Understanding Stellar Lifespans: Comparing Luminosity & Mass

AI Thread Summary
To determine the lifespan of a star compared to another based on luminosity and mass, stellar evolution simulations provide precise results, while approximate calculations can use mass scaling. The general formula indicates that a star's lifetime decreases significantly with increased mass, following the relationship τ ∼ 10^10 years (M/M☉)^-3. The mass-luminosity index varies, with lower mass stars having a higher index around 4.75, while high-mass stars exhibit a lower index closer to 3, leading to much shorter lifespans. The core activity of stars, fueled by hydrogen and helium, is crucial for their longevity and is challenging to measure accurately. Understanding these dynamics is essential for studying stellar evolution.
tommyboo
Messages
10
Reaction score
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?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
For a precise result, you would use a stellar evolution simulation to calculate the result numerically. For an approximate result, you can use an order of magnitude scaling for how long stars live---which is determined primarily by its mass.

\tau \sim 10^{10} \textrm{ yrs} \left( \frac{M}{M_\odot}\right)^{-3}

*The more massive the star, the (much) shorter its lifetime is, because its luminosity increases rapidly.

Depending on the mass range, the exponent can range somewhat (between about 2 and 3), but this is the general scaling. If you're curious about how to derive it, its based on a few simple assumptions---namely, the temperature of the star is determined by equipartition (i.e. its 'virialized'), the luminosity is thermal, and the amount of fuel is linearly related to the mass of the star.
 
Last edited:
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
 
Last edited:
Chronos said:
I think you inverted M/Msolzhermes.

Oh, damn. Thanks Chronos!
 
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 mass-luminosity index is more like 4.75 for stars from 0.7-2.0 times the Sun's mass. Very low mass stars are more convective than such Sun-like stars, and so fuse more of their fusion fuel during the Main Sequence. At the other end of the scale the index is more like 3, and high-mass stars live very rapidly indeed - typically just a few million years. Interestingly they ramp up in core temperature and fuse their way through heavier elements with very little change.
 
Stars are having gases like hydrogen and helium as their elemental compositions.They are continiously active in their core region.The life of star is dependent on this activity and quite difficult to measure it.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top