Relationship between stellar mass and core mass?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the relationship between the mass of a star and the mass of its core, examining whether this relationship is linear or more complex. Participants consider various types of stars, including red dwarfs and larger stars like blue giants, and discuss the implications of core definitions and fusion processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether there is a simple linear relationship between stellar mass and core mass, noting that red dwarfs can fuse their entire hydrogen supply, suggesting a different core structure compared to larger stars.
  • It is proposed that red dwarfs are convective throughout their volume, which may affect the definition of the core, as fusion occurs in a small area near the center.
  • Participants highlight that the definition of "core" varies, impacting the discussion on core mass relative to total stellar mass.
  • One participant suggests that the solar value of around 30% core mass is common among main-sequence stars, with implications for core helium burning and the eventual mass of white dwarfs.
  • Another participant questions whether all large stars have a core mass of approximately 0.3 solar masses during the main sequence phase and whether larger stars simply consume their cores more rapidly.
  • It is mentioned that even red dwarfs might have cores that align with this 0.3 solar mass figure, though the exact fraction can vary with mass and age.
  • Some participants introduce concepts from astroseismology, discussing how waves travel through stars and the implications for understanding core structures.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition of "core" and its implications for understanding stellar structure. There is no consensus on whether a straightforward relationship exists between stellar mass and core mass, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on definitions of "core" and the complexity of stellar evolution processes, which may influence the relationship between stellar and core mass.

bbbl67
Messages
216
Reaction score
21
Is there an astrophysical relationship between the how large a star's core gets and how large the star itself gets? Is it a simple linear percentage, or something more complex? For example, red dwarfs can fuse their entire hydrogen allocation, so the whole star is the core. But the Sun has a core that is only 35% of its mass. How about larger stars like blue giants?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
bbbl67 said:
For example, red dwarfs can fuse their entire hydrogen allocation, so the whole star is the core.

Red dwarfs can fuse their entire supply of hydrogen because they are convective throughout their entire volume instead of only part of it like larger stars. I'm fairly certain that the core is still a small area near the center where the overwhelming majority of fusion is taking place.

I'm afraid I don't know the answer to your question though, but I hope to find out.
 
Depends on the definition what "core" is.
 
I believe the solar value of around 30% of the mass in the core is fairly ubiquitous for main-sequence stars, where "core" means the region where central fusion is happening when it is happening, or the region inside the shell fusion when it isn't. For stars that eventually achieve core helium burning, most have that occur when the core mass (of pure helium) is about a half a solar mass, so in the core helium fusing phase, it's not the fractional mass but the total mass of the core that tends to be similar. Then shell helium fusion adds even more to that, so what ends up being the core when the envelope is shed and a white dwarf is made can be more like a solar mass (for stars that have had time to make white dwarfs).
 
nikkkom said:
Depends on the definition what "core" is.
Well, you tell me what definitions of "core" there are that you know of.
 
Ken G said:
I believe the solar value of around 30% of the mass in the core is fairly ubiquitous for main-sequence stars, where "core" means the region where central fusion is happening when it is happening, or the region inside the shell fusion when it isn't. For stars that eventually achieve core helium burning, most have that occur when the core mass (of pure helium) is about a half a solar mass, so in the core helium fusing phase, it's not the fractional mass but the total mass of the core that tends to be similar. Then shell helium fusion adds even more to that, so what ends up being the core when the envelope is shed and a white dwarf is made can be more like a solar mass (for stars that have had time to make white dwarfs).
So what you're saying is that during the main sequence phase, all large stars (i.e. not red-dwarfs), from the Sun on up to R136a1, will have an approximately 0.3 solar mass core? That the largest stars just burn through their 0.3 SM cores faster?
 
I think even the red dwarfs have cores like that, in rough terms-- the exact fraction varies with mass and age. As mentioned above, the fusing cores of highly convective stars are always pulling in new gas, so for them, the core is not a region of different composition, but it can be for stars with quieter radiative cores like our Sun. But yes, the more luminous stars simply burn through their cores faster.
 
bbbl67 said:
Well, you tell me what definitions of "core" there are that you know of.

Waves travel through an object and refract at phase boundaries. The core is the region on the inside. We know that the Earth and moon have cores because of earthquakes (moonquakes). Astroseismologists study resonant frequencies in stars.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K