Slashdot Mirror


Hubble Spots Star Explosion Astronomers Can't Explain

schwit1 writes: The Hubble Space Telescope has spotted the explosion of a star that does not fit into any theory for stellar evolution. "The exploding star, which was seen in the constellation Eridanus, faded over two weeks — much too rapidly to qualify as a supernova. The outburst was also about ten times fainter than most supernovae, explosions that destroy some or all of a star. But it was about 100 times brighter than an ordinary nova, which is a type of surface explosion that leaves a star intact. 'The combination of properties is puzzling,' says Mario Livio, an astrophysicist at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, Maryland. 'I thought about a number of possibilities, but each of them fails' to account for all characteristics of the outburst, he adds." We can put this discovery on the bottom of a very long list of similar discoveries by Hubble, which this week is celebrating the 25th anniversary of its launch.

154 comments

  1. More things in space by CaptQuark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It just means there are more things in space that we don't fully understand yet. But every discovery adds knowledge so we can understand it better.

    ~~

    1. Re:More things in space by Henning+Rogge · · Score: 1

      Exactly... astonomers love objects like this because that is a chance to learn something new.

    2. Re:More things in space by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

      spockons

    3. Re: More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.setterfield.org/basic_summary.html

    4. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it just means that this moron played around with the nova bomb. I told him not to touch it!

    5. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should science do that? I would say science hikes more than you could imagine. Do you really think science can hate stuff?

    6. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, dumbass, science has an aversion to accepting every hare-brained idea that comes along. Science is built on empirical observation and provable theories. While accepted scientific models may be stable, they are not static.

    7. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * Unless the hare-brained idea comes with a lot of 'research dollars' and the potential to curry favor with the powers that be. (Of course a 'true scientist' wouldn't do that, but there are plenty who don't care about science so much as their own power and self-aggrandizement - like other groups.)

    8. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do the gene pool a favor and have some kind of tragic chainsaw-induced trouser accident.

    9. Re:More things in space by BVis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dude sounds like a crank. For example: this article raises a number of red flags for me. One, he references his own work as the sole basis for a conclusion, and two, he whines like a 5 year old:

      Since, as usual, none of the above authors reference the voluminous evidence that quasars are intrinsically redshifted objects ejected from lower redshifted galaxies, there is very little chance of conventional astronomy correcting a huge error in their fundamental assumptions.

      Waah! The mean nasty mainstream astronomers won't completely change the field because I said so! Waaah!

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    10. Re:More things in space by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I initially read that as "spookons" which immediately brought to mind "nsasians"

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    11. Re:More things in space by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      begin (again) to guess what we're observing.

      Your entire premise is wrong - we don't guess, only observe. Guessing is junk science. Observation is "this is not like the others" and then we begin to wonder why.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    12. Re:More things in space by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i think it just means we need to stop all broadcasts immediately, and pray that the star eater hasn't noticed us yet.

    13. Re:More things in space by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Science hates new ideas and goes out of their way to protect the status quo at all costs.

      Poe or projecting? Everyone I know is excited.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    14. Re:More things in space by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Nah, it's more ignorant science junk. Shock! Awe! No one can explain this???!!

      History Channel2. It's your kind of place. All normal science is wrong, and everything is due to ancient aliens.

      Halton Arp? Seriously? Who's next, Uri Gellar?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    15. Re:More things in space by Immerman · · Score: 0

      Hey, they're right. Where do you think all the "Humans aren't causing Global Warming" "science" comes from. Sure it's atrocious science, but as long as someone with a Ph.D. and a lab coat is telling people what they want to here, plenty won't look too to see if they're actually scientists or just sciency PR flaks.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    16. Re:More things in space by Maritz · · Score: 2

      You're confusing Science with religion. You know all that amazing progress we've had over the last few centuries? That happened because science isn't dogmatic, like you.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    17. Re:More things in space by Maritz · · Score: 0

      Oh look, someone who is butthurt that AGW is real. Sorry but it really is that obvious.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    18. Re:More things in space by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Are you the same ignorant AC spewing anti-science shit all over these comments? Seems likely enough. Rest assured; we're going to ignore you because it's painfully, painfully obvious that you know fuck all.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    19. Re:More things in space by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      But thanks to recent advances in stem cell research and the fine work of Doctors Krinski and Altschuler, Clevon should regain full reproductive function!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    20. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when that 'someone with a Ph.D and a lab coat' mean "Science hates new ideas and goes out of their way to protect the status quo at all costs" ?

      It's more capitalist "hates new ideas and goes out of their way to protect the :s/status quo/ profit margin/ at all costs"

    21. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      " It was _speculated_ years ago that red shift can't explain distance, by Halton Arp. "

      There, that's better.
      Note that in the Observational Sciences like Astronomy, pretty much nothing can be proven, compared to the Experimental Sciences.
      We can just get better and better Speculations.
      BTW, Arp was wrong. The Big Bang has not only been observed, with results close to Theoretical Predictions, but we are getting closer to Experimental Proof as well.

      " I'm not offering a hypothesis of my own..."

      Even better. Don't even try.

    22. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that in the Observational Sciences like Astronomy, pretty much nothing can be proven, compared to the Experimental Sciences.

      Nothing can be proven with bench top experiments either, as it could turn out there is some factor that was missed or a new theory comes out superseding the approximation you thought you demonstrated. However it is much easier to build a much higher level of confidence and to attempt to try every reasonable possibility. But at the end of the day, observational astronomy is still experimental work, in these sense you make predictions, then make new measurements and see if they agree or not, as opposed to theoretical work where you try to come up with new explanations or predictions for the same data.

    23. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless our own sun decides to randomly have an explosion that kills us all.

    24. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was proven years ago that red shift can't explain distance, by Halton Arp.

      Actually, from his own bio:

      "Because of Arp's observations, the assumption that high red shift objects have to be very far away - on which the Big Bang theory and all of "accepted cosmology" is based - has to be fundamentally reexamined.!"

      That does not sound like it's been 'proven'.

    25. Re:More things in space by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0

      Are you a paid promoter, or are you a victim of the hoax?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    26. Re:More things in space by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      It just means there are more things in space that we don't fully understand yet. But every discovery adds knowledge so we can understand it better.
       

      Really, what objects in space do we fully understand? (I'm not being sarcastic!)

      We don't even fully understand the earth yet, and we can perform direct measurements on it.

    27. Re:More things in space by jae471 · · Score: 1

      Science may not be dogmatic, but scientists sure are.

      Old scientists don't change their minds; they just die off. You can even still find a few (respected in their day) cosmologists who endorse Steady State Theory if you look hard enough.

    28. Re:More things in space by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      Obvious troll is obvious. Go play somewhere else, kiddo.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    29. Re:More things in space by Guildor · · Score: 0

      Experimentation that seems to behave on the small scale as it does in the large scale is definitely a death-blow to contradictory theory alone, I'm sure you'd agree - so look into plasma physics experiments, and you'll find a lot of very compelling experiments that seem to show production in the lab of things we see in the sky. We're also finding that observations that "shock" astronomers and astrophysicists alike are to be expected in the Electric universe. That being the case, there's a real "shock" coming to the sciences, sooner or later. Because we'll have to bring a far greater force into our equations alongside gravity - and that's magnetism. As the universe is 99.99% plasma, and it's all conducting massive amounts of electricity all over the universe, and where electricity flows, grade school kids will tell you a magnetic field is formed. So it doesn't seem such a far stretch of the imagination to see we actually don't need dark energy, or dark matter to explain observations at all. We just need to update our models to bring them into the 21st century.

    30. Re:More things in space by Guildor · · Score: 0

      I think you're twisting this just a little. He was an observer, and did his due diligence and merely reported his findings. But the science establishment didn't seem to receive the news well, and chose to ignore it, and discredit him as much as possible in order to bury the work. Say what you like about him, but don't say his measurements were not accurate - or his hypothesis reasonable. I'm just saying that all too often we talk of observations as fact, when we can't be sure of anything - and we stand behind fanciful ideas such as black holes, which should have the opposite effect on a man of science - it should enrage your sensibilities. RIC = 0 is just not possible. Observations might suggest a lot of gravity, but if we don't really know how far away something is, then we can't make any assumptions of size, age, or much else. The whole "science" comes into question. All we can do is observe, and theorize. But we can't sit there knowing something is very wrong, and have religious faith that someone's going to answer it all, and believe we're going to be close to the truth, when there's something fundamentally wrong at the heart of our science.

    31. Re:More things in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - so look into plasma physics experiments

      Funny enough, the one reply you made here is to an experimental plasma physicists posting AC. I've spent that last two decades looking into plasma physics experiments... and the only thing I find shocking is how much I see EU people tell astrophysicists they need to look at plasma physics, yet they extensively talk about plasma physics, having whole journals and conferences dedicated to it, at least for the last two decades.

      and where electricity flows, grade school kids will tell you a magnetic field is formed.

      And yet various measurements of electric and magnetic fields come up short... but that doesn't stop one from telling others to think about updating models.

    32. Re:More things in space by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      And what exactly do you think a hypothesis is if not an educated guess.

    33. Re:More things in space by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      "Educated"?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  2. War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Probably some long-forgotten interstellar war.

    1. Re: War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My first thought was "death star".

    2. Re:War by Livius · · Score: 0

      A fleet of the latest X- and Y-Wing fighters - and one old freighter - successfully destroy the new Imperial Death Star.

      Damn Rebel scum.

    3. Re:War by jasper_amsterdam · · Score: 0

      Yes. This. =) Even with only 10 comments, multiple folks beat me to it. Damn.

      --
      Let's put the genes back in Genesis.
    4. Re:War by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure it was the Shadows. The Vorlons didn't get there in time.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    5. Re: War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      My first thought was "death star".

      Mine too. And from TFA:

      The light that Hubble recorded from the newly found outburst left its distant home galaxy 7.8 billion years ago.

      So it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away

    6. Re:War by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 4, Funny

      Probably some long-forgotten interstellar war.

      Nothing that exciting. Just a Vogon constructor fleet doing their job. They posted the notice. Nobody could be bothered to read it.

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    7. Re: War by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      Or, due to a strange quirk in the space-time continuum, we are actually looking at a future version of our own planet exploding. Don't worry about paradoxes ripping the universe apart, though. The fact that we can see it, means that there's no way to avoid it so there won't be a contradiction. Moving right along.

    8. Re:War by Maritz · · Score: 1

      The leopard sign might have scared them off. It made me wary that's for sure.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    9. Re:War by onepoint · · Score: 1

      How funny this would be if it was true. sad also but I would laugh for the last 5 minutes or so.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    10. Re:War by khallow · · Score: 1

      The Shadows sap all life energy with their traditional doomsday weapons. It's the Vorlons who blow things up.

  3. Meanwhile........ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    In a galaxy far, far away, Princess Leia turned her head away while Darth Vader took out his anger at the old empire for taking away his hot grits.

  4. Tarkin Jnr here by orange · · Score: 2

    Can't remember where I parked my star class death star..... Did I go on a bender last night.... time to lay off the sauce.

  5. Nexus Ribbon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That star was blown up to realign the ribbon's path.

  6. Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ten times fainter? "One tenth as bright" reads better and makes more sense.

    1. Re:Times by BetterThanCaesar · · Score: 1

      Ten times fainter? "One tenth as bright" reads better and makes more sense.

      In electrical engineering, there is something called admittance, which is the inverse of impedance. Are there similar inverse terms for radiometry? If so, then "ten times fainter" makes sense, because it would be using a "faintness" scale that is established.

      --
      "Stop failing the Turing test!" -- Dilbert
    2. Re:Times by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      Are you sure it would make sense? If you said 10% fainter how many times fainter would that be?

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    3. Re:Times by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      10%

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:Times by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      0.1 times fainter, or 1.0/1.1 ~= 0.90909 times as bright. There is a problem in that colloquially a linear scale is assumed for small percentages, and with that assumption 10% fainter means 0.9 times as bright.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  7. I blame the Vogons by AmIAnAi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just saying, maybe it's not a natural event.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
    1. Re:I blame the Vogons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it somewhat probable that at least one or more events we have seen are not natural? I doubt this is some alien war or anything but like, out of all the stars doing things, isn't it more than a little possible that something we write off as a natural event is not that at all?

    2. Re:I blame the Vogons by louic · · Score: 1

      Must be the death star. Probably planned as a viral advertisement for the new Starwars movie.

    3. Re:I blame the Vogons by mwvdlee · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, it WAS a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re: I blame the Vogons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if it were aliens, it is still "natural". The events surely aren't " super natural ", and they aren't " man made".

    5. Re:I blame the Vogons by drGreg · · Score: 1

      I believe it occurred in the Alderan system...

    6. Re:I blame the Vogons by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Groop I implore thee

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  8. Ahh, the great Zergoblott Event by PsyMan · · Score: 1

    Its the fallout from when Scientists on the planet Zergoblott 3 restarted their new collider, apparantly quite common throughout the universe once you know what to look for.

  9. I'm not saying it's aliens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obligatory meme https://imgflip.com/i/kjq7r

  10. It's obvious. by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A wizard did it.

    1. Re:It's obvious. by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      I find it hilarious yet bewildering that, after having to dig through a bajillion bad sci-fi jokes about the star, the one person who says 'wizard' gets modded troll.

      What do people have against wizards?

  11. We may have just found by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

    A new type of star !

    1. Re:We may have just found by JMJimmy · · Score: 5, Funny

      A new type of star !

      It was obviously an alien weapon and the government is trying to explain it away.

    2. Re:We may have just found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's no moon!

    3. Re:We may have just found by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

      No, it was the galactic equivalent of Eternal September. They just saying "hi" to the entire galaxy.

    4. Re:We may have just found by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Well funny that I was thinking along the similar way...
      like if a Dyson bubble that just went overload

      or maybe local region of gas ignited

      and what we are seeing is something like a flash over event that can happen in a regular fire.

      amazing what we find all the time in space.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    5. Re:We may have just found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were making way or a new intergalactic highway.

    6. Re:We may have just found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alien weapon...what the hell

    7. Re:We may have just found by jfdavis668 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's from a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. Must be the Death Star blowing up Alderaan.

    8. Re:We may have just found by clicker666 · · Score: 1

      I was surprised it took this long for that to be said. I figured first post!

    9. Re:We may have just found by jakimfett · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I pulled up the comments expecting a string of "That's no moon!" and "Now we know where the Sun Crusher is doing practice runs".

      --
      Bits of code, random ramblings: jakimfett.com
    10. Re: We may have just found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. I work for the Vogons and I haven't seen any paperwork yet.

  12. I just realized by jasper_amsterdam · · Score: 1

    It IS actually A long time ago in a galaxy far away

    --
    Let's put the genes back in Genesis.
    1. Re:I just realized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It IS actually
      A long time ago
      in a galaxy far away

      Now. You're looking at now, sir. Everything that happens now, is happening now. We passed then. Just now. We're at now, now.

    2. Re:I just realized by jasper_amsterdam · · Score: 0

      Yes. So it WAS now, and it IS a long time ago. =D

      --
      Let's put the genes back in Genesis.
    3. Re:I just realized by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      It is now, here. But in a galaxy far, far away, it was a long time ago.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  13. Not suprnova? by steelfood · · Score: 1

    Then it must have been a mininova.

    --
    "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    1. Re:Not suprnova? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Possibly a Chevy Nova.

      Maybe even Aldo Nova.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  14. Listen, I'm sorry. by engineerErrant · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying I didn't do this. I just have trouble controlling my temper sometimes. Bad day at work, OK?

  15. Starbust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this is the first time we record a Leviathan entering on Starbust. Astrobiologists should analise this.

  16. Bomb number 20 went off. by ianezz · · Score: 2

    It's just the the Dark Star hippies blowing up unstable stars for fun & profit.

  17. Re:I blame the constellation Eridanus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeass is the name the constellation Eridanus was changed to in 2620 to avoid people making the obvious joke.

  18. It's Praxis of course. by Derling+Whirvish · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's Praxis of course. Time to make a peace treaty?

    1. Re:It's Praxis of course. by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Praxis wasn't a star, you stupid geek*!

      * oh wait...

    2. Re:It's Praxis of course. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Not to take anything away from all the jokes, but wouldn't Qo'onoS be in our Galaxy, not another one 7.8 billion light years away?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  19. The Rift is Real by warewolfsmith · · Score: 1

    Time to plan for endless Christmas.

  20. What about distance? by little1973 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The host galaxy is quite far from us. At these distances we can only rely on the red shift which I always thought not to be completely accurate.

    So, if that galaxy is a little bit closer to us then there may not be any mystery here.

    --
    Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
    1. Re:What about distance? by Drethon · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they look just at the absolute brightness or the brightness curve? I would think the curve could give proper readings regardless of distance.

    2. Re:What about distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would have to be an order of magnitude closer than current estimates, which at a new distance under a billion light years would put it close enough that additional distance measuring techniques could be tried. Maybe they haven't been tried yet for this galaxy, but I wouldn't be surprised if it gets more attention now.

    3. Re:What about distance? by matfud · · Score: 1

      The are lots of ways to measure the distance to stars. But you are correct that certain methods are better for certain distance ranges
      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wri...

  21. vogons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Making way for a new intergalactic super highway

    1. Re:vogons by louic · · Score: 1

      If the starwars stuff gets +1 the comment above should at least get +2.

    2. Re:vogons by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Vogon poetry is of course, the third worst in the universe. The second worst is that of the Azgoths of Kria. During a recitation by their poet master Grunthos the Flatulent of his poem "Ode to a Small Lump of Green Putty I Found in My Armpit One Midsummer Morning", four of his audience died of internal hemorrhaging and the president of the Mid-Galactic Arts Nobbling Council survived only by gnawing one of his own legs off. Grunthos was reported to have been "disappointed" by the poem's reception, and was about to embark on a reading of his 12-book epic entitled "My Favourite Bathtime Gurgles" when his own major intestine - in a desperate attempt to save life itself - leapt straight up through his neck and throttled his brain. The very worst poetry of all perished along with its creator, Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings of Sussex, in the destruction of the planet Earth. Vogon poetry is mild by comparison.

  22. Weapons testing? by mjgday · · Score: 0

    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

    --
    foo
  23. Eagle Eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good job astronomers. Bravo. I am impressed that was ever seen. I guess when your entire job comes down to analyzing light, you develop a knack for spotting little baby dots of light that suddenly appear. But I'm still knocked out. There's a lot of dots up there.

  24. From the light universe... by pslytely+psycho · · Score: 2

    ...came the Lexx, to our dark universe of evil and depravity, destroying the twin worlds of Fire and Water.

    --
    Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
  25. The Monks by nicolaiplum · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is the remains of a star system whose inhabitants were unwilling to build laser cannons for The Monks (see "The Fourth Profession" by Larry Niven).

    --
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"
  26. That's no star. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's about time we see some interstellar warfare. Rollout the popcorn machine and grab some cola.

    1. Re:That's no star. by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      Could also just be construction work on an interstellar highway.

  27. Look at the size of that thing! by mooterSkooter · · Score: 0

    That's no moon...it's a space station

    1. Re:Look at the size of that thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1977 just called, they want their lame meme back.

    2. Re:Look at the size of that thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you warn them about Jar Jar?

  28. Small blast followed by ordinary blast by Rotaluclac · · Score: 2

    It's quite simple. First, the star underwent a small blast, too small to be detected, in which it expelled a layer of gas. That gas formed a cloud around the star. Then, there was an ordinary blast. What we saw was the gas cloud being illuminated by the ordinary blast.

    1. Re:Small blast followed by ordinary blast by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Except that the two blasts were in different locations. It is possible that it was path time differences between two lensed images.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  29. Starlifted Dyson sphere ? by Jesrad · · Score: 2

    The faint burst might be from the extra stellar activity from starlifitng all the material needed to make the dyson sphere.

    --
    Maybe we deserve this world ?
  30. Nova Bomb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTW

  31. Control of stars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glory device, just saying. Hope you enjoy a pretty shade of red for a sky.

  32. Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Supernova, ordinary nova, and inbetween the newly discovered bossa-nova.

    Why do I have to explain everything every time?

    1. Re:Simple by MadKeithV · · Score: 2

      Or to explain it with a car analogy: Chevy Nova.

    2. Re:Simple by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Doesn't go?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  33. What if.. by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

    What if the star was a normal supernovae but had a companion black hole? Wouldn't that make the light fade prematurely?

  34. only one explanation... by ecloud · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It must have been a champagne supernova in the sky.

    1. Re:only one explanation... by boarder8925 · · Score: 2

      I hope someday someone finds me, caught beneath the landslide...

  35. It was probably the microwave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone was probably just reheating their coffee in the microwave.

  36. Isn't the host galaxy lensed ? by Laxator2 · · Score: 1

    I looked at the picture given in TFA and it looks to me that the host galaxy of this mysterious non-nova, non-supernova explosion is a background galaxy, lensed by the foreground cluster. It does not look like a member of this foreground cluster.

    I would say, distance estimates for such background galaxies are not particularly easy to make.

  37. Galactic rotation at ludicrous speed! by pr0t0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The thing that struck me about those pics, was the distance the star moved from Jan 2014 to Aug 2014. It appeared to cover roughly 5-10% of the outer diameter of the host galaxy (although the star could be very well be deeper inside the galaxy). The Solar System takes about 226 million years to orbit the Milky Way. This thing appears to orbit at 13 years!

    That makes me think their preliminary analysis of these being two separate events is correct. Although, I am not an astrophysicist, so what do I know?

    --
    I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
    1. Re:Galactic rotation at ludicrous speed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing that struck me about those pics, was the distance the star moved from Jan 2014 to Aug 2014.

      It didn't move. What the article fails to describe clearly is that this is two views of the same event. With one being a longer path than another.

    2. Re:Galactic rotation at ludicrous speed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, it's not a moving object. The idea is we could be seeing the same event twice. The image of the galaxy is so distorted by the gravity of foreground objects, that the light from the explosion reaches us along two different paths. One of them is a little longer, so we see a "replay" of the event a little later.

  38. A Long Time Ago In A Galaxy Far Far Away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was a great disturbance in the astronomer community.

  39. Amargosa Star by sproketboy · · Score: 1

    Obviously Soren has something to do with it...

  40. Hmmm by koan · · Score: 1

    There's a war out there...

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  41. Another civilization discovers zero-point energy. by BubbaDave · · Score: 2

    Briefly.

  42. Oh, that is what it was. OK, OK. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I feared something terrible has happened, but dismissed it as the burrito I had for lunch at the Taco Bell. It does really look like some planet *was* destroyed. mm.. Should learn to trust the Force more.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  43. Human limitations? by ramriot · · Score: 1

    This is more a limitation of the researcher than of the science. This type of Short duration hyperbright nova is not unknown and elsewhere in the literature there are several theories as to their Natural origins. They have been a few detected over the last 50 years but because of their rarity a comprehensive analysis is still wanting.

    So this is not a NEW HUBBLE DISCOVERY, more a OH NICE! you saw one too.

  44. Simple explination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I felt a great disturbance in the force, as if a million voices cried out in pain all at once.

    1. Re:Simple explination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure none of you read the comments before posting the exact same starwars quote.

  45. Warp Drive - Engage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proof of Interstellar life?

  46. Obvious answer: by sabbede · · Score: 1
    Someone lost an interstellar war in a big way.

    Considering that this happened far, far away, and therefore long, long ago; I think we all know who was responsible. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki...

  47. So a planet-shattering kaboom? by Daetrin · · Score: 2

    A big boom, but not quite big enough to destroy the star? Perhaps the Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator just got misdirected to the wrong location?

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  48. I have an explanation by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Based on the most prominent modern science, it was either dark matter that caused the unusual result or the aliens that built the pyramids accidentally crashed their spaceship into the star, causing a mini-nova.

    1. Re:I have an explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weird how it is always you trying to connect everything to dark matter on every Slashdot science story, and not actual scientists...

  49. Death Star by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh hey! The light from the Death Star explosion finally reached us from a long time ago in a galaxy far far away!

  50. Then they decrypted the radio transmission by Dasher42 · · Score: 1

    A British voice was heard saying...

    "And here's where he lives..." (some sort of bang)
    "And here's his neighbor..." (bang again)
    "And here's his neighbor's summer home..." (bang and some thumps)
    "And here's the town by the beach - tropical island - the whole planet he lived on!"

    The bangs became curiously long and bass-level, and the voice broke off into maniacal cackling.

    1. Re:Then they decrypted the radio transmission by swilly · · Score: 1

      This demonstrates the importance of not being seen.

  51. Takes some imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine. An alien species testing a new anti-matter drive for stellar exploration. Oops, I think we were off a decimal point in that calculation! :-)

  52. Long ago, in a galaxy far away... by bferrell · · Score: 1

    The deathstar exploded

  53. Surprised no one said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that it might be a Nova Bomb(Andromeda).

  54. Maybe... by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

    Maybe it was a Deathstar

  55. Stellar collision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why couldn't it be a rouge white dwarf drifted into a medium to small mass star? I read an article once about the expected results of such a collision between a hypothetical rouge white dwarf and the sun - if the velocity of the impact was high enough, they speculated that the white dwarf would rip the core out of the sun and then keep going, ejecting the majority of the matter in a eruption of super heated gasses.

  56. Maybe using Endurium for fuel wasn't a good idea by Sowelu · · Score: 1

    There was always something fishy about those ruins.

  57. The fun of being clueless by rbrander · · Score: 1

    ...is that you get to speculate more wildly. Suppose two stars that are not yet (or never could be) able to supernova, smacked into each other at some very impressive clip. Their cores interact and there is briefly a mass in a state for a supernova...which is blown apart in the early seconds of the supernova because uniquely, the relevant core material is asymmetric and the two lobes are separated.

    Is that possible? Is it gibberish? I don't know, because I never studied astronomy except by watching, well, umm...Nova, ironically enough.

    So there's a lesson for you kids: don't study too hard, just read a lot of science fiction. You'll be dumber, but still have fun.

  58. New name? by Tyrannicsupremacy · · Score: 1

    A "not quite super nova"

    --
    http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
  59. Simple relatvitiy by MakersDirector · · Score: 0

    I don't think these 'observers' are quite understanding the simple implications of observer bias and relativity.

    Just because you observe an exploding star does not mean it's time is scaled relative to your own.

    I thought Einstein's Theories - which provide the cornerstone of modern physics - made this clear?

    What is an hour to you may be five minutes to someone OR SOMETHING else!

    wow. are ya'all really this brain dead?

    1. Re:Simple relatvitiy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because you observe an exploding star does not mean it's time is scaled relative to your own.

      Right, but it is scaled in the same proportion as the red shift of the light, which was already taken into account.

      are ya'all really this brain dead?

      Apparently some people are.

  60. It's a sphere! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly this is the sign of a Dyson sphere coming on line. The big flash? Just a few celebratory fireworks. No biggy.

  61. Mel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh I thought this was about Mel Gibson...never mind.

  62. Could it be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could it have been an object impacting the start, coming from an angle 180 degrees away from our view?

    1. Re:Could it be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...an eclipse?