Sumário
- Preface
1Science and the Universe: A Brief Tour
2Observing the Sky: The Birth of Astronomy
7Other Worlds: An Introduction to the Solar System
13Comets and Asteroids: Debris of the Solar System
14Cosmic Samples and the Origin of the Solar System
18The Stars: A Celestial Census
20Between the Stars: Gas and Dust in Space
21The Birth of Stars and the Discovery of Planets outside the Solar System
27Active Galaxies, Quasars, and Supermassive Black Holes
- AHow to Study for an Introductory Astronomy Class
- BAstronomy Websites, Images, and Apps
- CScientific Notation
- DUnits Used in Science
- ESome Useful Constants for Astronomy
- FPhysical and Orbital Data for the Planets
- GSelected Moons of the Planets
- HFuture Total Eclipses
- IThe Nearest Stars, Brown Dwarfs, and White Dwarfs
- JThe Brightest Twenty Stars
- KThe Chemical Elements
- LThe Constellations
- MStar Chart and Sky Event Resources
- Index
Thought Questions
Thought Questions
What methods do scientists use to distinguish a meteorite from terrestrial material?
Why do iron meteorites represent a much higher percentage of finds than of falls?
Why is it more useful to classify meteorites according to whether they are primitive or differentiated rather than whether they are stones, irons, or stony-irons?
Which meteorites are the most useful for defining the age of the solar system? Why?
Suppose a new primitive meteorite is discovered (sometime after it falls in a field of soybeans) and analysis reveals that it contains a trace of amino acids, all of which show the same rotational symmetry (unlike the Murchison meteorite). What might you conclude from this finding?
How do we know when the solar system formed? Usually we say that the solar system is 4.5 billion years old. To what does this age correspond?
We have seen how Mars can support greater elevation differences than Earth or Venus. According to the same arguments, the Moon should have higher mountains than any of the other terrestrial planets, yet we know it does not. What is wrong with applying the same line of reasoning to the mountains on the Moon?
Present theory suggests that giant planets cannot form without condensation of water ice, which becomes vapor at the high temperatures close to a star. So how can we explain the presence of jovian-sized exoplanets closer to their star than Mercury is to our Sun?
Why are meteorites of primitive material considered more important than other meteorites? Why have most of them been found in Antarctica?