Motions of and distances to stars chapter 17 and 19
Download
1 / 39

Motions of and Distances to Stars: Chapter 17 and 19 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 137 Views
  • Uploaded on

The ancients thought the stars were motionless and fixed to the firmament, unimaginably far, far away…. Motions of and Distances to Stars: Chapter 17 and 19. How can you guess the distance to stars?. Review: Angles. sin = opposite hypotenuse. cos = adjacent

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Motions of and Distances to Stars: Chapter 17 and 19' - durin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Motions of and distances to stars chapter 17 and 19

The ancients thought the stars were

motionless and fixed to the firmament, unimaginably

far, far away…

Motions of and Distances to Stars: Chapter 17 and 19

How can you guess the distance to stars?


Review angles
Review: Angles

sin = opposite

hypotenuse

cos = adjacent

hypotenuse

hypotenuse

tan = opposite

adjacent

adjacent

1 radian=2x105 arcsec

opposite

Most triangles we will make use of in the Universe are skinny (i.e., <10 deg).

Skinny triangle rule: If  is small, sin  =  (in radians), tan = , cos =1

(e.g.,  =0.1 radians=5.7 degrees = sin  to 0.1 %)and adjacent=hypotenuse

=width

distance

distance

width


Stars appear fixed to a large,

very distant celestial sphere

North

Celestial

Pole

Earth's

axis of

rotation

celestial

equator

(far, far away)

zenith

of B

B

zenith

of A

A

Earth

horizon

of B

horizon

of A

South

Celestial

Pole

Positionon Sky

From any point on Earth, you can see half of the celestial sphere at any given time (if you have a clear horizon).

As Earth rotates, stars move across sky-circles centered on NCP, SCP

Two angles fix location of a star on the sphere.

We use right ascension for East-West and declination for North-South



Ecliptic not equator

q

Ecliptic (not equator!)

  • Ecliptic=Plane of the Earth’s orbit (~ other planets + Moon too)

  • Tilted at 23 to celestial equator (seasons)

Northern summer

Northern winter

Imaginary point where ecliptic and equator cross

(and the Sun reaches on March 21, vernal

equinox) is 0 RA point


So a star s two angular coordinates should never change unless
So a Star’s two angular coordinates should never change, unless…

  • Edmond Halley (1718) measured stars positions and compared to

  • Ptolemy (Almagest) 1800 years earlier, found changes in

  • some of brightest stars, a degree to a few degrees!!!

  • Compare two bright stars in Bootes to the other stars…

Arcturus

Eta bootes


Question when you give directions to an alien why should you leave out the constellations
Question: When You Give Directions to an Alien, why should you leave out the constellations?

the figure of the constellations changes with location

the figure of the constellations change with time

a constellation star may explode

all of the above

none of the above

answer, d)


If we continuously monitored arcturus in bootes
If we continuously monitored Arcturus in Bootes you leave out the constellations?

Time step=100 years, from 0 AD to 10000 AD


What the heck
What the Heck? you leave out the constellations?

Why? Precession? Nutation?

Coherent! Aberration?

Also a pattern

Parallax?

No, position changes were along random directions, not periodic…

Some North, some South, etc (even since Tyco’s time)


The brighter they are the faster they move
The Brighter they are, the Faster they move you leave out the constellations?

Mayer, 1723-1762

Why did the brighter stars show larger movements?

Halley reasoned: Brighter=Closer. So?

So, closer means angular (i.e. apparent )motion is greater!

These motions called “proper motions” by Johann

Mayer in 1750’s, measured in ~80 stars.

So, if the Sun is a star, why wouldn’t it move too?

Perhaps it does! How could we tell?

Wouldn’t the Sun’s movement create the appearance of a pattern of star movements, like person walking through forest?


Announcements
Announcements you leave out the constellations?

Turn in HW #2

Observing this week, tonight

New HW #3


Flying through space
Flying Through Space you leave out the constellations?


Flying through space1
Flying Through Space you leave out the constellations?


The stellar wake
The you leave out the constellations?“Stellar Wake”

Johann Mayer, 1760, suggested motion of Sun should appear

as stars perpendicular to motion “move aside”, couldn’t see it.

In 1783 Hershel looked again for this effect, found it, towards Hercules

Circle for

RA (24 hrs)

Hershel’s paper, 1783, “…we find that Sirius, Castor, Procyon, Pollux, Regulus, Arcturus, and α Aquilae appear to have

respectively the following proper motions in right ascension: -0”.63; - 0”.28; - 0”.80 Nevil Maskelyne, then Great Britains Astronomer Royal. - 0”.93; - 0”.41; - 1”.40; and + 0”.57. And two of them, Sirius and Arcturus, in declination, viz. 1”.20 and 2”.01, both southward. Let figure [17.2] represent an equatorial zone with the above mentioned stars referred to it, according to their respective right ascensions, having the solar system in the center. Assume the direction AB …and suppose the sun to move in that direction from S towards B. Then will that one motion answer that of all the stars together”

Hershel: imagine sun (S) moves to C

Stars physically at positions s will appear

to move from a to b


Some stars also vary their brightness in time
Some Stars Also Vary Their Brightness in Time! you leave out the constellations?

  • Star Algol (A-ghoul; “the demon star”) (known since 1660’s) varies by a factor of 4 in brightness every 2 days 20 hours…how could stars vary in brightness?

  • Cepheid and  Aquilae also varied (J. Goodricke 1784)


Question what could cause a star s brightness to vary
Question: What could cause a star you leave out the constellations?’s brightness to vary?

starspots + spinning

Eclipse by companion star

changing size

all of the above

none of the above

answer, d)


So stars were not so immutable as the ancients believed and were they infinitely far away
So Stars were not so immutable as the ancients believed. you leave out the constellations?And were they infinitely far away?


The holy grail of astronomy 17 th 19th century the distance to a star

Sun with you leave out the constellations?

Hole in Screen

C. Huygens ~1690-when fraction Sunlight=

Sirius then: hole/whole=bSirius/bSun=dSun2/dSirius2

because brightness  1/d2

Couldn’t make hole small enough! But

got 27,664 AU (700 million times fainter!)

What assumed?

Sirius

J. Gregory ~1668-when Saturn as bright as

Sirius, same fraction given by light which

reflects from Saturn, reaches Earth. 83,190 AU.

What assumed? Newton: 1,000,000 AU

Unreliable! Parallax would be better…

“The Holy Grail” of Astronomy, 17th-19th Century:The Distance to a Star

Recall that the absence of parallax previously argued that the stars were far away. Copernicus, “of near infinite magnitude”


Parallax and the parsec
Parallax and The Parsec you leave out the constellations?

Against backdrop of very distant stars,

Nearby star will move by an angle 2p, in 6 months. Parallax angle=p

“Skinny Triangle” rule, p[radians]=1AU/d so d=1AU/p

If p=1”=1/(2x105) radians then d=2x105 AU. Called “parsec”= 3x1013 km=3.26 light years

Parsec is most common unit for distance in astronomy because its based on how we measure distance


Earth you leave out the constellations?

1 A.U.

B

A

C

p

Sun

p

p

d

d

d

d (pc) =

1

p (arc sec)

1 A.U.

1"

star

1 parsec

As distance increases, parallax decreases

The distance for which a 1 A.U. baseline has a one arc second (1") parallax is called 1 parsec (pc)

Note: 1" means 1 arc second

60" = 1 arc minute (1')

60' = 1 degree (1°)

360° = full circle

(for example, horizon to zenith = 1/4 circle = 90°)

(1 pc ≈3.26 ly)


More on parallax
More on Parallax you leave out the constellations?

Parallax is also a common surveyor’s tool


Broadening the baseline parallax measurements near to far

Human Eyes you leave out the constellations?

Meteor ranging in

Earth’s atmosphere

2.3

inches

several

miles

tens of feet

tens of miles

Optical Range Finder

Distance

to Moon

Moon

several

feet

8000

miles

Earth

many feet

240,000 miles

Surveyor’s

transit

Distance

to Star

Sun

186

million

miles

many

feet

Earth’s

Orbit

many feet to few miles

trillions of miles

Broadening the Baseline: Parallax Measurements Near to Far


What is the distance of a star with a parallax of 0 05 arcseconds
What is the distance of a star with a parallax of 0.05 arcseconds?

  • 5 parsecs

  • 10 parsecs

  • 20 parsecs

  • 50 parsecs

  • 100 parsecs


If a star were four times as far away from us how many times less light would we receive from it
If a star were four times as far away from us, how many times less light would we receive from it?

  • 1/2

  • 1/4

  • 1/8

  • 1/16

  • 1/64


The astronomical holy grail distance to stars by parallax
The Astronomical times less light would we receive from it? “Holy Grail”:Distance to Stars by Parallax

Galileo wrote about the method of parallax but measurements

were too imprecise and stars to far to get a reliable result.

J. Bradley & Molyneux had tried 1720’s with  Draconis,

but had discovered aberration and nutation instead!

(And also had to account for refraction). All these effects

bigger than parallax, and coherent, not individual.

Concluded lack of parallax to ~1”,  Draconis > 1 parsec !!

W. Hershel, ~1800, had tried using double stars (so

that refraction, aberration, precession drop out), had

discovered binaries instead!

Many others tried, spurious claims, none successful by ~1830


Space race to measure first parallax 1830 s

1784-1846 times less light would we receive from it?

“Space Race” to Measure First Parallax, 1830’s

Normal view

1838: Friedrich Bessel, 61 Cygni

target

reference

Bessel’s heliometer--split objective lens

Creates a double image, sections moved

Until a star coincides with another and

Angular separation is read off

Bessel measured a dozen times per

Night for 15 months!

Heliometer: adjust

Until stars align

  • Read Bessel’s Letter: He chose 61 Cygni because

  • Big proper motion (6”/yr) means its likely to be close enough for detectable parallax

  • Its near the pole so it will be visible throughout the year

  • Double star (24” sep) so he can better align it , aligning its bisection to calibration stars (stars are 1”)

  • Had to contend with: 1st reference stars too faint, Halley’s comet kicks him off the telescope,

  • Turbulence in the atmosphere means he needs to re-observe a dozen times per night


What bessel saw

Dial the reference times less light would we receive from it?

Star to the bisection pt

What Bessel Saw

Easier than

Aligning stars

60”

Main effects we see: proper motion, 5”/year

looking for a tiny 6 month variation 10 times smaller,

this is hard!!


Let s cheat a little
Let times less light would we receive from it? ’s Cheat A little

We correct for (differential) aberration (as Bessel would have),

(Note that the distant stars will also have aberration but

Not parallax) Then zoom in to a 1’ sized field…Hubble like resolution.

See that ripple every 6 months? There it is!! Bessel observed

2.5 of these cycles before he made his claim that….


Answer is
Answer is… times less light would we receive from it?

0.31” +/- 0.02” !! That’s 1/75 of the double separation

(that angle is a dime 5 km away!)

Corresponded to 3 parsecs (modern value = 0.28547”) or

10 ly!

Thomas Henderson, went down to Cape Town,

Alpha Centauri, parallax=1” (had it in 1832-33

but for lack of confidence published in 1839) .

Closest star! Could have been detected in 18th century

If it was in the North.

Friedrich Struve measured parallax of Vega the same year.

to be ~1/8”

Right on Bessel’s Heals…


Modern barnard s star at 2 parsecs
Modern: times less light would we receive from it? Barnard’s Star at2 parsecs


Today the gold standard hipparcos satellite
Today the Gold standard: Hipparcos Satellite times less light would we receive from it?

1989-1993:

Measured 120,000 stars to 1 milli-

arcsec precision. That’s

A distance of 1000 pc or 300 ly

(actually 1/10th that distance to get a significant measurement)

rough distance for

2.5 million stars in total

Science of measuring

Positions on the sky: Astrometry


Tomorrow s gold standard gaia
Tomorrow times less light would we receive from it? ’s Gold Standard: Gaia

Launch: Aug 2011 by ESA, mission through 2020

will measure parallax of 1 billion stars in the Milky Way

(20  arcsec precision for brightest, 200  arcsec for faintest

a distance of 50 Kpc to 5 Kpc )

Distance and angular position (3D) and 3D motion too.

Will address origin and evolution (life history) of Milky Way.


History of stellar parallax
History of Stellar Parallax times less light would we receive from it?


New approach using hubble space telescope precision astrometry with spatial scanning pass
New Approach Using Hubble Space Telescope: times less light would we receive from it? Precision Astrometry with Spatial Scanning (PASS)

Scanning, average many rows, error

=0.01 pix /√N rows or 0.001 pix

Imaging: error in position

of star=0.01 pix

scan

parallax

parallax


First times less light would we receive from it? PASS

Cepheid Star SY AUR @ 2.3 Kpc


Two advantages of spatial scans jitter removal and repetition
Two Advantages of Spatial Scans, times less light would we receive from it? Jitter Removal and Repetition


Astrometric precision per exposure
Astrometric Precision Per Exposure times less light would we receive from it?


And so the stars were put in their proper place
And so the Stars were Put in their proper place … times less light would we receive from it?

Insert Powers of Ten Movie Here.


ad