Posted on 12/13/2005 6:49:40 PM PST by KevinDavis
The brightest star in our sky has a companion that’s smaller than Earth yet 98 percent as massive as the Sun, a new study reveals.
Astronomers already knew the brilliant blue-white Sirius had a stellar companion. But they didn’t know the object’s mass. The new measurement, announced today, was done by an international team of astronomers using the Hubble Space Telescope.
Sirius is one of the closest known stars at 8.6 light-years away. It is twice as massive as the Sun and has a surface temperature of 18,000 degrees Fahrenheit (10,000 degrees C).
The companion, called Sirius B, was known to be much hotter. It is the scorching ember of a Sun-like star now called a white dwarf, and it’s the nearest of its kind. It was discovered in 1862 but close scrutiny is difficult because of the glare of the primary star.
“Studying Sirius B has challenged astronomers for more than 140 years," said Martin Barstow of the University of Leicester, U.K.
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
We could have saved money by sending up just one telescope and naming it Webb-Hubble.
Your doubts are unfounded. Thousands of scientists and opticians are intimitely familliar with exactly what was wrong with the Hubble. That's why a corrective lens was able to be made and dropped into place. Optics is a very exact and measurable science.
I doubt that the initial optical problem was on the up and up, since the contractors got rewarded for it by being paid to fix it.If memory serves, the contractor which should have made the optics got screwed out of the winning bid because of some joker in congress claiming that an inferior bidder (in his district) should have won.
You aren't the only one -- I remember when I turned 8 & 1/2 and looked up at Sirius, thinking "That light left when I was born."
Is the mass of Sirius B that much of a surprise? I mean, we knew it was a white dwarf already. It was just a matter of working out the period & separation of the binary. I guess those measurements couldn't be made w/o Hubble.
It compliments Hubble, not replace it. They "see" in different bands.
And Hubble has no onboard fuel to prevent deposits on the mirror. Hubble was modular and not only designed to be serviced but upgraded as well. It is a platform like no other. Loss of Hubble will be a great loss indeed.
The Webb cannot replace Hubble.
What a bunch codswallop.
Heh.
Nope. You want different platforms looking in different bands.
NASA was working on a hybrid of the two technologes, called the Webb Hubbell scope. It died.
Not that I am aware. Webb is still going strong. However, it was not a hybrid. The Webb looks in the IR. Hubble - UV and visible.
Does this sun make my solar system look fat?
Arrrggg! Finally got the joke. LOL! I am dense today.
ROFL! :-)
Because it's old and obsolete.
In a word. Nope.
Because we can get a $35.00 deposit back on the mirror at Piggly-Wiggly.
UA builds world's most advanced telescope Magellan scope would produce images 10 times sharper than those from Earth-orbiting Hubble.
The Arizona republic
Mass is nearly that of the Sun. 98%, not 198%... Still wickedly dense...
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.