Were early-generation Type Ia supenovae intrinsically brighter than today's?

Yousuf Khan

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 6:05:29 AM12/23/09

to

Star burst | COSMOS magazine
"Simulations developed by supernova expert Stan Woosley, also of UC
Santa Cruz, along with Kasen, Fritz R�pke of the Max Planck Institute
for Astrophysics in Garching, Germany, and others now suggest that
supernovae that erupted a few billion years back in time may be
different - intrinsically brighter - than those exploding today. The
team has begun to identify several other features that may affect the
brightness - such as how rapidly a star rotated before it exploded and
its abundance of elements heavier than helium - which might confound
dark energy measurements if overlooked."
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/features/print/3171/star-burst?page=0%2C1

Sam Wormley

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 9:01:35 AM12/23/09

to

On 12/23/09 5:05 AM, Yousuf Khan wrote:

> http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/features/print/3171/star-burst?page=0%2C1

Nice detail article--Important long term work.
Thanks.

-Sam

Yousuf Khan

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 9:46:40 AM12/23/09

to

And to think that the secret to figuring these supernovae out lay in
internal combustion engine research. :-)

Yousuf Khan

Uncle Al

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 10:35:31 AM12/23/09

to

If the need for Dark matter to fudge factor claimed accelerating
expansion of the universe vanishes, do librarians go through Physical
Review with a razor cutter?

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

eric gisse

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 3:21:25 PM12/23/09

to

Yousuf Khan wrote:

[...]

This is good, post more stuff like this.

Given that a Type 1a happens by the detonation [helium flash] of light
elements accumulating on a white dwarf, the initial conditions for the
supernovae are all remarkably similar and have comparatively small parameter
spaces than compared to...every other supernova.

jacob navia

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 5:51:12 PM12/23/09

to

Uncle Al a �crit :

>
> If the need for Dark matter to fudge factor claimed accelerating
> expansion of the universe vanishes, do librarians go through Physical
> Review with a razor cutter?
>

Idiot

eric gisse

unread,

Dec 23, 2009, 6:53:18 PM12/23/09

to

Uncle Al wrote:

> Yousuf Khan wrote:
>>
>> Star burst | COSMOS magazine
>> "Simulations developed by supernova expert Stan Woosley, also of UC
>> Santa Cruz, along with Kasen, Fritz R�pke of the Max Planck Institute
>> for Astrophysics in Garching, Germany, and others now suggest that
>> supernovae that erupted a few billion years back in time may be
>> different - intrinsically brighter - than those exploding today. The
>> team has begun to identify several other features that may affect the
>> brightness - such as how rapidly a star rotated before it exploded and
>> its abundance of elements heavier than helium - which might confound
>> dark energy measurements if overlooked."
>> http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/features/print/3171/star-burst?page=0%2C1
>
> If the need for Dark matter to fudge factor claimed accelerating
> expansion of the universe vanishes, do librarians go through Physical
> Review with a razor cutter?
>

Dark matter is not dark energy, Al.

But regardless...no, but that would make life more interesting if it were
the case that there was a systematic error in the measurements of 1a
supernovae that exactly corresponded to the apparent acceleration of the
universe. It makes it even more interesting if you consider vacuum energy
and the dark energy / dark matter fit (Lambda-CDM) to the CMB in the context
of no accelerated expansion.