Two suns in 2012?

[Townsend]

http://domeofthesky.com/clicks/betelgeuse.html

Betelguese and the related names derive from the Arabic phrase Ibt al Jauzah meaning "The Armpit of the Central One".

Well that explains it.

[Ibanez]

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/

[custosnox]

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.

[swake]

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.

[custosnox]

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.

[ZYX]

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?

[Ibanez]

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.

[Red Arrow]

Super Nova: 427/ 4sp /posi

Sorry, I could resist any longer.  I'll blow up now.

[Ibanez]

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.

[ZYX]

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.

[custosnox]

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.

[DolfanBob]

I'll bet I still cant get a tan.   

[patric]

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. 

[ZYX]

[quoteAnyway, the prediction seems to be a supernova in 2012 give or take 10,000 years.  ][/quote]



Ahhhhhh, close enough.

[ZYX]

Huh, that post came out weird.