Talk:Nova (astronomy)

From Citizendium
Revision as of 03:51, 19 July 2010 by imported>Tomas Kindahl (→‎What belongs to here and not)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Variable star in the class of cataclysmic variable stars, which is normally very faint but occasionally erupts in an immense explosion, increasing its brightness a thousand to tens of millions of times; similar but unrelated to supernovae. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Astronomy [Please add or review categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

I'm not sure about redirecting supernova here. Isn't there enough distinct information about this particular type of nova for a separate article? --Larry Sanger 14:28, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

I would think so. We'll see this happen a lot at the beginning but I imagine we'll expand on these type of redirect with time. Note that in Related Atricles subpages supernova can exist with its own unique definition and it will be identified as a redirect due to the purple link. See example below using the {{r}} template (and thanks for improving the def):
  • Supernova [r]: An astronomical object exploding to a brightness similar to that of an entire galaxy. Caused by a catastrophic explosion of either a white dwarf system or an aged star about five times the size of the sun, which occurs when the star collapses; a neutron star or a black hole may be formed as a result, or the explosion results in no remaining compact object. [e]
Hopefully this distinct color will attract peoples attention to the fact that this article needs to be started when users browse the related articles subpages. Chris Day 14:38, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

Yes, exactly. It's a perfect example of a beneficial side-effect of better-coordinated information. --Larry Sanger 15:16, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

Returning to Larrys question, I think there should be a separate article for Supernova, since it is nowadays considered too distinct from an ordinary nova to be treated in-depth in the same context. Maybe I'll do it later. Tomas Kindahl 18:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Test of name specificity

{{r|Nova (astronomy)}} is seen as:

  • Nova (astronomy)

{{r|Nova (astronomy)|Nova}} is seen as:

  • Nova

What belongs to here and not

Novae are those thingies that explode termonuclearly by a messy hot variant of the CNO-cycle, that is the "classic novae" and the "recurrent novae".

The supernovae, who don't really belong to this article, explode by an electron degenerate body, either a white dwarf, or a star core accreting matter so that the Chandrasekhar limit is reached and a massive gravitational well explosion of a kind occurs. The degenerate thingie collapses so that the core becomes a neutron star or compacter, while the outer layers of the degenerate body is photodissociated from high-energy gamma. If the degenerate thingie is the core of a star, then the envelope of that star is explosively blown into space making a visible type II or type Ib supernova, characterized by a certain radioactive signature of Ni-58. If the degenerate thingie is a white dwarf, then it is accreting matter from a companion subdwarf star, the accretion disk and the companion star is then blown into smithereens, making a type Ia supernova. There are other variants that are themes of these two.

The dwarf novae are variables that similarly to a nova is a white dwarf that accretes matter from a companion subdwarf, but the explosion is not thermonuclear, but instead a very bleak gravitational collapse when the accretion disk falls down onto the white dwarf. They also don't belong to this article, and so it is also with the luminous red novae, who are kind of a rare explosion that occurs in a certain phase after an aged red giant star (of the AGB type) has thrown off the main parts of its envelope, a stage related in time to, but not the same as the formation of a planetary nebula. Tomas Kindahl 21:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I mean Ni-56. Tomas Kindahl 08:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)