Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Fire  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? |
Stellar Remnant is referencing what is left after a star has gone through it's cycle. Stars lose a lot of mass throughout their life, (especially the end) so that's probably why they removed the generalization. There is only two ways I know of that a star exceeding the limit does not become a Black Hole.
A. It's part of a Binary system, as is getting absorbed by the parasitic Star.
B. The star is forced to exceed it's Roche Limit by a Black Hole or Neutron Star.