A question about star's luminosity, temperature and mass.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between a star's luminosity, temperature, mass, and size. Participants explore whether stars with the same luminosity and temperature must also share the same mass and size, considering various factors that may influence these properties.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that if two stars have the same luminosity and temperature, they typically must have the same size, as stars behave like blackbodies.
  • Others argue that factors such as metallicity can lead to stars of the same luminosity and temperature having different masses.
  • One participant emphasizes that age, composition, and the star's radiative or convective characteristics are crucial, challenging the notion that luminosity is a simple function of mass and size.
  • Another participant proposes that initial mass determines many stellar characteristics, including radius and luminosity, but acknowledges this may be an oversimplification.
  • Some participants mention the role of opacity in stellar evolution, noting that increased opacity can affect luminosity and temperature relationships.
  • There are claims that the luminosity of a star is fundamentally determined by its radius and temperature, but this is contested by others who point out additional factors like opacity and evolutionary stage.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between luminosity, temperature, mass, and size, with no consensus reached. Some assert that size must be the same for stars with identical luminosity and temperature, while others argue that various factors can lead to differences in mass and size.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram and discuss the implications of stellar age and composition, but the discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact relationships and dependencies among the discussed properties.

  • #31
Also there are two H-R diagrams. Theorists work with bolometric luminosity versus effective temperature. You run the computer model, that gives you energy output and a radius were pressure goes to zero, you then calculate an effective temperature.

Observers work with color versus absolute magnitude. You measure the brightness of the star with two colored filters and plot on one axis, you take the visual magnitude correct for distance, plot on the other axis.

These two scales are roughly the same, but if you want to do precision work, then you have to apply all sorts of correction terms. In the observers diagram you are measuring color temperature whereas in the theorists diagram, you are measuring effective temperature. People go spend a ton of effort getting all this right, see..

http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/120/2/1072/990160.text.html

The pattern in which everything becomes more complicated when you look at it closely is common thing in astronomy. For example if I ask you want time is it, do you mean TCG, TCG, UT, or TAI?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
Vanadium 50 said:
Rishavutkarsh, I am sorry, but none of that is true. The luminosity of a star is determined by its radius and temperature.

Luminosity in what energy band? A star isn't a blackbody of course, it has a distribution of temperatures and opacities at different depths and so does not have a single defined "temperature" and "surface".
 
  • #33
Chronos said:
There is no good way to calculate the size of a stars photosphere based on luminosity that I know of - too many variables.

What I am most interested in is having an acceptable approximation of luminosity, radius, surface temperature (and thus color) based on initial mass and approximate age. I'm not coming at the problem based on observed stars, but on initial mass.

Someone else 'round here mentioned metallicity influencing the visible output/temperature of a star, and that seems fair... but to what level? a percent? Are there terms I can research that would lead to understanding or measuring likely metallicity based on initial environment? or to what effect and degree their presence incurs?
 
  • #34


I have been finding formula's for just about everything about stars and
was wondering if core and surface temperature has a formula as well?

Its 2,771,043 for the Sun as an example.( core / surface)kelvin.


Thanks
Bob
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
383
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K