O/T: Space. Gamma Burster or Pulsar?

[JRouche]

Sorry. Not machining but interesting if you like Science.

I have read (books) and watched articles about both, Gamma Burst and Pulsars and the energy Theorized with each. .

I was interested if anyone else here is into the stars and what not?

Thats all JR

[darryl]

Always have been interested in space and all. Besides all the theorizing, the returns from all the space probes is fascinating. So much of the info re-writes what has been 'known' for decades. It's very humbling, and equally so that we know so relatively little about our own space rock, the earth.

I've read a bit lately about radio bursts, pulsars, etc. The theorized mechanisms by which these are said to come about are fascinating to read about in their own right- but the possibilities of even the modern theories being wrong- perhaps way wrong- have lead me to wonder if we simply haven't understood more than just the very basics of things. I don't particularly agree with anyone who says there is so much to know we can't ever know it- I don't believe in placing limitations like this in our quest for knowledge and understanding- but I am and remain humbled by the apparent vastness of space and the effects which emanate from it.

[Astronowanabe]

I would have to confess to more than a passing interest but it tends to very much down to earth and machining related.
Sure I will follow pop sci whatever newest thing is going on if I have the time and ponder the inponderables
but mostly liked designing & building robust scopes anyone (kids) can use.
Oddly I seemed to have more time for hobbies before remote work came along.

[macona]

Gamma burst are bad news for anyone unlucky enough to be around one. Instadeath. Unless you're the Hulk, maybe.

I think dark matter/energy is my biggest pet peeve. Its basically the god of science. "We can't explain this so it's got to be something invisible that we have no real evidence of that's causing it".

Tomorrow I am going to try to do some type III hard anodizing for some sliding parts on my telescope. I made the dovetail and mounting bar that attaches the scope to the mount out of aluminum. I powder coated these pieces because I didn't want to send them out to be anodized. Bad idea! Raw aluminum does not slide so well, instant galling. I got the acid this weekend and have been letting some pieces of aluminum dissolved in it for a couple days. Apparently you need to get some aluminum sulfate content in the acid which I had no idea about. You have to chill the acid down to 28-32 degrees F to do this kind of anodizing, I have a chiller with all stainless wetted parts so that ought to work.

[old mart]

I would recommend hard anodising a test piece first, and also think that some means should be used to keep the bath temperature from increasing during the process.

I have always been interested in astronomy, but unfortunately my Meade ETX 105 stays in its box as I feel the cold badly in my old age.

[Arcane]

I was reading where they discovered a source of a GRB and it was 12 billion light years away! I absolutely can not conceive just how powerful the explosion (or whatever it's called) was that caused that if it can be detected that far away.

[old mart]

Imagine, that GRB had to have happened 12 billion years ago.

[darryl]

I've recently been reading about the earths magnetic field- what put me onto this is the bermuda triangle, and the other similar areas such as the devils sea. These seem to be areas of magnetic anomalies, with the polar areas being where a jet of whatever particles may emanate by following the magnetic lines. On earth these 'jets' might be of little consequence, since earth is quite small to begin with, and the polar areas relatively uninhabited. But for something like a black hole, or other massive spinning body in space, the energy in the jets could be quite intense to say the least. We know of some forms of these jets- gamma rays, radio waves, and even acoustic waves which have recently been discovered emanating from some massive bodies.

Recently I've been intrigued by the idea that something like a black hole can be spinning with a surface speed being in the area of the speed of light. I can just imagine that if a resonance sets up to the point where a focused beam of energy can exit through a polar region, that could well be an X-ray source, a gamma ray source, or some other frequency of radiation that perhaps we haven't learned about yet.

Down here on little old earth, or even on Jupiter, there may not be enough spinning mass to form a significant jet of anything, although it would appear that some effects do arise in certain areas (like the Bermuda triangle). It makes me wonder if anyone has discovered polar effects from spinning masses like flywheels. At the sizes and speeds that are possible here on earth, perhaps any such effects are not measurable, but perhaps there is something to this. I don't think it has to be a magnetic effect, although ultimately I think it would have to be related in some way.

[darryl]

Something I've wondered about several times is what effect would there possibly be to spinning a magnet along its north/south axis. The lines of force would still form around the magnet, but now they are also rotating. Perhaps if the speed of that rotation is high enough, some kind of anomalous effect could be seen.

[macona]

I would recommend hard anodising a test piece first, and also think that some means should be used to keep the bath temperature from increasing during the process.

I have always been interested in astronomy, but unfortunately my Meade ETX 105 stays in its box as I feel the cold badly in my old age.

i decided to do regular anodizing instead, i was too lazy to set up the chiller. It's in the bath now, we'll see what we get in an hour or so.

[darryl]

Any of you astronomy guys have a 'telescope deck' as part of your house? Backyard observatory is one thing- but what about a rotating dome cut through the roof above an upper floor, the observatory room as it would actually be. I would love to have one, perhaps big enough to stand up inside, but even if it's only big enough to accommodate the telescope. A rotating dome would not even have to be clear if it had a sliding window that the telescope could be mounted to. That way you're getting azimuth and altitude without letting air in.

A roof top site is probably not preferred because of light pollution effects in some cases, but I can sure see being able to be inside the house, in say an upstairs room with a telescope 'viewing port' built into the ceiling. The cold can stay outside, and the cold dark nights can be excellent for viewing.

You would want a deployable cover for the lens, which would be outside in the rain. And you would probably want to be near the peak of the roof, depending on trees, whatever, as obstacles to viewing. A 360 degree view would be nice.

[rickyb]

I fit squarely in the enthusiast side. Had I lived on either coast I would have studied astronomy rather than getting an engineering degree. My engineering background keeps me very skeptical about any and all astronomic theories. Fascinating science coupled with theories to later be proven. But they were totally wrong about everything in our solar system, including the moon. Does make you doubt what they say about happenings billions of light years away. This doesn’t stop me from learning and enjoying the theoretical journey. Current pet peeve.. the Big Bang. The entire universe is created from an infinitesimal point. Should be named the Big B.S.

now string theory is something I like. Matter is energy, energy is matter, string theory makes sense. Who knows, it may prove correct.

[PStechPaul]

I find it fascinating that the cosmic background radiation, supposedly emanating from the singularity of the big bang, appears to be universally distributed in every (spatial) dimension, yet it started as a tiny point of space-time 13.8 billion years ago. At such distances, apparently the observation becomes totally time-like, and the three spatial dimensions become meaningless. So, what about objects we observe from 12 billion years ago, like Arcane's mention of a GRB burst. I would expect such an object would also be observed mostly as a time-like dimension, with its radiation appearing to come from a very wide range of spatial dimension. It seems that the radiation from the big bang and very early celestial objects must have originally radiated in all directions, but perhaps gravity has caused most of it to be bent back toward the center of the universe (as we observe it). Maybe things we detect and measure to be much closer are actually images of the same objects much further away and older?

[Jim Stewart]

I find it fascinating that the cosmic background radiation, supposedly emanating from the singularity of the big bang, appears to be universally distributed in every (spatial) dimension, yet it started as a tiny point of space-time 13.8 billion years ago. At such distances, apparently the observation becomes totally time-like, and the three spatial dimensions become meaningless. So, what about objects we observe from 12 billion years ago, like Arcane's mention of a GRB burst. I would expect such an object would also be observed mostly as a time-like dimension, with its radiation appearing to come from a very wide range of spatial dimension. It seems that the radiation from the big bang and very early celestial objects must have originally radiated in all directions, but perhaps gravity has caused most of it to be bent back toward the center of the universe (as we observe it). Maybe things we detect and measure to be much closer are actually images of the same objects much further away and older?

That's a difference of 1.8 billion years. From my reading (IANAA) the initial expansion phase after the big bang lasted for microseconds, not years. After the expansion we began with what we see as the laws of physics.

-js

[Jim Stewart]

I fit squarely in the enthusiast side. Had I lived on either coast I would have studied astronomy rather than getting an engineering degree. My engineering background keeps me very skeptical about any and all astronomic theories. Fascinating science coupled with theories to later be proven. But they were totally wrong about everything in our solar system, including the moon. Does make you doubt what they say about happenings billions of light years away. This doesn’t stop me from learning and enjoying the theoretical journey. Current pet peeve.. the Big Bang. The entire universe is created from an infinitesimal point. Should be named the Big B.S.

now string theory is something I like. Matter is energy, energy is matter, string theory makes sense. Who knows, it may prove correct.

So since it doesn't make sense to you it's BS? Totally wrong about everything in our solar system, including the moon? Perhaps you can elaborate (with details, not handwaving).

-js