This star has a secret – even better than 'alien megastructures'

KIC 8462852, also known as Tabby's star, has baffled scientists for more than a year and given rise to a popular 'alien megastructure' theory. The truth may be just as bizarre.

|
NASA/AP
An undated artist's concept provided by NASA shows the Keplar Spacecraft moving through space. Perplexing images of the distant star KIC 8462852 captured by Kepler have left scientists scratching their heads for the past year and a half. Now, scientists say they have an intriguing explanation.

When Yale researcher Tabetha Boyajian first focused on the star KIC 8462852 via the Kepler Space Telescope in September 2015, she didn't know what to make of it.

The lighting of the star was mysterious – it was far too dim for a star of its age and type, intermittently dipping in brightness. Theories around Tabby’s star, as it was nicknamed, quickly piled up, with some scientists attributing the atypical lighting to surrounding cosmic dust or nearby comets. But more excitable space enthusiasts predicted alien activity, arguing that only orbiting alien structures could block a star’s light so effectively.

The so-called alien megastructure hypothesis persisted longer than most extra-terrestrial-based theories, simply because scientists had few alternative ideas to explain the star's peculiar blinking – until now. And the latest theory is almost as intriguing as the alien hypothesis.

Dr. Boyajian and her team weren't the first to spot the star: it was actually discovered in 1890. But their questions about the star's light pattern – and the subsequent alien-related theories – made the star, well, something of a star.

“We’d never seen anything like this star,” Boyajian told the Atlantic in October 2015. “It was really weird. We thought it might be bad data or movement on the spacecraft, but everything checked out.” 

KIC 8462852's story became more intriguing in January 2016, New Scientist reports, when a comparison of the first image taken of Tabby's star, in 1890, with one taken in 1989 revealed that the star had dimmed 14 percent in the interim 100 years. And over one particularly confusing two-day period, the star dipped in brightness by 22 percent. 

Tabby’s star kept scientists scratching their heads all last year. Volatility in light patterns are typical for young stars, but KIC 8462852 is mature.

“The steady brightness change in KIC 8462852 is pretty astounding,” Ben Montet, a scientist at the California Institute of Technology, said in an October statement. “It is unprecedented for this type of star to slowly fade for years, and we don’t see anything else like it in the Kepler data.”

Now, a team of scientists from Columbia University and the University of California, Berkeley, say they have found a reasonable explanation to KIC 8462852’s strange lighting.  

“Following an initial suggestion by Wright & Sigurdsson, we propose that the secular dimming behavior is the result of the inspiral of a planetary body or bodies into KIC 8462852, which took place ~ 10-104 years ago (depending on the planet mass),” the three authors write in a study to be published Monday in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

“Gravitational energy released as the body inspirals into the outer layers of the star caused a temporary and unobserved brightening, from which the stellar flux is now returning to the quiescent state.”

In other words, KIC 8462852 ate a planet sometime in the past 10,000 years.

The theory goes like this:

If KIC 8462852 did eat a planet – which is extremely rare in the space world, unless a collision pushed the planet out of its orbit – the star’s brightness would increase for a short period of 200 to 10,000 years as it burned up the planet (short in star time, that is). But once the burning was complete, the star would go back to around its original level of brightness.

So we could be looking at KIC 8462852 during its post-planet digestion, as it dims back to normal, write the authors.

And KIC 8462852 could have been a messy eater, leaving crumbs – aka orbiting planet debris – that periodically block its light.

“This paper puts a merger scenario on the table in a credible way,” Jason Wright, an astronomist at Penn State University, tells New Scientist. “I think this moves it into the top tier of explanations.” 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to This star has a secret – even better than 'alien megastructures'
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2017/0113/This-star-has-a-secret-even-better-than-alien-megastructures
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe