I love simple questions, or at least non-correct answers. Astronomers make them knot, for example, trying to define what a planet isYou seem to know when you see it. The same is true for the moon; In fact, the international Union of the International Union, the official manager of the names and definitions of heavenly objects, is not try To declare what a moon is. That’s probably the best This is not so easy.
What happens to stars, though? They also confused polite definition?
In a very wide sense, a star is one of those bright light points you can see in the night sky. But this is not terribly satisfying in lexicological or physical terms. After all, we know that the sun is a star, but by definition, we never see the earth’s night sky, and it is certainly not (not a point)Unless I see Pluto in the past, this is).
To help Science Journalism
If you enjoy this article, consider entering award-winning journalism Subscribe. By purchasing subscription, you are helping to ensure the future of stories about the discoveries and ideas that are conformed to today.
A basic definition dries us a little, maybe we can do better. From the centuries, we can say more of the scientific observations and theoretical physics. The stars are massive, warm and roughly spherical. They are kept together through its gravity, and are made up of plasmas (gases heat up so much electron removed from the atoms of its components). And, of course, they are bright. Those shineIt’s probably its most basic feature.
That’s definitely a descriptor but it still doesn’t tell us what a star is. What makes it different, say, a planet? Can the smallest or largest star?
To answer such questions sensibly, we must first understand the basic mechanism that makes it a bright star. Then we can use this understanding to define what is or not a star.
Historically, astronomers were in the dark for a long time. Many machines were proposed, but it wasn’t XX. Until the beginning of the twentieth century, quantum mechanics came to the rescue and the concept of nuclear fusion was introduced to humanity (better or worse). In this process, subatomical particles such as protons and neutrons can also be broken to the entire atomic nuclei to form a heavier nuclei and form a huge amount of energy.
At the heart of a star, the merger takes a terrible temperature and pressure to crush the mass over the star. In order for a star to be relatively stable, the external force of energy generated as a result of the fusion should be balanced in the inside of the star’s severity.
There are a couple of different fusion paths in the stars like the sun. In the sun, this process makes 620 million tons of metric hydrogen helium every second. This creates enough energy, throwing a power.
Here here here will be this win here to win this win, you decided to do it about the nucleus of love. And hundreds of millions of millions of metrics like you and I, for a star, is a small infinitesimally small part of his mass, it has shining thousands of years.
So we can say what a star is more confident: it is a huge gravitative mass that is balanced according to the energy gravity created as a result of a permanent nuclear nucleus. Huzzah!
Except (and you jati “Except it was” coming “) is a smaller temperature and pressure limit required to hold the fusion.
For normal stars, Jupiter’s mass is around 75 times, or a twelfth mass of the sun. Under this mass, there is insufficient pressure to start the fusion process. But no one eagerly eager to “planet” than Jupiter. Generally, Objects are too massive to be planets, but the stars are light.
Things are blurred, because brown dwarfs can suffer some kind of fusion reactions. For example, they fuse calls, with an additional neutron of hydrogen isotop in its atomic nucleus. Some can mix with lithium proton, to complete Berlllium, and two smaller processes I described earlier than the standard “single-proton hydrogen” fusion. Brown dwarfs can hold these conditions at their core, as they only have ten years old or more years old. But the question remains: Are these objects stars?
For simplicity, astronomers would prefer to keep the brown dwarfs in their team and I don’t call the stars. (Perhaps we could say that they pass a short “star phase” of the fusion after birth.) So most would say that a star has maintained a single-protocal hydrogen fusion. It is still arbitrary as well as this The fusion is eventually stopped, though this may take several trillions for slow stars. But the implementation of this light limit does not make sense.
The stars also have the upper limit on the mass. The more massive star is gravityally harder, which can significantly increase the rate of fusion reactions. But it is also horrible producing energy, making the star warmer and brighter. If the star is very massive, it can be so bright, literally becomes a tear. This limit is not well defined, but 200 times is the mass of the sun. We see stars next to the link above, for example And CarinaeAnd they are violently unstable, trapped in paroxism stars that blow gases in many rumps.
What about, then, after a star running out of his nuclear fuel? Eventually hydrogen runs out, leaving a nucleus behind helium behind. This can get comprehensive Smart, but some massive stars can enter this helium in heavier elements and these items heavier. For real heavy stars“With more than eight times than sun mass, the end comes as a catastrophic supernova who leaves behind Neutron star or black hole. The smaller stars, the more sunny stars that are greater extinction Eventually the outer layers knock their dense nucleus to show space. We call cloudy cloud stars white dwarfs.
In addition to the black hole, they are so extreme, they are worth a category that all their astronomers tend to refer to these star imprints, but the lexicology is there. These objects once a permanent fusion, but there were no more. So maybe call The stars, we know that the “usual” stars like the sun are separated. It’s a bit confusing for lay, but astronomers have all kinds of terms that started with good intentions, but they are outdated or obsolete.
That makes sense; After all, the main principle of science is that He learns. We get more data and change the opinion, although the terms we use can take some time to catch. So we are stuck with some words that will not be used in the future.
Planets, moon, stars: astronomers know and know that in the edges, these conditions can become blood in one another. Despite the blurred edges of these categories, the recognition of distinctions between their internal objects is that the universe helps us better understand.
