Timeline for Ways to make a star go supernova? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3, 2017 at 0:28 | history | closed |
John Rennie Kyle Kanos Jon Custer Gold Daniel Griscom |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Nov 1, 2017 at 16:14 | comment | added | endolith | Iron Sunrise features this method: books.google.com/… | |
| Nov 1, 2017 at 12:44 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 8 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Oct 30, 2017 at 22:57 | answer | added | Anders Sandberg | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 22:06 | comment | added | userLTK | @dmckee That's true too and maybe I shouldn't have implied it was somewhat easy. My point was really that there's no shortcuts. Gravity becomes the dominant force when there's enough mass. Adding mass (which at stellar mass levels is far from easy) is probably the best approach even for an very technically advanced society. | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 21:54 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | "and when it reaches 1.4 solar masses" Unless it is already very close to the limit you're going to have a hard time finding enough planets. A quick scan through some of the easily available data on exo-planet systems indicate that total masses abover a few tens of $M_J$ are rare, which keeps us down around 1% of a solar mass. @userLTK | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 20:57 | comment | added | userLTK | A star - harder. A white dwarf, easier. A white dwarf can be made to go supernova by just adding mass. You can throw planets at it and when it reaches 1.4 solar masses - kaboom. A star is much more tricky. You want the star to cool, not heat up. Adding Iron might do it but you'd have to wait for the Iron to settle at the core and that would take some time. It might also require several planets mass worth of Iron, which I suppose could be achieved by throwing a few dozen (or few hundred?) Mercury like planets at a large star. (has to be a very large star, our sun won't cut it). | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 20:45 | comment | added | Kyle Kanos | Somewhat related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/79355/25301, physics.stackexchange.com/q/190308/25301, physics.stackexchange.com/q/72066/25301 | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:59 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 3, 2017 at 0:28 | |||||
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:55 | comment | added | user171879 | Fair enough, it was the symmetry of the infalling complete sphere that I thought you might be considering for a realistic plotline. | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:49 | comment | added | user1062760 | @User171879 yeah I'm not calling for a sphere like a ball but say a giant honeycomb structure not entirely continuous. Like an iron grid | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:45 | comment | added | user1062760 | @StephenG Have Tried Asking Such Questions There But Guess What They Say They Are a fictional content websites so matters relating to real world physics so go to physics SE. lol | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:42 | comment | added | StephenG - Help Ukraine | Really this should be asked on Worldbuilding SE. What a type 3 Kardashev civilization could do is way beyond speculation. | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:33 | comment | added | user171879 | I don't think this is the place for your particulat question, but I just want to point out, if you are thinking about Dyson Spheres, that Dyson himself knew they would be a collection of nodes, connected by articulated sections. A complete sphere is "engineeringly" impossible to build | |
| Oct 30, 2017 at 19:22 | history | asked | user1062760 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |