The astounding discovery of a new enigmatic particle named Amaterasu

isp.today...

In an astounding discovery, the Telescope Array experiment recently detected the second-highest extreme-energy cosmic ray ever observed. This mind-boggling subatomic particle, christened the Amaterasu particle after the sun goddess in Japanese mythology, possesses an energy of 2.4 x 1020eV – equivalent to dropping a brick on your toe from waist height. This finding has left astrophysicists both intrigued and stumped, as it defies the limitations imposed by our understanding of cosmic rays

It's worth reading the following peer reviewed publication on the origin of the Amaterasu Particle

arxiv.org...

Title: Where Did the Amaterasu Particle Come From?

Abstract

The Telescope Array Collaboration recently reported the detection of a cosmic-ray particle, "Amaterasu", with an extremely high energy of 2.4×10^20 eV. Here we investigate its probable charge and the locus of its production. Interpreted as a primary iron nucleus or slightly stripped fragment, the event fits well within the existing paradigm for UHECR composition and spectrum. Using the most up-to-date modeling of the Galactic magnetic field strength and structure, and taking into account uncertainties, we identify the likely volume from which it originated. We estimate a localization uncertainty on the source direction of 6.6% of 4π or 2726 deg2. The uncertainty of magnetic deflections and the experimental energy uncertainties contribute about equally to the localization uncertainty. The maximum source distance is 8-50 Mpc, with the range reflecting the uncertainty on the energy assignment. We provide sky maps showing the localization region of the event and superimpose the location of galaxies of different types. There are no candidate sources among powerful radio galaxies. An origin in AGNs or star-forming galaxies is unlikely but cannot be completely ruled out without a more precise energy determination. The most straightforward option is that Amaterasu was created in a transient event in an otherwise undistinguished galaxy.

The name Amaterasu comes from the Japanese Mythology and refers to the Sun Goddess Amaterasu also known as the ruler of the heavens. A very interesting name given to the particle may I add.

To make it simpler this is nothing more than a very high energy comic ray, the second-highest extreme-energy cosmic ray ever observed with an energy of 2.4 × 10^20 eV and the source located anywhere between 8-50 Parsecs from us. For reference one parsec = 3.0857×10^ 16 metres or around 3.26 light years (distance travelled by light in one year).

The particle seems to be an iron nuclei travelling at a speed close to the speed of light with ultra high energy that cannot be explained by the conventional theories in astrophysics hence they pose a new challenge in understanding how they are produced. Usually cormic rays are produced by the Sun and other Stars, Supernovae, and black holes.

The source seemed to originate from what is known as the Local Void, an empty area of space bordering the Milky Way galaxy. Voids are areas with few galaxies.

The authors have ruled out that the particle's source is a powerful radio galaxy and they think Active Galactic Nuclei and star forming galaxies have very small chance of being the sources of this particle. Their conclusion is a transient event in an undistinguishable galaxy. But what transient event is this??

Interesting finding. Do you know anything about the sensors used in the telescope array? How do these telescopes work?

My mind goes back to the field trip days of grade school when we would go to the local high school that had a working planetarium and watch the rotation of the planets and such on the ceiling.

Looking at the moon and Jupiter with a telescope we would manually move to track them.

Back on track. What is the significance of this finding and how will it change our understanding of our universe? Do you think its an insignificant transient event in an indistinguishable galaxy?

Is this a "Rods From God" weapon shot from an unknown location that did it's damage and this is what we are finding such and such parsecs later?

my mind wonders. Thanks.

originally posted by: montybd
Interesting finding. Do you know anything about the sensors used in the telescope array? How do these telescopes work?

My mind goes back to the field trip days of grade school when we would go to the local high school that had a working planetarium and watch the rotation of the planets and such on the ceiling.

Looking at the moon and Jupiter with a telescope we would manually move to track them.

Back on track. What is the significance of this finding and how will it change our understanding of our universe? Do you think its an insignificant transient event in an indistinguishable galaxy?

Is this a "Rods From God" weapon shot from an unknown location that did it's damage and this is what we are finding such and such parsecs later?

my mind wonders. Thanks.

It's a very interesting finding because it shows us there might be other unknown sources emitting these types of subatomic particles, in this case a iron nucleus travelling at a speed close to the speed of light. Iron nuclei are quite heavy containing 56 nucleons or even more depending on the isotope you have. I think the lightest isotope is iron-54.

The main question is what is the source of emission? Another object that we don't know of or the usual suspects like stars, supernovae, black holes and AGN. These emissions seem to come from different regions in the sky which I think excludes the possibility of an artificial way of producing the cosmic rays.

a reply to: Venkuish1

Well it looks like the uncertainty’s line up.

We estimate a localization uncertainty on the source direction of 6.6% of 4π or 2726 deg2. The uncertainty of magnetic deflections and the experimental energy uncertainties contribute about equally to the localization uncertainty.

It's worth reading the following peer reviewed publication on the origin of the Amaterasu Particle

No thanks, I think I would rather watch the paint dry on the wall I have just decorated.

originally posted by: AllisVibration
a reply to: Venkuish1

Well it looks like the uncertainty’s line up.

We estimate a localization uncertainty on the source direction of 6.6% of 4π or 2726 deg2. The uncertainty of magnetic deflections and the experimental energy uncertainties contribute about equally to the localization uncertainty.

It's worth reading the following peer reviewed publication on the origin of the Amaterasu Particle

No thanks, I think I would rather watch the paint dry on the wall I have just decorated.

Nobody forces you to read scientific articles and papers but when you decide to do them you get a whole different idea of what science is and how discoveries and developments are made. Something very different to the dogma offered in the threads we have both participated elsewhere on this site.

a reply to: Venkuish1

Are you certain about that? I don’t think philosophy is dogmatic, if you read my replies in such threads you would know I’m not religious.

originally posted by: AllisVibration

No thanks, I think I would rather watch the paint dry on the wall I have just decorated.

Be careful since there is an uncertainty of exactly when that paint dries...

originally posted by: AllisVibration
a reply to: Venkuish1

Are you certain about that? I don’t think philosophy is dogmatic, if you read my replies in such threads you would know I’m not religious.

The philosophy of religion is dogmatic but that's the topic of other threads. You still have plenty of time to read the articles and papers I linked because it gives you a really good idea of why science is (uncertainties and unknowns are always part of the process)

a reply to: Venkuish1

Very interesting. Thanks for posting.

It's a good reminder that these types of discoveries are dependent on technology. Without the Telescope Array Collaboration we wouldn't know it's there. We're essentially blind without technology.

originally posted by: Phantom42338
a reply to: Venkuish1

Very interesting. Thanks for posting.

It's a good reminder that these types of discoveries are dependent on technology. Without the Telescope Array Collaboration we wouldn't know it's there. We're essentially blind without technology.

We definitely depend on technology and as our technology gets better and better our chances increase to make new and useful discoveries in all fields of science.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

It's a very interesting finding because it shows us there might be other unknown sources emitting these types of subatomic particles, in this case a iron nucleus travelling at a speed close to the speed of light. Iron nuclei are quite heavy containing 56 nucleons or even more depending on the isotope you have. I think the lightest isotope is iron-54.

The main question is what is the source of emission? Another object that we don't know of or the usual suspects like stars, supernovae, black holes and AGN. These emissions seem to come from different regions in the sky which I think excludes the possibility of an artificial way of producing the cosmic rays.

(total ignorance on the subject here) - are cosmic rays simply atomic nuclei of varying weights? Might we expect to see chlorine or sodium nuclei wandering around?


(N.B. the idea of dropping a brick on my toe, even from my unimpressive height, is cringe-inducing. Great example!0

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Venkuish1

It's a very interesting finding because it shows us there might be other unknown sources emitting these types of subatomic particles, in this case a iron nucleus travelling at a speed close to the speed of light. Iron nuclei are quite heavy containing 56 nucleons or even more depending on the isotope you have. I think the lightest isotope is iron-54.

The main question is what is the source of emission? Another object that we don't know of or the usual suspects like stars, supernovae, black holes and AGN. These emissions seem to come from different regions in the sky which I think excludes the possibility of an artificial way of producing the cosmic rays.

(total ignorance on the subject here) - are cosmic rays simply atomic nuclei of varying weights? Might we expect to see chlorine or sodium nuclei wandering around?


(N.B. the idea of dropping a brick on my toe, even from my unimpressive height, is cringe-inducing. Great example!0

What they’re made of. About 90% of them are hydrogen, 9% are helium, and 1% are heavier elements, like iron

news.uchicago.edu...#:~:text=Cosmic%20rays%20are%20particles%20from,and%20made%20harmless%20to%20humans.

Cosmic rays are high energy atomic nuclei (mainly protons) travelling close to the speed of light. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe so you expect most cosmic rays to be hydrogen nuclei (protons)

I can’t help but wonder what would happen if one were struck by one of these ultra-high powered rays. With the same relative kinetic energy as a brick dropped from waist height, it really makes me pause and think of once or twice in my life that I’ve just been walking along and felt a sudden invisible backhand. I’ve always written it off as a muscle spasm or rapid facilitation, but what if it WAS a dang Iron nuclei traveling at near relativistic speeds that managed to travel trillions of miles through interstellar space only to use my head as a speed bump?

We really do inhabit a peculiar time and place.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Venkuish1

It's a very interesting finding because it shows us there might be other unknown sources emitting these types of subatomic particles, in this case a iron nucleus travelling at a speed close to the speed of light. Iron nuclei are quite heavy containing 56 nucleons or even more depending on the isotope you have. I think the lightest isotope is iron-54.

The main question is what is the source of emission? Another object that we don't know of or the usual suspects like stars, supernovae, black holes and AGN. These emissions seem to come from different regions in the sky which I think excludes the possibility of an artificial way of producing the cosmic rays.

(total ignorance on the subject here) - are cosmic rays simply atomic nuclei of varying weights? Might we expect to see chlorine or sodium nuclei wandering around?


(N.B. the idea of dropping a brick on my toe, even from my unimpressive height, is cringe-inducing. Great example!0

What they’re made of. About 90% of them are hydrogen, 9% are helium, and 1% are heavier elements, like iron

news.uchicago.edu...#:~:text=Cosmic%20rays%20are%20particles%20from,and%20made%20harmless%20to%20humans.

Cosmic rays are high energy atomic nuclei (mainly protons) travelling close to the speed of light. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe so you expect most cosmic rays to be hydrogen nuclei (protons)

Ah. That's sort of what I thought I remembered... have a vague memory that iron is sort of the default "end of stellar evolution product" for nuclear fusion. So the iron nucleus would not be from an ordinary sun (out in the galaxy) but from a supernova??

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Venkuish1

It's a very interesting finding because it shows us there might be other unknown sources emitting these types of subatomic particles, in this case a iron nucleus travelling at a speed close to the speed of light. Iron nuclei are quite heavy containing 56 nucleons or even more depending on the isotope you have. I think the lightest isotope is iron-54.

The main question is what is the source of emission? Another object that we don't know of or the usual suspects like stars, supernovae, black holes and AGN. These emissions seem to come from different regions in the sky which I think excludes the possibility of an artificial way of producing the cosmic rays.

(total ignorance on the subject here) - are cosmic rays simply atomic nuclei of varying weights? Might we expect to see chlorine or sodium nuclei wandering around?


(N.B. the idea of dropping a brick on my toe, even from my unimpressive height, is cringe-inducing. Great example!0

What they’re made of. About 90% of them are hydrogen, 9% are helium, and 1% are heavier elements, like iron

news.uchicago.edu...#:~:text=Cosmic%20rays%20are%20particles%20from,and%20made%20harmless%20to%20humans.

Cosmic rays are high energy atomic nuclei (mainly protons) travelling close to the speed of light. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe so you expect most cosmic rays to be hydrogen nuclei (protons)

Ah. That's sort of what I thought I remembered... have a vague memory that iron is sort of the default "end of stellar evolution product" for nuclear fusion. So the iron nucleus would not be from an ordinary sun (out in the galaxy) but from a supernova??

Most likely from a supernova or a black hole but this specific very high energy cosmic ray seems to have come from a different source that the authors have called a transient event in an indistinguishable galaxy. They said it's very unlikely the source to be an AGN which means a supermassive black hole at the center of a galaxy and it's very unlikely the source to be star-forming galaxies.

a reply to: Venkuish1

The authors have ruled out that the particle's source is a powerful radio galaxy and they think Active Galactic Nuclei and star forming galaxies have very small chance of being the sources of this particle. Their conclusion is a transient event in an undistinguishable galaxy. But what transient event is this??

Maybe God or the One Intelligent Infinity just passing through and giving us a wave hello.

originally posted by: SchrodingersRat
a reply to: Venkuish1

The authors have ruled out that the particle's source is a powerful radio galaxy and they think Active Galactic Nuclei and star forming galaxies have very small chance of being the sources of this particle. Their conclusion is a transient event in an undistinguishable galaxy. But what transient event is this??

Maybe God or the One Intelligent Infinity just passing through and giving us a wave hello.

Supernatural forces are nowhere to be seen. They have never been present in any of the physical and biochemical processes. Just as I said in various threads all physical and biochemical processes have natural causes and there is not a single one having a supernatural cause.

originally posted by: FloridaManMatty
I can’t help but wonder what would happen if one were struck by one of these ultra-high powered rays. With the same relative kinetic energy as a brick dropped from waist height, it really makes me pause and think of once or twice in my life that I’ve just been walking along and felt a sudden invisible backhand. I’ve always written it off as a muscle spasm or rapid facilitation, but what if it WAS a dang Iron nuclei traveling at near relativistic speeds that managed to travel trillions of miles through interstellar space only to use my head as a speed bump?

We really do inhabit a peculiar time and place.

Most cosmic rays never make it and are blocked by earth's magnetic field and atmosphere. On some occasions they will hit particles in the atmosphere resulting in the creation of other particles that make it to the surface of our planet.