Between you and Dr. Matt from PBS, I am learning so much. Thank you Astrophysicist for loving and learning about space, and then taking that knowledge and sharing with it all of us.
Absolutely great! I'm writing my BS.c. final project in physics about star formation and this video immensely helped me get a grasp of what to focus on and what are the major phases of a star formation. You explain it so eloquently and calmly and it really is a joy to watch. Thank you so much!
I’m in middle school and I’ve got to write an explanatory piece of writing and I’m really confused I don’t know if you check this @Julian Rubinstein but can you help?
I agree, Mr Launch Pad is extremely STELLAR! Love the pics & how he describes star formation! I’m gonna go now an binge on his vids. Keep lookin up ever one. U 2 Ruthie the Magma Cube!
Look up Jeans' instability, it's the basis for this kind of reasoning. Basic idea: if a certain clump within gas is dense enough, the sound speed throughout (i.e. how pressure waves propagate and communicate with the whole clump) is not sufficiently high when compared to the gravitational free-fall time (time it would take the clump to collapse if there was no pressure). For high enough density in a clump, the pressure simply isn't high enough to support the clump from further collapse. This can be derived by comparing the time it takes for sound to traverse a spherical clump and the free fall time, and a quantity called Jeans mass can be derived.
He didn't say "something happens" because it's unknown. He's saying it because it can be many things that trigger it, but whatever that event may be, it is gravity that results in the clumps forming. Perhaps other celestial events caused the matter to move closer and now gravity can do its job. Any number of things can affect those particles that move them closer.
I have to describe how a star is formed for my explanation writing I’m in intermediate and this is quite confusing could you recommend some videos or sites that explain it more simply?
This sounds reasonable, but I am stuck on how the gas clouds are able to clump together. Gravity seems to be too weak of a force and in space, gas clouds would more likely disperse, right? (Think of a shockwave going through a cloud of smoke.)
I'm no scientist or expert. But the way I understand it is that since there is no atmospheric pressure to scatter the gas, or wind, even very small gravitational forces can attract each other. There will also be spots of higher concentrations of molecules, which means a stronger local gravitation field.
At the big bang it was hot enough for some of the subatomic particles to come together to form hydrogen. Along w helium & lithium these were the only elements created at the big bang. The rest of the elements all came from stars performing nuclear fusion.
I have another question and really want to get the answer During Big Bang what actually came out of the black hole?? I mean only energy in form of light or mass also????
If I'm correct, there is tendency for most celestial bodies to rotate in one direction. This contradicts some of the thesis you've presented today. Please explain?
One might think if a critical mass is req'd to form a star then all stars would be the same size & mass. I wonder why they aren't? Amount of angular momentum perhaps?
Stars don't stop absorbing mass once they become stars. Some stars gain large amounts of mass and go on to become "heavier" stars in stellar evolution. Others remain small and never amount to much of anything. There's a floor here, but no ceiling.
I always wonder how gravity can overcome pressure. Gravity is a weak force. It is way weaker than the repulsive force between hydrogen molecules. If you put hydrogen molecules in space, they will scatter as far as they can get. The formation of stars is a mystery.
@@LaunchPadAstronomy Hii I got a doubt which I am unable to understand, 1) What is the necessity of deconvolution? (like whats the physics behind it, why do we do it) 2) What is primary beam correction ?
At the big bang it was hot enough to create hydrogen & helium & a small amount of lithium. Gravity & the existence of hydrogen ( gravity compressing hydrogen into clumps) is a molecular cloud.
@Debmalya Dey which means the gas would never “pressurize” in the first place. It would simply follow its nature and expand into massively distant individual particles.
So it’s due to jeans instability. Where the G gravity, overwhelms the P pressure coming from the cloud. As this happens it goes into something known as cloud fragmentation, where the fragments follow the same process and collapse in on themselves. At this stage the cloud must be optically thin, as it’s cooling radiation. As it gets denser the cloud gets thicker and thus the radiation gets trapped increasing the temperature. This helps stabilises it into a protostar.
One thing to remember is that star’s don’t follow the ideal gas laws thus they don’t have normal gas pressures. Electron degeneracy pressure, and increases with density, rather then temperature.
The formation in the cloud is flawed. How could a cloud of gas fall in on itself in a vacuum. There is some other motor at work in the formation model in my opinion.
Remember that this gas, as all things are, is gravitationally bound. This gravity balances with pressure and motion, but if the cloud is disturbed, and made dense enough for gravity to overcome pressure, the cloud begins to collapse.
Waaaaiiiit! Are you kidding? Is this a joke? The sheer number of assumptions just brushed over by a few words is astounding. What causes rapidly outward expanding gas in a vacuum to contract??? It doesn’t do that. (Never mind the initial assumptions that all there was was hydrogen and helium. And “something exploded” whatever that was and wherever that came from but, let’s assume that actually happened) pop a helium balloon in space and the expanding gas will dissipate into individual particles pushed away by the very nature of gas. Increasing the size of the balloon makes no difference to the effect. The gas is going to expand and dissipate, not contract in on itself. Gravity isn’t a magical wand you can wave over everything and magically overcome the laws of physics. You say “gravity “ like it’s some holy invocation and we’re supposed to bow down in awe of its power. No. Gravity is simply a force of nature that follows certain laws; namely mass is required. Where’s the mass, the “kick” causing gases to contract against their very nature? But wait, just a kick, whatever that may be, isn’t going to do anything but move some gas around, so it’s going to need multiple kicks in some kind of circular formation (yeah right) and even those would only serve to push gas around but, sure, why not? We’ve assumed this much so far. Now multiple that magic mass or “kick” by the number of stars in the known universe (estimated because there are too many to count) and admit you really have nothing but assumptions to work with. It makes no sense. But the “priesthood “ says it is so and therefore, I must believe it. Well, I don’t have that kind of faith.
I have read your comment a coupla' times and since you haven't brought anything new to the topic i am curious what your point is? I think you are either saying, A) Astrophysicists still know nothing, or B) It was all done by God.
@@Brucebod This was pushed on the unsuspecting as "fact". It's not. That's the point. I'd love to hear, "Hey, we're not sure how that many stars formed in such a relatively short amount of time. It's a conundrum we're still working on." At least that's honest. The fact of the matter is, if we didn't see the stars, we'd say they couldn't exist; especially as many as we can see in the known universe. (It's 3rd grade math; to have this many stars in a 15 billion year time span they would have had to be popping off like some maniacal nuclear popcorn machine. We're still staring at vast clouds of gas and dust waiting for them to contract and form into stars-- it doesn't happen when we can see the gas/dust clouds. Neither the math or the physics adds up.) But no, they pass of these half-assed (being generous there) theories as fact. So, yes, Astrophysicist still know very very little about what actually happened in the early universe although they talk as though they do. 2. Maybe God did it; maybe he didn't but at least I can accept the truth no matter where it leads. A naturalist cannot-- it must be a "natural" cause or nothing; no other choice is even allowed into the equation no matter how logical it may be. So, in the end, it's either eternal matter (an impossibility for a number of reasons) or Mind outside of space, time, matter that caused the universe to come into being. Once the idea of an eternal past is shown to be impossible and just plain wrong; like it or not, you are forced into a marriage of the natural (time, space, matter) and the "supra-natural" (something outside of time, space, and matter that was the initial "cause" which itself must be un-caused because an infinite past regression is an impossibility.) I would refer you to the works of William Lane Craig or Hugh Ross for a much much deeper analysis of the implications of what the "beginning" of the universe are. Once you shed this idea that everything must have a "natural" (although I would argue with that definition: why isn't mind "natural"? Why can't Mind be a part of the equation? Who announced that it couldn't? Why should I accept their decree?) once this idea that everything must fit into what they call the "natural" box is shed... the horizons and, quite frankly, the interest open up like never before. It's an astounding universe, an that, at least, we can agree... I would argue that my being open to "Mind" as a causative force brings the universe into the realm of the poet as well.
There are estimated to be 10 to the 24th power stars in the known universe. Divide that down by the number of hours in 15 billion years and you would need to be getting about 1,826,484,018,264 (trillion) stars an hour. Or 30.4 billion stars forming a second. No one in their right mind would say that is possible. But, that MUST have happened "naturally"... well, because... there they are and nothing outside of the "natural" is allowed. Well, I certainly don't have that kind of faith. Any chance of some other explanation outside of the accepted box?
@@craigfitzgerald772 Wow, those numbers are astounding! Thank you for replying, i feel i understand what you are saying much better now. And i agree with quite a lot of it - some i did not understand as i am not very well educated, but thank you also for the references, i will check them out. (When i see a number like 10 to the 24th it is easy for me to forget how truly big that number is, thank you for adding that part in, it really adds the Mind to mind-boggling. :) See what i did there? ;) )
@@craigfitzgerald772 I can understand the 30.4 billion stars a second. But your not saying fully formed stars, and your not saying just in this area, which would be impossible, or is it? In those clouds, you cant see every star that is being formed every second. Impossible. Just because we get a glimpse of one starting, doesnt mean there isnt another billion stars forming in that region. Now, if lets say we know about thousands of other regions spread across the universe, this actually becomes extremly plausable. These regions are massive. Unfortunately i dont have an answer for the rest. If the universe is expanding in every ditection, then your momentum is in fact acting in these regions as well, let it be gravity, magnetism or whatever. Its just gases, something, not knowing what is causjng it to collapse. Id say a lot lkke clouds spewing rain. They can only hold so much according to nature before releasing. I would suspect these star forming regions would be much the same way. How many stars failed in these regions causing a disturbance, shock waves causing more gases to collapse. Basically, its a never ending chain.
I don’t understand what you are on about. Yes, it does form clumps. They may be called little, but that is relative to the cloud. These clumps are large enough to collapse into stars or even star systems.
Stop speaking like your theories are facts or truth. There has never been an observed formation of not one star. And in order for the amount of stars in the observable universe to Have “ formed” to exist, a thousand stars an hour would have to form over a million years. And we have not seen one. ! Yet we see stars dying regularly. Hummmm?
Just a couple of examples of stars going through formation are MWC 349, VLA 1623, L1014, and GCIRS 8*. Some protostars include V1647 Orionis, HOPS 383, and IRS2. We can also observe many young star clusters, along with nebulae and bok globules that are in the process of forming stars.
@@MichaelAChristian1 a better analogy for stars is a landslide. you start with a lot of material that’s in position, and when a disturbance comes, it all falls down (ie. formation of a star) releasing a bunch of energy
Between you and Dr. Matt from PBS, I am learning so much. Thank you Astrophysicist for loving and learning about space, and then taking that knowledge and sharing with it all of us.
Absolutely great! I'm writing my BS.c. final project in physics about star formation and this video immensely helped me get a grasp of what to focus on and what are the major phases of a star formation. You explain it so eloquently and calmly and it really is a joy to watch. Thank you so much!
I’m in middle school and I’ve got to write an explanatory piece of writing and I’m really confused I don’t know if you check this @Julian Rubinstein but can you help?
It’s about how stars are boen
You can tell you really love what you do and I really enjoy binge watching your videos :)
Very helpful, thank you. This video deserves more views!
My pleasure, and thanks for watching!
I agree, Mr Launch Pad is extremely STELLAR! Love the pics & how he describes star formation! I’m gonna go now an binge on his vids. Keep lookin up ever one. U 2 Ruthie the Magma Cube!
Thanks Dennis!
I have just discovered your channel. So happy. Thank you for putting this all together, I have long wondered about the origins of stars ✨.
My pleasure and thanks for joining me for the ride!
It was really very informative. You need more views and subscribers
What determines the direction of the poles and the plane accretion disk?
Hi, I have a question. Why do dense clumps have a gravitational force stronger than the outward radiation pressure ?
Look up Jeans' instability, it's the basis for this kind of reasoning. Basic idea: if a certain clump within gas is dense enough, the sound speed throughout (i.e. how pressure waves propagate and communicate with the whole clump) is not sufficiently high when compared to the gravitational free-fall time (time it would take the clump to collapse if there was no pressure).
For high enough density in a clump, the pressure simply isn't high enough to support the clump from further collapse. This can be derived by comparing the time it takes for sound to traverse a spherical clump and the free fall time, and a quantity called Jeans mass can be derived.
Great video I love it I hope more people will get to know about this channel
That time-lapse of HH47 is so cool!!
Really nice overview of star formation! Thank you for making this.
2:31 somthing happens, something makes the dust and gas to form clumps. What's that, that's the whole question.
He didn't say "something happens" because it's unknown. He's saying it because it can be many things that trigger it, but whatever that event may be, it is gravity that results in the clumps forming. Perhaps other celestial events caused the matter to move closer and now gravity can do its job. Any number of things can affect those particles that move them closer.
I have to describe how a star is formed for my explanation writing I’m in intermediate and this is quite confusing could you recommend some videos or sites that explain it more simply?
@Launch Pad Astronomy
You can use igcse physics notes instead if this is too difficult
This sounds reasonable, but I am stuck on how the gas clouds are able to clump together. Gravity seems to be too weak of a force and in space, gas clouds would more likely disperse, right? (Think of a shockwave going through a cloud of smoke.)
I'm no scientist or expert. But the way I understand it is that since there is no atmospheric pressure to scatter the gas, or wind, even very small gravitational forces can attract each other. There will also be spots of higher concentrations of molecules, which means a stronger local gravitation field.
initial differences in density gave rise to gravitational forces and caused matter to get drawn together
Where the gas comes from?
It is theorized hydrogen started with the Big Bang and that hydrogen through gravity fused to helium later fusing to other heavy elements over time
At the big bang it was hot enough for some of the subatomic particles to come together to form hydrogen. Along w helium & lithium these were the only elements created at the big bang. The rest of the elements all came from stars performing nuclear fusion.
can you model the "snowball effect"? as spherical radius vrs time? what does that equation look like?
Love your videos
What a great story!
I have another question and really want to get the answer
During Big Bang what actually came out of the black hole?? I mean only energy in form of light or mass also????
Very helpful. I am preparing for International space Olympiad with ur help😁
Same😂
@@anveshithsadala9371 Which country??
@@nikitabhagat5716 India
@@anveshithsadala9371 same!!
Do you still have those reference books?
Realy I like this video so much its interestyng
This channel is the best
If I'm correct, there is tendency for most celestial bodies to rotate in one direction. This contradicts some of the thesis you've presented today. Please explain?
but the star formed first and material was ejected first in the form of a plane/disc before solar wind filled all directions
I LOVE Stars❤❤ ty
One might think if a critical mass is req'd to form a star then all stars would be the same size & mass. I wonder why they aren't?
Amount of angular momentum perhaps?
Stars don't stop absorbing mass once they become stars. Some stars gain large amounts of mass and go on to become "heavier" stars in stellar evolution. Others remain small and never amount to much of anything. There's a floor here, but no ceiling.
Wish i had chosen this as a career path :(
I always wonder how gravity can overcome pressure. Gravity is a weak force. It is way weaker than the repulsive force between hydrogen molecules. If you put hydrogen molecules in space, they will scatter as far as they can get. The formation of stars is a mystery.
are you studying astronomy?
My whole life, kid.
@@LaunchPadAstronomy oh thats so great i just started my studies in astronomy. May be I can ask you doubts in your channel sometime
Anytime!
Launch Pad Astronomy thanks
@@LaunchPadAstronomy Hii I got a doubt which I am unable to understand,
1) What is the necessity of deconvolution? (like whats the physics behind it, why do we do it)
2) What is primary beam correction ?
That theory of a cloud of gas collapsing and forming stars violates every law of thermodynamics.
Explain how.
The hydrogen sulfide gas in my butt starts collapsing to form a prototurd
Ok, but we have a little problem:
What is the origin of the molecular cloud? tertiary
At the big bang it was hot enough to create hydrogen & helium & a small amount of lithium. Gravity & the existence of hydrogen ( gravity compressing hydrogen into clumps) is a molecular cloud.
Has a star actually been observed to form?
Of course not
Doesn't Boyles law contradict this theory of star formation?
It's not a closed system to begin with so i guess it isn't applicable.
@Debmalya Dey which means the gas would never “pressurize” in the first place. It would simply follow its nature and expand into massively distant individual particles.
So it’s due to jeans instability. Where the G gravity, overwhelms the P pressure coming from the cloud. As this happens it goes into something known as cloud fragmentation, where the fragments follow the same process and collapse in on themselves. At this stage the cloud must be optically thin, as it’s cooling radiation. As it gets denser the cloud gets thicker and thus the radiation gets trapped increasing the temperature. This helps stabilises it into a protostar.
One thing to remember is that star’s don’t follow the ideal gas laws thus they don’t have normal gas pressures.
Electron degeneracy pressure, and increases with density, rather then temperature.
By the way nice video
Why is it rotating? No Comment? Disappointed.
Hi, everything in the Universe is rotating relative to something else. Cheers.
Is this just me or the video that the volume is too low? I can barely hear it even at the max volume lvl.
Anyways, great video!
Happens sometimes, try using a headphone. That's what i do LOL
What is the "something" that happens to cause the gas to clump together why does it stay as a cloud then start to clump.. gravity yes but why..
This is mentioned later in the video. It could be a supernova, a collision, stellar winds, etc.
The formation in the cloud is flawed. How could a cloud of gas fall in on itself in a vacuum. There is some other motor at work in the formation model in my opinion.
Clouds of hydrogen are compressed by gravity. Gravity works in a vacuum.
Gravity
Remember that this gas, as all things are, is gravitationally bound. This gravity balances with pressure and motion, but if the cloud is disturbed, and made dense enough for gravity to overcome pressure, the cloud begins to collapse.
Basically, if a region of gas is more dense than its neighbors, gas will start to collapse on that region, that is, if the region is dense enough.
I'll believe it when someone actually witnesses a new star
someone's been watching Kent Hovind lol
Long wait
Please give me star Formation?
“Lilerally”💀
👍
Not buying it. “Somehow” this happens, and “somehow” we “think” this happens.
This is full of speculation, not a schred of 'real' evidence
oi moda
Waaaaiiiit! Are you kidding? Is this a joke? The sheer number of assumptions just brushed over by a few words is astounding. What causes rapidly outward expanding gas in a vacuum to contract??? It doesn’t do that. (Never mind the initial assumptions that all there was was hydrogen and helium. And “something exploded” whatever that was and wherever that came from but, let’s assume that actually happened) pop a helium balloon in space and the expanding gas will dissipate into individual particles pushed away by the very nature of gas. Increasing the size of the balloon makes no difference to the effect. The gas is going to expand and dissipate, not contract in on itself. Gravity isn’t a magical wand you can wave over everything and magically overcome the laws of physics. You say “gravity “ like it’s some holy invocation and we’re supposed to bow down in awe of its power. No. Gravity is simply a force of nature that follows certain laws; namely mass is required. Where’s the mass, the “kick” causing gases to contract against their very nature? But wait, just a kick, whatever that may be, isn’t going to do anything but move some gas around, so it’s going to need multiple kicks in some kind of circular formation (yeah right) and even those would only serve to push gas around but, sure, why not? We’ve assumed this much so far. Now multiple that magic mass or “kick” by the number of stars in the known universe (estimated because there are too many to count) and admit you really have nothing but assumptions to work with. It makes no sense. But the “priesthood “ says it is so and therefore, I must believe it. Well, I don’t have that kind of faith.
I have read your comment a coupla' times and since you haven't brought anything new to the topic i am curious what your point is? I think you are either saying, A) Astrophysicists still know nothing, or B) It was all done by God.
@@Brucebod This was pushed on the unsuspecting as "fact". It's not. That's the point. I'd love to hear, "Hey, we're not sure how that many stars formed in such a relatively short amount of time. It's a conundrum we're still working on." At least that's honest. The fact of the matter is, if we didn't see the stars, we'd say they couldn't exist; especially as many as we can see in the known universe. (It's 3rd grade math; to have this many stars in a 15 billion year time span they would have had to be popping off like some maniacal nuclear popcorn machine. We're still staring at vast clouds of gas and dust waiting for them to contract and form into stars-- it doesn't happen when we can see the gas/dust clouds. Neither the math or the physics adds up.) But no, they pass of these half-assed (being generous there) theories as fact. So, yes, Astrophysicist still know very very little about what actually happened in the early universe although they talk as though they do. 2. Maybe God did it; maybe he didn't but at least I can accept the truth no matter where it leads. A naturalist cannot-- it must be a "natural" cause or nothing; no other choice is even allowed into the equation no matter how logical it may be. So, in the end, it's either eternal matter (an impossibility for a number of reasons) or Mind outside of space, time, matter that caused the universe to come into being. Once the idea of an eternal past is shown to be impossible and just plain wrong; like it or not, you are forced into a marriage of the natural (time, space, matter) and the "supra-natural" (something outside of time, space, and matter that was the initial "cause" which itself must be un-caused because an infinite past regression is an impossibility.) I would refer you to the works of William Lane Craig or Hugh Ross for a much much deeper analysis of the implications of what the "beginning" of the universe are. Once you shed this idea that everything must have a "natural" (although I would argue with that definition: why isn't mind "natural"? Why can't Mind be a part of the equation? Who announced that it couldn't? Why should I accept their decree?) once this idea that everything must fit into what they call the "natural" box is shed... the horizons and, quite frankly, the interest open up like never before. It's an astounding universe, an that, at least, we can agree... I would argue that my being open to "Mind" as a causative force brings the universe into the realm of the poet as well.
There are estimated to be 10 to the 24th power stars in the known universe. Divide that down by the number of hours in 15 billion years and you would need to be getting about 1,826,484,018,264 (trillion) stars an hour. Or 30.4 billion stars forming a second. No one in their right mind would say that is possible. But, that MUST have happened "naturally"... well, because... there they are and nothing outside of the "natural" is allowed. Well, I certainly don't have that kind of faith. Any chance of some other explanation outside of the accepted box?
@@craigfitzgerald772 Wow, those numbers are astounding! Thank you for replying, i feel i understand what you are saying much better now. And i agree with quite a lot of it - some i did not understand as i am not very well educated, but thank you also for the references, i will check them out.
(When i see a number like 10 to the 24th it is easy for me to forget how truly big that number is, thank you for adding that part in, it really adds the Mind to mind-boggling. :) See what i did there? ;) )
@@craigfitzgerald772 I can understand the 30.4 billion stars a second. But your not saying fully formed stars, and your not saying just in this area, which would be impossible, or is it? In those clouds, you cant see every star that is being formed every second. Impossible. Just because we get a glimpse of one starting, doesnt mean there isnt another billion stars forming in that region. Now, if lets say we know about thousands of other regions spread across the universe, this actually becomes extremly plausable. These regions are massive. Unfortunately i dont have an answer for the rest. If the universe is expanding in every ditection, then your momentum is in fact acting in these regions as well, let it be gravity, magnetism or whatever. Its just gases, something, not knowing what is causjng it to collapse. Id say a lot lkke clouds spewing rain. They can only hold so much according to nature before releasing. I would suspect these star forming regions would be much the same way. How many stars failed in these regions causing a disturbance, shock waves causing more gases to collapse. Basically, its a never ending chain.
Formation of little clumps, really? That is the explanation? I think little clumps are the synonym of - we don't know. This is pure nonsense
I don’t understand what you are on about. Yes, it does form clumps. They may be called little, but that is relative to the cloud. These clumps are large enough to collapse into stars or even star systems.
Stop speaking like your theories are facts or truth. There has never been an observed formation of not one star.
And in order for the amount of stars in the observable universe to Have “ formed” to exist, a thousand stars an hour would have to form over a million years.
And we have not seen one. !
Yet we see stars dying regularly. Hummmm?
Just a couple of examples of stars going through formation are MWC 349, VLA 1623, L1014, and GCIRS 8*. Some protostars include V1647 Orionis, HOPS 383, and IRS2. We can also observe many young star clusters, along with nebulae and bok globules that are in the process of forming stars.
Stars can't form themselves. Call upon the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be SAVED! Read Genesis. Read John. Get a king james bible and believe.
Please provide a scriptural reference for your claim that stars can’t form themselves.
Please provide a (reliable) cited source that suggests that stars can’t form themselves.
Amen
@@_thisnameistaken Put a hot coal in freezing lake. You believe itbstays hot for millions of years until it explodes for no reason.
@@MichaelAChristian1 a better analogy for stars is a landslide. you start with a lot of material that’s in position, and when a disturbance comes, it all falls down (ie. formation of a star) releasing a bunch of energy