First stars now thought to be 400 MLY after BB?

  • Thread starter Chaos' lil bro Order
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Stars
In summary: During inflation, space expanded so quickly that the distance between objects shifted, but the time didn't. So, measuring the light year still reflects the age of the universe at that point in time.A light year is the distance that light travels in a year. The analogous unit of time is just a "year".
  • #1
Chaos' lil bro Order
683
2
excellent websitehttp://www.solstation.com/x-objects/first.htm

According to the site, WMAP's results show that the first stars (Population III) appeared about 400 million LightYears after the BB, instead of the 200 million LightYears previously thought.

I have a question about this...

Was the first star purely Hyrdrogen based? What is known about the composition of the first star(s)?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Chaos' lil bro Order said:
Was the first star purely Hyrdrogen based? What is known about the composition of the first star(s)?

The first stars were composed of the elements generated in primordial nucleosynthesis -- that is, almost entirely hydrogen and helium. There were tiny abundances of lithium and beryllium as well. By mass, the ratio of hydrogen to helium was about 3:1.
 
  • #3
Roger that ST, ty.

Do cosmologists think the first stars were born 200-400 million LYs post BB? Is that the currently accepted view?
 
  • #4
Chaos' lil bro Order said:
Do cosmologists think the first stars were born 200-400 million LYs post BB? Is that the currently accepted view?

That's right, somewhere in that ballpark. Current estimates favor the high end of that range, ~400 million years. Note that light years is a measure of distance, not time.
 
  • #5
SpaceTiger said:
That's right, somewhere in that ballpark. Current estimates favor the high end of that range, ~400 million years. Note that light years is a measure of distance, not time.


Can't LY be a measurement of both, or does this lose meaning during Inflation when space (may?) have expanded superluminally?
 
  • #6
Correct. The universe was much larger [think VERY much larger] than 380,000 light years when it was 380,000 years old due to inflation and expansion. But the redshift does not lie. It still reflects the relative age of the universe at the time the photons we now observe were liberated.
 
  • #7
Chaos' lil bro Order said:
Can't LY be a measurement of both, or does this lose meaning during Inflation when space (may?) have expanded superluminally?

A light year is the distance that light travels in a year. The analogous unit of time is just a "year".
 

1. What is the significance of the first stars being thought to be 400 million light years after the Big Bang?

The first stars, also known as Population III stars, are important because they were responsible for the production of the first heavy elements in the universe. The fact that they are thought to have formed 400 million years after the Big Bang suggests that the universe was able to form and evolve at a much faster rate than previously thought.

2. How do scientists determine the distance of the first stars from the Big Bang?

Scientists use a variety of methods to determine the distance of the first stars from the Big Bang. One common method is to measure the redshift of light emitted by these stars. The farther away a star is, the greater its redshift will be. By measuring the redshift, scientists can calculate the distance of the stars.

3. What evidence supports the theory that the first stars formed 400 million years after the Big Bang?

There are several lines of evidence that support this theory. One is the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is leftover radiation from the Big Bang. By studying this radiation, scientists can determine the age of the universe and estimate when the first stars formed. Additionally, observations of the oldest known galaxies also support the idea that the first stars formed around 400 million years after the Big Bang.

4. How do the first stars differ from stars formed later in the universe?

The first stars were much larger and hotter than stars formed later in the universe. They were also made up of only hydrogen, helium, and trace amounts of lithium, while later stars contained heavier elements. The first stars also had shorter lifespans, as they burned through their fuel at a much faster rate.

5. What impact did the first stars have on the evolution of the universe?

The first stars played a crucial role in shaping the universe as we know it today. They were responsible for the production of heavier elements, which were necessary for the formation of planets, and eventually, life. They also provided the energy and radiation that helped to reionize the universe after the Big Bang, making it possible for light to travel freely and allow for further cosmic evolution.

Similar threads

Dark Age: Galaxy & Quasar Formation ?
    • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
4K
I Some questions about Cosmic Microwave Background radiation
    • Cosmology
Replies
13
Views
2K
New Satellite Data On Universe's First Trillionth Second
    • Cosmology
Replies
2
Views
2K
Is my summary of these subjects correct?
    • Other Physics Topics
Replies
0
Views
734
Cow flatulence and the ozone
    • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
18K
Schools PGRE - A message to undergrads from physics grad school.
    • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
25
Views
7K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 259)
    • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
1
Views
2K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 257)
    • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
5
Views
3K
Seaport 2.5 Miles Above Sea Level(?)
    • Earth Sciences
Replies
10
Views
8K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 258)
    • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
4
Views
9K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top