SN1987A

On a night late in February 1987, the 23rd, a bright star in the south seemed out-of-place: it had not existed recently in the usually clear skies, and it was about where the catalogs listed blue-giant Sanduleak (-69 202),—and within hours astronomers around the world were apprised of newly discovered supernova SN1987A...

A supernova of this type (II) is a very-massive star 8-25× our sun, that has nuclear-fusion-burned a solar-mass-and-a-half of its fuel, hydrogen and deuterium, at its core, over a few million years, and then quickly, burned-or-flash-and-cooled its core helium, carbon-oxygen-mean-mix, and silicon-mean-mix, and there accumulated in its last day or-so that solar-mass-and-a-half as iron-like ash that won't burn further (but finely alters by nuclear transmutations)... at which juncture the overweight of the star and its core, collapses the core from thousands of kilometers across, down to 30 kilometers in mere seconds (various scenarios) into a neutron 'star' pounded by in-falling layers of more star fuel yet-to-burn, a silicon-carbon-like mix layer crashing onto the neutron core and fusion-flash-burning, approximately-instantaneously-completely to calcium-silicon-like mix, the result being further equally explosive in its shock of extra-intense fire traveling quickly back outward to the star's surface, igniting undissipated more-complete burning all along the way ... the net-result being the star outside its core flashes-over and entirely blows away to hot nebulous plasma (with 0.6 solar-mass of 'dirt'), while also impelling its remnant core neutron star at typically intragalactic velocity some 200 km/s (or 4× faster is equally common but might be by gravity-slinging past a companion star) to an unpredicted direction... and it also did something else that's interesting...

(Note, iron-core fast-collapse starts where its pressure is heaviest in its middle and gravity has least significant vector-contribution, so the trigger is therefor collapsing only about-center, plus, subsequent processes in the remaining neutron core developing under its poles bouncing independently, including, neutrino reaction-thrust and lopsided enhanced meso-core fusion, and thus we'd expect core escape acceleration off-center 'til shockwave-turbulence smears it all out.)

That's what astronomers, saw, from their vantage on Earth their safe-haven about 160,000 light-years far-away-and-later. But what they saw was only about 1-2% of the total energy expended by the supernova and hours too late for detecting the much bigger initial event at the supernova's core: 98-99% of its energy was spent in the few seconds of core-collapse which generated a sudden flood-burst of 10^57-58 neutrinos, each 'half-photon' particle traversing ordinary atomic objects without absorption, with such unembarrassed ease that the star itself seemed translucent where silicon-core densities delayed neutrinos by scattering them ten-thousand[?] times, 10-20 milliseconds[?], nearly-invisible even viewed in new-technology neutrino-astronomy: it would go unnoticed at Earth except for the occasional photobombing neutrino striking an electron exactly-on-center, or a nucleon quark in a proton or neutron to emit a positron or electron, kicking it so hard it radiated Cernkov light in proper detectors, (other NDE's detect atomic scintillations or nuclear-chemical transmutations); This is what NDE operators found when reviewing their automated records of the hours preceding the visible-supernova event, of inside their tanks of thousands of tons of pure water (or LNG autc.), a handful tens of neutrinos—of the 10^16-17 passing through from the supernova core-collapse...

What the astrophysicists 'saw' was something yet more revealing; The correlated neutrino-event data collected from both the IMB NDE and the Kamioka NDE [REF: IAU circulars, Astronomy and Astrophysics, PhysRevLett, etc.], reveals what actually happened in the deep core of the star in the moment of the supernova trigger event; Time-series and power-spectra, histogrammic analyses, show the neutrinos exiting the neutronizing core of SN1987A predominantly, after settling, as beyond-threshold multiplets of 6.75 ± .35 MeV in KAM, and 7.35 ± .65 MeV in IMB, (a calibration difference or ramp threshold) with the highest in KAM amidst the IMB bracket, and the lowest in IMB amidst the KAM bracket, (despite the quoted precisions about ±25% ±1.6-2.0 MeV), synchronized in clicklike pulses as long as the NDE photomultiplier-tube 50 nsec aperture, possibly-longer but with more-variably-truncated energy readings by individually-closing apertures, shorter than its recovery time 20 µsec to exclude muons, and timed at 177 ± 10 msec in KAM, and 224 ± 26 msec in IMB, fairly distinctly-neatly 4:5 ratio, 6-12% variability each (5th-8th-harmonic 25-40 Hz in-sync, cf reported analysis of 3rd-harmonic 5-10-15 Hz), yet, rampantly diverging 25% per interval over 9-12 ~ 250% ~ 3 cycles... and except for KAM's settling-phase two earliest antineutrino events pointing back at the LMC as their source origin, and one 20-msec-quick-followon singlet (possibly that extra core-density-scattering; but 180° off the-other periodicity), and IMB exhibiting erratic skips but consistently in-sync-timing implicating sloshing emergence-alignments, and, both NDE's had a 5-6 cycle gap 0.86-1.12 sec followed by a top-energy event, thence lapsing 2.3-7 sec 10-40 cycles and flagging into the usual-background distribution, and, KAM had singlets 5/12 exhibiting threshold-bias variability—as most neutrinos were generated in batches cooked evenly behind shock-dense walls, percolating abruptly through the surface but the leading ramp-ups of each batch were more individualistic and when caught shut the NDE aperture leaving their close-heeling sync'ed-portions arriving unnoticed in the recovery phase 20 µsec 'sharp'ish...

(Note also KAM NDE threshold was low-enough to detect unrelated background, neutrino peak-events, and 1-3 probably occurred within the event-set-12 but 1 in-sync and 2 very-late had no statistical effect; But it may also be notable that an extended-600 sec of peak events showed periodicities of 255, 260±5, 240 sec for 21, 22, 23 PMT's, from possibly other specific sources, and 1 event appearing in-sync; But, there were also always, large, single events in 25-40 PMT's every few minutes...)

N.B. smaller Baksan NDE showed little-or-no fine-timing structure, with only one event calculably similar, to KAM by 3 × 178 msec, yet, its top-energy-event, next, after a 1.175 sec 5-7 cycle gap, may sync with IMB 1.12 sec and KAM 1.03 sec (excluding its exceptionally-weak-in-sync-event#6), as it was of similar energy, 33.3 MeV, like KAM 35.4 and IMB 37, (this may be a 'sharp' synchronization feature for all three), but, 6-10% on the low-side, and overall 15-23% low, which might be calibration but for its overall energy structure ambiguity 5.8 ± 0.5 vs 8.5 ± 0.4 MeV equally-tight-too-close-to-call with its then-threshold 12 MeV 10%-higher than its usual-40%-higher than KAM 7 MeV, so, altogether, Baksan played-in except for its systemic-delay discussed in a closing paragraph...

To explain the strange divergence of interval timings—each NDE narrowly self-consistent yet between them grossly vexed by cumulative cycle times—we suggest it's not-simply thresholds crawling up triangular-bulk-neutrino-pulse-shapes maxing-out short of one-cycle, but rather there are dual generators, north and south hemispheres of the new neutron core because the poles are unsupported by core rotation and separated from each other by a thickening inner rotating-disk-bulk (*), and breachings could be either at the separate poles or, along the entire faster-rotating equatorial zone—resulting in the 22%-disparity in cycle periodicity—the detected faster were also more, less-energetic bouncing-less-by-height (so more often)... and, KAM triggered on low 7 MeV energies, and IMB on 20 MeV 3× higher, but, we'd still expect the lower trigger to have detected greater—as KAM did indeed 6/9 times of its own, 2×2 + 3×3 + 1×5 but at its own pacing and mostly-missing the much-bigger 'big-ones' that IMB detected on its-pacing while 'ignoring' medium-big... So, early-threshold-triggering KAM missed the immediately-following bigger, or vetoed them for Cernkov-pattern-strangeness possibly simulating muons, as much-larger detection events triggered many-times-multiply even outside its NDE main-chamber...

* (additionally, with initially excess angular momentum the collapsing iron core may have extremely elongated trying to split into corevolving unequal masses nearly orbiting its center, a double-ended neutron core ‘baton' rotating-and-deep-sloshing, but very-quickly slowing-settling into disk form... its fast-spinning-'beater-bar' and fast-repetitive-bouncing modes might help contemporary astrophysics models find their supernova-shock-stall-override...)

But note also KAM NDE reported 2 muon events right-before-and-after its tight-9 neutrinos, with the same period 177 ± 10 msec in-sync with its main sync (despite its early-three-jumbled neutrino-timings)... but... muons aren't created by 7 MeV neutrinos—unless coherent packets hitting the same-nucleon/nucleus 'simulate' muon detections—which might help-explain KAM detections starting 1.15 sec after, IMB strong-detections, as, confused by 'startup' super-packets, of neutrinos...

Alternative explanations for 'sharp' neutrino-bunching, include: shallow cooking behind shock-dense walls, inverted-cascading core collapse successively 'burping' from neutron-density reconstituting at each stage, stimulated-(n'aser)-emissions, aether-dragging or Mach-frame-dragging as the outer face of each neutrino pulse 'makes-way' letting rearward neutrinos catch up, additionally to each burst carrying-away gravitational mass 100-1000 Earth-worth allowing its thence-less-retarded tail to creep forward into its leading edge, over its 160-millennia travel time, and, dense-masses of neutrinos passing-through changing each-others' flavors (a 'new-physics' correlation, tending to lower-mass electron-neutrinos because correlative velocities haven't enough energy to raise flavor-mass; but this would increase spread), gravity-gradient-ringing in asymmetrical potential-energy-mass loss of gravitational-stress-field at lightspeed (100% significant about mass-holes: momentum goes-around not-into a mass-hole; 20-30% about neutron stars), Schrödinger's Equation for fast-moving radiate, (or, the astrophysicists' odd-theory masses of neutrinos, KAM 3±1, 6, 18±2, 27±1, IMB 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, eV, which they'll ponder and adapt their supernova theory models to fit the evidence gathered)...

The time-envelope functions separating well-sync'ed bursting, and the longterm-shift of precise-time-intervals and strong-multiples, may have too many variables to solve here—maybe shearing-over-layers of spinning neutron 'star' still-settling to quantum-superfluidity, breaches pointing the spray towards-or-off Earth (affecting detection-threshold pulse-subsampling), vertically-shifting/shrinking generation zones, star spin-up as it shrinks, general slosh and possibly even north and south hemispheres rotating at different speeds, eventually sync'ing, 'quantum-lock picking', or-not...

Prior-modern supernova-theories calculated the iron-core collapse as preceding, photodisintegration, and we'd considered iron nuclei shredding at their sides by the recoil of nuclear surface protons exposing 'face' neutrons to touching-exchange (a 'vibrating-liquid-drop' model) as iron-type nuclei abutted-almost-to-fusion in the subatomic-density-crush of a post-silicon-core, occurring before collapse, releasing a briefer quantity of neutrinos as ⁵⁶Fe does not fusion to ¹¹²Te endothermically until receiving 44 MeV (30%± more than the Coulombic-repulsive-contact-energy), the iron core building in the final hours of its last day reaching central pressure and temperature where dashing iron nuclei touch, exchanging helons for 1.32 MeV (15 G°K, being the same as due to the energy-addition of silicon-burning), neutrons for 3.6 MeV, protons for 4.2 MeV, electrons for 8.3 MeV, (cf ⁵⁶Ni needs 5.3 MeV for helon exchange), for slightly-less-repulsive off-iron-mishmash, cf 24×28 is 0.6% 0.9 MeV less-repulsive than 26×26... but first the remnant silicon in the core would've fusioned with iron or-above, endothermically, at half the temperature energy before iron-iron, (and offset by degenerate-electron-assist very-close between nuclei but restricted by the 'headlight effect' to more narrowly, in either case)...

Antineutrino bursting began at the bottom, first-rebound, from the portion of neutrons freed in the abruptly photodissociating iron-mean-mishmash and rapid-decay by increasingly-higher-MeV γ-rays and electrons-in-degeneracy and cascading neutrino flux—(bouncing may also relieve enough pressure to allow stellarly-massive neutron-dripping)—and then predominantly regular-neutrinos in the succeeding 2-3 sec bouncing re-fusioning in the centrally-lopsided new core recombining protons and electrons into neutrons releasing electron-neutrinos 0.78 MeV-cooler recooking to full temperature under already-neutrino-depleted non-fusioning pole-cap-layers... and then 10 sec decreasing fainter faster-ringing neutrino-bursts, 193 msec periodicity sampled in IMB, impacting mesocore fusion so dense and hot it moved those layers outward, soon turbulently through the star, generating a prolonged tail-distribution of neutrino-'business' for all NDE's, mixing into their background counts, (which for KAM might be notable for its quick resumption after its main blast—all 7-extra samples fairly evenly 15-18 MeV)...

Now-modern supernova-theory-proposals calculate the extreme temperature of the iron core causes the iron-like ash nuclei to photodissociate by γ-rays attriting neutrons (favored), protons, helons, at higher-mass-per-nucleon lowering the overall binding-energy/mass of species, thus causing rapid cooling triggering the final collapse, but, we think this particular star did a step more before core collapse into total-photodisintegration by rapidly increasing temperature, nucleon-wrenching neutrinos, neutron-dripping, and—maybe, γ-rays, if they don't max-out by converting to electron-positron pairs—'til it hit bottom... (Note also, contemporary gravity calculations are in need of a 20-30% mass-hole-correction for neutron stars approaching their holing-threshold, as LIGO-VIRGO confirmed, much mass is in the gravitational stress field, and, we presume, particle mass diminishes but ratiocinates parameters as core-collapse increases field-potential energy-mass...)

N.B. #1. It should also be noted that these three NDE's had similar detection spans after their main bursts, followons inversely-proportionally-for-thresholds: an overall production-envelope by the star—and yet their fine-timing structures were so different: it's 'as-if' the NDE-thresholds were altering under neutrino capture, or, by the flood of subthreshold neutrinos dousing their photodetectors, suppressing electronic triggering, or, anti-and-neutrino-spin-pairing quasi-entangled like 'paired-half-photons' giving parallel-pairs better-detectibility, or, something else like gravity-waves imputed in the early 1987 literature 1.2 sec ahead of the mass-front of passing neutrinos, (note that a collapsing 3000 km sphere emits a tidal-pulse smeared 10 msec at lightspeed), or, as-if neutrinos by their self-gravitational mass re-clumped their spattery escapements into blobs along the way spanning Earth...

N.B. #2. There was also neutrino evidence from other NDE's—but with very different characteristics, occurring 4:44 hours earlier than the IMB, KAM, BAK, detections, and there-only (maybe due to thresholds-and-vetoes); and maybe attributable to a phase-change in the silicon-burning core in the evening of its final day, ²⁸Si_(%) + ⁵⁶Co_(9%) ⁵⁶Ni_(90%) →...→ ⁸⁴Sr + 5.0± MeV net exothermic, a 'bounce' event after a half-hour-collapse, via intermediate ⁸⁴Y→⁸⁴Sr + 6.49 MeV to a strontium-cobalt-nickel core only 1% 'no-bounce-iron' Ni→Co→Fe net 6.70 MeV ...or... perhaps abrupt ingestion of degenerate electrons Ni→Co→Fe, or that 'nuclear-face-touching' maintaining particle count while chewing-up a tenth the energy, slightly reducing maintainance volume, leaning it toward full collapse; neutrinos just slightly cooking in an event converting iron-mode to iron-mean-mishmash, thence waiting quieter 'til the whole cooled into fast final collapse 4:44 hours later... Subnote, KAM also, detected something smallish 4:44 hour earlier, as well as more significant neutrino pulses at 340 sec and 19 min later probably not-core-related...

(Subnote other core processes to consider for the 4:44-hour-pre-supernova-neutrino-event, might-include photodisintegration of ⁵⁶Co→⁵⁵Co + n at its 10.1 MeV trigger threshold set by the weakish 'odd-odd' vs 'odd-even' strong nuclear forces favoring this path, but, such neutrons would quickly find their way into other ⁵⁶Co + n →⁵⁷Co + 11.38 MeV, but which though overall exothermic gradually accelerating this core process and stalling collapse, only very slowly captures an electron →⁵⁷Fe which is stable, meanwhile first-product ⁵⁵Co + e →⁵⁵Fe + 3.45 MeV peaks nearing the end of that day, but, there'd be no abrupt, neutrino-flux, and, it'd tend to preclude later abundancy paths with higher thresholds e.g. ⁵⁶Co→⁵⁵Fe + p roughly 8.62 MeV Coulombic-exothermic over its 5.85 MeV endothermic nuclear species step, roughly 14.47 MeV, though its energetic proton might be more-effective at abruptly tearing apart other nuclei... nor would this process have occurred sooner in ⁵⁶Ni, because the threshold is roughly 16 MeV for either proton or neutron attrition, set by the strongish 'even-even' vs 'even-odd' strong nuclear forces... nor later, in ⁵⁶Fe→⁵⁵Fe + n triggering a-little-higher at 11.2 MeV but very slow to decay further, but which might lead into the slide process...)

N.B. #3. There is one 'big anomaly' in the SN1987A detection itself: the system-clocks of the NDE's on-the-whole implicated a neutrino wavefront differential delay of 30± sec across the Earth: KAM's clock was purportedly unknown to ±1 min but its event time-and-data structure aligned well with IMB +10/−1 sec later, but, neither, aligned with Baksan 30± sec later—so—an explanation, albeit still-to-be-determined, is: Most-likely, the smallish Baksan NDE detected heavier, neutrinos—of the original two-thirds of electron-neutrinos that had changed flavor passing through the supernova star and become muon-or tauon-neutrinos slower to traverse their 160-millennia space-vacuum trip to arrive at Earth merely 30± sec later and with the same overall pattern including our gap-and-top-energy feature—but, not its electron, neutrinos (unless its 4-sec-early catch was exactly-that a much-later electron neutrino)—and which might help define muon/tauon-neutrino rest mass as 20± eV (classic*)... but note, the current particle-physics-technology does not allow for easy detection of muon-neutrinos: the momentum-energy is there but no experimental process for distinguishing flavor... Otherwise, neutrinos again changed flavors somewhat in passing through the Earth [check whether only Baksan was on the 'backside' at that moment], but also with less-efficient passage due to 20% scattering, via Earth, thereby reducing their scintillation-detection-calibration energies... (Or else, possibly, the Baksan system clock "UT" was set by telephone ±30 sec off, listed as ±2 sec but which might be onsite equipment delays only, though the 4:44-hour earlier event seemed quite in-sync among those,-detections... Or else, if, breaches in the supernova neutron core were pinpoint-narrow rotating rapidly and creeping-precessing, their streaming sprays might self-gravitate their 100-1000-Earth-mass-portions into rotating sheets crossing the face of our Earth in 30± sec on-a-slant, with fine-structure preserved; or-else, it might be, that, neutrinos are dipolarly steered, decelerated, by galactic magnetic fields, into such rotating sheets, and, slowly changing flavor... if, it was not-altogether-some-32K-millisecond-buffering-issue-never-publicly-discovered)...

* (the Baksan scintillator, if it did detect muon neutrinos, either, didn’t then detect tauon neutrinos equally abundant and of equal momentum, just slightly-slower, or, they're of equal mass, or, the single detection 5.98 sec after its muon-neutrino feature, was 22± eV tauon—mass ratios chuffly 'log-log' of their particles' ratios...)

N.B. #3a. A correction of the KAM timebase to correlate with IMB had been proposed as +7.8 sec by researchers examining the several NDE's as well as gravitational wave detectors of an early sort (local-SN-alert-system) with notions of a mechanism for iron core collapse with fragmentation... and, we note that our gap-and-top-energy-feature would make this +7.52 ± .08 sec to fit KAM to IMB, and therefor a correction to BAK of −29.47 ± .08 sec to fit both...

N.B. #3b. As current particle-physics-lore does-say muons can-be detected by simple impact imparting momentum, without flavor detection, so, KAM NDE detection of muon-neutrinos, using our combined feature-correction of +7.52−29.47 = −21.95 sec to fit BAK, should've spotted something at KAM-time +23.5 sec of a 'muon/tauon-neutrino-echo' of our gap-and-top-energy-feature, but—KAM showed nothing-significant 'til ca +62± sec and that was typical of background...

N.B. #3c. KAM's main busy-detection 1.915 sec overlapped by 2.69 sec of IMB busy-detections leaving KAM miffed 3.5-4.5 cycles 775 msec, implicates a process phase change to something KAM could-detect (whether equipment-phase or some 'exotic-new-astrophysics' tbd); meanwhile, by our +7.52 sec alignment-correction we find KAM's start-up first-detected-neutrino is 1.15 sec into IMB's already-business, exactly-aligned with IMB's 4th a right-on-the-clock-95%-noncoincidence, but the point is, KAM got no detections at-all during that first-1.15 sec 3/6 43% of IMB's 'strong-signal' regularity, and yet 7-distributed and-more during the next 1.54 sec—so, something needs explanation, why, KAM, wasn't,-and-then-was, detecting, and, KAM's muon-detections might chip 175 msec off that expectancy... (a wilder possibility, by the number of detections till the feature, 6-7 in KAM vs 6 in IMB, may, be, the KAM pulses shifting position more than the IMB pulses, over millennia, because the KAM-threshold-singles exhibited more variability in energy at their source, accounting for 0.5± sec variability at arrival, for 4± eV electron neutrinos)...

N.B. #4. Some literature claims that the majority of SN1987A neutrinos were anti,-neutrinos—probably by their NDE experimental method sensitivity-preference, but possibly by their thresholds as neutrinos from electron capture converting protons to neutrons receive much less energy to be detectable, assuming these escape without heating under bouncing neutron core walls, but, possibly theoretically assuming neutrinoless-double-electron-capture is more-likely-than-conjecturable…

SIDEBAR THINKABOUTS:

Despite Alfven thermal species shift giving more energy to lighter species, electrons dumping energy by synchrotron radiation at every close-pass of a nucleus, their dump-and-recover-average should be cooler, with more γ-rays and hotter heavy-species nuclei... however, nuclear near-field-potential-energy, repulsion, delimits electrostatic attraction to highest-energy degenerate electrons nearest-touching nuclear surfaces, declining energy-lessers back into the flow...

Shadow-suction between nuclei nearing contact in the seething degenerate-electron flux where nuclei up-close-shading their electrostatic interface are thus additionally pushed,-inward, towards fusion...

Nuclei electrostatically soft-bounce, taking slower paths...

Electron degeneracy in a γ-ray-rich environment shouldn't exhibit pure, Pauli exclusion, because the immediacy of a traversing γ-ray pushes the electron into a 'hybrid state' of velocities (acceleration by perturbation) growing its deBroglie-momentum-wave... such interactions might use Saha-ionization-population-statistics on how-quickly the Pauli exclusion 'flood' should resolve momentum-wavicle-reestablishment at lightspeed—in the wave-field depths of a pre-SN iron core...

There is also long-ago-published (1980's) expectation of more variability in low-mass supernovae (8-12 M_☉)—silicon shell flash atop silicon core thermally inverted by electron degeneracy cooling and neutrino energy-loss, but not specifically the final core flash itself if, 4:44 hours before the main iron-core collapse event, and without discussing iron-nuclei rain rate in the core electron degeneracy... and, that the smallest supernovae collapse by magnesium-core EC...

AND LASTLY, N.B. This is not the first known neutrino evidence of a supernova: Unseen conjectured XN1974 recorded by the HomeStake Mine NDE (KLande/Nature Oct 11, 1974) where no visible detection was made but its neutrino signature µsec-pulses demarking consecutive msec-intervals, 24 over 3 filling the NDE 1.5-sec data-buffer, in retrospect now blows the horn of 'St. John's angel trumpet' on the evaluation of supernova evidences and extrasolar neutrino production....

Prior edition had instances of Cernkov Cerenkov radiation attributed to Compton (inverse radiation) as are vaguely similar involving high energy electrons and photons (Compton) or photonic medium (Cernkov), producing energetic photons; nevertheless, Casmir-effect Zero-Point-Energy 'ZPE' field theory would have Compton inverse radiation simulate Cernkov radiation from charged particles scattering virtual photon pairs, at local-sublight speeds....

A premise discovery under the title,