[HN Gopher] Hubble's Hitchcock Moment: An Explosion in Unexpecte...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Hubble's Hitchcock Moment: An Explosion in Unexpected Place
        
       Author : wglb
       Score  : 31 points
       Date   : 2023-10-06 15:46 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (scitechdaily.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (scitechdaily.com)
        
       | edbaskerville wrote:
       | Test of a large-scale weapon in a relatively uninhabited region.
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | Perhaps Dyson Sphere maintenance window?
        
         | lostmsu wrote:
         | IMHO, somebody's Andromeda mission blew up in mid flight.
        
       | nolta wrote:
       | should link to the original source:
       | https://hubblesite.org/contents/news-releases/2023/news-2023...
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | Thank you. This one looks like it was written by a human, or an
         | AI on a reasonable compute budget.
        
       | irrational wrote:
       | > Such collisions produce a kilonova - an explosion 1,000 times
       | more powerful than a standard supernova. However, one very
       | speculative theory is that if one of the neutron stars is highly
       | magnetized - a magnetar - it could greatly amplify the power of
       | the explosion even further to 100 times the brightness of a
       | normal supernova.
       | 
       | Uh... maybe my reading comprehension is bad, but are "1,000" and
       | "100" switched in this paragraph?
        
         | elmomle wrote:
         | I think brightness (being distributed over there surface area
         | of a sphere) scales with the square root of energy released.
        
         | pfdietz wrote:
         | Different kinds of stellar explosions put different fractions
         | of their output into visible light.
        
         | darthoctopus wrote:
         | Nope, you're not imagining things. The article actually quite
         | wrong here: kilonovae are so named because they yield ~1000
         | times the peak luminosity of classical novae (~1e8 Lsun vs ~1e5
         | Lsun), not supernovae. For that matter, supernovae are
         | themselves also named that way because their peak luminosities
         | far exceed that of classical novae (with the most luminous
         | recorded being >1e11 Lsun). I am not an expert on magnetar
         | mergers in particular but according to the MNRAS paper that is
         | cited, the transient in question, AT 2023fhn, gave a peak
         | luminosity of about 4e8 Lsun (under certain assumptions about
         | wavelength dependence, distance, etc) --- nowhere near
         | supernova territory. Notably, the paper doesn't actually make
         | the same claim about magnetars that the HN-posted article does.
        
       | addaon wrote:
       | Stars are ejected from galaxies all the time. Usually this causes
       | no problems to experiment designs which assume that each galaxy
       | acts as an isolated Petri dish, but sometimes a star is ejected
       | with a planetary system capable of supporting life, and on a
       | trajectory where it may interact with another galaxy during the
       | stellar life time. In that case, of necessity, when the star
       | enters the sterilization zone between galaxies it must be
       | sterilized to preserve the validity of the Experiments.
        
       | ordu wrote:
       | _> reaching peak brightness and fading again in a matter of days,
       | unlike supernovae which take weeks or months to dim._
       | 
       | This phrase appears in the article four times. It is not the only
       | phrase repeated multiple time. This is not the first article
       | doing that, I see it regularly: you read the abstract and then
       | 2-3 repetitions of the abstract with minor modifications adding
       | exactly zero new information. It seems to me as a trend in the
       | article writing to repeat something multiple times, with an
       | average number of repetitions growing from year to year.
       | 
       | It forces me to skim article instead of reading it thoroughly to
       | seek something I didn't read yet.
       | 
       | I wonder what makes writers to do it? Is it like in a school when
       | you need to write a text with a specific lower bound for a word
       | count?
        
         | RicoElectrico wrote:
         | AI likes to repeat phrases verbatim, just saying. Though the
         | Occam razor tells me there might be SEO considerations that get
         | proposed by plugins like Yoast SEO (key focus phrases and so
         | on). Someone might have blindly accepted them.
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | It's most likely SEO mysticism. Like those awful blogspam
           | articles: "This blog will tell you how to set up your WiFi
           | router. Setting up your WiFi router can be easy, but only if
           | you have a guide helping you to set up your WiFi router. The
           | first step towards setting up your WiFi router is to turn the
           | router on. You've just taken the first step towards setting
           | up your WiFi router. The second step towards setting up your
           | WiFi router is..."
           | 
           | Guess which article now shows up towards the top of search
           | results for "set up a WiFi router"?
        
         | redundantly wrote:
         | > Is it like in a school when you need to write a text with a
         | specific lower bound for a word count?
         | 
         | More text/article == More ad space
        
       | lawlessone wrote:
       | Maybe it was a normal supernova on star ejected straight at us at
       | an extremely fast speed?
        
       | cf100clunk wrote:
       | The article is fascinating but seems to give no context for the
       | use of Hitchcock's name in the title, so I'm going to just go
       | ahead and suggest it is regarding the film director's calculated
       | formula for suspense:
       | 
       | https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/5966-hitchcock-hoppe...
       | 
       | or perhaps his differentiation between suspense and surprise:
       | 
       | https://auralcrave.com/en/2018/08/01/what-is-suspense-the-de...
        
         | irrational wrote:
         | It is clearly a reference to Alfred Hitchcock and the Three
         | Investigators. The explosion location is a mystery that will
         | require the investigative power of three spunky teenagers
         | working out of a junkyard to solve.
        
         | throwbadubadu wrote:
         | Afraid being too old, but what else? No other association comes
         | up immediately for Hitchcock moment, a suspenseful moment in a
         | film in his style :) And that matches the articles content for
         | that observation here.. So: agreed! (if there is any doubt
         | left).
        
       | rbanffy wrote:
       | Interesting, but a painful read, with parts that don't even make
       | sense.
       | 
       | > Such collisions produce a kilonova - an explosion 1,000 times
       | more powerful than a standard supernova. However, one very
       | speculative theory is that if one of the neutron stars is highly
       | magnetized - a magnetar - it could greatly amplify the power of
       | the explosion even further to 100 times the brightness of a
       | normal supernova.
       | 
       | So, if one is a magnetar, it greatly amplifies it to a thing 10x
       | smaller than what it would normally be.
       | 
       | I expect more from AIs.
        
       | brennaw1 wrote:
       | The cosmos are a stage
        
       | wrycoder wrote:
       | If your planetary system offends the Empire, this is what
       | happens.
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | By Superlaser or Invictus? I'm guessing the former since you
         | used "the".
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-10-06 23:01 UTC)