The slowpoke pulsar sits in our galaxy, roughly 1,300 light-years away:
The newfound highly magnetic pulsar has a surprisingly long rotation period, which is challenging the theoretical understanding of these objects, researchers report May 30 in Nature Astronomy. Dubbed PSR J0901-4046, this pulsar sweeps its lighthouse-like radio beam past Earth about every 76 seconds — three times slower than the previous record holder.
[...] Further observations with MeerKAT revealed not only the pulsar's slow, steady radio beat — a measure of how fast it spins — but also another important detail: The rate at which the spin slows as the pulsar ages. And those two bits of info revealed something odd about this pulsar. According to theory, it should not be emitting radio waves. And yet, it is.
[...] A pulsar's rotation period and the slowdown of its spin relates to the strength of its magnetic field, which accelerates subatomic particles streaming from the star and, in turn, generates radio waves. Any neutron stars spinning as slowly as PSR J0901-4046 are in this stellar "graveyard" and shouldn't produce radio signals.
But "we just keep finding weirder and weirder pulsars that chip away at that understanding," says astrophysicist Maura McLaughlin of West Virginia University in Morgantown, who wasn't involved with this work.
[...] The astronomers also are altering their automated computer programs, which scan the radio data and flag intriguing signals, to look for these longer-duration spin periods — or even weirder and more mysterious neutron star phenomena. "The sweet thing about astronomy, for me, is what's out there waiting for us to find," Heywood says.
Journal Reference:
Caleb, M., Heywood, I., Rajwade, K. et al. Discovery of a radio-emitting neutron star with an ultra-long spin period of 76 s. Nat Astron (2022). DOI: 10.1038/s41550-022-01688-x
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 08 2022, @02:21AM (8 children)
The universe says fuck you to the boffins and their assumptions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 08 2022, @03:05AM (3 children)
Do you have a better way to learn? Didn't think so. Troll.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 08 2022, @04:33AM (2 children)
Yes, you are a troll.
I'm just responding to a clickbait headline.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Wednesday June 08 2022, @12:02PM (1 child)
> The universe says fuck you to the boffins and their assumptions.
> I'm just responding to a clickbait headline.
No, you are putting down "boffins" and your post is expressing an attitude in opposition to the scientific method itself. You're in the wrong place for that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 08 2022, @11:51PM
Thank you for elucidating what I didn't have mental energy for.
What you wrote, plus he did not offer a better method. "Scientific method" (not sure how I feel about that anyway) aside, the point is we only know what we know so far, and I think most scientists and researchers are doing amazing work, and building on what they've learned so far.
My take on the title and others similar: the universe probably has more for us to know than we even imagine, so be as open-minded to any and all new ideas. Science history is replete with stories of discoveries that broke the previous models and knowledge assumptions.
The only thing we can be sure of going forward: AC trolls will troll.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by janrinok on Wednesday June 08 2022, @05:58AM (3 children)
It isn't an 'assumption' - scientist have a working model which explains the phenomenon and, until now, the model and observations were in agreement.
The model may still be correct. There might be something different about this pulsar which requires a different model or, more likely, the model may simply be wrong because we do not yet understand the full mechanism of how pulsars emit radio waves.
But that is how we learn. We observe our environment and have to change our understanding to include what we actually observe.
The headline isn't, in my opinion, clickbait - but your definition of clickbait might not be the same as mine. I could have replaced 'Shouldn't Emit Radio Waves' with 'Does Not Correspond With Our Current Understanding of How These Radio Waves are Generated', but of course that wouldn't fit. You have full control of your mouse - if you click on things that you wished you hadn't there is not much I can do to help you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 08 2022, @07:17AM (2 children)
arguing a celestial object should have certain properties is like suggesting a swan should have white feathers.
All good, in theory, until you discover a continent with black swans.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Wednesday June 08 2022, @11:03AM (1 child)
So your problem is actually insufficient understanding of the English language.
From Merriam-Webster: [merriam-webster.com]
It was expected that such a slowly spinning neutron star should not emit radio waves.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Wednesday June 08 2022, @11:10AM
Err … I should have proofread before submitting. Of course in my paraphrasing, I should have written “would not” instead of “should not”.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.