KY Cygni acutally is ~1000 solar radii based on newer luminosity
@WhyIsJupiterInTheFridge6 ай бұрын
epic so cool and amorzong
@DivisionPrecision6 ай бұрын
I love stats
@Scuti26 ай бұрын
Statistics Yessssssssssssssssssssss (I have a second channel for stats lol)
@ImastupidXenton6 ай бұрын
@@Scuti2I think he said stars😂
@Scuti26 ай бұрын
@@ImastupidXenton uh oh
@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer6 ай бұрын
Estimates from Levesque _et al._ (2005) (like 1420 Rsol for KY Cyg) aren’t that accurate since they use questionable extinction estimates and poorly measured Mbols as far as I know
@Scuti26 ай бұрын
Alright.
@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer6 ай бұрын
@@Scuti2 Also, NML Cyg is ≲1350 Rsol based on a long baseline interferometry-derived angular diameter in the CHARM2 survey and its supposed distance. It is still likely to be lower than that value since it likely would have included its some parts of its complex dust shell. 1464 Rsol is derived from an effective temperature that most likely assumes a spherical dust shell, which is not the case.
@goldsaturn14365 ай бұрын
Isn't that where the ~1,500 Rsol maximum star size came from, the rough average of the largest stars in that paper? If so, then that limit seems rather questionable.
@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer5 ай бұрын
@@goldsaturn1436 Don’t forget that the limit is also based on stellar evolutionary models. If it was only based on three or four stars it would be unreliable either way.
@goldsaturn14365 ай бұрын
@@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer Fair enough.
@cwareal6 ай бұрын
why are there star 1400-1500 Rs that i didn’t know about
@Scuti26 ай бұрын
bc there are
@cwareal6 ай бұрын
@@Scuti2 so much
@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer6 ай бұрын
@@cwareal They still assume certain properties of their dust shells so they could be quite uncertain
@cwareal6 ай бұрын
@@SpaceImplorerExplorerImploreroh
@rainyanimatez58306 ай бұрын
Cool
@CreativeComparisons17506 ай бұрын
Very good video, and it uses reliable estimates for these stars