Superdupernova Explodes More Than Once
Astronomers think they know why one observed supernova was a hundred times brighter than your typical exploding star. Cynthia Graber reports.
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Last year scientists witnessed the dazzling death of a most unusual star.
The resulting supernova was about 100 times brighter than a typical supernova. Stan Wooseley, a professor of astronomy and astrophysics at the University of California at Santa Cruz, had an idea about what might have caused the dramatic demise. He and his colleagues published the results in the November 15th issue of the journal Nature.
First you need a star that’s at least 90 times the mass of our sun. As the star nears death, the core gets super-hot. Gammy-ray radiation transforms into pairs of electrons and their anti-matter counterparts, positrons. The core becomes so unstable that pressure drops, and the star contracts. It collapses, then quickly expands—then explodes. But the star is so big, the explosion does not destroy the entire star.
The process happens again, and the second explosion collides with the remains of the first. This produces an increasingly radiant fireworks display. The pulsings could theoretically continue up to six times. Who said you only live—or die—once?
—Cynthia Graber
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.
