Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Hubble Shoots Movies of Stellar Jets

Soulskill posted about 3 years ago | from the pretty-pictures dept.

NASA 30

With his first accepted submission, aglider writes "A number of different science publications are reporting on a recent announcement made by NASA and Hubblesite.org. Quoting: 'A team of scientists [headed by Rice astronomer Patrick Hartigan] has collected enough high-resolution Hubble Space Telescope images over a 14-year period to stitch together time-lapse movies of powerful jets ejected from three young stars. The jets, a byproduct of gas accretion around newly forming stars, shoot off at supersonic speeds in opposite directions through space.' The report is also accompanied by a number of photos and, of course, astounding small movies. The complete scientific study, which dates back to 2011.07.20, has been published in the Astrophysical Journal (subscription needed) but is also available on the ESA's Space Telescope site (PDF)."

cancel ×

30 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37291698)

assdick

Re:first post (1)

ailnlv (1291644) | about 3 years ago | (#37291702)

way to waste a first post there

SuperSONIC speeds... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37291718)

SuperSONIC speeds... in space... really...

Re:SuperSONIC speeds... (3, Funny)

Stoutlimb (143245) | about 3 years ago | (#37291802)

of course, it means faster than the speed of sound in a vacuum...

Re:SuperSONIC speeds... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37292088)

speed of sound (in the interstellar medium) is about 100 km/s

(source [wikipedia.org] )

Yes, really.

Moron.

if you'd left off the 'moron' (2, Informative)

decora (1710862) | about 3 years ago | (#37292316)

i would have modded you up

Is that a jet or a tail? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37291794)

From one of the videos it looks like a tail caused by the star moving... Could there be star-sized comets in the universe?

Re:Is that a jet or a tail? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37291954)

The tail of a comet is caused by the star around which it orbits heating it up and blowing off the dust into a 'tail' shape. The tail does not trail behind the comet as it moves, but points away from the star it is orbiting.

Re:Is that a jet or a tail? (3, Informative)

Doubting Sapien (2448658) | about 3 years ago | (#37292292)

From one of the videos it looks like a tail caused by the star moving... Could there be star-sized comets in the universe?

It depends on what you want to call a comet. The "dirty snow balls" at the nucleus of all the comet pictures you'd normally see are no bigger than an asteroid. When activated by solar energy, they develop a coma of gaseous material that is several times larger than the nucleus, but still pretty small. If you count the tail that streams away from the star, then yes: it is possible to say a particularly large and active comet can conceivably approach the diameter of a star. However, even as such, no comets are observable with today's technology at stellar distances of the order those Hubble observations are made.

Finally! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37291882)

This is awesome! Finally a real, optical series of images for something like this -- no infrared, or otherwise exotic EM 'images'. This moves us one step closer to what I really want to see before I die -- a supernova actually bursting and wiping out its star system in real imagery.

Hopefully we put another good, optical tele up there so we can get a bit better resolution so we can see the scales of a star system and not 14years worth of 440k mph stills.

Re:Finally! (2)

CheshireDragon (1183095) | about 3 years ago | (#37292020)

It would have to be done in still images as well since stars take days(and larger stars weeks) to fully explode. It would be nice to see a well pieced together time lapse video of a star exploding though.

Insects, we (2)

Lexx Greatrex (1160847) | about 3 years ago | (#37292062)

Does this give anyone else the impression that we are like insects, living, moving, dying too fast to appreciate the slowly unfolding majesty of the Universe?

Re:Insects, we (1)

Black.Shuck (704538) | about 3 years ago | (#37292186)

Yes. Breathtaking footage.

Re:Insects, we (2)

Bucc5062 (856482) | about 3 years ago | (#37292296)

I wont go so far as reduce us to insects, but I'll agree this blows me away. The universe continues to humble me with its complete beauty and art. Yes art, on a scale we can barely imagine. The first alien ship that passes by us asks if any one wants a one way ride out to see these sights close up...I'm in.

What is sad for me is that we have these amazing minds that can imagine, create, and explore worlds beyond our horizons, but we are ruled by insects who's lives are measured in quarterly reports, and how many grubs they can hold on to, and how many soldiers they can control. Man is not limited by our mind, we are limited by insects disguised as decision makes and political leaders. I believe one day humans will travel past our own system, and images like this will inspire young minds to make it happen.

Re:Insects, we (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 3 years ago | (#37293658)

The first alien ship that passes by us asks if any one wants a one way ride out to see these sights close up...I'm in.

No - because you would not go so far as to "reduce" us to insects, the insect-like aliens will just sacrifice you and place you on the giant fungal heap and you never will see those sights. I, for one, welcome our insect overlords.

Re:Insects, we (2)

MJKong (1238292) | about 3 years ago | (#37292320)

No not at all. Insects can't take pictures of matter located light years away. It really bother me when people say "We're really nothing, tiny insects roaming a small particle of dust floating in the universe".

Re:Insects, we (3, Informative)

Urkki (668283) | about 3 years ago | (#37294662)

No, we're not at all like insects. Insects are "cold-blooded", have chitinous exoskeleton and six legs, often wings and webbed eyes. We're very different. There's been like 600+ million years of evolution since our last common ancestor.

Sheesh, don't they teach biology in schools any more?

Re:Insects, we (1)

Lexx Greatrex (1160847) | about 3 years ago | (#37297100)

I suggest you look up the word "simile". The meaning hasn't changed in the 28 years since I was at school. Also, look up the meanings of the terms you are using before you post, because next time you are trolling you will make less of a fool of yourself.

Re:Insects, we (1)

Urkki (668283) | about 3 years ago | (#37297330)

I was not trolling, I was disagreeing with the simile, I just chose to be a smart-ass instead of writing a well reasoned response.

The simile is about as good as saying "we humans are like planets, totally insignificant in the grand dance of stars, dust and dark matter". And especially we don't die too fast to appreciate slowly unfolding majesty of the universe, because thanks to finite speed of light, we can see a cross-section of the entire history of the universe by just looking up. If you don't believe me, there was an article on slashdot just recently, which had links to some nifty images and even videos "looking up". Of course it'd be nice to see single events unfold "live", but it's not at all necessary for appreciating the whole thing.

Re:Insects, we (1)

Walter Carver (973233) | about 3 years ago | (#37324750)

He said "like" insects. Meaning that insects live their whole lives in what is for us a fraction of our lives.

In mood for flame, aren't we?

Re:Insects, we (1)

Walter Carver (973233) | about 3 years ago | (#37318998)

Oh there is lots of majesty even in a rosebud that lives for one night :)

Supersonic (1)

RNLockwood (224353) | about 3 years ago | (#37292252)

Wow, they move faster than sound in space. Wonder what speed that is? Are orbiting space loudspeakers blasting rock-n-roll to unfortunate planets next? (Apologies to Douglas Adams)

Cool videos, though.

Re:Supersonic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37292664)

Wow, they move faster than sound in space. Wonder what speed that is? Are orbiting space loudspeakers blasting rock-n-roll to unfortunate planets next? (Apologies to Douglas Adams)

Cool videos, though.

I knew this would come up pretty quickly, but yes, there is a speed of sound in space. In best /. tradition, I haven't RTFA, but speed of sound in space is usually taken as the speed of sound in the interstellar/intergalactic medium the matter is passing through. There's very, very little stuff in space, but it's not absolutely empty, particularly where new stars are being formed. That's why these jets form shockwaves. (The other way to measure the speed of sound would be relative to the jets themselves--jets moving faster than sound can propagate through them--but I doubt that's what the article is talking about.)

Re:Supersonic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37292928)

Space is not a perfect vacuum, especially in the neighborhood of a star; it is a rarefied plasma. Pressure waves can propagate through this medium, and hence, we have a "speed of sound." Things moving faster than this speed produce shock waves, just like in a thicker gas like what we're used to here at the bottom of Earth's atmosphere.

Re:Supersonic [Speeds] (1)

OnTheEdge (136784) | about 3 years ago | (#37295446)

The post mentioned "The jets [...] shoot off at supersonic speeds..." While determining supersonic speed requires not being in a vacuum, once you know what speed supersonic-speed is, can it not be used as a measuring stick for comparison? If I'm moving at a snails pace, I'm likely not crawling across the ground, in fact, I could be doing any number of non-transportive activities that could be claimed to be at a snails pace.

Re:Supersonic [Speeds] (1)

RNLockwood (224353) | about 3 years ago | (#37296720)

"While determining supersonic speed requires not being in a vacuum, once you know what speed supersonic-speed is, can it not be used as a measuring stick for comparison?"

Supersonic means faster than the speed of sound referenced to a specific medium at specific conditions, and that varies wildly depending on the medium, say air or steel, and on the temperature, pressure, and state of the medium. Perhaps astro-physicists use "supersonic" in some specialized sense, but it looks to me as if the author used it as a synonym for "very fast" much as "healthy" is used in place of "large" or "big".

NHL Jets (0)

sackbut (1922510) | about 3 years ago | (#37292498)

And how proud we are of the new NHL Winnipeg Jets... We have waited for longer than 14 years for them to return.

This looks like effects shots from Kubrick's 2001 (1)

Required Snark (1702878) | about 3 years ago | (#37293190)

Some of these sequences look like shots from the Stargate section of the film 2001.

Specifically the HH1 jet has some of the streaming blob like motion created using light show fluid projections techniques. This is done on an overhead projector with a big watch glass (a big shallow section of a sphere) and volatile fluids. Colors are dripped into the liquid and as the glass is moved they mix around and bubbles form from a combination of the heat of the projector and changing pressure in the liquid.

It's all fluid dynamic, in outer space on a table top.

huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37297340)

Why are there so few comments on this story?

Re:huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37298360)

Why are there so few comments on any of the stories? I haven't frequented slashdot for a few years now, but there always used to be, like, thousands of comments.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?