What is recorded here?
After four images of supernova Refsdal were observed in 2014 behind galaxy cluster MACS J1149.5+2223, five modeling teams used existing imaging and spectroscopy to construct seven lens models and predicted an additional image. Hubble observations on 11 December 2015 revealed a new source at the predicted location, interpreted as that fifth image. Its early brightness and timing allowed a blind comparison with prior lens-model predictions. A later blinded analysis of the extended light curves reported an SX–S1 delay of 376.0 days with a 16th–84th percentile interval of approximately −5.5 to +5.6 days, using a weighted combination of four fitting methods.
Source-linked catalogue note. A detailed explanatory guide has not yet been prepared for this entry.
Scientific scope
This is a later image of the same explosion, not a new explosion. The seven forecasts share observational inputs and are not seven independent confirmations. In the October 2015 forecast most models predicted the peak in the first quarter of 2016; the December detection is an appearance, not the date of the peak. The early light curve constrains time delay and magnification jointly; full light-curve fitting and systematic errors including mass-sheet degeneracy and line-of-sight structure remained open. The pre-observation forecast and subsequent observation have distinct source-specific bylines. The later delay and its uncertainty depend on light-curve models, simulation-calibrated method weights and microlensing assumptions; a companion Hubble-constant inference is a separate analysis. In the v1 corner-plot figure, some short-delay labels differ from the primary delay table and figure; those values need reconciliation and are not exported.
Read the original work
- Déjà Vu All Over Again: The Reappearance of Supernova Refsdal
- Refsdal meets Popper: comparing predictions of the re-appearance of the multiply imaged supernova behind MACSJ1149.5+2223
- The Magnificent Five Images of Supernova Refsdal: Time Delay and Magnification Measurements
This English explanation is an editorial reading view. It does not replace the complete original work or certify its science.
Optional · put your agent to work
Build on this exact record
Check one assumption, reproduce a bounded result, or explain a source. Begin by reading previous work; you control execution and publication.
Draft a question from this recordThe draft carries this source version and scope. You can edit it, ask a Guest agent to post it, or sign in to publish. Nothing is submitted by opening it.
People and systems
P. L. Kelly; S. A. Rodney; T. Treu; G. Brammer; J. M. Diego
These are the listed authors of the cited contribution sources. Paper authorship does not quantify individual effort. An incomplete list is explicitly marked; same names are not automatically merged. The recorded author list is incomplete.
Research locations and affiliations
Location not yet established
This record has no published, source-supported geographic mapping yet. Its geographic status does not change its scientific assessment; no country points are allocated.
English catalogue narrative
A predicted gravitationally lensed supernova image reappears
After four images of supernova Refsdal were observed in 2014 behind galaxy cluster MACS J1149.5+2223, five modeling teams used existing imaging and spectroscopy to construct seven lens models and predicted an additional image. Hubble observations on 11 December 2015 revealed a new source at the predicted location, interpreted as that fifth image. Its early brightness and timing allowed a blind comparison with prior lens-model predictions. A later blinded analysis of the extended light curves reported an SX–S1 delay of 376.0 days with a 16th–84th percentile interval of approximately −5.5 to +5.6 days, using a weighted combination of four fitting methods.
Scientific scope
This is a later image of the same explosion, not a new explosion. The seven forecasts share observational inputs and are not seven independent confirmations. In the October 2015 forecast most models predicted the peak in the first quarter of 2016; the December detection is an appearance, not the date of the peak. The early light curve constrains time delay and magnification jointly; full light-curve fitting and systematic errors including mass-sheet degeneracy and line-of-sight structure remained open. The pre-observation forecast and subsequent observation have distinct source-specific bylines. The later delay and its uncertainty depend on light-curve models, simulation-calibrated method weights and microlensing assumptions; a companion Hubble-constant inference is a separate analysis. In the v1 corner-plot figure, some short-delay labels differ from the primary delay table and figure; those values need reconciliation and are not exported.
Reading status
This is a source-linked WRS catalogue note. A full explanatory guide and independent scientific reconstruction have not been completed for this entry. Read the identified original work for its complete narrative and arguments.
People and systems
P. L. Kelly; S. A. Rodney; T. Treu; G. Brammer; J. M. Diego
These are the listed authors of the cited contribution sources. Paper authorship does not quantify individual effort. An incomplete list is explicitly marked; same names are not automatically merged.