in perfect unison. Alas, the turret has eliminated all but one of these things, so we missed out on a great spectacle.

  54. Re:Not always a 1:1 translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spelling fix: gesellig should be gezellig ;)

  55. No ambiguity here then by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

    So, to sum up, it's either a thing or an object, and it's green, blue, ultra-violet or x-ray. Luckily astronomer Bill Keel leaps to the rescue with a more comprehensive explanation: "it's an unprecedented... thing."

  56. It's a SKULL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks Castle GreySkull in space.

    Or its the evil nebula from some Cpt Herlock cartoon...

  57. Voorwerp, what does it mean ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dutch-English: Voorwerp is an object, a Ding is a thing (notice the resemblance) en een Onderwerp is a subject. A subject is 'subjected' to scruteny or some other power. An object is simply itself, just like a thing. Voorwerp is an unusual name for a celestial object, commonly a voorwerp is not to big, like a knife, a stone, something you can hold in your hand. No size restricitions for Dingen (or Things). Anyway, the most famous dutch word in english is apartheid..

  58. Spock's home world by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    It's Vulcan! Or perhaps that's where little green men com from.

  59. ALL TAKE NOTE by pkphy39 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Quite possibly the first time in history that a joke became MORE funny after being explained. Kudos.

  60. The hi-res version.... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

    The hi-res version looks like Gumby making a basketball hoop with his arms.

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  61. Soothing Green Light by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1

    Clearly it is a galaxy full of Slashdot readers.

  62. Obligatory joke by Juiblex · · Score: 1

    * Insert here joke about our new Voorwerp Overlords. *

  63. Voorwerp means object (a book, a pen, a tree...) by jansegers · · Score: 1

    The Dutch word 'voorwerp' means object, thing you can touch and move(a book, a pen, a tree, a desk, a computer, ...). Sometimes it's used for the subject line for email (though 'onderwerp' would have been the better translation). Thus the google translator confusion. Pieter Jansegers pieterjansegers.ning.com

  64. Tow Mater? by chrisaj5 · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else read this and think: Oh no, it's the Ghost Light!

  65. Shoggoth? by anarkavre · · Score: 1

    It is the "thing" that should not be.

    --
    "Without curiosity and knowledge, the mind is a vast void. Without the mind, curiosity and knowledge are nonexistent."
  66. Great Green Arkleseizure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are two ways we look at best day of the week to buy shares and worst day of the week to sell shares. We look at day of week and the date because numbers are very important to the investors decision to buy and sell.

    * day of week

    There are five days in the week that can be used to buy or sell our shares. As investors we have to pick the best possible shares for the increase of value. Many choices are made by investors every time they buy or sell the shares. Price, Broker, and How to pay. One other choice is the day of the week. Some days are more lucky than others that is a fact! Look at all the stock market collapses they always happen on fridays. So we know Friday is unlucky day for both buy and sell. Also Wednesday is the bad day to buy share. But Monday is good day - everyone have a nice weekend rest, come back refreshed so mood good and shares go up in price. Everybody is happy.

    Tuesday is a good day and Thursday is a good also.

    So avoid Friday because you never know when market crash. Do not sell shares on Friday. Maybe buy the shares on Friday but not sell because of market crash. And wednesday not good day either - many investor eager for the weekend and by middle of week go out Wednesday night and they lose focus on the market. So Wednesday not good day for buy or sell. The Tuesday and Thursday very good day for both buy and sell shares. And Monday best day of all for both buy and sell.

    So look for happy days to buy and sell shares. You feel good people near you feel good price go up.

    * numbers

    Also numbers very important. So these rules change by date.

    Eight is very lucky number. All people believe in eight. Buy or sell on Friday is ok on 8, or 18 or 28 of month.

    Sometimes number work by using basic math. 1+7 = 8 2+6 = 8 3+5=8 all good dates. So buy and sell the shares on 17, 26 but not 35 as this impossible date.

    Ok is 19 ( 9-1).

    So date work ok too.

    * conclusion

    We trade shares to make money. Not good to buy and sell shares at lower price. We need to buy and sell shares at higher price. We need to know best day or week to buy and best day of week to sell. This article help.

    Day of week is very important when buy or sell the shares.

    Friday very bad day. Monday very good day. Tuesday and Thursday is good but be careful. Worst day is Wednesday except when

    Also important is the date. Number very important. Even more important then the day.

  67. I used to do Galaxy Zoo until... by rholland356 · · Score: 1

    Galaxy Zoo was an interesting concept. Kind of like Mersenne Prime searching, only using wetware instead of software.

    The trouble with wetware is that it is time-sensitive, knows that time on earth is finite, and the count always goes backward.

    When it seemed that the same damn photos were appearing over and over, I gave up.

    I am glad to see something of interest was found.

    1. Re:I used to do Galaxy Zoo until... by Zanzibar+Q.+Tarquin · · Score: 1

      The same images started re-appearing for a very good reason - as the count of left-handed v right-handed spirals showed an imbalance that seemed highly unlikely, a bias check had to be run. This was explained in the GZ blog. Galaxy Zoo 2 should be up & running soon; come back & check it out...

    2. Re:I used to do Galaxy Zoo until... by rholland356 · · Score: 1

      You know, I felt like Charlie Brown at Halloween, looking in his bag and saying "I got a rock."

      If I had gotten more spiral galaxies, GZ might have held my attention beyond the few hundred images I evaluated. "I got an elliptical."

      I'm sure I'll stop by GZ 2. The galaxy selection might not be any better, but perhaps the community experience is enhanced.