Submitted by PuzzleheadedOne1428 t3_1268nex in space
Comments
sinisterdesign t1_jeac4lo wrote
I’m not sure I would like you now
tayl428 t1_jeb9qav wrote
What about if he got angry?
lothpendragon t1_jeeb8cn wrote
They're only a little more Hulky, so would peeved be enough?
tayl428 t1_jefculj wrote
Don't make me peeved. You wouldn't like me when I'm peeved.
[deleted] t1_jeacgsq wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je9aixb wrote
[removed]
BestAd1090 t1_jeayt59 wrote
Welp, alright. Sounds pretty good!
oicura_geologist t1_je8f819 wrote
"in human history"???? Um... Not happy with that. Best to say brightest recorded gamma-ray burst" vs. just being the brightest in all of human history.
Understands-Irony t1_je8kn38 wrote
The article says that it’s based on the odds of black hole emitting GRBs directly at Earth like this one did. So the statement isn’t based on the fact that we haven’t recorded one before, but on the astronomical estimate that it will occur only once every 10,000 years
Last_third_1966 t1_je9roj9 wrote
This is comment is an example of inverse gamblers fallacy.
nichogenius t1_je8kxv6 wrote
Well clearly the odds are probably higher than we realized
aris_ada t1_je8z94j wrote
On one side we have a statistical model based on our knowledge of the universe till now and on the other side we have n=1 empirical data. I'm siding with the theoretical model.
nichogenius t1_jeadg48 wrote
The first GRB was only detected in 1967. Assuming we have documented every GRB since (we certainly haven't), that means our observational history only covers 0.5% of that 10,000 year expected frequency of occurence.
Assuming our models are accurate, the odds we were just lucky to see this one in our limited observational history are roughly 0.5%. The odds that our models are underestimating the frequency of these events is quite a bit higher.
Time will tell.
oicura_geologist t1_je9x1pi wrote
Considering humans (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) evolved between 90,000 and 160,000 years ago, that would, on average, allow for up to 16 possible occurrences. I would still have to stand by my statement. Secondly, a 500 year flood does not simply happen once every 500 years, it is a statistical average, and I have seen records of 3 consecutive 500 year floods within one year. Statistics is, over the long term, useful, but useless to the individual.
Tsui_Pen t1_jea05nz wrote
They said civilization, not species evolution.
[deleted] t1_jeat7b7 wrote
[removed]
oicura_geologist t1_jea4pg4 wrote
My comment was regarding the title, not the article.
bluesam3 t1_jeabd9a wrote
"Human history" generally means "the time in which humans have been recording history" (often implicitly "in a way that has survived to the modern day"), not "the time in which humans have existed".
oicura_geologist t1_jef1r1o wrote
Not being an anthropologist myself, I can't say what the field considers. I am a geologist and note that history is not just that which is recorded in anthropomorphic records. Otherwise, history is only the last 5k years, and everything else was just mystical fun to note.
bluesam3 t1_jef763l wrote
Yes, "history" only generally refers to that period. I don't know where you got the idea that knowledge of the past is divided into "history" and "mystical fun to note" - that's just outright nonsense. Indeed, everything prior to written records is generally called "pre-history".
oicura_geologist t1_jefqqm4 wrote
Geology is a historic science. Perspective, to a geologist; pre-history is anything that happens prior to creation of the planet 4500 Ma. To a Cosmologist, pre-history is prior to the inflationary period 1x10^-32 sec post big bang. The article itself quotes "Scientists say the gamma-ray burst (GRB), the most powerful type of explosion in the universe, was 70 times brighter than any previously recorded event. So the title of THIS reddit forum claims "The brightest gamma-ray in human history hit our planet this past Fall" is not precise enough. Especially if one considers that Gamma radiation was not detected until 1903 by humans, and thus, the title is patently wrong considering the perspective of the historical argument.
Your opinion that "History" is only what is written, is a fallacy as many sciences see "history" in very different ways.
bluesam3 t1_jefsff4 wrote
That is just not how the word "history" is used by literally anybody else I can find. In particular, it's not how it's used by historians, who I rather think get to decide what they study.
oicura_geologist t1_jeh2oxl wrote
Um. Ok. Guess all of my professors were wrong.
[deleted] t1_je8l4sp wrote
[removed]
statistacktic t1_je9w6x5 wrote
I think for non-critical thinkers, human history implies recorded history.
Site-Staff t1_je8b6rp wrote
I mean… what are the ramifications for life with that exposure level?
Ivedefected t1_je8eeum wrote
None. A GRB would need to be within a few thousand light-years to damage the ozone layer. This one happened around 2.4 billion light-years away.
hundenkattenglassen t1_je9bljq wrote
Pretty fukin amazing that a few thousands light years is considered to be a dangerous area within GRB range.
Meanwhile on Earth and large explosions, meh go 10 km away and you’re perfectly safe from any man made non-nuclear explosions.
potatomafia69 t1_je9zote wrote
More specifically under 150 lightyears. Cancer rates will skyrocket, ozone layer will be depleted and it could even trigger an ice age. Under 25 lightyears is just a death sentence. It'll cause mass extinction of almost all life forms on Earth. Luckily there's not one star that will go supernova anytime soon within this radius and there's not much to worry about.
drailCA t1_jeaujyx wrote
Betelgeuse is the closest at 650 lightyears from my understanding.
potatomafia69 t1_jeav3hp wrote
The closest one that'll go supernova in the near future. There are a couple of other candidates as well in the far future.
jdragun2 t1_je9z1eg wrote
They have to be basically pointed directly at us to be a threat. The chances of one being in the correct range and be directly lined up with our solar system [I'm pretty sure they would be large enough to encompass most of the inner solar system in a beam] is outlandishly small. A few seconds difference and a beam would miss completely at those distances thanks to how fast everything is moving relative to one another at that scale. The fact that this one hit from the distances it did is mind boggling. I also wonder about how much diffusion of the beam there is over those distances, which if it did, would it increase the chances of getting hit or decrease it? Any astrophysics people who would like to chime in here I would appreciate it!
bluesam3 t1_jeab7wk wrote
Not an astophysicist, but I can give a lower bound: the lower limit limit on beam divergence angle is (wavelength) / (𝜋 × (initial diameter)). Wikipedia suggests a source diameter of ~60,000 km, and the peak photon energy for the event was 18 TeV, which translates to a wavelength of about 7×10^(-20)m, putting the lower limit on divergence (for a perfect laser) at 7×10^(-20)/(𝜋 × 60000000) = 372 nanoradians, which gives a final radius at that range of 60000km + 2 × sin(372 nanoradians) × (2.4 billion light years), which works out to somewhere in the region of 1,800 light years. This beam was presumably a very long way away from being a perfect laser, and most of the particles will have had lower energies, so that's probably an order of magnitude or several too low. However you slice it, though, that's a pretty wide end target, so it's probably more accurate to say it hit our vague region of the galaxy, rather than that it hit Earth. Certainly it wasn't at risk of hitting the wrong bit of the solar system.
[deleted] t1_jeapbk8 wrote
[removed]
Elon-Musk-Officiall t1_jeazkiv wrote
Forgive my lack if understanding, but youre saying the radius is 1,800 lightyears? Or the length?
[deleted] t1_jeblxa7 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jeadx37 wrote
[removed]
grafxguy1 t1_jeaipkk wrote
Says you. Tell that to my new sixth finger!
Jozywokp t1_jecdtxr wrote
my balls are glowing green!
patches3141 t1_jed2jgz wrote
"A few thousand lightyears" also means a few hundred quintillion miles. There are more miles in that distance than combinations on a rubiks cube. And that thing can still hurt us. Space is scary
AwesomeMindSlayer t1_je97bbj wrote
How do we know there wasn't a brighter gamma ray in 469 BC?
calabazookita t1_je9pm2c wrote
r/oddlyspecific r/timetravel
thejayroh t1_jeaht2v wrote
Folks back then just knew everything
keeperkairos t1_jebasng wrote
We don’t, it’s based on odds.
Riegel_Haribo t1_je8o5mg wrote
This story, again from another news source, shows us the preposterous "news cycle". That brings us "super moon" "harvest moon" "blood moon" or other invented moons, alarmist solar storms that happen a dozen a year, or the "planetary alignment" with an exact date my mom even asked about - which is one planet setting on the horizon, and then you turn around and look to the other horizon to see another.
That a prepublish about a presentation at the American Astronomical Society Meeting this week, concerning something that happened six months ago, can be written about once and hit news outlets all over to be regurgitated again and again.
A not-terrible link: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/nasa-missions-study-what-may-be-a-1-in-10000-year-gamma-ray-burst
KorgX3 t1_je9l61h wrote
Educating kids about the realities of shark attacks left an alarmist void that something had to fill. It will be even more fun when quantum sciences become more prevalent and new discoveries lead to headlines like "Quantum Computing Spells Doom For Humanity" when some kid in Italy figures out how to play Doom on a quantum computer.
PhoenixReborn t1_jebdrbd wrote
The term "harvest moon" dates back at least to the 18th century with other cultures celebrating or noting the autumn full moon long before. Blood moon can either mean a harvest moon or a lunar eclipse. Not really fair to blame the news. I'll give you super moon.
fleranon t1_je974ez wrote
Huh. I always thought Gamma Rays were the most deadly thing in the universe and would basically sterilize exactly half of the planet if one were to hit earth. Seems I was very wrong
calligraphizer t1_je9e5az wrote
Radiation dissipates with distance squared :-) Throw in any medium (dust, gas) and it dissipates even more
ApplicationRoyal1072 t1_je9xh3y wrote
Because of expansion of the universe radiation frequency changes with time/distance from any radiation source. Doppler effect. Add diffusion .
calligraphizer t1_jecr9b9 wrote
Only across cosmological distances. This would be negligible for gamma rays emitted within, say, the local group, which is gravitationally bound against Hubble flow.
Successful_Ad_6248 t1_je9hgwh wrote
In this case the origin was billions of light years away so the power of the gamma rays diminished after travelling for such a long distance.
bluesam3 t1_jeabku5 wrote
It's a question of range. If one went off 24 light years away, that would be true (except that the back side of the planet wouldn't have a good day either). This one was literally a billion times further away.
Bensemus t1_jeaksfz wrote
Within a few thousand light years would be bad news for Earth if we took a direct hit.
[deleted] t1_jeam59u wrote
[removed]
Secret-Head-6267 t1_je9hs5x wrote
Or, all of the scientific journals were wrong. Bc everything that I have ever read on the subject of GRBs has been quite clear on the outcome of a direct hit, irrespective of any inverse square law involving wave propagation and x distance traversed in a near vacuum: total annihilation. Perhaps the Perimeter Institute and Neil Turok have some final words on this phenomenon? -J
Bensemus t1_jeakjrh wrote
Then you didn't understand what you were reading. Gama rays are still just light and their intensity falls off with the square of the distance. This is ancient physics.
bluesam3 t1_jeabnfn wrote
Clearly you haven't read anything by anybody who isn't a moron, then.
fleranon t1_je9rlel wrote
Same! I think I even read something once that linked Gamma Rays to Fermi's great Filter. Instant death by massive Space Ray, Zzzzzap. Perhaps Science Mags tend to be overly sensationalistic sometimes :)
Bensemus t1_jeakp4w wrote
They are a possibility but there's never been confusion about how deadly they are. The farther away you are from something the less energy it will have when it gets to you.
bojun t1_je9d59i wrote
Not in human history as we only recently learned how to detect them
AutoBot82 t1_je8ha32 wrote
How can we say that? We only have had the means of detecting this for less than a century.....
itsRobbie_ t1_je8xlva wrote
A Dyson sphere from an advanced civilization missed its target
Secret-Head-6267 t1_je9ge79 wrote
And let's not forget about the Drake Equation. 😉
Secret-Head-6267 t1_je9gk72 wrote
... in consideration of another advanced civilization existing.
ssbn622 t1_je8tpm7 wrote
Hmm that explains the greenish tan i had though the holidays.
dwdrummond t1_je8tumk wrote
My ass still hurts, but I feel was always destined to take one for humanity
firewoodenginefist t1_jef9qg3 wrote
Is it called butthole sunning if it came from another celestial object?
Additional_Ad_2778 t1_je905rh wrote
The big mystery here is why these gamma rays were so slow, apparently only travelling 'near the speed of light'?
Successful_Ad_6248 t1_je9h9m1 wrote
The gamma rays travel at the speed of light. It was the jets created from the black hole collapse that travel at near the speed of light. The jets and the gamma rays are 2 different things although they happen together.
Additional_Ad_2778 t1_je9no32 wrote
Now that explaination makes more sense. I guess that's what happens when you get science news from a business newsletter.
jerry111165 t1_je94pn5 wrote
No wonder I’m feeling some super powers coming on
weizXR t1_je9c11c wrote
*Human history, since we've been ~accurately recording (so, not that long).
ApplicationRoyal1072 t1_je9z7ul wrote
Considering the fact that homo sapien and sub species history is about 1.5 or so million generations and recorded history is only about 20 thousand generations it's just a blink in time of a lifetime of each of us. There are physical phenomena that we deduce from our surroundings though. As we reach further into the past to collect data about facts with technological advances .........we still won't approach a meaningful understanding of our universe. Unless of course we somehow evolve . But then there won't be humans anymore. I think in the end all of this can't be fully resolved.
kayl_breinhar t1_jea12yv wrote
We can surmise that Earth has been meaningfully hit with GRBs over its history (even before ours) by taking ice and core samples and finding decaying isotopes that shouldn't be there.
[deleted] t1_je8b7sf wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je8kbqb wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je8njub wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je8qdlo wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je8trm1 wrote
[removed]
trollsmurf t1_je90760 wrote
Is that why I can't smell anything and my limbs fall off?
kayl_breinhar t1_jea0ru0 wrote
Honestly, if radiation from a GRB close enough to hurt us hit you, the first thing you'd notice would be intense nausea and/or unexplainable blindness.
And with a prolonged full body dose of radiation that would probably make the Chernobyl Elephant's Foot look like a Rabbit's Foot, your central nervous and immune systems would be overwhelmed by a complete bodily failure and you'd just pass out and never wake up.
[deleted] t1_je9feas wrote
[removed]
Funktapus t1_je9m7bf wrote
And that’s when AI technology started picking up steam. Coincidence?
[deleted] t1_je9mhe4 wrote
[removed]
Additional_Ad_2778 t1_je9nu1r wrote
I feel they've painted themselves into a corner calling it BOAT.
[deleted] t1_je9rsph wrote
[removed]
MegamanD t1_jeamm69 wrote
Is that why my pug starting firing eye laser beams?
Ghoolio- t1_jeb5a7p wrote
Feel the pulse!
ozhs3 t1_jealjp7 wrote
"Struck the solar system." This title is misleading. It did not hit our planet at all.
Edit: some misinformation i was presenting, deleted.
Equivalent_Ad_8413 t1_je9ybhu wrote
"Human history"? Do they really have good records going back a couple hundred thousand years?
That75252Expensive t1_je86k54 wrote
I have been feeling a little more Hulkish lately.