Are GRBs and Hypernovae the same thing?

[dark_energy]

Curious. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[thalion]

Well, the answer is yes, and no.<br /><br />"Yes," because the link between supernovae/hypernovae and the majority of GRBs seems to be quite strong, as determined by study of GRB afterglows. <br /><br />"No," because so far theory suggests that only stars too massive to become neutron stars can generate a GRB when they explode, so there are probably a number of supernovae/hypernovae that don't cause GRBs. Also, there are some GRBs that can't easily be explained by SN models, and many astronomers have settled on merging neutron stars as the culprits for these out-liers.

 

[Maddad]

We're living in a golden age of astronomy. We're discovering more about the universe in this lifetime than at any other point in history. We'll find the answer soon enough, and that's what makes the astronomers' life exciting.

 

[dark_energy]

What about the Swift mission? Isn't that helping us to find out more about GRBs? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

Yes, Swift is going to study GRBs. In addition to providing a very good and reliable rapid notification of GRBs (with position information) to ground stations, it will also slew itself to the site within I think 70 seconds. That's amazingly fast. It'll image the GRB's location in visible, infrared, and x-ray. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>