Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Weird Stars Show Evidence of New Form of Matter
Reuters ^ | Wed Apr 10, 2002 | Deborah Zabarenko

Posted on 04/10/2002 5:40:58 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
An article on this is also in the Washington Post, which I found from a link on Drudge, but I hunted up one that I could post here in its entirety.
1 posted on 04/10/2002 5:40:58 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; jennyp; junior; longshadow; crevo_list; RadioAstronomer; Scully; Piltdown_Woman...
Astonomy bump.
2 posted on 04/10/2002 5:42:00 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Weird stars I thought it was an article about angeline jolie and rosie o'donnell.
3 posted on 04/10/2002 5:43:38 PM PDT by dts32041
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
One way to produce such a tiny star, Drake said, would be to squeeze a neutron star down to its constituent quarks, creating a strange quark star.

Interesting. Gravity is too strong to have a neutron star, but not quite strong enough to produce a black hole...

4 posted on 04/10/2002 5:45:08 PM PDT by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Bump!
5 posted on 04/10/2002 5:46:05 PM PDT by neutrino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Hmmmmmm.......

6 posted on 04/10/2002 5:51:48 PM PDT by StriperSniper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
First Quark Star I ever heard of and already it's a Strange Quark Star. Compared to what?
7 posted on 04/10/2002 5:59:19 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Senator Pardek
I had the same thought. If a quark star's gravity isn't sufficient to create a singularity, imagine what the material at a black hole's center must be like...
8 posted on 04/10/2002 6:23:35 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: PatrickHenry; ThinkPlease; edwin hubble
Freak Star bttt
10 posted on 04/10/2002 6:27:27 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
The two stars under observation could be made up of free quarks huddled together, which take up even less space than confined quarks.

Perhaps one day, people will learn to live like quarks.

11 posted on 04/10/2002 6:42:04 PM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Astronomers in Asia became aware of this object in 1181 when it flamed out as a supernova, Helfand said. Going on this historical record, present-day astronomers calculated that the remnant star should have cooled down to about 35.6 million degrees Fahrenheit by now. In fact, Helfand said, it is only about 1 million degrees C., making it too cool for a neutron star.

Jeez, is it too much to ask the reporter to use the same units in the same paragraph???

12 posted on 04/10/2002 6:51:50 PM PDT by jennyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
Jeez, is it too much to ask the reporter to use the same units in the same paragraph???

The Washington Post Article on this subject is even worse. No indication of the units!

Neutron stars cool off by radiating tiny particles called neutrinos. After 10 years, such a star's temperature should be about five million degrees. After that, it cools more slowly.

Given its age, Helfand expected the temperature of 3C58 to be a bit less than two million degrees.

"Our observations show in the case of this remnant that the temperature is far lower than that and the energy being radiated is down by at least a factor of 10 from (what was expected)," he said.


13 posted on 04/10/2002 6:59:03 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
The writer could be refering to the type of Quark:

up, down,strange, charmed,bottom and top

All are names for types of Quarks.

Each name also can be come as a red, green or blue.

See page 65 in Stephen Hawking's book A Brief History Of Time

Or just could be calling the star strange.

14 posted on 04/10/2002 7:18:40 PM PDT by Calamari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Calamari
That was mostly a joke.

I was aware of strange quarks, but unaware of whether any kind of ordinary matter collapse can actually leave you with only strange quarks. I forget what a neutron is made of, but I believe all the particles made of quarks require some mix of different ones.

Looking for help with same, I found This Rather Prescient Slide-Show Display.

15 posted on 04/10/2002 7:49:45 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: Calamari
Patrick's Washington Post article clarifies:

Neutrons are made up of three quarks, two so-called "down" quarks and one "up" quark. On Earth, free quarks do not exist and while their existence can be inferred from atom smasher data, none has ever been directly observed.

RXJ 1856, however, implies the existence of an entire star made up of free quarks, a so-called "strange quark star." In that case, some of the original up and down quarks would have been transformed into "strange" quarks (hence the name). Quark stars also could exist with an outer shell of neutrons and a core of free quarks.

For some reason, the normal neutron quarks change flavor and are all strange quarks in the Strange Quark Star. You got it. I suspected but was very unsure.

BTW, that "atom smasher" takes me back to the 50s. How old was the guy who wrote that article?

17 posted on 04/10/2002 7:57:13 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: one_particular_harbour; gcruse
Yeah - but it resides in the universe with the bearded Spock!
18 posted on 04/10/2002 7:58:52 PM PDT by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I was aware of strange quarks, but unaware of whether any kind of ordinary matter collapse can actually leave you with only strange quarks. I forget what a neutron is made of, but I believe all the particles made of quarks require some mix of different ones.

Hadrons (particles made up of quarks and gluons) are of two types: mesons and baryons. Mesons (such as pions) are made up of a quark and an antiquark; the color charge of the quark cancels the anticolor of the antiquark. Baryons (such as protons and neutrons) are made up of three quarks, and the three color charges (red, green, blue) add up to a colorless particle.

(Geek alert: these quarks are merely the "valence quarks" of the particle; a real hadron is filled with a "sea" of virtual quark-antiquark pairs of all quark flavors.)

Neutrons are made up of two down quarks and an up quark. Protons are made up of two up quarks and a down quark. Other types of baryons also include one or more of the heavier quarks (strange, charm, bottom, top).

There are other states of matter that are permitted by quantum chromodynamics. The most famous is the quark-gluon plasma. In this state, the hadrons lose all integrity, and the quarks and gluons are free to travel throughout the medium, rather than being confined. This requires a fantastic amount of energy, however, and once it cools enough the plasma crystalizes into hadrons.

However.

Most calculations of quark-gluon plasmas include only up and down quarks. This is sensible, because we try to create such plasmas using heavy ions, which are made up of protons and neutrons. But this may not be a good approximation in all cases. Some calculations indicate that if there are enough strange quarks in the plasma, the plasma may be stable. That is, it may represent a lower energy state than the equivalent baryon-number worth of neutrons. If this is the case, then it is possible that a neutron star might spontaneously transition into this state of matter, becoming one giant subatomic particle (and releasing energy in the process). The properties of such a "strange star" would be very different from a standard neutron star.

19 posted on 04/10/2002 8:16:50 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Was just trying to be helpful

Kind of makes one wonder why the super conducting super collider project was scrapped. Would have come in handy for researhing these particles.

This strange quark star is not being called a black hole.That makes one wonder what a black hole would be composed of.

20 posted on 04/10/2002 8:40:08 PM PDT by Calamari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson