Well, no. Novas aren't powered by gravitational collapse, and they don't dissipate the entire star. Supernovas are powered by gravitational collapse, but they also don't dissipate the entire star, but leave a neutron star behind.
Or a black hole depending on the stellar mass.
Thank you. I am, of course, still partially confused. It appears the author advances that idea that, given a gravity well where hydrogen is continually compressiing, the heat generated would produce expansive forces that outweigh the attraction of gravity. I am unsure if this threshold is below what is needed for fusion, or above it. However, even if above (hotter) than the fusion threshold, ultimately there comes a point where the heat (expansive) certainly exceeds the gravity, no? Thus, supernova? I am aware that every nova or supernova leaves behind a mass, even a singularity, but I cannot see how this situation does not agree with what this author is stating. Please try to assume I am a stupid person and explain again, if you have the time/inclination. This is fascinating to me. Now I must go pound some square blocks into round holes.