Why Do Some Stars Grow So Massive?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mjacobsca
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Stars
AI Thread Summary
Some stars, like Eta Carinae and The Pistol Star, can be over 100 times more massive than the Sun due to factors such as the chemical composition and rotational velocity of the nebular gas cloud during formation. While hydrogen fusion initiates at similar mass and density for many stars, variations in available gas can lead to significant differences in mass accumulation. Once fusion begins, smaller stars like the Sun may not push away remaining gas, allowing for potential mass accumulation even after ignition. The formation and characteristics of hypergiants remain complex and not fully understood, similar to the nature of supermassive black holes. Stellar formation continues to be an active area of research with many unanswered questions.
mjacobsca
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Why are some stars so much more massive than others? Eta Carinae and The Pistol Star are 100X more massive than the Sun. When stars are forming, doesn't hydrogen fusion begin at about the same mass and density for all stars? Or does chemical composition and rotational velocity of the nebular gas cloud contribute to such huge variations? I assume Eta Carinae had a larger amount of available gas in the first place. But if fusion can start when the star has accumulated smaller mass like our Sun, why doesn't it ignite and push the remaining gas away before growing larger? Can it accumulate more mass from the gas cloud after igniting? I also assume collisions with other stars are rare enough not to be considered.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I suggest that you Google "stellar accretion rates" and start browsing the papers and following the citations in them.
 
mjacobsca said:
Why are some stars so much more massive than others? Eta Carinae and The Pistol Star are 100X more massive than the Sun. When stars are forming, doesn't hydrogen fusion begin at about the same mass and density for all stars? Or does chemical composition and rotational velocity of the nebular gas cloud contribute to such huge variations? I assume Eta Carinae had a larger amount of available gas in the first place. But if fusion can start when the star has accumulated smaller mass like our Sun, why doesn't it ignite and push the remaining gas away before growing larger? Can it accumulate more mass from the gas cloud after igniting? I also assume collisions with other stars are rare enough not to be considered.

From what I understand, red giants are really long lived stars and much less dense and cooler than the short-lived massive hot stars that produce the higher elements in nuclear fusion and distribute them by becoming supernovae.
 
The honest answer is that some stars (not 100x) such as hypergiants, much like supermassive black holes, don't have one clear explanation. Stellar formation isn't exactly a mystery, but it's an ongoing realm of study with unanswered questions.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
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...
Back
Top