Thread replies: 17
Thread images: 5
Thread images: 5
Anonymous
A distant star is roundest object ever observed in nature 2016-11-17 21:34:21 Post No.
[Report] Image search: [Google]
A distant star is roundest object ever observed in nature 2016-11-17 21:34:21 Post No.
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: distantstari[1].jpg (105KB, 1500x1060px) Image search:
[Google]
![distantstari[1].jpg](https://cdn.4archive.org/sci/image/1479/418/1479418461726.jpg "distantstari[1]")
105KB, 1500x1060px
A distant star is roundest object ever observed in nature
Anonymous
2016-11-17 21:34:21
Post No.
[Report]
http://phys.org/news/2016-11-distant-star-roundest-nature.html
> The star Kepler 11145123 is the roundest natural object ever measured in the universe.
> Stellar oscillations imply a difference in radius between the equator and the poles of only 3 km. This star is significantly more round than the sun.
What is the scientific explaination between this impossibly perfect roundness of a star 2 times bigger than the sun? It's a gas sphere so it is a lot more vulnerable to the random debris, piercing asteroids and other distorting forces around the space but it doesn't seem to be effected by them.
What are the implications of this unnatural precision?
>>
>>8480247
didnt we find that an electron in terms of charge distribution is an exact sphere?
>>
>>8480247
the dust cloud in which the star was formed had a near net 0 angular momentum.
>>
>>8480247
It's very possible the planet has nothing orbiting it, and a lack of any noticeable gravity well may explain its nearly perfect spherical shape.
That...or its aliens.....
>>
>>8480247
Not many forces acting on its shape? Doesn't rotate much, doesn't have many objects with strong gravitational pull near it?
I don't have a clue, just guesses.
>>
>>8480247
Debris and asteroids have negligible effect on a star this size. They don't mean the surface is perfectly smooth on the small scale, they mean there is minimal bulge on the large scale.
>>
>>8480278
well its still aliens and you know it
>>
>>8480282
Aliens like big bulges, just like your mom.
>>
File: IMG_6223.jpg (122KB, 800x572px) Image search:
[Google]
122KB, 800x572px
>>8480288
Well she does have her own gravity well...
>>
The paper says the star has a small equatorial bulge, it does not mean the entire star is smooth to 3km. Read.
>>
>>8480319
Small is a relative term anon.
That bulge is much smaller than other stars in the same spectral sequence.
>>
>>8480265
Roundest superatomic object you dingus.
>>
File: ayy lmaowl.jpg (73KB, 350x1297px)
73KB, 350x1297px
>>8480328
lmao
>>
Your mother is the roundest object observed in nature
>>
>>8480555
aw shiiiit nigga
>>
>>8480247
>Hardly anything orbiting the star pulling on it in a meaningful way
>Star has a very slow spin
>Star has more mass thus more gravity pulling matter in to the star more than gravity from other nearby objects can pull it away from the star
Lots of things, anon.
>What are the implications of this unnatural precision?
Big universe.
Thread posts: 17
Thread images: 5
Thread images: 5