Found this on KJRH:
QuoteTwo suns visible from Earth by 2012?
Jan 24, 2011 1:36 p.m.
They say you shouldn't stare at the sun... and well, you really shouldn't stare if there were TWO suns.
That's right. Two suns.
According to news.com.au , the second biggest star Betelgeuse is losing mass, running out of fuel, and may soon go supernova.
When a star goes supernova, it means it would explode with the potential of luminosity a billion times greater than the sun.
If that happens, the "twin stars" may be visible to us on Earth... at least for a few weeks.
According to the article , it could happen as early as 2012 or may take much longer.
But it's not something doomsday sayers can get too excited about. The article says it will be harmless to the Earth and everything living on it.
We just might not have any nights during that time.
Check out the full article for more.
Can't imagine that.
Quote from: ZYX on January 24, 2011, 02:57:31 PM
Found this on KJRH:Can't imagine that.
For us to see the light of that supernova, it would have had to have happened in the middle ages.
But it makes for good TV fluff.
Quote from: patric on January 24, 2011, 03:24:58 PM
For us to see the light of that supernova, it would have had to have happened in the middle ages.
But it makes for good TV fluff.
The estimate of the time to supernova could be off by a few million years, but that's pretty accurate when compared to CBO estimates!
QuoteQuote from: patric on January 24, 2011, 03:24:58 PM
For us to see the light of that supernova, it would have had to have happened in the middle ages.
But it makes for good TV fluff.
Yeah, I'm not sure what to think of it. It sounds kinda out there.
Quote from: patric on January 24, 2011, 03:24:58 PM
For us to see the light of that supernova, it would have had to have happened in the middle ages.
How do you know that it didn't?
Quote from: Red Arrow on January 24, 2011, 03:56:37 PM
How do you know that it didn't?
He didn't hear about it. ;)
The article says it will soon go into supernova, so if what patric says is true, we won't even come close to seeing it.
I am going to invest in good sunglasses.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 24, 2011, 04:08:55 PM
I am going to invest in good sunglasses.
I read a more complete article about this. It is about to go, or was when the light that we see from it was leaving the star. We could see a supernova next year (that actually happened hundreds of years ago) or we might not see one for a million years. If we do see it will only be about as bright as the moon. At night it would be brighter and for a time we might not have much in the way of a night with the brightness of two moons shining on us.
QuoteQuote from: swake on January 24, 2011, 04:14:55 PM
I read a more complete article about this. It is about to go, or was when the light that we see from it was leaving the star. We could see a supernova next year (that actually happened hundreds of years ago) or we might not see one for a million years. If we do see it will only be about as bright as the moon. At night it would be brighter and for a time we might not have much in the way of a night with the brightness of two moons shining on us.
No night would be really cool.
Not gonna happen. It would have had to go supernova in 1372 for us to see it in 2012. It didn't. KJRH is only about 5 days late picking up this incorrect story. The star is possibly about to go supernova with predictions saying it could happen in 2012. If it does it will be another 640 years before that light makes its way to Earth.
Quote from: Ibanez on January 24, 2011, 09:02:36 PM
Not gonna happen. It would have had to go supernova in 1372 for us to see it in 2012. It didn't. KJRH is only about 5 days late picking up this incorrect story. The star is possibly about to go supernova with predictions saying it could happen in 2012. If it does it will be another 640 years before that light makes its way to Earth.
How do you get that it did not go supernova already? We do not know what has happened to a distant star until the light from it reaches us. While saying that it will go Supernova in the next year or so and that we will see it happen would be grossly incorrect, it would not change the fact that if it is showing signs of a star approaching supernova that it actually happened a long time ago and we would just now be seeing the effects. Truth be told, none of the scientist know when it will happen (or appear to happen if it has already), so who knows, it could show up next year to give us an extra light show. I've always wanted to see a supernova. Oh, and it would have had to gone super nova in 1585 ± 92 years to be visible in 2012.
http://domeofthesky.com/clicks/betelgeuse.html
Quote from: ZYX on January 24, 2011, 04:39:54 PM
No night would be really cool.
The novelty of that would wear of really fast.
With no day/night cycles to maintain our circadian rhythm, or physical and mental health would deteriorate rapidly, and there would be planet-wide mass extinctions.
Except Ch 2 -- they would just report it a week late.
QuoteQuote from: patric on January 24, 2011, 11:34:45 PM
The novelty of that would wear of really fast.
With no day/night cycles to maintain our circadian rhythm, or physical and mental health would deteriorate rapidly, and there would be planet-wide mass extinctions.
Except Ch 2 -- they would just report it a week late.
Ha ha
Quote from: patric on January 24, 2011, 11:34:45 PM
With no day/night cycles to maintain our circadian rhythm, or physical and mental health would deteriorate rapidly, and there would be planet-wide mass extinctions.
Except way far north and south where most of the people and the animals have learned to accomodate long days and nights.
Quote from: custosnox on January 24, 2011, 10:05:05 PM
http://domeofthesky.com/clicks/betelgeuse.html
QuoteBetelguese and the related names derive from the Arabic phrase Ibt al Jauzah meaning "The Armpit of the Central One".
Well that explains it.
Quote from: custosnox on January 24, 2011, 10:05:05 PM
How do you get that it did not go supernova already? We do not know what has happened to a distant star until the light from it reaches us. While saying that it will go Supernova in the next year or so and that we will see it happen would be grossly incorrect, it would not change the fact that if it is showing signs of a star approaching supernova that it actually happened a long time ago and we would just now be seeing the effects. Truth be told, none of the scientist know when it will happen (or appear to happen if it has already), so who knows, it could show up next year to give us an extra light show. I've always wanted to see a supernova. Oh, and it would have had to gone super nova in 1585 ± 92 years to be visible in 2012.
http://domeofthesky.com/clicks/betelgeuse.html
By not relying on Channel 2 for all of my Astronomy news needs...
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/01/is-betelgeuse-about-to-blow/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/21/betelgeuse-and-2012/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/24/betelgeuse-followup/
Quote from: Ibanez on January 25, 2011, 03:17:42 PM
By not relying on Channel 2 for all of my Astronomy news needs...
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/01/is-betelgeuse-about-to-blow/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/21/betelgeuse-and-2012/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/24/betelgeuse-followup/
And yet you still have not proven that it has not gone supernova already. I'm not saying it has, or that it will be seen in 2012 or any of that, but you say it hasn't, which you do not know that. You may be sure it hasn't, and you might be right, but you don't
know that it hasn't.
Quote from: Ibanez on January 25, 2011, 03:17:42 PM
By not relying on Channel 2 for all of my Astronomy news needs...
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/01/is-betelgeuse-about-to-blow/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/21/betelgeuse-and-2012/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/01/24/betelgeuse-followup/
You are missing the point that when we look at the stars we are looking backwards in time. We have no way to know what's currently going on with anything out in space, it takes time for light and radio waves to get here. It may well have blown 500 years ago but we still won't know about it for another hundred years.
Quote from: swake on January 25, 2011, 03:25:03 PM
You are missing the point that when we look at the stars we are looking backwards in time. We have no way to know what's currently going on with anything out in space, it takes time for light and radio waves to get here. It may well have blown 500 years ago but we still won't know about it for another hundred years.
Provided the link I gave is accurate, and I have no reason not to think so, the actual distance is 427 ± 92 light years away. I like that kind of information over that of a blogger that says "about", "roughly" and "something like" a lot.
Quote from: custosnox on January 25, 2011, 03:27:44 PM
Provided the link I gave is accurate, and I have no reason not to think so, the actual distance is 427 ± 92 light years away. I like that kind of information over that of a blogger that says "about", "roughly" and "something like" a lot.
Don't you know how
reliable bloggers are?
That blogger is a Phd. in Astronomy whose thesis just happens to be on Supernovas. He was part of the Hubble team with NASA and helped design the Space Imaging Spectrograph, is published in the Encyclopedia Britannica, has several books on astronomy, runs the Bad Astronomy website where he debunks misconceptions about astronomy and space science and just happens to have an asteroid named after him. So I think I'll take his word over something that was posted on some Austrailian website and then picked up by the Huffington Post.
Super Nova: 427/ 4sp /posi
Sorry, I could resist any longer. I'll blow up now.
Quote from: swake on January 25, 2011, 03:25:03 PM
You are missing the point that when we look at the stars we are looking backwards in time. We have no way to know what's currently going on with anything out in space, it takes time for light and radio waves to get here. It may well have blown 500 years ago but we still won't know about it for another hundred years.
I am well aware of that. My point is that people who make a living in astronomy do not believe the star is due, in the short term, to go supernova based on observations gathered over the last 60 years. Their estimation is that on the short end the star could go supernova in 500 years, and on the long end 10,000 years.
I just linked some of the links I did because the did a nice job explaining things in laymen's terms...however there are many, many sites out there where good information can be gathered.
Quote from: Ibanez on January 25, 2011, 06:18:03 PM
That blogger is a Phd. in Astronomy whose thesis just happens to be on Supernovas. He was part of the Hubble team with NASA and helped design the Space Imaging Spectrograph, is published in the Encyclopedia Britannica, has several books on astronomy, runs the Bad Astronomy website where he debunks misconceptions about astronomy and space science and just happens to have an asteroid named after him. So I think I'll take his word over something that was posted on some Austrailian website and then picked up by the Huffington Post.
Thank you for clarifying your source of information, and perhaps my remark was unnecessary. But, I don't believe that you can just give a firm "no" when nobody will know the answer to this question until it either happens or does not.
My referance to a blogger using really general terms wasn't so much about how much knowledge he has, but the lack of accuracy in his statements. His comments gave rough estiments, which seem to be from memory and not referencing his sources of information. Which, even as well as he might know his field, most likely numbers from the top of his head, hence his not giving exacts. When you have studied so many things, and have seen so many numbers, being within a few 100 years with a quick recall is pretty impressive. Still, even he said it could happen tomorrow, or it could happen in 10,000 years. Yes, chances are it won't happen for a long time, but that small possibility is there that we coudl wake up in the morning and discover it had gone super nova, or in a year from now. And, of course, there is the fact that it's all theory, and since none have actually seen a SuperNova to know for certain what the signs of one is, it's all about best guesses given the information we do have. Careful with accepting extremely good chance with absolutes.
I'll bet I still cant get a tan. :(
Quote from: Red Arrow on January 25, 2011, 07:40:42 AM
Except way far north and south where most of the people and the animals have learned to accomodate long days and nights.
There might be pockets of humans that adapt, but would the world's food supply?
Anyway, the prediction seems to be a supernova in 2012 give or take 10,000 years. ;D
[quoteAnyway, the prediction seems to be a supernova in 2012 give or take 10,000 years. ][/quote]
Ahhhhhh, close enough.
Huh, that post came out weird.
Red,
You are an instigator!
I like that.
Let's just hope we aren't in line with the gamma burst out of that thing when it does happen. Instant vaporization just isn't all that much fun!