Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Hubble finds supernova star system linked to potential 'zombie star'

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Hubble finds supernova star system linked to potential 'zombie star'


Using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, a team of astronomers has spotted a star system that could have left behind a "zombie star" after an unusually weak supernova explosion.

A supernova typically obliterates the exploding white dwarf, or dying star. On this occasion, scientists believe this faint supernova may have left behind a surviving portion of the dwarf star -- a sort of zombie star.

While examining Hubble images taken years before the stellar explosion, astronomers identified a blue companion star feeding energy to a white dwarf, a process that ignited a nuclear reaction and released this weak supernova blast. This supernova, Type Iax, is less common than its brighter cousin, Type Ia. Astronomers have identified more than 30 of these mini-supernovas that may leave behind a surviving white dwarf.

"Astronomers have been searching for decades for the star systems that produce Type Ia supernova explosions," said scientist Saurabh Jha of Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey. "Type Ia's are important because they're used to measure vast cosmic distances and the expansion of the universe. But we have very few constraints on how any white dwarf explodes. The similarities between Type Iax's and normal Type Ia's make understanding Type Iax progenitors important, especially because no Type Ia progenitor has been conclusively identified. This discovery shows us one way that you can get a white dwarf explosion."

The team's results will appear in the Thursday, Aug. 7 edition of the journal Nature.

The weak supernova, dubbed SN 2012Z, resides in the host galaxy NGC 1309 which is 110 million light-years away. It was discovered in the Lick Observatory Supernova Search in January 2012. Luckily, Hubble's Advanced Camera for Surveys also observed NGC 1309 for several years prior the supernova outburst, which allowed scientists to compare before-and-after images.

Curtis McCully, a graduate student at Rutgers and lead author of the team's paper, sharpened the Hubble pre-explosion images and noticed a peculiar object near the location of the supernova.

"I was very surprised to see anything at the location of the supernova. We expected the progenitor system would be too faint to see, like in previous searches for normal Type Ia supernova progenitors. It is exciting when nature surprises us," McCully said.

After studying the object's colors and comparing with computer simulations of possible Type Iax progenitor systems, the team concluded they were seeing the light of a star that had lost its outer hydrogen envelope, revealing its helium core


Now before you start thinking that these Zombie stars will create Zombies that come to Earth, you are right
Just kidding

The many different lives of stars are amazing.

One possible explanation for the unusual nature of SN 2012Z is that a game of seesaw ensued between the bigger and smaller of the star pair. The more massive star evolved more quickly to expand and dump its hydrogen and helium onto the smaller star. The rapidly evolving star became a white dwarf. The smaller star bulked up, grew larger and engulfed the white dwarf. The outer layers of this combined star were ejected, leaving behind the white dwarf and the helium core of the companion star. The white dwarf siphoned matter from the companion star until it became unstable and exploded as a mini-supernova, leaving behind a surviving zombie star.

This study should help provide a better understanding of the relationship between Type Iax and normal Type Ia supernovae and their corresponding star systems.




posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
the forces required to create large ammounts of black matter is vast.

the trigger has to be magnitudes higher than the expansion point of atoms exploding.
If there is not enough force drawing in, Then expansion will occure.

There are medians tho, Middle points to these effects. I guess scientists were looking for proof of it.

Because like on earth we can cause a bomb to go off, But theres no external pressures containing the blast so it moves in one direction up and out ( Since we are on Earth) Earth still has forces drawing mass in but its not very strong compared to the force being exausted in bombs.

In Space there is a perfect vacume, When mass collapsed it expanded the energy and spread it out. Some of the mass remained and reformed under the excess pressures. Not all collapsing stars create black holes. But i wouldn't think all the mass would be shot out into space. Eitherway cool thread.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:23 PM
link   
"While examining Hubble images taken years before the stellar explosion, astronomers identified a blue companion star feeding energy to a white dwarf, a process that ignited a nuclear reaction and released this weak supernova blast. This supernova, Type Iax, is less common than its brighter cousin, Type Ia. Astronomers have identified more than 30 of these mini-supernovas that may leave bWhile examining Hubble images taken years before the stellar explosion, astronomers identified a blue companion star feeding energy to a white dwarf, a process that ignited a nuclear reaction and released this weak supernova blast. This supernova, Type Iax, is less common than its brighter cousin, Type Ia. Astronomers have identified more than 30 of these mini-supernovas that may leave behind a surviving white dwarf. ehind a surviving white dwarf."



I'm no scientist however, doesnt this statement conflict with the speed of light theory and our position in the galaxy? We are constently being told the light we see from these bodies is eons old so how could we see this star before and after the supernova? Considering how relatively new the Hubble is, and the region these images come from and the distance between each I just don't find this plausible. Is it?
edit on 7-8-2014 by bkfd54 because: Wrong qoute



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Um, aren't exploding white dwarfs produce a nova, rather than supernova? Nova explosions are always relatively weak compared to supernovae.

Gief the original Hubble.org article.


originally posted by: bkfd54
I'm no scientist however, doesnt this statement conflict with the speed of light theory and our position in the galaxy? We are constently being told the light we see from these bodies is eons old so how could we see this star before and after the supernova? Considering how relatively new the Hubble is, and the region these images come from and the distance between each I just don't find this plausible. Is it?

Well, the actual explosion would have occured aeons ago too. We're just lucky that we live at a time when light from that explosion reached us recently enough that the Hubble was in operation before, during, and after the event. Any time the Hubble (or any other big telescope) observes an event, the actual event ocurred a long time ago, and the light from it is just reaching us.

~~~

P.S. I stand corrected, white dwarfs do produce supernovae.
Original Hubble.org article: hubblesite.org...
Science article about the discovery of this new type of supernova: www.cfa.harvard.edu...
edit on 7-8-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace
Um, aren't exploding white dwarfs produce a nova, rather than supernova? Nova explosions are always relatively weak compared to supernovae.


Now's a good time for me to put this here....

Stellar Evolution 101
edit on 8-8-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

So when the star went from pre explosion to nova millions of years ago your saying that process only took 20-24 years? And that's what we are seeing now?

Just seems to the process would take a lot longer than the length of time it took from Hubble deployment to now.



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: bkfd54
a reply to: wildespaceyour saying that process only took 20-24 years?

Nowhere did I say that.

A supernova is an explosion, it doesn't last decades. It reaches maximum brightness within about 15-20 days, before fading from view over several weeks or months. en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 12-8-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:34 PM
link   
W T F
edit on 12-8-2014 by blacktie because: correction



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Ok to my original question then how could Hubble have images through the whole process from pre-explosion to supernova?

Just trying to understand....



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 04:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: bkfd54
a reply to: wildespace

Ok to my original question then how could Hubble have images through the whole process from pre-explosion to supernova?

Just trying to understand....

In 2005, 2006, and 2010, the Hubble took pictures of the spiral galaxy NGC 1309, where this supernova later occured (of course, no one could know that it would occur; they were just nice pictures of a galaxy for science purposes). hubblesite.org...

In 2012, the supernova occurred, and was discovered by an observatory. The Hubble then photographed the supernova location in 2013 - hubblesite.org... - and the star system that created the supernova was identified in the previous Hubble images. imgsrc.hubblesite.org...


The weak supernova, dubbed SN 2012Z, was found in the Lick Observatory Supernova Search in January 2012. Fortuitously, Hubble's Advanced Camera for Surveys also observed the supernova's host galaxy, NGC 1309, in 2005, 2006, and 2010, before the supernova outburst. NGC 1309 resides 110 million light-years away. Curtis McCully, a graduate student at Rutgers and lead author of the team's paper, reprocessed the pre-explosion images to make them sharper and noticed an object at the supernova's position.


Is it really that hard to understand?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

But the actual event took place eons ago not actually in the present right?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: bkfd54
a reply to: wildespace

But the actual event took place eons ago not actually in the present right?

Yes, aeons ago. As the NGC 1309 galaxy resides 110 million light-years away from us, we're seeing it (including the recent supernova) as it was 110 millions of years ago.

Because different stars and galaxies are located at very different distances from us (meaning we see them at many different times in the past), it's easier to just say that, for example, such and such supernova occured in 2012.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Thank you for the patience and clarity






top topics



 
3

log in

join