Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected • Hacker News Board

Re: Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected

#81

Post by HideousKojima » Sat, Dec 19, 2020, 3:33 AM UTC

ojnabieoot wrote: post #16

WJW wrote: post #3

From a Jupiter-like gas giant type exoplanet, which generate radio emissions through entirely natural processes just like the gas giants in our own solar system. The title is a tad more spectacular than the actual discovery.

The title is in an odd spot where, on the face, it is completely anodyne, and not at all misleading or “clickbait.” Yet even sensible readers (like me!) see “radio” and “exoplanet” in the same sentence and think “ALIENS!” Very awkward spot for the science PR people writing this. It’s almost like it needs extra words to prevent people from adding “Possible (But Definitely Non-Alien) Radio Emission From Exoplanet (Whic…

The same thing happens all the time with pulsars. "Astronomers detect radio signal in space" and don't mention that the signal's frequency is similar to a pulsar

Re: Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected

#82

Post by PenisBanana » Sat, Dec 19, 2020, 3:45 AM UTC

Also, in addition to this being an emission not a transmission:

> “There remains some uncertainty that the detected radio signal is from the planet. The need for follow-up observations is critical,” he said.

So, in the terms used in everyday life, we do not (_c.f._ we do) have an indication that the signal is from the exoplanet.

Re: Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected

#83

Post by earleybird » Sat, Dec 19, 2020, 5:09 AM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #29

standardUser wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Natural Radio Emission" seems to clarify things just fine.

If that's a Natural Radio Emission, then what's a Nocturnal Transmission then?

Why the downvotes - it's an obvious reference to Charlie Farquharson's commentary on the moon missions. :-)

Re: Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected

#84

Post by 8bitsrule » Sat, Dec 19, 2020, 9:29 AM UTC

chongli wrote: post #24

ojnabieoot wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title is in an odd spot where, on the face, it is completely anodyne, and not at all misleading or “clickbait.” Yet even sensible readers (like me!) see “radio” and “exoplanet” in the same sentence and think “ALIENS!” Very awkward spot for the science PR people writing this. It’s almost like it needs extra words to prevent people from adding “Possible (But Definitely Non-Alien) Radio Emission From Exoplanet (Whic…

It’s a radio emission, not a radio transmission. That’s a key distinction that may be lost on a lay reader (or anyone not paying enough attention). Astronomers, amateur astronomers, and astronomy enthusiasts all tend to be aware of the fact that radio is just another part of the spectrum we can use to look at the universe. It’s a strange quirk of our culture that the word radio carries connotations of technology and…

Not quite as whack as the rash of headlines a while back referring to FRB as 'mysterious radio signals' from 'deep space'.

Re: Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected

#85

Post by autocorr » Sat, Dec 19, 2020, 6:59 PM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #80

autocorr wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose... but often the top comment is wrong or mis-leading in some way: "the middle-brow dismissal" HN is famous for. I usually find the most enlightening commentary on HN a few replies down from the top comment where a true expert chimes in to show why the middle-brow dismissal is in fact incorrect and adds their own nuance to the conversation.

> "the middle-brow dismissal" HN is famous for. Famous amongst what group?

The site guidelines and @dang suggest "shallow dismissal" is now the preferred term. Paul Graham, cofounder of YC explains in a comment, back when he still posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4693920

Re: Possible Radio Emission from Exoplanet Detected

#86

Post by cercatrova » Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 4:50 PM UTC

MichaelZuo wrote: post #68

cercatrova wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same as for humans. Or a hive mind, or some other type.

Which is? Common dictionaries, such as Oxford, state: Sapient 1. Wise, or attempting to appear wise. 2. Relating to the human species. Where 1. wise is defined: Having or showing experience, knowledge, and good judgement. Hard to see how that would apply to a hypothetical hive or machine drone civilization with only a single ‘wise’ controller. 2. Clearly not applicable.

Why wouldn't 1 work? Basically it's a species that is at least as intelligent as us and can carry out civilization, including scientific and technological progress. It may or may not be sentient as well, see Blindsight for example.