Image: Hubble's portrait of star's gaseous glow

Image: Hubble’s portrait of star’s gaseous glow
Credit: ESA/Hubble & NASA, R. Wade

Although it looks more like an entity seen through a microscope than a telescope, this rounded object, named NGC 2022, is certainly not algae or tiny, blobby jellyfish. Instead, it is a vast orb of gas in space, cast off by an aging star. The star is visible in the orb's center, shining through the gases it formerly held onto for most of its stellar life.

When stars like the Sun grow advanced in age, they expand and glow red. These so-called then begin to lose their outer layers of material into space. More than half of such a star's mass can be shed in this manner, forming a shell of surrounding gas. At the same time, the star's core shrinks and grows hotter, emitting that causes the expelled gases to glow.

This type of object is called, somewhat confusingly, a , though it has nothing to do with planets. The name derives from the rounded, planet-like appearance of these objects in early telescopes.

NGC 2022 is located in the constellation of Orion (the Hunter).


Explore further

A fleeting moment in time

Citation: Image: Hubble's portrait of star's gaseous glow (2019, August 16) retrieved 18 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-08-image-hubble-portrait-star-gaseous.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.
144 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!

Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!
Better than a the glowing planetary nebula pictured above?

Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!


Lol.


Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!
Better than a the glowing planetary nebula pictured above?

You must be suggesting the above isn't glowing or plasma, amusing.

Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!
Better than a the glowing planetary nebula pictured above?

You must be suggesting the above isn't glowing or plasma, amusing.


It is not a glow discharge! Nobody in their right minds would suggest such a thing.
Star gets old - puffs away a bunch of gas - UV and other wavelengths from star illuminate gas. Simples.

Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!
Better than a the glowing planetary nebula pictured above?

You must be suggesting the above isn't glowing or plasma, amusing.


It is not a glow discharge! Nobody in their right minds would suggest such a thing.
Star gets old - puffs away a bunch of gas - UV and other wavelengths from star illuminate gas. Simples.

Got it, it is neither glowing nor plasma, according to jonesdumb.

Aug 16, 2019
The beauty of glow mode plasma can be breathtaking!
Better than a the glowing planetary nebula pictured above?

You must be suggesting the above isn't glowing or plasma, amusing.


It is not a glow discharge! Nobody in their right minds would suggest such a thing.
Star gets old - puffs away a bunch of gas - UV and other wavelengths from star illuminate gas. Simples.

Got it, it is neither glowing nor plasma, according to jonesdumb.


I said no such thing, you cretin. Stop trying to run away from your idiotic claim that this is some electric discharge woo. It isn't. It is called stellar evolution. I keep telling you - stick to Velikovsky. No science nor maths required! Happy days.

Aug 17, 2019
Somehow, this glowing plasma is not glow mode plasma?
Same physics that they describe for glow mode plasma over at PPPL;
https://scied-web...ov/rgdx/
But according to jonesdumb, it's "glow mode" plasma, not glow mode plasma....
What's really cool, you can make your own plasma on this website, controlled from your own device.

RNP
Aug 17, 2019
@Cantdrive85
Do you realize that the the "glow mode" (as you put it, but normally called the a "glow discharge") is, as its proper title suggests, a *discharge* process?

If so, are you trying to suggest that the image above is caused by some sort of discharge?

Aug 17, 2019
@Cantdrive85
Do you realize that the the "glow mode" (as you put it, but normally called the a "glow discharge") is, as its proper title suggests, a *discharge* process?

If so, are you trying to suggest that the image above is caused by some sort of discharge?

Undoubtedly, it's how plasma operates.

Aug 17, 2019
@Cantdrive85
Do you realize that the the "glow mode" (as you put it, but normally called the a "glow discharge") is, as its proper title suggests, a *discharge* process?

If so, are you trying to suggest that the image above is caused by some sort of discharge?

Undoubtedly, it's how plasma operates.


Wrong. Nothing to do with any sort of idiot discharge woo. Go look up 'planetary nebula'.

RNP
Aug 17, 2019
@cantdrive85
If so, are you trying to suggest that the image above is caused by some sort of discharge?

Undoubtedly, it's how plasma operates.

LOL. That's silly.

How would a discharge cause the almost spherically symmetric pattern of emission seen in the image? It is physically impossible!

Also, you do not need discharges to create or sustain a plasma. So your comment that "it's how plasma operates" is meaningless nonsense.

You really do understand nothing about either astrophysics or plasma physics.

Aug 17, 2019
The Glow Modes On The Hill

Protoplasmix,
Castrogiovanni,
CirclesBeginning,
RNP,
Are we reading this right?
All four of you
Entertained
Glow mode plasma!
Cantdrives taken you the cleaners

Either that or you're Glow modes on the hill

Day after day
Alone on a hill
The man with the foolish grin
Is keeping perfectly still
But nobody wants to know him
They can see that he's just a fool
And he never gives an answer
But the fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down
And the eyes in his head
See the world spinning 'round
https://www.youtu...atIMUSu8

Aug 17, 2019
The Glow Modes On The Hill

Protoplasmix,
Castrogiovanni,
CirclesBeginning,
RNP,
Are we reading this right?
All four of you
Entertained
Glow mode plasma!
Cantdrives taken you the cleaners


WTF are you talking about, you clown? It is a planetary nebula. Look it up, you simpleton. It is a star. Shedding its gas. It is described even in language retards can understand in the article above. What are you failing to understand this time?

Aug 17, 2019
With respect to baryonic matter, is there a percentage figure for how much (in the whole universe) is actually ionized? Seems like the majority of mass after accounting for all the stars, would be in the form of cold gas in the IGM (atoms and molecules), dust, solid bodies like comets, asteroids, etc., planets, neutron stars, black holes -- not much of the visible universe (aside from the regular stars) seems to be in the form of plasma ...

Aug 17, 2019
With respect to baryonic matter, is there a percentage figure for how much (in the whole universe) is actually ionized?

99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma. All that IGM is plasma, your presumption is basically opposite of the facts.

Aug 17, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma.


And that tends to be the extent of the knowledge of plasma that most EU wooists have!

Aug 17, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma.


And that tends to be the extent of the knowledge of plasma that most EU wooists have!
not the way to do science, but someone should see what google says the scientists say, shouldn't be that controversial, brb...

Aug 17, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma.


And that tends to be the extent of the knowledge of plasma that most EU wooists have!
not the way to do science, but someone should see what google says the scientists say, shouldn't be that controversial, brb...

From the PPPL link I posted above;
"While most of the matter we come in contact with is solid, liquid, or gas, the visible universe is more than 99% plasma"
https://scied-web...ov/rgdx/
Click on "what is plasma?"

Aug 17, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma.


And that tends to be the extent of the knowledge of plasma that most EU wooists have!

And why it's so blatantly obvious that we reside in a Plasma Universe.

Aug 17, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma.


And that tends to be the extent of the knowledge of plasma that most EU wooists have!
not the way to do science, but someone should see what google says the scientists say, shouldn't be that controversial, brb...
well, apparently no one's ever wondered, 4.6% is baryonic, can't find anywhere that breaks that down into %plasma, %hadronic, %degenerate, %gas, %liquid, %solid, %neutronium, %we don't know because it's in a black hole and definitely not plasma anymore...

Aug 17, 2019
And why it's so blatantly obvious that we reside in a Plasma Universe.


Which is just word salad. What is a 'plasma universe'? How does it differ from the real, observed universe? What is the evidence for its claims (assuming it has any)? Who is still pushing this PU stuff? Where is it?

Aug 17, 2019
The first International Conference on Plasma Cosmology was held in La Jolla, California between 20-22 February 1989. Those contributing papers included Hannes Alfvén, Carl-Gunne Fälthammar, Timothy E. Eastman, Anthony L. Peratt, Rainer Beck, Mauri J. Valtonen and Gene G. Byrd, Eric J. Lerner, William Peter, Paul Marmet, John Kierein, Jean-Pierre Vigier, Daniel R. Wells, and Halton Arp.


Right off the top of my head - Arp, Kierein and Marmet are crackpots! Or promoted crackpot, long since debunked notions. Eastman and Peratt (and possibly Peter) promoted some rather strange ideas that are similarly debunked. Alfven had his matter-antimatter woo that is long since dead. Lerner is a fruitloop, who thinks black holes are plasmoids! Falthammar is perfectly mainstream.
Hardly taken the world by storm, have they?

https://www.plasm...niverse/

Aug 17, 2019
@Protoplasmix.
With respect to baryonic matter, is there a percentage figure for how much (in the whole universe) is actually ionized? Seems like the majority of mass after accounting for all the stars, would be in the form of cold gas in the IGM (atoms and molecules), dust, solid bodies like comets, asteroids, etc., planets, neutron stars, black holes -- not much of the visible universe (aside from the regular stars) seems to be in the form of plasma
Newer techniques/scopes now also see cold ionised Hydrogen (ie, 'cold plasma'). I also agree with you that a lot more cold/low-visibility stuff is being found than previously thought; and that a lot of the light that we do 'see' is also from states/aggregations of molecules/material that either mimic the H-alpha spectrum and/or was not easily visible until more recently with ever-newer scopes/techniques being planned/employed. We should drop old/naive assumptions/estimates re baryogenesis, ratios, quantities and start afresh. :)

Aug 17, 2019
@RC
Plasma in such a great quantity as 99.9% sounds like a plausible amount within this Universe. I don't see the problem in it. Perhaps that is all that Space is actually made of, other than all the Matter/Energy that floats in it. Plasma as the answer would also help solve the dilemma of how the expansion after the Big Bang could be so extensive when normal Matter is purportedly only less than 10% of the contents of the Universe. I like the idea. Plasma could be the 'prime medium'.

Aug 17, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma.


And that tends to be the extent of the knowledge of plasma that most EU wooists have!
not the way to do science, but someone should see what google says the scientists say, shouldn't be that controversial, brb...
well, apparently no one's ever wondered, 4.6% is baryonic, can't find anywhere that breaks that down into %plasma, %hadronic, %degenerate, %gas, %liquid, %solid, %neutronium, %we don't know because it's in a black hole and definitely not plasma anymore...

Notice the disingenuous approach.
You can pretend there is another 96%, but in reality it is just balderdash. There is plasma and the electromagnetic fields it creates. No faerie dust required.

Aug 17, 2019
@RC
Plasma in such a great quantity as 99.9% sounds like a plausible amount within this Universe. I don't see the problem in it. Perhaps that is all that Space is actually made of, other than all the Matter/Energy that floats in it. Plasma as the answer would also help solve the dilemma of how the expansion after the Big Bang could be so extensive when normal Matter is purportedly only less than 10% of the contents of the Universe. I like the idea. Plasma could be the 'prime medium'.

There is no BB pseudoscience in a Plasma Universe.

Aug 17, 2019
Notice the disingenuous approach.
You can pretend there is another 96%, but in reality it is just balderdash. There is plasma and the electromagnetic fields it creates. No faerie dust required.


Wrong. And not a jot of science to back it up.

Aug 17, 2019
There is no BB pseudoscience in a Plasma Universe.


There is no plasma universe!

Aug 17, 2019
I was referring to what Space itself is made of. it may be a form of Plasma that is the prime medium in which everything exists and is capable of existing in the Plasma.
Space has to be made of something within the confines of Matter/Energy. It has to be an enabler, where Stars can form, live and die. Its viscosity has to be limited so that it can flow everywhere in the Universe. And it makes good sense.

Aug 17, 2019
@RC
Plasma in such a great quantity as 99.9% sounds like a plausible amount within this Universe. I don't see the problem in it. Perhaps that is all that Space is actually made of, other than all the Matter/Energy that floats in it. Plasma as the answer would also help solve the dilemma of how the expansion after the Big Bang could be so extensive when normal Matter is purportedly only less than 10% of the contents of the Universe. I like the idea. Plasma could be the 'prime medium'.

There is no BB pseudoscience in a Plasma Universe.
says CD

There had to be a Big Bang as the big catalyst for the explosion outwards in all directions for the Plasma to be pushed outward fast enough to move to the far reaches of that space. Without such a forceful explosion, the Plasma would remain in stasis, hardly moving at all and the Universe would have been a tiny object. (paraphrasing) A force continues to move until an equal but opposite force stops it.

Aug 17, 2019
There is no BB pseudoscience in a Plasma Universe.
says CD
There had to be a Big Bang as the big catalyst for the explosion outwards in all directions for the Plasma to be pushed outward fast enough to move to the far reaches of that space. Without such a forceful explosion, the Plasma would remain in stasis, hardly moving at all and the Universe would have been a tiny object. (paraphrasing) A force continues to move until an equal but opposite force stops it.

'Not With a Bang'
http://plasmauniv...Bang.pdf

Aug 17, 2019
'Not With a Bang'
http://plasmauniv...Bang.pdf


Oh dear! More ancient nonsense from Peratt!

Aug 17, 2019
There it is, glowing in the light of the star. No electric currents apparent.

Just sayin'.

Aug 18, 2019
@CD
On page 27 of your link, the argument against the Big Bang is too inconclusive and doesn't provide a probable alternative. It seemed to me that the more pressing argument was FOR plasma and that the BB was an inconvenience.

It reminded me of Castrovagina's answer to valid arguments as "Wrong" without explaining WHY it was wrong, nor offering a better solution.

Aug 18, 2019
And no Xenu either.

Aug 18, 2019
99.9% of the visible Universe versus 99.9% of the Universe
cantdrive> 99.9% of the visible Universe is plasma. All that IGM is plasma, your presumption is basically opposite of the facts.

To be or not to be
Foreth, cantdrive that is the question?
Fore which is it to be
99.9% of the visible Universe
Or
99.9% of the Universe

For the visible Universe is what we observe telescopically
Where as
99.9% of the Universe is the 99% of the Total Universe!

Because cantdrive
We are only observing 0.00000000000000000000000000000001% of the Total Universe

There is a very subtle, but subtle difference!

Aug 18, 2019
The Universe of Space is the Vacuum

The Universe - The Visible Universe – Space - Vacuum
SEU> I was referring to what Space itself is made of. it may be a form of Plasma that is the prime medium in which everything exists and is capable of existing in the Plasma.

When waking up in the morn
Outstretching your arms
Stretching into this Universe
For this Universe
Is where
This endless Space
Occupied by protons and scrumptious electrons
Their accompanying neutrons, neutrinos and photons
Exist in this Vacuum

There is no distinction between Universe, Space or Vacuum
For these three identities are descriptives
They are nouns, describing to the human mind
What is difficult to describe pictorially
How do you describe Vacuum Pictorially?
Fore a Picci of Vacuum
Maketh
The Black Canvas positively abounding with colour and detail

Well, what did you expect?
A Picci
Of Universe, Space or Vacuum to illustrate
For the Universe of Space is the Vacuum!

Aug 18, 2019
Subtly changing your observations
SEU> Space has to be made of something .. where Stars can form, live and die. Its viscosity has to be limited so that it can flow everywhere in the Universe. And it makes good sense.

Fore observations are our theories
Space by SEU
"Space itself is made of. it may be a form of Plasma that is the prime medium in which everything exists and is capable of existing in the Plasma - Its viscosity has to be limited so that it can flow everywhere in the Universe."

Fore SEU
There is little distinction
SEU, your description of the fluidity of space
That flows into all the nooks and crannies of the Universe
Essentially filling this Universe
Exactly in the same way vacuum fills all the nooks and crannies of the Universe
Fore as we mix and match metaphors in this Universe
Are eternal torment stilleth exists
As we endeavour in our efforts
To Free Albert Einstein from the shackles of the Spirit World

Aug 18, 2019
Ahhh good old Albert. He would have been 140 years of age in this hallowed year of 2019.
If Plasma IS the vacuum of Space, then would that not make it a Plasma Universe?
Oh, if only Albert Einstein were here to argue over this matter with his deductive powers and sense of Logic. Although his sense of Logic DID fail him when it came to Spacetime. But I forgive him.

Aug 18, 2019
Cantdrive will be tickled pink at The Plasma Universe!
But
Beware
Foreth, the MopMan comeths

Aug 18, 2019
Cantdrive will be tickled pink at The Plasma Universe!
But
Beware
Foreth, the MopMan comeths

We are looking down the barrel of the Birkeland current in the above image.

Aug 18, 2019
We are looking down the barrel of the Birkeland current in the above image
Do you mean magnetohydrodynamic flux tube? The object looks pretty spherical to me, lit up by the star that produced it.

Aug 18, 2019
We are looking down the barrel of the Birkeland current in the above image
Do you mean magnetohydrodynamic flux tube? The object looks pretty spherical to me, lit up by the star that produced it.

You can see here how perspective is everything, the spherical lobe ends are readily apparent.
https://apod.nasa..._985.jpg
And the proper name is a Birkeland current.

Aug 19, 2019
Cantdrive will be tickled pink at The Plasma Universe!
But
Beware
Foreth, the MopMan comeths

We are looking down the barrel of the Birkeland current in the above image.

That's a double barrelled Birkeland current

Aug 19, 2019
It's sitting there, no currents in or out. Simple as that.

Aug 19, 2019
And your evidence for that is.....?

Aug 19, 2019
The Plasma Universe
SEU> Ahhh good old Albert. He would have been 140 years of age in this hallowed year of 2019.
If Plasma IS the vacuum of Space, then would that not make it a Plasma Universe?
Oh, if only Albert Einstein were here to argue over this matter with his deductive powers and sense of Logic. Although his sense of Logic DID fail him when it came to Spacetime. But I forgive him.

Most of that we see in the universe today
That occupies the Universe of Space that is the Vacuum
Consist of stars
Which everyone will agree
Satisfies the description - PLASMA
Foreth, as the visible universe consists of stars that exist as plasma
Cantdrive is correct in his assertion
Namely - we exist in The Plasma Universe!

Aug 19, 2019
S'truth. What else could it possibly BE but Plasma. Even in spite of CastroVagina's meltdown, the primordial soup that is the Universe, is made of PLASMA.

Aug 19, 2019
This Plasma Universe is Quasi Neutral

NGC 2022
Is a vast orb of gas in space, cast off by this aging Star
That will eventually
Fade into the vacuum
To join all the other gas
To go on to form another Star
That will light up this Universe of Space in this Vacuum for another 5billion years
Foreth
This unfortunate truth
Hath to be digested
With the crumbs of comfort
Foreth, the MopManeth
Can take solace in this thought
By his riverbank, in his quiet contemplation
This Plasma Universe is Quasi Neutral

Aug 19, 2019
This Plasma Universe is Quasi Neutral
DaSchneib> It's sitting there, no currents in or out. Simple as that.

SEU> And your evidence for that is.....?

As has been pointed out
Quasi Neutral, meaneths that overall this This Plasma Universe is Quasi Neutral
But
On this macro-scale
Plasma
Has currents
Magnetic fields
Coronal mass ejections
Solar wind

In short, this Plasma turns This Plasma Universe into This Electric Universe

Aug 19, 2019
This plasma's turned This Plasma Universe into This Electric Universe

For what is Plasma?
But our two old friends
Our dear old Proton and his scrumptious Electron
Fore when these protons meet their scrumptious electrons in the wilds of our vacuum
In these windswept quantum lowlands of Gretna green
To the traditional sounds of quantum bagpipes
Do our newlyweds exit these wild windswept hills of quantum Gretna Green
Happily floating into our vacuum together on these quantum breezes

Foreth here is born our Electric Universe amongst these thistles of these Scottish lowlands
This proton bigamously entertains these lonesome scrumptious electrons
For to produce Ions
Ions, necessary for these elements of ionic attraction
For to create these atomic reactions
Despite all this protons guile of charm
Its greatest power of attraction
That bereft these scrumptious electrons of their senses
Is this protons electric charge
All 1.6Coloumbs of positive electric charge
This Electric Universe

Aug 19, 2019

You can see here how perspective is everything, the spherical lobe ends are readily apparent.
https://apod.nasa..._985.jpg
And the proper name is a Birkeland current.


Nope, nothing whatsoever to do with a Birkeland current. Or any other sort of current. Not a single scientist has ever claimed such bollocks.

Aug 19, 2019

We are looking down the barrel of the Birkeland current in the above image.


Really? According to which plasma physicist? Astrophysicist? None. You are making crap up, woo boy. Stick to Velikovsky.

Aug 19, 2019
Those gentler days of jonesdave

cantdrive> We are looking down the barrel of the Birkeland current in the above image


jonesdave> Really? According to which plasma physicist? Astrophysicist? None. You are making crap up, woo boy. Stick to Velikovsky

Those days
Where your worries
Would melt
Into the our Aetherous vacuum
Where these electrifying fields and currents
Snake thought this inky blackness
Of our vacuum
Our infinite spatially vacuum
Forever in our inky blackness
Protons and electrons
Forever eternally incrementally increasing in number
Infinitely throughout our vacuum
Foreth, jonesdave
As you siteth on youreth river bank in quiet contemplation
In trollian formeth
For TrollianJonesDave your days of embitterment are just a memory
In those bewildered windmills
Those trollian windmills
For as in days of yore
When youeth struggled in those SEU question in time
You will remember those last days of TrollianJonesDave
https://www.youtu...bv2ZKOto

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