Pulsars Don't Exist

reply to post by mnemeth1

At the center of the star, there is no gravity, only centripetal force.

That about sums up the assessment done by the thread aurthor.


No gravity at the center of a star now that is funny!

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by nataylor
I calculated the centripetal force directly on the surface at the equator. It's 5.4*10^-16 N. There is no material "above" that. The gravitational attraction towards the center would be 8.7*10^-16 N. Gravity wins out over centripetal force there.

I know, I'm talking about the center of the star, not the shell.

Re-read the questions.

OK, here's the centripetal force for a neutron 1 meter from the center: 3.4*10^-20. And the gravitational force: 1.1*10^-19. Again, gravity wins out!

It can't win out, because there is virtually no gravity.

At the center of the star, there is no gravity, only centripetal force.

edit on 20-10-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

By my calculations, a bit of neutron star with a 1-meter radius would still have a mass of 9.7 *10^17 kg. There's still a lot of gravity there. And since the radius has decreased, the rotational speed is down to a measly 4,400 m/s.

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

At the center of the star, there is no gravity, only centripetal force.

That about sums up the assessment done by the thread aurthor.


No gravity at the center of a star now that is funny!

I find it funny too because that's what they are arguing.

And I agree, there is no gravity at the center of a neutron star.

However, there is an epic sh## ton of centripetal force.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

And there is virtually no centripetal force.

So 700 hz rotation rates generates "virtually no centripetal force"

ok.

Yes, at the center there is zero centripetal force, no matter the angular momentum. Centripetal force increases from ZERO in the center of a rotating body to maximum on the surface.

Originally posted by nataylor
]By my calculations, a bit of neutron star with a 1-meter radius would still have a mass of 9.7 *10^17 kg. There's still a lot of gravity there. And since the radius has decreased, the rotational speed is down to a measly 4,400 m/s.

edit on 20-10-2010 by nataylor because: (no reason given)

oh come now.

You can clearly see the point I am getting at.

Centripetal force will be pushing the core outwards, and since there is no gravity at the center, the star should in theory oblate.

This would not last in any stable configuration of any matter.

Let alone the totally hypothetical matter neutron stars are proposed to be made out of.

reply to post by mnemeth1

And I agree, there is no gravity at the center of a neutron star.

Na man you completely misunderstood me, there is tons of gravity at the center of a Neutron Star, I mean what else is holding this mass/density ~10^14th g/cc together now?

That grain of sand plow has no relevance to this at all BTW, one grain sized piece of star would weight millions of pounds and makes your analogy rather useless.

Gravity is everything to such a massive and small object.

You really don't like Einstein do you?

Originally posted by Maslo

Yes, at the center there is zero centripetal force, no matter the angular momentum. Centripetal force increases from ZERO in the center of a rotating body to maximum on the surface.

Yeah, but neutrons are not infinitely small singularities.

Thus, they can never be at the "center" where there is no force.

The centrifugal force pointing away from the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

The gravitational force pointing to the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

In neutron star rotating at 700 hz, the force of gravity is ALWAYS higher than centrifugal force, everywhere.

The net effect of these forces points to the center.

reply to post by Maslo


So why do planets oblate?

reply to post by mnemeth1


The centrifugal force pointing away from the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

The gravitational force pointing to the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

In neutron star rotating at 700 hz, the force of gravity is ALWAYS higher than centrifugal force, everywhere.

The net effect of these forces points to the center.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Maslo

 

So why do planets oblate?

Because centrifugal force is highest on the rotational equator, and zero on the poles, because the poles lie on the axis of rotation.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Maslo

 

So why do planets oblate?

Let me word it even better:

The centrifugal force pointing away from the AXIS OF ROTATION increases LINEARLY from zero on the axis to maximum on the rotational equator.

Neutron stars with very high rotation rates are almost certainly oblate spheroids. But they do not have enough centripetal force to fly apart. Even at the equator, where the centripetal force is highest, the pull of gravity will exceed the centripetal force.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

The centrifugal force pointing away from the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

The gravitational force pointing to the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

In neutron star rotating at 700 hz, the force of gravity is ALWAYS higher than centrifugal force, everywhere.

The net effect of these forces points to the center.

Of course, the qualifier is the rotation rate.

Which I suppose is why these objects must disturb you.

iopscience.iop.org...

Again, I find the theory ludicrous on its face. We have clear examples in our own solar system of millisecond radio pulses being generated from celestial bodies that have absolutely nothing to do with spin rate.

The idea that there is a special kind of hypothetical matter that allows stars to shrink down to the size of asteroids while they spin around at appreciable speeds of light is utterly and totally ridiculous.

It comes down to plausibility.

The current theory of pulsars has none.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

The centrifugal force pointing away from the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

The gravitational force pointing to the center increases LINEARLY from zero in the center to maximum on the surface.

In neutron star rotating at 700 hz, the force of gravity is ALWAYS higher than centrifugal force, everywhere.

The net effect of these forces points to the center.

Of course, the qualifier is the rotation rate.

Which I suppose is why these objects must disturb you.

iopscience.iop.org...

Again, I find the theory ludicrous on its face. We have clear examples in our own solar system of millisecond radio pulses being generated from celestial bodies that have absolutely nothing to do with spin rate.

The idea that there is a special kind of hypothetical matter that allows stars to shrink down to the size of asteroids while they spin around at appreciable speeds of light is utterly and totally ridiculous.

It comes down to plausibility.

The current theory of pulsars has none.

edit on 20-10-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

So far, you have failed to demonstrate why they are implausible, let alone impossible. You have shown no math that would make such an object implausible. You supposition that centripetal force would exceed gravity has been shown to be in error. I find it odd that you dismiss such things as "ludicrous" when your apparent understanding of the forces involved is minimal.

Originally posted by nataylor
So far, you have failed to demonstrate why they are implausible, let alone impossible. You have shown no math that would make such an object implausible. You supposition that centripetal force would exceed gravity has been shown to be in error. I find it odd that you dismiss such things as "ludicrous" when your apparent understanding of the forces involved is minimal.

I have a clear understanding of the forces involved, which is why I find the theory totally asinine.

Neutronium?

LOL

1200 hz spin rates?

So far you have failed to demonstrate why I should believe such utter drivel.


Give me a break.

reply to post by mnemeth1

Of course, the qualifier is the rotation rate. Which I suppose is why these objects must disturb you.

At 1122 Hz, is the centrifugal force higher than gravitational? If the answer is yes, I may indeed be disturbed.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by nataylor
So far, you have failed to demonstrate why they are implausible, let alone impossible. You have shown no math that would make such an object implausible. You supposition that centripetal force would exceed gravity has been shown to be in error. I find it odd that you dismiss such things as "ludicrous" when your apparent understanding of the forces involved is minimal.

I have a clear understanding of the forces involved, which is why I find the theory totally asinine.

You clearly don't, as you believed there was a net force of gravity inside a hollow sphere. "LOL" doesn't show any math to be in error.

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by nataylor
So far, you have failed to demonstrate why they are implausible, let alone impossible. You have shown no math that would make such an object implausible. You supposition that centripetal force would exceed gravity has been shown to be in error. I find it odd that you dismiss such things as "ludicrous" when your apparent understanding of the forces involved is minimal.

I have a clear understanding of the forces involved, which is why I find the theory totally asinine.

You clearly don't, as you believed there was a net force of gravity inside a hollow sphere. "LOL" doesn't show any math to be in error.

There is if you put spin on it. That's the whole point you seem to be missing. The centrifugal force would blow the star apart post haste at those rates.

The notion that matter exists which can withstand those forces by gravity alone is retarded.

No "neutronium" has ever been produce in a lab. It can't be produced in a lab because the island of stability absolutely prevents it from forming. - just as it does in space.

Believing that the magical force of gravity can somehow overcome this fundamental tenant of nature with absolutely ZERO evidence to prove that it can is idiotic in the extreme.

Its especially idiotic when you consider that Jupiter emits millisecond radio pulses and its not spinning around at 66,000 times per minute.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

Of course, the qualifier is the rotation rate. Which I suppose is why these objects must disturb you.

At 1122 Hz, is the centrifugal force higher than gravitational? If the answer is yes, I may indeed be disturbed.

The answer is yes.

Which is why theory holds ~700 hz is the fastest a pulsar can spin.