What is the most mass that a star could have?

The earliest fossil records indicate that life appeared on Earth about a billion years after the formation of the solar system. What is the most mass that a star could have in order that its lifetime on the main sequence is long enough to permit life to form on one or more of its planets? Assume that the evolutionary process would be similar to those that occurred on Earth.What is the most mass that a star could have?For a long time, 150 solar masses was considered to be the top end for stellar mass. Recently, however, the most massive star found comes in at 300 solar masses.



Assuming that the development and evolution of life is pretty much in accordance with life on Earth, it's highly unlikely that life could originate on such a high-mass star; its lifespan is estimated to be little more than about 200-million years. In fact, that 300-solar mass giant is already throwing off material as it works its way through the stages of fusion.What is the most mass that a star could have?Off the top of my head, i believe the relation is

T ~ M^(1/3)

That is the lifetime (ie main sequence burn) of a star is proportional to the inverse cube of the mass. The lifetimes drop very quickly as you increase mass.

So the answer in a very approximate way is not that much more massive than the Sun, perhaps something like up to about 1.8 to 2.0 solar mass units assuming life takes a billion years to appear.

My reasoning is the Sun has a lifetime of about 10By, if you make a star 1.5 solar masses, it burns for about 30% that long. If you increase it to 2.0 you have a main sequence burn about 10% as long as the Sun or ~1ByWhat is the most mass that a star could have?Stars at about 300 solar masses have been discovered.