- #1
tommyboo
- 10
- 0
Hi, all how would you go about finding out how much longer a star would live compared to another if you knew the one star was x times more luminous and y times more massive?
Chronos said:I think you inverted [itex] M/Msol [/itex]zhermes.
Chronos said:I think you inverted M/Msolar, zhermes. The customary formula is
10^10 x 1/M^2.5 where M is in solar masses
re: http://mais-ccd-spectroscopy.com/Stellar%20Evolution%20Lesson.pdf
The luminosity of a star is directly proportional to its mass. This means that the more massive a star is, the more luminous it will be. This relationship is known as the mass-luminosity relationship.
The mass of a star plays a crucial role in determining its lifespan. Generally, the more massive a star is, the shorter its lifespan will be. This is because more massive stars burn through their fuel at a faster rate, leading to a shorter overall lifespan.
Yes, a low-mass star can have a longer lifespan than a high-mass star. This is because low-mass stars have less mass to burn through, so they use up their fuel at a slower rate and can live for billions of years.
Yes, there is a limit to how massive a star can be. This limit is known as the Eddington limit and is determined by the balance between the outward pressure of radiation and the inward pull of gravity. If a star exceeds this limit, it will face instability and potentially explode as a supernova.
Yes, a star's luminosity can change over its lifespan. As a star burns through its fuel, it will eventually run out and can either become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole. Each of these objects has a different luminosity, so the overall brightness of the star will change as it evolves.