Spoiler my eye!!
Thanks for the news.
Incidentally, I know one of the co-discoverers of this. 
Pictures etc can be found here: The Most Recent Supernova in Our Galaxy
For this, we were breathlessly waiting? Hrmmph
I must have missed something. How is it that we’ve been looking for this for 50 years?
Can anyone explain why this event is being ignored by MSNBC a d CNN?
Can you explain why they should be covering it?
They’re a bit dense. Moon crickets…
It’s a little unusual to see a supernova in our own galaxy.
Of course, the rescue of a woman from an overturned car on Cable might be more your speed.
Maybe you noticed there was an earthquake in china that’s killed 13,000 people and weakened the dams, and there was a cyclone in Myanmar that killed 100,000 people.
Maybe looking at pretty pictures of unusual things is more your speed, though.
Well, that was really cool. I’m glad I listened to the press conference.
And the two cranks were . . . amusing. Crank #1 wanted to know if this would pave the way to shipping the moon crickets off Earth. Crank #2 came in at the very end, yelling something hard to understand. I think it was something about a vagina.
Must be fun dealing with the public, eh? 
The second caller wanted to know if they had found a vagina.
Pshaw. Let me know when they find the clitoris.
:rolleyes:
Not that it isn’t a neat discovery, but worth the buildup?
Im confused, again. By the underlined parts. Can someone explain how that works?
(From link in post 120: )
10:03: NASA press release goes live, spoiling the fun. Scientists using NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory have discovered the Milky Way’s most recent supernova, which exploded a mere 140 years ago, a few years after the Civil War.
10:16: Reynolds continuing: Supernova located approximately 26,000 light years away from here.
My questions:
[spoiler]How can they say it blew up 140 years ago, when the light from the event took 26000 years to get here?
Are they saying that the light actually reached us 140 years ago, and we are just now noticing it? But we dont have photos of that area of the sky from 150 years ago to compare it to…[/spoiler]
It’s 26,000 light years away. It exploded 140 years ago. And we know about this? :dubious:
Props to NASA for their marvelously subdued announcement that faster-than-light travel is possible.
ETA: Shakes fist at mlees. Curses, foiled again.
I bow down before you. 
Yes, the light reached us 140 years ago… which is pretty much the same thing as saying that it blew up 140 years ago from our perspective, even though it actually blew up 26000 years ago.
Do I really have to spoiler my questions?
Did anyone record seeing this event 140 years ago? Did this supernova form a black hole?
CNN isn’t covering those events, either.
Not really. I’m not sure whether to spoiler box things or not since its out in the public now, but I will for now.
[spoiler]The light we can see right now was emitted 26000 years ago i.e. the 2008 VLA image. The supernova itself exploded 26140 years ago, and if it wasn’t for the obscuration from dust clouds etc, someone looking at the sky 140 years ago would have seen a bright new ‘star’ in the sky – the initial supernova. So based on how long it takes light to get to us, we would have seen a new supernova 140 years ago. We’re seeing the supernova in its 140th year right now; last year, Chandra saw it in its 139th year. The actual light travel time is irrelevant since we’re looking at a relative age.
Now, granted, we don’t have a map of the sky in X-ray or radio from 150 years ago, but we do have 2 radio maps 23 years apart, and an X-ray image from 2007, and we can see from these that the remnant has increased in size; thus we can calulcate an expansion speed and “rewind” the expansion to get an age. (This is all very roughly speaking, there are other methods that can be used too I think, but I’m not a supernova expert and so can’t elaborate properly on those)[/spoiler]
Hope that helps.
WarmNPrickly, no it wasn’t recorded, mainly because its too close to the galactic centre. Between us and it there is a vast amount of dust which obscures optical light. Its not a problem for radio and X-ray wavebands, so we can see it with modern instruments, but there’s no way we could have seen it with the naked eye, or even with an optical telescope 140 years ago. You’ll notice there’s no optical image on the Chandra webpage – because we can’t see it in the optical – the dust gets in the way.