Year of the Comet
Comet C/2011 L4 (PANSTARRS)

PANSTARRS information

Comet C/2012 S1 (ISON)

ISON information

Astronomy News
E-mail Article to a FriendPrint ArticleBookmark and Share

The star that should not exist

A team found that the proportion of metals in the star is more than 20,000 times smaller than that of the Sun.
By ESO, Garching, Germany Published: August 31, 2011
ancient star
At the center of this picture is an unremarkable looking faint star, too faint to be seen through all but the largest amateur telescopes. This ancient star, in the constellation Leo, is called SDSS J102915+172927 and has been found to have the lowest amount of elements heavier than helium of all stars yet studied. It has a mass smaller than that of the Sun and is probably more than 13 billion years old. ESO/Digitized Sky Survey 2
A faint star in the constellation Leo the Lion, called SDSS J102915+172927, has been found to have the lowest amount of elements heavier than helium — what astronomers call “metals” — of all stars yet studied. It has a mass smaller than that of the Sun and is probably more than 13 billion years old.

“A widely accepted theory predicts that stars like this, with low mass and extremely low quantities of metals, shouldn’t exist because the clouds of material from which they formed could never have condensed,” said Elisabetta Caffau from University of Heidelberg, Germany, and the Observatory of Paris, France. “It was surprising to find, for the first time, a star in this ‘forbidden zone,’ and it means we may have to revisit some of the star formation models.”

The team analyzed the properties of the star using the X-shooter and UVES instruments on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Atacama, Chile. This allowed them to measure how abundant the various chemical elements were in the star. They found that the proportion of metals in SDSS J102915+172927 is more than 20,000 times smaller than that of the Sun.

“The star is faint and so metal-poor that we could only detect the signature of one element heavier than helium — calcium — in our first observations,” said Piercarlo Bonifacio from the Observatory of Paris. “We had to ask for additional telescope time from The European Southern Observatory’s (ESO) director general to study the star’s light in even more detail, and with a long exposure time, to try to find other metals.”

Cosmologists believe that the lightest chemical elements — hydrogen and helium — were created shortly after the Big Bang, together with some lithium, while almost all other elements were formed later in stars. Supernova explosions spread the stellar material into the interstellar medium, making it rich in metals. New stars form from this enriched medium, so they have higher amounts of metals in their composition than the older stars; therefore, the proportion of metals in a star tells us how old it is.

“The star we have studied is extremely metal-poor, meaning it is very primitive,” said Lorenzo Monaco from ESO. “It could be one of the oldest stars ever found.”

Also very surprising was the lack of lithium in SDSS J102915+172927. Such an old star should have a composition similar to that of the universe shortly after the Big Bang, with a few more metals in it. But the team found that the proportion of lithium in the star was at least 50 times less than expected in the material produced by the Big Bang.

“It is a mystery how the lithium that formed just after the beginning of the universe was destroyed in this star,” Bonifacio added.

The researchers also point out that this freakish star is probably not unique. “We have identified several more candidate stars that might have metal levels similar to, or even lower than, those in SDSS J102915+172927. We are now planning to observe them with the VLT to see if this is the case,” said Caffau.

Find us on FacebookFind us on Twitter
User Comments
Be the first to leave your comment below!

Only registered members of Astronomy.com are allowed to comment on this article. Registration is FREE and only takes a couple minutes.

Register Today!
 
JOHN MOES from MICHIGAN said:
Mark Warner says: "I can't help thinking that most (western) cosmologists are constrained within the Judaeo-Christian creationist paradigm (at least subconsciously). Therefore they continually revise their theory to accomodate new findings"

Interesting comment. Within what paradigm are non-western cosmologist constrained? I see absolutely nothing in the story about the tiny medal-poor star that remotely hints at a Judaeo-Christian view of reality. If anything the story contradicts the idea of creation. It is scientist, not creationists, that continually revise their theories to accommodate new findings. Creationists have stuck with one theory for 4000 years, ignoring new findings.
3 stars
MARK WARNER said:
Very interesting article, shame about the presentation. To state that "Cosmologists believe" would suggest that there is no doubt about it, but there is. The 'Big Bang' theory is still just a theory, and not all cosmologists "believe" it to be valid. It irks me that the 'Big Bang' theory is constantly presented as if it were a proven fact, while other theories are dismissed, even though the reason for dismissing them are based on speculative interpretations. I can't help thinking that most (western) cosmologists are constrained within the Judaeo-Christian creationist paradigm (at least subconsciously). Therefore they continually revise their theory to accomodate new findings, or ignore data that doesn't fit, or, as in this case, they lable it a "mystery". All I ask for is for reporters to be a bit more scientific - a theory is a theory, not a fact, so please present it as such. Let's reflect on the fact that some cosmologists remain open-minded and don't necessarily sit on the 'Big Bang' bandwaggon.
5 stars
BILL SIMPSON from LOUISIANA said:
With the enormous number of stars out there, some tiny fraction would have had to form in some unusual way. Two failed stars may have collided and formed a mass just large enough to ignite. Shock waves or jets could have hit something just right to make an unusual star. Now if they find too many of these stars, the theory will need major revision. I'll go with the major revision. We will probably know in a few more years. I liked this one. And do those jets from super massive black holes at the center of galaxies ever collide. What is in them? Might they somehow form these unusual stars?
SEARCH SITE
Subscriber Only Access
Subscriber Only Content
Look for this icon. This denotes premium subscriber content. Learn more »
Become a Member of Astronomy.com
Register today for access to more valuable resource information.
Interact in our forums, comment on articles, receive our newsletter and much more!
Not a member?
Subscriber and Member Login
Password
Remember me