Massive Gamma Ray Bubbles Discovered In Milky Way 115
An anonymous reader writes "Two huge, mysterious gamma ray-emitting bubbles have been discovered at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, US astronomers said... The structure spans more than half of the visible sky, from the constellation Virgo to the constellation Grus, and it may be millions of years old."
Systematic Error (Score:3, Interesting)
So they used noisy data to try and algorithmically guess what was hidden behind a bunch of "fog" and got a giant bubble, and now their conclusion is "there's a giant bubble!" and not "Maybe we have a systematic error in our analysis..."? To be fair, it's possible there is a giant bubble, I don't know the math here, but it seems... suspect.
Anyway, this article [cosmosmagazine.com] sounds way cooler.
Re:Systematic Error (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"SHERRIF PERRY. You are violating my territorial bubble." -Milton Dammers
The future is now (Score:2)
Actually, doesn't our solar system begin to line up with line-of-sight to the center of the galaxy? Hmmmm....that would be around 2012.....Uh oh....
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Systematic Error (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:Systematic Error (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that even CfA people aren't experts in all fields, right? Doing Fermi-LAT is very tricky in the Galactic plane and only maybe a handful of people in the LAT team know how to do it correctly. That being said, this result isn't necessarily wrong but it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
Without Googling him.... (Score:2)
Those thinking types amongst us will understand he is one of those truly intelligent physicists out there who don't necessarily believe in theories based upon theories based upon theories, etc..
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, scientists never think to consider systematic error. It's up to random Slashdot "readers" to remind them.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not exactly a bubble, it's more like a void. Peter Hamilton was prescient. [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:2)
IINM slashdot covered the "death star" story you linked to three years ago. Personally, I think both stories are at least interesting, if not fascinating.
Re: (Score:2)
My god, please dont expose your ignorance like that in public, its embarrassing. Makes me cringe.
You have no idea that the method they used is perfectly fine. Finding a signal that is below the "noise floor" is used in many, many systems, for example GPS.
Finding a "signal" embedded in the "noise" of the gamma ray fog is nothing special, and does not immediately show a systematic error in the method. These people are scientists, they are well aware of these things.
Give the educated people who know craploads
I don't see it (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Does it look like Buttercup or Blossom then?
Re: (Score:2)
THIS is Bubbles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ITUYo7CRg0 [youtube.com]
Phenomenommenom explained.
And what the fuck is refuckulate?
Re:I don't see it (Score:4, Funny)
Look again.
See the two, red, bubble shaped things? Right in the middle there. Sort of coming off the center in a bubbly sort of way.
Those are the bubbles.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Look again.
See the two, red, bubble shaped things?
colornazi
Those would be purplish. Time to calibrate that monitor!
Re: (Score:2)
This NASA illustration [latimes.com] does.
A proposed mechanism for these bubbles exists (Score:4, Funny)
Dark Taco Bell.
This is also responsible for the increasing expansion of the universe.
Who's behind it? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
maybe because it's actually the chinese who are behind it and the US doesn't want to start a panic?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Black hole formation? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm sure I'm missing something, but I thought gamma ray bursts could occur as a result of black hole formation, which I thought was quite prevalent in the center of the galaxy. Wouldn't this be (or why isn't this) the top suspect?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure I'm missing something, but I thought gamma ray bursts could occur as a result of black hole formation, which I thought was quite prevalent in the center of the galaxy. Wouldn't this be (or why isn't this) the top suspect?
AFAIK the origin of Gamma ray bursts (GRBs) is not known yet (at least from the books I read, situation may have changed in recent years).
This is about Gamma Ray "Bubbles" (not GRBs), which just means some structure emitting at gamma ray frequencies.
Without having access to the article, I can only guess: Could those be the lobes/jets of our galaxy?
Mine. (Score:2)
My bubbles. They are MINE.
now THAT (Score:2)
"Two huge, mysterious gamma ray-emitting bubbles"...spans more than half of the visible sky, from the constellation Virgo to the constellation Grus, and it may be millions of years old.
Now THAT was some seriously bad Mexican food.
Mod points (Score:2)
To whoever makes the best sexual innuendo related to this article.
Re: (Score:2)
In other news... Not to be outdone by some mere galaxy, Dolly Parton has contacted her cosmetic surgeon to see if implants come in "Gamma-Ray Bubble" size.
Proof. (Score:2)
That the Milky Way is the only galaxy with balls big enough to create humans.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Mod points (Score:5, Funny)
"Gamma Ray Bubbles" is actually Sarah Palin's Stripper name.
Thank you (Score:2)
Wait a second... (Score:3, Funny)
Massive [...] bubbles discovered in Milky Way? Are you kidding me?
Are you telling me we're living inside a giant Aero chocolate bar [wikipedia.org]?
No need to worry yet (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
We won't see the Puppeteers, they are long gone toward galactic north already.
On the other hand, by the time we detect the Pak fleets coming from the core, it'll already be too late... they kill technological civilizations in their path.
SB
gamma ray bubbles? (Score:1)
gas giants (Score:4, Funny)
Hmmm...massive gas bubbles...and right after the U.S. election. Coincidence?
Core Explosion? (Score:2)
Is this Larry Niven's core explosion? We'd better get to work on that scrith, or we'd better try and hitch a ride with Puppeteers...
Re: (Score:2)
why, what does it say?
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds more like gas jets to me. And they say they think it might have been caused by a large mass being swallowed by the central black hole. (I wonder what they mean by large? A globular cluster?) That would be expected to produce gas & radiation jets. I suppose the radiation would hollow out the gas jet, and viewed from certain angles it could resemble a bubble.
If correct, what this means is that our central black hole has been active in "recent times". (How long ago?) This isn't surprising,
Spider Robinson (Score:2)
Dammit, where are Mike and Mary Callahan when you need 'em?
Scan (Score:1)
Hello (Score:1)
That's no bubble (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Looks like gas jets to me (Score:2)
When I saw the picture the first thing it looked like to me were those giant gets you sometimes see shooting away from black holes. I assumed that this was from the black hole in the center of our galaxy. The article says it might be, but might also be from star formation.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
One article I saw said it could possibly be both. They really don't know. Another article said the scientists were "amazed".
Yes, it is a bubble, but still ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am sure I will be able to sense when it is going to burst and get out in time
If you get too close to the source of those bubbles, the time's going to go REAL fast!
Nothing unusual (Score:1)
Incredible? No. (Score:2)
That amount of gamma radiation is going to create an Inconceivable Hulk!
Re: (Score:2)
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. ;-)
In the milky way? (Score:2)
pfft. Nothing strange about that. Call me when they discover bubbles around Uranus...
No, wait. Don't.
I feel a little cheated... (Score:2)
My firefox RSS thingy had truncated the title to "Massive Gamma Ray Bubbles Discovered In Milk" which I think you'll agree would have been a much more interesting article :)
Re: (Score:2)
so, you're crying over split milk?
Evolution assistant (Score:2)
Does the earth ever pass through the bubbles? If so, does our passing through correlate with more mutations and rapid evolution of various species in those times?
Inquiring minds that are too lazy to correlate the data themselves want to know!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As I understand it:
The earth passing through one of those bubbles would be more likely correlated with life having to start over. Perhaps some subducted radiodurans could survive, so we might not need to evolve DNA all over again. But one could expect all multicellular life to be killed, and most bacteria across all lines. That there would be surviving bacteria is not at all certain, but nothing else should be expected to survive.
OTOH, most of the action is taking place outside the plane of the galaxy, s
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you have a reference, I'd suspect there would be very little effect on life on Earth when passing through those bubbles, for the same reason why gamma ray observatories are impractical on earth surface... There would probably be slightly increased cancer rates, and perhaps some atmospheric effects like auroras, but not much else.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, of course it's a matter of intensity. I'm guessing it's high, you're guessing it's low. If it's high, the earth could lose most of it's water. (Well, this require long-lasting rather than just rather high intensity, but that's to be expected from this kind of phenomenon.)
As to "no gamma ray telescopes", the "bubbles" have had their contents blown out of them, because everything opaque to gamma rays is pushed away. This would include such things as planetary atmospheres. But outgassing continues to
Original Article (Score:5, Interesting)
So far I am finding the original article an interesting read. (it's in the original article NYT article)
It states that the bubble may be related to an ejection of the super massive black hole in the past 10 million years or so. You know those other galaxies that have giant lazer beams shooting out of them? Well, ours could have been like that at some point 10 million years ago. Kind makes sense that those SM black holes only occasionally and intermittently shoot stuff off, seems like just emissions like that would be hard to sustain for long periods of time. (and holy mother of Bohr, it was hard to not fall into sexual innuendo there)
Also, as far as it being a data anomaly (which I thought first due to it's symmetry and the fact that we apparently never knew about it), it apparently correlates with "hard-spectrum excess known as the WMAP haze (and) the edges of bubble also line up with features in the ROSAT X-ray maps at 1.5 - 2 KeV."
At last! (Score:2)
Yoohoo! (Score:1)
One is god, and the other is Jesus, end of story....move along, nothing to see here....
Re: (Score:2)
And the Galaxy is the Holy Spirit?
Are they that oblivious? (Score:2)
It's simply the whipped creamy filling!
What else is in a MilkyWay?
Belting us with Gamma Rays? (Score:2)
*used to* have a black hole? (Score:1)
from the article:
I thought that a black hole was a matter-&-light-gobbling monster that never stopped. What does the quote from the article mean? How does a black hole cease to exist? What happens to it?
Re: (Score:1)
from the article:
I thought that a black hole was a matter-&-light-gobbling monster that never stopped. What does the quote from the article mean? How does a black hole cease to exist? What happens to it?
You misread. What it says we may have had one million years ago that we don't have now is "such a jet". We still have the black hole, but the jets are gone (if they were there, which frankly seems likely to me given the lingering bubbles, but IANAPA [I Am Not A Professional Astronomer]).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Both explanations were very helpful. Thanks!
Sounds familiar... (Score:1)
Astro Pic of the day (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"So I says to him, 'Jesus quit farting in the bathtub!', but by my Holy Ghost, do you think he'll listen?"
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Perhaps it's just a case of bad gas caused by God eating the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? One's got a +1 "Funny", and the other one isn't moderated at all. What the hell are you going on about?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The moderation has changed since I made my comment.
Well if one has a +1, and the other has nothing, that would mean that neither comment was moderated when you made your comment. Soooo .... you were complaining about moderation, because both comments hadn't yet been moderated?
I fail to see the logic.
What I am going on about is that slashdot is awash in troll posts trying to be funny and moderation that doesn't seem to mind.
I don't think you actually understand what the word "troll" means, since neither of those comments fit the definition.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Both of the comments I referred to had been moderated, and the original moronic and offensive post still has a +3.
No, it has a +1. If you're seeing the number "3" beside it, that's because comments start off with a 1, some get an automatic bonus of 1 for karma, and the +1 that he actually got from moderation makes it a total of 3. For me it shows up as 2, since I have the karma thingy turned off. Either way, complaining that the guy got one fucking mod point is pretty dumb. It would still be dumb if his comment were a troll, and it's even more dumb when we consider that his comment is actually mildly amusing. Des
Re: (Score:1)
Both of the comments I referred to had been moderated, and the original moronic and offensive post still has a +3.
No, it has a +1. If you're seeing the number "3" beside it, that's because comments start off with a 1, some get an automatic bonus of 1 for karma, and the +1 that he actually got from moderation makes it a total of 3. For me it shows up as 2, since I have the karma thingy turned off. Either way, complaining that the guy got one fucking mod point is pretty dumb. It would still be dumb if his comment were a troll, and it's even more dumb when we consider that his comment is actually mildly amusing. Despite what some fascists might think, a shitty joke is not the same as trolling.
It was not a shitty joke. It was an offensive joke about good science from someone who clearly had nothing better to say. It was a troll and should have been moderated accordingly. Slashdot has been inundated by comments like that. As to what "troll" means, you can seek various sources to support various definitions. To me, a troll is an offensive, off-topic or patently silly remark intended either to get attention or to disrupt the conversation without advancing it or both.
I was using the word flame before there was an Internet to use it on.
Yah, me too. Had multiple meanings, too, including something you'd make with fuel, oxygen, and a spark, as well as being a descriptive term for the behavior of certain homosexual men. Not sure what that has to do with the usage of the word "troll" as it pertains to online communities, though.
Flame in the sense it was or
Re: (Score:1)