Black Hole Blasts Neighbor Galaxy with Deadly Jet 222
butterwise writes to mention that astronomers have, for the first time, witnessed a super-massive black hole hitting a nearby galaxy with a "death-star-like" beam of energy. The story also has a video with simulations, pictures, and explanations. "The 'death star galaxy,' as NASA astronomers called it, could obliterate the atmospheres of planets but also trigger the birth of stars in the wake of its destructive beam. Fortunately, the cosmic violence is a safe distance from our own neck of the cosmos."
Phew, good job it's far away (Score:2, Funny)
He Who Smelt It Dealt It (Score:5, Funny)
Re:He Who Smelt It Dealt It (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:He Who Smelt It Dealt It (Score:5, Funny)
AC: "Oh. What's it called now?"
Me: "Urectum. Here, let me locate it for you."
-kap
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Urectum? From the sound of it, u probably killed em.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:He Who Smelt It Dealt It (Score:5, Funny)
Possible names for the galaxies? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:He Who Smelt It Dealt It (Score:4, Funny)
One flaw... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
SB
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The astronomers explained (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eminent domain... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
SB
Old news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Old news (Score:5, Interesting)
(Disclaimer: I'm not saying we've found any here on Earth, just that it's interesting to speculate about)
We'll never know...
SB
Won't someone think of the aliens?!! (Score:4, Funny)
That doesn't help the poor aliens living in that neck of the cosmos, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
---
Santa was caught by surprise when delivering gifts to a house.
"Hey little girl, what are you doing awake at this hour?"
"Oh, Santa, I've been waiting all year for you. Please stay a while."
"Ho-ho-ho, gotta goooh gotta goohh. Gotta deliver these toys you know?"
She played with her night gown, pulling it tight... "Please, Santa, don't go..."
"Ho-ho-ho, gotta goooh gotta goohh. Gotta deliver these toys you know?"
She played mo
No anomalies detected (Score:3, Interesting)
Some people believe the universe is chock full of life, but this one is score for the skeptics. I remain a cautious optimist.
Re:No anomalies detected (Score:5, Insightful)
If there's a civilization that can shut down supermassive black holes at will then we'd know about it by now. Either because we're on the menu or we're needed to help clean the sewer mains on the black-hole-shutting-down supership.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No anomalies detected (Score:4, Insightful)
"If you'd quit giving our transmitters dumb names like "pulsar" and instead listen to the dang things, you might learn a thing or two."
Re:No anomalies detected (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Combat ? You're thinking way to martial. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe its not even technologicaly and physically possible to protect yourself from something like that. At best, if there was a super high tech civilisation in that galaxy, they got their alien asses out of there. But even then, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but even if you have a ship capable of light speed, you better have had that technology LONG before the ray hit the galaxy to make it out in time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you need to detect that not only it exists, but also that its going to hit you, research lightspee
Re:No anomalies detected (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, dude? That "death ray" has a significant scale relative to the size of a galaxy, all of it traveling at (x-rays, gamma rays) or close to (electrons) the speed of light. For one any species caught in its path wouldn't see it until it hit them, and two even if they knew about the beam it isn't clear that they could do anything about it except hide underground for thousands of years or bug out to another part of the galaxy, which itself would require faster-than-light travel. To actually redirect or shield themselves from the beam at a degree that would be visible in our telescopes would require technology on a scale that we can't even dream of.
I find it highly odd that you would be skeptical of the existence of life arising elsewhere in the universe (which while we have no idea what exactly it takes, we know is possible because it has happened at least once), because of the apparent lack of faster than light travel (which according to our current theories is impossible) or even more miraculous feats of what amount to complete science fiction. We can't say that it could ever even be theoretically possible to be "sufficiently advanced" to pull off what you propose, much less if humanity could ever attain it.
Have you seen the Hubble Deep Field [hubblesite.org]? That's an extremely narrow view of the sky, and it's completely stuffed with galaxies. And because this one particular galaxy has not, as far as we can tell, birthed a civilization with Q-like [wikipedia.org] powers, you're questioning whether there could be life anywhere else out there at all? That's literally the oddest form of skepticism I've ever heard.
Unless this is just dead-pan humor. I'll admit that I have problems detecting it when done with subtlety.
Re:No anomalies detected (Score:4, Insightful)
To paraphrase Carl Sagan's Contact, if there isn't any intelligent life out there, it sure would be an awful big waste of space.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they found a different solution (Score:2)
Alternatively, they may be taking advantage of this phenomenon, using the radiation somehow.
Real Leap forward: Telescopes (Score:5, Interesting)
"Only now by combining the images of radio telescopes, the optical and ultraviolet eyes of Hubble Space Telescope and the Chandra X-ray Observatory, can researchers put together the entire violent story about this intergalactic mugging.
The coordinated use of such an array of diverse and powerful telescopes is one of the unheralded triumphs of modern physics, Tyson said. "This is an example of the triumph of that exercise." http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/12/17/galaxy-black-hole-02.html [discovery.com]
Just the fact that we can observe such a dramatic event is awe-inspiring.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the biological human eye does not compare, but I consider our technology to be a part of us. After all, humans aren't really that we
Re: (Score:2)
Human eyes are amazing, but really only have much acuity in the fovea centralis (thus microsaccades). Horses' eyes don't have the acuity we do in the center of their visual fields, but their relatively high-resolution field extends considerably father than ours. We don't have tapeta; many other animals have much better night-vision than we do. Many birds can see a ways into the ultraviolet regions; many insects and
Re: (Score:2)
Technology is fast, evolution is slow.
SB
Re: (Score:2)
SB
Re: (Score:2)
That's the third time this month
SB
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aw(r)e-inspiring....
And, to 7String's
"exactly what you think it means. I guess it was interstellar "fajitas night" or something."
It might have been intergalactic "Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar-Bell", or
"Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tacar Tachyon-Bell" (The old 80's Taco Bell TV advert...)
the universe could get caught in a drive-by (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I give it 48 hours before we feel the effects... (Score:2, Funny)
Kucinich's plan (Score:2)
1.4 billion light years (Score:4, Interesting)
and then goes on with: The offending galaxy probably began assaulting its companion about 1 million years ago...
If the distance is 1.4 billion light years, light from the event should be taking that much time to reach us, and something that happened only a million years ago should not be visible yet.
What am I missing here?
Re:1.4 billion light years (Score:5, Informative)
It's just imprecise language.
SB
Re:1.4 billion light years (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Moderators certainly failed it tho...
SB
Re: (Score:2)
Or a sophisticated understanding of light cones and simultaneity. Since it's a news web site We'll go with yours as more likely though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I run into this question a lot, so I don't think he was being facetious.
(Usually I don't answer it wrong, doh, thanks)
SB
Radix! (Score:2, Interesting)
That is No Deathray Kids (Score:3, Funny)
A true weapon of mass destruction? (Score:2)
If so, then I for one welcome our galaxy-destroying overlords, at least for now.
In related news (Score:2, Funny)
Galactic Wife: (Score:2)
A Hypothesis: What if ... (Score:2)
What if say, our companion dwarf galaxies have somehow redirected a bit of a similar jet from our own galactic black h
Re:Way to be taken seriously.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Way to be taken seriously.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Way to be taken seriously.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Way to be taken seriously.. (Score:4, Funny)
anachronism (Score:2)
So let me get this straight. They have hyper-space interstellar travel, blaster guns, light sabers, intelligent robots, hover cars, space stations the size of a moon.... and they still store data, on TAPE ?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And how is that women are not turned on by statements like that, I'll obviously never know...
Re:Way to be taken seriously.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I have a degree in physics and I've never heard it pronounced "kwork", everyone pronounced it as it's spelt, as "kwark". Maybe it's a UK/US thing?
Speaking of quarks though, I like the names - charm, strange, up, down, top and bottom (which were called truth and beauty at first; I still think they should have stuck).
Anyway, scientific nomenclature is a serious business - but scientists are people too...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Both are correct as long as you mean kwork as kw-orc. If you mean that like kw-irk, then that's the word quirk, which has a very different meaning.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cheers.
Re: (Score:2)
I realize this (pronunciation of scientific terms) isn't a democracy, however I (a humble innocent-bystander without a degree in physics) have always believed that
quark rhymes with "phark!"
(as spoken by a truly broad Australian accent) for the most obvious of reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the ATLAS and CMS people I've spoken with have pronounced it kwark. I'm in the US so these are mostly americans as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Since hackers got at it, it now pronounces it as 'penis'.
Who said physics was boring?
Wrong, astronomers use fiction all the time ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Your suggestion is laughable, astronomers use fiction all the time. Consider the names of the planets, some constellations, etc. I apologize if you believe in the greek/roman gods, you have to consider that most of us consider them fictional.
Re: (Score:2)
(That begs a question: Do theoretical physicists write science fiction? Outside of work, I mean?
SB
Re: (Score:2)
Stephen Hawking appeared in Star Trek (Score:2)
They sometimes appear in Star Trek TV episodes, Stephen Hawking.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Alternative viewpoint. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just tell them: Jesus made a devil galaxy go away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WTF ... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TFA mentions that it's hitting the edge of the galaxy, so some of the planets would see it hit their neighbors many years before their part of the galaxy rotated into the beam.