Kepler's 'Alien Megastructure' Star Just Got Weirder

"We spent a long time trying to convince ourselves this wasn’t real," one of the researchers, Ben Montet from Caltetch, told Maddie Stone over at Gizmodo. "We just weren’t able to."

But basically what Kepler saw was KIC 8462852, also known as Tabby's star, dimming at such an incredible rate that it can't solely be explained by any of the leading hypotheses we had: comet swarms, or the effects of a warped star.

For the first 1,000 days Kepler was observing the star, that diminishing wasn't too extreme - the star dropped in luminosity by about 0.34 percent per year. But over the next 200 days, the star dimmed more than 2 percent before levelling off. In total, the star lost around 3 percent of its total luminosity during the four-year period.

So, everyone remembers Tabby's star, the wierd star, which was thought to have a Dyson sphere around it. Then, it was eventually dismissed by comet cloud theory. Well, now after a long term obsrvation (results above), we will have to rule out comets. No one is saying it out loud, but it looks more like 'Alien Megastructures'.

So what do you guys think?

Link

a reply to: asen_y2k

Very interesting star.

So the whole star loses brightness? Dims independant from some kind of blockage?

I get that right?

Maybe it's a cosmic highway sign? Artificial maybe?

a reply to: asen_y2k

Cant wait for the James Webb scope to check this out! Great find!

a reply to: asen_y2k

Next level star trek dysons sphere where no man has gone before stuff here. This 'Thing' intrigues me.

I don't understand how a 3 % dip in luminosity of an object so far away is such a big deal? Couldn't there be a observational + or - error percentage like in election polls, just spitballing here.

a reply to: asen_y2k


Why couldn't the slight (3%) dimming be caused by a thin space-dust cloud coming between Earth and Tabby? The space version of what happens on Earth when cirrus clouds "dim" the moon at night.

a reply to: asen_y2k

There are over a dozen research papers, by scores of scientists, trying to explain wtf is happening with KIC 8462852/Tabby's Star. Here's a summary of all the news articles and research papers

I never got this, a Dysons Sphere encompasses its host star to maintain life and create energy from within.....surely we would never see such a star as it would be completely surrounded?

I would be more inclined to think that there is just more rocks orbiting it than what we think, just because we have 8 planets and a bunch of smaller rocks in our solar system doesn't mean to say another couldn't have a whole heap more?

In fact, given that we are discovering more object beyond Pluto, even the possibility of planet-sized ones, makes this seem more likely.

a reply to: woogleuk

At first, it was suggested that a 'comet swarm' was orbiting the star which is sorta like the idea you're proposing. The idea was the star was periodically being orbited by large, scattered masses. It was an idea.

Someone else (Hippke), dug into the archives of all these old photo plates that are decades old. His team found that the star was still dimming decades ago. However, they also noticed that it dimmed at random intervals with no observable pattern.

Comet swarms and planets would have a routine. They'd pass at regular intervals and the star only dims at irregular intervals and not even annually - dims one year and not the next.

The Dyson sphere idea was an afterthought in a paper that the news (and us) ran with.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: asen_y2k


Why couldn't the slight (3%) dimming be caused by a thin space-dust cloud coming between Earth and Tabby? The space version of what happens on Earth when cirrus clouds "dim" the moon at night.

Because then it should go away after some time. Every time Tabby's star dimmed, it stayed that way, it never recovered. This dimming pattern is also not regular. And it has been constantly dimming for the last 100 years or so. It dims, stays that way, then dims further. Can be explained with construction activity in periodic phases. Moreover, no other star till date shows such activity.

originally posted by: woogleuk
I never got this, a Dysons Sphere encompasses its host star to maintain life and create energy from within.....surely we would never see such a star as it would be completely surrounded?

Dyson spheres may not be solid, it could be made out of panels, to save material.

a reply to: asen_y2k
What do I think? Wait, let me ask brain. Ok, brain got back to me and said it's still trying to figure out how the light switch works, so it doesn't have any idea what's going on with the star. Too bad because this is all interesting, but I want to see what the real smart people actually think about it, not what the "news" is BSing.

originally posted by: asen_y2k

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: asen_y2k


Why couldn't the slight (3%) dimming be caused by a thin space-dust cloud coming between Earth and Tabby? The space version of what happens on Earth when cirrus clouds "dim" the moon at night.

Because then it should go away after some time. Every time Tabby's star dimmed, it stayed that way, it never recovered. This dimming pattern is also not regular. And it has been constantly dimming for the last 100 years or so. It dims, stays that way, then dims further. Can be explained with construction activity in periodic phases. Moreover, no other star till date shows such activity.

Ahhh..Okay! I see what you're saying. I was just looking at the 1,000 day study, and thinking "space dust cloud".

Gosh, wouldn't it be great if at least one of the Star Trek episode writers was receiving actual communications via dreams, or some other means, from more advanced civilizations!

I've patterned so much of my adult thought waves from Star Trek.. for better or worse.

a reply to: asen_y2k

Maybe the star has some space illness, out of the box the stars didn't do that, I think the owner should try return it to coca cola company and reclaim his money back guarantee. Anyway it's not polite to sell broken stars anymore.

I think alien megastructures are awesome
at a nice safe distance from my lowly monkey butt.

a reply to: asen_y2k

Though it would be awesome to be able to conclude that this is the work of aliens, I very much doubt it.
Just because we can't explain it by any known natural phenomenon to us, doesn't mean that it in fact is just that: a natural phenomenon.

I am far from knowledgeable on the subject of space exploration, but more often than not, I feel that either sides (pro- and contra alien hypothesis) are too closed minded. Arrogant perhaps.
But what do we know about our universe really?
I am assuming the scientists that are investigating this phenomenon are approaching it the scientific way. By first examining and ruling out what we do know and understand.
To pull the alien card at this point seems to me like attention seeking. Perhaps drawing funds? But I am just spit balling now. Even though the thought it being a dyson sphere, is taking my imagination to wonderful places.

a reply to: woogleuk

A Dyson Sphere would be built over time, not be an instantaneous construct. As such, the reason Dyson Sphere fits as an answer to what's going on is the way the dimming is happening over time and continuing to grow in strength.

The theory is the the Dyson Sphere is in the process of being built, and not yet complete.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: woogleuk

The theory is the the Dyson Sphere is in the process of being built, and not yet complete.

How many light-years away is this star? It could have been finished hundreds of our years ago...or longer.

a reply to: Puppylove

The dips in brightness aren't consistent or permanent. There have been examples of almost 20% drops in brightness and 'Tabby's Star' then returns to earlier levels.

Let's imagine a Dyson sphere as a shell under construction? We can picture some form of frame or network of threads/membranes upon which the structure is being built. Let's say 20% is all done on one side and it's revolving around the star? In that scenario, the periods of dimness would be a result of the star being eclipsed by the completed parts of the Dyson sphere and it'd shine brightly again as those parts rotate past our of line of sight.

For this to be accurate, the dimming would be predictable and constant. Over the course of the hundred years we have on record, it'd be predictable as clockwork with a downward trend in brightness as the Sphere was being constructed.

This isn't the case. It's random and the levels it drops by aren't the same either. It's a real puzzler!

a reply to: carewemust

It would be complete in real time by now. But we aren't seeing it in real time. Kind of like any super nova we see has long since happened.

What makes this interesting is if a Dyson Sphere being built we're lucky enough that the time dilation is such, from our perspective we are seeing it as it's happening. More properly though, you are right in that we are seeing it as it happened.

Anything we are seeing from here has long since passed.

Hmmm makes me wonder if there are any complete Dyson Spheres out there we aren't aware of because the star has been completely enveloped and thus shed's no light for us to see...