Is it Rho Cassiopeiae or Mu Sagittarii?
I see in the Stellarium 0.13.0 that Mu Sagittarii has absolute magnitude -11.43!!

  • $\begingroup$ The sun, obviously! But don't think you can look directly at it with the naked eye. Well, you could, but that might be the last thing you see ;). $\endgroup$
    – rubenvb
    Commented Jul 2, 2015 at 18:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ No, the absolute magnitude of the Sun is only around 4.75. $\endgroup$
    – ProfRob
    Commented Jul 2, 2015 at 20:06
  • $\begingroup$ You should see Absolute magnitude $\endgroup$
    – Ab_Sh
    Commented Jul 2, 2015 at 20:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Johannes supernova?! Of course not. Only stars, this contains variable stars. $\endgroup$
    – Ab_Sh
    Commented Apr 9, 2016 at 13:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Johannes From Wikipedia: A supernova is an astronomical event that occurs during the last stellar evolutionary stages of a massive star's life, whose dramatic and catastrophic destruction is marked by one final titanic explosion. For a short time, this causes the sudden appearance of a 'new' bright star, before slowly fading from sight over several weeks or months. $\endgroup$
    – Ab_Sh
    Commented Apr 9, 2016 at 17:04

1 Answer 1


Mu Sagittarii is a star system, not a single star. If that can be included, then Eta Carinae should be included, and it has an absolute magnitude of -12.0. It's a star system about 7,500 light-years from Earth.

It looks like the brightest (absolute magnitude) single star visible to the unaided eye is WR 24 (in Carina Nebula). Its absolute magnitude is −11.1 and apparent magnitude is 6.48, so just barely visible.

source: Wikipedia - List of most luminous known stars

edit: Rho Cassiopeiae's absolute magnitude is -9.5.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .