I just saw this about a new supernova. They happened to be watching, when suddenly it just started happening.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24759985/
Wow!
QUOTE (Empress Palpatine+May 22 2008, 02:18 AM)
I just saw this about a new supernova. They happened to be watching, when suddenly it just started happening.
Far out! Did you hear about the youngest supernova in the Milky Way last week? www.universetoday.com/2008/05/14/the-big-announcement-chandra-vla-find-youngest-supernova-in-our-galaxy/
Far out! Did you hear about the youngest supernova in the Milky Way last week? www.universetoday.com/2008/05/14/the-big-announcement-chandra-vla-find-youngest-supernova-in-our-galaxy/
G'day
Re:
Supernova birth observed for first time
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24759985/
I think they are in error.
In many cases after a supernova the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons produced via the photodisintergration of the Fe built up over billions of years.
The star looks like its exploding, but its going through a stage.
But! thats my opinion.
Re:
Supernova birth observed for first time
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24759985/
QUOTE
With that observation, they became the first astronomers to catch a star in the act of exploding.
"For years we have dreamed of seeing a star just as it was exploding, but actually finding one is a once-in-a-lifetime, event," said Soderberg, a Hubble and Carnegie Princeton Fellow at Princeton University.
"For years we have dreamed of seeing a star just as it was exploding, but actually finding one is a once-in-a-lifetime, event," said Soderberg, a Hubble and Carnegie Princeton Fellow at Princeton University.
I think they are in error.
In many cases after a supernova the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons produced via the photodisintergration of the Fe built up over billions of years.
The star looks like its exploding, but its going through a stage.
But! thats my opinion.
QUOTE (Harry Costas+May 22 2008, 07:43 AM)
G'day
I think they are in error.
In many cases after a supernova the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons produced via the photodisintergration of the Fe built up over billions of years.
The star looks like its exploding, but its going through a stage.
But! thats my opinion.
And why do you think so? I mean, what is the reason why youwould think that this particular observation is not a supernova?
Anyway, after the supernova there isn't much left, since the core collapses, leaving behind a neutron star, or a black hole, or, in some cases, nothing but a shell of ejecta.
I think they are in error.
In many cases after a supernova the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons produced via the photodisintergration of the Fe built up over billions of years.
The star looks like its exploding, but its going through a stage.
But! thats my opinion.
And why do you think so? I mean, what is the reason why youwould think that this particular observation is not a supernova?
Anyway, after the supernova there isn't much left, since the core collapses, leaving behind a neutron star, or a black hole, or, in some cases, nothing but a shell of ejecta.
G'day
Ofelas said
The core does not collapse, do some research and you will find that the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons, that forms a rejuvinated Neutron core. When the core has very little gravity sink, the explosion could destroy the star completely.
A big explsion usually tells us that the core is quite dense and a Neutron star maybe left.
A so called black hole is a Neutron core with about 3 solar mass, that allows it to create electromagnetic field preventing light from escaping.
Neutron core has a density of 10^17 Kg/m3 Some think this is the ultimate compaction of degenerate matter stopped by Neutron repulsion.
or
Theoretical compaction of quarks and Preon particles composites can result in densities from 10^18 to 10^35 Kg/m3 and thats quite dense.
Ofelas said
QUOTE
Anyway, after the supernova there isn't much left, since the core collapses, leaving behind a neutron star, or a black hole, or, in some cases, nothing but a shell of ejecta.
The core does not collapse, do some research and you will find that the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons, that forms a rejuvinated Neutron core. When the core has very little gravity sink, the explosion could destroy the star completely.
A big explsion usually tells us that the core is quite dense and a Neutron star maybe left.
A so called black hole is a Neutron core with about 3 solar mass, that allows it to create electromagnetic field preventing light from escaping.
Neutron core has a density of 10^17 Kg/m3 Some think this is the ultimate compaction of degenerate matter stopped by Neutron repulsion.
or
Theoretical compaction of quarks and Preon particles composites can result in densities from 10^18 to 10^35 Kg/m3 and thats quite dense.
QUOTE (Harry Costas+May 22 2008, 01:30 PM)
G'day
Ofelas said
The core does not collapse, do some research and you will find that the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons, that forms a rejuvinated Neutron core. When the core has very little gravity sink, the explosion could destroy the star completely.
A big explsion usually tells us that the core is quite dense and a Neutron star maybe left.
A so called black hole is a Neutron core with about 3 solar mass, that allows it to create electromagnetic field preventing light from escaping.
Neutron core has a density of 10^17 Kg/m3 Some think this is the ultimate compaction of degenerate matter stopped by Neutron repulsion.
or
Theoretical compaction of quarks and Preon particles composites can result in densities from 10^18 to 10^35 Kg/m3 and thats quite dense.
I am sorry, but you need to re-take your stellar astrophysics. the core indeed collapses, said collapse stops--if the core is, indeed less than the Chandrasekhar limit--resulting in a neutron star and doesn't if the core is more massive, resulting in a vlack hole. Electromagnetic energy has nothing to do with the black hole formation. A "big" explosion is one from a hypermassive star, a hypernova (eta Cat is a good candidate), and that is possibly what we have observed.
Indeed quark and strange stars are hypothetically possible but, so far, have not been detected. i hope they will be too. Would be interesting, don't you think?
Ofelas said
The core does not collapse, do some research and you will find that the core gets rejuvinated by the Neutrons, that forms a rejuvinated Neutron core. When the core has very little gravity sink, the explosion could destroy the star completely.
A big explsion usually tells us that the core is quite dense and a Neutron star maybe left.
A so called black hole is a Neutron core with about 3 solar mass, that allows it to create electromagnetic field preventing light from escaping.
Neutron core has a density of 10^17 Kg/m3 Some think this is the ultimate compaction of degenerate matter stopped by Neutron repulsion.
or
Theoretical compaction of quarks and Preon particles composites can result in densities from 10^18 to 10^35 Kg/m3 and thats quite dense.
I am sorry, but you need to re-take your stellar astrophysics. the core indeed collapses, said collapse stops--if the core is, indeed less than the Chandrasekhar limit--resulting in a neutron star and doesn't if the core is more massive, resulting in a vlack hole. Electromagnetic energy has nothing to do with the black hole formation. A "big" explosion is one from a hypermassive star, a hypernova (eta Cat is a good candidate), and that is possibly what we have observed.
Indeed quark and strange stars are hypothetically possible but, so far, have not been detected. i hope they will be too. Would be interesting, don't you think?
G'day olefas
You said
You need to first prove that compaction past a neutron matric is capable. The most that you may get is the merging of the Neutrons. Untill we have further info.
Explain to me what you think happens when a star goes supernova.
and yes main stream does say that the core collapses.
I will later explain why the core is rejuvinated rarher than collapse.
As for my stellar astrophysics, at this moment, I'm reading up on Compact matter, jets formed from so called black holes and redshift. Thats going to take some time give or take a couple of years.
You said
QUOTE
I am sorry, but you need to re-take your stellar astrophysics. the core indeed collapses, said collapse stops--if the core is, indeed less than the Chandrasekhar limit--resulting in a neutron star and doesn't if the core is more massive, resulting in a vlack hole. Electromagnetic energy has nothing to do with the black hole formation. A "big" explosion is one from a hypermassive star, a hypernova (eta Cat is a good candidate), and that is possibly what we have observed.
You need to first prove that compaction past a neutron matric is capable. The most that you may get is the merging of the Neutrons. Untill we have further info.
Explain to me what you think happens when a star goes supernova.
and yes main stream does say that the core collapses.
I will later explain why the core is rejuvinated rarher than collapse.
As for my stellar astrophysics, at this moment, I'm reading up on Compact matter, jets formed from so called black holes and redshift. Thats going to take some time give or take a couple of years.
QUOTE (Harry Costas+May 24 2008, 05:18 AM)
I will later explain why the core is rejuvinated rarher than collapse.
Oh, yes. Please do. We could all use a good laugh.
Oh, yes. Please do. We could all use a good laugh.
G'day
Barakn said
Is this what you call science, to laugh at cutting edge information.
Than laugh as much as you want. Does not worry me.
Maybe you can explain how a supernova works and how a neutron star forms.
Barakn said
QUOTE
QUOTE (Harry Costas @ May 24 2008, 05:18 AM)
I will later explain why the core is rejuvinated rarher than collapse.
Oh, yes. Please do. We could all use a good laugh.
I will later explain why the core is rejuvinated rarher than collapse.
Oh, yes. Please do. We could all use a good laugh.
Is this what you call science, to laugh at cutting edge information.
Than laugh as much as you want. Does not worry me.
Maybe you can explain how a supernova works and how a neutron star forms.
Harry Costas
Neutron star formation is fairly well understood, except by you, it seems. And Black holes do exist, but their electro-magnetic properties are not the cause of their existence.
For every successful "outside-the-main-stream" idea, there are thousands of unsuccessful "crackpot" theories. Those you have put forth, so far, seem to be in the later catagory.
Grumpy
Neutron star formation is fairly well understood, except by you, it seems. And Black holes do exist, but their electro-magnetic properties are not the cause of their existence.
For every successful "outside-the-main-stream" idea, there are thousands of unsuccessful "crackpot" theories. Those you have put forth, so far, seem to be in the later catagory.
Grumpy
G'day all
It seems we have scientists in this forum.
Grumpy said
Grumpy give me your best shot.
Apply science to your words and not crank pot ideas.
Please explain how Neutron stars form.
and Please define what a black hole is.
I fully understand mainstream thinking and models and how they came about.
It seems we have scientists in this forum.
Grumpy said
QUOTE
Neutron star formation is fairly well understood, except by you, it seems. And Black holes do exist, but their electro-magnetic properties are not the cause of their existence.
Grumpy give me your best shot.
Apply science to your words and not crank pot ideas.
Please explain how Neutron stars form.
and Please define what a black hole is.
I fully understand mainstream thinking and models and how they came about.
Harry Costas
I'll keep it simple for your benefit.
Nuclear reactions in stars produce energy, this energy provides an opposing force against gravity. As stars burn they form layers with hydrogen(the lightest) on the outside, and iron(the product of the last energy producing reaction) accumulating in the core. When the core reaches a certain mass, the force of gravity exceeds the forces keeping the protons and electrons apart, and the core collapses almost instantly to a small fraction of it's original volume. At that point other forces stop the core's collapse(it has become a single neutron, or a neutron star), and a rebounding shockwave causes the outer layers of lithium, helium, carbon, oxygen and hydrogen to detonate, this is what we call a supernova. This is where the heavier elements are created and seeded into the universe.
A black hole is formed if this neutron star's mass exceeds the resistance of the nuclear forces keeping the neutrons from collapsing further. Whether this collapse is stopped is not known, because it is inside the event horizon, an area where gravity is so high that even light cannot escape(IE the escape velocity is greater than lightspeed). There are also time dialation effects that may mean that everything that has ever fallen into a Black Hole will continue to fall for the life of the Universe and no singularity is formed, but neither you nor anyone else knows, it is entirely speculative.
Grumpy
I'll keep it simple for your benefit.
Nuclear reactions in stars produce energy, this energy provides an opposing force against gravity. As stars burn they form layers with hydrogen(the lightest) on the outside, and iron(the product of the last energy producing reaction) accumulating in the core. When the core reaches a certain mass, the force of gravity exceeds the forces keeping the protons and electrons apart, and the core collapses almost instantly to a small fraction of it's original volume. At that point other forces stop the core's collapse(it has become a single neutron, or a neutron star), and a rebounding shockwave causes the outer layers of lithium, helium, carbon, oxygen and hydrogen to detonate, this is what we call a supernova. This is where the heavier elements are created and seeded into the universe.
A black hole is formed if this neutron star's mass exceeds the resistance of the nuclear forces keeping the neutrons from collapsing further. Whether this collapse is stopped is not known, because it is inside the event horizon, an area where gravity is so high that even light cannot escape(IE the escape velocity is greater than lightspeed). There are also time dialation effects that may mean that everything that has ever fallen into a Black Hole will continue to fall for the life of the Universe and no singularity is formed, but neither you nor anyone else knows, it is entirely speculative.
Grumpy
Hello Grumpy
What you say maybe correct, and I know that many agree with you.
Please I will keep it simple for your benefit.
Point form:
The core of star may have varies densities.
One is a Neutron core that solar envelopes build on.
Neutron stars show an outer layer of Iron.
During the life of a star the core's function is to keep the so envelope from expanding and control the temp within the solar evevelope.
As the star ages it builds up elements from H to Fe and Ni. Over billions of years Fe builds up and accumulates on the outer core.
The Neutron core releases Neutrons that make up H and via fusion combination produces the elements He to Fe and Ni, Neutrons are also produced via fission reactions of the elements.
Heavier elements are formed and if remained in the solar envelope break down to Fe unless ejected from the star.
During a super nova conditions change allowing the heavier elements to remain.
The Fe that is close to the core is hit by high energy photons, what triggers this is the mass of the core, losing its abilty to control heat lose.
The Fe is broken down to He than to H than to Neutrons via photodisintergration, fission chain reactions, being endothermic over a very short time.
All this time the core remains a Neutron core. The sudden increase in Neutrons is recycled back to the core allowing the core to increase in mass and thus been rejuvinated.
The star forms an hour glass form via z-pinch ejecting matter. The Hour shape is formed because of the core's mass reduction, has lost its abilty to hold onto the solar envelope
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arc...1106empinch.htm
Simple experiments can demonstrate the principle of the “z-pinch” that electrical theorists say is the best explanation of the hourglass shape of many bipolar nebulas.
What triggers the explsion to form the supernova? That part I agree with you.
Sorry I had to make this quick,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,have to go to church.
I will come back to it later.
What you say maybe correct, and I know that many agree with you.
Please I will keep it simple for your benefit.
Point form:
The core of star may have varies densities.
One is a Neutron core that solar envelopes build on.
Neutron stars show an outer layer of Iron.
During the life of a star the core's function is to keep the so envelope from expanding and control the temp within the solar evevelope.
As the star ages it builds up elements from H to Fe and Ni. Over billions of years Fe builds up and accumulates on the outer core.
The Neutron core releases Neutrons that make up H and via fusion combination produces the elements He to Fe and Ni, Neutrons are also produced via fission reactions of the elements.
Heavier elements are formed and if remained in the solar envelope break down to Fe unless ejected from the star.
During a super nova conditions change allowing the heavier elements to remain.
The Fe that is close to the core is hit by high energy photons, what triggers this is the mass of the core, losing its abilty to control heat lose.
The Fe is broken down to He than to H than to Neutrons via photodisintergration, fission chain reactions, being endothermic over a very short time.
All this time the core remains a Neutron core. The sudden increase in Neutrons is recycled back to the core allowing the core to increase in mass and thus been rejuvinated.
The star forms an hour glass form via z-pinch ejecting matter. The Hour shape is formed because of the core's mass reduction, has lost its abilty to hold onto the solar envelope
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arc...1106empinch.htm
Simple experiments can demonstrate the principle of the “z-pinch” that electrical theorists say is the best explanation of the hourglass shape of many bipolar nebulas.
What triggers the explsion to form the supernova? That part I agree with you.
Sorry I had to make this quick,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,have to go to church.
I will come back to it later.
Harry Costas
Don't bother, I've read enough of your gobbledegoop to know you simply don't have a clue about reality. A neutron star simply cannot exist in contact with normal matter, it is formed only when normal matter collapses, we call neutron stars "degenerate matter" due to this collapsed condition. Any matter in direct contact would also collapse due to the extreme gravity needed for degenerate matter to exist. So, no, the neutron star does not already exist inside a star.
Don't bother, I've read enough of your gobbledegoop to know you simply don't have a clue about reality. A neutron star simply cannot exist in contact with normal matter, it is formed only when normal matter collapses, we call neutron stars "degenerate matter" due to this collapsed condition. Any matter in direct contact would also collapse due to the extreme gravity needed for degenerate matter to exist. So, no, the neutron star does not already exist inside a star.
The Fe that is close to the core is hit by high energy photons, what triggers this is the mass of the core, losing its abilty to control heat lose.
The Fe is broken down to He than to H than to Neutrons via photodisintergration, fission chain reactions, being endothermic over a very short time.
All this time the core remains a Neutron core. The sudden increase in Neutrons is recycled back to the core allowing the core to increase in mass and thus been rejuvinated.
This bit is particularly vacuous and meaningless. "recycled"??? "rejuvinated"??? iron ash controlling heat loss??? GARBAGE!!! Elements heavier than iron being formed within a normal star, doesn't happen, to fuse iron requires an input of additional energy, energy only available during a supernova.
z pinch, as you call it, is a result of intense magnetic fields.
photodisintergration???Oh PULEEZE!!!
Grumpy
QUOTE
Sorry I had to make this quick,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,have to go to church.
I will come back to it later.
I will come back to it later.
Don't bother, I've read enough of your gobbledegoop to know you simply don't have a clue about reality. A neutron star simply cannot exist in contact with normal matter, it is formed only when normal matter collapses, we call neutron stars "degenerate matter" due to this collapsed condition. Any matter in direct contact would also collapse due to the extreme gravity needed for degenerate matter to exist. So, no, the neutron star does not already exist inside a star.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Sorry I had to make this quick,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,have to go to church. I will come back to it later. |
Don't bother, I've read enough of your gobbledegoop to know you simply don't have a clue about reality. A neutron star simply cannot exist in contact with normal matter, it is formed only when normal matter collapses, we call neutron stars "degenerate matter" due to this collapsed condition. Any matter in direct contact would also collapse due to the extreme gravity needed for degenerate matter to exist. So, no, the neutron star does not already exist inside a star.
The Fe that is close to the core is hit by high energy photons, what triggers this is the mass of the core, losing its abilty to control heat lose.
The Fe is broken down to He than to H than to Neutrons via photodisintergration, fission chain reactions, being endothermic over a very short time.
All this time the core remains a Neutron core. The sudden increase in Neutrons is recycled back to the core allowing the core to increase in mass and thus been rejuvinated.
This bit is particularly vacuous and meaningless. "recycled"??? "rejuvinated"??? iron ash controlling heat loss??? GARBAGE!!! Elements heavier than iron being formed within a normal star, doesn't happen, to fuse iron requires an input of additional energy, energy only available during a supernova.
z pinch, as you call it, is a result of intense magnetic fields.
photodisintergration???Oh PULEEZE!!!
Grumpy
Hello Grumpy
What is the use in expanding the information? If you think along those lines so be it.
I feel that the limited information is clouding your logic.
================================================
For those people who wish to extend their info on Neutron stars
You need to research more on Neutron stars and compacted matter.
Info on Neutron Stars
Neutron Stars Found to Spew Jets of Matter, Just Like Black Holes
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Neutron-Sta...les-58485.shtml
Scientists Gain Glimpse of Bizarre Matter in a Neutron Star
http://universe.nasa.gov/press/2004/040908a.html
Stars
Neutron Star Size
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com/topic...onStarSize.html
The Physics of Neutron Stars
J.M. Lattimer and M. Prakash
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0405/0405262v1.pdf
Neutron stars and their composition
This is a bit of reading
http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+compo...2ae2f97e2130c57
Neutron Star
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/pulsar.html
NEUTRON STARS AND PULSARS
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archiv...utron-Stars.pdf
The Structure of a Pre-Supernova Supergiant
http://cass.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/SN.html
Scientists Gain Glimpse of Bizarre Matter in a Neutron Star
http://universe.nasa.gov/press/2004/040908a.html
Stars
Neutron Star Size
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com/topic...onStarSize.html
The Physics of Neutron Stars
J.M. Lattimer and M. Prakash
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0405/0405262v1.pdf
Neutron stars and their composition
This is a bit of reading
http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+compo...2ae2f97e2130c57
Neutron Star
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/pulsar.html
NEUTRON STARS AND PULSARS
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archiv...utron-Stars.pdf
The Structure of a Pre-Supernova Supergiant
http://cass.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/SN.html
Because iron is the most tightly bound nucleus (the "break-even point" between fusion and fission) the star is no longer able to produce energy in the core via further nuclear burning stages. Nuclear reactions will continue, however, because of the extremely high temperatures in the massive star's core. These further reactions have a devastating effect on the star, because they take energy out of the core. At such high temperatures and densities the gamma-ray photons present in the core have sufficient energy to destroy the heavy nuclei produced in the many stages of nuclear reactions, e.g.:
High energy gamma+ 56Fe >>>>134He + 4n
This process, called photodisintegration undoes the work of a stellar lifetime in the core and removes the thermal energy necessary to provide pressure support. The result is a catastrophic collapse of the core, which cannot be halted until the core has shrunk to a size of about 10km and a density of the order of 200 million tons/cm3. Under such extreme conditions electron degeneracy cannot support the stellar core, and the free electrons are forced together with protons to form neutrons:
p+ + e- >>>>>>>n +
It is much more complicated than the above.
Neutron Star
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761577...utron_star.html
We are only now finding what a Neutron star is composed of. In the years to come we hope to know a bit more.
What is the use in expanding the information? If you think along those lines so be it.
I feel that the limited information is clouding your logic.
================================================
For those people who wish to extend their info on Neutron stars
You need to research more on Neutron stars and compacted matter.
Info on Neutron Stars
Neutron Stars Found to Spew Jets of Matter, Just Like Black Holes
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Neutron-Sta...les-58485.shtml
QUOTE
Astronomers knew that these stars resembled an onion, with multiple overlapping layers of materials, made up of different chemicals concentrated at different depths and just recently found that the surfaces of some neutron stars are much hotter than expected.
A new discovery consolidates the existing knowledge about these intriguing stars. Sebastian Heinz of the University of Wisconsin at Madison is the author of a study that found that the neutron stars, much like black holes, spew very powerful jets of matter in space.
The matter is hurled into space from their poles and the jets are comparable, sometimes even more energetic that the ones put out by black holes. So, it seems that some unique properties of black holes, like the event horizon and lack of physical surface are not absolute requirements for the formation of these jets.
"Gravity appears to be the key to creating these jets, not some trick of the event horizon," said Heinz, who made the discovery using observation from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory. The telescope spotted a jet of matter coming out of a system located 20,000 light-years from Earth.
A new discovery consolidates the existing knowledge about these intriguing stars. Sebastian Heinz of the University of Wisconsin at Madison is the author of a study that found that the neutron stars, much like black holes, spew very powerful jets of matter in space.
The matter is hurled into space from their poles and the jets are comparable, sometimes even more energetic that the ones put out by black holes. So, it seems that some unique properties of black holes, like the event horizon and lack of physical surface are not absolute requirements for the formation of these jets.
"Gravity appears to be the key to creating these jets, not some trick of the event horizon," said Heinz, who made the discovery using observation from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory. The telescope spotted a jet of matter coming out of a system located 20,000 light-years from Earth.
Scientists Gain Glimpse of Bizarre Matter in a Neutron Star
http://universe.nasa.gov/press/2004/040908a.html
Stars
Neutron Star Size
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com/topic...onStarSize.html
The Physics of Neutron Stars
J.M. Lattimer and M. Prakash
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0405/0405262v1.pdf
Neutron stars and their composition
This is a bit of reading
http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+compo...2ae2f97e2130c57
Neutron Star
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/pulsar.html
NEUTRON STARS AND PULSARS
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archiv...utron-Stars.pdf
The Structure of a Pre-Supernova Supergiant
http://cass.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/SN.html
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Astronomers knew that these stars resembled an onion, with multiple overlapping layers of materials, made up of different chemicals concentrated at different depths and just recently found that the surfaces of some neutron stars are much hotter than expected. A new discovery consolidates the existing knowledge about these intriguing stars. Sebastian Heinz of the University of Wisconsin at Madison is the author of a study that found that the neutron stars, much like black holes, spew very powerful jets of matter in space. The matter is hurled into space from their poles and the jets are comparable, sometimes even more energetic that the ones put out by black holes. So, it seems that some unique properties of black holes, like the event horizon and lack of physical surface are not absolute requirements for the formation of these jets. "Gravity appears to be the key to creating these jets, not some trick of the event horizon," said Heinz, who made the discovery using observation from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory. The telescope spotted a jet of matter coming out of a system located 20,000 light-years from Earth. |
Scientists Gain Glimpse of Bizarre Matter in a Neutron Star
http://universe.nasa.gov/press/2004/040908a.html
Stars
Neutron Star Size
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com/topic...onStarSize.html
The Physics of Neutron Stars
J.M. Lattimer and M. Prakash
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0405/0405262v1.pdf
Neutron stars and their composition
This is a bit of reading
http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+compo...2ae2f97e2130c57
Neutron Star
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/pulsar.html
NEUTRON STARS AND PULSARS
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archiv...utron-Stars.pdf
The Structure of a Pre-Supernova Supergiant
http://cass.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/SN.html
Because iron is the most tightly bound nucleus (the "break-even point" between fusion and fission) the star is no longer able to produce energy in the core via further nuclear burning stages. Nuclear reactions will continue, however, because of the extremely high temperatures in the massive star's core. These further reactions have a devastating effect on the star, because they take energy out of the core. At such high temperatures and densities the gamma-ray photons present in the core have sufficient energy to destroy the heavy nuclei produced in the many stages of nuclear reactions, e.g.:
High energy gamma+ 56Fe >>>>134He + 4n
This process, called photodisintegration undoes the work of a stellar lifetime in the core and removes the thermal energy necessary to provide pressure support. The result is a catastrophic collapse of the core, which cannot be halted until the core has shrunk to a size of about 10km and a density of the order of 200 million tons/cm3. Under such extreme conditions electron degeneracy cannot support the stellar core, and the free electrons are forced together with protons to form neutrons:
p+ + e- >>>>>>>n +
It is much more complicated than the above.
Neutron Star
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761577...utron_star.html
QUOTE
Physicists estimate that a neutron star probably has an atmosphere a few centimeters (about 1 inch) thick. Beneath the atmosphere is a surface crust about 1 km (about 0.6 mi) thick, which is made of iron 10,000 times more dense and stiff than any iron found on the earth. Despite the great stiffness of the surface material, the tremendous gravitational forces of neutron stars limit the height of “mountains” on their surfaces to only few centimeters (about 1 inch) in height.
Beneath the superdense iron crust is a superfluid sea of neutrons—a strange, liquidlike substance that is even more dense than the iron crust, yet has no resistance to movement (see Superfluidity). At the center of a neutron star is a core of exotic nuclear particles found under no other conditions in the known universe. The rapid rotation of neutron stars causes their equators to bulge, and they take on the shape of a flattened ball.
Beneath the superdense iron crust is a superfluid sea of neutrons—a strange, liquidlike substance that is even more dense than the iron crust, yet has no resistance to movement (see Superfluidity). At the center of a neutron star is a core of exotic nuclear particles found under no other conditions in the known universe. The rapid rotation of neutron stars causes their equators to bulge, and they take on the shape of a flattened ball.
We are only now finding what a Neutron star is composed of. In the years to come we hope to know a bit more.
QUOTE (ofelas+May 22 2008, 03:22 AM)
And why do you think so? I mean, what is the reason why youwould think that this particular observation is not a supernova?
Anyway, after the supernova there isn't much left, since the core collapses, leaving behind a neutron star, or a black hole, or, in some cases, nothing but a shell of ejecta.
core collapsing to a black hole simply has never added up in my oppinion.
You mean to tell me the star explodes, LOSING much of its mass, and yet somehow suddenly collapses into a black hole? No friend, that is psuedo-science.
A black hole forms by ADDING mass to an already super massive object, or by creating conditions in which the gravity is greater than all other forces opposing collapse.
A star simply exploding due to supernova conditions will not reasonably meet the conditions to form a black hole, in spite of what your text book may say.
Anyway, after the supernova there isn't much left, since the core collapses, leaving behind a neutron star, or a black hole, or, in some cases, nothing but a shell of ejecta.
core collapsing to a black hole simply has never added up in my oppinion.
You mean to tell me the star explodes, LOSING much of its mass, and yet somehow suddenly collapses into a black hole? No friend, that is psuedo-science.
A black hole forms by ADDING mass to an already super massive object, or by creating conditions in which the gravity is greater than all other forces opposing collapse.
A star simply exploding due to supernova conditions will not reasonably meet the conditions to form a black hole, in spite of what your text book may say.
QUOTE (Quantum_Conundrum+May 26 2008, 01:01 AM)
core collapsing to a black hole simply has never added up in my oppinion.
You mean to tell me the star explodes, LOSING much of its mass, and yet somehow suddenly collapses into a black hole? No friend, that is psuedo-science.
A black hole forms by ADDING mass to an already super massive object, or by creating conditions in which the gravity is greater than all other forces opposing collapse.
A star simply exploding due to supernova conditions will not reasonably meet the conditions to form a black hole, in spite of what your text book may say.
OK, I can spell it out: the star explodes, blowing most of its mass away, and the core collapses under its own gravity. If the remnant of the star is massive enough, it will collapse to a black hole.
Mass by itself has nothing to do with the black hole formation; black holes form when a certain amount of mass had been stuffed into a sufficiently small volume. Black holes can be relatively light: i.e., mountain-size, a few million tonnes, if they are small enough.
Your third paragraph actually says precisely that; gravity is greater than all other forces opposing the collapse of the core. It is mathematically demonstrated and the outcomes of such explosions are observed. So your incredulity is misplaced.
You mean to tell me the star explodes, LOSING much of its mass, and yet somehow suddenly collapses into a black hole? No friend, that is psuedo-science.
A black hole forms by ADDING mass to an already super massive object, or by creating conditions in which the gravity is greater than all other forces opposing collapse.
A star simply exploding due to supernova conditions will not reasonably meet the conditions to form a black hole, in spite of what your text book may say.
OK, I can spell it out: the star explodes, blowing most of its mass away, and the core collapses under its own gravity. If the remnant of the star is massive enough, it will collapse to a black hole.
Mass by itself has nothing to do with the black hole formation; black holes form when a certain amount of mass had been stuffed into a sufficiently small volume. Black holes can be relatively light: i.e., mountain-size, a few million tonnes, if they are small enough.
Your third paragraph actually says precisely that; gravity is greater than all other forces opposing the collapse of the core. It is mathematically demonstrated and the outcomes of such explosions are observed. So your incredulity is misplaced.
G'day
The issue is this.
A compacted matter is made from degenerate matter, maybe Neutrons or what ever.
The question is:
How does the compact core increase in mass and keep its Nucleon unit in place and than maybe turn into a so called black hole that has enough mass to prevent light from excaping.
Just straight collapse does not explain the process.
=================================================
http://flux.aps.org/meetings/YR04/DPP04/ba...bs/S400004.html
[CM1.004] Theory and Simulations of the Origin of Astrophysical Jets
R.V.E. Lovelace, P.R. Gandhi, M.M. Romanova (Cornell University)
The issue is this.
A compacted matter is made from degenerate matter, maybe Neutrons or what ever.
The question is:
How does the compact core increase in mass and keep its Nucleon unit in place and than maybe turn into a so called black hole that has enough mass to prevent light from excaping.
Just straight collapse does not explain the process.
=================================================
http://flux.aps.org/meetings/YR04/DPP04/ba...bs/S400004.html
[CM1.004] Theory and Simulations of the Origin of Astrophysical Jets
R.V.E. Lovelace, P.R. Gandhi, M.M. Romanova (Cornell University)
QUOTE
Powerful radio, and in some cases optical and gamma ray, emitting jets are observed to emanate from many compact accreting objects, from stellar mass black holes to super massive black holes in galactic nuclei. The jets are widely thought to arise from the twisting of an ordered magnetic field threading a differentially rotating accretion disk which acts to magnetically extract angular momentum and energy from the disk. Two main regimes have been discussed, hydromagnetic jets, which have a significant mass flux and have energy and angular momentum carried by both matter and electromagnetic field and, Poynting jets, where the mass flux is small and energy and angular momentum are carried predominantly by the electromagnetic field. Here, we describe recent theoretical work on the formation of Poynting jets from magnetized accretion disks. Further, we describe new relativistic, fully-electromagnetic, particle-in-cell simulations of the formation of jets from accretion disks. Laboratory Z-pinch experiments promise to further our understanding of the origin and nature of astrophysical jets.
QUOTE (Harry Costas+May 26 2008, 08:22 AM)
Just straight collapse does not explain the process.
...but it does; that's precisely what it does.
...but it does; that's precisely what it does.
Hello Olelas
Maybe I'm missing something
What happens in a collapse?
What are the chemical reactions.
How does it do it?
You said;
It sounds so simple.
Maybe I'm missing something
What happens in a collapse?
What are the chemical reactions.
How does it do it?
You said;
QUOTE
precisely what it does.
It sounds so simple.
Harry Costas
Since what is collapsing is a mass of pure NEUTRONS, "Chemical" is a non-sense word, having no meaning. The collapse occurs when gravity exceeds the nuclear forces resisting that collapse, ofelas is correct.
Jets are a phenomenon of the accretion disk, not of a black hole/neutron star(though the BH/NS's magnetic field may play a part), once matter enters the event horizon(BH only), nothing but Hawking radiation comes out.
Quantum_Conundrum
Since what is collapsing is a mass of pure NEUTRONS, "Chemical" is a non-sense word, having no meaning. The collapse occurs when gravity exceeds the nuclear forces resisting that collapse, ofelas is correct.
Jets are a phenomenon of the accretion disk, not of a black hole/neutron star(though the BH/NS's magnetic field may play a part), once matter enters the event horizon(BH only), nothing but Hawking radiation comes out.
Quantum_Conundrum
You mean to tell me the star explodes, LOSING much of its mass, and yet somehow suddenly collapses into a black hole? No friend, that is psuedo-science.
No, friend, you are wrong. The shed mass is OUTSIDE the collapsing core, the shockwave from the collapse detonates or expels most of the mass of the star(a supernova) leaving the collapsed core exposed. If that core is above a certain mass(1.4 solar masses) the collapse continues past the neutron stage and a black hole is formed. Even below that limit a BH can form during especially high compression/density conditions. Smaller BH's soon (cosmically) evaporate due to Hawking radiation, the smallest (microscopic) in just a few seconds.
Grumpy
QUOTE
What are the chemical reactions.
Since what is collapsing is a mass of pure NEUTRONS, "Chemical" is a non-sense word, having no meaning. The collapse occurs when gravity exceeds the nuclear forces resisting that collapse, ofelas is correct.
Jets are a phenomenon of the accretion disk, not of a black hole/neutron star(though the BH/NS's magnetic field may play a part), once matter enters the event horizon(BH only), nothing but Hawking radiation comes out.
Quantum_Conundrum
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| What are the chemical reactions. |
Since what is collapsing is a mass of pure NEUTRONS, "Chemical" is a non-sense word, having no meaning. The collapse occurs when gravity exceeds the nuclear forces resisting that collapse, ofelas is correct.
Jets are a phenomenon of the accretion disk, not of a black hole/neutron star(though the BH/NS's magnetic field may play a part), once matter enters the event horizon(BH only), nothing but Hawking radiation comes out.
Quantum_Conundrum
You mean to tell me the star explodes, LOSING much of its mass, and yet somehow suddenly collapses into a black hole? No friend, that is psuedo-science.
No, friend, you are wrong. The shed mass is OUTSIDE the collapsing core, the shockwave from the collapse detonates or expels most of the mass of the star(a supernova) leaving the collapsed core exposed. If that core is above a certain mass(1.4 solar masses) the collapse continues past the neutron stage and a black hole is formed. Even below that limit a BH can form during especially high compression/density conditions. Smaller BH's soon (cosmically) evaporate due to Hawking radiation, the smallest (microscopic) in just a few seconds.
Grumpy
G'day all
Grumpy you ideas maybe right, but! they fall short of explanation.
Take the first
Explain how a Neutron core is formed.
This does not mean a Neutron star although it may.
Than proceed to explain how the Neutrons break down to form a black hole.
Than explain, how some black holes, stella range from 3 to 20 odd suns masses and than you have the growth of the so called black holes growing bigger in mass as they approach the centre of any galaxy.
============================================
GROWING BLACK HOLES:
Accretion in a Cosmological Context
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/~bh-grow/
Heaviest Stellar Black Hole Discovered In Nearby Galaxy
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...71017145225.htm
Massive Black Hole Smashes Record
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...71030112102.htm
Black Holes: by Alex Nervosa
http://astronomyonline.org/Stars/BlackHole.asp
APOD: 2006 July 29 - The Swarm
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060729.html
Centre of the Milky Way Galaxy
X-APOD: 2003 July 12 - X-Ray Milky Way
Rays from the Galactic Core
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041106.html
The size of the black hole
If the density of the degenrate matter is 10^17 Kg/m3
1000 sun mases would fit 100 Km dia core estimate.
Ok, someone with a calculator can do this.
If the Sun could fit into 10 Km ball having a density of 10^17 Kg/m3
Whats the size of the ball to fit 1000?
If the deanity was 10^ 25 Kg/m3
Do the same calculations.
I'm off to pick up the kids
Grumpy you ideas maybe right, but! they fall short of explanation.
Take the first
Explain how a Neutron core is formed.
This does not mean a Neutron star although it may.
Than proceed to explain how the Neutrons break down to form a black hole.
Than explain, how some black holes, stella range from 3 to 20 odd suns masses and than you have the growth of the so called black holes growing bigger in mass as they approach the centre of any galaxy.
============================================
GROWING BLACK HOLES:
Accretion in a Cosmological Context
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/~bh-grow/
Heaviest Stellar Black Hole Discovered In Nearby Galaxy
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...71017145225.htm
Massive Black Hole Smashes Record
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...71030112102.htm
Black Holes: by Alex Nervosa
http://astronomyonline.org/Stars/BlackHole.asp
APOD: 2006 July 29 - The Swarm
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060729.html
Centre of the Milky Way Galaxy
X-APOD: 2003 July 12 - X-Ray Milky Way
Rays from the Galactic Core
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041106.html
The size of the black hole
If the density of the degenrate matter is 10^17 Kg/m3
1000 sun mases would fit 100 Km dia core estimate.
Ok, someone with a calculator can do this.
If the Sun could fit into 10 Km ball having a density of 10^17 Kg/m3
Whats the size of the ball to fit 1000?
If the deanity was 10^ 25 Kg/m3
Do the same calculations.
I'm off to pick up the kids
Harry Costas
The extremely large BHs we find in the centers of most galaxies were formed very early in the history of the universe, and by different methods than a stellar mass BH formed.
All BHs will ingest matter, in fact the matter around them determines the variance of our observations(active core/inactive core, for example), and without matter around them, they cannot be seen at all, gravity(and thus size of the event horizon and gravity gradient close to that horizon), spin and charge being the only physical properties they themselves have.
Stellar sized Black holes do not grow into galaxy sized Supermassives, nor do they get bigger, the nearer to the core(though there should be more of them nearer the core), except as all BH's do, by swallowing matter.
But the gravity gradient near the event horizon is amazingly high on smaller, stellar sized BHs, no matter would survive crossing the event horizon as anything but a hot gas.
But near large supermassive BHs, matter can pass through that event horizon unatomized(if that is the word), though, as the Greatful Dead said,"What a long strange trip it's been." for both the observed and the observer, timewise, that is.
Neutron stars are still matter, of a sort, though all the "air" has been squeezed out of the atoms, and all the electrons forced into the protons, so you actually have nothing but neutron soup, and, yes, a condensed crust of iron(the last stage before collapsed matter, and possible source of Magnatars's stupendous magnetic fields). Of course, condensed iron is not normal matter either.
Then you have accretion disks. These can be the real monsters, not the BH itself.
But that is really a whole other subject, isn't it???
Grumpy
The extremely large BHs we find in the centers of most galaxies were formed very early in the history of the universe, and by different methods than a stellar mass BH formed.
All BHs will ingest matter, in fact the matter around them determines the variance of our observations(active core/inactive core, for example), and without matter around them, they cannot be seen at all, gravity(and thus size of the event horizon and gravity gradient close to that horizon), spin and charge being the only physical properties they themselves have.
Stellar sized Black holes do not grow into galaxy sized Supermassives, nor do they get bigger, the nearer to the core(though there should be more of them nearer the core), except as all BH's do, by swallowing matter.
But the gravity gradient near the event horizon is amazingly high on smaller, stellar sized BHs, no matter would survive crossing the event horizon as anything but a hot gas.
But near large supermassive BHs, matter can pass through that event horizon unatomized(if that is the word), though, as the Greatful Dead said,"What a long strange trip it's been." for both the observed and the observer, timewise, that is.
Neutron stars are still matter, of a sort, though all the "air" has been squeezed out of the atoms, and all the electrons forced into the protons, so you actually have nothing but neutron soup, and, yes, a condensed crust of iron(the last stage before collapsed matter, and possible source of Magnatars's stupendous magnetic fields). Of course, condensed iron is not normal matter either.
Then you have accretion disks. These can be the real monsters, not the BH itself.
But that is really a whole other subject, isn't it???
Grumpy
Hello Grumpy
You said
They are all compact matter with silar properties. Their evolution is on the same path.
They are all compact matter with silar properties. Their evolution is on the same path.
All BHs will ingest matter, in fact the matter around them determines the variance of our observations(active core/inactive core, for example), and without matter around them, they cannot be seen at all, gravity(and thus size of the event horizon and gravity gradient close to that horizon), spin and charge being the only physical properties they themselves have.
BH ingest matter and they also recyle matter. Mainstream scientists think that BH are a end product and that nothing can escape. This type of thinking has prevented further research into the recyling process. There are millions of stellar black holes in the Milky Way and observation show us that they eat each other up and grow larger as they approach the centre. This is why there are many large Black holes at the centre.
I think you are mistaken. Have a look at the images at the galactic centre. The process is worth researching.
Black holes can merge and grow larger and from this process can grow into giant BH's.
Yes, I know what your text book tells you, but I'm saying it doesn't add up.
The star loses mass when it explodes, which decreases the gravitation.
Doesn't make sense. If the star is already burning up all of its mass into neutrons to begin with, the gravitation should continue to collapse all of the matter tighter and tighter, including any charged particles or outter gas layers, NOT explode.
It should be total gradual implosion, after all, the outter gases did not escape for millions or billions of years when the star was less dense(hydrogen and helium) and they were farther from the core, so why would the outter layers escape suddenly when the density is much greater (neutrons and heavy metals)? This is why I say text book description makes no sense.
Total gradual implosion makes perfect sense, however.
The star will either have enough mass to make a total gradual collapse, OR it will not have that much mass and will supernova leaving behind a neutron star, but a naked neutron star left from behind a supernova isn't going to simultaneously or spontaneously collapse.
Makes zero sense. Why would it expand since the fusion of the star has all but shut down, and the core density is critical? There isn't any force to cause an expansion of the lighter gases. The gravity at the surface of the neutron core is arbitrarily equal to an event horizon of a black hole just before this alleged expansion and explosion is said to take place. That is a complete contradiction. The light gases, and even half the electromagnetic radiation, should be absorbed by the neutron star as it continues to implode. The height of a star's repulsive energies happens at earlier stages in its life, any light elements that have stuck around this long, when things are far more dense and compact, isn't going anywhere.
Makes zero sense. Why would it expand since the fusion of the star has all but shut down, and the core density is critical? There isn't any force to cause an expansion of the lighter gases. The gravity at the surface of the neutron core is arbitrarily equal to an event horizon of a black hole just before this alleged expansion and explosion is said to take place. That is a complete contradiction. The light gases, and even half the electromagnetic radiation, should be absorbed by the neutron star as it continues to implode. The height of a star's repulsive energies happens at earlier stages in its life, any light elements that have stuck around this long, when things are far more dense and compact, isn't going anywhere.
and the heavier matter condenses to degenerate matter (electron, proton, neutron soup), or neutronic matter (protons are forced together with electrons forming all neutronic matter)
We know what a neutron is. Quit patronizing.
I hate to burst your bubble, but Quasars do not form from stellar objects. Quasars give off as much energy as entire galaxies for ages upon ages, and even more in many cases. You can't get that much energy from a few dozen or few hundred solar masses.
You said
QUOTE
The extremely large BHs we find in the centers of most galaxies were formed very early in the history of the universe, and by different methods than a stellar mass BH formed.
They are all compact matter with silar properties. Their evolution is on the same path.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The extremely large BHs we find in the centers of most galaxies were formed very early in the history of the universe, and by different methods than a stellar mass BH formed. |
They are all compact matter with silar properties. Their evolution is on the same path.
All BHs will ingest matter, in fact the matter around them determines the variance of our observations(active core/inactive core, for example), and without matter around them, they cannot be seen at all, gravity(and thus size of the event horizon and gravity gradient close to that horizon), spin and charge being the only physical properties they themselves have.
BH ingest matter and they also recyle matter. Mainstream scientists think that BH are a end product and that nothing can escape. This type of thinking has prevented further research into the recyling process. There are millions of stellar black holes in the Milky Way and observation show us that they eat each other up and grow larger as they approach the centre. This is why there are many large Black holes at the centre.
QUOTE
Stellar sized Black holes do not grow into galaxy sized Supermassives, nor do they get bigger, the nearer to the core(though there should be more of them nearer the core), except as all BH's do, by swallowing matter.
I think you are mistaken. Have a look at the images at the galactic centre. The process is worth researching.
Black holes can merge and grow larger and from this process can grow into giant BH's.
Harry Costas
Galaxy mass black holes(in the millions and billions of solar masses) formed early(within a few million years) and galaxies formed around them. Yes, stellar(and galactic) Bh's do merge with each other.
But there are stellar mass holes, and there are supermassive holes, we find few intermediates(largest BH in stellar class is about 100 solar masses, a million times too small for even the smallest of the supermassive), and there seems to be none in between. There is not enough time since the big bang for such large stellar holes to coalesce into a supermassive hole, so the supermassives were created by a different process, back when the densities and energies were high. Such holes under construction are the Quasars, which also almost exclusively occupy the very distant past.
Grumpy
Galaxy mass black holes(in the millions and billions of solar masses) formed early(within a few million years) and galaxies formed around them. Yes, stellar(and galactic) Bh's do merge with each other.
But there are stellar mass holes, and there are supermassive holes, we find few intermediates(largest BH in stellar class is about 100 solar masses, a million times too small for even the smallest of the supermassive), and there seems to be none in between. There is not enough time since the big bang for such large stellar holes to coalesce into a supermassive hole, so the supermassives were created by a different process, back when the densities and energies were high. Such holes under construction are the Quasars, which also almost exclusively occupy the very distant past.
Grumpy
Hello Grumpy
Mate you have got it wrong.
Do the research.
Mate you have got it wrong.
Do the research.
QUOTE
OK, I can spell it out: the star explodes, blowing most of its mass away, and the core collapses under its own gravity. If the remnant of the star is massive enough, it will collapse to a black hole.
Yes, I know what your text book tells you, but I'm saying it doesn't add up.
The star loses mass when it explodes, which decreases the gravitation.
Doesn't make sense. If the star is already burning up all of its mass into neutrons to begin with, the gravitation should continue to collapse all of the matter tighter and tighter, including any charged particles or outter gas layers, NOT explode.
It should be total gradual implosion, after all, the outter gases did not escape for millions or billions of years when the star was less dense(hydrogen and helium) and they were farther from the core, so why would the outter layers escape suddenly when the density is much greater (neutrons and heavy metals)? This is why I say text book description makes no sense.
Total gradual implosion makes perfect sense, however.
The star will either have enough mass to make a total gradual collapse, OR it will not have that much mass and will supernova leaving behind a neutron star, but a naked neutron star left from behind a supernova isn't going to simultaneously or spontaneously collapse.
Harry Costas
The human mind has trouble thinking about 3 1/2 dimensions. Three spacial(height, breadth and width) and half a time dimension, time forward(Tf), or cause and effect.
Physicists are investigating whether our universe actually contains 11 dimensions(and have pretty good reasons to do so).
These other dimensions are not expressed in our universe, but are "rolled up" in the Quantum world.
The other half dimension of time is one of these, and it is POSSIBLE that instead of being a duration dimension, it is a Space-like dimension of 0 length.
This means that all points in time backward(Tb), or effect then cause, actually are all the same point. Cause(say, the Big Bang) and effect(the beginning of time Tf and everything that has happened) are the same place on Tb's timeline. So you CAN travel backward through time, but there is only one destination and you will not survive the journey.
Once matter ceases to be subject to the laws of our universe and collapses into a black hole, does this space- like dimension Tb short circuit all timelines for all the matter back to the beginning of time???
And then there is Dark matter and energy.
Grumpy
The human mind has trouble thinking about 3 1/2 dimensions. Three spacial(height, breadth and width) and half a time dimension, time forward(Tf), or cause and effect.
Physicists are investigating whether our universe actually contains 11 dimensions(and have pretty good reasons to do so).
These other dimensions are not expressed in our universe, but are "rolled up" in the Quantum world.
The other half dimension of time is one of these, and it is POSSIBLE that instead of being a duration dimension, it is a Space-like dimension of 0 length.
This means that all points in time backward(Tb), or effect then cause, actually are all the same point. Cause(say, the Big Bang) and effect(the beginning of time Tf and everything that has happened) are the same place on Tb's timeline. So you CAN travel backward through time, but there is only one destination and you will not survive the journey.
Once matter ceases to be subject to the laws of our universe and collapses into a black hole, does this space- like dimension Tb short circuit all timelines for all the matter back to the beginning of time???
And then there is Dark matter and energy.
Grumpy
Such a well understood process, yet so many "go back to school" statements.
The mainstream guys are correct as far as accepted science goes. When a large star can no longer balance it's massive gravity with its fusion, the lighter matter expands and the heavier matter condenses to degenerate matter (electron, proton, neutron soup), or neutronic matter (protons are forced together with electrons forming all neutronic matter) in such a short time, bang diddy bang bang bang, Nova. The result is a halo of light gasses around what will become one of several possible objects, neutron star, BH, quasar, pulsar, magnetar. All depends on the type of aged main sequence and it's mass.
Nice find, Empress.
Peace,
Ron
The mainstream guys are correct as far as accepted science goes. When a large star can no longer balance it's massive gravity with its fusion, the lighter matter expands and the heavier matter condenses to degenerate matter (electron, proton, neutron soup), or neutronic matter (protons are forced together with electrons forming all neutronic matter) in such a short time, bang diddy bang bang bang, Nova. The result is a halo of light gasses around what will become one of several possible objects, neutron star, BH, quasar, pulsar, magnetar. All depends on the type of aged main sequence and it's mass.
Nice find, Empress.
Peace,
Ron
QUOTE
Such a well understood process, yet so many "go back to school" statements.
The mainstream guys are correct as far as accepted science goes. When a large star can no longer balance it's massive gravity with its fusion, the lighter matter expands
The mainstream guys are correct as far as accepted science goes. When a large star can no longer balance it's massive gravity with its fusion, the lighter matter expands
Makes zero sense. Why would it expand since the fusion of the star has all but shut down, and the core density is critical? There isn't any force to cause an expansion of the lighter gases. The gravity at the surface of the neutron core is arbitrarily equal to an event horizon of a black hole just before this alleged expansion and explosion is said to take place. That is a complete contradiction. The light gases, and even half the electromagnetic radiation, should be absorbed by the neutron star as it continues to implode. The height of a star's repulsive energies happens at earlier stages in its life, any light elements that have stuck around this long, when things are far more dense and compact, isn't going anywhere.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Such a well understood process, yet so many "go back to school" statements. The mainstream guys are correct as far as accepted science goes. When a large star can no longer balance it's massive gravity with its fusion, the lighter matter expands |
Makes zero sense. Why would it expand since the fusion of the star has all but shut down, and the core density is critical? There isn't any force to cause an expansion of the lighter gases. The gravity at the surface of the neutron core is arbitrarily equal to an event horizon of a black hole just before this alleged expansion and explosion is said to take place. That is a complete contradiction. The light gases, and even half the electromagnetic radiation, should be absorbed by the neutron star as it continues to implode. The height of a star's repulsive energies happens at earlier stages in its life, any light elements that have stuck around this long, when things are far more dense and compact, isn't going anywhere.
and the heavier matter condenses to degenerate matter (electron, proton, neutron soup), or neutronic matter (protons are forced together with electrons forming all neutronic matter)
We know what a neutron is. Quit patronizing.
QUOTE
in such a short time, bang diddy bang bang bang, Nova. The result is a halo of light gasses around what will become one of several possible objects, neutron star, BH, quasar, pulsar, magnetar. All depends on the type of aged main sequence and it's mass.
I hate to burst your bubble, but Quasars do not form from stellar objects. Quasars give off as much energy as entire galaxies for ages upon ages, and even more in many cases. You can't get that much energy from a few dozen or few hundred solar masses.
Check out the wiki article on Quasars.
This is the FIRST time I have ever seen an article that actually says what I have shown numerous times, in spite of the fact I've read countless books and articles on cosmology.
If something is calculated to be 13.7 billion LY distant, it is really much, much farther away.
Essentially, about 82% of all objects that appear to be in the observable universe are no longer IN the observable universe, you are just seeing light that is left over from billions of years ago and is only just now getting here...
Anyway, point is, quasars are not stars...
QUOTE
The highest redshift known for a quasar (as of December 2007) is 6.43,[2] which corresponds (assuming the currently-accepted value of 71 for the Hubble Constant) to a distance of approximately 28 billion light-years. (NB there are some subtleties in distance definitions in cosmology, so that distances greater than 13.7 billion lt-yr, or even greater than 27.4 = 2*13.7 lt-yr, can occur.)
This is the FIRST time I have ever seen an article that actually says what I have shown numerous times, in spite of the fact I've read countless books and articles on cosmology.
If something is calculated to be 13.7 billion LY distant, it is really much, much farther away.
Essentially, about 82% of all objects that appear to be in the observable universe are no longer IN the observable universe, you are just seeing light that is left over from billions of years ago and is only just now getting here...
Anyway, point is, quasars are not stars...
From wiki:
"A Quasar (contraction of QUASi-stellAR radio source) is an extremely bright and distant active galactic nucleus. They were first identified as being high redshift sources of electromagnetic energy, including radio waves and visible light that were point-like, similar to stars, rather than extended sources similar to galaxies. While there was initially some controversy over the nature of these objects, there is now a scientific consensus that a quasar is a compact halo of matter surrounding the central supermassive black hole of a young galaxy."
Oh, BTW, I was very clear on the difference between stars and supernova remnances. Some of the other object are much more than just stars also.
When a star runs out of fuel, the heavier core collapses into itself while the lighter elements are blown off. Nebulas are what?
Peace,
Ron
"A Quasar (contraction of QUASi-stellAR radio source) is an extremely bright and distant active galactic nucleus. They were first identified as being high redshift sources of electromagnetic energy, including radio waves and visible light that were point-like, similar to stars, rather than extended sources similar to galaxies. While there was initially some controversy over the nature of these objects, there is now a scientific consensus that a quasar is a compact halo of matter surrounding the central supermassive black hole of a young galaxy."
Oh, BTW, I was very clear on the difference between stars and supernova remnances. Some of the other object are much more than just stars also.
When a star runs out of fuel, the heavier core collapses into itself while the lighter elements are blown off. Nebulas are what?
Peace,
Ron
QUOTE (Quantum_Conundrum+May 28 2008, 03:18 PM)
Makes zero sense. Why would it expand since the fusion of the star has all but shut down, and the core density is critical? There isn't any force to cause an expansion of the lighter gases. The gravity at the surface of the neutron core is arbitrarily equal to an event horizon of a black hole just before this alleged expansion and explosion is said to take place. That is a complete contradiction. The light gases, and even half the electromagnetic radiation, should be absorbed by the neutron star as it continues to implode. The height of a star's repulsive energies happens at earlier stages in its life, any light elements that have stuck around this long, when things are far more dense and compact, isn't going anywhere.
We know what a neutron is. Quit patronizing.
I hate to burst your bubble, but Quasars do not form from stellar objects. Quasars give off as much energy as entire galaxies for ages upon ages, and even more in many cases. You can't get that much energy from a few dozen or few hundred solar masses.
Nope, it's called bounce, and is (relatively) well understood. I am not your professor, and it really isn't my problem if you can't (or won't) get it.
We know what a neutron is. Quit patronizing.
I hate to burst your bubble, but Quasars do not form from stellar objects. Quasars give off as much energy as entire galaxies for ages upon ages, and even more in many cases. You can't get that much energy from a few dozen or few hundred solar masses.
Nope, it's called bounce, and is (relatively) well understood. I am not your professor, and it really isn't my problem if you can't (or won't) get it.
QUOTE (Quantum_Conundrum+May 28 2008, 01:00 PM)
Yes, I know what your text book tells you, but I'm saying it doesn't add up.
Yes, we are all aware that you have a strangely low opinion of actual science and mathematics, berhaps because you don't know jackshit about them.
Yes, we are all aware that you have a strangely low opinion of actual science and mathematics, berhaps because you don't know jackshit about them.
G'day
This may be of interest to some
The birth of strange stars and their dynamo-originated magnetic fields
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0101007
Authors: R.X. Xu (Peking U.), F.H. Busse (Bayreuth. U.)
(Submitted on 1 Jan 2001 (v1), last revised 28 Mar 2001 (this version, v2))
=======================================
Supernova, Hypernova and Gamma Ray Bursts
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0101007
Authors: Arnon Dar
(Submitted on 1 Jan 2001)
=======================================
Supernova, Hypernova and Gamma Ray Bursts
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0101007
Authors: Arnon Dar
(Submitted on 1 Jan 2001)
Abstract: Recent observations suggest that gamma ray bursts (GRBs) and their afterglows are produced by highly relativistic jets emitted in core collapse supernova explosions (SNe). The result of the event, probably, is not just a compact object plus a spherical ejecta: within days, a fraction of the parent star falls back to produce a thick accretion disk around the compact object. Instabilities in the disk induce sudden collapses with ejection of highly relativistic ``cannonballs'' of plasma, similar to those ejected by microquasars. The jet of cannonballs exit the supernova shell/ejecta reheated by their collision with it, emitting highly forward-collimated radiation which is Doppler shifted to $\gamma$-ray energy. Each cannonball corresponds to an individual pulse in a GRB. They decelerate by sweeping up the ionised interstellar matter in front of them, part of which is accelerated to cosmic-ray energies and emits synchrotron radiation: the afterglow. The Cannonball Model cannot predict the timing sequence of these pulses, but it fares very well in describing the total energy, energy spectrum, and time-dependence of the individual $\gamma$-ray pulses and afterglows. It also predicts that GRB pulses are accompanied by detectable short pulses of TeV neutrinos and sub TeV $\gamma$-rays, that are much more energetic and begin and peak a little earlier.
This may be of interest to some
The birth of strange stars and their dynamo-originated magnetic fields
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0101007
Authors: R.X. Xu (Peking U.), F.H. Busse (Bayreuth. U.)
(Submitted on 1 Jan 2001 (v1), last revised 28 Mar 2001 (this version, v2))
QUOTE
Abstract: It is shown that protostrange stars (PSSs) can be convective and that there are two possible scenarios describing their turbulence. Besides the local turbulence on the scale which is less than the mean free path of neutrinos, large-scale (~1 km) convection also may occur with properties that are similar to those of convection in protoneutron stars (PNSs). We thus suggest that strange stars can also create dynamo-originated magnetic fields during the deleptonization episode soon after a supernova explosion. Further detailed investigations are needed to see whether or not strange stars and neutron stars can be distinguished according to the differences in dynamo actions in strange quark matter and in neutron matter. The magnetic fields of strange stars and neutron stars may also behave very differently during the accretion-phase when the fields decay.
=======================================
Supernova, Hypernova and Gamma Ray Bursts
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0101007
Authors: Arnon Dar
(Submitted on 1 Jan 2001)
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Abstract: It is shown that protostrange stars (PSSs) can be convective and that there are two possible scenarios describing their turbulence. Besides the local turbulence on the scale which is less than the mean free path of neutrinos, large-scale (~1 km) convection also may occur with properties that are similar to those of convection in protoneutron stars (PNSs). We thus suggest that strange stars can also create dynamo-originated magnetic fields during the deleptonization episode soon after a supernova explosion. Further detailed investigations are needed to see whether or not strange stars and neutron stars can be distinguished according to the differences in dynamo actions in strange quark matter and in neutron matter. The magnetic fields of strange stars and neutron stars may also behave very differently during the accretion-phase when the fields decay. |
=======================================
Supernova, Hypernova and Gamma Ray Bursts
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0101007
Authors: Arnon Dar
(Submitted on 1 Jan 2001)
Abstract: Recent observations suggest that gamma ray bursts (GRBs) and their afterglows are produced by highly relativistic jets emitted in core collapse supernova explosions (SNe). The result of the event, probably, is not just a compact object plus a spherical ejecta: within days, a fraction of the parent star falls back to produce a thick accretion disk around the compact object. Instabilities in the disk induce sudden collapses with ejection of highly relativistic ``cannonballs'' of plasma, similar to those ejected by microquasars. The jet of cannonballs exit the supernova shell/ejecta reheated by their collision with it, emitting highly forward-collimated radiation which is Doppler shifted to $\gamma$-ray energy. Each cannonball corresponds to an individual pulse in a GRB. They decelerate by sweeping up the ionised interstellar matter in front of them, part of which is accelerated to cosmic-ray energies and emits synchrotron radiation: the afterglow. The Cannonball Model cannot predict the timing sequence of these pulses, but it fares very well in describing the total energy, energy spectrum, and time-dependence of the individual $\gamma$-ray pulses and afterglows. It also predicts that GRB pulses are accompanied by detectable short pulses of TeV neutrinos and sub TeV $\gamma$-rays, that are much more energetic and begin and peak a little earlier.
Good input, Harry,
Thanks. I'll have to read those papers when time permits.
Peace,
Ron
Thanks. I'll have to read those papers when time permits.
Peace,
Ron
G'day
Interesting reading
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0009095
The Formation of Supermassive Black Holes and the Evolution of Supermassive Stars
Authors: Kimberly C. B. New (LANL), Stuart L. Shapiro (UIUC)
(Submitted on 6 Sep 2000)
Interesting reading
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0009095
The Formation of Supermassive Black Holes and the Evolution of Supermassive Stars
Authors: Kimberly C. B. New (LANL), Stuart L. Shapiro (UIUC)
(Submitted on 6 Sep 2000)
QUOTE
Abstract: The existence of supermassive black holes is supported by a growing body of observations. Supermassive black holes and their formation events are likely candidates for detection by proposed long-wavelength, space-based gravitational wave interferometers like LISA. However, the nature of the progenitors of supermassive black holes is rather uncertain. Supermassive black hole formation scenarios that involve either the stellar dynamical evolution of dense clusters or the hydrodynamical evolution of supermassive stars have been proposed. Each of these formation scenarios is reviewed and the evolution of supermassive stars is then examined in some detail. Supermassive stars that rotate uniformly during their secular cooling phase will spin up to the mass-shedding limit and eventually contract to the point of relativistic collapse. Supermassive stars that rotate differentially as they cool will likely encounter the dynamical bar mode instability prior to the onset of relativistic collapse. A supermassive star that undergoes this bar distortion, prior to or during collapse, may be a strong source of quasiperiodic, long-wavelength gravitational radiation.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.