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

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

 

Experiments on Earth can relate the finding to astrophyics.

 

Production of Thermonuclear Neutrons from Deuterium-Filled Capsule Implosions Driven by Z-Pinch Dynamic Hohlraums

Jun-04

Production of Thermonuclear Neutrons from Deuterium-Filled Capsule Implosions Dr

 

Evidence for the first production of thermonuclear neutrons by Z-pinch dynamic hohlraum driven deuterium-filled capsules is presented. The average neutron energy and yield isotropy measured is consistent with thermonuclear fusion production. The addition of Xe gas to certain capsules suppressed the fusion neutron yields by an order of magnitude, consistent with a thermonuclear production process. The ion temperature deduced from the neutron energy distribution was 4.8±1.5 keV and typical yields were 1 5×1010.

[Pyrotex]

...Neutron matter and its production is the key issue in producing so called black holes...

No. This is not just incorrect, it is totally wrong. Sheer mass density is quite sufficient for production of black holes

that have a killing vector field that prevent EMR from escaping.

This is also totally wrong. Gravity prevents EMR from escaping from a black hole. this was proved by Karl Schwartzchild when he found a solution for Einstein's equations of GR.

This is not evidence. It must state the type of black hole and how that evidence supports that definition. ...

It is most certainly empirical evidence.

How many kinds of black hole do you think there are? (beyond rotating and non-rotating)

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzz

 

Pyrotex if you think thats it, than thats it.

 

But! What about the IF?

[Pyrotex]

...What about the IF?

Pluto,

I've been studying physics for 50 years. I have a degree in physics.

I have been taught by a large number of teachers and professors during my 7 years of college.

I have done a good bit of teaching, while in grad school and in the companies I have worked for.

I know something about teaching and explaining.

 

Pluto, let me be straight with you -- you're not doing a good job of explaining.

I don't know where you got your training at "teaching" but they taught you wrong.

 

Exactly how you're doing it wrong is difficult to explain, because your teaching style is so wrong in so many ways. :phones: It is even possible that you're not here to teach at all, but just to mess with our heads. We call people like that "trolls" -- and we ban them. But I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, just this once.

 

So, here is some friendly advice. I'm assuming you really DO understand the physics of stellar cores, and black holes. But it just doesn't work to say things like: "Please supply evidence to support the so called black holes." That would take months. And if you can find papers on Kerr-Schild BH Theory, you can certainly find your own evidence for black holes. We are not going to do your research for you. We are not going to explain elementary particle physics to you.

 

If you want to engage in a senior level discussion of exotic physics with people who might understand, then behave like a person who understands what you are saying. So far, you just throw links at us, make cryptic remarks, change the subject too much, babble incoherently, and behave in a most annoying way. This is NOT the behavior of someone who is TRULY interested in physics and wants to share their knowledge and insights.

 

So, as we say in America, straighten up and fly right. If you want to teach us about neutron stars, then stop all the posturing and babbling -- and teach.

[Pluto]

G'day Pyrotex

 

I think you read my intentions out of context.

 

All I want is for moderators not use their position to abuse others.

[Pluto]

G'day Pyrotex

 

Thinking what you said

 

Your right

 

I cannot teach about something that I cannot get my teeth around.

 

I need to fully understand the make up of compact objects and jet formation.

 

I was asked to read up on the instabilities that may form the jets.

Weibel instability

Buneman instability

Bell instability

Oblique Instability

Filamentation

and than some

 

Although I have some idea of these intabilities there are missing links.

 

During my reading if you wish for me to post interesting papers I will do so.

[lawcat]

Seems to me, the original question boils down to: why do fermions spin, and what is the precise effect of fermions on bosons, and vice versa? And if we could answer that on this forum, we would provide a unifying theory, I think.

[Pluto]

G'day rom the land of ozzzzzz

 

We know basically how Neutrons form.

 

The question is how does it go about it during a supernova to form the Neutron core.

 

By the time I finish reading the papers on it. The universe will probably shift the goal posts.

[maddog]

All I want is for moderators not use their position to abuse others.

Pluto,

 

For one, I agree with the Moderators (including Pyrotex), and they are Not abusing your

or others. :)

 

You have repeatedly blown past explanations to your questions and repeatedly asked the

same question again. Does not build interest in what is your question or what you have

to say. -- I liked Pyrotex's comment to you to "stand up and fly right"... I concur.

 

If you want to know what "created" the "bulk" of the Neutrons in a Supernova, you have

already had Sanctus, Pyrotex, Modest, and myself (if not others), giving you a fairly

complete description.

 

A Supernova is formed as a very intense explosion where the bulk of the star is blown

off out into space. Look at a picture of the Crab Nebula in Taurus (though probably is

only a Nova). From a giant phase, the Helium fuel runs dry. The gravity (which has

always been there) overcomes the outward pressure by nucleosynthesis to compress

ever more tightly. The last process (nuclear) to create is Silicon into Iron (often called

the Silicon Flash). This happens on the order of seconds. Where all that energy pushes

out (ablates the star outer shell). As with Newton's Third Law of an Equal and Opposite

Reaction, echos this same pressure inward to the center. This pressure overcomes any

residual EM force between electrons and protons. They then undergo the process that

Sanctus mentioned above. Viola' ! If the mass of the star was greater than about 2

Solar masses and less than about 3.1 Solar masses, you have a Neutron Star. If less

than two, a White Dwarf is left, and if more than 3.1, a Black Hole. That is all there is

to say. If you want more you are going to have to dig for the "detail" yourself in those

papers. However, don't waste your time (or mine) by posting them here. PLEASE!

 

As as for the earlier comment, some previously asked about a "Quark Star" wherein

the Strong Force has also been overcome. From what I have read that kind of

remnant would need a star mass of a little more the 3.1-3.2 Solar masses. So a

Black Hole forms. I will admit the boundaries do shift as more is known about the

Nuclear processes and relating Physics.

 

maddog

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

 

Maddog I'm trying to understand the workings of how a supernova comes about.

 

If it was that simple, I would be playing tennis right now.

 

I have been directed to read several different forms of instabilities.

 

 

To start of with:

 

Weibel instability

arXiv.org Search

 

Weibel instability

Weibel instability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

and one paper that I have just read is quite interesting in understanding.

 

[0904.0096] Weibel instability and associated strong fields in a fully 3D simulation of a relativistic shock

Weibel instability and associated strong fields in a fully 3D simulation of a relativistic shock

 

Authors: K.-I. Nishikawa, J. Niemiec, P.E. Hardee, M. Medvedev, H. Sol, Y. Mizuno, B. Zhang, M. Pohl, M. Oka, D. H. Hartmann

(Submitted on 1 Apr 2009)

 

Abstract: Plasma instabilities (e.g., Buneman, Weibel and other two-stream instabilities) ex- cited in collisionless shocks are responsible for particle (electron, positron, and ion) acceleration. Using a new 3-D relativistic particle-in-cell code, we have investigated the particle acceleration and shock structure associated with an unmagnetized relativis- tic electron-positron jet propagating into an unmagnetized electron-positron plasma. The simulation has been performed using a long simulation system in order to study the nonlinear stages of the Weibel instability, the particle acceleration mechanism, and the shock structure. Cold jet electrons are thermalized and slowed while the ambient electrons are swept up to create a partially developed hydrodynamic (HD) like shock structure. In the leading shock, electron density increases by a factor of 3.5 in the simulation frame. Strong electromagnetic fields are generated in the trailing shock and provide an emission site. We discuss the possible implication of our simulation results within the AGN and GRB context.

 

I was going to hold off from posting any papers, but! habits are hard to break.

[modest]

Pluto, can you please explain in your own words how any of the links above are relevant to this discussion? Thank you.

 

~Modest

[Pluto]

G'day Modest

 

The instabilities in one way or another form part of a process that creates the Neutron Core.

 

This was also a response to Maddog post on supernova.

 

Looks like I have about a years reading on this subject. So bear with me until I get to understand the nuts and bolts.

 

 

Lawcat I will come back to your post later, I was reading a paper on your comments.

[Pluto]

G'day Lawcat

 

You said

 

Seems to me, the original question boils down to: why do fermions spin, and what is the precise effect of fermions on bosons, and vice versa? And if we could answer that on this forum, we would provide a unifying theory, I think

.

 

This paper maybe of interest which relates to fermions.

 

Condensates in the Cosmos: Quantum Stabilization of the Collapse of Relativistic Degenerate Stars to Black Holes

May-07

Condensates in the Cosmos: Quantum Stabilization of the Collapse of Relativistic

 

 

Mark*P.*Silverman

 

SpringerLink - Journal Article

 

Received: 17*December*2006**Published online: 13 March 2007

 

According to prevailing theory, relativistic degenerate stars with masses beyond the Chandrasekhar and Oppenheimer–Volkoff (OV) limits cannot achieve hydrostatic equilibrium through either electron or neutron degeneracy pressure and must collapse to form stellar black holes. In such end states, all matter and energy within the Schwarzschild horizon descend into a central singularity. Avoidance of this fate is a hoped-for outcome of the quantization of gravity, an as-yet incomplete undertaking. Recent studies, however, suggest the possibility that known quantum processes may intervene to arrest complete collapse, thereby leading to equilibrium states of macroscopic size and finite density. I describe here one such process which entails pairing (or other even-numbered association) of neutrons (or constituent quarks in the event of nucleon disruption) to form a condensate of composite bosons in equilibrium with a core of degenerate fermions. This process is analogous to, but not identical with, the formation of hadron Cooper pairs that give rise to neutron superfluidity and proton superconductivity in neutron stars. Fermion condensation to composite bosons in a star otherwise destined to collapse to a black hole facilitates hydrostatic equilibrium in at least two ways: (1) removal of fermions results in a decrease in the Fermi level which stiffens the dependence of degeneracy pressure on fermion density, and (2) phase separation into a fermionic core surrounded by a self-gravitating condensate diminishes the weight which must be balanced by fermion degeneracy pressure. The outcome is neither a black hole nor a neutron star, but a novel end state, a “fermicon star,” with unusual physical properties.

 

Sounds like the plot thickens.

[modest]

The instabilities in one way or another form part of a process that creates the Neutron Core.

By "the instabilities" I assume you mean Weibel instability and that's really what I'm asking. What does Weibel instability have to do with the formation of a Neutron star? How would you characterize Weibel instability and what effect would you say it has on the collapsing core?

 

I think we could avoid the impression that you're just posting random obfuscating links along with comments like "Mate, I think you're misunderstanding the process, you need to actually read the links and not just the abstracts" if you took the time to explain how the dozens and hundreds of pages of scientific literature is in any way relevant to the discussion as you're posting it. So:

 

I would sure appreciate it if you could explain your statement that Weibel instability is part of the process that creates the Neutron core. How is this so?

 

~Modest

[Pluto]

G'day Modest

 

Its not just the Weibel instability, we need to look at

 

Filamentation Instability

Bell Instability

Buneman Instability

Oblique Instability

Two-Stream Instability

Flame Instability

 

Just to name a few.

 

I'm just not looking at the ABS.

 

The topic is open for anybody to add to the subject.

[CraigD]

Its not just the Weibel instability, we need to look at …

A critical point, which several people have attempted to impress upon you with explanations, links, and leading qestions, Pluto, is that we do not need to look at these details to understand where the neutrons come from to form a neutron star. We need only look at the couple of factors dominant in neutron star formation: gravity; and neutron degeneracy.

 

Other phenomena, while interesting to astronomy, are not necessary for the formation of a neutron star, which will form under any conditions in which a sufficient quantity of protons, neutrons, and electrons with about zero net charge and sufficiently low speed occupy a sufficiently small volume. How it gets there is irrelevant. That other phenomena, such as supernovae, occur under these conditions, is coincidental. A neutron star would form even if its matter was deposited by giant shovels or some other bizarre means.

[Pluto]

G'day CraigD

 

What you say I agree and have read your post before. I'm not disputing what you are saying.

 

What I'm trying to understand is the Mechanism or mechanisms involved in the process.

 

I'm looking at why and when does matter under go transition from one degenerate phase to the next. Sush as Normal matter to Neutrons to Quarks to the theoretcial preon particles.

 

 

Than by understanding the process I can move forward in understanding the workings of the universe.