NASA's Fermi Satellite Maps Entire Sky, Finds Mysterious Unknown Object 133
StartsWithABang writes: With the launch of the Fermi satellite in the late 2000s, we began observing the highest energy photons in the Universe — gamma rays — all over the sky, to unprecedented precision. Produced from cosmic ray showers in space when high energy protons run into other, stationary protons, these gamma rays locate point sources from supermassive black holes to supernova remnants to pulsars. There is, additionally, a great correlation between the infrared sky and the gamma ray sky, since the great high-energy background scatters off of the diffuse infrared gas, producing gamma rays there as well. But while a great many sources can be correlated with known structures, Fermi reveals at least one unknown, intense behemoth that emits spectacularly in gamma rays.
It's God. (Score:2)
It's just God.
Re:It's God. (Score:5, Funny)
"It's just God."
And because he knows when you're using an ad blocker, He won't let you read the article.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
"It's just God."
And because he knows when you're using an ad blocker, He won't let you read the article.
No, God knows everything but then doesn't do anything about it. Only Santa Claus takes action if "he knows if you've been bad or good" -- like using an ad blocker.
I'm unclear in this case which state Santa would deem that you're in, though. Maybe we need Schrodinger Claus to determine that: instead of presents or coal, he comes with a bag of dead cats or live kittens and lets you decide which one to take. (Kind of like a lottery draw with fur. And yet more claws.)
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, there is only one bag of kittens. They are simultaneously dead and alive until you open it. Only then does Schrodinger Claus determine whether or not they are living.
Your only choice is whether or not to open the bag.
Re: (Score:1)
AC here, mind if I hijack first post... for great justice?
https://github.com/dhowe/AdNau... [github.com]
Start running this on sites with shitty ad blocking policies. Whitelist the sites you support.
Adblock is designed as a defensive measure, adnauseam is offensive.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This just in: they've decoded the gamma rays signal, and it said "don't masturbate".
Re: (Score:2)
This just in: they've decoded the gamma rays signal, and it said "don't masturbate".
Whoops, too late for me. That lazy fuck- why couldn't he have just told me that 13.4 billion years ago?? But nooooooooooo....
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, you didn't start masturbating until you were 399 ± 21 million years old? Geez, what late bloomer.
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, what late bloomer.
"Better latent than never."
Re:It's God. (Score:4, Funny)
This just in: they've decoded the gamma rays signal, and it said "don't masturbate".
Really?
I would have guessed either "drink more ovaltine" or "never gonna give you up."
Re: (Score:2)
It's hipsters like the author.
They thought everything revolves around them, and it turns out to be true.
Stationary Protons (Score:2)
FORBES!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
That site is completely out of control with trackers and third-party Javascript.
If I was in their web department I would do the honourable thing and commit seppuku.
Re:FORBES!!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Hehehe....NoScript showed a black page, it caused my browser to load nothing. Then I checked the url, Forbes. End-O-Session, nope, do not want, the Forbes site is the Breath of Satan.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I use uBlock Origin on Chrome. I am using only the included filters, but I might have checked a couple extra over the default configuration. The page loads more or less normally for me. No ads, no flash, no landing.
Re: (Score:1)
And by seppuku, of course you mean bukkake.
Re: (Score:3)
Forbes is a blank to me also. However you could read this http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_... [dailygalaxy.com]
Re: (Score:2)
fucking forbes (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:fucking forbes (Score:5, Insightful)
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2016/01/08/the-first-all-sky-extreme-energy-map-reveals-an-unknown-monster-in-our-galaxy-synopsis/
Fuck forbes.
Re:fucking forbes (Score:4, Informative)
Even that story links to Forbes for the "Answer".
Re: (Score:1)
Re:fucking forbes (Score:5, Informative)
Or to be slightly less of an ass:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_Gamma-ray_Space_Telescope
http://www.universetoday.com/19879/fermi-telescope-makes-first-big-discovery-gamma-ray-pulsar/
(This one comes with a movie!)
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/news/gr_pulsar.html
https://www.sciencemag.org/content/325/5942/840
(This one is an actual paper!)
Re: (Score:2)
Non-Forbes link (Nasa.gov) (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasas-fermi-space-telescope-sharpens-its-high-energy-vision
Ad blocker? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Click (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Click to find out what happens next!
http://scienceblogs.com/starts... [scienceblogs.com]
Even that story links to Forbes for the "Answer".
Re:Click (Score:5, Informative)
Click to find out what happens next!
Or better yet, don't click at all, and let this idiot who's using Slashdot as his personal advertising platform for every single one of his blogposts disappear into obscurity.
Anyone has a link to a anti-anti-add-blocker ? (Score:2)
For obvious reasons...
Re: (Score:2)
WTF is an anti-subtract, and why would I want to block one?
Blocked Because I'm Using AdBlock? (Score:5, Interesting)
Slashdot should not be accepting stories with links that refuse to work with AdBlock enabled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Blocked Because I'm Using AdBlock? (Score:5, Informative)
Slashdot should not be accepting stories from some blogger who decides to simply re-link every single one of his articles for free Slashvertising without every contributing to the site, period. The shittyness of the resulting site not withstanding.
Startswithabang has a post count of 1 and a submission count of 119.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. This makes me wonder if a good system for allowing submissions is to limit them to some factor of comments (or even better, comments that have had some positive moderation).
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot. News for nerds, by nerds with good karma sounds like a brilliant start.
Re:Blocked Because I'm Using AdBlock? (Score:5, Insightful)
Forbes asked readers to turn off ad blockers then immediately served them pop-under malware.
http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/08/you-say-advertising-i-say-block-that-malware/
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Forbs mo longer even works in Seamonkey EVEN with ad block plus disabled
it needs to be uninstalled
basically "Forbs" no longer is getting ANY of my traffic
News stories with Forbes links are useless. (Score:5, Insightful)
News stories with Forbes links are useless. You can't read them, and nobody's going to turn off their malware/ad blockers for them. At this time, Forbes is always a case of wait-until-someone-finds-another-link and check the comments for said link.
Submitter and Forbes Relationship? (Score:5, Insightful)
There seems to be some relationship between StartsWithABang and Forbes. All the submissions are to Forbes links.
StartsWithABang appears to be a shill and needs to be banned.
Re: Submitter and Forbes Relationship? (Score:1)
This, for the live of God. And filter all suggestions to discard those that link to Forbes and anything else that requires advertising.
Re: (Score:1)
Last time I pointed this out, I was mob-modded into oblivion.
Now, even the so very docile remnant of what used to be slashdot's readership cannot stand it any more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Submitter and Forbes Relationship? (Score:5, Informative)
Not at all. All of his submissions however are to his own blogs. EVERY SINGLE ONE. This dates back before Forbes when he was peddling his clickbate on Medium.
He has made 1 post in the past year.
He has had 119 stories on the front page.
He's not a shill, he's just someone using Slashdot as his own personal advertising platform.
Re:Submitter and Forbes Relationship? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If that's true, and I wouldn't be surprised, then Slashdot should provide some indicatation that that's the case.
Though they're typically mainstream stories, HughPickens writes decent summaries with links going outside his domain. I've clicked on a few of his summary links and never been to his domain. This guy writes an okay summary but with the main (and often only) link to his overdone Forbes blog. His posts either should not be allowed or be noted as p
Actually they're decelerating towards us (Score:5, Interesting)
The aliens have their drive unit pointed at us as they want to decelerate into our solar system and not fly right through it. Their drive emissions are tremendously blue shifted (into the gamma rays) since they are approaching at a fair percentage of the speed of light (and maybe the drive is outputting gamma rays to begin with).
The best way to verify this would be to look at the spectra of the gamma ray emissions and see if they are gradually being redshifted (slowing down). This would give us an idea of how fast they are decelerating and maybe when they will be arriving. Let's hope that their ship isn't really huge or that it's not pointed directly at us so that their drive won't scour away our atmosphere!
(They could also be using a huge solar sail and what we're seeing is the reflection of our own sun but they'd really have to be moving very very close to c in order for it to be reflected as gamma rays. In that case, since they would be traveling just behind the wavefront they would also have to be right on top of us!).
Re: (Score:2)
Actually not as far sketched at it might seem.
I did not rad the article, about how much power in relation to a photon (antimatter) drive do we talk here?
Re: (Score:2)
If it's using a solar sail for propulsion, it isn't going to stop anywhere near around here.
Also, if it's a near-lightspeed ship, to the point that the emissions are blue-shifted into the gamma, it's going to be pretty close behind the gamma rays also.
Or, just go to the source . . . (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.nasa.gov/content/fermi-gamma-ray-space-telescope
One thing is for sure... (Score:2)
Most importantly (Score:2)
Is it shaped like a Big Boy?
Yo mama (Score:1)
Yo mama so fat we're in her right now
Obligatory Star Trek (Score:2)
EXCELSIOR ENGINEER: Checking all systems, Captain. ...Send to Klingon High Command. 'This is Excelsior, a Federation starship. We have monitored a large explosion in your sector. Do you require assistance?'
SULU: Don't tell me that was any meteor shower.
VALTANE: Negative, sir. The subspace shockwave originated at bearing three two three, mark seven five. Location. It's Praxis, sir. It's a Klingon moon.
SULU: Praxis is their key energy production facility.
RAND: Aye sir.
SULU: Mister Valtane, any more data?
VALTA
As a General Policy, Any Links to Forbes (Score:4, Insightful)
No panic! (Score:1)
Gamma Burst Monitor Runs RTEMS open source RTOS (Score:3)
I thought it would be of interest that at least the Gamma Burst Monitor on Fermi is running the open source RTEMS real-time operating system. :)
There are multiple references but this is an easy to find one: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0908.0450... [arxiv.org] This paper details the hardware and some of the timing characteristics of the system. And it has some nice pictures.
nice summary (Score:2)
Forbes (Score:3)
Hi again. Looks like you’re still using an ad blocker.
Cheeky fuckers!
Re: (Score:2)
Hi again. Looks like you’re still using an ad blocker.
Cheeky fuckers!
Could be worse. [wikipedia.org]
Identified source (Score:1)
It's the Great Pop-Up Ad.
Coolest line in the article (Score:1)
"The entire Fermi map, if you’re wondering, contains some 61,000 gamma ray photons, a number that took 80 months of observations to collect. "
Wow.
Bert
Stop Promoting Forbes on /. (Score:5, Informative)
Stop promoting Forbes on Slashdot please.
Here's some alternative links:
- http://www.redorbit.com/news/s... [redorbit.com]
- http://motherboard.vice.com/en... [vice.com]
- http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_... [eurekalert.org]
- http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_... [eurekalert.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know what the deal is. I'm using Chrome + Adblock Plus and could view the site fine with no ads.
It's probably because I have "Adblock Warning Removal List" enabled. It blocks anti-adblock banners, etc when it can.
I also disable the "Allow some non-intrusive advertising" option.
FYI
Are you also running something to block javascripts like uMatrix? If not, then you're not blocking trackers (third party cookies) and the like so you're not completely safe and that may be why the Forbes site loaded for you. Most of us aren't that foolish to leave things other than just the ads to load in the background. Try uMatrix or another script blocker in conjunction with AdBlock Plus and see how scary things really are before you get pwnd.
Re: (Score:2)
Saying "in gamma rays" is pithier than saying "in the gamma-ray part of the electromagnetic spectrum."
Re: (Score:2)