Scientist:neutron stars,not black holes, center of galaxies

drwayne · Dec 2, 2005

For the past 50 years, black holes have been all the rage. Now, a University of Missouri-Rolla researcher says they never existed. Scientists have long believed that hydrogen fusion generates heat and light in the sun and other ordinary stars for billions of years before a star collapses into a neutron star or black hole when its fuel is exhausted. “Most scientists think neutron stars are dead matter, rather than energized, and might collapse further to form black holes at the center of galaxies,” says Dr. Oliver Manuel, a professor of nuclear chemistry at UMR. “In this scenario, the end game is the end of light as we know it.” Manuel thinks neutron stars are at the beginning of an astronomical renaissance, so to speak. In a new paper (http://arxiv.org/pdf/nucl-th/0511051), Manuel and his co-authors claim massive neutron stars are the energy source at the center of galaxies. “The neutron stars break up and form smaller stars, which drift apart to form planetary systems,” Manuel says. Rest of the story: http://www.physorg.com/news8658.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything." Admiral Jackie Fisher </div>

jmilsom · Dec 2, 2005

Very interesting. I am looking forward to hearing the rebuttals! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

vogon13 · Dec 2, 2005

Breakup of a neutron star would be a rather intense phenomena. Kerpowie, blammo !!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!So many people, so few recipes !!Let's clean up this stinkhole !! </div>

bonzelite · Dec 2, 2005

"For the past 50 years, black holes have been all the rage. Now, a University of Missouri-Rolla researcher says they never existed." --so what. people by the hundreds for years have been saying black holes never existed. this researcher is a bit late on that news.

Saiph · Dec 2, 2005

This researcher is out of touch. Trust me, I've met him and talked with him. He says that isotope ratios in our solar system point to it forming from the debris of a supernovae, and that the core of our sun is a neutron star (and isn't powered by fusion...but by neutrons tunneling off the surface...which doesn't liberate energy...go figure). But, despite these drastic divergences from standard models, he is completely unwilling to extrapolate to other G2 V stars (stars with the same observational characteristics as our sun). Those isotope ratios, btw, are important, but highly contested in the field by other experts. While I applaude Dr. Oliver Manuel for looking at things in a new light, he has never presented it in a fashion that remotely satisfies me. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

harmonicaman · Dec 2, 2005

Saiph - I agree with what you say about Dr. Manuel. His "Iron Sun" theory is also discussed but not taken too seriously. His ideas are described as "Romantic" and observations have not been able to confirm his postulations.

siriusmre · Dec 2, 2005

Wait til they find out that 'neutron stars' are as imaginary as 'black holes!' <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

nojocujo · Dec 2, 2005

This sounds like sci fi but........ what about quark stars and does it really breakdown to the constituents or does the nucleus of an atom become something more massive with different properties with gravity altering the properties of QM radically.

commander_keen · Dec 4, 2005

What if a black hole is simply just another phase of a neutron star? A black hole is defined by an extreme concentration of matter and an event horizen that prevents the outside world from viewing it.

harmonicaman · Dec 4, 2005

Here's a really fabulous Neutron Star primer page! "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." - Abraham Maslow

nojocujo · Dec 5, 2005

I am a little confused. Fusion creats new and heavier elements. A neutron star and a blackhole are very similar in nature and appear to have followed the normal processes except the schwartzchild radius is almost equal to the radius of the neutron star and a blackhole the the radius is equal to or greater than the radius of the blackhole. I understand that gravity has become the dominant force but throughout the genesis of star creation the premis is to take the constiuents and make ever greater nuclei. Why does that process stop?

neutron_star69 · Dec 6, 2005

fusion doesnt always make elemnet heavier, it is possible to create a super atom(1000000000000000000000000000 atoms in one) that will have the same weight and properties as a single atom.

nojocujo · Dec 8, 2005

Could you explain?

neutron_star69 · Dec 9, 2005

Alright back in 1924, Satyendra Bose and Anlbert Einstein came up with a theory that if you cooled down atoms to 20 billionths of a degree above absolute zero or lower, then the atoms would all be moving at the same speed cause them to form a giant super atom (5th state of matter). Then on June 5, 1995 Two scientists in Colorado actually proved the theory and created the super atom. They found that you can have millions of atoms combined into 1 super atom and the super atom will have the same weight as a single regular atom and it would also have the same chemical properties

neutron_star69 · Dec 9, 2005

another image

Saiph · Dec 9, 2005

first, i'm not sure what you mean by "same weight of a single atom"...as atoms weigh differently...and this one weighs as much as the constituent parts. It does however, act as a single atom (some strange vortices appear in the formation...it's all kinda odd). It is now, however, a form of fusion, as you suggested. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

mikeemmert · Dec 10, 2005

Hello, stevehw33; First of all, I would like to provide a link that I got from kmarinas on one of the other black hole threads that started today or yesterday: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation Now, notice that time slows down from the point of view of an outside observer as an object approaches the speed of light. This has been proven experimentally many times. In addition to the proofs in the link, muons created high in the upper atmosphere by cosmic rays have their half-lives slowed enough to reach the ground. We're on firm ground here. "Simple physics shows that concentrated masses of the type found at galactic cores are black holes." How can that be, Steve? Simple physics shows that as a large mass collapses, it's surface accelerates until, just before it reaches the event horizon (Schwarzchild radius), it's time slows to nothing. How can anything penetrate the event horizon? There seems to be a time barrier here. "Many galactic cores contain supermassive black holes. This is a confirmed fact. " Gee, Steve, I hate to do this to you. I really do, and I swear I'm not retaliating or anything, this is a question that needs to be answered. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> . How do you know? Nobody has ever seen a black hole. They're simply too small. The observations you are undoubtedly thinking of could also be explained by a massive object whose surface is poised just above the event horizon, which can't get through the event horizon because it's time has almost stopped. Have you ever played with the quantity, 1/x ? If you look at the equation in the link, it contains 1/x. Translated into physical reality, x approaches zero as the surface of the collapsing object approaches the event

Saiph · Dec 10, 2005

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr /> The observations you are undoubtedly thinking of could also be explained by a massive object whose surface is poised just above the event horizon, which can't get through the event horizon because it's time has almost stopped<hr /></blockquote> Sure...with two problems: 1) We don't know of any force capable of sustaining a mass that dense from collapsing further. 2) Since the surface is outside the EH...it can still radiate, and we'd detect light directlyfrom these compact sources. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

mikeemmert · Dec 10, 2005

"1) We don't know of any force capable of sustaining a mass that dense from collapsing further." As I explained and as the link so kindly provided by kmarinas explains, that force would be gravitational time dilation. Now, that's not exactly a force, but it would prevent passage through the event horizon. Really frustrating if you're TRYING to get there, but I don't want to go there. 2) Since the surface is outside the EH...it can still radiate, and we'd detect light directlyfrom these compact sources. Yes sir, that is correct. I have presented a falsifiable hypothesis. My understanding is that there is a bewildering zoo of gamma ray bursters. Although some sources have been identified by type, some have not. Also, the energy source of quasars is still a mystery. Could it be that the surface of a relatively fresh black hole is heating material? ...I don't know what that would look like, frankly. What I do know is that after some initial period, any radiation from the surface of a near-black hole would be radically, radically redshifted, perhaps into undetectability. The redshift of quasars was initially unidentified because they were so radically redshifted that the absorption lines had moved from violet to infrared. Perhaps they could look at hypernova remnants identified by the current supernova patrols. Unfortunately, I don't know how fast the surface of a stellar-sized black hole will redshift to undetectablility. Einstein didn't believe uncertainty. So he got up during a convention and showed that if you can know the position but not the velocity of a particle or vice-versa, that this implies other nuclear properties should behave the same way. That would imply that a certain particle (he worked out it's properties) should exist, and "Nobody's seen such a particle". A Japanese physicist in the audience wh

nojocujo · Dec 10, 2005

If the outside observer could somehow watch the action near the black hole, she would perceive the object moving and evolving at a staggeringly slow pace, while the black hole explorers would feel time passing normally, albeit their kinetic energy approaches infinity and their gravitational potential approaches − .5c2. If the crew could watch the life of the outside observer, it would appear to be passing by at a very fast pace, while the observer would feel time passing normally. If we ignore special relativistic effects due to relative velocity, the pace of the objects, as it appears to both observers is not illusory. The appearances, then, would represent the true time flow in the region. There exists a place of no time flow, and where impact velocity for mass equals the speed of light, where mass is compressed to its Schwarzschild radius. Such matter has passed a region where Gravitational Time Dilation approaches infinity, is greater than 10^100 and passes a layer where gravitational time dilation is "undefined". Therefore, one remains aloof about this strange paradox, until he or she is given an explanation. Didn't Chandra and Swift catch a neutron star being devoured by a BH in real time and it didn't take all eternity for us the observer. On the other hand the neutron stars time was slowed in the merger. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/swift/bursts/short_burst_oct5.html The paradox can be explained if gravity not only warps spacetime but consumes it also. This would mean that Einsteins field equations still need some work. In essence the spacetime consumption would work the reverse of inflation avoiding the FTL issue for inflation and below the event horizon. If the field equations also allowed for consumption and the reverse of it is inflation theory which is outside

nojocujo · Dec 12, 2005

If the Einstein Tensor were off a bit and should have allowed for a deflationary consumption of space time (an inverse inflation) to the schwartzchild metric and below the EH an FTL consumption of space time. This would account for the expansion or stretching of space between matter aggregations or galaxies. This would not necessarily indicate an expanding hypersphere only an expansion of space time. The same effects i.e. cosmological redshift and acceleration would be observed in a contracting hypersphere where space time consumption due to matter aggregations exceeded the cosmological contraction due to gravity. I know this is verrrrry out of the box. The elasticity of space time should allow this to occur. Tensor again!

chew_on_this · Dec 13, 2005

Your whole post is a logical fallacy. Black holes are NOT fact. They are theory. Where's the confirmation, confirmation boy?

chew_on_this · Dec 13, 2005

And once yet again, Pot, Kettle, Black.

yevaud · Dec 13, 2005

Discounting the numerous observations that we have of the very thing (more correctly their effects on surrounding bodies and material, polar jets, etc.). I suppose they're illusions then? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

chew_on_this · Dec 13, 2005

Theories are not illusion.

Scientist:neutron stars,not black holes, center of galaxies

drwayne

Guest

jmilsom

Guest

vogon13

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

Saiph

Guest

harmonicaman

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

nojocujo

Guest

commander_keen

Guest

harmonicaman

Guest

nojocujo

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

nojocujo

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

Saiph

Guest

mikeemmert

Guest

Saiph

Guest

mikeemmert

Guest

nojocujo

Guest

nojocujo

Guest

chew_on_this

Guest

chew_on_this

Guest

yevaud

Guest

chew_on_this

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page