Will the Sun end as a Type 1a supernova?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
9 replies · 2K views
Astronomy news on Phys.org
First of all, extrapolating conclusions from a general image is never a good idea.
(Btw even the image is not telling you what you think it's telling you: it says a sun-like star not Sun)

Second, it literally took me less than 1 min to find these two links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#After_core_hydrogen_exhaustion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Ia_supernova

Isn't it a better practice to take a few minutes to research something, than to quickly open a thread and then spend a couple of hours waiting for a response?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre, phinds, jim mcnamara and 1 other person
Motore said:
First of all, extrapolating conclusions from a general image is never a good idea.
(Btw even the image is not telling you what you think it's telling you: it says a sun-like star not Sun)

Second, it literally took me less than 1 min to find these two links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#After_core_hydrogen_exhaustion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Ia_supernova

Isn't it a better practice to take a few minutes to research something, than to quickly open a thread and then spend a couple of hours waiting for a response?
I had read before that the Sun will not go supernova, but only asked the question because this figure says otherwise (which is what I had mentioned in the original posting). Are you trying to say that the figure is incorrect? Or perhaps the Sun is very close to being large enough to go supernova, but will barely not, etc.? Perhaps the Sun has a very non-normal composition of metals so that it will not go supernova, but that typical stars of the Sun's size do go supernova? I would hope that the confusion is appreciated here.
 
swampwiz said:
I had read before that the Sun will not go supernova, but only asked the question because this figure says otherwise (which is what I had mentioned in the original posting). Are you trying to say that the figure is incorrect?
They are saying you are misinterpreting the figure. In fairness, it's not a great graphic.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Motore
swampwiz said:
I had read before that the Sun will not go supernova, but only asked the question because this figure says otherwise (which is what I had mentioned in the original posting). Are you trying to say that the figure is incorrect? Or perhaps the Sun is very close to being large enough to go supernova, but will barely not, etc.? Perhaps the Sun has a very non-normal composition of metals so that it will not go supernova, but that typical stars of the Sun's size do go supernova? I would hope that the confusion is appreciated here.
For a Type 1A supernova, you need to have at least a binary star system. The white dwarf accretes matter from the other star until it builds up enough mass to trigger the supernova.
So for a Sun like star to ever produce a type 1A supernova, it has to have a companion star.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: swampwiz and Bandersnatch
swampwiz said:
I had read before that the Sun will not go supernova, but only asked the question because this figure says otherwise

No, it doesn't. It really doesn't. This is your interpretation, not anything in the picture - which is illustrating another point entirely.
 
russ_watters said:
They are saying you are misinterpreting the figure. In fairness, it's not a great graphic.
mathman said:
The picture is utterly confusing. It does not indicate evolution, just lists cases.
Since the source material for this thread is very sub-standard (not the OP's fault), this thread is closed.
@swampwiz -- Please use the links posted by @Motore to answer your question. Thanks.
Motore said:
 
I know this is locked, but to be more specific; the graphic appears to have a dashed line between the White Dwarf and 1a supernova, like this: ////// That, to me, says "maybe".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: swampwiz, Motore and DaveC426913