Population I vs.II Stars, fr.TomMcCarthy

[Chris Horton <ChrisAHorton2@HOTMAIL.COM>]

<<For some reason, my e-mail editor and the phys-list don't like each other.  I have looked in all my options, so I can change to a basic editor but there does not seem to any options.  I am using Outlook Web Access and it is a terribly poor program.
 
If you don't mind, could you send this question to the list?  Thank you.
Tom McCarthy

<<<<-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas McCarthy mailto:tmccarthy@sps.edu
Sent: Thu 3/28/2002 10:16 PM
To: phys-l@lists.nau.edu: Forum for Physics Educators; PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu
Cc:
Subject: Population I Vs. Population II Stars



I have a question that has bugged me for a long time.  The globular clusters have the oldest stars and are, yet, metal-poor.  The disc contains the youngest stars and are metal-rich.  How can the oldest stars, which have had a much longer time to go super-nova and mix their interiors with the medium in which they are immersed, be less metallic?  And, it is observed that these older systems lack any considerable dust lanes or free gas, implying few, if any, supernovae.  I know this implies that nearly all of the stars are members of the F class or cooler, since not only are they remaining intact but are not revealing their metallic interiors (no mixing going on).  But, it the disc was origininally made out of the exact same material (H, He) as the globular cluster, why would the dynamics of the disc instigate the formation of numerous O, B, A type stars, while the galactic bulge and the globular clusters inhibit these stars being formed?
>>>>

>>