pith. sign in

arxiv: 1301.1855 · v2 · pith:N3WHZ7OTnew · submitted 2013-01-09 · ⚛️ physics.hist-ph · astro-ph.HE· astro-ph.SR

On Cas A, Cassini, Comets and King Charles

classification ⚛️ physics.hist-ph astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SR
keywords dateseenbeforebrightnesscassinicassiopeiacharlesconsistent
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

We re-examine the long-standing problem of the date of the Cassiopeia A supernova (SN), in view of recent claims that it might be the 1630 "noon-star" seen at the birth of King Charles II. We do not support this identification, based on the expected brightness of a Type-IIb SN (too faint to be seen in daylight), the extrapolated motion of the ejecta (inconsistent with a date earlier than 1650), the lack of any scientific follow-up observations, the lack of any mention of it in Asian archives. The origin of the 1630 noon-star event (if real) remains a mystery; there was a bright comet in 1630 June but no evidence to determine whether or not it was visible in daylight. Instead, we present French reports about a 4th-magnitude star discovered by Cassini in Cassiopeia in or shortly before 1671, which was not seen before or since. The brightness is consistent with what we expect for the Cas A SN; the date is consistent with the extrapolated motion of the ejecta. We argue that this source could be the long-sought SN.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.