Slashdot Mirror
Brightest Supernova Discovered
Maggie McKee writes "Astronomers have spotted the brightest supernova ever seen — it is intrinsically two to three times brighter than any previously recorded. It has many characteristics of a type Ia explosion, but has hydrogen in its spectrum, unlike other type Ia's. That suggests that this supernova resulted from the collision of two stars — most likely a white dwarf and a red giant — rather than from an exploding white dwarf. If so, it might affect the interpretation of previous cosmological studies that depend on type Ia 'standard candle' observations, like dark energy. But other astronomers say merger-triggered explosions are probably rare and therefore won't throw a wrench in the works."
If you are really interested in the topic I recommend
Fraser, Craig G.
Title The cosmos : a historical perspective
Westport, Conn. : Greenwood Press, 2006.
I learned a lot from it about novas.
Do not look into the supernova with your remaining eye!
(theres a lot of bright shiney things around at the moment, I'm surprised anyone can see anything at all)
liqbase
someone write it up
If it was so bright, how come nobody ever saw it before?
If, hypothetically, you found yourself to have evolved first or to exist in an otherwise empty galaxy - then you might look for an easy way to get the attention of any civilizations in any other galaxies. If you could move a star (details, details) then this would be a good way to get yourself noticed.
Just to poke a hypothetical hole in your hypothetical civilization...
I think the real questions here is the evolution of technology by an alien culture. For what you've said to make sense this civilization would have to have the ability to guide stars in a significant fashion while not having the ability to do simple observance as we do today. IMHO that's just too far fetched.
Consider our own little planet here: we have a limited ability to detect solar systems and radio signals from a distance within our own galaxy. Yet, we do not have the ability to jump to the next semi-habitable planet and stay there on a permanent basis. It's fairly clear that our ability to observe the cosmos is much much better than our ability to [work within/live within/manipulate] anything outside of our own little sphere of mud and rock.
It's just a question of how a civilization could evolve in such a fashion as to be able to work with outer space but not be able to observe it beyond their own first-hand experience.
If I had the insight or imagination to figure this out into a workable model I'd be one hell of a science fiction writer.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
OK, so this is calling into question one of the "standard candles" of astronomy and cosmology. But I'm curious exactly how? There's a fairly simple formula that relates absolute magnitude, relative magnitude, and distance. If you know any two, you can calculate the third. The whole concept of standard candles is that there are some events for which we know the absolute magnitude. This article is saying this is one of the standard candle events, but much brighter than ever before. The big question for me is, how do they know it's not just closer than ever before? My understanding is that the standard candle equations are the only way to determine distance at these ranges.
Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
Why would you bother, though? You won't get heard for millions of years.
you don't do this because you expect to be heard. Remember, the universe that this happens in is one where life is so incredibly rare that you searched your entire galaxy and didn't find any (we're talking a class III civilization here). So, on the off chance that there is life in another galaxy you announce your existance.
You'll never hear a reply - but if you don't do it, they will never hear YOU. On the other hand, if everyone follows my logic, then everyone will announce and you will hear from every civilization. And "hearing" from them probably means getting their version of the encyclopedia galactica. Everybody transmits everything they know.
What more do you want, a conversation? If you transmit your entire body of knowledge and all your history and all your culture, what more is there to talk about anyway? What do you think, you're going to get on the live and go: "a/s/l????"
Youre way of thinking, when you say, "why bother" is tragedy of the commons thinking. You don't want to take any action unless you personally get a return on that action. That's very selfish. If everyone else thinks unselfishly, then everyone will get everyone else's encyclopedia galactica.
Inversing the colors provides a more lifelike image. For the lazy.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
You missed my point. The point is we can never, ever know how advanced our stuff is compared to theirs. We don't even know if there is a "there stuff". So yes if F-22's (not F-16's :D) are the most advanced thing we have nothing to worry about. But it don't matter if we got little intergalactic fighters with friggin laser beams attached to their friggin heads - if we haven't come into contact with another race yet then they could very well just swat them all like flies . . . . or they might come against them with F-16 level stuff.
My point is just - until we meet another race, we simply DON'T know how our technology stacks up. If we flat our refuse to send out signals "until we're ready" then we better consign ourselves to letting them find us first, becuase you can never know if you're "ready" without knowing about them first.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain