Author Topic: Vampire stars and supernovae  (Read 1717 times)


graham d

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
    • View Profile
Re: Vampire stars and supernovae
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2012, 08:15:42 am »
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6093/444.abstract
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0707.2847v2.pdf
I am impressed with the quality and coverage on sciencedaily :).
This brightening effect would have an effect on luminosities of galaxies out to high z. However, I note that, although they don't mention it, that these O type stars represent less than 0.00003% of all main sequence stars, that's here and now in our own galaxy. With time the probability of forming such massive types diminishes. As we go out to high z and observe galaxies in their former youthful primes the background luminosity around star types, yet to form supernovae would be brighter. This effect would make the subtracted luminosity of supernovae lower than expected; ie. dimmer , making the galaxies appear further away than expected, as per Perlmutter et al. 0.00003% is a tiny base to start from so I have strong doubts that the effect is significant.
Of course I do. In the astronomical Implications thread I imply that the 3 generations of neutrino pair production from photon vacuum energy interactions accountfor the CMB temperatures.



robert gagliano

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
    • View Profile
Re: Vampire stars and supernovae
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2012, 03:09:34 pm »
"Of course I do. In the astronomical Implications thread I imply that the 3 generations of neutrino pair production from photon vacuum energy interactions account for the CMB temperatures." Huh? Don't get what this has to do with the finding that 60-70% of O type stars are binaries.

graham d

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
    • View Profile
Re: Vampire stars and supernovae
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2012, 04:29:44 pm »
Huh? or gezundheid. Is that a smoker's cough introduction Robert?

Let me play the devil's advocate and defend the BB.

This is indeed pertinent to the supernova thread. you are familiar with the origins of supernovae types, more so than myself infact. Let's go out to highish z~1 times. That's at about the limit for observing supernovae with light time travels ~5 billion years. I can set the DE component to zero and this will affect the timing shifting time back about 1 billion years. You may argue for higher z in that the formation of galaxies is happening ca. 5-6 billion years post BB.
The stars form first and are thought to be much more massive, hotter and thus more luminous. The accelerated expansion of the universe is thought to have happened at about prior to this period of history ca. 5 billion years post BB. Two groups noticed an apparent dimming of supernova type 1a at high z. Sorry I'm the advocate. Perlmutter et als data reveal a dimming of circa 25% in luminosites at circa z=0.6 The other group provide data that support this conclusion. The latter group's data reported an analytical precision of luminosity of ca. 7% whereas Perlmutter et al data was estimated at +- 15%. Remember please this is not particle physics precison. This dimming is real. There are many corrections to luminosities from galactic background sources, notably  cloud and dust types. The latter group carried out stringent proceedures to correct for absorption emissions. It's now a highly accurate science. The effect of this dimming is because the galaxies are receeding at a faster rate than predicted by a constant cosmological constant. Hence the galaxies are further away , a consequence of accelerated spatial expansion caused by dark energy.

God's council
There are far more binaries in hot O's than you imagine and oh be a fine guy in the celestial passage of time might not you anticipate many other binaries around other types? Admit it you have underestimated the amount of dirty linen out there. in the earlier phases of galaxy evolution. There are more supernoval bursts than are dreamed of in your philosophies. You underestimated the corrections.

"Huh?We carried out exhaustive tests, no other systematic errors were possible" your Reverencia

Accelerated expansion. You realise the consequences. You are attempting to subvert my role. Accelerated expansion and the dilution of God's work to a diluted nothingness.

"We kind of ignore any teleological remarks in our work since it doesn't win nobel Prizes". Perhaps we could have a rethink about matters.  We have spent the cash.

"It might be a good idea to relook at your graphs. "Those kicks starting at z=0.6 could be alternatively explained as vacuum energy phase transitions, the heat capacities changes of the vacuum with time."

"Don't look smug Graham. I don't abide anyone playing the Devil's advocate. "

"My profound apologies Sir. You in good company with Richard Dawkins on that one".

Henceforth I shall turn you all into the Pillars of Creation.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1207/pillars6_hst_1518.jpg



Wow! Isn't it just like climate change physicists trying to model clouds?



« Last Edit: July 29, 2012, 04:40:19 pm by graham d »