Connect with us


A repeating fast radio burst source localized to a nearby spiral galaxy –



  • 1.

    Lorimer, D. R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M. A., Narkevic, D. J. & Crawford, F. A bright millisecond radio burst of extragalactic origin. Science 318, 777–780 (2007).

  • 2.

    Petroff, E., Hessels, J. W. T. & Lorimer, D. R. Fast radio bursts. Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 27, 4 (2019).

  • 3.

    Platts, E. et al. A living theory catalogue for fast radio bursts. Phys. Rep. 821, 1–27 (2019).

  • 4.

    Spitler, L. G. et al. A repeating fast radio burst. Nature 531, 202–205 (2016).

  • 5.

    CHIME/FRB Collaboration. A second source of repeating fast radio bursts. Nature 566, 235–238 (2019).

  • 6.

    The CHIME/FRB Collaboration. CHIME/FRB discovery of eight new repeating fast radio burst sources. Astrophys. J. 885, L24 (2019).

  • 7.

    Kumar, P. et al. Faint repetitions from a bright fast radio burst source. Preprint at (2019).

  • 8.

    Petroff, E. et al. FRBCAT: The Fast Radio Burst Catalogue. Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust. 33, e045 (2016).

  • 9.

    Chatterjee, S. et al. A direct localization of a fast radio burst and its host. Nature 541, 58–61 (2017).

  • 10.

    Ravi, V. et al. A fast radio burst localized to a massive galaxy. Nature 572, 352–354 (2019).

  • 11.

    Bannister, K. W. et al. A single fast radio burst localized to a massive galaxy at cosmological distance. Science 365, 565–570 (2019).

  • 12.

    Prochaska, J. X. et al. The low density and magnetization of a massive galaxy halo exposed by a fast radio burst. Science 366, 231–234 (2019).

  • 13.

    Lazarus, P. et al. Prospects for high-precision pulsar timing with the new Effelsberg PSRIX backend. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 458, 868–880 (2016).

  • 14.

    Marcote, B. et al. The repeating fast radio burst FRB 121102 as seen on milliarcsecond angular scales. Astrophys. J. 834, L8 (2017).

  • 15.

    Alam, S. et al. The eleventh and twelfth data releases of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey: final data from SDSS-III. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 219, 12 (2015).

  • 16.

    Wright, E. L. A cosmology calculator for the world wide web. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif. 118, 1711–1715 (2006).

  • 17.

    Tendulkar, S. P. et al. The host galaxy and redshift of the repeating fast radio burst FRB 121102. Astrophys. J. 834, L7 (2017).

  • 18.

    Gusev, A. S. Hierarchy and size distribution function of star formation regions in the spiral galaxy NGC 628. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 442, 3711–3721 (2014).

  • 19.

    Metzger, B. D., Berger, E. & Margalit, B. Millisecond magnetar birth connects FRB 121102 to superluminous supernovae and long-duration gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. 841, 14 (2017).

  • 20.

    Guillochon, J., Parrent, J., Kelley, L. Z. & Margutti, R. An open catalog for supernova data. Astrophys. J. 835, 64 (2017).

  • 21.

    Michilli, D. et al. An extreme magneto-ionic environment associated with the fast radio burst source FRB 121102. Nature 553, 182–185 (2018).

  • 22.

    Margalit, B. & Metzger, B. D. A concordance picture of FRB 121102 as a flaring magnetar embedded in a magnetized ion-electron wind nebula. Astrophys. J. 868, L4 (2018).

  • 23.

    Metzger, B. D., Margalit, B. & Sironi, L. Fast radio bursts as synchrotron maser emission from decelerating relativistic blast waves. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 4091–4106 (2019).

  • 24.

    Ravi, V. The prevalence of repeating fast radio bursts. Nat. Astron. 3, 928–931 (2019).

  • 25.

    Margalit, B., Berger, E. & Metzger, B. D. Fast radio bursts from magnetars born in binary neutron star mergers and accretion induced collapse. Astrophys. J. 886, 110 (2019).

  • 26.

    Mahony, E. K. et al. A search for the host galaxy of FRB 171020. Astrophys. J. 867, L10 (2018).

  • 27.

    Bhandari, S. et al. The survey for pulsars and extragalactic radio bursts. II. New FRB discoveries and their follow-up. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 475, 1427–1446 (2018).

  • 28.

    Gourdji, K. et al. A sample of low-energy bursts from FRB 121102. Astrophys. J. 877, L19 (2019).

  • 29.

    Lyutikov, M. Fast radio bursts’ emission mechanism: implication from localization. Astrophys. J. 838, L13 (2017).

  • 30.

    Scholz, P. et al. The repeating fast radio burst FRB 121102: multi-wavelength observations and additional bursts. Astrophys. J. 833, 177 (2016).

  • 31.

    Scholz, P. et al. Simultaneous X-ray, gamma-ray, and radio observations of the repeating fast radio burst FRB 121102. Astrophys. J. 846, 80 (2017).

  • 32.

    Hardy, L. K. et al. A search for optical bursts from the repeating fast radio burst FRB 121102. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 472, 2800–2807 (2017).

  • 33.

    MAGIC Collaboration. Constraining very-high-energy and optical emission from FRB 121102 with the MAGIC telescopes. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 481, 2479–2486 (2018).

  • 34.

    Cordes, J. M. & McLaughlin, M. A. Searches for fast radio transients. Astrophys. J. 596, 1142–1154 (2003).

  • 35.

    CHIME/FRB Collaboration. The CHIME fast radio burst project: system overview. Astrophys. J. 863, 48 (2018).

  • 36.

    Keimpema, A. et al. The SFXC software correlator for very long baseline interferometry: algorithms and implementation. Exp. Astron. 39, 259–279 (2015).

  • 37.

    Greisen, E. W. AIPS, the VLA, and the VLBA. In Information Handling in Astronomy. Historical Vistas (ed. Heck, A.) Vol. 285, 109 (Astrophysics and Space Science Library, 2003).

  • 38.

    Shepherd, M. C., Pearson, T. J. & Taylor, G. B. DIFMAP: an interactive program for synthesis imaging. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 26, 987–989 (1994).

  • 39.

    Chatterjee, S. et al. Pulsar parallaxes at 5 GHz with the Very Long Baseline Array. Astrophys. J. 604, 339–345 (2004).

  • 40.

    Pradel, N., Charlot, P. & Lestrade, J. F. Astrometric accuracy of phase-referenced observations with the VLBA and EVN. Astron. Astrophys. 452, 1099–1106 (2006).

  • 41.

    Kirsten, F., Vlemmings, W., Campbell, R. M., Kramer, M. & Chatterjee, S. Revisiting the birth locations of pulsars B1929+10, B2020+28, and B2021+51. Astron. Astrophys. 577, A111 (2015).

  • 42.

    Ransom, S. M. New Search Techniques for Binary Pulsars. PhD thesis, Harvard Univ.…….123R/abstract (2001).

  • 43.

    Michilli, D. et al. Single-pulse classifier for the LOFAR tied-array all-sky survey. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 480, 3457–3467 (2018).

  • 44.

    Michilli, D. & Hessels, J. W. T. SpS: Single-pulse Searcher. Astrophys. Source Code Library 1806. 013 (2018).

  • 45.

    Hotan, A. W., van Straten, W. & Manchester, R. N. PSRCHIVE and PSRFITS: an open approach to radio pulsar data storage and analysis. Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust. 21, 302–309 (2004).

  • 46.

    Hessels, J. W. T. et al. FRB 121102 bursts show complex time-frequency structure. Astrophys. J. 876, L23 (2019).

  • 47.

    Law, C. J. et al. A multi-telescope campaign on FRB 121102: implications for the FRB population. Astrophys. J. 850, 76 (2017).

  • 48.

    Cordes, J. M., Weisberg, J. M. & Boriakoff, V. Small-scale electron density turbulence in the interstellar medium. Astrophys. J. 288, 221–247 (1985).

  • 49.

    Rickett, B. J. Radio propagation through the turbulent interstellar plasma. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 28, 561–605 (1990).

  • 50.

    Cordes, J. M. & Lazio, T. J. W. NE2001.I. A new model for the galactic distribution of free electrons and its fluctuations. Preprint at (2002).

  • 51.

    Fomalont, E. B. & Perley, R. A. Calibration and editing. In Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy II (eds Taylor, G. B., Carilli, C. L. & Perley, R. A.) Vol. 180, 79 (Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, 1999).

  • 52.

    Thompson, A. R. Fundamentals of Radio Interferometry. In Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy II (eds Taylor, G. B., Carilli, C. L. & Perley, R. A.) Vol. 180, 11 (Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, 1999).

  • 53.

    Natarajan, I. et al. Resolving the blazar CGRaBS J0809+5341 in the presence of telescope systematics. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 464, 4306–4317 (2017).

  • 54.

    Law, C. J. et al. realfast: real-time, commensal fast transient surveys with the Very Large Array. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 236, 8 (2018).

  • 55.

    Condon, J. J. et al. The NRAO VLA sky survey. Astron. J. 115, 1693–1716 (1998).

  • 56.

    Bertin, E. & Arnouts, S. SExtractor: software for source extraction. Astron. Astrophys. Suppl. Ser. 117, 393–404 (1996).

  • 57.

    Gaia Collaboration. Gaia Data Release 1. Summary of the astrometric, photometric, and survey properties. Astron. Astrophys. 595, A2 (2016).

  • 58.

    Gaia Collaboration. Gaia Data Release 2. Summary of the contents and survey properties. Astron. Astrophys. 616, A1 (2018).

  • 59.

    Jarrett, T. H. et al. Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): exploring the WISE web in G12. Astrophys. J. 836, 182 (2017).

  • 60.

    Kennicutt, J., Robert, C., Tamblyn, P. & Congdon, C. E. Past and future star formation in disk galaxies. Astrophys. J. 435, 22 (1994).

  • 61.

    Dopita, M. A., Kewley, L. J., Sutherland, R. S. & Nicholls, D. C. Chemical abundances in high-redshift galaxies: a powerful new emission line diagnostic. Astrophys. Space Sci. 361, 61 (2016).

  • 62.

    Faber, S. M. et al. Galaxy luminosity functions to z ~ 1 from DEEP2 and COMBO-17: implications for red galaxy formation. Astrophys. J. 665, 265–294 (2007).

  • 63.

    Blanton, M. R. et al. The galaxy luminosity function and luminosity density at redshift z = 0.1. Astrophys. J. 592, 819–838 (2003).

  • 64.

    Zhang, Y.-C. & Yang, X.-H. Size distribution of galaxies in SDSS DR7: weak dependence on halo environment. Res. Astron. Astrophys. 19, 006 (2019).

  • 65.

    Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N. & Wang, N. A new electron-density model for estimation of pulsar and FRB Distances. Astrophys. J. 835, 29 (2017).

  • 66.

    Yamasaki, S. & Totani, T. The galactic halo contribution to the dispersion measure of extragalactic fast radio bursts. Preprint at (2019).

  • 67.

    Inoue, S. Probing the cosmic reionization history and local environment of gamma-ray bursts through radio dispersion. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 348, 999–1008 (2004).

  • 68.

    Li, Y., Zhang, B., Nagamine, K. & Shi, J. The FRB 121102 host is atypical among nearby fast radio bursts. Astrophys. J. 884, L26 (2019).

  • 69.

    Lyubarsky, Y. A model for fast extragalactic radio bursts. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 442, L9–L13 (2014).

  • 70.

    Beloborodov, A. M. A flaring magnetar in FRB 121102? Astrophys. J. 843, L26 (2017).

  • 71.

    Zhang, B. A “cosmic comb” model of fast radio bursts. Astrophys. J. 836, L32 (2017).

  • 72.

    Zhang, B. FRB 121102: a repeatedly combed neutron star by a nearby low-luminosity accreting supermassive black hole. Astrophys. J. 854, L21 (2018).

  • 73.

    Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., Heisler, C. A. & Trevena, J. Theoretical modeling of starburst galaxies. Astrophys. J. 556, 121–140 (2001).

  • 74.

    Kewley, L. J. & Dopita, M. A. Using strong lines to estimate abundances in extragalactic H II regions and starburst galaxies. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 142, 35–52 (2002).

  • 75.

    Kauffmann, G. et al. The host galaxies of active galactic nuclei. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 346, 1055–1077 (2003).

  • 76.

    Loewenstein, M., Mushotzky, R. F., Angelini, L., Arnaud, K. A. & Quataert, E. Chandra limits on X-ray emission associated with the supermassive black holes in three giant elliptical galaxies. Astrophys. J. 555, L21–L24 (2001).

  • 77.

    Astropy Collaboration. Astropy: a community Python package for astronomy. Astron. Astrophys. 558, A33 (2013).

  • 78.

    Hunter, J. D. Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90–95 (2007).

  • Let’s block ads! (Why?)

    Source link

    Continue Reading


    Toward customizable timber, grown in a lab – EurekAlert



    image: In an effort to provide an environmentally friendly and low-waste alternative, researchers at MIT have pioneered a tunable technique to generate wood-like plant material in a lab.
    view more 

    Credit: Image courtesy of Luis Fernando Velásquez-García, Ashley Beckwith, et al

    Each year, the world loses about 10 million hectares of forest — an area about the size of Iceland — because of deforestation. At that rate, some scientists predict the world’s forests could disappear in 100 to 200 years.

    In an effort to provide an environmentally friendly and low-waste alternative, researchers at MIT have pioneered a tunable technique to generate wood-like plant material in a lab, which could enable someone to “grow” a wooden product like a table without needing to cut down trees, process lumber, etc.

    These researchers have now demonstrated that, by adjusting certain chemicals used during the growth process, they can precisely control the physical and mechanical properties of the resulting plant material, such as its stiffness and density.

    They also show that, using 3D bioprinting techniques, they can grow plant material in shapes, sizes, and forms that are not found in nature and that can’t be easily produced using traditional agricultural methods.

    “The idea is that you can grow these plant materials in exactly the shape that you need, so you don’t need to do any subtractive manufacturing after the fact, which reduces the amount of energy and waste. There is a lot of potential to expand this and grow three-dimensional structures,” says lead author Ashley Beckwith, a recent PhD graduate.

    Though still in its early days, this research demonstrates that lab-grown plant materials can be tuned to have specific characteristics, which could someday enable researchers to grow wood products with the exact features needed for a particular application, like high strength to support the walls of a house or certain thermal properties to more efficiently heat a room, explains senior author Luis Fernando Velásquez-García, a principal scientist in MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories.

    Joining Beckwith and Velásquez-García on the paper is Jeffrey Borenstein, a biomedical engineer and group leader at the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory. The research is published today in Materials Today.

    Planting cells

    To begin the process of growing plant material in the lab, the researchers first isolate cells from the leaves of young Zinnia elegans plants. The cells are cultured in liquid medium for two days, then transferred to a gel-based medium, which contains nutrients and two different hormones.

    Adjusting the hormone levels at this stage in the process enables researchers to tune the physical and mechanical properties of the plant cells that grow in that nutrient-rich broth.

    “In the human body, you have hormones that determine how your cells develop and how certain traits emerge. In the same way, by changing the hormone concentrations in the nutrient broth, the plant cells respond differently. Just by manipulating these tiny chemical quantities, we can elicit pretty dramatic changes in terms of the physical outcomes,” Beckwith says.

    In a way, these growing plant cells behave almost like stem cells — researchers can give them cues to tell them what to become, Velásquez-García adds.

    They use a 3D printer to extrude the cell culture gel solution into a specific structure in a petri dish, and let it incubate in the dark for three months. Even with this incubation period, the researchers’ process is about two orders of magnitude faster than the time it takes for a tree to grow to maturity, Velásquez-García says.

    Following incubation, the resulting cell-based material is dehydrated, and then the researchers evaluate its properties.

    Wood-like characteristics

    They found that lower hormone levels yielded plant materials with more rounded, open cells that have lower density, while higher hormone levels led to the growth of plant materials with smaller, denser cell structures. Higher hormone levels also yielded plant material that was stiffer; the researchers were able to grow plant material with a storage modulus (stiffness) similar to that of some natural woods.

    Another goal of this work is to study what is known as lignification in these lab-grown plant materials. Lignin is a polymer that is deposited in the cell walls of plants which makes them rigid and woody. They found that higher hormone levels in the growth medium causes more lignification, which would lead to plant material with more wood-like properties.

    The researchers also demonstrated that, using a 3D bioprinting process, the plant material can be grown in a custom shape and size. Rather than using a mold, the process involves the use of a customizable computer-aided design file that is fed to a 3D bioprinter, which deposits the cell gel culture into a specific shape. For instance, they were able to grow plant material in the shape of a tiny evergreen tree.

    Research of this kind is relatively new, Borenstein says.

    “This work demonstrates the power that a technology at the interface between engineering and biology can bring to bear on an environmental challenge, leveraging advances originally developed for health care applications,” he adds.

    The researchers also show that the cell cultures can survive and continue to grow for months after printing, and that using a thicker gel to produce thicker plant material structures does not impact the survival rate of the lab-grown cells.

    “Amenable to customization”

    “I think the real opportunity here is to be optimal with what you use and how you use it. If you want to create an object that is going to serve some purpose, there are mechanical expectations to consider. This process is really amenable to customization,” Velásquez-García says.

    Now that they have demonstrated the effective tunability of this technique, the researchers want to continue experimenting so they can better understand and control cellular development. They also want to explore how other chemical and genetic factors can direct the growth of the cells.

    They hope to evaluate how their method could be transferred to a new species. Zinnia plants don’t produce wood, but if this method were used to make a commercially important tree species, like pine, the process would need to be tailored to that species, Velásquez-García says.  

    Ultimately, he is hopeful this work can help to motivate other groups to dive into this area of research to help reduce deforestation.

    “Trees and forests are an amazing tool for helping us manage climate change, so being as strategic as we can with these resources will be a societal necessity going forward,” Beckwith adds.

    This research is funded, in part, by the Draper Scholars Program.


    Written by Adam Zewe, MIT News Office

    Additional background

    Paper: “Physical, mechanical, and microstructural characterization of novel, 3D-printable, tunable, lab-grown plant materials generated from Zinnia elegans cell cultures”

    Adblock test (Why?)

    Source link

    Continue Reading


    Crumbling comet could create meteor shower May 30 – Northern Daily News



    Article content

    A crumbling comet could create a meteor shower on May 30.

    Article content

    The ‘tau Herculids’ meteor display might be one of the most dramatic observed in over two decades, according to

    Meteor showers occur when dust or particles from asteroids or comets enter Earth’s atmosphere at a very high speed, the U.K. Sun explained.

    This one is expected to be the product of a comet named 73P/Schwassmann-Wachmann, also known as SW3.

    SW3 was first discovered in 1930 but did not reappear again until the 1970s, Republic World reported.

    In 1995, astronomers noticed that the comet’s nucleus split into four smaller chunks, according to CNET.

    It has continued to disintegrate more in the ensuing years.

    The display is expected to be very visible in the Northern Hemisphere as it is occurring on a Moon-less night.

    A consensus of experts predicts that the shower will be visible starting from 1 a.m. EST on May 31.

    It is suggested viewers will want to be outside at least an hour before this so your eyes have a chance to adjust to the dark.

    “The southwestern USA and Mexico are favored locations as the radiant, the area of the sky where these meteors come from, will be located highest in a dark sky,” Robert Lunsford wrote for AMS.

    “The outburst may be seen from southeastern Canada and the remainder of the (eastern) USA, but at a lower altitude.”

    Adblock test (Why?)

    Source link

    Continue Reading


    Boeing capsule lands back on Earth after space shakedown –



    Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft lands at White Sands Missile Range’s Space Harbor, Wednesday, May 25, 2022, in New Mexico. Credit: Bill Ingalls/NASA via AP

    Boeing’s crew taxi returned to Earth from the International Space Station on Wednesday, completing a repeat test flight before NASA astronauts climb aboard.

    It was a quick trip back: The Starliner capsule parachuted into the New Mexico desert just four hours after leaving the orbiting lab, with airbags attached to cushion the landing. Only a mannequin was buckled in.

    Aside from thruster failures and cooling system snags, Starliner appeared to clinch its high-stakes shakedown cruise, 2 1/2 years after its botched first try. Flight controllers in Houston applauded and cheered the bull’s-eye touchdown.

    “It’s great to have this incredible test flight behind us,” said Steve Stich, director of NASA’s commercial crew program. He described the demo as “extremely successful,” with all objectives met.

    Added Boeing’s Mark Nappi, a : “On a scale of one to 10, I think I’d give it a 15.”

    Based on these early results, NASA astronauts will strap in next for a trip to the , perhaps by year’s end. The has long wanted two competing U.S. companies ferrying astronauts, for added insurance as it drastically reduced its reliance on Russia for rides to and from the space station.

    Boeing capsule lands back on Earth after space shakedown
    Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft lands at White Sands Missile Range’s Space Harbor, Wednesday, May 25, 2022, in New Mexico. Credit: Bill Ingalls/NASA via AP

    Elon Musk’s SpaceX is already the established leader, launching astronauts since 2020 and even tourists. Its crew capsules splash down off the Florida coast, Boeing’s Starliner returns to the Army’s expansive and desolate White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.

    Boeing scrapped its first attempt to reach the space station in 2019, after software errors left the capsule in the wrong orbit and nearly doomed it. The company fixed the flaws and tried again last summer, but corroded valves halted the countdown. Following more repairs, Starliner finally lifted off from Cape Canaveral last Thursday and docked to the space station Friday.

    Station astronauts tested Starliner’s communication and computer systems during its five days at the space station. They also unloaded hundreds of pounds (kilograms) of groceries and other supplies that flew up in the Boeing capsule, then filled it with empty air tanks and other discarded gear.

    • Boeing capsule lands back on Earth after space shakedown
      In this infrared image from video made available by NASA, the Boeing Starliner capsule uses parachutes as it descends to land at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico on Wednesday, May 25, 2022. Credit: NASA via AP
    • Boeing capsule lands back on Earth after space shakedown
      In this image from video made available by NASA, the Boeing Starliner capsule, upper center, leaves the International Space Station on Wedndesday, May 25, 2022. At bottom foreground is a SpaceX Dragon capsule, still docked to the station. Credit: NASA via AP

    A folded U.S. flag sent up by Boeing stayed behind, to be retrieved by the first Starliner crew.

    “We’re a little sad to see her go,” station astronaut Bob Hines radioed as the capsule flew away.

    Along for the ride was Starliner’s test dummy—Rosie the Rocketeer, a takeoff on World War II’s Rosie the Riveter.

    The repairs and do-over cost Boeing nearly $600 million.

    Explore further

    Boeing docks crew capsule to space station in test do-over

    © 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    Boeing capsule lands back on Earth after space shakedown (2022, May 26)
    retrieved 26 May 2022

    This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
    part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

    Adblock test (Why?)

    Source link

    Continue Reading