Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Supernova Detonates In Empty Space

Posted by kdawson on from the no-one-can-hear-you-explode dept.

mlimber tips a story in New Scientist about a powerful cosmic explosion that has astronomers scratching their heads. It apparently resulted from a supernova detonating in empty space, far from any galaxy. Researchers propose that the exploding star was in the gas trail yanked out of a galaxy when it passed or began merging with another. Quoting the lead author of the study: "Even if the galaxies have stopped forming stars, in the tidal tails you can trigger new episodes of star formation [not to mention detonation]." The research will be published in the Astrophysical Journal.

9 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Far from any galaxy? by calebt3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How far can a star get from its home galaxy during it's lifetime? Especially one large enough to make a supernova: don't those have even shorter lifespans?
    Even if it could escape the galaxy, how would it get far enough to make it questionable about what galaxy it came from?

  2. Makes you wonder by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Maybe Fred Hoyle was right after all

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle#Rejection_of_the_Big_Bang

    While having no argument with the Lemaître theory, (later confirmed by Edwin Hubble's observations) that the universe was expanding, Hoyle disagreed on its interpretation. An atheist, he found the idea that the universe had a beginning to be philosophically troubling, as many argue that a beginning implies a cause, and thus a creator (see kalam cosmological argument).[4] Instead, Hoyle, along with Thomas Gold and Hermann Bondi (with whom he had worked on radar in World War II), argued for the universe as being in a "steady state". The theory tried to explain how the universe could be eternal and essentially unchanging while still having the galaxies we observe moving away from each other. The theory hinged on the creation of matter between galaxies over time, so that even though galaxies get further apart, new ones that develop between them fill the space they leave. The resulting universe is in a "steady state" in the same manner that a flowing river is - the individual water molecules are moving away but the overall river remains the same. I guess you could imagine white holes spewing out matter from black holes into the void between the galaxies in a sort of mini big bang. I guess if we had lots of little bangs instead of one big one it would explain why the universe is flat and homogenous - you wouldn't need to have an inflationary period to flatten things like you do after one big bang. The cosmic microwave background radiation would thus come from all these white holes over eternity rather than one big bang.

    Matter is conserved in one universe too, which seems neat. Black holes gobble it up and white holes spit it out. In the big bang model, something spooky connects black holes in one universe to big bangs in a different one. Or maybe matter isn't conserved at all.
    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    1. Re:Makes you wonder by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem is that white holes have never been observed either directly or indirectly. No, but in Hoyle's steady state theory he worked out that the rate of creation of matter would need to be very low to explain the appearance of the universe. Later the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation was discovered, which most people think is evidence for the Big Bang and that steady state theory is wrong. He tried to modify it into Quasi Solid State Theory, where there are lots of little bangs. Now admittedly no one takes this theory at all seriously, but it works by having minibangs, essentially white holes, doing the creation.

      Up to now, the only supernova seen have been inside galaxies. So it's plausible that they are stars exploding. But this one is between the galaxies. So my question is could this be one of Hoyle's minibangs, a white hole spewing out matter in the void between the galaxies? Like Hoyle, steady state theory appeals to me because it means there is no act of creation to explain - the universe has essentially always existed. The idea that matter is conserved in one universe is appealing too. But I'm no astrophysicist and it seems clear that the consensus among them is that Hoyle is wrong. But then again, even if this supernova isn't a minibang, maybe no one found one because no one is looking in the right places - i.e. observatories don't look at the space between galaxies because the consensus is that nothing happens there. And for Hoyle to be right, you don't need very many white holes

      On the other hand Chaotic inflation theory gives an eternal universe but (as far as I can tell) no minibangs - the Big Bang is not unique but it's the only white hole we can 'see'. There are multiple bubble universes, but each one comes from a single event and they are not causally connected since light doesn't have time to travel from one to another.
      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  3. Re:What's puzzling? by Zarhan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ok, I am not a professional astronomer, but here's my take on it.

    Problem is that stars that blow up as supernovas are big. Very big. Especially since this one hints that it was so big to collapse into a black hole (based on the gamma ray burst).

    Big stars don't live long. Only millions of years, instead of billions like our sun (or tens of billions like red dwarfs..).

    Nearest galaxy was about 100000 light-years away. You don't get a star from there to the current location in just a few million years.

    So, the star must have *formed*, burned, and blown up in intergalactic space.

  4. hypervelocity star by MyNymWasTaken · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It could've been a hypervelocity star.

  5. Re:Sounds like... by iocat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wasn't there just a galaxy to galaxy destructive jet of super heated plasma? Clearly we're witness the results of an interstellar war so vast that it even percolates down to our level.

    --

    Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

  6. Re:What's puzzling? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sort of. There are two galaxies 160,000 light years apart. The gamma ray burst came from a spot in between them. Since both are about 9 billion light years away, it's a bit hard to make out fine details. Since, as you say, giant stars don't normally form in intergalactic space, the hypothesis is that the galaxies collided and are now separating, dragging streams of material between them. Stars can and do form (copiously) in that disturbed material, which is not really in intergalactic space, but rather a deformed part of these two galaxies that's just too faint to see.

    They're doing deeper field observations now to try and detect the material dragged out by these galaxies colliding.

  7. "Don't worry too much about the myrrh next time.." by sponglish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This being the 30th anniversary of Monty Python's Michael Palin first discussing the "Life of Brian" draft at Oxford, and Christmas being nigh, that nova can only mean there are three wise men are en route to Bethlehem, bearing gold and frankincense, and leading a balm on a leash.

    --
    "I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
  8. Re:What's puzzling? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, we've got one big galaxy on one side of us and another one speeding towards us on the other side. If you can wait about a billion years we'll be in much the same position, except there will be LOTS of stars to go visit. Unfortunately there will also be lots of supernovae exploding around us as the two galaxies interact.