Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

BeepBlipBlapBloop t1_j25d53f wrote

The chances of that happening in the next 100 years are very small.

135

NorthernViews t1_j25mpat wrote

Unfortunately you’re right. It will probably explode in the next 500,000+ years, and I wish we were wrong in our estimates so maybe we could witness it, but it won’t happen. Universal time scales are too large.

60

Raspberries-Are-Evil t1_j25n87a wrote

Last visible recorded was about 1,100 years ago.

9

[deleted] t1_j25qhfn wrote

[deleted]

−8

AriochQ t1_j25r7x0 wrote

I think they were probably referring to visible with the naked eye.

11

[deleted] t1_j25re6p wrote

[deleted]

−15

AriochQ t1_j25t7ah wrote

Kepler’s Supernova was 1604. He is probably referring to the one from Chinese records in 185 A.D. EDIT: there are also a few from around 1000 AD that we’re visible to the naked eye.

8

Open-Alternative-979 t1_j25ueyj wrote

Can’t believe I got downvoted for this lol. 1987 people. February 1987 holy shit. A world were people are out on blast for being correct is a weird world to live it

−2

Assassin_by_Birth t1_j25ny8p wrote

Plot twist, it explodes tomorrow (or yesteryear however long ago it would take for the light to reach us)

3

punknothing t1_j25nm6h wrote

It might have already nova'd, but we won't know for sure for another ~642.5 years. ;)

43

tempejkl OP t1_j25ejh3 wrote

Oh ok, thanks for the answer though.

4

NephalemPride t1_j25fyew wrote

Very small doesn't really do it justice. I think infinitesimally slim comes closer

14

iCantPauseItsOnline t1_j25nj5k wrote

Do you understand your headline title question and then the text specifying a 100-year timescale are two completely different questions?

3

Seanspeed t1_j25tm2c wrote

It's not a problem at all for anybody who does the reasonable thing and reads the OP before responding.

0

ImNoAlbertFeinstein t1_j25u503 wrote

would we get irradiated ..if and when the supernova appeared ?

3

BeepBlipBlapBloop t1_j25ut16 wrote

No. But it'd be bright enough that we could see it in the sky during the day and it would be the brightest object in the night sky.

13

meinblown t1_j25t662 wrote

The chances of it not happening in the next 100 years are very small as well.

0

BeepBlipBlapBloop t1_j25ts7u wrote

The chances of it not happening are enormous.

3

KorgX3 t1_j25wybp wrote

This chances of it never happening are possibly higher.

1

thisisjustascreename t1_j25f391 wrote

Pretty much just as likely as it was to supernova in the last 100 years.

39

Equivalent_Ad_8413 t1_j25fqqr wrote

Actually, the odds of something already happening is known. It either happened or it didn't.

9

Ivedefected t1_j25hd76 wrote

Not when what's happening is over 500ly away.

18

Equivalent_Ad_8413 t1_j25pa9z wrote

I'm pretty sure he means adjusted for speed of light limitations.

0

_d3vnull_ t1_j25ct5w wrote

Im pretty sure i readed lately it is estimated that this star will go supernova in something between 100.000 and 1.000.000 years. So.. chance for it to be happen in the next 100 years is not that big

27

HarryHacker42 t1_j25gew7 wrote

Before it supernovas, Yellowstone will erupt and erase the least used 1/3rd of the USA. So think globally, die locally.

20

shawnwingsit t1_j25jw3p wrote

But the good news is that disaster will bring the world together. The world will come together and heal the world will enter a golden age. And dying to redeem everyone is so on-brand for us that It's perfect.

4

HarryHacker42 t1_j26v5a7 wrote

Same as with climate change!

The only thing bringing this world together is continental drift. We're on our way back to Pangea, just very, very slowly.

2

gladeye t1_j25nxv1 wrote

He man, I use that 1/3 of the USA.

2

HarryHacker42 t1_j26v04n wrote

A decision had to be made. Sorry, you didn't make the cut.

1

horsesizedpuppy t1_j25v61e wrote

Yellowstone may not ever erupt again if the Rockies move over the hotspot before it does. Or it may be millions of years until it is east of them.

2

JustAnotherRedditAlt t1_j25ge5h wrote

Not to mention that even if it were to supernova today, we wouldn't find out about it for another ~700 years...

12

[deleted] t1_j25jc1h wrote

Unless it already supernova-ed and the evidence hasn't reached us yet.

16

ThumbsUp2323 t1_j25jopn wrote

Right it could have happened 699 years ago and we'd have absolutely no idea.

7

JustAnotherRedditAlt t1_j26o089 wrote

Well, there will likely be increased activity some years (or centuries) before it actually goes boom...

1

ThumbsUp2323 t1_j26pvdx wrote

Like regions of the star's surface rapidly cooling unexpectedly? Gargantuan clouds of gas exploding thousands of miles into space? The fallout from these eruptions being so dense and vast that it reduced the star's brightness by more than a factor of 2?

2

aspheric_cow t1_j25ki9p wrote

When we say "happen in the next 100 years," we mean "observers on Earth will see it happen in the next 100 years."

Like, supernova 1987a was the one that was visible from Earth in 1987. It actually happened about 168,000 years ago.

14

krum t1_j25lv27 wrote

People always bring this up but you know what they mean.

8

JustAnotherRedditAlt t1_j26nmtz wrote

True, but if the star suddenly started acting very unstable and scientists believed it was going to supernova "soon", it probably went supernova 400-600 years ago and our children's children will be the ones to see it light up the sky...

1

Deluxe78 t1_j25gg7z wrote

It could have supernova’d yesterday we wouldn’t know until 2,664

14

TiredOfRatRacing t1_j25jje8 wrote

Or it supernova'd in the last 600 years and the light hasnt reached us yet.

2

Xaxxon t1_j25lalm wrote

That wasn't the question. If it already supernova'd then the chances of it doing it in the next 100 years are 0.

1

TiredOfRatRacing t1_j25opa1 wrote

But if it already supernovaed, and we havent seen it, then from our perspective, we dont know that it has or will soon. So the chances of our seeing it are unknown since we are unaware it may have happened already.

2

Xaxxon t1_j25qri6 wrote

stars don't just randomly go supernova. There is a long and predictable lifecycle of stars that lasts way longer than 500ish years.

0

tempejkl OP t1_j25u61g wrote

Well yeah. Betelgeuse is nearing the end of its lifespan. That’s why I asked.

2

zeeblecroid t1_j25oyry wrote

Zero - it's not burning the right elements to be near that point yet.

Stars on the road to supernovas go through a sequence of burning increasingly heavy elements for increasingly short periods of time, and Betelgeuse is still in the helium-burning phase. The following phases burn carbon, neon, oxygen and silicon in order, and once a star starts gnawing on its helium that gives observers about one thousand years' warning. Betelgeuse is 600-ish lightyears out; if it was most of the way through that process we'd be able to tell.

11

tempejkl OP t1_j25uga4 wrote

I know about this, but can we see what elements a star that far away is burning? How does that work?

3

Pleasant_Carpenter37 t1_j25w2gb wrote

You know how fireworks flash different colors? We put different things in the fireworks to make different colors. Aluminum burns white, barium burns green, etc.

The same thing is true in stars. We basically look at the light coming from a star, count up the mixture of colors we see, do some complicated math, and that gives us an estimate of what it's doing.

If you want more detail than my crude eli5 can give you, read up on spectroscopy.

5

AncientMarinerCVN65 t1_j25sp5j wrote

That's how I understand it, as well. And when it does go Supernova, it's too far away to do serious damage to Earth. It will give off enough light to be as bright as a half moon for about a month. It will even be visible during daylight, but the blast wave will dissipate to almost nothing by the time it reaches us. We'll just have really nice aurorae for a few years as the stellar remains wash over our Solar System (centuries after we see the Supernova itself, since what's left of the star will be traveling below the speed of light).

2

Turtley13 t1_j25iozr wrote

The most likely occurrence of an extinction level event will be a super volcano.

7

Vita-Malz t1_j25j0l6 wrote

How did you manage to answer the question with an actual answer that has nothing to do with the question asked? Are you a politician?

31

Turtley13 t1_j25mjs3 wrote

It's a neat fact that I could share.

This isn't even tagged as a question but a discussion.

Are you familiar with reddit? 90% of comments are just nonsense.

Your comment adds nothing of value so good job being a hypocrite.

−4

Vita-Malz t1_j25n2ke wrote

My comment is a question to you. Questions don't add, other than the opportunity to answer. You come across as if my response to your comment really struck a nerve. Why are you so offended?

3

tacoeater1234 t1_j25uwng wrote

Female wallabies have three vaginas.

1

Vita-Malz t1_j29dq0x wrote

Now that is a neat fact. But I do not wanna know how you found out.

1

Drwillpowers t1_j25kaoo wrote

Because people can understand when someone asks a question, what they're really trying to learn is sometimes is not the question they stated.

I also had the exact same interpretation of this question. I figured the person wanted to know what the odds of a local star going supernova was, because literally if that happened, it could bleach the earth clean of life.

So this answer is not unreasonable, but even if OP doesn't care about it, it doesn't hurt anybody. It was interesting for me to read anyway.

Be nice to people online. They are actual humans just like you. This person was just trying to contribute something helpful to the conversation, they didn't need to be attacked.

−6

Vita-Malz t1_j25klxb wrote

How was my response an attack? How do you come to the conclusion that not answering the question at hand is the intelligent choice here? If I ask a question I want the question answered, not what you decide was my actual hidden question.

If OP wants to know what the odds of an extinction level event occuring was, or what it would be, he could have just as well asked exactly that.

5

iCantPauseItsOnline t1_j25nv3g wrote

People take questions as attacks these days. Not just online, but in person as well.

It's part of America's attack on intelligence. It's socially unacceptable to question information someone just told you. They think it's okay to be upset, when instead it's critically important for us to share correct information.

0

phunkydroid t1_j25nbzm wrote

Betelgeuse isn't close enough to be dangerous to life on Earth.

2

Drwillpowers t1_j26f575 wrote

What is the exact distance to which we actually have to give a shit? I'm genuinely curious if you happen to know.

1

tempejkl OP t1_j25uma4 wrote

I don’t think the response was an attack.

1

kayl_breinhar t1_j25klbf wrote

Nah, a supervolcanic eruption is definitely in the Top 5, maybe even the Top 3, but the more likely candidate in the near future is a continental biosphere collapse.

The entire biosphere won't fail everywhere, but whatever/wherever doesn't will be what everyone fights over, and that fighting/warring will be what kills whoever's left.

7

Turtley13 t1_j25mmon wrote

From climate change?

2

kayl_breinhar t1_j25tdjk wrote

Not just one factor. Climate change is one part of the whole when it comes to biosphere collapse. Massive use of persistent pesticides have disrupted the beneficial insect life on the planet - not just the bees. Microplastics in combination with warming and increasingly deoxygenated seas in combination with massive overfishing are killing ocean life. The percentage of wildlife on the planet is the lowest it's ever been since hominids first showed up, and we just keep making more of ourselves.

3

GorillaP1mp t1_j25ohz6 wrote

GRB. Just have to be in the path, and the Ordovician extinction, which is very different from the other big 5 bears a lot of the signs it happened almost half a billion years ago.

1

Turtley13 t1_j25pdau wrote

What are the frequencies of these occurring?

2

GorillaP1mp t1_j25q76c wrote

Several times a day, but I should clarify that you would still need to be fairly close, say 50-100 light years away, and then also be directly in the path. I think Eta is the closest binary capable of producing GRB and it’s 7500 light years or more and offset 45 degrees so we wouldn’t be in the path anyways. Universe is a big place.

EDIT: I only have the most rudimentary of knowledge in this area, and even that’s a stretch. I would verify.

1

tempejkl OP t1_j25ucs8 wrote

Betelgeuse’s supernova won’t be an extinction level event anyway

1

Turtley13 t1_j25uyo4 wrote

True. I thought it may have been closer given the question.

1

shuckster t1_j25q6fd wrote

The whole “it might have happened already” argument that everyone says about these things might not turn out right.

I mean, if the warping of spacetime for the purpose of FTL travel isn’t possible under any condition, then we can say causality itself propagates at the speed-of-light.

Which means Betelgeuse will explode when we see it explode, not “600 years ago already”.

5

jidar t1_j25rgnr wrote

I was going to argue at the start of your post but you stuck the landing.

Okay yeah, causality travels at c.

3

tacoeater1234 t1_j25ulhp wrote

This is how I like to look at the progression of time. It's much simpler and consistent, in a lot of ways.

2

Taxoro t1_j25un5i wrote

>then we can say causality itself propagates at the speed-of-light.

You got it backwards lol. What we call speed of light or 3*10^8 m/s is actually the speed of causality. That's why it's denoted as "c". It's light that propagates at the speed of causality.

1

shuckster t1_j25wu96 wrote

> The speed of light in vacuum is usually denoted by a lowercase c, for "constant" or the Latin celeritas (meaning 'swiftness, celerity')

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

Still, even if you were right I don’t think you need convincing that many here are optimistic about warp-drives eventually becoming an actual thing.

If so, then we’ll have to choose another letter for “c”. I’d vote for “b”, meaning “bulb” in honour of that sly huckster Edison.

1

DarkUtensil t1_j25k4f5 wrote

We're going to find out one day that everything we see is just the remains of advanced civilizations going to war and that stars don't go supernova naturally or turn into black holes.

In all seriousness though, no one knows. The best educated guesses are either it already has or it will in the future.

3

StarVoyager96 t1_j25pqre wrote

It probably will go supernova in the near term on a cosmic time scale but that can mean anything between now and millions of years from now.

3

WhyNotDoItNowOkay t1_j25m9cm wrote

50/50. It either will or it won’t. Me be good at math.

2

tim_worst_isthe_best t1_j25udyb wrote

It's already happened ... we just haven't seen it

2

tempejkl OP t1_j25vj7d wrote

Probably not. It takes 600 years for us to see it. That means it’s going to happen between now and 100000 years from now.

−1

ChubbyWanKenobie t1_j25v6ba wrote

It would be amazing to see a supernova light up our sky before I am dust.

2

tempejkl OP t1_j25vo71 wrote

Truly a once-in-a-lifetime event.

3

ChubbyWanKenobie t1_j260rnx wrote

Have to say, all that Betelgeuse chat had me out back with my telescope, freezing my butt off hoping to see it pop.

2

Dartagnan1083 t1_j25g6ba wrote

Are we talking when the star itself goes boom? When we see it? Or when the earth is affected by the wave? Those are vastly different dates on a timeline.

1

tempejkl OP t1_j25uxah wrote

Not vastly different on a cosmic anyway. I was asking about when we see it. Because it would look cool.

2

SavienKennedy t1_j25ku2u wrote

It's a 100% guarantee.

In our lifetime, however, is another story all together.

1

27allen51 t1_j25n4np wrote

I don't get this. Astronomers say it is so far away , we won't see it for a long time. So how do you know it hasn't happened already?

1

Raspberries-Are-Evil t1_j25n4zb wrote

Slim to none.

Or its already happened and we wont know for 600 years.

1

GorillaP1mp t1_j25nxvf wrote

Won’t matter to us if it does, it’s not close enough to do any damage. Models suggest 25-100 light years is when you should be concerned about supernova. Betelgeuse is significantly further.

1

space-ModTeam t1_j25vpft wrote

Hello u/tempejkl, your submission "How likely is it that Betelgeuse will supernova?" has been removed from r/space because:

  • Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

1

Larry_Phischman t1_j25vrtz wrote

There’s less than a 1% chance that it will go supernova in the next century. About a 10% chance that it will go off in the next 10,000 years. And it’s almost certain that it will explode in the next 200,000 years. We can’t see what is going on in it’s interior, or what stage of its fusion cycle it’s in. It’s probably still fusing hydrogen or maybe helium.

1

[deleted] t1_j25pelh wrote

[deleted]

0

Skyhawk_Illusions t1_j25rbt6 wrote

No, this is not true. Only stars beyond a certain weight can supernova. Our sun will simply condense to a white dwarf

1

donzzler t1_j25rcaq wrote

Not all stars will supernova. Our sun for example.

1

led76 t1_j25relh wrote

Not all stars will supernova and Betelgeuse is not that far.

1

AncientMarinerCVN65 t1_j25rer7 wrote

Not true. Most stars aren't massive enough to go Supernova. Like our sun, they will swell to become red giants, slowly lose their outer material, and shrink to become white dwarves.

1

_A_Good_Cunt_ t1_j25rncv wrote

Wow, man you deserve a price for the most amount of wrong facts in a reply

1

Palanquin_IR t1_j25happ wrote

Well it either has or it hasn't. But it's still going to continue looking pretty much the same to us for around 640 years after [it blows / it blew] anyway.

−1

GraGal t1_j25gtq3 wrote

if Betelgeuse goes supernova right now, we won't know about it until 500 years from now.

−2

Midwinter77 t1_j25hys9 wrote

On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

−2