Why does supernova maintain dominance over descriptive synonyms in scientific literature?

It functions as a classification, pointing to specific physical models like Type Ia or Type II events

The enduring presence of 'supernova' in scientific discourse stems from its function as a precise classification rather than merely a descriptive synonym. Astrophysics categorizes supernovae into distinct types (like Type Ia, resulting from a white dwarf exceeding the Chandrasekhar limit, or Type II, a core-collapse event). Using the single, established term allows researchers to instantly reference specific physical origins and implications for nucleosynthesis. Attempting to convey this detailed classification using generalized terms like 'exploding star' sacrifices the necessary precision required for rigorous scientific communication.