Current Issues in Planetary Nebula Studies
A long standing problem in the study of planetary nebulae is that in most cases, their distances are very poorly determined. For the nearest planetary nebulae, it is possible to determine distances by measuring their expansion parallax. High resolution observations taken several years apart will show the expansion of the nebula perpendicular to the line of sight, while spectroscopic observations of the Doppler shift will reveal the velocity of expansion in the line of sight. Comparing the angular expansion with the derived velocity of expansion will reveal the distance to the nebula.
The issue of how such a diverse range of nebular shapes can be produced is a controversial topic. It is believed that interactions between material moving away from the star at different speeds gives rise to most observed shapes. However, some astronomers believe that double central stars must be responsible for the more complex and extreme planetary nebulae. Several planetary nebulae have been shown to contain strong magnetic fields, something which has been hypothesized by Grigor Gurzadyan in the 1960s. Magnetic interactions with ionized gas could be responsible for shaping some planetary nebulae.
There are two methods of determining metal abundances in nebulae. These rely on different types of spectral lines—recombination lines and collisionally excited lines. Large discrepancies are sometimes seen between the results derived from the two methods. Some astronomers explain this by presence of small temperature fluctuations within planetary nebulae; others claim that the discrepancies are too large to be explained by temperature effects, and hypothesize the existence of cold knots containing very little hydrogen to explain the observations. However, no such knots have yet been observed.
Read more about this topic: Planetary Nebula
Famous quotes containing the words current, issues, planetary and/or studies:
“This is no argument against teaching manners to the young. On the contrary, it is a fine old tradition that ought to be resurrected from its current mothballs and put to work...In fact, children are much more comfortable when they know the guide rules for handling the social amenities. It’s no more fun for a child to be introduced to a strange adult and have no idea what to say or do than it is for a grownup to go to a formal dinner and have no idea what fork to use.”
—Leontine Young (20th century)
“Your toddler will be “good” if he feels like doing what you happen to want him to do and does not happen to feel like doing anything you would dislike. With a little cleverness you can organize life as a whole, and issues in particular, so that you both want the same thing most of the time.”
—Penelope Leach (20th century)
“We cannot cheat on DNA. We cannot get round photosynthesis. We cannot say I am not going to give a damn about phytoplankton. All these tiny mechanisms provide the preconditions of our planetary life. To say we do not care is to say in the most literal sense that “we choose death.””
—Barbara Ward (1914–1981)
“Possibly the Creator did not make the world chiefly for the purpose of providing studies for gifted novelists; but if he had done so, we can scarcely imagine that He could have offered anything much better in the way of material ...”
—Elizabeth Stuart Phelps (1844–1911)