Author Topic: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion  (Read 192324 times)

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #940 on: 01/03/2018 05:14 PM »
I wonder if these papers have taken us as far as we can go in the study of this star with our current technology. That the unknowns will have to remain until better technology is available for its study.
Not at all. The papers discuss future observations and what can be tested by them. Also, this work provides a foundation for theorists to come with more specific models, which will very likely motivate new observations.

One of the main points in Jason Wrights blog posts (now public http://sites.psu.edu/astrowright/2017/12/26/what-weve-learned-about-boyajians-star/, http://sites.psu.edu/astrowright/2017/12/26/what-weve-learned-about-boyajians-star-ii/) is that more detailed theoretical work is required to understand whether they can really fit the observations.

Interesting first post under that article.

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1717
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 412
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #941 on: 01/03/2018 05:21 PM »
Yep, I'm glad to see some progress in explaining it all, but I still find it extremely easy to invoke ETI to still be consistent with what has been learned.  Even ETI's might make a bit of pollution while making their structures.   See how easy that was!   
I think they are doing a good job of chasing those aliens away! When the dips were first noticed once of the causes that fit the data back then was an optically thick and cold object. Which would have been weird. That scenario fit with some proposed ETI explanations. We now know that it is dust that is causing the dips and not something else so we can rule out some of the initially proposed ETI scenarios. The data thus far is inconsistent with a Dyson sphere, ring, or swarm being the cause of these latest dips. Something is generating dust and there doesn't appear to be anything yet observed that would favor an artificial source for it over a natural source. Also if I had a giant energy collecting structure I wouldn't want dust anywhere near it!

Thatís a rather skewed analysis.
No it isn't. The material blocking the star light is dust with particle sizes of 0.0015 to 0.15 μm. Its not any sort of hard totally opaque material which is what an artificial alien structure would be. The dips would have had to be achromatic for them to be caused by solid alien structures. Dr. Wright also said that the long term dimming also appears to be chromatic meaning dust is the culprit there too.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #942 on: 01/03/2018 05:56 PM »
Yep, I'm glad to see some progress in explaining it all, but I still find it extremely easy to invoke ETI to still be consistent with what has been learned.  Even ETI's might make a bit of pollution while making their structures.   See how easy that was!   
I think they are doing a good job of chasing those aliens away! When the dips were first noticed once of the causes that fit the data back then was an optically thick and cold object. Which would have been weird. That scenario fit with some proposed ETI explanations. We now know that it is dust that is causing the dips and not something else so we can rule out some of the initially proposed ETI scenarios. The data thus far is inconsistent with a Dyson sphere, ring, or swarm being the cause of these latest dips. Something is generating dust and there doesn't appear to be anything yet observed that would favor an artificial source for it over a natural source. Also if I had a giant energy collecting structure I wouldn't want dust anywhere near it!

Thatís a rather skewed analysis.
No it isn't. The material blocking the star light is dust with particle sizes of 0.0015 to 0.15 μm. Its not any sort of hard totally opaque material which is what an artificial alien structure would be. The dips would have had to be achromatic for them to be caused by solid alien structures. Dr. Wright also said that the long term dimming also appears to be chromatic meaning dust is the culprit there too.

Why would an artificial object be a huge structure it could just as easily be a swarm of tiny objects, as is proposed by the Dyson Swarm theory. If we as humans are proposing to send nano probes to another star then I donít see how that option can be taken off the table.
« Last Edit: 01/03/2018 07:15 PM by Star One »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #943 on: 01/03/2018 07:14 PM »
KIC 8462852: A Dusty Solution?

https://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=39068

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1717
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 412
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #944 on: 01/03/2018 07:26 PM »
Why would an artificial object be a huge structure it could just as easily be a swarm of tiny objects. If we as humans are proposing to send nano probes to another star then I donít see how that option can be taken off the table.
The original ETI  hypothesis was a Dyson swarm made up of objects larger than optical wavelengths. That hypothesis no longer fits what we know about the star. It was a good hypothesis because it was falsifiable. It has unfortunately been falsified.

I also doubt that it is a Dyson swarm made of nanoparticles. The dust particles are so small that the radiation pressure from the star would push them away over very short timescales. The swarm would get dispersed over a just a few days as Deeg et. all point out if not continually replenished. It doesn't really make much sense to build an energy collection device that is continually getting pushed away from its energy source.
« Last Edit: 01/03/2018 07:30 PM by notsorandom »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #945 on: 01/03/2018 07:32 PM »
Why would an artificial object be a huge structure it could just as easily be a swarm of tiny objects. If we as humans are proposing to send nano probes to another star then I donít see how that option can be taken off the table.
The original ETI  hypothesis was a Dyson swarm made up of objects larger than optical wavelengths. That hypothesis no longer fits what we know about the star. It was a goo hypothesis because it was falsifiable. It has unfortunately been falsified.

I also doubt that it is a Dyson swarm made of nanoparticles. The dust particles are so small that the radiation pressure from the star would push them away over very short timescales. The swarm would get dispersed over a just a few days as Deeg et. all point out if not continually replenished. It doesn't really make much sense to build an energy collection device that is continually getting pushed away from its energy source.

Agree I was really just playing devils advocate

My money is currently on Bruce Garyís solution especially now his predictions are starting to pan out.

Quote
3) Rafik Bourne did it again! About three weeks ago he successfully predicted that the "December Surprise" dip would recover at about the end of December! (His earlier successful prediction was a long timescale brightening in October, made a couple months earlier.) He also has a model upon which this is based. For the record, the "December Surprise" dip is the 5th dip deeper than 1.0 % since everyone began frequent observations in early May, 2017. The additional drop of 0.8 % (centered on Dec 09) has the pattern of a "short dip in the middle of a broad dip" (somewhat similar to the one seen Aug 09). A recovery of the short dip occurred (Dec 26) and the broad dip recovery is almost complete. Here's the Nov/Dec dip  that I'm referring to:

http://www.brucegary.net/ts5/
« Last Edit: 01/03/2018 07:34 PM by Star One »

Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #946 on: 01/03/2018 07:46 PM »
Why would an artificial object be a huge structure it could just as easily be a swarm of tiny objects. If we as humans are proposing to send nano probes to another star then I donít see how that option can be taken off the table.
The original ETI  hypothesis was a Dyson swarm made up of objects larger than optical wavelengths. That hypothesis no longer fits what we know about the star. It was a goo hypothesis because it was falsifiable. It has unfortunately been falsified.

I also doubt that it is a Dyson swarm made of nanoparticles. The dust particles are so small that the radiation pressure from the star would push them away over very short timescales. The swarm would get dispersed over a just a few days as Deeg et. all point out if not continually replenished. It doesn't really make much sense to build an energy collection device that is continually getting pushed away from its energy source.

Agree I was really just playing devils advocate

My money is currently on Bruce Garyís solution especially now his predictions are starting to pan out.

Quote
3) Rafik Bourne did it again! About three weeks ago he successfully predicted that the "December Surprise" dip would recover at about the end of December! (His earlier successful prediction was a long timescale brightening in October, made a couple months earlier.) He also has a model upon which this is based. For the record, the "December Surprise" dip is the 5th dip deeper than 1.0 % since everyone began frequent observations in early May, 2017. The additional drop of 0.8 % (centered on Dec 09) has the pattern of a "short dip in the middle of a broad dip" (somewhat similar to the one seen Aug 09). A recovery of the short dip occurred (Dec 26) and the broad dip recovery is almost complete. Here's the Nov/Dec dip  that I'm referring to:

http://www.brucegary.net/ts5/
I thought the theory of a brown dwarf orbiting is an interesting one. I hadn't heard that one before.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #947 on: 01/03/2018 07:54 PM »
Why would an artificial object be a huge structure it could just as easily be a swarm of tiny objects. If we as humans are proposing to send nano probes to another star then I donít see how that option can be taken off the table.
The original ETI  hypothesis was a Dyson swarm made up of objects larger than optical wavelengths. That hypothesis no longer fits what we know about the star. It was a goo hypothesis because it was falsifiable. It has unfortunately been falsified.

I also doubt that it is a Dyson swarm made of nanoparticles. The dust particles are so small that the radiation pressure from the star would push them away over very short timescales. The swarm would get dispersed over a just a few days as Deeg et. all point out if not continually replenished. It doesn't really make much sense to build an energy collection device that is continually getting pushed away from its energy source.

Agree I was really just playing devils advocate

My money is currently on Bruce Garyís solution especially now his predictions are starting to pan out.

Quote
3) Rafik Bourne did it again! About three weeks ago he successfully predicted that the "December Surprise" dip would recover at about the end of December! (His earlier successful prediction was a long timescale brightening in October, made a couple months earlier.) He also has a model upon which this is based. For the record, the "December Surprise" dip is the 5th dip deeper than 1.0 % since everyone began frequent observations in early May, 2017. The additional drop of 0.8 % (centered on Dec 09) has the pattern of a "short dip in the middle of a broad dip" (somewhat similar to the one seen Aug 09). A recovery of the short dip occurred (Dec 26) and the broad dip recovery is almost complete. Here's the Nov/Dec dip  that I'm referring to:

http://www.brucegary.net/ts5/
I thought the theory of a brown dwarf orbiting is an interesting one. I hadn't heard that one before.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

Itís also a fascinating natural solution.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #948 on: 01/04/2018 08:15 PM »
It would be ironic that thanks to these papers interest in this star wanes and as a result bang goes their future Kickstarter funding. That the very ethics of those involved in its study mean the end of that very study.
« Last Edit: 01/04/2018 08:19 PM by Star One »

Online jebbo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 627
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 258
  • Likes Given: 241
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #949 on: 01/05/2018 06:52 AM »
Here's an article from Slate that makes the same point:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2018/01/tabby_s_star_doesn_t_blink_due_to_aliens.html?utm_content=bufferbdc9b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Personally, I'd back it again (and I was a large donor). Then again, I am a bit odd ;)

--- Tony


Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Liked: 464
  • Likes Given: 816
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #950 on: 01/05/2018 06:55 PM »
Personally, I'd back it again
You're not alone ;)  The "OMG aliens" factor may be gone, but there's certainly a pool of engaged people who are still interested in solving a scientific mystery. (Some of us were pretty sure it wasn't going to be aliens the first time around...)

Online jebbo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 627
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 258
  • Likes Given: 241
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #951 on: 01/05/2018 07:35 PM »
I love that this system is still enigmatic even after all this time and effort.

Dust looking like a big part of the solution; blends eliminated; slight surprise from Neowise that it's cold dust. But the dust needs replenishment and then there's the secular decline and that faint M star.

--- Tony
« Last Edit: 01/05/2018 07:36 PM by jebbo »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #952 on: 01/05/2018 10:17 PM »
Personally, I'd back it again
You're not alone   The "OMG aliens" factor may be gone, but there's certainly a pool of engaged people who are still interested in solving a scientific mystery. (Some of us were pretty sure it wasn't going to be aliens the first time around...)

The hubris is strong with the anti-ETI crowd again I see.

Anyway just because megastructures are ruled out it says nothing about other ETI scenarios like starlifting. So I am afraid your declarations are incredibly premature.

Especially when one of the offered natural alternatives is that nonsense on Jason Wrightís blog about a transiting black hole and itís dust disc.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2018 10:45 PM by Star One »

Offline as58

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 278
  • Likes Given: 180
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #953 on: 01/05/2018 10:45 PM »
Personally, I'd back it again
You're not alone   The "OMG aliens" factor may be gone, but there's certainly a pool of engaged people who are still interested in solving a scientific mystery. (Some of us were pretty sure it wasn't going to be aliens the first time around...)

That sails dangerously close to looking like oh look at me I never believed it was aliens in the first place, it was only those other people who believed that.

Anyway just because megastructures are ruled out it says nothing about other ETI scenarios like starlifting. So I am afraid your declarations are incredibly premature.

Especially when one of the offered natural alternatives is that nonsense on Jason Wrightís blog about a transiting black hole and itís dust disc.

So a black hole with dust disk is somehow obviously nonsense while starlifting isn't?

I find it sad so that many people only seem to be interested in the star because of the ETI angle. I was hoping that there'd be more interest in just plain old astronomy...

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #954 on: 01/05/2018 10:47 PM »
Personally, I'd back it again
You're not alone   The "OMG aliens" factor may be gone, but there's certainly a pool of engaged people who are still interested in solving a scientific mystery. (Some of us were pretty sure it wasn't going to be aliens the first time around...)

That sails dangerously close to looking like oh look at me I never believed it was aliens in the first place, it was only those other people who believed that.

Anyway just because megastructures are ruled out it says nothing about other ETI scenarios like starlifting. So I am afraid your declarations are incredibly premature.

Especially when one of the offered natural alternatives is that nonsense on Jason Wrightís blog about a transiting black hole and itís dust disc.

So a black hole with dust disk is somehow obviously nonsense while starlifting isn't?

I find it sad so that many people only seem to be interested in the star because of the ETI angle. I was hoping that there'd be more interest in just plain old astronomy...

Itís not the science but the attitude displayed by some that bugs me, and hereís me thinking science was supposed to operate with an open mind.

Starlifting and the Black Hole are probably both equally unlikely so I donít see why one should be promoted over the other. Especially as we donít even know the exact black hole population or even if such disks exist around them. And then one of these hypothesised objects just happens to partly or fully transit this particular star just when we happen to be looking at. If you wanted to come up with something even less likely than starlifting I suppose youíd be hard pressed to beat this theory.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2018 11:11 PM by Star One »

Offline Req

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 401
  • Liked: 413
  • Likes Given: 2581
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #955 on: 01/05/2018 11:11 PM »
Itís not the science but the attitude displayed by some that bugs me, and hereís me thinking science was supposed to operate with an open mind.

You don't get to take this position while simultaneously putting your own confirmation bias on full display in greater than 50% of the posts you create.

Edit - Your contributions of interesting current content to discuss are appreciated, but it's unfortunate that you then try to assert your confirmation bias along with a dose of condescending internet warrior attitude on a persistent basis.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2018 11:13 PM by Req »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • UK
  • Liked: 1819
  • Likes Given: 183
Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #956 on: 01/05/2018 11:14 PM »
Itís not the science but the attitude displayed by some that bugs me, and hereís me thinking science was supposed to operate with an open mind.

You don't get to take this position while simultaneously putting your own confirmation bias on full display in greater than 50% of the posts you create.

Nice to know youíve paid that close a notice that youíve personally examined every single post of mine on here over all the many years Iíve been posting on here for this alleged bias.

I donít think Iíve ever hidden that I back things like SETI and I canít see whatís wrong with taking that position? Or that I hope we arenít just alone in the universe, again is that an unreasonable position to take? Iíve certainly never advocated that I think aliens are kidnapping rural Americans for experimentation or nonsense like that. Or that secret warehouses are full of dead aliens & flying saucers. It annoys me sometimes that because someone might believe the former certain people assume they must believe the latter when thatís not the case at all. This is probably what makes me look somewhat defensive on the topic sometimes.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2018 11:22 PM by Star One »

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10649
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7515
  • Likes Given: 5288
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #957 on: 01/06/2018 12:01 AM »
Play the ball, not the man. Less squabbling, please.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online MickQ

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • Australia.
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #958 on: 01/06/2018 01:56 AM »
Can someone please let me know what "Starlifting" refers to ?

Cheers
Mick

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1377
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 1602
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Boyajians Star Updates And Discussion
« Reply #959 on: 01/06/2018 02:04 AM »
Can someone please let me know what "Starlifting" refers to ?

Cheers
Mick
Good olí Wikipedia to the rescue...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_lifting
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Tags: