>within seconds, a star goes from being stable to ejecting all its contents within seconds at near lightspeed
Not all of it. In most core collapse supernovae the core will remain as some compact remnant, a neutron star or black hole. The other layers are ejected. Only in some rare, very energetic supernovae is no remnant expected.
>how does this make sense? wouldn't its mass still hold it together? where does the explosion come from?
It's quite obvious in the case you have a neutron star. The whole thing is collapsing until the core hits degeneracy pressure and stops contracting. The outer layers are still collapsing inwards and slam into the stalled core, then they rebound outwards with a shock wave. In the case of a black hole it's believed a proto-neutron star forms first, meaning there is still the rebound and the outward shock. You also have the monumental flux of neutrinos, which carry most of the energy. Although neutrinos interact very weakly there is enough of them to have a significant effect in driving the shock outwards. They are emitted in a fraction of a second and escape immediately. For supernova 1987A 25 neutrinos were detected, even though it is about 170,000 lightyears away.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/sci/

Thread:

>within seconds, a star goes from being stable to ejecting all its contents within seconds at near lightspeedhow does this make sense?…

>within seconds, a star goes from being stable to ejecting all its contents within seconds at near lightspeed
how does this make sense?…