Well, honey, a red giant star can have a radius anywhere from 10 to 1,000 times that of our beloved Sun. They're massive beasts, towering over other types of stars like show-offs at a party. So, yeah, they're basically the Beyonces of the star world with their size and presence.
Super giants are more massive and have larger radii than giant stars. Super giants are in a more advanced stage of stellar evolution compared to giant stars. Both types of stars eventually exhaust their nuclear fuel and go on to evolve into other stages, such as supernovae or white dwarfs.
A star's radius is the distance from it centre to its visible surface. The bigger the star, the larger the radius. The radius is not the best means of comparing stars, it is perhaps better to compare stars by their mass.
The radius of a star is generally proportional to its mass. More massive stars tend to have larger radii compared to less massive stars. This relationship is governed by the balance between the gravitational force pulling the star inward and the pressure from nuclear fusion reactions pushing outward.
Blue stars are more luminous than other main sequence stars but not necessarily brighter than giant and supergiant stars.
Giant stars are commonly referred to as "giant" stars because of their large size compared to main sequence stars like the Sun. These stars are in a later stage of their evolution and have expanded in size due to the depletion of their core's hydrogen fuel.
When compared to the other stars, the Red Giant Star are very minute. There are other stars that are very large by far as compared to the Red giant stars.
Super giants are more massive and have larger radii than giant stars. Super giants are in a more advanced stage of stellar evolution compared to giant stars. Both types of stars eventually exhaust their nuclear fuel and go on to evolve into other stages, such as supernovae or white dwarfs.
A star's radius is the distance from it centre to its visible surface. The bigger the star, the larger the radius. The radius is not the best means of comparing stars, it is perhaps better to compare stars by their mass.
The radius of a star is generally proportional to its mass. More massive stars tend to have larger radii compared to less massive stars. This relationship is governed by the balance between the gravitational force pulling the star inward and the pressure from nuclear fusion reactions pushing outward.
No really, no. A black hole does that.
In order to conveniently compare the distances from the various planets, astronomers devised a measure called the "astronomical unit". The Earth is one AU from the Sun. In order to conveniently compare the sizes of other stars to our Sun, astronomers use a "solar mass" as the mass of the Sun. and a "solar radius" as the radius of our Sun. This helps to make the comparisons more obvious to non-astronomers.
giant
The sun is larger than about 95% of stars in the galaxy.
Most stars are smaller than the Sun, but those that are larger can be a lot larger.
i dont know jajaj
As temperature decreases, luminosity will also decrease As radius increases (and with it surface area, but radius is a much easier to work with if you're trying to compare stars so we usually say radius) luminosity will also increase. If both are happening at the same time, it is possible that the luminosity of the star will remain more or less constant. Often one change will dominate the other, such as when a star goes through the red giant phase when the increase in radius has a far greater effect than the drop in temperature, and the star becomes more luminous.
The size of the sun is considered average compared to other stars. There are much larger stars, known as supergiants, and smaller stars, known as dwarfs, in the universe.