i'd just like to propose this idea!

[north]

what if, for the awhile, we leave BB theory aside as completely as possible.(whether it be right or wrong) and see what would happen if we try to combine three theories together.

these theroies are Steadystate, Arp's and Cosmic Plasmas( and/or EU). and more theories can be added of course( assuming their relevent). i know this can be a very complex exploration. however, leaving out BB gave me a whole new perspective on the universe. i saw the Universe as having to do more with electric currents in all matter, from galatic centers to atoms and the magnetic fields implied

is there any interest!!!!???? at all. i will need far more people than myself to be involved.

[north]

take a "neutron star" for example

the theory right now for "neutron star, at the core, are protons in a very high temp. super fluid.(100 million degrees)

the three questions i have for this view are these;

1) how do the protons NOT SLOW down because of friction within the superfluid? since with out resistence no heat is formed.

2) following from above, since heat IS formed and therefore there must be resistence, which means for the proton to continue to move around, it must be continually re-energzied. where does this energy come from?

3) and how does the proton, alone produce neutrinos?


this is how i look at the core of a "neutron star"


at the core are not just protons but electrons as well, a plasma.

the plasma produces a magnetic field and heat. and both of these depends on the density of the electrons and protons in the plasma. the neutrinos are produced here( since neutrinos have both - and + therefore neutral) at the core, by the proton-electron plasma.

as well,to have the strongest magnetic field known, it must also have the greatest electric current flowing through it. which for me is in evidence by the stars rotation. faster the rotation the higher the plasma current at the core, the greater is the electromagnetic field. inotherwords, the speed of a neutron stars rotation is caused by the neutron stars core plasma energy state.


any questions by anybody, on any point??

[Bob Angstrom]

what if, for the awhile, we leave BB theory aside as completely as possible.(whether it be right or wrong) and see what would happen if we try to combine three theories together.

You lost me after the introduction. Neutron stars came a bit late in the formation of the cosmos and their internal workings are too speculative to form the basis of anything solid. I suggest you begin with something more basic like which of the several flavors of steady state do you prefer?

[Ken G]

1) how do the protons NOT SLOW down because of friction within the superfluid? since with out resistence no heat is formed.

I agree with Bob Angstrom that neutron stars have little to do with cosmology, but in any event I thought I'd clear up a misconception here:
neutron stars are not hot because of friction (superfluids don't have that), they are hot because of gravity. Keep in mind that a neutron star is highly compressed, and this means a great deal of gravitational potential energy got released when the star formed. Thus, the matter didn't get hot due to currents, it was already hot from the outset.

[north]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by north
what if, for the awhile, we leave BB theory aside as completely as possible.(whether it be right or wrong) and see what would happen if we try to combine three theories together.

You lost me after the introduction. Neutron stars came a bit late in the formation of the cosmos and their internal workings are too speculative to form the basis of anything solid.

perhaps, but the point is that from the point of view i put forward we see the star called a neutron differently.

I suggest you begin with something more basic like which of the several flavors of steady state do you prefer?

i havn't had much time to look very far into it, but i mentioned steady state because i took the point of view that the galaxies are not speeding away from us but are motionless. so that the redshifts which are seen are for a different Reason.

[north]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by north
1) how do the protons NOT SLOW down because of friction within the superfluid? since with out resistence no heat is formed.

I agree with Bob Angstrom that neutron stars have little to do with cosmology, but in any event I thought I'd clear up a misconception here:
neutron stars are not hot because of friction (superfluids don't have that), they are hot because of gravity. Keep in mind that a neutron star is highly compressed, and this means a great deal of gravitational potential energy got released when the star formed. Thus, the matter didn't get hot due to currents, it was already hot from the outset.

perhaps from the point of contemporary astrophysics but from my point of view it explains the same star but differently.

for example assuming that this star has the stongest magnetic field out there how does astrophysics explain this magnetic field?

[Ken G]

for example assuming that this star has the stongest magnetic field out there how does astrophysics explain this magnetic field?

Again, gravity. When you compress currents that generate fields, the current densities get much higher and this makes the fields get much stronger. The energy that goes into the fields comes from gravity also.

[Coldcreation]

I would drop the three theories and us GR, QM and thermodynamics instead.

CC

[korjik]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

perhaps from the point of contemporary astrophysics but from my point of view it explains the same star but differently.

for example assuming that this star has the stongest magnetic field out there how does astrophysics explain this magnetic field?

Most of the physics of a neutron star is fairly well understood. First, they are not protons, they are neutrons. The gravity of a neutron star couldnt hold that much positive charge that close together. Therefore it must be neutral. Then considering the density and charge, the main component must be neutrons.
When the neutrons become degenerate, they should have a lower energy state when they spin pair-up, leaving them unable to interact in most ways. Since the neutrons are degenerate, the ideal gas law dosent apply Temp is not dependent on pressure. Since the neutrons are paired, they should be superfluid, and since they are electrically neutral, they wont loose heat to the surrounding medium (generally, more later).
When you look at the structure of the neutron star, you will see that above the surface is a low temp, low density region (the vaccum of space) this will cause the higher temperature surface to radiate heat, creating a temp gradient at the surface. the rest of the star will try to be the same temp as the surface, so you will get a heat flo, as blackbody radiation, until the star comes to equlibrium with the outside environment.
The magnetic field of a pulsar is not that hard to understand. When you start with the collapsing star that the neutron star came from, you have a conducting plasma with an imbedded magnetic field. This field is frozen in the plasma, because the plasma cannot bear an electric field to cancel the magnetic field. As the remnant collapses, this total field is conserved, so the field density shoots up, at the field is in a much much smaller volume.

This is all fairly basic QM and Electrodynamics. Adding the GR components just intensify the field if I remember correctly. There is no need to invoke any cosmology to explain this, and the plasma universe should come up with the same answers.

[north]

The magnetic field of a pulsar is not that hard to understand. When you start with the collapsing star that the neutron star came from, you have a conducting plasma with an imbedded magnetic field. This field is frozen in the plasma, because the plasma cannot bear an electric field to cancel the magnetic field. As the remnant collapses, this total field is conserved, so the field density shoots up, at the field is in a much much smaller volume.

what do mean by "you have a conducting plasma with an imbedded magnetic field."

as well, by what method is the Strength of the magnetic field measured?

[north]

in my view the current is the "cause" of the magnetic field and they balance themselves naturally. without neutrons.

as well i can explain "gamma rays".( at least in my view)

[north]

in my view the current is the "cause" of the magnetic field and they balance themselves naturally. without neutrons.

as well i can explain "gamma rays".( at least in my view)

in my view the current is the "cause" of the magnetic field and they balance themselves naturally. without neutrons.

as well i can explain "gamma rays".( at least in my view)

gamma rays are the result of the strength of the stars electromagnetic field to take the natural wavelength of a particular atom and split it further. the Zeeman effect. so i found.

in otherwords when a star is giving off gamma rays, the star can do this because of the strength of the stars magnetic field. and the reason for periodocity in the "burst of gamma rays", which can be from hundreds and even in the millions of a second, is due to the age( younger of course the faster) and i look at the periodicity as the ability of the gamma, X-rays to gain enough energy to escape the star aided by rotational energy of the star.in otherwords the physics of rotation by the star is stronger than the magnetic field when combined with the energy of the gamma ray( as well it would not be a surprise if, because of the strength of the stars magnetic field that it actually augments the energy of the gamma ray beyond its natural energy capacity). much like the straw in the tree from a tornado. the gamma ray energy exceedes the natural mass to energy ratio( because the magnetic field would surround the gamma wave three dimensionaly, carry it along so to speak) . plus the sort of sling shot affect of the gamma ray being able to break from the enormus magnetic field. and added all together actually go faster than the standard speed of light.

this action by the electromagnetic field on atomic matter drains the magnetic field of energy and therefore indirectly the plasma which slows down the stars rotation.

any questions?

[korjik]

what do mean by "you have a conducting plasma with an imbedded magnetic field."

as well, by what method is the Strength of the magnetic field measured?

Exactly what it says. You have a plasma in an area where the magnetic field is not equal to zero.

I havent actually done it, so this is a bit of a guess, but as for finding the magnitude of the field, one idea would be to use the gyrofrequency or gyroradius of the plasma. The are plenty of effects in the plasma which are B field dependent.

[north]

Exactly what it says. You have a plasma in an area where the magnetic field is not equal to zero.

the reason i asked my question is because you make it sound as though the magnetic field came first then the current. its the other way around, current then the magnetic field.

I havent actually done it, so this is a bit of a guess, but as for finding the magnitude of the field, one idea would be to use the gyrofrequency or gyroradius of the plasma. The are plenty of effects in the plasma which are B field dependent.

the magnetic field strength is measured by using the Zeeman effect. where the stronger the magnetic field the further the natural light wavelength of an atom gets split basicly.

[Nereid]

take a "neutron star" for example

the theory right now for "neutron star, at the core, are protons in a very high temp. super fluid.(100 million degrees)

the three questions i have for this view are these;

1) how do the protons NOT SLOW down because of friction within the superfluid? since with out resistence no heat is formed.

2) following from above, since heat IS formed and therefore there must be resistence, which means for the proton to continue to move around, it must be continually re-energzied. where does this energy come from?

3) and how does the proton, alone produce neutrinos?


this is how i look at the core of a "neutron star"


at the core are not just protons but electrons as well, a plasma.

the plasma produces a magnetic field and heat. and both of these depends on the density of the electrons and protons in the plasma. the neutrinos are produced here( since neutrinos have both - and + therefore neutral) at the core, by the proton-electron plasma.

as well,to have the strongest magnetic field known, it must also have the greatest electric current flowing through it. which for me is in evidence by the stars rotation. faster the rotation the higher the plasma current at the core, the greater is the electromagnetic field. inotherwords, the speed of a neutron stars rotation is caused by the neutron stars core plasma energy state.


any questions by anybody, on any point??

In your idea, how does a neutron star form?

In this idea of yours, north, what are pulsars?

What is Geminga?

[north]

In your idea, how does a neutron star form?

the star, forms because of the imbalance of the magnetic field of the star and the magnetic field of the matter of which the star is composed.( the stars magnetic field induces a current and therefore a magnetic field into the matter atomicly). if the balance is right then matter is not pushed off. but if the balance between both the magnetic fields is not balanced then matter is repulsed hence the explosion, although i don't call it an explosion, although the explosion analogy could still be accurate.

In this idea of yours, north, what are pulsars?

pulsars are the result of the Zeeman effect only three dimensionaly and rotation of the star. it is the ability of light energy from the matter in the star to escape the magnetic field.( to prove my point, it would be necessary to see if the pulsar was giving off a certain frequency of energy, gamma rays,x-rays etc. three dimensionally) the period of the energy released is based on the strength of the magnetic field and rotation. the slow down of the star, down to x-rays etc.( therefore electric current) is based on the indirect friction between the energy of the stars magnetic field and the release by matters electromagnetic light energy.

What is Geminga?

Geminga is the result of , if using the Zeeman effect, of an extremely powerful magnetic field and that the star is young. the periodicity is because of the energy needed by gamma rays from matter to escape the stars magnetic field. and the energy gained is, at least it would not surprise me , augmented by the magnetic field of the star its self. (i think there is a corralation between periodicity of energy released, energy release change, high energy gamma to x-rays etc. rotation and the magnetic field.)

[Nereid]

the star, forms because of the imbalance of the magnetic field of the star and the magnetic field of the matter of which the star is composed.( the stars magnetic field induces a current and therefore a magnetic field into the matter atomicly). if the balance is right then matter is not pushed off. but if the balance between both the magnetic fields is not balanced then matter is repulsed hence the explosion, although i don't call it an explosion, although the explosion analogy could still be accurate.

What are stars composed of?

In what way does the composition of neutron stars differ from other stars?

Where does the magnetic field come from?

How old are neutron stars?

pulsars are the result of the Zeeman effect only three dimensionaly and rotation of the star. it is the ability of light energy from the matter in the star to escape the magnetic field.( to prove my point, it would be necessary to see if the pulsar was giving off a certain frequency of energy, gamma rays,x-rays etc. three dimensionally) the period of the energy released is based on the strength of the magnetic field and rotation. the slow down of the star, down to x-rays etc.( therefore electric current) is based on the indirect friction between the energy of the stars magnetic field and the release by matters electromagnetic light energy.

How does 'the period of the energy released' relate to 'the strength of the magnetic field'? How does it relate to 'rotation'?

What is 'matters electromagnetic light energy'?

How does the 'indirect friction' arise?

Geminga is the result of , if using the Zeeman effect, of an extremely powerful magnetic field and that the star is young. the periodicity is because of the energy needed by gamma rays from matter to escape the stars magnetic field. and the energy gained is, at least it would not surprise me , augmented by the magnetic field of the star its self. (i think there is a corralation between periodicity of energy released, energy release change, high energy gamma to x-rays etc. rotation and the magnetic field.)

How powerful is Geminga's magnetic field?

How old is it?

Why do 'gamma rays from matter' need energy to escape 'the stars magnetic field'?

[north]

What are stars composed of?

high energy plasma, magnetic fields and states of matter.

In what way does the composition of neutron stars differ from other stars?

high energy plasma, plasmic current, magnetic field , rotation and the results of.

Where does the magnetic field come from?

above.

How old are neutron stars?

not yet known. but hopefully some theoretical physicist will tackle this aspect.

How does 'the period of the energy released' relate to 'the strength of the magnetic field'?

the relation of energy released to the magnetic field is the ability of the energy(gamma rays produced by the Zeeman effect from matter) to overcome the stars magnetic field. since gamma rays are electromagnetic in nature. as well, like i've mentioned before, it would not surprise me if the magnetic field of the star which i now call P.C.H.E.M.F.G.R.S.(plasma current high energy magnetic field gamma ray star) does give an energy to mass ratio beyond the standard energy to mass ratio, simply because the magnetic field of the star, being three dimensional , surrounds the gamma ray electromagnetically and three dimensionally.

How does it relate to 'rotation'?

higher the rotation the easier it is for gamma rays to escape the stars magnetic field.

What is 'matters electromagnetic light energy'?

the natural light frequency is in all atoms. look up the Zeeman effect.

How does the 'indirect friction' arise?

from the stars magnetic field wanting to pull back the gamma ray energy and the gamma ray energy wanting to escape outward. tug of war so to speak.

How powerful is Geminga's magnetic field?

well apparently its powerful enough to to divide the natural atomic light energy down to the most energetic , gamma rays.

How old is it?

not yet known to my knowledge but younger than an x-ray star.

Why do 'gamma rays from matter' need energy to escape 'the stars magnetic field'?

because gamma rays need to be high energy gamma rays as opposed to our suns low energy gamma rays.(fusion)



by the way high i predict that high energy light energy(gamma rays) will travell faster than flashlight light energy.

[north]

since gamma rays are electromagnetic in nature. as well, like i've mentioned before, it would not surprise me if the magnetic field of the star which i now call P.C.H.E.M.F.G.R.S.(plasma current high energy magnetic field gamma ray star) does not give an energy to mass ratio beyond the standard energy to mass ratio, simply because the magnetic field of the star, being three dimensional , surrounds the gamma ray electromagnetically and three dimensionally.

i've made a mistake.

before i said that the energy to mass ratio does NOT give an energy to mass ratio beyond the standard mass mass to energy ratio.

what i meant to say that the magnetic field of the star DOES give an energy to mass ratio beyond the standard energy to mass ratio, to gamma rays.

for an example of what i mean for those that have not read the whole thread, much like a straw caught in a tornado and is buried into a tree. despite the mass of the gamma ray(straw) it carries more energy then the mass of the gamma ray alone would imply it could.

also there would be a sort of a sling-shot effect once escaping the magnetic field of the star.


therefore my prediction is that the gamma rays from this star will arrive, to us, very close to real time.

any evidence to show i'm wrong about the last statement?

[Nereid]

What are stars composed of?

high energy plasma, magnetic fields and states of matter.

What is the range of energies of such plasma, as found in normal stars?

Ditto, magnetic field strengths.

What 'states of matter' comprise stars?

In what way does the composition of neutron stars differ from other stars?

high energy plasma, plasmic current, magnetic field , rotation and the results of.

How different are the *plasma energies, *plasma currents, *magnetic fields, *and rotations of neutron stars, from those of normal stars?

At what level(s) do normal stars become neutron stars (in terms of these four properties)?

Where does the magnetic field come from?

above.

I don't follow - would you please clarify?

How old are neutron stars?

not yet known. but hopefully some theoretical physicist will tackle this aspect.

How are neutron stars 'born'? (what are the processes involved in creating neutron stars?)

How does 'the period of the energy released' relate to 'the strength of the magnetic field'?

the relation of energy released to the magnetic field is the ability of the energy(gamma rays produced by the Zeeman effect from matter) to overcome the stars magnetic field. since gamma rays are electromagnetic in nature. as well, like i've mentioned before, it would not surprise me if the magnetic field of the star which i now call P.C.H.E.M.F.G.R.S.(plasma current high energy magnetic field gamma ray star) does give an energy to mass ratio beyond the standard energy to mass ratio, simply because the magnetic field of the star, being three dimensional , surrounds the gamma ray electromagnetically and three dimensionally.

How does the Zeeman effect produce gamma rays from matter?

Is the relationship between 'energy releases to the magnetic field' and 'the ability to overcome the stars magnetic field linear? quadratic? logarithmic? exponential? something else?

What is the 'standard energy to mass ratio'?

How does it relate to 'rotation'?

higher the rotation the easier it is for gamma rays to escape the stars magnetic field.

Is the relationship between rotation and ease with which gammas rays escape the stars magnetic field linear? quadratic? logarithmic? exponential? something else?

What is 'matters electromagnetic light energy'?

the natural light frequency is in all atoms. look up the Zeeman effect.

Here is a webpage on the Zeeman effect. I cannot find anything on this page about 'natural light frequency in all atoms'. Would you please clarify?

How does the 'indirect friction' arise?

from the stars magnetic field wanting to pull back the gamma ray energy and the gamma ray energy wanting to escape outward. tug of war so to speak.

How strongly does the stars magnetic field pull back the gamma ray energy? How strongly does the gamma ray energy want to escape outward?

How powerful is Geminga's magnetic field?

well apparently its powerful enough to to divide the natural atomic light energy down to the most energetic , gamma rays.

How powerful is that, compared, say, to the magnetic field in the motor which drives the hard drive of your PC (or, if you prefer, steers the electron gun in the CRT monitor of your PC - if you have one)?

How old is it?

not yet known to my knowledge but younger than an x-ray star.

How old is an x-ray star?

[Gillianren]

high energy plasma, magnetic fields and states of matter.

Okay, I'm confused. Isn't plasma a state of matter? I admit I'm not a science person (over and over and over, in fact), but I thought the states of matter were solid, liquid, gas, and plasma. Am I wrong? Are you defining it differently? If so, how do you expect anyone to know what you're talking about if you don't use standard terminology?

[north]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by north
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nereid
What are stars composed of?

high energy plasma, magnetic fields and states of matter.

What is the range of energies of such plasma, as found in normal stars?

that can easily be determined by the stars rotation. it is the plasmic current which governs the stars rotation and of course the magnetic field.( another prediction by myself. slower the rotation the lower the magnetic field)

Ditto, magnetic field strengths. answered.

What 'states of matter' comprise stars?

from fluid-dynamics to solid.

How different are the *plasma energies, *plasma currents, *magnetic fields, *and rotations of neutron stars, from those of normal stars?

i think i've answered these questions already. in a nutshell though, from a little less to alot less. think of our Sun.

At what level(s) do normal stars become neutron stars (in terms of these four properties)?I don't follow - would you please clarify?How are neutron stars 'born'? (what are the processes involved in creating neutron stars?)

first these stars that are called "neutron stars" are NOT neutron stars to start with. and are not from normal stars.

normal stars do not have the high energy plasma-current energy. and it follows, do not have the magnetic fields nor the rotation.( show me a star that has low rotation but has a high magnetic field, you won't)

so as you asked, then what are these high energy stars occur from?

picture if you will, the core of the star that is both extremely high in plasmic energy( electromagnetic, with heat) and therefore by implication, has a extremely high magnetic field and very hot. therefore the matter that is in the make up of the star is not dense enough nor solid enough to overcome both the electromagnetic and temp. of the star at first. therefore the star rotates extremely fast( which by the way means to me that the star is actually dispersing gamma rays 360 degrees continually. think Geminga) so that the stars plasma current can,in the begining, dictate the properties of the star.

How does the Zeeman effect produce gamma rays from matter?

because the magnetic field tears down the natural atomic light frequency of the atom to higher and higher frequency. in otherwords all atoms have gamma rays within. its just a matter of the strength of the magnetic field which dictates the gamma rays energy state.

Is the relationship between 'energy releases to the magnetic field' and 'the ability to overcome the stars magnetic field linear? quadratic? logarithmic? exponential? something else?

assuming you mean gamma rays.

to hazzard a guess i would say either log. or exponential. but this is, in the end yet to be determined.

What is the 'standard energy to mass ratio'?

i knew this would come up sooner or later!! what i mean by this "standard energy to mass ratio" is this, that the total energy within the mass does not exceed the mass its self. my example of a drinking straw in a tornado in which the energy supplied by the tornado exceeds the ability of the mass of the straw to absorb the energy supplied by the tornado.

Is the relationship between rotation and ease with which gammas rays escape the stars magnetic field linear? quadratic? logarithmic? exponential? something else?

yet to be determined

Here is a webpage on the Zeeman effect. I cannot find anything on this page about 'natural light frequency in all atoms'. Would you please clarify?

sure. according to book " Magnetism" by E.W.LEE pg.256 and i quote

"In the presence of a magnetic field each single wavelength that the atom would normally emit is split up into a group consisting of a smaller number of different wavelengths centered around the original."

How strongly does the stars magnetic field pull back the gamma ray energy?

with all its might.( calculations unknown, for now)

How strongly does the gamma ray energy want to escape outward?

with all its might.( calculations unknown, for now)

How powerful is that, compared, say, to the magnetic field in the motor which drives the hard drive of your PC (or, if you prefer, steers the electron gun in the CRT monitor of your PC - if you have one)?

how powerful is what exactly?

guessing what you mean, since the star called a "neutron star" is trillions times stronger than the Earths magnetic field. go from there.

How old is an x-ray star?

older than a gamma ray star for sure.


i hope i'm clear to all. if not, further questions are welcome by anybody of course.

[korjik]

the reason i asked my question is because you make it sound as though the magnetic field came first then the current. its the other way around, current then the magnetic field.



the magnetic field strength is measured by using the Zeeman effect. where the stronger the magnetic field the further the natural light wavelength of an atom gets split basicly.

the plasma does not have to be generating the field. Plasma in the Earth's magnetic field is not generating the Earth's field, but it does feel it. It also dosent matter what generated the field, just that the field is there. When the core collapses, the field is dragged along.

[north]

the plasma does not have to be generating the field. Plasma in the Earth's magnetic field is not generating the Earth's field, but it does feel it.

if not a low energy plasma then what? we know its not iron because iron loses its magnetic ability once it becomes molten.

It also dosent matter what generated the field, just that the field is there.

of course it matters what generates the Earths magnetic field.our lives depend on understanding the Earths magnetic field. surely you know that.

When the core collapses, the field is dragged along.

the core collapses?? what do you mean specifically??

and what do you mean by "the field is dragged along"??

[Nereid]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the range of energies of such plasma, as found in normal stars?

that can easily be determined by the stars rotation. it is the plasmic current which governs the stars rotation and of course the magnetic field.( another prediction by myself. slower the rotation the lower the magnetic field)

Ditto, magnetic field strengths. answered.

It seems my question was not sufficiently clear; let me try again.

Energy and magnetic field (magnetic flux density) are measured, in SI, in joules and teslas; rotation is a frequency, commonly expressed as a period.

What is the range of energies, rotations, and magnetic fields, in normal stars, expressed in SI (or equivalent) units? Ditto, for neutron stars?

What 'states of matter' comprise stars?

from fluid-dynamics to solid.

In which stars are solids to be found?

(to be continued)

[Nereid]

(continued)

[snip]

How does the Zeeman effect produce gamma rays from matter?

because the magnetic field tears down the natural atomic light frequency of the atom to higher and higher frequency. in otherwords all atoms have gamma rays within. its just a matter of the strength of the magnetic field which dictates the gamma rays energy state.

What strength must a magnetic field have to tear down the natural atomic light frequency sufficiently to produce gamma rays? What is the relationship between the magnetic field strength and the energy of the gammas?

[snip]

What is the 'standard energy to mass ratio'?

i knew this would come up sooner or later!! what i mean by this "standard energy to mass ratio" is this, that the total energy within the mass does not exceed the mass its self. my example of a drinking straw in a tornado in which the energy supplied by the tornado exceeds the ability of the mass of the straw to absorb the energy supplied by the tornado.

What is "the total energy within the mass"? How is this measured?

[snip]

How powerful is Geminga's magnetic field?

well apparently its powerful enough to to divide the natural atomic light energy down to the most energetic , gamma rays.

How powerful is that, compared, say, to the magnetic field in the motor which drives the hard drive of your PC (or, if you prefer, steers the electron gun in the CRT monitor of your PC - if you have one)?

how powerful is what exactly?

Gemina's magnetic field.

guessing what you mean, since the star called a "neutron star" is trillions times stronger than the Earths magnetic field. go from there.

Which is what, in teslas?

How did you determine this magnetic field strength?

How old is an x-ray star?

older than a gamma ray star for sure.

What is an x-ray star? How old is an x-ray star?

[korjik]

if not a low energy plasma then what? we know its not iron because iron loses its magnetic ability once it becomes molten.



of course it matters what generates the Earths magnetic field.our lives depend on understanding the Earths magnetic field. surely you know that.




the core collapses?? what do you mean specifically??

and what do you mean by "the field is dragged along"??

I will try to make this a little more plain. When plasma is in space, and in the earth's magnetic field the plasma feels the field but does not generate this field. In a star's core, any small amount of plasma feels the field created by the rest of the plasma. It does not generate this field. when a stellar core collapses, the plasma cannot move in the correct way to cancel the existing field. Because if this, the field lines are dragged with the plasma, because they are not being cancelled, and the energy stored in the field is stuck. As a result, the field density of a neutron star is much higher than the original star.

The Earth's field is generated by free electrons in liquid metal, not ferromagnetism due to the iron in the core.

[north]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by north
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
What is the range of energies of such plasma, as found in normal stars?

that can easily be determined by the stars rotation. it is the plasmic current which governs the stars rotation and of course the magnetic field.( another prediction by myself. slower the rotation the lower the magnetic field)

Ditto, magnetic field strengths. answered.

It seems my question was not sufficiently clear; let me try again.

Energy and magnetic field (magnetic flux density) are measured, in SI, in joules and teslas; rotation is a frequency, commonly expressed as a period.

well since the magnetic field of a high energy plasma star(H.E.P.S) is measured to be 10^ 12 gauss. in Tesla it would be 10^8 Tesla's.

rotation is a frequency assuming that the rotation of the "poles" of the star are the reason for these "periods". i do not. for example,the period seen in Gemina is due to the ability for the gamma rays to escape the star Gemina. we could look at the gamma rays which are given off by Gemina as continuous( for Gemina gives off gamma rays every 33 milliseconds!!) and one could reasonably expect that if viewed three dimensionally, that this enormous amount of energy is through the whole circumference of the star!!

What is the range of energies, rotations, and magnetic fields, in normal stars, expressed in SI (or equivalent) units? Ditto, for neutron stars?In which stars are solids to be found?

(to be continued)

what energies?

the range of rotations and magnetic fields would be from the extreme, HEPS to our sun. by observations.

as far as solids in stars-none. my mistake.

[north]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(continued)

Originally Posted by north
[snip]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nereid
How does the Zeeman effect produce gamma rays from matter?

because the magnetic field tears down the natural atomic light frequency of the atom to higher and higher frequency. in otherwords all atoms have gamma rays within. its just a matter of the strength of the magnetic field which dictates the gamma rays energy state.

(continued)What strength must a magnetic field have to tear down the natural atomic light frequency sufficiently to produce gamma rays?

its seems so far at least 10^8 Tesla's although it could be less.( its hard to know really isn't but lets put it this way, the only sourse of high energy gamma rays are HEPS.)

What is the relationship between the magnetic field strength and the energy of the gammas?

the ratio? i'm not sure. if anybody with more mathematical ability than myself can explore this aspect it would be appreciated and welcomed.

What is "the total energy within the mass"?

mass of??

How is this measured?

unknown as of yet.

Gemina's magnetic field.Which is what, in teslas?

10^8 Tesla's

How did you determine this magnetic field strength?

i found the strengh of the magnetic field of a HEPS off the internet. which is said to be 10^12 gauss.

What is an x-ray star?

an x-ray star is a star with a lower plasma electric current and therefore magnetic field less than a HEPS star.

How old is an x-ray star?

actually a x-ray star can be as old as a HEPS. stars coming from the galaxy core have variations in the plasma current (therefore rotation) and magnetic fields.

[north]

I will try to make this a little more plain. When plasma is in space, and in the earth's magnetic field the plasma feels the field but does not generate this field.

where then does the magnetic field originate from if not from the plasma its self?

In a star's core, any small amount of plasma feels the field created by the rest of the plasma. It does not generate this field. when a stellar core collapses, the plasma cannot move in the correct way to cancel the existing field. Because if this, the field lines are dragged with the plasma, because they are not being cancelled, and the energy stored in the field is stuck. As a result, the field density of a neutron star is much higher than the original star.

there is one aspect of the HEPS(neutron star) that you must account for. and that is the STRENGTH of the magnetic field. extremelly important.

the simpliest source( explaination) of the magnetic field strength of HEPS is high energy plasma.

The Earth's field is generated by free electrons in liquid metal, not ferromagnetism due to the iron in the core.

the problem though arises when the lattice structure of the metal breaks down because of the heat. and the electrons become so energenic that they break the structure of magnetic field( it has direction). therefore breaking down the magnetic field.