/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11045739]

We just found out that the milky way's galactic core is more active than we thought and sent out a HUGE BLAST of gamma and X-rays 3.5 +- 1 mya lasting around 300,000 years. Could this solve the fermi paradox?
https://astro3d.org.au/not-long-ago-the-centre-of-the-milky-way-exploded/
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~jbh/share/Papers/JBH-Ionization-Cones-Oct19.pdf

[Anonymous No.11045763]

>>11045739
Even in my intro to astronomy course we discussed the possibility that until recently the universe was a very violent place with lots of supernovas which solves the fermi paradox by killing off life, so sure?

[Anonymous No.11045772]

>>11045739
sweet. but i don’t think this has anything to do with the fermi “paradox”. apparently life on earth hardly would have noticed it even though it lasted 300,000 years. anyhow good post

[Anonymous No.11045789]

Ok, what I guess I should ask is what was the luminosity of this motherfucker in EUV? Cause "The habitability of the Milky Way during the active phase of its central supermassive black hole" has a nice table you can plug in luminosity to get a table of how close to the center till you're absolutely fucked.
>>11045772
There's the possibility that we're just far away enough to survive. Also a supernova has been claimed to be responsible for a marine-mass extinction event 2.6 mya which is within the margin of error for the event:
http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/supernova-explosions-end-pliocene-marine-mass-extinction-06716.html
maybe it wasn't actually a supernova? Of course there's a distinct iron 60 signature for that.

[Anonymous No.11045927]

>>11045789
Seems about right too me. One massive blast would make more sense than a bunch of small ones. Yes, that would help take care of quite a few civilizations around the galaxy. Then again, humanity might be "the ancients" or "the progenitors" to all the future alien races, if we are actually the first.

[Anonymous No.11046952]

>>11045739
>fermi paradox

[Anonymous No.11046994]

>>11045927
>when Terra is dying we will send a baby to Krypton and not the other way around

[Anonymous No.11047245]

>>11045739
>Could this solve the fermi paradox?
NO!
/thread

[Anonymous No.11047257]

>>11045763

That's pretty narrow minded.

The universe is full of total extinction events. It could be a supernova, or a big deal rock. The results are the same.

These are the Darwinian meat grinder. Same as entropy, scarcity and milder evolutionary pressures. They all do the same thing; force the development and unity of life. Give it no choice but life and death struggles where only the fittest survive.

Don't get your shit together as a species in time to avoid a periodic cosmic hammer? Off to the Darwinian dust pile you go with countless other species.

It's all the same. Just a driving force at different magnitudes.

And this implies there would be species that overcame and survived. Went to the stars. Harnessed the power of suns and entire systems. Became type I and II civilizations.

Sure they would be very few. But they would exist, and represent the bleeding edge of evolutionary development.

[Anonymous No.11047258]

>>11047245
why?

[Anonymous No.11047272]

>>11047257
Not necessarily, the filters might have been so hard that everyone got filtered.
Also you have a weird romantic vision of evolution. It's not some Nietzscean race to greatness, it's just species autistically adapting to their environment and being sometimes lucky enough that the environment doesn't change too fast.

[Anonymous No.11047285]

Hello Anons of sci, I have a question regarding planets and I didn’t want to start a new thread just for one little questions so I figured here would be the most relevant.
Anyway my question is; how does having no tilt effect a planet with a 208.000km equatorial circumference

More details on this post on /tg/ >>68804027

[Anonymous No.11047291]

>>11047285
Couldn't post the link to post so here's the thread itself if you want to have a poke around in it >>>/tg/68799619

[Anonymous No.11047295]

>>11047272

I don't disagree with the last part. And I certainly understand your initial argument.

However a universe that clearly is arranged to give rise to life - only to kill them and enforce a developmental ceiling is illogical. Unless you want to explore ideas like Fishbowl theory, Simulation theory, etc.

However on face it wouldn't make sense, and is totally at odds with all measurable phenomena that promotes life and development.

Yes, the Filters are tight. But we are basing the Fermi paradox on the idea that we have a complete and unbiased understanding of the universe. We really don't. Between simple lack of knowledge and outright censorship, we cannot trust our current model of the "where is everyone?" Universe.

The filters are tight. But not impossibly tight. Moreover I think that humans are capable of passing our current great filter, at least in principle. But understand that these filters do not just manifest in unthinking, cosmic phenomena and the rigid laws of physics.

They manifest in evolutionary eventualities. Phenomena among mankind as much as a result of social evolutionary pressures as physical ones. Inevitable manifestations of certain ideologies and tendencies. Until a subgroup exists that occupies a viable Darwinian niche. In this case, a largely parasitic role that fights by non traditional means. If you don't know who or what I'm referring to by now, you need to read more.

Can we overcome that great filter? I don't know. But by being here, we are on the front lines of that. Not just a counterculture but the people most conscious of the terrible Darwinian peril we face and at least doing something about it. No matter how small, or how potentially futile.

Such is life, struggle, try to succeed and breed, or else: Dustbin.

[Anonymous No.11047299]

>>11047285
This is how it's done. Observe.
>>>/tg/68804027

[Anonymous No.11047305]

>>11047299
Thanks /sci/! I am just visiting and I am already learning new stuff!

[Anonymous No.11047562]

>>11047272
>>11047295
The filter could be the difficulty of keeping society functioning while transitioning from planetary to interplanetary life. Think about it. We have climate change and peak oil coming up without working fusion technology. We could easily waste our opportunities on tariffs, wars and disaster mitigation, use up the oil and uranium and have to return to victorian technology with not enough society-wide available energy to climb back up.

[Anonymous No.11047580]

>>11047285
>>11047299
The axial tilt only affects seasons, which only function to balance climate extremes. If you have a hot part of the world and a cold part, the seasons will make sure somewhere meets in the middle.
The bit with your planet that matters is the 114-hour day. One part will be very hot and one part will be very cold, and a 30,000ish km radius means that the planet is way too big for the weather to equalize it. Weather will be batshit from 70°N to 70°S with a lot of storms moving polewards as well, although in 40k that doesn't matter much.

[Anonymous No.11047587]

>>11047295
>>11047257

[Anonymous No.11047601]

Isn't our solar system abnormal with gas giants normally being much closer to the sun?

[Anonymous No.11047608]

>>11047601
Rock planets are more dense and drift inwards while gas giants are lighter and seek out.
It\s probably from the exo gas planets you heard about being burned from being too close to their own suns.

[Anonymous No.11047642]

>>11047608
I'm finding lots of things that say the opposite of that, that Jupiter and Neptune did some stupid shit in the earlier stages of the solar system that sent them far out, most systems don't have rocky and gas giants separated, our solar system is abnormally large and its common for systems of 5+ planets to fit within murcury's orbit, half of exoplanets have oval or eccentric orbits, our sun is in the minority of stars, etc etc etc

[Anonymous No.11047681]

>>11047257

To what end would a civilisation even need to become a type 1 let alone type 2?
The paradox seems stupid for the sole reason that we could achieve most things we could even imagine with energy levels far below that of an entire Sun.

[Anonymous No.11047687]

>>11045739
Fermi paradox doesn’t exist. Only morons think about it

[Anonymous No.11047691]

>>11047608
wtf would density have to do with it lmao

Rocky planets FORM closer into their stars hence, you know, being rocky. Gas planets migrate. Jupiter would have fucked our system's shit up without Saturn's influence

[Anonymous No.11047701]

>>11047601
>>11047642
The majority (roughly 60%) of systems we've observed since we learned how to detect exoplanets are systems with one or more Jupiter or greater mass planets (usually a brown dwarf) orbiting extremly close to the star. Another 20% are systems more similar to our own with Earth-Neptune size planet(s) orbiting within the life zone of their star.

But keep in mind that this has everything to do with how we detect exoplanets. Our current methods are either observing the gravitational displacement of a star, which requires a Jupiter or larger mass object to be orbiting the star, or regular shifts in the stars spectra, which requires a 2-3x Earth mass planet to be orbiting the star.

Basically, our current methods produce those specific findings, we cant "see" other types of systems that well so our data is skewed toward what we can see. As far as we know, Sol could be extremly common or it could be completely unique, we just dont have enough data yet.

[Anonymous No.11048824]

>>11045739
and it would have been bright enough to see from Earth. Like almost as bright as the full moon. Imagine seeing that in the sky