Star System Soaked With 'Rain'

Smersh · Aug 30, 2007

Article from Live Science: By Dave Mosher, Staff Writer posted: 29 August 2007 1:01 pm ET NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has revealed a dusty star system being soaked with a "steamy rain" of water vapor. The water, pulled from gassy stellar leftovers into a dusty disk, provides what astronomers think is the first direct look at how the life-giving liquid makes its way into planets. The disk is the same sort of thing that forms around many stars and, in the case of our sun, was the seedbed for planet formation. The amount of water in the newly observed disk is thought to equal more than five times that of all oceans on Earth. "For the first time, we are seeing water being delivered to the region where planets will most likely form," said Dan Watson, an astrophysicist at the University of Rochester in New York. Watson and his colleagues' work will be detailed in the Aug. 30 issue of the journal Nature. Steamy surprise Water is abundant throughout our universe, existing as ice or gas around stars and in the space between stars, but rarely as a liquid. "On Earth, water arrived in the form of icy asteroids and comets," Watson said. "Water also exists mostly as ice in the dense clouds that form stars." Astronomers found the watery evidence in a young star system called NGC 1333-IRAS 4B, located 1,000 light-years away in the constellation Perseus. The system still grows inside a cooled cocoon of gas and dust, and Spitzer data show that ice is falling from the cocoon into a warm disk of potential planet-forming materials circling the star. As the ice smacks into the dust, it vaporizes. "Now we've seen that water, falling as ice from a young star system's envelope to its disk, actually vaporizes on arrival," Watson said. "This water vapor will later freeze again into asteroids and comets." Dry search Watson and his team's discov <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <h1 style="margin:0pt;font-size:12px">----------------------------------------------------- </h1>Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea." Churchill: "Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it."Website / forums </div>

mooware · Aug 30, 2007

I saw this and was wondering how this fits in with the theory that water on planets originates from comets? It's right there in the article. "Now we've seen that water, falling as ice from a young star system's envelope to its disk, actually vaporizes on arrival," Watson said. "This water vapor will later freeze again into asteroids and comets

brellis · Aug 30, 2007

I was quite intrigued when I saw this and was wondering how this fits in with the theory that water on planets originates from comets? hi Smersh I enjoyed this article very much, too. In my dangerously uneducated opinion, planet earth owes its oceans to the constant bombardment of comets, but some water might have indeed settled onto the planet during the early stages of its formation. As our solar system developed, many collisions occured. As Jupiter got bigger and bigger, it whipped smaller icy/slushy bodies to the outer reaches, creating a repository of future comets in the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud. That repository has restored earth's water supply constantly, and I believe it still does. The disk imaged by Spitzer is very young, so the chaotic dynamics caused by giant planets hasn't happened yet. If earth didn't get its water replenished by comets (we still accumulate 100,000 tons of dust and little bits of icy material every year!), we wouldn't be around to wonder how it all happened. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better. </div>

MeteorWayne · Aug 30, 2007

Just a comment from my understanding. AFAIK, the Kuiper belt for the most part formed in place (subject to future data) since it's unlikely the angle of ejection from the inner solar system would stay so close to the plane of the solar system. The residents of the "scattered disk" with higher inclinations and more elliptical orbits are more likely to be ejected material, as well as the Oort cloud. Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Smersh · Aug 30, 2007

mooware It's right there in the article. "Now we've seen that water, falling as ice from a young star system's envelope to its disk, actually vaporizes on arrival," Watson said. "This water vapor will later freeze again into asteroids and comets Yes you're quite right it does say that doesn't it? <img src="/images/icons/blush.gif" /> However, is there any solid proof yet that this is the process that takes place does anyone know? brellis As our solar system developed, many collisions occured. As Jupiter got bigger and bigger, it whipped smaller icy/slushy bodies to the outer reaches, creating a repository of future comets in the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud. That repository has restored earth's water supply constantly, and I believe it still does. I'm not denying that this process very possibly does take place, but just wondered if there is any proof (for example has it been observed in the development of other planetary systems, hence my question in response to mooware.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <h1 style="margin:0pt;font-size:12px">----------------------------------------------------- </h1>Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea." Churchill: "Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it."Website / forums </div>

brellis · Aug 30, 2007

hi Wayne thanks for the better info. I can imagine the icy bodies of our Kuiper Belt settling into place from a disk not unlike the one observed by Spitzer. A more correct way of describing Jupiter's effect would be that it perturbs the orbits of KB objects and has sent some of them onto earthbound trajectories, enough to keep our planet supplied with the seeds of life <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better. </div>

MeteorWayne · Aug 30, 2007

brellis Well actually, Jupiter sent asteroid belt aterial towards earth, towards the scattered disk, toward sthe Oort cloud, and out of the solar system. The KB has not been affected much by Jupiter, since that piece of the rubble pie likely formed there, and the effects have been from Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

3488 · Aug 30, 2007

Hi all, I agree with MeteorWayne. IMO the Kuiper Belt formed pretty well, where it is now. It is far to close to the plane of the Solar System, to just be ejected material. The fascinating article Smersh found relating to Spitzer does not refute that. The HUGE quantities of H20 Spitzer found WILL freeze into comets & ice rich asteroids. I am aware that Eris may throw a money wrench into a neat pattern, due to the 44 degree inclination of the orbit of this largish object. Perhaps Eris was scattered (I do not rule out a large object moving through the solar system about 1GYA, something stoked up the giant Jovian moon Ganymede's internal heat then & that Ganymede did appear to move into a temporary, more elliptical orbit around Jove back then). Perhaps some scattered KBOs might be evidence for this also. Do not forget that Triton, Nepune's large moon & Phoebe Saturn's wayward distant (not outermost BTW) moon, are likely captured KBOs. Something pushed these inwards. Below craters & mountains on Phoebe, a possible captured KBO? NASA / JPL. Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

brellis · Aug 30, 2007

Wayne, thanks for your patient answers! I just took a 5-minute reference trip to the Hubble Desk <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Comets are found in two main regions of the solar system: the Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud. There are two types of comets: short-period comets and long-period comets. Short period comets â€“ comets that frequently return to the solar system â€“ probably come from the Kuiper Belt beyond the orbit of Neptune. Astronomers estimate that this belt contains at least 200 million objects, which are thought to have remained essentially unchanged since the birth of the solar system 4.5 billion years ago. Long-period comets, which can take thousands of years to complete their orbits, are thought to emanate from the Oort Cloud, a vast group of frozen bodies that surrounds the solar system. The Oort Cloud is thought to extend 50,000 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun. Oort Cloud comets, like their Kuiper Belt brothers, probably originated in the region of the solar system between Jupiter and Neptune, but were ejected from to the Oort Cloud by close encounters with the gravity of the giant planets. Comets are kicked out of the Oort Cloud and the Kuiper Belt by the pull of the gravity of another object â€“ a planet, a star, or another small body. They then begin their journey toward the inner solar system and the Sun. Theory has it that Uranus, Neptune, KBO's and Oort cloud objects all were sent into orbits further out from the sun by the gravity of the giants Jupiter and Saturn. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better. </div>

h2ouniverse · Aug 30, 2007

Hi Andrew, That raises again the issue of how many ice dwarves / small bodies have really formed around the Sun. Because the protostellar nebula may well include some bodies from the previous generations of stars. When whirling around the center of mass of the collapsing nebula, these bodies should be accelerated into orbit and cluster period-wise with forming objects. It might not be easy then to differentiate them from the new-borns. They should become covered with materials as the nebula becomes denser. If the mass there in KB was 30 to 50 Earth masses, as it is thought, there is still place for forming a super-Earth of say 5 E-masses, that might be there at e.g. 300 AU. The mass now of the KB-proper is said to be about 0.05 E-masses, i.e. as order of magnitude a thousandth of the intitial mass. That means many bodies ejected!! A large quantity of them should still be in orbit around the Sun.

MeteorWayne · Aug 30, 2007

Estimates for the mass of the KB range form less than 1 moon mass to a few earth masses. There's no reason yet to expect one or the other to be right. The measured objects don't really answer that question. Check back in 15 years, we'll have a better idea <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

brellis · Aug 30, 2007

hi Andrew thanks again for your tireless efforts! You are the Hugh Hefner of planetary pics! <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /> It (Kuiper Belt) is far to close to the plane of the Solar System, to just be ejected material. something happened that caused both Uranus and Neptune to move out. Perhaps that same event, or chain of events, helped push the KBO's out as well. I see a big difference between being "ejected" and being "pushed" or "pulled", even though the cause and result are similar. Short period comets could have been "pushed" out to their current orbits, not just "pulled" in. Do not forget that Triton, Nepune's large moon & Phoebe Saturn's wayward distant (not outermost BTW) moon, are likely captured KBOs. Something pushed these inwards. At an earlier stage, KBO's could have been "pushed" by similar processes that enabled their "capture"? Anyway, I think that a lot pf pushing and pulling can occur along the plane of the ecliptic. In fact, most of it does! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better. </div>

schmack · Aug 30, 2007

where would the ice / water apparent around NGC 1333-IRAS 4B and obviously in our own system have originated? and where did the oxygen that is combined with the hydrogen to make the water come from? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Assumption is the mother of all stuff ups Gimme some Schmack Schmack! </div>

brellis · Aug 30, 2007

schmack- welcome to SDC Someone more informed is going to have to step in here, but in the meantime: as Harlan Ellison once said, "the two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity". <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /> hydrogen and oxygen are common in the cosmos. water is all over the place. there's an earthful of frozen water in the Kuiper Belt of our solar system alone. way over my head here: our solar system is built around a second generation star. Heavier (and rarer) elements in our solar system exist as an aftermath to the deaths of first generation stars, and these heavier elements may have more to do with the circumstances that gave life a chance than the simple presence of water. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better. </div>

3488 · Aug 31, 2007

Hi all, IIRC isn't Oxygen the third most abundant element in the Universe, after Hydrogen & Helium???? I would expect water ice to be as common as muck. Hi MeteorWayne. I heard something similar, although I would expect the true figure to be towards the lower end, perhaps a few moon masses at the very most. I cannot but think, if there were larger, more massive objects lurking around, would they not be detectable by modern equipment & COG of the Solar System measurements & yet there appear to be none. I wonder if Eris & Pluto are towards the upper size / mass limits?? I could be wrong, probably am!!!! <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> Thanks brellis, for your answer. That was what I had thought, good to hear it from someone else. Sorry, but I could not resist another Phoebe pic!!!!!! Three small craters, about 2 km wide the largest one. Note the differing levels of preservation. The middle one very highly degraded (wonder if formed whilst Phoebe was still a KBO), the top one much fresher with large ice boulders & the bottom smaller one looking quite deep. NASA / JPL. Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

h2ouniverse · Aug 31, 2007

Hi Andrew, In reply to "I cannot but think, if there were larger, more massive objects lurking around, would they not be detectable by modern equipment & COG of the Solar System measurements & yet there appear to be none. I wonder if Eris & Pluto are towards the upper size / mass limits?? " --------------------- 1) they are not the upper limit: you righlty quoted a larger TNO: Triton!! 2) Eris was the upper limit for the previous survey conducted by Brown et al. , not in terms of magnitude (Eris is at 18.9) but in terms of relative speed. Their survey compared pictures taken at very close time laps. Because they were hunting objects in KB <50AU. Brown had to rescan old data to get Eris,by pushing their processing to its limits. Brown has just begun another survey, for a far larger part of the sky, this time comparing pictures over two nights, to leave time for the parallax from Earth to generate an apparent motion. They will complete their scan within one year 3) 2005FY9 is very bright at magnitude 17, and yet had to wait until 2005 to be detected 4) they still miss large parts of the sky. Most TNOs have been detected close to ecliptic, but many won't stay there in the coming decades: so this means there is no reason why observations reasonably further from the ecliptic would not to detect new ones 5) even the ecliptic is not fully scanned. They miss all the Milky Way!!! (including intersections between galactic plane and ecliptic, especially the whole Scorpio+Sagittarius area). When the background is too rich in stars, they cannot detect TNOs. That is true also for the vicinity of brightest stars or large nebulae. The searchers do not come back periodically on such areas. 6) an object with an absolute magnitude of -4 (e.g. a super-earth 17000km-wide, albedo 0.25) orbiting at 800 AU would appear with a magnitude 25, not detectable until now. I am pretty sure they will find bigger than E

MeteorWayne · Aug 31, 2007

Triton is not a TNO, it is a moon of Neptune. Whether it was previously a TNO is a matter of much unknowns and much debate. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

h2ouniverse · Aug 31, 2007

Hi Schmack, At the end of its life a star begins to transmute He into C and then C into O. Its core stratifies from center to surface with layers [C= />O], [He=>C], [H=>He]. When it explodes (even heavier elements synthetized in the core), the layers are expelled. Huge quantities of oxygen are mixed with the formal external layers of hydrogen. The plasma cools one day forming atoms and molecules O+O= />O2, H+H=> H2, When such mix is in reasonably cool, you get O2+ 2 H2= />2 H2O . Best regards.

h2ouniverse · Aug 31, 2007

MW, Being an object that is sometimes further from Sun than Neputne is, that qualifies Triton for the title of "TransNeptunian Object". <blink /> Cheers!

jaxtraw · Aug 31, 2007

I prefer to think of it as a Non-Trans-Neptunian Trans-Neptunian Object, or NTNTNO, for short.

MeteorWayne · Aug 31, 2007

That may be your opinion, I define TNO's as objects whose semimajor axis is larger than that of Neptune. Triton is a Neptunian moon, so IMHO does not qualify. Just because for part of it's orbit around Neptune it is further away distorts the meaning of a TNO. I think you are being disingenuous in classifying it with objects such as plutinos, and residents of the Kuiper Belt and scattered disk. But you may be technically correct. Or not. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

h2ouniverse · Aug 31, 2007

MW I was joking about Triton. That was just to tease you. I know that Triton as a former member of KB is a theory, not yet evidenced. Btw, some have semi-major axes />29 AU, and perihelia far closer. E.g. 1999TD10 with perihelion at 12 AU, aphelion at 178 AU. The Minor Planet Center has even given up on the possibility to discrimibate SDOs from Centaurs and list them together! Best regards.

h2ouniverse · Aug 31, 2007

Well done jaxtraw!!!

h2ouniverse · Aug 31, 2007

MW, More seriously there is no reason IMHO (except incredible coincidence) that Eris should be the largest TNO to be ever discovered. I take the bets, as you said, for 2022!!

MeteorWayne · Aug 31, 2007

Yeah, I'll bet something larger will be discovered by then. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Star System Soaked With 'Rain'

Smersh

Guest

mooware

Guest

brellis

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Smersh

Guest

brellis

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

3488

Guest

brellis

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

brellis

Guest

schmack

Guest

brellis

Guest

3488

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

jaxtraw

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

h2ouniverse

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page