Talk:Cataclysmic variable star

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

cv novae distinction edit

does a cataclysmic variable have to undergo a typical nova reaction? the article describes a typical nova reaction

i think if it doesn't we don't recognise it as a variable. btw i also think that most of the types can be explained by the relative masses, temperatures and distances of the systems elements. for example a relatively big primary would be a VY sculpturis, and SU UM have a relatively cool primary, the ones that accrete more hydrogen supposedly would usually accompany a younger star , the ones that pause might well be in equilibrium or have very long periods (one side starts fusing but it takes long for the whole surface to heat enough, after wich the other side finishes the fusion proces (probably logically) before the first side burns out.(in that cse there should be variable's that have 2 periods if variation, when the critical mass of hydrogen is not allways big enough to have it all fuse. (i assume they would be rare however, since apparently the mechanism allows for the non exposed side to fuse usually.) etc. 24.132.171.225 (talk) 13:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Different classes edit

Notes on the different class.

  • Fusion-dominated phase
    • Classical novae
    • Super soft sources (SSS)
  • Accretion-dominated phase
    • Dwarf novae (DN)
    • Polars
    • Intermediate polars

Thanks, CarpD, 8/20/07. —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 06:10, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Confusing spelling error. edit

A spelling error in the opening paragraph is the word "ones". This should be "once". It is confusing. Fivemack used this word in May 2008, he should correct it. Edybevk (talk) 19:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cataclysmic variable star. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:24, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply