I understand, and I can do this. Make progress at whatever pace you can. First, our guiding philosophy: Eat like a predator, not like prey.
Values not in the table can be calculated by using linear interpolation. Slum is stellar luminosity, it is the Lum column on the table. BC is bolometric correction, it is the Bolo. Steff is effective temperature, it is the Teeff column on the table.
These will be used in the equations below. In Dole's Habitable Planets for Manhe estimates that an average planet requires about 3. This is important, since generally the only way a planet has oxygen in its atmosphere is by the action of native plant life. This means that the primary star needs a lifetime longer than 3.
This disqualifies stars with a spectral class of higher than F2. But keep in mind that Dole's 3 billion year figure is more of an educated guess than it is ironclad scientific fact. Obviously even though K0 stars has a lifespan of 1. It is of type F7, which means it is hotter and whiter than Sol.
Its mass is 1: The diameter is little greater, but spots, prominences, corona, and output of charged particles solar wind are fewer. It is a younger star than ours, though by less than a billion years. Either because of this, or because of variations in galactic distribution, the proportion of heavy elements in it and its planets is somewhat more than for the Solar System.
In earlier days, science fiction customarily put planets around the familiar ones like Sirius, Vega, Antares, or Mira. It was then legitimate enough, if a trifle repetitious.
But today we know, or believe we know, that few of the naked-eye stars will serve. Mostly they are giants, visible to us only because they are so brilliant that we can pick them out across immense gulfs of space. Sol would no longer be discernible without instruments at a distance of about 55 light-years.
Now the red giants like Antares, the variables like Mira, are dying stars, well on their way to the dim, ultra-dense white-dwarf condition. If ever they had planets—their mass makes that unlikely, as we will see in a minute—the inner attendants have been seared or even consumed, as these suns expanded.
Probably the majority of stars in the universe are still enjoying health. Their temperatures and luminosities vary enormously. The most important reason for this is the difference in their masses.
The more massive a sun is, the more intensely compressed it becomes at its core, and thus the more fierce and rapid are the thermonuclear reactions which cause it to shine. This dependence of output on mass is a highly sensitive one, so that the latter covers a much smaller range than the former.
These stars form a well-defined series, from the largest and brightest to the smallest and dimmest, which is called the main sequence. That last, G0, was formerly the classification of our own sun; but more recent information has gotten Sol to be labeled G2. Figure 1 shows a large part of the main sequence.
It omits the extremes, because they really are too extreme to diagram very well. That is, the main sequence runs from the hottest Type O blue giants, some as much as a million times the strength of Sol, on through the yellowish F and G stars, to the red dwarfs of Class M, the dimmest of which may be less than a thousandth as intense as our daystar.
Types are indicated along the bottom of the graph, with corresponding masses. Luminosities—necessarily on a logarithmic scale—are shown going up the left-hand side.
From this, you can find the mass corresponding to a given brightness. They vary by a fair amount, depending on such factors as the age and exact chemical composition of the individual star.
More is involved than just the total radiation. As everyone knows who has ever heated a piece of metal in a fire, temperature affects color.
The hottest stars are called blue giants because they are not only giants in output, but also their light contains a distinctly larger proportion of blue than does that of Sol. They also emit a higher percentage, as Well as absolute amount, of ultraviolet and X-ray wavelengths; and no doubt the solar winds streaming from them are something terrific.
All these quantities drop off as temperature does, until we get to the cool, ultraviolet-poor red dwarfs. However, the weaker ones among these last are not mere embers.Type or paste a DOI name into the text box.
Click Go. Your browser will take you to a Web page (URL) associated with that DOI name. Send questions or comments to doi.
Percentage mass. If you have the formula of a compound [compound: A substance formed by the chemical union (involving bond formation) of two or more elements.], you should be able to work out the.
While the formulae are given in Lbs., smaller batches can be made by substituting grams, ounces, etc. for the Lbs. or by multiplying or dividing all the quantities by . The percent composition of a compound is the percent of total mass made up by a specific element.
It can be calculated by dividing the mass of a specific element by the total mass and then multiplying by How do you determine the percentage composition by mass of the compound? A mixture of magnesium carbonate and .
A versatile 'back-titration' This practical can be adapted to determine the amount of calcium carbonate in a variety of different substances ranging from eggs shells to the shells of sea creatures, such as crabs, or in natural or artificial stone such as marble, limestone cliffs or lime mortar from old buildings.
The percent composition and empirical formula of magnesium oxide will be determined. The percent composition indicates the percent of each element’s mass found in a compound, therefore the percent composition describes the composition of a substance.