A Brief Gamma Ray Mystery...

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

A Brief Gamma Ray Mystery...

Unread post by MGmirkin » Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:35 pm

(A Brief Mystery: What Are Short Gamma-Ray Bursts)
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/A_Bri ... s_999.html
These bursts seemed impossibly powerful: to appear so bright from so very far away, they must vastly outshine entire galaxies containing hundreds of billions of stars.

These explosions, called gamma ray bursts (GRBs), are by far the brightest and most energetic phenomena in the known universe, second only to the Big Bang itself. Scientists were at a loss to imagine what could possibly cause them.

Astronomers now know what the longer-lasting GRBs are: the collapse and explosion of an ultra-massive star to form a black hole at its core, an explanation first proposed by Stan Woosley of the University of California in San Diego. But there's a second category of GRBs that still remains a mystery.

"The short-lived ones are very poorly understood ..."

[...]

"We have had good evidence since the 1990s that the short bursts and long bursts were different classes," Gehrels explains.

"It had to do with their gamma ray properties." Not only do the short bursts last less than about 2 seconds, the spectrum of light they emit is distinct. Gamma rays from short bursts lean toward the high-energy end of the spectrum, while long GRBs emit lower-energy gamma rays.

The differences were highlighted in 2005 when, for the first time, telescopes caught sight of short GRB afterglows. The fading debris contained no supernova, arguing against the collapse of a massive star.

[...]

Ultimately, the cause of short bursts is unknown. But scientists do have some good guesses.

The leading theory is that these bursts are extremely violent collisions between pairs of neutron stars.

[...]

So how could scientists know whether this explanation is true?

One way could be to detect gravitational waves. Before the two neutron stars collide, they would orbit each other as a binary system. Because their fields of gravity are so intense, the stars ought to send waves rippling outward in the fabric of space-time: gravitational waves.

[...]
Thus far LIGO et al have detected precisely squat in terms of GRBs.

Could it be that GRBs are simply high energy and low energy discharges? "Not only do the short bursts last less than about 2 seconds, the spectrum of light they emit is distinct. Gamma rays from short bursts lean toward the high-energy end of the spectrum, while long GRBs emit lower-energy gamma rays."

Reminiscent of Bernard Vonnegut's paper on vortex stabilization of a high voltage discharge.

(Stabilization of a High-Voltage Discharge by a Vortex.)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960JAtS...17..468V

Granted, the EM waves he was measuring were radio frequency waves. But the results were still interesting. In an arc it was relatively radio noisy, but could only jump a smaller gap. By spinning up the spark gap with fans (I seem to recall that's what he used), the discharge was able to traverse a large spark gap but hopped down from arc mode to glow mode and the radio noise died off as well. Could it be that GRBs are from an equivalent phenomenon? IE, a shorter, faster spark will tend to be much noisier, whereas a more strung out, slower discharge would be "quieter." Don't know if this is a reasonable explanation or not? Just a first crack at it.

I also recall a prior discussion regarding TGF (Terrestrial Gamma-ray Flashes), and the incidence seemed to be spatially located in regions undergoing heavy lightning activity:

(RHESSI Science Nugget: Terrestrial gamma-ray flashes)
http://sprg.ssl.berkeley.edu/~tohban/nu ... icle_id=32
All of these lines of study seem to be pointing to a common conclusion: that TGFs are not associated primarily with the exotic sprites, elves, and blue jets, which occur at very high altitudes, but with lightning itself.
Hmm, makes one take pause if only briefly, no? Does this give us a clue? Many upper atmospheric phenomena are diffuse glow mode effects. Lighting is a rather high-energy spatially confined process (z-pinched, arc mode plasma, etc.)... That TGFs come from lightning rather than auroras or difuse upper-atmospheric processes is perhaps not entirely to be unexpected?

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: A Brief Gamma Ray Mystery...

Unread post by MGmirkin » Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:59 pm

They seem to have missed this article touting to have "solved the mystery"...

(HETE satellite solves mystery of short gamma ray bursts)
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2005/gamma-ray.html

Sounds so 'final' doesn't it? All they've done is to cobble together a suggestion, not a rigorous proof of anything.

And then there's this site discussing GRBs and pointing out that they're slightly mysterious (especially the short ones).

(Gamma-Ray Bursts: Introduction to a Mystery)
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/scien ... /grbs.html

Several pages of stuff there, much of it supposition...

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
nick c
Site Admin
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: A Brief Gamma Ray Mystery...

Unread post by nick c » Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:42 am

From The Electric Sky by Donald E. Scott, p174-5:
On October 13, 1998, a NASA spokesperson explained:
[...]
They detected a rapidly fading star, probably the aftermath of a gigantic explosion, next to a faint amorphous blob believed to be a very distant galaxy. [Emphasis added.]
Scott goes on to give his explanation:
Doesn't this sound like fissioning again? An explosion, followed by a rapidly fading star, accompanied by some sort of companion. Might it be that the reason they "never [come] from the same direction twice" is that the creation of the binary pair has relieved the electrical stress (at least for a long enough time that we humans have not yet seen a recurrence)?
Scott's explanation, then, is that GRB's are the product (probably a special case) of stellar fissioning. Not neutron stars colliding and forming a black hole, or whatever other fanciful explanation mainstream wants to conjure.

nick c

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: A Brief Gamma Ray Mystery...

Unread post by StefanR » Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:36 am

I also recall a prior discussion regarding TGF (Terrestrial Gamma-ray Flashes), and the incidence seemed to be spatially located in regions undergoing heavy lightning activity

Add to that :
INTEGRAL confirms distinct, low-luminosity population of gamma-ray bursts

13 Oct 2008
An analysis of the 47 gamma-ray bursts detected by INTEGRAL since its launch reveals a previously unnoticed population of faint gamma-ray bursts associated with the local supergalactic structure.
Image
Spatial distribution of 47 gamma-ray bursts detected by INTEGRAL between October 2002 to July 2007 superimposed on the exposure map for that period. (Credit: ESA)

Foley and colleagues now demonstrate that INTEGRAL's high sensitivity has allowed it to detect a hitherto unnoticed population of GRBs. The team of Irish scientists analyzed the time profiles of the 47 GRBs detected by INTEGRAL in the period October 2002 to July 2007. This, together with spectral analysis, is a standard method used to categorize GRBs. In most GRBs, the higher energy emission precedes (in time) the low energy emission: this is referred to as the spectral lag. The INTEGRAL data show that events with a long (>0.75s) lag are also systematically weaker, suggesting that they belong to a different population. This conclusion is strengthened when the positions of the long-lag events are plotted in supergalactic coordinates. (The supergalactic plane is a planar structure in the local galaxy density field, mapping the distribution of galaxies in the local universe.) The events detected by Foley and colleagues appear to be aligned with the supergalactic plane, and are therefore inferred to be local and not at cosmological distances, in contrast to the distribution of high luminosity GRBs.

Within the BATSE GRB catalogue there was already some hint of a population of low-luminosity gamma-ray bursts with a tendency to concentrate near the supergalactic plane (Norris 2002). However, these appeared only at the faintest limits of the catalogue and it is only with the increased detection capability of INTEGRAL that these bursts can be clearly identified.

This result is important because it reveals another facet of the GRB phenomenology: a new population of bursts associated with sources in the local universe, a population to which the INTEGRAL telescope is particularly sensitive.
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object ... ctid=43555
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: A Brief Gamma Ray Mystery...

Unread post by MGmirkin » Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:19 pm

Adding to the mystery and/or solution:

(The Oddball Hosts Of Gamma-Ray Bursts)
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/The_O ... s_999.html
there are two types of gamma-ray bursts: long ones, [thought to be] produced by the explosion of supermassive stars as described above, and short ones, produced by some other still-unknown process. "Short GRBs aren't choosey about their hosts," says Fruchter.

"They're found in all types of galaxies. But the host galaxies of long GRBs tend to be oddballs, small and irregular, instead of 'regular' spiral galaxies like our own Milky Way."
So, now we seem to have two pieces of information to work with and mix-n-match:
Not only do the short bursts last less than about 2 seconds, the spectrum of light they emit is distinct. Gamma rays from short bursts lean toward the high-energy end of the spectrum, while long GRBs emit lower-energy gamma rays.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/A_Bri ... s_999.html

1. Short GRBs:
A) Last less than about 2 seconds and lean toward the high-energy end of the spectrum.
B) Short GRBs aren't choosey about their hosts. They're found in all types of galaxies.

2. Long GRBs:
A) Slightly more protracted and emit lower-energy gamma rays.
B) Host galaxies tend to be oddballs, small and irregular, instead of 'regular' spiral galaxies like our own Milky Way.

Do these tell us anything separately or when taken together? Wonder what other similarities or differences there are between long and short GRBs? Perhaps the similarities and differences can inform our opinion about behaviors and/or causes?

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Universe's Earliest Gamma Rays Missing? Uh oh!

Unread post by MGmirkin » Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:27 pm

(The Case Of The Missing Gamma-Ray Bursts)
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/The_C ... s_999.html

Based upon redshift==distance assumptions, we live in an expanding universe and there was a big bang. But there's a little glitch in the scheme. We can't find any objects with redshift higher than 6-7. So, where are the gamma ray bursts from the earliest universe (predicted to be redshift 10+?)...

Does it mean our instruments are insufficient or they're truly missing? If they're missing, why? If they're imaginary, what then? Reconsider redshift assumptions (or are those sacrosanct to call into question even when extrapolations turn out to appear violated)?

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests