The sun is very small, evidence

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by coyote66

 

Absolutely unbelievable....I thought Betelguese was a big star, but even it was dwarfed by those others. I can just imagine the size of the black holes when those super massive stars finally collapse

yeah it blew my mind too as i was a boy just imagine how even light requires 1 and a 1/4 hour to cross VY canis majoris in diameter.

AFAIK stelar blackholes r not big (except the supermassive blackholes). vice versa, they ought to be incredibly small. take the size of a neutron star, that is just some couple 10 km in diameter, and then squeeze it so hadrons r no more!

Originally posted by SonoftheSun
reply to post by confreak

 

Starred and Flagged !!!

Very very cool ! We are but a grain of sand...

I remember coming across a yt video that had the same effect on me :

Watch full size in HD...

Brain teasers !!!

edit on 7-7-2011 by SonoftheSun because: (no reason given)

Don't watch his version, watch this one! better music

reply to post by WhatAliens




John Barry !! He's right. Watch HIS version !!

Star for you Sir !

reply to post by SonoftheSun


Incidently, I found that video by searching for 'HD' on youtube! It was the first video returned at the time, although it's been demoted to third now! lol

Maybe someone of a higher mind than me can explain this to me...

This is the highest mass star they know of presently:
www.sciencenews.org ...

At birth it was about 320 solar masses. It's named R136a1. That's more than twice what is considered the limit for a birthing star. This link explains that stars which formed in the young universe were more massive and it was thought that stars of this mass would not be found anymore. Several links allude to the fact that most believe these hulking stars are the results of merging more than one star into one big star. This, I believe, is probably linked to the understanding that stars of this mass could only be singularly produced in the young universe.

The Eddington Limit essentially says that when a star is larger than 150 solar masses the growing core of energy outpaces the gravity and this inevitably leads to the star ripping itself apart.

So what does it mean when a star is 320 solar masses? I would presume that this would mean it would expand outward at a rapid rate and be torn apart quicker than a star that was only 155 solar masses.

That link also says that these stars which are 150 solar masses or more end in pair-instability supernovas, not normal supernovas which are associated with the lower mass stars.

So does this finding indicate that the more recent universe can produce massive stars like was thought to be the case for the young universe or instead that we've been lucky enough to find a star at the very edges of the eddington limit, rapidly killing itself as it outpaces its own gravity, and which is the result of a merging of stars in previous times into a single impressive solar mass.