Jump to content

Talk:VY Canis Majoris: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Nelfer (talk | contribs)
Line 81: Line 81:


Yeah... I don't think we can even observe stars in other galaxies. We can barely see the entire (other) galaxies, let alone the individual stars within them. Yes, this is all in our Milky Way.[[User:Nelfer|Nelfer]] ([[User talk:Nelfer|talk]]) 14:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah... I don't think we can even observe stars in other galaxies. We can barely see the entire (other) galaxies, let alone the individual stars within them. Yes, this is all in our Milky Way.[[User:Nelfer|Nelfer]] ([[User talk:Nelfer|talk]]) 14:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong, Nelfer. Read on the observable universe and galaxy articles. We can observe other galaxies. [[Special:Contributions/64.251.85.182|64.251.85.182]] ([[User talk:64.251.85.182|talk]]) 20:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


== Maximum star size ==
== Maximum star size ==

Revision as of 20:09, 14 November 2008

WikiProject iconAstronomy: Astronomical objects Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

Mass

There are two different theories of upper mass limit of red supergiants.

One theory says the mass limit is about 40 times solar masses. The other theory says the mass limit is about 25 times solar masses.

If the characteristics in wikipedia pages of the two red supergiants "VY CMa" and "VV Cep" are accurate , the former mass limit is correct. But the simulation tracks of steller evolutions by the current theory accord with the latter mass limit.

I hope the former mass limit(40 times solar massses) is correct.

Kometsuga 16:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Size

Regarding the size calculation... assuming a solar radius of 6.96 x10^8 meters, 1800 to 2100 solar radii would be roughly 777 to 908 million miles. Given that Saturns orbit varies between 838 and 939 miles, the edge of the star could be, at times, beyond the orbit of Saturn. Xlation 18:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)=[reply]

Wow

That size comparison w/the sun is absolutely mind-boggling. I have a hard time believing that a star could be that large.C1k3 07:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed- the sheer scale of the Universe and the things in it takes my breath away at times. --Ifitmovesnukeit 19:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yo momma so fat, she's bigger than a ja jestem cwelemVY Canis Majoris! -- Zondor 20:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh oh

I just got to think of a thing, if the star Eta Carinae is 7.500 light years away from earth and when it becomes a supernova it might effect earth(i know its not a lethal effect but still ) and if YV Canis Majoris is 5000 light years away then what the hell happens when it goes supernova!? (if it does) :S Kitten!meow 19:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Kitten!Meow[reply]

Isn't mass the important factor when it comes to supernova effectivity? Well, I'm not a scientist so I wouldn't be sure. 124.106.234.29 (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't their a Hipparcos number, or an HD number?? I want to research this star farther on a universe simulation application that I have at home. Can someone put that number on the actual article?? Thanks..65.117.69.179 (talk) 17:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

162000 yr calc seems off

That 162,000 yrs calculation is way off. If VY is 2100x the radius of the Sun, which itself is 109x the radius of earth, then the circumference of VY is 2100*109 times the circumference of the Earth. Since 109*2100 is about 229,000, then if it took someone 2.9 years to walk Earth's circumference doing about 24 miles a day, then 2.9 years * 229,000 is about 664,000 years to walk the circumference of VY Canis Majoris. Mark --70.108.162.180 02:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Others authors (Monnier 2004; see page #16 of [[1]] give an even larguer size for that star; the radius of 14 AU given there correspond to a real radius of 3000 times the one of our sun. However, it assumes a low temperature for the star.

I did find the numbers for this star. Please keep them in reference while you edit the page. I just might go ahead and add them if I can.

HIP 35793 HD 58061 SAO 173591

Reference is SIMBAD Thanks so much.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.88.139 (talk) 02:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

concurrency question

I'm not very well informed on how astronomists usually interpret a sentence such as "This star is likely to undergo a hypernova stage by 3200." in combination with the statements that it is 5k lightyears away, but would that mean that it actually probably underwent a hypernova around -1800 and that we will see this event in about 3200, or that it will undergo a hypernova around 3200 and that we will see this event around 8200?

Could somebody with more knowledge of the subject please clarify this a bit in the article?

I would guess that the correct interpretation is that the hypernova "really" happened ~1800 BCE and that we would observe it in 3200, since the information used by astronomers to make these estimations is ~5000 years old. However, there's always the possibility that these same astronomers already accounted for the travel time and believe that the star has already novaed...

--72.150.43.254 (talk) 04:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume , and we all know what happens when you assume something.

Since all things rotate around a something, The Earth rotates around the Sun, the Moon around Earth, what does this giant rotate around. This is scary.

My balls are bigger than your balls!!!. --NEMT 06:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Around the center of the galaxy. --142.176.13.19 22:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hypernova 3200

Why do scientists think it will hypernova in only 1200 years. Even though this star is in the terminal phase of its existence, it may not hypernova for 100,000 years. Why do they have a date. How can they know this --142.176.13.19 22:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's an un-referenced addition by an IP editor. I'm removing it. Hatch68 16:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would kick that star's star ass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.122.7 (talk) 04:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yeah, damn pussy star. Vael Victus (talk) 20:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parent Galaxy

This thing is in our galaxy, right? If so, I suggest adding that fact. Or is it just understood that stars with Wikipedia pages are in the Milky Way unless otherwise noted? Jyoshimi (talk) 22:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... I don't think we can even observe stars in other galaxies. We can barely see the entire (other) galaxies, let alone the individual stars within them. Yes, this is all in our Milky Way.Nelfer (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're wrong, Nelfer. Read on the observable universe and galaxy articles. We can observe other galaxies. 64.251.85.182 (talk) 20:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum star size

Does anyone know why "the largest possible star is approximately 2,600 times the radius of the Sun"? Louis Waweru  Talk  22:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eddington luminosity.Geni 10:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saturn in the bath

Article says:

If a human could walk on the surface of Canis Majoris...

Yeah, if the Moon would be a green cheese! Or, if Saturn was put in a huge ocean. Said: Rursus () 21:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original research for walking time?

Uh, is that walking time estimate listed anywhere? Also, is it even necessary to have a walking time estimate given that nobody will ever walk around that star? There are better ways to give a size comparison than a walking time estimate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.43.36.45 (talk) 00:45, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had tagged it as WP:SYN but that was removed. If anything it's just a useless comparison that probably should be removed. --George100 (talk) 00:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some people have trouble with really big numbers. But somehow, if you compare those numbers to money, then they can make a relationship. Like saying if the Earth was $1, then .... they get it. Try it with someone and you'll see.Nelfer (talk) 15:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]