Question Are new stars being born...

Aug 23, 2021
93
80
110
Where is the energy coming from to cause this to happen? As the universe increases in entropy, for new stars to form there must be some input of energy to decrease entropy. In an expanding universe matter tends to disperse. Order -> Disorder.
Just some thoughts :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe and rod

rod

Oct 22, 2019
2,285
915
3,560
Terra Australis, the question was asked *Are new stars being born...* Cosmology and astronomy today is committed to the BB model so the answer must be *yes* :) New stars form all the time because of gas clouds and gravitational potential energy in the gas clouds (M42 in Orion is an example). According to the BB model, cosmic high noon star formation took place where we see objects today with redshifts some 3.0 to 4.0, the star formation rates extremely high and fast compared to other parts of the universe much closer to earth. However, in my studies I find new star formations reported in the Milky Way, 200 pc from the Sun, Magellanic Clouds - all over the map :) Here are some references.

3 Msun/annum in Milky Way, source Allen's Astrophysical Quantities Fourth Edition 2000, p. 572
200 pc from the Sun, October 2021, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.506.5681D/abstract, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.01844.pdf
source 27-August-2021, https://www.newscientist.com/article/2288035-the-history-of-the-large-magellanic-cloud-has-been-mapped-in-detail/, the Magellanic Cloud star formation rate(s)

Ken Croswell reported in 1995 about 10 new stars per year form in the Milky Way, source Croswell, K. The Alchemy of the Heavens 1995, p. 3

Using a one million year time period, I get new stars formed in MW according to Ken Croswell, about 10 million. Within 200 pc of the Sun, about 150 solar masses of new stars, per annum 1.5E-4 solar mass/yr and 0.8E-4 solar mass/yr
Using Magellanic Cloud rates, 300,000 new stars formed (0.3 solar mass per annum).

Using my 90-mm refractor telescope and 10-inch Newtonian, I enjoy viewing M42 in Orion. I am still waiting to see some new stars pop out and become visible in M42 :)
 
Aug 14, 2020
559
106
1,060
You ask how much gain is there? How much loss is there, and how much has there been, to blackholes? Gain, especially concerning quantum fluctuation gain, creation, seemingly from nothing and nowhere, occurs. Loss to blackholes, and loss of blackholes (disappearing to seeming nothingness and nowhere), occurs. How much has been lost, all told? How much has been gained, all told? What is to the other side of the Planck Big Bang horizon? Or is the Planck Big Bang horizon itself also the Big Crunch (quantum gravity)? Endless end (endless ends wide) across the infinite.... and an endless beginning (endless beginnings wide) throughout an infinite.

The flattening smoothness of entropy will never extend beyond the Planck Big Bang horizon. The non-linear infinity of paralleling finite universes is at once a non-linear infinity of paralleling infinitesimals (thus a multi-dimensional entity). Thus entropy goes nowhere but to an existence already in place.... always in place.... always in existence. Ultimately, nothing is lost nor gained. "Universe" means nothing if not an ultimate balance of natures.... not once upon a time but at all times.
 
Jun 1, 2020
1,769
1,510
5,060
The BB model starts where physics can explain things. This is not at the very beginning (i.e. t = 0), but in fractions of a nanosecond thereafter where temperatures were extreme as all that existed was energy. Temperatures were something like 10^23 K - almost a trillion trillion kelvins. Next came quarks, then elementary particles (protons, electrons, etc.). The expansion brought temperature down to about 3000k when, all at once, electrons became attached to the protons and atoms were born. 9 hydrogen for each helium atom. I tiny amount of Li and one or two of the other, lighter elements were formed as well.

But this incredible mass of h and he wasn't perfectly homogenous or isotropic due to quantum effects. So the slight differences, along with incredibly fortuitous force strengths relative to one another, allowed large clouds to form. Over time, these clouds often fragmented into clumps that became the incubators for stars.

There are still large clouds around, but not as much as before as Rod has noted. Protostars and their disks were a complete mystery until IR and radar technology came along and started "seeing" these things.

The closests star forming region of consequence, besides the Magellanic clouds, is in Taurus, but perhaps the greatest area of study is in multiple regions of Orion.

It's incredible what high-level forms exist in the universe, like us, with the expense to entropy (increase).
 
Aug 14, 2020
559
106
1,060
The greatest star and galaxy forming region of consequence is the region 13 to 14 billion light years from any local region. The collapsed -- constant -- horizon of the infinite, or Multiverse, Universe has material substantiality of its own. Every finite local, relative, universe of an infinity of paralleling universes is result as well as contributor to that material substantiality in collapsed horizon (Big Crunch / Planck Big Bang horizon). It's an unapproachable horizon as are all such horizons. It keeps its distance and evolutionary aspect. A fast traveler of the universe would travel into seeming fast evolutions:

(past (-) ----> future (+) ----> now (t=0)).

That seemingly immortal traveler would always see, from midst uncountable stars and galaxies and other regions and things evolved -- or in process of evolution -- he has passed, the collapsed horizon to be keeping its constancy at 13 to 14 billion light years away (and keeping its constancy inside him at the Planck Big Bang base of his own makeup). One result of the fact that every point of an infinite expanse and depth of points is always and forever the dead center point of infinity (thus always dead center point, too, of the collapsed horizon / material substantiality of infinity). He can't catch that horizon of endless beginning, nor unless he happens into the event horizon of some blackhole, will he ever approach [universal] end point.
 
Last edited:
Aug 23, 2021
93
80
110
Amazing answers to a seemingly simple question, thank you everyone.
However is there not an entropy dilemma here?
Doesn't entropy either remain constant or increase?
The formation of new stars from potential energy of gravitational collapse is that an increase or decrease in entropy?
I welcome all responses. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe

rod

Oct 22, 2019
2,285
915
3,560
Some issues to ponder concerning new stars appearing in the galaxy or other galaxies today. Where are all the ZAMS (zero age main sequence) plots for new stars on the H-R diagram that are confirmed as ZAMS today? This is true for globular clusters and H-R diagram dating. All Milky Way GCs must originally be ZAMS plots to compute their ages on the main sequence at the start for today's calculated 11 to 13 billion year ages. We have many open star clusters too so where are the ZAMS in those open clusters? In our Milky Way, a July 2021 reports show 46 solar masses of new stars form each year in the gas clouds in the MW. Source, Which Molecular Cloud Structures Are Bound? https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021arXiv210705750E/abstract July 2021. The arXiv report indicates a SFR as high as 300 Msun yr^-1 according to some calculations and gas clouds short lived 10^7 to 10^8 years reported, arxiv paper, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.05750.pdf, 12-July-2021.

Another factor, spiral arms are known to be short lived, perhaps 80 to 180 million years at best. When it comes to new stars forming, the first stars did not collapse from molecular gas clouds like we see today in Orion, e.g. M42. Population III stars must form from the original, primordial gas created during BBN in the BB model (no dust, no CO gas, etc.). Can we see the original, pristine gas clouds in the universe today? Do we see Population III stars today? How do we know all the MW GCs documented (about 150 or so) started at out as ZAMS plots on the H-R diagram to calculate their ages today? I chew on issues like this 😊
 
Jun 1, 2020
1,769
1,510
5,060
Amazing answers to a seemingly simple question, thank you everyone.
However is there not an entropy dilemma here?
Doesn't entropy either remain constant or increase?
The formation of new stars from potential energy of gravitational collapse is that an increase or decrease in entropy?
I welcome all responses. :)
Good question as entropy is important.

The beginning instant is held to have been at an incredibly low entropy level, all-time low, in fact.

Entropy began increasing from that moment. Some of the early processes that brought forth atoms, etc., may have been considered reversible, but the net effect gives our universe an on-going process that causes entropy to continually increase.

So much so that if the universe were not expanding at this point, then the net heat from all the entropy increase would be the death of the universe, hence you will see "heat death" stated, less now than in the past.

Since the universe seems to not only be expanding but accelerating, then there won't be enough heat per unit volume to allow a heat death, but a cold death is far more likely, but that's trillions of years from now. [IOW, the expansion causes space temperatures to continually drop.]
 
Last edited:
Sep 24, 2021
28
3
35
There is a field of view of the Hubble (telescope). Since the universe is expanding at a speed higher than the speed of light (does not contradict SRT), then in theory we should not see new stars, i.e. photons and other particles must move away and will not come out to fix them. But at the same time, Hubble's field of view also expands, which makes it possible to catch a particle or a whole stream. This particle can serve as an identification mark for a star or even a galaxy. Not entirely new, but for us, it was recorded for the first time. Somewhere there was nothing, and then something flies in from there. That is, the field of view of our most powerful telescopes and sensors is far from the entire universe. And over time, more and more discoveries take place. And will be.
 
Jun 1, 2020
1,769
1,510
5,060
There is a field of view of the Hubble (telescope). Since the universe is expanding at a speed higher than the speed of light (does not contradict SRT), then in theory we should not see new stars, i.e. photons and other particles must move away and will not come out to fix them. But at the same time, Hubble's field of view also expands, which makes it possible to catch a particle or a whole stream. This particle can serve as an identification mark for a star or even a galaxy. Not entirely new, but for us, it was recorded for the first time. Somewhere there was nothing, and then something flies in from there. That is, the field of view of our most powerful telescopes and sensors is far from the entire universe. And over time, more and more discoveries take place. And will be.
I'm unclear how the FoV (Field of View) will help us see regions near or exceeding the speed of light. Do you mean the HST's light gathering and resolving power? The James Webb is our next big step for this.

It is true, surprisingly, that when big scopes look at galaxies that are very far away that they will appear larger than expected. This is because the light from these distant galaxies were emitted long ago when that galaxy and us were much closer to one another, hence its apparent size was larger then. But at greater distances, this isn't true since we are now too far away for that benefit. It's simple geometry, actually.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts