Binary stars are more common than we thought

Jun 16, 2014
Credit: ESO/WFI (Optical); MPIfR/ESO/APEX/A. Weiss et al. (Submillimetre); NASA/CXC/CfA/R. Kraft et al. (X-ray)1 / 16

High-mass stars are rarely solitary. This is what Bochum's astronomers found out at the Ruhr-Universität's (RUB's) observatory in Chile. For several years, they observed 800 celestial objects that are up to one hundred times heavier than our sun. More than 90 per cent have turned out to be multiple systems. These data support the theory that heavy stars are already formed as twins.

University observatory as key to success

Even with the world's largest telescopes, cannot generally be distinguished as two discrete points. In order to prove their existence nevertheless, the team headed by Prof Dr Rolf Chini from the RUB Institute of Astronomy used a trick. They watched the over a period of many weeks and months and detected that their spectra and their brightness oscillated. Regular brightness variations occur if two or more pass each other again and again. These long-term measurements were possible only because the Ruhr-Universität operates its own observatory in the best place for astronomical observations worldwide: the Atacama Desert in Chile.

Twins that weigh the same

The statistical analysis of the data revealed that stars in multiple systems usually have a partner with the same mass. According to Rolf Chini, this is no coincidence: "Why should a star of 50 solar masses capture, of all stars, a partner of likewise 50 solar masses in its surroundings? It would be much easier to attract a star of only one solar mass. Surely, the stars' formation process is what provides the explanation." The originate from gas and dust clouds which then become dense. In the final stage, the cloud apparently splits into two parts of similar size.

Rolf Chini, today Head of the university observatory, spent the first money he's ever earned on a telescope. Credit: RUBIN, photo: Nelle

You can find the complete article about the research conducted by Prof Dr Rolf Chini's team at the RUB Institute of Astronomy in the online magazine RUBIN at http://rubin.rub.de/en/sky-more-crowded-we-thought .

Explore further: A sharp eye on Southern binary stars

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

A sharp eye on Southern binary stars

Apr 17, 2014

Unlike our sun, with its retinue of orbiting planets, many stars in the sky orbit around a second star. These binary stars, with orbital periods ranging from days to centuries, have long been the primary ...

GOSSS catalogue clears the way for study of massive stars

Mar 06, 2014

Only one in two million stars in our galactic environment is of type O, a category that includes stars with anywhere between sixteen and more than one hundred solar masses, and luminosities millions of times greater than ...

Herschel sees budding stars and a giant, strange ring

Jun 13, 2014

The Herschel Space Observatory has uncovered a weird ring of dusty material while obtaining one of the sharpest scans to date of a huge cloud of gas and dust, called NGC 7538. The observations have revealed ...

First planet found around solar twin in star cluster

Jan 15, 2014

Astronomers have used ESO's HARPS planet hunter in Chile, along with other telescopes around the world, to discover three planets orbiting stars in the cluster Messier 67. Although more than one thousand ...

Astronomers suggest more accurate star formation rates

Apr 10, 2014

(Phys.org) —Astronomers have found a new way of predicting the rate at which a molecular cloud—a stellar nursery—will form new stars. Using a novel technique to reconstruct a cloud's 3-D structure, ...

Solving a 30-year-old problem in high mass star formation

Feb 06, 2014

Some 30 years ago, astronomers found that regions of ionized gas around young high mass stars remain small (under a third of a light-year) for ten times longer than they should if they were to expand as expected ...

Recommended for you

The entropy of black holes

Sep 12, 2014

Yesterday I talked about black hole thermodynamics, specifically how you can write the laws of thermodynamics as laws about black holes. Central to the idea of thermodynamics is the property of entropy, which c ...

Modified theory of dark matter

Sep 12, 2014

Dark matter is an aspect of the universe we still don't fully understand. We have lots of evidence pointing to its existence (as I outlined in a series of posts a while back), and the best evidence we have point ...

Gaia discovers its first supernova

Sep 12, 2014

(Phys.org) —While scanning the sky to measure the positions and movements of stars in our Galaxy, Gaia has discovered its first stellar explosion in another galaxy far, far away.

User comments : 32

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Tuxford
1 / 5 (7) Jun 16, 2014
'In the final stage, the cloud apparently splits into two parts of similar size.'

Just a big assumption again from the conventional wisdom based on the common ailment of merger mania.

High mass stars have accelerated new matter generation rates deep within their cores, blowing gas therefrom, or occasionally erupting larger mass ejections, thereby fertilizing the surrounding region with the material needed to form a companion. No wonder here why binaries are prevalent, especially in high mass stars. Simple really. Just need to overcome the mania.
Uncle Ira
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 16, 2014
'In the final stage, the cloud apparently splits into two parts of similar size.'

Just a big assumption again from the conventional wisdom based on the common ailment of merger mania.


@ Tuxford-Skippy, it is not just the assumption no. The scientist-Skippys actually see it happening in the telescopes they have around the world. The google has a lot of articles on the star forming in places where they are watching it.

I don't know what the merger mania is, the google doesn't say anything about that in a way I can understand so maybe you read that wrong some place, I do that too sometimes. Maybe that part you can ask one of the smart peoples about like Captain-Skippy or anti-Skippy or xyz-Skippy or one of them.
no fate
1 / 5 (5) Jun 16, 2014
'In the final stage, the cloud apparently splits into two parts of similar size.'

Just a big assumption again from the conventional wisdom based on the common ailment of merger mania.


@ Tuxford-Skippy, it is not just the assumption no. The scientist-Skippys actually see it happening in the telescopes they have around the world.


In english, the word "apparently" is what the people use when they leap to a conclusion without actual visual evidence. Perhaps you misunderstood this word or didn't see it ( feel free to ask the smart peoples why it is there), however it is clearly printed in the article and again in the quote referenced by Tuxford. Maybe Ol Ira skippy put the eyepatch on the wrong eye this morning....no?
Uncle Ira
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 16, 2014
Just a big assumption again from the conventional wisdom based on the common ailment of merger mania.


@ Tuxford-Skippy, it is not just the assumption no. The scientist-Skippys actually see it happening in the telescopes they have around the world.


In english, the word "apparently" is what the people use when they leap to a conclusion without actual visual evidence.


@ no-Skippy. That is a good thing to know Cher. But that is not the word the Tuxford-Skippy say. That is the word from the article writer-Skippy. I was talking to the Tuxford-Skippy, not the article-Skippy.

Perhaps you misunderstood this word or didn't see it ( feel free to ask the smart peoples why it is there),


No I understand it fine. As in "apparently the no-fate-Skippy is saying something stupid".

Maybe Ol Ira skippy put the eyepatch on the wrong eye this morning


Nothing wrong with my eyes. You are the one who didn't see the Tuxford-Skippy say assumption Cher.
no fate
1 / 5 (3) Jun 17, 2014
"Nothing wrong with my eyes. You are the one who didn't see the Tuxford-Skippy say assumption Cher."

I saw it. He used it correctly. You see, when someone uses the word "apparently" they are making an assumption. As in apparently Ira really is a creole because he can't understand english, but I would go with the assumption that he actually is stupid as well, so it is a coin toss as to why he doesn't get this particular relationship between words.
Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (4) Jun 17, 2014
You see, when someone uses the word "apparently" they are making an assumption.


Well apparently no-Skippy should learn the dictionary on the google. Because it says it means: 1.readily seen; exposed to sight; open to view; visible: The crack in the wall was readily apparent.

As in apparently Ira really is a creole because he can't understand english,


Apparently the no-Skippy having more trouble with the English today (see I spell English correct me) because he don't know that creole is not the Cajun. That in the dictionary too.

but I would go with the assumption that he actually is stupid as well,


That won't get you no farther than trying to be smart without a dictionary.

so it is a coin toss as to why he doesn't get this particular relationship between words.


Because Apparently (1.readily seen; exposed to sight; open to view; visible: The crack in the wall was readily apparent.) is different from Assumption (1.something taken for granted)

no fate
1 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
Well Ira, what we have here strangely enough, is another false statement made in a mainstream science news article. Given that no person has ever readily seen a molecular cloud, open to view, visibly divide into two to produce a binary star system. I will not dispute the dictionary meaning you posted, but instead the context it was used in the article which you took for the literal dictionary meaning, but Tux accurately labelled an assumption because of the absurdity of the statement. Do you understand why "apparently" means assumption here or, do you actually think they can watch this process through a telescope as you stated above? (hint, apparently it is a somewhat lengthy process, try using the google to find out how long it takes).

"Because Apparently (1.readily seen; exposed to sight; open to view; visible: The crack in the wall was readily apparent.) is different from Assumption (1.something taken for granted)"

The assumption in the article above is apparent.

Uncle Ira
3 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
Given that no person has ever readily seen a molecular cloud, open to view, visibly divide into two


no-Skippy, even I know it takes millions of years for that to happen complete. But the Skippys with the telescopes can it happening different places, sometime more along in the thing than at other times.

I will not dispute the dictionary meaning you posted, but instead the context it was used in the article which you took for the literal dictionary meaning, but Tux accurately labelled an assumption because of the absurdity of the statement.


It was not accurate no. Because he didn't take in to consider what the Skippys with the telescopes see.

Do you understand why "apparently" means assumption here or,


One person use apparently does not make it mean assumption because another person say so.

apparently it is a somewhat lengthy process,


It silly to assume it happen fast. You just mad because you don't want gravity to be part of it.
Uncle Ira
3 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
@ no-Skippy just in case you want to call me stupid again or have bad eyes let me tell you why I am not.

The Reg-Skippy believe like you that the gravity does not do nothing anywhere. That is just stupid because you can't explain what it is that works better.

The Nazi-Skippy believe almost like you that the electricity and magnets do everything. That is too just stupid because you can't explain what makes that work like peoples with telescopes see.

The Tuxford-Skippy believe like you that apparently and assumption means the same thing. That is not smart either because it is a silly try to win the science contest with only playing the words against each other.

The Socratic-Skippy say the universe is all filled with some kind of fuzzy stuff called aether and like you he thinks that is more important than gravity.

Real scientist-Skippys know about the electricity the magnets the gravity and other stuffs. That is why I believe them not you. They don't pick one thing to do it all
no fate
1 / 5 (3) Jun 17, 2014
LOL I don't get mad Ira. The skippy's have never seen anything close to what they say is "apparent" given the definition you posted. This means to say that it happens is an assumption. It isn't that I don't want gravity to be a part of it, evidence doesn't point at gravity as being the driving force behind it. Starting with the assumption that it is causes too many inconsistencies with observation. The solution thus far has been to produce a model showing the visible structure and place the DM compoent in the model where it would need to be to produce what is visible via gravity. Then state that it is there in reality because that is where the model says it must be. Then write a paper as though you just solved a mystery, for Physorg to carry and for us to debate.

This is why people think mainstream theoretical astrophysics is completely off the rails, and people like you can't differentiate between when something can or can't be apparent in physical reality.
Uncle Ira
1 / 5 (1) Jun 17, 2014
It isn't that I don't want gravity to be a part of it, evidence doesn't point at gravity as being the driving force


What evidence don't point to the gravity? That electricity and magnet evidence you magnet-electricity-Skippys are fond of is based on the ASSUMPTION that gravity isn't as real as it APPARENTLY is to everybody else?

The solution thus far has been to produce a model showing the visible structure and place the DM compoent in the model where it would need to be to produce what is visible via gravity.


They are smarter than you and me so their solution good enough for me and better than you not having one.

This is why people think mainstream theoretical astrophysics is completely off the rails


I wouldn't be so proud of the people who think that if the sample here are like most of them. Really-Skippy, Nazi-Skippy, Zephir-Skippy, Tuxford-Skippy, Reg-Skippy aren't the sort of Skippys I would use for good science teaching, they all bat doo doo crazy.

Jantoo
2 / 5 (4) Jun 17, 2014
Why not to ignore and report all posts containing the "Skippy" word from notorious name-callers, who aren't doing nothing else here, than just name calling? Such a posts are automatically POINTLESS VERBIAGE and PERSONAL ATTACK in accordance to forum rules.
Jantoo
1 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
Binary stars are more common than we thought

versus
Astronomers Had it Wrong: Most Stars are Single We are living in times of scientific misinterpretation (fed with tabloid journalism, indeed). According to this study, most of medical studies are BS. The astronomy and physics are considered hard science, but my perception is similar here. Their authors just rely on the fact, most of readers have a memory of tropical fish and they simply don't remember the yesterday news. In this way the informational explosion is fabricated. Actually it's merely just a disinformation explosion.
Uncle Ira
3 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
Why not to ignore and report all posts containing the "Skippy" word from notorious name-callers, who aren't doing nothing else here, than just name calling? Such a posts are automatically POINTLESS VERBIAGE and PERSONAL ATTACK in accordance to forum rules.


Socratic-Skippy are you talking about me? I didn't call you any names in a while. What name I call anybody lately? Other than cantdrive-Nazi-Skippy who brought it to him his self by his Nazi talking. I have been on my best behaving lately and trying to talk about the science mostly, can't you tell Cher? It is true, ask around. Maybe you didn't recognize it was me because I been being more nice than I used to be.
no fate
1 / 5 (1) Jun 17, 2014
"What evidence don't point to the gravity? That electricity and magnet evidence you magnet-electricity-Skippys are fond of is based on the ASSUMPTION that gravity isn't as real as it APPARENTLY is to everybody else?"

Actually Ira, it is based on experiments that were set up to test a model, and observed particle behaviour when exposed to magnetic fields. And photon production through magnetic excitation. Oh, and no assumptions.

The very same motions which cause the gravity model the myriad of problems without the requisite "add ins" so that the math still works are what naturally occurs in a magnetic structure.

"They are smarter than you" - some are, some aren't

"and me" - some are, some aren't

"so their solution good enough for me" - excellent

"and better than you not having one" - what I have will be made apparent when it is ready, but it was shown to me by real smart peoples and isn't mine to decide upon.

You are a perfect voice for your smart peoples, keep it up!
rockwolf1000
4.8 / 5 (4) Jun 17, 2014
Why not to ignore and report all posts containing the "Skippy" word from notorious name-callers, who aren't doing nothing else here, than just name calling? Such a posts are automatically POINTLESS VERBIAGE and PERSONAL ATTACK in accordance to forum rules.


Why not ignore and report all posts containing the words "scattering at the water surface"?

Such posts are automatically a waste of SPACE and TIME.
Jantoo
1 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
I didn't call you any names in a while.
Just keep the subject and act smart. The idiots will fall off automatically because they're not interested about on topic intellectually rewarding discussions. They're just looking for fun in flamewars. To call them Skippy is dishonest and plain silly from this perspective and it will attract the attention of trolls instead, because it makes easy for them to oppose you.
"scattering at the water surface"? Such posts are automatically a waste of SPACE and TIME.
Actually they're usually meant as an explanation of space and time...;-)
no fate
1 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
Socratic-Skippy are you talking about me? I didn't call you any names in a while. What name I call anybody lately?

You called him bat doo doo crazy 2 posts up....this is why you are a perfect voice for your smart peoples, they also forget that they said the opposite of what they are saying now.

Binary stars are more common than we thought
versus
Astronomers Had it Wrong: Most Stars are Single

Please speak for the smart peoples and explain to us which smart peoples we should listen to and which ones are just joking...cause you know...right Ira Skippy?
Jantoo
1 / 5 (2) Jun 17, 2014
Why "no fate" repeats the "Uncle Ira" posts? A glitch in sockpuppet Matrix?
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (4) Jun 17, 2014
Binary stars are more common than we thought

versus
http://www.space....le.html, most of medical studies are BS. The astronomy and physics are considered hard science, but my perception is similar here. Their authors just rely on the fact, most of readers have a memory of tropical fish and they simply don't remember the yesterday news. In this way the informational explosion is fabricated. Actually it's merely just a disinformation explosion.


"Binary stars are more common than we thought" & "Most stars are single" are not necessarily mutually exclusive ideas. That binary systems are more common than previously believed does not alter the concept that most stars are singular.

Not that I'm confirming or denying either or both premises.

I'll add that I'm getting tired of your BS. First you suggest everyone should report personal attacks then you refer to everyone as having the cognitive powers of small fish.

What's wrong with you?
Uncle Ira
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 17, 2014
I didn't call you any names in a while.
Just keep the subject and act smart. The idiots will fall off automatically because they're not interested about on topic intellectually rewarding discussions. They're just looking for fun in flamewars. To call them Skippy is dishonest and plain silly from this perspective and it will attract the attention of trolls instead, because it makes easy for them to oppose you.


Well Socratic-Skippy I apologize to you because I did not mean the Skippy to mean anything bad. I call everybody the Skippy even ol Ira-Skippy. It don't mean nothing bad. It's like saying "man" or "dude" or "guy" or like that. And trolls don't need the Skippy to find me, they find me even without the Skippy thing to point the way. I don't mind so much when they oppose me no. I don't care for it when they call me names using the bad words but what can I do about that? That has to do with their raising not the Skippy thing.
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (3) Jun 17, 2014
Why "no fate" repeats the "Uncle Ira" posts? A glitch in sockpuppet Matrix?


You should see an optometrist.

Or perhaps a tutor in reading and comprehension.
no fate
1 / 5 (4) Jun 17, 2014
Why not to ignore and report all posts containing the "Skippy" word from notorious name-callers, who aren't doing nothing else here, than just name calling? Such a posts are automatically POINTLESS VERBIAGE and PERSONAL ATTACK in accordance to forum rules.


Why not ignore and report all posts containing the words "scattering at the water surface"?

Such posts are automatically a waste of SPACE and TIME.


Why not ignore all articles about Dark matter and black holes? Such articles are also a waste of space and time....and an awful lot of research dollars. All based on math that says an infinitely small point can have an infinitely large gravitational attraction, and is created in a finite space by a finite amount of matter..only math and God can go to this place. I will see proof that God exists before the structure I just mentioned.
Uncle Ira
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 17, 2014
You called him bat doo doo crazy 2 posts up....this is why you are a perfect voice for your smart peoples, they also forget that they said the opposite of what they are saying now.


The English still giving you trouble Cher? That is a scientifical observation not a name I call him to be mean. I go way back with the Zephir-Skippy but he said he wants to be the Socratic-Skippy now while discussing things here. I am the only people who vote him the good karma points and talk nice with him until he got ugly with me four or three days ago about the Captain-Skippy.

Please speak for the smart peoples and explain to us which smart peoples we should listen to and which ones are just joking..


Well right from the top of my head you maybe ask the Captain-Skippy, or the xyz-Skippy or the Magnnus-Skippy or the anti-Skippy and I see the rockwolf-Skippy right there you could ask him too. They have some good answers and they are nice and will explain it to you like they do to me.
Jantoo
5 / 5 (1) Jun 17, 2014
I will see proof that God exists before the structure I just mentioned.
It doesn't explain, why the God exists just in form of filaments between galaxies, why it does rings and similar stuffs in so reproducible way. I presume, He has already a lotta activity automatized, after all, like every good programmer who cares about data in his company. We are just revealing its programs: a deterministic patterns in the Universe behavior. All the rest is not so interesting for science.
no fate
1 / 5 (2) Jun 18, 2014
By the way Ira, my laziness in accepting your substitution for the definition of "apparent" as the definition of "apparently" was pointed out by a colleague who also thinks you are the perfect spokes person for the "smart peoples".

ap•par•ent•ly
əˈparəntlē,əˈpe(ə)r-/
adverb
1. as far as one knows or can see.
"the child nodded, apparently content with the promise"
synonyms: seemingly, evidently, it seems (that), it appears (that), it would seem (that), it would appear (that), as far as one knows, by all accounts; More
o used by speakers or writers to avoid committing themselves to the truth of what they are saying.
"foreign ministers met but apparently failed to make progress

from "the google". Second from the bottom line fits here quite nicely.
Uncle Ira
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 18, 2014
@ no-Skippy then maybe you shouldn't be so the lazy Cher. You still have the silly ideas without the gravity doing stuffs.
no fate
1 / 5 (2) Jun 18, 2014
@ no-Skippy then maybe you shouldn't be so the lazy Cher. You still have the silly ideas without the gravity doing stuffs.


You see Ira, I just understand what it does and what it doesn't do. I don't assume, like the assumption Tuxford pointed out in his post, or the one you just made in your last one about my ideas. I would suggest to you not to assume and only post about what you know...but the smart peoples would miss you too much if you heeded that advice.
Uncle Ira
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 18, 2014
You see Ira, I just understand what it does and what it doesn't do. I don't assume, like the assumption Tuxford pointed out in his post, or the one you just made in your last one about my ideas. I would suggest to you not to assume and only post about what you know...but the smart peoples would miss you too much if you heeded that advice.


Skippy you got to make up your mind about what the gravity does or what it doesn't do. Tuxford-Skippy not the one I would be bragging about being on your side if I was you. People will start having the big fun with you if you do that.

But if you want to be in the Tuxford Zephir-Skippy, cantdrive-Nazi-Skippy, the Reg-Skippy, the Really-Skippy and such like Skippys camp, I hope you bring the aluminum wrap tent and aluminum wrap hat to keep the mainline science Skippys off of you. That is a funny big bag of foolishment you got between you. We can call it the silly looking pointy aluminum wrap cap brigade. What you think about that Cher?
no fate
1 / 5 (1) Jun 18, 2014
The Ira skippy shouldn't be judging the other posters being as the Ira skippy doesn't appear to understand english..or anything about anything. It's good that you have chosen a group of people to worship and that they give you the good karma points when you make fun of the people they do so you can feel accepted, it took you a few identities to get there which must have been alot of work. But at the end of the day you're still the little dog asking spike if today were gonna catch a cat.

If wearing a pointy aluminum hat tells the world that I don't adhere to mainstream lunacy, I'll take one in every color of the rainbow.

As a cheerleader lackey type of guy, one thing you should know about real science is that alternate theories only crop up because the currently accepted ones show their flaws. When the dying ones croak, the people who denied it was happening the longest look the stupidest...other than their lackeys of course.

What you tink about dat cher?
Uncle Ira
3 / 5 (2) Jun 18, 2014
Ira skippy shouldn't be judging the other posters being as the Ira skippy doesn't appear to understand english


I understand English enough to know that even the second thing you found something about apparent, it does not mean the same thing as assumption.

It's good that you have chosen a group of people to worship and that they give you the good karma points when you make fun of the people they do so you can feel accepted,


I did not chose anybody Skippy. I'm an independent operator. I come here alone, and I leave here alone.

it took you a few identities to get there which must have been alot of work.


Lot of work? Cher this is what I do for fun. It ain't no work. You should have seen my fun at the political forum.

a pointy aluminum hat tells the world that I don't adhere to mainstream lunacy, I'll take one in every color of the rainbow.


You left out silly looking.

What you tink about dat cher?


I don't know what to think of that.

Uncle Ira
3 / 5 (2) Jun 18, 2014
that they give you the good karma points when you make fun of the people they do so you can feel accepted,


I will admit that is the embarrassment for me. I put a lot of loving care into my postings here, I would rather me just get the fan mails only. But maybe I will actually start trying for the good karma points and see what happens.