Posted on 10/29/2009 8:03:26 AM PDT by GL of Sector 2814
PARIS (AFP) – It took 13 billion years to reach Earth, but astronomers have seen the light of an exploding mega-star that is the most distant object ever detected, two studies published Thursday reported.
The stunning gamma-ray burst (GRB) was observed by two teams of researchers in April, and opens a window onto a poorly known period when the Universe was in its infancy.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I wonder how its third planet handled the Global Warming?
How long does it take for a Megastar to exhaust its supply of hydrogen?
Is it surprising that this happened 13 billion years ago?
Hypergiant stars only have a lifetime of a few million years, so it’s not surprising that some were exploding 13 billion years ago.
Megastars burn through their fuel at a very rapid rate. For a Blue Giant star you are talking about only a few million years before it supernovas.
Can you tell me how long it takes to form a mega-star? I believe these can be about 20 times the mass of our sun. I'm thinking that gathering much a vast quantity of material would take a while -- but maybe it all comes together in just a few million years? And then burns up in a few million years? Are these massive hyperstars just little blinks in the age of the universe?
Thus evening came, and morning followed, the first day.
From what I understand, just an amateur, these giant stars tend to form in denser dust clouds. I do not know the time it takes to form compared to out ordinary Sun but given the higher density of the dust gravity takes over and I do not believe one is talking about a big difference but as I said this is pure conjecture on my part.
save
Found this on wikipedia:
In high mass stars, the length of the star formation process is comparable to the other timescales of their evolution, much shorter, and the process is not so well defined.
For stars with masses higher than about 8 solar masses, however, the mechanism of star formation is not well understood.
Thanks!
You are correct. Also note that there are practical upper limits to the masses of stars. A star with too much material in it may never become stable. The effect of convection will be so great that a fairly fixed surface may not be able to form. Look up Eta Carinae for an example.
BFL
Speaking of supernova, I shot this supernova remnant last week. It was a series of 16x150 second exposures, calibrated, aligned and stacked.
This supernova exploded about 7000 years ago, and is about 2,000 light-years distance from earth.
Veil Nebula NGC 6992
That is so cool ad beautiful. Was that with amateur equipment?
You bet. Using a Canon, 40D shooting raw, with a 9 year old scope, from my small, backyard observatory.
I remember reading astronomy magazines in the 1970s which often included amateur photos. The amateur photos I see today are far more impressive! I can only assume it’s the equipment.
Well I take credit for building the mount the scope sits on, staying up all night, adjusting the tracking for the scope to be near perfect or close, fighting for critical focus, and learning imaging techniques in regards to obtaining the raws, darks, and flat images, and then processing the data once the images are obtained...lol
But other than that, your absolutely correct.
The new digital cameras...DSLR and CCD cameras are fabulous for astronomical imaging, dramatically cutting down on tracking times, exposures times etc....But then again it opens up a entire set of new factors, like techniques in processing the images and data, which is an extensive complex combination of science and art...I have much to learn here...lol...
The processing side of it is like the new photo lab or modern "dark room" so to speak, which I really enjoy.
All the images I take, I will never over-process, and what you see in the image, is basically what the telescope saw...All I do is attempt to bring out, or squeeze out the existing data in the image. I really enjoy the image processing part, but I need to add, there are a lot of people out there that do much better work than I do.
Holy flipping cow that is stunning. Simply stunning.
Do you have more of these online somewhere?
Thanks!
I’m almost done processing M1, a massive supernova explosion remnant in the constellation of Taurus which was first seen by the Chinese in ancient times, around 1054.
When I’m done I’ll put it up.
BTW, I sent you a pm.
How do they form? It’s all about the infall. You get enough gas and dust crammed in there fast enough, you get an absolutely massive star. The problem is that there are believed to be theoretical limits on how much mass you can squash in there, before the stuff at the bottom of the pile ignites and blows off the rest.
There’s quite a bit we don’t know about stellar formation.
Because of the time scales involved, it's a bit like trying to work out the life cycle of trees by taking a single snapshot of a forest. You can do it, but it's tricky.
Yeah, and considering we have a star right next to this planet, keeping us alive, you'd think we'd know a lot more about their formations. I find stars to be some of the most bizarre objects we humans can see. Few other things can match their size, age and enormous, almost supernatural power.
Well it’s two things. One, it’s a very short process, and two, it’s difficult to observe the process. Stars are very dim when they are first forming.
Speaking of stars forming...I took this shot a few months back of Orion Nebula, M-42...The central core of the nebula is a region where over 700 new stars in various stages are being formed. This nebula is often referred to as a stellar nursery.
19x65second exposures, ISO800-Canon 40D-SC 10" w/a 6.3 focal reducer.
Bump for both.
God made a beautiful universe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.