|
"We've just started," Prochaska said. "I expect even today, in our current universe, there should be regions that are completely unpolluted" because of the vast expanse of so-called empty space between galaxies, he added. "Galaxies and stars really don't fill up much of the volume of the universe. We're rare," he said. "Our Milky Way is an island, if you will, in the vast expanse of the universe, so there's plenty of volume in the universe which is far, far away from galaxies." The study that concluded the first stars were not nearly as big as envisioned was conducted by a Japanese-U.S. team led by Takashi Hosokawa of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., and Kyoto University. University of Texas astronomer Volker Bromm, who was not involved in either study, said the separate results may well tie together. The smaller the early stars, the smaller the explosions, Bromm noted, and the less capability for dispersing heavy elements
-- i.e. metals -- into the universe via end-of-life stellar explosions, or supernovas. His own team at Austin reached similar findings, recently, on the diminished size of early stars. "Ten times the solar mass. Still, by all standards, very massive," Bromm said, "but a little less massive" than initially thought. ___ Online: Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2011 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor