The Action of the dying Sun

Why does the sun expand out as far as Jupiter before it contracts all
the way back to becoming a White Dwarf? Our sun would end up as a
neutron star if it had 50% more mass. A star with to much mass is not
beneficial for life. I don't think rock planets could form if their sun
only lasted for 100 million years. Lets go with that supermassive star
Eta Carinae it had a giant outburst,and released as much energy as a
supernova. This star is still around. Hmmmm How did it survive that
explosion? Astronomers estimate its mass to be 100 times that of the
sun. With that mass it should end up as a blackhole. It could be the
seed for another mini-bang that will reach a critical mass,and the
moment it stops spinning its horizon will collape into the core,and
release its singularity. to create a mirror image of the universe it
was recycled from.(I love that idea) Bert

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Why does the sun expand out as far as Jupiter before it contracts all
the way back to becoming a White Dwarf? Our sun would end up as a
neutron star if it had 50% more mass. A star with to much mass is not
beneficial for life. I don't think rock planets could form if their sun
only lasted for 100 million years. Lets go with that supermassive star
Eta Carinae it had a giant outburst,and released as much energy as a
supernova. This star is still around. Hmmmm How did it survive that
explosion? Astronomers estimate its mass to be 100 times that of the
sun. With that mass it should end up as a blackhole. It could be the
seed for another mini-bang that will reach a critical mass,and the
moment it stops spinning its horizon will collape into the core,and
release its singularity. to create a mirror image of the universe it
was recycled from.(I love that idea) Bert

What about if Eta Carinae will become a gravastar?
Or this theory is completely wrong?

Luigi Caselli

Hi Casselli I never heard of a "gravastar" Sounds interesting please
explain. Bert

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hi Casselli I never heard of a "gravastar" Sounds interesting please
explain. Bert

It's an interesting new theory a bit difficult to believe (not more than
black holes...)

You can see a rapid overview at
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...rs_020423.html

"Emil Mottola of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and Pawel Mazur of the
University of South Carolina suggest that instead of a star collapsing into
a pinpoint of space with virtually infinite gravity, its matter is
transformed into a spherical void surrounded by an extremely durable form of
matter never before experienced on Earth."
"The matter inside a gravastar would be akin to the Bose-Einstein
condensate. It would exist in a vacuum, surrounded by an ultra-thin,
ultra-cold, ultra-dark bubble, hence the name gra (vitational) va (cuum)
star, or gravastar."

I like this theory because I've always hated singularities, they bring too
much entropy in our universe...
..
Luigi Caselli

nightbat wrote

Luigi Caselli wrote:

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hi Casselli I never heard of a "gravastar" Sounds interesting please
explain. Bert

It's an interesting new theory a bit difficult to believe (not more than
black holes...)

You can see a rapid overview at
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...rs_020423.html

"Emil Mottola of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and Pawel Mazur of the
University of South Carolina suggest that instead of a star collapsing into
a pinpoint of space with virtually infinite gravity, its matter is
transformed into a spherical void surrounded by an extremely durable form of
matter never before experienced on Earth."
"The matter inside a gravastar would be akin to the Bose-Einstein
condensate. It would exist in a vacuum, surrounded by an ultra-thin,
ultra-cold, ultra-dark bubble, hence the name gra (vitational) va (cuum)
star, or gravastar."

I like this theory because I've always hated singularities, they bring too
much entropy in our universe...
.
Luigi Caselli

nightbat

Yes, Luigi, slowly many are coming around to nightbat's " Black
Comet " profound resolution for black hole paradox. Many scientists
have been getting clues from us net Mavericks for quite some time now.
Glad you like the fact simile gravastar to original nightbat no hole in
space idea over a more credible extremely dense neutron star class one
going over Chandra limit and metamorphosing into super plasma state.
Funny, ha, ha, as soon as they get a clue and immediately try to name
and claim it as theirs, they get caught and dated and try to do a patch
up job of playing catch up. Unless you have the right working model
you're out in left field. Too much entropy, ha, ha, it was always there
just imbedded in the quantum space fabric (VED). Bert speculates in his
" what if " posts that the Earth was hit by a comet. I have tried to
explain to him that the Earth was a " Black Comet ". The large Oort
cloud and high momentum broken off smaller ice comets are some of the
remains of the blown away outer core shell of the Black Comet as it came
into its galactic dispersed normal gravity restabilization position.
Ever wonder how white comets have so much power, ha, ha, it's all in the
remaining super condensed plasma gas.


the nightbat

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
Why does the sun expand out as far as Jupiter before it contracts all
the way back to becoming a White Dwarf?

Our sun would end up as a
neutron star if it had 50% more mass.

"The stars that eventually become neutron stars are thought to start out
with about 15 to 30 times the mass of our sun."
http://www.astro.umd.edu/~miller/nstar.html#formation


A star with to much mass is not
beneficial for life. I don't think rock planets could form if their sun
only lasted for 100 million years. Lets go with that supermassive star
Eta Carinae it had a giant outburst,and released as much energy as a
supernova. This star is still around. Hmmmm How did it survive that
explosion? Astronomers estimate its mass to be 100 times that of the
sun. With that mass it should end up as a blackhole. It could be the
seed for another mini-bang that will reach a critical mass,and the
moment it stops spinning its horizon will collape into the core,and
release its singularity. to create a mirror image of the universe it
was recycled from.(I love that idea) Bert

JohnZ Read that book again. In my book (just studied it),and it tells
me a star with 1.4 mass greater than the sun would end up as a neurton
star. However JohnZ we should stop throwing books at each other,and
discuss things. You started it so you have to end it.. My books are
heavier than yours,and I can add more pages to it for sure. Bert

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
JohnZ Read that book again. In my book (just studied it),and it tells
me a star with 1.4 mass greater than the sun would end up as a neurton
star. However JohnZ we should stop throwing books at each other,and
discuss things. You started it so you have to end it.. My books are
heavier than yours,and I can add more pages to it for sure. Bert

Nonsense. Your "Heavy Books" probably say something like "a Neutron Star is
about 1.4 solar masses". A Neutron Star does not contain the entire mass of
its progenitor. I suggest you take a closer look at your "Heavy Books".

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
JohnZ Read that book again. In my book (just studied it),and it tells
me a star with 1.4 mass greater than the sun would end up as a neurton
star.

"It is believed that the remnant of a core collapse SN is a neutron star if
the mass of the progenitor is less than ~ 20-25M(Sun) [80, 78]. If the
progenitor's mass is in the range 20-25 ~ M ~ 40-50M(Sun), not the entire
star is ejected in the SN explosion. More than 2M(Sun) will fall back onto
the nascent neutron star and lead to black hole formation. If the
progenitor's mass exceeds roughly 40-50M(Sun), then no explosion will occur
and the star will collapse directly to a black hole. These objects are known
as collapsars. However, it is unclear if high metallicity stars with M ~
40-50M(Sun) actually end their lives in collapse or are prevented from doing
so by stellar wind driven mass loss [78]. Note that the limits on the
progenitor masses quoted in this paragraph (especially the 40-45M(Sun),
lower limit for direct black hole formation) are uncertain because the
progenitor mass dependence of the neutrino explosion mechanism (see below)
is unknown [88, 150]."
http://www.emis.de/journals/LRG/Arti...new/node9.html


However JohnZ we should stop throwing books at each other,and
discuss things. You started it so you have to end it.. My books are
heavier than yours,and I can add more pages to it for sure. Bert

JohnZ Using far less words than you because the books I read come
right to the point. The Chandrasekhar mass is roughly 1.4 suns,and just
above this limit gravity squeezes the electrons and protons together. We
call this density a neutron star. Yes I do have the book and page
number. Well I do know a neutron star has 3 times less mass than a
blackhole. So that might help your saying 40 times a sun
mass.(hopefully) JohnZ why do you have to always be negative? Bert