Becky Smethurst took a "boring" Messier Object and came up with thoughtful, fun topics related it. She's always giving us broader picture of astronomy and her field. Thanks for the hard work!
It sounds to me like almost all of the Messier objects are more interesting than M23 in some way; older, younger, higher metallicity, greater mass. Sounds like M23 is pretty unique in its own way, then :)
I'm confused. How does stars burning out reduce how much they are gravitationally bound to each other? It's not like the mass of those stars ceases to exist. It's still going to be in the gravitational system... even if it goes super nova.
Most large stars will die by going supernova. The force from that explosion disperses most of the gas that was contained in the star out of the cluster.
Interesting question, really interesting answer and leaves me as boggled as these things often do when I'm told that a supernova is powerful enough to sling material right out of the system. Proper infinite perspective vortex type stuff!
As far as I know, even smaller stars like the size of the sun give off quite a bit of material as they die, and that's where you get planetary nebulae.
So, you said that the amount and density of the gas would dictate whether an open or globular cluster was formed. I'm wondering, at these scales, does rotation of the gas cloud have a significant impact? Basically what I'm thinking of is a large, dense gas cloud with high rotational speed forming stars. Due to the rotational speed, I would expect it not to form a globular cluster (as I would expect the stars to more or less form in a single plane similar to rotating galaxies) and when viewed from top, I can imagine it would look similar to an open cluster. Is this intuition correct? If not, where does it go wrong and how do we know it is wrong?
If the cloud did not have some rotational movement (or, more exactly, if the components of the cloud did not have some peculiar motion), then the whole clould would collapse into a single object.
From a Blog post of mine 24/05/15 on an APOD of 47 Tucanae" - "The interesting aspect of this is that some of the lighter stars can reach "escape velocity", flying right out of the cluster, and astronomers call this process "Evaporation", a term also applied to the loss of lighter gases from a planet, such as hydrogen and helium from the Earth - some molecules of sufficiently light gases at the top of the atmosphere will exceed the escape velocity of the planet and be lost. I find it an awesome concept, that a similar process to what leads to that dry brown ring in the bottom of a finished coffee, is happening to stars in a cluster, and even to galaxies in a cluster of galaxies." "As above, so below" so to speak :-)
Thank you Dr Becky for a fascinating look at the evolution of open clusters. One thing left me puzzled though. You said that after the large, short lived stars burn out, they no longer contribute to the mass of the cluster. Surely that’s not because they’ve stopped shining, but have lost a significant portion of their mass. What is the mechanism for this? Supernovae? Planetary nebula formation? And does this material leave the star above the escape velocity of the whole cluster?
I had a similar thought, that as the stars “died out” they might inadvertently feed their stellar neighbours. Thus perpetuating the lifespan of the cluster as a whole? Can stellar nurseries be created by many high mass stars going supernova, creating a metal-Rich molecular cloud? Or Would the cluster drift apart long before the stellar remnants could be interacted with by other stars in the area?
Giant stars end their lives as supernovas. Much of their mass is ejected at high speed. For one type of supernova, all of it. It will take thousands of years for this mass to leave the 20 light year cluster, but the time scale here is hundreds of millions of years.
Becky is actually one of the most interesting girls on the whole of RUclips. Only those who are born with the thirst for knowledge and answers will appreciate my comment. I Kinda feel sorry for everybody who is not familiar with Becky and the rest of the Deep sky video crew.
If an object turns out to be "boring", you can also talk about things like "Who was Charles Messier?" and how cool these things look in small telescopes.
Don't know whether this has been done here, so please forgive me if it has... but I don't see that "interactions with other objects" are necessary, because if you have a cluster that is "loosely gravitationally bound" surely the tidal effects of orbiting the galaxy will inevitably "smear" the (former) cluster out. No?
Energy exchange limit or limit for two point to interact. it is a bit hard to write down this thought for me. if two points have relative speed more then speed of light, they not able to interact. but they can interact through the third point. (exactly like dark matter) (try to imagine world WITH OUT this).
when the massive stars die off, why does this make cluster less gravitationaly bound? i mean the mass is still there just spread out a bit but in the same spot
I think it's really unlikely two stars would just collide. They would probably first form a binary system that could become unstable afterwards and merge.
I'm not sure how accurate it is for all groups but in one video I heard distances between stars are comparable to a basketball in NYC and another in LA.
Don't mix globular clusters with open clusters. They are completely different beasts. We are not sure how globular clusters form. We've never seen one forming. Globular cluster and 1000s of stars? You mean 100 000s of stars, don't you Becky? And, btw, open clusters aren't gravitationally bound (stars in them), that's why they break-up with time... Becky Beck, for a Dr. you say a lot of nonsense.
Dr. Becky: you mention many times the gravitational effects on the formation and evolution of objects. And you give some explanations based of that interaction. But you know that dark matter contributes more than visible matter to the behaviour of some objects. How can you live it outside? Wouldn't it be interesting at least to mention what we know (even if little) about dark matter to explain some parts?
Omg, I've always wondered if clusters and constellations weren't just a thing we created because of our perspective. So they are actually linked? How would our ancestors have known this?
Do galaxy superclusters eventually die by the acceleration of the universe? I know there is a rather large difference in sizes between open clusters and galaxy superclusters, but the answer to the latter one has been avoiding me and this video reminded me of that q I have ...
so the oldest stars in the universe are 1st order stars or 3rd order stars i remember that there organised backwards or counterintuitively!!! huh??? thats weird
Looked it up on Wikipedia - the cluster has an apparent size of 27 arcmins, about the same as the moon (hopefully did not confuse radius vs diameter). It would therefore have appeared as a fuzzy object to Messier - and fuzziness is primarily the criteria he was working on.
That stuff comparing the formation of globular and open clusters has confused me a bit. I thought globular clusters were extremely old, about the same age as the galaxy and formed at about the same time - I assumed by similar a similar process, whatever that may be. But surely not like the formation of open clusters in the recent past from gas and dust that is the product of galactic recycling and itself quite young, whereas the globular clusters must have formed from something primordial, mustn't they? I take the point that if there's a lot of stars there must have been a lot of primordial stuff (hydrogen and helium, I suppose) that ensures they are gravitationally bound - though how it came about that there was a little patch of that stuff all in one place I don't know at all - but differently to how star-forming regions are created within the galaxy, surely?
You shouldn’t run it down. Real people (or the galactic equivalent) live there. It isn’t fair to run down a low population neighborhood. Treat them with respect or they will hold it against us when they have warp drive capability
Hmmmm … M23 is a pretty open cluster in an interesting part of the sky. It’s a shame to portray it as boring. Try viewing it with your own eyes through a telescope. The video too often confounded globular and open clusters (animation for a globular).
![SahBabii - Viking [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D37cL92JX0I/mqdefault.jpg)
Becky Smethurst took a "boring" Messier Object and came up with thoughtful, fun topics related it. She's always giving us broader picture of astronomy and her field. Thanks for the hard work!
I love the animations showing what the cluster actually is in 3D
If you enjoy seeing the stars in 3D you should download space engine, if you have a pc, it's a free simulation of the entire universe.
Appreciate this discussion. Instead of a boring object, there’s an entire story to be told. Well done!
More Becky!
I think that's Dr. Becky to you ;p
Agreed!
(Btw, mooie naam, same as mine. xD)
This was very interesting! I always look forward to these videos!
Love your way of talking about astronomy, professor, and the Messier videos are always very interesting, due to their variety. Keep on recording!
Beautiful entropy at 3:23
Interesting, easy to listen to and very pleasing to the eye.
Yes more Becky! I love her, she's amazing!
M23 looks very handsome in my 20×80 binocular.. Like spilled grains of salt...
MORE BECKY!
M23 a somewhat boring cluster? I found Becky's explanation fascinating. Thanks!
2:50 fewer and fewer stars, not less and less! #thepedantsrevolt
I love these videos, it doesn't have to be a Messier Object... you can talk about any object in the sky, I would watch it.
It sounds to me like almost all of the Messier objects are more interesting than M23 in some way; older, younger, higher metallicity, greater mass. Sounds like M23 is pretty unique in its own way, then :)
I hope you guys keep doing this even when you run out of Messier objects!
The escape velocity doesn't work well on galaxies out on the rim so the same force may hold clusters.
Good star clusters never die, they just fade away...
I love how she says cluster ❤
very interesting.. I had no idea about 'death' of open clusters and appearance of streams
I'm confused. How does stars burning out reduce how much they are gravitationally bound to each other? It's not like the mass of those stars ceases to exist. It's still going to be in the gravitational system... even if it goes super nova.
Most large stars will die by going supernova. The force from that explosion disperses most of the gas that was contained in the star out of the cluster.
Interesting question, really interesting answer and leaves me as boggled as these things often do when I'm told that a supernova is powerful enough to sling material right out of the system. Proper infinite perspective vortex type stuff!
Their mass is also coverted to photons
As far as I know, even smaller stars like the size of the sun give off quite a bit of material as they die, and that's where you get planetary nebulae.
a photon has energy, and thus creates gravity. very little total energy is lost, and thus very little gravitational energy.
Becky is so adorably lovely
6:23
@@Nilguiri 3:58
@@JohnJohansen2 7:04
Love Dr. Becky. I could listen to her read the back of a Soup can.
In this video the Dr. told quite some stuff i did not know yet. Very interesting the stuff about streams
You now have an audiobook! :D
So, you said that the amount and density of the gas would dictate whether an open or globular cluster was formed. I'm wondering, at these scales, does rotation of the gas cloud have a significant impact? Basically what I'm thinking of is a large, dense gas cloud with high rotational speed forming stars. Due to the rotational speed, I would expect it not to form a globular cluster (as I would expect the stars to more or less form in a single plane similar to rotating galaxies) and when viewed from top, I can imagine it would look similar to an open cluster. Is this intuition correct? If not, where does it go wrong and how do we know it is wrong?
If the cloud did not have some rotational movement (or, more exactly, if the components of the cloud did not have some peculiar motion), then the whole clould would collapse into a single object.
From a Blog post of mine 24/05/15 on an APOD of 47 Tucanae" - "The interesting aspect of this is that some of the lighter stars can reach "escape velocity", flying right out of the cluster, and astronomers call this process "Evaporation", a term also applied to the loss of lighter gases from a planet, such as hydrogen and helium from the Earth - some molecules of sufficiently light gases at the top of the atmosphere will exceed the escape velocity of the planet and be lost.
I find it an awesome concept, that a similar process to what leads to that dry brown ring in the bottom of a finished coffee, is happening to stars in a cluster, and even to galaxies in a cluster of galaxies."
"As above, so below" so to speak :-)
I'm hypnotized by your intelligence and your eyes
Thank you Dr Becky for a fascinating look at the evolution of open clusters. One thing left me puzzled though. You said that after the large, short lived stars burn out, they no longer contribute to the mass of the cluster. Surely that’s not because they’ve stopped shining, but have lost a significant portion of their mass. What is the mechanism for this? Supernovae? Planetary nebula formation? And does this material leave the star above the escape velocity of the whole cluster?
I had a similar thought, that as the stars “died out” they might inadvertently feed their stellar neighbours. Thus perpetuating the lifespan of the cluster as a whole? Can stellar nurseries be created by many high mass stars going supernova, creating a metal-Rich molecular cloud? Or Would the cluster drift apart long before the stellar remnants could be interacted with by other stars in the area?
Giant stars end their lives as supernovas. Much of their mass is ejected at high speed. For one type of supernova, all of it. It will take thousands of years for this mass to leave the 20 light year cluster, but the time scale here is hundreds of millions of years.
Becky is actually one of the most interesting girls on the whole of RUclips.
Only those who are born with the thirst for knowledge and answers will appreciate my comment.
I Kinda feel sorry for everybody who is not familiar with Becky and the rest of the Deep sky video crew.
If an object turns out to be "boring", you can also talk about things like "Who was Charles Messier?" and how cool these things look in small telescopes.
Thank you, always a pleasure to watch
Don't know whether this has been done here, so please forgive me if it has... but I don't see that "interactions with other objects" are necessary, because if you have a cluster that is "loosely gravitationally bound" surely the tidal effects of orbiting the galaxy will inevitably "smear" the (former) cluster out. No?
What can you tell us about the Bootes Void?
Energy exchange limit or limit for two point to interact.
it is a bit hard to write down this thought for me.
if two points have relative speed more then speed of light, they not able to interact.
but they can interact through the third point. (exactly like dark matter)
(try to imagine world WITH OUT this).
5:40 The Seahorse Strem
when the massive stars die off, why does this make cluster less gravitationaly bound? i mean the mass is still there just spread out a bit but in the same spot
Lol great ending audio clip.
I think that was from the ring galaxy episode or whatever it was called. Quite a fun one.
Do stars in clusters ever collide? Their orbits seems to be quite chaotic. I guess distances between stars are huge, even in clusters.
I think it's really unlikely two stars would just collide. They would probably first form a binary system that could become unstable afterwards and merge.
I'm not sure how accurate it is for all groups but in one video I heard distances between stars are comparable to a basketball in NYC and another in LA.
So galaxies can have rings! That was a question I had a long time ago
Don't worry there are plenty of NGC objects to get through!
Don't mix globular clusters with open clusters. They are completely different beasts. We are not sure how globular clusters form. We've never seen one forming. Globular cluster and 1000s of stars? You mean 100 000s of stars, don't you Becky? And, btw, open clusters aren't gravitationally bound (stars in them), that's why they break-up with time... Becky Beck, for a Dr. you say a lot of nonsense.
the comment section is about Dr.becky and less about the star cluster
escape velocity means the velocity you need to escape. so smart.
well, still got 7 mins out of it! :)
Ooooo here's another interesting question: how many stars do you need to to classify as an open cluster? (Regardless of gas composition)
3?
42?
Dr. Becky: you mention many times the gravitational effects on the formation and evolution of objects. And you give some explanations based of that interaction. But you know that dark matter contributes more than visible matter to the behaviour of some objects. How can you live it outside? Wouldn't it be interesting at least to mention what we know (even if little) about dark matter to explain some parts?
❤️❤️❤️Becky❤️❤️❤️
I am assuming that the cluster is recognizable in the night sky to be classified as M23.
Omg, I've always wondered if clusters and constellations weren't just a thing we created because of our perspective. So they are actually linked? How would our ancestors have known this?
Brady, maybe you could get Brian May in this channel to talk about his doctorate thesis????
There are not enough videos with Dr. Smethhurst. We need more.
Do galaxy superclusters eventually die by the acceleration of the universe? I know there is a rather large difference in sizes between open clusters and galaxy superclusters, but the answer to the latter one has been avoiding me and this video reminded me of that q I have ...
The forces between the components of the clusters should be strong enough to counter the expansion of the universe.
Nobody can remove clusters but everybody can clean clusters in house. That is die clusters.
so the oldest stars in the universe are 1st order stars or 3rd order stars i remember that there organised backwards or counterintuitively!!!
huh??? thats weird
How did the 18th Century Charles Messier categorise this as one of his objects if the stars as so disperse?
Looked it up on Wikipedia - the cluster has an apparent size of 27 arcmins, about the same as the moon (hopefully did not confuse radius vs diameter). It would therefore have appeared as a fuzzy object to Messier - and fuzziness is primarily the criteria he was working on.
That stuff comparing the formation of globular and open clusters has confused me a bit. I thought globular clusters were extremely old, about the same age as the galaxy and formed at about the same time - I assumed by similar a similar process, whatever that may be. But surely not like the formation of open clusters in the recent past from gas and dust that is the product of galactic recycling and itself quite young, whereas the globular clusters must have formed from something primordial, mustn't they? I take the point that if there's a lot of stars there must have been a lot of primordial stuff (hydrogen and helium, I suppose) that ensures they are gravitationally bound - though how it came about that there was a little patch of that stuff all in one place I don't know at all - but differently to how star-forming regions are created within the galaxy, surely?
A sad cluster, still curious.
Yess
I have to talk about about boring open cluster, what needs to be done to kill it :D
I have a serious crush on Dr Becky.
M23 - Yuh basic!
I got such a crush on Becky :P
We all do.
Welcome to the club pal
@@TheManInRoomFivefalse.
It's more pants than the pants cluster (M29)!
Do stars collide?
Jordan Bakos sometimes but its pretty rare
Triffid is spelled wrong.
Becky is perfect!
You shouldn’t run it down. Real people (or the galactic equivalent) live there. It isn’t fair to run down a low population neighborhood. Treat them with respect or they will hold it against us when they have warp drive capability
Bye bye 20s!
😊jamaican reggae
Thumbs up for Becky
Hmmmm … M23 is a pretty open cluster in an interesting part of the sky. It’s a shame to portray it as boring. Try viewing it with your own eyes through a telescope. The video too often confounded globular and open clusters (animation for a globular).
my favorite science broad of them all.... thanx for talking like a normal human ..
The CUTEST Dr I have ever seen is Dr Smethurst...
It’s called a cluster, but I’ll assume they are all trillions of km apart ?
150 stars in a cluster that is 20 light years wide... yeah, I'd say they're far apart!
CFB..
Yo
Alien reggae are looking scory jamaican
Wow! Is she cute... and smart!
M-94 please. Strange galaxy. Too little dark matter present.
:D
Hey Becky
You're so fine
You're so fine you blow my mind
Hey Becky
Marry me and teach me about astronomy every day. :)
Alright mate, calm down.
That's creepy.
twas what I was going for. 1 percent of the time, it works every time.
IS (america) owner of THE EARTH- THE OTHER PLANET,S AND THESKY
I have such a hard time concentrating on what she's saying.
Hands down, the most beautiful astrophysicist to ever live.
Alright, calm down mate.
escape velocity means the velocity you need to escape. so smart.