Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA's IBEX Observations Pin Down Interstellar Magnetic Field (astronomynow.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the intergalactic-planetary-news dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Immediately after its 2008 launch, NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) spotted a curiosity in a thin slice of space: more particles streamed in through a long, skinny swath in the sky than anywhere else. Now, a new study uses IBEX data and simulations of the interstellar boundary to better describe space in our galactic neighborhood. The paper, published earlier this month in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, precisely determines the strength and direction of the magnetic field outside the heliosphere. Such information gives us a peek into the magnetic forces that dominate the galaxy beyond, teaching us more about our home in space. The new paper is based on one particular theory of the origin of the IBEX ribbon, in which the particles streaming in from the ribbon are actually solar material reflected back at us after a long journey to the edges of the Sun's magnetic boundaries.

26 comments

  1. refined ultrasonic magnetic resonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    who claims they cannot feel it?

    1. Re:refined ultrasonic magnetic resonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about dipole induced coherence kinematics. Can you feel that?

  2. NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    why post frikking fake NASA news?
    limit news to tech only. computers you can buy and use. you dumb fk.

    1. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Huh? What's with all the rude ACs on Slashdot this morning? The news isn't fake at all. In fact, here's the NASA article about it: http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-ibex-observations-pin-down-interstellar-magnetic-field

      By the way, this is definitely very interesting. The conditions in our galactic neighborhood likely can have effects on Earth. The Solar System is passing through a dust cloud and there are denser clouds its path. That has an impact on the Sun's magnetic field and can cause it to shrink. One result of this would be more cosmic rays possibly reaching the Earth. Understanding the heliosphere definitely matters and is worth posting. And here's an article about the topic I just mentioned: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/23dec_voyager/

      I've always wondered, do people who post this stuff have accounts on here where they act civil and behave? Do they act like this in real life? The criticism of the article is completely unwarranted and is quite rude.

    2. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Not OP here.

      INTERSTELLAR BULLSHIT FIELD DETECTED

      FWIW, I like the article and find it interesting... just doing my part to be rude. Like my t-shirt says... "A shitty attitude is just one more service we offer"

      And no I don't have an account. I haven't needed one in the 15 years I've been here.

      If there's anything else we can do to make your day less pleasant, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks for your time this morning.

    3. Re:NASA by advocate_one · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One result of this would be more cosmic rays possibly reaching the Earth.

      which would lead to more clouds and possibly rain... increasing the Earth's albedo and reflecting more solar energy back into space

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    4. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which still would not be enough to counteract climate change, because [a] clouds also trap heat near the Earth's surface, and [b] they don't cover 100% of the Earth's surface and CO2/H2O do. This has been pretty thoroughly investigated both as a response to climate contrarians and because it was something of a Hail-Mary loophole. Unfortunately all attempts to disprove AGW so far have failed.

      Slightly closer to reality, having more cosmic rays reach earth would be good news for the Pierre Auger Observatory, which otherwise is looking at a few dozen detection events per year. This article[pdf] goes into some more detail about their methods and data, if anyone else is interested.

    5. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me be the first to welcome you to Slashdot, you fucking asshole.

    6. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately all attempts to disprove AGW so far have failed.

      As have all attempts to prove it.

    7. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Willful ignorance is an ugly thing. AGW can be proven in your basement. It's not like water, carbon dioxide, and light are hard to come by. For a long time it was thought that humans and/or CO2 could not possibly affect the climate. Over the last hundred years this view has been gradually supplanted by the weight of evidence against it. From the discovery that this was possible, we have since ruled out any phenomenae that would prevent it from happening. For more information, see The Discovery of Global Warming.

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

      Maybe you should try Googling arguments against AGW, rather than blindly believing liberal-bisaed propaganda. After all, somebody once said that willful ignorance is an ugly thing.

      It has most certainly NOT been proven, and any scientist will tell you that the field is divided on the issue. This is Slashdot. We don't accept gut feelings as proof. I expected you to be smarter than that.

    9. Re:NASA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Water, O2, CO2, and light. The physics is very simple. I'm sure there are arguments against gravity as well, but there's no need to argue against what can be easily measured. Go forth and do.

  3. Cannot take this seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The article does not even have a link to a reputable source like forbes.

  4. NASA should fire their webmasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With no script, those pages are just a dark hole.

    Sometimes, when I think there's a cool pic in there, I go for the source and dumpster-dive for some .jpg -- that works in most cases.

    What happened to some informative, readable blurb and perhaps a pic or two? For those looking for, you know, some information? I don't give a flying fuck about "experience".

    1. Re:NASA should fire their webmasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With no electricity, my damn computer is just a brick.

      Why aren't the PC manufacturers making mechanical computers? It's ridiculous that we need all this infrastructure just to read a few words on a screen.

    2. Re:NASA should fire their webmasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.

      I had a similar problem while reading a book a few weeks ago, and the power went out. I was like... WTF. I forgot to put new batteries in the book, and when the power went out, the pages went blank.

    3. Re:NASA should fire their webmasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The black NASA pages are the result of a stalking/analytics layer from iPerceptions com Most likely the pages are made black with scripting off to motivate visitors to expose themselves by enabling scripting.

      The problem is definitely is definately not from any interface "enhancement". While NASA deserves kudos for so much great science, whoever is behind this hostile and invasive site construction ought to be canned. Surely there are log analysis tools that can adequately monitor effectiveness and abuses with sticking probes up their users, but it's pretty obvious that some behind the scenes have another agenda.

    4. Re:NASA should fire their webmasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > [...] all this infrastructure [...]

      Only an idiot can't differentiate between useful and useless infrastructure. Sorry, pal.

  5. Re:NASA, rudeness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Recurring anonymous (or so it seems), and I didn't critizice the article, but just the webmasters. And I do stand by my critique.

    The research itself is really interesting. I didn't say they should fire their researchers, on the contrary. But they should fire their webmasters.

  6. Lara Silvertongue was right by dhaen · · Score: 1

    It's dust.

  7. Speaking of space, it is surprising that this site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did not link to the news of Elon Musk's latest failure. The F9 cannot endure even a brief delay on the pad without its fuel boiling away. The F9 is clearly engineered to the smallest (and deadliest) or margins.

  8. tl,dr by rmdingler · · Score: 1
    It seems NASA's interstellar boundary explorer (an admittedly clever word triplet) has discovered what they believe is a feed back loop from the Heliosphere...

    made possible by the existence of magnetic fields elsewhere in the universe.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:tl,dr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there a mandate somewhere that somebody has to post an unsourced, unelaborated "feedback loop" claim in every single story?

  9. giyf by danda · · Score: 1

    electric universe...

    1. Re:giyf by delt0r · · Score: 1

      Explains Nothing at all. And these measurements prove it.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
  10. Galactic magnetic field by psyclone · · Score: 1

    The European Space Agency (ESA) has done some magnetic field work on our own Milky Way from their Planck satellite.

    Even more impressive is the polarized dust in our galaxy, showing directionality of magnetic fields.