How many supernova explode every year?

Cosmic-scale life, consciousness, and meaning

• Several comments speculate that the universe might itself be a kind of organism or “living system,” with supernovae as internal processes.
• Others argue this is implausible due to light-speed limits and expansion: communication across such scales would be too slow and disconnected to resemble known life or computation.
• Some connect this idea to pantheism, cosmic consciousness (quantum fields spanning the universe), and to “cosmic horror” tropes where incomprehensible scale drives madness.
• Quotes about humans as “wandering stardust” prompt debate: inspiring for some, but others say it does little to change human conflict or resource struggles.

Vast scales, heat death, and immortality

• The emptiness of the universe is seen as a blessing (supernovae usually harmless to us) but also a source of existential dread: eventual darkness and heat death.
• Speculative megastructures (e.g., Birch Worlds around giant black holes using Penrose energy extraction) are discussed as ways to extend civilization’s lifespan by ~10¹⁰⁴ years, still not “forever.”
• Many question the desirability of literal immortality: boredom, memory limits, and the likelihood of endless suffering in a cold, dark universe.
• Others counter that our current perspective is too limited to judge whether prolonging existence or “accepting” cosmic fate is better.

How many supernovae, really?

• A central numerical thread: roughly 1 supernova per century per galaxy, with ~10¹¹ galaxies, yields on the order of 10–100 supernovae per second across the observable universe; the article cites ~30/s.
• Initial back-of-envelope attempts (e.g., 1 in 32,000 stars per year) are corrected: typical main-sequence lifetimes (~10 billion years) plus the fact that only massive stars explode imply ~1 in 10 billion stars per year, and only a subset of those are supernovae.
• Comments note that stellar lifetimes depend strongly on mass; the most massive stars live only ~10⁷–10⁸ years, so the naive “average star lasts 10 billion years” argument is oversimplified.
• Some expect higher supernova rates in the early universe due to higher densities and star-formation rates.

Finite vs infinite universe, and what we can see

• There’s pushback against treating counts as “tiny compared to infinity”: the observable universe is finite, and infinities aren’t directly comparable to finite event counts.
• Debate arises over whether the entire universe is finite or infinite; commenters distinguish “observable universe” from the whole, and note that curvature measurements are inconclusive.
• One commenter suggests a 50/50 prior on “one universe vs infinitely many,” others object that probability and evidence don’t work that way.

Observation limits and technological progress

• Our direct, human-scale view is tiny: ~8,000 stars visible to the naked eye (and only half from one hemisphere).
• Yet instruments now detect tens of thousands of supernovae per year; when the Vera Rubin Observatory comes online, that could rise to hundreds of thousands annually.
• Supernovae are easier to count in other galaxies than in our own, due to dust in the Milky Way obscuring many events.
• Some emphasize that all we really “observe” are incoming photons and neutrinos, likening cosmology to an advanced version of Plato’s cave; others marvel at what we can still infer from these “shadows.”

Star formation vs stellar death

• A late thread notes that JWST-era estimates suggest thousands of stars form per second, which dwarfs observed supernova rates.
• Responses: most stars never go supernova; we are already past peak star formation, and current supernova counts are limited by observability, not occurrence.
• The large asymmetry in formation vs explosion rates is taken by some as evidence we’re in an early-ish cosmic epoch; others feel the imbalance suggests we may still be missing aspects of the full picture.

Naming, numeration, and humor

• The base-26 supernova naming scheme (e.g., SN2021axdf) triggers jokes about future long names and accidental profanities in the catalog.
• There’s a sub-discussion on better number bases (36, 60) and how many characters are actually needed to label all observable supernovae in a year.
• An astronomer’s “clicky” title and meme-like tone spark disagreement: some find it fun and accessible, others see it as low-effort or “YouTube voice.”

Cultural references and side topics

• Outer Wilds is repeatedly referenced: its in-game recurrent supernova is praised as a brilliant mechanic, though some find the controls and repetition frustrating.
• Other threads touch on Star Wars hyperspace jokes, classical texts (Diamond Sutra), and neutrino-based early warning systems (SNEWS) for nearby supernovae.