[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 3.63 MB, 320x180, .gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11158730 No.11158730 [Reply] [Original]

So if the first stars were hundreds of solar masses large, why didn't they collapse into black holes?

>> No.11158746

>>11158730
Mathemagicians power dictates that they did not exceed the Schwarzschild which has a term limit in the denominator that could be zero.
I forget, how does a zero in denominator work?

>> No.11158755

>>11158746
Cosmologist seem to be the only ones I'm familiar with that allow expressions where a term maybe zero but also allows it's division.

>> No.11158807

>>11158746
I can't help but feel like there's something I'm missing about what exactly causes a massive star to collapse into a black hole

>> No.11158826

>>11158730
>So if the first stars were hundreds of solar masses large, why didn't they collapse into black holes?

Why would they?

>> No.11159079

>>11158826
A big enough iron mass starts to form in the core, and when fusion reactions stop being able to support the mass of the star the infalling material compresses the core beyond electron degeneracy pressure

>> No.11159086

>>11159079
>A big enough iron mass starts to form in the core

Ah, that’s the problem.
First generation stars had zero metallicity to start with.

>> No.11159182

>>11159086
>what is silicon burning
>what is stellar nucleosynthesis

Bro I seriously had to remind you?

>> No.11159193

>>11158730
looks like they werent
https://www.space.com/13572-early-stars-universe-massive.html

>> No.11159212

>>11159182
They would have produced iron, but not enough. No first generation stars have ever been found.

>> No.11159215

>>11159193
"Only" tens of solar masses, as quoted as in the article, is still very much over the apparent black hole collapse limit

>> No.11159217

>>11159212
But not enough iron before what?

>> No.11159221

>>11159217
Before they explode. In massive stars, only material at the core gets used for fusion because there’s little to no convection in them. Stars born after the first generation would start already possessing some iron.

>> No.11159224

>>11158730
Obviously some of them did.
Others exploded in supernovae and spilled their heavy element guts everywhere across the universe which is where all the heavy elements come from.

>> No.11159238

>>11159221
So a supermassive star composed entirely of hydrogen and helium, with no beginning metallicity, will create 'some' iron, not enough to collapse into a black hole but enough to explode at some point between there? If you don't mind me asking, how does that work? What does the metallicity change?

>> No.11159244

>>11159238
I think if they spin fast enough they can explode at a higher mass right?
Not a scientist btw.

>> No.11159301

>>11158807
Same. But it's funny how many of these fields are interconnected at the base level due to the implications of previous work. I think the issue is getting away from experimental results leads us on a degree of error that creates a cosmology as accurate as dungeons and dragons campaign

>> No.11159490

>>11159301
While on sure you're right, I'm sure my questions have answers that professionals in the field, and not most 4chan amateur enthusiasts, would know

>> No.11159498

>>11158730
Maybe they did collapse and became centers of galaxies.

>> No.11159514

>>11159238
Don’t starts collapse when they begin burning iron? A star that already has iron would have more of it to burn

>> No.11159654

>>11159514
You can't burn iron, fusing iron uses up more energy than fusing an element lighter than iron creates. So that's what stops the heightened heat in the core of a supermassive star amidst a core collapse from halting a collapse, because no more energy can be made from fusion

>> No.11159672

The redshift epoch which would contain the signal of a large number of supermassive black holes being created relatively simultaneously in supernovae isn't bright enough to be detected above the signal to noise ratio of currently available data.

>> No.11159998

>>11159672
I would like to know more about this, brrainlet here, what exactly is the noise?

>> No.11161245

>>11159998
unironically a good question

>> No.11162994

>>11158730
What is the supermassive black hole at the center of almost all galaxies.

>> No.11163015
File: 530 KB, 1080x2220, Screenshot_20191120-090132_Armorfly.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11163015

>>11162994
Okay so I get that now, that the biggest ones must have become the supermassives, but all the literature says stars at least 13 or so sola- a lot less than that according to google results in a black hole so how were the first stars tens of solar masses large?

>> No.11163241

>>11158730
Gravity was also compact, thus pressurizing them neatly enough not to turn into black holes.