Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Massive Star Burps, Then Explodes

Posted by Zonk on from the oof-excuse-me dept.

gollum123 writes with a link to the Berkley site about an impressive star explosion that took place some tens of millions of years ago. We first caught sight of it in 2004, when there was a bright outburst, ahead of a massive supernova. "All the observations suggest that the supernova's blast wave took only a few weeks to reach the shell of material ejected two years earlier, which did not have time to drift very far from the star. As the wave smashed into the ejecta, it heated the gas to millions of degrees, hot enough to emit copious X-rays. The Swift satellite saw the supernova continue to brighten in X-rays for 100 days, something that has never been seen before in a supernova. All supernovae previously observed in X-rays have started off bright and then quickly faded to invisibility."

110 comments

  1. supernova burps by Uksi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interesting older article on supernova burps.

    1. Re:supernova burps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      In other news, Uranus farts, then soils it's rings. Details at 11.

    2. Re:supernova burps by pk69 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      i lold IRL

      --
      http://phlite.net Lay out on the beach in Rocky Point, Mexico : http://www.granizo.com
    3. Re:supernova burps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "its"

    4. Re:supernova burps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess the submitter, gollum123, burped mid-word and Berkeley came out as Berkley.

  2. The question that leaves me with is... by jimstapleton · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wonder what it ate? I hope it wasn't the fish...

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    1. Re:The question that leaves me with is... by darjen · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wonder what it ate? I hope it wasn't the fish...
      And there's no mention of it saying "excuse me" afterwards. I guess a little politeness is too much to ask from an exploding star...
    2. Re:The question that leaves me with is... by Trails · · Score: 3, Funny

      The star exploded after eating a mint. This surprised most astronomers, since the mint was wafer thin.

    3. Re:The question that leaves me with is... by Columcille · · Score: 2, Funny

      some of that tainted dog food, I'm sure.

      --
      I love my sig.
    4. Re:The question that leaves me with is... by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      No, if you eat fish for dinner, this is what happens, as described by Dr Rumack:

      It starts with a slight fever and dryness of the throat. When the virus penetrates the red blood cells, the victim becomes dizzy begins to experience an itchy rash, then the poison goes to work on the central nervous system, severe muscle spasms followed by the inevitable drooling. At this point, the entire digestive system collapses accompanied by uncontrollable flatulence until finally, the poor bastard is reduced to a quivering wasted piece of jelly.

      For those of you not getting the reference, this is from Airplane!.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  3. How do we know it wasnt a fart? by krbvroc1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did the White House force the scientists to change their qualified 'fart' into a 'burb'? Investigations are needed.

    Also, is there a term for Astronomers such as the one we use called 'Anthropomorphism?'

    1. Re:How do we know it wasnt a fart? by krbvroc1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is this a troll? Its supposed to be funny. All these Astronomers describe their 'work product' with Antrhopomorphic terms, add 'pretty colors' to their space images, etc. Apparently you guys have no sense of humor either!

  4. New alka-seltzer commercial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's-a spicy supernova!

  5. Title misleading. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Funny

    Phew. Before I RTFA'd, I thought they were talking about Rosie O'Donnell....

    --
    My blog
    1. Re:Title misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only we'd be so lucky.

    2. Re:Title misleading. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      If only we'd be so lucky.

      Be careful of what you wish for. I highly recommend renting the movie "Ghostbusters".
      --
      My blog
    3. Re:Title misleading. by Glog · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hi, Donald Trump!

    4. Re:Title misleading. by maxume · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It's Bill O'Reilly this week.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:Title misleading. by Randolpho · · Score: 1

      Phew. Before I RTFA'd, I thought they were talking about Rosie O'Donnell....
      This is Slashdot, not Fark!
      --
      "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
      -Marilyn Manson
    6. Re:Title misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She doesn't burp, she explodes right away.

    7. Re:Title misleading. by JohnnyLocust · · Score: 1

      Phew. Before I RTFA'd, I thought they were talking about Rosie O'Donnell....

      It's a damn shame we can't mark that comment as (Score:20 Funny)
      --
      Havoc Video
  6. But monsieur.... by qazxswedc · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's just a wafer-thin mint!

    1. Re:But monsieur.... by treeves · · Score: 1

      Bring me another bucket!

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    2. Re:But monsieur.... by qazxswedc · · Score: 1

      The Python clan...true comedic genius.

    3. Re:But monsieur.... by awright69 · · Score: 1

      News has it that a star cluster dining nearby had this conversation during this event:

      MAÎTRE D: Monsieur, is there something wrong with the food?
      STAR A: No, the food was excellent.
      MAÎTRE D: Perhaps you're not... happy with the service?
      STAR A: No, no. No complaints.
      STAR A'S WIFE: It's just that we have to go. I'm having rather a heavy period.
      STAR B: Hmm.
      STAR B'S WIFE: Mm mm.
      STAR A: And... we... have... a... hydrogen cloud to catch.
      MAÎTRE D: Ah.
      STAR A'S WIFE: Oh. Yes. Yes, of course. We have a hydrogen cloud to catch, and I don't want to start bleeding all over the seats. Ha, hm hm hm.
      MAÎTRE D: Madam?
      STAR A: Perhaps we should be going.
      STAR A'S WIFE: Oh.
      MAÎTRE D: Oh! Very well, monsieur. Thank you so much. So nice to see you, and I hope very much we will see you again very soon. Au revoir, monsieurs.
      [clunk]
      MAÎTRE D: Oh, dear. I have trodden in monsieur's X-ray emissions.

  7. Eta Carinae Next? by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Informative

    Eta Carinae could go any time and it's only 7,500 to 8,000 LY away.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean it could have gone any time? I mean, if it exploded 7000 years ago we'd still not have seen the explosion, and wouldn't for another several hundred years.

    2. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by operagost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean it could have gone at any time...

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    3. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by Lockejaw · · Score: 1

      And if it hasn't, "any time now" on an astronomical scale is... well... longer than I want to wait.

      --
      (IANAL)
    4. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by ajs · · Score: 1

      You mean it could have gone at any time... Not exactly. It could go at any time implies a time in the present or future. What you said implies any time at all. We know that it didn't happen more than 7,500 years ago (since that's the light we see).
    5. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "You mean it could have gone at any time..."

      It hasn't happened until we know it has happened.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    6. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      You mean it could have gone any time? I mean, if it exploded 7000 years ago we'd still not have seen the explosion, and wouldn't for another several hundred years.

      This is true. When we look up into the night sky we see history, not the present -- where stars, galaxies, globular clusters, nebulae, et al, were at their respective lightspeed/distance relative distances.

      In any event, when the various wavelengths of light and radiation get here will we survive? An event like this could have played a role in mass extinctions.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    7. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by sharperguy · · Score: 1

      perhaps a better way of putting it would be "we could see it any time now"?

      --
      "sudo rm -rf your-face"
    8. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      It hasn't happened until we know it has happened.

      So, if I shoot your mother, she isn't dead until the cops call you?

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    9. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by alienmole · · Score: 3, Interesting

      By all estimates I've seen, we're safe from Eta Carinae going nova. See e.g. Earth likely spared from one form of cosmic doom (NASA), which says that a supernova would need to be within 26 light years of Earth to cause significant damage.

    10. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "So, if I shoot your mother, she isn't dead until the cops call you?"

      Consider that example yourself, for a moment. Your world hasn't changed until the news has arrived. Think of it another way: Is your neighbor alive right now? He could be. He probably is. He may not be. You really couldn't say that he is or isn't already dead. To put it another way: The odds of his survival are in his favor, but they become 1 in 1 when you find out the outcome.

      Think about it. :P

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    11. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      Consider that example yourself, for a moment. Your world hasn't changed until the news has arrived. Think of it another way: Is your neighbor alive right now? He could be. He probably is. He may not be. You really couldn't say that he is or isn't already dead. To put it another way: The odds of his survival are in his favor, but they become 1 in 1 when you find out the outcome.

      Think about it. :P

      Ah, but you're arguing a different outlook on the universe. It's been a long time since I took my philosophy classes so I can't recall the specific words for it, but you're basically discussing your universe, not the universe. The reality of your dead mother doesn't change, whether you know it or not. Your relatavistic outlook on the universe may be different, but "the cold hard truth" is what it is.

      Of course, none of it matters, because the entire universe is actually just a construct in my mind... this is one long dream, you all are fictional constructs of my subconscious, and when I awake, this reality will cease to exist.

      Think about it. :P

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    12. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Ah, but you're arguing a different outlook on the universe."

      No, though I understand how you interpreted that from what I said. I apologize for not being clearer. I'm saying we don't actually know that the star is gone so it isn't entirely appropriate to use the phrase: "You mean it could have gone at any time..."

      "Your relatavistic outlook on the universe may be different, but "the cold hard truth" is what it is."

      Right, but in this context, the truth isn't known. A relatavistic outlook is all you get. If you wish to be empirical, that is.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    13. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by Xayma · · Score: 1

      We can't be affected by this until the light reaches us. If it blew up 1000 years ago in our frame of reference, then there is some velocity at which an observer will see today happening here before the star explodes. If the light has had time to reach us, then there is no velocity in which that will occur. However, in the case of the mother, the distance between him and his mother is quite small, so she isn't dead until the light has time to reach him (ie if it is a distance ct away, time t)

    14. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      "The possible Eta Carinae Hypernova could affect Earth nearly 7,500 light years away, but would not likely affect humans directly, who are protected from gamma rays by the atmosphere. The damage would likely be restricted to the upper atmosphere, the ozone layer, and spacecraft, including satellites, and any astronauts in space."

    15. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by alc6379 · · Score: 1

      Consider that example yourself, for a moment. Your world hasn't changed until the news has arrived. Think of it another way: Is your neighbor alive right now? He could be. He probably is. He may not be. You really couldn't say that he is or isn't already dead. To put it another way: The odds of his survival are in his favor, but they become 1 in 1 when you find out the outcome.

      But what if we're dealing with quantum neighbors? He is both dead and not dead until I go check out the situation. I don't know about you, but I don't want to be responsible for possibly killing the dude next door just because I got nosy... He's a pretty cool dude. I think I'll just stay here, and know that ignorance is bliss...

      ...Now where's that darn cat?...

      --
      I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
    16. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by master_p · · Score: 1

      It's actually on the borders of the Federation!

      (what do you mean mom by cooking? aren't the replicators working again? what do you mean we are not in Star Trek? mom? ...) :-)

    17. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by whimmel · · Score: 1

      Consider that example yourself, for a moment. Your world hasn't changed until the news has arrived. Think of it another way: Is your neighbor alive right now? He could be. He probably is. He may not be. You really couldn't say that he is or isn't already dead. To put it another way: The odds of his survival are in his favor, but they become 1 in 1 when you find out the outcome.


      So what you're saying is his neighbor is both alive and dead at the same time
      --
      Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?
    18. Re:Eta Carinae Next? by tm2b · · Score: 1

      It's more than that, though.

      If the light from an event hasn't reached us yet, physicists don't say that it's happened in the past. They only talk about events as having occured in the past when we are in the event's "light cone."

      There are competing interpretations of relativity, but they all pretty much agree that you can only really say that something happen in an observer's absolute past if the light from an event has already met the observer. Your "dead mother" example really only works in a cartesian universe (and we don't happen to live in one).

      --
      "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
  8. Burps then explodes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny


    Massive Star Burps, Then Explodes

    First seen in 2004... the same year Marlon Brando died... coincidence?

  9. This happens to me all the time.. by Cristofori42 · · Score: 4, Funny

    4) The star finally runs out of fuel and the core collapses

    That's like a segmentation fault right?

    --
    "Is that dad? Either that or Batman's really let himself go."
    1. Re:This happens to me all the time.. by Anon-Admin · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sounds more like a core dump.

    2. Re:This happens to me all the time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no this is like the oom handler killing your process

    3. Re:This happens to me all the time.. by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      Seems to me to be more like a laptop carrying a Sony lithium ion battery.

      The battery runs down, then....BOOM!

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    4. Re:This happens to me all the time.. by jcuervo · · Score: 1

      LOOK! A 7-DIGIT UID!

      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
    5. Re:This happens to me all the time.. by x2A · · Score: 2

      No you're thinking of uranus.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  10. dinner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i warned him he shouldnt have have eaten at taco bell...
    did he listen? noooooooo.

  11. Oops by aktzin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is this what Sir Arthur C. Clarke meant when he said that supernovae may be "industrial accidents"?

    --
    Quantum mechanics: the dreams that stuff is made of.
    1. Re:Oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh... I was modded down for making the same suggestion in a Slashdot thread on the Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider awhile back. Every time you see a supernova or a gamma-ray burst, there's another civilization reaching that particular point of technological development.

  12. Berkeley has an "e" in between the "k" and the "l" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The correct spelling is also in the URL! If spelling is too hard, then just call it Cal.

  13. That's what I call old news. by tanguyr · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...impressive star explosion that took place some tens of millions of years ago...

    Oooooooold news!

    --
    #!/usr/bin/english
    1. Re:That's what I call old news. by Bazzible · · Score: 1

      In a galaxy far far away?

  14. Burps, then Explodes? by wildsurf · · Score: 3, Funny

    "After dinner mint, sir?"

    "Oh, I couldn't eat another bite..."

    --
    Weeks of coding saves hours of planning.
  15. This is the height of "old news" by kpainter · · Score: 0, Redundant

    After all, it "took place some tens of millions of years ago".

  16. Massive star burps, explodes... by diesel66 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I really don't know if I'd call Rosie O'Donnell a star...

    At least I can start watching The View again. (Oh, boy!)

    --



    eleven plus two / twelve plus one
  17. Ejecta, eh? by bubbl07 · · Score: 2, Funny

    As the wave smashed into the ejecta, it heated the gas to millions of degrees, hot enough to emit copious X-rays.
    Strange, that usually happens when my ejecta smashes into something else, not the other way around...

    Oh wait...
  18. Intriguing Alternate Possibilities by StefanJ · · Score: 4, Funny

    [ ] G'Thak Meld testing out new nova bomb. Gas / dust shell was actually a cloud of mothballed habitats and light collectors towed to the system to see how blast would effect a dyson shphere.

    [ ] Elder Race equivalent of Jackson Pollock at work.

    [ ] Young Earth creationists are right; like anything more distant that 6,000 LY, this was actually elaborate illusion created by God.

    [ ] Extremem upper limit of Mentos / Diet Pepsi reaction now known.

    Stefan

    Download The MacGuffin Alphabet.

  19. Things that happened in 2006 happened in 2006 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I cannot see a single reason why a supernova observed in 2006 should be said to have occurred "tens of millions of years ago" just because that's when it happened in the rest frame of the Earth. There's a perfectly good frame of reference in which it occurred in 2006. Since all inertial frames are equally valid, why not pick the one that actually makes a tiny bit of sense?

    1. Re:Things that happened in 2006 happened in 2006 by Akaihiryuu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because it *did* happen that long ago. It just took the light from the supernova that long to reach us, so that we could see it.

    2. Re:Things that happened in 2006 happened in 2006 by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given that all inertial frames are equally good, why not just pick the one that's popular with readers of the article? Seems fair to me, after all you need some coordinate system if you're going to communicate physics. In fact, I'm a bit confused by what you mean by "the one that actually makes a tiny bit of sense". The only one I can think of is an inertial frame of the supernova itself. In that frame, here and now is also tens of millions of years later than when the supernova happened. But maybe you have another one in mind.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    3. Re:Things that happened in 2006 happened in 2006 by jcuervo · · Score: 1

      Because it *did* happen that long ago. It just took the light from the supernova that long to reach us, so that we could see it.
      But then, didn't it not happen that long ago until the light reached us, or something?

      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
    4. Re:Things that happened in 2006 happened in 2006 by x2A · · Score: 1

      No it happened now but it took us that long to get to the light it emitted.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  20. Last seen heading towards the back door by Alzheimers · · Score: 1

    ...Malcom McDowell whistles innocently, and tries to slip out the backdoor and through Nexus unnoticed.

  21. The Death of Planet Krypton... by LEX+LETHAL · · Score: 1

    So how much longer until Superman gets here?

    1. Re:The Death of Planet Krypton... by CatsupBoy · · Score: 1

      So how much longer until Superman gets here?
      Just shortly after his legacy fades away... 77 Million years from now.
  22. Wow... and damn by zappepcs · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I read the headline and thought this was going to be a John Candy story...

    --
    Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
    1. Re:Wow... and damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comment is dumber than you are, asshat!

    2. Re:Wow... and damn by Kozz · · Score: 1

      Hey! John Candy is dead. You should have said Chris Farley, instead.

      What? oh... nevermind.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    3. Re:Wow... and damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's always Louis Anderson

  23. Well... by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...this is slashdot, after all.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  24. Re:Berkeley has an "e" in between the "k" and the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pay Attention to this, Mods. BERKELEY, not BERKLEY. Fix the spelling, plz.

  25. Hey I didn't even eat the mousse... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, I didn't even eat the mousse...

  26. Is that you... by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

    Tom Cruise?

    --
    0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
  27. wallpaper damn you by Floritard · · Score: 1

    These Berkeley assholes need to get their priorities straight. After all the whole point of letting them do their million dollar research is so that I can have a pretty new desktop wallpaper to impress/alienate my coworkers with my profound appreciation of the cosmos. Paging down through their "print-quality" photo section all I can see are disturbing pictures of smiling old men, like some haunting NAMBLA forum.

  28. Huh? by SirKron · · Score: 2, Insightful
    about an impressive star explosion that took place some tens of millions of years ago

    But my priest told me God made the universe 10,000 years ago. How can that be? Maybe it exploded in the universe we had previous to ours, you know, the one with the dinosaurs.

    1. Re:Huh? by Kazrath · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What??? Before you try to critisize a religion or hell even a topic you should at least have some understanding of it.

    2. Re:Huh? by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 3, Funny

      Before you try to critisize a religion or hell even a topic you should at least have some understanding of it.

      And hurtling towards us from the decaying supernova remnants is a probe with a single mysterious inscription on the side:

      "You must be new here."

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    3. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should secularists afford religion that luxury when religious zealots so rarely grant it to secularists? Religion is just another name for superstition. It need not be understood to be criticized.

  29. The unasked question by koddso · · Score: 1

    What I am wondering is who would win in a belching contest? Massive star or Booger?

  30. Could this be the way to save Earth? by djones101 · · Score: 1

    Picture it: The future, our sun is getting ready to explode, and then a massive mission is sent to the sun to infuse it with...antacid?

    1. Re:Could this be the way to save Earth? by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      Of course, the mission would have to be carried out at night so they don't burn up.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
  31. waferthinmint by brian0918 · · Score: 1

    I nominate this for besttagever. And if anyone is wondering what it refers to, first hand over your honorary nerd badge, and then watch this.

  32. Could it be... by ajlea2k · · Score: 1

    Star Jones? We can only hope...

  33. NEWS???? by cabinetsoft · · Score: 1

    gollum123 writes with a link to the Berkley site about an impressive star explosion that took place some tens of millions of years ago
    "News for nerds. Stuff that matters."... right!!! You expect us to care about a thing that happened tens of millions years ago??? I can even complain this was on digg already since is it predates it. Pfew!
  34. It's more like... by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 1

    ..a stack overflow.

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
  35. Spontaneously combusting stars by vimh42 · · Score: 1

    My first thought when reading the headline was some fat actor belched and then exploded. Just one more, it's wafer thin!

  36. Faster than light travel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I did a little calculating. At 10 million miles per hour, that means the pieces of the star are traveling at about 15 times the speed of light. I would think that would have been something to bring up in the article. I've been led to believe that nothing can go faster than light speed.

    1. Re:Faster than light travel? by flabbergasted · · Score: 1

      I hope you aren't an accountant, because your math sucks. A speed of 10 million miles per hour works out to about 3000 miles per second which is way below the speed of light.

    2. Re:Faster than light travel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be using a different value for the speed of light, or a different value for the number of seconds in an hour (its 3600, not 60) to get your incorrect result.

    3. Re:Faster than light travel? by Rick+Genter · · Score: 2, Informative

      I did a little calculating. At 10 million miles per hour, that means the pieces of the star are traveling at about 15 times the speed of light.


      You did your calculations wrong.

      c is approximately 186,282 miles per second. That translates to over 670 million miles per hour. 10 million miles per hour is only about 1.5% of lightspeed.
      --
      Don't underestimate the power of The Source
  37. Oblig. Python by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was the Salmon Mousse!!

  38. the plans by f1055man · · Score: 2, Funny

    for the hyperspace bypass have been on public display for some time now. They should have taken a greater interest in galactic affairs.

    -----
    am I strange for wondering if I'm being callous?

  39. Seems famiiar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As the wave smashed into the ejecta, it heated the gas to millions of degrees, hot enough to emit copious X-rays.

    Does this person write for Penthouse too?

  40. Thats a one spicy pizza by infonography · · Score: 1

    maybe a bit too much garlic?

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  41. Burrpp!! by TheCybernator · · Score: 1

    Excuse Me!!

    --
    Eclipse PDE and Me
  42. For some nagging reason... by Anti-Trend · · Score: 1

    ...I honestly expected to see an "oldnews" tag on this article.

    --
    Working in a DevOps shop is like playing in a band made up entirely of keytarists.
  43. The one question I want answered in Astronomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is why stars go Nova in pairs or fields sometimes??? Scares the crap out of me...

  44. Astronomical numbers by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

    I started working as a programmer at a radio aobservatory in januari 2005, just weeks after this had been detected. I remember one of the first talks on how much energy was approximately in the explosion. Then I learned that numbers in astrophysics are indeed astronomical, as they came up with something like 10^48 Joule, or approx. 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000 Joule. This is purely from memory, so the unit might have been erg instead. I'm definately sure about the 10^48 as it made my mind boggle then.

    --
    RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor