Comments on: M100, before and after

By: Kay

Kay — Tue, 07 Mar 2006 10:46:06 +0000

Love the shots. To my untrained eye even though all the stars appear bigger in the 2002 shot, without seeing anything in the 2002 shot area that can easily be seen as something that would go supernova, I would have just though an object in front of the smaller star had just orbited down in the 2006 shot. Now laugh it’s good for the soul. I truly hope someday instead of peeping though scopes you will be able to drive through the universe on your way to work…if and only if mankind has finally reached a point of doing no harm.

By: RAD

RAD — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 10:35:50 +0000

Tom G now thats the kind of telescope I need! Awesome pic. I hope to have a better telescope soon.

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 09:03:00 +0000

Thanks, Phil, for another good one.

Tom, that was a very good image from a light-polluted backyard.

By: Allan Maylis

Allan Maylis — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:21:59 +0000

The newest term I have seen at some astron websies is “Hypernova.” It is a reference to the very largest stars 100+ solar masses. May we presume the Crab Nebula falls into that newly created category?

By: The Bad Astronomer

The Bad Astronomer — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:42:09 +0000

Well, there are ltos more, of course, but those are the ones in modern times. There are many supernova remnants in our Galaxy; seen on radio. I do wonder how many there are though!

By: Peter

Peter — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 23:47:10 +0000

In our galaxy? I think that comes to four, plus another one if you count the Large Magellanic Cloud as our galaxy.

We have:

1006, in Puppis
1054, in Taurus (the Crab Nebula supernova)
1572, in Cassiopeia (Tycho’s star)
1604, in Ophiuchus (Kepler’s star)
1987, in the LMC

Slim pickings!

By: TJ

TJ — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 17:16:00 +0000

Thanks Phil. Your explanation is, as usual, thoughtful, insightful, and educational. Anyone know how many supernovae we’ve seen in our own galaxy?