lemur Posted May 21, 2011 Posted May 21, 2011 (edited) No, "making Jupiter a star" doesn't have anything to do with Roman divinity and Hollywood movies. I am wondering if devoting energy and effort to transforming Jupiter into a star would be a viable means of extending the life of Earth as the sun and Earth's core cool. I realize that at some point, the sun is predicted to supernova, at which point it won't really matter to anyone on Earth what Jupiter is doing, but would it be beneficial to ignite Jupiter at some point between now and the end of the sun? Edited May 21, 2011 by lemur
ydoaPs Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 It doesn't have enough gravitation to cause fusion let alone balance the explosive force of fusion.
StringJunky Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 The Sun is about about 9 times too small in mass terms to supernova. It will go through a red giant phase which will basically scorch all life I think off the Earth before settling as a white dwarf. Solitary stars with a mass below approximately 9 solar masses, such as the Sun, evolve into white dwarfs without ever becoming supernovae. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova Jupiter is 75 times too small to have sufficient gravity to create the necessary internal pressures and temperature to sustain a thermonuclear process. With a mass only 93 times that of Jupiter, AB Doradus C, a companion to AB Doradus A, is the smallest known star undergoing nuclear fusion in its core.[105] For stars with similar metallicity to the Sun, the theoretical minimum mass the star can have, and still undergo fusion at the core, is estimated to be about 75 times the mass of Jupiter.[106][107] When the metallicity is very low, however, a recent study of the faintest stars found that the minimum star size seems to be about 8.3% of the solar mass, or about 87 times the mass of Jupiter.[107][108] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star
lemur Posted May 22, 2011 Author Posted May 22, 2011 (edited) Thanks. For some reason I had the idea that Jupiter isn't that far from having star-potential. So much for that mix-up. edit: but what about introducing some kind of artificial black-hole into it to initiate fusion? That may be too far-sought to even fuel an interesting discussion, though. Edited May 22, 2011 by lemur
swansont Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 Thanks. For some reason I had the idea that Jupiter isn't that far from having star-potential. So much for that mix-up. edit: but what about introducing some kind of artificial black-hole into it to initiate fusion? That may be too far-sought to even fuel an interesting discussion, though. It doesn't matter what the form of the mass is. That won't get you around the minimum. The fact that it's in black-hole form may mean that it wouldn't contribute to the fusion process, so it wouldn't count toward how much mass you'd need to add.
lemur Posted May 22, 2011 Author Posted May 22, 2011 It doesn't matter what the form of the mass is. That won't get you around the minimum. The fact that it's in black-hole form may mean that it wouldn't contribute to the fusion process, so it wouldn't count toward how much mass you'd need to add. I was thinking that as an atmosphere collapses into a black hole, it would have to condense to fusion-levels of pressure in the process. So I would assume that any black hole surrounded by a cloud of gas would appear as a star since the exterior of the black hole would be a fusion reaction collapsing into infinite time dilation.
swansont Posted May 22, 2011 Posted May 22, 2011 I was thinking that as an atmosphere collapses into a black hole, it would have to condense to fusion-levels of pressure in the process. So I would assume that any black hole surrounded by a cloud of gas would appear as a star since the exterior of the black hole would be a fusion reaction collapsing into infinite time dilation. The acceleration at the event horizon need not be at the levels needed for fusion. How would a (fusion) reaction proceed if infinitely time dilated?
lemur Posted May 22, 2011 Author Posted May 22, 2011 The acceleration at the event horizon need not be at the levels needed for fusion. How would a (fusion) reaction proceed if infinitely time dilated? I suppose it would require a certain amount of density accruing prior to crossing the event horizon, or not even then for some reason? I don't really get time dilation but from what I know I would guess that a fusion reaction falling into infinite gravity/time-dilation would redshift to the point of disappearance as well. But still how gradually would that occur? Would there be a period of high energy emissions comparable to a regular star?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now