martyb writes:
"Scientists have discovered a pulsar (with an estimated mass of between 1.4 and 2 solar masses) traveling at an estimated 2.5 to 5 million mph (0.0035c to 0.007c). According to NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory:
Originally discovered with the European Space Agency satellite INTEGRAL, the pulsar is located about 60 light-years away from the center of the supernova remnant SNR MSH 11-61A in the constellation of Carina. Its implied speed is between 2.5 million and 5 million mph, making it one of the fastest pulsars ever observed.
By comparison, one of the fastest man-made objects is the Voyager-1 spacecraft, currently traveling at an estimated 38,100 mph relative to the sun, or approximately 0.000056c (5.6 x 10-5 c)."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Fast-Moving Pulsar
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 1000 moderator points
| 19 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Daniel Dvorkin on Friday February 21 2014, @10:46PM
Wouldn't you kind of expect a pulsar to be moving fast, since (IIRC) it was created by an asymmetrical supernova explosion? The amount of energy involved in that is mind-boggling.
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [dev.soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 1) by khchung on Saturday February 22 2014, @04:31AM
Then you would have to explain why a supernova would be asymmetrical enough to give a significant boost to the pulsar in any particular direction.
(Score: 1) by Daniel Dvorkin on Saturday February 22 2014, @11:19AM
It looks like there isn't a solid explanation yet [wikipedia.org], but it certainly happens. IANAA, so if anyone who knows more about the subject would like to expound ...
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [dev.soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 2) by martyb on Saturday February 22 2014, @10:36AM
Daniel Dvorkin (1099) wrote:
My understanding is the creation of a pulsar does not require an asymmetry supernova. See "Formation" section on wikipedia - Pulsars [wikipedia.org].
By the way, the quoted mass of a pulsar was not in the linked article, but rather was the result of a quick search on the net. It was also pretty late, so the value of 1.4-2 solar masses may well be incorrect. (Things were moved around from what I had in my submission: http://dev.soylentnews.org/submit.pl?op=viewsub&subid= 187 [dev.soylentnews.org].)
(Score: 2, Informative) by Daniel Dvorkin on Saturday February 22 2014, @11:12AM
It doesn't mention asymmetry in the article on pulsars, but it does in the article on supernovas [wikipedia.org]. Looks like the cause is somewhat mysterious, but the phenomenon is well-known.
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [dev.soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 1) by martyb on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:13PM
Daniel Dvorkin (1099) wrote:
Huh! Well how about that! Thanks for passing along that link - that's what I love about this site! I learn something new every day!
(Score: 1) by Daniel Dvorkin on Saturday February 22 2014, @02:06PM
It's people!
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [dev.soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 2, Informative) by randmcnatt on Friday February 21 2014, @11:04PM
Maybe they (astronomers) have confirmed the velocity, etc.
The Wright brothers were not the first to fly: they were the first to land.
(Score: 4, Informative) by randmcnatt on Friday February 21 2014, @11:28PM
Is IGR J11014-6103 a pulsar with the highest known kick velocity? [iop.org]
You can read the article or download a PDF.
The Wright brothers were not the first to fly: they were the first to land.
(Score: 1) by mrcoolbp on Friday February 21 2014, @11:31PM
Looks like the same one, and it seems you would be correct: in your linked article it explains that they need to confirm speed, and it looks like they were dead on already.
(Score:1^½, Radical)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday February 22 2014, @01:54AM
Comparing the speed of a pulsar to a man made object seems somewhat pointless.
Its not like any of us can conceptualize Voyager-1's speed any way.
Why not compare it to other pulsars or fast moving stars, or even the speed of our own star in its journey around the galaxy?
Compared to the cosmic microwave background, our galaxy is barreling along at 1,234.788.83 mph [wikipedia.org], making this Pulsar look slower than molasses.
Discussion should abhor vacuity, as space does a vacuum.
(Score: 5, Funny) by mrcoolbp on Saturday February 22 2014, @02:35AM
It's all relative.
(Score:1^½, Radical)
(Score: 5, Informative) by stormwyrm on Saturday February 22 2014, @04:14AM
I checked the WP link you've got there by the way, and did conversions myself. You do very odd mixing of commas and periods, and find that the Milky Way's speed relative to the CMB is 552 km/s or 1,230,000 mph (using the proper number of significant figures). The pulsar's speed is quoted as 2.5 to 5 million mph, or at least double and up to nearly five times faster than the Milky Way's speed relative to the CMB. The pulsar is moving away from its supernova remnant much faster than the Milky Way is moving relative to the CMB!
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
(Score: 1) by mrdavis on Saturday February 22 2014, @11:52AM
But how fast is it moving relative to the Library of Congress?
(Score: 2, Funny) by nobbis on Saturday February 22 2014, @09:40AM
So how does it compare to the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow ?
It's easy to look up when your mind's in the gutter
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mtrycz on Saturday February 22 2014, @12:32PM
A car analogy would be nice, actually.
(Score: 2) by ticho on Saturday February 22 2014, @06:17AM
(Score: 1) by thoughtlover on Tuesday February 25 2014, @05:33AM
Ahh, so may good books, but I think this one is a tad closer to what's really going on... that star is in a hurry and (quite possibly) pissed.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/898071.Rogue_St ar [goodreads.com]
(Score: 2) by ticho on Tuesday February 25 2014, @10:46AM
Thanks for the tip, I'll check that one out, even though user reviews on the linked page seem less than stellar (get it? stellar!).