Galactic Neighbors having a party?!
I wanna hear it.
Cosmic Radio Noise Booms Six Times Louder Than Expected, page 1
privacy
Topic started on 7-1-2009 @ 08:20 PM by rattan1
I came accross this interesting article:Cosmic
Radio Noise Booms Six Times Louder Than Expected
Sorry if it has been discussed previously
I am supprised these radio signals were not picked up by SETI?
What are your theories?
[edit on 7-1-2009 by rattan1]
Sorry if it has been discussed previously
Loud sounds tend to startle us. But imagine being surprised by a sound six times louder than you expect. A balloon-borne instrument called ARCADE, (Absolute Radiometer for Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Diffuse Emission) was supposed to be used to search for heat signature from the first stars to form after the Big Bang. Instead it found an unexplained "booming" radio static that fills the sky. In July 2006, the instrument launched from NASA's Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility in Palestine, Texas, and flew to an altitude of 61,000 meters (120,000 feet) where the atmosphere thins into the vacuum of space. Its mission lasted four hours. The team, led by Alan Kogut of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center said they found the radio noise almost immediately. "We were calibrating the instrument, and we saw this big point in the graph. I said, 'What the heck is this — this shouldn't be here.' We spent the next year trying to make that point go away, but it didn't."
I am supprised these radio signals were not picked up by SETI?
Detailed analysis has ruled out an origin from primordial stars, user error or a mis-identified galactic emission, and the scientists are sure there isn't more radio sources than we expect. "Radio source counts are well known and they don't even come close to making up the detected background," said Kogut. "New sources, too faint to observe directly would have to vastly outnumber the number everything else in the sky." Dale Fixsen of the University of Maryland at College Park, added that to get the signal they detected, radio galaxies would have to be packed "into the universe like sardines," he said. "There wouldn't be any space left between one galaxy and the next."
"We don't really know what this signal is," said Seiffert. "We're relying on our colleagues to to study the data and put forth some new theories."
What are your theories?
[edit on 7-1-2009 by rattan1]
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 02:01 AM by Astyanax
reply to post by theresult
You misunderstand. This is the scientific method.
I'll explain with the help of Sherlock Holmes. Remember what he told Watson: 'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
So you're a young scientist, listening in on the universe through your radiosonde balloon, and your instruments suddenly pick up a huge signal out of empty space, where no signal is expected to be. Your heart leaps, your mind starts racing. You've made a new astronomical or cosmological discovery. Maybe it's the signal we're all waiting to hear - the first call from another intelligence Out There. Even if it isn't something so spectacular, just some - I don't know, previously unknown solar wind effect or something - your reputation is still made. They'll name the thing after you for sure. You can barely contain your excitement.
But you're a scientist, and after the first rush of ecstasy your training in the scientific method takes over. You have to convince the world that the thing you've found is real, whatever it is. Convincing the world, as any ATS conspiracy buff knows, is hard. Hardest of all to convince are your fellow scientists - they're going to pick your data over with a fine-tooth comb. If there's the slightest hint of error, you're toast.
And you know - from years of unpleasant personal experience - how easy it is to be wrong. Your 'signal' may be a fault in the equipment, a software glitch, a programming error, or interference from the local radio-cab company. It may be one of those modern demons called 'data artifacts'. It could be a hundred and one things.
So like Sherlock Holmes, you go through all the possibilities, eliminating them one by one - 'trying to make that peak disappear'. You check the equipment, reload the software, do everything you have to do. You're meticulous. And with each possibility you eliminate, your conviction grows stronger - this is the real thing.
Finally, it all checks out. There really is a signal. You can now announce your discovery to the world. And when you do, you do it with pride. You tell people how hard you worked on it, how real you know it is. You say, 'We tried for a whole year to make that peak disappear, and what do you know, it's still there! We're on to something here, boys!'
That's the spirit in which those words should be interpreted, I believe.
hahahaha
THEY SPENT A YEAR MAKING IT GO AWAY.. great
and now you know why we are DUMB oh dont understand the problem MAKE IT GO AWAY I CANT COPE IT MAKES NO SENS.
You misunderstand. This is the scientific method.
I'll explain with the help of Sherlock Holmes. Remember what he told Watson: 'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
So you're a young scientist, listening in on the universe through your radiosonde balloon, and your instruments suddenly pick up a huge signal out of empty space, where no signal is expected to be. Your heart leaps, your mind starts racing. You've made a new astronomical or cosmological discovery. Maybe it's the signal we're all waiting to hear - the first call from another intelligence Out There. Even if it isn't something so spectacular, just some - I don't know, previously unknown solar wind effect or something - your reputation is still made. They'll name the thing after you for sure. You can barely contain your excitement.
But you're a scientist, and after the first rush of ecstasy your training in the scientific method takes over. You have to convince the world that the thing you've found is real, whatever it is. Convincing the world, as any ATS conspiracy buff knows, is hard. Hardest of all to convince are your fellow scientists - they're going to pick your data over with a fine-tooth comb. If there's the slightest hint of error, you're toast.
And you know - from years of unpleasant personal experience - how easy it is to be wrong. Your 'signal' may be a fault in the equipment, a software glitch, a programming error, or interference from the local radio-cab company. It may be one of those modern demons called 'data artifacts'. It could be a hundred and one things.
So like Sherlock Holmes, you go through all the possibilities, eliminating them one by one - 'trying to make that peak disappear'. You check the equipment, reload the software, do everything you have to do. You're meticulous. And with each possibility you eliminate, your conviction grows stronger - this is the real thing.
Finally, it all checks out. There really is a signal. You can now announce your discovery to the world. And when you do, you do it with pride. You tell people how hard you worked on it, how real you know it is. You say, 'We tried for a whole year to make that peak disappear, and what do you know, it's still there! We're on to something here, boys!'
That's the spirit in which those words should be interpreted, I believe.
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 02:06 AM by theresult
reply to post by Astyanax
'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
yes and the truth was a BOOM that they tried to make go away becouse it made no sens...
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just wanted to edit
They "nasa" sent this up to measuer HEATE not sound.. read the aritcal NOT SOUND HEAT..
Then they got a large feed back via there intruments "larger" 6x larger infact than what they "expected" mathmatical caluclations / predictied this ... god neways..
The point is THEY DIDNT KNOW WHAT IT WAS.. OR why IT was so large ..
What question did they ask for IT to measure the suns right after the big bang,, ect
point is they tried to make sens of this thing and couldnt then came up with something that "fitted" in with there understanding of what the information was telling..
Not like they knew what it ment as the artical points out..
[edit on 8-1-2009 by theresult]
'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
yes and the truth was a BOOM that they tried to make go away becouse it made no sens...
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just wanted to edit
They "nasa" sent this up to measuer HEATE not sound.. read the aritcal NOT SOUND HEAT..
Then they got a large feed back via there intruments "larger" 6x larger infact than what they "expected" mathmatical caluclations / predictied this ... god neways..
The point is THEY DIDNT KNOW WHAT IT WAS.. OR why IT was so large ..
What question did they ask for IT to measure the suns right after the big bang,, ect
point is they tried to make sens of this thing and couldnt then came up with something that "fitted" in with there understanding of what the information was telling..
Not like they knew what it ment as the artical points out..
[edit on 8-1-2009 by theresult]
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 02:12 AM by theresult
reply to post by Astyanax
was supposed to be used to search for heat signature from the first stars to form after the Big Bang
Heat not sound...
was supposed to be used to search for heat signature from the first stars to form after the Big Bang
Heat not sound...
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 02:42 AM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by theresult
It measured electro magnetic waves not sound waves... its something you learn in chemistry. And the waves were stronger than anything they expected that's why its said to be six times as loud.
iragamiText Red
It measured electro magnetic waves not sound waves... its something you learn in chemistry. And the waves were stronger than anything they expected that's why its said to be six times as loud.
iragamiText Red
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 03:18 AM by Astyanax
reply to post by theresult
There is no air in space. Therefore there cannot be sound in space.
When things get hot, they give off electromagnetic radiation. So when you go looking for heat in space, what you really go looking for is electromagnetic waves.
Things that are really, really hot give off very, very high-frequency radiation. Cooler things radiate at lower frequencies. Really cool things radiate at what we call radio frequencies. Here's a chart of the electromagnetic spectrum (with corresponding temperatures) which might make things clearer.
The heat left over from the Big Bang isn't much. The Big Bang has cooled down a lot in 13 billion years. This heat is called the cosmic microwave background. You can't 'see' it with telescopes or gamma-ray detectors. You need to use a radio antenna, tuned to microwave frequencies. Lots of other stuff, like radio galaxies, radiate at even lower frequencies than this - at radio frequencies, as you might guess from the name.
These guys were looking for stuff emitting heat at radio frequencies.
Now, you know how we turn radio frequencies into sound. We use a radio.
So when they got this crazy radio signal they put it through a speaker and that's the roar they heard, when all they were expecting was the much softer sound (of the heat) of stars formed soon after the Big Bang.
Hope that made sense.
Heat not sound...
There is no air in space. Therefore there cannot be sound in space.
When things get hot, they give off electromagnetic radiation. So when you go looking for heat in space, what you really go looking for is electromagnetic waves.
Things that are really, really hot give off very, very high-frequency radiation. Cooler things radiate at lower frequencies. Really cool things radiate at what we call radio frequencies. Here's a chart of the electromagnetic spectrum (with corresponding temperatures) which might make things clearer.
The heat left over from the Big Bang isn't much. The Big Bang has cooled down a lot in 13 billion years. This heat is called the cosmic microwave background. You can't 'see' it with telescopes or gamma-ray detectors. You need to use a radio antenna, tuned to microwave frequencies. Lots of other stuff, like radio galaxies, radiate at even lower frequencies than this - at radio frequencies, as you might guess from the name.
These guys were looking for stuff emitting heat at radio frequencies.
Now, you know how we turn radio frequencies into sound. We use a radio.
So when they got this crazy radio signal they put it through a speaker and that's the roar they heard, when all they were expecting was the much softer sound (of the heat) of stars formed soon after the Big Bang.
Hope that made sense.
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 11:33 AM by Astyanax
reply to post by theresult
All right, Consequential One, have it your way.
Hope some of the other thread readers gained something from our little exchange.
They measure Heat using sound
Read the artical AGAIN>>>
All right, Consequential One, have it your way.
Hope some of the other thread readers gained something from our little exchange.
reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 04:21 PM by Hobbymat
So, they made this experiment in 2006. And only released the data two-and-a-half years later. I wonder why, or have they perhaps run out of news
stories?
After looking at the structure of the ARCADE probe, I've come to some conclusions. They may be wrong of course.
The black sky noise temperature that the radiometers (very sensitive radio noise receivers) measure, is calibrated using an external blackbody calibrator that is cooled close to 2.7K temperature. This is basically the same idea as on some large radio telescopes. However, if the calibrator is - for some reason - at slightly lower temperature than it is supposed to be, all signals from the sky would appear "louder" than they actually are as they were calibrated using an incorrect reference noise standard. The warmer the calibrator is, the more it emits radio frequency noise. And the cooler it is, the less noise it emits. There could have been some unprecedented inaccuracies in the calibrator temperature measurement, which may have resulted in noise levels higher than expected measured in the sky.
The ARCADE supposedly measured a doughnut-shaped piece of sky as its antennas had quite a wide beam and the instrument rotated all the time around its vertical axis. Therefore it was basically measuring a large chunk of the sky, not a single point. Still it was measuring a higher-than-expected background noise level from this entire area. This elevated noise level has not been measured using earth-bound radio telescopes, although they have their limits of measuring very low noise temperatures due to the radio noise created by the lower atmosphere.
One option would be that they were playing with HAARP just at the same time as the ARCADE experiment was taking place. As the HAARP is supposed to be an ionospheric heater, it would probably have resulted in somewhat elevated radio noise levels if any precise black sky background noise measurements had taken place at the same time.
But of course, the overall background noise level of the deep space might actually be a couple of decibels higher than it is supposed to be. This can only be verified with a precise instrument that is located high enough and has narrow-beam antennas that can be turned to any direction at will: a space-borne radio telescope. With this instrument it would be possible to find out if there are locations with considerably higher background noise or if the noise is uniform. I don't now remember if there have been any such satellites to this day, but at least the Russians were supposed to launch their Radioastron satellite already in the 1990s. So far they haven't. More than ten years ago I used to work for a very small Finnish company who designed the 22 GHz radiometer for that exact satellite...
After looking at the structure of the ARCADE probe, I've come to some conclusions. They may be wrong of course.
The black sky noise temperature that the radiometers (very sensitive radio noise receivers) measure, is calibrated using an external blackbody calibrator that is cooled close to 2.7K temperature. This is basically the same idea as on some large radio telescopes. However, if the calibrator is - for some reason - at slightly lower temperature than it is supposed to be, all signals from the sky would appear "louder" than they actually are as they were calibrated using an incorrect reference noise standard. The warmer the calibrator is, the more it emits radio frequency noise. And the cooler it is, the less noise it emits. There could have been some unprecedented inaccuracies in the calibrator temperature measurement, which may have resulted in noise levels higher than expected measured in the sky.
The ARCADE supposedly measured a doughnut-shaped piece of sky as its antennas had quite a wide beam and the instrument rotated all the time around its vertical axis. Therefore it was basically measuring a large chunk of the sky, not a single point. Still it was measuring a higher-than-expected background noise level from this entire area. This elevated noise level has not been measured using earth-bound radio telescopes, although they have their limits of measuring very low noise temperatures due to the radio noise created by the lower atmosphere.
One option would be that they were playing with HAARP just at the same time as the ARCADE experiment was taking place. As the HAARP is supposed to be an ionospheric heater, it would probably have resulted in somewhat elevated radio noise levels if any precise black sky background noise measurements had taken place at the same time.
But of course, the overall background noise level of the deep space might actually be a couple of decibels higher than it is supposed to be. This can only be verified with a precise instrument that is located high enough and has narrow-beam antennas that can be turned to any direction at will: a space-borne radio telescope. With this instrument it would be possible to find out if there are locations with considerably higher background noise or if the noise is uniform. I don't now remember if there have been any such satellites to this day, but at least the Russians were supposed to launch their Radioastron satellite already in the 1990s. So far they haven't. More than ten years ago I used to work for a very small Finnish company who designed the 22 GHz radiometer for that exact satellite...
