Slashdot Mirror


What Struck Earth in 775?

ananyo writes "Just over 1,200 years ago, the planet was hit by an extremely intense burst of high-energy radiation of unknown cause, scientists studying tree-ring data have found. The radiation burst, which seems to have hit between 774 and 775, was detected by looking at the amounts of the radioactive isotope carbon-14 in tree rings that formed during the 775 growing season in the Northern Hemisphere. The increase in 14C levels is so clear that the scientists conclude that the atmospheric level of 14C must have jumped by 1.2% over the course of no longer than a year, about 20 times more than the normal rate of variation (abstract). Yet, as the only known events that can produce a 14C spike are supernova explosions or giant solar flares, and neither event was observed at the time, astronomers have a cosmic mystery on their hands."

23 of 344 comments (clear)

  1. Quite Obvious, Even to Me by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Funny

    You need only look at the years leading up to 775 to unravel this mystery. In 773 at the start of the Islamic Golden Age, the number zero was introduced to Baghdad which would, in 775, surpass China's capital of Chang'an as Earth's largest city. Now, we know from the second law of thermodynamics that 'the entropy of an isolated system that is in equilibrium is constant.' Now with all those people suddenly using zero in tons of transactions and writings, Earth experienced a huge decrease in entropy. I'm sure if you analyze the existing works from the time, you'll find that pervasive use of the hot new number zero increased the frequency of numbers at the time by 1.2%. That means that somewhere there had to be an increase in entropy to maintain the balance described by the second law of thermodynamics. Of course, anyone with a mail-order internet degree can tell you the obvious natural source of entropy at the time would be the decay of nitrogen-14. What? Falsifiability? Just watch, the floods in Thailand have lead to a decrease in production of ones and zeros hard drives which means we'll finally get a break from this 'global warming' or (let's just call it for what it really is) the 'entropic energy extravaganza!'

    Also, for good measure: Nazis.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Quite Obvious, Even to Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      With that much carbon, it must have been a wet one.

    2. Re:Quite Obvious, Even to Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, the radiation is a resultant of the explosion of the second Death Star; it happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away so it took that long to get here.

    3. Re:Quite Obvious, Even to Me by Sparticus789 · · Score: 5, Funny

      All I see is the universal Linux file permission.

      --
      sudo make me a sandwich
    4. Re:Quite Obvious, Even to Me by paiute · · Score: 5, Funny

      Couldn't've been, Hitler is still in my textbooks.

      Duh. We have to go back and rescue him every time one of you noobs gets your time travel license.

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  2. More articles like this one by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't have a comment other than to say that I enjoy articles like this one. Please bring more like it and i will hit refresh 20 times to get yor page hit count up :)

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  3. Lavos by shiftless · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is that you?

  4. Effect on Carbon dating? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Would this mean carbon dating is inaccurate for items older than 1300 years?

    Time to redate the Shroud of Turin?

    1. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by vlm · · Score: 5, Informative

      Would this mean carbon dating is inaccurate for items older than 1300 years?

      Things that were alive in 775 appear to have more C14 than usual, so even after centuries of decay, they'd still have more C14 than usual, which would make them measure younger. This is my understanding from reading the "Amateur Scientist" column in "Scientific American" about doing radiocarbon dating at home. SciAm used to be a pretty cool magazine, well, 50 years ago. When I was a high school kid I spent about two weeks one summer reading on microfilm pretty much every Amateur Scientist column from the 30s (when it was all telescopes) until the 70s when it started sucking. You can buy a collection of those columns on a cdrom now, of course.

      Time to redate the Shroud of Turin?

      I'm not up on my mythology, but I think it's made of woven plant or animal fibers, and this would have no effect unless the plants or animals that made it were alive in 775. If it was grown in 775, then it would be misdated to be somewhat younger. I might misremember but isn't the mythology something along the lines that it was grown just a short time before year 0 ? This error is going in the opposite direction then. Or theres some alternate mythology as regards templars and freemasons and such, which is too recent to be fixed by the error.

      Or the TLDR summary version of the above is ... "no, and no".

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by EasyTarget · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Would this mean carbon dating is inaccurate for items older than 1300 years? "

      No; RC dating uses lots of correction tables to account for events like this (this is not the only such event, just the biggest one that is not explained) and for natural/cyclic variations in C14. So the effects of this will already be catered for when computing dates; it's just the 'WTF' of the event itself being discussed here.

      --
      "Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
    3. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by philip.paradis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's not demeaning, unless you define "demeaning" as failure to place higher value on political correctness than scientific examination of things based on evidence. Beliefs being heartfelt doesn't make them scientifically valid, and oftentimes seems to result in irrational adherence to said beliefs. This occurs in the face of absolute lack of supporting evidence for said beliefs, and/or overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    4. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by mrsquid0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. A myth is still a myth no matter how many people believe that it is not. If two billion people started to believe that the world was gnawed out of a carrot by The Great Rabbit, it would still be just a myth.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    5. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by goodmanj · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, scientists have known for a long time that the 14C creation rate isn't quite constant, and have taken this into account in order to do accurate radiocarbon dating. In fact, it was by looking at this carbon-dating calibration curve that they first noticed something unusual in 775.

      http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature11123.html

    6. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by Unordained · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just a side comment, but don't you think it's a little insulting to tell scientists who've put blood and sweat into these scientific discoveries that they need to pander to the religious, to pretend to hold some doubt, to lie that they wish they were wrong, to equivocate when no equivocation is really required, to imply and insinuate and hint rather than outright state what they know (inasmuch as you can know anything -- they'll grant you that), just to make people less sad about the religion they have merely because of the location of their birth and the (recursive) beliefs of their ancestry? I'm not normally one to go and try to de-convert the religious (my parents were missionaries, I'd rather just leave peole alone), but does that mean we have to be on eggshells? Besides -- the religious all feel free to call each other's religions (N) mere mythology and outright lies, why should we hold back about N+1 beliefs?

    7. Re:Effect on Carbon dating? by mrsquid0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Great Rabbit will protect me.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
  5. Re:Solar telescopes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    No. The sun was completely invisible until 1013.

  6. Southern hemisphere supernova by vlm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yet, as the only known events that can produce a 14C spike are supernova explosions or ... and neither event was observed at the time

    ... was observed at the time in surviving northern written records.

    Are there any detailed written astronomical observations from the southern hemisphere from that long ago?

    Also it would be pretty funny if the two guys recording solar observations in 775 both had a rainstorm the day of the largest solar flare.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  7. Re:Solar telescopes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I do it'll be because I think it's funny; not because you say so.
    I really wish people would stop with this sort of thing.

  8. Re:Behind the Sun?! by rvw · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Behind the Sun?"

    Maximum Prophet, for your information, the Earth rotates around the Sun.

    Being behind the Sun may not matter here, if the effect was strong and _long_ enough to elevate C14 levels.

    Wrong! Back then, the universe rotated around the earth. Everybody knows that. So it could be perfectly true back then, that this supernova hid behind the sun.

  9. Year of Permissiveness by TheCarp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    775 was a year of false permissiveness when anyone could read or do anything as long as it was produced by a small cabal known as "the group", headed by "owner".

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  10. well by JustOK · · Score: 5, Informative

    A.D. 774. This year the Northumbrians banished their king,
    Alred, from York at Easter-tide; and chose Ethelred, the son of
    Mull, for their lord, who reigned four winters. This year also
    appeared in the heavens a red crucifix, after sunset; the
    Mercians and the men of Kent fought at Otford; and wonderful
    serpents were seen in the land of the South-Saxons.

    http://omacl.org/Anglo/part2.html

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  11. Re:Behind the Sun? by pla · · Score: 5, Informative

    If the supernova was behind or near the Sun, earthlings around 775 wouldn't have been able to detect it.

    Nearby supernovae appear as one of the brightest objects in the sky for a few days to a week. The remnants remain visible for months, and then have a habit of leaving a nebula behind.

    The Earth travels slightly more than one degree of its orbit per day; The Sun, as seen from the Earth, subtends half a degree of arc. In the absolute worst case, the sun couldn't completely "hide" a supernova for more than a single day; and half a week later, the supernova remnant would dominate the dusk (or dawn) as the brightest thing in the sky except possibly the moon.

  12. Re:Behind the Sun?! by Noughmad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course, it all makes sense now. The supernove killed all the turtles, so the Earth had no choice but to start rotating.

    --
    PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.