I'm working on a project and I need a list of at least 50 stars with their known sizes (they must be below 50 solar diameters), but all star search engines I found didn't offer star sizes in the results, or didn't provide me with ways to search by size.

Does anyone know where I can find this information? Thanks in advance!

Also, while we're on topic, what's the estimated size of Betelgeuse? I'm finding values ranging from 500 to 700 solar diameters, which is a big difference I can't really ignore.

__________________

Hum,
you may want to look up a Hertzberg-Russell (HR) diagram on google.

__________________
`Irony` actually does mean `metal like`...

I have a book called Starlist 2000. It's a catalog of stars with the the basic details laid out in a grid. It has them listed by constellation, but in the back there are some other charts, like the top 20 brightest and so on. I just moved, and I'm not sure where that book might be but if you just want the numbers, it's a good place to start.

__________________
A Nerd can figure out how long it will take the original Enterprise traveling at warp 6.5 to travel from Regulus to Antares.
A Geek will think he can use that to pick up a girl in a bar.
A Dork knows he can't pick up the girl with it, but will hang around for hours anyway, just in case she asks.
She might. You never know.

Wikipedia offers a list of the largest known stars, by their solar diameter;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_stars

CJ

Here's a list of the 100 nearest stars, that includes their masses.

cjbirch, I already used that list from Wikipedia, but it stops at 43 solar diameters, and I need some examples of smaller stars as well.

And CuddlySkyGazer, I need their actual sizes, not masses.

About the rest, I'll be taking a look.

__________________

Don't expect too much precision. We don't have a lot of Betelguese-type stars to study and measure to make detailed inferences about their actual size.

Remember that attributes like distance, mass, age and diameter are all inferred and estimated based on spectral characteristics, commonalities with other stars and theories of stellar evolution.

__________________
"Barbarism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph" -- Conan

Dunno if its up-to-date, but also look at http://www.stellar-database.com

__________________
I would rather understand one cause than be King of Persia. -Democritus of Abdera

(emphasis mine) A Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, maybe?
LucasVB, if you can't find any explicit data on stellar radii, here is a fairly dependable relationship for main sequence (luminosity through hydrogen fusion) stars:
for stars of less than 2 solar masses, the radius is roughly proportional to the mass (M_star equal or approximately equal to 1.6 M_sun, then R_star is approximately 1.6 R_sun). For stars of greater than 2 solar masses (hotter main sequence stars), then the radius is proportional to the square root of the mass (M_star approximately 4 M_sun, then R_star is approximately 2 R_sun). The relationships for most of the main sequence stars are fairly well defined. If you want to go into a little more depth, try here, or try a google search for "mass-luminosity" or "mass-radius" (or variations of the above). Also study the HR diagram to get a good idea of the general relationships. Hope this helps.
Also, a note on Betelgeuse: it has evolved past its main sequence stage. It's estimated to be "only" 15-20 M_sun, but it's radius falls far outside the "main sequence" proportionalities due to it being in "supergiant" phase. Many believe it to be nearing supernova, so instabilities in the star itself might account for the differences in measurements. It's also classified as a pulsating variable. [/pedant]

Hum,
tnx for correction.

__________________
`Irony` actually does mean `metal like`...

Thanks guys. I've managed to gather the data I needed.

__________________

Which just links you to your post above.

Computers are idiots.

Now I want to see this man's artwork on stars.
http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/

He laments the lack of quality images out there.

Links from Mr. Tufte:
http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-...1kE&topic_id=1
http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-...262&topic_id=1

Cool,
i can see a new form of `google-ranking-feedback-sport` emerging from this...

__________________
`Irony` actually does mean `metal like`...