Talk:HE0107-5240

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to astronomy, and WikiProject Astronomical Objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Low mass

According to the source at the bottom of the article (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/relic_star_021030.html) it is a low mass star.Jan Lapère 16:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

It is a low mas star, but it is also very old. Therefore it has become a giant. Star doesn't have to be massive to become a giant, term 'giant' refers to an evolutionary phase of stars. Star becomes a giant when the hydrogen fusion ends in its core and it starts to swell.--Jyril 17:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

With an age of around 13 billion years, this red giant star ought to have a mass of about 70% of the mass of our Sun.

All single stars with masses lower than these 70% of the Sun have a life time superior to the age of the Universe. --Siffler 17:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought about that. But if it have a mass of <80% than Sun, shouldn't it be considerably older than Universe? Or ar the numbers from here obsolete? Said: Rursus ☻ 16:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

(Besides, stars being older than Universe is not a situation out of the ordinary, precisely – they've tended to be absurdely old for many decades by now – or the Universe absurdely young). Said: Rursus ☻ 16:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Luminosity

We do not have a clue the Luminosity of this Old Star. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.146.231.86 (talk) 04:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)