Young stellar system caught in act of forming close multiples

Young stellar system caught in act of forming close multiples
ALMA image of the L1448 IRS3B system, with two young stars at the center and a third distant from them. Spiral structure in the dusty disk surrounding them indicates instability in the disk, astronomers said. Credit: Bill Saxton, ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), NRAO/AUI/NSF.

For the first time, astronomers have seen a dusty disk of material around a young star fragmenting into a multiple-star system. Scientists had suspected such a process, caused by gravitational instability, was at work, but new observations with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) and the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) revealed the process in action.

"This new work directly supports the conclusion that there are two mechanisms that produce multiple star systems—fragmentation of circumstellar disks, such as we see here, and fragmentation of the larger cloud of gas and dust from which are formed," said John Tobin, of the University of Oklahoma and Leiden Observatory in the Netherlands.

Stars form in giant clouds of gas and dust, when the tenuous material in the clouds collapses gravitationally into denser cores that begin to draw additional material inward. The infalling material forms a rotating disk around the young star. Eventually, the young star gathers enough mass to create the temperatures and pressures at its center that will trigger thermonuclear reactions.

Previous studies had indicated that multiple star systems tend to have either relatively close, within about 500 times the Earth-Sun distance, or significantly farther apart, more than 1,000 times that distance. Astronomers concluded that the differences in distance result from different formation mechanisms. The more widely-separated systems, they said, are formed when the larger cloud fragments through turbulence, and recent observations have supported that idea.

Young stellar system caught in act of forming close multiples
Combined ALMA and VLA image of L1448 IRS3B system. Credit: Bill Saxton, ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), NRAO/AUI/NSF.

The closer systems were thought to result from fragmentation of the smaller disk surrounding a young protostar, but that conclusion was based principally on the relative proximity of the companion stars.

"Now, we've seen this disk fragmentation at work," Tobin said.

Tobin, Kaitlin Kratter of the University of Arizona, and their colleagues used ALMA and the VLA to study a young triple-star system called L1448 IRS3B, located in a cloud of gas in the constellation Perseus, some 750 light-years from Earth. The most central of the young stars is separated from the other two by 61 and 183 times the Earth-Sun distance. All three are surrounded by a disk of material that ALMA revealed to have spiral structure, a feature that, the astronomers said, indicates instability in the disk.

"This whole system probably is less than 150,000 years old." Kratter said. "Our analysis indicates that the disk is unstable, and the most widely separated of the three protostars may have formed only in the past 10,000 to 20,000 years," she added.

Young stellar system caught in act of forming close multiples
Artist's conception of how the triple-star system develops. Left, disk of material fragments into separate protostars. Right, the resulting stellar system. Credit: Bill Saxton, NRAO/AUI/NSF.

The L1448 IRS3B system, the astronomers conclude, provides direct observational evidence that fragmentation in the can produce young very early in their development.

"We now expect to find other examples of this process and hope to learn just how much it contributes to the population of multiple stars," Tobin said.

The scientists presented their findings in the October 27 edition of the journal Nature.


Explore further

New studies give strong boost to binary-star formation theory

More information: A triple protostar system formed via fragmentation of a gravitationally unstable disk, Nature, nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature20094
Journal information: Nature

Citation: Young stellar system caught in act of forming close multiples (2016, October 26) retrieved 19 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2016-10-young-stellar-caught-multiples.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
508 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Oct 26, 2016
Yes, but where does the unstable disk originate from? Merger maniacs need to answer! Maybe both the instability and the disk originate from planetary cannonballs?

http://phys.org/n...tar.html

Seems a bit more logical given the prevalence of binary systems, not to mention the abundance planetary bodied systems.

Oct 26, 2016
Looks like a hurricane spawning tornadoes to me

Oct 26, 2016
All of you on here that love to argue with idiot loser trolls whose opinion is about as consequential as an infant's drooling really have something to answer for. Idiots like Tuxturds. During the summer of 2015 when I was on vacation in the Channel Islands and was able to physically get at PO's IP logs, I also was able to look at a number of tracking cookies (which is why this site exists anymore). It was a revelation. 50% of the people that read this site read sciencedaily.org...but I could not find one, NOT ONE, troll that had visited the site. That's a pretty big discrimination.

There's only one reasonable explanation. They come on here purely because you will engage with them. You have caused the phenomenon, along with poor moderation, of course, but they'd bugger off if you didn't entertain them. Bshit/benji has admitted as much. Here. Isn't it nice to read this without the above idiot spew? https://www.scien...3056.htm

Oct 26, 2016
You know they're not interested in the science. Try and look at it from their point of view. What's Bshit/benji going to do as an alternative? Waddle down to Wal-Mart and try to practice her sophistry on the cashier? Are the EU cranks going to try to get a good pub debate going? They'd have a stein smashed over their fool head before the night was over. So, they're pretty grateful to have the disinformation brigade to entertain them. And working physicists I know think you're increasing the rate at which they pester them, not keeping them occupied. Face it; arguing with them is a compulsion. RC would be alone with his gnarly yellow TOEs if you didn't engage him. Canthink would get his face bashed in if he tried his schtick in public. shitlist would find himself in a nursing home.

Ultimately, you really need to consider if you're as narcissistic as gkam. Why else do you do it? Deniers? You should understand it. You're denying the facts just as much as they do.

Oct 26, 2016
Not to mention that the article is written better and has references.

Admit it. You're addicted.

Oct 26, 2016
Hi AGreatWhopper. :)
RC would be alone with his gnarly yellow TOEs if you didn't engage him.
Ahem, I would also "be alone with" those increasing number of examples of newer mainstreamer observations/studies/revisions which increasingly confirming me correct all along on the science/logics, and especially on much of what I have been pointing out to IMP-9 et al for years now about re cosmological observations/modeling etc claims that doen't stack up when closely examined properly and scientifically; latest examples:

http://phys.org/n...eor.html

http://phys.org/n...sly.html

http://phys.org/n...ies.html

As for my ToE work/insights; they serve me well. I was not fooled by that bicep2 crap like you/others whose 'science' consists of parroting patently incorrect orthodoxy and 'bashing cranks'.

Understand who is correct or not before 'bashing'! :)

Oct 26, 2016
"During the summer of 2015 when I was on vacation in the Channel Islands and was able to physically get at PO's IP logs, I also was able to look at a number of tracking cookies (which is why this site exists anymore)."

Wow, stalk much? I pity anyone you break up with.

Oct 26, 2016
Let's see, on this scale spirals are caused by "gravitational instabilities". On galactic scales spirals are created you dark matter. No continuity.

In an Electric Universe spirals at all scales are a function of charged particle interactions. Including hurricanes and tornadoes or that matter.

Oct 27, 2016
AGreatWhopper has the point on it and all the trolls are working hard to prove he's right. :) Priceless!

Oct 27, 2016
Face it; arguing with them is a compulsion
@AGreatWhopper
there are other reasons too... like studying the trolls themselves

https://www.psych...-sadists

http://www.scienc...14000324

whereas you are correct (validated in the above links) there is also no way to view the mind, mentality, beliefs, or morality of the troll without interaction

though a face-to-face interaction is preferable, you can learn a lot by interacting with them in public and private forums like this

also note: you don't need to be on site to see those logs and you can also build a bot to log the information yourself (read up on Python - it's quite versatile) and collect more if you want


Oct 27, 2016

https://www.psych...-sadists


The end of the article is worth mentioning here:

The next time you encounter a troll online, remember:

1. These trolls are some truly difficult people.
2. It is your suffering that brings them pleasure, so the best thing you can do is ignore them.

Oct 27, 2016
@AGW

Any opinion worth holding should be defensible. The trolls here constantly challenge and help me strengthen my understanding of Science. Not only that but I've learned quite a bit from Stumpy, Ira, IMP, Torb, AA, and even Gkam. Trolls don't have to be correct or even smart to be useful. If I have what I feel is a bullet-proof perspective Bullsh or Otto will point me to something I've never seen that will challenge me or force me to read up. It's a crucible of ideas and if you never put your ideas up to challenge then you'll never see where they are weak. Maybe it's because I'm foolish but here I can learn, interact, and be entertained free of charge.

Oct 27, 2016
This new work directly supports the conclusion that there are two mechanisms that produce multiple star systems—fragmentation of circumstellar disks, such as we see here, and fragmentation of the larger cloud of gas and dust from which young stars are formed

Well, a third mechanism would be gravitational capture - or is there any reason why that can't happen?
Yes, but where does the unstable disk originate from?

Do you mean where the disk originates from? Or why a disk should be unstable?

The answer to both is: "gravity" (and conservation of angular momentum)

Oct 27, 2016
Let's see, on this scale spirals are caused by "gravitational instabilities". On galactic scales spirals are created you dark matter. No continuity.

In an Electric Universe spirals at all scales are a function of charged particle interactions. Including hurricanes and tornadoes or that matter.


Well in my simplistic view, regardless of EU or GR, there are really only 3 things to consider:

The type/content of matter
The field/medium they interact in
The vortex they create

Oct 27, 2016
Admit it. You're addicted.
/chuckles

In the context of the "war on drugs" dystopia, there are more than enough illicit, naturally occurring drugs in your brain to put you away for life. And taking that in the context of survival in terms of behavioral motivation, then: Life is a drug, and the vast majority of us are addicted to it.

/chasing the wind

Oct 27, 2016
@AGW

The trolls here constantly challenge and help me strengthen my understanding of Science. Not only that but I've learned quite a bit from Stumpy, Ira, IMP, Torb, AA, and even Gkam. Trolls don't have to be correct or even smart to be useful. If I have what I feel is a bullet-proof perspective Bullsh or Otto will point me to something I've never seen that will challenge me or force me to read up. It's a crucible of ideas and if you never put your ideas up to challenge then you'll never see where they are weak. Maybe it's because I'm foolish but here I can learn, interact, and be entertained free of charge


Exactly the reason I keep reiterating why it is so "entertaining" to come here & read the Commentary by the ones you listed above. Everyone of them lives in a Perpetual Motion Universe & they don't even know it. Anyone who believes Infinite Wells of gravity & density can exist on a Finite Stellar mass is a Perpetual Motion fanatic wearing a tinfoil hat.

Oct 27, 2016
Hi Gigel. :)
AGreatWhopper has the point on it and all the trolls are working hard to prove he's right. :) Priceless!
Mate, I give you the same advice I gave AGreatWhopper and all the 'crank bashers' here, ie:
Understand who is correct or not before 'bashing'! :)


PS: In case you didn't witness one particular debacle which unfolded because that advice was not heeded a couple years back, I remind all how antialias et al fell hook line and sinker for that bicep2 crap and were busy acting like 'schoolgirls giddy with excitement' while gleefully 'bashing cranks' with that INCORRECT bicep2 'work/claims'!

PPS: Have you been paying attention lately to all those recent mainstream observations/reviews etc, especially over the past couple years, which increasingly confirming I was correct all along on many fronts? Not bad for a 'crank' being gang-trolled by incorrect detractors for years now, hey?

Good luck. :)

Oct 27, 2016
Admit it. You're addicted


In the context of the "war on drugs" dystopia, there are more than enough illicit, naturally occurring drugs in your brain to put you away for life. And taking that in the context of survival in terms of behavioral motivation, then: Life is a drug, and the vast majority of us are addicted to it. /chasing the wind


Exactly the reason I keep reiterating why it is so "entertaining" to come here & read the Commentary by the ones you listed above. Everyone of them lives in a Perpetual Motion Universe & they don't even know it. Anyone who believes Infinite Wells of gravity & density can exist on a Finite Stellar mass is a Perpetual Motion fanatic wearing a tinfoil hat.


.............see what I mean about "entertainment" & "tinfoil hats". The same ones who all they do is complain endlessly about other trolls, who themselves post zero content regarding the subject of an article.


Oct 28, 2016
.............see what I mean about "entertainment" & "tinfoil hats". The same ones who all they do is complain endlessly about other trolls, who themselves post zero content regarding the subject of an article.
Another zero-content harsh toke post from Buzzkill Benni. And erroneous content from someone pretending to be a nuclear engineer or a theoretical physicist or a high priest of electric wizardry is far worse than any off-topic rebuke.

Looks like gravity is still the dominant force even down at the scale of solar system formation. Look at that beautiful image, that fantastic spiral structure – no lightning bolts, no electric discharge, no modified Newtonian dynamics...

Oct 28, 2016
.....see what I mean about "entertainment" & "tinfoil hats". The same ones who all they do is complain endlessly about other trolls, who themselves post zero content regarding the subject of an article.


Another zero-content harsh toke post from Buzzkill Benni. And erroneous content from someone pretending to be a nuclear engineer or a theoretical physicist ....


Looks like gravity is still the dominant force even down at the scale of solar system formation. Look at that beautiful image, that fantastic spiral structure – no lightning bolts, no electric discharge, no modified Newtonian dynamics
.......you forgot one, no DM Cosmic Fairy Dust either.

Oct 28, 2016
.......you forgot one, no DM Cosmic Fairy Dust either.
I don't know if there are any microlensing observations relevant to the L1448 IRS3B system, but I'm confident that gravitational effects predicted (and observed) with general relativity are the best way to quantify how much of which type of matter is there, and – wait, aren't you the guy that wonders where 80% of himself is when he looks in the mirror? Uh huh, I wonder where 80% of yourself is when you post comments...

Oct 28, 2016
Hi FSC. :)

I'm also working on the Reality-Axiomatic-Math to model the Reality-Postulatic-ToE. So both will be free of unphysical 'creation-from-nothing', 'undefined entities' etc nonsense underlying all 'professional' cosmology theory/math.

You are free to swallow creation-ex-nihilo, wormholes etc physically-unreal, philosophical postulates/axioms which underpin BB etc theories/maths; but decades ago I chose not to swallow same. :)

Instead, I started theorizing from scratch; strictly grounded it in physical reality (instead of in all those metaphysical/philosophical 'unrealities' in which BB etc theories/models have been 'floating' for far too long under the mistaken impression they had any connection with the physical reality).

To start the reality-physics-logic-question 'chain', I asked:
What objective reality-based physical SCALAR POTENTIAL is absolutely independent of any and all other concepts? Answer: Undifferentiated Direction.
More real than 'ex nihilo'! :)

Oct 28, 2016
...you forgot one, no DM Cosmic Fairy Dust either.


I don't know if there are any microlensing observations relevant to the L1448 IRS3B system, but I'm confident that gravitational effects predicted (and observed) with general relativity are the best way to quantify how much of which type of matter is there


Well then, if you believe all this, then you should know that Einstein calculated Photon Deflection in GR based solely on the Visible Mass of the Sun, he didn't need to create fudge factors for 80% Missing Matter Gravity in order to be correct within 0.02% of present day computer calcs.

aren't you the guy that wonders where 80% of himself is when he looks in the mirror? Uh huh, I wonder where 80% of yourself is when you post comments...
My math is better than yours, I always know where 100% of myself is, you're one of the ones within the "asstrophysics funny farm pseudo-science" crowd that's been having such a hard time locating the missing 80% .

Oct 30, 2016
when he brags about "math" he may not mean the same thing as sane people
@Phys1
he/she/it doesn't mean the same thing

you should see his attempt at basic addition here
Interestingly enough, the wobble cycle of Earth's rotational axis seems to correlate closely with the time required for our solar system to complete a full orbital passage around the galactic core of the Milky Way
http://phys.org/n...als.html

then he demonstrates he doesn't know what ODE's or PDE's are, and much much more
http://phys.org/n...ood.html

http://phys.org/n...s_1.html

http://phys.org/n...and.html

http://phys.org/n...ity.html

got plenty more FUBAR STEM quotes from him, but i think i validated your point with plenty of evidence, eh?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more