The R163 object in Tarantula Nebula was known for years, but just know it's stars were identified precisely
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10707416
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Probably in the known universe.This thread title is incorrect, how can anyone be sure this is the biggest?
specialzed
It's not the bigest star, it's the most massive and luminous star - totaly different things, although it is still very big - 35 times more wider in radius than the sun, there is a picture.. You will find that quite often the biggest stars in the universe weight a lot less than our sun. Actually our sun is extremely dense for it's little size.
"Biggest" and "most massive" are the same thing, 2 words for the same thing that this new star is not.It's not the bigest star, it's the most massive and luminous star - totaly different things, although it is still very big - 35 times more wider in radius than the sun, there is a picture.. You will find that quite often the biggest stars in the universe weight a lot less than our sun. Actually our sun is extremely dense for it's little size.
Artas1984
[QUOTE="Artas1984"]"Biggest" and "most massive" are the same thing, 2 words for the same thing that this new star is not.It's not the bigest star, it's the most massive and luminous star - totaly different things, although it is still very big - 35 times more wider in radius than the sun, there is a picture.. You will find that quite often the biggest stars in the universe weight a lot less than our sun. Actually our sun is extremely dense for it's little size.
specialzed
ONCE AGAIN - IT IS NOT THE SAME THING..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_stars
Big is an adjective that determines the visual size of the object, not it's density.
It's not the bigest star, it's the most massive and luminous star - totaly different things, although it is still very big - 35 times more wider in radius than the sun, there is a picture.. You will find that quite often the biggest stars in the universe weight a lot less than our sun. Actually our sun is extremely dense for it's little size.
Artas1984
You know what that means. Fusion, Doubles Get; Iron; Collapses into itself: AN HERO.
We can only wish....[QUOTE="jubino"]
I thought this was a thread about Kim Kardashian and her massive glutes.
MrMcElliot
If you do, it will probably be about 11 nanoseconds before you doi want to witness a supernova b4 i die....
GrabTheYayo
Isn't this like a week old?ferrari2001Because it's a week old means it can't be posted on GS? :?
I don't know how they can tell by those photos because I sure can't. -Tish-
they dont use the picture to measure anything. to find mass they use either a binary star with newton's version of kepler's third law or they plot it on the H-R diagram as long as it is in the main sequence. to find temp they use the stars color and spectral lines, to find distance they probably use stellar parallax as long as the star is close enough, or they might use a standard candle within the cloud that the star is located in or use the inverse square law for light, to find luminosity they use inverse square law for light, which uses distance and apparent magnitude, or the H-R diagram. :)
i want to witness a supernova b4 i die....
GrabTheYayo
The last supernova witnessed bye eye was in 2008, so it's not a rare occurrence, you might get your chance - stay looking all day at the skies with a 7,5 cm refractor, don't go to job, don't meet friends, don't eat and don't do other things alike - just stay focused on the skies and you might witness a barely noticeable appearance of a new spot!!!
The mods will get you for sure if you ever made a thread about that..So we can make a hottest star thread but not a hottest girl thread. Boo I demand a democratic vote on this.
kidsmelly
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment