Page 1 of 29 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 841

Thread: Fun Papers In Arxiv

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157

    Fun Papers In Arxiv

    I have been posting this same collection in Google+ every weekday. Those who read Fraser Cain's G+ already know this. In any case, I ask that if you want to discuss any of these, please start a separate new thread.

    From arXiv.org, November 7th, 2011


    There were quite a few good ones today. I skipped some about GeV and Tev looks at Blazars, because I've been over-reporting on these a bit lately. I also skipped an amusing one about the detectability of unpiloted spaceprobes from other stars in our solar system (#57). The ones I did pick are even cooler.


    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.0966 is a paper that takes a close look at the recent Type 1a SN in nearby M101. The availability of good quality (Hubble et. al.) images from pre- and immediately post explosion place very strong constraints on the type(s) of objects that could have been the progenator. Not that there has been MUCH doubt that it is White Dwarfs that turn into Type 1a SNs, but this paper pretty much nails it, allowing a small chance that it could be explained by a neutron star making a transition during a merger.


    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.0969 is a product of the Galaxy Zoo project which is crowd sourcing the catagorization of millions of galaxies from SDSS and other broad deep surveys. I like the GZ project. It is a fun useful way for interested amateurs to make useful contributions. In this case they look at the differences that lead to disk galaxies with bars vs. disk galaxies with bulges, and find that barred spirals have higher dark matter to baryonic matter ratios.


    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.0972 is a paper about massive Young Steller Objects forming at the edge of bubbles detected by Spitzer (i.e. old supernova remnats). This is not unexpected, but it confirms the idea of triggered star formation by SNs compressing gas and dust clouds.


    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.0994 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1137 are papers from Kepler data about Sun-like stars. The first is very short paper about astroseismology looking at stellar ring-tones ( ha ha I coined a term) to see how they compare on the inside to the Sun. The second is a look at Sun spots on other stars, and rotation rates. This gives a nice look at the range of various parameters within the subset of stars that are like the Sun spectrally and size-wise.


    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1157 is a math-heavy paper about Axions as dark matter. Now, with the apparent non-detection of ~100 GeV Neutralinos by CERN, I'm keeping my eye out for other forms that Dark Matter could come in. This paper's title suggested it might answer my biggest doubt about Axions (it didn't), which is that they have a proposed mass of about ten millionths of an electron Volt... how in this universe could they ever slow down enough to be gravitationally bound to a galaxy or galaxy cluster? Somewhere I think someone will write about how being Bose-Einstein particles enables them to lose energy and thermalize... but I didn't see that here.


    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1158 Frequent readers know I'm curious about neutron stars. This paper examines isolated neutron stars to tell us what we know and can know. It includes a few new graphs about the spin-down as they age, among other things. Very readable.
    Last edited by antoniseb; 2011-Nov-08 at 12:44 PM.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From arXiv.org, November 8th, 2011

    I'm a bit pressed for time today, so there could well be some really entertaining or enlightening papers I missed, but the ones I found are great (except for one whose claim to being interesting is its title).

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1234 is a paper about looking in IR at the location of GRB980425, which was incredibly nearby for a GRB, and happened 13 years ago, so the details of its environment can be seen more clearly now. The short version is that the GRB happened in unusually intense star-forming region near many Wolf-Rayet stars (massive helium burning stars that have already blown off their outer Hydrogen layers). The paper contributes to the mainstream belief that long GRBs come from so-called hypernovae (some images). Meanwhile: http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1393 is another paper using different instruments looking at different GRBs to come to the same conclusion ... including some observations about green-pea galaxies.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1259 is a paper with a cool name, but since it is about a numerical method would otherwise be a rare choice for me. It is about smoothed particle hydrodynamics, and comes with some nice images. In the end I did enjoy reading the paper as a snapshot of how certain kinds of things are being done today.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1539 is a paper about one of my favorite objects in the sky: *OJ287*. OJ287 is a little SMBH (only 25 times as massive as the one in the center of the Milky Way) in a twelve year very elliptical orbit around a big SMBH (about 4500 times as massive as ours). Now the paper is about using polarization angle data over an extended period of time to draw some conclusions about the jet angles and disk orientations of the two members. It is cool that we are extracting this kind of detail from this system. I expect that this system will be one of the more important testbeds for General Relativity and whatever comes next over the next fifty years or so. The more we know, the better.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1623 This paper is about a close look at some Giant stars that have about 100 to 1000 times as much Lithium in their atmospheres as is found in pristine intergalactic gas clouds. My first reactions was *what?* Lithium was made in the big bang aftermath, and only gets used up now... but this is not quite right, and this paper shows some models that explain this phenomenon.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1343 is a cool idea I wish I'd thought of. Some stars (perhaps our Sun, and perhaps only somewhat less massive stars will turn into white dwarfs made of Helium (not Carbon, Oxygen, and Neon) because they will never have enough mass to make the core start Helium-burning ... so, what happens to a big collection of almost pure alpha particles under pressure? They act like bosons, and can forms some strange condensates. This paper looks at the possible states of matter in such an environment.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    5,249
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1343 is a cool idea I wish I'd thought of. Some stars (perhaps our Sun, and perhaps only somewhat less massive stars will turn into white dwarfs made of Helium (not Carbon, Oxygen, and Neon) because they will never have enough mass to make the core start Helium-burning ... so, what happens to a big collection of almost pure alpha particles under pressure? They act like bosons, and can forms some strange condensates. This paper looks at the possible states of matter in such an environment.
    What part of this is the "cool idea" you wish you had thought of? The idea of Helium white dwarfs? Or the idea of studying the strange states of nearly pure alpha particles within? Or something else?

    I was recently speculating on the idea of starlifting a regular star into a white dwarf--as a possible core for a dark dyson sphere. My speculation was that it would be like a star with a throttle. Store the lifted hydrogen in the form of artificial gas planets, and drop them as desired into the white dwarf as desired to fuel the fire.

    I just assumed that starlifting could create a white dwarf, although I wasn't entirely sure whether a white dwarf made out of helium would work.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    Quote Originally Posted by IsaacKuo View Post
    What part of this is the "cool idea" you wish you had thought of? ... the idea of studying the strange states of nearly pure alpha particles within? ...
    The Bose-Einstein states. I knew about the existence of Helium White dwarfs before, but the BEC thing didn't hit till I read the abstract. I should have thought of it when I first heard about the HeWDs years ago.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,892
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1158 Frequent readers know I'm curious about neutron stars. This paper examines isolated neutron stars to tell us what we know and can know. It includes a few new graphs about the spin-down as they age, among other things. Very readable.
    Thanks, this one is really good. If you come across any more "summary" papers please add them!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    Quote Originally Posted by PraedSt View Post
    Thanks, this one is really good. If you come across any more "summary" papers please add them!
    Each day, I just grab the three to eight papers that catch me most. Many are summaries. Some explain something I'm having personal trouble understanding. Some cover (support, refute, or clarify) arguments the ATM folks are making. Some are just amusing. Some are about current events. I'm really watching for ones that make a big change in our understanding or methods... I find one of those every few weeks.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    549
    With more condensed matter physicists using the Maldecena holographic math to suggest additional phase transitions, maybe they will find that it is a phase transition that leads to star fusion ignition rather than looking for some non-symmetrical event to start the burning.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    Quote Originally Posted by borman View Post
    With more condensed matter physicists using the Maldecena holographic math to suggest additional phase transitions, maybe they will find that it is a phase transition that leads to star fusion ignition rather than looking for some non-symmetrical event to start the burning.
    Hi Borman, if you'd like to discuss any of these, please quote the one you're discussing, and start a new thread. Thanks in advance.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From November 9th, 2011

    Today there were a lot of interesting papers about non-gaussianity in the CMB, and other things observed or simulated in the very early universe. There were also a few about the Sun, a few about millisecond pulsars, a few about Gamma Ray observations and a few about alternatives/extensions to General Relativity. I didn't select any of those (except one about Gamma Ray polarization).

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1717 is a paper about cold gas in high velocity clouds as observed through absorption in quasar spectra and 21 cm radio work. This paper sets some new limits on the amount and distribution of common forms of cold baryonic matter in the local universe, and also looks at the mechanisms for how it is changing where it is with respect to galaxies. Interesting readable paper with graphs, which wouldn't have caught my eye except for recent interactions with someone who thinks cold baryonic matter can be most/all of the observed dark matter.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1720 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1721 are papers about "Radio Relics". I didn't know what Radio Relics are (excpet maybe Bob and Ray), so I looked. RRs are radio emissions resulting from interacting galactic clusters, and these are being observed with LOFAR and other long wavelength tools. The first paper runs through simulations trying to explain why these shocks only occur at the boundary of Clusters, and never at the center (nice images), and the second looks ahead to how many can possibly be observed by LOFAR (about 900 so far, and 2500 total in the future). These were interesting papers that didn't really impact my big picture of how things work, but did add a new small detail.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1735 is a paper about SN1987a... specifically about using the Hubble COS spectrograph to look at where the shock wave is hitting the surrounding medium (which is still presumed to be material blown off by the progenator star before exploding. The changing proportions of elements/isotopes that make up this (now) cold gas tell an interesting tale about the behavior of the star in the period before its explosion. There is still more to sort out, but this promises to tell us something new about pre-SN stars.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1779 did you know that there was a gamma ray polarimeter in the Japanese IKAROS solar sail demonstrator? I didn't until today. So this instrument observed the long burst GRB100826a about a year ago, and the results show that the polarization angle of the observed gamma rays (energies under one MeV) changed during the burst. This puts some interesting constraints on what mechanisms (still not known) could be creating these gamma rays in the path from the exploding object to us.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1813 The Keck Telescopes on top of the volcano in Hawaii can be used as an interferometer. This paper looks at a recent effort to use them to make images of nearby Young Stellar Objects (YSOs) in Infrared bands, using the interferometry to null out the central bright spot so as to observe the characteristics of the disks. The results allow interpreting the size and temperature of the grains in the disk at different distances from the star... which interests me as yet another snapshot in the planet-forming process. I'm hopeful that in my lifetime we'll observe some (small) rates of change in some of these forming systems.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1911 is a simulations paper (and some observations) looking at substructures in Dark Matter halos resulting from the ongoing mergers of small halos (dwarf galaxies) with the larger galaxy. This relates to something posted in arXiv a few weeks ago about substructure observed in a nearby dwarf galaxy that lead to some discussion about DM halos on an astronomy forum I'm connected to. The results of the paper were not a surprise, but it is nice to have greater detail in the overall picture.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,892
    If we find interesting ArXiv astronomy papers would you mind us posting them here? Or would you prefer a new thread? For example, I found a cool one proposing autonomous navigation using pulsars. It's upto you..

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    Quote Originally Posted by PraedSt View Post
    If we find interesting ArXiv astronomy papers would you mind us posting them here? Or would you prefer a new thread? For example, I found a cool one proposing autonomous navigation using pulsars. It's upto you..
    I'd prefer you do as Trinitree et al. are doing. Start a thread in the appropriate (usually this one) forum section, and say what you find interesting about it... in fact, if you see something interesting here, just copy out my little bit, and start a thread with that. This is just me collecting stuff from this days arXiv new entries.

    BTW, the pulsars thing sounds very cool. Please post it.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,892
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
    I'd prefer you do as Trinitree et al. are doing. Start a thread in the appropriate (usually this one) forum section, and say what you find interesting about it... in fact, if you see something interesting here, just copy out my little bit, and start a thread with that. This is just me collecting stuff from this days arXiv new entries.

    BTW, the pulsars thing sounds very cool. Please post it.
    That's fine. And I'll post the navigation/pulsars paper now, in the Space Exploration forum.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From November 10th, 2011

    There were quite a few papers about Cepheids (must have been a coordinated release), and quite a few papers about results from VERITAS (a dual atmospheric cherenkov telescope). I've covered these recently, so didn't pick more.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2044 is a paper about how the Milky Way compares to other spirals. It is a very quick readable paper that concludes that the Milky Way is similar to about 2% of the nearby spirals, and seems to have not had any major mergers to disturb it since the very early days of its initial formation.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2051 is a paper about two types of neutron stars, about which I saw a really bad science-journalism article yesterday. The paper makes sense, and the authors weren't confused between whats interesting, and what's background material (not surprisingly). In short, some neutron stars are the kind most of know about where an Iron core gets massive enough to collapse, and the other is a lighter version in which a Carbon, Oxygen, and Neon core is able to collapse. Both of these models have been theorized for some time. THIS paper looks at identifying them in the wild, and finds that NSs in close orbits with Be stars come in two very distinct populations: close round orbits and faster spin, vs. longer elliptical orbits and slower spin. The paper is easy to read.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2330 This paper's title was more intriguing than its contents. It is also about Be-NS xray binaries, but this paper looks at why we see so few Be-Black Hole xray binaries. We have observed 170 of these binaries in the MW, and the Magellanic Clouds combined (a surprising fraction are in the SMC), and the number of confirmed BHs is zero (the number of possible BHs is higher). This paper asks why we don't see the Be-BH xray binaries, and concludes that the Magellanic Clouds and the Milky Way must have had different star forming histories. I see this as a paper with interesting data, and no conclusion, but it gave me a solid sense of how rare this Be-collpsedObject system is, and some new things to watch for about the SMC.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.3571 After three easy-read papers, I took a look at an alternative gravity paper (some math involved). This paper is a survey about three new modifications to gravity that each could explain what we see as Dark Energy. There so many such theories, but this paper looks at the ones in which Gravity is a function of Torsion (such models have often been used for describing inflation). These use teleparallel gravity (Weitzenboch) as opposed to the usual curvature we think about in normal General Relativity. To be honest, I have some more work to do to really get this paper, but it was a fun foray into an interesting alternative.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2305 is a deeper look at another Dark Matter alternative... specifically gravitinos as generated via Q-balls in Affleck-Dine baryogenesis (a relatively hot model these days). This is looking (among other things) at how we can observe some of the things that suggest supersymmetry without needing 100GeV Neutralinos. This paper is part of my current effort to self-educate about DM alternatives, since I'd had most of my eggs in the Neutralino basket till now.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From November 11th, 2011

    Once again, it's Friday, and there are too many cool papers (oh woe is me ). Some that I'm skipping include: one that shows that WMAP data alone cannot detect gravitational lensing of the CMB; one that looks at the 3D structure of Saturn's E-ring; one that looks at Umbral Dots on the Sun, and loads of VHE Cosmic Ray studies. All stuff I normally read with enthusiasm. But today, I'm mostly looking at papers about evolved stars, and separately about SN1987a-like events, with a few special papers on other topics.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2334 is the paper about the Pristine Gas at z>3 you've been seeing science journalism articles about. Nothing too remarkable, since in this case the science writers weren't too far off, but I include it for easy reference.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2333 is about an old star (NSV11749) which gave off something that looked like a "very late thermal pulse", which *might* be a sign of this and similar stars being in very late stages of evolution, that involve convection bringing new material for the core to briefly fuse, resulting in a "born again star". Very readable.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2339 is a paper studying a particular white dwarf that went through a period of strong regular pulsations in 2006, while material is pouring in on it... The paper looks at the pulsations to try an see more about the inner conditions of this star, and better understand its outbursts. Easy reading.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2533 is a paper about a pre-planetary nebula in the LMC called SMP LMC 11. Pre-planetary nebulae are stuff pushed out of aging stars before the actual planetary nebulae (so called because it is round and can look like a planet to early telescope users, not because it makes planets). This particular PrePN has a rich diversity of organic molecules, and has some odd structural qualities as well. It helps to know some organic chemistry to read this.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2497 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2509 are papers by overlapping teams about the underbright supernovae similar to SN1987a (in the LMC). These relatively rare SNs seem to have Blue Supergiants as their progentators, and produce only a small amout of Ni56 to light up the resulting debris. I've read previous papers suggesting that this is because these SNs produce black holes that consume certain key parts of the stellar material, that neutron-star producing SNs don't. These papers don't dwell on such an idea, but instead look at what we do see.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2429 is a fun paper about Gravitational Lensing properties of a galaxy whose central black hole has merged with a second massive black hole with enough momentum to kick the resulting new black hole out of the center (as defined by the central concentration of dark matter) of the galaxy. The results would be quite detectable, and the authors include some drawing showing what kind of lensed geometries to look for.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2576 is a proposal for a mission. A few things caught my eye about this: one it is a proposal for a joint mission between NASA and the *Brazillian Space Agency* (go Brazil!), and that it is a Gravitational Wave detector mission, intended to be cheaper (only a billion dollars for NASA) than LISA, because it is in Geostationary orbit, as opposed to LISA's solar orbit. On the plus side, it should detect higer frequency waves than LISA (having a short measuring arm). I should note that LISA will be looking in a range that probably has more sources. Short and easy to read.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From November 14th, 2011

    Some cool papers today. One set I didn't look at but will if time presents itself to me on a silver platter later today (unlikely) are http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2731 and five immediately following. These are six papers looking at different aspects of IceCube and what it is finding, and where it is going. The other papers I skipped cover diverse topics most of which would hold my interest on a slow day.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2731 as most of you know, the Milky Way is a barred spiral galaxy. This paper is about the recent discovery of a hot new open cluster of stars at the one end of the bar. This location is behind a dust/gas cloud, so we observed this cluster in the infrared. Nice details about what was seen, and nice images of this new cluster.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2719 Wow! This paper is about models that might explain how GRBs release the energy (photons) we see during the short amount of time we see anything. It takes the turbulence model, and maps it very tightly to observations of bright (good statistics) GRBs from Swift. Generally, we believe that the long GRBs happen from a massive star collapsing, but the mechanism for how that turns into a gamma ray burst has so far involved a lot of hand-waving. Now there is one option that appears to give clarity and the ability to model it with numbers.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2726 One of the things that people trying to refute the concordance model of the Big Bang often point to is mature (extremely red) galaxies in early times. The basic aspect of their rhetoric is "how could there be a galaxy with only old stars only two billion years after the big bang?". This paper looks at 63,000 such galaxies. This paper finds that the time-frame for the formation of these galaxies is perfectly within reason (such galaxies had to have formed before z~4.7) but the authors' main purpose of writing the paper is also interesting: they conclude that most large galaxies formed first, not by bulk merger of small galaxies. This is one of the leading edge topics today, with evidence on both sides.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2802 is a paper about the tidal disruption of normal stars by Galactic Center black holes, and the subsequent jets. The math in the paper is supported by observations from Swift. No pictures.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2604, http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2613, and http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2835 are papers about Fermi-LAT observations looking for gammas from Neutralino (MSSM) and other possible DM particles bordering the standard model self-annihilation. Lots of graphs, which I found enlightening as to where we are, and the diversity of such plausible particles and what evidence we should be able to see from them.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From November 15th, 2011

    There were half-again as many papers today as usual, and yet I saw very little (nothing) about the D-Meson and CP violation. I was expecting *something*. There were quite a few papers about gas and protostars, and quite a few about AGNs. I mostly picked easy-reading material today.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2872 is a paper about Red Dwarfs, especially focused on whether we could live orbiting one. Given that if we live that long, we'll eventually have to move out when the Sun grows up, this is a fun paper.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2900 is a paper looking at whether Hyperons play an important role in Supernovae that collapse into black holes. This is an interesting topic to me mostly because I think of neutron stars near the limiting state of becoming black holes as a fascinating venue for understanding unEarthly forms of matter. Here's one such exploration.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2922 is about two GRBs that happened in the same place (as near as we can tell) eleven minutes apart. Was this a magnetar collapsing into a black hole? Was it a strong lensing event? Was it something else. Sherlock Holmes is still elimiinating everything it can't be. We don't know what it must be.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2969 "neutrinos can pass unperturbed through a light-year of lead...". Well, maybe *some* neutrinos. This paper is about the shadow the Moon leaves on IceCube, so evidently the Moon stops very high energy neutrinos quite detectably... Now, these neutrinos also have to go through at least six thousand miles of the Earth to get to IceCube, but the effect is obvious, and (nicely) shows the pointing accuracy of IceCube's detectors.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2989 I'm fascinated with what Gaia can tell us. This paper is about how it can give us a much better estimate of the mass of the Milky Way galaxy. Man, that probe is going to tell us so much stuff. We should plan to launch an even better version of it ASAP (maybe ten years from now).

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3191 is a paper looking at the overall spectrum of cosmic rays, and looking for fine details in the spectrum. The paper serves as a nice survey about what we know and predict about the high energy stuff zipping around the universe.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3269 Planetary Nebula can potentially tell us something about how certain classes of stars end their main-sequence lives. What exactly that is, we are still working out. Aside from that their main purpose seems to be being the beautiful flowers that attracts certain people to astronomy. This is a paper about the shape and morphology of PNs, and what new things we are learning about them.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    5,249
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2872 is a paper about Red Dwarfs, especially focused on whether we could live orbiting one. Given that if we live that long, we'll eventually have to move out when the Sun grows up, this is a fun paper.
    I read it as talking about habitability of planets for alien life. If we move out when the Sun grows up, we will do so in mobile space colonies--the potential habitability of any super-Earth planets wouldn't be relevant. But of course, the habitability of exoplanets is relevant to our search for evidence of alien life.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    Quote Originally Posted by IsaacKuo View Post
    I read it as talking about habitability of planets for alien life. ...
    My notes reflected some of my ancillary take-away, such as how red dwarf massive CMEs may or may not contribute to uninhabitability for us, long term. You are right that I should spend more time making sure the notes distinguish between the paper's primary message, and why I found it especially interesting.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,693
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
    From November 15th, 2011
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2969 "neutrinos can pass unperturbed through a light-year of lead...". Well, maybe *some* neutrinos. This paper is about the shadow the Moon leaves on IceCube, so evidently the Moon stops very high energy neutrinos quite detectably... Now, these neutrinos also have to go through at least six thousand miles of the Earth to get to IceCube, but the effect is obvious, and (nicely) shows the pointing accuracy of IceCube's detectors.
    Their lunar shadow is cast by the flux of cosmic-ray muons (normally a terrible contamination source for IceCube neutrino observations) rather than by neutrinos. It does provide a very nice assessment of the accuracy of their event-direction reconstruction in any case.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ocean Shores, Wa
    Posts
    5,271
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
    From November 15th, 2011

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.2969 "neutrinos can pass unperturbed through a light-year of lead...". Well, maybe *some* neutrinos. This paper is about the shadow the Moon leaves on IceCube, so evidently the Moon stops very high energy neutrinos quite detectably... Now, these neutrinos also have to go through at least six thousand miles of the Earth to get to IceCube, but the effect is obvious, and (nicely) shows the pointing accuracy of IceCube's detectors.
    There is a cool sketch of the array relative to the Eiffel tower. Is this the largest physical structure in the world?

    Also, is the resolution consistent with expectations?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From November 16th, 2011

    Yesterday had more papers than usual, today is back to normal. Of the papers I didn't select, there were quite a few about populations of galaxies, star formation in barred spirals, DM halos and subhalos, and about pulsars. The ones that caught my eye today mostly did so for quirky reasons.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3364 I spent quite a few hours on IceHunters looking for KBOs, so this description of a software resource to look for asteroids and other moving objects seems nice. They provide a URL to the tool, and it can search through 1.6 million images from the top class of telescope looking for your object(s). Handy resource.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3370 The geometry of the universe... how many times have I read that phrase, and just assumed it was a mildly constrained set of variables that maybe some day we will nail down better? (OK the CMB data from WMAP nails some of them down, but this is an independent test). This paper describes the first foray into using weak lensing of low mass clusters to assess the geometric parameters of the universe, and gives insight into how future work in this area can nail them down even tighter.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3484 is about my old favorite OJ287, the binary SMBHs. This paper looks at the observations of this pair in many wavelenths, from 2005 to 2010, and shows that this confirms General Relativity (over MoND and G=f(R) theories) to a greater level of precision.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3556 is a paper about the phase space (looking at not just location, but momentum) of local Dark Matter according to several similar models of what the DM might be, and possible impact on how we might be observing it. For me this paper gave me a good background on the different models of DM in the local space, and the presumptions of the velocity distributions with some concrete numbers. DM is a topic that lay people frequently want to discuss, and they start off with no clear picture of how it is distributed. This paper arms with with some good information.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3628 is about the cratering history on Lutetia ( a large asteroid imaged last year by Rosetta) - pictures at the end of the paper. This paper caught my eye not so much for the topic, but because Lutetia has been in the news lately a possibly being a relic of the event that created our Moon. The paper is an interesting forensic study of craters.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3577 is another paper selected in my quest to understand the non-SUSY alternatives to Dark Matter. In this case the authors have previously proposed that three anti-Up quarks should be able to form a stable particle with a charge of +2. By extension of certain models they believe there should also be a stable "technilepton" or "O particles" with a charge of -2, but that the +2 particles have a path to destruction, and the technileptons don't, resulting (perhaps) with specialized atoms of these heavy technileptons bound by coulomb forces to alpha particles, in what they call OHe atoms. OHe atoms would have their lowest absorption spectral features in the weak x-ray part of the spectrum, and could easily have gone unnoticed. For myself, I am dubious that even if O particles exist that there could possibly be enough alpha particles for this to be a major portion of the observed DM.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 17 November, 2011


    I'm pressed for time today, which may have made some more technical but great papers not really grab me. I've selected five this morning... all are easy reading.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3644 is about the fact that of all the massive O and B stars in our galaxy, one in five is a high-velocity runaway... something I didn't know. This paper demonstrates that one possible cause is if these stars are formed in relatively dense, relatively low-mass clusters.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3648 on the same theme, this paper looks at how dense clusters can result in some massive stars (pre-Wolf-Rayet stars for example) might collide and produce pair-instability supernovae (powered by electron-positron annihilation).

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3693 still on that dense cluster theme, this paper looks at the idea that the Sun was formed in a dense (1000-star) cluster (and ejected). The paper looks at isotope abundances, the structure of the Kuiper belt, the orbit of Sedna, and the possible disturbance of the outer planets as clues.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3742 is a paper about Massive Black Hole Binaries in the centers of merging galaxies (like OJ287). Once the black holes get close enough that they start radiating Gravitational Waves in significant enough volume, the system is well described in other papers. This paper looks at the time shortly before that during which the orbits are likely to be highly elliptical.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3868 looks at high energy output from M87, and looks at inverse-Compton scattering as a possible place to observe the expected double hump from Dark Matter self annihilation. Observations cited in this paper show this, but at such a low signal-to-noise level that observations with future instruments will be needed to clarify whether this is real.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 18 November 2011

    This is the last one for the week. Once again pressed for time, once again I have a short list. It is hard to characterize the ones I skipped. Interesting, but no real concentration in any one subject area. My first selection is *BIG* news.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4204 *Gaugino SUSY Particle observed at about 500 GeV* The paper is a little more cautious than I've been here, but the sense of it is that the first direct observation of Supersymmetric particles may have occured in the ATLAS detecter at CERN. Super symmetry is an extension of the standard model that *might* be connected to Dark Matter, and be the answer to some more subtle mysteries in particle physics experiments. The search for SUSY particles was one of the compelling reasons to have build the LHC in the first place. If this holds up, this is a serious toe-hold for climbing a new wall of physics.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3964 UHECRs (>10^20 eV) must come from someplace, but their mean free path through the universe must be short (on cosmic scales). This paper confirms that they can't come from the cores of AGNs, but shows that they CAN come from more distant parts of the radio lobes of those galaxies (more than 110 Kpc from the core)... and in fact don't have to be lobes from Active galaxies. Radio quiet galaxies can also do the job.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3976 Is about Axions. As my regular readers know, I'm trying to better understand Dark Matter alternatives to SUSY. My big gap in the Axion model is that I don't yet see how these super-low-mass (10^-6 eV) particles could have been formed, and yet slowed down to a few hundred miles per second, during the creation and aging so far of the universe. I think the thing Axion-model promoters must believe is that because they are Bosons, and very low mass, that they can form Bose-Einstein Condensates at very high energy, and get slowed down collectively. This paper's title gave me hope that it would tell me something on this front. This paper *might* have explained it, but I didn't follow all the assumptions. One thing this paper DOES do that was interesting, was make an observable distinction about the distribution of Dark Matter in galactic halos depending on whether DM is Axions or WIMPS.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3985 The r-process (r=rapid) is the process by which the nuclei heavier than Iron are built up during supernovae. It is why we have Gold, Lead, Uranium, and so many other heavy elements on this planet. r-process is something taught in beginning astrophysics classes. This paper looks at something they call *tr-process*, which is a truncated r-process... that is in some SN explosions, a black hole forms and the r-process doesn't go on as long as it would in a neutron star forming supernova. ... OK, but what is cool is that the authors look at the isotope abundances here, and show that some of the Supernovae that contributed to this solar system's matter must have been tr-process explosions. Details about their properties can be derived from what we see, and some more careful future work.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 21 November 2011

    Lots of papers about the Sun today (I selected one about the ATA). There were lots of papers about galaxy clusters and cosmic rays (I selected one about LOFAR). There were a number of papers about magnetic fields. Aside from that, it was a diverse group of papers today.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4320 is about giant molecular clouds in nearby M33. I point this paper out because there were a few popular articles about this late last week in the media.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4441 is about Tachyonic Majorana Neutrinos, and how this model compares well to the observations at OPERA. I still need to read this paper in detail, but it showed an explanation for something *I* thougth was odd in the latest OPERA results (i.e. that the delay wasn't constant, but varied from 20 to 100 ns).

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4009 is another paper about OJ287 (the binary massive black hole). This one caught my eye because it discusses *Jacobson's Miracle Hair-Growth Formula*, which is an amusing expression as related to black holes having scalar hair. This is a fairly math-heavy paper, which I bring up for a number of reasons, including a recent forum discussion I was part of having to do with merging black holes, and whether they have hair...

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4217 is a paper about constraining the properties of Warm Dark Matter by looking at M31 (Andromeda). This caught my attention as part of my personal effort to understand all of the proposed dark matter models. I have ignored WDM up till now, because, the idea that relativistic particles could form a halo around galaxies and clusters has seemed crazy... and so the whole 2 keV Sterile Neutrino thing made no sense to me. So I took a look finally. This paper looks for low energy xrays from the decay of these particles, but also gives a lot of insight into the many different models that include these particles, and what impact they might have in particle physics.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4208 is about using LOFAR to look for "cool cores" of galaxy clusters. Personally, I'm interested in LOFAR results, because until the SKA gets online, it is the only tool covering long wavelength astronomy with any kind of angular precision, but also "Cool Cores" for galaxy clusters is something that seems counter-intuitive at first... however, as it happens , the density of the intercluster medium near the center is probably high enough that you CAN get enough radiative cooling there that it can collapse and stream in to the central galaxy. This paper is about a look for effects from this phenomenon.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4242 is about using the Allen Telescope Array to look at the relatively quiet Sun. There are quite a few interesting images, and analysis. The paper looks at distinguishing Corona emissions from Cromosphere emissions, and identifying the various types of interactions in the corona.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 22 November 2011

    Today there are plenty of papers about molecules, about flaring stars, about tests for gravitational models, and dark energy models... many of which were hard to not take the time to read, but time is limited. Today I seemed to be attracted to dust, and Sun-like stars, and a few other things caught me as well.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4985 is a paper about using SDSS data to look at 73 million stars in the Milky Way, and determine how much dust is in our line of sight (using extinction) to each of these stars, and then produce a map of dust densities. The conclusion is that previous estimated are fairly good, but that parts of the Southern sky had been over-estimated by about 20%. One reason this relatively benign topic caught my interest is that I am frequently engaged in conversation by people who dislike the idea of non-baryonic dark matter, and cold dust is one frequent alternative they suggest. This refutes that argument clearly and methodically. This is a longish but easy-to-read paper with many charts and graphs.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4480 During the early part of a stars life there is some processes that result in creating a dusty disk that eventually forms planets. This paper observes the formation of crystaline silicates in the outer disk of young brown dwarfs compered to the inner disk, and sees a much higher amount of radial differentiation than in hotter (more massive) stars. These observations are important to increasing our understanding of both dust transport mechanisms, and to the formation of comets.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4615 The Kepler probe is looking at stars, and watching for very small changes in brightness. One purpose of the probe was to look for planets transiting across the face of stars, but in this study the data is being used for asteroseismological study of five Sun-like stars. The paper draws some conclusions about the low relative importance of metalicity on mass and luminosity... but the reason this caught my eye was that it provides a nice looks at the methods and models of asteroseismology, and the current limits of what can be learned from it.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4843 looks at when (in the history of the universe) did the metal-poor stars, that we see around the outskirts of our galaxy and elsewhere, form. This study was done by looking at the absoption spectra from high redshift quasars, using some of the worlds largest telescopes. The conclusion of the paper is that these stars mostly had formed at or before z=4.7 (one billion years after the Big Bang). The paper gives some good insight into the chronology of when the elements were created.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4527 SN2010bh was a type 1c supernova associated with a GRB. This paper compares this SN to other 1c events and shows that it was a low luminosity SN with a faster decay time than most... material came out of the blast at a higher velocity than usual, but there was less of it. The paper doesn't draw concrete conclusions as to why this is, but does point out the range of diversity in Type 1c SN. I find myself imagining that this event created a larger fraction of the stars mass as a black hole as the explanation, but realistically, the authors are right in noting what happened and waiting for more such events before drawing conclusions.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4589 I'll need to read this one later, after more caffeine. This is about Supersymmetry in the face of the LHC results. I feel like there are things in this paper I want to understand, but time constraints of my own are making me put off reading this one.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 23 November 2011


    I have a short list today. There were interesting looking papers about SN remnants, Wolf-Rayet stars, dusty disks around stars, UHECRs, tidal tails, various simulations, dark matter, and non-GR theories of gravity. But only a few abstracts made me look deeper:

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5011 Omega Centauri is either a giant globular cluster, or the remnent core of a dwarf galaxy striped by multiple interactions with the Milky Way. Either way, maybe it has an intermediate mass black hole near its center. This paper looks at the motion of stars near the center of the cluster and suggests that there is an IMBH with a mass of about 50,000 times the mass of the Sun. The paper uses statistical means, and does not show observations of specific stars in close orbit as we have for Sgr A*. Still, it is cool to find evidence. I look forward to future efforts to actually find it, and observe it.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5283 is a boring, straight-up paper about determining the orbit of an Earth-crossing asteroid discovered in 1994 based on images taken in 2011... boring except that the paper seems to have been written by a group of kids, who conclude the asteroid will not hit the Earth in 2056.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5102 I am interested in how things have changed during the age of the universe. This paper looks at the ultraviolet (in rest frame) spectra of galaxies from about z=4 to compare them with galaxies at more recent times (this is part of a larger study looking at various times from z=3 to z=7). One of the main efforts here is to look at the changing fraction of neutral gas to ionized gas in and near the galactic centers... and from z=3 back to z=4, there are differences, but more detailed research is required to establish what is making the difference.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5111 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5099 are papers about specific new techniques using deformable mirrors to blot out the light from specific stars to make it easier to see light from objects orbiting those stars. What caught me about this is just that in general I like knowing what observational tehniques are being used and invented. It helps me understand the limits of what we can observe today and in the near future. With Exoplanets being a hot topic, this is a very cool set of techniques. Sadly, both of these papers are math-heavy, with no images or diagrams... but my minds eye was a big help on that front.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 24 November 2011

    There are lots of papers about MagnetoHydrodynamics in the atmosphere and coronas of Sun-like stars (or specifically the Sun) today. There is also a set of papers about the jet in M87. I skipped a 34 page paper about Zero-Point Quantum Fluctuations whose title tickled my 'Stargate SG1' memories. The ones I did pick aren't turkeys, but they might have some tasty stuffing and side dishes.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5530 is a very cool paper looking at the long term Solar neutrino flux at the several neutrino detectors that have been at work for the last thirty or so years. The paper notes a quasi-periodic (roughly 26-month) variation in the p-p reaction which tells us something about the turbulance in the core of the Sun.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5373 is a paper looking at the relative speeds of Sun-like stars within a hundred parsecs of here as a function of the age and distance of the star, and demonstrates something you'd expect... that the older stars have a wider dispersion of velocities. It's nice to have supporting evidence.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5424 Dr. Abraham "five-papers-a-week" Loeb has done it again. He is co-author on such a wide range of interesting papers. Today, it is about photon trapping in new super-massive black holes. The basic issue is that we observe bright quasars at high redshift z>6, with implied higher mass than should be allowed by normal accretion rules... essentially the heat of accretion should be blasting away the accretion disk. Here Wyithe and Loeb show that for black holes over a thousand Solar masses, the diffusion path of the photons during high accretion allows the photons themselves to get accreted, and the above mentioned limits can be exceded by many orders of magnitude. Problem solved.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5515 is another paper anticipating the Gaia probe. In this case it is looking more closely at the shapes of spectral lines produced in the atmosphere of stars to identify potential biases, so as to avoid misidentification by Gaia.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5535 is about isolated neutron stars (we know about 24 so far). This paper is basically setting up a request for future use of the yet-unbuilt giant optical telescopes to look at the UV, Optical, and IR pulses from the isolated neutron stars. There are a number of physical details that can be established with such observations that will help is better understand neutron stars.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    New Haven, Connecticut
    Posts
    7,066
    I'd not call this paper particularly funny, but it is quite readable and very good advice for students, in general. Of course, grad students have already figured this out.

    Courtney, Michael, Althausen, Norm, Courtney, Amy, "Five Frequently Fatal Freshman Physics Fantasies,", arXivhysics/0605152v1 [physics.ed-ph], http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0605152
    Information about American English usage here and here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by swampyankee View Post
    I'd not call this paper particularly funny, but it is quite acne treatment reviewsreadable and very good advice for students, in general. Of course,السياحة فى تركيا grad students have already figured this out.

    Courtney,رحلات تركيا من مصر Michael, Althausen, Norm, Courtney, Amy, "Five Frequently Fatal Freshman Physics Fantasies,", arXivhysics/0605152v1 [physics.ed-ph], http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0605152
    i'm agree with u
    Last edited by shsh250; 2013-Aug-24 at 08:49 AM.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    20,157
    From 28 November, 2011

    Friday's arXiv Day off lead to a bumper-crop on Monday. It is hard to characterize the papers I skipped over, the subjects were cool and diverse. I suppose, that even more than most days, the topic is ideas and observations about how things form.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5613 is a paper looking at how *Gaia* results can be used to show us some details about how open clusters form and evolve by looking at the streams of stars from long-ago decomposed clusters. This is a topic somewhat interesting to me normally, but is here because of my all-things-Gaia project.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5621 is a paper about using Hubble's WFC to watch a the spectral lines as a Super-Earth (GJ1214b) transits its red-dwarf host star (GJ1214). The paper has a lot of if-this-then-that in it, but basically concludes that the atmosphere has been stripped of Molecular Hydrogen, Methane, and anything else lighter than water, and that the planet must have an opaque cloud layer at or above 100 millibars. The results are very conlusive, but this is the first paper I've seen looking at the atmosphere of a Super-Earth.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5806 is a paper about narrowing the population of potential GRB progenators. In this case they are looking at rapid-rotating Wolf-Rayet stars, and conclude that while this might be necessary, it is not sufficient by itself, and some other parameter needs to be constrained, e.g. Iron content of the star. This is interesting to me because we read so many disaster scenarios about how Eta Car, or Rho Cas might be nearby GRBs waiting to happen and kill us. This study shows that likelyhood is even lower than we thought.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5917 is a nice short readable paper about the mystery of how chondrules were formed in the early solar system... i.e. when did they get hot enough? This paper guesses that they were formed during the accretion of material into the protostar, and that disk winds were hot enough between 1 and 3 AU out to have melted the chondrules.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5987 is about using the VLT to spatially resolve te Carbon-Monoxide distribution in the atmosphere of a red giant (BK Virgo) as it changes in time. This interests me because, it is amazing to me that we have this kind of capability. The particular science and implication of the distribution of CO is not a big deal by itself, but it is a precursor to a larger ability with the upcoming class of telescopes to study a wider range of specifics in these inflated old stars... which I can only imagine will lead to an overall better understanding of stars in general, and how our Sun is changing.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6099 is a readable paper about looking at neutrinos coming from radioactive decay inside the Earth, as a way to determine how much of the energy (47 TeraWatts) coming out of the Earth as heat flow is being generated by this decay. This paper is only about the prospects we have for making such measurements, but it is very cool to think that this is within our grasp.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5661 Until now, I have looked at LISA, and other Gravitational wave detection efforts as another way to observe and measure things in the sky. This paper makes the case that we could also use them (especially pulsar timing arrays) as a means to narrow the contraints on post-Einstein theories of gravitation. The paper walks through how possible observations could distinguish between any of several types of alternative models... and also how to tell if GR is upheld again.
    Forming opinions as we speak

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2011-Dec-14, 05:28 PM
  2. Why does arXiv ban people?
    By Noble Ox in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 2009-Nov-15, 07:02 PM
  3. Something Strange Going on at arxiv.org
    By Celestial Mechanic in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2009-Jul-09, 01:33 PM
  4. Is anyone willing to support a BAUT member in arXiv?
    By john hunter in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2007-Aug-18, 10:28 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
here
The forum is sponsored in-part by: