Introduction

Ashworth, Tony

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-04356-9_1

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Historians have long debated the possibility that Cas A was the mysterious star ‘3 Cas’ observed by John Flamsteed on 1680 August 26 (Gregorian calendar), with arguments in favour of this identification ( e.g. Ashworth 1980) because their locations are quite close and no other star exists there today, or against it ( e.g. Stephenson & Green 2002; Green & Stephenson 2003; Stephenson & Green 2005a) based on the fact that the discrepancy between the position of 3 Cas and Cas A is still unusually large for Flamsteed's accurate standards.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Cas A, Cassini, Comets, and King Charles

Soria

Balestrieri

Ohtsuka

2013

Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 fourth-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.

show abstract