A gravitational war next door: The Large Magellanic Cloud is gradually destroying the Small Magellanic Cloud
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission.
Two dwarf galaxies are waging war in the vicinity of our Milky Way and it looks like there is only one possible victor.
Using tips from the star-tracking Gaia spacecraft, scientists examined the motions of massive stars in the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC) to find it is being ripped apart by the gravitational influence of its larger counterpart, the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC).
The results spell disaster for the SMC, suggesting it may eventually be completely destroyed by this interaction. The SMC's loss is astronomers' gain, however, as this event can teach us more about galactic evolution.
"When we first got this result, we suspected that there might be an error in our method of analysis. However, upon closer examination, the results are indisputable, and we were surprised," team co-leader Kengo Tachihara of Nagoya University said in a statement. "The stars in the SMC were moving in opposite directions on either side of the galaxy, as though they are being pulled apart.
"Some of these stars are approaching the LMC, while others are moving away from it, suggesting the gravitational influence of the larger galaxy. This unexpected movement supports the hypothesis that the SMC is being disrupted by the LMC, leading to its gradual destruction."
Thanks to the proximity of the SMC to our own galaxy, Tachihara and his colleagues were able to identify and track around 700 massive stars in the dwarf galaxy.
These stars, with over eight times the mass of the sun, burn through their nuclear fuel supplies more rapidly than smaller stars do. This means they have much shorter lifespans. While the sun is expected to burn hydrogen in its "main sequence" lifetime for around 10 billion years, massive stars can exhaust their nuclear fuel in just a few million years. After exhausting their fuel supplies, the stars erupt in supernova explosions, leaving behind neutron stars or black holes.
In addition to discovering stars moving in opposite directions on different sides of the SMC, the team also found that the stars in this dwarf galaxy lacked rotational motion. This is surprising because massive stars are born from clouds of collapsing interstellar gas, which, as we have seen in the Milky Way, do rotate. Plus, massive stars usually share that rotational motion when they are young, as they have not yet "decoupled" themselves from their pre-natal cocoons.
This lack of rotating stars in the SMC hints that the interstellar gas in the dwarf galaxy may also not rotate. This could have implications for how we model the SMC and its interactions with the LMC and the Milky Way.
"If the SMC is indeed not rotating, previous estimates of its mass and its interaction history with the Milky Way and LMC might need to be revised," team co-leader Satoya Nakano, also of Nagoya University, said in the statement. "This could potentially change our understanding of the history of the three-body interaction between the two Magellanic Clouds and the Milky Way."
Related Stories:
— Hubble Telescope spies star-forming cocoons in neighboring galaxy (photo)
— Hidden monster black hole in the galaxy next door fired stars at us like million mph cosmic bullets
— NASA wants a 'Super-Hubble' space telescope to search for life on alien worlds
The new findings could help scientists better understand dynamic interactions between galaxies in general. Because the SMC and LMC share many characteristics with primordial galaxies in the early universe, such as the dearth of elements heavier than hydrogen and helium, this research could also help understand how the interactions of galaxies in the early universe shaped the cosmos as we see it today.
"We are unable to get a 'bird's-eye view' of the galaxy in which we live," Tachihara said. "As a result, the SMC and the LMC are the only galaxies in which we can observe the details of stellar motion.
"This research is important because it allows us to study the process of star formation in connection with the motion of stars throughout the galaxy."
The team's research was published on Thursday (April 10) in The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Is this the end of the world? How a galactic pile-up could bring Earth's violent end: Cosmic ‘coin flip'
Forget killer asteroids and nuclear annihilation — Earth's ultimate fate may hinge on a cosmic coin toss. Astronomers have revealed that our Milky Way galaxy has a 50/50 chance of colliding with its massive neighbor, the Andromeda galaxy, sometime in the next 10 billion years — an intergalactic smash-up that could fling our solar system into deep space or swallow Earth whole. Cue the sci-fi panic — or not. 'It used to appear destined to merge with Andromeda forming a colossal 'Milkomeda,'' said Professor Alis Deason, a computational cosmologist at Durham University, per The Daily Mail. 'Now, there is a chance that we could avoid this fate entirely.' In other words: The end of the world may not be as inevitable as we thought — at least not from the galaxy next door. 3 It's a cosmic coin toss: Astronomers say the Milky Way has a 50/50 shot at slamming into the giant Andromeda galaxy — a galactic train wreck that could hurl Earth into deep space or gobble it up for good. NASA/ESA/AFP via Getty Images The new study, published in 'Nature Astronomy,' analyzed 100,000 simulations of the Milky Way's future. The findings — thanks to refined data from NASA's Hubble Space Telescope and the European Space Agency's Gaia mission — dramatically downshifted previous predictions of a guaranteed galactic pile-up in just 5 billion years. 'In short, the probability went from near-certainty to a coin flip,' lead author Dr. Till Sawala, of the University of Helsinki, revealed to The findings factor in the gravitational tug of neighboring galaxies — most notably the Large Magellanic Cloud, a much smaller satellite galaxy whose pull may be yanking the Milky Way off a crash course. 'The main difference between our research and previous studies is that we benefited from newer and more precise data, and that we considered a more complete system,' Sawala said to the site. While a 220,000 mph galaxy-on-galaxy collision sounds catastrophic, astronomers say a head-on impact is 'very unlikely.' 3 New data from NASA's Hubble and Europe's Gaia missions just pumped the brakes on doomsday, slashing the odds of a galactic fender-bender once pegged for 5 billion years out. Nature Astronomy In fact, only 2% of simulations showed a direct hit within 5 billion years. Most scenarios had the galaxies swirling toward each other, possibly merging much later — or not at all. Still, if they do collide, it could be a literal star show. 'We see external galaxies often colliding and merging with other galaxies, sometimes producing the equivalent of cosmic fireworks,' said Durham cosmologist Professor Carlos Frenk, via The Daily Mail. 'Until now, we thought this was the fate that awaited our Milky Way galaxy. We now know that there is a very good chance that we may avoid that scary destiny.' But even if Earth sidesteps this stellar shakedown, don't get too comfortable. As The Post previously reported, our sun is expected to become a bloated red giant in about 5 billion years — likely boiling away Earth's oceans or swallowing the planet entirely. So, yeah. Pick your apocalypse. 3 The new study shows nearby galaxies — especially the smaller but mighty Large Magellanic Cloud — are messing with the Milky Way's path, possibly steering it away from a cosmic crash. ESA/ATG medialab / SWNS 'If [the Milky Way-Andromeda collision] happens, it might take place after the Earth and the sun no longer exist,' Sawala told The Daily Mail. 'Even if it happens before that, it's very unlikely that something would happen to Earth in this case.' Translation: By the time the universe gets around to smashing the Milky Way, we'll probably already be toast. Still, some experts say galactic fate is more than just an astronomer's obsession. 'The fate of our Milky Way galaxy is a subject of broad interest — not just to astronomers,' Raja GuhaThakurta of the University of California, Santa Cruz, told the Associated Press. And while the galaxy might survive — barely — we may not. As Sawala put it: 'Of course, there is also a very significant chance that humanity will bring an end to itself still much before that, without any need for astrophysical help.' Talk about a stellar self-own.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
The Milky Way may not collide with neighboring galaxy Andromeda after all: 'From near-certainty to a coin flip'
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. A titanic cosmic collision between the Milky Way and its closest large galactic neighbor, Andromeda, may not be as sure a thing as scientists thought. Previously, it had been proposed that there was a good chance that Andromeda and our galactic home, which are moving together, would meet in around 5 billion years and merge to form a daughter galaxy dubbed "Milkomeda." New research has revealed that there is a much smaller chance that these two spiral galaxies will slam into each other and merge over the next 10 billion years than was believed. In fact, it's about 50/50. "Our main finding is that the merger between the Milky Way and Andromeda, which had been predicted to occur in around 4.5 billion years, is actually much less certain. We found only about a 50% chance that this merger will happen during the next 10 billion years," team leader and University of Helsinki researcher Til Sawala told "In short, the probability went from near-certainty to a coin flip. "I was prepared to find something different, but yes, the fact that there is only around a 50/50 chance of a merger was very surprising." Sawala and colleagues reached this conclusion by simulating the next 10 billion years of the Milky Way's journey through the new simulation was based on updated astronomical data from the Hubble Space Telescope and from the European Space Agency (ESA) star tracking mission Gaia. The team also factored in new estimates of the masses of smaller dwarf galaxies around the Milky Way, which, via their gravitational influence, impact the cosmic passage of the Milky Way. "The main difference between our research and previous studies is that we benefited from newer and more precise data, and that we considered a more complete system, including the effect of the Large Magellanic Cloud, the Milky Way's largest satellite galaxy," Sawala said. The team was able to present different scenarios of what could become of the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies as they gradually move together."A head-on collision is very unlikely, we found a less than 2% chance for that. In most of the cases that lead to a merger, the two galaxies will indeed fly past each other at first, which will lead to a loss of orbital energy, and subsequently to a merger," Sawala said. "How close they come on their first passage is very uncertain, however, and if they don't come very close, meaning if their distance is more than around 500,000 light-years, they might not merge at all." The researchers found that if the orbits of the Milky Way and Andromeda come close enough for the two galaxies to gravitationally influence each other, then a merger is an eventuality. "But it's almost equally likely that they stay well separated, in which case they won't merge, and also continue to evolve mostly in isolation," The team found that while the odds of a merger with Andromeda drop when the Large Magellanic Cloud's influence is considered, with this adjustment, the Milky Way becomes more likely to cannibalize this satellite dwarf to this research, our galaxy is almost certain to merge with the Large Magellanic Cloud over the next 2 billion years. Related Stories: — Why do dwarf galaxies line up? 'Zippers' and 'twisters' in the early universe may solve a galactic mystery — Scientists calculate when the universe will end — it's sooner than expected — Amateur astrophotographer captures a stunning galaxy 24 million light-years from Earth (photo) "Of course, now we really want to find out whether the Milky Way and Andromeda will collide or not," Sawala said. "That will not only need more observational data, but also more complete modelling of their interaction, as well as of the effect of the environment in which they evolve. "Luckily, there will be more observational data coming very soon, next year, from the Gaia Space Telescope, and perhaps also from the Hubble Space Telescope." The team's research was published on Monday (June 2) in the journal Nature Astronomy.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Turning the Red Planet green? It's time to take terraforming Mars seriously, scientists say
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The concept of terraforming Mars — transforming the planet's climate to support life as we know it — has long belonged to the realm of science fiction. But a new study argues that it's time to take the idea seriously. "Thirty years ago, terraforming Mars wasn't just hard — it was impossible," said Erika DeBenedictis, CEO of Pioneer Labs and lead author of the new paper. "But new technology like [SpaceX's] Starship and synthetic biology have now made it a real possibility." The paper debates the complex ethical questions that must be considered if we're to terraform Mars and lays the blueprint for a potential path forward. "Advocates argue that more life is better than less, and terraforming Mars could mark humanity's first act of planetary stewardship with a net positive environmental impact," said DeBenedictis. Put succinctly, "living planets are better than dead ones," said study co-author Edwin Kite, an associate professor at the University of Chicago. "We now know that Mars was habitable in the past, from data returned by the Mars rovers, so greening Mars could be viewed as the ultimate environmental restoration challenge." Though full terraforming may take centuries, if not millennia, the long-term goal would be a Mars with stable liquid water, breathable oxygen and a thriving ecosystem. In the short term, this might mean only small patches of microbial life; in the distant future, there could perhaps be human cities on the planet. And if we reach the scale of cities, perhaps that's a stepping stone to even more significant exploration for our species. "As we move out into the galaxy, we will need base camps, and a base camp on the scale of the galaxy is a habitable planet," said Kite. For co-author Robin Wordsworth, a professor of environmental and planetary science at Harvard, the argument for terraforming Mars goes beyond human colonization to the propagation of life in general. "I see humanity as part of the biosphere, not separate from it," he said. "Life is precious — we know of nowhere else in the universe where it exists — and we have a duty to conserve it on Earth, but also to consider how we could begin to propagate it to other worlds." It's not all about looking beyond the bounds of Earth; terraforming Mars could also help us solve climate and sustainability challenges at home, advocates say. Nina Lanza, a planetary scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory and a co-author on the paper, sees Mars as a prime testbed for planetary engineering. "If we want to learn how to modify our environment here on Earth, to keep it in a configuration that suits us and other life forms, maybe it would be better to experiment on Mars and say, 'Look, does this work?'" she said. "I personally would like to be a little more conservative with our home planet. This is the only place we can live." There are technological lessons to be learned, too. "Concretely, developing and adopting green technology on Earth often falters because it must compete with dirtier alternatives that benefit from decades of infrastructure investment and entrenched interests," said DeBenedictis. "Mars is a unique target market because it has no oil, no existing infrastructure and no status quo. For this reason, developing green technologies for space is a powerful strategy for maturing it for use on Earth." But we should take a few lessons from "Jurassic Park" when thinking about terraforming, some scientists say: Before asking, "Could we?" we need to ask, "Should we?" "If we decide to terraform Mars, then we will really change it in ways that may or may not be reversible," said Lanza. "Mars is its own planet and has its own history. When we terraform, then we effectively don't have the opportunity to study that anymore, and we may lose knowledge about how planets form and evolve." Most dramatically, we may destroy potential evidence of ancient Martian life, if such evidence exists. "If we modify the environment on Mars, we're going to change the chemistry of the surface and of the subsurface, eventually," said Lanza, pointing out that such actions might erase any traces of life on Mars. "I can't say for certain. It's very complicated, but it's a risk." Terraforming Mars would require massive changes, namely the warming of the planet to support both oxygen-producing microbes and liquid water. While all the technologies to terraform Mars are not yet available, the authors of the paper propose three phases of development. First, scientists would use abiotic climate engineering techniques — such as deploying reflective solar sails, dispersing nanoparticles, or laying aerogel tiles — to warm the surface by at least 30 degrees Celsius (86 degrees Fahrenheit), enough to melt subsurface ice and release trapped carbon dioxide. This warming would thicken the Martian atmosphere and potentially support the presence of stable liquid water. The second phase would introduce extremophile microbes — likely anaerobic and genetically engineered ones — capable of surviving in Mars' harsh conditions and kickstarting ecological succession. These organisms would begin producing oxygen and organic matter, slowly altering planetary chemistry. The third and longest phase would focus on building a complex biosphere, increasing atmospheric pressure and oxygen content to eventually support more advanced plant life, and, in the very long term, potentially allow humans to breathe unassisted. Related stories: — Could we really terraform Mars? — New Mars terraforming idea: engineered, heat-absorbing dust nanoparticles — Bad news for terraforming: Mars' atmosphere is lost in space The study's authors agree: If we're to have any chance of terraforming Mars, we must move forward on multiple fronts simultaneously. "Answering the question of when and how to start making other worlds habitable requires a clear understanding of the costs and benefits, which can only be adequately assessed based on a combination of theory and experiments, with input from diverse fields including physics, chemistry, materials science and biology," said Kite. Right now, we need to continue to study Mars. Lanza advocates for the Mars Sample Return mission, a NASA-European Space Agency campaign to bring home material collected on the Red Planet by the Perseverance rover. "The samples are incredibly well documented and analyzed to the best of our ability on Mars," she said. "Now we need to bring those back, because that's going to help us answer some of these fundamental questions. What is Mars made out of? Are there traces of life?" And, as we continue to visit the Red Planet, we can put terraforming concepts into practice. "Upcoming Mars surface missions in 2028 or 2031 should include small-scale experiments to de-risk terraforming strategies, such as warming localized regions," said DeBenedictis. Then, of course, we need to continue to innovate new technologies that will allow us to terraform Mars in the future. All this is to say, while fully terraforming Mars might take generations, the decisions start now. "This is how we get from the imagination and the concept to some reality that has totally changed our world," said Lanza. "We should really keep doing science — it's transformational." The new study was published last month in the journal Nature Astronomy.
