Astronomers Discover Farthest Object In the Known Universe (livescience.com) 32
A possible galaxy that exists some 13.5 billion light-years from Earth has broken the record for farthest astronomical object ever seen. Live Science reports: That age places this collection of stars, now dubbed HD1, between a time of total darkness -- about 14 billion years ago the universe was a blank slate devoid of any stars or galaxies -- and one of just-burgeoning lights as clumps of dust and gas were growing into their cosmic destinies. [...] The researchers discovered HD1 in data collected over 1,200 hours of observation time using the Subaru Telescope, the VISTA Telescope, the U.K. Infrared Telescope and the Spitzer Space Telescope. They were particularly looking at redshift, a phenomenon in which light waves stretch out or become redder as an object moves away from the observer. In this case, the redshift suggested HD1 was extremely distant. The researchers found that the red wavelengths were the equivalent to a galaxy located 13.5 billion light-years away.
HD1 also seems to be growing at a feverish rate -- about 100 stars each year, or at least 10 times the rate predicted for starburst galaxies that are known to produce stars at an extraordinarily high pace. These stars were also more massive, brighter (in ultraviolet wavelengths) and hotter than younger stars, the researchers found. As such, HD1 could be home to the universe's very first stars, called Population III stars; if that identity is verified, this would be the first observation of this type of star, the researchers said. There's also the possibility that HD1 is a supermassive black hole with a mass of about 100 million times that of the sun. To figure out HD1's true identity, the researchers can look for X-rays, which are emitted as material gets devoured by the gravity of a black hole. "If HD1 is a black hole, we should see X-ray emission from it. If we do not find X-rays, the emission must originate from massive stars," [one of the researchers told Live Science].
HD1 also seems to be growing at a feverish rate -- about 100 stars each year, or at least 10 times the rate predicted for starburst galaxies that are known to produce stars at an extraordinarily high pace. These stars were also more massive, brighter (in ultraviolet wavelengths) and hotter than younger stars, the researchers found. As such, HD1 could be home to the universe's very first stars, called Population III stars; if that identity is verified, this would be the first observation of this type of star, the researchers said. There's also the possibility that HD1 is a supermassive black hole with a mass of about 100 million times that of the sun. To figure out HD1's true identity, the researchers can look for X-rays, which are emitted as material gets devoured by the gravity of a black hole. "If HD1 is a black hole, we should see X-ray emission from it. If we do not find X-rays, the emission must originate from massive stars," [one of the researchers told Live Science].
Re: (Score:2)
augers well for JWST (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
But the downside is that this headline will be appearing several times a day for years to come.
How can space be so empty? (Score:5, Insightful)
If it was filled with clear air we would not even be able to see the moon.
It is not just a little bit empty. It is staggeringly empty, apart from a few clouds. To even be able to see one light year. Let alone billions.
Very odd. And fortunate, as otherwise we would not know whether other stars even existed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Space is interesting for sure. The highest density possible for space to contain is a black hole, tiny ones made from a collapsed star are extremely dense. However, the mass essentially accretes on the surface, and their mass is proportional to surface area not volume like conventional solid objects. Super massive black holes are about as dense as water, while the largest black hole known has a density about 300 times less dense than air at standard temperature and pressure. A black hole with the mass of the universe would be the size of the visible universe.
The first three sentences are OK. The rest? No.
Re: (Score:2)
The highest density possible for space to contain is a black hole
Wrong. The density of a Black Hole is not fixed and the larger the Black Hole the less dense it needs to be so you can have Black Holes far less dense than atomic nuclei. Also, space contains fundamental particles like the electron which, as far as we know, is point-like thus technically having infinite density.
Super massive black holes are about as dense as water
No, you would need the entire mass of a very large galaxy to achieve that low a density and the most massive black holes known are several orders of magnitude less massive which means that...
while the largest black hole known has a density about 300 times less dense than air at standard temperature and pressure
Is ut
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. The density of a Black Hole is not fixed and the larger the Black Hole the less dense it needs to be so you can have Black Holes far less dense than atomic nuclei. Also, space contains fundamental particles like the electron which, as far as we know, is point-like thus technically having infinite density.
You lack a fundamental basic understanding of physics. Nothing can be more dense than a black hole for a given volume, any attempt to exceed this creates a horizon and a black hole. An electron acts as a point particle, but angular momentum and charge are conserved and are below the limits for a plank sized black hole so one does not form. If it was a naked charged singularity there are closed time like curves that would violate causality and we do not observe those. If you added energy to try, it woul
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing can be more dense than a black hole for a given volume
You lack an understanding of the simple concept of density. Yes, for a given volume, provided it is macroscopic, a Black Hole may be the densest object but your statement was that "the highest possible density for space to contain is a Black Hole" which is not true. The only known Black Holes are stellar-sized and thus much less dense than matter that can be created at smaller volume scales. The density of fundamental particles also technically has no upper limit either. This is why you will not generally
Re: (Score:2)
You lack an understanding of the simple concept of density. Yes, for a given volume, provided it is macroscopic, a Black Hole may be the densest object but your statement was that "the highest possible density for space to contain is a Black Hole" which is not true.
Quite the opposite, and it is among the most basic concepts in physics. For simplicity, it’s when for a given volume approaches the mass shown in the calculator link and roughly holds from the plank scale to the size of the visible universe. The formulas are also provided for transparency. Show an example that violates this and it’s a noble prize, good luck with that.
The only known Black Holes are stellar-sized and thus much less dense than matter that can be created at smaller volume scales. The density of fundamental particles also technically has no upper limit either. This is why you will not generally hear of those of us who are physicists and actually do understand fundamental physics refer to the "densest object" because this is not at all well defined.
What do you think the large, ancient quasars are then genius? What is at the center of the Milky Way, a piece of cheese? Th
Re: (Score:2)
Since no one knows what goes on inside a black hole, your comments about the mass are bollocks. And it is the information content of a black hole that is proportional to its surface area, not its mass. Even the mass of a quark is not all that fixed, it gets its mass interactions involving the strong force.
Re: (Score:2)
...because it expanded a lot (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just one of the peculiarities of this universe. Wait until you look at the supposedly sentient race that lives on a planet here!
Wrong tense (Score:4, Insightful)
HD1 also seems to be growing at a feverish rate
If it's 13.5 billion light years away, what we're seeing now happened 13.5 billion years ago. There's a good chance those stars don't exist anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
It is NOT 13.5 billion light years away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It is a peculiarity of people with (it would seem) no connection with astronomy to insist that the universal fact that all observations outside of the Solar System are delayed by the speed of light for years, a fact known to almost every person on the street, must frame every discussion of observed astronomical phenomenon. Burdening every statement with a cumbersome past tense reference to things we are observing now is absurd, and constantly pointing out that things that are light years away are, wait for
Re: (Score:2)
I see you've read Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's book.
"In the known universe" (Score:1)
Antarctica has it beat (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Okay ... (Score:1)
Is 13.5 billion ... (Score:2)
Re:Is 13.5 billion ... (Score:4, Interesting)
we observed that star (Earendel) at a distance of 12.9 bn lightyears, so we see it as it was 12.9 bn years ago. Using the (known) expansion of the universe, we can calculate its current position is 28 bn lightyears away.
This galaxy has been observed at a distance of 13.5 bn lightyears.
galaxy schmalaxy (Score:2)
They need to wipe their lenses; this is not a galaxy at all. It's a universe. And while I don't mean to imply that it is a mirror of our universe, well have you got a better theory? We are so lucky to have this fleeting glimpse of one of the many alternate universes before it flickers out beyond our instruments. My guess is that the programmers who set up this game made a slight error. Or maybe it was deliberate and they are testing whether we can understand what we discovered out there.
You've gotta give th
Re: (Score:2)
"They've got us spinning in circles with so many crises on earth"
Damn, you caught us. It isn't easy coming up with crises for y'all to contemplate and bamboozle yourselves over. It takes work. We have only a small team here. I'll let you in on a little secret, we call ourselves "They" during our deliberations.
There goes our property values (Score:2)
"Welcome to our brand new Universe! Oh, by the way, watch out for the super-mega black hole. Minor pot-hole, you'll learn to drive around it, we did, well, except for poor Uncle Fred. He's a pin-head, now literally..."