/sci/ - Science & Math

>some no-name professor at some no-name university

Cool.

cool so how does this make two suns?

PROTIP: There is a bigger chance of winning the lottery than betelgeuse exploding in our lifetime

Not this shit again.

>Every fucking time i'm here.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/21/betelgeuse-and-2012/

>>2409551
It turns out that no scientist said any such thing. The media is full of lies.

>.au

I don't fucking think so.

Australian websites have worse things to say than fox news and it would make sense too.

Fox news is owned by an ausfailian.

When astrophysicists say soon, it means within a million years.
when the media hears soon, they think it will occur at the next nostrodamus prophecy.

>>2409568
Nah, they're ignoring Nostradamus for the time being, because he said the world would not end until the 38th century.

So wouldn't this just happen in a blink of an eye? It goes boom and then the sky is how it was before in just 5mins?

>>2409572
The point was a little more subtle than what could be read- nostrodamus is the guy who makes up shitty prophecies that happen every few years, so a doomsday prophecy that happens every few years has some volcano, meteor, supernova, Y2K, whatever assigned to it.

>>2409575
Nah, it would be visible for months, but even at peak brightness, it wouldn't even be as bright as the full moon.

>“When a star goes bang, the first we will observe of it is a rain of tiny particles called nuetrinos,” says Dr Carter.

>nuetrinos

>>2409610

>also implying nuetrinos (lol) travel faster than light and so they will be the first things we see

>>2409610
Never mind the spelling error, focus on the more important mistake he made.

>>2409610
Sounds like a breakfast cereal

>>2409610
>Dr Carter

>>2409629
You're an idiot. Nothing travels faster than the speed of light *in a vacuum* but the light must first escape from the hot, dense matter of the star. Neutrinos are weakly interacting, so they escape first.

That was just about the only statement in the article that was *not* horse shit, so good job singling it out for criticism.

>>2409648

>implying light is only generated and emitted at the core of a star and not the surface

>The second biggest star in the universe is losing mass
We've checked every star in every galaxy then?

>>2409658
Okay, the second biggest KNOWN star you stupid Aspie.

>>2409656
He was not implying that, and he is right

>>2409656
Are you fuckign serious thinking that neutrinos wont arrive before light?!

>>2409656
>implying the supernova explosion starts at the surface

Seriously, I'm just a businessman and even I know it starts from a core collapse which produces a powerful flux of neutrinos which are the first thing to escape through the layers of the star.

>>2409671

You telling me that light is not emitted from the surface of a star? Really?

>>2409664
The article doesn't say anything about KNOWN stars. It just outright says it's the second biggest star in the universe.

>>2409664
there is an ammendment at the botto of article saying 2nd biggest in orion nebula

explain how nuetrinos can travel faster than light

>>2409684
Because space is not a total vacuum and neutrinos are affected much less then light.

>>2409563
What's really scary: Fox news actually got it right.

>>2409689
that doesn't really mean anything. you know that, right?

>>2409664
example
"The gamma rays (high-energy photons) released in fusion reactions are absorbed in only a few millimeters of solar plasma and then re-emitted again in random direction and at slightly lower energy. Therefore it takes a long time for radiation to reach the Sun's surface. Estimates of the photon travel time range between 10,000 and 170,000 years"
Neutrinos do not interact.

>>2409708
>mfw.jpg
Of course it does..


The amount of pseudo experts here today is unusually high.

I bet its the inertia guy

>>2409648
>implying the star will go black for a little while to give the neutrinos a head start.
>implying you're not the idiot.

>>2409673
Neutrinos have mass. They travel slower than light.

>>2409689
Space is enough of a vacuum for light to travel at c in it. But you already know this because you are a troll.

>>2409722
That "argument" has already been shot down ITT (supernova is a core-collapse event that does not directly involve the outer layers). By repeating it ad nauseam you only reveal your own idiocy.

>>2409726
>>2409722
>>2409708
>>2409676
>>2409656
Yep.
Yep.
Get yer arses offa mah lawn.

>>2409717
The light from the surface of a star leaves right away. If a star explodes, you get an explosion of photons from the surface. What happens to photons in the star's core is irrelevant.

>>2409737
That is completely wrong, but you probably know that.

>>2409738
>If a star explodes, you get an explosion of photons from the surface.

This is where you fail. Really, I'm done with this thread. Feel free to repeat the same errors among yourselves and glory in your perceived intellectualism.

>>2409733
No, i think you are the troll.

>>2409563

So to summarize:

1. No it won't.
2. But if it did, that wouldn't be the end of the world, it would be REALLY FUCKING COOL.

>>2409648

>>2409738
I wonder if you're confusing different kinds of supernova events here.

We're talking about a so-called core-collapse supernova, which begins at the core and the effects only show at the surface when the rebound shockwave reaches the surface. As seen in pic here.

Type 1a supernova on the other hand is a runaway fusion of accreted elements on the surface of an old, already-collapsed star.

>>2409689

fuck, i'm going to run out of reaction images at the rate this thread is going

>>2409726

>implying light does not have mass

what, do you think photons are fucking imaginary?

typical

>>2409782

>>2409770
>continued

...but judging by the no responses to my attempt at being civil, the gripping hand is that you could have checked it yourself instead of mouthing off, which makes you a troll.

>>2409795
Pretty much how most of 4chan is now.

yes, we think photons are imaginary.

God damnit, some people are just too stupid. At first I was going to label every post in which some middle school drop out tried to say that radiation would instantly come from the outer surface of a star, but that would take too long, seeing as how sci seems to be filled of WOULD BE mdidle school drop outs, if the system wasn't pushing them through.

Alright, listen up, because i'm only saying this once. When a star begins to collapse, the nature of the core changes such that a massive wave of radiation is emitted. However, because the radiation has to go through tens of thousands of kilometers of star, it takes a while to get through. Neutrinos on the other hand, can pass clear through entire planets without "hitting" anything. Therefore, they get a massive head start.

> my face when Betelgeuse have a longer article in wikipedia than the largest known start, VY Canis Majoris

>>2409899
>mfw it's because Betelgeuse is a lot closer and easier to observe than VY Canis Majoris.

Under goes a type 2 sypernova explosion the star will collapse in on itself . If it goes it will be the first supernova seen from earth in 1700 years.

But really if it blows it blows if it doesnt then well it doesnt .

if there was 2 suns suddenly im pretty sure it would fuck up the planet a lot

and if it was real because of that everyone would be panicking right now

The infamous red super-giant star in Orion’s nebula - Betelgeuse - is predicted to go gangbusters and the impending super-nova may reach Earth before 2012, and when it does, all of our wildest Star Wars dreams will come true.

Betel is btn 400 - 900 light years away.
meh ....

>The important thing is, one day, night will become day for several weeks on Earth.

>“It goes bang, it explodes, it lights up - we’ll have incredible brightness for a brief period of time for a couple of weeks and then over the coming months it begins to fade and then eventually it will be very hard to see at all.”

>>2410583
could grow mj 24/7...righteous...

Betelgeuse is one of my favorite stars. If it goes nova before I die, I will be sad to see such an old friend go.

>>2409556
it's going to take millions of years

we don't know when betegelse started its red giant stage and we don't know when it's going to finish

>mfw you're talking about "when" Betelgeux will die

>mfw it's already dead

>>2410833
>mfw implying simultaneity over instellar distances

>>2410854
>instellar

>>2410854

>mfw I didn't say anything about absolute simultaneity.

>>2410867
Oops.

BEETLEJUICE NO

>>2410854
>He doesn't know about entanglement

>>2410886
>he doesn't know anything about entanglement

Did anyone actually read the article? If you did you'd find this wonderful piece of trivia.

>The bad news is, it could also happen in a million years. But who's counting?

which roughly translates into

>We were totally lying about how it probably will blow up next year. I TROLL YOU.

Also a lot people on this board doesn't know shit about astronomy.

>The interwebs is being flooded

stopped reading right there

>>2409778
0/10
get the fuck out

>>2409877
>Therefore, they get a massive head start.
Even if the neutrinos were shot out at .999999c, they would need a 5.6 hour head start to get here before the photons. I don't think it takes 5 hours for the shock wave to travel through the star.