Researchers have observed the strongest candidate yet for a "microblazar" — a dazzling object that has long been predicted to exist but never spotted.

Observations of microblazars would give astronomers closer views of black holes emitting powerful jets of energy and help them understand how these extreme objects behave.

Blazars are some of the most energetic objects in the universe. They are a type of quasar — a brightly glowing object fueled by a supermassive black hole stripping material from its host galaxy and then ejecting some of it in powerful, opposing jets of particles and radiation. To qualify as a blazar, one of those near-light-speed jets needs to point directly at Earth. Astronomers have previously discovered smaller versions of quasars, dubbed microquasars, and long theorized that there must be smaller versions of blazars as well.

Now, an international team led by astronomers in Spain, the Netherlands and Argentina has described a microblazar in a study accepted for publication in the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.

"It is the first time that we have a serious candidate," Josep Martí, an astronomer at the University of Jaén in Spain and first author of the study, told Live Science.

The object, called IRAS 18293-0941, is located in our galaxy, about 12,000 light-years from Earth, and it's hidden behind a veil of dust. It is a binary system that includes a black hole that orbits a hot, gigantic star every 11 days. Matter from the star falls into the black hole, and some of this material is jettisoned into the surrounding environment in two opposing jets. One of those jets flares toward Earth.

These objects, as well as microquasars in general, are tricky to observe, Martí said. "Because of stellar evolution, you need to catch the system at the right time," he added. "The microquasar phase of evolution is very short, and so it is difficult to find one in that phase."

Theorists predicted that microblazars would have special characteristics that should help define them. These features include powerful emissions across the electromagnetic spectrum, rapid changes in brightness (variability), and a hotspot behind them where its opposing jet heats up the interstellar medium in the opposite direction of Earth.

To observe IRAS 18293-0941, the study authors used a variety of instruments ‪—‬ including the Calar Alto Astronomical Observatory in Spain, a network of radio astronomy telescopes called the European VLBI Network, and the MeerKAT radio telescope array in South Africa ‪—‬ as well as archival data from the Very Large Array in New Mexico.

They found that IRAS 18293-0941 has all of the expected microblazar characteristics, except one ‪—‬ variability. Microblazars have rapid variability, which means their brightness changes a lot in a short period, because one of the jets is facing Earth and small changes in brightness are amplified by an effect called Doppler boosting.

Martí said IRAS 18293−0941's lack of rapid variability could be explained by the dense cloud of gas surrounding it, which could smooth out quick fluctuations in brightness.

The researchers are currently investigating whether the observed area behind the microblazar is in fact a hotspot, study co-author Pedro Luque-Escamilla, an astronomer at the University of Jaén, told Live Science.

Even with one of the expected features missing, this object is a promising candidate for the first known microblazar. "The claims and the results of the paper are sensible and there are no questionable hidden assumptions," Kinwah Wu, a theoretical astrophysicist at University College London who was not involved in the research, told Live Science in an email. "The source in this paper had shown signatures of interactions between the jets and the ambient material, which naturally leads to [particle] interaction."

Svetlana Jorstad, a senior research scientist at the Institute for Astrophysical Research at Boston University who was not involved in the research, told Live Science in an email that the new study was "very interesting, important and comprehensive."

Itumeleng Monageng, an astronomer at the University of Cape Town who was also not involved in the research, added that the team's observations "presents a previously overlooked mechanism for generating some of the highest energy emissions observed."

Microblazars "may power some of the universe's most energetic processes," Monageng told Live Science in an email.

Martí, J., Luque-Escamilla, P. L., Marcote, B., Abaroa, L., Aguasca-Cabot, A., Combi, J. A., Romero, G. E., Paredes, J. M., García, F., Fogantini, F., Saavedra, E. A., Del Ser, D., & Van Den Eijnden, J. (2026). A Galactic microblazar as a potential accelerator of ultra-high-energy particles. Astronomy and Astrophysics. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202661105

See how much you know about black holes with our black hole quiz!

In the event of a global catastrophe, such as a nuclear war, an enormous volcanic eruption or large asteroid strike, the best place to be is Australia, according to a new study.

Researchers looked at the places that were most resilient to global catastrophic risks, which are events that would kill more than 10% of the global population over several months or years.

"These kinds of catastrophes are under-researched" because they are not very likely, study first author Florian Ulrich Jehn, a researcher at FernUniversität in Hagen, Germany, told Live Science. "That makes them easy to ignore."

But they are still possible — and no country would be unaffected if they occurred, he said. And some places are more vulnerable than others.

In the new study, published Aug. 23 in the journal Global Challenges, researchers analyzed studies across a variety of disciplines such as food security, biological weapons, and volcanism, to identify potential global catastrophic risks and the factors that helped communities to endure them in the past or on a smaller scale. They also brought in subject experts to add discipline-specific papers to their database.

The team identified three broad types of risk: events that would block out sunlight, such as nuclear war or a huge volcano explosion); events that destroy global infrastructure, such as a geomagnetic storm or massive cyber attack; and biological hazards, such as natural or human-caused infectious diseases that would kill much of the population.

These events, the authors wrote, would have significant and long-lasting global consequences. Many would result in global famine from crops failing and trade networks falling apart. "The food system is often the thing that gets you," Jehn said.

A trade-off of risks

The team identified characteristics that made countries more resilient to catastrophe and better able to feed their inhabitants. And while "no single place on Earth" would be resilient against all catastrophic risks, the authors wrote, some would fare better than others.

The team found that wealthier countries and regions with a strong industrial base that are not highly reliant on global trade are better able to weather global disasters.

With a strong industrial base, countries are able to manufacture goods that they cannot import, making them more resilient.

Geography also plays a role. Large islands have an advantage over continents because they can easily isolate, but they also need to have an economy that can at least partially support itself, the researchers said. If an island is highly reliant on international trade, like Japan, it will struggle if global trade networks are disrupted, the study found.

Certain countries and regions are less resilient in the face of some types of catastrophes, even if they are wealthy. For example, countries with nuclear capabilities, such as the U.S., the U.K., France, Israel, Russia, Pakistan, and India, are more at risk of being involved in nuclear war. This makes the Northern Hemisphere, where NATO countries are situated, more vulnerable to nuclear attack than places in the Southern Hemisphere.

There are also fewer volcanoes in the southern half of the globe, while the Southern Hemisphere has more ocean to act as a climate buffer, making countries there more resilient to a huge volcanic eruption, the study found.

Global resilience

There are some factors that make all countries better able to endure disasters in general, such as democratic processes and equality, Jehn said.

"When these catastrophes happen, you have to make the right decisions, and this depends on whether your country has functional governance," Jehn said. "Inequality makes governance worse, because it leads to things like elite rivalries, or less state capacity."

Australia came out as the best location to weather a catastrophic event that decimated global populations. It is in the Southern Hemisphere, so far away from the most likely location of a nuclear conflict (although the authors warn that it is allied with the U.S., which might increase its risk exposure). It is a major food producer, with diverse climatic zones, and has significant energy infrastructure.

Next best spots are Argentina, Brazil and New Zealand. New Zealand ranks lower than Australia because it has active volcanoes, a small industrial base, and is surrounded by water and vulnerable to tsunamis. Meanwhile, Brazil and Argentina have high levels of inequality and historical political instability, the authors wrote.

They also note that Iceland was a contender for a safe refuge, but its location in the far north makes it vulnerable to temperature shocks if a major incident were to block out sunshine.

The U.S. is not particularly well-placed to weather a global catastrophe, the study found. The country is exposed to the threat of geomagnetic storms because of its location and to nuclear war. The authors also pointed to the country’s poor COVID-19 outcomes, which appeared to be due to "a lack of political will and poor social cohesion."

David Denkenberger, director at Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disasters (ALLFED) and a researcher at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, told Live Science that the new study aids our understanding of future risks by considering a wider range of catastrophes.

"No country is resilient to every catastrophe, and this is an important central finding," he said. "A useful next step would be to quantify the relative likelihood and severity of different catastrophes, and the importance of different resilience factors, because these factors can involve significant trade-offs," said Denkenberger, who has previously collaborated with Jehn but is not an author on the paper.

How to be more resilient

Even though these global catastrophes are unlikely, it is important to include them on national risk registers and have international trade agreements in place in case they come to pass, Jehn said. "When global catastrophes happen, then you would likely have to restructure the food system — where it is produced, where it is traded," he said. "The chance to find a good compromise after the catastrophe has happened seems slim."

Denkenberger echoed his comments. The study, he said, "makes it clear that regional resilience to global catastrophic risk requires investment in practical preparedness, including food-system resilience, critical infrastructure, coordinated trade and governance."