Supermassive Supergiants Collapsed?

[hazelm]

Title makes no sense.  Let's see if the questions do.  I got bogged down in this article from Science Daily.  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190124141600.htm

 

So, I backed up to some definitions.  Wiki says "A neutron star is the collapsed core of a giant star which before collapse had a total of between  10 and 29 solar masses.

 

Google says "Neutron stars are thought to form by the gravitational collapse of the remnant of a massive star after a supernova explosion, provided that the star is insufficiently massive to produce a black hole.

 

Question 1:  Provided which star is insufficiently massive?

 

Wiki also says that a binary system is a neutron star paired with a massive  "normal" supergiant star.

 

Question 2:  In the Science Daily article, we have a binary system.  Is the "normal supergiant" collapsed or did that neutron core come from another star that did collapse?

 

Thanks for answers.  They will help read the article with comprehension.  I am thinking we have a different picture when we speak of binary systems.

[exchemist]

Title makes no sense.  Let's see if the questions do.  I got bogged down in this article from Science Daily.  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190124141600.htm

 

So, I backed up to some definitions.  Wiki says "A neutron star is the collapsed core of a giant star which before collapse had a total of between  10 and 29 solar masses.

 

Google says "Neutron stars are thought to form by the gravitational collapse of the remnant of a massive star after a supernova explosion, provided that the star is insufficiently massive to produce a black hole.

 

Question 1:  Provided which star is insufficiently massive?

 

Wiki also says that a binary system is a neutron star paired with a massive  "normal" supergiant star.

 

Question 2:  In the Science Daily article, we have a binary system.  Is the "normal supergiant" collapsed or did that neutron core come from another star that did collapse?

 

Thanks for answers.  They will help read the article with comprehension.  I am thinking we have a different picture when we speak of binary systems.

Which star? The star that reached the end of its life and collapsed in a supernova.

 

A supernova is the normal end point for all stars above a certain mass. What is left after the explosion depends again on the mass. Some leave a neutron star behind. Bigger ones leave a black hole behind. 

 

Not all binary systems involve a neutron star. But an "X-ray binary" does involve one (or a black hole), because it is the acceleration of material towards the neutron star (or black hole) from its "normal" companion that creates the X-ray emission. 

 

So you can have a binary system in which one member has gone through its death throes as a supernova and left behind a neutron star. 

[hazelm]

Which star? The star that reached the end of its life and collapsed in a supernova.

 

A supernova is the normal end point for all stars above a certain mass. What is left after the explosion depends again on the mass. Some leave a neutron star behind. Bigger ones leave a black hole behind. 

 

Not all binary systems involve a neutron star. But an "X-ray binary" does involve one (or a black hole), because it is the acceleration of material towards the neutron star (or black hole) from its "normal" companion that creates the X-ray emission. 

 

So you can have a binary system in which one member has gone through its death throes as a supernova and left behind a neutron star. 

Q1:  So it is massive but not massive to form a black hole.

 

Q2:  Oh!  So that massive "normal"  star is not the one that collapsed.  The neutron star is the remnant of one that did collapse?   Which maybe gets me to Q3.

 

In the article, that neutron star is passing through solar winds which are coming from its companion star.  As it passes through the solar wind it receives metal ions, kinetic energy and ionizing radiation.    Unless I have misread - and I will re-read - I can only wonder of what good are those to a dead star core?  That leads to the X-ray emissions.   I'll start there tomorrow.

 

Thank you ever so much. 

[exchemist]

Q1:  So it is massive but not massive to form a black hole.

 

Q2:  Oh!  So that massive "normal"  star is not the one that collapsed.  The neutron star is the remnant of one that did collapse?   Which maybe gets me to Q3.

 

In the article, that neutron star is passing through solar winds which are coming from its companion star.  As it passes through the solar wind it receives metal ions, kinetic energy and ionizing radiation.    Unless I have misread - and I will re-read - I can only wonder of what good are those to a dead star core?  That leads to the X-ray emissions.   I'll start there tomorrow.

 

Thank you ever so much. 

I think you are on the right track now. 

 

As for what "good" these things are, none at all. It's just an effect of the powerful gravitational field of these bodies. 

[hazelm]

I think you are on the right track now. 

 

As for what "good" these things are, none at all. It's just an effect of the powerful gravitational field of these bodies. 

Interesting, though.    Their title - "The Source Material for the Universe" and a collapsed star passing through it threw me a curve.  No matter.  Thanks again.