Where do the Neutrons come from to form the Neutron star?

[Pyrotex]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

Pyrotex please leave the dense insults out of the equation.

Intense gravity is already there. The mass has not altered...

No, you don't get to ask more questions, until you get the answer to your first one.

 

And whether or not I drop the insults is entirely up to you. Really.

 

Yes, the mass remains the same. but the gravity does NOT.

 

How can this be????? You recall the equation for the force of gravity? Do you not remember what is in the denominator of that equation? It's R-squared. R, the distance between two masses, or as it happens, the radius of a single mass.

 

When a star collapses, its radius goes down. Waaaay down. The force of gravity at its "surface" goes waaaaaay up. A neutron star has a radius of perhaps 10^-6 of its parent star. Therefore, the surface gravity of the neutron star has a gravity of around 10^12 of its parent star.

 

The mass remains the same AND the gravity increases hugely.

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

 

Pyrotex I do not care about the insults, I do care about this forum.

 

You said

 

The mass remains the same AND the gravity increases hugely.

 

What you say is correct.

 

But! you fail to understand the process that creates the Neutron Star.

 

So far you spoke around the process, but its not that simple.

 

 

This link is just a tip of the iceburg

 

[0901.4697] Magnetic reconnection and topological trigger in physics of large solar flares

Magnetic reconnection and topological trigger in physics of large solar flares

 

Authors: Boris V. Somov

(Submitted on 29 Jan 2009)

 

Abstract: Solar flares are accessible to a broad variety of observational methods to see and investigate the {em magnetic reconnection} phenomenon in high-temperature strongly-magnetized plasma of the solar corona. An analysis of the topological peculiarities of magnetic field in active regions shows that the {em topological trigger} effect is necessary to allow for in order to construct models for large eruptive flares. The topological trigger is not a resistive instability which leads to a change of the topology of the field configuration from pre- to post reconnection state. On the contrary, the topological trigger is a quick change of the global topology, which dictates the fast reconnection of collisional or collisionless nature. The current state of the art and development potential of the theory of collisionless reconnection in the strong magnetic fields related to large flares are briefly reviewed. Particle acceleration is considered in collapsing magnetic traps created by reconnection. In order to explain the formation of coronal X-ray sources, the Fermi acceleration and betatron mechanism are simultaneously taken into account analytically in a collisionless approximation. Finally, the emphasis is on urgent unsolved problems of solar flare physics.

 

 

What creates the super flare , jet what ever you may want to call it is of prime importance in understanding supernovas and massive jets that can alter their surroundings and in the process leave a Neutron Core.

 

This may also be of interest

 

Magnetohydrodynamic "cat eyes" and stabilizing effects of plasma flow

Authors: G. N. Throumoulopoulos, H. Tasso, G. Poulipoulis

(Submitted on 16 Jan 2009)

Abstract: The cat-eyes steady state solution in the framework of hydrodynamics describing an infinite row of identical vortices is extended to the magnetohydrodynamic equilibrium equation with incompressible flow of arbitrary direction. The extended solution covers a variety of equilibria including one- and two-dimensional generalized force-free and Harris-sheet configurations which are preferable from those usually employed as initial states in reconnection studies. Although the vortex shape is not affected by the magnetic field, the flow in conjunction with the equilibrium nonlinearity has a strong impact on isobaric surfaces by forming pressure islands located within the cat-eyes vortices. More importantly, a magnetic-field-aligned flow of experimental fusion relevance and the flow shear have significant stabilizing effects in the region of pressure islands. The stable region is enhanced by an external axial ("toroidal") magnetic field.

 

 

Kind regards from Pluto

[modest]

Pluto, since there is no evidence you read your infractions as you do not respond to them when asked to do so, I will post this in the open forum...

 

Please observe the forum rules. In particular:

4. Do not post links to other sites as proof of your claims without commenting what the relevant sites say and why they are important to the current discussion.

Your link: Magnetic reconnection and topological trigger in physics of large solar flares is not relevant to the creation of neutronium in a neutron star. The paper concerns solar flares and uses none of the words: neutron, jet, nova, etc. Your statement:

What creates the super flare , jet what ever you may want to call it is of prime importance in understanding supernovas and massive jets that can alter their surroundings and in the process leave a Neutron Core.

is not supported by the link you give while the explanation Sanctus, Pyrotex, Maddog, and myself have given have indeed been supported by multiple sources.

 

If you persist in claiming that jets or magnetic fields are the cause of converting protons to neutrons in the creation of a neutron star without providing a source to back up your claim or if you continue posting off-topic science papers as support for those claims then you will continue to receive infractions which will very soon cause your permanent suspension.

 

~modest

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzz

 

Sanctus said

 

Yep, gravity is always there you are right, but it has an opposing force due to the nuclear reactions in the core of the star. When the fuel runs out there is no more any opposing force to gravity (at least until you get to electron degeneracy pressure). So, ok, if you want the running out of fuel is the trigger...

 

It's not what I want.

 

But! your right, the running out of fuel is the somewhat trigger.

 

Now we are getting closer to the process.

 

What do you think happens when the core looses mass?

 

A number of things happen:

 

The core loses its hold on the solar envelope and the ability to control the heat loss from the core.

 

This is all general info.

 

What happens next?

 

================================

 

Modest I will come back to the Magnetic reconnection a most important process in the production of Neutrons.

 

[astro-ph/0512495] Neutron-loaded outflows in gamma-ray bursts

Neutron-loaded outflows in gamma-ray bursts

 

Authors: Elena M. Rossi (IoA, Cambridge/MPA Garching), Andrei M. Beloborodov (Columbia U, NY), Martin J. Rees (IoA, Cambridge)

(Submitted on 20 Dec 2005)

 

Abstract: Relativistic neutron-loaded outflows in gamma-ray bursts are studied at their early stages, before deceleration by a surrounding medium. The outflow has four components: radiation, electrons, protons and neutrons. The components interact with each other and exchange energy as the outflow expands. The presence of neutrons significantly changes the outflow evolution. Before neutrons decouple from protons, friction between the two components increases their temperatures by many orders of magnitude. After the decoupling, the gradual neutron decay inside the outflow has a drag effect on the protons and reduces their final Lorentz factor.

[sanctus]

Now I am lost, does the core loose mass?

[modest]

Modest I will come back to the Magnetic reconnection a most important process in the production of Neutrons.

 

[astro-ph/0512495] Neutron-loaded outflows in gamma-ray bursts

Neutron-loaded outflows in gamma-ray bursts

 

Authors: Elena M. Rossi (IoA, Cambridge/MPA Garching), Andrei M. Beloborodov (Columbia U, NY), Martin J. Rees (IoA, Cambridge)

(Submitted on 20 Dec 2005)

 

You did not comment on this paper

 

What does a gamma ray burst have to do with the formation of neutrons in a neutron star? The neutron-rich outflow that paper talks about is from a star which is already degenerate. While this is an excellent answer to Craig's question:

I find the question of what would happen if you could remove degenerate matter from a super-dense object like a neutron star an interesting one.

It does nothing to address the question of how neutrons form in a collapsing star.

 

No one is fooled by your obfuscating posting style, and one way or another it's going to stop.

 

~modest

[Pyrotex]

Now I am lost, does the core loose mass?

sanctus,

I believe the core does lose mass, in the form of neutrinos.

Several million tons of neutrinos--which is a LOT of neutrinos.

But I really doubt that that is what he is referring to.

 

In a similar vein: there is no mechanism for the core to have ANY control over the outer envelope of the star. Before or after the explosion.

[modest]

Now I am lost, does the core loose mass?

 

Yes. If the star collapses into a black hole I'd imagine it looses a good bit of its core. Likewise, if a neutron star collapses into a black hole making a GRB then a good deal of the remnant core will be blown away.

 

~modest

[Pluto]

G'day frm the land of ozzzzz

 

Modest said

 

Yes. If the star collapses into a black hole I'd imagine it looses a good bit of its core. Likewise, if a neutron star collapses into a black hole making a GRB then a good deal of the remnant core will be blown away.

 

This statement does not seem logical.

 

Can you explain this statement. Can you express some form of the process.

 

PS: I will not post anymore papers. It has stopped. I think you read my intentions out of context.

[modest]

Yes. If the star collapses into a black hole I'd imagine it looses a good bit of its core. Likewise, if a neutron star collapses into a black hole making a GRB then a good deal of the remnant core will be blown away.

 

This statement does not seem logical.

 

Can you explain this statement. Can you express some form of the process.

 

The formation of a black hole is an explosive event causing (as your most-recent link points out) gamma ray bursts. Some of that exploding material (especially that which is focused at the poles) is expected to come from deep within the collapsing star as it quickly collapses. This is the collapsar model and you can read about it in the following paper or google search "collapsar".

 

In some models the collapsing star forms a neutron star which persists for hours or days before loosing enough angular momentum to collapse further into a black hole. In this model the neutron star is the remnant core and all energy observed in the GRB necessarily comes from that core as it collapses into a black hole—which is again an explosive event whereby mass of the core is lost. This is the "supernova GRB" model. Both are discussed in detail here:

 

[astro-ph/0404608] The Collapsar and Supranova Models

 

In short: it would not be surprising for a very massive star to loose some of the mass of its core on its way to becoming a black hole.

 

PS: I will not post anymore papers. It has stopped. I think you read my intentions out of context.

 

Your intentions are not a factor. The moderators do not mind if you post papers nor if you make scientific claims so long as doing either adheres to:

1. In general, back up your claims by using links or references.

 

4. Do not post links to other sites as proof of your claims without commenting what the relevant sites say and why they are important to the current discussion.

~modest

[modest]

The core loses its hold on the solar envelope and the ability to control the heat loss from the core.

 

This is all general info.

 

What happens next?

 

When the core is no longer able to support the weight of the star above it with thermal pressure because the core no longer has nuclear fuel to fuse, the core will begin to collapse. When this happens it is said that the star has lost hydrostatic equilibrium. The gravitational force inward overtakes the thermal pressure outward and it collapses.

 

As this happens an enormous amount of energy is suddenly released in the form of x-rays, gamma rays, and neutrinos. This blows away the outer layers of the star in a type 2 supernova. This all happens in minutes.

 

The majority of the star's core continues to collapse forcing its protons, neutrons, and electrons closer and closer together. They will become so close that degeneracy pressure will start to support the core from further collapse. The first to make a serious contribution is electron degeneracy pressure. The various electrons are forced closer toward being in the same quantum state which the Pauli exclusion principle says can't happen. The electrons are forced to speed up and an outward pressure is provided for the collapsing core. Collapsing stars that find an equilibrium at this point are called white dwarfs.

 

If the collapsing core is greater than 1.44 solar masses (the Chandrasekhar Limit) then electron degeneracy will not be enough to support the remnant core from further collapse. The electrons go faster and faster to avoid occupying the same quantum state, but they cannot go faster than the speed of light so there's only so much pressure that can be provided by a degenerate gas.

 

As the star collapses further it becomes energetically favorable for the electrons and protons to combine turning into neutrons. In the simplest of terms:

If degeneracy pressure fails in this way, then the atoms crush into atomic nuclei in a degenerate electron gas, and if degeneracy pressure fails again, then the electrons will crush into the nuclei and combine with protons to become neutrons.

 

Degenerate matter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Atomic elements are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons. Therefore a collapsing star whose protons and electrons are combined to yield neutrons has basically nothing but neutrons left. This process can be called inverse beta decay, neutralization, or electron capture and it is where the neutrons in a neutron star come from.

 

The neutrons will resist occupying the same quantum state the same way the electrons did, so the star will become a degenerate neutron gas (or a neutron star). If the mass of the core is less than 2 or 3 solar masses (the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit) then it will find an equilibrium between the downward pressure of gravity and the outward pressure of the degenerate gas. It will now persist in this state as a neutron star approximately 12 kiloliters in diameter.

 

If it is very much more massive than the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit then it will collapse further into a black hole.

 

~modest

[Moontanman]

How about a quark star? Or is that a black hole?

[modest]

How about a quark star? Or is that a black hole?

 

Indeed, I was ignoring the subject of quark stars which is why I said "very much more massive than the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit" in the last paragraph in the previous post. Theoretically anything less massive than that limit will not collapse beyond a neutron star. Above the limit the star will collapse to some denser form. Theoretical propositions include quark stars (or strange stars) which is essentially the form the star would take between a neutron star and a black hole. Quark stars would theoretically contain QCD matter which is analogous with neutron degenerate matter in a neutron star. The speculative nature of the quark star's existence is commented on here:

In a neutron star lighter than the limit, the weight of the star is supported by short-range repulsive neutron-neutron interactions mediated by the strong force and also by the quantum degeneracy pressure of neutrons. If a neutron star is heavier than the limit, it will collapse to some denser form. It could form a black hole, or change composition and be supported in some other way (for example, by quark degeneracy pressure if it becomes a quark star). Because the properties of hypothetical more exotic forms of degenerate matter are even more poorly known than those of neutron-degenerate matter, most astrophysicists assume, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that a neutron star above the limit collapses directly into a black hole.

 

Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There certainly is evidence for black holes so we can safely say that a collapsing core much more massive than 2 solar masses should collapse into a black hole.

 

~modest

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

 

Please supply evidence to support the so called black holes.

 

I agree that vector field can be generated to prevent escape of EMR, but this is not evidence for a black hole.

 

These links, if I may post may change the way you think.

 

 

Beam-like Excitations of Kerr-Schild Geometry and Semiclassical Mechanism of Black-Hole Evaporation

[0903.2365] Beam-like Excitations of Kerr-Schild Geometry and Semiclassical Mechanism of Black-Hole Evaporation

Authors: Alexander Burinskii

(Submitted on 13 Mar 2009)

 

Abstract: It has been shown (gr-qc/0511131) that exact solutions for electromagnetic (EM) excitations of the Kerr-Schild (KS) geometry form outgoing beams which have very strong back reaction to metric and break the BH horizon. As a result, interaction of a BH with EM vacuum covers the horizon by a set of fluctuating microholes (0705.3551[hep-th]). We show here that twosheeted twistor structure of the KS geometry corresponds to a holographic structure of quantum BH spacetimes, and scattering of the ingoing vacuum take place on the holographically dual 2+1 source of the Kerr BH. We obtain the corresponding exact KS solutions and show that outgoing radiation contains two components: a) the singular set of the beam pulses which are responsible for the transparency of the horizon and :) regular component which are responsible for BH evaporation.

 

[gr-qc/0511131] Rotating "Black Holes" with Holes in the Horizon

[0705.3551] Aligned electromagnetic excitations of a black hole and their impact on its quantum horizon

Links below 2 off

 

 

[gr-qc/0511131] Rotating "Black Holes" with Holes in the Horizon

Rotating "Black Holes" with Holes in the Horizon

 

Authors: Alexander Burinskii, Emilio Elizalde, Sergi R. Hildebrandt, Giulio Magli

(Submitted on 24 Nov 2005 (v1), last revised 3 Jul 2006 (this version, v2))

 

Abstract: Kerr-Schild solutions of the Einstein-Maxwell field equations, containing semi-infinite axial singular lines, are investigated.

It is shown that axial singularities break up the black hole, forming holes in the horizon. As a result, a tube-like region appears which allows matter to escape from the interior without crossing the horizon. It is argued that axial singularities of this kind, leading to very narrow beams, can be created in black holes by external electromagnetic or gravitational excitations and may be at the origin of astrophysically observable effects such as jet formation.

 

 

[0705.3551] Aligned electromagnetic excitations of a black hole and their impact on its quantum horizon

Aligned electromagnetic excitations of a black hole and their impact on its quantum horizon

 

Authors: Alexander Burinskii, Emilio Elizalde, Sergi R. Hildebrandt, Giulio Magli

(Submitted on 24 May 2007 (v1), last revised 29 Dec 2008 (this version, v5))

 

Abstract: We show that elementary aligned electromagnetic excitations of black holes, as coming from exact Kerr-Schild solutions, represent light-like beam pulses which have a very strong back reaction on the metric and change the topology of the horizon.

Based on York's proposal, that elementary deformations of the BH horizon are related with elementary vacuum fluctuations, we analyze deformation of the horizon caused by the beam-like vacuum fluctuations and obtain a very specific feature of the topological deformations of the horizon. In particular, we show how the beams pierce the horizon, forming a multitude of micro holes in it. A conjecture is taken into consideration, that these specific excitations are connected with the conformal-analytic properties of the Kerr geometry and are at the base of the emission mechanism.

[Moontanman]

I thought we were talking about where neutrons come from in neutron stars not black holes?

[modest]

Yes Pluto, that's completely off topic.

 

 

To support what was mentioned in the previous post, you'll find the best evidence might be a 16-year study characterized here:

Black hole confirmed in Milky Way

Quoting the lead scientist:

The most spectacular aspect of our 16-year study, is that it has delivered what is now considered to be the best empirical evidence that super-massive black holes do exist

 

Professor Reinhard Genzel, Head of the research team

And the published paper:

Monitoring stellar orbits around the Massive Black Hole in the Galactic Center

If you want to discuss black holes, this is not the thread for it. This thread is about Neutron stars.

 

~modest

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

 

 

Neutron matter and its production is the key issue in producing so called black holes that have a killing vector field that prevent EMR from escaping.

 

Re your above link

 

Black hole confirmed in Milky Way

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | Black hole confirmed in Milky Way

 

"The stellar orbits in the galactic centre show that the central mass concentration of four million solar masses must be a black hole, beyond any reasonable doubt."

 

This is not evidence. It must state the type of black hole and how that evidence supports that definition. So far they have confirmed a compact body several million times that of our Sun.

 

Your right this is not the topic for black hole. I will start another thread.