Astroforensics Reveals Surprise Twist in Death of Planet Swallowed by Star
A surprise twist has emerged in the tale of an exoplanet that was devoured by its star.
Rather than the star expanding to engulf the poor defenseless world, the world itself was complicit in its demise, falling in towards the star on a spiraling orbit of doom.
The finding, revealed through observations from JWST, offers some insight into the evolution of planetary systems, and the wild ways they can behave.
"Because this is such a novel event, we didn't quite know what to expect when we decided to point this telescope in its direction," says astronomer Ryan Lau of NOIRLab in the US.
"With its high-resolution look in the infrared, we are learning valuable insights about the final fates of planetary systems, possibly including our own."
The event first caught the attention of astronomers in 2020, when a star 12,000 light-years away suddenly blazed with light, brightening by a factor of 100 before rapidly fading again. By carefully analyzing all the possibilities, scientists concluded that the event, named ZTF SLRN-2020, could only be the result of a star scarfing down one of its exoplanets.
This is a Big Deal. It was the first time astronomers had observed a star devouring one of its orbiting worlds, opening what we thought was a window into the final stages of the life of a planetary system as a Sun-like star puffs up into a red giant and engulfs the exoplanets orbiting it.
"We are seeing the future of the Earth," astrophysicist Kishalay De of MIT's Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research said at the time.
Only, well, that turns out not to have been the case at all. Lau and his colleagues turned JWST's mid-infrared and near-infrared instruments to the star to reveal a completely different story.
When a star is just living its life, fusing atoms in its core to make heavier elements, it exists on the main sequence stage of a star's lifetime. When a Sun-like star starts to run out of its fuel, it puffs up into a red giant. It becomes hotter, brighter, larger: an unstable giant on the brink of death.
Any worlds within range would be toast; the Sun, scientists believe, might puff up as far as the orbit of Mars when it reaches the red giant phase in a few billion years.
However, when looking at the star responsible for ZTF SLRN-2020, JWST's mid-infrared instrument (MIRI) found that this star was nowhere near as bright as it should be if it was at the red giant phase. Rather, its brightness was consistent with a K-type star around 70 percent of the mass of the Sun, an orange dwarf with a main sequence lifespan up to 70 billion years.
In other words, it's a smallish, dimmish, coolish star that's still comfortably sitting on the main sequence. There's no puffing, there has been no puffing, and there will be no puffing for a long time. Which means that the exoplanet had to have died some other way.
There's a category of exoplanets out there that can explain it. A surprising number of 'hot Jupiters' exist in the Milky Way. These are Jupiter-sized worlds that are orbiting their stars extremely closely – too close to have been able to form there.
We have even seen hot Jupiters on such close orbits that they are evaporating, creating long tails of material as they whirl around their star. This could be one of the earliest stages of devourment: the exoplanet loses mass, its orbit decays further, and it ultimately slams into the star and dies.
This is what Lau and his colleagues think happened with ZTF SLRN-2020. A Jupiter-sized world was on a close orbit, closer than that of Mercury, that gradually decayed over millions of years, until it reached the point of total devastation.
"The planet eventually started to graze the star's atmosphere. Then it was a runaway process of falling in faster from that moment," says astronomer Morgan MacLeod of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "The planet, as it's falling in, started to sort of smear around the star."
Eventually, it disappeared into the star, leaving behind a puff of gas that cooled into cold molecular gas. Observations with NIRSpec revealed something unexpected, though. Closer to the star than the cool gas was a cloud of hot molecular gas that contained molecules such as carbon monoxide and phosphine.
The carbon monoxide, in particular, was interesting: it bore a powerful resemblance to the carbon monoxide seen in the planet-forming disks of dust that surround baby stars. What its presence at a planetary death means remains to be studied.
"This is truly the precipice of studying these events. This is the only one we've observed in action, and this is the best detection of the aftermath after things have settled back down," Lau says. "We hope this is just the start of our sample."
The research has been published in The Astrophysical Journal.
Striking Evidence of Water Imbalance on The Moon Hints at a Collision
21 Heartwarming Images Reveal The Human Side of Life in Space
'Hidden Galaxies' Exposed by Deep Sky Map Could Solve Energy Mystery
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Japanese startup attempts Moon landing
A Japanese startup will attempt a tricky lunar touchdown on Friday with an unmanned lander named Resilience, two years after its first try which crashed onto the Moon's surface. If successful, it will be only the third private mission to the Earth's rocky natural satellite ever completed, and the first by a company based outside the United States. The startup, ispace, says touchdown is expected at 4:17 am Japan time on Friday (1917 GMT Thursday) with the potentially nail-biting attempt streamed on its website. Resilience is "ready to attempt a historic landing on the Moon" and "we are confident in our preparations for success", ispace CEO Takeshi Hakamada said last week. "We have leveraged the operational experience gained in Mission 1 and during this current voyage to the Moon," he said in a statement. Only five nations have soft-landed spacecraft on the Moon -- the Soviet Union, the United States, China, India and Japan. And now companies are vying to offer cheaper and more frequent space exploration opportunities than governments. Last year, the Houston-based Intuitive Machines became the first private enterprise to touch down on the Moon. Although its uncrewed craft landed at the wrong angle, it was still able to complete tests and send photos. Then in March this year, Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost -- launched on the same SpaceX rocket as ispace's Resilience -- aced its lunar landing attempt. Despite their rocket ride-share, Resilience took longer to reach the Moon than Blue Ghost, and ispace is now hoping for its own moment of glory, after its first mission resulted in an unsalvageable "hard landing" in 2023. Landing on the Moon is highly challenging as spacecraft must rely on precisely controlled thruster burning to slow their descent. Intuitive Machines' second attempt at a Moon landing ended in disappointment in late March. Its spacecraft Athena, designed to touch down on a spot called the Mons Mouton plateau -- closer to the lunar south pole than any previous mission -- tipped over and was unable to recharge its solar-powered batteries. Meanwhile another Japanese startup, Space One, has been trying to become the country's first private firm to put a satellite into orbit. Its latest rocket launch attempt in December blasted off but was later seen spiralling downwards in the distance as the company said the launch had to be terminated. nf/kaf/dhc/rsc
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
NASA scientists describe ‘absolute sh*tshow' at agency as Trump budget seeks to dismantle top US climate lab
Federal agencies Space programs Climate changeFacebookTweetLink Follow NASA scientists are in a state of anxious limbo after the Trump administration proposed a budget that would eliminate one of the United States' top climate labs – the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, or GISS – as a standalone entity. In its place, it would move some of the lab's functions into a broader environmental modeling effort across the agency. Career specialists are now working remotely, awaiting details and even more unsure about their future at the lab after they were kicked out of their longtime home in New York City last week. Closing the lab for good could jeopardize its value and the country's leadership role in global climate science, sources say. 'It's an absolute sh*tshow,' one GISS scientist said under condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. 'Morale at GISS has never been lower, and it feels for all of us that we are being abandoned by NASA leadership.' 'We are supposedly going to be integrated into this new virtual NASA modeling institute, but (we have) no idea what that will actually look like,' they said. NASA is defending its budget proposal, with a nod toward the lab's future. 'NASA's GISS has a significant place in the history of space science and its work is critical for the Earth Science Division, particularly as the division looks to the future of its modeling work and capabilities,' NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner said in a statement. 'Fundamental contributions in research and applications from GISS directly impact daily life by showing the Earth system connections that impact the air we breathe, our health, the food we grow, and the cities we live in,' Warner said. GISS has a storied history in climate science on the global scale. James Hansen, a former director, first called national attention to human-caused global warming at a Senate hearing during the hot summer of 1988. The lab, founded in 1961, is still known worldwide for its computer modeling of the planet that enable scientists to make projections for how climate change may affect global temperatures, precipitation, extreme weather events and other variables. The about 125 scientists who work there are also known for tracking global temperatures, with GISS' records serving as one of the independent checks on other labs around the world monitoring global warming. The lab stands out, the scientist said, for its 'fundamental work contributing to our understanding of global warming, volcanic and aerosol forcing of climate, and advances in detection and attribution' of climate change impacts. 'All work that was curiosity-driven and enabled by the autonomy we had at GISS to pursue these questions,' they said, adding: 'Everyone is stressed because we have no clarity from leadership on even what the long-term plan is. (It) Really feels like we are just being left to die on the vine.' Another GISS scientist, who also spoke under the condition of anonymity, said the lab's independence has been key to its success, which can be seen in the abundance of published studies from researchers at the facility. The autonomy afforded to GISS over the years, given its distance from NASA headquarters in Washington, and its academic-like freedom helped its researchers take on important studies that might not be pursued in other circumstances, they said. And unlike high-level managers at NASA, GISS' leadership received high marks for their communications and advocacy of the center's work, according to three researchers. 'It is important for climate modeling to continue,' one of the GISS researchers said. 'They're the best tools that we have for the planet.' A technical NASA budget supplement released late last week committed to 'strengthening America's leadership in space exploration while exercising fiscal responsibility. NASA is adapting the way we work and invest to accomplish our mission,' Warner, the spokesperson, said. That Republicans' proposed NASA budget includes funding for climate modeling at all is notable, considering its cuts for space exploration and overall Earth science. Numerous space exploration missions and satellites would be abandoned under the budget, including some satellites already in space that are actively sending climate-related data back to Earth. The budget supplement makes GISS' fate both clear and hazy. It states Earth system modeling activities at four different NASA centers will be merged into one 'virtual institute.' This would incorporate 'core capabilities' of GISS 'as needed,' it adds. 'GISS as an independent entity will not continue,' the document says. This fate may be considerably better for NASA's climate scientists than the worst-case scenario seen at agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where the budget for nearly its entire weather and climate research portfolio would be zeroed out and most of its research labs shuttered. Overall, the NASA budget would be a 24% cut compared to last year, with a 47% cut to agency science activities, according to The Planetary Society, a group that advances space science and innovation. Its analysis found the NASA funding level would be the smallest since 1961 when adjusted for inflation. The ultimate decisions on the future of climate modeling at NASA, as well as its space exploration activities, will fall to Congress as members consider the budget proposal, adding even more uncertainty to an already fraught period for GISS's staff.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
NASA scientists describe ‘absolute sh*tshow' at agency as Trump budget seeks to dismantle top US climate lab
Federal agencies Space programs Climate changeFacebookTweetLink Follow NASA scientists are in a state of anxious limbo after the Trump administration proposed a budget that would eliminate one of the United States' top climate labs – the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, or GISS – as a standalone entity. In its place, it would move some of the lab's functions into a broader environmental modeling effort across the agency. Career specialists are now working remotely, awaiting details and even more unsure about their future at the lab after they were kicked out of their longtime home in New York City last week. Closing the lab for good could jeopardize its value and the country's leadership role in global climate science, sources say. 'It's an absolute sh*tshow,' one GISS scientist said under condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. 'Morale at GISS has never been lower, and it feels for all of us that we are being abandoned by NASA leadership.' 'We are supposedly going to be integrated into this new virtual NASA modeling institute, but (we have) no idea what that will actually look like,' they said. NASA is defending its budget proposal, with a nod toward the lab's future. 'NASA's GISS has a significant place in the history of space science and its work is critical for the Earth Science Division, particularly as the division looks to the future of its modeling work and capabilities,' NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner said in a statement. 'Fundamental contributions in research and applications from GISS directly impact daily life by showing the Earth system connections that impact the air we breathe, our health, the food we grow, and the cities we live in,' Warner said. GISS has a storied history in climate science on the global scale. James Hansen, a former director, first called national attention to human-caused global warming at a Senate hearing during the hot summer of 1988. The lab, founded in 1961, is still known worldwide for its computer modeling of the planet that enable scientists to make projections for how climate change may affect global temperatures, precipitation, extreme weather events and other variables. The about 125 scientists who work there are also known for tracking global temperatures, with GISS' records serving as one of the independent checks on other labs around the world monitoring global warming. The lab stands out, the scientist said, for its 'fundamental work contributing to our understanding of global warming, volcanic and aerosol forcing of climate, and advances in detection and attribution' of climate change impacts. 'All work that was curiosity-driven and enabled by the autonomy we had at GISS to pursue these questions,' they said, adding: 'Everyone is stressed because we have no clarity from leadership on even what the long-term plan is. (It) Really feels like we are just being left to die on the vine.' Another GISS scientist, who also spoke under the condition of anonymity, said the lab's independence has been key to its success, which can be seen in the abundance of published studies from researchers at the facility. The autonomy afforded to GISS over the years, given its distance from NASA headquarters in Washington, and its academic-like freedom helped its researchers take on important studies that might not be pursued in other circumstances, they said. And unlike high-level managers at NASA, GISS' leadership received high marks for their communications and advocacy of the center's work, according to three researchers. 'It is important for climate modeling to continue,' one of the GISS researchers said. 'They're the best tools that we have for the planet.' A technical NASA budget supplement released late last week committed to 'strengthening America's leadership in space exploration while exercising fiscal responsibility. NASA is adapting the way we work and invest to accomplish our mission,' Warner, the spokesperson, said. That Republicans' proposed NASA budget includes funding for climate modeling at all is notable, considering its cuts for space exploration and overall Earth science. Numerous space exploration missions and satellites would be abandoned under the budget, including some satellites already in space that are actively sending climate-related data back to Earth. The budget supplement makes GISS' fate both clear and hazy. It states Earth system modeling activities at four different NASA centers will be merged into one 'virtual institute.' This would incorporate 'core capabilities' of GISS 'as needed,' it adds. 'GISS as an independent entity will not continue,' the document says. This fate may be considerably better for NASA's climate scientists than the worst-case scenario seen at agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where the budget for nearly its entire weather and climate research portfolio would be zeroed out and most of its research labs shuttered. Overall, the NASA budget would be a 24% cut compared to last year, with a 47% cut to agency science activities, according to The Planetary Society, a group that advances space science and innovation. Its analysis found the NASA funding level would be the smallest since 1961 when adjusted for inflation. The ultimate decisions on the future of climate modeling at NASA, as well as its space exploration activities, will fall to Congress as members consider the budget proposal, adding even more uncertainty to an already fraught period for GISS's staff.
