Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Supernova Imaged by Hubble Telescope

Posted by michael on from the long-shot dept.

Delta Vel writes "First discovered by a Japanese amateur astronomer on July 31, this Type II supernova was imaged by Hubble on August 17th. The newly named SN 2004 dj, the closest supernova to be observed in over ten years, is about 11 million light-years away in the spiral galaxy NGC 2403. Looks like they goofed in one of the images, though--the arrow points to a different bright spot on the before-and-after image than it does on the main and annotated images." Reader Saeed al-Sahaf writes "Today, astronauts Gennady Padalka and Mike Fincke popped open the hatch on the Russian side of the ISS spacecraft and quickly stepped through the fourth and final spacewalk of their six-month mission. Their mission? Install three antennas and replace a 2-foot-square Russian pump panel. But of course, because it isn't a part or our Mission to Mars, it is still too dangerous work on the Hubble Telescope, which after all, is only used for science."

14 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. Neato by g-to-the-o-to-the-g · · Score: 1, Interesting
    It looks cool and all, but theres an even bigger looking one to the left. How exactly can they tell the difference? Maybe the wavelength/frequency of the light is different, and if so how would they actually know what they're looking at? I wonder how accurate the stuff that these scientist tell us is. I'm sure a lot of this stuff is just based on educated guesses.

    PS. No, I didn't rtfa.

    --

    Hi there

    1. Re:Neato by deglr6328 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Looking at the redshift of some common spectral line will give you an immediate answer. What I want to know is if the neutrino pulse was detected at one of our observatories like super kamiokande like supernova 1987a was. This one is much further away so I don't know if it was possible....

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    2. Re:Neato by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Brightness isn't going to tell you whether or not the object is a supernova. In fact, the supernova is LESS bright than the star next to it. A good way to tell is to look at the CCD artifacts, like the vertical and horizontal lines. The longer they are, the brighter the object.

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
    3. Re:Neato by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Would you explain to us what exactly is the difference in the spectra of stars and SN? How does a typical SN spectrum look like? Do you have a graph?

      Sure. Stars are mostly Hydrogen and Helium. A supernova is cascading fusion reaction, and they produce every naturally occuring element in the universe. The spectra reflect this.

      I won't google a graph for you, but I'm sure it would only take a few seconds.

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
  2. I want to know if it will be visible with the... by students · · Score: 2, Interesting

    naked eye. That would be unusual. Has it reached it's peak brilliance yet? I know that takes several days.

    --
    Simon's Rock College
  3. They goofed? I think you did by Xhris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Looks like they goofed in one of the images, though--the arrow points to a different bright spot on the before-and-after image than it does on the main and annotated images."

    I don't think so. Looking at the pics its the same one in both. I think the submitter is confused as there is a large similar looking nebula in the south-east (bottom left, which *is* south-east)

  4. Super Novas & Nebulas are different critters by superbaltar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The way I understand it, a super nova would explode like a nuclear bomb in the air, that is, in all directions, so shoulded the upper right image be the correct one? Nebulas are like the foreground objects, often like wisps of fog. They are either the birthing ground of stars or a _long_ ago remnant of a super nova.

  5. Re:I want to know if it will be visible with the.. by Ironsides · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What I would want to see is one that lights up the night as if it were day. Heard that happened once, would love to see it with my own eyes.

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  6. Nearby galaxy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone else kinda glad that the supernova in question is in a "nearby galaxy" (nearby is a relative term, obviously) rather than our galaxy? If it can be mistaken for a local star at that distance, imagine what it would be like up close and personal.

  7. Re:High Rez Goodness by Ironsides · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Interesting rainbow halo around it. I wonder what causes the CYM pattern. Anybody know?

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  8. Re:Grainy Image? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That noise you see are the gazillion of stars out there.

  9. Re:Mmm, explosions by Soldrinero · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Very true- planetary nebulae are some of the most beautiful objects in the universe. Hubble has taken a lot of great pictures of them. If you like the Cat's Eye, but occasionally want a different view, try these planetaries:

    Hourglass Nebula

    Spirograph Nebula

    Eskimo Nebula

    --
    I would rather be killed by a terrorist than enslaved by my government.
  10. Re:High Rez Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Looks like the diffraction pattern caused by the spider vanes in the telescope. In a reflector type scope the arms holding the secondary mirror cause this to occur. I don't know if hubble uses a reflector or what, I suspect they did, but that's what it looks like.

  11. question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    so just a question,
    how hard would it be to actually replace hubble with a similar yet much more modern instrument? And just how long would it take. Lets say we kept with the hubble design and just upgraded everything. Can you put a new hubble into orbit without a shuttle launch and if so, why not do that. It can't be that expensive to build a clone and this time they know what to generally expect. I'm no genius on this stuff but I was wondering if anyone had any reliable information on the prospects of saving hubble this way.

    I would think having done it once, it could be done again faster and cheaper and with less things going wrong.