by Ann » Fri Dec 04, 2015 6:04 pm
neufer wrote:Ann wrote:
The star that blew the Soap Bubble nebula is long dead, a stellar cinder slowly radiating its remnant heat into space.
A
very hot cinder (illuminating the Soap Bubble) from
a recently deceased hydrogen burning star.
The star that blew off the Soap Bubble nebula
a mere few thousand years ago
currently illuminates the same as it transforms into a long lived white dwarf star.
All planetary nebulas are young, certainly.
Wikipedia wrote:
For a typical planetary nebula, about 10,000 years[12] passes between its formation and recombination of the star.
So indeed, these planetary nebulas are cosmic blinks of an eye. But as planetary nebulas go, I'm not sure that the Soap Bubble is very young, or that its central star is remarkably hot. After all, the nebula is so faint that
it was discovered only seven years ago! Bear in mind that many planetary nebulas are quite bright. To be as faint as the Soap Bubble Nebula is, it seems to me that its central star must have cooled off quite a bit. Note that the Soap Bubble looks mostly red, not blue, in today's APOD, definitely less blue than the Crescent Nebula. This suggests that the Soap Bubble's dominant ionization is Ha, not the more energetic OIII.
So while the central star of the Soap Bubble shed its outer layers and illuminated them only a few millennia ago, the star is not necessarily very young as central stars of planetary nebulas go.
King Tut, older or younger than the Soap Bubble?
Ann
[quote="neufer"][quote="Ann"]
The star that blew the Soap Bubble nebula is long dead, a stellar cinder slowly radiating its remnant heat into space.[/quote]
A [b][u]very hot cinder[/u][/b] (illuminating the Soap Bubble) from [b][u]a recently deceased[/u][/b] hydrogen burning star.
The star that blew off the Soap Bubble nebula [b][u]a mere few thousand years ago[/u][/b]
currently illuminates the same as it transforms into a long lived white dwarf star.[/quote]
All planetary nebulas are young, certainly.
[quote][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_nebula#Lifetime]Wikipedia[/url] wrote:
For a typical planetary nebula, about 10,000 years[12] passes between its formation and recombination of the star.[/quote]
So indeed, these planetary nebulas are cosmic blinks of an eye. But as planetary nebulas go, I'm not sure that the Soap Bubble is very young, or that its central star is remarkably hot. After all, the nebula is so faint that [url=http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap150113.html]it was discovered only seven years ago[/url]! Bear in mind that many planetary nebulas are quite bright. To be as faint as the Soap Bubble Nebula is, it seems to me that its central star must have cooled off quite a bit. Note that the Soap Bubble looks mostly red, not blue, in today's APOD, definitely less blue than the Crescent Nebula. This suggests that the Soap Bubble's dominant ionization is Ha, not the more energetic OIII.
So while the central star of the Soap Bubble shed its outer layers and illuminated them only a few millennia ago, the star is not necessarily very young as central stars of planetary nebulas go.
[float=left][img2]http://www.rickrichards.com/egypt/mask_uraeus.gif[/img2][/float] King Tut, older or younger than the Soap Bubble?
Ann