Re: SR time dilation on remote objects ?

From: Bjoern Feuerbacher (feuerbac_at_thphys.uni-heidelberg.de)
Date: 07/20/04 

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:58:52 +0200

vonroach wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:45:04 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
> <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>
>
>>vonroach wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:17:30 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
>>><feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>The collapse of a mass (star) produces a supernova.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes. The collapse *produces* the supernova. It *precedes* the supernova.
>>>>>>It is not identical to the supernova! During a suernova explosion,
>>>>>>the star is *expanding*, not collapsing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Arguable.
>>>>
>>>>What exactly is arguable here?
>>>>
>>>
>>>whether you know as much as you claim about supernovas.
>>
>>What makes you think that *you* know more not only than me, but also
>>more than all the people who *studied* the SNs?
>>
>
> Because many disagree with your terminology.

Who are these "many"?

So far, *you* are the only one who disagrees with calling a
supernova an explosion.

[snip]

>>>>The light which we see comes from the explosion, from the "debris"
>>>>which flows away. So it is perfectly reasonable to talk about an
>>>>explosion here.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, the residual star still emits light.
>>
>>Yes. But the light we *see* comes from the explosion, not from the
>>collapsing core!
>
>
> It comes from the supernova remnant.

What do *you* call an event where a lot of stuff is shot violently
outward from a center, due to a release of a huge amount of energy, if
not an explosion???

> Material extruded when the star implodes.

Why do you choose the word "extrude" here? Apparently in order to
avoid the *obvious* implication that this describes an explosion.

> It may be seen long after the initial event, and slowly
> fades. Would you call this `chronic slowly fading explosion'?

No. The original event of shooting all this stuff outward from the center.

> Most of
> the opinions that I've seen disagree with this interpretation. Perhaps
> if you really mean a `chronic explosion', the term stellar nuclear
> reaction would be preferable. Then we would have to decide when a
> `chronic explosion' becomes just a star.

Nice strawman, as usual.

Bye,
Bjoern

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SR time dilation on remote objects ?
    ... >> whether you know as much as you claim about supernovas. ... Because many disagree with your terminology. ... Would you call this `chronic slowly fading explosion'? ... `chronic explosion' becomes just a star. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Action Replay of Powerful Stellar Explosion (Forwarded)
    ... Action Replay of Powerful Stellar Explosion ... supernova explosion that was visible from Earth long ago. ... Using data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, ... the supernova remnant and the supernova light echo that are located in the ...
    (sci.space.news)
  • Action Replay of Powerful Stellar Explosion (Forwarded)
    ... Action Replay of Powerful Stellar Explosion ... supernova explosion that was visible from Earth long ago. ... Using data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, ... the supernova remnant and the supernova light echo that are located in the ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: SR time dilation on remote objects ?
    ... >>In a supernova explosion, there is only a quite tiny remainder (type ... >>the original star is blown away. ... > the fate of the extruded remanent, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • SN1987As Twentieth Anniversary (Forwarded)
    ... ESO Education and Public Relations Dept. ... The unique supernova SN 1987A has been a bonanza for astrophysicists. ... it is exactly twenty years since the explosion of Supernova 1987A ... in particular using ESO's telescopes. ...
    (sci.astro)
Quantcast