I am currently working on a research paper regarding Supernovae and am looking for materials to read on them to gain deeper understanding of how they are formed (from a physics standpoint). Do you have any recommendations for books, papers, publications? I am really struggling to find something interesting. :)

Not sure how or where to research this so I figured I'd toss the question in here.

So I'm watching 2001: A Space Odyssey and at the part where Dave shoots himself into the ship airlock and I'm musing about physics in a vacuum.

One question that popped up tangentially is momentum. We talk about objects moving and at rest in physics but is there ever a situation where something in space is ever at 0 acceleration? Like, relatively speaking, something could match the momentum of a larger object e.g. a rock sitting on Earth and that would be considered at rest, but the Earth is moving. So in a bigger picture the rock is also moving. But say you took a spaceship into the vacuum with nothing nearby, could you balance out the momentum of the ship to 'stop' completely, or is momentum relative to other objects? If so, how is that measured is there a baseline to reference? Is there a gravitational component to it?

Hi all! Wanna start off by saying I know next to nothing about astronomy, including good terminology so I'm sorry if this is poorly worded and a dumb question.

My partner and I were driving on the expressway tonight and saw quite a large shooting star above us which went over the treeline before dissipating behind the treeline. It had a bit of a comet tail but apart from being somewhat large did not seem unusual. What us off was after it dissipated there was a hazy red-orange plume in that area that went from where the comet/asteroid first appeared that then went down in front of the tree line.

This is probably a very stupid question with a very obvious answer, but what was the plume and why did it's path appear somewhat different than the original shooting star?

I've spent the last hour trying to find more information but the only things that seemed to make sense with its appearance and timing were 1. a dust trail and 2. information on the likely makeup of the comet/asteroid. Any additional info would be greatly appreciated :)

Hi, I’m gonna be roadtripping this winter. I’ll be at big bend national park either January 4th or January 5th. I’m looking to stargaze.

If I make it there by the 4th, the 23% ilium moon sets at 10:55pm. I’d assume this means by midnight the stars would look beautiful right? If I make it there the 5th, the 33% ilum moon sets at 11:59pm. So how long would it take for the starts to look nice then?

Getting there by the 4th would be a bit rushed but I really really wanna have my first cool star gazing experience.

I’m also young and don’t mind staying up all night if that would work for the 5th.

Any advice? Thanks!

So I notice that, today, the constellation Centaurus just peeks above the southern horizon at night and draws a slow circle across the sky. It wasn't like that anciently due to precession, as the earth's poles were pointed in different directions. So, I am curious which constellation in ancient times was closest to the Southern horizon?

Thanks!

Buying a used sky watcher 150p 6in dob. My first time buying a used scope. I've asked for a picture of the mirror and it looks clean. Was wondering if there is anything I should look out for or any red flags.

GIF for attention. Taken on an L3 high fom night vision device. 7/7/24 flagstaff az

I'm trying to visualise what a planet's rings would look like in the sky from the surface of one of its shepherd moons.

So far I've been able to conclude that the rings and the moon would share their orbital tilt, so at the equator of the moon, it would look very similar to what it would look like from the planet's equator, a thin band across the sky of varying intensity depending on if you're looking "out" or "in".

Would latitude impact this? I understand how it impacts the view from the parent planet, but the shepherd moon is much smaller. If it were closer to Earth size, would one be able to gradually see the "surface" (for lack of a better term) of the rings, or would they simply fade from view the closer to the poles you got?

Say the moon is tidally locked to the planet (suspend your disbelief for me, please) and you were located on the hemisphere facing away from the planet, at 45° latitude, and the axial orbit is 22.5° to the ecliptic.

During the night, the rings would reflect some light to the surface, could it be enough to act as a Moon stand-in? I'm pretty sure it would be very bright if the rings were icy like Saturn's, but what if they were rocky?

Would the rings remain visible during a partial eclipse (or even just at high noon), or would the star's light be too overpowering? Would they gradually fade out closer in the sky to the sun?

What about if you were on the side facing the planet? would the rings be visible at all, at least at night?

So, I just saw a picture of the sombrero galaxy, 30 million light years away from earth taken on jwst. How can we have a clear picture of that whole galaxy with the black hole in the center of it, but our own black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, our only picture of it is super blurry and can barely see anything?

Next week I'm gonna visit my grandparents and I want to take some pictures of Andromeda Galaxy, Orion, Jupiter and etc. What settings do I need?

He keeps stating that it's actually the Sagittarius Stream from the ongoing merger with the Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy, I'm stating that it's the disk and bulge of the milky way that we're seeing. I've provided like 8 sources stating what the band is, and how the Sagittarius stream runs perpendicular to it, but he keeps stating that it's "new research and data" and that any of my links are simply too old or just plain wrong (my links range from 2007-2024 and some are university articles/publications, and some are just news articles from former astronomers).

My question is, does anyone know what data he is referring to? I have a feeling he's just trolling, and I know what the milky way is in the night sky, but I just don't know where's he's getting this wrong information or what he's misinterpreting. I know arguing on Facebook is worthless and useless, but the guy is amazingly annoying.

My 4.5 year old asked me what colour star dust is. From what I understand, it can be a lot of different colours and reflect light as well, and only a fraction of space dust is actual star dust.

I really want to answer this question correctly and I am really surprised that I’m having a hard time really understanding or wrapping my head around the answer.

Can someone please help me out? Bonus if you literally explain it like I’m (almost) 5!

Thank you!

If the first stars were Pop II and we currently form Pop I stars, will we get Pop 0 stars at some point in the future?

With the science we have today, how far away could we be to be very sure there is something worth studying on Earth?

I'm fourteen and I love astronomy. Well, perhaps I loved it, because in last week i feel that i'm losing Interest in astronomy. I don't want to lose it, because I really want to study astrophysics or astronomy. Can anyone help me what to do?