Slashdot Mirror


Origin of Cosmic Rays Revealed

neutron_p writes "An international team of astronomers has produced the first ever image of an astronomical object using high energy gamma rays, helping to solve a 100 year old mystery - an origin of cosmic rays. The astronomers studied the remnant of a supernova that exploded some 1,000 years ago, leaving behind an expanding shell of debris which, seen from the Earth, is twice the diameter of the Moon. Cosmic rays are extremely energetic particles that continually bombard the Earth, thousands of them passing through our bodies every day."

49 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. We've traced the cosmic rays! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    They're coming from inside your house! Get out of your house!

    1. Re:We've traced the cosmic rays! by Bastian · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's safe. I bought an Ionic Breeze Quadra. It filters out harmful indoor air pollutants such as cosmic rays with the power of ions.

      It also cleans my laundry with the power of oxygen.

  2. Eep. by deemaunik · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Cosmic rays are extremely energetic particles that continually bombard the Earth, thousands of them passing through our bodies every day." I feel so Violated.

    1. Re:Eep. by tmacd · · Score: 5, Funny

      I probably shouldn't mention that 610 trillion neutrinos are passing right through your body in the second it takes to read this line, then.

      http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw13.html

    2. Re:Eep. by JanneM · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't worry - any day now they'll pass an amendment forbidding any bodily penetration except between men and women.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    3. Re:Eep. by fireman+sam · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pfft, I eat nutrinos for breakfast... Oh um, sorry I'm thinking of fruiy O's. my bad.

      --
      it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
    4. Re:Eep. by krlynch · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, you go into your neutrino detector lab, and you measure the number of neutrino interactions that you see in a certain amount of time. When you combine the known properties of the detector with the know properties of neutrinos (from other experiments that don't directly measure rates) with the rate of observed interactions, you can calculate the number of neutrinos that must have gone through the experiment without interacting in order to produce the number that DID interact. Turns out that that number is mind-bogglingly large.

  3. Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Cosmos?

  4. Not through these precious bodily fluids by thrillseeker · · Score: 3, Funny
    Cosmic rays are extremely energetic particles that continually bombard the Earth, thousands of them passing through our bodies every day.

    Not with my handy-dandy tinfoil hat.

    1. Re:Not through these precious bodily fluids by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Funny
      Tinfoil hat? I wear a neutronium helmet!

      Unfortunately, I've had to have a scrith-reinforced prosthetic spine installed, and I have to stand on a floor plate made of Xeelee construction material... Exotic matter comes with its own set of health hazards.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  5. CoralCache Link... by MoThugz · · Score: 4, Informative

    here.

    Enjoy.

  6. cosmic rays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Cosmic rays are extremely energetic particles that continually bombard the Earth, thousands of them passing through our bodies every day."

    You mean it's like intergalactic spam?

  7. Here are some beautiful visualizations... by funkbrain · · Score: 5, Informative
  8. Uh, no... by bokmann · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thousands of cosmic rays do not pass through our bodies every day... They are stopped by the atmosphere. Cosmic rays are actually fairly dangerous radiation. During the Apollo missions, Astronauts would occasionally see flashes of light as cosmic rays hit their eyes... they also left 'streaks' in the porthole glass.

    I think you are confusing them with neutrinos, but even then you are wrong... billions of those pass through us every second.

    1. Re:Uh, no... by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The curious thing about these muons is this. Muons have a very, very short half-life; they decay extremely rapidly. Even moving near lightspeed, they should decay significantly between (say) a mountaintop lab and a sea-level lab, because of the travel time on the way down, but they don't.

      It's almost as if time was slowed down for these high-velocity particles... and indeed this is the case. It's a classic demonstration of relativity in action.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  9. Long suspected, finally proven. by Sheetrock · · Score: 4, Informative
    The wierd thing about cosmic rays is that despite their isotropism we noticed a great deal of them coming from our own Sun. Some went so far as to suspect 'dark matter', that theoretical material that accounts for the great chunk of the universe we cannot directly observe, as being either responsible for or made up of rays!

    In a way, it makes sense that they'd be partly responsible for the blue in our atmosphere -- the rest comes from the Sun bombarding the layers of gases up there. Sometimes science is just a way of jerryrigging loose facts together to create a plausible test or explanation for strange phenonema.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  10. *A* source, not *the* source by gnuman99 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Supernovas are a source of cosmic rays. Not suprising. After all, they do go boom. :)

    What is more interresting than a source of cosmic rays is the source of the gamma bursts. Some background is here.

  11. The Terrible Secret of Space by l1nuxpunk · · Score: 3, Funny

    Space has a terrible power. We are here to protect you from the terrible secret of space. Do you have stairs in your house?

    Pak chooie unf.

    --
    Prontab.net - Porn for geeks. (nsfw)
  12. Uh, YES by gnuman99 · · Score: 4, Informative
    Thousands of cosmic rays do not pass through our bodies every day.

    They are called muons. There is a lot more than a thounsand per day! And they can do A LOT of damage. Oh, and muons are produced from cosmic ray interractions in the upper atmosphere.

    1. Re:Uh, YES by dragons_flight · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even in physics circles, they are both are refered to as cosmic rays. The muons, high energy electrons and other particles created in the atmosphere are refered to a "secondary" cosmic rays and the stuff traveling through space are refered to as "primary" cosmic rays, but everything gets called "cosmic rays".

  13. Powerful by vlad_grigorescu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These things are very powerful. The Russians have been conducting experiments on the sea floor for years and lots of them are energetic enough to go through. It's been assumed for a while that supernovas are the source of cosmic rays but it has been hard to pinpoint their origin, since cosmic rays can be deflected by magnetic fields.

  14. Re:DO NOT PANICE by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow, you enjoy looking at goatse enough to have noticed that he has a wedding ring?!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  15. I have a question that's barely related. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What's the highest frequency EM raidation that can be detected/measured with the technology we have today?

    Could there be massive amounts of EM radiation flying around the universe that is simple undetectable? Could this not be the "missing mass" that is conjectured in discusions of universal inflation and what not?

    Anyone know?

    1. Re:I have a question that's barely related. by cjameshuff · · Score: 3, Informative

      As the wavelength of a photon drops, its energy increases. Above a certain point (1.02 MeV), it becomes likely that the gamma ray will convert its energy into an electron-positron pair (with the excess energy as kinetic energy). The positron will most likely annihilate with a nearby electron and create two lower-energy gamma rays (0.51 MeV each). Today, pair production normally requires an interaction with a nucleus, but I think most high-energy photons in the universe formed elementary particles in the conditions following the big bang. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong...I'm not a physicist.) Anyway, such interactions would give us a way to detect and measure the amounts of super-high energy gamma in the universe.

    2. Re:I have a question that's barely related. by dragons_flight · · Score: 4, Informative

      Geophysics grad student actually, but I have had all the typical physics courses.

      Einstein really said E = sqrt(p^2*c^2+m^2*c^4), where E = Energy, p = momentum, c = speed of light, m = rest mass. For things that are not moving this reduces to the more familiar E = mc^2.

      Einstein also said, via general relativity, that gravitational fields are controlled by something known as the stress-energy tensor. In essense, it says that gravitational forces result from all energy, momentum and pressure in the universe (though mostly energy unless very high velocities are involved).

      EM radiation has energy E = hv, where h is Planck's constant and v is the frequency of light. It has no rest mass (m = 0), but from above we see E = pc = hv => p = hv/c, so it has momentum. Since it has energy it creates a gravitational field, and this field would be equivalent to a particle with the same rest mass energy. [Caveat: Because momentum also contributes to the stress-energy tensor, the fields are not actually identical but the momentum correction is typically small.]

      So in short a beam of gamma rays does create a gravitational field (though a very very small one for typically numbers of gamma rays).

  16. Angular diameter by Flexagon · · Score: 3, Informative

    an expanding shell of debris which, seen from the Earth, is twice the diameter of the Moon [unattributed quote from the original article]

    So its diameter is a function of viewing position. Sounds like angular diameter. That's still huge, though not as huge as M31 in Andromeda.

  17. Neutrino detectors are unbelievably cool. by turnstyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now that we've veered off onto neutrinos, let me point out how unbelievably cool neutrino detectors are. Start your journey via Google Images.

    --
    Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
  18. Cosmic rays and computers by osho_gg · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Cosmic rays are of some real practical significance in the world of computers. Cosmic rays are attributed as a reason (among others) for why sometimes we see unexplained behavior in Computers - mainly memory (RAM) where suddenly 0 bits become 1 and 1 bits become 0. These heavily charged extremely small particles have the property that they change the capacitance of parts of semiconductors when passed through them. This could change certain bits 0 and 1 (which are all stored as capacitance inside RAM and other places in computers) into 1 and 0.

    This has, along with semi-conductor material and process defects etc., led to the whole field of Error Correcting Codes in computers - where such kind of errors can be prevented by things such as parity bits and what not. This works on the presumption that the probability of such bitswaps occurring on two bits is very small compared to just 1 bit. So, high-reliability computing servers etc. always tend to use memories with good ECC.

    I have heard anecdotal evidence that IBM did some thourough testing of how such a behavior of bit-flipping due to cosmic rays changes at different elevation. When the elevation was high (7000 feet or so) - it occurred far more often then at the sea level. They did such tests below the surface of the earth and as they went deeper into the earth - such cosmic rays bit-flipping effect decreased but still remained. Only, after they went something like 40 feet or so below the surface of the earth - such behavior completley went away.

    So, next time you wonder why you are paying more for ECC-RAM - think of cosmic rays (and material defect and what not ...)

    Osho

    1. Re:Cosmic rays and computers by gralves · · Score: 4, Funny

      During my freshman years they were also responsible for every error on physical lab expirements. :)

    2. Re:Cosmic rays and computers by osho_gg · · Score: 4, Informative
      That sounds highly suspect. The sharp dropoff at that depth seems very unlikely, and there is plenty of background radiation even underground. In fact, unless you design specifically to prevent it, background radiation is likely to increase due to radioactive decay in the surrounding rock producing radon. Not as energetic as cosmic rays, but enough to make some noise in electrical circuits. (Disclaimer: I'm not a particle physicist...)

      Here is a summary of IBM's 15 year experiments with cosmic rays:

      IBM's research on cosmic rays

      I quote from this:

      The cosmic ray intensity is greatest at high terrestrial altitudes, and approaches zero under extensive shielding. IBM has conducted extensive field testing3 of components at high altitudes (10,000 ft), at moderate altitudes (5000 ft), at sea level, and under shielding of 50 ft of concrete. All elevated-altitude tests showed cosmic-ray-induced fails in electronic components. In all tests, the observed fail rate scaled directly with the cosmic ray intensity, over a total observed change of more than 1000× .

      There is also another related article at IBM.

      IBM's research on cosmic ray densities at different places on earth

      Osho

  19. Re:It still doesn't explain by Zangief · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... how the "cosmic rays" can make Mr. Fantastic so stretchy.

    They didn't. Cosmic rays just activated the x-factor in the fantastic four, which would have stayed dormant otherwise, because they weren't mutants.

    "Normal" mutants get their x-factor activated naturally, during the teen years.

    (OMG, I can't believe I knew that)

  20. Found some more info by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Went looking around for more information, and came up with this:

    http://www.pparc.ac.uk/frontiers/archive/update.as p?id=15U3&

    It includes a picture of the telescope array as well as a small image of the gamma ray map.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  21. If you want to see cosmic rays for yourself... by SIGFPE · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...I have a web page describing how: here

    --
    -- SIGFPE
  22. Why I love science writers by RealProgrammer · · Score: 3, Informative
    Why do I feel like a first grader? From TFA:
    The astronomers studied the remnant of a supernova that exploded some 1,000 years ago, leaving behind an expanding shell of debris which, seen from the Earth, is twice the diameter of the Moon.
    Do they mean it subtends as large a portion of sky as does the moon? If it's 1000 light-years away, that would make it ...

    ((1000 light-years)*(size of moon))/(moon orbital height)

    across,

    ((9.5 × 10^18 meters) * (3,476,000m))/ (384,403,000 m)

    That's about 86 light years in diameter. Its average velocity is left as an exercise to the homebound.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  23. Oops! by RealProgrammer · · Score: 3, Informative

    Make that 172 light years in diameter.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  24. Not unexpected by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was involved in a similar, but very much smaller scale, experiment for my MSc thesis (JANZOS), attempting to find detect gamma rays from the (then very recent) supernova 1987A in the Large Magellanic Cloud.

    So supernovae were a prime suspect source back then.

    We had three (not four) 2 metre (not 12 metre) telescopes with about 30 'pixels' each (compared to a few thousand for HESS.) (I actually worked on another part of the experiment, which used particle detectors to detect higher energy showers.)

    A significant problem is to distinguish between showers created by gamma rays and ones created by charged particles (mostly protons.) The charged particle showers are 'uninteresting', because the direction they come from is uncorrelated to their source - they move on curved paths due to galactic magnetic fields. Unfortunately, they are about 99% of the cosmic rays. We were not able to distinguish, so we had a large 'signal to noise' problem.

    There was a single telescope similar to these ones in the mid 80s (the Whipple Telescope, I think) which claimed to be able to distinguish by details of shower structure. (We didn't have the resolution, nor perhaps the light gathering power, to make use of this.) I presume HESS has built on this work.

    Note that this result does not necessarily tell us about the very highest energy cosmic rays. There is a change in the slope of the spectrum at (from memory) about 10^15 electron volts, so it is likely that different processess are involved on either side of this boundary. I think there were also theoretical reasons to think that supernovae could not accelerate particles to such high energies.

    As I recall, the models for acceleration generally required shock waves in a gas with magnetic fields. Particles could repeatedly bounce across the shock, getting accelerated each time. (Think of a ball bouncing between two walls that are moving towards each other.)

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  25. Cosmic Ray and DNA... by ImaLamer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Much like your own DNA.

    We all think that mutations happen daily, but that is far from the case. In fact genetic mutation is very rare because we have error correcting enzymes which travel back and forth on DNA strands correcting them as they change. Typically the DNA "code" is changed as subatomic particles rip through your body, just as you've explained with RAM.

    Yes, our DNA mutates. It doesn't stay that way however. Statistically there are more errors in a 300 page book then in a mile long DNA sequence. Actually there are about 0 errors in DNA because of this self-correcting mechanism.

    * Source: Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors by Ann Druyan and Carl Sagan.

  26. Cosmic Ray Experiences/Background by Michael+Snoswell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A long time ago (early 80s) I worked in a lab that used scintillation counters to measure biological activity (Background: you'd put a radioactively labelled (eg with tritium or C14)reagent in with the other cocktail for a test you're conducting in a little test tube. After say 5 mins you'd stop the reaction (say with perchloric acid), syphon off the top layer and put it into scintillation liquid (not sure what it was, but largely based on toluene) and put the vials into the scintillation counter which would have hundreds of little tubes in a conveyor belt and one by one drop the tubes deep inside the lead shielding to measure flashes of light as the isotopes decayed, hence telling you v accurately how much of the original substance under test had bound to the labelled reagent).

    Anyway, every few days the counter would go completely stupid, and every few weeks copletely bananas (a technical term). It turned out the major machine crashes coincided with all scintillation counters in the building going crazy at the same time. We had over a dozen of these machines (all different brands) and they had about 6inches of lead around the detectors, so that was quite some energetic particles we were getting. The all the manufacturers' reps said there was little we could do to fix this, unless we wanted to be underground.

    Talking to a friend at the local uni cosmic ray observatory (500+ scintillation counters spread over about a square kilometer), he said the more energetic showers were smaller in radius as the particles have less time to spread out from the initiating collision of a cosmic particle with the upper atmosphere. Usually they spread out to 50 to a few hundred metres across, with a massive cascade of all sorts of particle by the time it reaches ground level.

    Interestingly, the initial byproducts of cosmic ray collisions have a v short life which means they should decay before reaching sea level. However as they travel close to the speed of light the depth of the atmosphere is foreshortened (Lorenzian contraction) to only a few hundred metres deep - a simple proof of relativity in action (or likewise, time is going slower for the cosmic particles).

    It has been said that cosmic rays are the largest contributor to genetic mutations, beyond background radiation levels due to radioactive isotopes occuring naturally in the ground. Similarly, work place studies show airline hostesses/stewards have the far largest dosage of radiation of any occupation as they spend so much time above the bulk of the atmosphere. (Pilots spend less time in the air due to safety/fatigue regulations).

    I also recall reading that it's extremely difficult to work out where cosmic rays originate as they are usually charged particles that follow curved paths through space due to the small but significant magnetic fields of stars and the galaxy itself. Due to timing of shows hitting detectors we can easily measure the angle a particle was going when it hit the atmosphere, but the particle took a very convoluted path prior to that, so finding a close source (100ly) is significant.

    --
    pithy comment
  27. Muon Clarification by vlad_grigorescu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The cosmic rays that the article discusses are not muons, they are most often protons. The muons are what we encounter on Earth. The proton (also called the primary cosmic ray) comes in, hits our atmosphere, and a shower of subatomic particles is produced. The muon is the most powerful of these subatomic particles that is commonly produced. The fact that muons have a short half-life, and yet they can still reach us, has been cited as proof of relativity, and the idea that when you travel close to the speed of light (which these things do), time will slow down.

  28. Misleading header by forand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is NOT the first gamma-ray image. I work on Glast which is the second generation of gammay observation satelites. EGRET was the most recent satelite to provide gamma-ray skymaps. Googled

  29. misleading by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Informative
    Both the PhysOrg article and the Slashdot blurb are misleading. They both imply that the origin of cosmic rays in general is a complete mystery. Actually only certain types of cosmic rays are mysterious. The Wikipedia article that was linked to explains this. The really mysterious ones are actually not the ones that this research is about.

    The group's publications page is here (click on observations section), but they don't seem to have a preprint of this paper. Nature will let you read the abstract of the paper for free.

    The research seems to be just a more direct confirmation of something that was already thought to be understood, but had never really been verified.

  30. It's clobberin' time! by HunterZ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't worry - cosmic rays are a great source of super-powers such as stretchiness, spontaneous combustion, invisibility, and...and...Things.

    I'm surprised noone else caught the Fantastic Four reference in the "from the...department" line of the summary - it was the first thing I thought of when I saw the phrase "cosmic rays"!

    --
    Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
  31. Re:Article author is confused by dragons_flight · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't think he is confused, just over simplifying.

    Via pair production, gamma rays produce the same kinds of secondary particle showers that the far more common primary cosmic rays do. However, because of momentum conservation, the particle shower is much more tightly focused and produces a distinctive Cherenchov cone that allows gamma rays particle showers to be easily distinguished from cosmic ray showers.

    As noted in the article, the fact that gamma are currently being produced in the supernova remnant strongly argues that cosmic rays are also being accelerated there. The physics for this was proposed long ago, but no one has been able to directly measure it.

  32. Close but no cigar by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Informative

    These heavily charged extremely small particles have the property that they change the capacitance of parts of semiconductors when passed through them.

    Close but no cigar.

    The rapid passage of a charged particle deposits enough energy on nearby charged particles to jog them out of place - creating a sudden conductive sea of electron-hole pairs. These charge carriers are then swept away by the local field, becoming a burst of current.

    This affects memory and logic devices in two ways:

    1) It can suddenly leak away the charge stored in the capacitance of a dynamic RAM.

    2) It can momentarily turn "on" a transistor that should be off (even turning it more "on" than it normally would be, so its conduction swamps that of its turned-on partner in a totem-pole stage.)

    Leaking the stored charge in a RAM flips the bit - in a particular direction. Turning on a transistor that should be off may flip a bit in a flop. latch, or static RAM, or momentarily cause the wrong level on a logic line.

    Nothing to do with changed capacitance (although the sudden appearance of an extra conductive region does represent an increased capacatance on some nearby conductors).

    Cosmic rays (fast charged nuclear fragments) can do this. Another problem was alpha particles from heavy elements in the ceramic integrated circuit packages once used for memory and mil-spec ICs (which is why they disappeared). A third was alpha particles from the decay of radon gas. (Turns out some locations in Silicon Valley have a lot of radon.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  33. a nice description of the telescopes by twitter · · Score: 3, Informative

    here. They even have a picture.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  34. Cosmic dose. by twitter · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Thousands of cosmic rays do not pass through our bodies every day... They are stopped by the atmosphere. Cosmic rays are actually fairly dangerous radiation.

    Cosmic Radiation makes up about 8% of the 360 mREM annual average background dose someone in the US receives. See the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements NCRP 93, 1988, for more information. Murray's "Nuclear Energy" has a pie chart of all sources and might be in your local library. This looks good too.

    If you have a Sodium Iodine detector set and a scope, you can see it. Most common energies seen are around 20 MeV. They are big pulses next to the puny normal ones but you will detect one every twenty seconds or so.

    You are correct, however, to note that most of these particles are blocked by the atmosphere and that you do get dosed at higher elevations. A person at 80,000 ft. according to the lesson plan cited above, gets about 10 R/hr. Each hour that's five hundred times the dose you get per year on the surface, ouch. By comparison, plants have a cow if you get more than a few unplanned mR.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  35. H.E.S.S. and cosmic rays by Conor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since I work for this experiment, I guess I should try to clear up a few points which have been discussed here.

    A Supernova remnant (SNR) is a very rapidly expanding bubble of hot gas, created by the explosion of a massive star. It is thought that the shock wave caused by these expanding bubbles in our galaxy accelerate surrounding hydrogen gas to very high energies, which then become the cosmic ray protons which we see at the earth today. Protons form the bulk of the cosmic ray flux between MeV and EeV energies, and at least up PeV energies they seem to be formed in our Galaxy, probably by SNRs.

    The SNRs are really light years across, the ones we see are generally in the local quadrant of our galaxy, thus are really not far away in the cosmic scale of things. Happily not close enough to fry us though! Cosmic redshift does not occur within our galaxy, by the way.

    We detect gamma rays at very high energies by looking at their interactions with the upper atmosphere. The gamma rays themselves do not generally penetrate to the ground, we measure the Cherenkov light emitted by the shower of charged paticles which stem from the gamma ray interaction.

    One reason gamma rays are interesting is that they , like other photons, travel directly to us from their source, so we can use them to make pictures of what the source looks like. We believe in this case that the gamma rays are produced in the supernova remnant by interactions of the accelerated protons, and thus are a tracer which proves the existence of the comsic rays at the SNR, and thus that SNRs generate cosmic rays.

    The particles which pass through us every day are mostly muons, which are by-products of the interaction of cosmic ray protons with the atmosphere.

    More information can be found at:

    http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/hfm/HESS/HESS.html

  36. Re:Shell of debris approaching by Conor · · Score: 3, Informative

    RXJ 1713-39, the SNR in question, is believed to about 1kiloparsec away, which corresponds to 3260 light years. When we say it is believed to be 1000 years old, that means it would have been seen at the earth 1000 years ago. It is actually possibly 4000 years old, but may be older. It is quite hard to determine the distance to these things unless one saw them explode.

    What we see now is 1000 years after it exploded, so we just call it 1000 years old for simplicity.

    The shell should be too old and dispersed to emit gamma rays by the time it reaches the earth.

  37. Re:Shell of debris approaching by Conor · · Score: 3, Informative

    First question, yes, it is possible to do that, especially for younger SNRs (up to a few hundred years maybe). For older ones, such as RXJ 1713 its harder as its more difficult to discern expansion.

    The second point refers to SN 1987a, which was observed to explode 17 years ago (hence the name).