Intriguing New Development on Tabby's Star (KIC 8462852)

originally posted by: Xenogears

What effect on religion may it have?

If it were somehow confirmed for sure to be real intelligent alien life more advanced than man, that would at least put a very large nail in the coffin for the abrahamic faiths which basically put man as the center of creation. That would basically prove such religions are false, manmade fabrications.

A crazy person can justify anything in terms of their belief system.

It wouldn't surprise me if such confirmed contact would whip a lot of crazies into a frenzy, in fact triggering the "end of the world".

Never bet against the capacity for human self-deception.

Kev

it's larger than Jupiter. that's pretty cool


a reply to: ItCameFromOuterSpace

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear

originally posted by: Xenogears

What effect on religion may it have?

If it were somehow confirmed for sure to be real intelligent alien life more advanced than man, that would at least put a very large nail in the coffin for the abrahamic faiths which basically put man as the center of creation. That would basically prove such religions are false, manmade fabrications.

A crazy person can justify anything in terms of their belief system.

It wouldn't surprise me if such confirmed contact would whip a lot of crazies into a frenzy, in fact triggering the "end of the world".

Never bet against the capacity for human self-deception.

Kev

A crazy person as you say ignores scientific facts and protocols when forming their belief systems , take the major religions and their belief systems of man/humans ,this doctrine can be seen as a premature crazy persons belief system. All religions put man as the all conquering creation, above all life forms in the image of their God, now put that in the perspective of confirmation of alien intelligences that are more advanced in terms of "intelligence"or dare i say "spiritual" understanding and practises, were does that leave man made religions and their dogmatic claim that man is the only supreme being??? and the God they worship???

originally posted by: Frocharocha
Maybe a supernova? I dunno, i also agree it's mostly likely not aliens. I think this is an enterely new think on astrophysics, maybe in the future we will know what's going on there.

The primary question here is is this signs of wilful intelligence?? Is this a sign of a non natural phenomenon??

This could also be an entirely new intelligence outwith any known astrophysics we know of too.

Maybe in the future we will realize that intelligence/s beyond our own can also present itself in the ways we are observing this current light phenomenon.

a reply to: K-PAX-PROT

Just where it is right now.

We have religious people who let their children die, because
a blood transfusion is against "god's word".

Humans flew to the moon.. yet more than a billion people
value their god as being more real, more powerful, even
though that god refuses to heal amputees

(whywontgodhealamputees.com...)

I know MANY people on ATS who would scream
DEMON! DEMON! SATAN! Apocalypse! repeatedly,
if one lone, mangy alien were to fly down to earth
with chemical rockets ... or worse yet, try to
convert them to 'the truth' (or both)

But we are off-topic. I will excuse myself from
further comments about this issue.. it's for another
thread.

Really.. I'd love to ponder the possibility of Tabi's
star perhaps having an unusual composition which
is causing that dimming.. but no matter how I
twist it in my mind.. burning of helium or
heavier elements.. etc.. you'd get a red star,
not a dimming F type star.

Kev

I think they're run through the reasonable natural explanations for the dimming of Tabby's Star already, and found each unsatisfactory in some way. Dust-- not found, despite repeated searches. Comets--apparently not, judging by Dr. Schaefer's recent findings.

He says a century of dimming would require them in vast, unbelievable numbers. Disrupted asteroids and/or planets-- very doubtful , they'd leave behind enough dust for us to find, which we haven't. Single natural objects big enough to dim the star by 15 to 22 percent-- those are on the scale of stars, yet such stars are not seen near KIC 8462852.

Is it really too much to think, that some intelligent form of life, at a star 1500 light years away, has managed to put up some solar collectors, orbiting in space around their star? Is it so impossible to imagine that they have gotten really good at doing this, probably with the help of automated, self reproducing construction machines?

a reply to: Ross 54

Oh, it's not too much to think, it's just that "therefore, aliens " might not be the first conclusion to jump to. In terms of probability.

a reply to: Bedlam

"Therefore, Aliens" hasn't been the first thing to jump to. Several things have been considered, and found wanting. At this stage, assuming someone hasn't made a massive mistake somewhere, the true nature of this phenomenon is looking to be either Aliens, or something else equally as unprecedented.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I'd also say "looking to be aliens" is still unwarranted. All you know is that it's putting out less light than expected, and it's variable over time.

There's a lot of investigation between here and aliens as a cause. Could it be, sure. It could also be something novel in terms of astrophysics.

a reply to: Bedlam

"Looking to aliens" is never unwarranted in cases such as this. Neither so is looking to natural phenomena, or experimental error. To dismiss one possibility out of hand, in favor of other such possibilities that are equally if not more so unlikely, is not science.

It could also be something novel in terms of astrophysics

You are acting like this is somehow more likely than the alien explanation.
Why?
Both are unprecedented.
This isn't "Aliens on Earth", this is "Aliens somewhere in the universe, 1500 light years away."
You are applying the standard of evidence of the former to the latter.
For this occurrence to be of Alien cause, it does not have to be "undeniable", it must simply be "the most likely."

Of course, I'm not saying that this is an alien mega-structure, in fact it probably isn't. However, it greatly irritates me to see people looking for something, anything, no matter how unlikely, simply so that "Aliens" is not the answer.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

So far, aliens never HAS been the answer. But there's a lot of physics still to explore.

Do you really consider "aliens diddit" to be as or more likely an answer as "some mundane if rare astrophysics" as an answer to the question "why did this star become somewhat variable"?

Variable stars are not unheard of, Sol itself is somewhat variable. Stars of this type are generally not THIS variable, true.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I've got to side with Bedlam on this one..

Instances of new physics / astrophysics discovered in human history: hundreds of thousands+.

Instances of life discovered on a planet: one.

By the numbers, pure science with no wishful thinking.. the answer is obvious.

And you KNOW that I love going off the rails. But logic is logic.

The day may come.. but that day is not today. Not even close.

Kev

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

So far, aliens never HAS been the answer. But there's a lot of physics still to explore.

Do you really consider "aliens diddit" to be as or more likely an answer as "some mundane if rare astrophysics" as an answer to the question "why did this star become somewhat variable"?

Variable stars are not unheard of, Sol itself is somewhat variable. Stars of this type are generally not THIS variable, true.

So far there has been no evidence provided that aliens have EVER been the answer ??

Maybe because we have no present physics or science to able to determine just what is alien teck?? Is there such advanced teck that is unknowable , is there teck beyond any checkable reference tables??

Then all those unsolved UFO cases due to high strangeness data and investigated by credible sources are to be discounted as non alien teck and just new physics???

To prematurely reject any alien possibility at present is not science and reeks of the "know all" mentality.

As you well know until further data is found to answer this either way then you cannot rule out a alien source. Even if it is new physics or new astrophysics until PROVEN either way you cannot dismiss prematurely an alien source.

We have barely been outside our own solar system never mind 15000 light years away and to think that there might even be another planet in our solar system that has been undetected for how long....

Where is the evidence that aliens or ET technology would not be POSSIBLE ??

Where is the checkable or knowable scientific data reference table by present day scientific understandings that could prove or rule out that any present unknowable phenomenon,("Tabby star"), could never be alien technology??

Do we have a checkable scientific reference table on advanced alien technologies ?? no we do not, and like you have said "So far, aliens never HAS been the answer" , then how can we judge what is , could be, or is not advanced alien technologies,

Where is the checkable alien technologies reference table to justify the ET rejection?? is that not how we base our current model and protocols on in any scientific endeavours or truths , that first WE have in place a checkable scientific reference table to be able to differentiate fairly and scientifically??

Just now we and science are at a loss, we all agree on that fact but why is the alien possibility ruled out prematurely, is that really science, if so it's not for me. Those that say present day science knows everything there is know are the ones to avoid,there is no point in prejudging or making premature rejections purely based on unscientific wimps or prejudices.

There are stranger things in this imaginable universe than there is dreamt of in human philosophy.

Do you really consider prejudging prejudiced ideals over any unknowable phenomenon until more data is understood even if that included possible alien technologies??

You cannot have it both ways here.

Variability of up to 22 percent in F type, main sequence stars is unheard of. These stars are remarkably stable. Observations of a great many stars furnishes evidence of this. The minor sort of variability, such as our star displays, does not even begin to approach this.
We have no information on the number or distribution of ET civilizations in our galaxy. How are we to determine that our happening upon signs of such a civilization is less likely than some unheard of astrophysical phenomenon?

If anyone knows of any speculative, yet workable astrophysical process that could account for this star's dimming, without running afoul of the evidence we've already collected, I would like to hear it.

a reply to: K-PAX-PROT

No-one is ruling out the possibility that the phenomenon being observed is related to alien technology; it just seems highly unlikely based on what we currently understand about the nature of the universe. It is much more likely to be an exciting new natural phenomenon. Please try to keep an open mind.

a reply to: K-PAX-PROT

I'm 100% willing to entertain the probability
Of non biological.. Non physical life forms
(those are the high strangeness cases you
Just mentioned).

Entertain due to personal observation
And due to conversations with world
Class researchers (and even still my
Theory and experiences might be
In gross error).

But I can't vouch for Tabi's star, so
Have to stick to the no nonsense
Numbers there.

Kev

a reply to: Ross 54

The Universe won't crumble to dust, just
Because we don't have a good theory
For this one instance YET!

Kev

Radio astronomy observations should still be possible with Tabby's Star appearing in the daytime sky. It's 44 degree North of the ecliptic, so radio interference from the Sun shouldn't be a serious problem.
Either the Green Bank or Very Large Array observatory, which have been mentioned as possibilities, would offer a great deal more sensitivity than the SETI Institute's recent try with half of the Allen Telescope Array.
There may be some uses of radio waves that can not be dispensed with, even by an advanced civilization. Space radar for tracking deep space debris that might strike or perturb the equilibrium of a Dyson swarm comes to mind. We might be able to pick that up. Our own space radars are among the most powerful signals produced on this planet.

a reply to: Bedlam

So far, aliens never HAS been the answer. But there's a lot of physics still to explore.

So?

Do you really consider "aliens diddit" to be as or more likely an answer as "some mundane if rare astrophysics" as an answer to the question "why did this star become somewhat variable"?

If "rare" means "hitherto unobserved," then yes.

Is that supposed to be a hypothetical question implying that the "Aliens" hypothesis is the "stupid, don't bother considering it" answer? "Aliens diddit?" Really? I was under the impression this was supposed to be a serious discussion. If you're going to resort to playground tactics, I won't even bother.

I have already stated that in all probability, it likely is not a phenomenon of alien origin. However, that does not mean that possibility should be dismissed offhandedly.

I've got to side with Bedlam on this one..

Instances of new physics / astrophysics discovered in human history: hundreds of thousands+.

Instances of life discovered on a planet: one.

By the numbers, pure science with no wishful thinking.. the answer is obvious.

And you KNOW that I love going off the rails. But logic is logic.

The day may come.. but that day is not today. Not even close.

No, what you are talking about is not even close to logical.
It is also not scientific.
It is, honestly speaking, simply without perspective.

When the first instance of discovering new physics/astrophysics occurred, how many times had that happened beforehand? That number is of course, Zero.
None.

How many times had water been discovered on another planet, before it was found to exist on Mars? (Or the first planet, Mars was not the first.)
Once again, none.

The reasoning you are using absurd. "A has occurred before, and B has not, though is not impossible. Therefore A."

originally posted by: K-PAX-PROT

So far there has been no evidence provided that aliens have EVER been the answer ??

No.

Maybe because we have no present physics or science to able to determine just what is alien teck?? Is there such advanced teck that is unknowable , is there teck beyond any checkable reference tables??

You're really big into "checkable reference tables". I might remind you that those tables came from scientists and engineers, they didn't come down from a deity.

Appealing to "there is surely science we don't know of" (true) "...thus anything we don't immediately understand MUST BE ALIENS" is just laughable to me.

Then all those unsolved UFO cases due to high strangeness data and investigated by credible sources are to be discounted as non alien teck and just new physics???

Oh, I'd add in misidentification, folie à plusieurs, schizophrenia and whatnot as well. While you can't exclude some possibility of alien visitation, most "UFO cases" DON'T end up being aliens, despite the total conviction of the people involved that they were kidnapped by beautiful Venusian women.

To prematurely reject any alien possibility at present is not science and reeks of the "know all" mentality.

Not at all. Nor did I "reject" it, I did say that it is not the first nor most likely conclusion to draw. If you are very convinced that anything you don't understand is "aliens", then you are credulous.

As you well know until further data is found to answer this either way then you cannot rule out a alien source. Even if it is new physics or new astrophysics until PROVEN either way you cannot dismiss prematurely an alien source.

No one did.

We have barely been outside our own solar system never mind 15000 light years away and to think that there might even be another planet in our solar system that has been undetected for how long....

Do you think aliens put it there?

Where is the evidence that aliens or ET technology would not be POSSIBLE ??

No one said it wasn't POSSIBLE!!!11!!, just that it was highly unlikely and a ridiculous first assumption given the limited data.

Just now we and science are at a loss, we all agree on that fact but why is the alien possibility ruled out prematurely, is that really science, if so it's not for me.

It isn't. It requires a detachment from what you'd LIKE to be true, and more accurate observation of what your data are telling you. That doesn't seem to be your forte.