Pranam
Source   KR IRS

Jupiter Is Bigger Than Some Stars, So Why Didn't We Get a ...
https://www.sciencealert.com › why-isn-t-jupiter-a-star
<https://www.sciencealert.com/why-isn-t-jupiter-a-star#:~:text=So%20why%20is%20Jupiter%20a,able%20to%20fuse%20hydrogen%20either.>

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 18:10, 'Siva Subramanian Perinkulam' via iyer123 <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Yes. It is always better to indicate the source if known . But, many time
> it is not furnished in the FB or WA fwds. So we copy and paste.
> The problem comes if you raise a query!!
>
> SP
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS>
>
> On Monday, July 5, 2021, 8:07 AM, Indian Rediff <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> It would be wonderful if you could also give full attribution as to where
> you have retrieved this information from. That way curious folks could
> choose to go deeper into the subject - and the not-so-curious, could simply
> read what you have posted.
>
> Sai
>
> On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 5:43 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Pranam
>
> This is Jupiter and this is Science.
>
> Jupiter Is Bigger Than Some Stars, So Why Didn't We Get a Second Sun?
> JANUARY 2021
>
> The smallest known main-sequence star in the Milky Way galaxy is a real
> pixie of a thing.  It's called EBLM J0555-57Ab, a red dwarf 600 light-years
> away. With a mean radius of around 59,000 kilometres, it's just a smidge
> bigger than Saturn. That makes it the tiniest known star to support
> hydrogen fusion in its core, the process that keeps stars burning until
> they run out of fuel.
>
> In our Solar System, there are two objects larger than this teeny star.
> One is the Sun, obviously. The other is Jupiter, like a giant scoop of ice
> cream, coming in with a mean radius of 69,911 kilometres.
>
> So why is Jupiter a planet and not a star?
>
> The short answer is simple: Jupiter doesn't have enough mass to fuse
> hydrogen into helium. EBLM J0555-57Ab is about 85 times the mass of
> Jupiter, about as light as a star can be - if it were any lower, it would
> not be able to fuse hydrogen either. But if our Solar System had been
> different, could Jupiter have ignited into a star?
>
> Jupiter and the Sun are more alike than you know.
>
> The gas giant may not be a star, but Jupiter is still a Big Deal. Its mass
> is 2.5 times that of all the other planets combined. It's just that, being
> a gas giant, it has really low density: around 1.33 grams per cubic
> centimetre; Earth's density, at 5.51 grams per cubic centimetre, is just
> over four times higher than that of Jupiter.
>
> But it's interesting to note the similarities between Jupiter and the Sun.
> The Sun's density is 1.41 grams per cubic centimetre. And the two objects
> are very compositionally similar. By mass, the Sun is about 71 percent
> hydrogen and 27 percent helium, with the rest being made up of trace
> amounts of other elements. Jupiter by mass is about 73 percent hydrogen and
> 24 percent helium.
>
> It's for this reason that Jupiter is sometimes called a failed star. But
> it's still unlikely that, left to the Solar System's own devices, Jupiter
> would even become close to being a star.
>
> Stars and planets, you see, are born through two very different
> mechanisms. Stars are born when a dense knot of material in an interstellar
> molecular cloud collapses under its own gravity - spinning as it goes in a
> process called cloud collapse. As it spins, it spools in more material
> from the cloud around it into a stellar accretion disc.
>
> As the mass - and therefore the gravity - grows, the core of the baby star
> is squeezed tighter and tighter, which causes it to grow hotter and hotter. 
> Eventually
> it becomes so compressed and hot, the core ignites, and thermonuclear
> fusion kicks off.
>
> According to our understanding of star formation, once the star has
> finished accreting material, a whole lot of accretion disc is left over.
> This is what the planets are made of.
>
> Astronomers think that, for gas giants like Jupiter, this process (called
> pebble accretion) starts with tiny chunks of icy rock and dust in the disc.
> As they orbit the baby star, these bits of material start to collide,
> sticking together with static electricity. Eventually, these growing clumps
> reach a large-enough size - around 10 Earth masses - that they can
> gravitationally attract more and more gas from the surrounding disc.
>
> From that point, Jupiter gradually grew to its current mass - about 318
> times the mass of Earth, and 0.001 times the mass of the Sun. Once it had
> slurped up all the material that was available to it - at quite a remove
> from the mass required for hydrogen fusion - it stopped growing.
>
> So, Jupiter was never even close to growing massive enough to become a
> star. Jupiter has a similar composition to the Sun not because it was a
> 'failed star' but because it was born from the same cloud of molecular gas
> that gave birth to the Sun. There is a different class of objects that can
> be considered 'failed stars'. These are the brown dwarfs, and they fill
> that gap between gas giants and stars.
>
> Starting at over about 13 times the mass of Jupiter, these objects are
> massive enough to support core fusion - not of normal hydrogen, but
> deuterium. This is also known as 'heavy' hydrogen; it's an isotope of
> hydrogen with a proton and a neutron in the nucleus instead of just a
> single proton. Its fusion temperature and pressure are lower than the
> fusion temperature and pressure of hydrogen.
>
> Because it occurs at a lower mass, temperature and pressure, deuterium
> fusion is an intermediate step on the way to hydrogen fusion for stars, as
> they continue to accrete mass. But some objects never attain that mass;
> these are known as brown dwarfs.
>
> For a while after their existence was confirmed in 1995, it was unknown
> whether brown dwarfs were underachieving stars or overambitious planets;
> but several studies have demonstrated that they form just like stars, from
> cloud collapse rather than core accretion. And some brown dwarfs are even
> below the mass for deuterium burning, indistinguishable from planets.
> Jupiter is right on the lower mass limit for cloud collapse; the smallest
> mass of a cloud collapse object has been estimated at about one Jupiter
> mass. So if Jupiter had formed from cloud collapse, it could be considered
> a failed star. But data from NASA's Juno probe suggest that, once upon a
> time at least, Jupiter had a solid core - and that is more consistent with
> the core accretion formation method.
>
> Modelling suggests that the upper limit for a planet mass, forming via
> core accretion, is less than 10 times the mass of Jupiter - just a few
> Jupiter masses shy of deuterium fusion. So, Jupiter isn't a failed star.
> But thinking about why it isn't one can help us better understand how the
> cosmos works. In addition, Jupiter is a stripy, stormy, swirly butterscotch
> wonder in its own right. And without it, we humans may not have even been
> able to exist. That, however, is another story, to be told another time.
>
> KR IRS 5721
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "iyer123" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZoo%2B50zugmBLjsYFLr4AnnCbaLrLoZ8BTrMLyG9uawbSSw%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZoo%2B50zugmBLjsYFLr4AnnCbaLrLoZ8BTrMLyG9uawbSSw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "iyer123" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAHqYaCr52jHWWtpgrdT-6qYzqYs4W604UPZYGyh80xx-CiCgtg%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAHqYaCr52jHWWtpgrdT-6qYzqYs4W604UPZYGyh80xx-CiCgtg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "iyer123" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/856653164.3294992.1625488794272%40mail.yahoo.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/856653164.3294992.1625488794272%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZooYW_aGzJ8ZGZ4rxC%2B9F9Xgd4BZC-O2O9o%3DDREoXsENDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to