- #1

- 116

- 1

M(max)=4/9*R/G*c^2

Calculations show that Sun can absorb almost 200,000 more Suns and remain it its current radius and stay away from collapsing.

Is this correct?

- Thread starter victorvmotti
- Start date

- #1

- 116

- 1

M(max)=4/9*R/G*c^2

Calculations show that Sun can absorb almost 200,000 more Suns and remain it its current radius and stay away from collapsing.

Is this correct?

- #2

mfb

Mentor

- 34,824

- 11,006

If you try to produce such an object by adding more and more mass from the outside, however, you produce a star with extremely strong stellar winds that will prevent more mass from getting added.

- #3

- 116

- 1

I was essentially trying to picture a thought experiment here.

If you try to produce such an object by adding more and more mass from the outside, however, you produce a star with extremely strong stellar winds that will prevent more mass from getting added.

How much mass-energy could fit into the current radius of Sun, referring to the condition of a static Star obtained from Buchdahl’s Theorem, which sets the upper limit.

- #4

- 9,862

- 1,057

Buchdahl's theorem assumes that the material the object (in this case the sun) is made of is incompressible and of constant density, i.e. that it's proper volume doesn't shrink under pressure. This isn't the case for the sun, so I wouldn't expect the theoretical maximum mass given by the theorem to be reached.

M(max)=4/9*R/G*c^2

Calculations show that Sun can absorb almost 200,000 more Suns and remain it its current radius and stay away from collapsing.

Is this correct?

- #5

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Education Advisor

2019 Award

- 25,425

- 8,614

- #6

- 116

- 1

After introducing the maximum mass-energy allowable equation on page 234 he writes:

"Thus, if we try to squeeze a greater mass than this inside a radius R, general relativity admits no static solutions; a star that shrinks to such a size must inevitably keep shrinking, eventually forming a black hole. We derived this result from the rather strong assumption that the density is constant, but it continues to hold when that assumption considerably weakened."

- #7

- 9,862

- 1,057

Your original post:

After introducing the maximum mass-energy allowable equation on page 234 he writes:

"Thus, if we try to squeeze a greater mass than this inside a radius R, general relativity admits no static solutions; a star that shrinks to such a size must inevitably keep shrinking, eventually forming a black hole. We derived this result from the rather strong assumption that the density is constant, but it continues to hold when that assumption considerably weakened."

didn't state this. Your followup:victorvmotti said:Calculations show that Sun can absorb almost 200,000 more Suns and remain it its current radius and stay away from collapsing.

basically asserts correctly that Buchdal's theorem gives an upper limit to the mass that would fit into an object with the circumference of the sun. (We could quibble some over the difference between "radius of the sun" and "circumference of the sun", but I'm currently not thinking that the issue is important enough to argue about).victorvmotti said:How much mass-energy could fit into the current radius of Sun,

The point that the theoretical upper limit given by the theorem wouldn't be reached if you used the hydrogen/helium/other mix that the sun uses is the point I was trying to convey.

This isn't the case for the sun, so I wouldn't expect the theoretical maximum mass given by the theorem to be reached.

- #8

- 116

- 1

Can you explain the difference and why is it so?Your original post:

but I'm currently not thinking that the issue is important enough to argue about.

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 16

- Views
- 4K

- Replies
- 40

- Views
- 7K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 16

- Views
- 10K

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 4K

- Replies
- 11

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 688

- Last Post

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 4K

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 2K