Talk:VV Cephei: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
I cannot believe the mass estimated from orbital motion, 100 solar masses. I guess , the distance between A and B is not well defined. The shape of VV Cephei A is highly distorted, so the center of the star must be far different from gravity point of the star. |
I cannot believe the mass estimated from orbital motion, 100 solar masses. I guess , the distance between A and B is not well defined. The shape of VV Cephei A is highly distorted, so the center of the star must be far different from gravity point of the star. |
||
I second that emotion: if this star is at least 1000 times the diameter (and hence radius) of the Sun, and we were to assume equal density, then this star's mass should be a _billion_ times that of the Sun, since mass is volume*density, and volume is proportional to the cube of the radius. Is the density really 10^-7th that of the Sun? |
|||
[[User:Kometsuga|Kometsuga]] 14:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC) |
[[User:Kometsuga|Kometsuga]] 14:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 15:17, 18 December 2006
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_stars says it's 1900 times the size of the star, but the article says it's "about 1140 times the Sun's diameter". Which is true?
Is the distance between VV Cephei A and VV Cephei B the distance between their centers, or their surfaces? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.214.89.74 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 2 October 2006.
- I'd guess their centers, since that's how distances are usually measured in astrophysics. Foobaz·o< 23:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I cannot believe the mass estimated from orbital motion, 100 solar masses. I guess , the distance between A and B is not well defined. The shape of VV Cephei A is highly distorted, so the center of the star must be far different from gravity point of the star. I second that emotion: if this star is at least 1000 times the diameter (and hence radius) of the Sun, and we were to assume equal density, then this star's mass should be a _billion_ times that of the Sun, since mass is volume*density, and volume is proportional to the cube of the radius. Is the density really 10^-7th that of the Sun?