Comprehensive coverage

A new 300D map of the interstellar gas at a distance of XNUMX pars from the Sun

A French-American team of astronomers monitored the solar region up to a radius of 300 parscals by using Cal and Nall absorption lines, and mapped the interstellar gas in the region

The image of the area near the sun
The image of the area near the sun

A French-American team of astronomers presents in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, a three-dimensional mapping of the interstellar gas that includes about 1800 stars located in the region of the Sun.

The map is spread over a radius of about 300 persec (9.26 times 10 to the power of 15 km) from the sun. The team of astronomers presents new measurements of the interstellar gas absorption in the region. Information concerning the interstellar medium and its properties, spatial distribution, dynamics, and chemical and physical components, allow scientists to better understand the interactions, the evolution of the stars and the material found between them. The local region around the Sun has been studied in many surveys and at different wavelengths, but the big picture has never been completed and fully understood.

Barry Y. Walsh and his research colleagues present in their work, high spectral resolution measurements of calcium lines (Kal) and sodium doublet lines (Nal). The absorption lines are usually used to study the interstellar medium. The calcium lines were first observed in 1904 by the German astronomer J. Hartmann, in the spectrum of the star Delta Orionis. The initial detection of the gas set the platform for subsequent studies on the subject of the interstellar medium. The sodium doublet was only discovered in 1919 in Delta Orion and Beta Scorpius. The calcium Cal and Nael Dublat lines complement each other: the first is sensitive to partially ionized gas, and the second is used to detect cold and neutral interstellar gas.

The team combined their data (most of which was collected at the European Observatory in Chile), with previous data. The new paper presents a catalog measuring absorption in 1857 stars located at a distance of 800 persec from the Sun. The Nal Doublet test of the interstellar gas density was made on stars at a distance of 300 parscal. The white region surrounding the Sun is equivalent to a low-density region of neutral gas. It spreads over about 80 persec in the radius around the sun in most directions and is bounded by a dense "wall" of gas. The black gaps in the wall are called "interstellar tunnels" and they represent sparse pathways to other interstellar fissures. Cal distribution maps have never been made, and these reveal the fact that the region near the Sun contains many and branched structures of partially ionized gas. Structures that form a honeycomb-like pattern of cells.

Theories about the interstellar medium require that there be such low-density regions, which were apparently created by energetic activity in supernova events and cloud cluster streams of young, hot stars. The history of the solar region is still speculative, but many believe that it was formed about 15 million years ago in a series of supernova explosions, and that the last eruption occurred about 3 million years ago.

Press release

Yael Petar

Yael Petar

For all the author's articles

41 תגובות

  1. Ron
    I repeat, it's not because of the opinions but because of the trollish behavior. The talkbacks are designed to allow people to know more about the topic of the article and it is impossible to turn each article into a trigger for 50 anti-scientific comments that fly far beyond the topic of the comment.

  2. Parting response from the site.
    (Last comment - there will be no more comments from me)

    I received a personal response from my father, the site manager - and if he wants he will share it with you in full or not - his right to choose is his site.
    At least together if so
    This is my last response on the science site - by choice, I will not fight with my father anymore,
    Although I could do it.

    I am writing these lines only to say that I stand behind the well-founded material that I have provided in the past on the site, including this article (even though some of it has been blocked) and I do not evade criticism secretly.

    All the best to everyone and a successful journey

  3. Friends:
    I just wanted to comment that the links I uploaded within the NASA man's quote (response 17) are already working.
    It turns out I was right when I thought it was a temporary glitch.
    In the second link there is an explanation and demonstration of the phenomenon that they tried to troll here.
    Those who don't like open ends are welcome to read.

  4. Response 13-Ron:

    From a short and rough calculation, if these objects are indeed physical, between frame and frame there should be a difference of a few degrees between specific object locations. What you do see is random appearances. You don't see any rotation.

  5. Devil's advocate, I agree with every word and all that remains is to call on Abby Blizovsky on behalf of those who cherish the site to find a creative solution that does not include gagging the problem of the trolling of, what shall we call it, bizarre science or pseudo science of any kind.

    Ron, as mentioned, I have no problem with voicing opinions, any opinions, with one limitation, that it be related to the article. Pay attention to what you say in comment 5, this is an uninteresting article, what is interesting is…. Just like politicians who answer: "That's not the question, the question is..."

  6. Rach
    The argument has two sides
    If after Ron's reaction (5) no one would have entered into an argument with him, there would have been no argument.
    It's usually like that, the commenters here can't stop themselves from commenting back and then it develops into an argument that is as long as exile.

    Now the only remaining problem is that a stray surfer who is not yet familiar with the ins and outs of the site, would log in, see Ron's response, see that no one is responding, and think that the site's visitors agree with Ron.
    We need to find another solution to this problem that does not involve entering into an endless debate.
    An example would be that those commenters who can't help themselves will settle for a short, laconic and cynically informative complete-yourself sentence in which they express their lack of interest in another idiotic argument with Ron.
    A second possibility is that the "website management" will add a short and concise message after his messages, in the following style: "Since and ideologically there is no interest in censoring Ron, and after many debates on these issues in the past, it is necessary to clarify that his responses should not be taken as in any way similar to the position of the website operators".

    Another possibility would of course be to ignore my strange ideas and continue to prove yourself in your opinion.
    The worst possible option (and this in my opinion of course) would be to start with more extreme censorship than has been the case so far.

  7. Ron, you don't notice, but when you are not bothered to post more than one nonsensical comment, you go back and become a troll and hijack the whole article in your direction, as you do successfully and without interference really otherwise. Here these articles have a purpose - for people to learn new things and not to continue grinding old and false things. And no - NASA is not hiding anything, it cannot hide a mole from any of its employees.

    If you do not return to the procedure of only one response to the article, I will make sure that you are taken care of.

    Apart from that, there is no tendency to block you more than others, but you more than others fall into all kinds of traps that I put in the software designed to find spammers and block them to enable the discussion that Sarah and the other surfers are interested in.

  8. Ron,
    My problem is the amount of discussions about aliens/evolution/god on a site that claims to present science news.
    Any relevant discussion is immediately washed away by rivers of comments on these issues.
    I have no problem discussing them as well and I expressed my opinion in response to your words several times. The problem is the quantity, the irrelevance of the published articles and the incessant repetition of the same arguments that make the site non-serious, which deals only with the bizarre.

  9. Rach
    Your response is honorable to me,
    Note that the "relevant" comments were editorial standards and did not discuss the topic of the article
    There is no trolley hijacker here
    Would you prefer the article with only these three comments? why?

    If you follow the thread - I brought up a topic related to the phenomenon of being close to the sun - you will discover that it is also related to the sun.

    From there the discussion devolved into a broader discussion that is related and how to the matter.
    But for some reason there is a tendency to block and follow my comments and not the comments of my critics
    And that's the emphasis.

    Best regards

  10. Avi Blizovsky,
    In the past I argued with you about gagging and taking comments down. I still think that a scientific site should not have such a policy except for the case where trolls divert any discussion whatsoever in the direction of their own agenda and here you are right.
    Who else remembers that the subject of the article was about a cloud 300 farsecs from the sun?
    Lately, every article in science and it doesn't matter what the subject is, immediately becomes an arena of conflict yes evolution / no evolution, yes aliens / no aliens, yes vaccines / no vaccines.
    One might think that there are no more questions in science or that all science deals only with the bizarre. Science, gentlemen, does not only revolve around these issues and what to do are not the main questions today either.
    So Ron, please bombard your YouTube with an article about aliens, it's legit. But not every mention of the sun (or a cloud at a distance of 300 farsecs from it) should immediately automatically bring up the images we have already seen 1000 times from you.

  12. Ron, first off, you're not a wreck at all, I think there's nothing like clowns to liven up a party.
    Second, you overestimate yourself. There was nothing in my response but disdain (Anger? Acceptance as a matter of course?!?!? (By the way, those punctuation marks at the end are not anger, in case you're confused, it's bewilderment and wonder)) On the other hand, you're a master at seeing things that don't exist 🙂
    As for your response, well, you are the best parody of yourself, I can only smile 🙂
    What kind of indoctrination they did to me, horrible and terrible, it's all from the fluoridation - the government controls my mind! Only Ron escaped the long arm of Area 51! I think you don't know what you're thinking, and using made-up punctuation such as "..?" Just strengthening my hypothesis.
    Be healthy honey 🙂

  13. Adi LOL (first contempt, then anger and finally acceptance as a matter of course - Schopenhauer)

    Have you decided to take off your gloves?

    Come on:

    UFO photographs -official- of the Ministry of Defense of Mexico (also broadcast in the news)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqkzgFJzeow

    Former Defense Minister of Canada Paul Hallier

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e_jD27STw0

    Army man Clifford Stone (as part of an organization exposing over 400 military and intelligence personnel in classified positions) at a large press conference in 2001

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDP2Jq1_0NA

    The secret American AUTEC base near the mysterious Bermuda Triangle (professional testimony
    And directly from an army man who receives a military medal due to his contribution to the army in .. you'll see it starts at minute 2:20)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=My49f992sSo

    What kind of indoctrination did they do to you - do you think it's innocent..?

    Just as dear Adi's response was confirmed - please confirm this response as well... sorry to ruin the party

  14. : )
    I felt silly pride when I realized there was nothing to click on the links.
    There is also a passage here that perhaps even Adi did not mean - the matter of a close research base raises the question "close to why?" And this is said to be "a close research base in itself".

  15. Guys, you're missing the point - the Earth was once a huge spaceship just like the one you see in the photos, and contained on board all the life we ​​see today, which was engineered by aliens (yes, you too are a hybrid between primates and alien DNA) . These spaceships revolve around the sun and are charged by its energy, and when they are charged they create warm holes and jump to distant galaxies - this is how the aliens spread life throughout the universe. Our spaceship just didn't jump, because the aliens decided to leave them a research base nearby (that's why they keep coming to us and kidnapping people from among us).
    Links to articles:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=link_hazuy
    Related research:
    http://www.atar_kikyoni_shel_eyze_tambal.com
    http://www.ein_li_maspik_sehel_laasok_be_mehkar_amiti.com

  16. Ron,

    Indeed, what could be more logical than to assume that an artificial object at least the size of the Earth suddenly revolves around the Sun?

    If I were you, I would have run a long time ago to a shelter with food and water for two years.

    "Principles of Ron":

    If everyone thinks so - I think the opposite
    The more absurd the hypothesis, the more convinced I am that it is true.

  17. The truth, Michael - your response is cute, I enjoyed it
    The new style - even if I don't agree with its content, it's fine

    The expert says it's probably Cosmic Rice, oh wait, mistake... -maybe- it's compression

    Oh wait - maybe Bill forgot to clean the borax crumbs from the printer..

    Could it be an artificial bone? God forbid! How can you even think such a thing!
    Back to the speech - NASA is looking for signs of life throughout the galaxy..

  18. Ron:
    I don't know what you call "incriminating images" but the objects in question also appear in the remaining images.
    In the NASA man's letter there is a sentence that could be an explanation because he says that after a while the images are replaced for technical reasons.
    I also couldn't open the links and thought it was a temporary glitch, but the text itself is detailed enough.
    Of course, when there is an expert on the subject who expresses an opinion, there will also be Ron who claims the opposite. This is the role of Aaron in our world.
    You say there is "something" there that you don't know what it is, but you are sure of one thing - it can't be what NASA experts say.
    Hurry hurry. It's pretty funny.

  19. Bolognese - I said what is it?
    Call it a UFO as its name means "unidentified object" -
    It's still a bone!

    My only statement is that it is not related to "improper" equipment or pixelation,
    We are not retarded.

    And if my responses are finally approved - you will see that NASA deleted these screaming images from the archive.

    And please spare me the - why don't you trust NASA with your eyes closed?

    Astronaut Brian O'Leary says in no uncertain terms
    (there are more like it of course)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlYWc-m7Z7c

  20. Ron, you are boring and repeating yourself, does it make sense to you that an object 10 times larger than the Earth and the smaller ones the size of the Earth are aliens?
    Are these the same aliens who also visit Earth? Because if so then it would be pretty hard to miss an object the size of the Earth coming towards us.

  22. Okay, I understood that you copy-pasted from the blog - since the links don't work.

    So according to the latest correspondence
    It's not Cosmic Rice - it's a compressor... bullshit..

    Michael There is something there - I don't know what, but it is a (huge) existing object
    And NASA did delete the incriminating images from the archive as I showed

  23. Regarding your comment 13 - all I can say is that as usual - the music is beautiful.
    Do you see there that they revolve around the sun?
    I did not see.

  25. I also found a comment from a NASA person on some blog:

    copy of 1st email
    Alex:
    I believe the features that you're talking about are cosmic ray hits on the detector. In the STEREO EUVI images, these generally appear as small star-like features, and do not persist between images. In the initial space weather images, these features are often distorted by the extreme compression applied to the images to allow them to be brought down in the low rate beacon telemetry stream. The initial images are replaced after a few days by the full resolution versions, where one can get a better sense of what the features actually look like.

    We have a web page discussing various artifacts visible in the images at

    http://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/artifacts/artifacts.shtml

    copy of second email
    The apparent sphericity probably has something to do with the compression algorithm. I've just put up a short write-up about this at

    http://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/artifacts/artifacts_cosmic_rays.shtml

  27. The light is indeed in the right direction - and in general, the very fact that they reflect light in such a way demonstrates that these objects are made of any kind of metal (that is, not stone)

  30. I don't know which photos were deleted. I found the pictures he is talking about.
    You said that the light reflection is from the right direction but it is not from the right direction at all.
    I'm tired of repeating everything ten times before you dare to address it.

  31. Michael, this is not a compression error - you see the same artifact in the photo from the other direction.
    Look at the picture at minute 1:11 - you can even see the small details

    The very fact that NASA gave an illogical answer and currently delete these photos from the archive - says Dorshni

  32. Ron:
    It's nice that you insisted on the importance of the direction of the reflection of the sunlight because it can really be a key to identifying artifacts and really the light reflection is not (but really not!) in the right direction.

  33. A very important map for those who are about to sail on a ship equipped with a "Bossard" jet launcher.

  34. Perhaps stars like suns and larger stars produce dark energy and dark matter that are complex
    Anti-particles maybe. (Surely Michael Rothschild will 'correct' what I said)

  35. Scarecrow:

    An artifact created by photography that reflects sunlight in the right direction...?

    And I'm gullible?

  36. Laron: I have an excellent explanation, you will find it in the following picture:
    http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080425/the-sphere_l.jpg

    For those who don't understand, this is a picture from the movie "Safra" with Dustin Hoffman, Sharon Stone and Samuel L. Jackson.
    Do you believe in such fanatical piety even for Hollywood effects? It didn't occur to you that it was probably an artifact
    created from photography?
    Get a life, man

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.

Science website logo
SEARCH