Misplaced Pages

Talk:Asymptotic giant branch

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wnt (talk | contribs) at 23:22, 6 July 2008 (→"as large as one astronomical unit"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:22, 6 July 2008 by Wnt (talk | contribs) (→"as large as one astronomical unit")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
WikiProject iconAstronomy: Astronomical objects Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Misplaced Pages.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

"as large as one astronomical unit"

Probably meant to say "in radius", but the naïve might assume "in diameter." This is vague at best and wrong at worst, since isn't even Sol expected to get bigger than 1AU radius in several billion years? --Polymath69 13:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

"surficide reactions"? - wouldn't surface chemical reactions be better? As it is, it sounds like your talking about the results of murdering surfers. 144.137.116.114 (talk) 07:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Jim Jacobs.

Nah. Point break on Rocheworld. Be there or B ;) Wnt (talk) 23:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Apparent contradiction

The diagram in this article shows stars moving horizontally from the main sequence to supergiant status. The diagram shown in most of the other articles, e.g. giant star, shows the supergiants far higher in absolute magnitude. Please reconcile or clarify this. Wnt (talk) 05:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The supergiants are in roughly the same position in both diagrams. In Image:Stellar evolutionary tracks-en.svg, the luminosity of the 15 solar-mass track is shown as approximately 3·10 solar luminosities. In Image:HR-diag-no-text-2.svg, the absolute magnitude of luminosity class Ia is shown as around −7. Since 4.83 − 5 log100 (3·10) = −6.36, you can see that the positioning is approximately the same. Spacepotato (talk) 17:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
You're right - the distinction is actually that the stars starting these horizontal paths are 30,000 K or hotter class O stars, which are extremely rare. The main sequence in the second link or at stops at class B and doesn't include class O. Wnt (talk) 23:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Categories: