Talk:SCP 06F6

Timing

If possible, we need to differentiate between when the object was first imaged by Hubble, and when some human actually looked at the data / pictures / whatever and asked "what's that thing?" Evercat (talk) 21:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

New Scientist writes that the object was first reported in 2006. http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn14738-space-firefly-resembles-no-known-object.html AxelBoldt (talk) 03:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

SN1993J like?

Also, I'm uneasy about this connection to SN1993J, which seems like original research? Evercat (talk) 22:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The object has a strong feature at a wavelength of 5360 Å which is unexplained; another object that is known to have had its largest bump at 5360 Å is the supernova SN1993J.

The 5360 Angstrom feature doesn't seem to be original research though. AxelBoldt (talk) 03:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

How are they sure it isn't dust.Tailsfan2 (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

How are they sure what isn't dust? --Falcorian ^(talk) 17:50, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Spectrum

"when astronomers try to trace any one of them to an element the other lines fail to match up with any other known elements". This seems like an unfounded claim; i would love to see a reference. The cited source makes no mention of unknown elements.

The cited source is for the first two sentences... Not the last one. (This is why I like putting the refs at the end of each sentence, even if repeated as it reduces confusion.) You need to look at the paper itself which says:

• The absorption features at 4320 and 4870 °A are consistent with Hgamma (4341 °A) and Hbeta (4861 °A) respectively, including uncertainty in the shape of the underlying continuum. However, there is no significant Halpha (6563 °A) emission or absorption, which would be expected for the presence of strong Hgamma and Hbeta features. (Although there is slight evidence for emission at 6563 °A in the Keck spectrum, this is not seen in the VLT or Subaru spectra.) The absorption feature at 5890 °A is consistent with Na i 5890, 5896. Although the combination of Hgamma, Hbera, and Na i consistently fits three of the observed features,the strong feature at 5360 °A and the weaker feature at 6330°A are left unexplained.

• It is also possible that the transient is extragalactic. The absence of Lyman alpha absorption features shortward of 4500 °A places a hard upper limit of z ~ 2.7 on its redshift. Among redshifts 0 < z < 2.7, the cluster redshift of z = 1.112 is of specific interest as the transient is located a small projected distance from the center of the cluster. At this redshift, the absorption feature at 5890 °A is consistent with Mg ii 2796, 2803.However, the remaining features are not identified at this redshift.

Hope that helps. I've fixed the citations in the article to match my comment. --Falcorian ^(talk) 21:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

update

this needs some updating

• http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/New_class_of_stellar_explosions_found_999.html
• http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Cosmic_blasts_point_to_new_class_of_supernova_999.html

Now declared to be a new class of supernova.

65.94.47.63 (talk) 13:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that!

My brother just told me he got on my computer and vandalized this article on my account when I forgot to lock it. :-/ Luckily it looks like it was reverted.

Sorry!

flarn2006 [u t c] time: 05:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

SCP?

so you're telling me this thing is/was an SCP object? 178.51.26.77 (talk) 08:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

stop Bismuthdistrict (talk) 21:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

please Bismuthdistrict (talk) 21:18, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

this has nothing to do with the spc foundation LobedHomunculus (talk) 14:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

The Shark Punching Centre? 2604:3D09:2A84:6600:F304:CC84:1E13:3907 (talk) 01:27, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

what LobedHomunculus (talk) 10:11, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/spc-hub 2604:3D09:2A84:6600:996F:B38D:DAAE:FC71 (talk) 20:37, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

how is this funny? LobedHomunculus (talk) 20:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes it is, check the edit history. Foundation .aic's are clearly hard at work upholding the Veil, preventing rogue personnel from exposing the truth about this entity. 2604:3D09:2A84:6600:F304:CC84:1E13:3907 (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

No it isn't, it's just a space object with the letters SCP in it's designation. LobedHomunculus (talk) 10:11, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Nah the Foundation is trying to cover it up Jake11223344 (talk) 09:25, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

ha ha very funny... LobedHomunculus (talk) 13:13, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Yep Jake11223344 (talk) 13:29, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Also, I've noticed you vandalized multiple articles with SCP related stuff. LobedHomunculus (talk) 16:01, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@LobedHomunculus To be fair, I also thought it was an SCP entity LunarMeow12 (talk) 02:02, 31 January 2026 (UTC)