Lethal gamma-ray burst from star WR 104 could reach earth - Polidicks

[QUOTE=TheTalon;40809457]Am I the only one that thinks it's impossible to know if it's alligned with us or not? I mean there's going to be an 8,000 year long gap for error at the very best 100% correct prediction of it going SuperNova, so how can it possibly be predicted when the margin of error is possibly 500,000 years[/QUOTE] We can know it's aligned with us and not know when it will go supernova.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;40809457]Am I the only one that thinks it's impossible to know if it's alligned with us or not? I mean there's going to be an 8,000 year long gap for error at the very best 100% correct prediction of it going SuperNova, so how can it possibly be predicted when the margin of error is possibly 500,000 years[/QUOTE] You can see where it's pointed "now" (now being the current time for Earth, but 8000 years ago for WR104 due to speed-of-light delays). So if it goes off "now", we can know if it would hit us or not (assuming the measurements are correct - there is significant debate about this particular star since different measurements disagree). It's true that it could potentially change orientation over time, or the Sun will move out of the danger zone. But we could just as likely move into the danger zone of a different star, so it all pretty much evens out. I will note that GRBs are a very low-risk apocalypse. Out of the five largest extinction events, only one is even suspected to have been caused by a GRB, and even that one we're not sure of (an ice age caused by sequestration of CO2 is a more widely-accepted theory for the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction). I'd worry more about asteroid impacts and supervolcanoes.

Queue the massive increase of views [editline]27th May 2013[/editline] Here, let me cool your poles, this has an extremely rare chance of hitting us.

Yay vacuum metastability event's and gamma ray bursts are the perfect thing to read before going to bed [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] not because I'm super worried but now i'll think about it for hours

[QUOTE=paindoc;40809545]Yay vacuum metastability event's and gamma ray bursts are the perfect thing to read before going to bed [editline]28th May 2013[/editline] not because I'm super worried but now i'll think about it for hours[/QUOTE] If it helps, you'd be dead before you knew it hit...

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;40809469]There's a million and one ways the universe could wipe us out at any moment without us being able to do a damn thing. Best thing is just not to think about it. Google "vacuum metastability event." Nature is a dick.[/QUOTE] Actually, I am NOT going to look that up, because I know if I do, I will never stop thinking about it.

How fragile we are, that a random event that happens millions of times in the Universe can destroy us.

bring it on I want my superpowers

[quote]vacuum metastability event[/quote] nope not gonna do it ... fuck my curiosity jeez that's depressing

I hate fear-mongering. It's the shittiest thing a news source can do for people who they're trying to get the trust of.

For some odd reason I skimmed the title so quickly I thought it was about Star Wars.

don't worry guys i know people we will protect you from all this sciency stuff

Although if a GRB was fired at earth, it would tear a hole straight through it and there would be nothing that could stop it.

kind of humbling, just shows you should live your life to the fullest you can live boring intentionally to be safe and then a giant rock or radiation wave completely knocks out Earth. Just shows how vincible we are

[QUOTE=Map in a box;40809635]Although if a GRB was fired at earth, it would tear a hole straight through it and there would be nothing that could stop it.[/QUOTE] Nope. The mass of the Earth should be enough to shield half the planet from immediate destruction, at least for any GRBs that can be produced close enough to deal damage (I wouldn't be surprised if the largest could do what you describe, but they're caused by black hole collisions or other ultra-high-energy events that simply can't happen in our galaxy).

[quote]We could see it go supernova anywhere from tomorrow to 500,000 years from now[/quote] That's a narrow window, definitely gonna hit any minute now.

I'm not sure I'd mind being hit by it.

[quote]"You would first notice a 10-second blue flash in the upper atmosphere, but then the damage would be done," he said.[/quote] So I could be walking anyday from now to a 500000 years and if I just so happen to look up and see a 10-second blue flash appear in the upper atmosphere I'll be sure to remember this article!

For the sake of sanity: [url]http://www.universetoday.com/23342/wr-104-wont-kill-us-after-all/[/url] "It would appear the original Keck imagery may not have been as straight-forward as it seemed. Spectroscopic emission lines from the binary pair strongly suggest the system is in fact inclined 30°-40° (possibly as much as 45°) [B]away[/B] from us." All still speculation, but it's nice to think, anyway.

snip

[QUOTE=gman003-main;40809652]Nope. The mass of the Earth should be enough to shield half the planet from immediate destruction, at least for any GRBs that can be produced close enough to deal damage (I wouldn't be surprised if the largest could do what you describe, but they're caused by black hole collisions or other ultra-high-energy events that simply can't happen in our galaxy).[/QUOTE] GRBs are more powerful than you think. It wouldn't just last for one second.

[QUOTE=Map in a box;40809822]GRBs are more powerful than you think. It wouldn't just last for one second.[/QUOTE] How long?

[QUOTE]There's a million and one ways the universe could wipe us out at any moment without us being able to do a damn thing. Best thing is just not to think about it. Google "vacuum metastability event." Nature is a dick[/QUOTE] Just looked vacuum metastability event up and actually found that extremely fascinating.

[QUOTE=PelPix123;40809780]I'm actually very interested in this. You seem knowledgeable. Can you tell me if I have the concept right? A false vacuum is a situation where what we assume is the bare minimum of energy isn't actually the bare minimum, and what we call a vacuum is actually excited. If this were true, then if the false vacuum changed in energy level, everything we know about physics could be invalidated because it was biased by the assumption that our reference point is a viable reference point, which turns out to be false. It would be like basing an entire system of integers on the number 2 being the smallest possible value instead of 0 and wondering why our understanding of everything is so approximate and patchy.[/QUOTE] Sort of, except the real thrust of it is that quantum mechanics means there's always a chance that the universe will spontaneously jump down to the actual vacuum state. Then every thing would be fucked. A bubble of new universe would expand at nearly the speed of light until it consumed everything. The universe inside the bubble would be unsurvivable. I can't tell you rigorously why this is the case, but the universe inside the bubble is always anti de Sitter space, which is basically a time-reverse Big Bang which would collapse into a singularity in a few microseconds.

[QUOTE=laserguided;40809864]How long?[/QUOTE] It depends, but they aren't just ON *instant* DONE.

[QUOTE=Map in a box;40809920]It depends, but they aren't just ON *instant* DONE.[/QUOTE] Source?

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;40809914]Sort of, except the real thrust of it is that quantum mechanics means there's always a chance that the universe will spontaneously jump down to the actual vacuum state. Then every thing would be fucked. A bubble of new universe would expand at nearly the speed of light until it consumed everything. The universe inside the bubble would be unsurvivable. I can't tell you rigorously why this is the case, but the universe inside the bubble is always anti de Sitter space, which is basically a time-reverse Big Bang which would collapse into a singularity in a few microseconds.[/QUOTE] The fuck is this shit This shit is scary

[QUOTE=Falubii;40809971]Source?[/QUOTE] Anything on GRB will probably mention it.

Wasn't there a recent study that said that due to the mass of the higgs boson being the way it is, that our universe is fundamentally unstable? [QUOTE=PelPix123;40809780]I'm actually very interested in this. You seem knowledgeable. Can you tell me if I have the concept right? A false vacuum is a situation where what we assume is the bare minimum of energy isn't actually the bare minimum, and what we call a vacuum is actually excited. If this were true, then if the false vacuum changed in energy level, everything we know about physics could be invalidated because it was biased by the assumption that our reference point is a viable reference point, which turns out to be false. It would be like basing an entire system of integers on the number 2 being the smallest possible value instead of 0 and wondering why our understanding of everything is so approximate and patchy.[/QUOTE] It's not that our understanding of physics would change, physics itself would change in the area.

[QUOTE=joshjet;40809114]And if I'm not wrong, gamma rays aren't like normal radiation. Instead of shielding blocking it completely, it just reduces it.[/QUOTE] It's exactly the same as light, except it has a lot more energy. Shielding it is difficult, as a single ray has so much energy. Imagine it like throwing a softball at styrofoam vs. shooting a gun at styrofoam.