{"id":793022,"date":"2025-01-27T16:53:05","date_gmt":"2025-01-27T21:53:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/?p=793022"},"modified":"2025-01-27T16:53:05","modified_gmt":"2025-01-27T21:53:05","slug":"why-the-first-stars-couldnt-grow-forever","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/?p=793022","title":{"rendered":"Why The First Stars Couldn&#8217;t Grow Forever"},"content":{"rendered":"<p> <br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div>\n<p>Star formation in the early Universe was a vigorous process that created gigantic stars. Called Population 3 stars, these giants were massive, extremely luminous stars, that lived short lives, many of which were ended when they exploded as primordial supernovae. <\/p>\n<p>But even these early stars faced growth limitations. <\/p>\n<p><span id=\"more-170605\"\/><\/p>\n<p>Stellar feedback plays a role in modern star formation. As young stars grow, they emit powerful radiation that can disperse nearby gas they need to keep growing. This is called protostellar radiative feedback, and it takes place in addition to the restrictive effect their magnetic fields have on their growth. <\/p>\n<p>However, new research shows that the growth of Pop 3 stars was limited by their magnetic fields.<\/p>\n<p>The research is titled \u201cMagnetic fields limit the mass of Population III stars even before the onset of protostellar radiation feedback.\u201d The lead author is Piyush Sharda, an astrophysicist at the Leiden Observatory in the Netherlands. It\u2019s available on the pre-print server arxiv.org. <\/p>\n<p>Scientists observe stars forming in the modern Universe to understand how the process plays out. This is difficult because stars take so much time to form, while we\u2019ve only been watching young stars from a great distance for a few decades. Stars are massive, energetic, complex objects that don\u2019t give up their secrets easily.<\/p>\n<p>There are many unanswered questions about star formation, but a general picture has emerged. It starts with a cloud of cold molecular hydrogen that collapses into dense cores. These cories become protostars, also called young stellar objects (YSOs). Accretion disks form around the young stars, and this is where radiative feedback comes in.<\/p>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">This artist\u2019s concept shows a young stellar object and the whirling accretion disk surrounding it. NASA\/JPL-Caltech<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>As young stars accrete mass, they heat up. They radiate this heat outward into their own accretion disks. As the material in the disk heats, it slows or even stops the accretion process. So radiative feedback limits their growth. <\/p>\n<p>YSOs also rotate more rapidly than more mature stars. The rotation creates powerful magnetic fields, and these fields drive jets from the YSO\u2019s poles. These jets steal away some of the accretion energy, limiting the stars\u2019 growth. The jets can also disperse some of the surrounding gas, further limiting their growth.  <\/p>\n<p>However, the picture may look different for Pop 3 stars. To begin with, their existence is hypothetical at this point in time, though theory supports it. If they\u2019re real, astrophysicists want to know how they formed and what their growth limits were. If they\u2019re real, Pop 3 stars played a critical role in the Universe by forging the first metals and spreading them out into space. <\/p>\n<p>According to the authors of the new research, simulations haven\u2019t been thorough enough to explain the masses of Population 3 stars.   <\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe masses of Population III stars are largely unconstrained since no simulations exist that take all relevant primordial star formation physics into account,\u201d the authors write. \u201cWe evolve the simulations until 5000 years post the formation of the first star.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In the team\u2019s more thorough simulations, which include magnetic fields and other factors, these early stars are limited to about 65 solar masses. \u201cIn 5000 yrs, the mass of the most massive star is 65 solar masses in the RMHD &lt;radiation magnetohydrodynamics&gt; simulation, compared to 120 solar masses in simulations without magnetic fields,\u201d they write.<\/p>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"568\" height=\"483\" src=\"https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Population-3-star-simulations.png\" alt=\"This figure from the research shows a panel from each type of simulation: HD (hydrodynamic), MHD (magneto-hydrodynamic), RHD (radiation-hydrodynamics including ionizing and dissociating radiation feedback), RMHD (radiation-magnetohydrodynamics). They show each simulation at 5,000 years after the first star forms. White dots show the positions of Population 3 stars. Image Credit: Sharda et al. 2025\" class=\"wp-image-170623\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Population-3-star-simulations.png 568w, https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Population-3-star-simulations-250x213.png 250w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 568px) 100vw, 568px\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">This figure from the research shows a panel from each type of simulation: HD (hydrodynamic), MHD (magneto-hydrodynamic), RHD (radiation-hydrodynamics including ionizing and dissociating radiation feedback), RMHD (radiation-magnetohydrodynamics). They show each simulation at 5,000 years after the first star forms. White dots show the positions of Population 3 stars. Image Credit: Sharda et al. 2025<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>The results show that both simulation runs that included magnetic fields are fragmented, leading to the formation of Pop 3 star clusters. That means that the evolution of the most massive Pop 3 stars in both runs is influenced by the presence of companion stars.  <\/p>\n<p>The difference comes down to gravity and magnetic fields working against each other. As young stars accrete mass, their gravitational power increases. This should draw more material into the star. But magnetic fields counteract the gravity. This all happens before radiative feedback is active. <\/p>\n<p>The results also show that in both simulations that include magnetic fields, the amount of mass that reaches the envelope initially increases, then declines. However, the results were different in the simulations without magnetic fields. In those simulations, mass transfer from the envelope to the accretion disk is fast at first, creating a decline in the mass in the envelope and a build-up of mass in the disk. \u201cThis mass is consequently accreted by the star at a high rate,\u201d the authors write.<\/p>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"578\" height=\"308\" src=\"https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Pop-3-star-disk-mass-decrease.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-170625\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Pop-3-star-disk-mass-decrease.png 578w, https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Pop-3-star-disk-mass-decrease-250x133.png 250w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 578px) 100vw, 578px\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">This figure from the research illustrates some of the simulation results. It shows the mass enclosed within a disk of radius 500 au and height 50 au (from the midplane) around the most massive star. \u201cThe mass reservoir that can be accreted onto the central star in the MHD and RMHD runs eventually decreases as magnetic fields suppress gravitational collapse,\u201d the authors explain. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>\u201cWe learn that magnetic fields limit the amount of gas infalling onto the envelope at later stages by acting against gravity, leading to mass depletion within the accretion disk,\u201d the authors explain. \u201cThe maximum stellar mass of Population III stars is thus already limited by magnetic fields, even before accretion rates drop to allow significant protostellar radiative feedback.\u201d <\/p>\n<p>Though Population 3 stars are only hypothetical, our theories of physical cosmology rely on their existence. If they didn\u2019t exist, then there\u2019s something fundamental about the Universe that is beyond our grasp. However, our cosmological theories do a good job of explaining what we see around us in the Universe today. If we\u2019re putting money on it, place your bets on Pop 3 stars being real. <\/p>\n<p>\u201cRadiation feedback has long been proposed as the primary mechanism that halts the growth of Pop III stars and sets the upper mass cutoff of the Pop III IMF (initial mass function),\u201d the authors write in their conclusion. They show that magnetic fields can limit stellar growth before feedback mechanisms come into play. <\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis work lays the first step in building a full physics-informed mass function of Population III stars,\u201d the authors conclude. <\/p>\n<div class=\"sharedaddy sd-block sd-like jetpack-likes-widget-wrapper jetpack-likes-widget-unloaded\" id=\"like-post-wrapper-24000880-170605-6797fe9967b62\" data-src=\"https:\/\/widgets.wp.com\/likes\/?ver=14.0#blog_id=24000880&amp;post_id=170605&amp;origin=www.universetoday.com&amp;obj_id=24000880-170605-6797fe9967b62&amp;n=1\" data-name=\"like-post-frame-24000880-170605-6797fe9967b62\" data-title=\"Like or Reblog\">\n<h3 class=\"sd-title\">Like this:<\/h3>\n<p><span class=\"button\"><span>Like<\/span><\/span> <span class=\"loading\">Loading&#8230;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"sd-text-color\"\/><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><br \/>\n<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/170605\/why-the-first-stars-couldnt-grow-forever\/?rand=772204\">Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Star formation in the early Universe was a vigorous process that created gigantic stars. Called Population 3 stars, these giants were massive, extremely luminous stars, that lived short lives, many&hellip; <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":775868,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-793022","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-genaero"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/793022","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=793022"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/793022\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/775868"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=793022"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=793022"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=793022"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}