It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Neutron Stars, Pulsars, and Magnetars

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 11:48 AM
reply to post by jkrog08

More than welcome mate, you've been putting in some solid posts of late, and I've enjoyed reading through them immensely.

Please forgive my recent absence from the threads. Wanted to join in with you and Internos, mikesingh. et al, but snowed under at the moment. So I'm ostensibly in lurker mode.

[edit on 21-6-2009 by mckyle]

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 11:51 AM
reply to post by squiz

I appreciate any scientific insights, that is why I make threads like these,lol a educational/ research paper (from member input) type thing. Although I think that gravity is much more powerful than we think, it seems to be a 'smart' force. It isn't surprising if you think of gravity like Einstein, being a result of the curvature of spacetime. Why do we need gravitons or force carrying particles? I think both relativity and quantum mechanics are correct, as well some unknown things not discovered yet. I admit the insane amount of very confusing and odd string, brane, bosonic, etc, etc theories with the particle 'zoo' is as of now VERY QUESTIONABLE. But it seems like there is some proof of some of these being correct. I don't know, right now we are in over our heads to be honest with you.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by mckyle

Not a problem, and thank you for including me in that GREAT company.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 11:56 AM

Originally posted by mikesingh
There may be many more parameters that need to be taken into account in those equations that we haven't the slightest clue about at this juncture!


Great point.

We are really just pre-schoolers kicking around in the sandpit at the moment. We haven't even begun to comprehend how much we simply don't know about the cosmos.

[edit on 21-6-2009 by mckyle]

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 12:17 PM
thanx good post

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:11 PM
Great post !

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 02:29 PM
If you want to blow peoples minds with Astronomy. Show this video about star size comparison.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 03:33 PM

Originally posted by jkrog08
Some notable pulsars…

The first radio pulsar CP 1919 (now known as PSR 1919+21), with a pulse period of 1.337 seconds

I wonder if the guy who first figured that out got as much of a kick out of that as I did?

(Obscure reference maybe, but still pretty 1337 lol)

Very interesting and educational thread. How these things behave is one thing, and very interesting and relevant to them, but what they "are" is what really makes me wonder. We have no idea what they really "are." My best guess is, something like an atom, for much, much greater scales. A universe like a fractal, and everything is alive. Just my 2 cents.

[edit on 21-6-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 04:16 PM
Great post thanks for all the hard work and effort, I do however believe in the electronic universe theory and things like pulsars back it up. Will take take time to look at all of the content.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 06:06 PM
I like the idea of electronic universe, but will someone please enlighten me about how neutrons relate to electricity????

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 06:42 PM
What an excellent, informative post. A pleasure to read and very well put-together. Thank you for that. I would like to give an opinion but it will take me some time to digest the information presented here.


posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 06:54 PM
reply to post by DangerDeath

Before you go embracing bogus theories spread on ATS, you should look at the existing literature (theories supported by observation) and then branch off into the fringe stuff.

Truth is stranger than fiction, anyways. Read up on quantum mechanics and relativity. It's all proven and it will blow your mind, unlike the 'electric universe theory.'

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 08:03 PM

Originally posted by Kaytagg
reply to post by DangerDeath

Before you go embracing bogus theories spread on ATS, you should look at the existing literature (theories supported by observation) and then branch off into the fringe stuff.

Truth is stranger than fiction, anyways. Read up on quantum mechanics and relativity. It's all proven and it will blow your mind, unlike the 'electric universe theory.'

Oh well, I appreciate your advice, but I don't trust science so much since it always discovers new things which are contradictory to the present information they possess. Same happened to quantum physics, it was shunned at the beginning.

The fact is, those magnetars certainly have to do with electricity, don't they? Isn't magnetism closely related to electricity? Not necessarily electric "current", but the structure of atoms can create magnetic field and vice versus. And if the star (magnetar) is made of neutrons, where does the magnetism come from?

Also, it is a fact that no one really understands electricity. It is there, but if it is in neutron stars, how is that possible, since there is no difference in potential like between protons and electrons?

It is really easy to conceive a hypothesis. A supernova explosion expels all protons and electrons, and the remains are expelled later in bursts and that's what constitutes a pulsar. It actually radiates electricity... That's why neutrons stay in place.

Or, neutrons "produce" positrons and electrons in equal proportion...

If we strictly observe all matter as waves, theory of electric cosmos actually makes a lot of sense. Change in frequency is realized as different matter (transmutation). All particles have their own frequency.

Insulation is half of a transistor, isn't it? Insulators can be used to redirect electrical current. Computer processors, printed circuits, are very much like that. We don't know what is the "structure" of neutron stars on subatomic level. It could just be such to direct electrical current and offer no resistance by the way. Perhaps it can even behave as a catalyst. Definitely a source.

Frankly, science knows so little about neutron stars, and even less about quasars (which are curiously missing from this thread).

Cosmos is not vain
All is filled with

[edit on 21-6-2009 by DangerDeath]

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 08:38 PM
Thank you everybody for your kind words, I am glad so many people have liked this thread.


Why I left quasars out is the same reason I left black holes out, that in its self would be a whole OP, with those two. Plus this was more about stars, and black holes and quasars are not stars technically. A quasar is a "quasi star", it is star like because it emits light, but other than that there is nothing else in common with a star. Plus it is still unknown what they are, they are very old as well and do not exist anymore (more than likely). Scientists are arguing between a early phase of a galaxy or some unknown galaxy that is interacting strangely with its super massive black hole. Of course black holes are simply singularities of near infinite mass and density within a zero volume of no dimensions. The curvature of spacetime thus becomes infinite.


Neutron stars are comprised of a crystallized iron crust and a dense neutronic fluid (thus pulsars and magnetars are too) and rotate very rapidly. This causes a magnetic field, also inside of the crystalline iron crust there is a neutron fluid, which was created by the extreme compression on the subatomic scale of electrons and protons-this makes neutrons. The convection currents of the neutronic fluid inside the star (caused by the rotation) creates electric currents, which in turn creates very strong magnetic fields. The way a neutron star functions is well explained in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, electrodynamics , and magnetic physics, as well tectonic physics. The very fact that these stars exist pretty much prove that our fundamental theories are correct. In essence a neutron star (and this has been said before) could be looked at as a large scale version of an atom, but this is not the correct observation, it is only a lose analogy.

[edit on 6/21/2009 by jkrog08]

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 08:58 PM
Excellent work!

I had limited knowledge of these. Basically what I saw on history channel of things that could wipe out the Earth. Thnx for teaching this old dog a new trick.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by HooHaa

Thanks, and no problem.

The Universe on History Channel is GREAT for learning basic to intermediate knowledge on things. I can not say enough about that show, we watched it many times in my astronomy 101 class last year, so that should say a lot. It is the best series History as ever had IMHO.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 10:03 PM
great post

i reminded me of this vid i saw a while back

never forget how crazy big the universe is.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 10:11 PM
Didn't they just announce that Betelgeuse is shrinking (15% already) and might go nova.

It is 600 Ly from us.

It's perfectly safe

But, if it shrinks into a neutron star and start jamming...

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 10:24 PM
reply to post by Alaskan Man

Great addition

Yes, the Universe is HUGE and likely infinite, some of those hypergiant stars are ridiculous, you can bet they will likely end up as a black hole. It is crazy that we can now predict that stuff. LOL, it is like the wait for the big event.

posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 11:22 PM
This is what realy put it all into perspective for me. It is a website that lets you listen to the sounds of some famous pulsars.
It is difficult to concieve that something the mass of a star is rotating so fast that it sounds like a dentists drill.

<< 1    3 >>

log in