Thread: Reinforcing Theoretical Mass Limit for Stars
View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 12-20-2006
Blue Fire's Avatar
Blue Fire Blue Fire is offline
Senior Member
  
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western New York State
Posts: 245
Send a message via ICQ to Blue Fire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon Star View Post
You are actually, I think you got 150 for the maximum predicted mass that a Star can sufficiently support it's self. (the opposite of becoming a black hole ) Though the largest Star known is thought to have a mass of just over 100 solar masses.
Quote:
Quote:
A quantitative analysis of this idea led to the prediction that a stellar remnant above about three to five times the mass of the Sun (the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit) would be unable to support itself as a neutron star via degeneracy pressure, and would inevitably collapse into a black hole.
-Wiki.
So, the key words here for me seem to be Stellar Remnant, and 3-5 solar masses would be the lower limit for a star in the condition of being a stellar remnant for collapsing to a black hole. Right? If so, then stars of much greater mass can exist without ever becoming a black hole simply because their particular life cycle would be different and result in a supernova or something else aside from a black hole?
__________________
Have you ever been just about to grasp the truth when somebody suddenly yanked it out of your reach?
Reply With Quote