Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Monday August 17 2020, @07:50AM   Printer-friendly
from the pushing-the-speed-limit dept.

Fastest star ever seen is moving at 8% the speed of light:

In the center of our galaxy, hundreds of stars closely orbit a supermassive black hole. Most of these stars have large enough orbits that their motion is described by Newtonian gravity and Kepler's laws of motion. But a few orbit so closely that their orbits can only be accurately described by Einstein's theory of general relativity. The star with the smallest orbit is known as S62. Its closest approach to the black hole has it moving more than 8% of light speed.

[...] For years, S2 was thought to be the closest star to SgrA*, but then S62 was discovered. As a team recently discovered, it's a star about twice as massive as the sun that orbits the black hole every 10 years. By their calculations, at the closest approach, its speed approaches 8% of the speed of light. That's so fast that time dilation comes into play. An hour at S62 would last about 100 Earth minutes.

Because of its proximity to SgrA*, S62 doesn't follow a Keplerian orbit. Rather than being a simple ellipse, it follows a spirograph motion by which its orbit precesses about 10 degrees with each cycle. This kind of relativistic precession was first observed with the orbit of Mercury, but only as a small effect.

Journal Reference:
Florian Peißker, Andreas Eckart, and Marzieh Parsa. S62 on a 9.9 yr Orbit around SgrA* - IOPscience, The Astrophysical Journal (2020) (DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5afd)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17 2020, @01:22PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17 2020, @01:22PM (#1037800)

    If your space ship hyperspace jumped to this point of closest approach, what escape velocity do you need to escape the blackhole?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17 2020, @03:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17 2020, @03:08PM (#1037831)

    And when can we start mining black holes so that tech billionaires can keep little trophies made out of black hole pixie dust on their mantelpieces?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17 2020, @03:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17 2020, @03:11PM (#1037833)

    Only a little faster than the star is moving. I used a quick online calculator given the star's periapsis (closest approach) distance from Wikipedia, and the mass of the black hole and it came up with 21,000 km/sec, which is about 7% of the speed of light. Of course, the online calculator is just a simple Newtonian calculation and doesn't take into account all the factors going on with a supermassive black hole. But in general, speed at the periapsis of a highly elliptical orbit, which this one is, is only a little slower than the escape velocity.

    At periapsis, the star is only about 2.4 billion km away from the black hole - that's closer than Uranus is to the Sun.

    The linked article gives the speed of the star at about 8% of light speed - but both Wikipedia and the source paper list it at 10%. It's fast.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by https on Monday August 17 2020, @05:00PM (1 child)

    by https (5248) on Monday August 17 2020, @05:00PM (#1037912) Journal

    A bit more than 0.08c, it looks like. Else that star wouldn't be in orbit.

    --
    Offended and laughing about it.
    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday August 19 2020, @05:45AM

      by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Wednesday August 19 2020, @05:45AM (#1038734) Homepage
      Only if you assume you've got no thrust. Of course, the rocket equation is a mathematical law, not merely a physical one, you can't cheat or optimise anything to get around it, so let's not consider how much fuel would be needed for that escape. Despite Gaark's protestations, fuelless thrust is still a thing of sci-fi only. (Yeah, so's jumping around space - probably the best answer to the question asked is "just jump back away again".)
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves