This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
It would be useful if someone could find the star's coordinates in the sky, as well as the meaning of the name iPTF14hls. I figured that iPTF= Intermediate Palomar Transient Factory, followed by the year of discovery=2014. It remains to decifer the "hls". - BatteryIncluded ( talk) 19:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I am not familiar with the star's database, but these other names (synonyms) may give us data on the calculated mass and radius: "iPTF14hls was later independently discovered by the Catalina Real-Time Transient Survey as CSS141118:092034+504148 (more recently the event was reported to the Transient Name Server as AT 2016bse).". - BatteryIncluded ( talk) 21:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
The photo currently in the Infobox, captioned "Example of a supernova", actually shows a supernova remnant (SNR 0519-69.0) – rather like a planetary nebula, but bigger. While I grant that this is not wholly incorrect in a technical sense, it seems to me that this is somewhat misleading, as most people's interest is on the Supernova (or not) explosion itself rather than what the remnants may look like some indeterminate time later.
An actual photo of IPTF14hls would of course not be very spectacular, as it would comprise a tiny white dot within a small fuzzy blob, but could we not instead use a photo of SN 1987A soon-ish after detection? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.27 ( talk) 23:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Do supernovas always have to follow a set time? also i see scientists suggesting something https://phys.org/news/2019-11-iptf14hls-variable-hyper-wind-massive-star.html plus i think it might also be that the star did not expend all of it's energy, so could it be just pure chance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiritami (621) ( talk • contribs) 18:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
It would be useful if someone could find the star's coordinates in the sky, as well as the meaning of the name iPTF14hls. I figured that iPTF= Intermediate Palomar Transient Factory, followed by the year of discovery=2014. It remains to decifer the "hls". - BatteryIncluded ( talk) 19:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I am not familiar with the star's database, but these other names (synonyms) may give us data on the calculated mass and radius: "iPTF14hls was later independently discovered by the Catalina Real-Time Transient Survey as CSS141118:092034+504148 (more recently the event was reported to the Transient Name Server as AT 2016bse).". - BatteryIncluded ( talk) 21:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
The photo currently in the Infobox, captioned "Example of a supernova", actually shows a supernova remnant (SNR 0519-69.0) – rather like a planetary nebula, but bigger. While I grant that this is not wholly incorrect in a technical sense, it seems to me that this is somewhat misleading, as most people's interest is on the Supernova (or not) explosion itself rather than what the remnants may look like some indeterminate time later.
An actual photo of IPTF14hls would of course not be very spectacular, as it would comprise a tiny white dot within a small fuzzy blob, but could we not instead use a photo of SN 1987A soon-ish after detection? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.27 ( talk) 23:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Do supernovas always have to follow a set time? also i see scientists suggesting something https://phys.org/news/2019-11-iptf14hls-variable-hyper-wind-massive-star.html plus i think it might also be that the star did not expend all of it's energy, so could it be just pure chance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiritami (621) ( talk • contribs) 18:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)