Quadrantids Source Discovered 55
linuxwrangler writes "Man has observed the annual Quadrantid meteor shower since antiquity but its source has remained unknown. Astronomer Peter Jenniskens of the SETI Institute predicted that the source would turn out to be the burnt-out core of an ancient star. Now, just in time for this year's display, the source has been discovered right where Jenniskens predicted."
Article is really bad (Score:5, Informative)
Meteors are pieces of asteroids or comets that are visible when they intercept the Earth's atmosphere.
It's absolutely preposterous that a star that exploded 500 million years ago could:
Throw a rock into Earth's orbit. Any supernova within a few dozen light years would have destroyed life on Earth at the time. Any supernova would have pulverized a chunk of rock too. And even if a rock somehow came from a distant supernova, we'd never be able to figure it out a half-billion years after the fact.
I attribute the complete absurdity of this article to a science writer who doesn't know anything about science. Or, it could have been an incompetent editor who screwed up the article. Anyway, it completely sucks.
What they did in fact discover is that a particular asteroid is the parent of the meteor stream. This is interesting to know, but hard to dig out of that ill-written article.
Editing (Score:2, Informative)
Look again - the SFGate's science editor is the writer. And is the paper's main editor going to overrule the science editor on a science article? Don't think so. Hopefully this is just a temporary situation, like the editor filling in while the astronomy/physics reporter is on holiday or something.
Dare I ask why /.'s ed
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Editing (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Editing (Score:2)
More to the point, why didn't the /. editors catch this?
Re:Article is really bad (Score:2)
First the article says that it was an ancient star that exploded, and at the end it says that it was an ancient comet that exploded.
Could it be that the star's core _was_ the comet seen by the Chinese, and as it outgassed, provided the dust we see now as the meteor shower?
Re:Article is really bad (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Article is really bad (Score:2)
It wasn't a star and it didnt explode...what else? (Score:3, Insightful)
The person who let that piece be printed in that form deserves to be the laughingstock of the science-editor community from now until he leaves the business. There is no excuse for getting high-scho
Re:It wasn't a star and it didnt explode...what el (Score:2)
Re:It wasn't a star and it didnt explode...what el (Score:2)
In Second Grade I got in trouble because my teacher didn't know what "asteroid" meant, and thought because it had "ass" in it, it must be profanity.
She had a college degree.
Is asteroid the new niggardly? (Score:2)
Besides, I bet you cringed when it was a liberal administration which tried to fire someone for using the word "niggardly", while the poster's experience sounds more like an embar-ass-ment of the right because a leftist isn't going to get bent out of shape fo
Re:Is asteroid the new niggardly? (Score:1)
It's a made up definition of liberal, provided by people like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. And if you buy into that definition, you're being fooled.
The actual definition of liberal is easily available to anyone, and I can only surmise that if someone doesn't know it, they must be uneducated, or willfully malicious.
Also, I'm not ragging on "people". I'm ragging on the demonic right-wing swine that signed up for my abuse list. I'm polite to everyone
Re:Is asteroid the new niggardly? (Score:2)
Really? According to the Washington Times [washingtonpost.com], Anthony Williams (the then-mayor of Washington DC) is black, as is 60% of the city. He's also a Democrat. Blacks also have a history of voting strongly to the left of the political spectrum, so if the Williams administration is not "liberal" in the political
So, nothing personal but.... (Score:2)
Re:So, nothing personal but.... (Score:1)
If you want to have no relationship with me, then do not have a relationship with me.
I don't see the "foe" indicator at this time, which is why this reply is polite.
Re:So, nothing personal but.... (Score:2)
Again, nothing personal; this is part of attention-management. What I read is my business. How you react to what I decide to read is your problem, not mine. If you choose to waste your time writing flames I'll probably not see except as a response below my current threshold, it's your life (or lack thereof).
Re:It wasn't a star and it didnt explode...what el (Score:1)
The facts are that the schools take the money from "our" pockets first.
If you take (without my permission) $20 from my pocket, and then I take (without your permission) $10 back, then you would call me the selfish thief?
Before you call somebody a selfish bastard or an idiot, why don't you at least make a half-assed attempt to get the logic straight.
Re:It wasn't a star and it didnt explode...what el (Score:1)
Facts and logic don't play any part in the real Ann Coulter's writings, and they don't play any part in mine either.
Re:It wasn't a star and it didnt explode...what el (Score:1)
Re:Article is really bad (Score:2)
Re:Article is really bad (Score:1)
Re:Article is really bad (Score:1)
orbit geometry (Score:3, Informative)
The article just says it orbits between Jupiter and Earth, but doesn't mention its geometry. The orbit could be highly elliptical, with its perihelion being lower than Earth's and apohelion being higher than Earths's. At some point in its orbit, it would be "orbiting" between Earth and Jupiter.. at another point it would be crossing orbital paths with Earth on its way to perihelion.
Yes, it is terrible use of terminology (indicative of the rest of the article), but it could kind
Re:orbit geometry (Score:1)
Re:Article is really bad (Score:2)
Where do I find that? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Where do I find that? (Score:2)
Rad:
I once had a cat named Bootes. She never had kittens, but came into season about every three weeks. Obviously, she was a favorite of the local tomcats.
Back to astronomy, though: shouldn't the Quadran
"Star" should be "comet" (Score:4, Informative)
Re:"Star" should be "comet" (Score:1)
Ancient star? (Score:5, Informative)
On topic complaint (Score:3, Funny)
Timothy should post a correction, and be more careful in the future.
damn bugs (Score:1)
Re:damn bugs (Score:1)
Go easy on the autor ...he's apologised. (Score:5, Informative)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:13:40 -0800
From: Perlman, David
[ Add to Address Book | Block Address | Report as Spam ]
To:
Subject: RE: Quadrantids Article
That article was written by me carelessly and in haste; we will publish a brief correction tomorrow, but I can only apologize for its total confusion. I've emailed everyone who complained and can only apologize again --it is far below my usual standards.
-----Original Message-----
From: roch1west@excite.com [mailto:roch1west@excite.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:49 PM
To: Perlman, David
Subject: Quadrantids Article
I do believe this: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003
one more thing he got wrong... (Score:3, Informative)
Ok, so it wasn't just me. (Score:1)