Figuring out mass of a star based on diameter

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter NOBARTHOLEM
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diameter Mass Star
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The mass of a star can be estimated based on its diameter using the equation R = M^{0.8} for main sequence stars, where R represents the diameter and M the mass. However, this relationship does not apply to non-main sequence stars, such as red giants and supergiants. For example, the Sun's mass remains constant as it expands into a red giant, while Betelgeuse, a supergiant, has a mass 14 times that of the Sun and a radius 630 times greater. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for accurate stellar mass calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of stellar classifications, particularly main sequence and non-main sequence stars.
  • Familiarity with the equation R = M^{0.8} for mass estimation.
  • Basic knowledge of stellar evolution, including the life cycle of stars.
  • Awareness of astronomical measurements, such as diameter and mass of celestial bodies.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the life cycle of stars, focusing on transitions from main sequence to red giant phases.
  • Study the properties of supergiant stars, using Betelgeuse as a case study.
  • Explore advanced stellar mass estimation techniques beyond the R = M^{0.8} equation.
  • Investigate the impact of stellar composition on mass and diameter relationships.
USEFUL FOR

Astronomy students, astrophysicists, and anyone interested in understanding stellar mass and diameter relationships in different types of stars.

NOBARTHOLEM
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
How do you find the mass of a star based on its diameter? are there other factors that play into it and other things like that or is it just an equation?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
For main sequence stars you can use

[tex]R=M^{.8}[/tex]

with R being the diameter. For non-main sequence stars, this doesn't hold however. For instance, when our Sun expands into a red giant, its mass will not increase but its radius will do so greatly. Another Example is Betelgeuse, a super giant with a mass 14 times that of the Sun and a radius 630 times as much.
 
i can figure out that non main sequence stars hold the same mass because its just less matter per square mile or sqaure yoctometer or whatever measure u want to use.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad How Does the Size of Neutron Stars Compare to Black Holes?
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
Undergrad Exoplanet, HD 137010 b and it's star, HD 137010
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Undergrad Why Does Gravity Remain when Star Mass Dissipates?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
High School Question: Orbital mechanics of a binary star system
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Undergrad Is the Sun a low-mass star or a medium-mass star?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Undergrad M31-2014-DS1, slow disappearance of a massive star
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad The Heavier Elements: A Question About Their Abundance
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
Undergrad J0524-0336, surprisingly high Li concentration
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad Mass Loss on an HR diagram
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Abundant water from primordial supernovae at cosmic dawn
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K