The object was discovered by the Chandra Space Telescope, which studied the explosion of a rare type of supernova that is 26 light-years away from Earth and is only a thousand years old.
New data transmitted by the Chandra space telescope, which observes the X-ray sky, raises the suspicion that the remnants of a supernova that looks distorted than usual contain the freshest black hole created these days in the Milky Way galaxy. The remains appear to be the product of a rare explosion, in which material is thrown into space at high speeds from the poles of a spinning star.
The remains, called W49B, are about a thousand years old, as seen from Earth and are located about 26 thousand light years from us.
"W49B is the first of its kind to be discovered in our galaxy," says Laura Lopez, who led the research at MIT. "It seems that the parent star of the supernova ended its life in a different way than most stars."
Normally, when massive stars run out of fuel, the central region of the star collapses, triggering a chain of events that quickly leads to a supernova explosion. Most of these explosions are symmetrical, with the stellar material receding more or less uniformly in all directions.
However, in supernova W49B, the material near the poles of the rapidly spinning, collapsing star was ejected at a much faster rate than the material ejected from the equator. The jets that shoot out from the star's poles cause the strange shape of the supernova and its remnants.
The remnants of the supernova now shine in X-rays and other wavelengths, thus testifying to the strange outburst. By tracking the distribution of the various elements in the star's remains, the researchers were able to compare Chadra's data to theoretical models showing how stars explode. (For example, when iron is found in only half of the remains while the other elements such as sulfur and tin are scattered throughout, this is expected to cause an asymmetric explosion.
"In addition to the unusual signature of the elements, W49B is also more elongated and elliptical than most supernovae" says Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz of the University of California, Santa Cruz, and co-author of the paper. "This is visible in X-rays and other wavelengths, leading to the unusual end of this star."
16 תגובות
Maybe it's easier to understand if we say it like this:
1. The supernova explosion happened 27.000 years ago.
2. The image we see today took 26.000 years to travel the distance to us
3. Hence the picture we see shows the state of the supernova after 1000 years.
Why is it similar?
Imagine a photographer photographing Tel Aviv from a distance of 1 km
After that he takes the picture and moves away from Tel Aviv for another 26 km until he reaches the settlement which is 27 km from Tel Aviv. There he shows people the picture of the city of Tel Aviv as it looks from a distance of 1 km.
Does the explanation help or spoil?
skeptic,
As my father wrote here, when they say that an object is 1000 years old, it means that it is 1000 years old + the time it took for light to arrive. To understand the reason for the definition in this way, consider the following example:
10,000 light years away from us is a star that exploded 10,001 light years ago (we see it a year after the explosion) - why do you think it makes more sense to compare it to a star 11 light years away from us that exploded a year ago (both stars are seen at the same stage of the explosion) or to a star that exploded Exactly at the same time but is one light year away from us and therefore appears to be 10,000 years after the explosion?
It seems logical to me to discuss what you see - and so from our point of view, it doesn't matter that today the star in question is 27,000 years old - you look at this object and see what a 1000 year old object looks like - that's what matters!
To your questions
- W49B is the name of this strange nebula seen in the picture - what is meant by saying that it is 1000 years old is that 1000 years have passed from the explosion to the configuration we see now.
- From what is written here, I understand like you that the event is rare - but the fact that an event is rare does not mean that it is impossible to know what it is. Explosions of stars are things that know how to model them exactly one way or another (usually in computer simulations), by their nature simulations are not the real thing, sometimes they are more successful and sometimes less so - this is known, there is nothing to be done, science is not perfect.
But in this case, the article actually describes the matching of a new observation, which has not been seen so far, to a theoretical predication - this is exactly the way in which a theory is usually accepted - it presents a predication (if we are right in our model, then we would expect to find an explosion with such and such characteristics).
I think this is the most compelling thing you can ask for - this is how scientific work should be conducted.
deer
The wording of the article supposedly implies that the place of the black hole is less than 1000 light years away from us, while the supernova is 26,000 away from us (from this I concluded that there are two phenomena that are separate from each other, with the second one, the one closest to us, being of an unclear nature). This interpretation of mine is because we cannot see an event that happened 1000 years ago when we are watching an event that is 26,000 light years away. (It is possible that the intention was that the event happened 27,000 years ago or a little less, only that is not what is written here, I am not supposed to guess...).
If it is two events at the same location (both events are at the location of the supernova) — the analysis of the event is with greater certainty than the analysis of two events at different locations (in this case, your explanation sounds more reasonable than what was implied in the article, it was implied in the article that there were two events in different locations).
The following questions still remain:
(1)
The question is what is meant by the expression "W49B are about a thousand years old". Is it a configuration of some kind that is located in the vicinity of the supernova, how can the age of this configuration be determined (and how to tie it to a black hole that was created simultaneously with it).
(2)
If it is such a configuration (mentioned above), how many times have you come across it? I understand that this is a rare situation
(even after adding evidence from other galaxies); After all, the rarity is implied by what is written in the article itself, where no other precedents are mentioned at all. If I interpret your words correctly, such a phenomenon has not been observed in our galaxy or it has been observed rarely, therefore we need evidence from other galaxies.
Subject to section (2) - my impression is that this is a rare event that, because of its rarity, can be interpreted here and there, perhaps it is a violation of numerical symmetry for reasons other than a black hole. It is also possible that the absorption of part of the spectrum is not due to a black hole. For example, according to my memory, it was written that there are systems of double stars that during a supernova of one of them, the supernova does not follow a normal course (because the other star is swallowed into the star while it explodes). Such an event (in which there are two supernova active stars) can disrupt dispersion in numerical symmetry.
safkan
What you say is not written in the article itself, and certainly not written in other articles about the event. It is not written anywhere that there is a black hole on the way from Nova to here. It seems to me that you are talking about another phenomenon called gravitational lensing.
The title is not 100% accurate because elsewhere it says that it is a hypothesis. But you make such a thing out of it that it's a bit strange……
skeptic,
You did not understand correctly some of what was said here and therefore also rushed to say that the phenomenon has no explanation.
The black hole is not halfway from the supernova to us causing distortion but is at the focus of the strange supernova.
The idea is quite clear and explained:
Usually, when massive stars end their lives, the bulk of the star's material is blown off in a fairly large manner, while the material in the center collapses. Although this is not said, it usually collapses into a neutron star and indeed, neutron stars have been discovered in the center of known supernovae and the best known case is the Cancer Nebula where a neutron star was discovered in a well-documented supernova whose explosion was seen in 1054
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_Nebula.
In this specific case, they discovered a very non-numerical distribution of the remnants of the star (implying a non-numerical explosion). In addition, the radiation spectrum is different from what is expected from a normal supernova explosion. These two anomalies are in good agreement with the prediction of the shape of the nebula and the late radiation of a star that has collapsed into a rotating black hole.
Rotating black holes are well known and known to exist, and it is also known (from other galaxies) that massive explosions (lacking numerical symmetry) are often associated with the formation of massive stars suitable for the formation of black holes.
In conclusion, the whole story is quite clear:
know there are black holes spinning,
There is very good evidence that they form from the collapse of massive stars in a process similar to the one described here,
There are theoretical predictions regarding such collapses - how the nebula should look and what the radiation spectrum is expected to be,
And now they discover such a thing - what is so surprising...
So why say "an explosive title for a phenomenon that has no explanation."
Father, please refrain from chants like "enough with this nonsense".. People here are trying to learn...
And as you said - it seems to us to be between 1000 years old. ZA Shiyotm was right: if we were to look 1000 years ago we would probably see the beginning of its formation.
Enough with this nonsense. We can see something that happened a thousand years ago plus the time it takes for light to arrive. This is not taken into account in determining the age of the supernova as it appears to our eyes at the moment because it is not possible to jump in time 26 thousand years ahead. That's how it always is when talking about phenomena thousands, tens of thousands and millions of light years away.
Site http://www.isciencetimes.com Bringing the news, the following paragraph appears:
The supernova remnant detected by the observatory
is about 1000 years old……………….not including light travel time
And a redeemer came to Zion
Exploded title for a phenomenon that has no explanation.
From what I understand the situation is this:
A supernova explosion 26,000 light years away from us reveals a distortion unknown to us. One of the possible explanations is that on the way from the place of this event to our observation of that explosion there is an obstacle, the hypothesis is that the obstacle is a black hole. This is just one of the possible explanations, for the simple reason that an incomprehensible and new phenomenon may have many explanations.
Liotam
The letter was created 1000 years ago. If we had observed 1000 years ago, we would not have discovered anything since it would take a signal 26000 years to reach us at the speed of light.
Tam, I think the intention is that if 1000 years ago we had aimed a telescope at this hole we would have seen the beginning of its formation.
Tham
You're right.
Think for a moment…. It's a piece of distance!
Avi Blizovsky, by the way, is this the same star here:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/nasas-chandra-finds-youngest-nearby-black-hole-1611108/
?
If so, the studies reveal completely different information and it is not clear if the new information is correct. Do you know anything about it?
Thanks.
Information should take 26000 years to travel the distance, if it travels at the speed of light
research and technology
How is there information about a 1000 year old object that is 26000 years away from us?