Talk:RS Ophiuchi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Astronomy This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to astronomy, and WikiProject Astronomical Objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Astronomy because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPAstronomy}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPAstronomy}} template, removing {{WPAstronomy}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

[edit] Artical subject

I have a question. Is this artical talking about the litteral nova that is RS Oph, or is it about the star that made it? Because the star also made Nova Oph 1898, Nova Oph 1933, Nova Oph 1958, & Nova Oph 1967. Also is the star now called RS Oph? I don't want to edit this artical further until I'm 100% sure about this subject. — HurricaneDevon @ 17:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

This is about the star called RS Oph, which has recurrent outbursts. It is not about one of these outbursts, only. That's least how the use of the article name should be interpreted, I think. Awolf002 22:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


There seems to be an error in the article: "..at which point a type Ia supernova will occur and destroy the star system in a spectacular explosion that will be visible from the Earth for several days, even after sunrise."

This is way off, a Type Ia supernova would not just be visible for several days if it were at the distance RS Oph is. It would be visible for something more like a year. I think the "several days" was referring to seeing it in broad daylight for several days but the article didn't clearly say that. At night it would be visible for much longer. M.O.S 23 July 2006

[edit] Supernove prediction depends on 1950ly distance, which is not sure.

The supernova theory is only valid if the star is 1950ly away. If it is 5000ly far, then another, explosion-less theory explains the observations. One would think we already have fine enough parallax rangefinders to determine the exact distance with the 2AU basis lenght available on Earth. 195.70.32.136 10:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The Supernova theory doesn't rely on the distance at all, but on the way in which gas is transfered from one star to the other in the system and then how this gas reacts to the recurrent nova explosions. Also parallax measurements cannot reach out to these sorts of distances. Spseyres 16:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)