Scientists Witness Huge Cosmic Crash, Find Origins of Gold
It started in a galaxy called NGC 4993, seen from Earth in the Hydra constellation. Two neutron stars, collapsed cores of stars so dense that a teaspoon of their matter would weigh 1 billion tons, danced ever faster and closer together until they collided, said Carnegie Institution astronomer Maria Drout.
The crash, called a kilonova, generated a fierce burst of gamma rays and a gravitational wave, a faint ripple in the fabric of space and time, first theorized by Albert Einstein.
The signal arrived on Earth on Aug. 17 after traveling 130 million light-years. [...] The colliding stars spewed bright blue, super-hot debris that was dense and unstable. Some of it coalesced into heavy elements, like gold, platinum and uranium. Scientists had suspected neutron star collisions had enough power to create heavier elements, but weren't certain until they witnessed it. "We see the gold being formed," said Syracuse's Brown.
So the ring on your finger is actually the skeletal remains of neutron stars.
Observatories Across the World Announce Groundbreaking New Gravitational Wave Discovery
Today, physicists and astronomers around the world are announcing a whole new kind of gravitational wave signal at a National Science Foundation press conference in Washington, DC. But it's not just gravitational waves. That August day, x-ray telescopes, visible light, radio telescopes, and gamma-ray telescopes all spotted a flash, one consistent with a pair of neutron stars swirling together, colliding and coalescing into a black hole. The observation, called a "kilonova," simultaneously answered questions like "where did the heavy metal in our Universe come from" and "what causes some of the gamma-ray bursts scientists have observed since the 60s." It also posed new ones.
[...] All in all, the discovery marks an important milestone in gravitational wave astronomy and proof that LIGO and Virgo do more than spot colliding black holes. At present, the detectors are all receiving sensitivity upgrades. When they come back online, they may see other sources like some supernovae or maybe even a chorus of background gravitational waves from the most distant stellar collisions.
https://gizmodo.com/observatories-across-the-world-announce-groundbreaking-1819500578
[Also Covered By]:
- ESOcast 133: ESO Telescopes Observe First Light from Gravitational Wave Source
- In a First, Gravitational Waves Linked to Neutron Star Crash
- New gravitational wave discovery confirms dawn of a new field of astronomy
- What Have Gravitational-Wave Detectors Discovered?
- Scientists detect gravitational waves from a new kind of nova, sparking a new era in astronomy (archive)
Papers:
Optical emission from a kilonova following a gravitational-wave-detected neutron-star merger (open, DOI: 10.1038/nature24291) (DX)
Spectroscopic identification of r-process nucleosynthesis in a double neutron-star merger (open, DOI: 10.1038/nature24298) (DX)
A gravitational-wave standard siren measurement of the Hubble constant (open, DOI: 10.1038/nature24471) (DX)
The X-ray counterpart to the gravitational-wave event GW170817 (open, DOI: 10.1038/nature24290) (DX)
A kilonova as the electromagnetic counterpart to a gravitational-wave source (open, DOI: 10.1038/nature24303) (DX)
Origin of the heavy elements in binary neutron-star mergers from a gravitational-wave event (open, DOI: 10.1038/nature24453) (DX)
Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9) (DX)
Gravitational Waves and Gamma-Rays from a Binary Neutron Star Merger: GW170817 and GRB 170817A (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c) (DX)
An Ordinary Short Gamma-Ray Burst with Extraordinary Implications: Fermi-GBM Detection of GRB 170817A (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8f41) (DX)
INTEGRAL Detection of the First Prompt Gamma-Ray Signal Coincident with the Gravitational-wave Event GW170817 (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8f94) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. I. Discovery of the Optical Counterpart Using the Dark Energy Camera (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9059) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. II. UV, Optical, and Near-infrared Light Curves and Comparison to Kilonova Models (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8fc7) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. III. Optical and UV Spectra of a Blue Kilonova from Fast Polar Ejecta (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9029) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. IV. Detection of Near-infrared Signatures of r-process Nucleosynthesis with Gemini-South (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa905c) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. V. Rising X-Ray Emission from an Off-axis Jet (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9057) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. VI. Radio Constraints on a Relativistic Jet and Predictions for Late-time Emission from the Kilonova Ejecta (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa905d) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. VII. Properties of the Host Galaxy and Constraints on the Merger Timescale (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9055) (DX)
The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. VIII. A Comparison to Cosmological Short-duration Gamma-Ray Bursts (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9018) (DX)
The Discovery of the Electromagnetic Counterpart of GW170817: Kilonova AT 2017gfo/DLT17ck (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8edf) (DX)
A Deep Chandra X-Ray Study of Neutron Star Coalescence GW170817 (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8ede) (DX)
The Unprecedented Properties of the First Electromagnetic Counterpart to a Gravitational-wave Source (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa905e) (DX)
The Emergence of a Lanthanide-rich Kilonova Following the Merger of Two Neutron Stars (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa90b6) (DX)
Observations of the First Electromagnetic Counterpart to a Gravitational-wave Source by the TOROS Collaboration (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9060) (DX)
The Old Host-galaxy Environment of SSS17a, the First Electromagnetic Counterpart to a Gravitational-wave Source (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9116) (DX)
The Distance to NGC 4993: The Host Galaxy of the Gravitational-wave Event GW170817 (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9110) (DX)
The Rapid Reddening and Featureless Optical Spectra of the Optical Counterpart of GW170817, AT 2017gfo, during the First Four Days (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9111) (DX)
Optical Follow-up of Gravitational-wave Events with Las Cumbres Observatory (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa910f) (DX)
A Neutron Star Binary Merger Model for GW170817/GRB 170817A/SSS17a (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa91b3) (DX)
Previously: European Southern Observatory to Announce "Unprecedented Discovery" on Monday
Original Submission #1 Original Submission #2 Original Submission #3
Related Stories
The European Southern Observatory (ESO) will announce an "unprecedented discovery" on Monday:
ESO will hold a press conference on 16 October 2017 at 16:00 CEST, at its Headquarters in Garching, Germany, to present groundbreaking observations of an astronomical phenomenon that has never been witnessed before.
[...] By registering for the conference, journalists agree to honour an embargo, details of which will be provided after registration, and not to publish or discuss any of the material presented before the start of the conference on 16 October 2017 at 16:00 CEST.
LEAK IT!
Update: The announcement will be related to gravitational waves, and may involve a neutron star collision, which would also be visible using optical methods.
Even small black holes emit gravitational waves when they collide, and LIGO heard them
LIGO scientists say they have discovered gravitational waves coming from another black hole merger, and it's the tiniest one they've ever seen.
The findings, submitted to the Astrophysical Journal Letters, could shed light on the diversity of the black hole population — and may help scientists figure out why larger black holes appear to behave a little differently from the smaller ones.
"Its mass makes it very interesting," said Salvatore Vitale, a data analyst and theorist with the LIGO Lab at MIT. The discovery, he added, "really starts populating more of this low-mass region that [until now] was quite empty."
The black holes had estimated masses of around 12 and 7 solar masses.
Related: LIGO May Have Detected Merging Neutron Stars for the First Time
First Joint Detection of Gravitational Waves by LIGO and Virgo
"Kilonova" Observed Using Gravitational Waves, Sparking Era of "Multimessenger Astrophysics"
Gravitational wave detectors could provide advance notice of seismic waves caused by powerful earthquakes (magnitude 8.5 and greater), allowing a little more time for people to evacuate (particularly at coastal regions that may be endangered by a tsunami):
Gravity signals that race through the ground at the speed of light could help seismologists get a better handle on the size of large, devastating quakes soon after they hit, a study suggests. The tiny changes in Earth's gravitational field, created when the ground shifts, arrive at seismic-monitoring stations well before seismic waves.
"The good thing we can do with these signals is have quick information on the magnitude of the quake," says Martin Vallée, a seismologist at the Paris Institute of Earth Physics.
Seismometers in China and South Korea picked up gravity signals immediately after the magnitude-9.1 Tohoku earthquake that devastated parts of Japan in 2011, Vallée and his colleagues report in Science on December 1. The signals appear as tiny accelerations on seismic-recording equipment, more than a minute before the seismic waves show up.
Observations and modeling of the elastogravity signals preceding direct seismic waves (DOI: 10.1126/science.aao0746) (DX)
Related: First Joint Detection of Gravitational Waves by LIGO and Virgo
The Nobel Physics Prize Has Been Awarded to 3 Scientists for Discoveries in Gravitational Waves
"Kilonova" Observed Using Gravitational Waves, Sparking Era of "Multimessenger Astrophysics"
Neutron-star merger yields new puzzle for astrophysicists
The afterglow from the distant neutron-star merger detected last August has continued to brighten – much to the surprise of astrophysicists studying the aftermath of the massive collision that took place about 138 million light years away and sent gravitational waves rippling through the universe.
New observations from NASA's orbiting Chandra X-ray Observatory, reported in Astrophysical Journal Letters, indicate that the gamma ray burst unleashed by the collision is more complex than scientists initially imagined.
"Usually when we see a short gamma-ray burst, the jet emission generated gets bright for a short time as it smashes into the surrounding medium – then fades as the system stops injecting energy into the outflow," says McGill University astrophysicist Daryl Haggard, whose research group led the new study. "This one is different; it's definitely not a simple, plain-Jane narrow jet."
Brightening X-Ray Emission from GW170817/GRB 170817A: Further Evidence for an Outflow (open, DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa4f3) (DX)
Previously: LIGO May Have Detected Merging Neutron Stars for the First Time
"Kilonova" Observed Using Gravitational Waves, Sparking Era of "Multimessenger Astrophysics"
Okay, Last Year's Kilonova Did Probably Create a Black Hole
In August of 2017 [open, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101] [DX], another major breakthrough occurred when the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) detected waves that were believed to be caused by a neutron star merger. Shortly thereafter, scientists at LIGO, Advanced Virgo, and the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope were able to determine where in the sky this event (known as a kilonova) occurred.
This source, known as GW170817/GRB, has been the target of many follow-up surveys since it was believed that the merge could have led to the formation of a black hole. According to a new study by a team that analyzed data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory since the event, scientists can now say with greater confidence that the merger created a new black hole in our galaxy.
[...] While the LIGO data provided astronomers with a good estimate of the resulting object's mass after the neutron stars merged (2.7 Solar Masses), this was not enough to determine what it had become. Essentially, this amount of mass meant that it was either the most massive neutron star ever found or the lowest-mass black hole ever found (the previous record holders being four or five Solar Masses).
Previously: "Kilonova" Observed Using Gravitational Waves, Sparking Era of "Multimessenger Astrophysics"
Neutron-Star Merger Grows Brighter
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 16 2017, @06:01PM (16 children)
I'm going to try and shrink the summary a bit.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 16 2017, @06:31PM (5 children)
Not done adding papers. There are at least 10. Adding to a spoiler block.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 16 2017, @06:54PM (4 children)
28 papers added to the summary and they are all open access.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday October 16 2017, @07:29PM
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday October 16 2017, @07:41PM
Awesome. Very appreciated :)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Monday October 16 2017, @08:41PM (1 child)
Well, looks like you had it picked nicely =)
Still, a proper earth like planet nearby or with an interesting atmosphere would have been nice too!
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 16 2017, @08:56PM
It will probably take the delayed JWST [soylentnews.org] to give us a good idea of what is in an exoplanet's atmosphere.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Funny) by bob_super on Monday October 16 2017, @06:45PM (5 children)
Follow the example: grab both parts of the summary, which are pretty dense, and let them collide, emit new material and positive energy, leaving behind a tiny black dot and a slash in the fabric of the internet.
(Score: 3, Funny) by LoRdTAW on Monday October 16 2017, @06:58PM (3 children)
That's how we got beta :-(
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Monday October 16 2017, @07:02PM (1 child)
But what amount of heavy elements got created in the process!
Some are even unstable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @11:52PM
Still waiting for them to decay and become regular right wingers instead of nutters.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @01:12AM
But from the decay of Beta we got Soylent
(Score: 3, Funny) by Phoenix666 on Monday October 16 2017, @07:10PM
My god. That's the question for the answer:
42
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Funny) by wonkey_monkey on Monday October 16 2017, @06:53PM (3 children)
Mostly harmless.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 16 2017, @07:02PM (2 children)
Yes, you are.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by Phoenix666 on Monday October 16 2017, @07:11PM (1 child)
No, no, he's onto something. What if we wrapped the whole thing up and soaked it in a cup of really, really hot tea?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @11:54PM
Existentially concrete crisis in 3, 2, 1...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @06:15PM (4 children)
What are those guys who doubted the LIGO data [soylentnews.org] saying now?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @06:48PM (3 children)
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c [iop.org]
You can look later in the paper and see this is a p-value. They really have to get someone on the authoring team who can properly interpret a p-value. It is embarrassing to watch this go on for one of the most highly funded and publicized science projects of my generation. They are leaving a pretty much permananet record that makes them look like fools here...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @07:08PM (1 child)
That they don't waste time with pedantry seems to correlate with the awesomeness of their data. And keep whining about mis-interpretation of p-values, as future observations with more detectors and better SNR roll in. This is not some medical study where p=5 % was achieved by massaging a spread-sheet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @07:15PM
Actually they waste tons of time on this, even devoting whole sections to it and putting in in the abstracts. I agree with you though, the p-value/significance stuff should be left out all together.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @07:11PM
Yep, maybe the line in the abstract could indicate a correct understanding due to use of "occurring" rather than "occurred", but right there we see clearly what they meant to say. That is an undeniable stats 101 error.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @07:23PM
That's my gold, keep your grubby paws off you dirty telescope geeks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @09:49PM (3 children)
Forget electromagnetic (radio, IR, visible, UV, X-ray, gamma, etc.) telescopes. We have lots of those already.
We need to get enough gravity wave detectors that we can make images. Scatter tens of thousands of the detectors all over the earth. Maybe put another ten thousand each on Mercury, our moon, and Mars. Put tens of thousands more in polar Sun orbits.
Maybe neutrinos are worth something too; better imaging would be nice.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday October 17 2017, @01:59AM (2 children)
Do you even get an "image" from gravitational waves? It seems like you get a blip that you can use to orient your telescopes. Not anything complicated like the "real-time" positions of the two neutron stars in the years before they collided.
Maybe if we made the detectors a trillion trillion times more sensitive we could pick up the location of Planet Nine. But by then it will have already been detected or disproven by optical telescopes.
What we need is better infrared telescopes [wikipedia.org], wide [wikipedia.org] field [wikipedia.org] telescopes [wikipedia.org], and starshades [nasa.gov] or gravitational lensing [airspacemag.com] (telescope placed at ~550 AU using the Sun as a lens to bend light). Those are the kind of telescopes that will image exoplanet atmospheres as well as dwarf planets in our solar system.
The gravitational wave detections from galaxies hundreds of millions of light years away will continue to happen and with a few more detectors we could locae the events without having to worry about most of the detectors being offline for maintenance. Identifying possible life forms or at least more exoplanets in a 100 light year sphere around Earth is a more pressing concern.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Tuesday October 17 2017, @06:27AM (1 child)
If you had lots of detectors, it might be possible to reconstruct enough of the wave to calculate an image from it. However the wavelengths of those detected gravitational waves are thousands of kilometers. Compare to the wavelength of visible light which is hundreds of nanometers. That is, the gravitational waves are about 13 orders of magnitude longer than light waves. Since the size required to get a certain resolution is proportional to the wavelength, this means that to get the same resolution as a measly 10cm optical telescope, you'd need gravitational detectors of diameter of about a billion kilometers. That's about the distance of Saturn to the Sun.
Sorry, you won't. Not just because of size and sensitivity issues. To see the gravitational waves generated by its orbiting, you'd have to be outside our solar system. And even then, at best you could only locate it to the size of its orbit. That is, you could tell which solar system it is in.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:34AM
Keep in mind also that these gravitational wave emitters are super dense. They are way too small for any structure to be resolved.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday October 17 2017, @05:21AM (6 children)
I'm busted flat until my driver goes to beta.
I was paid some up front, that would have been more than enough had my time estimate been even remotely accurate. I've been making a lot of progress but there are some serious bugs that I don't have the first clue about.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @05:24AM (1 child)
Try adding a GoFundMe, bitcoin wallet, or something.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:26AM
BEHOLD:
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @05:43AM (3 children)
Ickhhh... gofundme doesn't accept anonymous donations, does it?
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday October 17 2017, @07:28AM (2 children)
If you're worried about cash being stolen, send a money order. Those can be anonymous.
Michael Crawford
3008 NE Stapleton Rd
Vancouver, WA 98661
I Am Eternally In Your Debt.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @10:23AM (1 child)
As much as I like you, I don't want you to know my identity.
Might be a bit difficult from overseas, but I'll look into it.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday October 18 2017, @07:50PM
... international money orders.
I'm not sure but I do know that US postal money orders can be redeemed at foreign post offices.
If that's a hassle I'd be happy to get a bitcoin wallet. I want a wallet anyway.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Tuesday October 17 2017, @08:08AM (2 children)
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeassssssssseeee
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday October 17 2017, @08:25AM (1 child)
http://www.news.ucsb.edu/sites/www.news.ucsb.edu/files/styles/slideshow_image/public/slideshow_images/2017/SkyMap_detail_UCSB_hi%20res.jpg?itok=GKDFsz2I [ucsb.edu]
https://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1717d/ [spacetelescope.org]
https://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1717c/ [spacetelescope.org]
https://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1717a/ [spacetelescope.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Tuesday October 17 2017, @10:25AM
Thanks!
(Score: 4, Informative) by unauthorized on Tuesday October 17 2017, @09:28AM
The origin of heavy metal is stars, particularly those in the Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath constellations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @01:04PM
They saw an event in the LIGO data, great, that's interesting new data from a different view of the universe.
But what are they seeing?
Were the filter algorithms good enough to pick out the event from the background noise before they knew there was an event, or did the other observations cause them to look in more detail?
If the filters are tuned to see this event, how many other events also get through?
LIGO is an outstanding machine, but I'm not convinced that it's filters are sufficient to give reliable discrimination between true and false detections.
The good news is that these will only get better over time and the old data is always there to go back and look through.
As they improve the sensor network (noise floor and number of stations), LIGO is going to get better and better.
It may well be that these early events are only a taste of what LIGO will produce.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 17 2017, @01:14PM
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 [iop.org]
I see they rendered the background model invalid (again), so a significant deviation from it doesn't mean much. Honestly, from this I don't know what to think. I thought the multi-message signal would be convincing, I really did. At first it sounded good: Observe a GW then predict what other signals should show up. If they do show up when and where it was predicted, great looks like you've got it. But somehow once again they have given me an uncomfortable feeling.
The gamma ray burst (GRB) was detected first, then they went back into the LIGO data and found a candidate to match up to it. Apparently this candidate would not have been approved without having a coincident GRB (it would have been marked as background), since it was only triggered in one GW detector. This is not the process I expected.
The GW data should be used entirely on its own to tell the EM and GRB people where to look. It shouldn't have gone GRB -> GW + EM, not if we are trying to verify the instrument is functioning properly. The treatment of the GW signal should have been independent of the others.