A study of "MY Camelopardalis" binary system, published in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, shows that the most massive stars are made up by merging with other smaller stars, as predicted by theoretical models.
Most of the stars in our galaxy have been formed in binary or multiple systems, some of which are "eclipsing", this is consists of two or more stars which, observed from Earth, undergo eclipses and mutual transits because of their orbital plane facing our planet. One such system is the eclipsing binary MY Camelopardalis (MY Cam). The journal Astronomy & Astrophysics has published an article on MY Cam, one of the most massive star known, with the results of observations from the Calar Alto Observatory (Almería) signed by astronomers at the University of Alicante, the Astrobiology Centre of the Spanish National Research Council (CAB-CSIC) and the Canaries’ Astrophysics Institute (IAC), along with amateur astronomers.
This article concludes that MY Cam is the most massive binary star observed and its components, two stars of spectral type O (blue, very hot and bright), 38 and 32 times the Sun's mass, are still on the main sequence and are very close to each other, with an orbital period of less than 1.2 days, in other words, the shortest orbital period in this type of stars. This indicates that the binary was virtually formed as it is now: the stars were almost in contact at the time they were formed.
The expected development is the merger of both components into a single object over 60 solar masses before any of them have time to evolve significantly. Hence, these results demonstrate the viability of some theoretical models suggesting that most massive stars are formed by merging less massive stars. ...
MY Camelopardalis, a very massive merger progenitor - J. Lorenzo et al
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk. — Garrison Keillor
Not a fan of the illustration. I like the schematic drawing provided in the paper which seems to more accurately show the size and shape of the two objects.
"Fig. 6. Representative drawing of MY Cam to scale at quadrature phase, created with the PHOEBE 2.0-alpha code via the Python interface."
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.
For me, a lover of blue stars, this article was incredibly interesting.
What I found confusing about the illustration by Javier Lorenzo is that it seems to show three stars: the binary, and then an extremely bright star in the background. I would guess that the very bright star in the background might represent the optical appearance of the binary, since the two components are so close (and so brilliantly bright) that they will look like one and the same star to the eye, even through a telescope.
Ann wrote:For me, a lover of blue stars, this article was incredibly interesting.
What I found confusing about the illustration by Javier Lorenzo is that it seems to show three stars: the binary, and then an extremely bright star in the background. I would guess that the very bright star in the background might represent the optical appearance of the binary, since the two components are so close (and so brilliantly bright) that they will look like one and the same star to the eye, even through a telescope.
Ann
I two wondered about the bright background star. It could also represent what this pair is destined to become though; an actual solitary, very massive star.
It would have been nice to have had the meaning of the third star explained in the caption...
Bruce
Just as zero is not equal to infinity, everything coming from nothing is illogical.
Ann wrote:For me, a lover of blue stars, this article was incredibly interesting.
What I found confusing about the illustration by Javier Lorenzo is that it seems to show three stars: the binary, and then an extremely bright star in the background. I would guess that the very bright star in the background might represent the optical appearance of the binary, since the two components are so close (and so brilliantly bright) that they will look like one and the same star to the eye, even through a telescope.
I think the star is just supposed to be indicative of a nearby star in the same cluster.
Of course, the whole image is hugely unrealistic, so I'm not sure it matters much.
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory https://www.cloudbait.com
Ann wrote:For me, a lover of blue stars, this article was incredibly interesting.
What I found confusing about the illustration by Javier Lorenzo is that it seems to show three stars: the binary, and then an extremely bright star in the background. I would guess that the very bright star in the background might represent the optical appearance of the binary, since the two components are so close (and so brilliantly bright) that they will look like one and the same star to the eye, even through a telescope.
I think the star is just supposed to be indicative of a nearby star in the same cluster.
LS I +57◦138 is far less massive and brilliant than either component of MY Cam, and it is very much less massive and brilliant than the two components combined.
Bruce wrote:
It could also represent what this pair is destined to become though; an actual solitary, very massive star.
Chris Peterson wrote:I think the star is just supposed to be indicative of a nearby star in the same cluster.
I don't think so.
LS I +57◦138 is far less massive and brilliant than either component of MY Cam, and it is very much less massive and brilliant than the two components combined.
Yes, but no effort has been made to show either color or brightness accurately. So I think it's just an artistic flourish. He took a couple of SOHO UV images, distorted and combined them, and threw in another star in the cluster to give the image some sense of depth.
But I guess someone would have to ask him to know the intent for sure.
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory https://www.cloudbait.com
Chris Peterson wrote:But I guess someone would have to ask him to know the intent for sure.
I'm on it. I got a response but the question was not answered. He did toss a link to a cool video at me though. But it's unlisted so I'm not sure I should share it.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.
The illustration aside, this paper about MY Cam reminds me of something that made me protest rather violently when I read it here at Starship Asterisk*, namely, that the Trapezium Cluster contains too few massive stars, and therefore two or more massive stars might have merged and collapsed into a black hole. In other words, the Trapezium Cluster might contain the well-known Trapezium plus a circa 50-solar-mass(?) black hole.
Like I said, I protested at the obvious (or so I thought) absurdity of the whole idea. I was immediately told that I had no business dismissing the idea of a black hole in the Trapezium Cluster, since I can't even begin to understand the mathematics behind the reasoning. Of course those who told me to shut up when it comes to questions that are so far away from my own "area of competence" were right.
But I was reminded of the suggestion of a black hole in the Trapezium Cluster (or possibly only in the Orion Nebula) when I thought about MY Cam. Apart from this remarkably massive and incredibly tight young binary, the cluster where MY Cam is found, Alicante 1, contains only one other high-mass star. Perhaps there ought to be more OB stars there? Perhaps one or more stars in the cluster have already collapsed into one or more black holes?
If there is a black hole in the Orion Nebula because some of the star-forming material there turned into a black hole rather than into stars, then surely this should have happened to other clusters as well?
Well, it's been a couple of days now and I have not heard back from Javier. I guess either he didn't understand my question or is too busy. On the plus side, the video is now public. It's still just an illustration but it's a bit better than the 2d one.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.
