Record-breaking 'BOAT' gamma-ray burst managed to disturb Earth's atmosphere

News
By
published

It's named BOAT because it's "the Brightest Of All Time." It's also the first of its kind to affect our planet's upper ionosphere.

An illustration of the Earth as seen from our planet's orbit. A hot pink, bright beam seems to be hitting the hazy shield around the Earth. There are two satellites capturing the light as well.
The artistic impression depicts the effect of a powerful blast of gamma rays that provoked a significant disturbance in our planet’s ionosphere. (Image credit: ESA/ATG Europe; CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO)

Last year, on Oct. 9, scientists witnessed an anomaly in the sky. 

Sprouting from the darkness between stars, an abundance of deep space X-rays started to flood observatories. These signals appeared to be connected to an immensely bright event happening in our galaxy known as a gamma-ray burst (GRB) — an outpouring of highly energetic particles linked to things like star explosions and black hole births. But as one expert said, for instance, this GRB is to a standard one what a floodlight is to a lightbulb.

The event was dramatic enough at first blush. It was speculated to be the brightest GRB since the start of human civilization and exhibit photons that hold more energy than the Large Hadron Collider produces. In fact, it was even given a cheeky name to complement its formal title of GRB 221009A: BOAT, short for "Brightest Of All Time." But then, scientists realized something even more stunning about the BOAT. It didn't actually originate from the Milky Way. No, the BOAT came from a galaxy behind our own — or, in other words, the BOAT's brightness really cannot be overstated.

And now, on Tuesday (Nov. 14), researchers came out with a paper that starts answering one of the questions that's probably running through your mind: What does this super-bright GRB mean for us? 

According to the new study, it would appear the seven-minute-long burst (still detectable for 10 hours afterward) led to large "variations" in Earth's atmosphere. Most fascinatingly, those variations seemed to be found in our planet's upper ionosphere, the barrier between us and outer space. If true, this would mark the first time we have seen a GRB impact this region, the team says. "We’ve been measuring gamma-ray bursts since the 1960s, and this is the strongest ever measured," Pietro Ubertini of the National Institute for Astrophysics in Rome, a co-author of the new study, said in a statement.

Related: Largest known explosion since Big Bang has a unique jet structure

Why are these results important? Well, life on our planet depends on the stability of Earth's atmosphere. "There has been a great debate about the possible consequences of a gamma-ray burst in our own galaxy," study lead author Mirko Piersanti of the University of L'Aquila in Italy said in the statement. 

What do you mean by 'variations?'

Earth's atmosphere contains a few layers, and the ionosphere sits in the uppermost section, stretching between about 31 miles (50 kilometers) and 590 miles (950 km) in altitude. Anywhere above 217 miles (350 km) in altitude is considered the top half. And, importantly, all over the ionosphere lie charged particles, or ions. The new authors saw disturbances in that top half, at around 310 miles (500 km) in altitude. 

These disturbances/variations/perturbations the new study's researchers are talking about essentially refer to a change in the upper atmosphere's electric field. That means all those ionospheric charged particles are directly affected. Ionosphere disturbances like this are usually associated with energetic particle events originating from our own sun — but the BOAT's interference, scientists think, was the result of an exploding star sitting almost two billion light-years away. 

That's part of why everyone is so astounded by the fact that it impacted our planet's outer shell. 

"We can see things that are happening in deep space but are also affecting Earth," European Space Agency (ESA) Project Scientist, Erik Kuulkers, said in the statement. Statistically speaking, a GRB as bright as this should arrive at our planet just once every 10,000 years or so, ESA officials said.

And when it got here, this GRB activated lightning detectors in India, alerted instruments in Germany, sprayed evidence of its photon flux over Asia and parts of Australia and even cast a lingering afterglow.

The record-breaking GRB221009A gamma ray burst seen by the Gemini South telescope in Chile. (Image credit: Gemini Observatory/NOIRLab/NSF/AURA/B. O'Connor (UMD/GWU) & J. Rastinejad & W. Fong (Northwestern University))
Related Stories:

— This gamma-ray space mystery may finally be solved with new black hole simulations

— Brightest gamma-ray burst ever seen a 1-in-10,000-years event that's 'absolutely monstrous'

— A tiny Eastern European cubesat measured a monster gamma-ray burst better than NASA

For the new study, the researchers analyzed the BOAT with data from the China Seismo-Electromagnetic Satellite spacecraft (CSES) sitting in low Earth orbit, which is typically used to study how earthquakes switch things up in the ionosphere. This is how they found the results published today, though they used other tools to model their ultimate conclusions, such as ESA's Integral satellite. "We had looked for this effect from other GRBs in the past but had seen nothing," Ubertini said. 

"As far as we know, this GRB is among the largest ever detected," the authors wrote in the new paper. 

And, to be clear, BOAT affected some of the lower layers of the ionosphere as well. 

"Notably, this disturbance impacted the very lowest layers of Earth's ionosphere, situated just tens of kilometers above our planet's surface, leaving an imprint comparable to that of a major solar flare," Laura Hayes, an ESA solar physicist and co-author of a 2022 study on those lower ionosphere consequences, said in the statement. 

The brightest gamma-ray burst ever seen as observed by the Swift X-Ray Telescope around an hour after it erupted.  (Image credit: NASA/Swift/A. Beardmore (University of Leicester))

It's fine, we're fine

Though ESA says "analyzing the effects of the blast could provide information about the mass extinctions in Earth’s history," the team's paper doesn't quite suggest that an eruption like BOAT could bring about the end of humanity. Rather, this eruption could offer us some insight into what would happen if a nearby, actually threatening GRB impacted our planet.

In their new paper, for instance, the team writes, "being able to abruptly increase the atmospheric ionization, they might deplete stratospheric ozone on a global scale." 

The ozone layer can be thought of as Earth's sunscreen, protecting our planet's inhabitants from harmful ultraviolet rays emanating from the sun. If our bodies sop up too many of those rays, that can lead to things like an increased risk of cancer and cataracts. If plants are exposed to too much UV, many of them will die. 

But there's no need to panic just yet, as our ozone seems relatively fine (even the ozone hole is healing). Scientists, however, are interested in what a future GRB could do to us. This investigation is precisely what the new study's team has in mind. 

Meanwhile, other astronomers continue to look into the BOAT' cause. It's a slightly confusing one. The James Webb Space Telescope and Hubble Space Telescope teams, for instance, tried their hand at the matter, but the search came up empty, as neither could pinpoint the aftermath of a star explosion in the BOAT's patch of the cosmos. 

There's also a lot to study with those original BOAT X-ray signals, as the wavelengths had to travel across the vast expanse of space before reaching us, crossing through dust clouds and other phenomena out in the universe and picking up valuable information along the way — ready for humans to decode.

The study was published on Nov. 14 in the journal Nature Communications. 

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Monisha Ravisetti
Monisha Ravisetti
Astronomy Channel Editor

Monisha Ravisetti is Space.com's Astronomy Editor. She covers black holes, star explosions, gravitational waves, exoplanet discoveries and other enigmas hidden across the fabric of space and time. Previously, she was a science writer at CNET, and before that, reported for The Academic Times. Prior to becoming a writer, she was an immunology researcher at Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York. She graduated from New York University in 2018 with a B.A. in philosophy, physics and chemistry. She spends too much time playing online chess. Her favorite planet is Earth.

15 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Classical Motion
    With space expansion, wouldn't there be a distance at which, gamma light could not be detected? And another distance where x-rays could not be detected? And another distance where visible light could not be detected...........so with expanding space, all EM is shifted down. The expansion itself would shift and limit all detection with distance.

    We shouldn't be able to see gamma and x-ray from long distance. And if it is shifted down, x-ray and gamma don't have broad spectrum like light.......they are slotted spectrums, not broadband.

    And the article referred to gamma as particles, but they are EM emissions.
    Reply
  • billslugg
    Gamma rays can be considered as particles, as can all EM waves. All particles, Earth included, can be considered as waves. Wave particle duality was discovered by de Broglie who got the 1929 Nobel Prize in physics for it.

    All EM waves travel at c. At the distance where the recessional velocity due to the expansion of space equals c, we can no longer see the EM.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    To me, things that have similar properties does not imply that the things are the same thing. Especially even though having similar properties at the same time display dissimilar properties. Such as inertia. And locality. Positional change with isolation. Staying still long enough to be.....being.

    And to me, similar properties do not imply that things can change form and substance. Or alternate such.

    All particle duality means is that particles have an EM field around them, and interact thru that field. That's all. No mystery. There's nothing to ponder.

    As for the EM in space, wouldn't all EM emissions stretch down, before that point where light can not make it here? That's the way I understand it with the enormous red shifts.

    Was it not inflation that gave us low frequency GHz background. An unbelievable down shift. The observed expansion should do the same with distance. And if it truly does, those hard x-ray and gamma ought to have a precise spectrum of slots, not broad band pattern. Very easy to pick out. And from what I have read, if we can see gamma and x-ray from the start(13.8by), without that shift, then we will have to rethink the cause of that shift. And the expansion theory.

    Maybe you or others might know, what is the longest distance(and the longest time) for a gamma and x-ray emission, as far as we can tell? With energies similar to earth's x-rays and gammas?
    Reply
  • Qloop
    Classical Motion said:
    To me, things that have similar properties does not imply that the things are the same thing. Especially even though having similar properties at the same time display dissimilar properties. Such as inertia. And locality. Positional change with isolation. Staying still long enough to be.....being.

    And to me, similar properties do not imply that things can change form and substance. Or alternate such.

    All particle duality means is that particles have an EM field around them, and interact thru that field. That's all. No mystery. There's nothing to ponder.

    As for the EM in space, wouldn't all EM emissions stretch down, before that point where light can not make it here? That's the way I understand it with the enormous red shifts.

    Was it not inflation that gave us low frequency GHz background. An unbelievable down shift. The observed expansion should do the same with distance. And if it truly does, those hard x-ray and gamma ought to have a precise spectrum of slots, not broad band pattern. Very easy to pick out. And from what I have read, if we can see gamma and x-ray from the start(13.8by), without that shift, then we will have to rethink the cause of that shift. And the expansion theory.

    Maybe you or others might know, what is the longest distance(and the longest time) for a gamma and x-ray emission, as far as we can tell? With energies similar to earth's x-rays and gammas?
    The cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) was emitted when the universe was filled with a plasma that cooled enough to shift from opaque to transparent. Roughly 3000K. Basically, space looked like the surface of the Sun before then; that "surface" is the temp where the plasma becomes opaque. The universe was about 379,000 years old (roughly) when that transition happened.

    Inflation started and ended in an extremely tiny fraction of part of the first second of the universe.

    Expansion has been ongoing since then, possibly speeding up a bit in the most recent 8 billion years. That speed up is described as dark energy. The amount of energy involved in forcing the entirety of the universe's spacetime continuum to expand is, of course, immense. (We don't see it; hence the label "dark" in "dark energy", "dark matter", and in a bygone era, the "dark side of the moon").

    The microwave background is also black body radiation. It is closer to the idealized curve of black body radiation than any other measurement. That matches theory.
    Reply
  • Qloop
    Qloop said:
    The cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) was emitted when the universe was filled with a plasma that cooled enough to shift from opaque to transparent. Roughly 3000K. Basically, space looked like the surface of the Sun before then; that "surface" is the temp where the plasma becomes opaque. The universe was about 379,000 years old (roughly) when that transition happened.

    Inflation started and ended in an extremely tiny fraction of part of the first second of the universe.

    Expansion has been ongoing since then, possibly speeding up a bit in the most recent 8 billion years. That speed up is described as dark energy. The amount of energy involved in forcing the entirety of the universe's spacetime continuum to expand is, of course, immense. (We don't see it; hence the label "dark" in "dark energy", "dark matter", and in a bygone era, the "dark side of the moon").

    The microwave background is also black body radiation. It is closer to the idealized curve of black body radiation than any other measurement. That matches theory.
    Qloop said:
    The cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) was emitted when the universe was filled with a plasma that cooled enough to shift from opaque to transparent. Roughly 3000K. Basically, space looked like the surface of the Sun before then; that "surface" is the temp where the plasma becomes opaque. The universe was about 379,000 years old (roughly) when that transition happened.

    Inflation started and ended in an extremely tiny fraction of part of the first second of the universe.

    Expansion has been ongoing since then, possibly speeding up a bit in the most recent 8 billion years. That speed up is described as dark energy. The amount of energy involved in forcing the entirety of the universe's spacetime continuum to expand is, of course, immense. (We don't see it; hence the label "dark" in "dark energy", "dark matter", and in a bygone era, the "dark side of the moon").

    The microwave background is also black body radiation. It is closer to the idealized curve of black body radiation than any other measurement. That matches theory.
    For some reason this reminds me... the cooling off, by itself, would indicate that the universe itself was expanding. If the universe were not expanding, it never would have cooled.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    I am by no means an expert on x-ray and gamma detection. I worked with low frequency radio. But I assume we detect xray and gamma indirectly. I don't believe we are capable of using it electronically like radio. Being able to tune to, filter and emit specific frequencies. Like GHz radio. I'm guessing we use heat or energy reactive sensors for it. Perhaps ionization.

    Hard xray and gamma emission should be similar to laser emission, except for direction. The direction would be isotropic like light......but just one or possibly two colors per emission. Colors that we can not see. And still a flux, like laser light. Hard xray and gamma should be monopole emissions, without the analog bandwidth, that comes from oscillation. i.e......the emissions should have discrete frequencies. Quantum emissions......which are DC emissions. Rotational emissions. These frequencies are super duper high.....and would require much more shift to bring them down. Frequency is logarithmic.

    Modern science uses energy for these entities, but frequency can tell much much more than energy. And I would be wary of energy/frequency conversions. For a multitude of reasons.

    Also both the electron and the proton are capable of emitting the same frequencies. But never the same polarization.

    If we could control xray and gamma like we control radio, we could probably build some atoms ourselves. After disassociation of atoms and a frequency catalog is made. Perhaps a catalyst to preform custom chemical functions. Maybe even a new material or two. Atomic structure modified with radio. Not heat. Heat uses a flux of heat, a flux of rates, and a flux of direction to modify mass. But it might take very little power at the right rate and the right direction. Surprisingly little.
    Reply
  • Jan Steinman
    I'm a bit confused about the claims about the ionosphere's involvement in the BOAT.

    My understanding is that essentially all gamma-ray bursts become detectable through the interaction of the atmosphere. In other words, gamma rays can't make it through the atmosphere to the surface of the Earth (where the detectors are), but rather, they strike atoms of atmospheric gas, which then cause a burst of other rays, in a cascade.

    So is the noted involvement of the ionosphere merely a matter of degree?

    As an amateur radio operator, I'm also aware of different layers in the ionosphere that are exploited for long-distance radio communication. It would have been helpful if they had noted the specific layers involved (F? Sporadic E? etc.)
    Reply
  • billslugg
    This happened at 500 km per the article. The radio wave skip layers end at F layer at about 260 km. Above that there are not enough ions to cause skip.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    I have read that cosmic rays are particles and cause particle showers. Gamma is radio radiation and causes ionization.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    I have read that one of the experiments from HAARP, was to ionize a patch of atmosphere, so radio could be skipped at will. High speed communications thru atmospheric skip when ever needed. To replace the very slow long-wave link with subs. And it works......but needs way too much power for practical application.

    We need a fast communication and location backup, isolated from the internet and sat links.

    Also.......the upper atmosphere might have the exact properties we try to mock......in our quantum sensors. If we could measure and monitor such a region, we might just surprise ourselves.....of what we could detect.
    Reply