Astronomers may have found giant alien 'megastructures' orbiting a star in the Milky Way

[Streetwind]

But then the parent body would be moving along its orbit around the Sun, and the orbiting body would not be able to occlude the same distant star more than once. So, less than infinitessimal probability - it's not physically possible at all.

In order to be possible, it would have to be an object independent of the Sun that is traveling in such a way around the center of our galaxy that a satellite it possesses repeatedly and perfectly obstructs the line of sight between the same two random stars more than 1250 light years apart for many years in succession.

... I'm tempted to say that even Occam's Razor would prefer aliens at that point of probability  

 

Edited May 23, 2017 by Streetwind

[Green Baron]

People are working on it, but no news yet.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/star-spurred-alien-theories-dims-again

 

 

[YNM]

Actually, I sincerely think this has more to do with the star itself. An occulting physical object the diameter of half an F-class star would be a star as well. Any "field" of such dimension would just collapse. A 3% area object... that's roughly one-sixth the diameter, must be glowing in some of the longer wavelength. That's too much in a system... well if it really is, it's OK, but I don't quite think so, thank you.

[1of6Billion]

1 hour ago, Streetwind said:

[snip]

... I'm tempted to say that even Occam's Razor would prefer aliens at that point of probability  

 

Never thought I would read thát in my life time

[Green Baron]

4 hours ago, monophonic said:

Likewise if a single something in the Oort cloud happened to orbit another something there with circa 2 year period. Infinitesimal probability?

A structured interstellar molecule cloud is proposed as well, it is actually not that improbable, at least more probable than aliens :-)

One day we'll know. Or those after us. Or not. Who knows :-)

[Spaceception]

@K^2 Didn't they rule out stars because they would've seen the infrared signature already? 

Unless it's an old one..

Adding to this!

What if it was a almost dead, cold brown dwarf that got captured, and destroyed a planet in/near the HZ, creating the dense Asteroid belt?

EDIT

Actually, that doesn't hold up either, I think they reported not seeing a wobble indicating brown dwarfs or anything larger. A captured, but extremely bloated/low density gas giant could be the answer, but again, it'd be a stretch. (I assume you already know this, I'm just laying out my thought process) A planet the size of Jupiter would block 1% for a sunlike star, this star's bigger than the sun, so to get  just a 1% dip, you would need a planet larger than Jupiter. The asteroid belt/destroyed planet thing could hold up, weird dips could indicate bits of light getting through, but wasn't there weird dips on the smaller dips as well? Large eccentric orbiting moons could explain it, but even still, it's unlikely. 

I mean, a Dyso- NO SPACECEPTION.

Edited May 23, 2017 by Spaceception

[Technical Ben]

Protoplanetary nebular of some sort?

[YNM]

24 minutes ago, Technical Ben said:

Protoplanetary nebular of some sort?

The whole thing would glow much, much brighter in IR, and the dips might show as a spike instead I presume...

 

I remember that someone once said to me (and I hold it) that a star's spectra is like it's fingerprint. Now it's really time to get a whole team of stellar forensic analyst into the scene...

[Scotius]

2 hours ago, YNM said:

Actually, I sincerely think this has more to do with the star itself. An occulting physical object the diameter of half an F-class star would be a star as well. Any "field" of such dimension would just collapse. A 3% area object... that's roughly one-sixth the diameter, must be glowing in some of the longer wavelength. That's too much in a system... well if it really is, it's OK, but I don't quite think so, thank you.

But what process or anomaly would change star's brighness so radically, without changing underlying properties of the star itself? And for all i found, aside from unexplained changes in luminosity Tabby's Star register as typical F - class obiect. It is not a young, dynamic star - nor a dying giant on the verge of collapse like Betelgeuse.

[magnemoe]

41 minutes ago, Scotius said:

But what process or anomaly would change star's brighness so radically, without changing underlying properties of the star itself? And for all i found, aside from unexplained changes in luminosity Tabby's Star register as typical F - class obiect. It is not a young, dynamic star - nor a dying giant on the verge of collapse like Betelgeuse.

Yes, weird if one average star is unlike all others we have seen. something weird in orbit makes more sense as it can easy be something very rare who we was lucky to spot since we study 300k stars. 

[Technical Ben]

2 hours ago, YNM said:

The whole thing would glow much, much brighter in IR, and the dips might show as a spike instead I presume...

 

I remember that someone once said to me (and I hold it) that a star's spectra is like it's fingerprint. Now it's really time to get a whole team of stellar forensic analyst into the scene...

Ah, ok then. It's some sort of Vampire Star. Eating away at it, orbiting close, but not circular, and thus wobbling the star and it's fuel all over the place.

[KAL 9000]

[YNM]

5 hours ago, Scotius said:

But what process or anomaly would change star's brighness so radically, without changing underlying properties of the star itself? And for all i found, aside from unexplained changes in luminosity Tabby's Star register as typical F - class obiect. It is not a young, dynamic star - nor a dying giant on the verge of collapse like Betelgeuse.

Well, I am unable to grasp any data for now. If I were in charge of trying anything on it, I'd do photometry and spectroscopy at the same time. But I suppose there's not enough interest, or I simply don't know whether they did. Maybe if someone can do it from their backyard...

What process ? I was thinking something like P Cygni - Ae/Be star. Maybe there's this precessing bulge that could "obscure" the light passing through, or something. It's just speculation.

 

4 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Yes, weird if one average star is unlike all others we have seen. something weird in orbit makes more sense as it can easy be something very rare who we was lucky to spot since we study 300k stars. 

Well, they weren't aware of white dwarfs as well until they double checked...

[TheEpicSquared]

If it is aliens...

 

Humans: "Woohoo we found aliens!"

Aliens:

"Woohoo the humans found us!"

[0111narwhalz]

I'm reminded of the OnOff star of Vinge's A Deepness in the Sky. Granted, it's only twenty percent instead of all and a few seconds every ~2 years instead of two centuries every three, but still.

[insert_name]

New study suggests a ringed planet with Trojan asteroids

http://www.iflscience.com/space/new-hypothesis-for-tabbys-star-suggests-a-ringed-planet-and-lots-of-asteroids/

[kerbiloid]

5 hours ago, insert_name said:

New study suggests a ringed planet with Trojan asteroids

http://www.iflscience.com/space/new-hypothesis-for-tabbys-star-suggests-a-ringed-planet-and-lots-of-asteroids/

Looks like two enormous asteroid clouds are tearing apart the tiny ringed gas giant with their gravity.

Spoiler

KIC is not enigma, it's just a life. The Game of Life.

 

Edited May 25, 2017 by kerbiloid

[magnemoe]

10 hours ago, 0111narwhalz said:

I'm reminded of the OnOff star of Vinge's A Deepness in the Sky. Granted, it's only twenty percent instead of all and a few seconds every ~2 years instead of two centuries every three, but still.

How should it work? Has read Deepness in the Sky but don't remember that star.

The huge planet / brown dwarf with an giant ring system and troyan cloud makes more sense.

[0111narwhalz]

18 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

How should it work? Has read Deepness in the Sky but don't remember that star.

Really? IIRC, it was a major plot point.

And a very mysterious one, at that. I don't think it was ever properly explained.

[Spaceception]

A 'planet' 170x the mass of Jupiter? That theory also crumbles, an object would need to be 75x Jupiter mass to become a star, this would be more than twice that, it would definitely make the star wobble, and we would be able to see its infrared and even its visible light signatures. 

[Scotius]

Pretty much my thoughts. If Jupiter with his four hefty Galilean moons and two Trojan groups can occlude only 1% of the Sun, similiar set-up able to cause 22% drop in the luminosity of the star would have to be colossal. Which means we would have little problem with detecting body so massive. Also, wouldn't dense cluster of asteroids with a mass comparable to a big gas giant collapse on itself forming a new planet or planets? I'm not an expert, but this theory seems... stretched to me.

[kerbiloid]

75-jup limit is for a hydrogen planet.

What if it's, say, carbon or iron remnants of a star. If they collapse into a 170-jup planet, unlikely the fusion could start,

(If the iron - unlikely it could start at all, with any mass).

Edited May 25, 2017 by kerbiloid

[Green Baron]

Iron is rock stable. Afaik elements heavier than iron are only produced in supernovae or, in a very narrow time scale, in some giants. That would be visible or the remnants detectable.

There are quite a few hypothesises, none is verifiable / disprovable right now because we only have the light curve and partial spectra. This is just not enough information to judge ...

 

Edit: leaving this here so that i do not always have to perform an extra search when looking for new information on the subject.

KIC 8462852

err, yeah ... that's all

 

Edited May 26, 2017 by Green Baron

[magnemoe]

5 hours ago, Scotius said:

Pretty much my thoughts. If Jupiter with his four hefty Galilean moons and two Trojan groups can occlude only 1% of the Sun, similiar set-up able to cause 22% drop in the luminosity of the star would have to be colossal. Which means we would have little problem with detecting body so massive. Also, wouldn't dense cluster of asteroids with a mass comparable to a big gas giant collapse on itself forming a new planet or planets? I'm not an expert, but this theory seems... stretched to me.

Agree, detectable wobble would put an upper limit on planet size, an giant ring and an giant trojan field is implausible but we can live with implausible. However it don't need to be an stable condition, then scanning hundred tousand of stars you will find weird stuff who just last some million years. 

[radonek]

Can somebody explain to me why it could not be two stars with same spectra occluding each other?