Last year, it seemed as if the entire planet revolved around Ozzy Osbourne, and now there’s a scientific explanation (if the Oz were a gargantuan exploding ball of hydrogen, that is). Stars rich in iron, nickel, and other metallic elements are more likely to have planets, reported Debra Fischer of the University of California at Berkeley and her colleagues at the International Astronomical Union meeting in Sydney last week. The astronomers compared 754 stars, some with planets, most without, and proved a correlation between the amount of metal in a star and whether or not it formed planets. More metal means more raw material to build planets. “These results tell us why some of the stars in our Milky Way galaxy have planets while others do not. The heavy metals must clump together to form rocks, which themselves clump into the solid cores of planets,” said Geoffrey Marcy, a professor of astronomy at UC Berkeley. Added Fischer, “If you look at the metal-rich stars, 20 percent have planets. That’s stunning.”
-
Recent Posts
Archives
- September 2022
- August 2020
- June 2019
- August 2017
- August 2016
- December 2015
- October 2015
- February 2015
- June 2014
- January 2014
- July 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- August 2012
- January 2012
- August 2011
- January 2011
- August 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- October 2009
- January 2009
- May 2008
- April 2008
- January 2008
- September 2007
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- January 2005
- November 2004
- September 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- November 2002
Categories
Meta