Talk:Quasar: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Aldebarium (talk | contribs) |
→revision 884056298: "At the source..." vs {{Solar luminosity}} |
||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
:It would also be helpful if you could provide a citation to back up the statement that this is the most luminous known quasar. I would recommend more precise wording for what you wrote, e,g., "the luminosity of this quasar is x {{Solar luminosity}}" rather than "shines like x trillion Suns". And I'm not sure what you mean with the statement that the peak luminosity of a supernova is "mere seconds". The comparison to Type Ia supernovae seems a bit out of context in any case. I recommend against using terminology like "shine no brighter than" when you are referring to an object's luminosity, because again, brightness in astronomy should not be confused with [[luminosity]] or power. Instead, it would be better to give a clear statement of luminosity or power in units of {{Solar luminosity}}. [[User:Aldebarium|Aldebarium]] ([[User talk:Aldebarium|talk]]) 22:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC) |
:It would also be helpful if you could provide a citation to back up the statement that this is the most luminous known quasar. I would recommend more precise wording for what you wrote, e,g., "the luminosity of this quasar is x {{Solar luminosity}}" rather than "shines like x trillion Suns". And I'm not sure what you mean with the statement that the peak luminosity of a supernova is "mere seconds". The comparison to Type Ia supernovae seems a bit out of context in any case. I recommend against using terminology like "shine no brighter than" when you are referring to an object's luminosity, because again, brightness in astronomy should not be confused with [[luminosity]] or power. Instead, it would be better to give a clear statement of luminosity or power in units of {{Solar luminosity}}. [[User:Aldebarium|Aldebarium]] ([[User talk:Aldebarium|talk]]) 22:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC) |
||
No need to mention "the most luminous known quasar", I now think; |
|||
still, I like comparing it to supernovae, as others have done before. |
|||
{{Solar luminosity}} is more appropriate for a University textbook, not Wikipedia. At the source, J043947.08+163415.7 shines like 600 trillion Suns. |
|||
"At the source..." is something most anyone can understand. |
|||
[[User:Jeff Relf|Jeff Relf]] ([[User talk:Jeff Relf|talk]]) 23:24, 19 February 2019 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:24, 19 February 2019
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Quasar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
.jpg){kind=small} | Physics B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small} | Astronomy: Astronomical objects B‑class Top‑importance | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
 | This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (September 2010) |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AjBongiorno (article contribs).
Citations for some of the info on this page
There seems to be some citations missing. In particular, I can't see any reference for "600 Earths per minute" in the Properties section, or indeed for many of the numbers and statements in that section. Can anyone help out?
Jim421616 (talk) 21:52, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
revision 884056298
[User:Aldebarium] Undid revision 884056298 by Jeff Relf (me), saying:
Brightness and luminosity don't mean the same thing: brightness refers to apparent brightness
J043947.08+163415.7 shines like 600 trillion Suns, more than supernovae.
Certainly, "the most luminous object known to man" is worth noting. Jeff Relf (talk) 22:06, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed, it's relevant for the quasar article to note the most luminous known quasar. Aldebarium (talk) 22:30, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- It would also be helpful if you could provide a citation to back up the statement that this is the most luminous known quasar. I would recommend more precise wording for what you wrote, e,g., "the luminosity of this quasar is x L☉" rather than "shines like x trillion Suns". And I'm not sure what you mean with the statement that the peak luminosity of a supernova is "mere seconds". The comparison to Type Ia supernovae seems a bit out of context in any case. I recommend against using terminology like "shine no brighter than" when you are referring to an object's luminosity, because again, brightness in astronomy should not be confused with luminosity or power. Instead, it would be better to give a clear statement of luminosity or power in units of L☉. Aldebarium (talk) 22:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
No need to mention "the most luminous known quasar", I now think; still, I like comparing it to supernovae, as others have done before.
L☉ is more appropriate for a University textbook, not Wikipedia. At the source, J043947.08+163415.7 shines like 600 trillion Suns. "At the source..." is something most anyone can understand. Jeff Relf (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Categories:
- B-Class physics articles
- High-importance physics articles
- B-Class physics articles of High-importance
- B-Class Astronomy articles
- Top-importance Astronomy articles
- B-Class Astronomy articles of Top-importance
- B-Class Astronomical objects articles
- Pages within the scope of WikiProject Astronomical objects (WP Astronomy Banner)