<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>On the nature of apparent transient sources on the National Geographic Society-Palomar Observatory Sky Survey glass copy plates · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2402.00497/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2402.00497/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>On the nature of apparent transient sources on the National Geographic Society-Palomar Observatory Sky Survey glass copy plates — mentioned by _alternator_</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47894971</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2402.00497:47894971</guid><pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 19:49:37 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Two things here: radiation exposure could explain this, since there&amp;#x27;s a period after exposure and before developing where you can get radiation exposure. Second, and perhaps more importantly, is that there&amp;#x27;s a detailed criticism of this line of research available, including evidence against the argument that these are more likely ±1 day of nuclear tests. See https://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.21946, and also https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.00497 for a study of plate defect issues. I think the current paper continuing this line of research should be read cautiously. I don&amp;#x27;t love discounting ideas out of…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2402.00497/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.IM</category></item></channel></rss>
