|
|
Post by npsguy on Feb 20, 2009 11:47:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by heatsink on Feb 20, 2009 18:08:55 GMT
How can this explosion happen 12.2 billion light years form earth if "astronomers believe [supernovas] occur when massive stars run out of nuclear fuel and collapse." I'm not familiar with the latest estimates on the age of the universe but i believe they run in the range of 13 -15 billion years old. If this star collapsed it must have run out of fuel in .8 - 2.8 billion years. This seems rather quick for a Hugh star. |
|
|
|
Post by Maui on Feb 20, 2009 19:32:50 GMT
Once again, I think this is evidence that events in the universe show a "Levy Flight" distribution instead of random ("Monte Carlo"). Therefore, I contend that ALL use of random numbers in computer models is flawed.
My "agenda" is that the Sun affects volcanoes. Sure enough, the definitive study by Stothers at NASA of volcanoes and the Sun relied on random numbers (he only found a weak correlation). I honestly believe that the pervasiveness of "random numbers" in simulations is a bigger mistake than Y2K, and this discovery of a higher-than-predicted gamma ray energy is further proof.
|
|
|
|
Post by npsguy on Feb 20, 2009 21:21:57 GMT
How can this explosion happen 12.2 billion light years form earth if "astronomers believe [supernovas] occur when massive stars run out of nuclear fuel and collapse." I'm not familiar with the latest estimates on the age of the universe but i believe they run in the range of 13 -15 billion years old. If this star collapsed it must have run out of fuel in .8 - 2.8 billion years. This seems rather quick for a Hugh star. I am confused by your post. The more massive a star the shorter its life cycle, right? Supergiants and Hypergiants have life cycles in million of years. Eta Carinae is a good example. And in the early universe it was predicted that first generation stars were quite large www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/science/space/01stars.htmlI don't exactly see the problem with this story... if anything it fits all predictions. |
|
|
|
Post by heatsink on Feb 20, 2009 22:58:23 GMT
How can this explosion happen 12.2 billion light years form earth if "astronomers believe [supernovas] occur when massive stars run out of nuclear fuel and collapse." I'm not familiar with the latest estimates on the age of the universe but i believe they run in the range of 13 -15 billion years old. If this star collapsed it must have run out of fuel in .8 - 2.8 billion years. This seems rather quick for a Hugh star. I am confused by your post. The more massive a star the shorter its life cycle, right? Supergiants and Hypergiants have life cycles in million of years. Eta Carinae is a good example. And in the early universe it was predicted that first generation stars were quite large www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/science/space/01stars.htmlI don't exactly see the problem with this story... if anything it fits all predictions. Thanks, I guess I didn't know just how short these initial stars could live. |
|
|
|
Post by npsguy on Feb 21, 2009 0:13:33 GMT
[Thanks, I guess I didn't know just how short these initial stars could live. Yeah the early universe appeared to have a lot of giants (in theory). There is another interesting story about this www.skyandtelescope.com/news/39867717.html which states that the sub-atomic wavelengths of the high energy gamma rays may actually be slowed down due to quantum distrubances. |
|
|
|
Post by donmartin on Feb 21, 2009 7:03:15 GMT
It's all relative  |
|
