|
![]() |
![]() |
by Jerry Bonnell For me, one of the compelling ironies borne of discoveries in astronomy over the past few decades is the contrast between the detection of planets outside our solar system, which has fueled speculations about life beyond Earth, and the discovery of perhaps the most violent, inhospitable events in the universe -- gamma-ray bursts -- which have fueled speculation about a conceivable end to life on Earth. Unlike the detection of extrasolar planets, for which astronomers were actively searching, the discovery of gamma-ray bursts -- sudden unpredictable flashes of high-energy photons coming from space -- was serendipitous. In the 1960s, the U.S. Air Force launched a series of satellites designed to verify the conditions of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, whose signatories, including the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, agreed not to test nuclear devices in the atmosphere or in space. Called Vela, from the Spanish verb velar ("to watch"), the satellites bore experimental detectors intended to give the U.S. a means to monitor nuclear bomb tests. In a 1973 publication, Ray Klebesadel, Ian Strong, and Roy Olson of the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory announced that Vela gamma-ray detectors had indeed picked up high-energy gamma-ray flashes -- but they originated not from Earth but from deep space.
Striking fear The BATSE results struck fear into the hearts of astrophysicists around the planet. Well, maybe not fear, but some did seem to experience symptoms of "ergophobia" (fear of energy). The concerns arose after it was realized that a startling but natural explanation of the bursters' random positions and observed brightness was that they were located in distant galaxies, themselves randomly distributed in our sky. Now, to be in galaxies far, far away and yet detectable on Earth, the burst sources, whatever they are, had to release truly enormous energies -- tremendous but distant explosions only faintly "heard." Instead of a nuclear bomb-sized hiccough from a nearby neutron star, such truly cosmological distances (i.e., in the billions of light-years) to the bursters seemed to require the sudden conversion of a significant fraction of a star with the mass of the sun into gamma rays a la Einstein's famous equation E=mc2. The idea of such extreme energies led many to search for other explanations of the BATSE results.
In addition to fading afterglows, prompt optical emission was actually detected while a gamma-ray burst was in progress in 1999. This first-ever visible light image of an ongoing gamma-ray burst was recorded by the automated Robotic Optical Transient Search Experiment (ROTSE-I) operating at Los Alamos, home of the original satellite-borne cosmic gamma-ray detectors. Impressively, if that burst had occurred in our own galaxy at a distance of about 3,000 light-years, the direct optical emission would momentarily have appeared to us at least as bright as the noonday sun. [To hear what it was like to discover the first optical counterpart of a gamma-ray burst, see One Astronomer's Universe.]
In the early 1990s, however, astrophysicists hotly debated the significance of the BATSE results, including the implied distances and energies. This debate led to thoughts of what would happen if a burst occurred in our galactic neighborhood. Wondering if any other lines of evidence might point toward such extreme postulated energies for gamma-ray bursts, for instance, Princeton University's Steve Thorsett, writing in the May 1995 Astrophysical Journal Letters, calculated some terrestrial consequences that might be expected if gamma-ray bursts really were at cosmological distances. He asked, what if such a burst occurred somewhere within our own galaxy, say only thousands of light-years away? Building on past researchers' descriptions of the consequences of a nearby supernova or exploding star, Thorsett outlined in general terms a disheartening scenario of a local gamma-ray burster firing its energetic photons at planet Earth. Regardless of the mechanism producing the burst, the intense flux of gamma rays would likely be stopped in the lower stratosphere by collisions with atmospheric nitrogen molecules. The molecules would break up and reform as nitric oxide and related compounds. (Hanging over cities today, nitric oxides are the brownish constituents of smog; they are also catalysts for the destruction of ozone.) Uncheerful brown skies and stratospheric ozone destruction would initially affect only the hemisphere facing the gamma-ray burst, but winds would soon spread the destruction worldwide. Continue: How much ozone would be destroyed? Photo credits
One Astronomer's Universe | A Bad Day in the Milky Way Catalogue of the Cosmos | Tour the Spectrum Resources | Transcript | Site Map | Death Star Home Search | Site Map | Previously Featured | Schedule | Feedback | Teachers | Shop Join Us/E-Mail | About NOVA | Editor's Picks | Watch NOVAs online | To print PBS Online | NOVA Online | WGBH © | Updated January 2002 |