Timeline for The two channels of Type Ia SNe and their use as standard candles
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2022 at 9:32 | vote | accept | YiFan | ||
| Jan 26, 2022 at 9:26 | history | edited | ProfRob | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 67 characters in body
|
| Jan 26, 2022 at 7:58 | answer | added | ProfRob | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jan 26, 2022 at 0:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAstronomy/status/1486126814628130816 | ||
| Jan 25, 2022 at 16:20 | comment | added | Justin T | Ok maybe I’m missing something here, but I read through the paper and I’m not seeing any justifications or citing for this 20% number; it seems they spend the entirety of the paper trying to decide specifically what happened to SN 1006 and then just at the end say “combined with previous results” and then that 20% number, with no citations or further explanation. Again, maybe I’m missing something, but that just seems a bit unfounded given their evidence, maybe some other literature can supply additional light. | |
| Jan 25, 2022 at 9:21 | comment | added | YiFan | @zibadawatimmy Thank you! I don't think that answers my question exactly, but it is very helpful nonetheless. | |
| Jan 25, 2022 at 8:01 | comment | added | zibadawa timmy | I believe this has been asked before, though I don't recall an answer really being given. I think this is the Q&A I'm thinking of. It's slightly different, so I'm thinking not a duplicate, but ProfRob's answer does bring up the basis of your question (variation in the origins of Ia supernovae). | |
| Jan 25, 2022 at 4:25 | history | asked | YiFan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |