NASA's IBEX Observations Pin Down Interstellar Magnetic Field (astronomynow.com) 26
An anonymous reader writes: Immediately after its 2008 launch, NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) spotted a curiosity in a thin slice of space: more particles streamed in through a long, skinny swath in the sky than anywhere else. Now, a new study uses IBEX data and simulations of the interstellar boundary to better describe space in our galactic neighborhood. The paper, published earlier this month in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, precisely determines the strength and direction of the magnetic field outside the heliosphere. Such information gives us a peek into the magnetic forces that dominate the galaxy beyond, teaching us more about our home in space. The new paper is based on one particular theory of the origin of the IBEX ribbon, in which the particles streaming in from the ribbon are actually solar material reflected back at us after a long journey to the edges of the Sun's magnetic boundaries.
Re:NASA (Score:4, Insightful)
Huh? What's with all the rude ACs on Slashdot this morning? The news isn't fake at all. In fact, here's the NASA article about it: http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-ibex-observations-pin-down-interstellar-magnetic-field [nasa.gov]
By the way, this is definitely very interesting. The conditions in our galactic neighborhood likely can have effects on Earth. The Solar System is passing through a dust cloud and there are denser clouds its path. That has an impact on the Sun's magnetic field and can cause it to shrink. One result of this would be more cosmic rays possibly reaching the Earth. Understanding the heliosphere definitely matters and is worth posting. And here's an article about the topic I just mentioned: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/23dec_voyager/ [nasa.gov]
I've always wondered, do people who post this stuff have accounts on here where they act civil and behave? Do they act like this in real life? The criticism of the article is completely unwarranted and is quite rude.
Re:NASA (Score:4, Interesting)
which would lead to more clouds and possibly rain... increasing the Earth's albedo and reflecting more solar energy back into space
Re: (Score:1)
Which still would not be enough to counteract climate change, because [a] clouds also trap heat near the Earth's surface, and [b] they don't cover 100% of the Earth's surface and CO2/H2O do. This has been pretty thoroughly investigated both as a response to climate contrarians and because it was something of a Hail-Mary loophole. Unfortunately all attempts to disprove AGW so far have failed.
Slightly closer to reality, having more cosmic rays reach earth would be good news for the Pierre Auger Observatory [wikipedia.org], w
Cannot take this seriously (Score:1)
The article does not even have a link to a reputable source like forbes.
NASA should fire their webmasters (Score:3, Insightful)
With no script, those pages are just a dark hole.
Sometimes, when I think there's a cool pic in there, I go for the source and dumpster-dive for some .jpg -- that works in most cases.
What happened to some informative, readable blurb and perhaps a pic or two? For those looking for, you know, some information? I don't give a flying fuck about "experience".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
With no electricity, my damn computer is just a brick.
Why aren't the PC manufacturers making mechanical computers? It's ridiculous that we need all this infrastructure just to read a few words on a screen.
Lara Silvertongue was right (Score:2)
tl,dr (Score:2)
made possible by the existence of magnetic fields elsewhere in the universe.
giyf (Score:1)
electric universe...
Re: (Score:2)
Galactic magnetic field (Score:1)
The European Space Agency (ESA) has done some magnetic field work on our own Milky Way [esa.int] from their Planck satellite.
Even more impressive [esa.int] is the polarized dust in our galaxy, showing directionality of magnetic fields.