|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Stars: Solar Mass and Life Span Question - Larger Stars?
From a similar thread where I was given a link (with formula and 8 size
samples), I ran some numbers on star sizes and longevity and was surprized to find that, while the math works fine for the 5 smallest stars, it diverges dramatically for the three largest samples. Is the formula only applicable for smaller stars? Does some other variable play a part? Or what? (I assume the table is correct and not the calculated values.) The left two columns and the formula was from: http://www.astronomynotes.com/evolutn/s2.htm , while the right column was calculated in Excel. 1/(SM/1)(4-1) × 10^10 years star mass (solar Calculated masses) time (years) (years) 0.1 1000's billions 10^13 1 10 billion 10^10 1.5 3 billion 2,962,962,963 3 370 million 370,370,370 5 80 million 80,000,000 10 32 million 10,000,000 (Diverges) 30 11 million 370,370 ( -"-) 60 3 million 46,296 ( -"-) Why the divergence? TIA. Regards, Brett (still not homework) Aubrey. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Never mind. I should'a read the site. Regards, Brett.
"Brett Aubrey" wrote in message news:9%iId.139644$6l.39414@pd7tw2no... snip garbage |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Brett Aubrey" wrote in message
news:fvjId.139690$6l.132107@pd7tw2no... Never mind. I should'a read the site. Regards, Brett. I was just about to say that. Glad you caught it first ;-) "Brett Aubrey" wrote in message news:9%iId.139644$6l.39414@pd7tw2no... snip garbage |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scrapping Scram | sanman | Policy | 28 | November 7th 04 06:24 PM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Astronomy Misc | 3 | May 22nd 04 08:07 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | May 21st 04 11:44 PM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Space Station | 0 | May 21st 04 08:02 AM |
Breakthrough in Cosmology | Kazmer Ujvarosy | Policy | 0 | May 21st 04 08:00 AM |