It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Massive Star " Vanishes "

page: 4
31
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic
You can list "aliens" as a possible answer to any mystery. If you don't know the answer, how can you rule anything out, including aliens? There were unsolved murders in New York City last year. Could some have been committed by aliens? Sure, how can you rule it out? But, that doesn't mean it's likely, and most detectives probably don't have extraterrestrial aliens on their suspect lists, even if they haven't read this paper (have you?)

New Model Predicts That We’re Probably the Only Advanced Civilization in the Observable Universe
That paper is largely speculation so I wouldn't give it much confidence, though it might be worth a read for interest, and to put Dan Hooper's writings in perspective.

Regarding Dan Hooper's paper, in his own words "In this paper, we speculate...". It's a bit of an understatement to say that, but it is also speculative, very specluative.
A Dyson sphere won't necessarily make a star disappear completely, it would still have a detectable electromagnetic signature in the infrared wavelengths, and while we are speculating, how fast do you want to speculate a Dyson sphere could be made? It can't be done overnight.

Dan is not really clear on how aliens would transport the stars in his paper. He makes reference to a Shkadov thruster, and then he explains that would move the star far too slowly for his idea to work. Instead of giving us an explanation of something that would work better than the Shkadov thruster, he just says, "We leave it to the advanced civilization to figure out how exactly this would be accomplished." or in other words, for all the explanation he gave us on what they would use that's so much better than the Shkadov thruster, it may as well be step 2 in this cartoon:



He does say "By using part of the star’s mass (or the mass of another star) as a propellant..." so he's alluding to something akin to a rocket-propelled star. So is it possible to transport stars using part of their mass to propel them? I don't know, but I expect it would leave a tremendous signature, just look at the huge signatures rockets make on Earth, we can and do easily detect rocket launches from detectors in orbit. So if you manage to give a star some kind of rocket propulsion, it should give off a heck of an electromagnetic signature different from ordinary stars which are not rocket propelled.

The last thing I would point out is that there may be as many as a trillion stars gravitationally bound in our local group, which would not be separated from us by dark energy like the more distant galaxies. Shouldn't a trillion stars be enough? The idea behind Dan Hooper's paper seems to be that the civilization's own trillion stars isn't good enough so they would go grab stars outside of the trillion they already have. It seems a bit greedy to me. Maybe they should have instituted population control or something to make due with the trillion stars they have.

edit on 2020713 by Arbitrageur because: clarification




posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

People have tried to pin natural phenomena on “aliens” up to this point in the history of humankind, and have been burnt every time.

Is that a fakes statement.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 04:02 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

And wouldn’t be easier to move a planet to a needed star, than move a sun to a planet in need? Or just build on a new planet? What do you do with the old sun?

The only thing that really makes sense to me, is they need stars for hyperspace jumps. But this total speculation with zero evidence. And to disturb areas of balances gravity is a bit alarming.
edit on 13-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 06:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

There's not one thing you posted that refutes anything I have mentioned. Some of you guys lose all reason and logic at the mere mention of extraterrestrials.

First, I can quote hundreds of Scientist and different models that say we're not the only "advanced civilization" in the universe and to say we're advanced based on our current understanding and primitive exploration of planets in our own backyard is just an understatement.

Secondly, the paper you linked to talks about the Fermi Paradox which is a joke. It basically says where are all of the aliens but discounts the mountains of U.F.O. evidence. I have personally had experiences with 4 sightings. These U.F.O.'s could be extraterrestrials or probes. We're working on sending out A.I. probes. The Fermi Paradox is basically saying because I haven't had an experience with U.F.O.'s I'm going to discount every sighting, close encounter and more. The Government is just releasing more data about U.A.P.'s.

Third, you say it's speculative about star harvesting. So what?? In science many discoveries starts with speculation. Einstein speculated and used his imagination about time and it led to one of the most groundbreaking discoveries in the history of science. In fact, Einstein credited imagination for his success.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution."

So the fact that you mention it's speculative like that's a pejorative is just asinine. At this point, there's no natural explanation for these missing stars so there will be Scientist who speculate how this could occur naturally.

Fourth, I don't want to turn this thread into a debate simply about extraterrestrials, but sadly people like you and the other guy are so childish that you lose your minds at the mere mention of an extraterrestrial explanation for an observed phenomenon. I said it's another explanation not the only explanation.

Fifth, what is the problem with Researchers doing the the research into these areas when there's no natural explanation? You act like it's the end of the world because these Researchers dare to even ask the question. Like I said I can post hundreds of Scientist who say things like extraterrestrials most certainly exist(Stephen Hawking) and different models that support this conclusion. We're spending billions on missions to go to other planets and look for signatures of life. Why not just bury our head in the sand like you and the other guy and remove all speculation and imagination from science.

Sixth, The Researchers here did a good job and there's NOTHING wrong with asking the questions and doing the research. Here's a good write up on the research.


However, the scientific method also teaches us that nothing should ever be taken for granted and that even the more obvious hypotheses must be empirically verified. It is the reason why the VASCO [1] project was born. The project aims to compare star catalogs of the last century with catalogs published in recent years, looking for stars that were and are no longer there or, on the contrary, stars that were not there and are there today.

On December 12, the first of a series of studies planned for the project appeared in The Astronomical Journal. The article, signed as the lead author by Beatriz Villarroel of the Swedish Nordita (Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics), provides the first official data on the outcome of the research carried out so far by the group of astronomers participating in the initiative.

The article describes the results obtained by comparing two star catalogs separated by an interval of about 70 years: the US Naval Observatory catalogue (USNO) B1.0, whose observations date back to the 50s of the last century, and the Pan-STARRS1 survey catalog, published at the end of 2016.

In the end, of the 600 million objects initially considered, around 100 mismatches survived all attempts to trace the missing object in recent catalogs. The analysis of the magnitude and color of the “disappeared” objects has shown that they are almost all very faint and very red. The color and the fact that they have a point-like appearance suggests that they are not objects of the Solar System. If they had been, for example, asteroids, they would have left a linear trace, due to the movement accumulated during the exposure (which, in the photographic plates of the USNO catalog, lasted for about 50 minutes). Furthermore, the bodies of the Solar System are typically much bluer (because they reflect sunlight) than the approximately 100 candidates discovered by Villarroel and colleagues.




medium.com...

So the Researchers did some extensive research. If anyone has an open mind outside of Frick and Frack, I suggest you read the Medium article and also here's a link to the paper in The Astronomical Journal.

The Vanishing and Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations Project. I. USNO Objects Missing in Modern Sky Surveys and Follow-up Observations of a "Missing Star"

iopscience.iop.org...

Seventh, you look ridiculous yet again as you have in other threads because someone dared to mention a topic as another explanation in a thread discussing different explanations and you make an asinine post that doesn't refute anything.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Sigh....

Can you answer the simplest of questions.

People have tried to pin natural phenomena on “aliens” up to this point in the history of humankind, and have been burnt every time.

Is that a false statement.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 06:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: neoholographic

Sigh....

Can you answer the simplest of questions.

People have tried to pin natural phenomena on “aliens” up to this point in the history of humankind, and have been burnt every time.

Is that a false statement.


I answered your questions, it's not my fault you don't accept the answers because of your illogical obstinance at the mere mention of "extraterrestrials" or "aliens."

As I posted above, these Researchers did a good job and laid out their finding in The Astronomical Journal. As the article said:

On December 12, the first of a series of studies planned for the project appeared in The Astronomical Journal. The article, signed as the lead author by Beatriz Villarroel of the Swedish Nordita (Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics), provides the first official data on the outcome of the research carried out so far by the group of astronomers participating in the initiative.

medium.com...

THE FIRST in a series of studies planned.

Maybe they will refute their own Hypothesis in the end but the Research is just starting and you act like just the act of doing research in these areas shouldn't be allowed.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Just a Big cloud of space dust!
one day it may become a galaxy.

thats what all the dark mater they are looking for is!



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

What I am claiming. Historically, the answer for observable natural phenomenon has never been “aliens”. There are many reasons for the mismatch between older surveys and new star surveys. If either older or new surveys are 99.9 percent accurate, how many stars are potentially erroneously cataloged? .1 percent error of just a million is 1000 stars. How many stars are cataloged again? At what percent accuracy? With discrepancy errors compounding the issue between older and newer surveys.

Then throw in any other event that might block the stars light. And that stars do move about the Milky Way galaxy unaided by aliens.

If I was a bettting man, I would place my money on something other than aliens.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Your post doesn't make any sense.

You act like these Researchers are stupid and didn't ask any questions. Did you even read any of the paper and look at the research?

You act like they just looked at a old map, compared it to a new map of the sky and said hey, let's publish this. They started out with 600 million objects and dwindled it down to 100 looking for particular technosignatures. I think we need to start looking for better signatures for life and technosignatures. This is exactly what Researchers are doing despite closed minded people like you who don't even want them asking questions. Here's some of what they did:


The work done on these two databases by Villarroel and colleagues is the result of the enormous computing power available to scientists today. The authors have selected 600 million objects from the digitized version of the USNO catalog, looking for their analogs within the Pan-STARRS1 catalog — a cyclopean amount of data, which only very powerful computers can “grind” in a reasonable amount of time.

The comparison was set up in such a way as to verify, for each of the 600 million light sources taken from the USNO catalog, the existence of a counterpart in Pan-STARSS1 within a radius of 30 arc seconds starting from the position shown in USNO. From this first major skimming, 426,975 mismatches (that is, lacked correspondences) emerged: a number equal to 0.074% of the examined objects.

Researchers then filtered the set of mismatches, eliminating those that depended on errors due to different sky coverage by the two surveys. It meant removing all light sources with declination below −30° because natively not included in Pan-STARSS1. In all, 151,193 items remained not matched on the initial total of 600 million items.

One of the reasons why a star can disappear from a particular region of the sky after 70 years is because it has a high proper motion and has thus shifted considerably in the sky, ending up so far away from where it was seven decades before that it seemed to have disappeared. Therefore, to eliminate from the list of missing stars all cases attributable to a fast proper motion, the authors of the study used the very precise data provided by the astrometric satellite Gaia as well as a series of comparisons performed on the database of another large recent astronomical catalog, that of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) in its version number 12. After this further step, the number of mismatches has decreased to 23,667 in all.

In the end, of the 600 million objects initially considered, around 100 mismatches survived all attempts to trace the missing object in recent catalogs. The analysis of the magnitude and color of the “disappeared” objects has shown that they are almost all very faint and very red. The color and the fact that they have a point-like appearance suggests that they are not objects of the Solar System. If they had been, for example, asteroids, they would have left a linear trace, due to the movement accumulated during the exposure (which, in the photographic plates of the USNO catalog, lasted for about 50 minutes). Furthermore, the bodies of the Solar System are typically much bluer (because they reflect sunlight) than the approximately 100 candidates discovered by Villarroel and colleagues.


medium.com...

If I was a betting man, I would bet you didn't even read the research. You just saw the word "Alien" and was triggered to blindly respond.

This is the first step and they did a thorough job at reducing the number of candidates and now they can look at more objects because they did this first step. They have the criteria to use supercomputers to look at a lot of data to find these candidates that match their criteria.

Again I ask, what's wrong with Researchers doing research? Just because you don't like the questions they're asking is meaningless. You act like just asking the question is wrong.

I need to inform you, the days are over when people are scared to ask questions and do research about extraterrestrials. Most Scientist believe they exist based on the accumulation of evidence. Here's a few links from NASA:

NASA's Dragonfly Will Fly Around Titan Looking for Origins, Signs of Life

www.nasa.gov...

Johnson-Built Device to Help Mars Perseverance Rover Search for Signs of Life

www.nasa.gov...

Seeking Signs of Life in Ancient Martian Rocks

mars.nasa.gov...

Why do any of this if there's no evidence for extraterrestrial life? Why go to Titan and not Mercury or Neptune? It's because Researchers did the work and looked at the evidence and have shown the places most likely to find life.

Why are you against research into these areas?

Here's more research which you hate.

Qualitative classification of extraterrestrial civilizations


Abridged: The interest towards searches for extraterrestrial civilizations (ETCs) was boosted by the discovery of thousands of exoplanets. We turn to the classification of ETCs for new considerations that may help to design better strategies for ETCs searches. We take a basic taxonomic approach to ETCs and investigate the implications of the new classification on ETCs observational patterns. We use as a counter-example to our qualitative classification the quantitative scheme of Kardashev. We propose a classification based on the abilities of ETCs to modify their environment and to integrate with it: Class 0 uses the environment as it is, Class 1 modifies the it to fit its needs, Class 2 modifies itself to fit the environment and Class 3 ETC is fully integrated with the environment. Combined with the classical Kardashev's scale our scheme forms a 2d scheme for interpreting ETC properties. The new framework makes it obvious that the available energy is not an unique measure of ETCs, it may not even correlate with how well that energy is used. The possibility for progress without increased energy consumption implies lower detectability, so the existence of a Kardashev Type III ETC in the Milky Way cannot be ruled out. This reasoning weakens the Fermi paradox, allowing the existence of advanced, yet not energy hungry, low detectability ETCs. The integration of ETCs with environment makes it impossible to tell apart technosignatures from natural phenomena. Thus, the most likely opportunity for SETI searches is to look for beacons, specifically set up by them for young civilizations like us (if they want to do that is a matter of speculation). The other SETI window is to search for ETCs at technological level close to ours. To rephrase the saying of A. Clarke, sufficiently advanced civilizations are indistinguishable from nature.


arxiv.org...

More research on technosignatures.

So again, it makes no sense to get triggered at the mention of the words aliens or extraterrestrials. It's research being done whether you like it or not.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Whatever dude. When it comes to the missing stars are erroneous surveys, and natural phenomena with no aliens needed, remember this thread. And those a little more levelheaded that warned you.

But you think the cause is more likely aliens than not. Just like the “signals” coming from pulsars had to be aliens. Or fast radio bursts had to be from aliens. Just like Perytons has to be aliens.

Yes. That was sarcasm.



5 Times 'Aliens' Fooled Us
By Jesse Emspak

First Published 3 years ago

www.livescience.com...



See a trend forming.......



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic



You act like these Researchers are stupid and didn't ask any questions


Or they like to make head lines. And are willing to risk a little ridiculousness and ridicule on the one percent chance it really is aliens to be the first for the glory. Kinda like a 100 Dollar bet on the worst team in the NFL making it to the Super Bowl at the start of the season. Probably will not pan out. But if it does, you win big.
edit on 13-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




Spinning science: Overhyped headlines, snarled statistics lead readers astray

They should only be used to decide whether to read the article or not,” she said. “They’re written to grab eyeballs and they’re often inflammatory and not scientific.”

www.fredhutch.org...




But researchers studying Oumuamua — including Loeb — courted controversy and attracted fascinated media attention when they mentioned in their paper that Oumuamua could instead be artificial in origin, and may even be a solar sail.

www.vox.com...






Astronomers Have Analysed Claims 'Oumuamua's an Alien Ship, And It's Not Looking Good
www.sciencealert.com...

We already mostly knew this. But a paper last year from Harvard astrophysics enfant terrible Avi Loeb briefly suggested the possibility that the rock was an alien probe. It was like a spark to dry tinder, honestly, and other scientists have been running around with buckets ever since.


The scientists that played the logic game with Oumuamua received very little notoriety. For doing what was ethical, and not sensational. Those willing to play the fool and claim aliens with no proof made headlines.

Starting to see the difference between science and pseudoscience?
edit on 13-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Title high lights cited source

edit on 13-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 13-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Fixed more



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

More perspective...




The scientists searching for alien life aren’t very popular in science

qz.com...

Even so, he added, there were some negative reactions as well. One cutting tweet by Paul Sutter, an astrophysicist at Ohio State University, reads: “No, ‘Oumuamua is not an alien spaceship, and the authors of the paper insult honest scientific inquiry to even suggest it.” In Forbes, astrophysicist Ethan Siegel called the paper a “shocking example of sensationalist, ill-motivated science.”

Skip

But while scientists tossing around the idea of alien life may find a rapt public audience, they can also draw cynical, even hostile reactions from their fellow scientists, a response summed up by acclaimed physicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, who once quipped to CNN: “Call me when you have a dinner invite from an alien.”



I really think people are open to extraterrestrial life. But every time something new is discovered, people are tired of “scientists” claiming aliens at the drop of the hat for a bit of fame and attention. It’s like using the dark side of the force. And for us persons getting a little older, it’s like the boy who cried wolf one too many times. It’s tiresome.



posted on Jul, 13 2020 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

First off, your post are all over the place and have nothing to do with the research presented. You have an article on Medium and the published paper in The Astronomical Journal and you don't mention anything about the research actually being discussed.

This shows you're trying to obfuscate because you can't respond directly to the research.

Let's address some of the goose chase you're on.

First, they don't know what Fast Radio Bursts are and an Alien explanation is still a possible explanation.

Mysterious, looping space signal could be aliens, says Harvard scientist Astronomers detected powerful radio signals from across the cosmos in a weird pattern. A Harvard professor says E.T. is on the table of possible explanations.

Article from February 2020.

www.cnet.com...

Here's another from February 2020. This one also talks about technosignatures.

Did Ancient Aliens Send Us Messages Every 16 Days? Either Way It’s Time To Listen In Our Own Galaxy

Is there intelligent life out there in the Universe? If so, has it seen us?

All we can say for now is: there may have been.

The Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME) radio telescope in British Columbia, Canada was in the news this week after a paper was published that presented details of blasts of radio waves from a nearby massive spiral galaxy every 16 days.

Was it aliens? If it was, don’t get your hopes up about making contact with them; the spiral galaxy in question is 500 million light years distant, so even if the fast radio bursts (FRBs) detected—28 bursts were recorded from September 16, 2018 through October 30, 2019—were an intelligent civilisation, they may not exist by now. Worse still, it’s the closest FRB yet discovered.

Searching for intelligently-generated radio signals is at the core of what the privately-funded SETI Institute has done since Frank Drake’s Project Ozma in 1960, but new techniques are emerging. A key technique is to search for “technosignatures”—evidence of extraterrestrial technology—as structures orbiting other stars, laser emissions, and even the presence of oxygen and/or methane in a planet’s atmosphere.

technosignatures FRB's

I can go on and on listing research that shows evidence for extraterrestrials that hasn't been refuted in any way. A lot of what you posted is from writers that don't refute anything. They just seem to get triggered like you at the mere mention of Aliens.

The important point is, the need for technosignatures. It's great that researchers are now looking for more technosignatures that will allow them to crunch massive amounts of data on supercomputers once they get better at identifying these technosignatures.

Like I said, you didn't post anything talking about the actual research. You probably didn't read the article or the paper in The Astronomical Journal. This is because you don't have an open mind. You see the word Alien and you're triggered.

I ask again, what's wrong with Researchers doing research in these areas and coming up with ways to identify better technosignatures?

edit on 13-7-2020 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2020 @ 03:42 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

I think I was quite clear in there is a history of “scientists” claiming aliens every times something new comes along to create headlines out of wanting attention. Headlines based on junk science. While more ethical scientists are ignored.

And I think I provided enough examples to establish a pattern that less ethical scientists do use junk science for the sole purpose of using headlines to grab attention.

And after numerous unfounded claims of “aliens” over decades. Since the discovery of pulsars. It has grown tiresome, like the boy who cried wolf one too many times.



posted on Jul, 14 2020 @ 03:46 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic



Like I said, you didn't post anything talking about the actual research


I’ll bite. Please list the actual evidence stars were moved by aliens. Any evidence moving large gravity wells interacting with other stars while on the move? And slow changes in sources of radiation as the stars were being moved? Have the stars been found in new locations to prove they were even moved?
edit on 14-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Added moved

edit on 14-7-2020 by neutronflux because: Fixed more



posted on Jul, 14 2020 @ 05:44 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Again, you have this silly habit of never actually debating the issue. You said:

I think I was quite clear in there is a history of “scientists” claiming aliens every times something new comes along to create headlines out of wanting attention. Headlines based on junk science. While more ethical scientists are ignored.

This is just nonsense. Tell me, what is the junk science. Here's the paper from The Astronomical Journal.

The Vanishing and Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations Project. I. USNO Objects Missing in Modern Sky Surveys and Follow-up Observations of a "Missing Star"


Abstract
In this paper we report the current status of a new research program. The primary goal of the "Vanishing and Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations" project is to search for vanishing and appearing sources using existing survey data to find examples of exceptional astrophysical transients. The implications of finding such objects extend from traditional astrophysics fields to the more exotic searches for evidence of technologically advanced civilizations. In this first paper we present new, deeper observations of the tentative candidate discovered by Villarroel et al. in 2016. We then perform the first searches for vanishing objects throughout the sky by comparing 600 million objects from the US Naval Observatory Catalogue (USNO) B1.0 down to a limiting magnitude of ~20–21 with the recent Pan-STARRS Data Release-1 (DR1) with a limiting magnitude of ~23.4. We find about 150,000 preliminary candidates that do not have any Pan-STARRS counterpart within a 30'' radius. We show that these objects are redder and have larger proper motions than typical USNO objects. We visually examine the images for a subset of about 24,000 candidates, superseding the 2016 study with a sample 10 times larger. We find about 100 point sources visible in only one epoch in the red band of the USNO, which may be of interest in searches for strong M-dwarf flares, high-redshift supernovae, or other categories of unidentified red transients.


iopscience.iop.org...

Here's a list of Scientist involved with the study.

Beatriz Villarroel1,2, Johan Soodla3, Sébastien Comerón4, Lars Mattsson1, Kristiaan Pelckmans3, Martín López-Corredoira2,5, Kevin Krisciunas6, Eduardo Guerras7, Oleg Kochukhov8, Josefine Bergstedt8, Bart Buelens9,10, Rudolf E. Bär11, Rubén Cubo3, J. Emilio Enriquez12, Alok C. Gupta13, Iñigo Imaz8, Torgny Karlsson14, M. Almudena Prieto2,5, Aleksey A. Shlyapnikov15, Rafael S. de Souza16, Irina B. Vavilova17, and Martin J. Ward18

Tell me how these scientist are not ethical as you stated in your post.

Next you said:

Please list the actual evidence stars where moved by aliens.

This clearly shows you you don't have an argument. I never said that stars were moved by Aliens as a fact. I said it's "ANOTHER EXPLANATION." This is why Researchers are looking for technosignatures.

See you can't debate what was actually said because it just looks like illogical babble. You have to try and debate against an imaginary absolute that nobody claimed. I never said there was actual evidence and nobody in the study said this. I said it was "ANOTHER EXPLANATION." You can't debate against what I said.

You then ask these questions that have nothing to do with the study. If you would take the time to actually read what you're debating against, then you wouldn't as such silly questions.

First off, they're looking for technosignatures. As the article said this is the first step.

In the end, of the 600 million objects initially considered, around 100 mismatches survived all attempts to trace the missing object in recent catalogs. The analysis of the magnitude and color of the “disappeared” objects has shown that they are almost all very faint and very red. The color and the fact that they have a point-like appearance suggests that they are not objects of the Solar System. If they had been, for example, asteroids, they would have left a linear trace, due to the movement accumulated during the exposure (which, in the photographic plates of the USNO catalog, lasted for about 50 minutes). Furthermore, the bodies of the Solar System are typically much bluer (because they reflect sunlight) than the approximately 100 candidates discovered by Villarroel and colleagues.

medium.com...

Let me try to educate you since you don't want to do any actual reading of what you're debating against.

First, let's look at an example.



The image in the upper left is from 1950. The object then was gone in the image in the upper right from 1980 and the two images in the bottom from recent SDSS and Pan-STARRS1 surveys.

When they examined the object from 1950 a couple of things stood out.

First, the 100 objects they identified as possible technosignatures were very faint and very red. The color and the point like appearance of these objects suggest they're not objects of the solar system.

Let me repeat that. The color and the point like appearance of these objects suggest they're not objects of the solar system.

It goes on to say:

If they had been, for example, asteroids, they would have left a linear trace, due to the movement accumulated during the exposure (which, in the photographic plates of the USNO catalog, lasted for about 50 minutes). Furthermore, the bodies of the Solar System are typically much bluer (because they reflect sunlight) than the approximately 100 candidates discovered by Villarroel and colleagues.

So these are very interesting objects.

This shows the importance of looking for technosignatures. This suggest it might have been placed there and then moved. There's more if you had bothered to read the paper you're debating.

The very red point source of the object. The article says:


From this point of view, a red point source in the USNO catalog without matches in recent stellar catalogs could also be considered a “technosignature,” that is, the technological signature of an advanced civilization. The authors of the study explain:

An attractive feature about the list we have produced is that a monochromatic interstellar laser at 600–680 nm that shines for about one hour may well present itself as a point source detected only once in one image, due to the short time when the laser operated.

The technological level for producing such a signature is not far from what humanity has achieved. We already have technologies capable of producing short laser pulses, lasting nanoseconds, with a brightness equal to about 5,000 times that of the Sun.


medium.com...

Again, just wow! The Researchers really did their job but you would know this if you bothered to actually read the research.

What they're saying is that they may have captured a technosignature and it may not even be a star. It may be the effects of technology designed by intelligence that was captured in 1950 was just mistaken as a star. It was a technosignature of a technology that used a monochromatic interstellar laser at 600–680 nm that shines for about one hour may well present itself as a point source detected only once in one image.

Wow, let me repeat that:

CONT'D
edit on 14-7-2020 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2020 @ 05:45 AM
link   
What they're saying is that they may have captured a technosignature and it may not even be a star. It may be the effects of technology designed by intelligence that was captured in 1950 was just mistaken as a star. It was a technosignature of a technology that used a monochromatic interstellar laser at 600–680 nm that shines for about one hour may well present itself as a point source detected only once in one image.

Do you see how ignorant your questions were now?

If you would have taken the time to read what you're debating against, you wouldn't ask such asinine questions.

This is a technosignature. So these objects may not even be stars, they might be a technosignature of the use of advanced technology that we have mistaken as stars. Now that these Researchers have done the work of identifying these 100 sources, they can do a much more extensive search of the sky looking for objects that are very faint and red and not as blue as other objects in the solar system. Objects that have vanished and objects that fit this criteria that are still there because this could be ongoing use of this technology by an advanced civilization.

Now, technosignatures are becoming very important and will be used along with biological signatures. In fact, technosignatures might even be better in this search at first because we can find technosignatures that aren't confined to a planet.

This is what recently happened in Congress.


To address the growing interest in this field, NASA hosted the NASA Technosignatures Workshop back in September. The purpose of this workshop was to assess the current state of technosignature research, where the most promising avenues lay, and where advances can be made. Recently, the workshop's report was released, which contained all their findings and recommendations for the future of this field.

This workshop emerged as a result of the Congress House Appropriations Bill that was passed in April 2018, wherein NASA was directed to begin supporting the scientific search for technosignatures as part of their larger search for extraterrestrial life. The event brought scientists and principle investigators together from various fields at the Lunar and Planetary Institute (LPI) in Houston, while many more participated via Adobe Connect.

"If we can find technosignatures— evidence of some technology that modifies its environment in ways that are detectable– then we will be permitted to infer the existence, at least at some time, of intelligent technologists. As with biosignatures, it is not possible to enumerate all the potential technosignatures of technology- as-we-don't-yet-know-it, but we can define systematic search strategies for equivalents of some 21st century terrestrial technologies."


phys.org...

Let me close by saying, I hope you actually read the research if you want to keep debating the subject. This way we can avoid the asinine questions that would be asked and answered if you just......READ!



posted on Jul, 14 2020 @ 06:38 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

So? Noting but speculation. No actual evidence, Got it.
edit on 14-7-2020 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2020 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

But they did get another headline.......




top topics



 
31
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join