Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RadioAstronomer
From the article:
When the astronomers probed this star's disk with Spitzer's powerful infrared spectrometer instrument, they were surprised to find the molecular "barcodes" of large amounts of acetylene and hydrogen cyanide gases, as well as carbon dioxide gas. The team observed 100 similar young stars, but only one, IRS 46, showed unambiguous signs of the organic mix.

"The star's disk was oriented in just the right way to allow us to peer into it," said Lahuis.

It's confusing, at least to me. The first paragraph gives the impression that this star is the only one out of 100 which exhibited such gases. But then the next paragraph hints that this was the only star that they could really get a good look at. So what is it? Are these gases found in only 1% of young stars, or in all of them that we can observe?
13 posted on 12/31/2005 3:45:55 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, common scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry
It's confusing, at least to me. The first paragraph gives the impression that this star is the only one out of 100 which exhibited such gases. But then the next paragraph hints that this was the only star that they could really get a good look at. So what is it? Are these gases found in only 1% of young stars, or in all of them that we can observe?

THe key word in the article is 'unambiguously.' The gas is in a disk around the central star. In order to get a good, strong spectrum of the gas, it needs to be between a light source (the central star) and the observer (the telescope used). Since the material in question is in a disk, the spectrum with the lowest signal to noise ratio will be obtained when the disk is aligned edge-on to us. 100 stars may have been studied, but the combination of an edge-on alignment, teh presence of a disk, and a high concentration of the chemicals in question would likely lead to unambiguous detection around only 1% of observed stars. The other stars may have similar disks and gases, but we may not have the technology to detect them at this time.

As usual, science reporters have to distill the article for the general public.

69 posted on 12/31/2005 8:08:32 AM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: PatrickHenry

Even if it is 1%, the number of stars that is is mind blowing. Where's Sagan to say "billions and billions"?


89 posted on 12/31/2005 9:36:58 AM PST by mad_as_he$$ (Never corner anything meaner than you. NSDQ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson