What would happen if someone had a telescope and watched Betelgeuse when it goes supernova?











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Would that person go blind?



Neutrino detectors and the abundance of Neutrinos would detect the upcoming visible show about 3 hours before any visible signs, so there would be time to point certain telescopes that could handle the brightness towards it.



I'm curious if an individual with a telescope pointed in that direction would have an unpleasant surprise. Would the scientific community be wise to not announce the massive stellar explosion until after it's visible to avoid potential negative effects from over-eager amateur astronomers.



I realize this is a kind of silly question and it might depend too much on the telescope, but I'm curious.










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    "When it goes ..." - It's 642.5 light years away, so it would need to have already gone supernova over 550 years ago ... But we know what you meant, and Mark's answer is OK, as is the other.
    – Rob
    6 hours ago















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Would that person go blind?



Neutrino detectors and the abundance of Neutrinos would detect the upcoming visible show about 3 hours before any visible signs, so there would be time to point certain telescopes that could handle the brightness towards it.



I'm curious if an individual with a telescope pointed in that direction would have an unpleasant surprise. Would the scientific community be wise to not announce the massive stellar explosion until after it's visible to avoid potential negative effects from over-eager amateur astronomers.



I realize this is a kind of silly question and it might depend too much on the telescope, but I'm curious.










share|improve this question


















  • 1




    "When it goes ..." - It's 642.5 light years away, so it would need to have already gone supernova over 550 years ago ... But we know what you meant, and Mark's answer is OK, as is the other.
    – Rob
    6 hours ago













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











Would that person go blind?



Neutrino detectors and the abundance of Neutrinos would detect the upcoming visible show about 3 hours before any visible signs, so there would be time to point certain telescopes that could handle the brightness towards it.



I'm curious if an individual with a telescope pointed in that direction would have an unpleasant surprise. Would the scientific community be wise to not announce the massive stellar explosion until after it's visible to avoid potential negative effects from over-eager amateur astronomers.



I realize this is a kind of silly question and it might depend too much on the telescope, but I'm curious.










share|improve this question













Would that person go blind?



Neutrino detectors and the abundance of Neutrinos would detect the upcoming visible show about 3 hours before any visible signs, so there would be time to point certain telescopes that could handle the brightness towards it.



I'm curious if an individual with a telescope pointed in that direction would have an unpleasant surprise. Would the scientific community be wise to not announce the massive stellar explosion until after it's visible to avoid potential negative effects from over-eager amateur astronomers.



I realize this is a kind of silly question and it might depend too much on the telescope, but I'm curious.







telescope amateur-observing supernova






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 7 hours ago









userLTK

15.5k11941




15.5k11941








  • 1




    "When it goes ..." - It's 642.5 light years away, so it would need to have already gone supernova over 550 years ago ... But we know what you meant, and Mark's answer is OK, as is the other.
    – Rob
    6 hours ago














  • 1




    "When it goes ..." - It's 642.5 light years away, so it would need to have already gone supernova over 550 years ago ... But we know what you meant, and Mark's answer is OK, as is the other.
    – Rob
    6 hours ago








1




1




"When it goes ..." - It's 642.5 light years away, so it would need to have already gone supernova over 550 years ago ... But we know what you meant, and Mark's answer is OK, as is the other.
– Rob
6 hours ago




"When it goes ..." - It's 642.5 light years away, so it would need to have already gone supernova over 550 years ago ... But we know what you meant, and Mark's answer is OK, as is the other.
– Rob
6 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote



accepted










No, it would not be a problem. Supernovae are not at all like flashbulbs -- they brighten over a period of many days and dim again even more slowly. Here are a number of different lightcurves taken from Wikipedia:
enter image description here



The rise is fast on an astronomical scale -- several orders of magnitude over a period of roughly ten days -- but very slow on a human scale. An amateur looking at it would not notice any significant change in brightness, but if the same person came back a few hours later or the next night, the change would be very evident.



As far as we can tell, the reason is that the light at peak brightness is caused by emissions from material blown off by the explosion. For example, in Type 1a SNe, most of the light if from the radioactive decay of the //huge// mass of ejected nickel-56 (half life 6 days).



The Wikipedia article on supernovae is quite good and covers this all in more detail.






share|improve this answer




























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    Unless you observe it through a 5–10 meter class telescope during peak brightness, you'll be fine.



    Betelgeuse will explode as a type II supernova, the typical brightness of which is around $M sim -17$. With a distance of $dsimeq200,mathrm{pc}$, its distance modulus is
    $$
    mu = 5log(d/mathrm{pc}) - 5 simeq 6.5,
    $$

    so its apparent magnitude will be
    $$
    m = M + mu simeq -10.5.
    $$

    The Sun has an apparent magnitude of $m_odot = -26.7$, i.e. it is $Delta m = 16.2$ magnitudes brighter. In other words, Betelgeuse will be
    $$
    f = 10^{Delta m/2.5} simeq 3times10^6
    $$

    times dimmer than the Sun. That means that if you observe Betelgeuse through a telescope with an area three million times larger than your pupil, it will look as bright as the Sun. Taking 6 mm for the diameter of the pupil, that means a telescope of roughly 10.5 meters. Such large telescopes exist, but these are not made for looking through with your naked eye.



    Based on evolutionary models of Betelgeuse, Dolan et al. (2016) estimate an apparent magnitude of $m=-12.4$. This would mean that you'd need a 4.5 meter telescope, which still wouldn't be one meant for your naked eye.



    Moreover, as Mark writes in his answer, supernovae don't increase to their peak brightness in matters of seconds, but rather in matters days (roughly half a mag per day), so there is no real risk.






    share|improve this answer






























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Brightness varies inversely with the square of the distance. Betelgeuse is about 642.5 light years away and has an apparent magnitude of 0.42. My grasp of apparent magnitude concepts is a bit wobbly, but I believe if it grew a million times as bright, it might have an apparent magnitude of -14.5 or so, which is a lot more like the brightness of the moon than the sun.



      Given the great distance, the decrease in brightness due to distance, and the countless amounts of dust & gas between earth and Betelgeuse, I think you'd probably be fine. You might be dazzled by its brightness -- a bit like looking at a light bulb, I imagine -- but I doubt it would cause any physical harm.



      EDIT: I hope a real astronomer sounds off here. I'm not sure what kind of supernova we might expect from Betelgeuse, but apparently supernovas (supernovae?) can achieve a theoretical brightness equal to 5 trillion suns!






      share|improve this answer





















        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "514"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });














        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f28677%2fwhat-would-happen-if-someone-had-a-telescope-and-watched-betelgeuse-when-it-goes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        4
        down vote



        accepted










        No, it would not be a problem. Supernovae are not at all like flashbulbs -- they brighten over a period of many days and dim again even more slowly. Here are a number of different lightcurves taken from Wikipedia:
        enter image description here



        The rise is fast on an astronomical scale -- several orders of magnitude over a period of roughly ten days -- but very slow on a human scale. An amateur looking at it would not notice any significant change in brightness, but if the same person came back a few hours later or the next night, the change would be very evident.



        As far as we can tell, the reason is that the light at peak brightness is caused by emissions from material blown off by the explosion. For example, in Type 1a SNe, most of the light if from the radioactive decay of the //huge// mass of ejected nickel-56 (half life 6 days).



        The Wikipedia article on supernovae is quite good and covers this all in more detail.






        share|improve this answer

























          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          No, it would not be a problem. Supernovae are not at all like flashbulbs -- they brighten over a period of many days and dim again even more slowly. Here are a number of different lightcurves taken from Wikipedia:
          enter image description here



          The rise is fast on an astronomical scale -- several orders of magnitude over a period of roughly ten days -- but very slow on a human scale. An amateur looking at it would not notice any significant change in brightness, but if the same person came back a few hours later or the next night, the change would be very evident.



          As far as we can tell, the reason is that the light at peak brightness is caused by emissions from material blown off by the explosion. For example, in Type 1a SNe, most of the light if from the radioactive decay of the //huge// mass of ejected nickel-56 (half life 6 days).



          The Wikipedia article on supernovae is quite good and covers this all in more detail.






          share|improve this answer























            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted







            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted






            No, it would not be a problem. Supernovae are not at all like flashbulbs -- they brighten over a period of many days and dim again even more slowly. Here are a number of different lightcurves taken from Wikipedia:
            enter image description here



            The rise is fast on an astronomical scale -- several orders of magnitude over a period of roughly ten days -- but very slow on a human scale. An amateur looking at it would not notice any significant change in brightness, but if the same person came back a few hours later or the next night, the change would be very evident.



            As far as we can tell, the reason is that the light at peak brightness is caused by emissions from material blown off by the explosion. For example, in Type 1a SNe, most of the light if from the radioactive decay of the //huge// mass of ejected nickel-56 (half life 6 days).



            The Wikipedia article on supernovae is quite good and covers this all in more detail.






            share|improve this answer












            No, it would not be a problem. Supernovae are not at all like flashbulbs -- they brighten over a period of many days and dim again even more slowly. Here are a number of different lightcurves taken from Wikipedia:
            enter image description here



            The rise is fast on an astronomical scale -- several orders of magnitude over a period of roughly ten days -- but very slow on a human scale. An amateur looking at it would not notice any significant change in brightness, but if the same person came back a few hours later or the next night, the change would be very evident.



            As far as we can tell, the reason is that the light at peak brightness is caused by emissions from material blown off by the explosion. For example, in Type 1a SNe, most of the light if from the radioactive decay of the //huge// mass of ejected nickel-56 (half life 6 days).



            The Wikipedia article on supernovae is quite good and covers this all in more detail.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 6 hours ago









            Mark Olson

            4,158717




            4,158717






















                up vote
                2
                down vote













                Unless you observe it through a 5–10 meter class telescope during peak brightness, you'll be fine.



                Betelgeuse will explode as a type II supernova, the typical brightness of which is around $M sim -17$. With a distance of $dsimeq200,mathrm{pc}$, its distance modulus is
                $$
                mu = 5log(d/mathrm{pc}) - 5 simeq 6.5,
                $$

                so its apparent magnitude will be
                $$
                m = M + mu simeq -10.5.
                $$

                The Sun has an apparent magnitude of $m_odot = -26.7$, i.e. it is $Delta m = 16.2$ magnitudes brighter. In other words, Betelgeuse will be
                $$
                f = 10^{Delta m/2.5} simeq 3times10^6
                $$

                times dimmer than the Sun. That means that if you observe Betelgeuse through a telescope with an area three million times larger than your pupil, it will look as bright as the Sun. Taking 6 mm for the diameter of the pupil, that means a telescope of roughly 10.5 meters. Such large telescopes exist, but these are not made for looking through with your naked eye.



                Based on evolutionary models of Betelgeuse, Dolan et al. (2016) estimate an apparent magnitude of $m=-12.4$. This would mean that you'd need a 4.5 meter telescope, which still wouldn't be one meant for your naked eye.



                Moreover, as Mark writes in his answer, supernovae don't increase to their peak brightness in matters of seconds, but rather in matters days (roughly half a mag per day), so there is no real risk.






                share|improve this answer



























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote













                  Unless you observe it through a 5–10 meter class telescope during peak brightness, you'll be fine.



                  Betelgeuse will explode as a type II supernova, the typical brightness of which is around $M sim -17$. With a distance of $dsimeq200,mathrm{pc}$, its distance modulus is
                  $$
                  mu = 5log(d/mathrm{pc}) - 5 simeq 6.5,
                  $$

                  so its apparent magnitude will be
                  $$
                  m = M + mu simeq -10.5.
                  $$

                  The Sun has an apparent magnitude of $m_odot = -26.7$, i.e. it is $Delta m = 16.2$ magnitudes brighter. In other words, Betelgeuse will be
                  $$
                  f = 10^{Delta m/2.5} simeq 3times10^6
                  $$

                  times dimmer than the Sun. That means that if you observe Betelgeuse through a telescope with an area three million times larger than your pupil, it will look as bright as the Sun. Taking 6 mm for the diameter of the pupil, that means a telescope of roughly 10.5 meters. Such large telescopes exist, but these are not made for looking through with your naked eye.



                  Based on evolutionary models of Betelgeuse, Dolan et al. (2016) estimate an apparent magnitude of $m=-12.4$. This would mean that you'd need a 4.5 meter telescope, which still wouldn't be one meant for your naked eye.



                  Moreover, as Mark writes in his answer, supernovae don't increase to their peak brightness in matters of seconds, but rather in matters days (roughly half a mag per day), so there is no real risk.






                  share|improve this answer

























                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote









                    Unless you observe it through a 5–10 meter class telescope during peak brightness, you'll be fine.



                    Betelgeuse will explode as a type II supernova, the typical brightness of which is around $M sim -17$. With a distance of $dsimeq200,mathrm{pc}$, its distance modulus is
                    $$
                    mu = 5log(d/mathrm{pc}) - 5 simeq 6.5,
                    $$

                    so its apparent magnitude will be
                    $$
                    m = M + mu simeq -10.5.
                    $$

                    The Sun has an apparent magnitude of $m_odot = -26.7$, i.e. it is $Delta m = 16.2$ magnitudes brighter. In other words, Betelgeuse will be
                    $$
                    f = 10^{Delta m/2.5} simeq 3times10^6
                    $$

                    times dimmer than the Sun. That means that if you observe Betelgeuse through a telescope with an area three million times larger than your pupil, it will look as bright as the Sun. Taking 6 mm for the diameter of the pupil, that means a telescope of roughly 10.5 meters. Such large telescopes exist, but these are not made for looking through with your naked eye.



                    Based on evolutionary models of Betelgeuse, Dolan et al. (2016) estimate an apparent magnitude of $m=-12.4$. This would mean that you'd need a 4.5 meter telescope, which still wouldn't be one meant for your naked eye.



                    Moreover, as Mark writes in his answer, supernovae don't increase to their peak brightness in matters of seconds, but rather in matters days (roughly half a mag per day), so there is no real risk.






                    share|improve this answer














                    Unless you observe it through a 5–10 meter class telescope during peak brightness, you'll be fine.



                    Betelgeuse will explode as a type II supernova, the typical brightness of which is around $M sim -17$. With a distance of $dsimeq200,mathrm{pc}$, its distance modulus is
                    $$
                    mu = 5log(d/mathrm{pc}) - 5 simeq 6.5,
                    $$

                    so its apparent magnitude will be
                    $$
                    m = M + mu simeq -10.5.
                    $$

                    The Sun has an apparent magnitude of $m_odot = -26.7$, i.e. it is $Delta m = 16.2$ magnitudes brighter. In other words, Betelgeuse will be
                    $$
                    f = 10^{Delta m/2.5} simeq 3times10^6
                    $$

                    times dimmer than the Sun. That means that if you observe Betelgeuse through a telescope with an area three million times larger than your pupil, it will look as bright as the Sun. Taking 6 mm for the diameter of the pupil, that means a telescope of roughly 10.5 meters. Such large telescopes exist, but these are not made for looking through with your naked eye.



                    Based on evolutionary models of Betelgeuse, Dolan et al. (2016) estimate an apparent magnitude of $m=-12.4$. This would mean that you'd need a 4.5 meter telescope, which still wouldn't be one meant for your naked eye.



                    Moreover, as Mark writes in his answer, supernovae don't increase to their peak brightness in matters of seconds, but rather in matters days (roughly half a mag per day), so there is no real risk.







                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited 5 hours ago

























                    answered 5 hours ago









                    pela

                    16.8k3660




                    16.8k3660






















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Brightness varies inversely with the square of the distance. Betelgeuse is about 642.5 light years away and has an apparent magnitude of 0.42. My grasp of apparent magnitude concepts is a bit wobbly, but I believe if it grew a million times as bright, it might have an apparent magnitude of -14.5 or so, which is a lot more like the brightness of the moon than the sun.



                        Given the great distance, the decrease in brightness due to distance, and the countless amounts of dust & gas between earth and Betelgeuse, I think you'd probably be fine. You might be dazzled by its brightness -- a bit like looking at a light bulb, I imagine -- but I doubt it would cause any physical harm.



                        EDIT: I hope a real astronomer sounds off here. I'm not sure what kind of supernova we might expect from Betelgeuse, but apparently supernovas (supernovae?) can achieve a theoretical brightness equal to 5 trillion suns!






                        share|improve this answer

























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Brightness varies inversely with the square of the distance. Betelgeuse is about 642.5 light years away and has an apparent magnitude of 0.42. My grasp of apparent magnitude concepts is a bit wobbly, but I believe if it grew a million times as bright, it might have an apparent magnitude of -14.5 or so, which is a lot more like the brightness of the moon than the sun.



                          Given the great distance, the decrease in brightness due to distance, and the countless amounts of dust & gas between earth and Betelgeuse, I think you'd probably be fine. You might be dazzled by its brightness -- a bit like looking at a light bulb, I imagine -- but I doubt it would cause any physical harm.



                          EDIT: I hope a real astronomer sounds off here. I'm not sure what kind of supernova we might expect from Betelgeuse, but apparently supernovas (supernovae?) can achieve a theoretical brightness equal to 5 trillion suns!






                          share|improve this answer























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            Brightness varies inversely with the square of the distance. Betelgeuse is about 642.5 light years away and has an apparent magnitude of 0.42. My grasp of apparent magnitude concepts is a bit wobbly, but I believe if it grew a million times as bright, it might have an apparent magnitude of -14.5 or so, which is a lot more like the brightness of the moon than the sun.



                            Given the great distance, the decrease in brightness due to distance, and the countless amounts of dust & gas between earth and Betelgeuse, I think you'd probably be fine. You might be dazzled by its brightness -- a bit like looking at a light bulb, I imagine -- but I doubt it would cause any physical harm.



                            EDIT: I hope a real astronomer sounds off here. I'm not sure what kind of supernova we might expect from Betelgeuse, but apparently supernovas (supernovae?) can achieve a theoretical brightness equal to 5 trillion suns!






                            share|improve this answer












                            Brightness varies inversely with the square of the distance. Betelgeuse is about 642.5 light years away and has an apparent magnitude of 0.42. My grasp of apparent magnitude concepts is a bit wobbly, but I believe if it grew a million times as bright, it might have an apparent magnitude of -14.5 or so, which is a lot more like the brightness of the moon than the sun.



                            Given the great distance, the decrease in brightness due to distance, and the countless amounts of dust & gas between earth and Betelgeuse, I think you'd probably be fine. You might be dazzled by its brightness -- a bit like looking at a light bulb, I imagine -- but I doubt it would cause any physical harm.



                            EDIT: I hope a real astronomer sounds off here. I'm not sure what kind of supernova we might expect from Betelgeuse, but apparently supernovas (supernovae?) can achieve a theoretical brightness equal to 5 trillion suns!







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered 6 hours ago









                            S. Imp

                            1185




                            1185






























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded




















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Astronomy Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                                Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f28677%2fwhat-would-happen-if-someone-had-a-telescope-and-watched-betelgeuse-when-it-goes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                flock() on closed filehandle LOCK_FILE at /usr/bin/apt-mirror

                                Mangá

                                Eduardo VII do Reino Unido