“A star is born when a dense patch of gas and dust collapses inside a
cosmic cloud”
For a stellar packed galaxy or even the individual stellar and/or
binary, trinary outcome, and the complex solar system disk of multiple
planets to start off with, it needs at least an nearby kicker or
perhaps two or more black holes merging or combining within a
sufficient cosmic molecular cloud of mostly hydrogen, plus some helium
and assorted other elements that just so happen to exist out of
nowhere. Otherwise, if there’s nothing of any gravity seeds or nearby
cosmic event(s) taking place, such as a supernova, whereas the natural
cosmic gas collapsing process via molecular gravity that’ll provide
for the primary star plus an accretion disk is going to take a great
deal of time, perhaps at least 10+ millions of years before any such
star materializes, much less stellar companions and/or worthy planets
created out of whatever cosmic molecular cloud remainders didn’t
become part of a given main sequence or greater primary star.
In other words of my limited but open-minded wisdom, no one here or
anywhere else really knows this timeline within any objective
certainty, of what a typical star and the remaining accretion disk
formation of planets requires. Only a limited number of complex
simulations has ever emerged, and few if any of those efforts are
similar enough to call it other than subjective or highly conditional
science with more complex variables than you and I can imagine.
Under the best of stellar creation/birthing conditions, such as
whatever created the nearby Sirius star/solar system, it should have
taken a cosmic molecular cloud proportion or volumetric area of at
least a thousand fold the mass of whatever stars get made, with
otherwise a few tens of thousands in stellar mass most likely
required. On average the necessary core molecular cloud density of
1e61e9 particles/cm3 is required in order to initiate and thereby
feed this initial core formation process, that’ll have to gravity suck
as uninterrupted upon that surrounding cosmic molecular medium of
1e41e6/cm3, all the way down to the vacuum of only a few particles/
cm3 or perhaps even less than 1/cm3, as well as the primary star flare-
up having subsequently solar wind blown away most of whatever
remainders that didn’t manage to become any other companion star(s),
planets and moons, as a highly complex process that should also take
at least millions of extra years.
Good thing for us this suddenly rotating disk of a complex stellar
creation process doesn't happen very often, however the original 12
solar massive Sirius star/solar system as having emerged right next
door, if not essentially on top of us, and supposedly having
formulated as of not much further back than 300 MBP from such a
complex molecular cloud of at least 12,000 solar masses, was certainly
one very lucky cosmic environment of nearby stellar creation for us,
that which I still find extremely hard to fathom this kind of
tremendous stellar birthing event supposedly didn’t affect us.
Perhaps this extremely recent creation of the Sirius star/solar system
and of its more recent hydrogen flashover to becoming a white dwarf
was always downwind, so to speak, though I find this analogy as
equally hard to fathom.
Of course, I and most others still have no good objective idea as to
where all of that vast volumetric expanse of mostly molecular
hydrogen, helium and a complex composite of many other elements came
from to start with, much less of where the hell a pair of black holes
or white/clear antimatter holes or that of any other significant
sources of a sufficient gravity seed worthy substance materialized
from in the first place. In other words, thus far no one knows with
sufficient certainty as to the exact time-line of how a star is born,
or even knowing the demise process of a main sequence star is now
entirely in question, at risk of being far more complex than anyone
can imagine.
~ BG
On May 5, 12:57*pm, BradGuth wrote:
A “what if” retrospective look at Sirius B in its red supergiant
phase:
I bet you think we’ve seen just about everything Sirius has to offer.
(think again)
*http://www.cosmicastronomy.com/oscillat.htm#sirius
*Not that far better instruments don’t exist that could easily
accomplish a thousand fold better and of multiple narrow bandpass
imaging results of Sirius, but what the hell when at least an honest
amateur gives us a no-charge freebie whack, because we got nothing to
lose but our self-rightists pride in all things faith-based and/or
government moderated.
Red giant stars are supposedly many, and yet remain a little hard to
come by, as only a few public images of whatever is within 1000 light
years seem to exist that fit within the bloated size and color
saturated eye-candy profiles that we’ve been taught to accept.
However, the visible spectrum is extremely limited as to what is
otherwise technically accessible from just above and below our
genetically limited and thus inferior visual spectrum. (seems entirely
odd that our human evolution was rather careless in having discarded
so much nifty visual capability, in that other creatures seem to have
a far wider visual spectrum capability that includes some UV and IR
without any need of applied technology)
“Red Giant Star Found to Have Massive Tail” *The obvious bow-wave
proves that even 64 km/s is pushing towards the intergalactic terminal
velocity of such stellar motion for items of this volumetric inflated
red giant size (a mere fraction of what the Sirius B red supergiant
had to have represented)http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Red_G...Have_Massive_T...
*Mira_A of 1.2 M solar mass and several hundred solar radii (UV
colorized as bluish): “A dying star situated 400 light years away from
us exhibits an unusual and massive tail of heated gas that spreads for
more than 13 light years.” *Trekking it’s way through space at a rogue
velocity of 64 km/s none the less.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mira
*http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/20070815/a.html
Sirius B could have been looking much like an image of Mira A, except
a whole lot larger (1000 solar radii), as viewed in visible and near
IR, as that of a nearby red supergiant star, nearly half that of the
star Betelgeuse.
*http://xmm.esac.esa.int/external/xmm...osium/173770_m....
Mira A, and lots more composite observationology from FAS
*http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/docs/rst/Sect20/A6.html
There are many possibilities, as for how Sirius B used to function as
a truly massive (9 solar mass) and extremely vibrant star, thereby
extremely hot and fast consuming itself prior to becoming the
impressive red supergiant, creating another planetary nebula phase
before ending as the little white dwarf. *For all we know Sirius B was
even a variable kind of red giant and then perhaps a slow nova
flashover phase prior to finishing off as the compressed white dwarf
we can barely see today.
These following examples are probably similar or perhaps representing
a slightly smaller version of what the Sirius star/solar system looked
like once Sirius B had started turning itself from an impressive red
supergiant into a white dwarf of perhaps 1/8th its original mass,
taking roughly 64~96,000 years for this explosive mass shedding phase
to happen. *A few tens of billions of years later is when such a white
dwarf eventually becomes a black dwarf, kind of black diamond spent
star, in that our universe may or may not be quite old enough to
display such examples.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_nebula
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix_Nebula
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Eye_Nebula
*http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap031207.html
*http://www.uv.es/jrtorres/index6.html
Betelgeuse has been a massive red supergiant at 20+ fold the mass of
our sun, and likely worth somewhat better than two fold the mass of
the original Sirius B, as Betelgeuse currently having expanded to 1000
solar radii and growing, it'll certainly become a truly impressive
nova whenever it suddenly transforms into a white dwarf that’s nearly
the size of Saturn.
The soon to be renewed and greatly improved Hubble instrument should
accomplish the improved spectrum coverage, along with improved
resolution and several extra DB in dynamic range of imaging most
everything, along with other existing and soon to be ESA deployed
telescopes that are far superior yet, should give us even better
composite examples of what Sirius B used to look like, and quite
possibly our first light of Sirius C.
This kind of investment in astronomy should give some of us a better
deductive observationology interpretation as to what transpired right
next door to us, as well as having unavoidably contributed to some of
what our solar system has to offer. *However, perhaps there’s too much
information about the Sirius star/solar system for the public to
grasp, without causing more faith-based and political harm than good.
*http://www.cosmicastronomy.com/oscillat.htm#sirius
*~ BG