For amateur astronomers, discovering a supernova is a significant and rare feat. For a 10-year-old amateur to do it — well, that’s astronomical.
Kathryn Aurora Gray of Fredericton, N.B. is basking in the spotlight after noticing what was later determined to be a magnitude 17 supernova, or exploding star, on New Year’s Eve.
It’s in the distant galaxy UGC 3378, about 240 million light years away, in the constellation of Camelopardalis.
The Royal Astronomical Society of Canada says Kathryn is the youngest person to make such a discovery, which was soon verified by amateur astronomers in Illinois and Arizona. The finding has been reported to, confirmed and announced by the International Astronomical Union…
She is still on Christmas break, so none of her schoolmates know yet, except for one of her friends who popped by for a play date Monday…
“It’s fantastic that someone so young would be passionate about astronomy. What an incredible discovery. We’re all very excited,” said Deborah Thompson, executive director of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada.
The new supernova is called Supernova 2010lt.
I think it should be called Kathryn.
Data Mining in Hubble Space Telescope Data Base will find many more of EVERYTHING ASTRONOMICAL !!! We just need a BATTALLION OF ASTRONOMERS AND COMPUTER PROGRAMMERS SET TO THE TASK !!!
Thats what we need, more citizen scientists. GOOD JOB
You go girl.
Bravo
Heard it on the news yesterday, completely made my day.
a) good job and congratulations;
b) why do I have to go to Dvorak.org to hear about this sort of thing; should be on the front page of my local (canadian) paper.
#6
It is unusual for main stream media to broadcast any good news as there is no money in it. A crying shame really.
I hope this girl goes far.
mikecraig. CBC was running it nationally on radio and TV yesterday. National Post, Mop & Pail, etc. are running it.
FOX news was reporting that the nova was caused by liberal tax and spend activities and that Kathryn is a heroic young conservative for blowing the whistle on them.
Sweet!!!!
My town!!! Go Freddie!!!!!!
Canadians: Just like Americans, but smart. 😀
Seems to me the “real” story is that these things aren’t monitored in real time by computers so that Novae could be discovered WHILE they are blowing up so that whatever they have to teach us we could learn from? Or is there anything?
I hear her brother likes to sew.
heh, heh.
#11 Ben
Maybe not. Quote from The Canadian Press video report:
“the supernova is in a galaxy 240 lightyears from earth.”
In my previous life, I built and sold large aperture robotic computer controlled telescopes. Robot telescopes are now used in the hunt for supernovae by programming an observing schedule for many external galaxies and downloading hi-res digital photos for each. The photos are then compared night to night to see if anything has changed. Like shooting fish in a barrel.
Prior to the 80’s, supernovae were discovered by astronomers, both amateur and professional, by memorizing the appearance of many galaxies and comparing images in an eyepiece to memory as often as the weather allows.
Interestingly, most comet hunting is still performed by amateur astronomers using binoculars. I think David Levy and Gene Shoemaker still hold the human record. Levy is also the first to discover comets visually, photographically and electronically. Probe SOHO holds the all-time record, over 2,000 comets discovered.
Bobbo, there are too many galaxies to watch them all in real time. Like a few million close enough for detection of supernovae via CCD.
The appearance of a supernova in any one galaxy is an extremely rare occurrence, as it increases the number of targets that can be imaged in a single night.
There are photos available of night-to-night discoveries of supernovae.
Maybe that explains all those dead birds.
I saw it first but made nothing of it.
Bullshit, it was her Dad who discovered this and let his little daughter have the fame. Good on Dad, but really who gives to craps.
Dallas–you do crack me up. Keep posting.
KD–I simply don’t know enough. I assume that finding a “spent” novea in archived photo’s is really of no scientific interest at all–or of very little and this got posted as a human interest story. For human interest, it is very good.
I thought the value of supernovae was in what they give off very early in their explosion, and still valuable but not as much, what they give off in the next 2-3 days and after that, really not much of interest is happening?
To the degree that is true, the fact that it is a rare experience is exactly why computers should be doing it. Sorry, I assumed that would be understood.
And if the “odds” or productivity of finding anything makes the search by computer not worth the effort, then what’s the value anyway? Seems to me if the rewards are so slight as to not being worth dedicating a few computer’s worth of time to it, or spare time when not being used for something else, then again–what is the actual worth of spotting a supernovae? Have we learned all that we need to know or enough that learning something else is better spent time?
I’ve been seeing more news about how “dark matter/energy” may not exist at all. Funny how much science that gets reported is reported as fact when it is only a working hypothesis? I still don’t understand most of relativity, so I heartily accept science works with things I dont/cant/never will understand, but dark matter has always struck me as “maybe so, but sounds like BS to me.” Same with different theories having punch lines like “this solves the dilemma of having 19 rather than 17 other dimensions.” WTF???
I know I’m ignorant but you shouldn’t make fun of me.
Bullshit, it was her Dad who discovered this and let his little daughter have the fame. Good on Dad, but really who gives two craps.
Am I the only one who thought “wow that’s an old Viewsonic monitor…”
Very cool discovery. Hopefully she wont get bullied to death at school for being a nerd.
Hooper, obviously you give two craps or you wouldn’t have posted. Don’t dump on other peoples’ accomplishments dude. It makes you look like a douche.
Good for you Kathryn!!!
two craps Stupornova, two craps!
#19, Bobbo,
A supernova occurs about every 50-100 years in our galaxy. It’s the computers that control the telescopes and compare images, but there are so many galaxies and they are so small visually that it’s rare to find a supernova when you can only image maybe 40 galaxies a night. A large amount of luck is involved.
Still, several supernovae have been detected at just after their explosions and followed for a week or two until they are too dim to photograph.
A lot of research is involved with detecting Type Ia supernovae, as these are “standard candles”, always the same amount of radiation, and thus provide a method to accurately determine the distance to galaxies. This accurate measurement of distances to galaxies that are halfway across the universe directly led to the discovery that the universe is expanding at an increasing rate, which led to the determination that 75% of the universe is made of dark energy.
As for dark matter, it has been proven through months of computer simulations that galaxies can’t form without it. Dark matter was discovered by an astronomer who proved that, unlike our Solar System where outer planets orbit more slowly, stars in galaxies all orbit the galactic center at the same velocity. Only unseen matter could account for this.
Every time I itch, I blame it on the billions of dark matter particles that are passing through me every second.
I’m asking: Is “discovery” the correct concept or is dark matter merely a hypothesis? My take so far is that the concept/label of “dark matter/energy” is just a label covering up what we don’t know or what we may have wrong? Prior to more accurate measurements, the most precise of all the sciences said that the Universe’s expansion should be slowing down, the effect of gravity and its infinite attraction. But our notion today is that the expansion rate is increasing. I’d say maybe even that measurement is wrong? I don’t know at all exept that much of what people like “me” think is true is actually just a conjecture.
I won’t google, just wait to fall across the relevant literature, but I thought a while back I read that “maybe” black matter is wrong and some other heretofore well settled constant was a bit off or something else wasn’t understood well, or understood enough. The article didn’t SAY IT, but I inferred that dark matter, unlike a heavy element spewing supernovea, has not been “discovered” as a thing at all. Merely a label for what we don’t understand: very different.
I’m probably wrong, but very comfortable.