Neutron Star is there a limit to their size?

The cosmos at our fingertips.
Post Reply
harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Neutron Star is there a limit to their size?

Post by harry » Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:50 am

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzzz

Neutron stars is there a limit to their size?

How small can they get?

How big can they get?

Are black holes mistaken for Neutron stars?


Neutron star found where a black hole was expected
CHANDRA X-RAY CENTER NEWS RELEASE
Posted: November 2, 2005
Scientists found this neutron star - a dense whirling ball of neutrons about 12 miles in diameter - in an extremely young star cluster. Astronomers were able to use well-determined properties of other stars in the cluster to deduce that the parent star of this neutron star was at least 40 times the mass of the sun.

"Our discovery shows that some of the most massive stars do not collapse to form black holes as predicted, but instead form neutron stars,” said Michael Muno, a University of California, Los Angeles, postdoctoral Hubble fellow. He is lead author of a paper to be published in an upcoming edition of The Astrophysical Journal Letters.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:43 am

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

This maybe of interest to some

Synthesis of the elements
http://mais-ccd-spectroscopy.com/Lesson-4E.pdf
Harry : Smile and live another day.

jesusfreak16
Ensign
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: Oklahoma,USA

Post by jesusfreak16 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:14 pm

Well if they found the neutron star where the black hole was expected,I guess it is possible to mistake them :wink:
T.T.F.N. (Ta Ta For Now!)

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Thu Jul 03, 2008 7:57 am

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzz

In actual fact nobody has ever seen a black hole. Some think that the last compaction is a Neutron Matrix composite and if this is the case. We are able to study these compacted bodies with greater prediction of what the hell is going on.

Rather than making predictions of black holes and all the assumptions that go with it.

I could be wrong.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

User avatar
neufer
Vacationer at Tralfamadore
Posts: 18805
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia

Re: Neutron Star is there a limit to their size?

Post by neufer » Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:11 pm

harry wrote:Neutron stars is there a limit to their size?
.
How small can they get?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron

<<A free neutron is a neutron that exists outside of an atomic nucleus. While neutrons can be stable when bound inside nuclei, free neutrons are unstable and have a mean lifetime of 886 s (about 15 minutes), decaying by emission of a negative electron and antineutrino to become a proton>>
........................................................
----------- Rest mass
Neutron : 939.566 MeV + kinetic energy - binding energy
Proton : 938.272 MeV + kinetic energy - binding energy
----------------------------
_______ 1.294 MeV + Δkinetic energy - Δbinding energy

Electron : 0.511 MeV+ escape kinetic energy
Antineutrino : 0 MeV+ kinetic energy
-------------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dineutron

<<A dineutron is a hypothetical particle consisting of two neutrons that was suggested to have a transitory existence in nuclear reactions produced by helions that result in the formation of a proton and a nucleus having the same atomic number as the target nucleus but a mass number two units greater. A system made up of only two neutrons is not bound, though the attraction between them is very nearly enough to make them so.>>
-------------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraneutron

<<A tetraneutron is a hypothesised stable cluster of four neutrons. This cluster of particles is not supported by current models of nuclear forces. However, there is some empirical evidence which suggests this particle does exist, based on an experiment by Francisco-Miguel Marqués and co-workers at the Ganil accelerator in Caen using a novel detection method in observations of the disintegration of beryllium and lithium nuclei. Subsequent attempts to replicate this observation have failed.

Confirmation of the existence of a tetraneutron would be a significant discovery because current nuclear theory suggests that these clusters should not be stable, and thus should not exist. If it does, then it has been suggested that the substance be considered an "element", and be placed on the Periodic Table of the Elements, with an atomic number of 0 (zero).
-------------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutronium

<<Neutronium is a term originally used in science fiction and in popular literature to refer to an extremely dense phase of matter composed primarily of neutrons. The word was coined by scientist Andreas von Antropoff in 1926 (i.e. before the discovery of the neutron itself) for the conjectured 'element of atomic number zero' that he placed at the head of the periodic table. However, the meaning of the term has changed over time, and from the last half of the 20th century onward it has been used legitimately to refer to extremely dense phases of matter resembling the neutron-degenerate matter postulated to exist in the cores of neutron stars.>>
-------------------------------------
It is not exactly clear how small a large ball of neutronium there could be that would be gravitationally stable against either beta decay or the quantum degeneracy pressure of neutrons. However,

"In general, compact stars of less than 1.38 solar masses,
the Chandrasekhar limit, are white dwarfs.""
harry wrote:How big can they get?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_stars

<<A typical neutron star has a mass between 1.35 and about 2.1 solar masses, with a corresponding radius between 20 and 10 km, respectively — in contrast, the Sun is 30,000 to 70,000 times larger. Thus, neutron stars have overall densities of 8.4×1016 to 1×1018 kg/m³, which compares with the approximate density of an atomic nucleus of 3×1017 kg/m³. The neutron star's density varies from below 1×109 kg/m³ in the crust increasing with depth to above 6 or 8×1017 kg/m³ deeper inside.

In general, compact stars of less than 1.38 solar masses, the Chandrasekhar limit, are white dwarfs; above 2 to 3 solar masses (the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit), a quark star might be created, however this is uncertain. Gravitational collapse will always occur on any star over 5 solar masses, inevitably producing a black hole.>>
-------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman-Opp ... koff_limit

<<The Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) limit is an upper bound to the mass of stars composed of neutron-degenerate matter (neutron stars). It is analogous to the Chandrasekhar limit for white dwarf stars.

The limit was computed by J. Robert Oppenheimer and George Michael Volkoff in 1939, using work of Richard Chace Tolman. Oppenheimer and Volkoff assumed that the neutrons in a neutron star formed a cold, degenerate Fermi gas. This leads to a limiting mass of approximately 0.7 solar masses. Modern estimates range from approximately 1.5 to 3.0 solar masses. The uncertainty in the value reflects the fact that the equations of state for extremely dense matter are not well-known.

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.

A black hole formed by the collapse of an individual star must have mass exceeding the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit. Theory predicts that because of mass loss during stellar evolution, a black hole formed from an isolated star of solar metallicity can have mass no more than approximately 10 solar masses. Observationally, because of their large mass, relative faintness, and X-ray spectra, a number of massive objects in X-ray binaries are thought to be stellar black holes. These black hole candidates are estimated to have masses between 3 and 20 solar masses>>
Art Neuendorffer

henk21cm
Science Officer
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:47 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Neutron Star is there a limit to their size?

Post by henk21cm » Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:01 pm

neufer wrote: The limit was computed by J. Robert Oppenheimer and George Michael Volkoff in 1939, using work of Richard Chace Tolman. Oppenheimer and Volkoff assumed that the neutrons in a neutron star formed a cold, degenerate Fermi gas. This leads to a limiting mass of approximately 0.7 solar masses. Modern estimates range from approximately 1.5 to 3.0 solar masses. The uncertainty in the value reflects the fact that the equations of state for extremely dense matter are not well-known.
The BBC's open university told once (15 years ago?) that a neutron star could not get more compact due to the Pauli principle. 'Since neutrons are fermions, it is not possible to squash them closer to each other, since in that case they would occupy the same location an so have the same quantum numbers'. They must have referred to the limit you mentioned. '10 to 15 km' they said.
Regards,
 Henk
21 cm: the universal wavelength of hydrogen

User avatar
neufer
Vacationer at Tralfamadore
Posts: 18805
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia

Re: Neutron Star is there a limit to their size?

Post by neufer » Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:11 pm

henk21cm wrote:The BBC's open university told once (15 years ago?) that a neutron star could not get more compact due to the Pauli principle. 'Since neutrons are fermions, it is not possible to squash them closer to each other, since in that case they would occupy the same location an so have the same quantum numbers'. They must have referred to the limit you mentioned. '10 to 15 km' they said.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_stars
To first order. a neutron star is a degenerate relativistic fermi gas but the various second order effects of general relativity, variable density & temperature and nuclear forces (both attractive & repulsive) are not trivial.

Code: Select all

<<A typical neutron star has a mass between 1.35 and about 2.1 solar masses, with a corresponding radius between 20 and 10 km, respectively>>

MASS        Radius         Schwartzchild Radius
----------------------------------------------------
1.00 SM    30? km.          3 km.
1.35 SM    20 km.           4 km.
2.10 SM    10 km.           6.3 km.
3.00 SM   <10? km.          9.0 km.
5.00 SM   <15 km.          15 km.

Clearly the neutron star must have a radius larger than its Schwartzchild Radius. 
Art Neuendorffer

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:00 pm

Hello Neufer and henk

I agree with what you say, and there is great information.

Now knowing that.

Can a Neutron star form a normal star in time?
Harry : Smile and live another day.

User avatar
neufer
Vacationer at Tralfamadore
Posts: 18805
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia

Post by neufer » Fri Jul 04, 2008 2:19 pm

harry wrote:Hello Neufer and henk

I agree with what you say, and there is great information.

Now knowing that.

Can a Neutron star form a normal star in time?
No.
Art Neuendorffer

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:11 am

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

No! Just no!

Why?

I disagree.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

henk21cm
Science Officer
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:47 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by henk21cm » Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:34 am

harry wrote:Can a Neutron star form a normal star in time?
I agree with Art. Give me one good reason why the neutron ball would turn into hydrogen.
Even if that would be possible, radiation pressure would create an explosive expansion. Not to mention the violation of the law of conservation of energy, the main pilar of physics.
Regards,
 Henk
21 cm: the universal wavelength of hydrogen

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:58 am

G'day from the land of of ozzzzzzzzz

May I suggest to read up
Than again some links maybe stopped.

http://myprofile.cos.com/manuelo09
http://www.omatumr.com/PapersArxiv.html

Although his papers have been disputed by main stream. The information is cutting edge. The science behind it, I cannot fault it.

Some may prefer this formation as better supported.
SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)


On the Cosmic Nuclear Cycle and the Similarity of Nuclei and Stars
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-d ... 2236325742


http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-d ... 2236325742

The Structure of the Solar Core
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-d ... 2236325742

The Origin, Composition, and Energy Source for the Sun
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-d ... 2236325742
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:32 am

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzz

This is quite interesting:

Research overturns accepted notion of neutron's electrical properties
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 091707.php
For two generations of physicists, it has been a standard belief that the neutron, an electrically neutral elementary particle and a primary component of an atom,
"A particle can be electrically neutral and still have properties related to charge. We've known for a long time that the neutron has those properties, but now we understand them more clearly," he said.

He noted that the most important aspect of the finding confirms that a neutron carries a negative charge at its outer edge, a key piece of Fermi's original idea.
This becomes very important in compaction of Neutrons and explaining Neutron Stars.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

harry
G'day G'day G'day G'day
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by harry » Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:06 am

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

I came across this paper and thought it maybe of interest to someone.

http://aps.arxiv.org/abs/0804.4143

The most massive progenitors of neutron stars: CXO J164710.2-455216

Authors: K.Belczynski (LANL), R.Taam (NU)
(Submitted on 25 Apr 2008)
Abstract: The evolution leading to the formation of a neutron star in the very young Westerlund 1 star cluster is investigated. The turnoff mass has been estimated to be 35 Msun, indicating a cluster age ~ 3-5 Myr. The brightest X-ray source in the cluster, CXO J164710.2-455216, is a slowly spinning (10 s) single neutron star and potentially a magnetar. Since this source was argued to be a member of the cluster, the neutron star progenitor must have been very massive (M_zams > 40 Msun) as noted by Muno et al. (2006). Since such massive stars are generally believed to form black holes (rather than neutron stars), the existence of this object poses a challenge for understanding massive star evolution. We point out while single star progenitors below M_zams < 20 Msun form neutron stars, binary evolution completely changes the progenitor mass range. In particular, we demonstrate that mass loss in Roche lobe overflow enables stars as massive as 50-80 Msun, under favorable conditions, to form neutron stars. If the very high observed binary fraction of massive stars in Westerlund 1 (> 70 percent) is considered, it is natural that CXO J164710.2-455216 was formed in a binary which was disrupted in a supernova explosion such that it is now found as a single neutron star. Hence, the existence of a neutron star in a given stellar population does not necessarily place stringent constraints on progenitor mass when binary interactions are considered. It is concluded that the existence of a neutron star in Westerlund 1 cluster is fully consistent with the generally accepted framework of stellar evolution.
Harry : Smile and live another day.

Post Reply