Submitted via IRC for FatPhil
An amateur astronomer has captured the birth of a supernova while trying out his new camera. Scientists believe this could be the first time anyone has photographed the initial flashing of a supernova—a phase which can last just minutes.
Researchers think the serendipitous snaps offer unique insights into the evolution of supernova, which are usually only pictured after this brief "shock breakout" phase. A new analysis of the surge of light is published in Nature this week.
[...] The discovery was monumental not just for Buso but astronomy as a whole. Researchers Melina Bersten and Gastón Folatelli, part of the team investigating the supernova in the Nature paper, told Newsweek these chance photos could be the first of their kind.
"We actually think this is the first time an observer recorded the appearance of a supernova literally on camera. Some supernova have been discovered hours after explosion. But, Victor Buso caught the exact minutes when the supernova was being born," Bersten said. Not only that, she added, but he had captured the evolution of this elusive phase.
Source: http://www.newsweek.com/supernova-birth-photograph-amateur-815041
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday February 22 2018, @01:55AM (22 children)
Never observed before very short phenomenon, predicted by science based on models of observed data, snapped by random guy.
Chalk one for the smart guys.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @02:08AM (21 children)
With a bit (or a lot) of luck, everything works.
Now, organize for me a statistically significant sample and do double-blind experiments.
Or at least have the results independently replicated. Otherwise it's not science!!
(large trollish grin)
---
PS: my point? Not all science can rely on experiments or replication, and this doesn't make from that discipline less of a science; observation (and luck) is all that's accessible at the verification level.
(troll) Now, apply the above on economic or social sciences.
(Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Thursday February 22 2018, @04:16AM (4 children)
Sure, it does. But some things need a lot more "luck" than others.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @06:33AM (3 children)
I am a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work, the more I have of it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @07:36AM (2 children)
So,why not start digging that Hyperloop tunnel with a shovel and pickaxe to increase your chances to win the lottery?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Thursday February 22 2018, @09:59AM
The luck was seeing the supernova. The hard work was knowing what he saw and realising the significance (not just an instrumental error/passing plane/etc), at least at the level to get in touch with professionals.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 23 2018, @12:19AM
You're not working more to win the lottery. And you're not working more to dig that Hyperloop tunnel either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @04:18AM (13 children)
Well, while it does add to the scientific database, it's not an example of application of The Scientific Method.
.
...and I came to say this to Victor:
Dude, head to Vegas before all your luck runs out.
.
This has me wondering about The Star of Bethlehem.
Some think it was a supernova.
The story goes that the 3 wise guys used it as a navigational beacon.
Wouldn't it have to be very near to Polaris (the only thing that is stationary in the sky) in order for this to be useful?
...and wouldn't the 3 smarties have to be due south at the start to "follow" it to their destination?
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday February 22 2018, @04:32AM (1 child)
Very little of Science is. The Method is how you verify what you've discovered/imagined via other means.
The Method is what keeps it honest, so that you can confidently build on what came before, but it's not what drives things forward.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday February 22 2018, @07:40PM
Not necessarily. The method can also be (as this may be an example of) gathered data that supports something that was already hypothesized, or something that falsifies an established hypothesis. Theory-Observe-Question-Hypothesize / Predict - Data - Refinement loop / Repetition of results - Back to Theory. It is a cycle which the closure of the loop inspires new theory and therefore does drive science forward.
This is presented as part of data phase for known issues concerning supernova birth, and potentially observation concerning certain aspect of the shockwave.
Very much within the method.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @05:15AM (5 children)
No.
First, It isn't three wise men. Just an unspecified number of wise men.
Second, they were astrologers following the predictions of their delusionary magic, not astronomers making predictions about real astronomical bodies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @07:07AM (3 children)
So, the gold, frankincense, and myrrh were spread out over how many wise guys?
Let's see:
There were 2 wise guys and 1 wanted to show up the 2nd wise guy, so he brought 2 things?
There were more than 3 wise guys and some showed up without anything?
More than 3 showed up and all brought cool stuff but the incontrovertible book that recorded the activities left out a bunch of those?
Which is it? Inquiring minds want to know!
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @02:24PM
You know, there's not just one piece of gold, one portion of myrrh and one portion of frankincense in the world. So it is entirely possible that each of them did bring all three of those gifts.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Thursday February 22 2018, @05:19PM (1 child)
The fourth one brought pot for daddy to relax, and the fifth brought opioids for mommy's recovery.
The sixth one had read the future and brought a nail puller, but it was misunderstood as a hint to become a carpenter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @10:04PM
The fourth [...] the fifth
Both make good sense. (Clever.)
The sixth [...] a nail puller [...] carpenter
Also clever.
Here's where we note that the "carpenter" thing is actually from a bad translation.
In the original Greek, the word used was "tekton", meaning "hand worker". [google.com]
The modern term that correlates is "day laborer".
So, more like the guys that hang around Home Depot than a cabinetmaker.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Thursday February 22 2018, @03:08PM
Next, you're going to tell us that there weren't three blind mice, right?
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Thursday February 22 2018, @09:44AM (3 children)
A large shiny object in geostationary orbit near longitude 35.2 would work if they were somewhere north of it to start with. It would appear to hang in the sky without moving, and if it disappeared when they got to Bethlehem then they would assume they had reached their destination.
(The exact longitude of the object for any given starting position of the wise men is left as an exercise for the reader.)
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @01:09PM (2 children)
VERY large, I would think.
if it disappeared
Plunged to Earth? Straight down?
(That would give the Christmas story a whole different twist.)
...or did it take off to another part of space under its own power?
Do-do-do-do Do-do-do-do (Twilight Zone riff)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by Crash on Thursday February 22 2018, @04:14PM (1 child)
Surely, Chris de Burgh - A Spaceman Came Travelling [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @09:47PM
Readable lyrics [songteksten.nl]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday February 22 2018, @10:51PM
The stars can be viewed to each be over a particular line of latitude. They will be over a particular point on the surface every day at the same sidereal time. I have no idea how they might have chosen the sidereal time, perhaps the time they first saw it brighten?
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 22 2018, @08:39AM (1 child)
How much luck do you need to make faster-than-light-travel by pure meditation work?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @03:34PM
Are there drugs involved? That affects the results, so it's an important metric to consider.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday February 22 2018, @02:14AM (2 children)
I assume that's the supernova in the bottom right?
Nice, he named his flat the "Observatorio Busoniano".
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Snow on Thursday February 22 2018, @04:30AM (1 child)
I think so?
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Thursday February 22 2018, @05:49AM
Oh nice, we can just compare it to the follow-up images like this one (clearly labeled):
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-supernova-birth-camera-20180221-story.html [latimes.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @08:37AM
Neither. Because under the jewish doctrine, the supernova has to tell us what it wants to be. Until then, it will wear both girl and boy clothes and be brainwashed to believe that gender is something you have to choose. Never mind the fact that gender benders have brain disease. The disease makes you more special than you already are.
So now we have a supernova that wants to change its gender. But how does it change its gender?