Talk:Rigel

Absolute magnitude

Rigel is actually a multi star system. But the energy output of its components other than the main star are negligable. Its average apperent magnitude is m=0.13 and the distance is d=860 ly. With these figures its absolute magnitude should be M= -6.97 . But the article gives the figure as M= -7.84. Have I missed something? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you missed something. First, the references given for the apparent magnitude, the distance, and the absolute magnitude are not the same, so they are not necessarily consistent. In fact the reference for the absolute magnitude (which I just changed to the original paper that derived the value instead of one that was just quoting it) assumed a distance of 360 pc. There is also extinction, which many people forget about. In this case it isn't obvious how many magnitudes of extinction have been included in the calculation because the paper goes directly from the distance modulus and colour excess to the absolute magnitude. However, the difference between the distance modulus and the absolute magnitude makes it fairly clear that there are about 0.16 magnitudes of extinction in there. That is consistent with the E(B-V) of 0.05. Lithopsian (talk) 17:27, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Should we add an image showing Rigel components?

Found this image in commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rigel.png This article mentions Rigel components lots of times but they are never shown visually. I think we should add this image. It was removed on the basis that it misleads making the user think the stars are actually that close to each other. That claim is valid but if the image were to scale it would be all points and features of each star as size and color would not be appreciated. I don't know. Milkayaculturekeep (talk) 02:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't think it adds anything of accuracy. Attic Salt (talk) 02:22, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

See WP:ASTROART for the consensus policy on artistic representations in articles about astronomical objects. The key takeaway is that they must be from a reputable scientific source (although even some of those are wildly speculative and even outright misleading) and must be clearly identified as artistic impressions. This source doesn't seem to fit that criterion. See also the discussions on the talk page, there can be exceptions, for example for images clearly based on known scientific data without embellishment; much of the discussion is about how to represent exoplanets, but you get the idea. I don't think this one makes the cut. Lithopsian (talk) 18:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Distance

The first paragraph gives a distance of 860 light-years (260 pc) from Earth. Yet the sidebar lists Distance 1,010 ± 20 ly (309 ± 5 pc). KevinTernes (talk) 14:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I took a look and it seems that the infobox value was obtained using another method, but the value of 860 ly (863, to be exact) is the more widely accepted value. I have updated the infobox and added a reference. -Pax Verbum 18:54, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I would rhyme this with Nigel, but is that correct? Would it be a hard G? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:1428:C467:F0B7:ED5:AF2E:FE81 (talk) 07:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I rhyme it with Nigel, the 'g' as in jam. Some pronunciation guides give a hard 'g', but I haven't heard this actually being used. Lithopsian (talk) 17:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

And that corresponds to the tri-literal root RJL of the Arabic name (ar-Rijl al-Jauza, the foot of the giant). -- Elphion (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Evolutionary stage

The sidebar says that Rigel is on the main sequence but the text says that it has evolved away from the main sequence. Presumably the text is correct 155.137.25.15 (talk) 11:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The sidebar says that the faint companion, or at least one component of it if it is a binary, is on the main sequence. It describes the primary star (component A) as being a blue supergiant. Lithopsian (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)