Comments on: Orphan burst http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/ I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog. Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:24:58 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Barton Paul Levenson http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60108 Barton Paul Levenson Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:34:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60108 Singe writes: [[<i>One of the more interesting, and somewhat depressing, answers to the Fermi paradox is that a galaxy won’t start seeing advanced civilizations until star formation has slowed enough such that the average amount of time it takes for an advanced civilization to evolve begins to outpace the average time between your run of the mill planetary star system is bathed in lethal radiation from nearby GRBs, and that this is the era our galaxy is in.</i>]] I think GRBs may have all taken place in an earlier era of universal history. The event this thread is about took place 9.4 billion years ago, did it not? I don't think there are any nearby GRBs. Dr. Plait is probably more up on this than I am and can correct me if I'm wrong. Singe writes:

[[One of the more interesting, and somewhat depressing, answers to the Fermi paradox is that a galaxy won’t start seeing advanced civilizations until star formation has slowed enough such that the average amount of time it takes for an advanced civilization to evolve begins to outpace the average time between your run of the mill planetary star system is bathed in lethal radiation from nearby GRBs, and that this is the era our galaxy is in.]]

I think GRBs may have all taken place in an earlier era of universal history. The event this thread is about took place 9.4 billion years ago, did it not? I don’t think there are any nearby GRBs. Dr. Plait is probably more up on this than I am and can correct me if I’m wrong.

]]> By: Singe http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60107 Singe Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:01:56 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60107 One of the more interesting, and somewhat depressing, answers to the Fermi paradox is that a galaxy won't start seeing advanced civilizations until star formation has slowed enough such that the average amount of time it takes for an advanced civilization to evolve begins to outpace the average time between your run of the mill planetary star system is bathed in lethal radiation from nearby GRBs, and that this is the era our galaxy is in. There's a paper on it here! http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9901322 One of the more interesting, and somewhat depressing, answers to the Fermi paradox is that a galaxy won’t start seeing advanced civilizations until star formation has slowed enough such that the average amount of time it takes for an advanced civilization to evolve begins to outpace the average time between your run of the mill planetary star system is bathed in lethal radiation from nearby GRBs, and that this is the era our galaxy is in.

There’s a paper on it here! http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9901322

]]> By: StevoR http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60106 StevoR Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:24:56 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60106 # Quiet_Desperationon 19 Dec 2007 at 1:13 pm wrote : "Oh, thank goodness! Gamma ray bursts. Phew! I thought it was going to be a tragic tale of overfed orphans with some vague astronomical connection." OVER-fed orphans? Overfed? I can just see this! (With apologies to Charles Dickens & Oliver Twist.) "Please sir can I have some more ... & more .. & more .. & more & ... Ooop! Blerggh!" POP! "Right-o orphans get the mops!" ;-) # Quiet_Desperationon 19 Dec 2007 at 1:13 pm wrote :

“Oh, thank goodness! Gamma ray bursts. Phew!

I thought it was going to be a tragic tale of overfed orphans with some vague astronomical connection.”

OVER-fed orphans? Overfed?

I can just see this! (With apologies to Charles Dickens & Oliver Twist.)

“Please sir can I have some more … & more .. & more .. & more & … Ooop! Blerggh!”

POP!

“Right-o orphans get the mops!” ;-)

]]> By: Quiet_Desperation http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60105 Quiet_Desperation Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:13:22 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60105 Oh, thank goodness! Gamma ray bursts. Phew! I thought it was going to be a tragic tale of overfed orphans with some vague astronomical connection. Oh, thank goodness! Gamma ray bursts. Phew!

I thought it was going to be a tragic tale of overfed orphans with some vague astronomical connection.

]]> By: Will. M. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60104 Will. M. Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:00:38 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60104 I went to the NASA site to find out why the bursts look as though they're coming from narrow streams opposite each other from the sphere of the collapsar/hypernova star, but there's nothing about the shape of the event. I am I in error about the shape? Does the event involve the entire star? I went to the NASA site to find out why the bursts look as though they’re coming from narrow streams opposite each other from the sphere of the collapsar/hypernova star, but there’s nothing about the shape of the event. I am I in error about the shape? Does the event involve the entire star?

]]> By: Ian http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60103 Ian Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:44:43 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60103 "Eventually, a faint feature was found that allowed a distance determination: at least 9.4 billion light years, about average for GRBs, but still a mind-numbing distance." "There are two somewhat nearby, but they are at least 80,000 and 150,000 light years way, far too distant for either to be the host galaxy." Shouldn't that be far too close? Also, those galaxies already don't appear very bright. If the host galaxy is really 100,000 times farther away, is it possible the Keck telescope simply failed to detect it? “Eventually, a faint feature was found that allowed a distance determination: at least 9.4 billion light years, about average for GRBs, but still a mind-numbing distance.”

“There are two somewhat nearby, but they are at least 80,000 and 150,000 light years way, far too distant for either to be the host galaxy.”

Shouldn’t that be far too close?

Also, those galaxies already don’t appear very bright. If the host galaxy is really 100,000 times farther away, is it possible the Keck telescope simply failed to detect it?

]]> By: George http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/comment-page-1/#comment-60102 George Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:25:11 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/12/18/orphan-burst/#comment-60102 A couple of BAUTers cleared-up my question above. The distances shown are not the distance from us, but distances between the GRB and neighboring galaxies. This is amazaing resolution since the angular distance to the GRB's nearest galaxy is < 2 arcseconds. The 10 meter Keck is a heck of a scope! A couple of BAUTers cleared-up my question above. The distances shown are not the distance from us, but distances between the GRB and neighboring galaxies. This is amazaing resolution since the angular distance to the GRB’s nearest galaxy is < 2 arcseconds. The 10 meter Keck is a heck of a scope!

]]>