So KIC 8462852 can't be a comet swarm after all. Bradley Schaefer examined photographic plates showing the star dating back to 1890 and discovered that whatever is causing the dimming effect has been steadily increasing in size over the last century or more, ruling out a swarm of comets.
Ironically enough they could be communicating with us (or trying) using gravitational waves. But we have no way of picking up gravitational waves yet here on earth.
This is assuming they're a civilization advanced enough to be building a Dyson swarm. (g-waves propagate faster than light)
Nothing really, it's a couple thousand lightyears away so we can't really communicate or send anything over to monitor it. Plus because it's so many lightyears away we're viewing an image of this alien dyson sphere from thousands of years ago, so for all we know they might have finished it or left the area. I don't know, I'm not a space science man.
There's many people with pretty regular, non-Nasa non-government jobs that do work that relates to and relies on the existence (or what you would consider conceit) of space. A shit ton of regular people from many walks and cultures would have to be in on this conspiracy.
Okay but did you even read what Schaefer said?
He himself gave more evidence as to why it wouldn't be any kind of solid structure.
You know what I think?
I think there's a black hole orbiting either incredibly closely to the star, or within its corona.
I think that as the black hole passes on our side of the star, it would drastically decrease the light output. It would also explain the increase in the decrease in brightness of the star over the last century or so.
if the sun were replaced with a black hole with the same mass,
we wouldn't notice, because nothing would happen
(except the surface freezing over, but we would still be able to get away with burrowing underground and using geothermal heating.
not the point
the point is we're definitely not alone, we're definitely not special, Earth is definitely not special, national borders, nationalism and competing states are retarded and if we don't get our act together one of these faggots is going to eventually come around and thoroughly wreck our shit.
that's the point
that's why they need to be absolutely sure that it's aliens before saying "it's aliens", the implications are huge for our collective cultures.
this, to me, indicates one or more of the following:
it's not any kind of alien tech
it's been done by an isolationist civilization (possible, given the fact that they're maximizing output of their star before simply spreading out to other locations for resources?)
faster than light travel is not physically possible even with highly advanced technology
we're being intentionally avoided
I've been reading one of Bradley Schaefer's research papers he published in 2007 (he wrote it in 2006).
He's an expert on gamma ray bursts, supernovae, and general redshifting. He's also very proficient at understanding and interpreting data from satellites like SWIFT, SNAP, and Kepler. He's also studied the data from far older methods of recording star and supernovae information.
I trust that when he says that it's not comets, it's not comets.
I also trust that if he says it's not a megastructure, it's not a megastructure.
Unfortunately, he did say that.
I'm going to stick with my theory about black holes, and email him tomorrow to discuss it.
Prime directive, son.
I'd push for a nonintervention policy if we had intergalactic FTL travel too. At worst, I'd allow for drone tagging, tracing, and surgical missions at night so we could learn more about their behavior, social systems, and biology.
I definitely wouldn't approve of any direct contact with anything incapable of our level of hyper tech. Intervention would stifle novel scientific, cultural, and evolutionary breakthroughs that culture could achieve on its own.
i would also push for a prime directive-like policy. it would, i think, be the most intelligent course. but i think that assuming all sufficiently advanced alien species are as careful as we might hope they are could be foolish. i can't ignore the feeling that species to rapidly expand into space could very easily be the most self-centered kind.
not saying it is. just that it could be one of the implications of an alien superstructure being constructed over 1500 years ago and still not having us met them.
>learn about... biology
A flat-earther who is also a Babylonian occultist.
That's the /x/ equivalent of a rare flag right there.
Long term photo paper existed, large telescopes as well. There were also large parts of the planet that were quite dark due to lack of street lights. This isn't hard to figure out.
Can't. Got Steve at 8:15. Have ta reschedule.
That makes the assumption that they detected us at all. Without assuming anything about their technology we know we're towards the edge of the galaxy and hard to detect given thay we have no megastructures or an ewuivalent.
>Seti blieves that there is no Dyson Sphere (stock illustration). They note that any society able to build such a megastructure would have access to energy at a level approaching 1027 watts, so that massive transmitters would be detected even if only a tiny percentage of this energy were used for signalling
What now, /x/?
You forget the absurdity of the scale of the universe. Be it 10 lightyears or 150000, Earth is a speck of dust, and our technology is in its infancy. Any civilization sufficiently advanced to travel in interstellar space wouldn't probably even pick up our signals, and seeing as we've been sending any sort of signals anywhere for hardly a century...
So next i guess yer gonna tell me that a younger vesion of jfk was brought forward in time to shoot older jfk in the head because he wanted to be rebellious in new and interesting way.
>there are millions of stars that we can see that have super-future tech and are living as imortals in a utopia with all technology and space adventure you couldnt even dream of, but its too far away so you will never be a part of it
I've been thinking about it, and although my black hole theory would be completely valid in terms of light blockage and increase in the amount of light blockage (as the black hole gains more of the star's mass, the star wouldn't itself dim very much, but the larger mass of the black hole would make it block/absorb more light over time, causing the apparent growth of the "structure")
However, there are two main problems with this theory:
1. We see no remnants of a supernova, that would have caused the black hole to form so close to that star. This means that if there is a black hole, it had to have been formed somewhere else and found its way so close to that star that it was captured.
2. If there was a black hole close or inside the corona of the star, we would see an intense wobble in the star, similar to the wobble we see in stars with planets, but on a much larger scale, depending on the mass of the black hole.
And I don't know if we do see that wobble.
In fact, I don't actually know if we've seen the remnants of a supernova anywhere around it, because I don't even know if we've been looking.
Aren't you the guy who couldn't figure out that I was referring to the article in OP?
And light blockage is a pretty good way to describe how we detect planets around stars.
I have no idea who you are, I just saw a pile of shit text that made no sense so thought I'd comment.
You have no idea how ANYTHING works, so please don't try to appear like some fucking Einstein because I'll call you out on it. And don't drag me into your nonsense argument either because you will lose.
G'day to you, Sir.
A neutron star is approximately 20km across. A black hole is even smaller. The accretion disks of active black holes are some of the brightest objects in the universe.
Some food for thought.
>And I don't know
>In fact, I don't actually know
>because I don't even know
Exactly. So keep your "theory" to yourself.
Fyi, you're meant to come up with a "hypothesis" first, then you find facts to support the hypothesis, then you create a theory.
Actually, you're supposed to find facts, then build a hypothesis from them, then try to find things that disprove that hypothesis.
What you just described is how religions argue that their god exists.
In fact, that's exactly what I've done.
I thought "What could be causing this phenomena that I see?
Maybe there's a black hole, that might explain the dip in brightness, and it might explain how the dip has been increasing over the past century.
Now let's see how that hypothesis holds up.
Well, actually, here are some things that might work against this theory, if I had more information to work with."
At this point, I say, "okay, is there something that may explain those flaws away, and if so, is there proof that that something is happening."
And you know what, I can't do that. I don't have access to the proper equipment, and I don't have the education necessary to work any further.
If you want to believe that it's aliens so hard that you're willing to wrestle every hypothesis to the ground, even when multiple PhDs agree that there is a good amount of evidence against your own,
then you can live in your world of confirmation bias and never be accepted into the world of physics for all I care.
At least I wasn't trying to be an asshole about it all.
I dunno Anon, this really gets you thinking about what the stars in the sky are doing... Maybe we should review these bad boys for visibility anomalies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_variable_stars
It's like you're trapped on an island since infancy and never seen the rest of the world. You could be on the only land or there could be huge continents but it doesn't matter how likely it should be when you don't know.
Not so fast there, slick.
I assume you have rudimentary knowledge of binary systems? Let's replace one star with a black hole. This would not account for the light fluctuation, not to mention, the star isn't being pulled on like it would be if it were half of a binary system.
Now, instead of one black hole, let's have lots of smaller ones. First, they have to be created at that small size and in a cluster like that. I'm not going to use the word "impossible" but you get the idea. Also for them to be that small, they wouldn't last very long, they would swallow each other pretty quickly.
That being said, I am not an expert, and I do like your theory. Just putting in some constructive criticism.
Probably not. Unless our hypothetical aliens have advanced enough to generate matter from nothing (which, in case you weren't aware, is in violation of at least one law of physics as we know it today) it would be far more economical to just build a swarm of satellites around the star, rather than a solid sphere.
>Misunderstanding how a "dyson sphere" would actually work
>Assuming all aliens would have enough material to make one
>FUCKING NO THEY WOULDN'T
>We don't have enough material
>We're aliens to other aliens
>Therefore you're fucking stupid
We do have multiple ways of picking up gravitational waves.
In fact, we have detected them.
We're just not very GOOD at it.
We're currently building something that will nearly quintuple our ability to pick them up, but gravitational waves aren't really a good method of communication. They're very easily distorted through celestial bodies.
Far more than light.
If there were a way to detect them more easily, neutrinos would be a far more valid method of communication, as there's almost zero chance of any information being lost in the actual sending.
If the distortion caused by gravitational waves was enough to cause loud booms, then I'm surprised the earth was able to form at all, let alone have life propagate.
Some people's theories are interesting. The other day some guy was saying that Antarctica doesn't exist, the Earth is flat and it has a wall of ice around it, and that's why exploration of Antarctica is prohibited. Who knows man. Could just be people fucking with us, but only in places like /x/ can you find shit like that.
The best thing we know of to allow for two-way communication IF we even wanted to communicate with unknown intelligences so far away would be quantum entanglement aka spooky action at a distance but it would still require us gaining new knowledge from their hypothetical broadcasts and even if we did learn the secret of entangling remotely, we would still be foolish to do it before we studied them carefully and we'd still be taking a huge chance since a lot can happen in 1500 years. Maybe there will be a way to receive quantum broadcasts if we can discern their "frequency".
I was about to say "no shit nothing would happen if it was the same mass", but then I remembered most or /x/ thinks science is mumbo jumbo shilling bullshit. Idk why I even come here anymore desu :|
I think we've all seen things move strangely, fall from places they've been sitting for years etc but for that I'd put unusual vibration or magnetism as higher likelihood than quantum entanglement
The problem with quantum entanglement is that it breaks when you use it to measure more than 1 thing at a time.
Also, entangled particles may happen to form on opposite ends of the universe, but we have no way of discerning where it is, only what it's doing. Unless we're the ones who form the two entangled particles. I recommend you watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Eeuqh9QfNI
We've measured the mass and size.
Yeah, but I doubt we've been looking for the signs.
It's not like you can just point the same kind of camera at it and measure everything.
Same desu :/
This is true.
In fact, we've observed that.
If the sun completely disappeared, the earth would still continue to follow the path of its orbit for about 8 minutes.
Pluto would continue its non-planetary orbit for about 4 hours.
The new planet (yes, PLANET, not dwarf planet) that we think we've discovered would continue to follow its orbit for even longer.
Gravity propagates at the speed of light.
I explained it clearly in my post;
>They rely solely on the fact that the layman (Congressmen and Senators) don't understand wtf they are talking about so they can't question it.
The above = funding.
That doesn't change whether a planet or moon has a methane atmosphere or not. You have not explained why reporting that a planet has a methane atmosphere would earn more funding.
Now fucking START OVER
No. Done. Your face.
NASA doesn't get paid more because their latest discovery sounds "way cooler" because "methane." That's, like, how a ten yaer old comic book fan nerd might think the world works, but not anyone else.
>>A highly complex legal case allows a lawyer to claim more recompense
>Yes or no?
>You didn't answer my question at all
I think it's your bedtime, citizen.
Uh yeah I know that's why I said things like
>it would still require us gaining new knowledge
>even if we did learn the secret of entangling remotely
I was attempting to use it to express that as our technology advances, our ability to discover EBEs increases. It's lately been increasing in massive steps. It shouldn't super surprise anyone for this new method of finding exoplanets we've been using with the light-wobble to be what does it.
See, my personal science-fantasy is that we'll not only receive and decode some form of broadcast from them but it will also have all sorts of information of benefit to mankind, including some method of instant communication which I would assume would involve some of our so-far-discovered principles of quantum entanglement. But that's just one little /vr/s dream.
It took you three angry posts to process the word "no" through that sludge passing for your brain, I don't think you're ready for a more complex answer just yet. Small steps, my friend, small steps, we must learn to walk before we can run.
If you even had a basic grasp of natural sciences you'd know fire needs oxygen, fuel and ignition.
Not even just this but you're able to tell people in your post to google something yet you are incapable of googling a counter to your argument to fact check.
I have a feeling you are a child so I won't further poke holes in your ego but you need to start thinking outside the box and stop assuming.
It's not a Dyson sphere. It's a Niven ring. The amount of metal needed to create a Dyson sphere would make the task well-nigh impossible, whereas a Niven ring uses scrith as its construction material.
>if we don't get our act together one of these faggots is going to eventually come around and thoroughly wreck our shit.
They won't. Because to them, we're a microbe-tier beings. Do you go out of your way everyday to step on every anthill you see? No? Well, there's your answer.
>The new planet (yes, PLANET, not dwarf planet) that we think we've discovered
>we've observed that.
>If the sun completely disappeared
Well, strictly speaking, fire doesn't necessarily need OXYGEN, just a reactive material that would produce heat in the process of reaction.
It's just that in most cases this material happens to be oxygen.
NASA depends on government funding. NASA can influence the politicians that control its budget allocation in at least 2 ways:
- direct appeal for funds
- indirect appeal by appealing to the population
By appealing to the population with things people think are 'way cool', the citizens influence to some extent how representatives and senators vote.
A lot of what NASA seems to do is just PR that makes NASA sound cool to buy public goodwill. You don't have to believe that NASA is an evil organization for doing this, it is a political move that makes sense in our current society, your public image is important.
NASA does not invent "methane atmospheres" because they "sound cooler than other types of atmospheres," nor does that influence public good will or Federal funding.
These are objective, established facts of the existence you and I both share.
>Do you go out of your way everyday to step on every anthill you see?
Some people do. When I was a kid walking down to the store to buy candy I used to make it a game to avoid stepping on anything that wasn't an anthill.
I was a dick when I was a kid.
"That we think we've discovered"
Here you go: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/science/space/ninth-planet-solar-system-beyond-pluto.html?_r=0
It's all over the fucking news
"We've observed that."
"If the sun completely disappeared."
Two separate statements.
But we have observed that gravity propagates at the speed of light.
It just prevents bumping, correct?
Senator Lintwhistle you have made my day
Here, I'll engage, however briefly, and answer some of your questions and pose a couple of my own.
Lawyers get paid whatever rate they quote you up front. What they charge you is the amount of man-hours they devote to your case. Insofar as that goes, your analogy holds, but ask yourself the following:
What do they gain through false reporting?
Wouldn't they still get funded simply reporting the truth of their findings and save themselves the risk of being exposed?
Also, a little more in-depth researching hasn't yet shown me any planetary body in possession of anything more than trace amounts of methane, so at least as far as I can ascertain with the limited amount of time I've devoted to the subject thus far, those atmospheres wouldn't of necessity be any more combustible than our own. You have to take into consideration the density of such an atmosphere as well, as that is the primary operator in the friction in-bound objects like comets and meteors experience.
If you'd like to provide a link to a source with details on the specific planetary bodies to which you're referring, I'd be more than happy to take a look, though.
>What do they gain through false reporting?
Lawyers are notorious for over-billing. They can say they worked on a specific task for 1 hour when it only took 30 minutes. Very few people will attempt to sue over this because there is no way to prove it, and it is extremely expensive to do. Not just lawyers, I would venture most contractors overcharge to some extent.
>The problem with quantum entanglement is that it breaks when you use it to measure more than 1 thing at a time.
>Also, entangled particles may happen to form on opposite ends of the universe, but we have no way of discerning where it is, only what it's doing
That isn't how entanglement works. "Strong" entanglement is transient and can be thought of as a "100% entangled" state between two particles. But every particle in existence has at least a 0.0...0001% entanglement to every other particle, because everything collided in the instant after the big bang. Entanglement is a spectrum, and it's also a quantum fingerprint of every quantum interaction that particle has ever undergone, they're just far, far too faint for us to usefully detect or manipulate.
You are correct. NASA does try to put as positive a spin as they can on their discoveries and do all they can to up the wow factor on what they find, but at the end of the day, they have to stop well short of outright fabrication simply because there are too many ways to independently falsify any truly outlandish claims, on both the international as well as the private scale.
>Here you go
See, >>17247844 , was that so difficult?
An interesting read, I hadn't heard about that.
>But we have observed that gravity propagates at the speed of light.
What I'm curious about is how exactly this was observed.
>It just prevents bumping, correct?
Correct, and just for the one post as far as I know. People keep using it as if it somehow makes the thread die faster, but I don't believe that to be the case.
Basically, saging is exactly the same as not posting at all. Unless one actually intends to contribute something, in which case why sage in the first place?
It's important to remember that friction as actually an incredibly small part of what reentry heating (or entry heating, I guess in the case of meteors).
The main cause is a pressure buildup at the front of the entering object.
These pressures are so intense that the gas heats to extremely high temperatures, but does not necessarily combust. Incredibly high pressures can also change the properties of gases, including
the point at which an element or molecule will change states.
I'm not sure of the exact process, but I am sure that if you had the measurement capabilities of a well funded lab, and the materials, you could recreate that result through any number of means.
Yes, that is true, and Ihave no doubt that NASA's as guilty of padding as any other agency, but have you taken a look at the budget they're working with?
Last time I checked, we spent more in one day providing air-conditioning in Iraq than NASA got for that entire year.
>Senator Lintwhistle you have made my day
Always a pleasure and might I add, nice trips!
Actually that is accurate. Though oxidation is one of the most common and accessible exothermic chemical reactions, there are others. Mixing strong acids and bases, as an example.
>New planet discovered behind Pluto
>Still no idea what the hell KIC 8462852
>Five planets(Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn and Venus) are going to align for a month starting tonight
I think we're going to get something BIG regarding extraterrestrials in the next two months.
Planets aligning is totally subjective, and the new planet being discovered within a few days of 'alignment' is mere coincidence.
Above all that, planetary alignment is a perfectly natural phenomena that has absolutely no correlation to the existence or none thereof of alien life in our own solar system.
Don't defend Earth-centrists by being obstinately broad-minded. He's not talking about oxidation he's talking about combustion and for combustion you need oxygen. Sure there are plenty of other exothermic reactions but the atmospheres of exoplanets will have reached a point of relative equilibrium regardless of what particular process may still be fairly common on them. One meteor strike isn't going to just touch off the whole surface.
My brain has decided that this and the new planet are related. Ayy lmaos built the dyson sphere 1500 years ago and are now waiting outside our solar system in their giant fucking. It's probably the same aliens that have been abducting us and screwing with ancient civilizations.
I have two balls, a red one and a blue one. I place each ball in a seperate opaque black trash bag. I give one bag to Sally and one bag to Jim. I tell them that each bag holds a ball and that there is one red and one blue ball. Sally fucks off 100 million light years away while Jim stays put. Jim open his bag and sees that he has a blue ball. He instantly knows that Sally must have a red ball despite her being 100 million light years away. That's quantum entanglement. You think that just maybe it's not a way for FTL communication?
>Linking to NewScientist, the Daily Mail of science magazines
Seriously, don't do this. You'd be better off with almost anything else.
For the curious, the paper can be found here: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1601.03256v1.pdf
They didn't. The minute variations were detected by the Kepler telescope, in 2013. This paper is talking about a different thing - analyzing old photographic plates dating from 1890 to 1989 to discover that the star actually got dimmer over that time, by around ~0.165 magnitudes. This is actually quite a bit - it works out to about a 15% dimming, or the star being ~1.2 times brighter at the beginning than at the end. Hardly a minute variation!
Why would you communicate with gravitational waves? The reason we haven't detected them is because the interaction of gravity with matter is so incredibly tiny, a difficulty which is rendered even worse by the equal inefficiency of creating them. You couldn't focus them, either, for the same reason.
I'm not saying advanced aliens couldn't do it, maybe there's advanced gravity manipulation technology - but there's no point! The only benefit is that there's not a lot of background noise, and the signal can pass right through solid matter unobstructed. But since the vast majority of space is not full of solid matter, and is transparent to many bands of ordinary electromagnetic radiation, and is still fairly easy to separate signal from noise, there's just no benefit over optical or radio communication so enormous that it justifies the factor-of-100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000*
increase in difficulty.
Meanwhile, you can get a 250-light-year communications range with a 1-kilowatt red laser and a 10-meter telescope on the transmitting and receiving end.
*I didn't pull this number out of my hat - I actually calculated this.
I see an apple fall from the tree.
I wonder what caused that.
I drop a bunch of stuff off of different heights.
I invent gravitational constant.
Everybody knows me.
I get tons of hot chicks.
>black hole orbiting
black holes don't orbit, son
we orbit them
was what I was gunna say... UNTILL I GOOGLED IT!
Spanish scientists *giggle* have blahblah
Listen. You are openly supporting the idea of a global totalitarian regime as the sole solution to our continuation and the aliens thing. Grow up or fuck off. What planet do you come from and of what species are you? Humans have differing ideas about everything, we will never get along. We'll figure out how to get off this beautiful planet or we won't, but, we are not doing it all together. Differing cultures and ideologies will determine which colony craft people board, if that happens. Star Trek Federation of Bullshit. Corporations are the future of humanity. We will form them into entities with more meaning that our terrestrial Nations ever had, if we live long enough.
Is the trip ironic, or am I misreading? I get the whole 'lone senator blowing the whistle' sense. Please tell me yes or no and then explain.
Sorry I had to put that last part in there, 4chan these now..
Nobody said anything about totalitarianism
You seem like eh pretty cool guy but I thought it was newscientished who published the first non-academic-journal story on both the initial discovery and this 100 year update
Not overtly, but I heard it in there somewhere. We will take our borders and our sovereignties into space with us. If we get that far. Ok. I'm finished on that point, I wave that flag no more.
>star with potential alien mega structure 1,500 light years away
>means aliens were there over a millennia ago
Yeah, let's not send any signals that way. They've either long since moved on (or will have done by the time our signals get there), or they're still there and we better not fuck with shit we can't match.
If aliens were there over a millennium ago, that's only 1,000 years. Why wouldn't they still be there? They just built this massive mega structure, gotta amortize those costs nigga.
It's a dip in light. That's it. The mystery is what's causing it, not what flavor of alien it is. There are large objects circling a star causing light to be blocked from our point of view. That's it. Until we know what those objects are, there's proof of nothing.
People like you will just get their own planet
> implying we could match their 1500 year old Dyson sphere level technology, or the technology of any ETIs who could receive our signals and come to us
>gotta amortize those costs nigga.
Lol as a real estate fag that amuses me
Even you are showing how much you want to believe
So just to bump and reiterate here:
The reAson KIC-8462852 is significant is because of all possible explanations for the observed behavior thus far, some type of Dyson configuration is NOT the least likely.
Your calculations are only valid if both the transmitter and receiver know each other's exact positions. If we were to beam a laser into space, what are the odds of us actually pointing it in the exact direction for a hitherto unknown alien civilization to pick it up? At least gravity waves (or radio for that matter) propagate outwards, making them more likely to be detected.
1400... If they've sent out probes 1400 years ago, they'd land here now. Given the ratio with which it can block out its starlight, I'd say it's had to have been post-singularity for well of 10,000 years. It's a given that they know about us and would wish to study us, but not a given that they'd actually try to contact us prior to our own singularity. Assuming it's a planetary civilization at all. If this is a galactic node then we have an entirely separate class of hypotheticals to consider.
All I know is the smart folks have suggested waiting for a big supernova to happen then send a communication wave the direction of the watchers in the hopes that the people looking at the same supernova we saw would accidentally get our transmissions. Do we have to wait until that happens for us to prosper or can we contact somebody now?!
>At least gravity waves (or radio for that matter) propagate outwards, making them more likely to be detected.
If you want range, you basically have to focus the beam. (You can focus radio, too - that's what dish antennas are for.)
Because intensity drops off with the inverse square of distance, you need extraordinarily high intensities to have a signal that is detectable at high range.
So either you pump a reasonable power into a signal that has such an intensity in a very narrow range of directions, or you spend somewhere around a billion to a trillion times more power pumping out that same intensity in all directions. Which would be a phenomenal waste, and a nuisance for anybody in the same solar system.
So the only radio signals of ours that have any hope of being detected by another star system are the tight, narrowband high-power beams from planetary radars like Arecibo and the nuclear early warning radars. Our omnidirectional, unfocused signals like TV fade to undetectability within a fraction of a light year.
Also, if you want the light beam to spread out more, just use a smaller telescope as a less effective focusing device.
>2016 C.E. or 2769 year from base Rome
Your view are obsoletely. Mankind is prefer Presidents nowadays.
The thing's just too far away for that. There's no telescope on Earth that could resolve the star as anything more than a single point.
And it definitely isn't a black hole. Black holes are just too *small* - A black hole 10 times as massive as WTF-001 would only be 85 kilometers across - blocking virtually none of our view of the 2,200,000-kilometer-wide star. And even a black hole this small would be immediately, obviously visible - the star would be orbiting the black hole, rather than the other way around, creating a glaringly obvious Doppler shift as it swung around that would have been noticed instantly.
>has been steadily increasing in size over the last century or more
How do they get to know such information?
Wouldn't they need to monitor it for centuries to know it has been growing for that amount of time?
We've been doing astronomy for a long time, and astronomers take photographs. Nobody had bothered to catalog and number KIC 8462852 until the Kepler mission surveyed it, but that wasn't the first time astronomers had ever looked at that patch of sky.
Bradley Schaefer looked at old photographic plates from between 1890 and 1989 - which does indeed span a century - that happened to include KIC 8462852 in frame, and compared its brightness to the stars nearby. He observed that over the past century, the star had gotten steadily dimmer, compared to the stars next to it that stayed the same.
If you think the light dips in the data are from an alien megastructure, you can then leap to the conclusion that it must have been caused by the megastructure undergoing continued construction and thus hiding more of the star.
>If you think the light dips in the data are from an alien megastructure, you can then leap to the conclusion that it must have been caused by the megastructure undergoing continued construction and thus hiding more of the star.
Or more of them being built. Like, the current popular replacement for the dyson sphere (which based on what we know about engineering is effectively impossible,) and instead just swarming the sun with satellites. So if a species were, over the course of a century or centuries, slowly building up this huge orbital swarm, that'd I guess produce an effect like that. Maybe?
Nobody was observing KIC 8462852 *on purpose* until recently. This is actually pretty common - there's too many stars, and this one looks completely unremarkable unless you're measuring it with a very precise photometer at the right moment.
It just happened to be in frame sometimes while astronomers were looking at different things.
Didn't Bill Cooper say something about an upcoming "invasion"? Where the ayylmaos would come down and then the world would unite against them. Then, the world would form the Superfriends and become the NWO?
What if this is fake and or the start of his predictions?
>It would also explain the increase in the decrease in brightness of the star over the last century or so.
Why not just say "The decreasing brightness of the star over the last century or so" instead of throwing in a weird, obtuse inverted negative.
>Talks down about global totalitarian regimes
>Stoked for the coming global corporate totalitarian regime
Global post-capitalist corporate hegemony is going to be the final evolution of the cultural virus that kills the planet. Our cancerous desire for profit and perpetual growth will starve and pollute the planet until it can't host human life anymore, and then that's that. It will happen, and it will be the most short-sighted, selfish, soulless, inhuman group of people to ever hold power.
>> implying we could match their 1500 year old Dyson sphere level technology, or the technology of any ETIs who could receive our signals and come to us
That's actually the opposite of what he said, you pretentious dumbass. Try reading what he actually said before mocking him like a mad cunt.
You guys realize this star is in Alpha centauri
This is the closest solar system to ours at 4.2m light years away
These are literally our fucking neighbors
This is is a across the fucking street
We didnt spy this shit over 1000 light years away
this is fucking in the solar system right next to ours
...wut? The Alpha Centauri star system is made up of 3 stars, Proxima Centauri, Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B. Proxima Centauri is 4.22 light years away not 4.2m
KIC 8462852 is the center of its own solar system, being a star and it is 1,480 light years away.
I'll ridicule anyone I goddamn well please. You want some? Fucking earth-centrist.
So, are you trolling, or are there actually still people who believe this?
Someone else answer, because I know which answer you're gonna give regardless of which is actually true.
>dubs confirm aliums appear and we do all we can to vanquish them (probably in vain)
>I think that as the black hole passes on our side of the star, it would drastically decrease the light output
Unlikely. A black hole, especially close to a star, is surrounded by glowing plasma pouring in. It wouldn't appear black.
I don't think that the actual star has decreased in brightness.
What has happened is that whatever has been blocking the light has been increasing in size over the last century, or at least, the dips in brightness have been getting larger.
I didn't want people to think that the entire star was dimming, that's why I worded it that way.
No it isn't
No, but it would decrease the total amount of light heading towards earth, would it not?
Either way, over the course of this (very drawn out) thread, I've lost faith in the black hole idea anyway. Just too many things that go against it.
Exactly like the aliens hypothesis, so y'all should be throwing that out too, but since this is /x/, and noone seems to understand how the scientific method functions, I doubt that'll happen.
No, you're the troll. A troll that didn't read the news: http://news.discovery.com/space/astronomy/9th-planet-may-lurk-in-the-outer-solar-system-160120.htm
Yeah, if we were looking in the right spectrum for the jets on the ends of the black hole, but to my knowledge we've just been looking at in in the infrared and visible ranges.
But, then again, I could be totally wrong about that, so.
Put your trust in Trump and you will know contentment.
>No, you're the troll. A troll that didn't read the news
>hasn't actually read the news
Planet 9 has a known orbit (And is technically still theoretical, mind you - it's just much more firmly attested theory now), and it doesn't even get closer than Neptune, much less enter the inner solar system.
The infrared and visible ranges don't make up nearly 2/3rds of the spectrum of light. It makes up about 1/2.
And you're right that the disk is unrelated to the jets, but again, I'm not in support of the black hole idea anymore so