Study: First stars were massive, fast-spinning

Apr 27, 2011
Study: First stars were massive, fast-spinning

The first stars that dotted the universe were not only immense, but probably also fast-spinning, according to a new study that sheds light on the nature of stellar evolution.

Astronomers using data from the Very Large Telescope (VLT) of the European Southern Observatory (ESO) have spotted the remains of some of the Universe's very first stars in the Milky Way. The gas cloud left behind when the stars exploded billions of years ago contains elements in proportions different to those found in new stars, shedding light on the 'missing links' between the Big Bang and today's Universe.

Even with the most powerful telescopes, it is not possible to observe these stars directly. They are so old that only the most massive, with eight times or more the mass of our sun, would have had the time to die and pollute the gas from which they were formed with elements heavier than helium. These stars lived fast and died young, after no more than 30 million years.

'We think that the first generations of massive stars were very fast rotators - that's why we called them spinstars', explains Christina Chiappini from the Leibniz Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam (AIP) in Germany and the Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF) in Italy, who led the study published in the journal Nature.

Dr Chiappini and her colleagues have found the remains of these stars in the oldest known globular cluster in our Galaxy, the 12-billion-year-old NGC 6522 which probably witnessed the early phases of the seeding of heavy elements across the Universe. Professor Georges Meynet, from the University of Geneva in Switzerland, explains that it is like trying 'to reveal the character of a cook from the taste of his dishes'.

The researchers discovered eight old stars with strangely high levels of the rare elements strontium and yttrium. They also calculated that the stars would have whirled with a surface speed of 1.8 million kilometres per hour. By comparison, massive stars in the Milky Way typically spin at about 360,000 kilometres per hour.

This high rate of spin would cause overlap between inner and outer gas layers of the stars that would not otherwise mix. The resulting cascade of nuclear reactions would generate radioactive neon, which in turn would emit neutrons that would collide with iron and other heavy atoms to create strontium and yttrium. After the spinstars' death, these elements made their way into new star-forming clouds and eventually into the stars of NGC 6522.

These findings suggest that these fast spinners may have changed the face of the Universe in dramatic ways. For instance, their fast spinning could have led them to create and disperse heavy elements across the Universe much earlier than previously thought. It could also have led to a greater-than-expected number of gamma ray bursts, the most powerful explosions known in the Universe.

However, 'alternative scenarios cannot yet be discarded, but we show that if the first generations of massive stars were spinstars, this would offer a very elegant explanation to this puzzle!', says Cristina Chiappini. Therefore, Urs Frischknecht, a PhD student at the University of Basel in Switzerland, is currently working on further testing the proposed scenario.

Explore further: New mass map of a distant galaxy cluster is the most precise yet

More information: Imprints of fast-rotating massive stars in the Galactic Bulge, Nature 472, 454–457 (28 April 2011) doi:10.1038/nature10000 www.nature.com/nature/journal/… ull/nature10000.html

Abstract
The first stars that formed after the Big Bang were probably massive1, and they provided the Universe with the first elements heavier than helium (‘metals’), which were incorporated into low-mass stars that have survived to the present2, 3. Eight stars in the oldest globular cluster in the Galaxy, NGC 6522, were found to have surface abundances consistent with the gas from which they formed being enriched by massive stars4 (that is, with higher α-element/Fe and Eu/Fe ratios than those of the Sun). However, the same stars have anomalously high abundances of Ba and La with respect to Fe4, which usually arises through nucleosynthesis in low-mass stars5 (via the slow-neutron-capture process, or s-process). Recent theory suggests that metal-poor fast-rotating massive stars are able to boost the s-process yields by up to four orders of magnitude6, which might provide a solution to this contradiction. Here we report a reanalysis of the earlier spectra, which reveals that Y and Sr are also overabundant with respect to Fe, showing a large scatter similar to that observed in extremely metal-poor stars7, whereas C abundances are not enhanced. This pattern is best explained as originating in metal-poor fast-rotating massive stars, which might point to a common property of the first stellar generations and even of the ‘first stars’.

Related Stories

Rare observation of cosmic explosion

Mar 10, 2011

Gamma ray bursts, which are the most powerful bursts of radiation in the universe, have now been observed in direct connection with an exploding giant star - a supernova. Researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute ...

Making massive stars

Sep 10, 2010

Massive stars -- those with more than about eight times the mass of the sun -- are arguably the most important actors in the universe. Much hotter and more luminous than the sun, they live only hundreds of ...

Dark ages seen in new light

Jan 05, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Remnants of the first stars have helped astronomers get closer to unlocking the “dark ages” of the cosmos.

Hubble Sees Star Cluster 'Infant Mortality'

Jan 10, 2007

Astronomers have long known that young or "open" star clusters must eventually disrupt and dissolve into the host galaxy. They simply don't have enough gravity to hold them together, unlike their much more ...

The origin of supernovae confirmed

Mar 19, 2009

Where do supernovae come from? Astronomers have long believed they were exploding stars, but by analysing a series of images, researchers from the Dark Cosmology Centre at the Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen ...

Recommended for you

Satellite galaxies put astronomers in a spin

5 hours ago

An international team of researchers, led by astronomers at the Observatoire Astronomique de Strasbourg (CNRS/Université de Strasbourg), has studied 380 galaxies and shown that their small satellite galaxies almost always ...

Video: The diversity of habitable zones and the planets

5 hours ago

The field of exoplanets has rapidly expanded from the exclusivity of exoplanet detection to include exoplanet characterization. A key step towards this characterization is the determination of which planets occupy the Habitable ...

Ultra-deep astrophoto of the Antenna Galaxies

5 hours ago

You might think the image above of the famous Antenna Galaxies was taken by a large ground-based or even a space telescope. Think again. Amateur astronomer Rolf Wahl Olsen from New Zealand compiled a total ...

The most precise measurement of an alien world's size

7 hours ago

Thanks to NASA's Kepler and Spitzer Space Telescopes, scientists have made the most precise measurement ever of the radius of a planet outside our solar system. The size of the exoplanet, dubbed Kepler-93b, ...

User comments : 14

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

TabulaMentis
2 / 5 (3) Apr 27, 2011
I wish someone could provide a better timeline because I think the writer may not be correct. What I have is that POP III stars, the first black holes and possible black stars first appeared directly after the CMB about 380,000 years after the BB. Recently there was a Physorg.com article that said the reionization period may have began around 200 million years after the BB.
jamesrm
3 / 5 (7) Apr 27, 2011
You have remember what passes for science these days, an infinite number of researchers bag away at an infinite number of computers with an infinite number of models/simulations, once renormalised the answer should be obvious, at least it can't be wrong. :)

rgds
James
omatumr
1.5 / 5 (8) Apr 27, 2011
I am nor sure there were any "first stars." The universe may be cyclic and infinite.

Older stars in this cycle probably became visible as the photon-emitting cloud of waste products (H and He) that accumulated around massive, rapidly spinning pulsars.

See: "Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press (2011) 19 pages

http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1
Graeme
5 / 5 (1) Apr 27, 2011
Why would the population III stars be fast spinning? It must be hard for them to lose angular moementum. There may be no dust or planets forming. The star would be more transparent, but could that reduce "solar" wind, thus cutting back on momentum loss? Or could there be an almost total lack of magnetic field in these stars?
Tuxford
2.1 / 5 (7) Apr 28, 2011
Is the fast-spinning conclusion reached due to the assumption that the universe is only 13.7 billion years old? Otherwise, how could these stars have so much metal content so early? Why not consider that the Big Bang is a Big Fantasy Model? Is it not becoming obvious that the universe if much older than 'accepted' models indicate???
kevinrtrs
1.9 / 5 (9) Apr 28, 2011
Recent theory suggests that metal-poor fast-rotating massive stars are able to boost the s-process yields by up to four orders of magnitude6, which might provide a solution to this contradiction.

As per usual, unfortunately, whenever some major contradiction occurs, there's a tendency to find a solution in something that's not there to observe [ along the lines of dark matter/energy or an Oord cloud ].
In this case I just hope that for their own sake they find their tell-tale gamma rays. Otherwise they'll have to abandon the latest postulate and go back and actually face the hideous conundrum of where those heavy elements actually came from.

Skeptic_Heretic
4.3 / 5 (3) Apr 28, 2011
possible black stars first appeared directly after the CMB about 380,000 years
Black stars take hundreds of billions of years to develop.
Terrible_Bohr
5 / 5 (3) Apr 28, 2011
Otherwise they'll have to abandon the latest postulate and go back and actually face the hideous conundrum of where those heavy elements actually came from.


There are problems with stellar nucleosynthesis? I mean, ones that stem from reasons other than your religious viewpoint.
omatumr
1.8 / 5 (5) Apr 28, 2011
Why would the population III stars be fast spinning?


Because the brightly glowing waste products (H and He) emit photons that obscure the tiny, compact, energetic source of these waste products below - a pulsar.

See above link to: "Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press (2011) 19 pages
TabulaMentis
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 28, 2011
possible black stars first appeared directly after the CMB about 380,000 years
Black stars take hundreds of billions of years to develop.
I am talking about Black Stars as in Dark Stars (Dark Matter Stars).

This is what Wikipedia says about Dark (Black) Stars:

"A dark star is a theoretical type of star that may have existed early in the history of the universe before conventional stars were able to form."

http://en.wikiped..._matter)
6_6
not rated yet Apr 29, 2011
I could imagine there being additional unknown materials in abundance that would make any number of unimaginable impossibilities in our day possible back then.. stem cells of the universe
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (2) Apr 29, 2011
I am talking about Black Stars as in Dark Stars (Dark Matter Stars).

When discussing concepts, you must use the proper terminology. Black stars are not dark stars.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Apr 29, 2011
I am talking about Black Stars as in Dark Stars (Dark Matter Stars).

When discussing concepts, you must use the proper terminology. Black stars are not dark stars.
Yes Sir!Dark energy stars are also interesting, link:

http://en.wikiped...rgy_star
TabulaMentis
not rated yet May 03, 2011
Ugh, more aether nonsense.
Actually, Dark Stars and Dark Energy Stars existence prior to POP III Stars and Black Holes sounds plasuible.