271 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
271 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
Episode: 1587
|
||
|
|
Title: HPR1587: Beginner's guide to the night sky 3 - A wee dot on a dark sky
|
||
|
|
Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr1587/hpr1587.mp3
|
||
|
|
Transcribed: 2025-10-18 05:24:06
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This episode of HBR is brought to you by AnanasThost.com.
|
||
|
|
Get 15% discount on all shared hosting with the offer code HBR15.
|
||
|
|
That's HBR15.
|
||
|
|
Better web hosting that's Aniston Fair at AnanasThost.com.
|
||
|
|
Hello and welcome to this third episode in this series especially for Hacker Public Radio HBR.
|
||
|
|
Gold beginner's guide to the night sky with me McNalloo, real name Andrew and this episode
|
||
|
|
episode three is entitled A We Dot on a Dark Sky and there's two things in that title.
|
||
|
|
There's the dark sky bit, it's quite remarkable, certainly it's worth remarking upon that
|
||
|
|
our night sky is dark but that is something for the future.
|
||
|
|
Absolutely cosmology because it's telling us something about whether the universe is infinite or
|
||
|
|
finite, about whether the universe is very full of stars, a high star density, about whether
|
||
|
|
the light from these stars have had enough time to reach us here at the earth.
|
||
|
|
As I say that is interesting but fortunate in a way that we have a dark sky otherwise we
|
||
|
|
wouldn't be able to notice the faint dots of star light.
|
||
|
|
So what we have in our real night sky is a little tiny amount of light from the stars at night
|
||
|
|
other than the sun which we can only see during the day of course by definition and these
|
||
|
|
this feeble amount of light from stars is telling us all we know about them.
|
||
|
|
We didn't learn a huge amount about stars from the sun because there's only one example of
|
||
|
|
the sun and it's a pretty normal star, very close to it but that doesn't help us because there's
|
||
|
|
only one close to one example of a star. And when we look up at the night sky all we get to see
|
||
|
|
of all these other stars at least as far as our eyes are concerned is a little dot of light,
|
||
|
|
a weird dot of light. So how do we know so much about stars? Well let me start with the fact that
|
||
|
|
well we don't just see a little dot of light. Well first of all let's look at the difference
|
||
|
|
between a star and a planet. Now the first most obvious thing about planets is that they are
|
||
|
|
wanderers. That's what they mean, that's what they mean literally from the Greek planet means
|
||
|
|
wanderer and they move position quite rapidly amongst the background of the stars but the patterns
|
||
|
|
of the stars themselves remain fixed. Now simple notions of parallax tell us that things that are
|
||
|
|
closer appear to move more quickly. So a tree that passes your car window where you're driving
|
||
|
|
down the road will appear to move more quickly than a jet fighter traveling in the horizon some miles
|
||
|
|
away even if you're looking at it through the same window. Similarly the planets appear to move
|
||
|
|
much more quickly because they're closer. And the second thing as planet light is that the dots
|
||
|
|
aren't that weak. With the naked eye you should be able to perceive that a star at a given
|
||
|
|
altitude or angle above the horizon will twinkle. Now the lower the better actually the lower the
|
||
|
|
star and the more it twinkles. A planet say Jupiter or Saturn or Mars anyone will do. At the same
|
||
|
|
altitude will twinkle a lot less in fact hardly at all. And the reason is because the dots of a
|
||
|
|
planet is not so weak it's not so small. And in fact with a small telescope in the case of
|
||
|
|
certainly Jupiter but also Mars and Saturn you'll quite easily be able to make out the the
|
||
|
|
fact that the planet has a disk. And that is why the planet doesn't twinkle as much because the
|
||
|
|
star even to the best of our optical telescopes is essentially a dot of light an unresovable dot of
|
||
|
|
light well below the optical diffraction limit of any traditional telescope that we've ever made
|
||
|
|
certainly any that I imagine myself or any listeners here will ever lay their hands upon
|
||
|
|
and amateur capacity. So we're not going to tell enough a lot about stars by looking at their
|
||
|
|
their disks other than the Sun of course. So what else would be good to go on? Well your eye can
|
||
|
|
pick up one other thing about some stars. If you look at Orion which I mentioned in the first
|
||
|
|
episode you'll notice that Rachel which is in the bottom right foot of Orion as you're looking at it
|
||
|
|
is white tissue maybe tinged with blue. I never see the blue with my eyes. Whereas Betelgeuse,
|
||
|
|
a star of compatible magnitude that is about the same right in the store eyes. At the top left
|
||
|
|
shoulder of Orion has quite a distinct orange U-rayed hue to it now. Again depending on your urban
|
||
|
|
environment, your location and your eyes and also whether you've got a fever or not, whether you're
|
||
|
|
drunk or not, your dark adaption and therefore your perception of color may differ.
|
||
|
|
So you may not see these colors quite the way I described them or at all but usually most people see
|
||
|
|
the color of Betelgeuse. For the dimmer stars you can't perceive color at all they're just two
|
||
|
|
dims. It's only the very brightest of stars or if you view stars through binoculars or a telescope
|
||
|
|
that'll allow more light into your eye and therefore give you a better idea of the color.
|
||
|
|
Now the color of a star is simply related to its temperature. It's basic physics actually. You can
|
||
|
|
do the experiment just turn on an electric element and it will start off not glowing. It will be
|
||
|
|
giving you an infrared radiation which you can confirm by holding your hand near it. You can feel
|
||
|
|
something as heating up your hand if you hold it close enough and then as it heats up it should go
|
||
|
|
red and then orange, then yellow and then white. Although if you have an electric element in a
|
||
|
|
cooker or an electric heater that goes white hot I suggest you turn it off quickly and call an
|
||
|
|
electrician. But if you let it keep going eventually it would start to emit off the blue end of
|
||
|
|
this bettrum. Get bluish tinge and be beaming out ultraviolet which of course would give you a nice
|
||
|
|
suntan but you won't get a suntan by looking at a very hot star such as a riddle or even a star
|
||
|
|
tan for that matter. It's obviously just two people. So just with your eyes you can make some
|
||
|
|
determination over the physical property of a star. It's temperature just from its color.
|
||
|
|
And if you want to do better than that then you need to start splitting up the light into the
|
||
|
|
spectrum of its colors. Now the simplest device you can use for such a purpose is called a prism
|
||
|
|
it's the block of glass usually it's of triangular shape and that would do the job rather than
|
||
|
|
likely to produce a spectrum of the light. In astronomy at least in professional astronomy a prism
|
||
|
|
is very rarely used. In fact it's almost never used to produce a spectrum. For two reasons first of all
|
||
|
|
every millimeter that light has to travel through glass or a perspex or any transparent material
|
||
|
|
you'll lose some of that light because no material is perfectly transparent. So you really want to
|
||
|
|
avoid losing light by passing it through a big thick block of glass like a prism. Now you can make
|
||
|
|
a small prism yes and that would reduce the effect but even then there's all kinds of other
|
||
|
|
problems with using prisms. Not least of which is that the mathematics describing the diffractions
|
||
|
|
out of prism is rather complex. So the solution to this is to use something called the diffraction
|
||
|
|
and it works in a different way it uses the interference wave properties of light to cancel
|
||
|
|
light at certain angles leaving you with only if you're viewing light through a diffraction
|
||
|
|
grating for a particular angle you're guaranteed only to see one wavelength of light.
|
||
|
|
So it works quite differently for a prism but it has the same desired effect it will produce a
|
||
|
|
spectrum if you hold a screen on the other side of the diffraction grating so you're at your
|
||
|
|
telescope and one side the diffraction grating and another side you'd have a screen where you can
|
||
|
|
view the spectrum or you replace that with photographic film or in modern equipment of course you'd
|
||
|
|
replace that with some kind of digital camera and you get an ice image of the star spectrum.
|
||
|
|
Another reason that you want to use a diffraction grating quite apart from the light loss problem
|
||
|
|
of a prism is that the mathematics of a diffraction grating is much simpler and in fact you
|
||
|
|
can work out the angle of diffraction, the angle at which you'll find a particular wavelength,
|
||
|
|
the sign of that angle is equal to the wavelength divided by the distance between lines and
|
||
|
|
the diffraction grating which doesn't mean, think of a diffraction grating as a tiny little fence
|
||
|
|
with slits and slats and typically you'll have thousands watts per millimeter to produce the
|
||
|
|
desired effect with light giving you the spectrum and so if you can get down to thousands
|
||
|
|
of lines per millimeter that kind of level or maybe hundreds would do actually thousands
|
||
|
|
of bulletin much but certainly hundreds of lines per millimeter then you'll get your
|
||
|
|
interference effect to produce your spectrum and then you get that simple equation that just said
|
||
|
|
the sign of the angle of diffraction equals the wavelength divided by the distance between slats
|
||
|
|
and the diffraction grating. So from that you can probably guess well if you've got any maths
|
||
|
|
and any feeling for the maths that because the angle is wavelength divided by the distance between
|
||
|
|
slats and the diffraction grating then you want as I was suggesting before it a small
|
||
|
|
gap between the slats and diffraction grating as possible because that'll produce a wide range
|
||
|
|
of angles and indeed that's why you need several hundred lines per millimeter.
|
||
|
|
Anyways I'll a bit be distracted there with diffraction gratings but what you will see if you do
|
||
|
|
that is that a star has a continuous spectrum and indeed you can sort of tell that from our own
|
||
|
|
sun. The sunlight is whitish it's got a yellowish tinge to it cartoon drawings by children often
|
||
|
|
calling the sun in yellow but actually the sun if you think about it is not that yellow I mean if
|
||
|
|
you look at a white wash wall on a sunny day it doesn't look yellow does it? No it looks
|
||
|
|
decently white. So but there is it but it's got a yellowish tinge to it which is why
|
||
|
|
old fashioned tungsten filament light bulbs give us a much more pleasing light than some of the
|
||
|
|
LED or low energy fluorescent equivalent bulbs because essentially you're looking at with a
|
||
|
|
filament bulb you're looking at an object the filament glowing at at the same temperature
|
||
|
|
of the surface of the sun so by physics it produces more or less the same spectrum what in physics
|
||
|
|
you would call a black body spectrum rather confusing because it's not black at all I'm not going
|
||
|
|
to go into the physics of black bodies I already digressed off into diffraction grating so resist
|
||
|
|
that temptation but maybe I'll come back and talk about black bodies and I might even mention it
|
||
|
|
in a show notes because who knows it might put up the number of hits and search engines to the
|
||
|
|
episode anyway so yeah so you get this emission across the spectrum but if you were to look at it
|
||
|
|
carefully you would find that it isn't flat across the whole spectrum white light is emission
|
||
|
|
across the whole spectrum but you'd actually find that sunlight peaks in the green parts of the
|
||
|
|
spectrum not that our eyes can see it because the sun doesn't look green because as I say it's
|
||
|
|
it's really quite broad spectrum but it's slightly higher in the green there's more light
|
||
|
|
emitted in the green than there is say in the red of the blue and that's because the surface of our sun
|
||
|
|
is at a temperature of 5,800 Kelvin now it's probably worth me saying what a Kelvin is
|
||
|
|
it's very simple in one setting it's not like Fahrenheit in degree c a change of one Kelvin
|
||
|
|
is one degree c and the only thing is that the Kelvin scale starts at minus 273 degrees c
|
||
|
|
so if you take a temperature of if I say get caught your temperature of in Kelvin of 5,800 Kelvin
|
||
|
|
you have to subtract 273 from it so ballpark let's say the surface of the sun is 5,500 degrees c
|
||
|
|
now as far as our everyday experience of temperature goes that's just hot 5,500 5,800 you know
|
||
|
|
and isn't that quite important but in everyday intuition that's just basically hot and admits white
|
||
|
|
across the spectrum now I said that the sun spectrum peaks in in the green that that doesn't mean
|
||
|
|
the sun looks green as I said and I don't think it's related to the fact that plants are green
|
||
|
|
because of the chlorophyll in them I don't think that's true I I feel it's just the number of times
|
||
|
|
I've never quite got to the bottom of it but then to be honest I haven't seriously looked
|
||
|
|
and I you know I'll look again and maybe in the next episode I'll tell you what I find but if you
|
||
|
|
know if the fact that what why most plants are green most leaves the green do let me know in
|
||
|
|
the comments to the show anyway another decoration now superimposed upon that continuous spectrum
|
||
|
|
are parts of the spectrum that appear a little bit darker and these are called absorption lines
|
||
|
|
so if you look at a spectrum of the sun you'd see it going as you'd expect a rainbow as a rainbow
|
||
|
|
you go sort of red, blue, green and then off through the blues eventually I'm going to violet color
|
||
|
|
and then those all the colors that you see with the eye and of course one end you've got infrared
|
||
|
|
and no further end you've got ultraviolet but we can't see them anyway on top of this sort of rainbow
|
||
|
|
spectrum you would see these dark lines called absorption lines and these are caused because
|
||
|
|
atoms in the atmosphere of the sun so above that surface of the sun I referred to called
|
||
|
|
the photosphere that's what it's called a bright surface that bright ball that we see that's
|
||
|
|
if you like what we think of as the sun but there's an atmosphere above that called the
|
||
|
|
chromosphere which we can't see except junior eclipses and in that there's some actually cooler
|
||
|
|
gas and in that you'll find atoms and those atoms are stopping some of the light at very
|
||
|
|
particular wavelengths that correspond to energy levels in the atom so again I have to go
|
||
|
|
to wee bit of degradation and to physics here so you've got an atom and let's say it's mainly hydrogen
|
||
|
|
there's other things in there but a hydrogen atom which is what the sun and most stars are made of
|
||
|
|
is a positively charged proton one particle in the middle called the nucleus and around that
|
||
|
|
is a single negatively charged electron now just like you can find planets in the solar system
|
||
|
|
orbiting different distances from the sun electrons in an atom can be found at different
|
||
|
|
distances from the proton so electrons orbiting the atom can be different distances from the proton
|
||
|
|
but since we're now in the realm of the weird and wonderful quantum effects
|
||
|
|
the terms of the electron doesn't really occupy any old orbit it is constrained to be in one of a
|
||
|
|
set of allowable orbits quantum orbits if you like and each of those corresponds to a different
|
||
|
|
energy level and when a light from the sun comes in and the particle of light is called a photon
|
||
|
|
as opposed to a proton which was the positive charge thing in the center of the atom when a photon
|
||
|
|
photon particle of light arrives at the atom if that has just the right amount of energy
|
||
|
|
if it's just the right wavelength it will be able to bump the electron from its current energy
|
||
|
|
level up to a higher one and then that photon will disappear and it won't come to us here at the
|
||
|
|
earth and it won't make it through your direction grating in your telescope etc so you'll get a dark
|
||
|
|
light but only at that wavelength now hydrogen atom has many different energy levels so it can
|
||
|
|
be used a number of lines and these dark lines historically go by the name of fronhofer lines
|
||
|
|
also you will find the lines corresponding to other elements and what's particularly interesting
|
||
|
|
is that the element helium which may be in a balloon near you is named after the sun helium
|
||
|
|
heliose Greek word for the sun because that is where it was discovered it wasn't discovered
|
||
|
|
here in earth it's very rare it doesn't bond with anything so it's helium only unlike hydrogen
|
||
|
|
which is plentiful in water and other places helium can only really be found by itself
|
||
|
|
it's not bond with anything it's no bill it's called a no-bill gas it doesn't react
|
||
|
|
so it was never found here in earth and they noticed the strange pattern of spectral lines
|
||
|
|
these absorption lines in the sun that they'd never seen anywhere else it concluded there must
|
||
|
|
be another element called helium and eventually it was found here in the earth in tiny quantities
|
||
|
|
I then bagged up and sold as balloons but we need to stop doing that otherwise well we might run
|
||
|
|
out of helium for medical purposes again another story so once it was realized that you could
|
||
|
|
associate these spectral lines that you'd find in the spectrum of the sun with light from atoms
|
||
|
|
that you could analyze in the lab so you could take a hydrogen sample in the lab pass them white
|
||
|
|
light through it and create your own absorption lines and match those up with what you saw in the sun
|
||
|
|
and then in the reverse direction helium was discovered in the sun and then we found it here in the
|
||
|
|
earth and a lot of other elements that we know about which is just carbon for instance were identified
|
||
|
|
here in earth in their spectral signature and then we found them in the sun and it turns out
|
||
|
|
that although the light from other stars is relatively feeble it's still possible with the
|
||
|
|
telescope to produce a spectrum and find these spectral lines quite easily even in the feeble
|
||
|
|
list of light from star light was to equipment so very quickly we were able to determine the
|
||
|
|
only what temperature the surface of a star was from as broad spectrum but by hunting for spectral
|
||
|
|
lines these absorption lines in particular we could start to to make measurements of what elements
|
||
|
|
were present in in the stars and what we found is that the sun most stars in fact most of the
|
||
|
|
universe is predominantly hydrogen and a small amount of helium and only a tiny amount of everything
|
||
|
|
else so roughly speaking the universe is about 75% hydrogen 20 something percent helium and then
|
||
|
|
probably generally less than 1% everything else and this varies slightly from star to star Jupiter
|
||
|
|
shows for example the gas giant it shows a similar makeup it does vary from star to star and
|
||
|
|
from different places in the universe if you look at different places you'll find slightly
|
||
|
|
different makeups but it's always around that sort of 75 25 hydrogen helium ratio I should point
|
||
|
|
that that's measured by the mass of the atoms if you're going on counting atoms then that figure
|
||
|
|
is more like 90% 10% because and that's because helium is roughly four times more massive than
|
||
|
|
the hydrogen anyway another degradation so from only a tiny dot of light if you can get that spectrum
|
||
|
|
you can determine awful lot to build the stars and then once you've looked at a number of stars
|
||
|
|
you can start to build up correlations and the first correlation that you can build up is that
|
||
|
|
the surface temperature of a star is correlated with how much light is pouring out of it now the
|
||
|
|
story of how you do that is that you need some number that measures the temperature of a star now
|
||
|
|
it could be the temperature itself but in the olden days you didn't do that you took a B filter a
|
||
|
|
blue filter looked at how bright the star appeared through that through your telescope and then
|
||
|
|
you took a V filter V for visible and looked at how bright your star appeared through that through
|
||
|
|
a telescope and of course if you had a blue star then it would look brighter through the blue filter
|
||
|
|
so you could then take the difference of B minus V the values you got for the brightness of the
|
||
|
|
star and the system used back then was called magnitude where the brightest stars in the sky
|
||
|
|
have a magnitude of zero and the damage that you could see with your naked eye were about six
|
||
|
|
so you could work up the magnitude through the B and the V filter and then the B magnitude minus
|
||
|
|
the V visible magnitude would give you what's called the color index and that would give you a number
|
||
|
|
which actually is very well tied very well closely connected to the temperature of the star
|
||
|
|
surface temperature of the star and you can plot that along with axis and you can draw another
|
||
|
|
axis up the way usually and on that you can plot how bright the star actually is that is
|
||
|
|
removing the effect of the fact that different stars have different distances now for the closest
|
||
|
|
stars you can use the parallax effect which I think I mentioned in the first episode the fact that
|
||
|
|
as the sun sorry as the earth orbits the sun six months apart the earth will be
|
||
|
|
on opposite sides of the sun and a nearby star due to this parallax effect will appear to move
|
||
|
|
back and forth as the earth orbits the sun and you'll see nearby stars moving back and forth
|
||
|
|
and you can measure how far but at the angle by which they move back and forth you know you can
|
||
|
|
with a bit of simple geometry, trigonometry you can calculate the distance the star and by doing
|
||
|
|
that then you can calculate what's called the absolute magnitude of a star an absolute magnitude
|
||
|
|
of the star is how bright it would appear to be if you moved it to a standard distance which is
|
||
|
|
10 parts x which is 32.6 light years I could quote that at you in meters but it's a very large
|
||
|
|
distance indeed it's fast to see one light year is the distance that light travels in a year
|
||
|
|
and light travels 300,000 kilometers every second so it's a very large distance but it's
|
||
|
|
the standard anyway so what you end up with is a scatter plot of values along with horizontal
|
||
|
|
axis which you call the B minus V index which is essentially mentioned the surface temperature
|
||
|
|
of the star and on the vertical axis you can plot them absolute magnitude which is essentially
|
||
|
|
measuring how much light is pouring out the surface of the star and as I said before you find
|
||
|
|
the two are very strongly correlated for more stars and in fact on the famous diagram it's
|
||
|
|
called the heart's broadened rustle diagram what you see is that that red stars tend to be
|
||
|
|
intrinsically rather dimmed what's called low luminosities luminosity is the amount of energy
|
||
|
|
pouring over star per second we actually could measure it in the same units we use for light bulbs
|
||
|
|
so like there's a light bulb next to me it's about 100 watts I think
|
||
|
|
and the sun which I can't see because it's Scotland and it's all cloudy and if it was a light bulb
|
||
|
|
it would be rated at about 4.6 times 10 to the 26 watts and that's 4.6 and then another 23
|
||
|
|
25 0s watts so rather more powerful than a light bulb and anyway I've again done my
|
||
|
|
degradation thing so what you end up with is a correlation you've got red dim that is low
|
||
|
|
luminosity stars and blue bright intrinsically bright high luminosity stars most stars will
|
||
|
|
this a straight line going from red and dim up to blue and luminous and that line is
|
||
|
|
astronomy called the main sequence because you find most stars on that and the sun sits in the middle
|
||
|
|
not particularly hotter cool surface temperature not particularly high luminosity not very low
|
||
|
|
luminosity either neither is it red nor is it blue it's typical I don't say average because
|
||
|
|
more star that average star would be in the red end more stars are small faint and low surface
|
||
|
|
temperature the sun is I would say a typical star does nothing special about what it sits
|
||
|
|
in the diagram and you see other stars you see these strange luminous
|
||
|
|
but red things and they're called red giants and you might sometimes pick up these rather
|
||
|
|
odd little times called white dwarfs which are surprisingly high temperature but very very dim
|
||
|
|
and so it's not quite as simple as just a simple main sequence there are other things going on in
|
||
|
|
this in this plot compared to brown russell diagram and I'll provide a link to one in the show
|
||
|
|
nodes so I think what I'll do is I'll bring this episode to a close here because I think I've
|
||
|
|
actually packed quite a lot in rather more than I intend to if it was too much please let me know
|
||
|
|
if there are things you feel like skated over or gave short shrift to let me know what that is
|
||
|
|
well and I'll never to address that in future episodes um well thank you very much again
|
||
|
|
for listening and thanks to all those uh on hpr who made this a great community and I
|
||
|
|
shall hopefully do another beginner's guide to the night sky episode four in the not too
|
||
|
|
distant future thanks bye
|
||
|
|
you've been listening to hecka public radio at hecka public radio dot org we are a community podcast
|
||
|
|
network that releases shows every weekday Monday through Friday today's show like all our shows
|
||
|
|
was contributed by an hpr listener like yourself if you ever thought of recording a podcast
|
||
|
|
and click on our contributing to find out how easy it really is hecka public radio was found
|
||
|
|
by the digital dog pound and the infonomican computer club and it's part of the binary revolution
|
||
|
|
at binwreff.com if you have comments on today's show please email the host directly leave a comment
|
||
|
|
on the website or record a follow up episode yourself unless otherwise status today's show is
|
||
|
|
released on the creative comments attribution share a light 3.0 license
|