this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
38 points (100.0% liked)

Astrophotography

1814 readers
56 users here now

Welcome to !astrophotography!

We are Lemmy's dedicated astrophotography community!

If you want to see or post pictures of space taken by amateurs using amateur level equipment, this is the place for you!

If you want to learn more about taking astro photos, check out our wiki or our discord!

Please read the rules before you post! It is your responsibility to be aware of current rules. Failure to be aware of current rules may result in your post being removed without warning at moderator discretion.

Rules




If your post is removed, try reposting with a different title. Don't hesitate to message the mods if you still have questions!


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] over_clox 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

Awesome photography! But I have a question...

Regarding space-time adjustments to what you have there, and the fact that we're already seeing it..

Doesn't that mean the explosion radius is way larger than it appears?

[–] Gnomie 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I get your point, and yes, it’s already moved from where it was when it was imaged. What you could see would depend on how far away you are from it. If you could now, suddenly, magically be at the edge when the photo was taken it would be some where else. Everywhere we look we’re seeing into the past.

[–] over_clox 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You missed my point altogether. It doesn't matter if the source of the event moved at all or not, I'm talking about the shockwave through the universe.

Once we can actually see the radius of a supernova explosion, well that radius is long ago in the past, and whatever dangerous gamma rays or neutrinos or whatever have probably long ago passed us.

Time dilation yo.

[–] Gnomie 2 points 8 months ago

I got your point; I think you just argued my point. Nothing we image is as it “is” but rather as it “was”.

load more comments (1 replies)