Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 236 posts

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#21

Post by emteycz »

zaroth wrote: post #9
_aky4 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Further we look into the void, further we see how vast it is in length of time and breadth of space. And in that void we're a tiny speck of dust on an already tiny speck of dust. For me, looking at zoomable deep space telescope imagery, it's a 50/50 proposition, either we have the only miracle of life in existence, or it's prolific. Deepest visible light image of 10,000 galaxies - https://www.spacetelescope.org/image…

The incomprehensible vastness in terms both time and space, combined with our own flittering existence, mean that even a universe utterly teeming with life would never see two advanced civilizations actually cross paths.

Could you elaborate? To me that seems tobe too anthropocentric thinking.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#22

Post by craigching »

person_of_color wrote: post #17

I don't get it. Why don't we image this thing directly?

We have! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ʻOumuamua

But it’s small and moving away from us fast. We couldn’t build anything in time that could catch up to it and image it closer.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#23

Post by ekimekim »

> Asked if there is a clear leading candidate explanation for 'Oumuamua's acceleration, Loeb referred Live Science to a not-yet-released book he authored called "Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth," due for publication in January.

I don't know enough about the science to have an informed opinion, but it seems to me that if the main skeptic is also selling a book based in their exciting alternate theory, that's kinda a huge red flag.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#24

Post by Sharlin »

person_of_color wrote: post #17

I don't get it. Why don't we image this thing directly?

Uh, because of the most obvious reason that comes to mind: it's way too small and way too far away! Even when it was discovered, near the perihelion of its hyberbolic orbit, it was small enough that we had no way whatsoever actually resolving it as anything else than a point of light. We could only guesstimate its rough shape by measuring its light curve—how its brightness changes as it rotates—and then simulating what kind of shape would produce that light curve. And now it's already way beyond Saturn's orbit, almost 100 times farther away than when it was discovered.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#25

Post by rosstex »

waynecochran wrote: post #15
czzr wrote: post #3

Summary: hydrogen iceberg theory questioned as the expected lifespan of a hydrogen iceberg is likely too short, given the distance Oumuamua would have had to travel.

You forgot about the aliens.

You have failed to account for the fact that we live in a simulation.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#26

Post by dogma1138 »

rosstex wrote: post #25
waynecochran wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot about the aliens.

You have failed to account for the fact that we live in a simulation.

Background sprite object and a physics engine bug, can I haz noble prize now?

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#27

Post by api »

emteycz wrote: post #21
zaroth wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incomprehensible vastness in terms both time and space, combined with our own flittering existence, mean that even a universe utterly teeming with life would never see two advanced civilizations actually cross paths.

Could you elaborate? To me that seems tobe too anthropocentric thinking.

All thinking about aliens is anthropocentric. We have a sample size of one.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#28

Post by rendall »

bluedays wrote: post #2

This is pretty cool. I am constantly looking at current events and thinking to myself "what if aliens were watching this?". I feel like it sorta puts things in perspective for me. Seeing that this might be a possibility is sorta thrilling.

"what if aliens were watching this?"

There is an archetype of the Mysterious Stranger, an innocent, naive observer of our culture, who finds us incomprehensible because we are Just Terrible. We make war, pollute, enslave, etc, while this archetype is pure.

Examples: K-Pax, Powder, Dostoyevski's The Idiot, Crocodile Dundee all have elements of this archetype

The thing is, the only reason this archetype has any meaning to us is because this archetype shares our values. That character is always just the author, putting words in the mouth of a character who could not exist in reality. There is no Mysterious Stranger.

We can expect actual aliens, ones who evolved in a different ecosystem, would have no opinion about what we do. Not from our value system anyway. Less "these poor hooman creatures actually kill each other, how primitive!" and more ... well, something more incomprehensible to us

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#29

Post by api »

Sharlin wrote: post #24
person_of_color wrote: post #17

I don't get it. Why don't we image this thing directly?

Uh, because of the most obvious reason that comes to mind: it's way too small and way too far away! Even when it was discovered, near the perihelion of its hyberbolic orbit, it was small enough that we had no way whatsoever actually resolving it as anything else than a point of light. We could only guesstimate its rough shape by measuring its light curve—how its brightness changes as it rotates—and then simulating wh…

Could the JWST see it? It goes up soon.

Re: Mystery of interstellar visitor 'Oumuamua gets trickier

#30

Post by dwighttk »

api wrote: post #29
Sharlin wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, because of the most obvious reason that comes to mind: it's way too small and way too far away! Even when it was discovered, near the perihelion of its hyberbolic orbit, it was small enough that we had no way whatsoever actually resolving it as anything else than a point of light. We could only guesstimate its rough shape by measuring its light curve—how its brightness changes as it rotates—and then simulating wh…

Could the JWST see it? It goes up soon.

Lol

Soon

Post reply on HN