|
Top Document: [sci.astro] Stars (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (7/9) Previous Document: G.02 Are there any green stars? Next Document: G.04 What fraction of stars are in multiple systems? See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge John E. Gizis <jeg@pistol.caltech.edu> [Table reflects most recent distances from Hipparcos.] The most luminous star within 10 light-years is Sirius. The most luminous star within 20 light-years is Sirius. The most luminous star within 30 light-years is Vega. The most luminous star within 40 light-years is Arcturus. The most luminous star within 50 light-years is Arcturus. The most luminous star within 60 light-years is Arcturus. The most luminous star within 70 light-years is Aldebaran. The most luminous star within 80 light-years is still Aldebaran. The most luminous star within 100 light-years is still...Aldebaran. The most luminous star within 1000 light-years is Rigel. (Honorable mentions: Canopus, Hadar, gamma Velae, Antares, and Betelgeuse.) The most luminous star within 2000 light-years is Rigel. The most luminous star in the whole Galaxy is *drum roll, please* .... Cygnus OB2 number 12, with an absolute magnitude around -10. (also known as VI Cygni No 12). A table listing the nearest stars (within 12 light years) may be found at http://www.ccnet.com/~galaxy/tab181.html. The faintest star within that distance is Giclas 51-15 with absolute visual magnitude 16.99 and spectral type M6.5. Wielen et al. published the following as the local luminosity function (total number of stars within 20 parsecs = 65 lightyears). At the faint end (abs. magnitude >12) this table is bit out of date and the numbers are probably too high. Everything from abs. magnitude 9 to 18 is considered an M dwarf (shows TiO and other molecules) or a white dwarf. abs. mag Number -1 1 0 4 1 14 2 24 3 43 4 78 5 108 Sun is here! 6 121 7 102 8 132 9 159 10 245 11 341 12 512 13 597 14 427 15 427 16 299 17 299 18 >16 User Contributions:Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic:Top Document: [sci.astro] Stars (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (7/9) Previous Document: G.02 Are there any green stars? Next Document: G.04 What fraction of stars are in multiple systems? Part0 - Part1 - Part2 - Part3 - Part4 - Part5 - Part6 - Part7 - Part8 - Single Page [ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: jlazio@patriot.net
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:11 PM
|

with stars, then every direction you looked would eventually end on
the surface of a star, and the whole sky would be as bright as the
surface of the Sun.
Why would anyone assume this? Certainly, we have directions where we look that are dark because something that does not emit light (is not a star) is between us and the light. A close example is in our own solar system. When we look at the Sun (a star) during a solar eclipse the Moon blocks the light. When we look at the inner planets of our solar system (Mercury and Venus) as they pass between us and the Sun, do we not get the same effect, i.e. in the direction of the planet we see no light from the Sun? Those planets simply look like dark spots on the Sun.
Olbers' paradox seems to assume that only stars exist in the universe, but what about the planets? Aren't there more planets than stars, thus more obstructions to light than sources of light?
What may be more interesting is why can we see certain stars seemingly continuously. Are there no planets or other obstructions between them and us? Or is the twinkle in stars just caused by the movement of obstructions across the path of light between the stars and us? I was always told the twinkle defines a star while the steady light reflected by our planets defines a planet. Is that because the planets of our solar system don't have the obstructions between Earth and them to cause a twinkle effect?
9-14-2024 KP