The distance of first generation stars. Credit: STScI
All stars are composed of mostly hydrogen and helium, but most stars also have measurable amounts of heavier elements, which astronomers lump into the category of “metals.” Our Sun has more metals than most stars because the nebula from which it formed was the remnant debris of earlier stars. These were in turn children of even earlier stars, and so on. Generally, each new generation of stars has a bit more metal than the last. The very first stars, those born from the primordial hydrogen and helium of the cosmos, had almost no metal in them. We’ve never seen one of these primordial stars, but with the power of the Webb and a bit of luck, we might catch a glimpse of them soon.
This artist’s impression shows a possible seed for the formation of a supermassive black hole. Credit: NASA/CXC/M. Weiss
Roughly half a century ago, astronomers realized that the powerful radio source coming from the center of our galaxy (Sagitarrius A*) was a “monster” black hole. Since then, they have found that supermassive black holes (SMBHs) reside at the center of most massive galaxies. This leads to what is known as Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) or quasars, where the central region of a galaxy is so energetic that it outshines all of the stars in its galactic disk. In all that time, astronomers have puzzled over how these behemoths (which play a crucial role in galactic evolution) originated.
Astronomers suspect that the seeds that formed SMBHs were created from giant clouds of dust that collapsed without first becoming stars – aka. Direct Collapse Black Holes (DCBHs). However, the role of magnetic fields in the formation of DCBHs has remained unclear since none of the previous studies have been able to simulate the full accretion periods. To investigate this, an international team of astronomers ran a series of 3D cosmological magneto-hydrodynamic (MHD) simulations that accounted for DCBH formation and showed that magnetic fields grow with the accretion disks and stabilize them over time.
New results from the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope suggest the formation of the first stars and galaxies in the early Universe took place sooner than previously thought. A European team of astronomers have found no evidence of the first generation of stars, known as Population III stars, when the Universe was less than one billion years old. This artist’s impression presents the early Universe. Image Credit: ESA/Hubble, M. Kornmesser.
The oldest stars in the Universe are cloaked in darkness. Their redshift is so high, we can only wonder about them. The James Webb Space Telescope will be our most effective telescope for observing the very early Universe, and should observe out to z = 15. But even it has limitations.
To observe the Universe’s very first stars, we need a bigger telescope. The Ultimately Large Telescope.
Ever since astronomers realized that the Universe is in a constant state of expansion and that a massive explosion likely started it all 13.8 billion years ago (the Big Bang), there have been unresolved questions about when and how the first stars formed. Based on data gathered by NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) and similar missions, this is believed to have happened about 100 million years after the Big Bang.
Much of the details of how this complex process worked have remained a mystery. However, new evidence gathered by a team led by researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy indicates that the first stars must have formed rather quickly. Using data from the Magellan Telescopes at Las Campanas Observatory, the team observed a cloud of gas where star formation was taking place just 850 million years after the Big Bang.
Accroding to new research, the Milky Way may still bear the marks of "ancient impacts". Credit: NASA/Serge Brunier
Despite all we know about the formation and evolution of the Universe, the very early days are still kind of mysterious. With our knowledge of physics we can shed some light on the nature of the earliest stars, even though they’re almost certainly long gone.
Now a new discovery is confirming what scientists think they know about the early Universe, by shedding light on a star that’s still shining.
The star, named 2MASS J18082002–5104378 B, is part of a two-star system orbiting around a common point. Credit: ESO/Beletsky/DSS1 + DSS2 + 2MASS
According to the most widely-accepted cosmological theory, the first stars in our Universe formed roughly 150 to 1 billion years after the Big Bang. Over time, these stars began to come together to form globular clusters, which slowly coalesced to form the first galaxies – including our very own Milky Way. For some time, astronomers have held that this process began for our galaxy some 13.51 billion years ago.
In accordance with this theory, astronomers believed that the oldest stars in the Universe were short-lived massive ones that have since died. However, a team of astronomers from Johns Hopking University recently discovered a low-mass star in the Milky Way’s “thin disk” that is roughly 13.5 billion-year-old. This discovery indicates that some of the earliest stars in the Universe could be alive, and available for study.
SDSS001820.5-093939.2 (seen in white) is a small, second-generation star bearing the chemical imprint of one of the universe's first stars. It shines at an apparent magnitude of 15.8, just south of the celestial equator in the constellation Cetus. Credit: SDSS / NAO
The young universe was composed of a pristine mix of hydrogen, helium, and a tiny trace of lithium. But after hundreds of millions of years, it began to cool and giant clouds of the primordial elements collapsed to form the first stars.
The first “Population III” stars were extremely massive and bright, synthesizing the first batches of heavy elements, and erupting as supernovae after relatively short lifetimes of just a few million years. This cycle of star birth and death has steadily produced and dispersed more heavy elements throughout cosmic history.
Astronomers haven’t spotted any of the first stars still shining today. But now, a team using the 8.2-meter Subaru Telescope has discovered an ancient low-mass star that likely formed from the elements produced in the supernova explosion of a very massive first generation star.
Pop III stars with masses exceeding 100 times that of the Sun would have died in a peculiar explosion that theorists call a pair-instability supernova.
Like its lower-energy comrade, a pair-instability supernova occurs when a massive star no longer produces enough energy to counteract the inward pull of gravity. But with so much mass, the star’s core is squeezed to such a high temperature and pressure that runaway nuclear reactions power a devastating explosion. The whole star is obliterated and no compact remnant, such as a black hole or neutron star, is left behind.
Astronomers have seen hints of these rare events before. But now, Wako Aoiki from the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan and colleagues have approached the search in a different way, by finding a star that bears the chemical fingerprints of these ancient explosions.
The elements we see lacing a star’s surface provide a key to understanding the supernova that preceded the star’s birth. And the star, dubbed SDSS001820.5-093939.2, exhibits a peculiar set of chemical abundance ratios. It has high levels of heavy elements, such as nickel, calcium, and iron, but low levels of light elements, such as carbon, magnesium and cobalt.
Note that the star is still metal poor in the grand scheme of things. Its iron abundance is 1/100 of the solar level. But compared with most metal-poor stars, where the iron abundance can be 1/100,000 or less of the solar level, the star is metal rich.
The chemical abundance ratios (with respect to iron) of SDSS J0018-0939 (red circles) compared with model prediction for explosions of very-massive stars. The black line indicates the model of a pair-instability supernova by a star with 300 solar masses, whereas the blue line shows the model of an explosion caused by a core-collapse of a star with 1000 solar masses. The abundance ratios of sodium (Na) and aluminum (Al), which are not well-reproduced by these models, might be produced during the evolution of stars before the explosion, but that is not included in the current model. (Credit: NAOJ)
These odd fingerprints suggest the star formed from material seeded by the death of a very massive Pop III star. In fact, the chemical composition of the star matches the elements that pair-instability supernovae are predicted to create.
The team notes that this is the only star of about 500 in the same low-metallicity range that has this peculiar makeup. It is — at the moment — our only window into the early universe and the first generation of stars.
