Paper detail

On Monolithic Supermassive Stars

Supermassive stars have been proposed as the progenitors of the massive ($\sim 10^{9}\,\rm{M}_{\odot}$) quasars observed at $z\sim7$. Prospects for directly detecting supermassive stars with next-generation facilities depend critically on their intrinsic lifetimes, as well as their formation rates. We use the 1D stellar evolution code Kepler to explore the theoretical limiting case of zero-metallicity, non-rotating stars, formed monolithically with initial masses between $10\,\rm{kM}_{\odot}$ and $190\,\rm{kM}_{\odot}$. We find that stars born with masses between $\sim60\,\rm{kM}_{\odot}$ and $\sim150\,\rm{kM}_{\odot}$ collapse at the end of the main sequence, burning stably for $\sim1.5\,\rm{Myr}$. More massive stars collapse directly through the general relativistic instability after only a thermal timescale of $\sim3\,\rm{kyr}$--$4\,\rm{kyr}$. The expected difficulty in producing such massive, thermally-relaxed objects, together with recent results for currently preferred rapidly-accreting formation models, suggests that such ``truly direct'' or ``dark'' collapses may not be typical for supermassive objects in the early Universe. We close by discussing the evolution of supermassive stars in the broader context of massive primordial stellar evolution and the possibility of supermassive stellar explosions.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.