On a scale from 1 to 10, where do you stand on emotional stability? Would you be an 8 or a 9? What if you were a 7.9? Would that be just the same as an 8?
Among stellar entities, white dwarfs are stars that have used up their nuclear fuel, that is, they don’t turn hydrogen into helium anymore or helium into carbon. Our sun will become a white dwarf in about 5 billion years, give or take a week. Before it becomes one, it will shrink, heat up, swell, blast off about half its matter, then shrink again, maybe repeating the process. Then, it will become a white dwarf that will last a very long time. You won’t be there, so I’m not giving any figures.
Stars that use up their nuclear fuel yet remain close to one and a half times more massive than our sun will become neutron stars or, if large enough, black holes. The dividing line of stellar future is 1.4 (rounded) times our sun’s mass. That boundary between white dwarf and neutron star is the eponymous Chandrasekhar’s Limit; that’s the standard measure. It’s an accurate assessment. It’s empirical. It’s the difference between a so-called planetary nebula (a sphere of expanding gases moving outward from the white dwarf that ejected them in the process of becoming a white dwarf) and a supernova.
What if we could get an empirical dividing line between mild emotion and intense emotion? Imagine. Instead of the sun as a standard, we could pick some person, one not too prone to violent or passionate outbursts nor too prone to quiet passivity. Take the latter. Here’s the story. I don’t know whether or not it is true. Some nuns who had avowed poverty and lived in a community took a rowboat onto a lake. The boat developed a leak. A nun looked down, saw her feet in water, and said, “Oh. Our shoes.” Not, “OH! My shoes! The boat is sinking! Jesus, save us.” Okay, probably not true, but it makes a point. Of course, the second, more passionate reaction would be a little closer to a supposed emotional Chandrasekhar’s Limit.
Make the emotional mass after the first reaction less than 1. Make the second, more than 1.44. Bam! Neutron nun! Or, even bigger reaction, “Every nun for herself!” Supernunva. Black Habit Hole.
Back to the original question: Where do you stand on an emotional stability scale that runs from 1 to 10? After you finish your reaction to whatever, is there less mass than the standard measure or 1.4 times more? Becoming white dwarf or black hole?
The destiny of stars is determined by their mass. The destiny of personality is determined by its emotional mass.
Among stellar entities, white dwarfs are stars that have used up their nuclear fuel, that is, they don’t turn hydrogen into helium anymore or helium into carbon. Our sun will become a white dwarf in about 5 billion years, give or take a week. Before it becomes one, it will shrink, heat up, swell, blast off about half its matter, then shrink again, maybe repeating the process. Then, it will become a white dwarf that will last a very long time. You won’t be there, so I’m not giving any figures.
Stars that use up their nuclear fuel yet remain close to one and a half times more massive than our sun will become neutron stars or, if large enough, black holes. The dividing line of stellar future is 1.4 (rounded) times our sun’s mass. That boundary between white dwarf and neutron star is the eponymous Chandrasekhar’s Limit; that’s the standard measure. It’s an accurate assessment. It’s empirical. It’s the difference between a so-called planetary nebula (a sphere of expanding gases moving outward from the white dwarf that ejected them in the process of becoming a white dwarf) and a supernova.
What if we could get an empirical dividing line between mild emotion and intense emotion? Imagine. Instead of the sun as a standard, we could pick some person, one not too prone to violent or passionate outbursts nor too prone to quiet passivity. Take the latter. Here’s the story. I don’t know whether or not it is true. Some nuns who had avowed poverty and lived in a community took a rowboat onto a lake. The boat developed a leak. A nun looked down, saw her feet in water, and said, “Oh. Our shoes.” Not, “OH! My shoes! The boat is sinking! Jesus, save us.” Okay, probably not true, but it makes a point. Of course, the second, more passionate reaction would be a little closer to a supposed emotional Chandrasekhar’s Limit.
Make the emotional mass after the first reaction less than 1. Make the second, more than 1.44. Bam! Neutron nun! Or, even bigger reaction, “Every nun for herself!” Supernunva. Black Habit Hole.
Back to the original question: Where do you stand on an emotional stability scale that runs from 1 to 10? After you finish your reaction to whatever, is there less mass than the standard measure or 1.4 times more? Becoming white dwarf or black hole?
The destiny of stars is determined by their mass. The destiny of personality is determined by its emotional mass.
RSS Feed