Mixing
Can a collision with a neutron star make a planet via the can-o-snakes method?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Simplistically, a neutron star is a celestial body with enormous mass crushed into a small volume. That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be.
Background rumination in question form
Is it a true or false premise that the condition of the atoms at that point is not permanent? If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density? (Yeah... not unlike opening a can-o-snakes).
The actual question
Assuming this is believable, what mass + force could be brought against a neutron star to cause it to shatter such that the resulting debris does not fall back together quickly (quickly <= 100,000 years) but allows the mass to expand — thereby forming planets?
(If this works, it would be a cool source of rogue planets.)
science-based planets gravity stars
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Simplistically, a neutron star is a celestial body with enormous mass crushed into a small volume. That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be.
Background rumination in question form
Is it a true or false premise that the condition of the atoms at that point is not permanent? If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density? (Yeah... not unlike opening a can-o-snakes).
The actual question
Assuming this is believable, what mass + force could be brought against a neutron star to cause it to shatter such that the resulting debris does not fall back together quickly (quickly <= 100,000 years) but allows the mass to expand — thereby forming planets?
(If this works, it would be a cool source of rogue planets.)
science-based planets gravity stars
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
1
"If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density?" -- Yes! Actually, wait....it might explode. Perhaps it depends how quickly it is brought up the gravity gradient. I'll be watching this question!
– Qami
4 hours ago
I asked a question about something related to this once upon a time on Astronomy.
– HDE 226868♦
4 hours ago
4
"That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be": No, one may not think that. There are no atoms in a neutron star: it is made of neutronium; hence the name.
– AlexP
4 hours ago
@AlexP the section on neutron stars in the article you linked to contradicts that. "Neutronium is used in popular literature to refer to the material present in the cores of neutron stars (...). This term is very rarely used in scientific literature (...) When neutron star core material is presumed to consist mostly of free neutrons, it is typically referred to as neutron-degenerate matter in scientific literature."
– Renan
3 hours ago
1
@Renan: Aren't we on a web site which can safely be considered "popular literature"? Anyway, the point is that "neutron stars are composed almost entirely of neutrons", or at least so says the found of all knowledge.
– AlexP
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Simplistically, a neutron star is a celestial body with enormous mass crushed into a small volume. That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be.
Background rumination in question form
Is it a true or false premise that the condition of the atoms at that point is not permanent? If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density? (Yeah... not unlike opening a can-o-snakes).
The actual question
Assuming this is believable, what mass + force could be brought against a neutron star to cause it to shatter such that the resulting debris does not fall back together quickly (quickly <= 100,000 years) but allows the mass to expand — thereby forming planets?
(If this works, it would be a cool source of rogue planets.)
science-based planets gravity stars
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
Simplistically, a neutron star is a celestial body with enormous mass crushed into a small volume. That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be.
Background rumination in question form
Is it a true or false premise that the condition of the atoms at that point is not permanent? If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density? (Yeah... not unlike opening a can-o-snakes).
The actual question
Assuming this is believable, what mass + force could be brought against a neutron star to cause it to shatter such that the resulting debris does not fall back together quickly (quickly <= 100,000 years) but allows the mass to expand — thereby forming planets?
(If this works, it would be a cool source of rogue planets.)
science-based planets gravity stars
science-based planets gravity stars
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
edited 47 mins ago
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
asked 4 hours ago
JBH
34.8k581167
34.8k581167
1
"If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density?" -- Yes! Actually, wait....it might explode. Perhaps it depends how quickly it is brought up the gravity gradient. I'll be watching this question!
– Qami
4 hours ago
I asked a question about something related to this once upon a time on Astronomy.
– HDE 226868♦
4 hours ago
4
"That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be": No, one may not think that. There are no atoms in a neutron star: it is made of neutronium; hence the name.
– AlexP
4 hours ago
@AlexP the section on neutron stars in the article you linked to contradicts that. "Neutronium is used in popular literature to refer to the material present in the cores of neutron stars (...). This term is very rarely used in scientific literature (...) When neutron star core material is presumed to consist mostly of free neutrons, it is typically referred to as neutron-degenerate matter in scientific literature."
– Renan
3 hours ago
1
@Renan: Aren't we on a web site which can safely be considered "popular literature"? Anyway, the point is that "neutron stars are composed almost entirely of neutrons", or at least so says the found of all knowledge.
– AlexP
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 4 more comments
1
"If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density?" -- Yes! Actually, wait....it might explode. Perhaps it depends how quickly it is brought up the gravity gradient. I'll be watching this question!
– Qami
4 hours ago
I asked a question about something related to this once upon a time on Astronomy.
– HDE 226868♦
4 hours ago
4
"That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be": No, one may not think that. There are no atoms in a neutron star: it is made of neutronium; hence the name.
– AlexP
4 hours ago
@AlexP the section on neutron stars in the article you linked to contradicts that. "Neutronium is used in popular literature to refer to the material present in the cores of neutron stars (...). This term is very rarely used in scientific literature (...) When neutron star core material is presumed to consist mostly of free neutrons, it is typically referred to as neutron-degenerate matter in scientific literature."
– Renan
3 hours ago
1
@Renan: Aren't we on a web site which can safely be considered "popular literature"? Anyway, the point is that "neutron stars are composed almost entirely of neutrons", or at least so says the found of all knowledge.
– AlexP
3 hours ago
1
1
"If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density?" -- Yes! Actually, wait....it might explode. Perhaps it depends how quickly it is brought up the gravity gradient. I'll be watching this question!
– Qami
4 hours ago
"If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density?" -- Yes! Actually, wait....it might explode. Perhaps it depends how quickly it is brought up the gravity gradient. I'll be watching this question!
– Qami
4 hours ago
I asked a question about something related to this once upon a time on Astronomy.
– HDE 226868♦
4 hours ago
I asked a question about something related to this once upon a time on Astronomy.
– HDE 226868♦
4 hours ago
4
4
"That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be": No, one may not think that. There are no atoms in a neutron star: it is made of neutronium; hence the name.
– AlexP
4 hours ago
"That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be": No, one may not think that. There are no atoms in a neutron star: it is made of neutronium; hence the name.
– AlexP
4 hours ago
@AlexP the section on neutron stars in the article you linked to contradicts that. "Neutronium is used in popular literature to refer to the material present in the cores of neutron stars (...). This term is very rarely used in scientific literature (...) When neutron star core material is presumed to consist mostly of free neutrons, it is typically referred to as neutron-degenerate matter in scientific literature."
– Renan
3 hours ago
@AlexP the section on neutron stars in the article you linked to contradicts that. "Neutronium is used in popular literature to refer to the material present in the cores of neutron stars (...). This term is very rarely used in scientific literature (...) When neutron star core material is presumed to consist mostly of free neutrons, it is typically referred to as neutron-degenerate matter in scientific literature."
– Renan
3 hours ago
1
1
@Renan: Aren't we on a web site which can safely be considered "popular literature"? Anyway, the point is that "neutron stars are composed almost entirely of neutrons", or at least so says the found of all knowledge.
– AlexP
3 hours ago
@Renan: Aren't we on a web site which can safely be considered "popular literature"? Anyway, the point is that "neutron stars are composed almost entirely of neutrons", or at least so says the found of all knowledge.
– AlexP
3 hours ago
 |Â
show 4 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
For this to happen, you need the neutron star to be hit by something that will not merge with it. Good candidates are a gamma ray burst up close, or another, passing neutron star.
The escape velocity for neutron stars is in the relativistic range... Most of the mass will just fall back. Whatever mass is lost will leave the system at close to light speed. Such mass may reform as rogue planets leaving the galaxy, specially if going out of the galaxy plane.
As for the star, it will actually expand from the lost mass, because the degenerate pressure upon it will be reduced. Once it has lost enough mass it will revert to a regular, dead or dying small star. At this point escape velocities will be much lower, and some debris may reform as gas planets around it.
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
For the layman understanding I have of neutron stars, they are created once the gravity is strong enough to overcome the degeneracy pressure which keeps the nucleons apart in conventional atomic nucleus. Therefore every atoms collapses into more and more neutrons the closer to the center of the star it goes.
From this it follows that whatever substance venture onto or into a neutron star would be subjected to the same pressure, collapsing into neutrons, too.
So this pretty much rules out any matter based means (spoons and the like, explosives, etc.)
To overcome the gravitational attraction of a neutron star one could use a black hole, which is the following step in the cosmic monstrosity level. However, I am afraid that it would be easier for a camel to go through a neutron star than for a dromedary to escape a black hole.
Assuming one can carefully control the position of the black hole with respect to the neutron star, so that it is kept after the Roche limit and can disgregate but not fall in the black hole.
However I am afraid that the sudden release of the pressure would result in an energetic explosion triggered by the weak force. This might make for a fantastic strong bomb, but not for a planet. (for visual reference, minerals collected in the depth of the Earth crust also tend to explode due to the sudden release of pressure, and they do not deal with strong force at all)
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
That is quite a few questions. I think it is best to take them one at a time.
- Is the condition of the atoms permanent? First, they're not atoms at all, in a neutron star, it doesn't really make sense to talk about atoms. Next, permanent (as far as the state of matter), in the context of taking some away from the star and the gravity holding it in that type of state, no, it is not permanent.
- If you took a cup of it away from the star (never mind the how), would it expand to something approximating its original density? First, would it expand, yes, it would expand in a very large explosion in which there would be so much energy released that it wouldn't form a planet at all, just a giant explosion of exotic matter undergoing constant decay and causing more explosions as it decomposes. Second, it is unclear what you mean by its original density, if you were to collect all the exploded bits of the explosion after it all cooled down, it would have a density close to that of regular matter (my guess would be that with that much energy, it would be mostly hydrogen, but I don't think it's possible to know).
- How to do get this mass out of the neutron star by hitting it with something? Any method that has sufficient energy to break up the neutron star to remove pieces of it, would also provide the star with enough energy to break apart entirely. You would have to make up some sort of imaginary method to do this and to avoid the problems associated with the exploding mass in order to have this form a planet in the way you described.
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I want to build on top of already existing answers:
First and foremost, the state of matter in a neutron star is something way out of the ordinary as to assume that "common sense" applies. It is formed by subatomic particles that do not form actual atoms.
In fact, you could compare the neutron star with the initial stages of the Big Bang, before atoms were formed.
Now, if you get to scoop a large enough dust of neutrons, what would happen? Mathaddict claims that it would explode; I am not so sure but the most interesting part is that isolated neutrons have a half-life of 14 minutes and 42 seconds in a process that will produce a proton, and electron and an antineutrino.
And what is a proton + an electron? An Hidrogen atom. Maybe some of the protons would combine with (yet unconverted) protons to form deuterium, or even Helium by combining with other protons, but that is basically all that you would get from it (again, the comparation with the Big Bang).
Now, the final question would be if 100,000 years would be enough to build a gas giant (the only kind of planet that you could get) from just the Hidrogen and Helium. I am severely lacking in this aspect, but I doubt that -even accounting that the existence of other elements in the solar system could cause gravitational movements that increase the chance of the gas concentrating- 100,000 years would be enough.
A disting possibility, though, would be if the gas cloud was crossed by some already existing planet that served as a "nucleus" to "vacuum" all the gas around it. And even in this case, I am not sure that after 100,000 revolutions you would get little more than a "rock with a lot of hidrogen around it" and not a true gas giant.
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
add a comment |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
For this to happen, you need the neutron star to be hit by something that will not merge with it. Good candidates are a gamma ray burst up close, or another, passing neutron star.
The escape velocity for neutron stars is in the relativistic range... Most of the mass will just fall back. Whatever mass is lost will leave the system at close to light speed. Such mass may reform as rogue planets leaving the galaxy, specially if going out of the galaxy plane.
As for the star, it will actually expand from the lost mass, because the degenerate pressure upon it will be reduced. Once it has lost enough mass it will revert to a regular, dead or dying small star. At this point escape velocities will be much lower, and some debris may reform as gas planets around it.
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
For this to happen, you need the neutron star to be hit by something that will not merge with it. Good candidates are a gamma ray burst up close, or another, passing neutron star.
The escape velocity for neutron stars is in the relativistic range... Most of the mass will just fall back. Whatever mass is lost will leave the system at close to light speed. Such mass may reform as rogue planets leaving the galaxy, specially if going out of the galaxy plane.
As for the star, it will actually expand from the lost mass, because the degenerate pressure upon it will be reduced. Once it has lost enough mass it will revert to a regular, dead or dying small star. At this point escape velocities will be much lower, and some debris may reform as gas planets around it.
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
For this to happen, you need the neutron star to be hit by something that will not merge with it. Good candidates are a gamma ray burst up close, or another, passing neutron star.
The escape velocity for neutron stars is in the relativistic range... Most of the mass will just fall back. Whatever mass is lost will leave the system at close to light speed. Such mass may reform as rogue planets leaving the galaxy, specially if going out of the galaxy plane.
As for the star, it will actually expand from the lost mass, because the degenerate pressure upon it will be reduced. Once it has lost enough mass it will revert to a regular, dead or dying small star. At this point escape velocities will be much lower, and some debris may reform as gas planets around it.
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
For this to happen, you need the neutron star to be hit by something that will not merge with it. Good candidates are a gamma ray burst up close, or another, passing neutron star.
The escape velocity for neutron stars is in the relativistic range... Most of the mass will just fall back. Whatever mass is lost will leave the system at close to light speed. Such mass may reform as rogue planets leaving the galaxy, specially if going out of the galaxy plane.
As for the star, it will actually expand from the lost mass, because the degenerate pressure upon it will be reduced. Once it has lost enough mass it will revert to a regular, dead or dying small star. At this point escape velocities will be much lower, and some debris may reform as gas planets around it.
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
answered 4 hours ago
Renan
34.2k877174
34.2k877174
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
For the layman understanding I have of neutron stars, they are created once the gravity is strong enough to overcome the degeneracy pressure which keeps the nucleons apart in conventional atomic nucleus. Therefore every atoms collapses into more and more neutrons the closer to the center of the star it goes.
From this it follows that whatever substance venture onto or into a neutron star would be subjected to the same pressure, collapsing into neutrons, too.
So this pretty much rules out any matter based means (spoons and the like, explosives, etc.)
To overcome the gravitational attraction of a neutron star one could use a black hole, which is the following step in the cosmic monstrosity level. However, I am afraid that it would be easier for a camel to go through a neutron star than for a dromedary to escape a black hole.
Assuming one can carefully control the position of the black hole with respect to the neutron star, so that it is kept after the Roche limit and can disgregate but not fall in the black hole.
However I am afraid that the sudden release of the pressure would result in an energetic explosion triggered by the weak force. This might make for a fantastic strong bomb, but not for a planet. (for visual reference, minerals collected in the depth of the Earth crust also tend to explode due to the sudden release of pressure, and they do not deal with strong force at all)
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
For the layman understanding I have of neutron stars, they are created once the gravity is strong enough to overcome the degeneracy pressure which keeps the nucleons apart in conventional atomic nucleus. Therefore every atoms collapses into more and more neutrons the closer to the center of the star it goes.
From this it follows that whatever substance venture onto or into a neutron star would be subjected to the same pressure, collapsing into neutrons, too.
So this pretty much rules out any matter based means (spoons and the like, explosives, etc.)
To overcome the gravitational attraction of a neutron star one could use a black hole, which is the following step in the cosmic monstrosity level. However, I am afraid that it would be easier for a camel to go through a neutron star than for a dromedary to escape a black hole.
Assuming one can carefully control the position of the black hole with respect to the neutron star, so that it is kept after the Roche limit and can disgregate but not fall in the black hole.
However I am afraid that the sudden release of the pressure would result in an energetic explosion triggered by the weak force. This might make for a fantastic strong bomb, but not for a planet. (for visual reference, minerals collected in the depth of the Earth crust also tend to explode due to the sudden release of pressure, and they do not deal with strong force at all)
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
For the layman understanding I have of neutron stars, they are created once the gravity is strong enough to overcome the degeneracy pressure which keeps the nucleons apart in conventional atomic nucleus. Therefore every atoms collapses into more and more neutrons the closer to the center of the star it goes.
From this it follows that whatever substance venture onto or into a neutron star would be subjected to the same pressure, collapsing into neutrons, too.
So this pretty much rules out any matter based means (spoons and the like, explosives, etc.)
To overcome the gravitational attraction of a neutron star one could use a black hole, which is the following step in the cosmic monstrosity level. However, I am afraid that it would be easier for a camel to go through a neutron star than for a dromedary to escape a black hole.
Assuming one can carefully control the position of the black hole with respect to the neutron star, so that it is kept after the Roche limit and can disgregate but not fall in the black hole.
However I am afraid that the sudden release of the pressure would result in an energetic explosion triggered by the weak force. This might make for a fantastic strong bomb, but not for a planet. (for visual reference, minerals collected in the depth of the Earth crust also tend to explode due to the sudden release of pressure, and they do not deal with strong force at all)
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
For the layman understanding I have of neutron stars, they are created once the gravity is strong enough to overcome the degeneracy pressure which keeps the nucleons apart in conventional atomic nucleus. Therefore every atoms collapses into more and more neutrons the closer to the center of the star it goes.
From this it follows that whatever substance venture onto or into a neutron star would be subjected to the same pressure, collapsing into neutrons, too.
So this pretty much rules out any matter based means (spoons and the like, explosives, etc.)
To overcome the gravitational attraction of a neutron star one could use a black hole, which is the following step in the cosmic monstrosity level. However, I am afraid that it would be easier for a camel to go through a neutron star than for a dromedary to escape a black hole.
Assuming one can carefully control the position of the black hole with respect to the neutron star, so that it is kept after the Roche limit and can disgregate but not fall in the black hole.
However I am afraid that the sudden release of the pressure would result in an energetic explosion triggered by the weak force. This might make for a fantastic strong bomb, but not for a planet. (for visual reference, minerals collected in the depth of the Earth crust also tend to explode due to the sudden release of pressure, and they do not deal with strong force at all)
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
edited 1 hour ago
Mathaddict
85411
85411
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦
64.8k20155304
64.8k20155304
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star#/media/… - not only neutrons... Other than that, this looks pretty OK.
– Mołot
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
That is quite a few questions. I think it is best to take them one at a time.
- Is the condition of the atoms permanent? First, they're not atoms at all, in a neutron star, it doesn't really make sense to talk about atoms. Next, permanent (as far as the state of matter), in the context of taking some away from the star and the gravity holding it in that type of state, no, it is not permanent.
- If you took a cup of it away from the star (never mind the how), would it expand to something approximating its original density? First, would it expand, yes, it would expand in a very large explosion in which there would be so much energy released that it wouldn't form a planet at all, just a giant explosion of exotic matter undergoing constant decay and causing more explosions as it decomposes. Second, it is unclear what you mean by its original density, if you were to collect all the exploded bits of the explosion after it all cooled down, it would have a density close to that of regular matter (my guess would be that with that much energy, it would be mostly hydrogen, but I don't think it's possible to know).
- How to do get this mass out of the neutron star by hitting it with something? Any method that has sufficient energy to break up the neutron star to remove pieces of it, would also provide the star with enough energy to break apart entirely. You would have to make up some sort of imaginary method to do this and to avoid the problems associated with the exploding mass in order to have this form a planet in the way you described.
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
That is quite a few questions. I think it is best to take them one at a time.
- Is the condition of the atoms permanent? First, they're not atoms at all, in a neutron star, it doesn't really make sense to talk about atoms. Next, permanent (as far as the state of matter), in the context of taking some away from the star and the gravity holding it in that type of state, no, it is not permanent.
- If you took a cup of it away from the star (never mind the how), would it expand to something approximating its original density? First, would it expand, yes, it would expand in a very large explosion in which there would be so much energy released that it wouldn't form a planet at all, just a giant explosion of exotic matter undergoing constant decay and causing more explosions as it decomposes. Second, it is unclear what you mean by its original density, if you were to collect all the exploded bits of the explosion after it all cooled down, it would have a density close to that of regular matter (my guess would be that with that much energy, it would be mostly hydrogen, but I don't think it's possible to know).
- How to do get this mass out of the neutron star by hitting it with something? Any method that has sufficient energy to break up the neutron star to remove pieces of it, would also provide the star with enough energy to break apart entirely. You would have to make up some sort of imaginary method to do this and to avoid the problems associated with the exploding mass in order to have this form a planet in the way you described.
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
That is quite a few questions. I think it is best to take them one at a time.
- Is the condition of the atoms permanent? First, they're not atoms at all, in a neutron star, it doesn't really make sense to talk about atoms. Next, permanent (as far as the state of matter), in the context of taking some away from the star and the gravity holding it in that type of state, no, it is not permanent.
- If you took a cup of it away from the star (never mind the how), would it expand to something approximating its original density? First, would it expand, yes, it would expand in a very large explosion in which there would be so much energy released that it wouldn't form a planet at all, just a giant explosion of exotic matter undergoing constant decay and causing more explosions as it decomposes. Second, it is unclear what you mean by its original density, if you were to collect all the exploded bits of the explosion after it all cooled down, it would have a density close to that of regular matter (my guess would be that with that much energy, it would be mostly hydrogen, but I don't think it's possible to know).
- How to do get this mass out of the neutron star by hitting it with something? Any method that has sufficient energy to break up the neutron star to remove pieces of it, would also provide the star with enough energy to break apart entirely. You would have to make up some sort of imaginary method to do this and to avoid the problems associated with the exploding mass in order to have this form a planet in the way you described.
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
That is quite a few questions. I think it is best to take them one at a time.
- Is the condition of the atoms permanent? First, they're not atoms at all, in a neutron star, it doesn't really make sense to talk about atoms. Next, permanent (as far as the state of matter), in the context of taking some away from the star and the gravity holding it in that type of state, no, it is not permanent.
- If you took a cup of it away from the star (never mind the how), would it expand to something approximating its original density? First, would it expand, yes, it would expand in a very large explosion in which there would be so much energy released that it wouldn't form a planet at all, just a giant explosion of exotic matter undergoing constant decay and causing more explosions as it decomposes. Second, it is unclear what you mean by its original density, if you were to collect all the exploded bits of the explosion after it all cooled down, it would have a density close to that of regular matter (my guess would be that with that much energy, it would be mostly hydrogen, but I don't think it's possible to know).
- How to do get this mass out of the neutron star by hitting it with something? Any method that has sufficient energy to break up the neutron star to remove pieces of it, would also provide the star with enough energy to break apart entirely. You would have to make up some sort of imaginary method to do this and to avoid the problems associated with the exploding mass in order to have this form a planet in the way you described.
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
answered 58 mins ago
Mathaddict
85411
85411
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I want to build on top of already existing answers:
First and foremost, the state of matter in a neutron star is something way out of the ordinary as to assume that "common sense" applies. It is formed by subatomic particles that do not form actual atoms.
In fact, you could compare the neutron star with the initial stages of the Big Bang, before atoms were formed.
Now, if you get to scoop a large enough dust of neutrons, what would happen? Mathaddict claims that it would explode; I am not so sure but the most interesting part is that isolated neutrons have a half-life of 14 minutes and 42 seconds in a process that will produce a proton, and electron and an antineutrino.
And what is a proton + an electron? An Hidrogen atom. Maybe some of the protons would combine with (yet unconverted) protons to form deuterium, or even Helium by combining with other protons, but that is basically all that you would get from it (again, the comparation with the Big Bang).
Now, the final question would be if 100,000 years would be enough to build a gas giant (the only kind of planet that you could get) from just the Hidrogen and Helium. I am severely lacking in this aspect, but I doubt that -even accounting that the existence of other elements in the solar system could cause gravitational movements that increase the chance of the gas concentrating- 100,000 years would be enough.
A disting possibility, though, would be if the gas cloud was crossed by some already existing planet that served as a "nucleus" to "vacuum" all the gas around it. And even in this case, I am not sure that after 100,000 revolutions you would get little more than a "rock with a lot of hidrogen around it" and not a true gas giant.
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I want to build on top of already existing answers:
First and foremost, the state of matter in a neutron star is something way out of the ordinary as to assume that "common sense" applies. It is formed by subatomic particles that do not form actual atoms.
In fact, you could compare the neutron star with the initial stages of the Big Bang, before atoms were formed.
Now, if you get to scoop a large enough dust of neutrons, what would happen? Mathaddict claims that it would explode; I am not so sure but the most interesting part is that isolated neutrons have a half-life of 14 minutes and 42 seconds in a process that will produce a proton, and electron and an antineutrino.
And what is a proton + an electron? An Hidrogen atom. Maybe some of the protons would combine with (yet unconverted) protons to form deuterium, or even Helium by combining with other protons, but that is basically all that you would get from it (again, the comparation with the Big Bang).
Now, the final question would be if 100,000 years would be enough to build a gas giant (the only kind of planet that you could get) from just the Hidrogen and Helium. I am severely lacking in this aspect, but I doubt that -even accounting that the existence of other elements in the solar system could cause gravitational movements that increase the chance of the gas concentrating- 100,000 years would be enough.
A disting possibility, though, would be if the gas cloud was crossed by some already existing planet that served as a "nucleus" to "vacuum" all the gas around it. And even in this case, I am not sure that after 100,000 revolutions you would get little more than a "rock with a lot of hidrogen around it" and not a true gas giant.
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I want to build on top of already existing answers:
First and foremost, the state of matter in a neutron star is something way out of the ordinary as to assume that "common sense" applies. It is formed by subatomic particles that do not form actual atoms.
In fact, you could compare the neutron star with the initial stages of the Big Bang, before atoms were formed.
Now, if you get to scoop a large enough dust of neutrons, what would happen? Mathaddict claims that it would explode; I am not so sure but the most interesting part is that isolated neutrons have a half-life of 14 minutes and 42 seconds in a process that will produce a proton, and electron and an antineutrino.
And what is a proton + an electron? An Hidrogen atom. Maybe some of the protons would combine with (yet unconverted) protons to form deuterium, or even Helium by combining with other protons, but that is basically all that you would get from it (again, the comparation with the Big Bang).
Now, the final question would be if 100,000 years would be enough to build a gas giant (the only kind of planet that you could get) from just the Hidrogen and Helium. I am severely lacking in this aspect, but I doubt that -even accounting that the existence of other elements in the solar system could cause gravitational movements that increase the chance of the gas concentrating- 100,000 years would be enough.
A disting possibility, though, would be if the gas cloud was crossed by some already existing planet that served as a "nucleus" to "vacuum" all the gas around it. And even in this case, I am not sure that after 100,000 revolutions you would get little more than a "rock with a lot of hidrogen around it" and not a true gas giant.
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
I want to build on top of already existing answers:
First and foremost, the state of matter in a neutron star is something way out of the ordinary as to assume that "common sense" applies. It is formed by subatomic particles that do not form actual atoms.
In fact, you could compare the neutron star with the initial stages of the Big Bang, before atoms were formed.
Now, if you get to scoop a large enough dust of neutrons, what would happen? Mathaddict claims that it would explode; I am not so sure but the most interesting part is that isolated neutrons have a half-life of 14 minutes and 42 seconds in a process that will produce a proton, and electron and an antineutrino.
And what is a proton + an electron? An Hidrogen atom. Maybe some of the protons would combine with (yet unconverted) protons to form deuterium, or even Helium by combining with other protons, but that is basically all that you would get from it (again, the comparation with the Big Bang).
Now, the final question would be if 100,000 years would be enough to build a gas giant (the only kind of planet that you could get) from just the Hidrogen and Helium. I am severely lacking in this aspect, but I doubt that -even accounting that the existence of other elements in the solar system could cause gravitational movements that increase the chance of the gas concentrating- 100,000 years would be enough.
A disting possibility, though, would be if the gas cloud was crossed by some already existing planet that served as a "nucleus" to "vacuum" all the gas around it. And even in this case, I am not sure that after 100,000 revolutions you would get little more than a "rock with a lot of hidrogen around it" and not a true gas giant.
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
answered 14 mins ago
SJuan76
11.1k12245
11.1k12245
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126134%2fcan-a-collision-with-a-neutron-star-make-a-planet-via-the-can-o-snakes-method%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
"If you scooped out a cup of neutron star matter and tossed it a long distance away from the star... would it expand to something approximating its original density?" -- Yes! Actually, wait....it might explode. Perhaps it depends how quickly it is brought up the gravity gradient. I'll be watching this question!
– Qami
4 hours ago
I asked a question about something related to this once upon a time on Astronomy.
– HDE 226868♦
4 hours ago
4
"That crushing force is gravity and the result, one might think, is atoms packed much more closely than they want to be": No, one may not think that. There are no atoms in a neutron star: it is made of neutronium; hence the name.
– AlexP
4 hours ago
@AlexP the section on neutron stars in the article you linked to contradicts that. "Neutronium is used in popular literature to refer to the material present in the cores of neutron stars (...). This term is very rarely used in scientific literature (...) When neutron star core material is presumed to consist mostly of free neutrons, it is typically referred to as neutron-degenerate matter in scientific literature."
– Renan
3 hours ago
1
@Renan: Aren't we on a web site which can safely be considered "popular literature"? Anyway, the point is that "neutron stars are composed almost entirely of neutrons", or at least so says the found of all knowledge.
– AlexP
3 hours ago