Thanks BenLurkin. It's been quite a haul for the Catastrophism list.
|
Posted on 08/17/2019 9:20:34 AM PDT by BenLurkin
In November of 2016, the sharp-eyed Gaia spacecraft spied a supernova that exploded some billion light-years from Earth. Astronomers followed up with more telescopes, and quickly realized that this supernova – dubbed SN2016iet – was an odd one in many ways.
For one, the star that caused the supernova seemed to orbit far in the hinterlands of its tiny, previously unknown dwarf galaxy, some 54,000 light-years from its center. Most massive stars are born in denser clusters of stars, and it’s a puzzle how this one came to form so far out.
And this star was extremely massive, starting life as some 200 times the mass of the Sun, near the upper limit of what scientists think is possible for a single star to weigh.
The supernova itself also left what appeared to be the signature of two explosions, separated by about 100 days. Astronomers think this isn’t actually due to multiple explosions, but from the explosion hitting different layers of material the star lost in the years leading up to its death and left scattered around it in a diffuse cloud.
The star meets many of the criteria for something called a pair-instability supernova, a kind of explosion that some extremely massive stars should theoretically undergo. Such an event leaves the star completely destroyed, leaving nothing behind. But finding examples of these rare stellar explosions has been difficult, and this is still one of the first scientists have discovered. And even in that rare company, SN2016iet remains an oddball find.
(Excerpt) Read more at astronomy.com ...
Someday you will find me
Caught beneath the landslide
In a champagne supernova in the sky
Cosmic Rays!
Thanks BenLurkin. It's been quite a haul for the Catastrophism list.
|
Answer: 54 billion years.
Sneaky! The old trick question with superfluous information. But you were caught!
This is old news. This supernova actually happened about a billion years ago.
Made me laugh. :)
I went out with a girl like that.
Interesting analogy. I wouldn’t have thought of it.
Fusion reactors on Earth require creating supernova conditions. Is that really a good idea? Instead of meltdowns we might have to worry about whole mountains exploding into the sky.
Fusion reactors on Earth require creating supernova conditions.
Our sun operates at 15 million degrees Kelvin. Fusion reactors try for 100 million Kelvin. Are you comfortable with politically driven big government projects playing with supernova conditions?
No, the conditions that produce a supernova are far more extreme than what’s needed for fusion. There is a connected between the two processes, though. It’s the energy from fusion that prevents a supernova from occurring in a star. It’s only after fusion has run its course that the core finally collapses to atomic nucleus density, triggering the supernova. The energy release is also far greater, up to 10% matter to energy conversion, as opposed to only 0.7% in hydrogen fusion.
Everything can be explained by global warming.
Uh, no. They exist. They have been observed. The part you can question is the theory explaining why supernovae happen.
Dark matter?
Anybody else who had to invent dark matter and dark energy (and maybe even Steven Hawkins) might suspect that there is something seriously wrong with their Big Bang fantasy.
And let’s NOT forget inflation either.
I expect the James Webb space telescope is going to cause some self proclaimed geniuses to need safe rooms and serious counseling...
What?!
I thought the title was about Jennifer Lawrence destroyed by fame.....
Get over it. It happened a very long time ago. ;-D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
