3 ms·
The problem is that the angular resolution is not all that great so it could've been a coincidence. With the number of observations we make and the relative fr
by throwawaymaths 2y ago
The problem is that the angular resolution is not all that great so it could've been a coincidence. With the number of observations we make and the relative frequency of supernovae anywhere, it's surprising that n isn't at least 2. Or 5.