New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Milky Way X-ray Mystery Deepens

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Astronomers have long puzzled over the origin of the x-ray glow in the middle of our Milky Way galaxy. Previous spectral measurements have hinted at the source of the diffuse light, but the data were inconclusive. Recently, observers spent 170 hours pointing NASA's Chandra x-ray telescope at a 100-light-year-wide region around the galactic center in hopes of elucidating matters. The results raise as many questions as they answer.

To study the diffuse x-ray emission, Michael Muno of UCLA and his collaborators removed from the Chandra image 2,357 bright points that came from obvious x-ray sources, like white dwarfs, neutron stars and black holes, as well as distant galaxies lying behind the Milky Way. The remaining sources in the image were too faint to identify. But the researchers determined that these unresolved sources could not account for all of the remaining x-rays. In fact, they estimated that the galactic center would have to contain 200,000 of the known x-ray objects--10 times more than are predicted to exist--in order to generate the leftover light in the image.

Instead the majority of the galactic center's ghostlike x-ray emission appears to be coming from two bodies of hot ionized gas, or plasma. The two plasmas occupy essentially the same volume, but one has a temperature of 10 million degrees Celsius and the other about 100 million degrees C. The cooler gas is most likely gas blown off during the violent deaths of massive stars.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But the origin of the hotter gas remains an enigma. It is so hot that the galaxy's gravity cannot keep it from boiling off into intergalactic space. Supernovae and stellar winds could replenish the gas, but their typical energy is not enough to produce a 100-million-degree plasma. As an explanation, the researchers posit that cosmic rays, magnetic fields and excess supernovae could provide additional heat, but they note that none of these theories are entirely successful.

The heating problem may call into question some of the basic understanding of the composition of the interstellar medium. "I think it deepens the mystery more than anything," Muno remarks. The answer, he thinks, may come when the Japanese satellite Astro-E2 is launched. Its ability to distinguish features in the x-ray spectrum will complement Chandra's ability to distinguish objects in the sky, Muno explains: "I think that should really nail it down." The team's findings are slated for the September 20 Astrophysical Journal.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe