Massive Star " Vanishes "

a reply to: neoholographic

Your cited source....

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.

Vs

It’s Never Aliens—until It Is

www.scientificamerican.com...

“If these dips were caused by solid, opaque objects, you’d expect them to block light equally at all colors. But we saw that the dips were deeper in blue [light] than they were in the red, which indicates that something more transparent, like dust, is crossing in front of the star,” Boyajian says. “How do we know it’s not solar panels absorbing blue light more efficiently than red light? Well, we don’t, but we do know dust is all over the universe in many different places, and what we now see is what we’d generally expect from dust.” The result mirrors that of another team led by the University of Arizona astronomer Huan Meng, which also flagged dust as the likely cause of the star’s odd behavior in October 2017.

Strange coincidence with less blue light and more red light......

a reply to: neoholographic

Maybe large amounts of iron rich dust was killing the stars?

a reply to: neutronflux

Again, you're all over the place and not even addressing the research. You posted this:

“If these dips were caused by solid, opaque objects, you’d expect them to block light equally at all colors. But we saw that the dips were deeper in blue [light] than they were in the red, which indicates that something more transparent, like dust, is crossing in front of the star,” Boyajian says. “How do we know it’s not solar panels absorbing blue light more efficiently than red light? Well, we don’t, but we do know dust is all over the universe in many different places, and what we now see is what we’d generally expect from dust.” The result mirrors that of another team led by the University of Arizona astronomer Huan Meng, which also flagged dust as the likely cause of the star’s odd behavior in October 2017.

This has nothing to do with the research talked about on this thread.

This is taliking about Tabby's star by space writer Lee Billings. It has nothing to do with the research presented here. You haven't even read the research or you would know the difference.

1. You haven't addressed the research posted in this thread and I doubt you have even read it.

2. You haven't answered why they shouldn't do research looking into technosignatures. You made some vague statement about these Scientist not being ethical but never showed how they're unethical.

3. You post the opinion of Lee Billings a Space Writer at Scientific American but again you don't address the research presented in the thread.

Read before you post. You wouldn't make these illogical posts.

a reply to: neoholographic

You

. You haven't addressed the research posted in this thread and I doubt you have even read it.

One. What research. Please cite more than speculation, opinion, and junk science.

Two. Your own source...

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.

Funny. Your source mentions red light and blue light. Odd. Especially that Tabby's star light turns more red as the dust filters out the blue. As the dust obscurees the star’s light. Strange coincidence between Tabby’s star, and your source that mentions red light and blue light. Bet there m’s a connection.

You haven't answered why they shouldn't do research looking into technosignatures.

I am indifferent until they post real evidence. Not speculation.

You made some vague statement about these Scientist not being ethical but never showed how they're unethical.

Just pointing out literally for decades now, each time some strange space phenomena is observed like pulsar stars, some jackass scientists claims “aliens”. And it’s been wrong everting. Again. The patten is pretty clear.

You post the opinion of Lee Billings a Space Writer at Scientific American but again you don't address the research presented in the thread.

What research. It’s speculation. I claim dust has choked off the light of the stars, making them appear invisible. The red was the early stages. Or the dust some how poisoned the stars and caused their life cycles to terminate. Again. Backed by the way dust is know to block blue light more than blue light. Prove your supported theories have more credible evidence than my theories concerning dust.

a reply to: neoholographic

You

You made some vague statement about these Scientist not being ethical but never showed how they're unethical.

This is vague???

originally posted by: neutronflux
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.

originally posted by: neutronflux
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...

originally posted by: neutronflux
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.

originally posted by: neutronflux
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?

a reply to: neoholographic

You should listen to this...

Are Stars Disappearing? With Dr. Beatriz Villaroel
m.youtube.com...

At the 10:28 mark. “So... it more than likely we found some very natural phenomena.”

An international research group led by Beatriz Villarroel from the Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics in Sweden and the Institute for Astrophysics on the Canary Islands reports something strange in the current issue of The Astronomical Journal. They compared star maps from the 1950s with recent surveys, and discovered that 100 previously catalogued stars cannot be found anymore.
www.airspacemag.com...

a reply to: neoholographic

This again....

Are Stars Disappearing? With Dr. Beatriz Villaroel
m.youtube.com...

Care to quote what Dr. Villarroel said at the 9:47 mark in its entirety?

originally posted by: neutronflux
Are Stars Disappearing? With Dr. Beatriz Villaroel
m.youtube.com...

Care to quote what Dr. Villarroel said at the 9:47 mark in its entirety?

That's a good example of a Holmesian Fallacy, which fortunately Dr. Villarroel realizes is a fallacious approach in astronomy.

"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." —Sherlock Holmes

In this case the fallacy would be to think that we could "eliminate all which is impossible". We can't do that because knowing everything which is possible or impossible in astronomy is beyond our current knowledge.

a reply to: neutronflux

She said exactly what I've been saying. Of course she said it's more likely, not that it is a natural explanation at this point. It's the first step so why wouldn't she say this? This is what I quoted earlier:

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...

She talked about technosignatures at around 16:00 in the interview and they go much further in the published paper.

Giving extraterrestrials a second chance

Undoubtedly, VASCO will generate large lists of candidate objects in searches for vanishing stars. Individually, these serve no purpose unless verified. We can agree that a wide-field search that results in a list of candidates is of no great interest for research if each candidate sooner or later gets dismissed due to lack of verification as a potential SETI candidate.

However, if a region of the sky has a tendency to produce an unexpectedly large fraction of candidates relative to the background, this region or “hot spot” may deserve some extra attention. As a part of VASCO’s research program, we plan to combine all the unverified initial results from many different search programs such as the optical all-sky surveys NIROSETI and PANOSETI, and from other wide-field surveys in general (see Section 5.2. We aim to visualize the background of the unverified candidates in a two-dimensional projection of the sky. Altogether, this noisy background of neglected candidates could reveal “hot spots” of transient activity, where for some reason many candidates are concentrated. Doing this iteratively with reliable clustering methods and zooming in on the most active regions in our SETI (or technosignature) searches, we can identify the most probable locations to host extra-terrestrial intelligence. VASCO will therefore never dismiss any candidates forever. Rejection and acceptance are only transient states in the process. The information on potential “hot spots” can further be used to select the most interesting candidates.

arxiv.org...

Tell me, where do they differ from what I said? Again, in my first post in this thread:

Another explanation is that .....

Yes, it's another explanation. Here's more:

Three years later, it's still unclear what happened to that star spotted in 1950, but the team behind the "Vanishing & Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations" (Vasco) project now says they've found a hundred more missing stars like it by comparing old and new observations. While they've seen no signs of aliens just yet, they say parts of space where multiple stars seem to disappear could be the best places to look for extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI).

"Unless a star directly collapses into a black hole, there is no known physical process by which it could physically vanish," explains a new study published in the Astronomical Journal and led by Beatriz Villarroel of Stockholm University and Spain's Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias. "The implications of finding such objects extend from traditional astrophysics fields to the more exotic searches for evidence of technologically advanced civilizations."

The project team believes their search for vanishing stars could be useful in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) by identifying "hot spots" in space where an unexpectedly large number of stars seem to be missing.

"Zooming in on the (hot spots) in our SETI (or technosignature) searches, we can identify the most probable locations to host extra-terrestrial intelligence," they write.

www.msn.com...=BBY9Ht7_1|2

Again, what did I say:

Another explanation is that .....

Let me repeat what I said:

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.

Where was I wrong?

a reply to: neoholographic

Remember this...
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: neoholographic

This again....

Are Stars Disappearing? With Dr. Beatriz Villaroel
m.youtube.com...

Care to quote what Dr. Villarroel said at the 9:47 mark in its entirety?

———————

I will sum up. If you get crappy again. I will take the time to listen and do the exact quote.

But to sum up. The doctor said. If it’s not known natural natural phenomena, it’s probably unknown natural phenomena. The missing stats are not evidence of aliens. Not until a study trying to find red lasers which could actually be natural phenomena would that process of discovery start for proving aliens.

Is that a false summary of the doctor’s words.


Is it false to say “aliens” is third down on the Doctor’s list of probabilities. The first is probably known phenomena. The second probability is unknown natural phenomena. The last and third probably cause is “aliens”.

Is that a false summary of the Doctor’s thought.

a reply to: neoholographic

I don’t trust you. Your pretty intellectually dishonest.

Are Stars Disappearing? With Dr. Beatriz Villaroel
m.youtube.com...

When asked about the SETI aspect and as evidence of extraterrestrials. The Doctor’ words were “It cannot be taken as evidence.” Is that false.

Then the doctor goes on to to say, “One cannot take it as evidence of any techno signatures.” Is that false.

a reply to: neoholographic

The real quest is. Why do you so dearly need it to be “aliens” when it’s probably not?

Again. I am coming from a attitude where “aliens” have been literally claimed for decades. And it repeatedly has not been “aliens”. Scientists wanting attention have cried wolf one to many times for my taste.

a reply to: neutronflux

Again, what did I say that was false?

I quoted directly from the paper and her exact quotes. I even said this:

Of course there could be some natural process but we're not aware of any. That's just being Captain Obvious. Does that mean we shouldn't explore an extraterrestrial explanation while we wait around for someone to come up with a natural explanation that really doesn't explain anything?

And this:

I didn't say this was the answer but it's "another explanation" for missing stars that needs to be looked at and I'm glad open minded Researchers are looking at it and not just sticking their heads in the sand and saying we can't even look at this because there might be some natural explanation that we're unaware of.

And this:

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.

Of course you can't reach the conclusion that it's an Alien source based on 100 missing stars but it's an event that's not common and at this point can't be explained therefore an Advanced Civilization is ANOTHER EXPLANATION.

Again, from the published paper:

However, if a region of the sky has a tendency to produce an unexpectedly large fraction of candidates relative to the background, this region or “hot spot” may deserve some extra attention. As a part of VASCO’s research program, we plan to combine all the unverified initial results from many different search programs such as the optical all-sky surveys NIROSETI and PANOSETI, and from other wide-field surveys in general (see Section 5.2. We aim to visualize the background of the unverified candidates in a two-dimensional projection of the sky. Altogether, this noisy background of neglected candidates could reveal “hot spots” of transient activity, where for some reason many candidates are concentrated. Doing this iteratively with reliable clustering methods and zooming in on the most active regions in our SETI (or technosignature) searches, we can identify the most probable locations to host extra-terrestrial intelligence. VASCO will therefore never dismiss any candidates forever. Rejection and acceptance are only transient states in the process. The information on potential “hot spots” can further be used to select the most interesting candidates.

arxiv.org...

So an Advanced Civilization is ANOTHER EXPLANATION like I said.

Maybe that will be strengthened or weakened after the next step but let me spell it out for you again:

Doing this iteratively with reliable clustering methods and zooming in on the most active regions in our SETI (or technosignature) searches, we can identify the most probable locations to host extra-terrestrial intelligence.

How can they IDENTIFY THE MOST PROBABLE LOCATIONS TO HOST EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE if Aliens aren't ANOTHER EXPLANATION to explain the research?

a reply to: neoholographic

Dude. Dr. Beatriz Villaroel, project leader of Vanishing & Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations" (VASCO), in regards to evidence of “aliens” literary said:

The Doctor’ words were “It cannot be taken as evidence.”

Then the doctor goes on to to say, “One cannot take it as evidence of any techno signatures.”

Are these false quotes.

And the doctor literally placed “aliens” as a third possibility after know natural phenomena, and after unknown natural phenomena.

This is obviously your “religion”. Your beyond rational, ethical, common sense debate in relationship on this subject.

a reply to: neutronflux

You have trouble with the concept of full context.

You can't use the 100 missing stars to say, this is caused by an advanced civilization. This is why I quoted from the article that this is the first step.

Aliens are Another Explanation of the research. The Reaserchers said this:

"Unless a star directly collapses into a black hole, there is no known physical process by which it could physically vanish," explains a new study published in the Astronomical Journal and led by Beatriz Villarroel of Stockholm University and Spain's Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias. "The implications of finding such objects extend from traditional astrophysics fields to the more exotic searches for evidence of technologically advanced civilizations."

And this:

"Zooming in on the (hot spots) in our SETI (or technosignature) searches, we can identify the most probable locations to host extra-terrestrial intelligence," they write.

And this in the published paper:

However, if a region of the sky has a tendency to produce an unexpectedly large fraction of candidates relative to the background, this region or “hot spot” may deserve some extra attention. As a part of VASCO’s research program, we plan to combine all the unverified initial results from many different search programs such as the optical all-sky surveys NIROSETI and PANOSETI, and from other wide-field surveys in general (see Section 5.2. We aim to visualize the background of the unverified candidates in a two-dimensional projection of the sky. Altogether, this noisy background of neglected candidates could reveal “hot spots” of transient activity, where for some reason many candidates are concentrated. Doing this iteratively with reliable clustering methods and zooming in on the most active regions in our SETI (or technosignature) searches, we can identify the most probable locations to host extra-terrestrial intelligence. VASCO will therefore never dismiss any candidates forever. Rejection and acceptance are only transient states in the process. The information on potential “hot spots” can further be used to select the most interesting candidates.

So of course she couldn't say based on the 100 missing stars, an Advanced Civilization is the cause of the observered phenomenon. They make clear though that an Advanced Civilization could be the cause of what they're seeing. Aliens can be ANOTHER EXPLANATION for the data.

What's so hard to grasp?

a reply to: neoholographic

Shrugs. I believe there is alien life out there. I don’t need speculation in a report your pushing as a “study” to validate my belief. And when we find concrete proof of an extraterrestrial civilization, we find it. But I am tired of scientists that use “aliens” for headlines and attention. There is literally decades of “studies” that claimed “aliens” that never lived up to their spin and hype. Nor produced evidence of “aliens”. Your way more vested in this than me. Good luck to you.

a reply to: neutronflux

They're not using Aliens as headlines. Read the paper. It's just saying it's Another Explanation of the data.

What do you have against Researchers doing research?

I hope more Researchers start looking at an Extraterrestrial explanation for their data when it's warranted. This is how you will build up better bio and technosignatures.

a reply to: neoholographic

Since the discovery of the first pulsar in 1967, certain scientists at the drop of a hat have tried to pin “aliens” on ever new unexplained phenomena.

How has that working out? For the last 53 years.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: neoholographic

Since the discovery of the first pulsar in 1967, certain scientists at the drop of a hat have tried to pin “aliens” on ever new unexplained phenomena.

How has that working out? For the last 53 years.

You act like there needs to be a ban on scientist mentioning Aliens or Extraterrestrials while doing research. This is your problem not theirs.

You keep trying to debate against an absolute that was never claimed. Nobody tried to pin Aliens on anything. They just asked the question could there be an Alien explanation for the data observed.

I'm sorry to tell you, but the cat is already out of the bag. Look at these papers in arXiv:

Scientists Claim to Have Found The First Known Extraterrestrial Protein in a Meteorite

A new discovery could be a clue for us to see if life could emerge elsewhere in the Solar System. Using a new analysis technique, scientists think they have found an extraterrestrial protein, tucked inside a meteorite that fell to Earth 30 years ago.

If their results can be replicated, it will be the first protein ever identified that didn't originate here on Earth.

www.sciencealert.com...

Here's the paper:

Hemolithin: a Meteoritic Protein containing Iron and Lithium

This paper characterizes the first protein to be discovered in a meteorite. Amino acid polymers previously observed in Acfer 086 and Allende meteorites [1,2] have been further characterized in Acfer 086 via high precision MALDI mass spectrometry to reveal a principal unified structure of molecular weight 2320 Daltons that involves chains of glycine and hydroxy-glycine residues terminated by iron atoms, with additional oxygen and lithium atoms. Signal-to-noise ratios up to 135 have allowed the quantification of iron and lithium in the various MALDI fragments via the isotope satellites due to their respective minority isotopic masses 54Fe and 6Li. Analysis of the complete spectrum of isotopes associated with each molecular fragment shows 2H enhancements above terrestrial averaging 25,700 parts per thousand (sigma = 3,500, n=15), confirming extra-terrestrial origin and hence the existence of this molecule within the asteroid parent body of the CV3 meteorite class. The molecule is tipped by an iron-oxygen-iron grouping that in other terrestrial contexts has been proposed to be capable of absorbing photons and splitting water into hydroxyl and hydrogen moieties.

arxiv.org...

Here's more research. These scientist just aren't listening to you for some reason.

Model of the Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence with Coronagraphic Imaging

arxiv.org...

The Astrobiological Copernican Weak and Strong Limits for Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life

arxiv.org...

The Breakthrough Listen Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence

arxiv.org...

Searching for Extraterrestrial Intelligence by Locating Potential ET Communication Networks in Space

arxiv.org...

I can go on and on and we haven't even explored Europa, Titan, Enceladus or went back to Mars yet. You can bury your head in the sand if you want to but I'm glad these researchers aren't.

a reply to: neoholographic

What are you going on about


Again....

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: neoholographic

Shrugs. I believe there is alien life out there. I don’t need speculation in a report your pushing as a “study” to validate my belief. And when we find concrete proof of an extraterrestrial civilization, we find it. But I am tired of scientists that use “aliens” for headlines and attention. There is literally decades of “studies” that claimed “aliens” that never lived up to their spin and hype. Nor produced evidence of “aliens”. Your way more vested in this than me. Good luck to you.


—————-