Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Astronomers Awaiting 1a Supernova

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the really-excited-space-geeks dept.

Aryabhata writes to tell us BBC News is reporting that astronomers have sighted a star on the brink of a "1a" supernova. This opportunity presents the first chance astronomers have ever had to view a supernova of this magnitude up close. From the article: "They are so rare that the last one known in our galaxy was seen in 1572 by the great Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, who first coined the term nova, for "new star", not realizing he was in fact witnessing the violent end of an unknown star. It has long been believed that type 1a supernovae are the death throes of a white dwarf star. But all modern ones have been so distant that it has not been possible to see what had been there beforehand."

2 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Actually by Short+Circuit · · Score: 0, Troll

    We don't know that from this article. For one, they don't mention how far away the star is. Two, they don't name the star, so I can't look it up. Three, evidence of a supernova could reach us anywhere in the next 100,000 years, which is about how long it takes light to reach us from the other side of the galaxy.

    So if it happens tomorrow, we may not know about it for another 100,000 years. If it happened 50,000 years ago, we might see it tomorrow, or 50,000 years from now.

    The article is long on grand imagery, but it's missing the information that would be important to know whether it already happened.

    --
    tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
  2. WRONG. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    IAAP.

    Big deal. Simultaneity through space-time isn't reflexive (thanks to the "minus" sign in
    x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - t^2 = 0
    ), that doesn't mean that there's some absolute reference frame against which you can say something happened, say, 5000 years ago. In fact: there isn't.

    The Sun could have blown up 4 minutes ago, but we wouldn't know for another 4. It still blew up 4 minutes ago, it simply takes another 4 until this can be observed by us. Of course it's unlikely that the Sun would blow up suddenly, but - hey, what's that ligNO CARRIER.
    NO. You're assuming that your preferred reference frame is more "real" than other reference frames. IN YOUR REFERENCE FRAME it blew up 4 minutes ago. THAT REFERENCE FRAME IS ARBITRARY.

    Imagine a non-accelerating observer moving just under the speed of light in our reference frame, moving past the sun, towards us. As far as he's concerned, he's not moving. Light leaves the sun. One second later, in his reference frame, the light gets to us.

    THERE IS NO CORRECT REFERENCE FRAME: his measurement is as valid as yours. It is just as correct to say the light left the sun 1 second ago as it is to say that it left 8 minutes ago.

    Space-time is weird stuff - don't try to tack your own intuitive absolute non-relativistic rigid space-time under it, you can't do it. This isn't "just light" behaving that way, it's the way that space-time is structured. Your intuition isn't up to the job, no matter how much you wish otherwise.

    God, I hate it when people who don't understand relativity pretenf to, and then try to explain it wrongly, as though it were just about things getting weird when you go fast and causality having a speed limit. Space-time is weirder than that.