The merged and improved (?) KIC 8462852 thread

[Dryson]

I have also read about KOI , Kepler Objects of Interest, that are far inside the the orbit of Earth even where the four or five planets all orbit so close to the KOI Sun that they almost collide.

The same could have been happening at KIC 8462 where possible gravitational interactions between the planets and KIC 8462 caused the dims to occur.

 

[Silvercrest]

How would gravitational interactions change the light that the star puts out?

 

[scotthm]

Then what caused the dims of KIC 8462852 then?

Everyone continues to say comets over and over again yet the recorded data does not prove comets.

Has it ever occurred to you that we don't have enough information to know, and that none of your posts has provided any pertinent information?

---------------

 

[Silvercrest]

When his version of Occam's Meat Cleaver allows "aliens" as an equal possibility, I'd have to say the answer is no.

 

[Dryson]

How would gravitational interactions change the light that the star puts out?

A star creates magnetic fields as do planets. Perhaps if a planet got close enough to KIC 8462 then the magnetic fields of both objects could interact in a manner to cause Compton Scattering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_scattering

When his version of Occam's Meat Cleaver allows "aliens" as an equal possibility, I'd have to say the answer is no.

And what you provided to the discussion? Nothing at all.

Here is a spreadsheet that I worked on last night for about six hours. It might not be precise but then again I haven't seen any other attempts.

https://www.facebook.com/641915669282915/photos/p.655736997900782/655736997900782/?type=3&theater

At day 140 the first major dim takes place. 119 days later at day 259 another dim takes place that is relatively the same as the dim at day 140. Mercury orbits our Sun every 88 days. The orbit of object 140 took 119 days which means a planet the size of Mercury or Venus could be orbiting KIC 8462 somewhere between the orbit of Mercury and Venus with the orbit being closer to Venus.

 

[Silvercrest]

The same could have been happening at KIC 8462 where possible gravitational interactions between the planets and KIC 8462 caused the dims to occur.

How would gravitational interactions change the light that the star puts out?

A star creates magnetic fields as do planets. Perhaps if a planet got close enough to KIC 8462 then the magnetic fields of both objects could interact in a manner to cause Compton Scattering.

Sorry, I was asking about your mention of gravitational interaction and you started going on about magnetic interaction instead. If you're going to spout gibberish, at least be consistent about it.

Has it ever occurred to you that we don't have enough information to know, and that none of your posts has provided any pertinent information?
---------------

When his version of Occam's Meat Cleaver allows "aliens" as an equal possibility, I'd have to say the answer is no.

And what you provided to the discussion? Nothing at all.

As scotthm has just pointed out, neither have you. Wild, unsupported speculation doesn't count as contributing. You're just throwing crap at the wall and hoping some of it sticks.

 

[Dryson]

Sorry, I was asking about your mention of gravitational interaction and you started going on about magnetic interaction instead. If you're going to spout gibberish, at least be consistent about it.




As scotthm has just pointed out, neither have you. Wild, unsupported speculation doesn't count as contributing. You're just throwing crap at the wall and hoping some of it sticks.

You are talking about yourself Silvercrest again as usual as throwing crap against the wall.

At day 140 the first major dim takes place. 119 days later at day 259 another dim takes place that is relatively the same as the dim at day 140. Mercury orbits our Sun every 88 days. The orbit of object 140 took 119 days which means a planet the size of Mercury or Venus could be orbiting KIC 8462 somewhere between the orbit of Mercury and Venus with the orbit being closer to Venus.

This is fact information taken from the charts showing the dims if KIC 8462.

A comparison between the first two dims of KIC are consistent with a planet the size of Venus to Mercury possibly causing the dims of KIC. The dims range at about half of .99% or .9950 a dim of .0050 that is .0050% from .01% or the same amount of dim caused by Earth when Earth transits across our Sun.

The problem with the planet issue is the transit time of being between 10 and 13 days which extremely slow for a planet that would cause a .0050 dim.

The discussion is not about you Silvercrest. Unless you can discuss the article I would suggest you don't.

 

[{ Emilia }]

The discussion is not about you Silvercrest.

No ad hominem attacks, please. Stick to discussing the content of the post, not the poster.

 

[Dryson]

Based on the Day 140 dim occurring again 119 days later and the dim being slight under .01% at .0050 and .0038 that the first dim more have been a planet the size of Mars with potential orbital bodies that might have caused the the smaller dims in between Day 140 and 259. Maybe even a possible small asteroid belt close to the planet at Day 140.

Comets are still out of the question because based on transit data and distances of Earth from the Sun comets even a large swarm would taken less time to orbit KIC due to the increase invelocity.

Another issue with comets is the sublimation of the coma. When the swarm of comets came into contact with solar radiation from KIC sublimation would have taken place before the comets transited KIC. Kepler should have been able to see the large swarm of comets due to the glow of the coma at a farther distance from KIC.

Also the smaller dims of KIC of .0015/.9985 are fast moving around KIC could not be comets either.

 

[Silvercrest]

Another issue with comets is the sublimation of the comets that created the coma would have been readily seen as the swarm of comets came close to KIC where the sublimation would have been noticeable long before a comet swarm came close to KIC that would have caused the sublimation to reflect light thus glowing. If the object was a large swarm then Kepler would have identified the large swarm whenever the swarm came into contact with solar radiation causing sublimation.

All you're saying here is that Kepler should have been able to see it. It was already established upthread that Kepler can't distinguish such things.

 

[Dryson]

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.ne...=a5ff8622f2a2a41c2cb57e3ddf533ecd&oe=5730970A

What is interesting is that the dims 2,3,5,6,8 and 10 on the KIC 8462 chart linked above all have the relatively same transit times of a little bit over a month's orbit around KIC 8462. This would make the object very fast moving. The first two dims 1 and 4 are relatively the same as well with slower transit times of 281.72 days which would put the object if it is a planet between the orbit of Venus and the Earth but closer to Earth and possibly in the Habitable Zone with the smaller dims being a smaller planet. Then from day 500 to day 1200 the objects are not present until Day 1200 where the Day 140 dim appears again very briefly. Perhaps between day 500 and 1200 the object D-140 was orbiting behind and too the side of KIC and then re-emerged on day 1200 on the other side of KIC 8462.

 

[Dryson]

I am still looking at comets in the background. The smaller dims of KIC that transit faster around KIC 8462 based on Kepler's law could not be comets as they have a very fast transit and orbit. Kepler states that the closer to a Sun an object is the faster it will orbit and transit. The smaller dims transiting as fast as they are and taking place at two times in between the larger dims starting at day 140 would be to close for comets. Not to mention a comet repeating the same orbit around a Sun as fast as the transits of KIC are has never been discovered as far I no of. The faster transits making two or three passes that close would have sublimated completely causing a much larger dim....so maybe the 15% dim was a comet that came close to KIC 8462 and caught in KICs orbit sublimated all of its mass at once causing the 15% dim to take place.

Gravitational lensing could also be responsible for the odd light dims of KIC as well. Perhaps there is another larger body between KIC 8462 and Earth that caused the lensing to occur which then caused the light of KIC to dim.

What about Solar Jumping? Solar Jumping is when a planet is close enough to its star that the magnetic fields will align between the star and planet where the star will lend an amount of solar energy comparable to the planets magnetic field thus increasing the light of the star by a fraction possibly.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Comets are still out of the question because based on transit data and distances of Earth from the Sun comets even a large swarm would taken less time to orbit KIC due to the increase invelocity.

Unless they were in a highly elliptical orbit with an apopsis closest to Earth.

Kepler should have been able to see the large swarm of comets due to the glow of the coma at a farther distance from KIC.

No. Even a large cometary coma would be far too dim to be viewed from this distance, especially when viewed from OUTSIDE the system where the coma and tail will both appear more as shadowed regions than illuminated ones.

Also the smaller dims of KIC of .0015/.9985 are fast moving around KIC could not be comets either.

They certainly could, if the comet was -- again -- in a highly elliptical orbit.

For the record, my understanding is that no comet in history has ever been detected in a circular orbit; eccentric orbits is sort of their thing. Planetssimals and largish asteroids are rarely found in such highly eccentric orbits mainly because such orbits tend to be highly unstable; the object either falls into the star, is ejected from the system, or stabilized into a circular orbit by interaction with other planets.

The only reason there are so many comets in such weird orbits is because there's more OF them.

I am still looking at comets in the background. The smaller dims of KIC that transit faster around KIC 8462 based on Kepler's law could not be comets as they have a very fast transit and orbit. Kepler states that the closer to a Sun an object is the faster it will orbit and transit.

This only applies to circular orbits. Again, to the best of my knowledge there is no record of any comet actually achieving a completely (or even mostly) circular orbit.

The faster transits making two or three passes that close would have sublimated completely causing a much larger dim

"Larger" than what? A smaller-than-expected object that sublimated completely could account for the exact same event.

OTOH, you're assuming the seperate events were all caused by the same objects. This is not something anyone has proposed. A "swarm" of comets means exactly that: a large number of separate bodies, each one responsible for a different drop in luminosity.

 

[Dryson]

Unless they were in a highly elliptical orbit with an apopsis closest to Earth.


No. Even a large cometary coma would be far too dim to be viewed from this distance, especially when viewed from OUTSIDE the system where the coma and tail will both appear more as shadowed regions than illuminated ones.


They certainly could, if the comet was -- again -- in a highly elliptical orbit.

For the record, my understanding is that no comet in history has ever been detected in a circular orbit; eccentric orbits is sort of their thing. Planetssimals and largish asteroids are rarely found in such highly eccentric orbits mainly because such orbits tend to be highly unstable; the object either falls into the star, is ejected from the system, or stabilized into a circular orbit by interaction with other planets.

The only reason there are so many comets in such weird orbits is because there's more OF them.


This only applies to circular orbits. Again, to the best of my knowledge there is no record of any comet actually achieving a completely (or even mostly) circular orbit.


"Larger" than what? A smaller-than-expected object that sublimated completely could account for the exact same event.

OTOH, you're assuming the seperate events were all caused by the same objects. This is not something anyone has proposed. A "swarm" of comets means exactly that: a large number of separate bodies, each one responsible for a different drop in luminosity.

This only applies to circular orbits. Again, to the best of my knowledge there is no record of any comet actually achieving a completely (or even mostly) circular orbit.

The transit data is suggesting that highly elliptical orbits did not take place.

On this chart I have outlined all of the major dims prior to the 15% dim and directly afterwards. I should probable go back and outline the events that took place right before the 15% as well.

https://www.facebook.com/641915669282915/photos/p.655736927900789/655736927900789/?type=3&theater

Dims #2,3,5,6,8 and 10 are all basically transiting the same, meaning that the object orbited KIC 8462 on average of 83.3333 days. How did I get this number? I divided 500 days by the number of transits made by the object that caused a similar dim of between .0015 to .0025. Mercury orbits our Sun in only 88 days and travels at velocity of 112,000 mph through space.

Comet 67p/Churyumov-Gerasimenko travels through space at 84,000 mph orbiting the Sun further than Mars and sometimes as close as Earth.

http://www.space.com/31932-comet-tails-comas-and-nuclei-oh-my.html

KIC 8462 is about 1.57 times larger than our own Sun (Jason Wright, et. al,? A late tale from the mouse who drives a teal mousy car?) The object would in my opinion based on the data have a velocity that is faster than Mercury as it takes five days less on average to orbit KIC 8462 which is larger than our Sun which might put the object closer in orbit around KIC 8462 and could be the same size as Mercury or could be smaller than Mercury.

Mercury speeds around the sun every 88 Earth days, traveling through space at nearly 112,000 mph (180,000 kph), faster than any other planet. Its oval-shaped orbit is highly elliptical, taking Mercury as close as 29 million miles (47 million km) and as far as 43 million miles (70 million km) from the sun.Nov 4, 2014.

Mercury has a highly elliptical oval shaped orbit.

My opinion for Object 2356810 is that it is a planet with a highly ellipitcal orbit similar to Mercury's, might be slightly smaller or the same size as Mercury but is traveling through space faster than Mercury is.

Like you mentioned Crazy E, Kepler probably wouldn't even be able to determine if the object was a comet. From what I have read about Kepler is that the mission has not yet discovered any comets but is geared towards finding exoplanets. Ruling out comets because none have been discovered by Kepler yet then the last two implications of KIC 8462 would either be planets or an alien civilization.

Planets will transit across a sun based an algorithm. The algorithm of KIC 8462 is strange because Object 235680 and the other objects prior to the 15% dim all have a regular and repeating variable that can be seen on the charts for KIC 8462 that should have continued across the entire time line that KIC 8462 was being monitored.

Another opinion that has not yet been discussed is that a cloud similar to our Oort Cloud could be orbiting KIC 8462 which the dims could have been caused by Kepler being in a chance alignment to catch comets from the KIC Oort Cloud, if it exists, passing between Kepler and KIC 8462. Which would be great because if such a cloud like Oort existed around KIC 8462 then the possibility of a planet similar to Earth might exist as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The transit data is suggesting that highly elliptical orbits did not take place.

Actually, the transit observations are inconsistent with anything BUT a highly elliptical orbit.

Dims #2,3,5,6,8 and 10 are all basically transiting the same, meaning that the object orbited KIC 8462 on average of 83.3333 days. How did I get this number? I divided 500 days by the number of transits made by the object that caused a similar dim of between .0015 to .0025...

Which would almost be a valid method if we knew for sure we were dealing with a SINGLE object. But we're not, we're dealing with what researchers describe as a "swarm" of comets. There's no reason to believe any two dimming events were caused by the same object.

So no, the "object" does NOT have an orbital period of 83 days. We're dealing with MULTIPLE objects with a much longer period; I would guess in the neighborhood of 80 years.

My opinion for Object 2356810 is that it is a planet with a highly ellipitcal orbit similar to Mercury's

A planet would be too small to account for these observations unless it was completely pulverized and distributed into a dust cloud several hundred million kilometers in diameter. In that case, it would very quickly be strewn across its orbit and form a ring or belt system, which would not be consistent with observations.

Like you mentioned Crazy E, Kepler probably wouldn't even be able to determine if the object was a comet.

And it didn't. The determination that it was a SWARM of comets was based on the observation of the dimming events: the timing of the transits and the lack of a strong infrared anomaly which ruled out normal protoplanetary debris and implied multiple objects in a very irregular/eccentric orbit. Comets fit that description extremely well, and very few other things do.

Another opinion that has not yet been discussed is that a cloud similar to our Oort Cloud could be orbiting KIC 8462 which the dims could have been caused by Kepler being in a chance alignment to catch comets from the KIC Oort Cloud, if it exists, passing between Kepler and KIC 8462.

The Oort clouds of hypothetical solar systems are too diffuse for that to be a factor; they're called "clouds" but really, the distance between any two particles in the Oort cloud is larger than the diameter of the entire solar system.

If anything, it would be something in OUR Oort cloud getting in the way. But the data isn't consistent with either of those theories.

 

[Dryson]

You just stated in an earlier comet that it could not possibly be comets because the distance is to far away to determine.

I highly doubt if the dims were created by comets.

On the light chart for KIC 8462 right before the 15% dim there are some rather interesting events.

All of the dims prior to the 15% dim reside within the .0090/.9990 region of causing a dim. Earth causes a .0900/.0100 dim of our Sun. That is huge difference in causing a change in the light curve of sun. Huge meaning that the objects were smaller than Earth and were still detected by Kepler. Comets would not have been detectable that far away.

The grouping also transits KIC extremely fast within .5 to 1 day about the same that Earth does. There was at least five dims close to another before the 15% dim took place that had orbits occuring at 20 days from the last dim to 10 days orbit in between each .0090/.9910 dim back up to 25 days with the last orbit period suddenly taking off and having a 150 day orbit. How does a group go from having ten day orbit periods and then to 150 days where only a single object is recorded at the 150 day orbit period?

 

[Dryson]

What is also interesting is prior to the 15% dim there are six "burps" or increase in the light from KIC 8462 within a 200 day time period starting at day 600 to around day 775. The 15% dim occurred at day 800. During the say 200 day time period seven dims took place at KIC 8462 mostly concentrated between at day 700 and between day 775.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You just stated in an earlier comet that it could not possibly be comets because the distance is to far away to determine.

No, I said you can't get a spectral reading from the comet's tail from this distance, not for a star as bright as Tabby's. Kepler also wouldn't be able to directly image the tail for the same reason. You can, on the other hand, work out the probably orbits of the object in question based on the light curve and an estimate of its diameter and opacity. With a 15% dim and the orbital characteristics observed, there aren't many things that it COULD be other than comets.

The grouping also transits KIC extremely fast within .5 to 1 day about the same that Earth does. There was at least five dims close to another before the 15% dim took place that had orbits occuring at 20 days from the last dim to 10 days orbit in between each .0090/.9910 dim back up to 25 days with the last orbit period suddenly taking off and having a 150 day orbit. How does a group go from having ten day orbit periods and then to 150 days where only a single object is recorded at the 150 day orbit period?

Simple answer: two different groups being detected on different obits.
Simpler answer: Like Schaeffer, you have chosen to throw additional observations into this discussion that don't actually have anything to do with the recorded dimming event. I've been looking for solid data on the half-percent dim and there doesn't seem to be any; even the Kepler team doesn't think it's relevant (one researcher thought they were probably sunspots).

 

[Dryson]

No, I said you can't get a spectral reading from the comet's tail from this distance, not for a star as bright as Tabby's. Kepler also wouldn't be able to directly image the tail for the same reason. You can, on the other hand, work out the probably orbits of the object in question based on the light curve and an estimate of its diameter and opacity. With a 15% dim and the orbital characteristics observed, there aren't many things that it COULD be other than comets.

You just said that you couldn't get spectral readings from a comet tail from this distance. Yet you say that the orbital characteristics are that of comets.

Comets causing a dim of up to 22% of KIC 8462's light would generate more than enough spectral data for Kepler to observe.


Simple answer: two different groups being detected on different obits.
Simpler answer: Like Schaeffer, you have chosen to throw additional observations into this discussion that don't actually have anything to do with the recorded dimming event. I've been looking for solid data on the half-percent dim and there doesn't seem to be any; even the Kepler team doesn't think it's relevant (one researcher thought they were probably sunspots).

You are still imposing Occam's Razor because it fits a belief that you want to perceive is correct.

Where is the link to the Kepler Team stating that they were probably sunspots?

If there were two different groups of comets near the 15% dim of KIC then because of their close approximation in transit times they would have grouped closely to the dim that took place 150 days after the last dim occurred before the 15% dim.

D(24) – 660 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 25 days
D(25) – 690 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 10 days
D(26) – 700 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 10 days
D(27) – 710 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 20 days
D(28) – 720 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 25 days
D(29) – 740 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 20 days
D(30) – 765 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 150 days
D(31) – 910 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 100 days
D(32) – 1010 .5 – 1 day b/tw Mercury and Sun .0090/.9910 85.5 days

This is data from the light charts of KIC 8462 right before the 15%.
Notice how closely the objects D24 to D29 are and then suddenly don't re-appear until 150 days at D30?

Comets don't simply orbit a sun for a certain amount of days and then get together and decide to move on. If these had been comets in an elliptical orbit around KIC 8462 then orbit and Transit would have been regular just like the data from the chart shows them to orbit and transit.

To confirm the fade was real, Schaefer went to Harvard to look at the original photographic plates and inspected them by eye for changes, a skill few astronomers possess these days. “Since no one uses photographic plates any more, it’s basically a lost art,” says Wright. “Schaefer is an expert at this stuff.”

So are you now going to dispute Jason Wright as throwing out additional observations as well as Schaefer of whom Jason has supported Schaefer in his claims?

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ain-weird-alien-megastructure-star-after-all/

 

[Silvercrest]

You are still imposing Occam's Razor because it fits a belief that you want to perceive is correct.

Occam's Razor has nothing to do with belief, only fact. It's is only intended to be brought in when multiple theories are equally valid and the evidence is equal. That situation doesn't remotely apply here, and neither does the term. Your misuse of "Occam's Meat Cleaver" (again) has just caused William of Occam to turn over in his grave.